" : I I ‘ —
Housing policies
lack consistency
As a virtue, consistency often rates low in human
affairs — as any observer of romantic love or professional
sports might well agree.
But, as a principle of bureaucratic administration, con
sistency is well-regarded by most, and in its housing prac
tices and policies the University too often lapsed into mud
dled inconsistency.
This quirk arises most frequently in the University
Housing Office’s attitude toward its family-housing pro
jects, Amazon and Westmoreland. On some occasions the
Housing Office treats these rental havens as a single en
tity, while at other times it views them as separate subjects,
each requiring special consideration.
These contradictory attitudes were succinctly jux
taposed in the Housing Office's efforts this year to impose
part of Westmoreland’s construction debt repayment on
Amazon residents and at the same time propose maintain
ing a reserve fund for building repairs equal to two percent
of Amazon’s replacement value.
On the one hand. University officials argued that all
family housing was a single project; so, debt-free Amazon
should share in the construction costs remaining at West
moreland. On the other hand, the University argued that
the mandatory one percent repair-reserve fund required
for the state’s educational facilities was inadequate for
Amazon. That aging, poorly repaired bit of military surplus
had a “special" need for a higher reserve, the Housing
Office reasoned.
Both of these proposals were incorporated into the
1978-79 budget that determines rents for each of the
University-owned housing projects.
The University assigned part of Westmoreland’s debt
service to the Amazon project for the first time since the
early 1960s to help prevent too large a discrepancy in rates
that might create vacancy problems for an "expensive”
Westmoreland competing with a “cheap” Amazon.
Although rent at both apartment projects will remain
the same as last year, the proposals angered Amazon
residents rightfully concerned that these policies will affect
future rental rates. The dispute over whether Amazon ten
ants should help retire Westmoreland’s debt or not is now
before the Amazon Appeals Board. That issue should be
settled in favor of Amazon tenants.
Despite the University’s intermittent contention that
the housing projects are one, the differences between the
two units — age, locale, condition, attitudes of the
renter/consumer community at each — demand that Ama
zon and Westmoreland be dealt with separately.
The $11,630 sought by the Housing Office as
Amazon’s share of the debt-service fund for Westmore
land represents only 7 and % percent of this year’s pay
ment. If that cost had not been offset by other factors in this
year’s budget, it would have required less than a $4 in
crease in the monthly rent for each of Amazon’s 246 units.
But, once debt-service sharing is accepted in princi
ple, nothing stands between the Housing Office and an
increase in Amazon’s share of Westmoreland’s debt ser
vice. In fact, several fiscal consultants have proposed that
Amazon’s share of the debt should reflect its share of the
replacement value of the two housing projects — a formula
that could raise Amazon’s portion of the debt service to 32
percent.
However, other costs incurred by the separate com
plexes, including project managers’ salaries, repairs and
insurance, are budgeted to the individual project. Costs
incurred by the Housing Office as a whole — such as
central staff and office costs — are allocated to the various
housing projects based on the number of units in each.
If the University truly wanted to “level” costs within an
integrated family-housing entity, it would assign part of
Amazon’s rep air-reserve costs to lower-maintenance
Westmoreland, which this year required no budgetary ad
dition to its reserve fund, already at the prescribed level.
But the greatest “consistency” would be for Amazon resi
dents to accept the higher repair-reserve request in return
for the University’s full-fledged treatment of it as a separate
entity.
But probably the strongest argument for treating the
projects as distinct came from the University itself when it
acquiesced last fall in the creation of an Amazon Family
Housing Policy Board to help govern the older apartment
complex. At that time it was noted that Westmoreland
residents might desire to establish a similar mechanism
through which to channel their concerns, although that has
not occurred — unfortunately.
The creation of a separate housing policy board for
Westmoreland would allow users of each to voice their
particular needs. It would also allow both groups of Univer
sity renters to have an equitable, political access to the
Housing Office’s budget-making.
Lockers up
I would like further explanation from Dean Lynn
Rodney (College of HPER) for the recently an
nounced increase in faculty-staff locker permits from
$4 to $10 per term. While I can understand the es
calating costs of clothing, supplies, wages, laundry
products, etc., I challenge Dean Rodney to show us
these things have risen 150 percent over the past few
years! Certainly I would be happy to pay an in
creased rental fee even as high as 50 percent in
crease (i.e., $4 to $6). Talking with postdocs and
graduate students in the department, we discovered
that locker service varies from free to $7.50 per
term-semester at 13 other universities.
We would all like to see University of Oregon No.
1 in everything, but I would like us to pass on the
category of locker fees.
Stephen J. Girsch
Research Associate
Institute of Molecular Biology
r
City thanked
I would like to express my appreciation to the
Eugene City Council for passing an ordinance requir
ing that smoke detectors be installed in motels,
hotels and apartments. This is an important require
ment for people like myself who are physically hand
icapped.
I also feel that the citizens of Oregon should be
informed that this same kind of requirement could
have been made statewide. In 1977, House Bill 2292
was introduced, passed the house, but, unfortu
nately, did not receive acceptance by the Senate
prior to adjournment. Concerned citizens should
carefully examine the voting record of legislative
candidates on this important issue before voting in
November. For example, incumbent Dave Frohn
mayer voted against these important safeguards in
voting against House Bill 2292.
Loren D. Simonds
Assistant Director, ALERT
Tfwitvs wmmtfa&s ap$ still attempting t> quiet vocmc rnmus m wuwN^CRifta.
Good news
With all the unpleasant news around the world
concerning human rights, we feel extremely happy to
be able to share some good news with everyone.
We have just found out that the great Indian
spiritual leader and social philosopher, Shrii Shrii
Anandamurti, has won his own battle for human
rights.
Over six years ago, Anandamurti (who is an
outspoken critic of corruption in India’s government)
was imprisoned and accused of complicity in several
previously “unsolved” murder cases. His supporters
claimed that he was being framed and that, in reality,
he was being imprisoned for his criticism of the gov
ernment.
After one year in jail, Anandamurti was adminis
tered a near-lethal dose of poison in his cell. Since
that incident, he has maintained a liquid fast to pro
test the treatment of himself and of other political
prisoners.
Anandamurti was eventually convicted in a trial
that impartial human rights observers called a mock
ery of justice. After lengthy court delays, however,
Anandamurti has now finally won his appeal of the
case He has been officially acquitted of the charges.
As members of Ananda Marga (a world-wide
socio-spiritual organization founded by Anan
damurti), we have waited long for this day, and we
welcome the return of this great humanitarian to the
life of freedom that all human beings deserve
Wayland Secrest
Graduate Student, Psychology
(For the Ananda Marga Society)
Wrong choice
Regarding Helene Johnston’s letter of June 27,1
was sorry to hear her objection to a news story con
cerning the nationally renowned Tom Skinner.
As any journalist knows, in-depth stories worth
their salt include plenty of quotes from the inter
viewee. To neglect this makes them nothing more
than long, glorified editorials.
If this is "evangelism," then, the Playboy inter
views with President Carter and Anita Bryant are at
least as much “evangelistic” — perhaps more so.
As far as evangelism is concerned, perhaps Ms.
Johnston should be concerned with the evangelism
with which this reader has been indoctrinated at least
thrice weekly all year in this tabloid: the “Good News”
of nuclear-power abolition, divestment, and — glory
hallelujah — equal rights for oppressed homosexu
als. Let’s put the shoe on the foot which wears it best.
Harold Tilden
Graduate, Business
Letters policy
The Emerald will accept and try to print all
letters and opinion columns containing fair
comment on ideas and topics of concern or
interest to the University community. Letters
and opinions will be run on a first-come, first
served basis. Both letters and opinion columns
must be typewritten, using 65 character mar
gins, and should be triple-spaced. Letters and
opinions must be signed and the author’s field
of study (or faculty status) noted.