Oregon Daily
WEONSDAY. NOVEMBER 10, 1993
EUGENE, OREGON
VOLUME 95, ISSUE 51
Oregon voters decisively defeat tax proposal
j Ballot Measure 1 rejected by 7b
percent of Oregonians
By Stephanie Sisson
Oagty> Omfy I
Oregon voters resoundingly defeated Ballot Measure
1 in Tuesday’s vote for a proposed sales fax
Seventy-five peri rent of the Oregon voters to turn their
votes in cast tfieir ballots against the sales tax, accord
ing to the national wire service
As of 1(1:58 p.rn. Tuesday night. 13 percent of the
2,188 precincts had not yet turned in their votes.
The sales tax fared a little better in Lane County, with
only 65 percent of the votes against the measure
According to the Lane County Elections office, 27.181
ballots were cast against the measure, with 52,343 for
the measure as of 10:56 p.m.
Ballot Measure 1, the ninth sale tax defeated by Ore
gon voters, proposed a five percent sales tax to help
fund public schools. The sales tax plan anticipated
close to SI billion in annual revenues to be dedicated to
public schools, from kindergarten to community col
leges Included in the plan was a guarantee that half of
all lottery proceeds would go toward public, schools.
The sales tax plan would have also helped colleges
and universities. Money from the Cenernl Fund, whir h
is now for public schools, would have been replaced by
sales tax revenue and made more funds available for
higher education.
Opponents of the sales tax say that the tax is regres
sive, taxes essential food items and hurts small busi
nesses. Many believe that schools could find funding by
eliminating administrative positions instead of teaching
positions.
The sales tax would have applied to retail goods.
Exemptions would include housing, most food for home
consumption, utilities and prescription drugs There
also would have been no tax charged for services.
The sales tax. which supporters saw us a replacement
for revenue lost as a result of the 1990 Ballot Measure
5 property tax limit, was to be written in the Constitu
tion and could have been changed only by a vote of the
people of Oregon.
The tax was to lie on a trial basis. It was scheduled to
be voted on again in 1998.
Wll SON CMAN.T<* m« ( rrmtaU
University senior Mike Fogelqulst checks In with desk assistant Betty Llbke during Tuesday's vote on Ballot Measure
1 at South Eugene High School. The proposed sales tax measure was defeated 75 to 25 percent.
Two UW students formally charged
jCharges include
burglary and abuse
By Susanne Steffens
Oregon Daily Emerald
Iii the Circuit Court of the
State of Oregon for I .ana Coun
ty, a grand jury assembled
Monday to mete charges
against two of the three Uni
versity of Washington athletes
who allegedly entered a room
in the University Inn and
exposed themselves to a Uni
versity student Oct. 31
Jason Shelley and Prentiss
Perkins were formerly charged
and arraigned for first-degree
burglary and first-degree sexu
al abuse. Their bail was
increased from $38,500 to
$110,000.
Douglas Barnes, the third
person involved, was released
from custody Nov. 3. and is
now in Seattle. He was origi
nally charged with both first
degree burglary and
third-degree sex abuse, but the
Lane County District Court
dropped the sex charges Nov.
1. His !>ail was set at $35,000.
Shelley is also wanted for an
arrest in King County. Wash.,
and therefore received a fugi
Htftafci Tom#ofc*iGr !*•
4f the Lane County Jail, Steve and Karen Shelley express grief over
the charges meted against their son Jason Monday.
tivo charge in court. Shelley
was charged with second
degree assault after punching
another University of Wash
ington student.
Attorney Robert Gorham rep
resented Perkins and Shelly in
court Tuesday.
Officials postpone
EMU budget debate
□Delay will allow
ASUO to devise plan
By Edward Klopfenstain
Cktxjon l ;‘i 'V I rrwM
University administrators
delayed debate on who controls
the EMU Hoard of Directors bud
get Monday by allowing ASUO
officials time to devise their own
plan.
The meeting marked the first
time that administrators and
ASUO officials discussed the
University’s proposed changes to
tint Incidental Fee Committee's
operating rules, called the Clark
Document. The administration
has been pushing for nearly two
years to block the IFC from gain
ing line-item control of the EMU
hoard budget
"We, the administration, are
pleased that the students are
interested in solving the gover
nance issues themselves,” said
Gerard Moseley, the vice provost
for academic support and student
services. Tuesday
The University told student
officials Monday that it will wait
on implementing the adminis
tration's amendment of the (dark
Document until the ASUO could
present its own amendment. Thu
amendment would allow the
EMU board to receive its portion
of the incidental fee money with
out having to go through the IKC.
Moseley sai(i. an idea that has
received no support from student
government organizations.
The administration gave the
ASIIO until the student elections
in April to devise and implement
a plan of its own, Moseley said.
If the ASUQ stalls, Moseley
said the administration “will use
the president's authority and will
implement the best set of rules
ttint will he available up to that
date."
The administration demanded
several "checkpoints" to ensure
that student government will
meet that deadline, said the offi
cial, who said much of the coin,
mittee work last year was
stonewalled by the lack of 1FC
participation.
Moseley said he was confident
that the ASUO will meet the
deadline and keep the I EC from
micro-managing the EMU board
budget, which is the administra
tion's chief concern.
"They've already said they had
Turn to ASUO, Page 6