More of the 'sue' saga

[cbline]

My gosh, this just won't stop!! Now they want Gov. Hoeven involved too!!! Don't they get it that the longer this drags out, the longer the Summit will stay away?!?!?!?!

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/275633/group/homepage/

[TheBisonator]

My gosh, this just won't stop!! Now they want Gov. Hoeven involved too!!! Don't they get it that the longer this drags out, the longer the Summit will stay away?!?!?!?!

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/275633/group/homepage/

95 percent of UND fans only care about the puck. They would spit on Douple and the Summit if given the chance.

A school that values its basketball and low-revenue sports like that doesn't deserve to be in a DI autobid conference.

[Tatanka]

Oh, come on now. You seriously thought the circus was over? Shit, man, this is just intermission. Go get your picture taken with the bears, ride the elephants, get some more cotton candy, and make sure your popcorn box is full.

[tony]

Summit League: Zero hockey-playing schools.
NSIC: four or five DI hockey schools.

Just saying.

[Green-N-Gold]

Some idiot on SS says he will vote for Hoeven's opponent if he doesn't intervene on the name. Now there's a good idea, base your voting decision of a US SENATOR because of the nickname. :(

[56BISON73]

Oh, come on now. You seriously thought the circus was over? Shit, man, this is just intermission. Go get your picture taken with the bears, ride the elephants, get some more cotton candy, and make sure your popcorn box is full.

Correct. This is far from over.

[tjbison]

Correct. This is far from over.

And as long as there is this Unstable talk the Summit WILL NOT admit or even consider, and any chance of this being over by the time the Presidents meet in June is 0% which would put them into 3 years before admittance

[cbline]

Schadenfreude (noun): "the pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others."

See also: NDSU fans watching the UND sue fiasco.

[TbonZach]

And surprise surpise the comments section is disabled.

[Facts]

Anyone on BV with great literary or film skills should really get on this one. Maybe the Coen Bro's could tackle this comedy.

[ndsubison1]

I really couldnt care less at this point anymore.

[TransAmBison]

It is the perfect storm. I love it.

[NorthernBison]

I made the mistake of perusing the SS board to see what they were talking about.

They have about 10 pages devoted to the "SHOCKING" revelation that the current UND President and AD are in favor of dropping the nickname and their actions in that regard helped the SBoHE to act. The general consensus is to run them out of town.

Seriously, is there anybody in this world that is surprised at anything in the previous paragraph?

Really? Are there actually people out there who thought that Kupchella was in favor of the nickname? Ralph wrote the letter to the SBoHE because he wanted to back up Kupchella's support???? Do people really live in caves today with no contact with the outside world? I'll bet that Bin Laden understands what happened better than some of the posters I read.

[KC Bison]

Boo hoo. We're going to fight this til the bitter end. We don't care if we ever get into a real conference. We don't care if we ever play more than 3 real football games a year or 5 real basketball games, we want to keep that name. The most important thing is that we can keep beating up d2 and d3 schools in hackey.


http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/275760/group/Sports/

[80ALUM]

Good explanation of the SBOHE efforts in todays Bismarck Trib.

BHE members recount Fighting Sioux effort

By GRANT SHAFT | Posted: Saturday, April 17, 2010 2:00 am | (0) Comments
On April 8, 2010, the Board of Higher Education directed the University of North Dakota to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. The most common criticism is that the board did not give the Standing Rock tribe a chance to vote on the issue.

The NCAA settlement allowed UND a three-year period, ending November 30, 2010, to obtain written approval from both the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock tribal leadership. If obtained, UND could continue to use the name and logo until either tribe revoked their permission. Therefore, the board sought to obtain written permission from both tribes and a long-term agreement so that the usage would not be jeopardized each time there is a tribal election or referendum.

Following the settlement, the board unanimously supported an exhaustive effort to obtain tribal approval. Our chancellor had several meetings with both tribes. Both tribes emphatically opposed UND's continued usage of the nickname and logo. The board also monitored private efforts to obtain approval. These too were unsuccessful.

By October of 2008 neither tribe would participate in further discussions. Still, the board resolved to continue making every effort to obtain approval. A committee was formed to engage the tribes. The committee made several oral and written requests to all tribal leaders to meet. None of our requests were answered.

Despite this, the board continued in its resolve. Since tribal leadership was not receptive, the board embraced the referendum process. Through the great effort of Spirit Lake tribal members, a successful referendum vote was held. Unfortunately, efforts are currently underway to revoke this authorization.

During the above process UND notified the oard that it wished to seek athletic affiliation with the Division I Summit League, the same league in which NDSU, USD and SDSU are currently members. This decision was based on numerous factors, including lack of available leagues, scheduling, travel, renewal of rivalries and automatic bids into NCAA tournaments. UND's lack of solid league affiliation was jeopardizing their transition to Division I. However, the Summit League refused to consider UND's application until the nickname issue was resolved. Given the potential impact to the Fighting Sioux name and logo, board members met with the Summit League to confirm the league's requirements. Given the urgency stated by UND and the risk that the Summit League might fill the opening sought by UND, the board needed to determine whether it was in UND's best interest to delay application to the league until November 30, 2010 or shorten the timeline for tribal approval so UND could apply.

In May of 2009, Standing Rock again stated their continued opposition to the nickname and logo. They informed the Board that there was still a tribal moratorium on raising the issue and the referendum process was not available under their law. In August of 2009 their leadership refused to schedule a referendum vote. They restated this position on September 17, 2009.

The board continued working for approval due to tribal elections in the fall of 2009. Hoping for a change of posture by the tribe, the chancellor met its new chairman but was told that the moratorium on referendum elections remained, and, even if an agreement could be reached, it would not be binding on future councils.

The board continued to delay action while the Standing Rock members petitioned for a referendum. At their April 6, 2010 council meeting, the tribe did not consider the petitions, did not approve a referendum and reconfirmed that their law does not allow a referendum vote. In addition to communications to the Board regarding their opposition, the Standing Rock tribal council has formally resolved on eight occasions between 1992 and 2009 to oppose UND's use of the nickname and logo or placing the issue on the ballot.

The above information is only a summary and cannot do justice to the hundreds of hours spent by the board attempting to secure approval from the tribes. This time and effort greatly exceeds any reasonable expectations of such a board. Nevertheless, we have been dedicated to doing so even at the expense of other issues vital to UND and the other 10 institutions in North Dakota.

To date, all eight voting members of the board believe that UND's use of the nickname and logo has always been respectful and dignified. We were asked to balance Standing Rock's approval against UND's need to find a Division I league. Allowing UND to submit this application by June 1 was the board's decision.

(Grant Shaft was joined as the author of this essay by Duaine Espegard, both are members of the North Dakota Board of Higher Education from Grand Forks.)

[Tatanka]

does anyone out there still believe the bullshit that this fiasco didn't cost the ND taxpayers anything? I think an audit of the time spent by state entities (with or without "reimbursement", most of which was well below market value when it did occur) on this crap would be a real eye-opener.

[99Bison]

You mean like this quote:

"Nevertheless, we have been dedicated to doing so even at the expense of other issues vital to UND and the other 10 institutions in North Dakota."

You are right, there really should be an audit on this. Who was keeping track of what was being spent here?

[Tatanka]

one more obvious fact: if the GF Herald ( or the Forum or the Bis Tribune) had any integrity they would have already been all over this... just compare to their relentless pursuit of anything Chapman or NDSU. however since it doesn't besmirch NDSU don't look for it anytime soon.

[BadlandsBison]

one more obvious fact: if the GF Herald ( or the Forum or the Bis Tribune) had any integrity they would have already been all over this... just compare to their relentless pursuit of anything Chapman or NDSU. however since it doesn't besmirch NDSU don't look for it anytime soon.

All of this is "Poor poor UND." The SBoHE and and und supporters act like they are entitled to all of this special treatment and special attention. Its just weird to me how when they start crying, the state is supposed to go put a bottle in their mouth and change their diaper.

[JackJD]

And surprise surpise the comments section is disabled.

At first I had a hard time believing the newspaper would disable the comments section on UND-negative or controversial stories but not on NDSU-negative or controversial stories. But, I think that is exactly what has happened and that stinks. Journalists try to hang on to the notion they're professionals but professionals have codes of ethics etc. (my undergrad degree is in journalism and I belonged to the Society of Professional Journalists which has an excellent code of ethics for journalists).

I wonder if the Forum's reason for disabling the comments section is because it is quickly overrun with comments due to the nature of the name issue and the emotions running so high in Grand Forks. Even so, they should let it hang out: the nut-cases who make the strident comments are now a big part of the story.

I'm not a big fan of comments sections generally because it seems the majority of the comments are written by people who have tipped over on a particular topic. But, if you're going to have comments, then they should be allowed in an even-handed manner. Allowing people to bash NDSU and then shutting off the comments on UND articles is flat unfair. (And if the newspapers feel the comments do not have the potential to influence people and affect issues, then tell that to their advertising people who are running all over town selling ads because of the influence the newspaper has on people.)

[KC Bison]

I also noted that there are a few suzie stories with comment sections and on a number of occasions my comments don't get added so there is also some censoring going on of comments (they aren't kind but there is no cussing).

[MHDBisonfan]

To date, all eight voting members of the board believe that UND's use of the nickname and logo has always been respectful and dignified.

http://ryan85268.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/s002.jpg.w300h225.jpg

I think you can get this Sammy jersey at the "Sioux-venir" stand, just after you buy your "Sioux-per Nachos"

Yeah right its always been respectful and dignified.

[Bisonguy]

http://ryan85268.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/s002.jpg.w300h225.jpg

I think you can get this Sammy jersey at the "Sioux-venir" stand, just after you buy your "Sioux-per Nachos"

Yeah right its always been respectful and dignified.

Don't forget the Sioux-per hotdogs, Sioux shotglasses, and the 'Buck the Fison' T-shirts they allowed into games.

[Tatanka]

By GRANT SHAFT | Posted: Saturday, April 17, 2010 2:00 am | (0) Comments
On April 8, 2010, the Board of Higher Education directed the University of North Dakota to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo. The most common criticism is that the board did not give the Standing Rock tribe a chance to vote on the issue.

The NCAA settlement allowed UND a three-year period, ending November 30, 2010, to obtain written approval from both the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock tribal leadership. If obtained, UND could continue to use the name and logo until either tribe revoked their permission. Therefore, the board sought to obtain written permission from both tribes and a long-term agreement so that the usage would not be jeopardized each time there is a tribal election or referendum.

Following the settlement, the board unanimously supported an exhaustive effort to obtain tribal approval. Our chancellor had several meetings with both tribes. Both tribes emphatically opposed UND's continued usage of the nickname and logo. The board also monitored private efforts to obtain approval. These too were unsuccessful.

By October of 2008 neither tribe would participate in further discussions. Still, the board resolved to continue making every effort to obtain approval. A committee was formed to engage the tribes. The committee made several oral and written requests to all tribal leaders to meet. None of our requests were answered.

Despite this, the board continued in its resolve. Since tribal leadership was not receptive, the board embraced the referendum process. Through the great effort of Spirit Lake tribal members, a successful referendum vote was held. Unfortunately, efforts are currently underway to revoke this authorization.

During the above process UND notified the oard that it wished to seek athletic affiliation with the Division I Summit League, the same league in which NDSU, USD and SDSU are currently members. This decision was based on numerous factors, including lack of available leagues, scheduling, travel, renewal of rivalries and automatic bids into NCAA tournaments. UND's lack of solid league affiliation was jeopardizing their transition to Division I. However, the Summit League refused to consider UND's application until the nickname issue was resolved. Given the potential impact to the Fighting Sioux name and logo, board members met with the Summit League to confirm the league's requirements. Given the urgency stated by UND and the risk that the Summit League might fill the opening sought by UND, the board needed to determine whether it was in UND's best interest to delay application to the league until November 30, 2010 or shorten the timeline for tribal approval so UND could apply.

In May of 2009, Standing Rock again stated their continued opposition to the nickname and logo. They informed the Board that there was still a tribal moratorium on raising the issue and the referendum process was not available under their law. In August of 2009 their leadership refused to schedule a referendum vote. They restated this position on September 17, 2009.

The board continued working for approval due to tribal elections in the fall of 2009. Hoping for a change of posture by the tribe, the chancellor met its new chairman but was told that the moratorium on referendum elections remained, and, even if an agreement could be reached, it would not be binding on future councils.

The board continued to delay action while the Standing Rock members petitioned for a referendum. At their April 6, 2010 council meeting, the tribe did not consider the petitions, did not approve a referendum and reconfirmed that their law does not allow a referendum vote. In addition to communications to the Board regarding their opposition, the Standing Rock tribal council has formally resolved on eight occasions between 1992 and 2009 to oppose UND's use of the nickname and logo or placing the issue on the ballot.

The above information is only a summary and cannot do justice to the hundreds of hours spent by the board attempting to secure approval from the tribes. This time and effort greatly exceeds any reasonable expectations of such a board. Nevertheless, we have been dedicated to doing so even at the expense of other issues vital to UND and the other 10 institutions in North Dakota.

To date, all eight voting members of the board believe that UND's use of the nickname and logo has always been respectful and dignified. We were asked to balance Standing Rock's approval against UND's need to find a Division I league. Allowing UND to submit this application by June 1 was the board's decision.

(Grant Shaft was joined as the author of this essay by Duaine Espegard, both are members of the North Dakota Board of Higher Education from Grand Forks.)

The Fargo fishwrap ran this letter today, minus the part in bold... Hmmmmm...... wonder why.

[Tatanka]

And finally, some perspective. (http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/275775/group/Opinion/)


Despite an 80-year attachment to a mascot, it is just a mascot. It’s not like you had your homeland buried under a dam project, or had your village burned by the military.

[80ALUM]

The Fargo fishwrap ran this letter today, minus the part in bold... Hmmmmm...... wonder why.

Omitting lines pertinent to the story and disabling comments on UND articles....Journalism at it's finest.

[mebisonII]

At this point, I don't know why UND would want to continue trying to fight. Its got to be clear that the Standing Rock leaders are just trying to jockey for position and leverage on UND. First they are against the the nickname, then they don't want to take a stand, then they "can't" get an official vote from the tribal members, then when the name is going to go away, all of the sudden they are going to sue because their voice wasn't heard and maybe they are honored by the nickname afterall *cough* if the price is right *cough*.

Why sign up for many more years of being jerked around and being subjected to what borderline extortion when you could call yourself the Fleeing Flickertails and be done with it?

[tony]

At this point, I don't know why UND would want to continue trying to fight. Its got to be clear that the Standing Rock leaders are just trying to jockey for position and leverage on UND. First they are against the the nickname, then they don't want to take a stand, then they "can't" get an official vote from the tribal members, then when the name is going to go away, all of the sudden they are going to sue because their voice wasn't heard and maybe they are honored by the nickname afterall *cough* if the price is right *cough*.

Why sign up for many more years of being jerked around and being subjected to what borderline extortion when you could call yourself the Fleeing Flickertails and be done with it?

I don't think Standing Rock's tribal council has ever changed their position on the nickname.

While UND's use of the nickname has generally been honorable, the defense of the nickname has not.

Here is a controversy that has been going on for over four decades and UND refused to discuss the matter with the tribes until forced to by the NCAA. Not that UND didn't spend MILLIONS fighting so that they could avoid negotiating with the tribes. And, oh yeah, there is the small matter of President Kupchella lying about where the funding for that lawsuit was coming from. Of course, by then, UND no longer had the power to negotiate with the tribes because the State Board of Higher Ed, acting under orders from UND's hockey folks, had stripped UND of that power on the same day that UND's President was going to inform them the nickname was going to go. Throw in the threats about starting a Chippewa casino in Grand Forks as leverage against the Spirit Lake tribe and there seems to be a pretty clear pattern of some pretty unsavory behavior in defense of the nickname.

http://www.bisonville.com/forum/images/misc/progress.gif

[mebisonII]

I don't think Standing Rock's tribal council has ever changed their position on the nickname.

While UND's use of the nickname has generally been honorable, the defense of the nickname has not.

Here is a controversy that has been going on for over four decades and UND refused to discuss the matter with the tribes until forced to by the NCAA. Not that UND didn't spend MILLIONS fighting so that they could avoid negotiating with the tribes. And, oh yeah, there is the small matter of President Kupchella lying about where the funding for that lawsuit was coming from. Of course, by then, UND no longer had the power to negotiate with the tribes because the State Board of Higher Ed, acting under orders from UND's hockey folks, had stripped UND of that power on the same day that UND's President was going to inform them the nickname was going to go. Throw in the threats about starting a Chippewa casino in Grand Forks as leverage against the Spirit Lake tribe and there seems to be a pretty clear pattern of some pretty unsavory behavior in defense of the nickname.

http://www.bisonville.com/forum/images/misc/progress.gif

You know, I almost prefaced my comment with "I probably don't know enough to comment on this but..." Turns out I should have put that disclaimer in there :hide:

[zooropa]

even if an agreement could be reached, it would not be binding on future councils.

If Jody Hodgson thinks that getting a new agreement every 2 years (?) is an acceptable way for UND to do business..................

................in order to protect the intents of his dead Nazi boss.................

[NorthernBison]

If Jody Hodgson thinks that getting a new agreement every 2 years (?) is an acceptable way for UND to do business..................



Not to mention the fact that those hollering about the need for a Tribal vote don't seem to understand the implications of what they are asking Standing Rock to do (BTW, I seriously doubt that this is a "Grass Roots" movement that came from Reservation nickname supporters either).

1. The Tribal Constitution does not allow for "initiated measures". They don't vote on things that are considered to be "Council Business". For generations, the council or elders have made decisions for the Tribe.
2. Even if they were to have a vote, a positive outcome would ensure that future councils would be harrassed to reverse it or hold more votes and would be a contentious issue basically forever.

[Bison bison]

Not to mention the fact that those hollering about the need for a Tribal vote don't seem to understand the implications of what they are asking Standing Rock to do (BTW, I seriously doubt that this is a "Grass Roots" movement that came from Reservation nickname supporters either).

1. The Tribal Constitution does not allow for "initiated measures". They don't vote on things that are considered to be "Council Business". For generations, the council or elders have made decisions for the Tribe.
2. Even if they were to have a vote, a positive outcome would ensure that future councils would be harrassed to reverse it or hold more votes and would be a contentious issue basically forever.

Which would not be without its positive qualities...