OPINION Page 6 Friday, May 27, 1988 The Michigan Daily Pfl i Racism strikes at shanty I Vol. XCVIII- No. 4S Unsigned editorials represent the majority views of the Daily's Editorial Board. Cartoons and signed editorials do not necessarily reflect the Daily's opinion. Secretive search THE UNIVERSITY BOARD of Re- gents is violating the essence of the state of Michigan's Open Meetings Act (OMA) by secretly conducting their search for the University's next president. The OMA, enacted eleven years ago, requires public bodies to conduct most business in open meetings. Last Friday, the Ann Arbor News filed a lawsuit against the regents in hopes of compelling them to publicly iden- tify the candidates and obey the law. The OMA states that closed meetings are permitted when re- viewing "the contents of an application for employment or ap- pointment to a public office when the candidate requests the applica- tion to remain confidential." How- ever, the rule also states, "all inter- views by a public body for em- ployment or appointment to a pub- lic office have to be conducted in an open meeting (emphasis added)." By ignoring this stipulation, the regents are blatantly violating the intent and spirit of the OMA. With less than a month left to choose Harold Shapiro's replace- ment, the regents have yet to dis- close the names of the candidates. The applicants are unknown be- cause the Board of Regents has been interviewing candidates privately in small groups, and skirting the OMA by not having a quorum present at the interviews. By deliberately circumventing the OMA, the regents are displaying a flagrant disregard for public opin- ion. The University community has a right to know and to examine the candidates in question; for example, the community has a right to know if the regents are considering wo- men and people of color. Also, considering the racial and sexual antagonism on this campus, there is a true need for the public to examine the backgrounds of poss- ible candidates. The regents fear that many of the candidates would withdraw their names if faced with publicity, thus leaving the University with fewer applicants. Supposedly, some can- didates have requested that their names not be made public because of the friction it might cause at their present occupation. Though the regents' actions may be sympa- thetic to the needs of the candidates, their shroud of secrecy must be sacrificed for the sake and needs of the public. If the Senate Judiciary Commit- tee had conducted its search for a new Supreme Court Justice last year in private and not in the public eye, Robert Bork might have been appointed. President Reagan's at- tempt to install Bork was blocked in large part by the public outcry it aroused. This is just one example of how laws like the OMA have worked in the public's best interest. It is the regents' responsibility to uphold the law and bring the presi- dential selection process out of the closet. Even without the legal im- perative of the OMA, the regents should feel accountable to the Uni- versity community and encourage its participation in choosing the most qualified candidate for this vi- tally important position. ON SATURDAY, MAY 14, one an anti-apartheid structure is clearly anti-apartheid shanty on the diag an expression of racism. was burned, and the other w a s When campus security found the doused with gasoline. Campus Se- shanty ablaze early in the morning, curity was slow to respond and is a "suspicious" looking group of not continuing its investigation. four men were spotted in the vicin- Predictably, the University admin- ity. "Security" recorded the license istration, which continually es- plate number of the car they drove pouses its concern about racism on away in, but they have undertaken campus, has also not responded no follow up investigation. Addi- seriously to this act of vandalism tionally, they delayed their standard and racism. notification of the Ann Arbor po- The burning of the shanty is a lice until Thursday - fully five premeditated act of racism. This days after the incident occurred. vandalism is a direct attack on what This weak and slow response by those shanties symbolize: the campus security to the racist attack struggle on this campus to end makes their professional priorities racism at home and abroad, specifi- and commitment to equal protection cally in Southern Africa. There are on campus highly suspect. several potential targets (even other Response by the University ad- shanties) for vandals on campus - ministration has been no more that these vandals singled out only reassuring. Fleming claimed that LDOKS SUSPICIOUS AOCRACK DEAL? NAl, ITS JUST REGENTS INTERYWING L MOTtR CANDIDATE. the destruction of the shanty could not necessarily be considered a racist act. "It's a shame that it hap- pened," he said, "the question of what you can do about it is a different matter." This is merely rhetoric spouted by an administra- tion concerned about their image and apparently unconcerned about racism on this campus. The establishment of the code - the self-heralded policy against racial harassment - is a perfect example of how Fleming and the regents opt for public relation ploys instead of dealing with real issues. The burning of the shanty indicates that the code, Fleming's superficial answer to racist attacks, is useless in deterring them. Any sincere effort to address racism must be accompanied by a change in University policies and structure, such that it works to dismantle the institutional racism which pervades this campus. One small step in this direction would be for the administration to recog- nize acts of racism, such as the burning of the shanty, when they occur. In response to the shanty burn- ing, the University community should demand that campus security conduct a full investigation, and President Fleming to condemn the act as an act of racism. Campus se- curity and the administration must fulfill their duty to create an atmo- sphere intolerant of racism on cam- pus. i The nriminiotration nnralere na nlidlnxit clcepn't iindrfroctnd: Regents ignorant of MLK day AS USUAL, PRESIDENT Fleming and the Board of Regents have re- sponded inappropriately and hypo- critically to an important campus issue, this time the observance of Martin Luther King's birthday. More awareness and understanding of Dr. King and his teachings is vitally needed on this campus, per- haps now more than ever. Yet the administration is dealing with this issue in a nonproductive, reaction- ary manner. Last term, predominantly-student groups forced the administration to deal with the King holiday b y protesting and organizing a boycott of classes. Since the regents couldn't make the students' demand for a King holiday subside, they took their second favorite option when faced with student and minor- ity outrage: to pretend that what students had forced them to consider was actually their idea from the start. As a result, the administration is V V looking for a way to cause the least amount of damage to their "author- ity" while still appearing to be concerned. In fact, during their discussion of their planned "obser- vance," the regents did not mention the student protests once. The idea of designating the Mon- day after Dr. King's birthday as a University holiday (it has been a legal public holiday since 1983) was originally brought up as one of the BAM III and UCAR demands last spring. The University typi- cally decided to "recognize" the holiday without actually doing anything about it, like cancelling regular classes in favor of alterna- tive classes about Dr. King's life and beliefs, or providing financial support for these alternative events. President Fleming has said he is considering designating January 16, 1989 as "Diversity Day," and that, while classes would be cancelled, employees would not be given a day off. In these statements Flem- ing shows all too clearly his warped and inadequate understanding of the meaning of MLK Day and of the situation of workers on this cam- pus. MLK day is a reminder of the past and present oppression against minorities across the world; the fact that they are all members of the human race is to be emphasized. Celebrating only "diversity" on this day omits the more radical and basic message this day stands for. Dr. King's message has immense value to the many struggles against oppression in this world today. It is for this reason Dr. King's birthday requires special recognition and honor over and above other legal holidays which are not observed by the University. Of all groups within the Univer- sity community, the employees have without question the largest minority population; they are also the most oppressed by the Univer- sity and its policies. They are the primary target for MLK's message; however, Regent Smith said at last week's meeting: "If you give stu- dents a day off, the staff will want a day off as well... It will cost the University a lot of money." That doesn't sound like the statement of a person whose concern is spreading MLK's message; rather, it sounds like someone whose "bottom line" is finances. It is highly offensive for Fleming and the regents to put up this pub- lic relations farce of recognizing Dr. King's birthday when they clearly haven't heard or understood much of what he said or stood for. The ad- ministration would do a much greater honor to Dr. King by re- flecting on his message, giving time off for workers and students, and altering its repressive policies. This would be much more acceptable than granting hypo- critical tokens in an attempt to still the growing discontent of students and minorities.