3PM in 115 Lawrence. Official agenda here, live video here. My understanding is that Senate President Paris has cleared the session for as long as the Q&A takes. The UO M timeline on the rape and cover-up allegations is here. Sorry, the live-blog below has gaps – though none as bad as those in the administration’s timeline on how they responded to the rape allegations.
He’s not ready to sign the Academic Freedom policy – his lawyers still need to review it. Speaking of lawyers, I wonder how much Rudnick and Frohnmayer have billed on this so far.
President Gottfredson reiterated his desire to protect UO students. He was very forceful about that. It was a better delivered speech than his usual, but he didn’t explain the many gaps in the timeline, e.g. the 14 day gap, JH failure to send the EPD report to the UOPD, the Geller resignation, decision to dismantle the IAC, etc. He was asked about Senate participation in hiring the FAR replacement. He punted. I asked him if he had ever planned to report the alleged rape to the campus. He didn’t give an answer to that. (If you’ve got any idea how not giving a police report to your police “protects your students” please let him know, for his next speech.)
After the questions ended, I asked the Senate to suspend the rules to consider a resolution about the allegations and the administration’s response, but explicitly not including a vote of no-confidence. The senate voted 30/9 to suspend the rules. People repeated said that the Senate needed to “own this problem” as it involved our core responsibilities as teachers. Senator Martinez proposed that the resolution include a call for a) an investigation of the response to this situation and b) proposals for how to fix issues uncovered during a).
The Senate agreed that we needed to act but that we could not draft this resolution on the floor. The Senate will draft it over the next two weeks, and vote on it at the 5/28 meeting.
Reports: LMS. New Ombud Bruce McAllister introduces himself. Lots of experience, attorney, 1st floor of Anstett. Serves faculty, employees and students – anyone impacted by UO. Has already worked with a few “visitors”, ready to roll out soon. Has one staff person. Four principles: Confidential and informal, does not report (e.g. not the place for Clery reporting. Neutral and independent, although he’s hired and paid by President. Serious about the confidentiality.
Stahl speaks on behalf of Nathan Tublitz, giving notice of motion for a vote of no-confidence in President Gottfredson.
President Gottfredson’s University Update:
Pres Gottfredson, university update:
well thank you Margie ah and thank you for your service to the Senate this past year. –the skill, diplomacy w/ which you’ve handled any number of issues that have come before the Senate (applause)
I had intended to talk about strengthening of acad freedom policy, transforming OARs into UO policy, academic freedom is one review away from approval;
50-70 academic policies that will be coming your way. These matters are important, but there’s another issue as you know of more immediate urgency sexual assault, harassment, and intimidation on our campus. NO one should ever have to experience them
not one student, not one staff member, facaulty member, a single member of our communicty. Yet too many do. Pres Obama has identified sexual assault as a significant threat to our campuses, our community, our country.
1 in 5 women is sexually assaulted while in college. That’s shocking to many. That’s appalling. But this figure does not shock the good people o n our campus who work in health centers, campus counseling, dean of students’ offices: they are all too familiar with this statistic.
Right now our campus is grappling with this issue.
It’s angered many people and how we react to it will define who we are: we have the opp to take our anger around this issue and direct it to a solution. WE have the responsibility to become leaders in creating a campus safe from sexual harassment and violence. I’ll tell you what we’ve been doing and will be doing.
Because we cannot by law share many details of the current case, many have speculated we are not acting in the best interest of the university,
these allegations are false and these speculations are highly inappropriate.
Highly sensitive material,
protecting the safety, rights of individuals involved was and is our top priority.
I understand the frustration of not being able to say more. We would like to say more. But we will follow federal law in protecting the privacy of our students.
When we receive a report, an established process of federal response occurs immediately. Within minutes. Within a context of various laws and policies designed to provide the highest protection for the rights and safety of our students.
Support srvcs for those who experienced the violence.
application of our code of conduct.
cooperation with law enforcement.
We have obligations in all these areas that we must balance, in real time. Incredibly complex, nuanced, often contradictory. As the national conv. now tells us. The moment we receive a report, parallel processes begin. Many of the U’s actions are not disclosable, to protect privacy. In general, actions we might take include issuing no contact orders; providing requested accommodation;
WE can’t talk about this. To do so risks violating privacy.
We have seen the unfortunate consequences of judgment in the absence of information.
I’m responsible for the integrity of the campus and safety of our students. I take it seriously. I study crime, violence, and prevention. It’s my life’s work. Interfering w due process, indiv rights to privacy, or an ongoing investigation that cd jeopardize a prosecution is s.t. we would not do, I would not do.
For the survivors, for the accused, for our campus, for our society.
It was entirely appropriate that we work closely with EPD while they investigated, and abide by their request to not jeopardize their investigation. Timeline of their investigation on our website.
Interfering w due process, indiv rights to privacy, or an ongoing investigation that cd jeopardize a prosecution is s.t. we would not do, I would not do. For the survivors, for the accused, for our campus, for our society.
We seek to balance our obligations under Title IX, which allows us to defer our investigation for law enforcement—not forever, but for an appropriate time.
We did meet our obligations under the Clery Act.
Now is the time to turn our attn to the future. Come together as a campus, as a community, to make our u stronger, safer. To make sure we are all fostering the culture of safety, dignity, respect for students. We share responsibility for creating a culture safe from sexual harassment, violence, abuse.
Vote of confidence for Holmes and her staff. The steps she took addressed prevention,
stdt sexual misconduct, harassment, and assault policies and protocols, outreach practices. The Grove report found much to commend, and room for improvement. Need to add staff, information, improve student education. Most done, some yet to do, including redefining the parameters of the conduct code.
3+1 new staff members;
now, 2 additional staff positions: sexual assault survivor services position (not mandatory reporter) + EO specialist, to oh Christ who knows.
Campus climate surveys.
independent review, composed by representative experts on sexual violence, higher ed, athletics, and law (I missed one)
efforts to respond to sexual violence and intimidation.
to move us forward
Holmes, Mullens and I are taking recommendations for members of the group.
‘personal respect and privacy, student safety adn academic integrity’;
we will solicit input from our own community;
this is our time to come together to change the culture of harassment and intimidation. It’s our duty and resp. to one another. We have the will, leadership, ability to change the culture and make the campus safer for everyone.
Q: Harbaugh: protection of students a foremost priority? I met yesterday with UOPD spokesperson and was told that the UOPD never received a copy of the EPD’s investigation from your office, but from the R-G. How, if protection is our highest priority, was this information not conveyed to the UOPD?
A: I don’t know what our department’s response to that would be.
Q: The got it 3 wks after the report was complete, and only got it from the R-G.
Margie: does the central admin have a policy of not providing information to the UOPD?