Freedom of information? Not in Eugene.
Somebody had the nerve to ask the Oregon athletic department to see the outside lawyer bills that the school is paying to try to extricate itself from its NCAA rules violation problems. What the jockmeisters produced in response to that request makes a mockery of the state's public records laws. Get ready for a good laugh (or cry) if you click to see it, here.
| Posted at 10:42 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (7)
The U-of-O Foundation constantly hides the truth about what they are doing from the public and the media. They apparently can get away with it since they aren't part of the public university "system" or some such legalese nonsense. Bottom line from U-of Nike is, "shut up, go away, leave us alone, we'll do what we want..."
Posted by paul | October 6, 2011 11:40 AM
Doesn't the attorney-client privilege play a role here?
Posted by Larry Norton | October 6, 2011 12:50 PM
The privilege belongs to the client, in this case U of O. And here the client is required by the public records law to disclose the document. Nobody asked the lawyer for anything.
Posted by Jack Bog | October 6, 2011 3:49 PM
I've asked UO to waive attorney-client privilege for these documents. They refused. So I've petitioned AG John Kroger and he will decide whether the redactions to this invoice are allowed or not. The opinion should be out late next week. Claims of privilege are common in public records cases, so this may set a precedent of sorts.
Posted by UO Matters | October 6, 2011 4:01 PM
couldn't we have a contest to fill in the redacted parts?
Posted by Allan L. | October 6, 2011 9:37 PM
Yeah, like MadLibs!
Posted by msmelharmon | October 6, 2011 10:43 PM
Yeah, let's get Kroger on the case.
I can hear his opinion now:
Mistakes were made. No one is responsible. Time to move on.
Posted by The Other Jimbo | October 7, 2011 10:57 AM