Opinion
Kansan
4A
Published daily since 1912
Spencer Duncan, Editor Sarah Scherwinski, Business manager Lindsey Henry, Managing editor Brian Pagel, Retail sales manager Andrea Albright, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Ebten, General manager, news adviser Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Wednesday, October 8,1997
Clay McCuistion / KANSAN
Examining
Small building and green space should be preserved in 20 years
The University of Kansas Planning Committee is charged with the task of keeping the University growing. With campus traffic problems growing worse and campus buildings getting more crowded and difficult to maintain, that task requires a constant view of the long-range future. That's the idea behind the Framework for Campus Renewal and Physical Development, more commonly known as the campus master plan.
With those two principles in mind, the master plan presents three possible scenarios for future campus development:
The master plan is a vision of campus 20 years down the road. In the most recent draft of the plan, Chancellor Robert Hemenway set forth two "guiding principles" that shape the master plan: First, to preserve the beauty of Mount Oread; second, to create an environment that shows respect for learning. These are fairly universal goals which no student would argue with.
■ Increased density: The core campus (essentially, Jayhawk Boulevard) would see intensified building.
Contiguous expansion: Core campus is expanded through building projects adjacent to the area (for example, along Sunnyside Avenue and near Potter Lake.
Decentralized development: Campus buildings are constructed at a distance from core campus, for example, in West Campus and south of Watkins Health Center.
More time between classes is a necessary annoyance in saving valued buildings.
Scenario one
Smaller buildings like Stauffer-Flint, Twente, and Bailey Halls would be razed to make room for multistory buildings similar to the Dole Center and Summerfield Hall. All, or at least nearly all, parking would be eliminated from core campus. Paved plazas would replace green space, and basically every lawn area would become a durable planting that students wouldn't walk on. The bus system would be scaled back, essentially getting students from home to campus and dropping them there. But getting from one class to another wouldn't be more difficult than it is today, and no new land would have to be purchased.
Scenario two
The small-footprint buildings are preserved and green space is still plentiful. But getting from one class to another would require more time, and longer passing periods between classes would be needed. The class day would be longer as a result. Also, this plan necessitates acquiring some new property.
It can't exist under the current transportation system. An expanded KU on Wheels would be required, and cooperation with the City of Lawrence would be essential. Students would have to move across the city rather than simply to and from campus. This scenario, like the second one, also means longer passing periods and thus a longer class day.
Scenario three
Solution
What can't be argued is the fact that the University will have to adopt one of these visions. This university can't continue to grow and be effective unless one of these plans takes shape. The second scenario, of contiguous expansion, makes the most sense. It keeps campus looking academic and historical while keeping students from running all over Lawrence just to get to class. If some activities are focused in the current core campus, longer passing periods may not be needed. For example, using West Campus as it was intended, as the center for graduate studies, would keep undergraduates focused in core campus.
The second plan also keeps transit service to and across campus — something students wouldn't be able to adjust to life without. Buses today can take you from the Union to Trail Ridge Apartments, or they can get you from Wescoe to Learned much faster than your own two feet could. That's an essential part of campus transportation, especially if core campus expands.
The Planning Committee deserves credit for fully investigating all their options. But the second scenario makes more sense, and it should be pursued.
Andrew Rohrback for the editorial board
Kansan staff
Bradley Brooks ... Editorial
Jason Strait ... Editorial
Jodie Chester ... News
Jen Smith ... News
Adam Darby ... News
Charity Jeffries ... Online
Kristie Blasi ... Sports
Tommy Gallagher ... Associate Sports
Dave Morantz ... Campus
Eric Westlander ... Campus
Ashleigh Roberts ... Features
Steve Puppe ... Photo
Bryan Volk ... Design, graphics
Mitch Lucas ... Illustrations
Mark McMaster ... Wire
Ann Marchand ... Special sections
Lachel Rhoades ... News clerk
News editors
Advertising managers
Matt Fisher ... Assistant retail
Michael Soifer ... Campus
Colleen Eager ... Regional
Anthony Migilazzo ... National
Jeff Auslander ... Marketing
Chris Haghirian ... Internet
Brian LeFevre ... Production
Jen Wallace ... Production
Dustin Skidgel ... Promotions
Tyler Cook ... Creative
Annette Hoover ... Public relations
Rachel O'Neill ... Classified
Jaime Mann ... Assistant classified
Marc Harrell ... Senior account executive
Scott Swedland ... Senior account executive
Broadon your mind: Today's quote
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science."
Albert Einstein
**Letters:** Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
How to submit letters and guest columns
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Bradley Brooks (brooks@kansan.com) or Jason Strait (jstrait@kansan.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4810.
Andy Obermueller
andyo@kansan.com
I've been going off from this side of the page for a couple of years now, and finally it's dawned on you homo erecti to write in when I piss you off.
Students shouldn't be shocked into citizenship
Raving
In the past few days, I've been called both a racist and a moron by readers, chastised for missing a finance committee meeting and been told that I am scared of Delta Force members.
The only nice response I've received has been from my mom, and I couldn't convince the editors to print it.
But the other responses, some sent to my editors, some sent to me directly
via e-mail, reflect one thing: I am doing my iob.
I'm here to make you read this page, not necessarily to make you nod your head. I'm here to bring a point of view you can't get from your couch. And if you think, after reading my rants, that I'm a liar and a sumbitch, well, good. I won't lose any sleep over it.
Fact is, I hope you do get mad. One of my favorite professors once said, "I hope you disagree. I hope you disagree to the point where you get up and do something about it."
If you aren't moved to respond to at least one issue on the editorial page during the course of a year, then you don't have a big enough stake in your community. You aren't paying close enough attention. You care too little.
Take the following statements as an editorial test to determine what it takes to light a fire under your free-sweeck kettle:
Student Senator Matt Bachand should be fitted with a larynx harness to keep him from sponsoring any more inane legislation.
Bike lanes impede natural selection.
Congressman Jim Ryun's mental deficiency can be explained by the fact that his brain was oxygen starved during those long-distance races.
GTAs deserve health care about as much as proponents of animal liberation deserves Student Senate funding.
Bringing important issues to the foreground of student's collective awareness is an unusual job, and it's hard to determine whether one is being successful. Mother Teresa once said, "It's not my job to succeed, it's my job to try."
Environmental activists who are buried in coffins are hypocrites. We need those nutrients for farming.
But you shouldn't have to be shocked into citizenship. The editorial page should get the same amount of response for a piece on student fees that it does about the death of a student. Both are important issues that deserve space and debate in the paper.
- Kiosk is a waste of student's resources second only to the Center for Community Outreach.
All of these statements are hyperbole — inflated aphorisms designed to offend. Their shock value is certainly greater than their truth, except for that bit about Jim Ryun.
No one in their right mind would ever compare me to Mother Teresa, but her point is well taken.
I'm not here to apologize when you don't like my opinion. If you happen to agree, fine. If you're angered, OK. And once you're done being angry, I hope that you'll start to think. Maybe you'll change your mind. Maybe your opinion will be made stronger. Either way, I've earned my paycheck.
Steamed vet?
"A principal function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger."
In one of my favorite Supreme Court cases, Texas v. Johnson, Justice Brennen explains the Court's decision to uphold the right to burn the flag:
That's a fine want ad for the editorial page, and not a bad guide to active citizenship.
Obermüeller is an Liberal, Kan., senior in journalism.
Printing a couple of letters of concern about the caption is a pitiful attempt by the "Kansan" at accepting responsibility for blatant sexism. Not good enough. I want a formal apology from the editors about this incident printed on the front page. With that apology I would like to see an article on sexual harassment giving reasons why it is still happening and why it is not taken seriously in the media. The caption was a slap on the behind for all women. I want the editors to take responsibility for their sloppy editing and realize that this did not only offend many people, it was a direct attach on all women. Please take me seriously, this is a legitimate issue.
Loran Collier Kansas Alumnus
Feedback
Senate applause is inappropriate
'Kansan'caption was offensive
The "Kansan" slipped Sept. 29. One of its reporters wrote an article about a sorority function. To accompany the article there was a picture of a woman surrounded by watermelons. The bold caption read "Nice melons." When questioned by a concerned student and alumni the editor's excuse was, "I was not there to approve that." My concern is why the editor was not there to edit the work of these students. By "Webster's" definition, an editor is one who edits by occupation. In other words, it's you job.
Because this is an opinion page, I'm going to express my opinions about the funding process that the Feminist Union underwent in the last two weeks. In order for an organization to receive funding, they must go through the University Affairs Committee, the Finance Committee and Student Senate. The University
"Nice melons" is the type of caption that would be found in pornography, not in a publication that is trying to inform students. Stop and think about this for one moment. Would you tell your mom "Nice melons" even as a joke because she had on a shirt with watermelons? No, at least I pray that you wouldn't.
Jen Keltner Wichita senior
Sexual assaults were not funny
Instead, he didn't even argue the amount of funding or give the bill a nay in Finance. There are a number of reasons why this could have occurred, but I believe the bill was not amended in Finance because there would not have been enough votes for the amendment to pass. (Most of the committee members had left by the time the Feminist Union's bill was brought to the floor, including the ever so concerned Andy Obermueller.) Knowing that the amendment would not be passed in Finance, the senator waited for the Senate meeting to add the amendment. The amendment was barely passed. Then, the bill for the Feminist Union passed. At this time, Obermueller and his neo-servative buddies applauded. I could write another editorial about Obermueller and his twisted mind, but I will leave you to come up with the reasons why they felt the clapping was appropriate.
I am writing this letter in regard to the editorial cartoon printed in the Oct. 2 issue of the "Kansan." In the cartoon, you refer in a comical way, to the "masturbator" that has been flashing himself around campus. In no way do I see that it is the right of the "Kansan" to poke fun at this incident. One of my very close friends was one of the victims that evening. You were not there to see how frightened she was, but you did not waste any time
There were no amendments to the Feminist Union bill even discussed in Finance. When the Feminist Union went to Senate, a financial amendment was made to cut the Feminist Union's funding by $55. The senator that requested the amendment is on the Finance Committee; he should have done this in Finance, not Senate.
Affairs Committee passed the Feminist Union's bill. In Finance, there were questions, but not a single nay. Note that this is the committee that any issues of money, hence the name finance, would be brought up.
The value of dissection in fining cures for human diseases is another issue entirely. Believe me when I say that the cure for AIDS is not going to come out of a Biology 105 dissection lab. all the supporters of the student choice movement want is security. We know that student have been discriminated against in the past for the refusal to dissect. A student should not have to appeal his/her way to the top of the department to receive what is fair.
The Oct. 2 edition of the "Kansan" contained a column that inaccurately represented the position of the movement for a student choice dissection policy at the University. Know first that the proposed policy has yet to be drafted, and when it is it will contain no mention of eliminating dissection for all students. It is quite literally a student choice dissection policy. By visiting www.ukans.edu/~pal you can read PAL's views on this issue, which does not contain mention of eliminating disction labs. The movement for a student choice policy is widespread. It is supported by many groups of people for many reasons.
The goal of the student choice dissection movement is to assure that students have a choice. I'm sure this will be quite clear as soon as the policy is drafted. This movement represents no threat to students who wish to participate in dissection labs.
Dissection options needed at University
making light of this situation.
This kind of thing is not funny.
Who knows what this man was thinking?
I consider these women very lucky that they were not harmed physically. It is sad to think that a college woman cannot even go to her school's library to study without the fear of such occurrences. But what saddens me more is the fact that the "Kansan" does not skip a beat to laugh at such incidents. I feel that as a university newspaper, it is your job to inform, not condone and publicize comically such behavior.
Brenna Sweeney
Prairie Village sophomore
John Fowler Parsons freshman