Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
PO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Thursday, March 7,2002
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Jeremy Lang
Editorial Editor.
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Editorial
Politics ofPFC: Abolition,
moratorium or reform?
The ASUO Programs Finance
Committee controls more than
$4 million in incidental fees
every year and gives the money to stu
dent groups during budget hearings
held winter term. But the group, led
for the past two years by senior politi
cal science major and ASUO Student
Senator Mary Elizabeth Madden, has
made procedural mistakes and held
illegal meetings — during the Emer
ald’s hearing process alone — that
bring into question the group’s com
petence and its members’ ability to
handle their tasks responsibly.
It may sound like sour grapes on
our part — because the PFC did not
give us the full funding we requested
— but we believe there are legitimate
concerns with both the leadership of
the PFC and the process it uses to
fund student groups.
One problem with the process is
the blatant disregard for adhering to
Oregon Public Meetings Law, both in
letter and in spirit. The group did not
adequately publicize their meetings, a
necessity under the law.
The PFC held at least one meeting
without having a true quorum and
without giving even 24 hours’ public
notice — a bare minimum for even
an emergency meeting of a public
board under Oregon law. “Ade
quate” may be a subjective term, but
less than 24 hours is not adequate by
any standards.
This illegal meeting occurred as the
Emerald was appealing its original
budget decision to the PFC and trying
to get minutes from previous meet
ings to strengthen its case. After wait
ing three hours for someone in the
ASUO office to locate those minutes,
the Emerald filed an appeal form ask
ing for a deadline extension of one
business day after the minutes were
found and photocopied. That night,
Madden met with fellow PFC mem
ber Nadia Hasan at the student senate
meeting. The pair talked, and they
agreed the extension shouldn’t be
granted. They then reached another,
as-yet-unnamed PFC member by
phone who agreed with them. Mad
den said she believed this constituted
a quorum (although it does not under
Oregon law). Madden came to the
Emerald office to speak to manage
ment about the decision they had
reached. When she couldn’t reach
anyone at the office, she called Emer
ald managing editor Jeremy Lang at
home about 10 p.m. to inform him of
the decision. No formal notice was
given to the Emerald of the PFC’s de
cision, however, so management filed
their formal appeal with the PFC the
next day.
We have several issues with this
process — including the fact that the
PFC held an illegal meeting — but the
main one is the PFC’s back-room
dealing. If the PFC made such major
decisions about the Emerald’s budget
outside of an actual public meeting
and without giving public notice,
who is to say they didn’t do this to
other student groups? We still have
not been given any explanation or jus
tification for the decision on our
budget, and we have been derailed in
every attempt to determine why.
Another issue concerns viewpoint
neutrality. PFC members are expect
ed to examine every budget from a
viewpoint-neutral stance, without
letting their own biases cloud their
decisions. But this often does not
happen. One clear example of a PFC
member’s bias was evident during
the Emerald’s budget hearings. PFC
member Joe Streckert did not dis
close that he had applied and been
turned down for a position at the
Emerald in May 2001, but he contin
ued to vote on budgets and voice his
opinion that the Emerald’s budget
should be cut during the paper’s ap
peals. And it was an evidently agitat
ed Streckert who practically bounced
back and forth on the balls of his feet
as he vehemently (and successfully)
lobbied the Student Senate to deny
hearing the Emerald’s appeal to that
body. We heard much from Streckert
and Madden about why the Senate
should not hear our appeal, but noth
ing that would indicate why other
senators at the meeting also voted not
to hear the appeal.
It is both puzzling and frustrating
to us that a student government
body would have an appeals process
in place yet become enraged when a
student group attempts to use that
process. We understand the PFC’s
desire to meet their deadline — our
entire operation is deadline-based
— but the board has a responsibility
to ensure the process is fair and
complete. Shutting programs out of
the appeals process without even al
lowing them to present their case
makes one question what the PFC
has to hide.
The University administration has
been a staunch supporter of the inci
dental fee-funding model, but we
have yet to see high-level administra
tors checking in on the process. Uni
versity President Dave Frohnmayer
and representatives from the Oregon
University System approve the total
PFC budget. But the final numbers do
not reflect the flaws in the process
that the Emerald — and certainly oth
er groups — have faced and continue
to face each year.
On the surface, it sounds like a
good idea — students deciding how
to disburse student fees — but really,
the current model is flawed. There
needs to be more members on the
PFC, more administrative oversight of
the process and more students paying
attention to where their money goes.
There are simply too many problems
when $4 million is being allocated by
four people.
Editorial Policy
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sentto letters@dailyemerald.com. Letters to the editor
and guest commentaries are encouraged. Letters are limited to 250 words and guest
commentaries to 550 words. Please include contact information. The Emerald reserves
the right to edit for space, grammar and style.
,
□l
Attack of the state budget monster
There was one unforgettable week during my sixth
grade year without television, Nintendo or com
puters. During that week, I learned to take part in
the formal ceremony of raising and lowering the
American flag, created my first tie-dyed shirt and
learned some lessons in ecolo
gy and environmentalism. It all
happened at Outdoor School,
an annual sixth-grade event for
most Oregon students.
Outdoor School was an
event that the entire sixth
grade looked forward to for the
entire school year, and it was
probably the only time that
seventh and eighth-graders
were actually jealous of those
on the lowest rung of the mid
dle-school food chain. We pre
NeWeil pared by constructing name
fnlumnkt tags from pieces of wood
- strung on a necklace of colored
noodles and learning songs that we would sing for
meal times, the flag ceremony and at campfire.
Unfortunately for many Oregon students, the
fun of Outdoor School may never be a reality. As
the state continues to cut more and more dollars
from the education budget, Outdoor School has
been placed high on the list of programs to be cut.
In the Multnomah School District, this will be the
last spring that Portland’s 12-year-olds will leave
to spend a week in the outdoors with their peers.
And that’s more than unfortunate. In this day
of limited family interaction, Outdoor School is
often the closest thing to camping many kids
will experience. Not all parents have the finan
cial resources to provide their child with the op
portunity of attend camp during the summer.
My own memories of Outdoor School are one of
the things I remember most clearly from my awkward
middle-school years. Not only were all of the educa
tional activities and games such a contrast with what I
had experienced in the classroom, but I also got the
opportunity to spend time with older kids—college
and high school-aged counselors—and as a 12-year
old, I looked up to them with awe and respect.
In fact, I so fondly reminisced over the five days
spent at the camp in Eastern Oregon that I decided
to sign up as a counselor through the University’s
Community Internship Program. I wanted to be on
the other side of the experience, to utilize the oppor
tunity to be a role-model for a group of young girls.
Totakeawaythatopportunityforlddsistotakeaway
an experience that is more important than a history les
son or mathematics test Outdoor School provides a real
experience fc>r students to actively engage with each oth
er andadultsinapositivesettingandin an environment
they rarely have theoppoitunitytobepartof.
So much has already been taken away from
our educational system in the form of school
sports and art and music programs. These pro
grams are an integral part of helping our young
people develop into well-rounded adults, and
they allow school to be an interactive and yes,
even fun, experience. Losing Outdoor School is
a blow kids shouldn’t have to experience.
E-mail columnist Rebecca Newell
at rebeccanewell@dailyemerald.com. Her opinions
do not necessarily reflect those of the Emerald.
Letters to the editor
Negative attitudes spawn
negative behavior
The Emerald ran a letter regarding rape culture
at the University. The author complained all men
are treated as perpetuating this culture solely be
cause we have penises (“A penis is not guilt by
association,” ODE, Feb. 15). As a male student
and a member of the Sexual Wellness Awareness
Team, I find this argument ignorant of the real is
sues of sexual violence on campus. The majority
of men don’t rape, and it’s wrong to classify all
men based on the atrocious actions of some.
Rape culture isn’t the result of all men raping, it’s
the result of attitudes like the one in that letter, of
non-rapists who don’t consider the fight against sex
ual violence their problem. Instead of confronting
the objectification of women, many take part in it
(calling someone a “pimp,” for example] and think
we’re immune to criticism because we’ve never vio
lated anyone. This attitude creates a society where
men often see women as sexual objects; conse
quently, some men don’t believe they need consent
to get what they want from a woman sexually.
The attitude of some men that “it’s not our prob
lem” is why one in six college women will be sex
ually assaulted. As men who don’t rape and don’t
want to be treated as assault perpetrators, it’s our
duty to join women in the fight for a society where
women are treated as sexual equals.
This isn’t to make sex better just for women, but to
make it more enjoyable and healthier for both partners.
John Fillmore
senior
business administration
University needs to play fair
with neighborhoods
Now that the University planning and hous
ing departments have changed their proposed
day care center site location to the homes of oth
er students, do you think they will invite the
families that were told to leave their homes for
the first site back? I don’t think so. That might
interfere with University Housing Director Mike
Eyster’s plan to replace fifteen family homes
with a new matching vinyl mega-complex. If
most of the Moss Street homes sit empty until
further notice, there will be far less opposition
when the University rolls in to tear them down.
Congrats to University President Dave Frohn
mayer for committing to turn over a new leaf on
the University human rights record. A great start
would be to allow University student families on
housing department waiting lists to occupy twen
ty homes, most that have been empty for years.
Don’t block affordable labor of historic
preservation students from showing that 100
year-old neighborhood the respect it deserves.
Zachary Vishanoff
Eugene