Following the release of a report by the Secretary of State Audits Division it appears the University has had some trouble ensuring accountability in the use of thousands of dollars. Auditors have questioned the University’s use of credit cards and donated funds, and Vice President for Administration Dan Williams has acknowledged that there have been some mistakes made in using these.
It is hard to believe that expenses like these could have passed through with little notice: Nearly $8,000 spent on football tickets for donors, $3,336 for airline tickets for a dean and staff member to attend the Aloha Bowl and an almost $500 rental car insurance premium for another dean. Auditors questioned several other expenses as well.
The University has to have some independent means to ensure that almost every dollar can be accounted for and is used responsibly. After a change in the state system a few years ago that gave each institution the responsibility to account for its own use of funds, it appears that this task is a little too much for this University.
Several deans — or at least those who would comment on the expenses — stood by their departments’ use of funding by saying it was necessary to maintain good relationships with donors. They called this using “development” funds and maintained it was in accordance with University policy.
This does make sense, and it is quite true that donor dollars make possible a myriad of beneficial educational programs here on campus.
But without some better system of accountability there will always remain the risk of funds being used inappropriately simply because University staff can do so.
Let’s abandon this temptation by placing the University’s use of funds under greater scrutiny. Williams said the University is committed to making changes, so let’s hope these come about soon.
However, what is still troubling is the University’s use of University Foundation dollars. The state auditors had several questions about these funds because of the foundation’s rigidly private nature. State auditors said several of the foundation’s employees were not completely forthcoming in providing records of their transactions and there is still some ambiguity about whether those transactions can, in fact, be reviewed by the state.
It is curious, to say the least, that the University puts such a dense smokescreen around the foundation’s dealings. This reluctance to allow public scrutiny only arouses suspicions instead of creating confidence.
Williams told The Register-Guard that “at some point, there has to be a certain level of trust between the general public and the University.” But that trust will continue to be strained here if the University continues to keep under wraps how it uses the massive amounts of donated dollars it receives every year.
As the University moves forward with its Autzen expansion, it has been criticized for the eagerness with which it accepts large donations. This has led some to speculate that the University is becoming more and more privatized as generous donors begin to exhibit more and more sway on campus. These critics will only have more ammunition if the University continues to maintain a screen of confidentiality.

Speed limit increase makes sense
Many students on campus are frequent travelers on both Interstate 5 and I-84, and an increase in the speed limit for those roads that has recently passed in both the state Senate and House may soon be making their trips through the state somewhat quicker.
This increase from 65 mph to 70 mph makes sense, as anyone who is familiar with traveling in the I-5 corridor can say the average speed is not that of the posted speed limit. But legislators made clear that the increase is not intended to increase the speed of traffic, but rather make the posted speeds comply with the almost accepted speeds on those major roads.
When pitching the bill, its sponsor, Sen. Randy Miller, R-Lake Oswego, asked his fellow lawmakers to consider how fast they travel when driving up or down to Salem on I-5. Most, apparently, keep with the flow of traffic, as they have voted the bill along.
But there should be some concern, as raising the speed limit could further increase the flow of traffic. Drivers who have become accustomed to pushing their speed up to 75 mph from 65 mph may now feel free to push it past 80 mph. And as anyone who has had extensive experience driving Oregon’s freeways can tell you, this is not inconceivable. Added to this is the provision that increases the speed for trucks to 60 mph. One should hope this does not give truckers the motivation to push their rigs too fast.
But those are just worrisome “what ifs.” Traffic does move fast on Oregon’s roads, and it is high time that legislators realized this. Speed limits on dangerous roads are good safeguards to prevent auto accidents. But on the straight and often flat stretches of major interstates where traffic has been moving along safely for some time, it makes sense to bump up the speed limit.
Ideally, Oregon’s speed limit signs will become just that — a recognition of the signs of the times and not an impetus for drivers to push their lead foot down any farther.