Holmes/Gottfredson/Lariviere EMU emails

Full email dump here. Lots of CYA, spiced with a little defamation. Robin Holmes to Mike Gottfredson, after Diane Dietz broke the RBI story:

Of course UO would never interfere in a student election. And anyway, it’s OK, everybody does it. Wait: the EMU is generating profits as an IRS 990 auxiliary and then using them for a political slush fund? It’s like Nixon and milk. OK, not exactly, but I wonder what else is under that rock. Next time get Paul Weinhold to give you some UO Foundation money, much harder to trace.

For the record, here’s what the RBI campaign consultants actually said:

That’s right, the narrow-minded stubborn politically engaged student opponents just don’t care about sustainability. Or diversity. That’s factual information? Really, Ms Holmes – I’m no lawyer, but ask Randy Geller – this is defamatory if you claim it’s a fact. Or ask a competent lawyer instead – that’s my opinion, Randy.

Thanks to anon for sharing the records. When you turn 21 I owe you a drink. Hell, stop by my office tomorrow, there’s a bottle in my desk. It’s OK, everybody does it. 11/19/2012.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Holmes/Gottfredson/Lariviere EMU emails

  1. Anonymous says:

    Is this Robin Holmes at her worst? Those ‘key contrasts’ pissed me off the first time. Seeing them again, knowing now that she hasn’t even skipped a beat, is an embarrassment.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Anonymous says:

    I’m no doctoralified intellectual, but I can read well enough to see that Holmes’ Ph.D. is worth holding up as an exemplar of Piled Higher and Deeper. What I most appreciate about this dump (how more appropriate can a term be?) is the fluidity with which Holmes lays the blame for any kerfufflizing on the students.

    Live. Learn. Doo-doo. The fact that heads haven’t rolled more than negates the added students to the IAC.

    P.S. Nice friggin’ redactions on the last three pages.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      The censor’s pen was unjustifiably heavy on most of these documents. Somebody has got to call this Administration on its disregard of Oregon Public Records law. I mean someone besides UO Matters.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. Anonymous says:

    I love that Holmes’ email signature ends with “Go Ducks!”. It reminds me of the nut job who goes about campus screaming about LTD, but then punctuates his verbal assault with “Go Ducks!”.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. Anonymous says:

    VP for Student Affairs throws student leaders under the bus.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. Anonymous says:

    Seems like someone decided Wendy Polhemus should take the fall on this one.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Anonymous says:

    As a student who has worked for the past three years in the EMU and to promote the renovation, the contrasting lists of “for” and “against” is spot on. The marketing firm we hired helped us to get the word out…

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      Your characterization of those contrasts as “spot on” is exactly why there needs to be adults in the room telling you “No, that isn’t right and here is why.” Holmes and others failed to do that and you continue to think that was ok. Sad how we have failed you.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Anonymous says:

    What might a public records request would turn up if it focused on correspondence between John Moseley, Greg Vincent, and Robin Holmes re: Ann Leavitt and Joe Wade?

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. UO Matters says:

    From the settlement, I’m guessing Joe’s lawyer went through Moseley’s emails at least, and nailed the son of a bitch.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. Anonymous says:

    Look folks, Holmes had nothing to do with the contracting of RBI. The firm was hired at the request of students on the EMU renovation task force to help us develop a outreach campaign and approved by EMU admin, not Holmes. The comparisons quoted were a brainstorming workshop exercise presented by the firm to work on the marketing message. The firm got fired after many raised justifiable concerns about their heavy handed approach.

    efforts to pin this on holmes and insult students that were trying to do outreach on the need for the renovation are off target and lame.

    Hopefully we can move forward together now to rebuild this most important student building in the heart of campus. That has always been the core of the matter, not all the crappy politics and conspiracy theories.

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • Anonymous says:

      You want to stick to the core issue here and not get mired in “politics” … so you hired a political PR firm to campaign for students to spend millions of dollars on something they have already demonstrated they don’t want? http://www.rbistrategies.com/current-and-past-clients

      It’s despicable to use organizational money in this way.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  10. Anonymous says:

    really? no follow up on how students have voted to approve the renovation of their student union? guess that fact doesn’t fit uo matters conspiracy mindset of evil admin forcing a project on students…

    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    • UO Matters says:

      The comments are open, friend, post away. If you can make it coherent I might even add it to the original post.

      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. Anonymous says:

    I just wish that the roof of the EMU didn’t leak so much. What can we do about that? I honestly don’t understand all the politics and don’t care. However, I notice BUCKETS all over the building collecting raindrops from the ceiling on a regular basis.

    What would be the best way to go about getting the funds to fix this, having recognized that there isn’t enough money in the regular operating budget? I’m not challenging what people are saying here, I’m just looking for a path to fixing a building that’s falling apart that WON’T make people angry. Any suggestions? (Please note, saying something to the effect of “Well, they SHOULDN’T have done it the way they did” isn’t the same as suggesting a course of action. I recognize that what’s been done might be flawed.)

    The smartest people on campus read this blog. I challenge you to brainstorm constructively here for a second.

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

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>