Gottfredson’s "State of the University of Oregon" speech + drugs

10/15/2012 update: Video of Pres Gottfredson’s “State of the University of Oregon” speech is now posted, here, along with the rest of the Senate meeting, including the debate on random drug testing. Or watch below. (Thanks to anonymous tech dude for correct embed code.)

Note that by leaving Rob Mullens’s emergency drug testing rule in place while the Senate Executive decides what to do we have given the athletic department the power to revoke the scholarship of any “student-athlete” after just one failed random pot test.

President gives fact filled “State of the University” speech to Senate: That would be Ed Ray at OSU. Gottfredson’s speech to the UO Senate is not here, I suppose someone has a copy somewhere. Something on his website here, it’s got a picture of trees.

Live-blog of Senate: Gottfredson to answer questions


Given the low expectations, Gottfredson’s speech was good. He said “transparency” and “shared governance” many times. But then so did Berdahl. Still no action, of course – public records are in lockdown, thanks to the decisions of loyal trustee Dave Hubin. But today’s big loser was Randy Geller, who managed to thoroughly embarrass his new boss and himself without even showing up.

The meeting started with President Gottfredson’s speech. He made a point of saying that he did not believe the random duck drug testing policy was an academic matter that required Senate approval.

John Bonine and Frank Stahl then proceeded to politely shred the procedures Geller’s office was using to implement this OAR without going through the Senate. Geller – incredibly – was not present to defend his work. Nor was AD Rob Mullens.

How is it possible these guys put forward something like this and then won’t even defend it in public? That fell on Gary Gray, a mid-level AD type, who began by announcing the decision to do this was over his pay grade, but said the decision was not required by the NCAA but was being done for the benefit of the “we smoked it all” athletes. Sorry, “student-athletes”. He said it  was done in a rush over the summer because a recent court case. Sure.

So, then we got to the substance. Geller’s office’s own summary of the drug OAR stated its academic importance, and said it was being done to comply with NCAA rules. Which directly contradicted what Gottfredson and Gray had just said. Whoops. Then it turned out the “recent” court decision that Gray had said made the AD move on this over the summer was actually from 1995 – Clinton’s first term, when our current football team was in diapers instead of getting interviewed by ESPN about their purple kush habit.

At this point, out of respect for the new president, and pity for the fact he had relied on Geller for advice, the Senate passed a motion allowing AD Rob Mullens to keep collecting pee while the reeking residue of this OAR went back to the Senate Executive for a review of the hack-job version that had been prepared by Geller’s office.

If you want my opinion, it’s this: People should not be subject to unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause. That principle is a lot more important than embarrassing a football team and the NCAA by smoking a little purple kush. The fact that the AD won’t let athletes talk to reporters about it is another violation of basic rights. The Senate should have told Mullens and Gottfredson to drop the whole repugnant proposal. Next time maybe I’ll have the balls to make that motion.

Live: 3:06 … n ~70 people. My comments in []. Video at 

Niceties, more niceties, we are a distinguished university …

Views on governance:
New org chart, board questions. Views stem from idea we are “one of nation’s premier public research universities”. Value discovery, creativity, freedom of speech. … Respect for ideas, civility…
Public university: access, quality, integrity: open and transparent governance and administration. 
Requires faculty input into academic matters. List of things that means: hiring, promotion, admissions.

Responsibility and competencies of admin:
Be stewards. Sharing requires consultation and advice, spirit of transparency and timeliness. So Senate has a role even on admin matters like space, finance, planning, selection of academic administrators.

Examples from this meeting’s agenda:
Policy on academic freedom. Purview of the faculty, [not Randy Geller!].
Drug testing: Not your call: it’s administrative.
Constitution signed by Lariviere: Solid, will consult and delegate, but ultimate responsibility is mine.

Recent events:
Org chart: He’s saying Provost, not Provost Bean.
Institutional boards: [Remember, he was hired by Pernsteiner] Thinks it’s going in good direction, to deal with changes in higher ed funding…. No intention of changing our mission, access, quality… Do in collaboration [not a word Lariviere used a lot.] Optimistic.
[No mention of faculty union.]

Personal note: Committed to the public and research mission, a good thing. Social and economic mobility via access to higher ed that does not depend on SES.

Q John Bonine:
Governance extends beyond academics though Pres has final word, but not the only word. We have a process for resolving what’s in the Senate’s purview: Scholarship and scholarships and policies. Cannot let this be done [by Geller] and OARs.

Moving on … Kyr’s remarks:
Interim Provost Bean is preparing the survey on university priorities which the Senate will distribute! [I guess that means question 1 will not be “Who do you think should be the new Provost?”]

Q’s from Bonine and Stahl on why the admin is not posting policy proposals as they have been voted on by the Senate.

Random Duck Drug Tests:
good idea?
good process?
We should hear from the proponents.
Gary Gray:
We’ve wanted to do this for years [so we rushed…]. Bonine calls him on it.
Not an NCAA mandate! 
Bonine: How did this get so far without consultation?
Gray: Not my call.
Bonine: Regulations are policymaking
Harbaugh: Summary of the OAR references academics and suggests this type of random testing is required by the NCAA, but Gray just said it’s not.
Discussion of how to proceed:
Gray: this is all about protecting our athletes.
Gillem: Establish committee to review policy in light of it’s academic import, “emergency” testing can proceed.

Kenton, OUS VC for FA [This guy is great, a nerd’s nerd.]
ORP and PEBB: [Snoozer, you’ll have to google this stuff yourself.]
Wake up people, this might be important: Currently UO pays into ORP based on PERS rate. PERS rate goes up, UO pays more into your account. IRS wants a fixed rate. Also, ORP can reduce admin fees by limiting number of investment companies. Also a problem with guessing if people will work 600 hours.
Also, they may change their contribution amount for new employees – not current. (which is 12.3).
John Chalmers is on top of this stuff, nothing big, go back to sleep.
Q Botvinnik: Inequity between tier 1 and 3 – 16% vs 6% contributions.
Kenton: You are correct. (also a 6% employer pickup so really 22 vs 12.)

PEBB health and wellness: 
Set up committee, hired Gallagher Benefit Services to advise.
OUS paid $67M *more* to PEBB than benefits, (over two year?) because we are healthier than average state worker. This cost gets bult into tuition, etc. But Kitzhaber wants a *bigger* pool.

Admins slide out of meeting.

I’ll submit an edited list of questions on this entry to Gottfredson and ask for responses.

Earlier, 10/10/2012: At the Senate meeting today, 3PM, room 101 in the Knight Library. I’ll try and live-blog it.

Q1: I heard your talk to the department head’s was panned for lack of specifics. You could have been giving it at Arizona. Where’s the beef?

UO Matters: Actually, while Gottfredson’s speech was short on specifics, it had a certain emphasis on transparency and shared governance that I like.

Duck drug testing forum Wednesday

Update: The logical consequences of this policy? More drunk athletes. See here for the Senate debate.

4:20 PM 10/3/2012 update: Randy Geller missed another opportunity to apologize for accusing Kyr and McWhorter of defamation. Sam Stites reports the only speaker at the administration’s pro forma public meeting on duck drug testing was IAC chair Brian McWhorter. The students were busy protesting Jim Bean’s beamer payments. Presumably Randy’s saving himself for the better attended 10/10/2012 Senate meeting, where either he or Gottfredson will have to explain why they are ignoring the UO constitution rules requiring a Senate vote on this.

Dear [UO Senate President Rob Kyr and IAC Chair Brian McWhorter]

I received your email of July 24, 2012, requesting a delay in the public hearing scheduled for August 23rd, 2012. The hearing will be rescheduled for September 13, 2012. Written comments will be accepted until noon on September 14, 2012. We will similarly postpone the date the rule will be filed with the Secretary of State and become final. The rule will be filed on September 21, 2012.

Your allegations about the University’s rulemaking processes are offensive and false , as are the comments made publicly by members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. I ask that you apologize in writing to President Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and me. I also ask that you censure the members of the IAC who have published offensive and defamatory comments.

Randolph Geller  

General Counsel
University of Oregon

10/2/2012. From what I can tell from the administration’s policy library website Gottfredson intends to go forward with the random drug testing without submitting it to the Senate to approval. The policy was also never discussed with the Senate Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. Paperwork here. So much for the shared governance constitution the faculty signed with Lariviere.

The “interim” policy is already in place. The public meeting on the “proposed” policy is in the EMU Walnut room, Wed 10/3 at 1PM. It’s on the Senate agenda for 10/10 but it appears any vote will be a non-binding sham.

RG trashes UO’s secret drug deal

Their editorial board is just not buying what Mullens and Geller are selling and writes a strong editorial protesting efforts to start random drug tests of Duck players without probable cause and without genuine public discussion of that policy. They trust the faculty Senate more than they trust the UO administration. Really? No confidence in a lawyer who sends emails like this, trying to intimidate the faculty into shutting up?

Dear [UO Senate President Rob Kyr and IAC Chair Brian McWhorter]

I received your email of July 24, 2012, requesting a delay in the public hearing scheduled for August 23rd, 2012. The hearing will be rescheduled for September 13, 2012. Written comments will be accepted until noon on September 14, 2012. We will similarly postpone the date the rule will be filed with the Secretary of State and become final. The rule will be filed on September 21, 2012.

Your allegations about the University’s rulemaking processes are offensive and false , as are the comments made publicly by members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. I ask that you apologize in writing to President Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and me. I also ask that you censure the members of the IAC who have published offensive and defamatory comments.

Randolph Geller  

General Counsel
University of Oregon

I’ll go out on a limb here and predict that Gottfredson puts this hack job of a policy on hold and again postpones the public meeting on it, which Geller has now rescheduled a second time for Wednesday, October 3, 2012 at 1:00 pm in the Walnut Room of the EMU. The Senate meeting follows a week later.

It’s an election year, there’s a popular marijuana legalization initiative on the ballot, and vote-by-mail will start Oct 20th. The growers are heavy donors to the statewide races, and don’t get me started on their grassroots supporters, who have a way of taking over public meetings even when they have nothing to do with hemp. Turnout will be huge. If they actually hold this meeting, Mullens and Geller and Gottfredson are going to have to defend mandatory random testing for marijuana use in Matt Court, and it’s not going to be the usual home game crowd.

Forget about trying to get publicity for any major UO restructuring or fundraising initiatives. Instead Gottfredson is going to be spending a lot of time on national TV, explaining why he thinks Duck football is more important than the 4th Amendment. What a waste. 9/9/2012.

Duck drug testing begins, without Senate approval

9/6/2012: In trying to defend random drug testing UO spokesperson Phil Weiler comes close to slandering UO’s acrobatics and tumbling team, formerly known as Competitive Cheer. Diane Dietz of the RG has the story here:

In acrobatics, Weiler said, “there are bodies that are literally flying through the air. The chance of injury if an athlete wasn’t caught properly or supported properly is pretty high. You want to make sure people are not under the influence.”

And there was some probable cause or reasonable suspicion about the team that led him to make this statement about UO students to a reporter? Or is it just public relations bullshit to take the heat off the football team’s Purple Kush problem?

President Gottfredson went ahead with this drug testing policy change without going through the Senate Executive Committee as Lariviere’s agreements with the faculty require. Perhaps Randy Geller convinced him that Duck athletics has nothing to do with UO academics, and therefore the policy didn’t need Senate review? It looks like Randy Geller needs to know more, and learn about saliva drug tests and the legality of conducting said tests.

Dear Rob and Brian:

I received your email of July 24, 2012, requesting a delay in the public hearing scheduled for August 23rd, 2012. The hearing will be rescheduled for September 13, 2012. Written comments will be accepted until noon on September 14, 2012. We will similarly postpone the date the rule will be filed with the Secretary of State and become final. The rule will be filed on September 21, 2012.

Your allegations about the University’s rulemaking processes are offensive and false , as are the comments made publicly by members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. I ask that you apologize in writing to President Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and me. I also ask that you censure the members of the IAC who have published offensive and defamatory comments.

Randolph Geller

General Counsel
University of Oregon

The mild-mannered email from the UO Senate President and the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee Chair that set off Geller is here. He has a history of using this sort of intimidation. President Gottfredson made him apologize to the former AG for similar language, but apparently it’s OK to threaten the faculty – particularly when it works.

Senate update from President Kyr

To: University of Oregon Senate 

From: Robert Kyr, President 
RE: Looking Ahead
In four weeks, we will begin a new academic year that promises to be one of the most significant in the history of our university. I am writing to give you a brief overview of some of our activities and projects for the year, as well as an update on several other matters.
Since his arrival at the university on August 1, President Michael Gottfredson and I have discussed a wide range of issues, including most of those that I have summarized below. I am confident that our new President is the ideal leader for our university, one who strongly supports shared governance and our ongoing commitment to academic excellence, and who will work with the Senate in a consultative and collaborative way. As President of the Senate, I will meet with President Gottfredson at least once per week during the fall quarter and on a regular basis throughout the rest of the year.
SENATE EXECUTIVE COORDINATOR-Christopher Prosser, our Senate Executive Coordinator for 2011-2012, has resigned from his job in order to pursue doctoral studies at the University of Texas at Austin. Chris was an exceptional colleague and will be greatly missed by the Senate. The position announcement may be accessed through the following link:
I encourage you to share it with all viable candidates. Please note that a review of applications will begin no later than September 14 and the appointment will begin on October 15 or as soon as possible thereafter.
In the meantime, please direct all of your correspondence regarding Senate matters to me at both of the following email addresses: [email protected] and [email protected]
TENTH YEAR REVIEW-This year, the Committee on Committees will conduct a Tenth Year Review of all University Standing Committees. After the Committee on Committees has completed its comprehensive review of the charge and membership of each committee, the Senate will discuss the final report and vote on the recommended revisions and changes. I anticipate that this review will bring about a much needed set of reforms in our system of university service.
FACULTY UNION-Throughout the summer, I have had meaningful and productive contact with the UA Organizing Committee, the UA Coordinating Committee, and the UA Governance Subcommittee. The union has been both consultative and collaborative on all matters related to the Senate, and has assured me that one of its goals is to strengthen both the Senate and shared governance at our institution. As a result of our discussions, the UA Coordinating Committee is in the process of forming a University Senate Liaison Committee that will meet with me and the Senate Executive Committee throughout the year. I know that we will continue to have a fruitful interaction and I will keep you informed about our discussions.
TWO NEW AD HOC COMMITTEES-In order to explore a wide variety of issues that are focused on academic matters, I am forming two ad hoc committees: the Committee on Academic Excellence and the Committee on Instructional Technology (IT). The former will concentrate on proposing substantive ways in which academic excellence can be furthered at the University of Oregon, especially in regard to improving our standing in the Association of American Universities (AAU). The latter will explore the role of Instructional Technology at our university, and propose constructive ways in which we can become a regional and national leader in this important area.
OAR ON RANDOM DRUG TESTING OF STUDENT ATHLETES-Over the summer, changes were proposed for the OAR on random drug testing of student athletes (OAR 571-004-0038: “Institute random student-athlete drug testing and provide for safe-reporting program”). At first, a public hearing was scheduled during the summer months, but the Senate (in collaboration with the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee [IAC]) filed a request to postpone the meeting until after the beginning of the new academic year. Interim President Berdahl accepted our request and the new meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 3, 2012 at 1:00 pm in the Walnut Room of the EMU. (Please see the attached document, “OAR ON RANDOM DRUG TESTING.”) [UO Matters ed: Also see Randy Geller attacks Rob Kyr and Senate] I strongly urge you to attend and participate in this important public meeting, which will precede our consideration of the revised OAR at our October 10th Senate meeting.
POLICY AGENDA FOR 2012-2013-During the coming academic year, the Senate will consider three important policies-Academic Freedom and Freedom of Speech Policy; Facilities Use Policy; and Legal Representation Policy–as well as several other policies that are currently in development. The three aforementioned policies can be accessed by going to the Senate webpage ( and clicking on the policies that are listed under the blue headline near the top of the page (“Policies under consideration by the Senate”). At our first Senate meeting of the year (October 10), I will be giving an update about each of these policies and the process through which we will be considering them.
STUDENT VOTER DRIVE-The ASUO is organizing a student voter drive, through which it hopes to register at least 6,000 students in order to foster greater civic engagement regarding the candidates and issues on the November ballot. I am in conversation with ASUO Senator Lamar Wise regarding how the University Senate can best assist in this effort.
I hope that you enjoy the remaining weeks of summer and I very much look forward to our work together during the coming academic year.
All the best, Rob
Robert Kyr 
Philip H. Knight Professor of Music 
President, University Senate

Randy Geller takes charge

I’m guessing the exchange below has something to do with AD Rob Mullens’s efforts to start random drug testing of UO’s “student athletes”, and the efforts by the Senate to make him run that policy and change in UO’s OAR’s through the UO Senate first. Instead of resolving this by meeting with the Senate and talking it over, Geller just lays down the law. At least this time he’s not accusing President Kyr and the IAC of defamation:

… Your allegations about the University’s rulemaking processes are offensive and false , as are the comments made publicly by members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. I ask that you apologize in writing to President Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and me. I also ask that you censure the members of the IAC who have published offensive and defamatory comments.

Randolph Geller  

General Counsel
University of Oregon

From: Randy Geller <[email protected]>

Date: Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: proposal to resolve our differences regarding the definition of “academic matters”
To: Nathan Tublitz <[email protected]>
Cc: Rob Mullens <[email protected]>, …, Robert Kyr <[email protected]>

Dear Nathan,

Thank you for your follow up.

ORS 351.011 renders the Oregon University System ineligible to request
or receive legal services from the Attorney General and the Department
of Justice. This language was added by the Legislative Assembly at the
request of former Attorney General John Kroger. Under Board of Higher
Education policy, an OUS institution may receive legal representation,
services, and opinions only from attorneys authorized to provide legal
services to the institution. Legal advice and opinions rendered by
anyone other than an attorney authorized to provide legal services to
an OUS institution are ineffective. No director, officer, employee
(faculty members are employees) or authorized representative of the
University may request a legal opinion or seek legal advice from the
Oregon Attorney General or the Oregon Department of Justice. I have
attached the Board policy for your information.

ORS 351.070, 352.004, and 352.010 and Board IMDs and policies are
clear and unambiguous with regard to the respective roles of the
president and the faculty (faculty is defined as the “president and
professors”) in matters pertaining to intercollegiate athletics. I am
certain that President Gottfredson will want to provide for a strong,
appropriate role for faculty in matters pertaining to intercollegiate
athletics and ensure that the faculty’s role is discharged properly.
He knows that faculty involvement is essential under the NCAA
governance structure. I know that Rob Mullens shares this view.



—–Original Message—–
From: Nathan Tublitz [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 1:42 AM
To: Randy Geller
Subject: proposal to resolve our differences regarding the definition of “academic matters”

Dear Randy:

Thanks for your note and clarifications. Our recent email
discussions, which I greatly appreciate, demonstrate a clear
difference of opinion regarding the role of faculty and our
governance system in governing the University and what constitutes
academic matters. For the record, I do not believe that the phrase
“academic matters” encompassing every aspect of the University.
However it is clear that my definition of “academic matters” is
broader than yours. That said, we both provide only advice to the
University President and do not make policy decisions. So perhaps the
best approach to resolving this difference is to refer the matter to
the Oregon Department of Justice who would issue a ruling on the
breadth of ORS352.010 (and how it interacts with other ORSs and IMDs)
after receiving briefs from all interested parties. Such a ruling
would resolve our differences and allow our governance system to
interact with the administration more efficiently and more
effectively. I suggest therefore that the new University President
and the current University Senate President write a joint letter to
the Oregon DoJ requesting such a ruling. How does that sound to you?

I appreciate your thoughtful discussions and hope we can find a way
to resolve our differences.



Randy Geller attacks Rob Kyr and Senate

Update: Berdahl has caved, mostly, after Geller wasted untold hours of faculty time on this. Not to mention his weird threats below. Berdahl can’t quite make himself admit that the UO Senate has to approve this policy first, but he’s postponing hearings until UO is in session. Meanwhile, he wants to let the interim random drug testing begin:

From: Bob Berdahl <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:49 AM
Subject: Rule making 

Dear Senate President Kyr and IAC Chair McWorter,

Thank you for your correspondence requesting a modification to the
schedule for hearings in the rulemaking process associated with random
drug testing for our student athletes. I appreciate your attention to
this and your suggestion for scheduling that reflects better the
academic calendar. I write to convey that we will postpone the
formal rulemaking hearings until after the beginning of the academic

Because we have a pressing need to have this testing in place as our
athletes reassemble in September, we will be implementing the
procedure of “temporary rule making” that will allow testing beginning
September 1st. This use of the 60 day temporary rule with formal
hearings on the permanent implementation of the rule taking place
after school is back in session will allow us to meet the immediate
need for this procedure while respecting the request you make that
broader hearing.

Thank you for your attention to this.

All the Best,

Bob Berdahl
IAC2012-13 mailing list
[email protected]

But he’s wrong about the 60 day rule. He cannot act unilaterally:

Policy Review and Approval 

… If the Senior Vice President and Provost endorses the Policy Statement, then it will be submitted to the Senate Executive Committee who will decide whether a full-Senate review is necessary. If the Senate Executive Committee determines that full-Senate review is not necessary, the PL Program Manager will send the Policy Statement to the President for approval. If a full-Senate review is necessary, the Policy Statement will be placed on the agenda of the next Senate meeting. However, if the Senate is adjourned for the summer, the Policy Statement may be placed in the Policy Library on an interim basis and will be scheduled for review when the Senate reconvenes in the fall. …

And he’s not willing to follow UO policy on emergencies:

Emergency Policies 

If the University needs to comply immediately with federal, state or local law, or in the case of an immediate emergency, the President has the authority to issue a temporary, emergency policy or temporarily suspend an existing policy without following the procedures described in this Policy Statement. Each action of this type shall if possible be taken only after consultation with the Senate Executive Committee, shall have a duration of no more than six months, and shall be non-renewable and non-extendable. If the President wishes to make the action permanent, the President shall follow the process in this Policy Statement. If the process cannot be completed within six months, the President can take further emergency action.

7/31/2012. In response to demands from Senate President Kyr and others including Frank Stahl, Nathan Tublitz and John Bonine, UO General Counsel Randy Geller announced yesterday he’s rescheduling his random drug testing hearing.

But it’s a sham, he’s picked another date when school is out of session. And he completely ignores the faculty / administrative agreement calling for UO policies like this to go through the Senate. That “policy on policies” agreement with Lariviere had been the Senate’s major accomplishment for 2011-2012. Now Geller thinks it isn’t worth a mention.

Geller also claims Senate President Rob Kyr and the IAC Chair made false and offensive comments about the university’s rulemaking process. Apparently that process’s feelings have been hurt, so Randy asks Kyr et al to apologize to it, and to some especially sensitive senior administrators:

Dear Rob and Brian:

I received your email of July 24, 2012, requesting a delay in the public hearing scheduled for August 23rd, 2012. The hearing will be rescheduled for September 13, 2012. Written comments will be accepted until noon on September 14, 2012. We will similarly postpone the date the rule will be filed with the Secretary of State and become final. The rule will be filed on September 21, 2012.

Your allegations about the University’s rulemaking processes are offensive and false , as are the comments made publicly by members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee. I ask that you apologize in writing to President Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and me. I also ask that you censure the members of the IAC who have published offensive and defamatory comments.

Randolph Geller  

General Counsel
University of Oregon

I like that “in writing” part. Maybe Geller wants Kyr to stand in front of the whole class and use the blackboard, like in third grade? Geller sent this out yesterday. Berdahl’s last few days look to be as crazy as his first. Adult supervision supposedly returns Aug 1, but Gottfredson still hasn’t signed his contract. and Gottfredson apparently signed his contract last night.

Bonine asks Berdahl to follow law and UO Constitution

Berdahl has already wasted too much of his time and ours subverting transparency and shared governance. Bonine calls him out on his most recent effort:

From: John Bonine
Subject: Scheduling of Public Hearing of Aug. 23
Date: July 26, 2012 2:04:10 AM EDT
To: , Provost Office , Franklin Stahl ,>>>>
Cc: Robert Kyr , David Hubin , Randy Geller>>>

Dear Bob [Berdahl] and Michael [Gottfredson],

I am writing to ask you to postpone the public hearing on binding regulations of the University that is scheduled for August 23.  This can be done by either the Interim President or, after August 1, by the new, permanent President of the University.

The regulations at issue will directly affect University of Oregon students.  What affects students can also affect faculty who interact with students on a daily basis.  Procedures for adopting such regulations should [not] be scheduled while both are absent from campus.  

Such scheduling of University rule making processes during vacation or exam periods has unfortunately occurred often during past years.  I  hope that a new Administration at UO will institute new, collaborative methods of governance and participation on this campus.  The lodestar from here forward should be not what is convenient, but what is proper.  Engaging in crucial rule- and policy-making while most of the campus is absent is not proper, no matter how convenient it may be.

The Attorney General of Oregon has written, “Government transparency is vital to a healthy democracy. Public scrutiny helps ensure that government spends tax dollars wisely and works for the benefit of the people.”  This is, of course, true of the University as well, where we strive to prepare citizens for tomorrow.

Under the Oregon Administrative Procedure Act, the purpose for soliciting public participation in the adoption of administrative rules in the State of Oregon is both to allow the relevant public to help formulate administrative policies and to improve the quality of decisionmaking by administrative bodies.  Those affected by regulations must have the opportunity to share information with agency officials prior to adoption of policies.

Under the Oregon Administrative Procedure Act, the University retains the authority to adopt temporary emergency regulations (in a state of true emergency) that can go into effect while public processes are taking place.  In other words, there is no administrative need to adopt permanent changes to regulations while we are all absent from campus.

In addition, the University of Oregon carefully designed a “Policy on Policies” (adopted as faculty legislation) to ensure that the Executive Committee of the University Senate can review new policies (which includes, of course, legally binding regulations) before they go into effect.  The Executive Committee can decide that a new policy needs no further review or can refer it to the full University Senate.  

Nothing in Oregon law or University policies contemplates, however, that a member of the Administration would decide on his or her own to make it difficult for us to share in collaborative governance.

I respectfully request that this public hearing be postponed and that officials of the University Administration be instructed to adhere to the spirit as well as the requirements of the relevant laws and policies.

With regards,

Professor John E. Bonine

Senate calls for drug testing postponement

Two weeks back UO announced it was going to try and change the Oregon Administrative Rules which forbid random drug testing of Ducks. Bob Berdahl, Rob Mullens, and Randy Geller ignored both the intent of Oregon law (which requires public input) and the UO “Policy on Policies” (which requires Senate approval) to rush this through when school was out of session and there wouldn’t be an embarassing public debate.

But now the relevant UO Senate officers are calling for a postponement. Great. I do not understand why they are not also explicitly saying that this policy will require Senate approval. Scared of Randy Geller? Come on, Geller’s too chicken to even show his face. Yup, UO’s $200,000 a year general counsel has foisted responsibility for his latest off on his $45,000 a year executive assistant – there’s courage for you.

Update: Frank Stahl has now emailed Ms Hatch, saying “This postponement will allow time for the University Senate to act upon this Policy as required by the University Policy on Policies and the UO Constitution.” Which is going to make it a little harder for Randy to pass the buck.

To: Amanda Hatch, Rules Coordinator
re: Rulemaking Announcement – OAR 571-004 

Pursuant to OAR 571-001-0020, and as President of the University
Senate and Chair of the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee (IAC, a
standing senate committee), we are writing to you to request a
postponement of the public hearing that is currently scheduled for
August 23rd, 2012 at 2:00 pm (Walnut Room of the EMU). The purpose of
this public hearing is to receive public input regarding the proposed
amendments to OAR 571-004-0020, 571-004-0025, 571-004-0050 and
571-004-0055, and the proposed adoption of OAR 571-004-0038.
August 23rd does not fall during a time in our academic calendar when
school is in full session. This makes it virtually impossible for our
constituents to attend this important public hearing, and if it goes
forward as planned, our constituencies will feel that they were cut
out of the “public” process, which numerous individuals will assume
was intentional. 

We request a postponement that will set the date for the public
hearing during the second week of the fall quarter (Monday, October
1st through Friday, October 5th) or later. This time frame will enable
our constituents– especially members of the faculty and student
populations–to participate fully in a truly public process that is
synchronized with our standard academic calendar. 

Robert Kyr
Philip H. Knight Professor of Music
President, University of Oregon Senate 

Brian McWhorter
Associate Professor of Music
Chair, Intercollegiate Athletic Committee (IAC)

More on drugs

It seems that someone in the President’s office forgot to notify interested campus components – like the Senate Intercollegiate Athletics Committee – of the proposed UO rule change, as OAR requires:

571-001-0025Procedure for Providing Notice(1) The University News Bureau shall be responsible for providing notice to appropriate media. The Office of the President shall provide notice to internal components and personnel of the University and to all other persons requesting notice.

Nor does the notice that was sent out satisfy the requirements that

571-001-0005Contents of Notice When University Contemplates a Public HearingWhen the University holds or contemplates a public hearing, the notice shall contain:
(1) The written statements required by ORS 183.335(2) and OAR 571-001-000(3)(e).
(2) The time, place, and manner in which the proposed rule can be inspected.
(3) The time and place of the public hearing and the manner in which interested persons may present their views at the hearing.
(4) A designation of the person or entity who will preside at and conduct the hearing.
(5) The address of the University office or offices where public inspection during regular business hours may be made of the written statements required by ORS 183.335(2) and OAR 571-001-000(3)(e), and the documents cited therein.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 183ORS 351 & ORS 352
Stats. Implemented: ORS 183.335(1)
Hist.: UOO 18(Temp), f. & ef. 2-5-76; UOO 19, f. & ef. 4-27-76; UOO 1-1978(Temp), f. & ef. 4-5-78; UOO 2-1978, f. 6-19-78, ef. 6-20-78; UOO 4-1981, f. & ef. 5-5-81; UOO 3-1982, f. & ef. 5-26-82

Presumably because of this screwup Randy Geller will now have to postpone the public meeting from August 23rd – maybe even to a date when the university is actually in session, to comply with the spirit of the principle that people ought to have input into the rules that govern them?

Thanks to an old man for the tip. The ODE has posted the notification of the new rules, here. The relevant part?

The opponents claim this violates Oregon constitutional protections. I’m no law professor – any informed comments? Why is this needed – the NCAA cartel already requires their so called “student-athletes” to sign an agreement allowing random testing. Maybe some of them are raising legal questions? 7/16/2012.

Duck drug testing follow-up

UO General Counsel Randy Geller’s previous modification of the Oregon rules on drug testing to suit the needs of the NCAA cartel was in 2010:

Geller appears to have notified the Senate of what he planned to do:

and shown us the proposed changes:

But that was when Lariviere was president. From what I can tell this time there was no notification at all – not even of the Senate Intercollegiate Athletic Committee – until the papers broke the story. The public hearing is, of course, scheduled for summer, when the students are gone. Last time he did it over winter break. 7/14/2012.

UO asks state to pay for Duck drug tests

The $2 million that Jim Bean is making regular students pay for the jock box tutoring isn’t enough? David Lieberman has the story in the ODE:

The University of Oregon released on Friday a list of proposed amendments and additions to its current student-athlete drug policy, including implementing random drug tests. Using an Ehrlich test kit and others like it, coaches and school facility members will be able to test students to ensure that they do not have any drugs in their systems.

The rules “emphasize that illicit and performance enhancing drugs are not allowed, provide for random drug testing, outline sanctions for positive drug tests, outline drug testing methods, and encourage self-reporting and treatment for drug use.” …

The amendments and additions will not be enacted until after a public hearing has occurred. The hearing will take place on Aug. 23 at 2 p.m. in the Walnut Room of the EMU.

In order to make these changes a reality, the UO is requesting $35,000 of additional annual funding from the Oregon University System.

The NCAA’s random drug testing rules appear to violate both Oregon law and the sentiment of Oregon voters. A pot legalization referendum just made Oregon’s November ballot, and Nigel Jaquiss of Willamette Week reports that 1/3 of Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum’s campaign donations come from dope growers and their supporters.

Given this, and since good cheap weed and lax testing seems to be an important recruiting tool for the Ducks, I assume all involved know this new policy will vanish as quickly as a bong hit of Purple Kush in a crowded Courtside Apartment living room. Anyway, there are many ways to manipulate hair drug testing so that you pass, so it’s quite hard to know who is and who isn’t taking drugs anymore. Just an attempt by Rob Mullens to convince the NCAA he’s doing all he can legally do. 7/13/2012.

With more and more ways being created to assist people to beat random drug screening tests is there anyway we can really know for sure if someone has legitimately passed a drug screening tests or if they have been online and bought and used something to help them beat the test.

Although none of the methods offer 100% success in beating the urine test there are those that now offer a 99% success rate, that being said it does depend on whether the drug urine test is supervised or unsupervised. To read more about the different types of methods that are now being used to beat drug tests visit ouchclub as they have a wealth of information pertaining to the most current methods.