UO Board of Trustees posts skimpy agenda for March 2,3 meetings

BOT March 3 meetings: 30 month delay in internal audit of “significant risks” and “negative impact of unfortunate events in athletics”

Sorry, I’m skipping today. Looks like the livecast link below is now working, and Max Thornberry is tweeting here: https://twitter.com/Max_Thornberry

There’s an updated version of the BOT materials here, and I (and the Trustees) finally got a copy of the internal audit report, here. Not much meat:

 

The Board of Trustees first ordered the Athletics Risk Assessment back in September, 2014:

Screen Shot 2015-05-20 at 9.52.36 PM

That athletics audit has been delayed for 30 months, so far. The previous auditor left, reportedly over a dispute about her independence from the VPFA’s office and her inability to get public records from the administration.

And the audit has now shrunk from 300 hours to 120. It’s almost as if the Trustees don’t really want to hear about the “significant risks” and “negative impact of unfortunate events in athletics”.

March 2 BOT meeting:

These are on the BOT page as pdf’s here, I’ve reposted them below in more user friendly form. The meetings will be livecast here. [NOTE: This is now the correct link, but last time I checked it didn’t work.] The proposed tuition increases are scheduled for 1:45 or so on Thursday. Live-blogging will be light to none Thursday, so I’ve done a little pre-blogging in italics below.

Compare the bare-bones information the UO Board is given with the extensive material the OSU Board receives before their considerably more substantive meetings, here.

Executive and Audit Committee – Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 9:00 am Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom  [Materials]

1. Quarterly Audit Report: Trisha Burnett, Chief Auditor  

This is due diligence? We wouldn’t want the trustees to be prepared to ask tough questions, would we:

 

2. University Tier III Investments Update: Ross Kari, Finance and Facilities Chair; Jamie Moffitt, Vice President and CFO  

No materials.

Compare this lack of audit materials with the extensive material the Oregon State Board Audit Committee gets, here. I’m going to have to make a public records request for the athletics stuff.

Finance and Facilities Committee Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 9:30 am Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom  [Materials]

1. Retention and Delegation of Authority – Amendment re Capital Project Budget Approvals (Action): Ross Kari, Finance and Facilities Committee Chair

Seems sensible. Leaves more day to day stuff to President.

2. Knight Campus Capital Project Preliminary Expenses (Action): Jamie Moffitt, Vice President for Finance and Administration

Hell yes.

3. Quarterly Finance and Treasury Reports (Written Reports Only)

So, 10 minutes to review a $1B budget? that doesn’t even break out the $120M in athletics expenses? WTF? Any quick questions? No? Meeting adjourned.

Academic and Student Affairs Committee Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 10:00 am [Materials]

1. Reset the Code Campaign: Allen Hall Advertising representatives  

Will they throw free speech a bone this time?

2. Health Center / Counseling and Testing Center Expansion Overview: Roger Thompson, Vice President for Student Services and Enrollment Management  

Yes. Students need this.

3. University Accreditation: Ron Bramhall, Assoc. Vice Provost for Academic Excellence; Chuck Triplett, Asst. Vice President for University Initiatives and Collaboration and Accreditation Liaison Officer   

Chill, Ron’s got this covered.

4. Program Approval – Master of Arts in Language Teaching Studies: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost  

Yes.

Meeting of the Board Thursday, March 2, 2017 – 1:30 pm Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom   Friday, March 3, 2017 – 10:00 am Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom [Materials]

THURSDAY, MARCH 2 – 1:30 pm (other times approximate) – Convene Public Meeting – Call to order, roll call, verification of quorum – Approval of December 2016 minutes (Action) – Public comment

1. Reports
‐‐ASUO President Quinn Haaga

Quinn gave her usual excellent presentation, with lucid commentary.

‐‐Senate President Bill Harbaugh

Harbaugh, not so much.

‐‐Provost Scott Coltrane
‐‐President Michael Schill

2. AY17‐18 Tuition and Fees (Action): Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost; Jamie Moffitt, Vice President and CFO;  Brad Shelton, Senior Vice Provost for Budget and Strategy

3. Seconded Motions and Resolutions from Committee (pending March 2 committee action)
‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: Delegation of Authority / Capital Project Approvals
‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: Knight Campus Preliminary Capital Expenses
Meeting Recessed

FRIDAY, MARCH 3 – 10:00 am (other times approximate) – Re‐Convene Public Meeting

4. Federal Affairs: Issues and Trends: Dennis Galvan, Vice Provost for International Affairs; David Conover, Vice President for Research and Innovation; Betsy Boyd, Assoc. Vice President for Federal Affairs

5. Cluster of Excellence in Focus – Energy and Sustainable Materials: Jim Hutchison, Professor and Lokey Chair of the ONAMI Safer Nanomaterials and Nanomanufacturing Initiative

6. Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact: Patrick Phillips, Acting Executive Director 

Meeting Adjourned

Day 2: Liveish-blog, Board of Trustees Th & Fr in Portland

Meeting of the Board — 1:45PM December 1-2, 2016 [Materials]

The 2015-16 audited financial statements are finally posted here, with past statements here. Spending on Instruction is up 9% over 3 years, spending on research is down, spending on Institutional Support (i.e. administration) is up 17%.

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-9-30-13-am

Despite previous requests from the board, UO is still not breaking out Athletics in these operating cost reports.

UO is still stuck with a pile of debt from Knight Arena and the baseball stadium, but is gradually paying that off (unfortunately the bonds were sold without a provision for refinancing) and will be able to borrow for replacing dorms, etc.:

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-9-47-27-am

FRIDAY, DECEMBER 2 – 9:00 am (other times approximate) – Reconvene Public Meeting

4. UO Portland Vision Statement: Jane Gordon, Vice Provost for UO Portland (Moved from Th)

Sorry, missed most of this.

6. Seconded Motions and Resolutions (Pending December 1 committee action) (Action)
–Recommendation from EAC: Selection of Board officers

Passes on a voice vote with no discussion.

–Seconded Motion from FFC: Authorizing Acquisition of Property Rights

Maybe I missed this.

–Seconded Motion from FFC: Authorization for Use of Certain Derivatives

Agreement to settle UO’s $42M lawsuit against the construction companies over shoddy construction of the Global Scholars Hall. UO gets $6M in work to fix the buildings over 3 years, so it will be ready for the IAAF, plus $1M to pay for UO’s external lawyers. I thought there was some cash involved too, but maybe I’m wrong.

Passes on a voice vote.

7. Long-Range Facilities and Physical Infrastructure Planning: Michael Harwood, Associate Vice President for Campus Planning and Facilities Management

No discussion of Ron Lovinger’s idea about moving Franklin Blvd back along the railroad tracks to allow for joining the Knight Campus to the regular campus. New Black Cultural Center to be constructed near Hayward Field. Many other new construction and renovation projects. Unfortunately there don’t seem to be any plans to tear down PLC or Collier house.

8. Budget Overview and Key Cost Drivers: Jamie Moffitt, Vice President and CFO

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-9-50-53-am

Of course not. Wouldn’t want the Trustees to have this in advance – they might ask informed questions.

The board’s public talking point on enrollment is that it’s leveled off in a planned effort to avoid overcrowding, not declining as Diane Dietz has reported. Actually they’re both sort of right – freshman enrollment is steady (below, by residency) but past large classes are finally graduating. Lots more on the IR website at ir.uoregon.edu

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-10-41-06-am

Moffitt & Schill explain that out-of state tuition is at market, but there’s still room to increase in-state tuition. UO has increased spending on tuition discounts, much of it for in-state tuition, and the Governor’s budget also projects more state funding for financial aid for low income students. So my take is that increases in the posted tuition price will *not* mean increases of the same magnitude for our low SES students.

Moffitt talks about how the administration gives itself raises according to the same scale that the faculty union negotiates. Why? She also says that the union contract includes promotional raises that the administrators don’t get, but she’s obfuscating: OA’s get promotions and new job titles, and raises to go along with them. How big? I don’t know, but administrative spending us up 23% over 3 years.

Schill notes that UO is essentially subsidizing the state’s other employees by participating in PEBB, because our employees are healthier. (I think this is $5-10M a year – OUS’s Jay Kenton had a good presentation about it a few years ago.)

Schill asks abut Title IX costs. $1M a year? Moffitt explains that it’s hard to calculate, but yes costs and hiring have gone up. Not to mention how much money we’re paying to cover for Penny Daugherty’s AAEO office mistakes. Lillis asks Moffitt to prepare a summary of these costs.

Bottom line is that Moffitt is predicting a 5% increase in UO’s “Education and General” costs for 2017-18, on a base of about $500M.

Moffitt and Schill tell the board that UO’s administrative staffing is below our AAU peers. Of course so is our faculty staffing.

Obviously there are many places UO can cut administrative spending and also some places where we need to spend more – despite the 23% increase over the past 3 years. The board has not been give anywhere near enough information to have an informed discussion on this.

Schill notes that the Knight Campus will allow UO to recruit more top Oregon students to do science.

9. State Government Affairs: Hans Bernard, Assistant Vice President for State Affairs; Libby Batlan, Senior Director for State Affairs

Hans Bernard has sent this helpful report on UO’s Legislative Agenda and the Governor’s budget, here, starting with the usual PR bragging:

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-10-16-24-am

Here’s the beef:

screen-shot-2016-12-02-at-10-18-10-am

UO got $44M of $55M request for a new classroom and office building. UO will pay $30M in gifts and our own bonds. The missing $11M would have gone to fund renovation of the offices of the administrators and faculty who move into the new building. (This building is in addition to the Tykeson building, for which we got $17M last round.)

Governor agreed to fund the $100M asked for the Knight Campus over 3 biennia. UO is going to try and accelerate that.

Peter Bragdon says he’s willing to join Will Paustian in a protest in Salem over the state’s refusal to fund higher ed. (Anyone know what the Time Place and Manner free speech restrictions are for the capitol’s lobby?)

10. Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact: Patrick Phillips, Acting Executive Director

Patrick Phillips does a great job explaining why the campus is excited about this – more research, more good students – and why it will be good for the state.

Schill gives the Senate a shout-out for its enthusiasm and support for helping implement this project.

Willcox asks if the Campus Planning Committee will be involved. Moffitt: Sort of. They’ve been briefed, and are supportive.

Ginevra Ralph notes that UO should collaborate more with local businesses to help solve the spousal hire issues that UO currently faces, and which will need to be better addressed in order to hire all these new faculty.

12:17PM: Meeting adjourns, then subcommittee reconvenes to approve the GIS programs left over from yesterday. 

Day 1: Liveish-blog, Board of Trustees Th & Fr in Portland

Breaking news: Governor to cut real Higher Ed operating budget, won’t give HECC their requested extra $100M, will fund construction, will blow $35M on “free” community college. In the Oregonian:

Gov. Kate Brown is proposing a roughly equal combination of new revenues and program cuts to close a looming $1.7 billion shortfall in the state’s budget. … In the wake of the November defeat of Measure 97, which would have raised $3 billion a year, Brown is asking legislators to approve $897 million in new revenue to help balance the 2017-19 budget. …

Oregon Opportunity Grants, aimed at helping the state’s neediest post-secondary students, are expanded in Brown’s budget, with an aim of providing financial assistance to an additional 5,000 students.

She has also chosen to preserve the Oregon Promise program, which lets high school students with high enough grades attend one of the state’s nine community colleges for as little as $50 per semester.

Funding for community colleges and higher education, meanwhile, would contain no built-in cost for maintaining current service levels.

“These cuts are a level that I find absolutely unacceptable,” Brown said. “State needs are growing, but state resources are not keeping pace with the needs.”

On the other hand, the governor has proposed spending $350 million to help with facilities projects at the state’s colleges and universities. That effort includes $15 million in bonding money for campus security upgrades in the wake of the October 2015 shootings at Roseburg’s Umpqua Community College.

And I just got this helpful email from Hans Bernard:

Operating Funding:
· The Governor recommends flat funding for universities. The Public University Support Fund (PUSF) is funded at the Legislative Approved Budget (LAB) 2015 level of $667.3 million). Because of the current service level calculations and the technical details on how funds are split over the biennium (49% in the first year, 51% in the second). this does represent a modest cut to UO.

While we will need to manage a slight cut in state support and account for significant cost increases amounting to nearly $25 million in the coming year – the Governor went to great lengths to shield public universities and students from taking a disproportionate cut.

Student Financial Aid:
· The Governor increased funding for the Oregon Opportunity Grant by approximately 8% from last biennium, bringing the total funding amount to $151 million.

Oregon Promise:
· The Governor’s Budget recommends funding the Oregon Promise “Free Community College” program at $39.7 million.

Capital Funding
The proposed budget includes approximately $275 million in funding for university Capital construction projects. The largest slices of the pie are given to UO ($77 million), OSU ($47 million), PSU ($40 million) and OIT ($38 million). The budget also recommends funding for $75 million in community college projects.

UO’s Projects:
Classroom and Faculty Office Building: The Governor’s budget provides $44 million for UO’s Classroom and Faculty Office Building. The project UO submitted to the HECC included funding to renovate faculty offices once the new building was constructed. The Governor’s budget does not provide funding for those portions of the project ($11 million).

Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact: The Governor’s budget supports full funding for the Knight Campus, with the investment made over the course of three biennia. An initial investment of $33 million is included in the 2017-19 budget.

Again, I will provide you a more thorough update in the coming days. Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have.

Live webcast on BOT meeting here. Some live-blogging below.

The official BOT website buries the agenda, so here’s an easier version. Haven’t had time to look into the materials much, but I did notice Chuck Lillis and Ginevra Ralph have no competition for their elected Chair and Vice Chair positions. (Last year Lillis presided over the meeting that extended his own term from 2 years to 3.) I note that the UO Senate generaly is able to field competitive slates for these kinds of jobs.

And where are the internal audit reports?

Executive and Audit Committee — 8:30AM December 1, 2016 [Materials]

1. IT Strategic Planning Update: Scott Coltrane, Sr. Vice President and Provost

Sorry, there’s not enough coffee in Portland to get me up early enough to sit through Scott’s powerpoint again. Rumor down at Cafe Roma is that about 15 IT people have left so far or are leaving. There are 12 open IT jobs, including the director position, posted on the HR website. Moral is low.

2. Audited FY16 Financial Statements: Scott Simpson, Partner, Moss-Adams LLP; Jamie Moffitt, Vice President and CFO; Kelly Wolf, Controller

Not in the packet. How can the board do due diligence with this?

screen-shot-2016-11-29-at-5-01-47-pm

Angela passed out packets at the meeting, but there weren’t emugh for the 5 visitors. Presumably it’ll be online soon. The auditor’s report is that all’s well from the from the 40,000 foot level.

3. Quarterly Audit Report and Approval of an External Auditor: Trisha Burnett, Chief Auditor

UO has been independent from the state’s Audit Board for 3-4 years now. It took a year to hire the first auditor. She left in frustration after a year or so. So did a couple of her staff. That was a year ago. Our new auditor has just staffed out her office and put up a webpage. Someday they may actually start doing internal audits, such as the long promised athletics audit. While the state regularly published their audits of UO, I’m guessing it’s going to be a long public records battle to get these from the PRO.

4. Strategic Enterprise Risk Management and Compliance: Andre LeDuc, Associate Vice President and Chief Resilience Officer

Lots of colorful powerpoint slides. LeDuc’s empire seems to have expanded from security and digging faculty out of the rubble of PLC, to consideration of isssues like IT security, tuition dependancy, grant administration. Not sure where the athletics lawsuits and Halloween parties fit in. Wants to buy more insurance and water filtration systems.

Lillis asks Moffitt if UO has a list of “unfunded mandates” from the feds for UO. This idea presumably comes out of his support for erstwhile Presidental Candidate and higher-ed crank Ben Carson.

Moffitt: There was a report coming out of some east coast school listing these mandates and claiming they were a major driver of administrative bloat, but it was problematic.

5. Board Officers: Trustee Peter Bragdon

Finance and Facilities Committee — 9:45 AM December 1, 2016 [Materials]

1. Standing Finance and Treasury Reports (Written Only) and Authorization for Certain Investment Activities (Action): Karen Levear, Director of Treasury Operations

This is a proposal to invest UO’s medium term funds with the UO Foundation, in stocks and derivatives, for hedging not speculation. It was passed as a ballot inititiative this fall. Very sensible, Lavear knows her stuff.

Kurt Willcox asks what sort of oversight the board will have, and what sort of information the notoriously secretive UO Foundation will share with the Board. Jay Namyet, UOF CIO, says not much. This is a trust me proposal, but imho I trust Lavear’s judgement on this and her ability to keep an eye on Namyet.

Ann Curry asks more skeptical questions. Ross Kari does a good job addressing them, notes that after the last financial meltdown there are now more SEC rules regarding transparency and reserve requirements.

Jay Namyet notes that the UOF insists on dealing with managers who have their own net worth in the fund, and they insist on complete transparency. Good practices – but not ones the Foundation follows for its own employees.

Lillis notes that Namyet has had a spectacular 10 years in terms of investment returns.

2. UO Buildings – Energy Policies and Programs: Michael Harwood, Associate VP for Campus Planning and Facilities Management

Susan Gary: Is it worth it for UO to pay the LEED people to certify buildings as energy efficient. Can’t we just build them that way and save the money? Harwood: probably worth paying for the LEED stamp of approval, for public relations.

Frankly, it’s a little odd to hear so much discussion of energy audits, and so little of internal financial audits from the board.

3. Authorization of Possible Eminent Domain Proceedings (Action): Kevin Reed, Vice President and General Counsel

Diane Dietz has the story here.

Reed makes clear he is taking his responsibility to comply with the Constiution’s taking clause very seriously, with the help of some Portland lawyer.

Lets hope he takes to university’s obligation to comply with the First Amendment, when it comes to our student-reporters, student-athletes, and Divest UO and other protestors just as seriously.

Ann Curry give the RG’s Diane Dietz a shout out over her story on who this will affect the tenants. The Jock Box’s athlete-only parking lot will be untouched, of course.

screen-shot-2016-12-01-at-11-15-09-am

Moffitt notes that all the funds for relocation etc., will come from the Knight gift.

Academic and Student Affairs Committee — 11:00AM December 1, 2016 [Materials]

1. Title IX – National Picture, Current Trends & UO Organization: Darci Heroy, Associate Vice President and Title IX Coordinator

Full disclosure: I’ve been working with Darci Heroy for 6 months on the Senate’s successful effort to replace the administration’s mandatory reporting policy with a student-centered policy, and I think she’s very sensible, effective, and committed to reducing campus sexual assault – not trying to cover it up, as has been UO’s unfortunate history.

She shows the board the new safe.uoregon.edu website, which has fixed many of the problems with famously incompetent AAEO Directo Penny Daugherty’s unnavigable and factually inaccurate website. It’s no surprise that the administration has never put Daugherty in front of the Board.

Heroy goes on to give some history on Title IX, explains that the pendulum is shifting back towards increased rights and more legal action for the accused.  Confident that our processes to a good job of blancing the rights of the victim and the accused.

Pres Schill asks Reed about how many lawsuits we have at the moment. Austine et al., and 2 others (?).

Heroy notes that the lawsuits have helped improve UO’s internal processes. She wants UO to be consistent in following the focus of Title IX on making sure that all of our students have access to a fair and compassionate process, one that will make sure they all have equal rights to accessing education.

Ginevra Ralph asks why universities are required to handle sexual assault differently than, say, murder.

Heroy explains that’s because of the focus of title IX on equal access to education. It does put us in an awkward place, we must have a sort of ghost criminal process. Reed agrees.

Ralph follows up, asking about the basketball allegations. Why were we required to investigate, rather than give it to the police?

Reed: The police often inestigate as well, but civil rights law holds us to a higher standard because of our obligation to provide equal access to education.

Reed & Schill: Criminal process has a higher burden of proof, is invasive, public, students don’t use it. We need to protect them anyway.

Heroy gives a shout-out to the Senate RRWG and it’s new policy. Talks about how campus is now working in sync on issues of sexual assault prevention.

Very good discussion between Heroy and the Board.

2. Health Center / Counseling and Testing Center Project Preview: Roger Thompson, Vice President for Student Services and Enrollment Management

Moved til after lunch.

3. Student Success: Lisa Freinkel, Vice Provost and Dean of Undergraduate Studies; Doneka Scott, Associate Vice Provost for Student Success; Ron Bramhall, Associate Vice Provost for Academic Excellence

[Sorry, I had to answer some emails. Sounds like the 15 credit plan is taking off, and Doneka Scott has a handle on the new system for tracking and helping students who are behind.]

Lunch break until 1:45

4. Program Approvals – Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts in Spatial Data Science and Technology (Geography) (Action): Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost

Meeting of the Board — 1:45PM December 1-2, 2016 [Materials]

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1 – 1:45 pm (other times approximate) – Convene Public Meeting
– Call to order, roll call, verification of quorum
– Approval of September 2016 minutes (Action)
– Public comment (2:13).

Sorry, not much live blogging. Check the video. Several public comments calling for more building energy efficiency efforts. Several pointing out the problems with the IT reorganization effort and its thus far negative effect on it personnel and services.

Several comments from owners and leasors of the land UO is negotiating to buy, all building the arguent that their property and investments are worth more than the appraised value. According to the Domino’s owner, our General Counsel stepped in the deep-dish with his RG comments.

Two portland students comment on the Halloween “black-face” incident. Appreciate Schill’s statement. Embarassed by the professor’s actions. Want more university resources in Portland for students to talk about incidents like this.

NOTE: A live teleconference will be available during public comment to accommodate individuals wishing to participate from Eugene (Ford Alumni Center, Room 403)

1. Reports
–ASUO President Quinn Haaga
–Senate President Bill Harbaugh
–Provost Scott Coltrane
–President Michael Schill

2. AY2016-17 Student and UO Scholarship/Waiver Statistics: Roger Thompson, Vice President for
Student Services and Enrollment Management; Jim Brooks, Assistant Vice President and Director
of Financial Aid and Scholarships

3. Classroom Scheduling Task Force – Findings and Next Steps: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President
and Provost; TBD

4. UO Portland Vision Statement: Jane Gordon, Vice Provost for UO Portland

5. Portland Programs In Focus

5.1 Agora Journalism Center, School of Journalism and Communication: Regina Lawrence,
Executive Director, George S. Turnbull Portland Center and Agora Journalism Center; Andrew
DeVigal, Chair in Journalism Innovation and Civic Engagement and Professor of Practice

5.2 Sports Product Management, Lundquist College of Business: Roger Best, Professor Emeritus
of Marketing; Damian Vaugh, Assistant Clinical Professor of Product Management

Lot of buzzwords, shiny video. Still no news on the $20M donation we were told would fund this spire of excellence.

Meeting Recessed for the Day

Day two here.

 

UO Board of Trustees denames Dunn, meets new admins, approves renovations

These are not easy to find on the Board’s website, so I’ve put them here. Schedule and links. Each link below takes you to a post with the respective committee agenda, documents, summary and sometimes some commentary. The full board agenda and materials and some live-blogging are at the bottom.

Academic and Student Affairs Committee —8:30 am – September 8, 2016, Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom 

Finance and Facilities Committee — September 8, 2016 10:00 am – September 8, 2016

Executive and Audit Committee —1:15 pm – September 8, 2016 Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom 

Meeting of the Board — September 8-9, 2016 [Materials] [Livestream]

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8 – 2:00 pm – Convene Public Meeting

– Call to order, roll call, verification of quorum – Approval of June 2016 minutes (Action) – Public comment. Those wishing to provide comment must sign up advance and review the public comment guidelines either online (http://trustees.uoregon.edu/meetings) or at the check-in table at the meeting.

Jim Igl: He has provided written documents to the board. He is skeptical of the Historians’ Report’s section on Dunn, and argues that his connection to the KKK was tenuous and short lived. He notes that Dunn was a life-long member of a Methodist church that was famous for its eucemenical nature, not anti-catholicism. He also brings up Dunn’s family connection to Abraham Lincoln.

[I don’t know Mr. Igl, but I want to thank him for stepping up to tell us more about Dunn. As President Schill later noted, the dead cannot speak for themselves, and everyone deserves an advocate. It was a brave move, which I imagine will cost Mr. Igl some grief even though there was nothing in his remarks to suggest that he has anything but disgust for the KKK, racism, or religious intolerance. Quite the opposite.

But my takeaway is that when Dunn took the job as Grand Cyclops, even if it turned out only to be for a day, and only because he was duped, he went to a place from which there is and should not be any returning.]

ASUO VP Natalie (sorry, missed last name). Supports denaming Dunn and Deady. believes majority of students do as well.

ASUO Pres Quinn Hagga: Supports denaming Dunn and Deady, calls for an investigation of the names of all other campus buildings.

1. Recommendation re Dunn Hall (Action): Michael Schill, President

Chuck Lillis: We’re here to decide about Dunn, not Dealy, or Healy, or whoever he was. Oh, Deady. OK.

Pres Schill: Serious decision, those up for denaming are not here to defend themselves. Strongly believes that racism and bigotry have no place at a university. Dunn was the Grand Cyclops of the KKK, a terrorist organization that promoting lynching. Recommends Dunn Hall be denamed today, and then renamed for someone whose life does represent our values, after an open, campus-wide process. Thanks the Black Students for raising this issue, believes that the process they started has benefited us all.

Trustee Andrew Colas gives a very effective speech on why he supports denaming Dunn now, and also Schill’s decision to delay dealing with Deady until the students are back. I’m not going to try and summarize it, I hope the Board posts the video soon.

The still very relevant demands of the 1968 Black Students are here. Read it all, here’s a snippet:

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 2.53.01 PM

Frederic S. Dunn is denamed by unanimous vote of the Board.

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 2.41.01 PM

Dunn was also a member of the YMCA and a freemason, but he is not buried in Eugene’s Masonic Cemetery with his parents, or in their fabulous Mausoleum. Someone needs to hire HLGR to work on this conspiracy.

More Dunn trivia: The YMCA sent him to Italy to work with US soldiers after WWI. What sort of classics professor comes back from a trip to Italy hating Catholics?

Screen Shot 2016-09-05 at 7.55.38 PM

2. Seconded Motions and Resolutions (Actions)
–Seconded Motion from FFC: Pacific Hall Renovation (pending September 8 committee action)
–Seconded Motion from FFC: Oregon Hall Renovation (pending September 8 committee action)

Allyn Ford recuses himself from the vote, because he’s giving the money for this. Pretty sweet, and the board cracks up.

3. New Administrator Introductions: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost

Sorry, I got sucked down the Dunn history hole. Provost Coltrane introduces President Schill’s many recent hires. They all sound good from where I’m sitting. Schill gives Coltrane full credit for hiring them.

4. President’s Report: Michael Schill, President

Pres Schill discusses how much UO has improved in the past year. Agreed.

He then goes on to discuss how he is meeting the remaining demands of the Black Student task force and how UO is trying to meet them. Frankly, some of this stuff sounds illegal given past court rulings, but then I’m not a lawyer.

$1.05B in fundraising so far. In the past year *80%* has been for academics. As Schill notes, this is a turnaround.

Budget: 12% of Education and General Fund budget comes from the State. [Thanks to Schill for giving this correctly, instead of using the 6% of UO’s total budget – i.e. including the Duck crap, which his predecessors always trotted out to dis the state and the taxpayers.]

Lots of uncertainty about next biennium, particularly if Measure 97 fails. If it does, we will need double digit tuition increases and spending cuts.

[Me: Vote for Measure 97! Sure it’s not perfect but what tax is. Oregon needs more money for basic services like health and education, and HLGR’s Bill Gary and Sharon Rudnick are never going to get PERS cuts through the Oregon Supreme Court when the judges are in PERS, no matter what we pay them.]

3:25PM: Lillis recesses for a private “training session” with the Board. Uh-Oh, last time this happened they decided to subsidize Tracktown’s IAAF championship bid.

Meeting Recessed

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 9 – 9:30 am – Reconvene Public Meeting [Materials] [Livestream]

[Sorry, no live-blog today. Tran Nguyen has it covered on twitter: https://twitter.com/tranngngn]

5. Presidential Assessment Report: Chuck Lillis, Chair; Ginevra Ralph, Vice Chair

6. AY16-17 Tuition and Fee Setting-Process: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost

7. Clusters in Focus
–Center for Genome Function: Eric Selker, Professor of Biology and Member of the Institute for Molecular Biology; Diana Libuda, Assistant Professor of Biology; Jeffrey McKnight, Assistant Professor of Biology
–Health Promotion, Obesity Prevention & Human Development: Beth Stormshak, Professor of Counseling Psychology and Human Services and Director of the Prevention Science Institute

8. Federal Funding at the UO: David Conover, Vice President for Research and Innovation; Jim
Brooks, Assistant Vice President for Enrollment Management and Director of Financial Aid and Scholarships

9. UO Portland – Update: Jane Gordon, Vice Provost for UO Portland

Meeting Adjourned

Executive and Audit Committee —1:15 pm – September 8

Executive and Audit Committee —1:15 pm – September 8, 2016 Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom [Materials]

Screen Shot 2016-09-07 at 9.01.12 PM

Whoops, that’s from OSU. Also see their detailed work plan posted by their Board’s Executive and Audit Committee. Compare with the minimalist info the UO Board is willing to share:

UO: Convene – Call to order, roll call – Approval of June 2016 EAC minutes (Action) 

1. Quarterly Audit Report and Amendment to Internal Audit Charter (Action): Trisha Burnett, Chief Auditor

There is no Quarterly Audit Report in the materials. Perhaps they will have copies at the meeting? [Yes, and the Board Secretary was kind enough to provide a pdf, here. Not much has been done.]

For some history on the sudden departure of Brenda Muirhead, UO’s previous Chief Auditor, see here. The rumors are that she left because of a lack of cooperation from the VPFA’s office. For last quarter’s uninformative report to the Board from the Audit Office see here.

The main item on the UO agenda is this, which a skeptic might say is aimed at weakening the need to document the independence or lack of independence of UO’s Internal Audit Office, and at buying another 2 years before peer review is required:

Screen Shot 2016-09-07 at 6.15.42 PM

Screen Shot 2016-09-07 at 6.06.47 PM

For some background on what university Audit Committees are supposed to do, see the AGB on “Assessing the Quality of Internal Audit

Trisha Burnett, Chief Auditor: Not much has been done, because of turnover in the office. Expect to make offers to tw new auditors shortly. We’ve been brainstorming with other ex-OUS schools. Making sure our salaries are competitive. Bought some software, get our policies and procedures set up. Identifying a closed-source provider to help out when things get busy. Brainstorm with the ACUA. Joined the Oregon chief auditors council.

A few softballs from the committee, Lillis asks for a voice vote, passes. Then on to:

2. University IT and Computing Priorities Update: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost; Chris Krabiel, Interim CIO; Adriene Lim, Dean of Libraries

The Blustain report has been out for several months now and it’s a done deal. Link to full text and some skeptical comments here. All that remains is implementation, which is not the Board’s area of comparative advantage or their fiduciary responsibility. So why are they spending more time on it, instead of new things?

Meeting Adjourns

Finance and Facilities Committee — September 8, 10:00AM

Elevator version: Moffitt says the academic budget is sort of OK. Meanwhile Mullens is raking in the dough, and spending it just as quickly on whatever he wants. No talk of the long overdue Athletics Department contributions to UO’s academic mission.

Finance and Facilities Committee — September 8, 2016 10:00 am – September 8, 2016 [Materials] [Livestream]

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 12.22.43 AM

Whoops, that’s the OSU Board’s Finance and Administration Committee. Here’s what I could put together for UO’s committee:

Convene – Call to order and roll call – Approval of June 2016 FFC minutes (Action) – Public comment

Lois Yoshishigi, classified staff from the business office. Comments on the Oregon Hall renovation. Her office works with student loan repayment, and will have to move. She is worried that the move will make it more difficult for students to work with them on repayment rescheduling, and that this will discourage students who need help to stay in college.

Chair Ross Kari thanks her for her comments and says they will be considered.

1. Quarterly and Year‐End Finance Report: Jamie Moffitt, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO

This is the one place where UO beats OSU. See page 3 of the UO materials for VPFA Jamie Moffitt’s summary of UO’s financial situation, followed by pages of detailed information.

Moffitt: Students are taking more credits, fund balance is up a little, the well is run-rate-even and should be for this coming year too.

2. Auxiliary Budget Review: Athletics: Rob Mullens, Director of Intercollegiate Athletics; Eric Roedl, Deputy Athletic Director

I’m no internal auditor sworn to follow the IIA’s Red Book & Code of Ethics, but if Rob Mullens’ and Eric Roedl’s “budget review” doesn’t raise some red flags with UO’s Chief Auditor, what will? Starts on page 9:

Moffitt introduces, explains that the committee has mostly talked about the E&G budget, will spend more on “auxiliary units” like the Ducks.

Mullens:Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 12.32.41 AM

I’ve lost track of how many years, and how many auditors, UO’s Audit Office has gone through while saying it would someday audit athletics, or at least try “To gain an understanding of the athletics program in order to identify inherent risks ….”:

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 2.26.45 AM

Mullens, who got a fat raise from the trustees last year, skims through the finances with a few pie charts. Makes his usual subtle pitch for another Autzen expansion. Are the trustees going to ask him any tough questions? Such as:

  1. Why are you charging the President’s office $500K for the Autzen skybox and basketball tickets?
  2. Why are UOs regular students still subsidizing the $2.5M Jock Box, given all your new revenue?
  3. What’s the new sneaker deal going to look like? Where are you going to spend that money?
  4. Are you ever going to start contributing to UO’s academic mission?

Ann Curry asks Mullens about UO’s ranking in NCAA’s bullshit Academic Progress Rate. Break this out for the revenue athletes. Mullens explains all the help that the Jock Box gives student-athletes to make sure they can stay eligible to play and earn money for him and the coaches.

Ross Kari notes the risks of revenue variation. Mullens admits football season ticket sales have fallen. Kari asks him if he has plans for cost cutting or revenue enhancement.

Lillis: Any progress in refinancing the Arena debt? Moffitt: As you know the deal was structured in a way that makes it very difficult to refinance. We’ve talked with a lot of bankers. We’re stuck with it. [Meaning the academic side is also stuck with the high interest rate on the $500K a year we’re paying for the chunk of land that Matt Court sits on. Thanks for all that, Kilkenny.]

3. Capital Construction & Planning
‐‐Oregon Hall Renovation (Action): Jamie Moffitt, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO

Moffitt: It’s complicated, we’re trying to handle all the disruption and moves as well as possible. [Striking that the Jocks have everything, while UO’s multi-cultural student services don’t have places for confidential student advising.]

‐‐Pacific Hall Renovation (Action): David Conover, Vice President for Research and Innovation; Bill Cresko, Professor and Associate Vice President for Research

[Cheryl and Allyn Ford have already donated $7M for this. Nice]

Conover: We need more space for more science faculty and labs. We want to renovate, create space for 14 labs, with undergrad, PhDs, post-docs etc.

Cresko: This building was originally science, gradually got taken over by AAA etc. We’re going to convert it back to science. Much cheaper and quicker than new construction, we’re already recruiting faculty for these labs.

4. UO Buildings – Energy Policies and Programs: Michael Harwood, Associate VP for Campus Planning and Facilities Management

Academic and Student Affairs Committee —8:30 am – September 8

These are not easy to find on the Board’s website, so I’ve put them here.

Elevator version: A long rambling report from Coltrane on academic program assessment, followed by a substantive report on UO’s new student success initiatives, with Schill’s new hire Doneka Scott and Bramhall and Freinkel. The trustees were fully engaged by the later, session ran late with questions.

Academic and Student Affairs Committee —8:30 am – September 8, 2016, Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom [Materials] [Livestream].

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 12.02.39 AM

Whoops, that’s the agenda from Oregon State’s Academic Strategies Committee. Html with links to all their work – including a complete self-assessment of their board, here. For comparison, the UO Board’s equivalent committee’s agenda – which I had to scrape from a pdf, is below:

Convene – Call to order, roll call – Introductory comments and agenda review  – Approval of June 2016 ASAC minutes (Action)  – Public comment

1. Academic Program Review: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost; Susan Anderson, Senior Vice Provost

Reading these content-lite powerpoints you’d never know that UO is up for reaccreditation this year. Does our Board know?

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 12.09.02 AM

I missed most of this, mostly seemed to be Coltrane talking about how academic programs are reviewed. Mentioned Academic Analytics. Lots of talk about consolidating honors under the Honor’s College. That will be a tough sell.

Coltrane passes around the schedule of program reviews. It’s not in the online materials. LCB hasn’t had an external review since 1991? Or did I hear him wrong?

Most of the discussion is a very basic , general discussion about how academic reviews are done. It’s surprising that this committee isn’t getting into specifics or asking more knowledgeable questions.

Coltrane offers to share examples of some reviews off-line with the committee members. He hadn’t done this already? No wonder they don’t have any good questions. He does mention the fact that UO’s accreditation is up for review this year, at the very end of his talk.

Ginevra Ralph asks about humanities programs and how the review process handles their importance.

2. Student Success Initiatives: Scott Coltrane, Senior Vice President and Provost; Lisa Freinkel, Dean of Undergraduate Studies; Ron Bramhall, Assistant Vice Provost for Academic Affairs; Doneka Scott, Associate Vice Provost for Student Success

Fortunately this part seems a bit more substantive:

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 12.11.48 AM

Coltrane gives Ron Bramhall a great introduction, noting he has worked both sides of the faculty union bargaining table.

Lisa Freinkel introduces Doneka Scott, who was hired by Schill to try and increase graduation rates and graduation time, and then goes on to explain how UO will target specific kinds of students to increase retention in years 1-2, and then target students in 1-4 to get them to take enough classes that they don’t need to stay for 5. Both strategies will save students enormous amounts of money.

Doneka Scott then explains how UO will target students by academic performance, rate of credit accumulation. Students who take too credits in their first quarter never catch up.

But, she also notes that most students leave for non-academic reasons: family, health, money. Believes that student engagement with the university as their home, where they should be. Wants to implement campus wide centralized advising. Student centered, evidence based, interventions for students identified as needing help. Mandatory advising for targeted students. [This all sounds very good so far.]

Bramhall’s turn:

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 10.00.07 AM

Majors need to give their students 4-year degree paths with milestones. Need to address advising about these classes, potentially readdress the curriculum? [I’m guessing Bramhall’s not proposing we have them all take Doug Blandy’s easy A online AAD 250-252 sequence.]

Screen Shot 2016-09-08 at 9.58.53 AM

Allyn Ford and others ask some good questions about how these new efforts will affect first generation, low income students.  Important, because the easy way to move these metrics is to just admit richer students.

Willcox notes that her committee will come back to this at the next meeting. The members are impressed by how much has been done on this since Schill first raised it last year, as they should be.

Adjourn

Here is some info on past meetings of this committee:

Academic and Student Affairs Committee — June 2, 2016 [Materials] [Webcast] [Minutes]

UO Trustees post self-evaluation of Board’s performance, want audit info

They want more diversity on the board, more info on finances and audits, more time to interact with students, faculty, deans, and ask questions and have discussions, and less emphasis on one-sided presentations:

Screen Shot 2016-08-11 at 12.26.48 PM

Just kidding, that’s the OSU Board of Trustees. Full 7 page evaluation here. I have no idea if the UO Board has done anything similar.

UO Board meetings video: Senate myths, Divest UO, Deady denaming, etc

The UO BOT does not post videos of the board meetings – so UO Matters operatives will do it for them. More to come. (Links fixed, thanks.)

Randy Sullivan’s farewell speech to the Board: “Six Myths the UO Trustees believe about the University Senate” starts at https://youtu.be/qn1T21TlS_0?t=2h8m2s

Faculty Union President Michael Dreiling explains to the Trustees how UO gives its students education in science, finance, and politics – and they’re now using it to fight for CO2 reductions. Starts at https://youtu.be/qn1T21TlS_0?t=1h8m9s, the students follow Dreiling.

UO alumni and faculty use the Black Students campaign to rename Deady and the Boards public comment period to teach us all a little Oregon history. Starts at https://youtu.be/qn1T21TlS_0?t=1h36m2s. I’m hoping history lessons will become a regular part of the board meetings. I’m working on a talk about Treetops, Phimister Proctor, and Irene Hazard Gerlinger.

ASUO Student Government President Helena Schlegel – chased off the board by Chair Chuck Lillis – returns for a postscript. starts at https://youtu.be/qn1T21TlS_0?t=1h57m45s

June 2 Board meeting, continued:

The morning committee meetings are here. Live video here. Some live blogging below. Usual disclaimer: my opinion of what people said, should have said, meant, or should have meant.

Highlights (to be updated):

  • Strong public comments from the the Divest UO students, who describe the contempt they’ve received from the UO Foundation while making rational, reasoned arguments in favor of CO2 divestment. An impressive group of students. They talk about the Divest Fund – a fiendishly clever plan to outflank the UO Foundation’s monopoly on donations to UO. I can’t wait to hear what Foundation CEO Paul Weinhold has to say, later in the meeting.
  • Outgoing Senate President Randy Sullivan demolishes the Board’s “six myths about the Senate”.
  • UO Foundation CEO Paul Weinhold reports on high earnings, investments in alternative energy, high cost of unwinding the foundation’s troubled tar-sands private equity deal.

More on Divest UO – an OPB interview:

We hear why some students at the University of Oregon want the college to stop investing in fossil fuels companies. Guests: Oregon senior and co-director of the Divest UO campaign, Erik Jung; and University of Oregon Foundation President, Paul Weinhold.

Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 12:45 pm. Full Board.  Materials

12:30 pm (other times approximate) – Convene Public Meeting

– Call to order, roll call, verification of quorum
– Opening remarks
– Approval of March 2016 minutes (Action)
– Public comment

Those wishing to provide comment must sign up advance and review the public comment guidelines either online (http://trustees.uoregon.edu/meetings) or at the check‐in table at the meeting.

I’m sorry, I’m listening not blogging. I’m hoping there’s video somewhere.

Strong public comments from the the Divest UO students, who describe the contempt they’ve received from the UO Foundation while making rational, reasoned arguments in favor of CO2 divestment. An impressive group of students. They talk about the Divest Fund – a fiendishly clever plan to outflank the UO Foundation’s monopoly on donations to UO. I can’t wait to hear what Foundation CEO Paul Weinhold has to say, later in the meeting.

De-naming Deady: Fascinating to hear the alumni speak about Deady and Oregon history. How often does William Lloyd Garrison’s name come up in a Board meeting?

1. End of Year Reports

– Senate President Randy Sullivan

In homage to President Schill’s excellent speech yesterday, on “Six Myths About Higher Education”, Senate President Randy Sullivan marks his last Board meeting with a report titled “Six Myths About The UO Senate”. (Schill loves this, of course.) Most of these myths originated with the very bitter Bob Berdahl, and were taken up with enthusiasm by Lillis, and too many others on the UO Board. The faculty representative on the Board, Susan Gary (Law) did nothing to fight these memes.

Randy is knocking these myths down one-by-one, starting with a reminder that it is faculty governance, operating through institutions like the Senate, that make U.S. higher education the envy of the world. He gives full credit to Mike Schill for the progress that has been made over the past year repairing the damage done by Berdahl, Gottfredson and Coltrane.

‐Associated Students of the University of Oregon, 2015‐16 President Helena Schlegel

Helena was the student representative until last year, when she left in frustration over her dismissive treatment. Her report touches on the tuition increase, Black Student Demands, Shasta Lake.

2. President’s Report, President Michael Schill

Sorry, listening not blogging. Close to $1B in campaign, 60% for the academic side, ratio has been increasing.

3. Seconded Motions and Resolutions (Actions)

‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: AY2016‐17 expenditure authorization (pending June 2 committee action)
‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: Naming of certain facilities (pending June 2 committee action)
‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: Multimedia license agreement (pending June 2 committee action)

4. University of Oregon Foundation Overview, University of Oregon Foundation President and CEO Paul Weinhold

Video of Weinhold’s presentation here:

Screen Shot 2015-12-19 at 11.33.15 PM

Whoops, that’s Weinhold in Doha, promising the full faith and credit of his $1B foundation to the notoriously corrupt IAAF and their President Lamine Diack to cover any losses or cost overruns if they will hold their Track and Field Championships in Eugene. They took him up on his offer.

Weinhold tells the UO Board that, under CIO Jay Namyet, the UO Foundation is doing a stellar job investing funds.

Are any of the Trustees going to ask about the Divest UO campaign? Yes, Ann Curry: What about fossil fuels investments. Are they part of the reason for Namyet’s high returns? Weinhold: Syracuse and UMass say they are divesting, but if you look at the language they haven’t. We have 1% in carbon, 6% in alternative energy. Weinhold:

“We don’t ever want to put ourselves in a situation where we would be liars.”

On that topic, here’s the UO Foundation’s Chief Investment Officer Jay Namyet’s pissy email to the UO Divest students (more here):

On 2015/04/09 10:05, Jay Namyet wrote:

[UO Divest undergraduate student],

When I asked you all why you were meeting with the president, the response I got was to learn his personal thoughts about this issue.

Turns out, not really.

As is indicated by [UO Divest undergraduate student] below in [pronoun redacted] email to the president’s office, and just as you three did with me this morning, this is about pressing your argument for divestment even though you have already received responses from all parties involved.

I offered an olive branch to you all last meeting and was the basis for today’s meeting. You all chose to ignore that and continue to beat the same drum of divestment.

I don’t appreciate being lied to about your intent of meeting with the president and I don’t appreciate your not honoring the reason for meeting today with me.

As a result, you have now lost the opportunity for further dialogue with me.

Jay

Trustee Susan Gary (Law) then lavishes Weinhold with praise for doing so much.

5. University “Clusters of Excellence” Initiative – Update, Provost and Senior Vice President Scott Coltrane, Vice President for Research Brad Shelton

I’m looking at Coltrane’s slides and not seeing anything about the contentious Sports Product Design proposal that Lillis was pushing last year. Wasn’t that one of the clusters? Or was it a spire? Weren’t we going to get $20M in donations to pay for it?  We didn’t, but now Coltrane is claiming it will pay for itself.

Instead, Coltrane has a slew of impressive looking new science hires to announce, funded in part by donors and in part by the Schill’s internal cost-savings.

Ballmer: Would it be better to see a more directed approach from the central administration?

Schill: It’s very hard to have a top down approach with top faculty. We can put them in a lab together, give them resources, but we don’t have the expertise to direct them in particular research directions – they are the ones on the cutting edge, they are the only people in the world who know where research should go. Ballmer pushes back a little: university has already done some direction, by picking the clusters. You can make sure they understand the high expectations. Schill: Oh they do!

~ 4:00PM Thursday. Meeting Adjourned

 

Friday, June 3:

The BOT meeting was originally scheduled for June 2 and 3, then changed to a one day meeting.  I found out that they’d set aside June 3 for a closed “training session”.  The last time they did this BOT Secretary Angela Wilhelms kicked Diane Dietz and me out of the room, and the board then met with Vin Lananna about the multi-million dollar TrackTown subsidy plan.

There was no information about the June 3 meeting on the Board’s website. It took a public records request to find out what Friday’s meeting  meeting was about:

Dear Ms Thornton –

This is a public records request for a copy of the agenda and meeting materials for the UO Board of Trustees June 3 “training day” session.I ask for a fee waiver on the basis of public interest, and ask for a prompt response given that the meeting takes place on Friday.

I am ccing UO Trustee Susan Gary (Law) as she should have a copy of these public records, and should be able to forward them at minimal expense.

Thanks, Bill Harbaugh

Today I got the agenda and the packet, here. The PRO Office sent their usual zipped pdf. It seems they are using a lossy compression algorithm designed to make reproduction and character-recognition more difficult:Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 1.44.49 PM

But GC Kevin Reed was kind enough to send the original, no charge:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 1.45.34 PM

Haven’t had time to read it, but it seems to be about how to perform your due diligence as a member of a university board. What a great idea, because the past three years of Chuck Lillis’s leadership have been pretty rocky.

Live-blog: UO Board of Trustees to meet June 2nd – and June 3rd?

These are the morning committee meetings. The afternoon full board meeting is here.

Live video here. Some live blogging below. Usual disclaimer: my opinion of what people said, should have said, meant, or should have meant.

Highlights (to be updated):

  • Still no information from Trustee Susan Gary on the secret meetings tomorrow.
  • 8 months after UO’s Chief Auditor left in frustration with the lack of cooperation from the VPFA’s office, the office is still in disarray. Just as UO is going through an administrative realignment process where good, independent information is key, the UO board and the President have no good independent information. Which gives Moffitt and Shelton a lot of power.
  • Gigabits.
  • Jamie Moffitt reports that the budget is “run rate even”. Turns out the union raises didn’t break the bank after all. No one asks her about her $10M gift to the law school, and $5M to AAA.

Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 8:00 am. Executive and Audit Committee. Materials (now updated w/ audit).

Ford Alumni Center, Giustina Ballroom

Convene – Call to order and roll call – Approval of December 2015 EAC minutes (Action)

1. Quarterly Audit Report and FY2016‐17 Audit Plan, Chief Auditor Trisha Burnett

From the materials: During FY16, the Office of Internal Audit (Internal Audit) met with the Director of Enterprise Risk Services (ERS) and discussed the risk assessment process. It was determined that Internal Audit would collaborate with ERS for the enterprise risk assessment during early 2016. However, this collaborative process was subsequently rescheduled for fall 2016. Internal Audit has experienced nearly complete turnover in staffing during FY16. As a result, risks identified during the prior year risk assessment process have not been fully evaluated. For the FY17 audit plan, Internal Audit will revisit information gathered during the prior year as a basis for the audit plan. This includes review of the prior year audit plan, the results of the Strategic Enterprise Risk Management & Compliance (SERMC) committee risk assessment process, and prior year interviews conducted by Internal Audit. Feedback from senior leadership will be obtained to identify necessary adjustments.

Many processes and systems are currently being evaluated by management for potential changes. Time will be allocated on the audit plan to allow for advisory services in these areas. Internal Audit will advise on internal controls, safety, security, compliance, efficiency, and effectiveness. The progress and action plans will be included in Board communications.

[Given all this turmoil, you’d think that the Trustees might get a little time to go through the latest audit? Nope:] “Note: The quarterly audit report will be provided at the meeting.”  And it is, in the newly updated supplementary material, here. Pretty skimpy. The Athletics Risk Assessment is still on hold, as it has been for a year.

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 8.56.26 AM

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 8.56.34 AM

UO’s first internal auditor was hired in May 2014, and left in October 2015. She was very frustrated by the lack of cooperation from VPFA Jamie Moffitt – at one point telling me UO Matters had information she couldn’t get from the VPFA. One of her assistant’s also left. Her other assistant, Trisha Burnett, was promoted w/o an external search.

Burnett’s presentation basically involves explaining the fact that in the two years the office has been in place it has conducted almost no internal audits. I would think the board – which has the obligation to exercise due diligence – would be pushing hard on this. They are not.

Burnett says that she’s now restarting the audit plan Muirhead put forward last year. But first she has to hire two new staff, and perhaps hire an external firm to help. It’s now been eight months since Muirhead left, and nothing substantive has been done. Not even a hire. Amazing.

Here’s the new 2017 audit plan:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 8.35.20 AM Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 8.34.58 AM Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 8.34.39 AM

And here’s last years plan, which the board approved almost exactly a year ago:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 9.06.55 AM

The Chief Auditor reports to the Board of Trustees, and is central to their ability to do their due diligence. Virtually none of the work above was done. You’d think the board, and especially Chuck Lillis, would be a little more concerned. I wonder what their D&O insurance covers?

Lillis got into a bit of D&O trouble when he was on the Washington Mutual Board, which went through one of the largest bankruptcies in US history:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 9.15.19 AM

 Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 9.16.10 AM

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 9.20.06 AM

The D&O insurance company then sued the WaMu directors, including Lillis, arguing that they’d failed to exercise their due diligence and that they should be personally liable. The lawsuits finally ended with a $37M payout. There was another $49M for ERISA violations.

For some reason Lillis’s WaMu service is not mentioned in his UO trustees bio: “…. and has served on the boards of private and public companies including Williams Co., Medco and SuperValu. He is a member of the board of SomaLogic …”

2. University IT and Computing Priorities Update, Interim CIO Chris Krabiel; Professor of Computer and Information Science and IT Leadership Team Member Joe Sventek

Good presentation, tough problems.

Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 9:00 am. Finance and Facilities Committee Meeting.  Materials

Convene
– Call to order and roll call
– Approval of March 2016 FFC minutes (Action)
– Public comment

1. Naming of Certain University Facilities

– Berwick Hall (Oregon Bach Festival), Executive Director of the Oregon Bach Festival Janelle McCoy

– Bowerman Track & Field Complex, University of Oregon Foundation President and CEO Paul Weinhold

2. Contract Approval – Multimedia Rights Agreement (Action), Director of Intercollegiate Athletics Rob Mullens

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 9.30.47 AM

Here’s hoping Eric Roedl read this contract a little more carefully than the Bowl Insurance deal. The board has some good questions. Lillis asks AGC Bryan Dearinger what he thinks of the contract. Dearinger says it’s more transparent, more flexible. GC Kevin Reed says that the current contract prohibited UO from shopping around for competitive bids, they had to get an “independent evaluation” to use in renegotiating with IMG. I wonder which previous UO GC approved that clause? Grier? Geller? Park?

The Ducks now need to renegotiate their Nike deal, which expires next year. It’s a great deal for the coaches and JH administrators who want free shoes, but not so good for UO. Some old links:

12/9/2014 update: Which football championship team has the worst Nike contract? The Ducks.

From Matthew Kish in the Portland Business Journal:

Here’s a breakdown of Nike’s [athletic apparel] deal with each university in the playoffs. The terms cover the 2014-15 academic year [reordered in descending order of cash payment]:

– Ohio State: $2.5 million in equipment and apparel and nearly $1.5 million in cash. The university also gets $150,000 in discretionary apparel, typically for athletic department personnel.

– Florida State: $3 million in equipment and apparel and $1.4 million in cash.

– Alabama: $2.8 million in equipment and apparel, $780,000 in cash.

– Oregon: $2.2 million in equipment and apparel and $600,000 in cash. The university also gets $185,000 in discretionary apparel, typically for athletic department personnel.

But hey, we’re #1 in “discretionary apparel”!

From what I can tell from Dave Hubin’s redacted public records, $30K of that goes to our colleagues in Johnson Hall, presumably including some who signed off on the contract. So they’ll be looking good on their Jan 1 Rose Bowl junkets.

Screen Shot 2013-12-31 at 1.05.07 PM

2/3/2014 update: Under Armour pays Notre Dame $9M, Nike pays UO $600K

Nike just signed Tennessee to a new deal for $1M cash a year, plus $2M signing bonus.

1/23/2014: Our Uncle Phil drives a tough bargain. Nike’s merchandising deal with UO pays us just $600K a year. Meanwhile Notre Dame just closed on a 10 year deal with Nike competitor Under Armour for ~$9M a year. Bloomberg financial news has a report here:

3. Quarterly Finance Report, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO Jamie Moffitt

The usual, it’s “run rate even”. Tuition revenue is up – students taking more credits – but so are employee costs. Next year costs will be up more but the tuition increases will cover it.

Willcox: So we could have had a smaller tuition increase?

Curry: If we’re this tight, are we going to have to look at cuts again? Schill: We always need to be thinking about cuts and efficiencies. [too bad we still don’t have a functioning internal audit office to look for those efficiencies.]

Schill: Worried about potential for a state budget deficit, state cuts. Would have been irresponsible to have not increased tuition by the amounts we did.

Curry: Are the faculty being advised on the importance of getting students to take more classes?

Schill: Yes, but it’s going to take a culture shift on the part of the students.

Paustian: Do we have the faculty to teach students, if they all start taking more classes?

Moffitt: We’re hiring more faculty.

Schill: We’re gearing up to do this, but you’re absolutely right, we need to work on supply, not just demand.

4. Fiscal Year 2016‐17 Capital and Operating Expenditure Authorizations (Action), President Michael Schill and Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO Jamie Moffitt

Moffitt: We secured AA2 and AA- ratings, got great rates, debt will be used to pay for new dorms, working capital for athletics, etc.

See page 17 of your packet here:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 10.03.12 AM

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 10.03.26 AM

No significant increase in revenue from philanthropy? Oh, right, this is UO’s academic budget, not the Duck’s budget.

Question about the cuts – which I don’t see very well documented in the materials.

Moffitt: I had to personally cut $1M from my budget, it was very difficult.

Curry: What’s going on with the large increases in “supplies and services”?

Moffitt: I’ll look into it.

Wilcox: Why don’t you break it down more?

[Very good to see the board getting more skeptical about Moffitt’s budget reports. Their auditor really should be helping with this.]

Willcox to Moffitt: CAS Dean Marcus gave the campus very careful explanations for his budget cuts. It would help build trust if your office would do that for the rest of the campus cuts as well. [I tried to get that info through the SBC. Didn’t get it.]

Moffitt: We’ve also been charged with finding additional 3% in cuts over next several years.

Willcox: Pushes back, calls for more transparency.

Estimated cash payments for 2016-17 capital projects:

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 10.25.31 AM

Where’s the athletics? Hayward Field tart-up?

Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 10:30 am. Academic and Student Affairs Committee.  Materials

Convene

– Call to order and roll call
– Introductory comments and agenda review
– Approval of March and April 2016 ASAC minutes (Action)
– Public comment

1. Update on University Ombuds Program and Initiatives, Interim Ombudsperson Jennifer Reynolds

Reynolds gives a good, brief report. Not quite as comprehensive and interesting as former Ombud Bruce McAllister’s:

2. Classified Staff
Deep Mistrust of AA/EO
Classified staff report high levels of distrust and low levels of confidence in the
fairness, competence, and responsiveness of the University’s AA/EO function.
Examples of concerns reported include reaching decisions and conclusions about
employee medical fitness without adequate input from an employee’s physician,
sharing information outside of the appropriate confines of HR record-keeping, and
generating shadow files. Ombuds does not independently investigate concerns and
draws no conclusions beyond noting a pattern of reported perception. I also note that
perception does not necessarily equate to fact, but patterns are important to the
acceptance and long-term efficacy of any particular program.
Patterns of abusive management style in trades positions.
Ombuds received extensive reports of managers in the “blue collar” positions being
subjected to perceived retaliation for surfacing safety concerns or physical injury.
Patterns of perceived avoidance of “Weingarten” protections
Ombuds received reports that employees felt “ambushed” in meetings that were
announced with a more generic topic, but in actually included disciplinary action,
which the employee perceived implicated certain NLRB protections.

3. Officers of Administration and Other Non-union Positions
Widespread perception of a lack of functional protections equivalent to those
available to unionized employees.
Officers of Administration consistently report a perception of an utter lack of due
process protections associated with their position. They report an incomprehensible
and unusable employee grievance process and a widespread sense of vulnerability.
Further, employees in this category report that they have no sense of confidence that
their managers will exercise progressive discipline or even candidly communicate
performance issues and expectations. Rather, these employees report that they
perceive that their managers simply use the annual contract renewal/non-renewal
process to winnow out non-classified personnel perceived to have performance
issues.

4. Faculty
Widespread perception of an academic culture that accepts abrasive behavior
and harassment.
There was a strong pattern of concerns reported among faculty that, as colleagues,
faculty are very hard on one another, and that department heads, deans, and other
administrators do not enforce standards of civility.

Perceptions that University “administration” is not transparent
A significant number of faculty reported that they do not trust “Johnson Hall,” and
that “Johnson Hall” resists sharing information and reacts to faculty who speak out defensively and with a tendency towards laying blame or finding faulty with the source of the particular comments.

Polarization … For a large portion of my tenure as ombuds, it was clearly apparent that faculty had splintered into subgroups around polarizing issues, such as the role of NCAA athletics on a campus, or the appropriate role of the President in challenging personnel or student issues. This extreme polarization led to a widely perceived sense that “Johnson Hall” was operating with a “bunker mentality” and refused to engage. The more that “Johnson Hall” was perceived as refusing to engage, the more activated groups of faculty became. I note that the polarization was not focused exclusively on the Administration versus Faculty vector, but included polarization among faculty, some who perceive that the UO Matters blog inhibits safe and open communication, in itself, and others who believe that the venue provides a valuable independent forum.

2. Classified Staff
Deep Mistrust of AA/EO
Classified staff report high levels of distrust and low levels of confidence in the
fairness, competence, and responsiveness of the University’s AA/EO function.
Examples of concerns reported include reaching decisions and conclusions about
employee medical fitness without adequate input from an employee’s physician,
sharing information outside of the appropriate confines of HR record-keeping, and
generating shadow files. Ombuds does not independently investigate concerns and
draws no conclusions beyond noting a pattern of reported perception. I also note that
perception does not necessarily equate to fact, but patterns are important to the
acceptance and long-term efficacy of any particular program.
Patterns of abusive management style in trades positions.
Ombuds received extensive reports of managers in the “blue collar” positions being
subjected to perceived retaliation for surfacing safety concerns or physical injury.
Patterns of perceived avoidance of “Weingarten” protections
Ombuds received reports that employees felt “ambushed” in meetings that were
announced with a more generic topic, but in actually included disciplinary action,
which the employee perceived implicated certain NLRB protections.

3. Officers of Administration and Other Non-union Positions
Widespread perception of a lack of functional protections equivalent to those
available to unionized employees.
Officers of Administration consistently report a perception of an utter lack of due
process protections associated with their position. They report an incomprehensible
and unusable employee grievance process and a widespread sense of vulnerability.
Further, employees in this category report that they have no sense of confidence that
their managers will exercise progressive discipline or even candidly communicate
performance issues and expectations. Rather, these employees report that they
perceive that their managers simply use the annual contract renewal/non-renewal
process to winnow out non-classified personnel perceived to have performance
issues.

4. Faculty
Widespread perception of an academic culture that accepts abrasive behavior
and harassment.
There was a strong pattern of concerns reported among faculty that, as colleagues,
faculty are very hard on one another, and that department heads, deans, and other
administrators do not enforce standards of civility.

Perceptions that University “administration” is not transparent
A significant number of faculty reported that they do not trust “Johnson Hall,” and
that “Johnson Hall” resists sharing information and reacts to faculty who speak out defensively and with a tendency towards laying blame or finding faulty with the source of the particular comments.

Polarization … For a large portion of my tenure as ombuds, it was clearly apparent that faculty had splintered into subgroups around polarizing issues, such as the role of NCAA athletics on a campus, or the appropriate role of the President in challenging personnel or student issues. This extreme polarization led to a widely perceived sense that “Johnson Hall” was operating with a “bunker mentality” and refused to engage. The more that “Johnson Hall” was perceived as refusing to engage, the more activated groups of faculty became. I note that the polarization was not focused exclusively on the Administration versus Faculty vector, but included polarization among faculty, some who perceive that the UO Matters blog inhibits safe and open communication, in itself, and others who believe that the venue provides a valuable independent forum.

Reynold and Reed then discuss the progress on hiring a permanent replacement for MacAllister – sounds like finalists should be on campus in a month or so. Here’s hoping that there will plenty of time for meetings with OA’s, staff, faculty, etc.

Willcox asks about what sort of cases she’s getting. Reynolds: About 100 so far, about 1/4 students, 1/3 OAs. Appreciates her work for SEIU staff. [I’ve met with her too, she’s very helpful.]

2. Overview of Graduate Education at the UO, Graduate School Dean Scott Pratt

Pratt: We assess graduate programs, provide resources, serve as center for innovations. Talks about role in staying in the AAU. PhD enrollment is small relative to other AAU’s, but delivers in terms of time to degree and completion.

Pratt doesn’t have a 5 year plan, he’s got a 1 year plan. And he’s already started implementing it, with new first year fellowships funded by Schill’s office. $800K recurring, plus $100K for underrepresented minorities. These fellowships and top-off awards are essential for getting top students, who are heavily recruited by other universities.

Pratt got this money out to the departments out very quickly. Entering PhD students increased from 188 last year to 248 this year. Largest entering class in 5 years – and high quality ones, more diverse. Fabulous.

Ford: Very happy with the high quality of UO’s graduate education – wonders if the state and the HECC supports it, or, as Schill said yesterday, that they just wanted us to be a little better than Idaho?

Schill: We’re going to need support from Ben Cannon and HECC – including funding for new science labs –  to continue to make progress. We’ve have enough lab space for only one more year of science hires. Then we’re full-up. The state prioritizes undergrad access, gives us very little for research. The future of this state is going to depend on making the transition to the new information based economy – and we need this.

Schill: Want to congratulate Pratt for doing more than I thought he good do with this $800K. We need to find more resources for more of this.

Pratt: UO’s research is competitive on a national, international scale. Oregon needs this.

Curry: What are the stellar programs? Pratt: Most selective in terms of enrollment are Psychology. Chemistry, Bio. Philosophy, English. Curry: Why? Pratt: Because of the faculty. Prospective graduate students come to UO because they see the faculty’s research and want to be part of it.

Schill: One new thing Pratt did was to allocate funds on the basis of quality. [Unlike Shelton’s budget model, which rewards departments for teaching low cost courses with easy A’s. Why is Shelton still in charge of that?]

3. University Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Initiatives Update, President Michael Schill and Vice President for Equity and Inclusion Yvette Alex‐Assensoh

Here are my comments from when this was presented to the Senate in January:

Review of IDEAL Framework; Sari Pascoe, Office of Equity & Inclusion

Here’s a link to the final version of UO’s 2006 Diversity plan. This was sent to the Senate by President Frohnmayer and approved after a contentious set of meetings, during which it came out that the administration had agree to hire a diversity director and prepare a diversity plan as part of the legal settlement with Joe Wade, an African-American administrator who had sued Frohnmayer and Provost John Moseley for discrimination in hiring. Frohnmayer had kept this hidden from the faculty and even from the person he hired as Diversity Director.

That diversity director left, and was replaced by Charles Martinez (Education). After faculty complaints about the text and the process, Martinez heavily revised the plan and Frohnmayer brought it to the Senate. There was a healthy debate, the minutes are here. One snippet:

Senator Chris Ellis, economics, then rose to oppose the motion. He felt everyone in the room believed diversity was a good thing because they cared about some of the underlying problems in our society. However, Senator Ellis felt that the current plan was fundamentally and logically flawed, and as such, could not achieve its goals. He noted that there was a large body of literature on the economics of education and he introduced some issues raised in that literature. One issue is that economically disadvantaged people historically do poorly in education, and Blacks and Hispanics have been historically poor, thus there are not enough persons in these underrepresented groups to fill the “pipeline” to become college undergraduates and graduates from which to make hires. He suggested the proposed plan does not address the pipeline issue. He concluded by noting that there is a large bureaucracy with a large budget devoted to diversity already, and he was concerned about resource questions. He proposed putting our resources into resolving the pipeline issue.

The plan was approved. It included a very expansive definition of diversity, and explicit recognition that “diversity of thought” was of primary interest to the university, given our academic mission. Income and class and political beliefs were also included:

Screen Shot 2016-01-27 at 12.14.59 PM

Screen Shot 2016-01-27 at 12.21.47 PM

The language in the newly proposed 2015-16 diversity plan, here, is much less inclusive, focusing on race and ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and disability status:

Screen Shot 2016-01-27 at 12.25.32 PM

And

Screen Shot 2016-01-27 at 4.12.11 PM

Sullivan: I asked VP Alex-Assensoh what the Senate could do to help with diversity, she asked us to get involved in the IDEAL process.

More on the OEI page here.

[Sorry, I’m listening not blogging.]

Psaki: Concerned about the faculty review part. During bargaining, the faculty union was concerned that some faculty, particularly women and minorities, where not being recognized or rewarded for their work on equity and inclusion. The union and the administration agreed to language on this. In contrast this plan imposes a new unfunded time-mandate on all faculty, which was explicitly not part of what we agreed to.

Sullivan: The Senate will post this plan for discussion, and this is an example of the sorts of issues that should be raised.

Schill: Will have Deans prepare diversity plans, and will evaluate them on these.

Schill then goes into the Black Student Demands, and responses. Thirteen demands, 6 responses so far.

[Sorry, I’m too hungry to blog. The Trustees got bacon and eggs, the peanut gallery got coffee. He’d better wrap this up soon, or nobody is getting lunch.]

Colas: Asks if the Board can meet with the Black Students themselves.

Lunch: Full board starts at 12:45.

 

UO Board to give up some control of Duck athletics

Back in 1987 the OUS Board established several policies establishing their control over intercollegiate athletics. These became UO policies in 2014. Tomorrow at 10AM in the JH Conference room, UO Board of Trustees Secretary Angela Wilhelms is going to try and persuade the Policy Advisory Committee to recommend that two of the three policies governing athletics should be repealed, under the argument that the OUS board is defunct and the policies are irrelevant. However, for most other policies that mention OUS, UO’s approach has simply been to replace OUS with the UO BOT. And many parts of the OUS policies are still highly relevant, if in need of some revision:

OUS 31 Statement Regarding Intercollegiate Athletics

Screen Shot 2016-04-05 at 2.35.22 PM

OUS 30 Fiscal Policies for Intercollegiate Athletics:

Screen Shot 2016-04-05 at 2.05.34 PM

 

The Intercollegiate Athletics policy is not (yet?) proposed for repeal: In addition to financial constraints on athletics, it imposes a code of ethics on the coaches:

Screen Shot 2016-04-05 at 2.42.15 PM

 

Independent boards fail to deliver, so universities ask state for $100M

The tit-for-tat from the Duck boosters who wanted the state to give them a Board they could control was their promise that private donations would soar. They haven’t – except of course for sports facilities like the Mariota worship center, the new softball egofice, and the Hayward Field tart-up. The state, on the other hand, has been increasing its higher education support, albeit by small amounts and from a very low base. Now the university presidents are going back to the state for another $100M, mostly to cover PERS increases resulting from the failure of HLGR’s Bill Gary and Sharon Rudnick to convince the state supreme court that Kitzhaber’s reform package was legal. Andrew Theen has the report on the new ask in the Oregonian, here:

Last summer, lawmakers approved $665 million in general support for the universities, a 27 percent increase over the 2013-15 biennium. Officials also dramatically increased funding for the Oregon Opportunity Grant, the state’s largest financial aid program for needy Oregonians.

The $100 million request represents a 15 percent increase over current levels.

Universities say the $100 million would help protect students from the burdensome costs associated with increased Public Employee Retirement System obligations that will hit schools and the public sector hard in 2017. PERS costs alone will increase $59.4 million during the two-year period, according to the report.

For years, schools have argued the state’s formula for distributing money is unfair. The universities say after 2011, the state started treating them like vendors rather than state-funded agencies. The state’s share of university funding did not “capture the true costs” of running a university, including mandatory services such as retirement, healthcare and collective bargaining costs.

I wonder how many legislators are going to look at UO and say “Didn’t we just give you $25M for a Track championship? What are your real priorities?”

Meanwhile the “Oregonians for Higher Education Excellence” PAC set up to push the independent board proposal through the legislature has been dissolved, and the donors have taken their money back:

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 1.08.34 PM

Two days later, UO Board of Trustees Chair and tenure skeptic Chuck Lillis turned around and gave $5000 to noted higher education reformer, free-speech advocate, and presidential candidate Ben Carson. Perhaps Lillis liked what Carson had said on Meet the Press a few weeks earlier. It’s all about the students. And Jesus:

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 4.28.05 PM

From InsideHigherEd, in October:

Ben Carson, currently leading the Republican candidates for president in Iowa, on Sunday explained for the first time how the Education Department, in an administration he wants to lead, would monitor “extreme bias” by colleges.

What Carson had said to date: Twice in the campaign before Sunday, Carson had said that he wants the Education Department to identify “extreme bias” and work to cut off federal funds to colleges and universities found to engage in such bias. But he had said nothing about how this bias would be uncovered (and he has not responded to inquiries from Inside Higher Ed).

How “extreme bias” would be identified: On the NBC News show Meet the Press, Chuck Todd asked him how the department would do this. Carson corrected Todd when the journalist referred to his campaign against “bias.” Carson quickly said it was only “extreme bias,” and said that he had given this serious thought, that this was “not just spouting off.”

Carson said the Education Department would get help in identifying extreme bias. “You invite the students at universities to send in their complaints,” he said, and then the department would start investigations.

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 1.16.51 PM

Screen Shot 2016-04-01 at 1.17.02 PM

Should UO rename Judge Deady Hall?

3/4/2016: Diane Dietz has the latest on this increasingly interesting debate, in the RG here:

… Eminent black scholar Edwin Coleman said it would be a “disgrace” to remove the name of Matthew Deady from the oldest hall on the University of Oregon’s campus to mollify students who condemn Deady’s racist history.

… “He was a staunch supporter of (Oregon suffragist) Abigail Scott Duniway. He was a champion of women’s voting rights,” Coleman said. “He called for black suffrage. He kept a warm relationship with Portland’s African-American religious community.”

He opposed the ­murder of Indians and the mistreatment of Chinese immigrants, he said. “He knew Chief Joseph, and he had his portrait hanging in his chambers.”

Coleman and other researchers say they’ve combed through Deady’s voluminous writings and accounts of his actions. “There’s no trace of personal bigotry in his public actions after 1860 as far as I’ve been able to research,” Coleman said.

“Forgive this brother”

Deady, the first federal judge in Oregon territory, was the head of the University of Oregon’s first board of trustees. He drafted the university’s charter and included prohibitions against discrimination based on religion or politics.

But it took football to integrate UO racially, in 1926. From Fishduck.com:

Robinson was a multi-sport star at Jefferson High School in Portland, a gifted halfback on the gridiron and pole-vaulter on the track, as well as baseball and basketball. Williams meanwhile was a bruising runner in his own right coming from Washington High School in Portland. Both were high school friends and rivals, both selected First Team All-City their senior years, and both packing the stands at Multnomah Field on gamedays with eager fans fanatically following their athletic performances.

Together, the two of them would help Coach McEwan usher in a new era at Oregon, both in success on the field and in a far more important way off of it, paving the path for other minority student-athletes to compete at the University of Oregon.

It was not without its difficulties though, as both Robinson and Williams were initially barred from living in campus dorms, having to find housing in off-campus apartments during their freshman year. Their white teammates signed a petition and submitted it to the school under protest demanding that their fellow players be allowed to live on campus in the dormitories alongside their peers. By their sophomore year the university relented, allowing Robinson and Williams to reside in Friendly Hall, albeit separated from others and permitted to enter the building only through their own designated entrance.

12/16/2015: UO students protest calls to keep the Deady name, on the RG Op-Ed page, here:

The article and the alumnus, Scott Bartlett, emphasize in their defense of Deady that, as a federal judge, he ruled to protect the rights of Chinese ­immigrants, as if this negated his pro-slavery, anti-black views. We would argue that doing his job is not necessarily indicative of his belief in equal rights — especially as the historical record indicates his seeming transformation was nothing more than a political move to prevent rule by mob politics, not a miraculous moral discovery about social equality.

To be clear, Deady never repudiated his stance on slavery or blacks.

Furthermore, what the arguments for retaining racist names on historical buildings do not recognize is that those names continue to honor Oregon’s white supremacist legacy. To move forward, the UO needs to start acknowledging its racist history and take concrete action to remedy its part in perpetuating racial inequity. How can a university hope to recruit a diverse faculty and student ­population if it does not address its own institutionalized racism?

12/13/2015: James Mooney, UO Law Professor Emeritus, has an excellent op-ed in the RG, here:

… At statehood, President James Buchanan appointed Deady to serve as our state’s first and only federal district judge, a position he retained until his death in 1893. He issued many important rulings during that formative era of American law, including a sizable number protecting workers, seamen, consumers and others among the less fortunate.

Most relevant for current purposes, perhaps, was a remarkable series of decisions Judge Deady wrote between 1876 and 1892 in which he emerged as an outspoken champion of immigrant Chinese rights and sensibilities. Those decisions were, without question, an uncommonly memorable instance of federal judicial intervention against 19th century American racism.

… For example, in 1879 he declared invalid — as violating a recent treaty with China and hence the federal constitution’s supremacy clause — a series of state and local prohibitions against employing Chinese on public works. In addition, Judge Deady: declared invalid a Portland ordinance directed against Chinese gambling activities; overturned another ordinance purporting to “regulate” Chinese laundries; in 1886, in a strongly worded decision accusing the white majority of hypocrisy, struck down an ordinance prohibiting opium smoking.

Screen Shot 2015-12-04 at 11.54.16 AM

12/4/215: The RG’ Diane Dietz has more on the debate, here, and on the general issues regarding Black students and faculty at UO, here:

University of Oregon alumnus Scott Bartlett pleaded the case of 19th-century judge and UO founder Matthew Deady at a UO Board of Trustees quarterly meeting on Thursday.

… Bartlett, a longtime Eugene resident and civic activist, told the UO board that he’s not averse to renaming a civic asset. In 2003, he noted, he participated in the drive to rename Centennial Boulevard, which runs between Eugene and Springfield, to honor civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

… “Deady’s life was not exemplary in the early stages, with regard to racist and backward views,” Bartlett said. “But, just as we want our students to transform, he transformed.”

Deady became the first federal judge in Oregon, and in more than three decades on the bench made key decisions upholding the rights of the state’s Chinese population.

“He fought like hell against the harassment and brutalizing of Chinese immigrants, who were the largest minority then, and were in danger of being massacred in the (work) camps,” Bartlett said.

… Schill also announced that he’s appointed Yvette Alex-Assensoh, the UO’s vice president for equity and inclusion, to lead the university’s response to a dozen demands that black students presented to the university last month.

… Trustees later pushed administrators to hire more black faculty and increase the number of black students on campus. Currently, about 1 percent of the UO’s faculty and 2 percent of its students are black.

“One percent doesn’t even represent (the size of the black population) we have here in Oregon,” trustee Ann Curry noted. “We should be at 12 percent African-American professors and students — or at least moving in that direction.”

I have to say that the level of knowledge shown by the trustees regarding the numbers of available black PhD’s, academic hiring, student recruitment, etc. was not high. It’s too bad they don’t have a faculty member on the board with some expertise and willingness to speak on these issues. Susan Gary (Law) just doesn’t cut it.

11/23/2015: Mark Baker of the RG on Minoru Yasui’s Medal of Freedom:

… The key date in Minoru Yasui’s life was March 28, 1942. It came 111 days after the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor.

Yasui spent hours on Portland’s streets that night, violating the first stipulation of Executive Order 9066, a curfew that forbid those of Japanese ancestry from being anywhere outside a five-mile radius of their homes at any time, or outside at all between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m.

Then a 25-year-old attorney, he could not persuade the one officer he encountered to arrest him and so instead turned himself in at the Police Department and spent two nights in jail.

He would be housed that summer of ’42 at the Portland Assembly Center, once a livestock pavilion, with 3,000 other Japanese-Americans, before being sent to an Idaho internment camp.

He was returned to Portland in November, where a U.S. District Court judge ruled that his curfew violation was unconstitutional, according to his life history on the tribute project website. But in a bizarre twist, the judge ruled that since Yasui had worked for the Japanese Consulate in Chicago in 1940-41, he had effectively renounced his U.S. citizenship and thus disobeyed a lawful regulation governing enemy aliens.

He was sentenced to a year in jail and fined $5,000.

In 1943, the U.S. Supreme Court heard his case and reversed the lower court on both counts, saying the curfew violation applied to U.S. citizens due to “wartime necessity” but that Yasui’s work for the Japanese Consulate did not abolish his U.S. citizenship.

He would spend the rest of his life appealing the conviction. …

11/20/2015:

Screen Shot 2015-11-19 at 9.20.30 PM

Deady Hall was the first building on the UO campus, completed in 1876. Originally just called “the building”, in 1893 it was named after Judge Matthew Deady, the first president of the UO Board, and the man who put the notorious black exclusion language in Oregon’s first constitution.

The obvious alternative candidate is Minoru Yasui, a UO Law grad and posthumous recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. More on this amazing man here.

Screen Shot 2015-11-19 at 9.21.43 PM

UO Law Professor Ralph Mooney has an excellent history of the evolution of Judge Deady’s racist views and legal decisions, here. It’s not as simple as it seems. By the 1890’s, as a federal judge, he was a strong defender of the rights of Chinese immigrants. Read it all, here:

Screen Shot 2015-11-20 at 8.52.23 AM

Comments welcome.

Full UO BOT meeting – March 4 – liveblog

Update:

Diane Dietz reports that the Trustees voted 11-3 to raise tuition – here:

… The trustees voted 11-3 in favor of Schill’s proposal for a higher-level of tuition. The students stood, yelled and stomped out of the room.

Trustees Willcox, Ann Curry and student trustee William Paustain voted against the higher-level tuition increase.

Curry said that the rising cost of retirement and medical coverage for university faculty and staff drove the need for the larger increase — and placing those costs on students backs is “not right.”

“It’s fundamentally unethical. I would go as far as to say immoral,” Curry said.

After the vote, Paustain joined the students in the noisy walkout. After last year’s tuition increase of 3.7 percent, the students shut down the trustees meeting.

She also has a report on BOT Chair Chuck Lillis’s anti-tenure comments, here:

Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 3.03.50 PM

Meeting of the Board — March 4, 2016 [Materials] Live stream here

10:00 am (other times approximate) – Convene Public Meeting – Call to order, roll call, verification of quorum – Opening remarks   – Approval of December 2015 and February 2016 minutes, and March 2015 Presidential Factors Committee minutes (Action) –

Public comment Those wishing to provide comment must sign up advance and review the public comment guidelines either online (http://trustees.uoregon.edu/meetings) or at the check‐in table at the meeting.

The UO Board of Trustees is the only one I’ve ever heard of that doesn’t allow for a regular report from the Senate President, followed by some Q&A with the board. Weird.

The current Senate President, Randy Sullivan (Chemistry) has submitted written remarks to the board anyway. I’ll post them when I find them.

Chair Lillis opens the meeting. Will start with public comment on Deady, then tuition. In the past Lillis has been actively hostile to public comment, he’s mellowed considerably. 90 secs per speaker.

Theodora Tho Thompson, SEIU classified union president: Comments on new strategic excellence framework.

Public Comment on renaming Deady Hall:

Professor Emeritus Ed Coleman speaks in opposition to the renaming of Deady Hall, noting that Deady not only repudiated his early racism, he became a strong supporter of black suffrage, women’s suffrage, the rights of Chinese immigrants, workers, etc. in a lifetime of consistent work as a federal judge. “It would be a disgrace to remove his name from Deady Hall.”

Jerry Rust,’65. Deady contributed money to support women’s suffrage. Was a friend of Chief Joseph. Hired blacks. He was a supporter of diversity and, financially, his contributions saved the university.

Scott Bartlett, alumnus: Heartfelt remarks opposing Deady’s racism and reiterating his later redemption.

Public Comment on Divestment:

Students Emma and Amber (sorry, missed last names): For fossil fuel divestment – argues this is consistent with UO’s claims on sustainability. Emma notes that President Schill reports the UO Foundation now has only $4M invested in fossil fuel stocks. Too bad Jay Namyet didn’t get out when the students first started arguing for this:

Screen Shot 2016-02-16 at 1.59.05 PM

 

Comments on tuition increases:

[Note: For more details on the increases, and Schill’s plan to reduce the cost of UO by helping them graduate in 4 years instead of the increasing common 5: http://uomatters.com/2016/02/one-extra-year-of-college-costs-students-more-than-a-100-tuition-increase-would.html

Jimmy Murray (libraries): Reports on information he has collected about student opposition to tuition increases, as a supervisor of student workers in the library.

Shawna Meecham (GTFF president) speaks in opposition.

Amber Potratz, student, speaks in opposition. Learning disabilities can only take 12 credits, first in family, tuition is already too high.

Chandler (missed name): Couldn’t be happier with Ducks or his professors. Worried about student debt. Not saying this board is responsible, but asks board to do their part to combat student-debt crisis.

Student (missed name): Argues that increased tuition will make it more difficult to meet diversity goals.

Helena Schlegel – the student Trustee that Lillis got to leave the Board: Announces that ASUO supports divestment, renaming, Supports Kurt Wilcox’s proposal to limit tuition increase to 3.5%. Not asking for a tuition freeze – we understand the UO’s financial situation. But remember what it was like to be a student – even $90 is a lot of money.

Shawn Stevenson, undergrad. Let’s compromise – 4.7% is just too large. [Shawn’s an econ major, in case you didn’t guess ;)] Argues that UO can find the $2.7M. [Easy: cut baseball, make the cash rich athletic department pay for the $2.4M Jock Box tuition, etc.] Stevenson goes on to argue that the state is not giving UO money in part because the legislators don’t believe UO when they say they will use state money to provide affordable education.

[There’s a lot of emotion from some student and staff commenters. I’m surprised at how little recognition there is of UO programs like Pathways, diversity scholarships, etc. No one has mentioned Schill’s plan to accelerate completion to reduce the opportunity cost of college – which far exceeds the tuition increases. This would all be more interesting with some back and forth from the board. They’re getting a lot of very serious thoughtful comments from students, it’s odd that the board just sits there making sympathetic faces instead of getting into the back and forth.]

And then the penultimate speaker goes off the rails with a rant. Oh well.

The last one (missed name) reads comments collected from students opposing increase. Says she’s got 30 pages. What is the point of this? She’s shutting off discussion with this.

Ann Curry tries to save the day by suggesting that this can be put into the record.

Nope, she goes on and on. The other students tell her she’s made her point, time to sit down. She does.

1. AY2016‐17 Tuition and Fees (Action), President Michael Schill, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO Jamie Moffitt and Vice Provost for Budget and Planning Brad Shelton

Break 1b. Additional Resolutions from Committee ‐‐Seconded Motion from FFC: Authorization for Bond Issuance (pending March 3 committee action)

Lillis: Complicated, difficult, we’ve considered all the ins and outs.

Schill: I’ve listened to everyone, but my recommendation stands. Increase tuition by $405 per year.for the average in-state student. This is necessary because we must invest in the university in order to deliver an excellent education. I wish it weren’t so, but because of low state support we need to fund UO with tuition.

[Wasn’t one of the arguments for an independent board that there would be $2B in philanthropy to augment state funding? How’s that going?]

VPFA Jamie Moffitt: We had lots of public meetings, 3 forums, got feedback, then ignored it all. We’re unwilling to go after the bloated athletic budget and their hidden subsidies, because the jocks and boosters scare us. So we’re hitting up the students. And please don’t ask me about the $10M UO undergrads are now paying to prop up my husband’s law school. Any other questions?

VPB Brad Shelton: Info starts on page 68 of pdf here. Unfortunately this info was not part of the original board materials, here. This is too bad, it might have led to better public comments, or not.

Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 11.27.21 AM Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 11.27.34 AM

Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 11.27.42 AM

VPFA Moffitt then explains why UO is using millions from the “education and general fund” to pay for the jock box tutoring and Knight Arena land. Just kidding. It’s all about the increasing cost of salaries and benefits:

Screen Shot 2016-03-04 at 11.40.52 AM

Peter Bragdon mentions that not only does the legislature not fund UO much, they also impose unfunded mandates such as requiring UO employees to stay in the state health insurance pool ($25M a year, if I recall) plus PERS. They’ve raised the minimum wages, which benefits many student workers e.g. in the library, but UO will have to fund all that.

[Sorry, I have to go. Please post comments if you are here or watching.]

2. President’s Report and Strategic Framework Overview, President Michael Schill

Nothing says mediocre like saying EXCELLENCE. So Schill won’t say this word.

3. Presidential Goals and Evaluation (Action), Chair Chuck Lillis and Vice Chair Ginevra Ralph

Snoozer. Schill’s doing his job plus all the jobs the previous 5 presidents and interims were supposed to be doing but didn’t.

4. Capital Campaign and University Advancement Update, Vice President for Advancement Mike Andreasen

Andreasen isn’t showing much. I wonder why not? All the donations are going to the Jocks?

5. University of Oregon Foundation Overview, University of Oregon Foundation President and CEO Paul Weinhold

Basic due diligence.

I’m sure the Board will ask Weinhold some tough questions about the decline in transparency since he took over the Foundation, and his loss exposure for the various IAAF track championships.

6. Information Technology Strategic Planning, Provost and Senior Vice President Scott Coltrane, Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO Jamie Moffitt, Interim Vice President for Research Brad Shelton and Assistant Vice President and Chief of Staff to the Provost Melanie Muenzer

Yikes.

Things that should be on the BOT agenda but aren’t (suggestions welcome).

 

Background:

The last time the UO Board of Trustees voted to increase tuition UO’s Public Records Office tried to charge $474.28 for public records explaining the increase:

Dear Mr. Harbaugh:

The University of Oregon has received your public records request for “any documents provided to the Tuition and Feed Advisory Board, from 7/1/2013 to the present”, on 11/04/2014, attached. The office has at least some documents responsive to your request. By this email, the office is providing you with an estimate to respond to your requests.

The office estimates the actual cost of responding to your request to be $474.28. Upon receipt of a check made payable to the University of Oregon for that amount, the office will proceed to locate, copy, and provide the records you have requested that are not exempt from disclosure. Your check may be sent to the attention of Office of Public Records, 6207 University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-6207.

The university has received your request for a fee waiver for these records. The decision to waive or reduce fees is discretionary with the public body. After considering your request, the office does not consider that the totality of the circumstances you presented meets the standard for a fee waiver.

… Thank you for contacting us with your request.

Sincerely,

Lisa Thornton
Office of Public Records
University of Oregon
Office of the President

Really? No public interest in understanding why a public university is increasing tuition? A few months later the board met to approve the increase. The students came out in mass to protest. The very high participation by the international students was striking. Full post here. The signs called  out the administrators and coaches for their bloated salaries:

Screen Shot 2015-03-05 at 2.05.57 PM

BOT chair Chuck Lillis just couldn’t stomach the fact that the UO Student Board Member, Helena Schlegel, then proposed a slightly smaller increase. Lillis drove Schlegel off the board and had the Governor replace her with a new student trustee, picked by the board instead of by student government. What a horrible precedent.

Off course there are good reasons to increase tuition. The basic model is to raise tuition and raise the discounts for low income students. And, in fact, UO is proposing to keep tuition for in-state Pathways students at $0. This is really not that hard to explain to people. Every university does it – and there’s no reason to hide it.