GULLEY TO FACE ETHICS HEARING: Student Senate Report 3/14/07
I would like to take this moment to remind you to enjoy your upcoming spring break, because not everyone will. A certain ASUO Senator will be be hard pressed to enjoy his binge-drinking, frolicking-in-the-sun good time, because when he gets back, it’s ETHICS HEARING TIME!
This week’s Senate meeting was supposed to be a low-key little chat about the Rec Center. Because of the recent unpleasantness (more, our coverage), there were other things to talk about. At the top of the meeting, Senate Ombudswoman Natalie Kinsey requested a chance to give a report, and with help from Senators Sherrick and McKenzie, she detailed the charges that Gulley would face in an ethics hearing to be held at the next Senate meeting on April 4th. The concerns that had been brought up to the Ombudswoman are:
- Conflict of interests
- Swearing during Senate meetings
- Unbecoming behavior during Senate meetings
- Defamation of Senate members outside of the public meeting
Kinsey went on to say “I have decided that while Nate, as a citizen of the United States of America, has the freedom of speech and can say what we wants, he has defamed the names of several Senators and breaks rules Senate has established for itself as well as Robert’s Rules of Order.” Kinsey went on to outline the sanctions that the Green Tape Notebook prescribes in such cases:
- Suspension from Student Senate for up to three weeks, with or without pay; and/or
- Loss of stipends for up to one month; and or
- Removal from position as Student Senator officer; and/or
- In severe cases, the Student Senate may forward to the Constitution Court articles of impeachment against the member.
Motions for discipline require 72 hours notice to prepare defenses, but Kinsey will wait until after spring break to bring the motion. “As of now, I believe the best solution would be a suspension from your seat for three weeks without pay,” said Kinsey, “I do not want to see you removed from your position because I believe you add good ideas to this body. However, your actions must be punished, and this seems the most reasonable way to do it.”
Senate went on to debate a new resolution on the SRC situation. They took Senate Bill 28, “gutted and stuffed” it, with language from the Student Rec Center Advisory Board, which Senate altered slightly, then they passed it. I will post the link shortly.
March 14th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
If the ASUO actually did represent students and students actually cared, a suspension would essentially be disenfranchising all the students this guy is supposed to be representing. Awesome.
Luckily, I doubt anyone gives a shit and the students he’s supposed to represent will probably never even know they didn’t have a rep. on the Senate for three weeks. Still, seems like they should at least appoint someone to fill in for him during his suspension. If they don’t it’s practically proof that the ASUO is just for a small group of students and doesn’t actually represent the student body.
March 14th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Not true. As seat 14, Gulley represents Social Science majors. But as Seat 15, Jacob Daniels also represents the same group of students. So even if Gulley is absent, Daniels will still be the rep. But I agree - I doubt anyone will know that Gulley is suspended, let alone know that he represents social science majors.
March 14th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Well if they can do without two reps for a couple of weeks then they should do without two reps all year. My point still stands.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:41 pm
Haha… this made my week. I am totally showing up at that senate hearing!
March 14th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
With bells and booze on. That’s all I have to say.
Except that I hope Nate Gulley fries.
March 14th, 2007 at 11:50 pm
The students he represents elected a moron, so this is really on them. Yet another reason not to vote, I suppose.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:37 am
Quite to the contrary Ian. I think this a perfect reason to encourage others to vote…well anyone who isn’t moronic (sp?) enough to elect a moron. And same to MC. Instead of bitching about how inclusive the student government at UofO is, get out and help make that statement less true. Encorage others to participate and try to be a little less cynical. But I guess if you are reading the commentator blog its hard not to be…
March 15th, 2007 at 5:33 am
Let’s just pretend we’ve had the arguments we usually have about voting systems and the flaws in democracy as a decision-making tool, then skip right to the end of the thread where Andy calls somebody a douchebag.
March 15th, 2007 at 8:25 am
I would like to take a second to commend the people who spoke last night in relation to the diciplinary hearing. Your demonstration of courage, professionalism, respect, and responsibility was amazing and I thank you. If any of you missed it then you missed a demonstration of what this year’s senate truely represents! It was awesome and I am so proud to be a part of it all.
March 15th, 2007 at 8:36 am
*ditto*
March 15th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
I can’t help but be disgusted that David Goward of all people believes that he should write a letter to the editor about Senator Gulley in the ODE. I believe that Gulley has acted horribly and what ever punishment happens, he deserves. That being said though, it makes me sick to see David act as if he is some moral beacon and knows what is best. Goward cussed and said inappropriate things all the time while in the ASUO, has a charge against him for assualting a woman while working at DDS (which it dissappointed me that Ted wrote in the latest issue he believes it is out of his character-trust me, its not) and lets not forget last year when at the Northwest Leadership Conference which was an incidental fee funded event- David Goward drove a state owned vehicle while DRUNK. Of course, no one mentions these things and the last point was kept under raps after the Sun River Scandal but if he is going to parade himself about as if he always did the right thing and always knows when to shut his mouth, I’m going to have to call bullshit on the man. Enough is Enough Goward- please graduate and get the hell out of here.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
hehehe… OHHHH SNAPS!
March 15th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
I would like to comment on “Since when is David Goward a moral authority?”’s post, but since that would be a clear conflict of interest, I choose instead to abstain.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:05 am
Since when have you been bothered by conflicts of interest, Evan? I recal a situation last year when you filed a grievance against Dallas Brown at the requets of Goward, who was not allowed to take sides during the election. Of course, you both denied this at the time, and all that the Emerald could publish was your inconsistencies in rhetoric, but Goward admitted after year’s end, that yes, he did advise you to file that grievance for him. Not like anybody doubted. A guy who didn’t know squat about student government suddenly is filing grievances based on “immoral” campaign practices, regulated by rules in the Green Tape Notebook. It was commonly known that Goward and Brown weren’t the best of friends since working together at DDS, where they fought for authority. But nooo, you shy away from conflicts of interst.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:01 am
You kids are just so cute together. Can I take a photo?
March 21st, 2007 at 10:35 am
I think that was self deprecation, Nick. You know, sort of a meta comment.
Tim: There are way too many Nick’s on the comment section currently.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:41 am
T: I don’t even know who’s who anymore, and I’m not going to try, they should all pick a unique handle, but whatevs.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:52 am
You should take a lesson in reading comprehension from “T”, Nick. Do you know what a joke is? Stop making erroneous assumptions.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:15 am
Does “T” offer reading comprehension lessons?
You state that I made a false assumption by, I’m assuming, my comment that you are not, in fact, worried by conflicts of interst. I do understand, how you say, “jokes”, but I really wanted to point out that you once did make a fool of yourself with a conflict of interest and that now you used a ‘joke’ to avoid arguing against the comments in the post ‘Since when is David Goward a moral authority?’. I think it would be pretty hard to make that case. Is that why you avoided it with a “joke” about a conflict of interest?
March 21st, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Nick: when you’re in a hole, stop digging. (Alternatively, blame the Jews. Or was that a different Nick?)
Everyone else: let us at least be thankful that this thread has featured no “motorboating”.
And since when does a person have to be some kind of “moral authority” in order to point out that Nate Gulley is a ludicrous douchebag? It’s a morally neutral statement, and pretty hard to argue with.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Olly: You were wrong.
BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBR BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBR
See?
March 21st, 2007 at 3:35 pm
I don’t think you need to be a moral authority to see that Nate Gulley is a douchebag but reading Goward’s letter to the editor made my skin crawl because he is such a sleezy person.
Nick: If your lack of being able to form a coherent argument leads me to believe that you are the vertically challenged Nick, you can join David Goward in the group of people that should graduate and get the hell out of here.
March 21st, 2007 at 4:31 pm
OK…you’re right. I’m in a hole. I don’t understand jokes. BUT HEY, AT LEAST I GET METAPHORS!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Wait, which Nick is this? It can’t be Wilbur, unless sometime since last year he lost the ability to form coherent sentences. Plus, I thought Hudson already graduated, so he would no longer have to “get the hell out of here.”
I don’t know if “T” actually offers reading comprehension lessons. However, I bet “A Student” could teach you punctuation if you ask nicely. Anyway, the comment I “abstained” from saying was pretty much summed up Olly’s “morally neutral” comment a few posts back. However, instead of posting it and looking like an asshole, I wrapped it up in self-deprecation and tied it into this thread’s subject. As Ranier Wolfcastle would say, “that’s the joke.”
Crap, I forgot how to punctuate sentences that end in commas.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:01 pm
*blink* SO! Who’s up for a drink after midnight? I know *I* am.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Doomscheissah:
At long last, sir, have you no shame?
March 21st, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Hey, someone had to do it…so why not me?
March 22nd, 2007 at 8:45 am
“It can’t be Wilbur, unless sometime since last year he lost the ability to form coherent sentences.”
Hey Evan, if you can’t understand me, and I can’t understand jokes, maybe you and I could take T’s reading comprehension lessons TOGETHER. That’s only if Goward wouldn’t mind. Wanna?
March 22nd, 2007 at 10:53 am
That’s cool with me. But, like, don’t you like check facebook or anything? David and I are, like, SOOOO not even together anymore.
March 22nd, 2007 at 11:29 am
Why are you talking like that?
March 22nd, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Levity?