Report Contents:

1. Introduction, Goal, and Objectives
2. Make-up of Bias Response Team (BRT)
3. Reporting of Bias Related Crimes (BRC)
4. Location of BRT
5. Logistical Structure of BRT
6. Summary of incidents reported to BRT
7. Preventative Programming and Education
8. Publication and Materials
9. Timeline, personnel, and equipment
10. Possible List of Secondary Members of BRT
11. Approach Taken for Research
12. List of Speakers and Organizations for BRT Educational Events

Hate crimes or bias related crimes (BRC) are rampant and increasingly recognized as a threat to the well being of our diverse communities. The 1997 hate crime statistics show that a total of 8,049 hate crime incidents were reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Of the 8,049 reported incidents; 4,710 were motivated by racial bias; 1,385 by religious bias; 1,102 by sexual orientation bias; and 836 by ethnicity/national origin bias. Colleges and Universities are also homes for BRC; eleven percent (886) of these incidents occurred in campuses of higher education. In the case of campus ethnoviolence alone, 65-70 of the nation's minority students reported some for of ethnoviolent harassment. Many students, faculty, staff, and administrators have experienced bias related crimes in relation to their race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ability, age, marital status, as well as other reasons.

At the University of Oregon, the Race Task Force (RTF) has taken efforts to address BRC. This group was effective in supporting individuals who were targets of BRC but did not have the resources for extensive education, support, and dialogue. The members of the RTF were unable to provide a comprehensive response to BRC, due to the lack of resources and administrative structure. The support offered by the RTF became accessible only to those who were familiar with individual members of the RTF. This left the work of responding to BRC on the agenda of individuals whose plates were already full with the variety of ongoing responsibilities. An ad-hoc organization created to address issues of race on this campus clearly cannot be held responsible for responding to the variety of BRC that take place on this campus.

This May's incident rekindled the discussion of campus responsibility to BRC from two different perspectives. A vocal student body felt that the university administration had not responded in an effective and timely manner. From the viewpoint of many administration and faculty, the lack of coordinated effort created a feeling of "hands being tied", leaving offices and individuals without a clear understanding of their options.

The inadequate response of the U of O is in no way due to a scarcity of caring individuals on this campus, but linked to a lack of an administrative plan for handling BRC. The issue of a Bias Response Team was one of the primary ad-hoc committees formed following the May 18^th , 1999 sit-in, as a response to the growing demands by students for adequate attention paid to this issue. The necessity for the administration's financial commitment to a Bias Response Team (BRT) is paramount in showing how deeply committed the University community is to the eradication of BRC through target support, dialogue, and preventative education.

Change campus climate by setting clear standards for administrative response to bias related crimes (BRC).

1)  Educate campus community about BRC through preventative programming.
2)  Institute a Bias Response Team (BRT) that will:

• Intervene in crisis moments
• Act as an immediate and ongoing support system for targets of BRC.
• Create opportunities for dialogue, when possible, with perpetrators of BRC.
• Document information of incidents in order to dismantle discrimination more effectively.

1. Make-up of BRT

• The BRT coordinator
• A member of the Office of Student Judicial Affairs, the person will be able to inform the team of all options available to the target for initiating a code infraction process.
• A member of the Conflict Resolution Services staff, or a person adequately trained in conflict resolution.
• A member of the Counseling Center staff.
• A member of the Office of Student Life staff.
• A student member of the team, possibly the BRT coordinator's intern or ASUO Safety Advocate.
• A member of the Office of Public Safety staff.

C. The "secondary" group will consist of an extensive list of members all belonging to various elements of the campus community. These members will agree to become involved with a BRT response if they are affiliated with the community that is effected. For example, if the incident occurs in residential housing, a member of the housing staff will be involved. If a queer student is a target, a student from the LGBTA will be involved. This will not only benefit the team in their process for deciding on protocol for the incident, but will strengthen the communication between the community and the BRT response to the incident.

D. All members of the team, both primary and secondary, will participate in a BRC related training.

E. An email list will be created and send to all members of the BRT (both primary and secondary). This will be a closed list that will inform members of BRT related news, events, and training. There will not be any discussion of ongoing cases in length; the details of these cases will be kept in confidence between the primary and involved secondary members of the team.

F. A self-subscribed email list will be created through the BRT website. This list will be open to all who want to be kept informed about BRC that take place on campus. Example would include: an announcement by the BRT for concerned individuals to write letters to the Emerald when an incident occurs to denounce the incident or the announcement of a rally or vigil following an incident. This will serve as a tool for a mobilized response by the campus community to an incident.

G. Advertising for possible secondary members of the BRT or interested individuals will be done through the Emerald, News and Views, as well as the email listserve for Faculty Concerned with Peace and Justice. The selection of the secondary team will be more thoroughly decided by the primary team in fall, 1999.

2. Reporting BRC

A. Online reporting form. This form will be reviewed within 24 hours by a member of the BRT staff (GTF or intern) and will also be sent to a database for its inclusion in the BRT report.

B. A "hotline" created (346-BIAS, 346-TEAM)

C. Coordinator or primary members of the team will have a notification mechanism if incident is reported.

• If through "hotline"- Audix will be checked at least once a day 7 days a week

• If through online form- have form "trigger" an email to BRT database, which will be checked once a day 7 days a week.

• If through written report form- A member of the BRT staff will report to the office every weekday. Protocol concerning a written report submitted over the weekend will be decided by the primary team in the fall, 1999.

• Discuss possibility for adopting a uniform report form for racial and sexual orientation motivated bias crimes (see drafts).

3. Location of the BRT

The campus office in which the team will be administratively "housed" will be the Office of Student Life. This is due the nature of the Office of Student Life as an advocate for students as well as the BRT work. However, to physically house the BRT in the EMU will be advantageous to the team because of its close proximity to many of the student groups affected by these types of incidents. This will:

• Enhance incidents of reporting
• Improve communication surrounding an incident immediately following its occurrence, the BRT staff will be easily accessible, able to answer questions, and able to clarify what is being done.
• Show the institutional commitment to this issue by its visible presence. These incidences, for the most part, are aimed towards the students of this University, and therefore the BRT should "live" where these students "live".
• Strengthen the sense of community on campus through a collective denunciation of these incidences, which will be better facilitated by an ongoing, accessible presence.

4. Logistical Structure of the BRT

A. If the incident involves "action" by the BRT, it can act in a variety of ways:

• Inform the target of their options.

• Act as mediators or advocates for dialogue, when possible, between those involved.

• Refer the individual(s) to campus or community resources.

C. Following a discussion of options for action by the BRT, 1-3 members of the team contact the individual(s) to inform them of their options. Following this discussion, the individual(s), not the team itself, will decide on how to proceed. To avoid placing the individual(s) into a situation in which they do not feel comfortable, the members of the team which will have direct contact with the individual(s) at this stage will be restricted to the BRT coordinator, a secondary member acting as a personal advocate, and possibly a member of the Office of Student Life or Counseling Center. The limitation of the contact is so that the individual(s) are not overwhelmed by the presence of an extensive committee, which would undermine all efforts in offering support. These team "representatives" could bring forth the possible courses of action decided upon by the BRT as a whole.

D. The individual(s) may have contact with other members of the BRT if the decided protocol calls for such a meeting. For example, if dialogue is agreed to by both involved parties, then the representative from Conflict Resolutions Services would become directly involved.

The BRT will serve as an educational body to support reporting individual(s) and attempt to, when possible, bring together parties in dialogue. The BRT is completely independent of the Office of Student Judicial Affairs, apart from the presence of a member of this office on the team, and is unable to take any punitive measures against the involved parties.

5. Summary of incidents reported to BRT

If an incident is reported for "information" or "action" it will be compiled and included in a report by the BRT coordinator and intern to be distributed periodically, possibly every 3 months, to campus offices and student organizations.

• A summary of brief descriptions of BRT reported incidences. This report will not contain specific names or locations, to protect the privacy of the reporting individual(s).
• Cases for which BRT action is pending will be noted with a letter "A" following the description.
• Cases reported for information only will be noted with a letter "I" following the description.
• A summary of specific statistics of incidents reported will be compiled with:
• Number of cases reported
• Gender of reporting individual(s)
• Gender of offender(s)
• Race/ethnic identity of reporting individual(s)
• Race/ethnic identity of offender(s)
• Location (residence halls, on/off campus, classroom, etc.)
• Nature of reported incident (verbal/physical harassment, graffiti, phone/computer harassment, etc.)
• Status of offender(s) (student, staff, faculty, admin., etc.)
• Status of reporting individual(s)
• Predominant outcomes (information only, informal mediation, legal action, removal of graffiti, etc.)

6. Preventative programming and education

A. Educational conferences, training, workshops, and presentations.

• Training for employees of the residence halls (Residence Assistants, Residence Directors) as well as the Office of Public Safety (OPS) in the identification and investigation of BRC.
• Ongoing major conferences and events such as "Hate Crimes Awareness Week" (January 10-15) with:
• Major speaker (See List).
• Smaller workshops; media coverage of hate crimes, how to mobilize a community response, ways to prevent hate crimes in and outside classroom, etc.
• Panel discussion of free speech vs. hate speech.
• Speak-out for survivors of hate crimes.
• Multi-media exhibit that addresses issues of BRC (in discussion with Journalism and Art departments for possible project in fall, 1999).
• Outreach, presentations, and training to student unions, classes, etc. The BRT coordinator would be responsible for building relationships with student groups which will result in better communication once an incident occurs.

A. In print

• Brochures, posters, stickers (as Project Saferide has), etc.--making the team as visible and well advertised as possible.
• Produce one large poster with names of all primary and secondary members of the team. Display this poster at different areas on campus. These members will serve as "advocates" for individual(s) interested in reporting to widen accessibility and instances of reporting.
• Emerald and RG coverage of incidents occurring on campus. The BRT coordinator will be responsible, through his/her communication with all groups involved as well as the affected communities, for statements to the press. The statement from the BRT as well as the President of the University will, depending on the situation, rely more on the condemnation of and response to the incident, rather than the identity of the target or perpetrator.
• Push for coverage in News and Views as well as the Oregon Quarterly.
• Coordination of letter to editor campaign when incident occurs.

• "Safety Web" or "BRT Webpage": Links to definitions, policy, reporting, ongoing updated news on incidents locally and nationally, events, as well as other related sites. The coordinator or his/her intern will be responsible for updating the web page.
• On this page an online reporting form will be available.

A. Timeline

• September 13th: Presentation of "final" rough draft of BRT proposal to steering committee.
• September 27th: Beginning of fall term, interim coordinator uses fall term to put together web site, materials, itinerary for "Hate Crimes Awareness Week", finalized list of primary and secondary members of BRT, as well as networking with student groups, etc. to begin to publicize BRT.
• Throughout fall term (every 2 weeks): primary members of BRT meet to finalize protocol and logistics of team.
• Final 4 weeks of fall term: Interviews for coordinator and intern held, final 2 weeks of fall term act as transition period from interim coordinator to new coordinator.
• January 4th: winter term begins, BRT coordinator and intern begin.
• January 11th: "Hate Crimes Awareness Week", public kick-off of team.

1999-2000

BRT interim coordinator for fall, 15 hours a week @ $6.50-$8.00/hour--$975-$1,200

GTF BRT coordinator, .49 (19 hours/week) -minimum $8,182

Undergraduate intern, 15 hours/week @ $6.50-$8.00/ hour----$2925-$3600

Web Services Specialist, 40 hours @ $10.00/ hour----$400.00

Operating Budget (To include "Hate Crimes Awareness Week" costs; speaker, exhibit, training)------$5,000

Computer---$1,500

Printed Materials (brochures, posters, packets, advertisements)---$5,000

Total -----$23,982-$24,882

2000-2001

GTF BRT Coordinator, .49 (19 hours/week)- minimum $8,182

Undergraduate intern, 15 hours/week $6.50-$8.00/ hour---$2925-3600

Operating Budget- $5,000

Printed Materials- $1,000

Total-----$17,107-$17,782

9. Possible List of Secondary Members of BRT

Administration

• Office of the President
• Human Resources
• Academic Advising and Student Services
• Academic Learning Services
• U of O Housing
• Office of Multicultural Affairs
• Office of Student Judicial Affairs; 2 GTFs

• Greek Life
• Health Center
• ASUO Legal Services
• Continuing Education Center
• Crisis Center
• High School Equivalency Program
• Alliance for Sexual Assault Prevention
• Women's Center
• Spenser View/Westmoreland Housing
• LGBT Support Services
• Teaching Effectiveness Program
• Academic English for International Students
• American English Institute
• Office of International Education and Exchange
• Chi Alpha Christian Fellowship

• Labor Education and Resource Center
• Institute on Violence and Behavior
• Center for the Study of Women in Society

• Women's Studies
• Sociology
• History
• Law School
• International Studies
• Judaic Studies
• Ethnic Studies
• Graduate School

• Associated Students of the University of Oregon (ASUO)
• Multi-cultural Center (MCC)
• Black Student Union (BSU)
• Asian-Pacific Student Union (APASU)
• Jewish Student Union (JSU)
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Alliance (LGBTA)
• Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanos de Aztlan (MEChA)
• Native American Student Union (NASU)
• Returning Students Association (RSA)
• Chinese Student Association (CSA)
• Hong Kong Student Association (HKSA)
• International Student Association (ISA)
• Mongolian Student Association (MSA)
• Vietnamese Student Association (VSA)
• Tiwanese Student Association (TSA)
• Arab Student Union (ASU)
• Common Ground
• Student CO-Ops
• Black Law Student Association
• Minority Law Student Association
• Native American Law Student Association

• Eugene Human Right Commission
• Communities against Hate
• Eugene NAACP
• Eugene ACLU
• Hillel
• Basic Rights Oregon
• Sexual Assault Support Services
• Northwest Coalition Against Malicious Harassment
• Community Alliance of Lane County (CALC)
• Centro Latino-Americano
• African American Community Coalition
• Jewish Federation of Lane County

A. Internet research

B. Library Research

C. Contacts.

• Stephanie Carnahan, Assistant Dean, Office of Student Life. (scarnahan@oregon.uoregon.edu, 346-1134)
• Gwen Tistdat, Counseling Center (gtistdat@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Lisa Foisy, Director, Women's Center. (lfoisy@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Lisa Frankel, 1998-9 Chair of Student Conduct Code Committee, English Department (lfrankel@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Annie Bentz, Director, Conflict Resolution Services. (annhb@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Troy Franklin, Assistant Dean in the Office of Student Life (tfrank@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Chris Demaske, School of Journalism (cdemaske@darkwing.uoregon.edu)
• Wayne Westling, School of Law (westling@law.uoregon.edu)
• Catherine Forell (cforell@law.uoregon.edu), School of Law
• Gil Carassco, Visiting Professor, School of Law (carrasco@law.uoregon.edu)
• Carla Gary, Director of the Office of Multicultural Affairs and University Advocate. (cgary@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Christi Browning, Graduate School (browning@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• City of Eugene Human Right Commission (hrc@ci.eugene.or.us)
• Poly Nelson, ACLU Eugene (345-6162)
• Chris Leshaivo, Director Student Judicial Affairs, (conduct@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Luke Jensen, Office of Student Life, University of Maryland, (ljensen@deans.umd.edu)
• Stephen Polniaszek, New York University Office of Student Life (stephen.polniaszek@nyu.edu)
• Elizabeth Davenport, Office of Student Life, University of Southern California (ejld@rcf.usc.edu)
• Melinda Grier, Lead Counsel for U of O (grierm@oregon.uoregon.edu)
• Pamela Freeman, Assistant Dean of Students and Director of Student Ethics and Anti-Harassment Programs (freemanp@indiana.edu)
• Doug Bauder, Assistant Dean of Students, University of Indiana (dbauder@indiana.edu)
• Batya Hyman, Professor Arizona State University-West, (batya.hyman@asu.edu)
• Mitra Anoushiravani , ASUO Vice President (asuovp@gladstone.uoregon.edu)
• Jennifer Anne Eliot, ASUO Safety Advocate (jeliot@gladstone.uoregon.edu)
• Beverly D. Tuel, Director Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Resource Center, University of Colorado, Boulder (Beverly.Tuel@Colorado.EDU).

• Polly Nelson, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Eugene
• Marcy Westerling, Rural Organizing Project, Oregon
• Bill Wassmuth, Northwest Coalition Against Malicious Harassment
• Michelle Lefcowitz, Communities Against Hate, Eugene
• Henry Luvert, NAACP Eugene
• Harriet Merrick, Basic Rights Oregon, Eugene
• Tim Gleason, U of O School of Journalism
• Gil Carassco, U of O School of Law, visiting professor
• Donna Albro, Eugene Human Rights Commission
• Tammy Schnitzer, ACLU, Montana