While the revised draft of a document addressing the role of the University of Wisconsin Athletic Board is currently under legal review, university officials have expressed both confidence and outrage about its contents.
Walter Dickey, chair of the Athletic Board, said he is pleased with the document, which is a product of an ad hoc committee created last fall to investigate concerns about the board’s operations.
However, Jeremi Suri, a former Athletic Board faculty representative, said the document does nothing to address very serious concerns raised about problems within the Athletic Board.
He said the language used in the draft itself is a testament to this.
“This report shows that the board and its operations are out of line from what we expect … and it’s not serving the students or university,” Suri said.
Suri resigned from the board last fall after alleging it was controlled by the Athletic Department’s agenda. He cited cases of discrimination and harassment in his reasons for resignation and said the board relied on secret meetings to decide important business.
Suri said the ad hoc committee has yet to effectively address these concerns.
“[I]t doesn’t address the very serious allegations raised by more than one Athletic Board member about discrimination, intimidation and unfair treatment, and these concerns were raised with the university committee, the athletic board and the chancellor,” Suri said. “Any other department would investigate these. They have not investigated those.”
He went on to say the document gives more power to board leaders to use intimidation as a means of accomplishing their agenda, as it requires board members to fully support all decisions made by the board.
He said this is an effective cover up of other internal issues, as by giving directors further control they will be able to suppress lesser board members’ voices.
“That’s ridiculous. Every other committee you have a right to speak out about your disagreement. This reveals the kind of intimidation and repression of free speech that characterizes the Athletic Board’s operations,” Suri said.
Dickey addressed what some have called ambiguous definitions of the board’s role in regards to university and state rules, saying he believes the board has done its job, and the university will agree when it next reviews the document.
“I think there is ambiguity in almost everything in life. The point was that in resolving any ambiguities, that the state statutes basically trump whatever the law may exist,” Dickey said. “I think in the boards mind we’ve certainly clarified a lot of other things. If you know what your job is, you’re much more likely to do it well.”
After passing through legal review, the document will be returned to the ad hoc committee. If legal issues arise, it will be revised and returned to the Athletic Board in May for further review. If no legal issues arise, it will be forwarded to the university.
The draft was unanimously passed by the Athletic Board at their February meeting, and Dickey expressed confidence the university will accept the new draft.
