Wednesday, Oct. 9 - Tuesday, Oct. 16 2019 Weekly Print Edition
Vol. 106, Issue 9 www.thedailyaztec.com
San Diego State University’s Independent Student Newspaper Since 1913
Scooter ban based on bad data
inconclusive about the role of motorized scooters in causing accidents, the University Senate followed through with the restrictions. Richseon said the university community was not informed of the decision sooner because the ban still needed to be worked out with the scooter companies.
by Jack Molmud ASST. MULTIMEDIA EDITOR
San Diego State voted to restrict micro-mobility devices — both personal and pay-to-ride — based off ill-informed data and without telling the university community for months, according to a review conducted by The Daily Aztec. In an August SDSU Newscenter article, the school said a Parking & Transportation Services report “showed a 22% increase in incidents involving bicycles, scooters and skateboards — both motorized and manual powered — on campus between 2017 and 2018.” In analyzing the 22% statistic, there were several vague areas in the data the university used to justify its ban on electronic mobility devices. These devices – most notably, dockless scooters such as Lime and Bird – had become a popular transportation option for students following their San Diego debut in 2017. But they’re popularity has been met with criticism over the safety of the devices and their practicality, as they are often found littering the streets in droves due to their dockless nature.
Birds parked in front of a residence in the College Area.
HOW THE BAN WAS PASSED The ban was passed by the University Senate in a March 5 meeting, a fact the SDSU community was largely unaware of. This is because there was no formal announcement of the decision until just ahead of the 2019-2020 school year in an Aug. 19 campus-wide email. As part of the meeting, Parking and Transportation Services Director Debbie Richeson pointed to data that shows a 22% increase in bike, scooter and skateboard
Photo by Jack Molmud
incidents between Fall 2017 and Fall 2018, according to the meeting’s minutes. She said, considering the safety threat, geofencing should be instituted that would prevent certain dockless devices from being able to enter campus boundaries. Although, when asked about the 22% increase in accidents, Richeson clarified “she can’t actually distinguish those (accidents) specifically related to motorized scooters.” Although the data was
WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE DATA? The 22% figure used to justify the ban was collected from a spreadsheet of all the bike, scooter and skateboard accidents reported to Calpulli. Richeson said the data spreadsheet was obtained per request from Student Health Services. It wasn’t until she requested the report that the department labeled the scooters as motorized or not, starting in February 2019. This means the data made it impossible to conclude, in some cases, whether scooter accidents were due to motorized or manually operated devices. In addition to not mentioning the kind of scooters that caused accidents, the report failed to SCOOTERS, PAGE 2
CSU audit: SDSU labs fail to meet safety standards by Jeanette STAFF WRITER
Giovanniello
San Diego State has failed to meet safety standards within the school’s science labs, according to a CSU health and safety audit published last month. The Sept. 13 report – first reported by Times of San Diego – found several problems concerning safety procedures, and the school’s failure to submit reports and verification forms. The university did not conduct regular maintenance inspections for safety equipment such as fire extinguishers, emergency eyewashes and showers, according to the audit. These appliances were also not installed in the required safety areas, which must be within a 10-second walking distance of hazardous materials, according to Larry Mandel, California State University vice chancellor and chief audit officer. SDSU was denounced in its state report from last year, which had many of the same findings. State regulations said equipment must be activated and inspected at least monthly, but the school’s average time between inspections of shower and eyewash flushes was nearly nine months, according to California State Auditor Elaine Howle, who conducted the 2018 audit. This year’s audit noted findings
of chemical spills that were not cleaned for days, along with unlabelled hazardous waste and material containers, one of which accumulated waste for over a year. Many containers had neither graphic warnings nor labels that identified contents or proper dates. This absence of proper labeling can risk the failure of disposing of these wastes too late, or worse, students and employees being exposed to the toxins. A fume hood holding some of these toxins was in need of a new filter for airflow, as well. The school also failed to retain acknowledgment forms signed by students and members of the campus organizations. These forms would confirm students and employees are wearing proper lab equipment, received safety training and have a full understanding of procedures. Despite campus officials confirming these policies, there was no documentation provided, according to the state audit. Senior Director of Environmental Health and Safety Gillian Marks said the department ensures training for equipment, and that verification is collected as signatures that are audited periodically. However, due to the audit findings, EH&S plans on switching from this traditional format. “In the near future verification
File photo
A state audit found SDSU failed to meet safety standards inside science labs on campus.
will be migrated to an electronic platform to provide more engaging training and to ensure tracking can be accomplished,” Marks said. Many violations were linked to the use of labs by recognized student organizations. These clubs neglected the verification forms and proper disposal and labeling of wastes. There were also instances of food and drinks being consumed in the labs, or clubs storing specific substances prohibited by the school, according to Mandel’s audit. These organizations were unsupervised and, therefore, not subjected to mandatory training. “We found that oversight and responsibility for safety at RSOs, including supervision of students working with various hazards and the administration of safety training, were not clearly defined and often was not documented,”
Mandel said. “There was also a lack of enforcement of campuswide safety standards in RSO workspaces.” Marks said the department is unaware of which RSOs are in need of additional training, as they are registered through Student Life and Leadership. To decide which RSOs need more oversight calls for the help of administration. “This requires collaboration between academic staff and the university administration,” Marks said. “Delivering relevant and important safety information depends on knowing the organizations leadership, needs and location.” The audit states SDSU administration has agreed to make improvements for each of the issues addressed, and they aim to have these tasks completed by January 2020.
University proposes two fee increases for fall 2020 by Michael Cline ASST. NEWS EDITOR
Proposed increases to the Health Services Fee and Instructionally Related Activity Fee, slated for fall 2020, could see San Diego State students paying up to $113 in additional mandatory campus fees per semester to support additional mental health resources and identity and cultural centers on campus. Now, the university is sponsoring an alternative consultation process to solicit student feedback on the proposed fee increases in public forums held throughout the fall semester. The forums are scheduled to be held from Oct. 21 to Nov. 15, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs Andrea Dooley said. Dooley also said the need for additional resources and support emerged through conversations between students, faculty, staff and administrators dating back to the previous academic year. “We’ve had a number of conversations to explore what would be possible,” she said. Under the current proposal to raise additional health fees, students could pay an additional $55, $61 or $73 to the renamed Student Health and Wellness Fee for the fall and spring semesters. The additional revenue would be spent addressing the need for additional counseling resources to meet increasing campus demand. “Revenue generated from this proposed increase will sustain existing, and allow the hiring of additional, counseling faculty and staff to meet the mental health needs of SDSU students,” according to the Budget & Finance website. Director of Counseling & Psychological Services Jennifer Rikard said the increased fees are necessary to shrink the student-to-counselor ratio. “The need for mental health resources is skyrocketing, both here at SDSU and across the country,” Rikard said. SDSU students could see the ratio drop from one student per 1,500 counselors to one student per 1,000 counselors, depending on which fee option is recommended. And the amended Student Health FEES, PAGE 2