Oregon doily
emerald
Listen to this:
The Friday Edition
is here
see inside
Friday, October 7, 1983
Eugene, Oregon
Volume 85, Number 25
Photos by Brian Erb
The Amazon child care center has become so successful that the state asked the center to
write a book on starting a cooperative child care center.
Parents power Amazon center
By Marianne Chin
Of the Emerald
About 20 small children are seated at
miniature tables and chairs in a toy-tilled
classroom. "Daddy, what are you doing?" asks
one girl of a man emerging from an office.
If's not the typical question you hear at a day
care center, but the Amazon child care center
isn't the usual day care center. Participation by
parents is part of what keeps the six year-old
center open.
The Amazon Cooperative Child Center,
located in the heart of the Amazon Family Hous
ing complex, arose out of a need for low-cost full
time day care services for the children of students
living there. The complex houses students and
gives priority to those with children.
A cooperative program where parents con
tribute from three to five hours a week servicing
the center seemed to be the solution to meet the
day care needs of the tenants.
The classrooms are well-equipped and well
staffed at the Amazon child care center.
The center, which is partially funded by in
cidental fees, is open to children two-and-a-half to
five years-old and normally accomodates about 20
to 25 children at any one time, according to
Eugene Organ, a parent at the center.
"There are many places for parents to fit in.
They keep it going," says Organ, who has been
with the center for the past three years.
A look at the well-equipped playground and
classroom, fully-stocked freezer and happy
children shows the apparent success of the pro
gram. Parents not only provide help in the
classroom, but they also do the purchasing and
cooking of food, cleaning and maintenance of the
facilities, fund raising and planning of curriculum.
Parents also serve on the school's board of direc
tors, which also includes one member from the
Amazon Community Tenants Association and
meets about twice a month.
"We're working to maintain what we have
now," says Organ. "Our program has been con
sidered one of the most successful in the state."
So successful was the program that two years
ago the center was offered funding by the State of
Oregon Children's Services Division to write a
book on starting and operating a cooperative
child care program. The guide, published and
written by staff members and parents in 1981, is
entitled "All Right, Who Ate the Goldfish," and
was inspired by a child who did just that.
The Amazon center, open from 8 a.m. until
5:30 p.m. weekdays, is staffed by a full-time
teacher, a teacher-coordinator, a bookkeeper,
work study students and the parents. The teacher
to student ratio is 1-5, according to Organ.
On a typical day, parents drop their children
off before 9:30 a.m. and pick them up around 4:30
p.m., though children are not required to stay at
the center a full day, according to Suzy Blanc hard,
teacher-coordinator.
Daily activities include planned physical and
learning projects, story and nap times, outdoor
playtime and three complete meals. Visiting
speakers, field trips and a swim program at the
YMCA are also planned, said Blanchard.
"We try to make this a home away from
home," says Blanchard, "and emphasize family,
nurturing and belonging."
Blanchard says the center also has plans to set
up a learning center and emphasizes that
teaching children to be self-sufficient and less
reliant on adult supervision is a goal of the center.
Organ also points out that the center sees a
lot of participation by male adults, a factor he says
is not present in most day care centers.
"We have lots of support from the University
in kind, though not financial," says Organ. "It is
an effective program and there is a lot of Amazon
community support."
ASUO resurrects
divestiture lawsuit
By Jim Moore
Of the Emerald
A 1978 divestiture lawsuit, born amid an outcry of public support
and buried by lack of action, is being resurrected by the* current ASUO
administration.
In 1977 the Oregon State Board of Higher Education voted 8-3 to halt
its investments in any company that conducts business in South Africa.
But six months later James Redden, then state attorney general, ruled
that the board did not have "statutory authority" to make a decision
regarding divestment.
Redden said that the Oregon Investment Council has the greatest
amount of authority over investments in the state of Oregon. The coun
cil, whose investment officer is State Treasurer Clay Myers, has not
made any requests to stop the investment of state funds in those
companies.
Encouraged by
public protests of Red
den's decision and
demonstrations calling
for divestment, the
ASUO spearheaded the
court action that includ
ed support from many
non-University organiza
tions and individuals.
But after gaining two
judgments favoring the
ASUO's position, the
case has slipped from
public view. Briefs and
motions lay in the
Graphic by Shawn Bird
countless stacks ot other
unfinished court business.
Meanwhile, those investment funds have grown from $11.75 million
in 1977 to $25.4 million at last count in 1982, says ASUO attorney fames
Campbell.
Campbell says it's nearly impossible to determine, at any given mo
ment, how much of that money is invested in companies involved in
South Africa, but he estimates it may be as much as 30 percent.
The suit involves four major points, two from the ASUO, the plain
tiffs in the suit, and two from the state board and the Investment Coun
cil, the defendants.
The ASUO's first point is that the ASUO and other student groups
have the right to take the board and council to court. The court ruled
they do.
The ASUO's second point may be the most critical and the most
controversial. The ASUO questions whether higher education invest
ment funds are controlled by the board or the council. They felt the
board had control and should not have been overruled by Redden.
In two separate decisions from 1981, the courts ruled in favor of the
ASUO's second point.
"The board retains the ultimate authority and control over funds
currently invested in common stock," wrote Circuit ludge George
Woodrich in September 1981.
Since that ruling, the board and council have not sought a ruling on
either of their points. Those points are that states cannot divest because
that action intrudes on foreign relations, and that divestment violates
the state's prudent investor rule.
Without a ruling the money remains where the council wishes.
That's where the current ASUO administration enters the scene.
ASUO Pres. Mary Hotchkiss intends to approach the Incidental Fee
Committee within a month to seek help in funding the reactivation of
the suit.
"It's unfinished business,” Hotchkiss says. "A suit that’s halt won."
She says a lot of time, effort and money have gone into the suit and
she wants to carry it through.
Campbell says he feels confident about winning the suit, if enough
money can be raised to force the case back into court. Hotchkiss and
the ASUO are prepared to participate in fund raising activities.
"We have a good chance of winning and setting a precedent,"
Campbell says.
Hotchkiss also is concerned with the moral issue involved.
South Africa has legalized apartheid, which is strict racial segrega
tion. Blacks, who overwhelmingly outnumber whites, have been denied
participation in government, job opportunities, education oppor
tunities and other basic human rights.
The heart of the issue centers on whether divestment is the best
method of denouncing and defeating apartheid; the ASUO says yes, the
Investment Council, led by Myers, says no.
"Divestment would probably hurt more than help blacks," says
Myers, who says he believes apartheid is "reprehensible."
Myers says many black leaders in South Africa oppose divestment,
and that there are a variety of other pressures that can be brought to
bear against the South African government.
Boycotts don't work, he says, referring to divestment. Rather than
divesting, money could be raised to support multi-racial groups, and
sanctions could be imposed on companies that don’t practice job
equality, he says.
Myers also is opposed to new businesses entering South Africa and
the expansion of those currently established there. He says conditions
Continued on Page 4