Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (June 6, 2001)
Wednesday Editor in chief: Jack Clifford Managing Editor: Jessica Blanchard Newsroom: (541) 346-5511 Room 300, Erb Memorial Union P.O. box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403 E-maH: ode@oregon.uoregon.edu EDITORIAL EDITOR: MICHAEL J. KLECKNER opededitor@journalist.com Kiss control of your money good-bye 1th the recent news of Liuua Dievendorfs termination and the closed-door Clark Docu ment meetings, it seems as though the school year has come full circle. The University began fall term with the news that University President Dave Frohnmayer had joined the Fair Labor As sociation, drawing the ire of student ac tivists, who complained that students had no input on the decision. The FLA deal was a high-level Universi ty administration decision; it might have seemed natural for the president to act au tonomously. However, the two recent events show that now the administration is flexing its muscle over students’ inci dental fee money. The year has gone from bad to worse. Linda Dievendorf has worked with students at the University for 21 years. She has been director of the Cultural Forum for 17 of those years. All ac counts are that she is a pleasure to work with, skillful and adept at what she does, and that she works collabo ratively with students to help them learn. It was announced last week that Dievendorf’s contract wouldn’t be re newed — a euphemism for “fired” — after the 2001-02 school year. What rea son was given? None. No one would speak on the record about the situation ex cept for Dievendorf, who said that she was given no reasons. Dievendorf’s situation is made all the more troubling by the fact that her salary is paid with student incidental fee money. But students didn’t make the decision to terminate her contract. Instead, Gregg Lo bisser, an administration-appointed em ployee on the University payroll, made the decision. And he apparently made it with out considering input from student leaders, who have said they were left out of the process. Needless to say, this makes us up set, as it should all students. Student fee money should be controlled by students. Obviously, students need some guidance, and in positions such as the Cultural Forum, they need a salaried professional to teach them. It would have been perfectly reasonable for Lobisser to have input on the decision, but it is unrea sonable and unacceptable the way it hap pened instead. Just two years ago, Dievendorf was moved from a union contract to an unstable “officers of administration” job designa tion. There are many people in similar po sitions on campus, and none of them has any job security. It’s this setup that gives us the most concern. When employees who work with stu Giovanni Salimena Emerald dents and are paid by students dis cover that their jobs rely on the favor of an administration-appointed individual who owes nothing to students, whom will the employees represent? Will they defend the interests of students? Or will they advocate the administration’s policies? In a letter to the editor Tuesday (“Dieven dorf is strange counterpart to Runge,” ODE), George Beres compared Dievendorf’s situation to that of former women’s basket ball head coach Jody Runge. He found it odd that Runge was forced to resign be cause students disliked her, while Dieven dorf is terminated against the wishes of stu dents and faculty. There’s another comparison to Runge that gives us added concern. Runge was of ten a critic of the Athletic Department. Dievendorf recently advocated moving the Cultural Forum’s budget from the EMU’s control to the Programs Finance Commit tee, which would give students more direct control of their Cultural Forum. Might this have been a motivation for terminating her contract? And if it was, is it possible that Runge’s resignation and Dievendorfs ter mination could have a chilling effect on the many University employees currently working without a contract? After these two cases, it might be difficult for employ ees to support students too vociferously or fight the administration too loudly. And to top off the year, we have the Clark Document discussions. The Clark Docu ment governs how students can use the in cidental fee; it keeps the University legal. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Southworth ruling, it seemed logical that some changes might have to be made to the document, and specifically to the ballot measure process. But in keeping with the motif of less stu dent control of student money, discussions about the Clark Document were not held openly, and leaders of student groups — who will arguably be most affected by changes — were not invited to the private table. Instead, a panel of nine was organized, and fully four of the nine were administrators. This is not acceptable. When student money is being discussed, four administrators on a panel of 16 might have been reasonable, and repre sentatives of the largest student groups (in terms of student participation as well as inci dental fee allocation) should have been invit ed. Some of these groups have firsthand ex perience with incidental fee battles and could have brought a different perspective to the discussion. All in all, spring term doesn’t seem to be faring well for student control of student money. Just a small percentage of students seemed to care about electing their student government — which is in charge of spend ing the incidental fee. The administration looks to be consolidating its power over the fee. And hardly anyone is standing up to say, “This isn’t OK.” Well, we’ll take that stand. Students need substantial represen tation in decisions involving their money. Linda Dievendorf should be reinstated. And the campus community should rise up and support her. This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald^ editorial board. Responses can be sent to ode@ore gon.uoregon.edu. . $ Letters to the editor Don't abandon pets this summer As the academic year winds to a * close, we would like to congratu f late the University of Oregon com munity on another successful year! We have enjoyed great support from University students, faculty and staff through volunteer time and dopations. It is this continued support that enables our work on behalf of abused, neglected and un wanted animals. Sadly, it is at these times of tran sition that many animals end up left in the lurch. Although most of us view our animals as companions for whom we would provide guardianship regardless of circum stances, many pets are abandoned each year when people travel, move or change jobs. We would .like to encourage everyone to accommodate their critters during this busy time of year. Provide support for friends or family members who need a help ing hand. And should you find yourself with a bit of spare time on your hands during the dog days of summer, come on by for a visit. Please feel free to contact us if you need further information. Helen Gold community outreach liaison Greenhill Humane Society Linda Dievendorf should not be terminated What a shame! Linda Dievendorf cannot or should not be terminated from the Cultural Forum. She is a natural leader who inspires every one around her. She is part of what makes the University what it is and what it has been in the past. I worked as a graphic designer for two years with Linda and the rest of the Cultural Forum staff. She __ •»i^_ helps give students opportunities they could not get in the typical University setting. I feel proud to have been able to play a part in what I consider a very influential and valuable life experience. I urge all who read this to take the time to voice your opinions with the EMU and the Oregon Dai ly Emerald. Bless you, Linda. Ron Crose Class of ’93 Austin, Texas
