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