Summer parking strife is exaggerated

As a fellow student, I tend to agree with most of the editorials I read

in the Technician. Antoinette Russell’s struck me differently. 

We all agree the construction on Hillsborough Street causes a number of headaches (for everyone, not just students) due to new traffic patterns, more

congestion and, yes, reduced on-street parking. However, I disagree

that N.C. State should provide summer students a free parking permit in light

of the ongoing construction.

First, the university offers summer session permits starting at $90 for

the parking decks. If students are indeed paying thousands of dollars

to attend summer school, a $90 permit isn’t a substantial additional

cost. 

If money really is a concern, there are a number of alternatives

such as riding a bicycle or taking the Wolfline. Cliche as it may

sound, if you can’t afford a permit, these are some of the

alternatives.

Second, the fact that you cite this morning “frenzy” as an added

complication for the life of a summer school student is inappropriate. There is far less traffic in and around campus during the summer

sessions, even with the construction, than there is during the

school year. If students are late to class because of their commute,

it’s no one’s fault but their own.

Lastly, why should summer students receive free parking permits while so

many other students have paid hundreds for a year long parking permit?

No offense, but I don’t want to subsidize your convenience.

NCSU is a research institution, but believe me, those researchers have

far more important things to do than worry about the exaggerated

strife experienced by summer students who can’t or won’t find

alternatives.

Patrick Wellenius

doctoral student, electrical engineering

Easley and Oblinger need ethics review

The Mary Easley situation is something that is nothing more than a crash

course in politics 201. The only problem is that ethics 101 was completely

overlooked. 

When Chancellor Oblinger says he cannot recall conversations

with such a high profile subject, you have to wonder what he can

recall, if anything at all? 

There were other applicants considered when the Provost candidacy and considerations were announced. Instead, Larry Nielson was chosen when according to the Technician and News and Observer he

was not in the final selection process. Chancellor Oblinger does recall

that. 

Mary Easley’s office is in the same building as Chancellor Oblinger, so I would question if the Chancellor has selective memory or management issues if he cannot remember memos, conversations and most of all how high-profile and influential people are retained to our campus.

Ronald Reagan had the same symptoms of selective memory remembering the Iran-Contra affair and could not remember key information that impacted a

nation.

Instead, Ollie North and other staffers took the fall for the

President. This time I think the University community should have learned

a valuable lesson from that period about accountability for the office in

which you assume and direct from. 

Merely firing Mary Easley does not erase or bring betterment to the University. It is not new news that she was hired because of her political connections and her rolodex of contacts. Another argument would be that the Duke Lacrosse team was blamed for criminal wrongdoing and the University and community did not back the players. 

High profiled lawyers had to speak for the accused and it turned out that the accused were innocent. However the lives of those players will still be remembered as the accused. 

It also took the Attorney General’s involvement. Perhaps we need for that to happen in this case.

If the Chancellor cannot recall things, perhaps he should remove

himself from making key decisions and leave it up to other agencies to

assist in ethics investigations. By doing so, he would not hurt the University

but instead would help create process improvement.

I personally think the Chancellor should apologize to everyone and recuse

himself in termination decisions relating to Mary Easley. Otherwise this

will cost the University more in the long term and create a stigma

like that of the Duke Lacrosse scandal.

Samuel Daughtry

freshman, business and marketing education

Easley is disgusting

The fact that Mary Easley has the nerve to ask for an $850,000 buy-out when I can’t even find another class to register for this fall to be qualified as a full-time student is truly disgusting.

Charles Burnett

sophmore, first year college