occupy sf state

Click here to download a pdf of “In Defense of the Occupation: A Critical Response”. Below you can find jpg versions. Please read, forward and engage!

this is a disclaimer against any charges for damages to the san francisco state university campus by student protesters from the december 9th, 2009 occupation.

we are children who grew up in violence. we are children who cannot remember a world without national debt, who can barely recall life before wartime. these warlords and money gods have been our fathers as far back as we can remember, but we are wise enough to know that these patterns are not to be repeated. we are nonviolent children. we refuse to walk in the footsteps of these fathers, in the footsteps of the blood thirsty imperialists who claimed this country as their own and continue to exploit it. we do not aim to damage anyone or anything. we seek to empower and liberate using the most powerful and revolutionary tools we have: our words and our ideas. there is no need to break or destroy anything to incite change. the tools are simple, inherent, and gifts from higher powers.

there was no damage to oscar grant memorial hall (formerly known as the business building). during the occupation of december 9th and 10th, no computers were touched, nothing was scratched. if anything had been broken into, wouldn’t alarms have gone off?

what students did that day was expose the violent nature of our society. students used militant yet peaceful means to express their fear and outrage at the atrocities being forced upon us by self-serving bureaucrats, by warlords, by our administration and government. this fear and concern was met with a line of riot police. the only damage that was done that day was the deep spiritual damage that comes from being shut up and locked up for fearing for our futures and the futures of those generations yet to come. the riot squads broke windows and shoved students. they held us at gunpoint and detained us. who is violent? who is damaging?

we are children who see that this society, this system, was not built for our benefit and further development. we are seeking ways to change that. we are children hungry to learn, hungry to study the history of struggle and advance our own. we are oscar grant. we do not need weapons to protect ourselves, like the police do. the force of our convictions is more powerful than any knife, bullet, or baton.

-a statement given to the administration after an academic hearing on 1/11/10

We wish to extend our solidarity to the students, faculty, staff, and especially the occupiers of the business building at SF State! The CSUs and Junior/Community Colleges are where we’re hurting the hardest, and where we must push back with the most force. We held a 200-person rally in the quad of CSU Stanislaus today, marched through the main Administration building, rallied on street corner, and returned to the administration building and held a sit-in for half an hour before leaving of our own accord.

STRIKE // OCCUPY // TAKEOVER EVERYTHING (especially at the CSUs & CCs!)

december 10, early morning hours

When word got in that UPD and SFPD were gearing up for the beatdown, the outside occupation got into motion and secured themselves together, all chanting loudly in front of the 4 entrances of the now renamed Oscar Grant Memorial Hall. Media cameras flared as the breach became inevitable, the pigs forcibly dragging the picketers out of the way as they broke windows to enter the building through a classroom. On the inside, riot police would break through the barricades and enter the Business Conference Room where the occupiers were waiting for them, singing “whose side are you on, boy, whose side are you on?”

The doors swung open, CSUPD stormed in the room pointing guns at unarmed working-class youth, victims of the monopolized-violence of the system, where any sudden movement or seemingly attempt to resist could warrant a trigger being pulled, exemplified by the racist killing of Oscar Grant, for who we renamed the building.

To portray the occupation and the occupiers as violent by SF State President Robert Corrigan is a hypocritical and pathetic attempt at propaganda. In an e-mail sent out to faculty shortly after the police extracted the occupiers, he claims that the action “was not a peaceful sit-in, not a student demonstration, and not an expression of free speech but an illegitimate takeover that denied thousands of students their educational rights.”

He’s right. It is not a peaceful sit-in, because he ordered police in riot gear to beat through students with batons, destroy school property to enter the building, and then point guns at a small group of students whose sole weapons were our words, our ideas, our politics, our potential to unleash the power of student militancy waiting to be woken up.

It’s not a student demonstration. It is a reclaiming of space that called for a broader scale of working-class unity, and our fight isn’t a student fight, it is a fight of the exploited against the exploiter, of the oppressed against the oppressor, where we as students recognize our strategic place in society as a privileged sector of the working-class whose task is to use our knowledge and ideas to unveil the mask of capitalism and expose its contradictions in every sense, to fight all of its manifestations including the budget cuts to education that impact the working-class and people of color in harsher ways.

Corrigan claims that by taking over a building for one day, we denied thousand of student their educational rights. Rights to what? To fight for the remnants of a school left in shambles, mere training for jobs that are disappearing, where the millions of unemployed are receiving the graduating classes with open arms, a “welcome to the real world, place your bachelor’s degree right there on the sidewalk, flip it over, there’s a Sharpie, you might find work if you convince them enough.”

The fee increases that have been going on at the CSU’s and at community colleges have been denying “educational rights” to thousands of students every year. Corrigan attributes this to “unprecedented underfunding, which is harming students, faculty and staff and has forced us to turn away thousands of qualified students.” This, while working with the Associated Students, Inc. to sidestep a student referendum on another fee for students to pay for a $93 million dollar Recreation and Wellness Center. This definitely will “harm students, faculty, and stuff and [will] force [you] to turn away thousand of qualified students” by leaving the tab for the Rec Center to the students, whose fees will increase even more every year if (read: when) this project is approved. *As quoted in the Golden Gate Xpress, ASI president Natalie Franklin set the message clear for those involved in protests against the proposed venture: no protests, no petitions, no town-hall meetings were worth her attention, the Rec Center was going to be built no matter what.

The effort to invest student fees in capital projects such as this one has been replicated on campuses all over California, and SF State has the dignity of being the only CSU without one of these “Recreation and Wellness Centers.” Who are these centers for? While the so-called budget crisis is a veil over the strategic structural adjustment of education and other public services, the supposed health and well-being of the student population is a mask in front of thousands of working-class and of-color students who will again be the most affected when the promise of free and accessible education for all becomes the broken concrete underneath future temples of investment.

Dear Colleagues:

We will strike on March 4, across the CSUs, Community Colleges, UCs, K-12, all public sector, and beyond. We will organize to run it ourselves, to stop this madness.

First of all the 24 hour occupation of Oscar Grant Memorial Hall (previously the Business Building) was not a “very short-lived” occupation when compared to the other recent occupations at the Chicago windows and doors factory, Berkeley, Santa Cruz etc. The occupation was not “violent”, but was a peaceful, militant, demonstration which exposed who this campus really belongs to, and how legal methods of protest no longer suffice as we enter a capitalist driven mass extinction. It was not “an illegitimate takeover that denied thousands of students their educational rights,” but a legitimately necessary protest in a system that denies political power or recourse to the working class.

Education was not disrupted, but advanced, as the statements, actions, demands, and picket line broke through the apathy and fatalism which has convinced so many that nothing can be done to build community, educate ourselves, and struggle for justice.

Students on the picket articulated their struggle in a dialogue that included student-workers from all walks of life.  Students picked a side in a struggle that affects everyone’s future and argued their point, which is more educational than learning the language of exploitation taught in many modern business schools. The occupiers on the inside read labor history aloud, about the successful 1936 sit-down strike of GM workers in Flint Michigan, to ensure that education was not simply shut down, but continued on the terms of the working class.

The furloughs cost the state money because furloughed tax collectors cannot do their jobs and tax the large companies. Furloughs actually disrupt classes and cost the school more money than they save due to the cost of bureaucrats who administer the furloughs. The occupation disrupted classes to make a strong statement about the deeply rooted contradictions in our society that cause these cuts, like the 2.5 billion dollar tax break for large corporations passed for this year and each of the next four to ten years.

The occupation may have disrupted 3,000 students’ classes for one day, but the robbery of the working class, by the bankers, the administrators, and the ruling class, has caused the disruption of a viable future for 40,000 students this year. The administrative departments, like the board of trustees, the treasury department, DHHS, and so on, have allowed the capitalist class to disrupt every rational sector of society, with no regard for the checks and balances guaranteed by our constitution.  Yes, this did happen “at a crucial time,” as millions lose their homes while the banks get 5 trillion, and as our friends are forced out of school, into private prisons or mercenary private armies in the middle east.

Now is the time to struggle, not to engage in the free market of politics they call Sacramento, in which power belongs to those who fund lobbying, political campaigns, bribes, and who get themselves appointed to unconstitutional administrative positions.  It is a lie that no one was injured when the
police vandalized taxpayer property to enter the building. The police maced numerous students, slammed students on the ground, kicked students, entered the occupiers final room with guns drawn, and put the cuffs on people of color so tight that bruising and bleeding occurred.

Do you, Corrigan, really support the rights to protest, and to air grievances? What about when police videotape protestors at Malcom X from the second floor window of the student center? What about when students are locked out of Student Fee Advisory Committee meetings so that you can raise our fees by 93 million dollars and hand it to a construction company for the Recreation Center without any student input? These rights are indeed a “cherished tradition at SFSU;” being exercised in the 5 month student strike that won SFSU the first Ethnic Studies department in the nation. How can you say that this takeover is an affront to that tradition, when all of those gains are threatened, when our university is being shut down before our eyes, when the fabric of our very society is torn apart under the watch of capitalist figureheads like Bush and Obama. These actions are out of respect for the tradition of working class struggle in this country on whose shoulders we stand.

We refuse to limit our demands to what our administrators have “authority” to grant us because capitalism does not give its figureheads the authority to undo capitalism. These demands are not unrelated, but are directly linked to the historical self-interest of the students. Many “on-campus” demands were included, such as the cancellation of the 93 million dollar Recreation Center, re-establishment of the Ethnic Studies Resource Center, the rehiring of union painters who were replaced with independent contractors, transparency in the decision making process and distribution of cuts to each department, the prosecution of you, Robert Corrigan, for embezzlement and union busting at your old jobs, the cancellation of costly furlough days, reduction of your salary to the level of a custodian, student worker control of the university, abolishment of fees, admission of denied students, and rehiring of laid off lecturers. We would like to hear from workers and students on campus about additional grievances at the coalition meeting.

However, we also recognize that many of these problems have their roots in the so called “state budget crisis” caused by the capitalist crisis of the wars in the middle east, the sub-prime mortgage crisis, corporate/government collusion to give tax breaks and tax dollars to the ruling class etc. This is why we also included demands such as returning bailout money, ending wars, and taxing multinationals. While Corrigan implied that demanding the “closure and defunding of prisons” is ridiculous, we ask, is it also ridiculous that our friends are dropping out of school without employment, and may face enslavement in the prison industrial complex due to crimes of economic desperation? Is it ridiculous to demand the dissolution of the CSU board of trustees? Or is it ridiculous that they can give themselves raises, hand out money to independent contractors while busting unions, make their own laws, and adjudicate them; that they are not elected but appointed out of the ranks of the CEOs and war profiteers who benefit from all of our exploitation? Isn’t it ridiculous that the Trustees still exist? And why not tax the multinationals by fifty percent? Is that so ridiculous? They have all the money and value that we produce. Think about all the value that we make when we work, and where all that money goes. It goes to them right? So when we are in crisis, why do we allow them to line their pockets with the fruits of our labor when that only serves as justification for a ’budget crisis’ and the loss of jobs and services like public education or healthcare? Tax them 100 percent. Take them over and run them yourself.

The demand that disciplinary action be waived makes sense, because the protesters were fighting for the University; for the benefit of nearly everyone who works and studies at our school. The university should give us a medal for addressing the real reasons behind the California budget crisis, as well as the
problems that have not been addressed here on campus. If Corrigan is really so concerned about SFSU, then why doesn’t he echo the demands to the state and federal government, who caused this budget crisis by colluding with the ruling class to rob and pollute the world. Corrigan’s belittling of
our demand that the administration drop all charges in solidarity with the occupiers shows which side he is really on.

The crisis that confronts us all, as corporations loot every possible market, workers struggle to make ends meet, and students are forced to drop out, change our majors, take out loans, take an extra job, and lose our future as a people, must be addressed now more than ever through education, organization, and demonstration of ability. The occupation accomplished education through the statements and demands of the occupiers, through the political dialogue that took place at the picket, and through the media coverage, however biased. The occupation accomplished organization as students made valuable contacts, allied with other sectors on and off campus, and took on roles of responsibility with courage and articulate conviction. The occupation demonstrated the ability of the working class to retake control of their own tools, resources, and finished product, a control that is denied under capitalism. When we see such a small number retake a building, a tool of our education, it shows just who this University belongs to. When we see a manifestation of the struggle which we are all a part of, like the picket line defending occupiers from the police, we are given the choice to pick a side and fight for our survival.

The unprecedented under-funding that we face is due to a capitalist political economic system which denies political power to the working class, forcing us to resort to tactics like occupation. Occupation is just one form of struggle that can be used at this time. We also need education and organization that takes shape in the form of weekly meetings, reading groups, events, and outreach, to help each other decide where this struggle will lead us. Capitalism and its fascist tactics constantly lower the exchange value of our labor with methods like California’s 2.5 billion dollar corporate tax breaks, fear mongering, racism that divides the working class, globalization, privatization of public space and services, torture, political repression of class conscious organizers, outsourcing, sexism, and enslavement in the prison/military industrial complex. We tried to make it clear that the needed funding will not be restored by begging for our freedom, we must demand it. We must take it. Because behind every fee increase is a line of riot police.

Sure, there were things that could have gone better. We could have had more publicity for the March 4 general strike, more literature, more involvement from the groups on campus, more information to arm the picketers, and more badgering of the media with our message. But this was a huge success. We broke down apathy, exposed the violence that upholds the system, reclaimed our space, reclaimed our education, and inspired the working people of the world to not give up on each other, to unite for a rational society that isn’t controlled by a fraction of a percent of the population.

We will win! We will learn! We will organize! We will be free! Soon!

With love and respect to the history of oppressed peoples and their struggle,
An Informed and Organized Student

In Defense of the Occupation

The 24-hour occupation of the Business Building (renamed by occupiers as ‘Oscar Grant Memorial Hall’) at SFSU on December 9th was a peaceful sit-in, a legitimate expression of student’s free speech rights. Corrigan’s riot police, with batons swinging and guns pointed, were the only ones who were violent.

These and further actions incite discussion about who is really keeping students away from classes. While students and faculty were kept out of the classroom building for a day, we must look at the larger picture. The attack on public education orchestrated by Schwarzenegger and the state legislator bars tens of thousands of students from access to education every semester. This results in shutting them out for not a day, but possibly for the rest of their lives.

Many people were frustrated that they couldn’t attend their classes, and ultimately we see this as a positive — in the end, we should all value our right to a college education — but if we are interested in the rights of one, we must be interested in the rights of all.

The administration has supported repression and constant police surveillance of student activism. It is important to note that the struggle at SFSU 40 years ago was based on direct action tactics like occupying building for several months. This is what the SFSU community is founded upon, the very actions that Robert Corrigan claims to “cherish.”

The occupation demanded an end to furloughs, a rollback of layoffs and cuts, and a reopening of the Ethnic Studies Student Resource and Empowerment Center. Also included were demands pertaining to larger social justice issues, like the over-funded prison and military systems. By including these issues in our discussion, we recognize that the so-called “budget crisis” is really a crisis of priorities. In order to defend public education, we must fight for a world where human need is prioritized over simple profit.

Disciplinary action against the occupants should cease because they were courageously fighting for the rights of everyone who works and studies at SFSU. We have tried walkouts, speak-outs, lobby days, calling legislators, EVERYTHING. Year after year, the Sacramento government, the trustees, and the SFSU administration forces more cuts upon us, denies education to more students, and gives themselves raises. So we have to stop business as usual.

Witness the courageous actions of students at UCLA confronting the regents, and the students at UC Berkeley standing up to police repression. These are the tactics of mass mobilization that have given our outrage a voice. They have brought national attention to the crisis we face, and have turned up the heat on the people undermining our futures.

It seems foolish to make such insurmountable cuts to education in a state whose status as one of the world’s largest economies is in large part built on the rewards of public higher education.

With all of this in mind, students have begun to appropriate power back into our own hands; we no longer intend to ask our legislators — we will demand from them. In doing so we can help create empowerment and community. We the students must recognize our own power. We intend to engage in further forms of direct action that will build this solidarity, and we plan to involve the entire student body in the process. The next major step we will take is a united call for a statewide strike on March 4th. Business must stop until everyone has access to quality, free education.

In Solidarity with and Defense of the Occupation,
Wes Vasquez

Please sign this petition to drop all charges:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/6/we-support-the-sfsu-occupation

Prezzy Corrigan writes:

“If you are going to engage in an act of civil disobedience, then you should have the courage of your actions. Civil rights activists – and I was one — did not demand immunity; they acted and changed our nation.”

Watch this video and tell me that part about students needing courage again. Am I crazy or were we the ones standing up to riot cops because of what we believe in? So far all you have done is write a letter from behind your computer screen. We encourage President Corrigan to attend the General Assembly meeting coming up on Wednesday, December 16th, where we can engage in a public dialogue.

<< Listen for some of the most notable quotes including Capt. Gary Jimenez of SFPD saying “We got the green light to swing.”>>

Credit to Claudia Rodriguez-garcia

Thanks for Keeping an Eye Out!

First of all, we’d like to reiterate that our demands as they appear on this blog, in their entirety, were and are a political statement, and/or indictment of the capitalist system, and are representative of our belief that no issue can be truly isolated from any other.

Despite this fact, we HAD actually given President Corrigan a list of our campus-specific demands, which he ignored anyway. The campus specific demands were as follows:

1. That the 93 million dollar recreation center not be built. We see the recreation center as a move to gentrify and privatize campus, since it would require another mandatory fee hike.

2. That union painters be rehired.

3. That the Ethnic Studies Resource Center be reopened.

4. That we are given full disclosure of the budget. We need transparency to understand how the cuts have been implemented and how they will be implemented in the future.

5. We demanded that President Corrigan attend the General Assembly and have an open discussion with students to address these grievances, among others.

Nonetheless, we feel it would be helpful to explain some of the thinking behind why we felt it necessary to list an ‘end to all imperialist wars’ as one of our demands.

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Imperialism & Budget Cuts

1. Question: Doesn’t adding an antiwar to the budget cut fight weaken the movement by including a divisive issue?

Answer: Actually adding Antiwar can unite previously disconnected movements. This is a global economic crisis. Acknowledging this will expand our movement not weaken it. Tying imperialism to the budget cuts unites the broad array of forces currently fighting the war, protesting the G20 and globalization in general.

By connecting budget cuts to imperialism, we link privatization of education and the public sector at home, to neocolonial policies and imperialism abroad.

The war is unpopular and it will continue to get more unpopular as the economic crisis gets worse. News reports reveal the U.S. public is against Obama’s 40,000 troop surge into Afghanistan. People are war-weary.

2. Question: Well, isn’t the war a FEDERAL issue? The Budget cuts are a STATE issue, and we are Californians, targeting Sacramento, so how can we demand an end to war? Our politicians in Sacramento don’t control that!

Answer: Our state politicians are involved in national politics. Diane Feinstein/Nancy Pelosi are military hawks and they are located in California. Diane Feinstein’s husband is a military profiteer, and she is a huge supporter of the troop increase in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, some of the biggest war profiteers are located in California: Chevron and Bectel. In fact, Chevron is involved in imperialism outside the middle east. Chevron has been battling indigenous people in Ecuador for decades because of its toxic dumping and destruction of the environment.

3. Question: Well what can we as students do about this? We can only fight for things that apply directly to us! Its not strategic to dilute the budget cut movement with antiwar demands!

Answer: Actually, these issues relate directly to us in important ways.

Did you know that two of our own CSU board of Trustees are major war profiteers? (See the attached photo for more information.) To bring attention to their work as war profiteers and demand they divest from war, alongside demanding an end to war in general, is to pressure these people and their practices of treating schools like corporations wherein they can cut costs by firing teachers and doing work speed-ups, and their treatment of the third world as their own private bank account that they can dip into, or a lucrative business they can profit from.

Also, since when did our status as students render us incapable of having an opinion on federal issues? If we were protesting against the war, could we not also demand that the money be used for education? Why is this invalid when stated the other way around?

4. Question: Isn’t it strategically disadvantageous to combine antiwar with budget cuts, since it dilutes the budget cut fight and takes attention away from the California Budget?

Answer: Actually, having a strike that demands both an end to budget cuts and an end to the war, makes the movement stronger. Why? Because a strike against imperialism/budget cuts/domestic privatization, targets government/business corporate interests both inside California and without.

Corporate business interests in California buy politicians inside California and outside of California. To only address these forces on a California level puts us at a strategic disadvantage. It allows these forces leverage by limiting the scope of our resistance to a space much smaller than the space they inhabit. To revitalize the antiwar movement is to fight politically from two locations rather than one, this is a practical advantage, not a disadvantage.

For example, for election cycle 2010 (which hasn’t even happened yet), reported Oil & Gas contributions to Politicians made up for $5,538,913. Of the 6 top contributing Oil & Gas corporations who gave money, 2 are located in California. These two corporations gave almost half a million dollars combined. If we only target these corporations within California, we are vulnerable to arguments that compare California’s taxation with that of other states. If we make antiwar a part of our budget cut movement, we subject these corporations to a movement that is not limited to the state and which is not only asking that these corporations be taxed, but that is challenging their actual business in and of itself.

ALSO, our own Cesar Chavez Student Center has stock in Halliburton, which we can demand it divest from.

5. Question: Aren’t War and Budget Cuts are Two Seperate Issues? Don’t combine them. Its unrealistic.

Answer: By treating war as an add-on demand, you ghettoize war and imperialism and depoliticize it, framing it as just a biproduct of “misplaced priorities”. We cannot forget that our government did not invade iraq because it thought there were WMD’s it invaded Iraq because there is a tangible link between exploitation at home and abroad.

Saying ending war is a “long term struggle” is destructive and negative. The current U.S. military budget is a large part of the domestic economy. Any fundamental change to the economy must deal with the massive military spending.
6. Question: Shouldn’t we focus on overturning Prop 13/AB656 as the only goal? Anything else distracts us from these concrete goal!

Answer: WRONG. To argue this is to ignore the massive global economic crisis and the way this crisis has been building for decade both at home and abroad. We MUST not fail to recognize that for the past thirty years we’ve seen an expedited process of neoliberal globalization, with our federal and state government implementing policies aimed at facilitating global free trade.

Again, If we target politicians demanding they tax oil and petroleum without criticizing the role these corporations are playing on a global level, i.e. war profiteering, we make ourselves vulnerable to the pitting of state against state. Again, by pushing forward a budget cuts campaign that is also against imperialism, we have these same business interests and the politicians fighting on two fronts.

7. Question: Isn’t our gargantuan military budget merely a problem of misplaced priorities?

Answer: WRONG AGAIN. Military spending is a form of class war in and of itself. It is a way for government to reverse new-deal social welfare gains through a two pronged strategy: 1) Increased military spending is a mechanism of wealth redistribution. Military companies are incredibly lucrative and are often some of the most powerful lobbyists of Politicians. 2) Tax cuts coupled with increased military spending creates massive deficits that provide the rationale for dramatic cuts to social services.

“Close scrutiny of the Pentagon budget shows that, ever since the election of Ronald Reagan as president in 1980, opponents of social spending have successfully used military spending as a regulatory mechanism to cut non-military public spending, to reverse the New Deal and other social safety net programs, and to redistribute national/public resources in favor of the wealthy.

Close examination of the dynamics of redistributive militarism also helps explain why powerful beneficiaries of the Pentagon budget prefer war and military spending to peace and non-military public spending: military spending benefits the wealthy whereas the benefits of non-military public spending would spread to wider social strata. It further helps explain why beneficiaries of war dividends frequently invent new enemies and new “threats to our national interests” in order to justify continued escalation of military spending.

Viewed in this light, militaristic tendencies to war abroad can be seen largely as reflections of the metaphorical domestic fights over allocation of public finance at home, of a subtle or insidious strategy to redistribute national resources from the bottom to the top.

Read more at the link below…

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=5368 by Prof. Ismael Hossein-zadeh

Reclaiming a space is not merely borrowing and then giving back. Reclaiming implies previous or deserved ownership, the taking back of what is understood as inherently belonging to someone or someones. We have maintained the occupation of Bu$ine$$ for 18 hours, our barricades not so much a threat as the extremely important work of agitation and political defense from our comrades on the outside occupation. Much love to those that have been out in the cold for as long as we’ve been on the inside, and props to the many inspired students who are witnessing the first SF State occupation in our living memory.

Moving forward, we are not in the mood of negotiating (we’re running on no sleep), and neither is the administration, so the only logical conclusion: we are still here, and we ain’t goin’ nowhere. We still need support for the outside occupation of the premises, which to our eyes looks hella dope, with its militant 4-layer pickets supporting our doorways and its mobile dance party. We’re planning to be here all night, and although the pigs have been really quiet and not visible, we can’t afford to get too comfortable and are expecting them to attack at any chance they are given. Bring your blankets, dance through the cold night and come occupy the outside of Bu$ine$$. Create a tent city! Occupy and reclaim all of SF State!

Also, to the administration: if you want us to even consider negotiating with you, you better turn the heat back on.