The ASUO and Connecting Eugene are seeking legal guidance outside of the University’s Office of the General Counsel as they consider taking legal action against the administration’s push for riverfront development.
Generally, when the ASUO needs assistance with legal matters, its members consult the counsel used by the administration.
But because of ASUO concerns that University President Richard Lariviere will continue to pursue construction of the University’s riverfront property without a public comment period stipulated in the original agreement, the ASUO petitioned Oregon Attorney General John Kroger to allow them to hire alternative legal support.
Part of the Over-realized Fund Committee’s recommendations to the ASUO Senate involved directing $56,238 in unallocated incidental fee funds to Connecting Eugene, a local riverfront development opposition group.
Connecting Eugene is a campus and community organization opposed to what it views as a non-transparent process in the University’s efforts to build a four-story office building for the Oregon Research Institute along the Willamette riverfront.
ASUO Environmental Advocate Nathan Howard has taken the lead on ASUO opposition to riverfront development this year, a role former President Emma Kallaway and current President Amelie Rousseau held in the past.
“The university wants to build a private office building that will destroy open space along the riverfront and cost taxpayers more money than they get from leasing the property,” Howard said in a news release. “How does that benefit students?”
Both the ASUO Senate and the University Senate have passed resolutions in the last two years demanding a public comment period before further development efforts can be undertaken.
This year, the University adopted a new procedure that forces Lariviere to come back to University Senate and provide an explanation if he chooses to disregard a Senate resolution.
Though he came forward after submitting correspondence showing the University did not need to follow the agreement, many felt it was not enough and that he didn’t answer the questions presented to him.
According to the 1986 Intergovernmental Agreement, entered into by the University, the City of Eugene and the Oregon State Board of Higher Education regarding work on the riverfront, if one party removes themselves from the agreement in writing, then the IGA is no longer binding.
Lariviere argued that former President Dave Frohnmayer removed the University from the agreement’s stipulations. Opponents have argued that the agreement should still apply or, at the very least, that public testimony should be heard.
Rousseau wrote a guest editorial to The Register-Guard with Connecting Eugene members Allen Hancock and Paul Cziko that criticized the low level of public participation involved in the planning process.
“Had the university listened to community concerns, other viable building sites in the Riverfront Research Park could have been vetted early on, controversy could have been avoided,” the editorial read, “and construction would now be well under way.”
Essentially, it is because of this disagreement between Lariviere and members of the University Senate that Connecting Eugene and the ASUO are pursuing outside help.
“The ASUO maintains that since the attorney general has and will continue to provide legal counsel for the university administration in matters regarding the Riverfront Research Park, it cannot also serve the interest of students,” Rousseau said in a news release.
[email protected]
Activists seek legal advice regarding riverfront development
Daily Emerald
March 6, 2011
0
More to Discover