Unwanted Publicity

OC,

I just picked up the latest issue of your magazine, and happened to notice MY PICTURE [in your magazine]! What's the deal? I never gave you permission to use my face or story. I'm dealing with this whole issue right now in court. You article [sic] discusses the rights regarding local television cameras raiding rights and other issues, that Eugene police violate daily, but no one has the guts or brains to battle them. I'll be discussing this with a student attorney. I'd reply asap [sic] if you wanted to back up your legal status. Thanks for violating my rights!

We'll be in touch :(
[Name withheld]

For the purposes of our story, we used footage from the KVAL broadcast in question. We obtained the videotape from Zach Shleifer, who held the party, for the purposes of using the footage on the tape in the story.

You do not say explicitly, but I take it that you are the student facing the officer in the photograph? If so, it seems to me that you would agree with the points of the article, and I hope you would see that as such. No court is going to hold the photo against you.

I can well understand your being upset, and had I known a way to contact you, I would have preferred to do so. However, the footage had previously been broadcast, and to a larger audience.

We wish you luck in dealing with the Eugene court system, and we would be more than happy to discuss this further, albeit without the threats of legal action.

-Ed.

Editor's note: We received this email a few weeks after the publication of our second issue, and replied promptly. Since then, we have yet to hear again from the above individual. Perhaps his case against us wasn't that strong. Perhaps he's lying in wait, ready to defund the damned thing. We'll keep you posted.

The PSU Solution

I was reading your articles relating to DPS officers in residence halls [OC, v. XVIII, i. III/IV]. At Portland State even though they own the buildings they are managed by College Housing Northwest. Public Safety Officers do not respond to calls at housing unless they are criminal or exigent circumstances exist. If they get loud noise complaints then they refer them to the resident managers, who are students, to handle. If they are not able to handle them and need assistance then Public Safety responds. Perhaps this is something you can work out with your university thus eliminating the need for DPS in residence halls unless circumstances dictate otherwise.

It is really difficult to compare Portland State with the University of Oregon. Being an urban university most of our activities are with non-university affiliated people, we rarely deal with students.

Brent Laizure
Officers at Risk

As any undergraduate in the University of Oregon residence hall system, there are resident assistants - students in residence and employed by the University Housing to monitor an assigned dormitory. Not unlike the situation at Portland State, residence halls are not directly administered by the University, but by University Housing, which despite reporting to President Dave Frohnmayer, is a financially independent (i.e. supported not by tuition but by rent paid per term) organization with little day-to-day oversight by the UO.

Regardless, the UO Department of Public Safety (itself financially independent of the UO) is brought in to resolve matters considered too dangerous or complicated for the usually undergraduate resident assistants.

Of course, Portland State is an urban university and places more emphasis on the operation of apartments than does University Housing, and therefore has a different position on public safety matters. However, like Portland State's public safety department, the UO's dorms are relatively safe and rarely is there an emergency reason for public safety to enter the actual residence hall buildings - though they are nonetheless a common sight. Whether patrolling - as do resident assistants - or working out of the newly founded substation, public safety has little to do in the residence halls.

We agree that a comparison is imprecise at best, but it would still behoove University Housing as well as the Department of Public Safety to reconsider their approach to their policing of the University of Oregon's residence hall system.

-Ed.

A Different Take

A review of [the UO Department of Public Safety's] 1999 crime statistics does indicate that a majority of reported SERIOUS crime appears to happen in residence halls. It is also possible that crimes which are not properly being reported happen there and this is an effort to address those incidents.

We believe that campuses need professional security, and when it is appropriate for the size of the institution fully sworn police officers. While your articles address legitimate problems, the overall tone seems to be very anti-police.

You approach it from the view of students who may be cited for illegal underage consumption of alcohol or drugs. Aside from the fact that these things are ILLEGAL, you seem to ignore the dangers that go along with these activities and the more serious problems of campus violence that would be better addressed by fully sworn campus police.

If properly trained they should be armed, as that is the only way to deal with certain types of incidents. Campus officers will respond faster, and know the campus better than city police no matter what "contractural" arrangement exists.

Also, better qualified people will be willing to take jobs as police officers rather than as campus security (often a thankless job no matter what).

You seem to be asking that students be allowed to break "minor" laws with impunity, and fear that a real police presence will stop you from doing this. That is not an argument that will help you be treated as the adults you are.

Legitimate civil rights violations should certainly be addressed, but did you stop to think that there might be better, additional avenues if the officers were full police officers and legally acting under the "color of law."

Most campus security/police officers mean well, and while those that don't should be dealt with, your article attacks an entire department based on the apparent misdeeds of a few and administrative transitions. That's just not fair.

There are clearly problems at DPS, and bringing those further into the light is a good thing. Allowing your own biases to creep in to your reporting isn't.

S. Daniel Carter, Vice President
Security On Campus, Inc.

For readers unfamiliar with Mr. Carter's organization, Security on Campus is a national, non-profit organization which monitors college and university campus crime and assists crime victims in legal matters. SOC was founded in 1987 following the rape and murder of Jeanne Cleary in her dorm room at Leghigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. Federal legislation instigated by SOC (commonly referred to as the Cleary Law) requires public universities to disclose their crime rates, and this information was invaluable in researching our issue on the Department of Public Safety.

While we hold the mission of SOC in the highest regards, we take issue with their positions on matter of public safety administration and the facts of the University of Oregon's crime statistics.

Firstly, the training required to arm campus security officers is so much greater than that of current officers that the university might as well disband the Department of Public Safety and enlist the Eugene Police Department to patrol full-time. It is also the stated position of the University of Oregon as well as the Oregon State Board of Higher Education that there are no plans to arm campus security officers. While we have to wonder if the the commissioning of UO public safety officers might change this, at the current moment the political climate renders this unlikely so the matter currently requires no further discussion.

Mr. Carter objects to the Oregon Commentator's interpretation of the "serious crime" statistics at the UO, specifically regarding those in the residence halls. A review of the 1999 campus crime statistics indicates that there were no homicides, forcible sexual assaults, robberies, bias crimes or bomb threats at the university during that year.

Of the other serious crimes, 27 of 43 burglaries occurred in the residence halls, more than half to be certain, but considering the overwhelming concentration of personal property and traffic in residential areas of the campus, this is no great issue. Additionally, two of the three aggravated assaults did occur in the dorms, but three assaults in a year is hardly indicative of a major problem.

As for Mr. Carter's assertion that the Commentator approached the issue from an anti-police perspective, it is true that the Commentator is skeptical of public safety's performance, but we believe the facts reported more than justify our position. Furthermore, as a journal of opinion, our news articles were written with no more bias than that of any respected publication; all conclusions were left to the issue's editorials, which were clearly labeled as such.

Though we strongly disagree with Mr. Carter's take on the situation at the UO, we appreciate the intelligent response to our investigation.

-Ed.

Laizure, Part II

From reading the articles it does in fact appear as though there are problems. However, there are always two sides to a story, and I would hope that you do not compare The University of Oregon DPS to other DPS agencies within OUS.

One of the things we are trying to change is the distinction between commissioned Public Safety Officers and the non-commissioned Security Officers and that the non-commissioned officers wear the words, "SECURITY OFFICER", on their uniforms not, "PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICER".

As for the red and blue lights under ORS 352.360(5) the State Board of Higher Education may appoint peace officers who shall have the same authority as other peace officers as defined in ORS 133.005. We have them at Portland State University due to our commission and with that we enforce the five major traffic crimes: ORS 813.010 Reckless Driving, ORS 813.010 Driving under the influence of intoxicants, ORS 811.700 or ORS 811.705 Failure to perform the duties of a driver, ORS 811.182 Criminal driving while suspended or revoked, ORS 811.540 Fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer, and and other offenses in the officer's presence except traffic infractions as defined in ORS 153.505 and violations as defined in ORS 161.565.

I am not sure if you fully agree with the changes we are attempting to make. However, again I would hope that you understand that each DPS agency and university environment within OUS is different.

Brent Laizure
Officers at Risk