Peter Hamilton served as the editor in chief of The California Aggie for the 2006-2007 school year. He previously served as the science and technology editor in 2005-2006, and as a science and technology reporter for two years prior to that.
On May 15, 2007, 31 Aggie staff members, including five of the nine editorial board members, asked Peter Hamilton and Talia Kennedy, the campus news editor, to resign. In a letter presented publicly at a Campus Media Board meeting, the members expressed the reasons they felt warranted his resignation, including poor leadership, inadequate training of the incoming editor in chief, unnecessary expenses incurred while attending the 2007 California College Media Association awards banquet, the fostering of what they called a "divisive and unprofessional" atmosphere, and the detrimental effects of a "secretive relationship" he allegedly had with the campus editor. Peter and the campus editor responded to this letter with their own letter, stating that the expenses were justified and chastising the signatories of the original letter for their lack of professionalism and their desire to "publicly humiliate us — and our institution — at [the] Campus Media Board meeting by dragging internal personal issues into the public."
At the time the letter was presented, there were only 15 days left in his term as chief. See The California Aggie Controversies for more information.
At the close of the 2006-2007 school year, The Aggie faced another consecutive year of deficit — this time approaching $120,000 — under his leadership. The two Aggie staff members responsible for overseeing The Aggie's finances at the time were business manager Mia Szmuch and advertising manager Christina Chin, who was responsible for the newspaper's lack of advertising sales. Of course the buck stops with the Editor-in-Chief, and Peter overruled, ignored, or failed to consult Mia on a few known occassions. Peter even submitted a FY2007-2008 Aggie Budget without involving Mia substantially; his solution to the towering deficit was to be eliminating career staff, a move Mia, the Campus Media Board, and ASUCD General Administration opposed, eliminating two members of the Editorial Board, and cutting pay for photographers. This proposal, by informed estimates, would have actually had a negative impact on the Aggie because cutting the career staff would probably cripple the Aggie's administrative functions (if not in the short run then in the long run) which would hurt the advertising department the most. In the end, a solid budget was drafted with Mia's consultation that could eliminate up to $70,000 of the deficit. The deficit won't disappear this year, of course, but it "slows the bleeding," buys the Media Board and the Aggie leadership time to come up with a more complete solution, and keeps the ASUCD General Administration" from repeating its last managerial intervention in the late 1970's.
|The California Aggie Staff 2006 — 2007|
|Editor in Chief|
|E. Ashley Wright|
|Melanie B. Glover|
|Science and Tech Editor|