ASPSU silent on OUS report

On the heels of a commissioned Oregon University System report suggesting the financial restructure of Portland State University, the Oregon Student Association instructed its board members yesterday via e-mail to not talk to the media and the Portland State student government leadership followed suit.

Less than three minutes after the e-mail was sent, Jonathan Sanford, ASPSU president and OSA board member, e-mailed all branches of ASPSU: the Judicial Board, Student Fee Committee, Executive Staff and Student Senate.

In the e-mail, he instructed ASPSU members to “NOT TALK TO THE PRESS [sic] about the future of PSU and any merger until we have read this report and formed an official opinion.”

Tamara Henderson, executive director of the OSA, a lobbying body that, according to its Web site, is “dedicated to the representation, service and protection of the collection of over 100,000 students,” sent the initial e-mail to student leaders asking them not to talk to the media “until OSA has taken an official stance and appropriate preparatory materials have been put together.”

Portland State’s student government works closely with OSA, and over one-third of its budget is dedicated to OSA dues, staff and events. For the 2009–10 year, ASPSU requested over $100,000 in student fees for membership in the OSA and for an OSA campus organizer.

Sanford said that he did not receive the OSA e-mail before sending his message to ASPSU but that he was in communication with Henderson yesterday.

“I’ve yet to read my e-mails from today, so I’ve yet to see that,” Sanford said. “I did talk to Tammy [Henderson], we did have a meeting prior to that about a lot of things...but, no, that was not an OSA-sponsored decision. That was our decision.”

University President Wim Wiewel addressed student senators at their weekly meeting Tuesday night, Nov. 17. He informed them of the forthcoming report and asked them to consider forming a committee to address the possibility of financial restructure.

Wiewel will also hold a public forum tomorrow from 11 a.m. to noon to discuss the report.

In an e-mail sent to the entire Portland State community he said, “The primary focus will be on the growing discussion about the future structure and governance of the Oregon University System, as well as budget issues.”

Sanford, when asked about his request of ASPSU to not speak with the media, expressed that ASPSU did not want to talk about it because they didn’t have all the information yet.

“If you look at the context of the e-mail, I don’t think it says, necessarily, you can’t have an opinion personally. It says, just the opinions—especially about the Frohnmayer report—not to speak of it yet,” he said. “You can, on your own, if you know something about it, but I don’t think many of the students know of it. It hasn’t even been sent out on the listserv yet.”

Concern has been raised about the appropriateness of a request from Sanford to all student government members, instructing them to not talk to the media on ASPSU’s behalf.

“I don’t think that he can restrict people or punish them for speaking,” said Brad Vehafric, Judicial Board chair. “As far as I’m concerned—and I’m pretty sure the rest of the board would agree with me—that if it’s not a partisan issue, there is no reason why a student couldn’t or shouldn’t have an opinion on something like that.”

Student Senator Wael Elasady said, “I think he certainly can’t tell people who they can and cannot talk to. No member of the [executive] staff can give our official stance on what is happening. Students can talk to the press whenever they want.”

Four out of five senators the Vanguard spoke with refused to comment when asked to respond to Wiewel’s presentation about the OUS report.

“[Sanford] is a respectful person and [restriction] was not his intention,” said Senator Maria Escobar-Sinn. “That’s not how [the e-mail] was meant to play out.”

Daniel Lyons, senate president pro tempore, also refused to comment on Wiewel’s senate address but said, “I can see where [Sanford] is coming from. But, we are a separate body and need to handle this how any legislative body would handle it.”

Lyons said that the Senate Coordinating Committee is planning to meet before the next senate meeting, which will be held Dec. 1, to discuss the formation of Wiewel’s requested committee.
 

3 comments

Wael Elasady

Mon Nov 23 2009 19:00

What is unfortunate is the Vanguard's selective use of my comments to try and stir controversy and portray ASPSU and Johnathan Sanford in a negative light. While I did say that Johnathan did not have a right to tell any one Senator to not speak to the press, I did say that it was acceptable for him to ask ASPSU Student Representatives to refrain from speaking ON BEHALFof ASPSU because we had not yet received any detailed information on the report and of course did not have time to go through any deliberation on the subject. In the end I think the email sent out by Johnathan was poorly worded but not an attempt to silence debate.

Furthermore the Vanguard decided not to print my comments in response to Wiewel’s senate address, in which I expressed concerns on the possible effects of switching to the corporate model including concern over loss of the shared governance model to significant increases in tuition.

The omission of my comments on the actual substance of the Frohnmayer Report, shows how little this article was truly interested in informing students about the Frohnmayer Report as opposed to stirring controversy at ASPSU.

Wil Smith

Fri Nov 20 2009 21:48

I believe that ASPSU is fulfilling its responsibilities by ensuring that all parts of ASPSU are given all of the information available and are doing their best to ensure a consensus is reached.

There is power in unity, and no matter what side ASPSU comes out on for this issue, their power will be much greater if everyone is speaking with the same voice rather than with multiple, disparate voices. This is not to silence their opinions, nor to pretend that everyone in ASPSU will agree, but there will be an official ASPSU stance, and it is a stance that requires research and discussion instead of knee-jerk reactions. The OSA is the same way, in that their power is derived in part from a unified front, and for ASPSU to break with the OSA could devastate their power to fight for or against this issue as well. This news broke just this week, and while it is the Vanguard's job to report on it as soon and as accurately as possible, organizations like the OSA and ASPSU require time to investigate and determine their position in relation to this issue.

If you wish to express your opinion to your student government, they are in the Smith Memorial Student Union, room 117, and every day, pretty much all of the time, someone will be in there with whom you can talk with. There are many meetings that are open to the public, and if you wish to attend their next Senate meeting (as mentioned in the article, the next one is December 1st), you can probably get on the speaker's list to express your concerns. You and I are ASPSU as well- our opinion counts, and our voices can and should be heard in the discussions to come.

Troy

Thu Nov 19 2009 14:10

At a school with a long history of being outspoken about protecting freedoms, especially around freedom of speech, it's rather unsettling to see the OSA and PSU student government leaders telling their people not to talk to the media! Perhaps someone should remind them of their true responsibilities and capabilities?

Add comment


I am not posting spam. I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

Enter the characters in the image above:

log out