News
April 5, 2005
The Honorable Ginny Burdick, Chair
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee
State Senate
State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310
Dear Senator Burdick and Members of the Committee:
I regret that I am unable to attend the hearing on SB 220, scheduled for Wednesday, April 6th. I have been called to jury duty.
SB 220 is a priority bill for the Oregon University System and it is a priority bill for Portland State University. The legislation provides the Oregon University System and its institutions with the legal representation needed to protect the institutions and addresses the significant cost issues that are occurring under the current system. This bill is good for Oregon because it ensures coordination with the State Attorney General and reduces the costs to taxpayers. The legislation accurately reflects the need for coordination with the State Attorney General’s office on matters related to litigation and appeal.
When I joined PSU in 1997, I was, quite frankly, shocked that I did not have an in-house counsel to assist in the operations of Portland State University. My academic career and my professional training continue to lead me to the conclusion that in-house counsel is essential to the efficient operations of any large corporation, company, or public institution. As you may know, before I was appointed President of PSU, I served as the Dean of the Law School at the University of Wisconsin and prior to that I was the General Counsel for Howard University in Washington, DC. At Howard, I served as the University’s Chief Legal Officer and supervised a staff of in-house lawyers who represented the University’s complex legal interests. Similarly, at Wisconsin, in-house lawyers represent the University to the point of litigation which is handled by the State Attorney General.
My opinion, formed as a result of my experience as a university general counsel, as a dean of two law schools, and now as President of Portland State University, is that the current system under which PSU must operate – that of having State Assistant Attorney Generals assist part-time – is simply too expensive for the State to continue to support in these times of tight resources. Furthermore, it is essential for an organization as complex as PSU to have consistent legal advice that reflects a strong understanding of the mission, goals, and purposes of the institution.
Portland State University has been even more disadvantaged under the current system because we have been unable to gain the support of the Attorney General’s office for an in-house State Assistant Attorney General, similar to what is in place at the University of Oregon and Oregon State University. In the nearly eight years that I have been at PSU, our need for legal services has grown substantially, reflecting both the tremendous growth in student enrollment and expansive development of the University District. PSU, as you may know, has been a leader in innovative real estate development transactions and complex funding transactions related to the construction of our facilities. All of these efforts have required substantial involvement by the Department of Justice, with much of the work focused on contract development. Work of this nature does not present particularly difficult legal questions, instead it is work that requires legal skills and training but could be done at less cost and more efficiently by a salaried employee working at PSU.
It is my hope that you will support the Oregon University System’s request for this legislation and recognize the need for greater efficiency in the way legal matters are handled by the OUS institutions. It is especially important to the work at PSU that we are able to have our own legal staff, understanding that we will rely on the Department of Justice and State Office of the Attorney General for guidance on issues of statewide significance, and for matters related to litigation and appeal.
I appreciate the work that has been done by the many State Assistant Attorneys General who have assisted PSU throughout the years. This work has spanned the spectrum from student grievances and services, faculty issues, and real estate transactions. It has also carried a high financial cost that is associated with billable hours and the way we must interact with the DOJ acting as law firm. I remain convinced that many of these matters could have been resolved in-house by a PSU attorney, thus saving the State many thousands of dollars.
In closing, the costs associated with the current practice must be addressed and should be a concern to all of us working to provide high quality services to Oregon taxpayers. However, my interest in this legislation goes beyond cost and is the result of my need as a manager responsible for the operations of a multi-million dollar enterprise to have what any other leader of an institution this size has, and that is reliable guidance from a legal counsel who is consistently associated with Portland State University.
Thank you for considering my request.
Sincerely,
Daniel O. Bernstine
President
