Notice of Resolution US07/08-10 - to obtain clarification from the state Attorney General regarding required majority to pass a motion in the UO University Assembly, and how the UO University Assembly differs from other state governing bodies.
Sponsored by: Frank Stahl, emeritus biology
For senate action: February 13, 2008
WHEREAS UO President Frohnmayer has mentioned (in a conversation on 27 February 2003 with representatives of about 550 petitioners requesting a meeting of the UO Assembly with legislative power, at a recorded DISCUSSION held shortly after that aborted Assembly meeting, and on the Senate floor last Spring and on 9 January 2008) a ruling from the Attorney General specifying that a UO Assembly with legislative power can vote on a motion only if it meets the quorum requirement of the Oregon Public Meeting Law and that it can pass a motion only by an affirmative vote of a majority of the Assembly Membership, and
WHEREAS the motion that created the UO Senate as the normal governing body of the University is documented to have been passed by an affirmative vote of less than half of the Assembly membership, with the effect that the legitimacy of the Senate and all of its actions is put in doubt,
BE IT RESOLVED that the Senate President seek timely clarification (with arguments) from the Attorney General regarding the following issues:
|Web page spun on 13 February 2008 by Peter B Gilkey 202 Deady Hall, Department of Mathematics at the University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1222, U.S.A. Phone 1-541-346-4717 Email:firstname.lastname@example.org of Deady Spider Enterprises|