Something didn't sit right with me when I heard the news of Jack Hanbury's elevation to "University Counsel" status immediately following the hearings where Shelby had been criticized for twice using that term to describe him.  Then we hear the news of the shredder.  Then the information from Faculty Senate appeared that showed the university's administration is not responding to Open Documents requests.  Finally, it clicked and I went looking for a post that I read before the hearings.  Was this "promotion", if that is what it was, designed to keep individuals from getting documents from Jack Hanbury through FOIA requests?  And, if so, are documents from BEFORE the "promotion" still available through FOIA, assuming that they weren't shredded?

From Law Buff:  (Who IS the University  Attorney, anyway? Page 9 or 10 now)

"...If I understand this correctly, Lee Gore is the University Counsel who reports to the state Attorney General and represents the University. Jack Hanbury is the Risk Manager and NOT the University Counsel.  Hanbury reports to Shelby. ... The University Counsel's notes related to the Glamser/Stringer case would probably be protected but the Risk Manager's may not be.  Can Hanbury be FOIA'd for all notes and communication regarding the investigation, suspension, and proposed terminations of Drs. Glamser and Stringer?  Dome staff watch the shredders!

I know of another situation where a legal advisor had to stop taking notes in meetings about an employee because this particular lawyer was not the counsel of record and, therefore, not protected by attorney/client privilage, and not exempt from FOIA requests. ..."