UO to drop counter-claim, Coltrane to apologize to alleged rape survivor

2/26/2015, 4:20PM: That’s the rumor, anyway.

No news on when he’ll apologize for his prejudicial allegation of an “unlawful release” of UO Presidential Archives.

Meanwhile, Coltrane and Bronet’s Campus Conversation and Progress Report on Addressing Sexual Violence is scheduled for Monday, March 2, from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at the Ford Alumni Center Giustina Ballroom.

Petition protesting UO decision to sue victim has 550 signatures as of 1:00 PM 2/24 2100 signatures as of 4 PM 2/26. Many powerful statements, read them here.

2/25/2015 update: Did UO Strategic Communicator Tobin Klinger lie to the student newspaper about the counterclaim?

tobinfor_web

From the comments:

This is from the Emerald story: Toby Klinger said this: ““The university is not seeking court costs or attorney fees from a student.” Emerald. http://www.dailyemerald.com/2015/02/23/petition-against-uos-counterclaim-in-recent-sexual-assault-litigation/

Nonsense. From the Answer filed in court by lawyers for the University: “defendants are entitled to recover attorney fees from the plaintiff.” Paragraph 102.

And this also: “Oregon is entitled to recover its reasonable attorney fees from plaintiff, or in the alternative, from plaintiff’s counsel.” Paragraph 106.

Toby Klinger is lying. Why is this tolerated by Coltrane?

I sent Klinger an email yesterday asking him to clarify his statement, and I cced Coltrane’s Chief of Staff Greg Rikhoff. No response.

Another 2/23/2015 update: UO student reporter Francesca Fontana has some posts from the petition, some sophomoric BS from $115K Duck PR flack Tobin Klinger, and the cutting response from the plaintiff’s attorney, here:

Samantha Brace, a UO student, wrote, “As a person, I am appalled. As a female student at the University of Oregon, I am outraged. UO is putting them self on the wrong side of history, the student body does not support the legal actions being taken against this woman. Make it known.”

Alumna Diana Salazar wrote, “Stop victim blaming! As an alumna, Im ashamed to have gone here and will reconsider recommending folks to UO.”

University spokesperson Tobin Klinger told the Emerald that the counterclaim is not directed at the plaintiff herself, but rather her attorneys.

“The university is not seeking court costs or attorney fees from a student. Rather, the counterclaim is directed at the Colorado-based attorneys. The goal is to hold the plaintiff’s attorneys responsible for their actions in bringing forth false allegations to leverage a difficult and unfortunate situation for their own financial gain,” he said in an email.

John Clune, the Colorado based lawyer representing the plaintiff responded to Emerald inquiries about the university response with the following statement:

“They need to just stop.  This whole counterclaim was an ill-conceived PR move that has blown up on them.  Since they are finding out that it looks bad to sue a rape victim, they are now saying that it was only intended for her lawyer.  That is obviously not what the counterclaim says.   We genuinely would like to help UO do a better job with responding to campus rape and would love to work together to achieve this but their behavior so far is not encouraging.”

2/23/2015 update: John Canzano calls out UO and Doug Park for “a brush-back pitch against all women on UO campus”, in the Oregonian here:

If you’re a student on campus at UO who reports an alleged sex crime, but the Lane County District Attorney doesn’t file charges, you now know you’ll potentially become a target of the university. You may get sued by UO. You may not be able to get standard care and services on campus. Even if the DA says he believes your account but couldn’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, you’re potentially a target.

Think that fosters reporting? Think that makes women at UO feel safe?

The counter claim seeks legal expenses and a dismissal of the original lawsuit. It’s legal wrangling. Some would tell you this is standard practice in an attempt to have any lawsuit dismissed. But a move like this carries a bigger punch. The university must know that and should have been more responsible with the filing.

I don’t think the general counsel is acting alone here, either. I think Oregon took great satisfaction in throwing a legal haymaker at “Jane Doe” for the trouble she’s caused administrators and coaches. The counter claim is the equivalent of a brush-back pitch to all women on campus.

I’m not much for sports metaphors, but they’re probably the only thing the Trustees who now run our university understand.

In other news, Duck PR flack Jennifer Winters reports in “Around the 0″ that Interim President Coltrane Coltrane wants to update us about his efforts to encourage reporting. Really:

The Campus Conversation and Progress Report on Addressing Sexual Violence is scheduled for Monday, March 2, from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at the Ford Alumni Center Giustina Ballroom.

The forum will include an update from interim UO President Scott Coltrane about the university’s campuswide efforts to prevent sexual assault, improve support services for survivors and encourage reporting.

2/23/2015 update: Tyler Kingkade has a report in the Huffington Post, here:

The “publication of false allegations about Oregon’s handling of a report of an alleged sexual assault creates a very real risk that survivors will wrongly be discouraged from reporting sexual assaults and sexual harassment to Oregon, in direct contravention of the goals of both Title IX and Oregon,” the university’s lawyers wrote in their filing.

Colby Bruno, senior legal counsel for the Victim Rights Law Center, a nonprofit in Boston that provides free legal services to sexual assault survivors, disagreed with UO’s assessment.

“In fact, it’s always the contrary,” Bruno told The Huffington Post Monday. “These types of lawsuits help bring voices to some victims who feel wronged, but were not in a place to speak out about it. These lawsuits often help with reporting, and do nothing to discourage reporting. Furthermore, a university’s reaction like this could actually discourage reporting because the victims on campus do not feel protected by their university if at the first sign of problems, the university lashes out against the victim.” …

UO called Doe’s lawsuit “frivolous” and “unreasonable,” and said the allegations “threaten to harm not only Oregon and Altman but also all sexual assault survivors in Oregon’s campus community.”

John Clune, who is one of Doe’s attorneys and is involved in several high-profile campus rape lawsuits, said he has never seen a university use the type of language that UO did in its counterclaim.

… Other colleges have pushed back in lawsuits against sexual assault survivors, but it’s highly uncommon for schools to go as far as Oregon has and sue the alleged victim. …

2/23/2015 update: Who made the decision for UO to sue the alleged basketball rape survivor?

Looks like it was Interim General Counsel Doug Park, presumably with the consent of Scott Coltrane and his “Executive Leadership Team”:

Doug Park Doug Park
Interim General Counsel
(541) 346-3082
gcounsel@uoregon.edu

From the GC job description, here:

Description of Duties

… As the chief legal officer for the university, the General Counsel is responsible for managing the legal affairs of the university and overseeing the office’s provision of legal services across the entire spectrum of university life.

The GC advises the university’s senior leadership team, including the president, UO Board of Trustees, Senior Vice President and Provost, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO, and others, on the legal implications of strategy, business, and policy decisions.

The GC retains and supervises outside counsel when prudent. The GC works closely with the University Secretary on all matters with legal implications that come before the board.

This position supervises the office staff including five attorneys, one executive assistant/operations manager, and one legal assistant (all officers of administration).

2/22/2015 update: Sign petition protesting UO and Altman’s decision to sue alleged rape survivor

The University of Oregon has become the first institution in higher education to sue a rape survivor pursuing her rights under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act — all after violating medical privacy laws by seizing her counseling records from the campus health center, and asking campus counselors to give her substandard care.

It has nearly 200 signatures as of 4:30PM, and many very powerful comments.

Obviously some of the facts are still in dispute, and I don’t know who is circulating this petition, but signing it seems like a good first step towards telling Scott Coltrane and his lawyers that they aren’t speaking for UO when it comes to this dishonorable decision.

Keep in mind that while the Lane County DA did decline to prosecute, saying he didn’t doubt the events but didn’t think he could prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, UO eventually expelled the three perpetrators for non-consensual sex, and banned them from campus for 10 years. Coach Dana Altman has all but admitted he did not do his due diligence in investigating why Providence had banned one of them from playing basketball for a year (initially he’d been banned from campus as well) when recruiting him for UO. The UO administration’s own hand picked “Presidential Review Panel” has called for recruiting reforms. And UO is now claiming that the survivor’s lawsuit is “frivolous”?

2/19/2015: Dana Altman and UO file counterclaim against alleged basketball rape survivor

Yes, I’m sorry to say you read that correctly. Andrew Grief has the report in the Oregonian, here. Full despicable counterclaim here:

Screen Shot 2015-02-19 at 11.41.58 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-19 at 11.41.43 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-19 at 11.41.13 PM

Screen Shot 2015-02-19 at 11.40.50 PM

Of course the reason Canzano wrote his “Every Day with Dana Altman is Another Day in the Muck” column and the reason for the hundreds of other news reports, columns, blog posts, and angry letters to President Mike Gottfredson was not the survivor’s purported efforts to manipulate public opinion through the press, it was the UO administration’s efforts to cover up the allegations and UO’s inept handling of them, once they finally became public.

And now UO and Dana Altman are, literally, blaming the victim. And suing her.

On top of that they are claiming that the reason they are suing her for their attorney’s fees is because they think her lawsuit will discourage civil rights claims and rape reporting, and because they think she has “damaged a good man’s reputation.” I’m sorry, but this is bullshit. Watch Dana Altman’s news conference. The damage to this Eagle Scout’s reputation, and to UO’s, was entirely self-inflicted:

Timeline and links to the docket and filings here.

So who is footing the bill for the Miller Nash attorneys who filed this nasty counterclaim? It looks like UO is. With student tuition money? By raising the mandatory fee UO students pay for football and basketball games?

Continue reading

Union proposes 7% + 6% to get faculty to Lariviere target. Bargaining Session IV: Economics, Thursday 2/26 10AM.

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 11.33.20 AM
That’s Tobin Klinger in the back right, presumably he’ll have an “Around the 0″ post up soon with the Duck view of the meeting.

2/26/2015 update: The union proposes raises of

July 2015:
2.5% ATB
2.0% Merit
1.0% Internal equity pool for each department
1.5% External equity pool, to be allocated across rank and dept. based on AAU public averages. No external equity raise from this pool to exceed 5%.

July 2016:
2.5% ATB
4.0% Merit

As before, 8% promotion raises, and 8% (exceeds expectations) or 4%(meets) 6th year review raises after promotion to full, and raises in the hiring floors for NTTFs.

My estimate is that this will get UO salaries to the AAU public peer averages by July 2016. The 2009 Lariviere/Coltrane/Bean plan would have done this by July 2013 or so, but that’s money under the bridge:

From: James Bean [mailto:jcbean@uoregon.edu]
Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 12:26 PM
To: Deans Working Group
Subject: Faculty Salaries
The Missouri article stating that UO has the lowest salaries in the AAU has caused quite a stir (we have since verified that they were correct). Low salaries were always thought of as just Oregonian. But 34 out of 34 is a whole other thing. We cannot have this. Richard’s reaction was “this is job #1.” Richard will likely have an announcement on how we are attacking this when politically feasible (after last gavel). Please communicate to your faculty that the Missouri article really got our attention. This may require disruptive solutions.
Thanks, Jim
_______________________________
James C. Bean
Senior Vice President and Provost

Five days later, the Register Guard’s Editors essentially endorsed Lariviere’s plan to get UO faculty to the AAU medians:

The market for academic talent is national, even global. From a salary standpoint, Oregon has dropped out of the competition. The state is fortunate in having universities that continue to meet high standards, but Oregon’s advantages — a relatively low cost of living and a high quality of life — can only be relied upon to make up part of the salary deficit.

Richard Lariviere, who will become president of the UO in July, comes to Eugene from the University of Kansas, an AAU university with an average faculty salary of $91,400 — 25 percent higher than at the UO. He’s no doubt aware that higher education claimed 15.1 percent of Oregon’s general fund budget in 1987-89, but received only 6.4 percent in 2007-09. One of Lariviere’s continuing challenges will be to persuade Oregon’s governor and Legislature that underfunding higher education has consequences.

In March 2011 Scott Coltrane, at the time CAS Dean, announced his plans to implement this for CAS faculty:

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 3.38.22 PM

Russ Tomlin, then VP for Academic Affairs, released a detailed spreadsheet showing the plan for the entire UO, designed to get salaries to the AAU comparator averages by no later than 2014:

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 3.43.29 PM

But then Kitzhaber and Pernsteiner fired Lariviere, and Allyn Ford and the OUS Board replaced him with Bob Berdahl, then Mike Gottfredson. They devoted all their energies to fighting with the faculty over pay, and everything else.

Getting back to the present, Coltrane’s administration is hiding basic financial information from the union – which has been waiting for more than 3 months, and has paid $1700. Rumor has it that Moffitt and Shelton are also hiding this information from the Administration’s bargaining team, if that makes it any more excusable.

They will make their economic counterproposal on March 12.

(Jim Bean, of course, is still collecting his pork from the administration’s bloated budget.)

12:01 PM: Lots of talk now about national searches. This is all about faculty searches. The administration hires its own people without any search whatsoever, e.g. $130K AVP for Collaboration Chuck Triplett. So it’s pretty amusing to listen to Bill Brady talk about how such searches are needed to increase diversity.

12:30PM: Session IV ends. Session V, with the admins counterproposal on raises, will open with a presentation from Jamie Moffitt, explaining where she’s been spending all our money. In the Library Collaboration room, 10AM Thursday, March 12. Should be well worth attending.

2/15/2015: Some history: In 2013 the union opened with a proposal for 9% raises for each of the two years of the contract. Basically this was the Lariviere plan, to get UO salaries to the AAU medians. The University countered with, if I remember correctly, an offer of 2%, for one year. Rudnick, Gleason, and Blandy said this was all UO could afford, saying UO had already spent the Lariviere money on other things.

Months of bitter haggling ensued. VPFA Jamie Moffitt refused to give the union the documents showing UO’s budget projections:

The union brought in Howard Bunsis, a forensic accountant, to challenge those few budget numbers that Moffitt would provide. Bunsis showed that Moffitt had been building a large and increasing reserve – so large it broke OUS’s rules. Moffitt fled the room in tears. Literally.

The University then made a take it or leave it offer of, if I remember right, 5.5% spread over 2 years. More was impossible. Rudnick told us “The well is dry”.

The union ignored the threat. Eventually we got ~12% in raises, spread over two years. Plus Tim Gleason’s $350 in Goat money. What will happen this time? Show up Thursday and find out: Continue reading

What’s Gottfredson’s PAGIA up to?

Let’s find out:

Subject: public records request, PAGIA documents
Date: February 26, 2015
Cc: Gregory Rikhoff
To: Lisa Thornton

Dear Ms Thornton –

This is a public records request for any documents sent or received by the President’s Office relating to former President Gottfredson’s decision to establish the “President’s Advisory Group on Intercollegiate Athletics”, the determination of its membership, and its activities since.

I ask for a fee waiver on the basis of public interest.

UO Board Trustee Susan Gary will allow NTTFs to meet with Trustees

2/25/2015 update: Ron Bramhall (Business) and faculty union VP for NTTFs, persuades the BOT’s sole Faculty Trustee, Susan Gary (Law), to invite NTTFs to meetings with Board members:

Screen Shot 2015-02-25 at 4.51.27 PM

Yes, after 18 months she’s still trying to figure things out as she goes.

2/19/2015 update: Gary had been planning all along to invite the NTTF’s to “separate but equal” meetings in June. Honest:

MEMORANDUM

February 19, 2015

TO: Deans & Department Heads
FROM: Susan Gary
RE: UO Board Discussions with NTTF

Continue reading

UO President’s Office staff to face discipline for deleting documents from Archives

Just kidding, that will never happen, and this situation is not funny.

The latest Rich Read report in the Oregonian doesn’t have anything about what documents the President’s Office is hiding from the public. This is despite the fact that many emails in the Presidential Archives, about matters clearly related to the public’s business, mention attachments that were not in the archives. Other things that clearly should have been in the archives – e.g. documents and correspondence about Knight Arena funding – were not. Or at least I couldn’t find them.

CAS Dean Andrew Marcus gave me VPAA Doug Blandy’s takedown letter at 5:10 PM on Jan 20th. At that point the administration knew almost nothing about what was in the Archives or how I had obtained them. The administration’s normal response in these situations is “we can’t comment about a discipline matter under investigation”.  Instead they sent out the prejudicial email below, just 2.5 hours later.

And now, having prejudged the decision by the UO Archives to release the Presidential Archives as “unlawful” in his off-the-hip email, Interim President Coltrane needs to find some scapegoats to make that hasty judgement look true.

The chances that this will be followed by an investigation of what Johnson Hall has hid from the public are pretty slim.

Date: January 20, 2015 at 7:39:38 PM PST
From: “President’s Office” <pres@uoregon.edu> Reply-To: pres@uoregon.edu
Subject: Archive release investigation

Dear Colleagues,

We have recently learned that a significant number of archived records from the President’s Office have been unlawfully released. These records contain confidential information about faculty, staff and students, but our current understanding is that no social security numbers, financial information or medical records were shared.

We have launched an investigation of the incident, and we have put staff members on administrative leave, pending that investigation. The information was sent to a university professor, and we have already requested that the professor return the information and refrain from any public release of confidential information. To our knowledge, only one record has been shared externally at this point.

We are committed to taking steps to mitigate the potential injury associated with this situation.

Sincerely,

Scott Coltrane, Interim President

Things our administration has money for: Sports Products and Cops

2/24/2015: Coltrane tops off the bloated UOPD budget – up $1M in a few years – with a new Assistant Chief to help out UOPD Chief Carolyn McDermed. She gets $139K a year – same as the chief of Eugene’s far larger EPD. The Chief of the Oregon State Police gets $149K. Job ad here, more bloat below.

12/1/2014: From Gottfredson’s “Strategic Initiatives” project last summer. These are two of the projects that were approved, the funds are mostly out of student tuition money and CAS cutbacks. More than $1M. No sign that Coltrane has revisited these priorities:

Screen Shot 2014-12-01 at 10.15.11 AM

Emerald: Parking tickets subsidize Matt Court parking garage

2/23/1015: Since the Ducks are still claiming they pay their own way, it seems like a good time to repost this classic Emerald report:

Alex Tomchak and Dave Martinez have the story in a Daily Emerald investigative report – from back in 2010:

If you pay a parking ticket doled out on the University campus, chances are you’ll be helping to pay off debts accrued on the parking structure under construction beneath the Matthew Knight Arena.

… “If the circumstances had been perfect, we would never have built an underground structure,” Horner said, adding, “Under the circumstances, because of the location, because of the requirement to actually build the arena, this is what we have.”

Paul Omundson on UO Board’s failed search plan – endorses Coltrane

2/22/2015: Paul Omundson on UO Board’s failed search plan

An Op-Ed in the RG, here:

Despite spectacular success on the football field, these are hardly good times for the University of Oregon. … Donors gone amok in self-aggrandizement, with a growing cadre of campus development and donor relations personnel, is one cause. Lack of real leadership from the administration in Johnson Hall is another. And the state doesn’t help by reducing public funds for competitive teacher salaries.

In this poisonous cauldron of self interests, the fabric of the UO as an educational institution is being destroyed.

The school’s new Board of Trustees can help change all that with its power to select a new president. But right now the board is blowing it.

The solution, and probably the only lifeline that can rescue the university, is to select a new president who can truly lead and rise above the tumult. Because of the depth of the tumult, this individual must be someone internal — a person who knows the nuts and bolts of the institution and can stand up to campus piranhas; one who has gained respect of constituents; one who has survived the craziness that now prevails; and, most importantly, a healer who can restore the balance between academics and athletics.

There are such candidates. Start with Scott Coltrane, who is shackled by that “interim president” title and can only tread water right now. But there are other worthy internal candidates. Here’s why it’s so important to change course right now:

The current model for selecting a UO president doesn’t work. The same process was used to hire the last president, Michael Gottfredson. A national executive search committee selected him as best candidate, ran him through pretentious dog and pony shows on campus, and the UO hired him. He was shortly run out of town. No one wants a Twilight Zone experience like that again. …

2/15/2015: Nathan Tublitz on UO’s troubling times

An Op-Ed in the RG, here:

…The unusually high turnover rate of presidents and upper administrators has not helped our academic standing. Neither has the financial disinvestment by the state of Oregon. Also contributing to UO’s academic stagnation is the growing number of decision-makers who do not understand academia, because they have never been faculty members. The situation has been further exacerbated by a series of university scandals, poorly handled labor negotiations, decreased fiscal transparency, and retaliation against those who speak up.

The consequences have been a major decline in morale among faculty and staff and a loss of trust in the administration. This is not a good framework for positive change.

Enter the new UO Board of Trustees. Created by the state of Oregon, the board is mandated to oversee and improve the UO, something the state Board of Higher Education, with seven institutions to manage, could not provide. It is hoped a UO-specific board will reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies, stabilize finances and support strong leadership inside the university. Indeed, board members seem genuinely committed to improving the UO.

But what is their vision? What do they want the university to be? …

As an experiment, I’m not going to allow comments on this post – please add yours on the RG website instead. They have some thoughtful ones already.

UO Student Senate rejects Ducks’ attempt to raise mandatory ticket fee

2/21/2015 update: That’s the vote from today’s ASUO meeting.

Duck Athletic Director  Rob Mullens is now in the difficult position of having to choose between:

a) taking the same $1.6M as last year and being revealed as the sort of person who would try and bluff our students for money, or

b) cutting the ticket allotment and being revealed as the sort of person who would take revenge on the students over $50K, after getting a $250K raise himself.

Presumably he’ll figure out some way to take the offered 0% increase and try and save face. My guess is this will involve a donation from some Duck booster who suddenly finds it in his heart to give a little to UO students.

By rejecting the Duck try for a 10% increase, our students are leading the way to the March 4th meeting of the full UO Senate, which will consider legislation to hold the Athletic Department to its 2004 promise to start making payments to UO’s academic side for academic scholarships. The student vote is a hopeful sign that maybe UO can finally figure out how to balance the interests of the Duck’s big-time sports enterprise and its well paid coaches and AD’s with those of UO’s cash-strapped academic side.

2/21/2015 update: Meanwhile, the University of Akron is *paying* its students to go to basketball games, in an effort to build some buzz for TV. And in cash – not just Uncle Phil bobbleheads.

Ironically, as Fox Sports points out, if Akron were to give the *players* $5 for showing up for each game, they would swiftly bring down the wrath of UO’s Jim O’Fallon and his NCAA infractions committee.

2/20/2015: Lubash and ASUO Student Senators call out Eric Roedl out on his ticket threat

Letter to the Daily Emerald, written by UO undergrad and Truman Scholar Andrew Lubash, and signed by 13 other Senators and 3 ACFC members, here:

… Out of the $15 million ASUO budget, students spend $1,695,348 paying for the football and men’s basketball ticket lottery. This comes down to about $71 per year that students pay through their mandatory fees for the chance to go to our athletic events. We, the undersigned, think this is too high. …

However, when the ASUO began negotiating with the Athletics Department this year, we were surprised to find out that not only was there absolutely no chance they were going to give us more tickets, they were requesting $169,000 more from students than last year, for the same number of tickets. A 10% increase!

We were infuriated.

Now, they say that they will likely begin cutting student football tickets if we don’t give them at least a 3% increase (~$50,000). Their actions are greedy and deplorable. They’re acting like a business focused solely on profit, when they should be working towards supporting the academic side of this university. Why isn’t there an expectation on our campus that athletics give back to students? Students aren’t even guaranteed a ticket.

… After an article came out in the register Guard saying that the Athletic Director would fundraise millions in order to pay for his own salary increases ($700,000/year) and those of other Athletic department staff, we had had enough. We find it fundamentally unfair that the Athletic Department can find it within their hearts to fundraise for themselves, yet they resort to threatening to cut student tickets if the ASUO does not give them their requested increase. Is it actually that hard for them to raise $50,000 on top of the millions they already plan to raise? We don’t think so.

… At some point, someone needs to stand up and shine a light on the enormous difference that exists between what the Athletic Department deems as “necessary” and what students deem as excessive. Many of us struggle to afford our education as it is. We should not stand for our own Athletic Department to treat us as another lucrative source of funds to line their own pockets with. It’s time for them to start giving back and support students of all financial backgrounds.
We don’t understand how the ASUO, in good conscience, could increase the Athletic Department’s budget $1 unless we guarantee that students get more football ticket. If more tickets is not an option, we should not agree to charge students more for the same amount of tickets.

[Signed by 17 Student Senators, etc.]

2/19/2015 update: Duck’s Eric Roedl threatens to cut student tickets unless they pay 10% more:

Actually, our students have already talked him down to a 3% increase, and Roedl’s latest threat seems pretty unlikely, given that Scott Coltrane just told the UO Board that athletics would have no problem coming up with millions to pay for raises for Helfrich and Mullens.

But Roedl’s giving it a half-hearted effort anyway. Gotta try and cover his own $42K raise, I suppose:

From: Eric Roedl
Date:02/19/2015 4:05 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: [student name redacted]
Cc: Laura Jorgensen
Subject: Student Seating Options

[Student name redacted]

Attached ticket calculator contains two options:

1. Represents a 3% increase to I-Fee as discussed with no impact to student seat allocation.

2. Represents a 0% increase to I-Fee. Under this model we would likely [emphasis added] reduce the number of football seats per Pac 12 Game (Utah, Wash. St., Cal, USC, Oregon St.) by 300. We would then increase the number of Pac-12 Season Student Season Ticket Plans available for student purchase (at a price of $300 per package) by 300.

Please review and let me know if you have any questions or thoughts prior to submitting.

Thanks, Eric

Spreadsheet here.

2/10/2015 10:30 update: AAD Eric Roedl fails to talk students into paying more

The committee can’t agree, so the default recommendation of $0 goes to the ASUO Senate, for a Feb 24. vote. That’s a $1.6M cut from last year. Rob Mullens has two weeks to raise the money from donors, twist enough arms in the student senate to get a bailout, or convince Scott Coltrane to stick to the threat of a cut in tickets if the students don’t pay up.

The compromise plan should be to switch to a voluntary athletics fee. Roedl hates that idea because he wants to hide the true cost of “free” tickets from the students.

8:00 AM Tuesday, Now, in the EMU Rouge River room.

Lubash is giving Roedl a brutal beating. Roedel is trying to cram down a mandatory student fee increase, the day after the AD announced it had the funds to give $2M in raises to the coach and athletic director.

IMG_0519

My guess is Roedl bails and leaves the money on the table, but who knows? Students will have to play hardball, and he’s spewing doubt and confusion.

Student asks what would happen if they cut the IFee? Roedl won’t say.

Lubash: You say you can raise money to pay for coach’s raises. Why not go out to you donors and ask for money to pay for cuts in student ticket prices.

Hansen: Notes that the AD estimate for ticket values assumes demand curves don’t slope down. Ben assigns failing grade.

Schlegel: Never a campaign among donors to get donations for student tickets? Roedl: Not to my knowledge.

I gotta go, sorry no more live-blog.

3:30 PM update: UO Board approves fat raises for Helfrich, Mullens. Ducks want more student cash.

Diane Dietz has the story, here.

It’s tough listening to Coltrane push this on the Board: “The cost of these contracts is borne entirely by athletics”. Sure, if you ignore the millions in hidden subsidies from student tuition money.

The brown-nosing at this meeting is pretty deep. The trustees did have some tough questions about the Falling Sky contract to sell beer to the students at the new EMU though.

2/9/2015 update: That’s what’s happening today, in 15 minutes, at the Board’s EAC meeting. Angela Wilhems is still hiding the contracts, but it looks like Mullens will get a $250k raise to $700K, while Helfrich will go from $1.5M (if I remember right) to ~$3.5M. Plus a plethora of bonuses, of course.

Well this certainly explains why Mullens has been trying to get more money out of the UO students. More on that below and here.

2/9/2015: With Matt Court attendance < 50%, Mullens wants to raise student fee

According to this new report from the OC Register’s Ryan Kartje, Oregon’s basketball attendance is down 24% from last year. Word is the student section was half empty tonight.

But apparently that’s not going to keep Duck Athletic Director Rob Mullens and his AAD Eric Roedl from trying to raise the mandatory fee they charge UO students for tickets. Kaylee Tornay has the report in the Daily Emerald, here:

The Feb. 6 budget hearing between the athletics department and the Athletics and Contracts Finance Committee, which determine annually the amount and price for student ticket distribution for football and men’s basketball games, led to yet another stalemate in reaching an agreement. The ACFC approved a proposal of an 18.9 percent decrease to the Athletics Department’s current ASUO budget. Later, this decision was overturned due to faulty voting processes, according to ACFC Chair Andrew Lubash.

The budget hearing was the second held this year to work out how much it will cost students next year, regardless of whether they attend athletic events or not, to receive the same amount of tickets to athletic events that they received in the 2014-2015 school year. Students pay for 5,448 tickets per regular season football game and 1,854 per basketball game. These are distributed via a lottery system (when you log onto goducks.com and watch the O spin for an hour hoping to get a ticket) that is funded by a percentage of the Incidental Fee, which each student pays every enrolled term.

This year the student body as a whole paid the Athletics Department $1,695,348 for the ticket lotteries for football and men’s basketball. The Athletics Department opened negotiations this fall requesting a 10 percent increase to provide the same amount of tickets for the 2015-2016 year. This would mean an additional $169,535 and would bring next year’s total to $1,864,883.

The ACFC met with Athletics on Jan. 16 and negotiated the request to a possible 3 percent increase rather than 10 percent. That would mean students would pay $50,860 more than they did this year. However, no official agreement was reached, and the ACFC discussed the athletics budget again in a meeting on Jan. 30. Ronnie Grenier-Hemphill, the chief liaison between the Athletics Department and ACFC, informed the Committee that Eric Roedl, Executive Senior Associate Athletic Director of Finance, had brought up the possibility of having to cut the amount of tickets, if anything less than the 3 percent increase were approved.

The Emerald followed up with Roedl on the matter and he delivered the following comment:

“Maybe we’d adjust the ticket allotment in some ways to more accurately reflect the value and the money that’s being transacted…we’d continue to have dialogue to find something that works for everybody.” Roedl said.

Funny, I don’t remember anything about falling attendance in Roedl’s powerpoint, when he was hitting up the students for a 10% increase.

If the students do pay this, where will the money go? To people like AD for Finance Eric Roedl, who’s already managed to scrape up the funds to give himself a $42K raise, to $212K, in just two years:

2014:

Screen Shot 2015-02-09 at 9.14.23 AM

2012:

Screen Shot 2015-02-09 at 9.14.11 AM

Continue reading

Jon Krakauer sues over use of FERPA to hide rape records

The Student Press Law Center has a report, here:

… Krakauer sought the records in connection with an upcoming book, “Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town,” focusing on the Johnson case and the larger issue of campus sexual assault. But the university system claims that the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act forbids even acknowledging that the records exist.

… “Public records are the backbone of investigative journalism,” the brief argues. “Access to records makes a decisive difference in whether the public learns of the shortcomings of government officials and programs in time to take action.”

… “It’s essential for public accountability to clarify that FERPA does not override state open-records laws, especially not where there is an intense public interest in disclosure and no real privacy left to protect,” said attorney Frank D. LoMonte, executive director of the SPLC. “The public has a right to know how Commissioner Christian reached his decision, and that will be possible only if the Court affirms the trial court’s reasonable, common-sense understanding of this widely abused statute.”

Strategic planning workshop #3, Monday 1-3PM at Longhouse

I heard some good reports about workshop #2 on Tuesday, which apparently had about 100 people show up. Here’s the announcement for #3:

Dear students, faculty, OAs, and classified staff:

Your input and expertise is greatly needed for the university’s strategic planning process. We are currently in the process of creating a strategic plan that will chart our course into the future. We need your help in shaping our strategic direction; and defining our university’s priorities and goals.

We invite you to participate in the upcoming Strategic Planning Workshop:

Workshop 3: Monday, February 23, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. at Many Nations Longhouse
Focus on: Increasing the impact of UO’s research, scholarship, creative inquiry, and expanding graduate education.

Food and drink will be provided and no RSVP is required. You are welcome to come for all or part of the session.

Faculty, staff, and students from across campus are working on creating this plan, and they need your input and expertise in the process. Your participation will enable us to determine how we can best use our resources to serve our students, conduct our research, and serve our community. Please come to share your insights.

To learn more about the Strategic Planning Process, the university’s Competitive Excellence plan, future workshops, and/or “comment on-line,” visit the Office of the Provost website and click on the Strategic Planning Tab.

We very much look forward to our work together during the strategic planning process.

All the best,

Frances Bronet
Acting Provost

Robert Kyr
Senate President