Senate to meet today, Wed 4/23, 3-5PM 115 Lawrence

Update: Today, in an open meeting, the UO Senate voted to make Senate committee meetings open.

Meetings of the UO Board and its committees are already open. For example the UO Board Finance Committee has posted notice of a public meeting on May 6, here. The Senate Budget Committee, on the other hand, holds its meetings in secret, and UO VP Brad Shelton has said he will not share important information with the SBC, if they hold public meetings. Weird.

The Senate open meetings motion was proposed in November, and was presented to Dave Hubin and the Committee on Committees several months ago. It was discussed at the February Senate meeting. Extensive comments have been posted on the Senate website, here. The Senate spent about 45 minutes today debating the motion, starting with an eloquent and passionate speech in favor by Jennifer Freyd-Johnson, one of the sponsors. Rob Kyr proposed a significant amendment to provide a mechanism by which the Senate could address the reasonable confidentiality concerns that have been raised. After discussion, this passed.

The motion then passed, with all but one present voting in favor.

4/23/2014: Big issues for today’s meeting:

1) President Gottfredson to sign Academic Freedom Policy?

2) Provost Coltrane to announce interim VP for Research?

3) President Gottfredson to explain budget changes? There’s been no public notice or discussion about President Gottfredson’s plan to dismantle Brad Shelton’s old “New Budget Model” and return to the tight central administrative control we had under Dave Frohnmayer and John Moseley. This is going to mean a huge change in how departments function, and drastic cuts in their autonomous financial resources. But there’s no word to the faculty from the secretive SBC, FAC, ELT, or the department heads, on the motivation or consequences.

Update: Apparently President Gottfredson (and Provost Coltrane) are gong to skip this Senate meeting. The President’s official schedule:


9:00 a.m. — Meetings with academic deans

3:00 p.m. — Meeting with Vice President for Student Affairs Robin Holmes and the Associated Students Presidential Advisory Council
President Gottfredson meets with his student advisory council on issues important to students.

4) Open Meetings motion – discussed in more detail here.

Senate Meeting Agenda – April 23, 2014 

115 Lawrence, 3:00-5:00 p.m.

3:00 pm     1.   Call to Order

3:05 pm     2.   Approval of Minutes

April 9, 2014

3:10 pm     3.   University Update

3:30 pm     4.   New Business

4.1       Motion (Legislation): Clarification of Procedures for Senate Elections; Robert Kyr, Professor (Music) & UO Senate President-Elect

Some minor amendments, discussion, passed unanimously.

4.2       Motion (Legislation): Final Examination Schedule Revision; Randy Sullivan, Lecture Demonstrator (Chemistry) & UO Senator

Makes sense, approved.

4.3       Motion (Legislation): Open Committee Meetings; Frank Stahl, Professor Emeritus (Biology), Nathan Tublitz, Professor (Biology), and Jennifer Freyd, Professor (Psychology)

Jennifer Freyd-Johnson (Psychology) speaks eloquently: It’s not right that to get information from the administration, the faculty has to promise not to share that information with their colleagues!

Kyr moves to amend, to have the C on Committees to come up with legislation for the Oct meeting to deal with objections raised about opening up the FAC and the SBC in particular. Harbaugh insists that these meetings and communications be public. Amendment passed.

Bonine: This is not revolutionary. UNC requires open meetings for committees. Montana, Kansas, Wisconsin, etc. “I don’t think Oregon should be the secret state.” Paris: Exceptions for FAC type committees? Bonine: I think Washington may have that. “I also think the FAC has become a threat to shared governance.”

Martinez: The motion is consistent with how the Senate operates, which is good. Worries about applying it to the FAC. President may select his own confidential advisors.

Bonine: President can consult with whomever he wants. Not a bad thing.

Amended motion passes with one opposed.

4.4       Motion (Legislation): Committee Requirements with Moderate Revisions, Slate 3 (Tenth-Year Review 2014); Robert Kyr, Professor (Music), Chair of Committee on Committees, & UO Senate President-Elect

Not enough time for debate – Senate to meet on 4/30 on this.

4:40 pm     5.   Open Discussion

Sullivan (Chemistry) remarked on the ad hominem and unprofessional attacks on Harbaugh (Economics) which IAC Chair Rob Illig (Law) included in his report to the Senate last meeting.

4:50 pm     6.   Reports

4:50 pm     7.   Announcements and Communication from the Floor

4:55 pm     8.   Other Business

5:00 pm     9.   Adjournment

Meeting over early.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)

Gottfredson misleads Senate about secrecy on Board authority policy

4/23/2014 update: The Senate “ad hoc committee on cleaning up Geller’s latest mess” is having their next to last meeting today. They are doing a thorough job, reports and redlined versions here.

4/12/2014 update: The report by UO’s new $115K Senior Director of Communication Affairs Tobin Klinger in “Around the O” gives Gottfredson’s excuse to the Senate for hiding Geller’s delegation of authority policy from the faculty:

Prior to the [Senate] discussion, President Michael Gottfredson spoke on the board meeting actions, expressing his regret that the timing of the board meeting had not allowed for adequate comment and reflection on the policy from the campus community.

Bullshit: Nothing prevented Gottfredson telling the Senate about this months ago, or from sending the Senate an email with a heads up and the draft policy. Rumor has it he didn’t even tell his Faculty Advisory Council, whom he meets with weekly.

How long has he known this was coming? A year? Geller was so paranoid about keeping the policy secret he even told faculty Trustee Susan Gary (Law) to sent her comments to him privately and not to the other Board members. This was Randy’s effort to subvert Oregon’s open meetings law, which according to the Attorney General applies to meetings conducted via email discussions, but not necessarily one-on-one exchanges.

The next Senate working group meeting on fixing Geller’s policy is Wed April 16, 1:15, in the Johnson Hall conference room. It’s an open meeting.

4/7/2014: Kyr Committee to defend UO from Administration’s spring break coup attempt

Since this committee will be advising the UO Board by taking a fat red marker to Gellers’ policy, these are public meetings.

Thursday, April 3

3:00 – 4:00 pm
Johnson Hall Conference Room

Wednesday, April 9
1:15 – 2:30 pm
Johnson Hall Conference Room

Wednesday, April 16
1:15 – 2:30 pm
Lewis Lounge

Wednesday, April 23
1:15 – 2:30 pm
Johnson Hall Conference Room

Wednesday, April 30
1:15 – 2:30 pm
Johnson Hall Conference Room

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)

VP for Research Kimberly Andrews Espy to leave UO for Arizona

4/22/2014: The UA student paper has a bit on Espy’s hiring, here:

The criteria for candidates was that they be leaders with the vision and capability to meet the priorities established by the “Never Settle” strategic plan, according to Nikolich-Žugich. The plan’s goal regarding research and development is to double research expenditures at UA in the next 10 years. … Espy added that she was impressed by Hart’s Never Settle strategic plan. She said it is exciting to join the leadership team in an environment with such a bold vision, and that the goals in the plan are well-articulated.

Nearly two years into President Gottfredson’s presidency, and UO still has no research plan – though the Duck athletic department sure as hell does:

4/15/2014: This is a big win for President Gottfredson, for the UO Senate which has been pushing for this for more than a year at the urging of much of UO’s research community, and for the review committee that the Senate established and which Associate Dean Bruce Blonigen chaired. UA President’s announcement here, UO’s below:

From: “President’s Office” <>
Subject: Vice President Espy to take research position at University of Arizona
Date: April 15, 2014 at 3:07:39 PM EDT

Dear Colleagues,

Kimberly Andrews Espy, vice president for research and innovation and dean of the Graduate School, has accepted the position of vice president for research at the University of Arizona. She begins May 27.

I wish Dr. Espy the very best in her new appointment, and thank her for her outstanding service to the University of Oregon. During her nearly three-year tenure at the UO, she has provided valuable leadership and guidance that has greatly benefited our research mission. Dr. Espy led efforts to significantly expand the university’s research infrastructure and began the University’s Research Development Services, which assists faculty in proposal development. She also built strong partnerships in Oregon to accelerate research application through start-up businesses.

Please join me in congratulating Dr. Espy as she takes her new position.


Michael Gottfredson, President

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +6 (from 8 votes)

UO Foundation assets hit $600M

Great news – the Daily Emerald has the story, here. Not clear how much of this is for athletics, e.g. Knight’s ~$125M “Legacy Fund” or the $5M Robin Jaqua endowment that Johnson Hall let the jocks hijack.

The recent OUS audit of the Foundation – with a weird $7M exception apparently related to coach’s retirements – is here:

For a tax-exempt non-profit, the UO Foundation releases very little data on how they spend money. Their IRS 990 was due 5 months ago, but they keep asking for extensions. I’m guessing they’ll release it on the last possible day: 5/15/2014.

They did release this info for the 2013 AY. It’s incomplete, but shows $21M for athletics, $723K for research.

Screen Shot 2014-04-22 at 12.09.29 AM

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Trustees post summary of spring break meeting

Pdf here. It summarizes the Retention and Delegation of Authority policy – more on that later. This is also of note:

Applying the assumptions given in the HECC request, Moffitt reported that the UO would require an additional $7.4 million in FY 2016 and an additional $7.7 million in FY 2017 to maintain the current service level.

Shelton described four proposals to address 40-40-20 goals if additional funding were provided:

  • PathwayOregon: A “high touch” program with demonstrated success, increased funding for PathwayOregon would expand eligibility to serve more Pell-eligible Oregon students, increasing the number served from 1,700 to over 2,300. Cost: $2,200,000/year.
  • UO Graduation Assistance Grant: A “last mile” approach targeted to resident upper division students at risk of dropping out, this program would serve an estimated 150 juniors and 250 seniors. Successfully implemented, this program is conservatively estimated to raise UO’s graduation rate by 5 percentage points. Cost: $4,200,000/year.
  • UO Retention and Completion Initiative: This is an integrated retention approach that provides enhanced advising, learning, and enrichment support through peer advising, support for building writing skills, assistance for historically difficult “gateway” and general education courses, greater staffing provided through an undergraduate retention office, and greater academic enrichment through residential, first-year, and capstone experiences. Cost: $3,500,000/year plus $500,000 one- time funds.
  • University of Oregon Tenured Faculty Initiative: Recognizing the synergy of research and instruction in providing a high quality learning environment, as well as the attraction to promising undergraduate students of the opportunity to work directly with research faculty, this proposal asks the state to fund half of the proposed increase of 120 tenure-related faculty. Cost: $7,500,000/year.
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Senate to vote Wed. on opening up committee meetings

This motion was introduced in November and has been presented to Dave Hubin and the Committee on Committees. It was discussed at the February Senate meeting and was scheduled for a vote in March, but delayed because of the important Academic Freedom policy legislation. So there’s been plenty of debate, now it’s time to wrap it up and vote.

If approved, this will mean a change in how committees such as the FAC, SBC, and IAC function. The FAC, for example, requires that elected faculty members agree to secrecy. In theory, this promotes a full and frank discussion between the UO President and the faculty. In practice, it’s just filibustering and ass-kissing.

The AAUP has strongly endorsed open meetings, in its Confidentiality and Faculty Representation in Academic Governance, June 2013. It’s well worth reading the entire AAUP piece, which links transparency to the basic principle of academic freedom – and concludes with this:


1. Because requiring a pledge of confidentiality as a precondition for participation in any governance activities, other than serving on committees that deal with personnel matters, is incompatible with widely accepted standards of shared governance, faculty members should not agree to preemptive confidentiality mandates or agreements.

2. Confidentiality expectations appropriate to various modes of participation in governance
should be specified, and faculty representatives should be mindful of their responsibility to
keep their constituents informed and to seek their opinions.

3. Searches for presidents and other chief academic officers should have an open phase that
allows individual faculty members as well as faculty bodies to review the credentials of finalists, ask questions, and share opinions before a final decision is made.

The links below include many substantive comments for and against this change, from UO faculty and committee chairs. The motion is from Jennifer Freyd-Johnson (Psychology), Frank Stahl (Biology) and Nathan Tublitz (Biology). They have revised it in response to these comments, and I expect this will be an interesting and important debate and vote.

FWIW, I support the motion. I think the onus is on those faculty that want to keep their Senate committee meetings closed to make a convincing case for how closed meetings have promoted strong shared governance at UO. I don’t think they can do it.

Open Committee Meetings

Number: US13/14-19

Date of Notice: Fri, 11/22/2013

Legislation, Resolution, or Policy Adoption: Legislation

Current Status: Notice Given



1.1 Whereas the importance of transparency for good governance is recognized by public meeting laws nationwide and by the State of Oregon, and

1.2 Whereas the ability of the University of Oregon Senate to discharge its duties in a responsible manner depends on its unfettered access to relevant materials and perspectives,


2.1 BE IT HEREBY MOVED THAT all meetings of the University Standing Committees, Senate Internal Committees, and Senate ad hoc committees shall be open.

2.2 BE IT FURTHER MOVED THAT exceptions to this policy shall be limited to the following:

a) Meetings to discuss confidential records of students or employees;

b) Meetings to deliberate on on honors, awards, or grants to individuals;

c) Meetings at which a person called to give testimony requests that the testimony be confidential, in which case the meeting shall be closed for the period necessary to protect the identity of the person;

d) and meetings whose topics fall under the exceptions to the Open Public Meetings Law (as listed in ORS 192.660);

2.3 BE IT FURTHER MOVED THAT the Committee shall notify the public of the time, place and intended agenda for each meeting. Said notification shall be submitted for posting on the Senate Web Page not less than two days in advance of the meeting;

2.4 BE IT FURTHER MOVED THAT the Senate Executive Committee shall implement procedures for such reporting; and

2.5 BE IT FURTHER MOVED THAT this legislation becomes effective at the beginning of the 2014-15 academic year.


OPML: This motion is compliant with the spirit of the Oregon Public Meetings law (ORS 192.630, 640, 650 and 660).

AAUP: This motion is compliant with the recommendations of the AAUP: “Because requiring a pledge of confidentiality as a precondition for participation in any governance activities, other than serving oncommittees that deal with personnel matters, is incompatible with widely accepted standards of shared governance, faculty members should not agree to preemptive confidentiality mandates or agreements.” (Confidentiality and Faculty Representation in Academic Governance, June 2013)

AFFECTED COMMITTEES as of the date of this Motion:

         University Standing Committees: Academic Council, Academic Requirements, Campus Planning, Committee on Courses, Distinguished Service Awards and Honorary Degrees, Distinguished Teaching Awards, Environmental Issues, Faculty Advisory Council, Faculty Personnel Committee, Faculty Research Awards, Graduate Council, Intercollegiate Athletics, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns, Library, Nontenure-track Instructional Faculty, ROTC Advisory, Scholarships, Scholastic Review, Student Conduct and Community Standards, Student-Faculty Committee on Grievances, Study Abroad Programs, (Tenure Reduction, Retirement, and Emeriti), Undergraduate Council, University Appeals Board, University Hearings Board.

         Senate Internal Committees: Senate Budget Committee, Committee on Committees, Senate Rules Committee, Senate Executive Committee, Senate Nominating Committee

         Ad hoc committees: Various


Q. Why must my committee meetings be open when it deals mostly with personnel issues?       A. You will close your meeting when it is dealing with individuals. When dealing with policies, as opposed to individuals, you will be open.

Q. What if no one is willing to serve on one of the open committees? A. The Senate may decide that Committee isn’t needed.

Q. What happens to a Chairperson who fails to submit the agenda on time? A. After some discussion, the sponsors agreed that neither the Stocks nor the Dunking Stool were appropriate. They hoped that, over time, people would get good at their job. (See how long it took the Senate Chair to get the Senate agenda out on schedule.)

Q. Will committees be able to get their work done if its members are unwilling to speak up in front of strangers, journalists or bloggers? A. That may be a bit of a problem for some members. However, it may be compensated by other members who like the chance to have their views reach an audience. City Councils and School Boards seem to get their work done.

Q. How will we fit everyone into our small room? A. Unless you are serving bodacious goodies at your meetings, you are most likely to have no visitors. In any case, the Chair will limit the number of visitors to those who can reasonably be accommodated. If demand repeatedly exceeds capacity, help to get a larger room can be sought from the Senate Executive Committee; and, BTW, congratulations for attracting such a crowd.

Q. What shall we do if visitors delay our work by asking questions or making comments? A. The Committee or its Chair sets the conditions for the meeting. If visitors’ contributions are not wanted, silence can be a condition of attendance.  If visitor input is wanted, in a regulated manner, a period can be set aside for visitor comments and questions. Desired regulations may be adopted by the individual committees. Of course, these rules must be applied to all visitors without favor.

Q. What about Committees that have rules of confidentiality?  A.  As indicated above, confidentiality agreements are disapproved of by the AAUP. In any case, the right of visitors to attend the meeting cannot be contingent on the signing of such an agreement.

Financial Impact:



Frank Stahl (Biology), Professor Emeritus
Nathan Tublitz (Biology), Professor
Jennifer Freyd (Psychology), Professor

Related Documents:

Feedback from Committee Chairs about open meetings

Email from General Counsel Randy Geller regarding Public Meetings Law and the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee

Alternate opinion regarding Public Meetings Law

Feedback from former Faculty Advisory Council Chair Kim Sheehan

Feedback from former Faculty Advisory Council member Edward Kame’enui

Feedback from Committee on Committees member Anne Laskaya

Open Letter to the Senate on Making FAC Meetings Public

Redlined version of motion, updated 04/15/2014

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +6 (from 6 votes)

Coltrane to hold 3 public meetings to set UO’s financial priorities!

Just kidding, the meetings Provost Coltrane announces below are about a new UO mission statement – basically a PR fluff piece of one or two paragraphs. All unnecessary, I’ve simply run President Gottfredson’s first speech to the Senate through an algorithm, and here’s our new mission statement:

Screen Shot 2014-04-18 at 5.00.46 PM

So how about it Scott – let’s use these meetings for presentations from VPFA Jamie Moffitt about UO’s financial situation. Show us the budget forecasts:

Then lets have a real talk about the administration’s peculiar spending priorities. You know you can’t put this off forever.

Dear Campus Community,

The Provost’s Office will continue its series of academic planning discussions during spring term, with a focus on reviewing and revising the University of Oregon mission statement. Each discussion will include a short presentation on mission statements in general and will be structured to allow ample time for questions, comments and dialog about the process for making any changes to our own.

Background materials for these discussions will include the UO Mission Statement, mission statements of other Oregon public universities, and mission statements of the AAU public universities. These will be available on a website next week, with a link on the Provost’s Office website.

Three opportunities for your participation are provided on the dates and times listed below. All discussions will be held in the Browsing Room of the Knight Library.

April 23, 12:00 – 1:00 pm Topic: Mission Statement Revision

May 6, 2:00 – 3:00 pm Topic: Mission Statement Revision

May 20, 10:00 – 11:00 am Topic: Mission Statement Revision

I look forward to seeing you there.


Scott Coltrane

Senior Vice President and Provost

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +1 (from 5 votes)

Coltrane special assistant Tim Gleason drops ball again

4/18/14: It’s been two months since UO’s former journalism dean Tim Gleason has bothered to update the administration’s blog on faculty union contract implementation - one of his few job duties. I’m guessing he’s on time when it comes to cashing his paychecks though. Does anyone know what, if anything, Gleason *is* doing to earn $16,543.67 a month, topped off with a $1,666.67 stipend?

12/13/2013: Former Journalism Dean Tim Gleason not “fully engaged”?

Interim Provost Scott Coltrane is paying Tim Gleason $218,524 a year:

Screen Shot 2013-12-13 at 5.07.33 PM

His mission?

Screen Shot 2013-12-13 at 5.21.25 PM

Full contract here. Tim’s not doing very well so far. His CBA blog is more about petty rumors and snide comments about economics faculty than about solid information on implementing the agreement. And now Randy Geller is elbowing Gleason out of the way when it comes to “campus wide messaging”:

12/11/2013: Geller: Faculty must be fully engaged

An email from President Gottfredson’s General Counsel Randy Geller, sent round today:

Work schedule for bargaining unit faculty members:

This is a reminder that under Article 32, Section 21, of the United Academics Collective Bargaining Agreement, bargaining unit officers of instruction who do not earn vacation will be considered to be on paid leave during the week between Christmas and New Year’s Day (and during the week of Spring Break).

Christmas Day and New Year’s Day are paid holidays. However, bargaining unit faculty members (typically some officers of research) may be required to work on these holidays if necessary to maintain or operate critical facilities or operations. If a bargaining unit faculty member is required to work on a holiday for that reason, he or she may take an equivalent amount of time off with pay at a later date, as approved by the bargaining unit faculty member’s supervisor.

Otherwise, as provided in Article 17, Section 7, of the CBA, each bargaining unit faculty member must be fully engaged in teaching, research, and service work for the university to the extent of his or her appointment, and must be engaged in work or reasonably available for work for the entirety of the term for which the bargaining unit member is employed unless on approved leave. There is no blanket leave for the period between fall and winter terms.

You previously received information about the Governor’s Day.

Faculty members who are not subject to the United Academics CBA may make individual arrangements with their supervisors regarding work schedules.

Randy Geller

General Counsel

University of Oregon

Update: I’ve got a public records request in to Hubin for this year’s  list. Last year’s Fiesta Bowl junketeers are here – including our hardworking, if somewhat spiteful Randy Geller, and spouse:

1/28/2013: Dave Hubin’s PR office provided this complete list of the UO Fiesta bowlers, today. Not all those listed in the letter below went, but plenty of others did. Here are just a few:


Update: If you’re confused about what the hell Randy is talking about, how he plans to implement this, and if he’s monitoring your email to see if you are obeying him, I suggest you send him an email, at Randy Geller <> and cc your department. I did.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +2 (from 12 votes)

Duck Coach Aliotti to get Frohnmayeresque PERS payout

4/18/2014: Ted Sickinger has the story in the Oregonian:

Aliotti is 59 years old. If he lives another 26.5 years, as PERS’ actuarial tables predict, the state pension system will pay him about $6.6 million in retirement, plus cost of living increases.

Where will that $6.6M come from? As Sickinger explained in his earlier story below, these payouts are so high because UO pulled a scam with how it treated the Nike money that is part of the coach’s compensation. So UO and OUS didn’t pay enough into PERS for to cover these payouts, and now the rest of the money will have to come by diverting payments from current UO/OUS employees.

And then the university will claim that, when they count the cost of faculty benefits, faculty are overpaid. Got it?

4/10/2012: Bellotti, Frohnmayer top PERS payouts

It took a long legal struggle, but the Oregonian has been getting data on PERS payouts from the state, bit by bit. The Ted Sickinger story on how Mike Bellotti managed to pull off his $500K pension scam is pretty amazing. It will cost taxpayers $5 million.

And here’s a bit on how Bellotti took UO for another $2.3 million, plus this. He tried to get $7 million. And now the curious/jealous/outraged/smug can now check up on their friends and colleagues retirement benefits on the Oregonian website:


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: -2 (from 2 votes)

Gottfredson: Weak on Freedom?

4/16/2014 update: It’s been a week now, no signing ceremony. The rumor is that President Gottfredson has stuck Dave Hubin with the job of finding some explanation – plausible or not, doesn’t really matter - for why although he would personally love to sign this policy, it would be a violation of his fiduciary responsibility as “The University”.

4/10/2014 updates: Senate passes academic freedom motion unanimously

InsiderHigherEd has a report on the “months of contentious negotiation” between the Senate, the union, and Gottfredson over academic freedom, and Betsy Hammond has a story on this in the Oregonian here:

Gottfredson, in an emailed response to The Oregonian, said, “I look forward to closely reviewing (it) …I fully support the strongest policy on academic freedom possible. Academic freedom is central to our mission and underlies everything we do as a university.”

This is our passive-aggressive president’s typical non-response. “Asked and answered.” “I’ll take that under advisement”. ” “I look forward to reviewing it”. Then nothing.

Here’s some more history, with his Randy Geller’s redlines of an earlier Senate draft. And here’s Gleason and Rudnick’s restrictive proposal on academic freedom, from 2/17/2013 during the union bargaining. All about the limitations, authority, and of course that easily abused requirement for “civil dialogue” – and if The University thinks it’s not, then discipline!

Continue reading

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)

UO law school prof angry about plan to use his raise for student fellowships

4/17/2014 update: And now the ABA Journal.

These emails have gone viral, with many hundreds of comments on law blogs like Lawyers Guns and Money, Tax Law Blog, Above The Law, Professor Bainbridge, JDU, Eschaton, Leiter’s Law School Reports, something called Gawker, and Jeff Manning’s piece in the Oregonian:

This was bad viral. The University of Oregon Law School professor’s wild rant about his compensation made Illig look petty and unsympathetic at the same time. More importantly, it shined a light on the raging debate about higher education, the value of advanced degrees and the mushrooming debt encumbering a generation of students.

The official UO law school blog – which, in an admirable demonstration of transparency actually allows comments, has responded:

To The Law School Community:

We’ve been getting some questions about a resolution brought to the last faculty meeting, and we’d like to share some information. Recently the University announced across-the-board cost of living adjustments and merit pay increases to take effect later in the year. A group of law faculty came up with the idea to divert the law school’s portion of the faculty merit pay funds to a post-graduate fellowship program for new law grads, in lieu of accepting a pay increase. Last Friday, this group brought this idea as a resolution (included below) to the regularly scheduled faculty meeting. A wide majority of those present voted to approve the resolution—in addition, a majority of the full faculty support the resolution.

We brought the matter to the Provost and although he is supportive of our goals he cannot bend the University rules to make this creative idea happen. However, we remain committed to finding ways to fund post-graduate opportunities and address other employment issues facing our graduates. We invite your comments and questions on this blog or one-on-one.

(I am not the Faculty Spokesperson. To avoid the appearance of speaking for everyone on the faculty, here I will include the names of some faculty who agreed to sign this statement (and I don’t mean to imply that those not included do not support it): Stuart Chinn, Michael Fakhri, Caroline Forell, Liz Frost, Erik Girvan, Carrie Leonetti, Mohsen Manesh, Roberta Mann, Michelle McKinley, Margie Paris, Jen Reynolds, Liz Tippett.)

Here is the text of the resolution from 4/11/2014:

The faculty recommends that the dean proceed with conversations with the Provost and the President regarding: reallocating funds for proposed faculty merit raises toward student fellowships, with a focus at present on post graduate student fellowships. If this proposal is approved, the faculty will revisit this reallocation of funds after two-three years.

4/14/2014: Several members of the law school email lists (which included staff, secretaries etc.) have forwarded these two emails from professor Rob Illig (Law) about a plan apparently floated by Law Dean Michael Moffitt (paid $292,800 after a recent raise) to deal with the law school’s enrollment problems and US News ranking, which has fallen from #80 to #100 since Moffitt took over in 2011.

The plan? Cancel raises for the faculty, and use the money to fund a program to give non-profits money to hire UO law school graduates, boosting the employment numbers that go into the US News rank.

Here are UO Law salaries for 2012-13, with comparison to other AAU publics:

Screen Shot 2014-04-14 at 6.08.28 PM

Associate Professor Illig is not happy with Moffitt’s plan, or with the lack of transparency in how it was presented to the law faculty (who apparently voted to approve it).

Subject: Re: law-fac-staff: What happened to Oregon Law?
From: Rob Illig <>
To: Rob Illig <>
Cc: Dustin Littrell <>, law-faculty Faculty <>, “ Staff List” <>, Dan Miller <>


To my shock and amazement, I just learned – three days after the faculty
meeting – that someone (you? the faculty?) is trying to take away my
one-in-a-decade chance at a raise WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.

Continue reading

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 2 votes)

Mark Yuran gone as UO Chief HR Officer

4/16/2014 Now verified:

Sent on behalf of Jamie Moffitt:

UO Faculty and Staff Colleagues,

I am writing to share news regarding an important change within the University of Oregon Human Resources Department.

Mark Yuran has elected to resign his position as Chief Human Resources Officer. We wish him well and thank him for his contributions.

We ask that you and your staffs continue to work with the appropriate Human Resource office specialists regarding specific and ongoing issues and opportunities. Feel free to contact Greg Stripp, associate vice president for administration, at or 541.346.5551, or myself, should any urgent items arise during this interim period. We will provide additional succession details when appropriate and thank you for your ongoing support.

Please share this message with additional colleagues as appropriate.


Jamie Moffitt
Vice President for Finance & Administration & CFO
University of Oregon

4/2/2014: That’s the latest from rumor control. VPFA Jamie Moffitt hired him in October, according to this announcement from UO’s “Office of Strategic Communications”. According to the Sept search announcement he was charged with, among other things, union contract implementation and grievances. The outside search was conducted by Kim Morrison of Diversified Search, Inc.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)