Sunday, March 31, 2013

What a month!!!

So there have been times that I've experienced writer’s block, that temporary period when I just can’t seem to get my thoughts together coherently. I usually do something else, give my brain a rest, and then return to it and find that the block has passed. I haven’t had writer’s block per se. There has just been so much happening simultaneously that I couldn’t write it all down.
First, the Governor has chosen not to re-appoint the Executive Committee members of the Board of Trustees who were on the brink of repairing the damage wrought by the current regime. There is an inconsistency in state law. According to the Chicago State University Law (110 ILCS 660), Board members serve until they are replaced by the Governor but a more recent statute gives the board member 60 days to serve before a formal reappointment process is necessary. Since the terms of the three Trustees expired January 21st, and the 60 day window closed March 21st, three seats on the Board of Trustees are now vacant. Add the already existing vacancy, never filled by the Governor and you find that there are not enough members to constitute a quorum on the eight member board. Thus the CSU Board of Trustees cannot govern the university. It poses the uncomfortable question of who is in charge? I would surmise at this point that the Governor will likely appoint one member of clergy, (what would CSU be without a pastor on its Board?) one “community activist” and another former politician, all of whom would no doubt be FOW. I’m forced to concur with Corday’s assessment of the continuation of a failed regime either until the university is closed or until the death of the incumbent. Political indifference will lead to the demise of this university.
Second, will there be no consequences for employees not being paid on time this past Friday? In the opinion of your humble narrator, the story presented by the regime doesn’t fly and here’s why. The practice is either a courtesy or a policy but not both. It is my understanding that the industry standard for situations like this is that when the pay day falls on a weekend or holiday the employee is paid the business day prior. Like many continuous functions, the payroll calendar is not generated month to month. I would imagine it is generated either on a calendar year or fiscal year basis. If so, the university is well into both so the necessary review of dates is long overdue. Additionally, why would an office responsible for money (payroll) not be in the area of Administration and Finance? At least the now released former Vice President can’t be blamed for what is not managed in his former area of responsibility.
Third, with no functioning Board of Trustees, there are several activities which the university cannot conduct now. Faculty personnel actions, namely approval of tenure and approval of contracts exceeding $250,000 are impossible if the Board does not have a quorum. Given that there have been six appointments to public university boards, three each at Governors State University and Western Illinois University, it is indeed curious that the similar appointments were not made at a university that is so clearly imploding. Four the six appointments were for members already serving, essentially re-appointments. Given the swirl of activity at the university the Governor has indeed declared his defacto support of incompetence and misconduct. Not surprising for a Governor reluctant to act to protect the assets and resources owned by the citizens of the State of Illinois. That is the same state that has sent its last two governors to federal prison for corruption. The corruption in this state is part of its DNA and its practice, crony hiring, unjustifiable pay raises, sub-standard performance and perpetuation of a narrative whose veracity is suspect, is clearly in evidence here. At some point, some legislator is going to get the idea of how to finally put CSU down for good.
Here’s one way. What if the state created a single public university system with one president and eleven chancellors? That single system would need to examine capacity and would likely find that the “system” has excess capacity. In the private sector, companies with excess capacity reduce capacity by firing employees or closing down plants. In public education, the excess capacity of the “system” would be in enrollment at individual campuses. With the plummeting enrollment at CSU and negative press reports weekly it seems, this university would appear poised to be eliminated by the “system.” That would then give the state the opportunity to liquidate its assets, re-assign or eliminate excess personnel and give students opportunity to attend other universities if they meet the admissions standards. The state wins by shedding a drag on the “system.” The city wins by making the real estate taxable once the assets are sold to a private investor. The students who can attend other universities win because their education will only be mildly disrupted. The faculty who continue at other universities win because they will likely be better compensated, treated better and led better. The citizens of the State of Illinois win because theoretically, the closing of a dysfunctional institution that has been treated poorly by politicians historically will be a satisfactory public outcome to average taxpayers. Of course, the losers in such a scenario are those who view CSU as their private, patronage playground. Those who seem so expert in the operations of higher education, those who liken failed leadership to Jesus, those intent to continue the rapid descent of Chicago State University into irrelevance will find that their behavior will, in the final analysis, be to blame for eliminating a path to higher education for those most at risk of losing out.
When all is said and done and the history of this university is written, this will indeed likely be its saddest chapter.

The Dirty Politics of the Preacher-Politician Class: A Lesson in Colonial Politics


The capitalist system requires colonies from which to extract resources such as minerals and human labor.  In classic colonialism such as in India, the invading country controls native resources through violence, ideology, and a native middle-class known also as the comprador class.  This comprador class created a well-paid buffer between the masses of colonized and the foreign colonizer.  Under neo-colonialism, native elites run governments where they continue to serve foreign elites to the detriment of the native population.  All the while, they reap massive rewards.  Internal colonialism such as we have in the United States, involves the colonial elite stealing the resources of subordinate ethnic groups or people of color.  Here also the colonizers require an educated, self-aggrandizing native elite to control the masses of the Black and Brown working classes.

In graduate school in Texas we referred to them as the Black and Brown managerial class.  As we militantly struggled for educational opportunities for people of color, nicely suited ‘community leaders’ and university personnel urged us to be calm and ‘respect’ the institution; “the very same institution that disenfranchises us and many others like us,” we thought.  They urged patience.  While my friends were being arrested, they were ‘negotiating’ (i.e., ‘making deals’) over lunch with the university and government elite in Austin.  They secured their place in academe.  When we began to ask questions about their involvement, they advised prudence.  "We wouldn’t want our enemies to take advantage of our ‘family’ disagreement," they counselled.  

This was the same year that political operative, Ward Connerly, worked tirelessly as the Black voice of the anti-affirmative action movement and was paid handsomely to speak all over the country.  After shouting him down on his visit to the campus of the University of Texas, we became the First Amendment villains for not allowing this member of the Black petit bourgeoisie to spread his message in favor of the educational disenfranchisement of people of color.  He was paid well to encourage policies that kept people of color from having a voice but we were the First Amendment villains.

Everywhere we looked the Black and Brown men in suits traded us in for self-gain and to curry favor with the colonial elite.  We lost those battles against Hopwood v. The University of Texas Law School, the undermining of Ethnic Studies (in particular, Asian Studies) at UT, and the entrenched Texas elite and their Black and Brown managerial class.  Black and Latino enrollment at Texas universities dropped precipitously the very next semester.  ‘Race’ could no longer be considered for admissions.  In addition, many accepted to Texas universities simply could not afford the tuition since millions of dollars of scholarships could no longer be earmarked for members of subordinate ethnic groups. 

It has been over fifteen years since I have witnessed such crass racist and classist behavior.  While the daily signs of racism are everywhere (just drive down my block or almost any in the Roseland neighborhood where CSU is located), glimpses into the machinations of colonialism and the role of the comprador are rare.  So, I was taken off guard on Friday, March 8, 2013 at the Board of Trustees meetings as the comprador class reared its ugly head in the guise of the Preacher-Politician.  They turned out in droves to support Wayne Watson, millionaire member of the Black managerial class who has been paid handsomely to fleece public institutions in the form of corny hires and contracts (see, for example, the recent blog post “Seventy-eight Million Reasons to Party” or any of the news stories re-posted on the facebook page, “Watson Must Go”).  They did not come to defend the thousands of working class people of color, the students, staff and faculty, victimized over the years by Wayne and his class but to ensure Black petit bourgeois control over ‘their Southside institution.’

While objectively unqualified FOWs (Friends of Wayne) and FOFOWs (Friends of Friends of Wayne) make outrageous sums to do damage to the university (see enrollment numbers down, outrageous policy coming out of legal), the Black working class who attend CSU are denied the respect of functioning facilities and the resources that students at PWIs (predominantly White institutions) take for granted.  Their education suffers when what little resources we get go to hires and raises for an incompetent, greedy, and, ultimately, racist managerial class.

Race is most assuredly a part of the story of the dirty politics being played at CSU.  But, it is not the story of the Black leader, the King figure, fighting for the civil and human rights of the Black masses up against a small group of powerful Whites trying to take down the Black man.  It is the story of the comprador class, the Black and Brown managerial class, the Preacher-ticians, attempting to claim their prize for years of loyal service to the ruling class and a big "screw you" to the Black, Brown and other working class groups on this campus who work and learn here.

More Great News from the Auditors (If you believe in fairy tales)

Elnora Daniel responding to audit exceptions in 2007: “I’m the CEO and anything, any audit finding, as far as I’m concerned, I take full responsibility for.”

Wayne Watson in 2011, attributing many of the audit exceptions to: "incorrect processes (that are) embedded in the culture here — have lasted for years and are even part of training for the staff. That is unacceptable, and we are working to correct it."

The latest CSU audit report is out. 29 exceptions, with 16 repeat findings. It is available on the Illinois Auditor General's website: http://www.auditor.illinois.gov/Audit-Reports/CHICAGO-STATE-UNIVERSITY.asp,

In the ten years between 2000 and 2010 auditors discovered a total of 120 audit exceptions at Chicago State. Those years include audits for Elnora Daniel's entire tenure and for Frank Pogue's only year as interim president. The Daniel administration totaled 107 audit exceptions between 2000 and 2009, including a high of 20 in 2009. In Wayne Watson's three years, his administration has amassed a total of 104 audit exceptions, including 49 repeat exceptions. Of course, in the integrity-filled world of Wayne Watson, this is not his fault, it is the fault of previous administrations. As far as his administration working to correct the problems, it should only take another two years to reduce audit exceptions to below the level achieved in Elnora Daniel's worst year. Another terrific job by you and that great leadership team you have assembled.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Reminder: it's all about the students!


Been thinking about this recently. For those of you not up on your French Revolutionary history this is an image of the clergy and aristocracy on the back of the peasantry from the 1789 era. Don't you think it makes a nice background for birobi's post today on 78 million reasons to keep Wayne Watson?

Seventy-eight million Reasons to Party

Last night, in the wake of the payroll fiasco, the university apparently hosted a gala event honoring Emil Jones for giving a little bit of money to the school. Or was it for Emil Jones temporarily saving Watson’s job? Why did Emil Jones work so hard for Watson? Why did he organize the groundswell of “public” support for the embattled president? Why the lavish do for someone giving such a modest gift to the school? I suggest there are close to eighty million reasons for honoring the former State Senate president.

When Wayne Watson took control of the City Colleges in 1998, one of his early moves involved the hiring of someone named Louis Herman as an Information Technology “consultant.” Herman received $110,000 plus $15,000 in expenses for the year he did consulting work. There is scant mention of him in the Board Reports of the City Colleges, but in May, 1999, he apparently became instrumental in the awarding of a no-bid contract for computer services to a company named Synchronous Solutions. According to one report, the company had been incorporated in “February 1998 . . . with a handful of employees [and] functioned as a placement service for businesses needing specific technological help.” However, running the company were two of Emil Jones’ relatives: his stepson and nephew.

Despite the company’s extremely limited experience, on June 3, 1999, the City Colleges contracted to pay it $375,000 for “professional consulting services,” that encompassed “the recruiting and placement of three consultants to render services for the District’s library systems and systems analysts for the Office of Information Technology.” The City Colleges requested and received a waiver from the competitive bidding process due to the fledgling company’s “considerable experience in recruiting and placement of consultants in the area of information technology.”

The 1999 contract proved the first in a series of eleven no-bid contracts bestowed upon the company by Wayne Watson. The total amount of these deals: $78 million dollars. The company’s final deal with Wayne Watson amounted to a payoff of more than $44 million for a three-year contract from 2007 to 2010. For verification of these contracts and their respective amounts, the curious (or skeptical) may consult the following City Colleges Board of Trustees action items: 21340, 22085, 22265, 23645, 23739, 23905, 23950, 26172, 27031, 27915.

Of course, the budget of Chicago State is much smaller than the one at City Colleges. Nevertheless, I wonder if this is our future? Between 1999 and 2010, Emil Jones’ family benefitted from his acquaintance with Wayne Watson to the tune of $78 million in taxpayer funds, all of it spent with no oversight. Although current City College Board regulations require competitive bidding for contracts over $25,000, that requirement is easily skirted. Certainly, the less stringent requirements that exist here can also be circumvented. What is wrong with the people of this city and this state that they allow this invitation to corruption to exist? On a smaller scale, how much did last night’s shindig cost and where did the money come from? Given their failure to meet payroll yesterday, perhaps the university had some extra money lying around.

Friday, March 29, 2013

Attack on Free Speech, Again!!


"It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."  Chief Justice Abe Fortas in majority decision in Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)


Can this be true?  Student athletes were reportedly told that they could lose their scholarships if they attend the April 11 demonstration against the Watson regime called by students.  Does anyone else know more about this?  

I was also told by student workers and students at the fitness center that they are no longer allowed to play music there.  According to sources, Wayne claims that the finest fitness centers do not have music playing so neither should we at CSU.  The story goes:  Without consulting anyone at the center Wayne had the audacity to turn off the music that others in the gym were listening to as they worked out. He wanted to listen to the television.  He was challenged and reacted by issuing an edict that the office of the Director of Athletics should no longer allow music in the fitness center.

Do the pettiness and lack of respect ever cease?  

Why We Weren't Paid

As usual, what we receive from the administration is not even close to the truth. Here's the explanation from an administrator:

From what I have learned, apparently VP Glenn Meeks was fired by President Watson prior to Meeks' authorization of the direct deposit disbursement for the current pay period. Interim VP Pinkelton did not have the authority to conduct the disbursement in place of Meeks. Typically we would all receive our paycheck today, but due to Watson's choices you will not get paid until Monday. HR Director Mitchell's email states that early paychecks have always been a courtesy. As others have pointed out, a courtesy which has become a practice can create serious problems when the practice is disrupted. If this situation creates problems for you in the form of late penalties, fines for insufficient funds, etc., please carefully document the penalties and fines.

Of course, this comes on the heels of Watson deciding that if he doesn't get his way on that ridiculous essay that "we risk the refusal of Watson to hire any of our candidates." So he's going to take his ball and go home if we don't do as we're told. Given his track record, why doesn't he simply tell each department who it should hire, I'm sure there are a number of his other cronies who don't yet have cushy tenure-track jobs. Truly, what is wrong with this man? His apparent narcissistic desire to indulge himself comes at a great price and in order to impose his will on the university he is quite happy to act with the emotional maturity of a ten-year-old. Pathetic.

No Paycheck Here

I have not had my paycheck deposited in my account. How many others are in the same position?

A 22% Pay Increase and I Don't Get Paid???

So I am a believer in the phrase, "just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you." Thus I have no idea if I am being retaliated against or if there was general incompetence in me not being paid today as is required by my contract. If you are a CSU employee with Direct Deposit  and you weren't paid, you might be asking, in the colloquial way, WTF! So check your bank accounts. This must be all part of the culture change brought by this failed regime.

Check your bank account--word is we didn't get paid

Just had a phone call this morning. Something screwed up in payroll (remember the director got that big pay raise herself). Word is direct deposits did not go through, but paper checks did.

Please post if you have any more info.

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Raining down Retaliation Continues-- Faculty Know Your Place: NO MORE MORE MR NICE GUY!!

I used to be such a sweet, sweet thing
'Til they got a hold of me.
I opened doors for little old ladies,
I helped the blind to see.
I got no friends 'cause they read the papers.
They can't be seen, with me and I'm gettin' real shot down
And I'm feeling mean.

No more Mister Nice Guy
No more Mister Clean
No more Mister Nice Guy
They say, he's sick he's obscene


Gotta love 70s rock--thanks Alice Cooper.
And so for round 2 in Retaliations brought to you by Wayne Watson. Faculty Listen Up.

Watson wants to have control over EVERY aspect of the job gifting at CSU. There is NO ONE any longer, NO ONE he has to worry about checking his authority. The President's Office rules the Board of Trustees as we have seen over the past 2 weeks and Emil Jones rules the president and the governor. This is not a "known secret" any more. It is a full-blown out in the open fascist installation that we have here.  Apologists for this megalomania that has reared up in this past week can cry the race card all they want, but any academic worth their salt knows in their heart of hearts that this institution is heading for the dumpster and careening there at breakspeed pace.

Administrative control over Academic matters, job searches (that is the process by which you hire anyone) is now the business of the President's Office. So Criminal Justice was indeed a testing ground after all.  What happened there--the administration placing its people with nary a faculty member involved in the decision-making can certainly happen to you now and here's the first volley of incursions. Show me, please show me, what university in the good ole U. S. of A. operates like this? Call your colleagues at normal universities and see how they'd react to this latest assault.

Deans and Chairs and the Provost know this is administrative overreach.
I betcha that Watson's Chief of Staff knows this as well.
There is no restraint on the President's Office any longer.

If your department is doing a job search you are now required to do the following listed below. This is not negotiable according to dictates levelled at the most recent Dean of the Arts and Sciences Chair's Meeting this week. I expect it is what is happening in other colleges.

NEW DIRECTIVES
  • HR needs to come to a departmental search committee meeting for five minutes discussion of the process, then committee members need to sign a form saying they understand the process.
  • At an earlier meeting we were told to finalize our recommendation down to one candidate only if there was a clear favorite. That is no longer recommended. We should send forward (to the dean) a non-ranked list of 2-4 candidates with an attached spreadsheet or checklist of strengths and weaknesses.
  • If we refuse to do the writing sample we risk the refusal of Watson to hire any of our candidates. 
  • H.R. has a version of an appraiser evaluation form for committee members to fill out after each interview .  If we want to use a unique form, we need to get approval before using it.

  • Is any of this contracturally mandated?
    Does any of this contravene HLC regulations regarding university governance?
    Jones and Watson and Quin have already violated the idea of an independent Board of Trustees.

    Are you outraged enough to join the protest yet?

    If not, take yourself over to the Sun Room @5.30p.m. tomorrow for a reception CSU is hosting for none other than the man who keeps CSU in his pocket: Emil Jones. As the Zoroastrians would say, the "Great King," "King of Kings," King of Countries Containing All Kinds of Men," King in this Great Earth Far and Wide."

    Aside from saving Dr Watson's *** from a fate worse than a lousy $250,000 (City College after all got him off for $800,000), Emil Jones gave Watson $200,000 from his Foundation to give to the school. Of course, Jones said a few weeks ago that had he known that the Board of Trustees thought Watson violated policies so much so that they wanted to "let him go" he would never have given the money to Watson, er, CSU, right, CSU, it's all about the students. Right, the money was for the students, not Watson,  it's all about the students afterall, dammit it is ALL ABOUT THE STUDENTS !!!!

    Go to the party if you're not on your Good Friday knees. Kow-tow and kiss rings (or whatever suits your fancy), maybe someday you'll be in with the inner circle too, maybe you'll get your share of Jones' southside pie.


    Meanwhile, back at the ranch... retaliation for some and big salaries for others (but we already knew that)

    Check out today's Chicago Tribune. Doubtful that the citizens of Illinois and certainly not Chicago either northside or southside will care very much about this outrageous situation. I can hear the collective "ho hum" from the shores of Lake Michigan to the banks of the Mississippi, "everyone does it, what do you expect?", "it's the Chicago way," "when they do it at UIC/UofC/Western/Eastern/Northern/SIU/UIUC/Harvard/SUNY/CUNY/UCLA/NYU/BU/IU/Oxford/theSorbonne... no one criticizes them, but when we do it..." It all puts me in mind of a conversation I heard between two CSU students back in the mists of time when I was a mild-mannered un-tenured assistant professor and the then President Dolores Cross was on her way to being ousted and various nefarious schemes and misdeeds were being attached to her administration as well as herself.
    Student #1: "Yeah, she really got away with a lot here and made a lot of money off this place..."
    Student #2: "She sure did."
    Student #1: "But I'd probably do the same thing if I had the chance..."

    And the seasons they go round and round...

    So when Cross's group is in power they get the CSU spoils.
    When Daniel's group is in power they get the CSU spoils.
    No surprise then that when Watson's group is in power...well, you know how to finish the sentence.

    Thanks again Emil for the living political science experiment you've been nurturing here for so long. And I love the explanation Dr W. gives for raising salaries so high--administrators have taken on a lot more duties that warrants "double-digit" raises. I bet all those department chairs who had to take on extra faculty, what with all the "reorganization" in combining departments to cut back on the number of dept. chairs, are next in line to get their double-digit raises, not to mention the university's service workers, janitorial staff whose numbers have been cut back--I bet we'll be hearing about that group's double-digit salary increase soon. Or were those cutbacks where the money came from in the first place to give out these big salary increases? Got it.

    Oh who cares. "I'd probably do the same thing if I had the chance..."

    For those of you who haven't found your excuse for not being outraged, read below for Part II of the politician's playbook: when you are on the defensive throw out bold defiant moves--screw integrity defiantly, fire some high-ranking figure just to show that you can (papa Emil has you covered) and pay off your loyal soldiers royally.

    Chicago Tribune, Jodi Cohen
    Embattled CSU president authorizes big salary hikes for administrators

    Chicago State University President Wayne Watson, who is fighting to keep his job, approved double-digit salary increases for several high-ranking administrators this year, according to newly released records.

    In another personnel move, Watson dismissed his vice president of administration and finance, Glenn Meeks, who said he was fired this week in retaliation after raising questions about the salary increases and other decisions by Watson.

    Trustees of the South Side public institution indicated last month that they wanted new leadership and said Watson would be taking a yearlong sabbatical. But Watson and his political supporters fought back, and the board decided he would remain in office while they investigated him over an unspecified allegation that he violated university policy. They promised a decision on his employment by June 30.

    Then on Friday, the terms expired for two trustees who had supported a change in leadership — board Chairman Gary Rozier and Vice Chairwoman Zaldwaynaka "Z" Scott — lending further doubt to whether Watson will be replaced. Four of the seven board positions appointed by the governor are now vacant.

    In the wake of the board members' terms ending, Watson on Tuesday fired Meeks.

    "It is clear to me that it is retaliatory because of the position I took in support of terminating (Watson)," Meeks said Wednesday. "He has been found guilty by the board of violating university policy, and he is still there. And I have done nothing wrong, and he is allowed to dismiss me."
    A university spokesman declined to comment on Meeks' termination.

    Meeks said that, among other issues, he had questioned Watson's decision to give raises to select administrators.

    The administrators who received the salary boosts include general counsel Patrick Cage, who got a 17.4 percent increase, to $155,004; Renee Mitchell, the associate vice president of human resources, who got a 21.4 percent increase, to $144,996; and Provost Sandra Westbrooks, who received an 18.8 percent increase, to $208,092.

    Two executive assistants in Watson's office also received increases of about 20 percent after they were promoted, university spokesman Thomas Wogan said. All of the increases took effect Jan. 1.
    In a statement, Wogan said decisions about pay are based on "merit and performance" and that competitive salaries are needed to retain talented employees. He said Cage and Mitchell took on increased responsibilities and that neither received a salary increase in the two prior years. He said Westbrooks' salary had been lower than that of a dean who reported to her.

    Watson approved the raises at a time when hundreds of employees had no salary increases from 2012 to this year, and faculty members generally received a 2.25 percent hike.

    "I find it disturbing we would have administrators that would get double-digit raises while faculty this year got a 21/4 percent raise," said faculty senate President Phillip Beverly, a political science professor. "It should be a little more equitable."

    The Tribune received the salary information from Chicago State after filing a Freedom of Information Act request.

    On Wednesday, Watson provided an update to a state Senate appropriations committee. He said he expects the university soon will get a favorable report from its accrediting body, and he highlighted new tutoring and advising programs for students and a new performance evaluation system for tenured faculty members.

    Lawmakers discussed an audit report expected to be released Thursday that will show 29 financial problems, down from 41 in 2011.

    Since 2009, when Watson took over, overall student enrollment has dropped 16 percent, according to an internal university report.

    Watson acknowledged to the committee that enrollment is down to 6,100 students.
    "We made a decision to go for quality versus quantity," he said.

    Wednesday, March 27, 2013

    To My Colleague: Something Needs Correction

    Lionel:

    When I read your post this morning I was disturbed and sorry that you felt that way. However, when I revisited the draft letter you featured so prominently as the lead example of the "racial subtext" of the anti-Watson campaign, my feelings changed to anger. I have a great deal of respect for you as a teacher and scholar but I have to say that comment about the draft was problematic. Here is what I actually wrote: "I believe you can see that this unprecedented procedure, including outside reviewers, contravenes the contract and removes the creation of disciplinary standards from the CSU faculty, making an administration that has proven itself to be profoundly anti-intellectual responsible for the academic standards within each discipline. How is this defensible?" As you can plainly see, I do not call Wayne Watson an anti-intellectual, nor do I disparage his Ph.D. or the institution from which he earned it. I note that in your response to blog comments on your earlier post you include a rather tepid acknowledgement, tucked parenthetically into the last paragraph that "So, when he was called anti-intellectual (to be fair this language was quickly abandoned), for me and other African American faculty who read the draft this was akin to a slap in the face. Indict the man for the things he has done to the detriment of the University and stick to this issues that confront us all." In fact, I indicted his administration, not him and I think your correction is analogous to the New York Times printing on page 75 a correction of a front page story. Also, it is fair to criticize Watson for doing nothing scholarly since receiving his Ph.D. Does that constitute a personal attack? For examples of personal attacks from Watson supporters, see the anonymous e-mail sent to faculty on October 31 or November 1, 2012, or refer to previous posts on this blog, or take a look at the memorandum Watson recently sent to the Board of Trustees. Of course, there is a slight power difference here which undermines the argument that both sides are equally guilty of impoliteness. We post on the blog and Watson and his supporters have television, newspapers, and political supporters to spread their personal attacks.

    Ultimately, you're right, we still have to work together. At the conclusion of this nonsense, I wonder whether we'll have an institution in which to work.

    What do they call a Black Person with a Ph.D?. . . or Why I sit on the Sidelines.

    It has come to my attention that the move to rid ourselves of Dr. Watson has taken an uncomfortable turn.  While I completely agree with the prevailing complaints made against Watson during his tenure, I was also put off by much of the rhetoric of the anti-Watson campaign.  For me, the racial subtext of the debate was a huge turn off.  Starting with a discussion of a (draft) letter that called the President, a man with a PhD from one of the most prestigious universities in the United States an “anti-intellectual”; to the personal attacks about the president in front of students; to the assault on the African American clergy (an imperfect group, to say the least, but one who proves to be an all-too-convenient target highlighting all that is corrupt within the black freedom struggle). I was uncomfortable.  It was also not lost on me that the tenured African American faculty has not taken the lead in much of the movement against the Watson regime. 
    I thought this needed to change and, in spite of my reservations, I assured a colleague that I would consider a more active role. I thought about what I could do all morning.  Before I made any solid commitments, I sought counsel from those I trusted.  What I heard disturbed me and prompted this post.  I was told by more than one person about an exchange between a junior faculty member and another faculty member working to remove Watson.  In this exchange, the junior faculty was told (and I am paraphrasing here) that the black faculty was “chicken-shit” for not actively calling for Watson’s ouster.  How about that “chicken shit”?
    This exchange reminded me of a famous exchange where Malcolm X famously asked in a television interview, "what do you call an educated negro with a B.A. or an M.A., with a B.S., or a PhD?" The answer? "You call him a nigger, because that is what the white man calls him, a nigger."  Now, I am not going to go as far as to accuse my colleague of using such a vile word as there is no evidence that he did.  Nor am I willing to posit that this notion was driving this attack on my fellow black faculty members.  What I am charging, however, is that such sentiment is both paternalistic and divisive.   Black intellectuals, as Malcolm argued, have been among groups who have constantly had to prove our worth within the academy.  In too many cases, no matter what they did, their efforts, degrees, opinions were degraded in the ivory tower.  It still goes on and it’s too bad that this seems to going on here.  
    The way you chose to frame your frustration was discriminatory, distracting, and bordered on race-baiting.  Your use of race to hold African American faculty to a higher standard is analogous to the classic trope of the field slave versus house slave. Black faculty who choose to either not participate, or worse, disagree with YOU, apparently are brain-washed and, by extension, part of the problem.  What’s ironic is that, we as faculty, have criticized the Watson camp for dodging culpability by resorting to name-calling and innuendo to disparage their enemies and YOU have done the same thing.  I have shared my opinions about this process.  Have you even bothered to survey all us chickens to ask why we do not speak out? Maybe, just maybe, it is exactly this attitude that keeps us on the sidelines.  And some of you ask why I do not participate!
    How dare you insult an entire community, with the same credentials as you, and imply that we, they, I don’t get it.  How dare you?!? Who made you the king of common sense? Would you insult the Latino faculty?  I haven’t seen many of them at the anti-Watson phalanx.  What insults await them?  I can only imagine what you call the white faculty members who refuse to speak out against Watson. I’m not sure but, we, they, and I get chicken shit! You, my friend, owe EVERY African American faculty member on this campus an apology. However, I would settle for making amends to the aforementioned junior faculty member whom was insulted to his face.  I can tell you this: such statements will guarantee that I, a card-carrying-member of the chicken shit coalition, will continue to stay on the sidelines.
    Too often during this campaign black folk who choose to campaign behind the scenes are either chastised for not speaking out or falsely accused of being a Watson apologist for merely asking a question regarding protest rhetoric. If I don’t agree with you then I am your enemy, right?   I know the answer to this one because I asked it on one another occasion.  The answer, of course, was “yes”.  My question to my colleague is “who died and made you keeper of my indignation?”  
    Corday likes to frame the activities occurring on campus in historical context.  I think this is a good idea because, as a historian, I think that protest movements can learn much by studying the predecessors.  In that vein, I would like to include my own example from history.  In the years of the French Revolution the Committee of Public Safety was de facto government of the new France and assumed its role of protecting the newly established republic against foreign attacks and internal rebellion.  The power of the Committee peaked between August 1793 and July 1794. In December 1793 the entire power of government come to rest in the Committee and a virtual dictatorship was established. To defend France and suppress internal uprisings, the Committee raised fourteen armies, while to ensure supplies the Committee instituted a partial system of maximum prices and fixed wages. To repress domestic opposition, it instituted the Reign of Terror, in which those deemed enemies of the revolution were executed with the guillotine.  Now, we are insulted!
    I want to make this clear, I am a union man.  I come from a union family.  Watson’s disregard for us as workers is immoral and his violations of federal law (his attempts of suppressing free speech) and alleged state ethic laws with the employment of his romantic partners are egregious and he should be removed from his post.  He is, in sum, the wrong man, for the wrong job, at the wrong time.  I have never wavered on my position here.  However, I will always be a race man, first and foremost.   Anyone who finds it that easy to insult the entire body of African American intellectuals on this campus is not, and will NEVER be, okay with me.  If you are going to be a leader of a movement and fight this good fight, be sure to remember who you are fighting for.  Until that time, I’ll keep watching from the cheap seats.


    This just in:  In the latest development, now we have GRADUATE STUDENTS insulting tenured FACULTY on the blog!  I've seen enough.  APATHETIC he says?  How about tired of have our integrity questioned? 



    Our President, Mr. Tough as Nails

    “My position is anybody can clean house. Anybody can walk in off the street without an ounce of education and fire everybody. My job was to empower people to do their jobs.” Frank Pogue, July 30, 2009.

    “You’ve got to change people’s behavior or you’ve got to fire them.” Wayne Watson, May 4, 2009.

    “It’s no wonder that Dr. Watson is not the most beloved man on campus, though respected throughout the educational community . . . He courageously corrected institutional wrongs and mishaps that had history as long as 20 years.” Emil Jones, March 7, 2013.

    Wayne Watson, a stand up, courageous leader, our President Tough as Nails. Does the behavior of President Nails match that profile? Why not take a look?

    A “true leader” takes responsibility for the thinks that occur on her/his watch. How does President Nails measure up here?

    Audit findings tripled during his first full year. They continue at levels far in excess of those experienced by previous administrations. Watson’s response: it is some else’s fault. That is “true” leadership?

    His meddling in the curriculum includes no paper trail that leads back to him. Although he mandated curriculum changes, he did it through willing subordinates. That is “true” leadership?

    The three separate attempts this administration has made to stifle expression on campus, the Human Resources “Policy Manual” of 2009, and the “Computer Usage Policy” and “Communications Policy” in 2012, came from highly placed members of his administrative team. Other than calling the latter policy a “mistake” that “we fixed,” President Nails takes no responsibility for those abominations. Does anyone on campus think any of the three came out without his knowledge or approval? That is “true” leadership?

    The unqualified and apparently inept cronies he hired to run Enrollment Management continue to oversee plunging enrollment. A leader might be expected to come to the conclusion that a change at the top might be in order. President Nails’ response? Do nothing. That is “true” leadership?

    He has attacked tenure through the DAC process. President Nails’ participation in the process became impossible to hide. He responded with an almost laughable set of responses to individual DACs, while trampling the union contract underfoot. Involving deans, chairs, outside evaluators, the Provost in the process demonstrated his contempt for both faculty and the CSU-UPI contract. That is “true” leadership?

    He violated his own university’s own administrative policy by orchestrating a search for new faculty to ensure that two of your cronies get highly-paid faculty positions. He hid behind the deans and the chair who constituted the entirely improper “search committee.” That is “true” leadership?

    He has raised no funds for campus except for the $300,000 that came late 2012 or early 2013, $200,000 from his political mentor, Emil Jones. In an environment in which the state of Illinois contributes only 27 percent of our operating revenues, his failure to raise money for the school is nothing short of scandalous. That is “true” leadership?

    He has alienated faculty with his high-handed and uninformed forays into various academic areas in which he possesses no expertise. There is hardly any need to describe his relations with the mainstream media, they are simply antagonistic, something that surely hurts the university’s public image. That is “true” leadership?

    In the recent fiasco over his continued employment at Chicago State, President Nails could not defend himself without the assistance of political allies who rallied to his support. He could not muster any substantive reasons for retaining his position. Instead, as he is wont to do, he hid behind his attorney (the husband of the Vice President of Enrollment Management), political poo-bahs like Emil Jones, a coterie of South Side ministers and Chicago politicians. Their praise stemmed from President Nails’ efforts to move the university “forward,” and “trying to create a culture of change.” That is heady stuff. Clearly the strategy to defend President Nails revolved around obscuring the real issues with a smokescreen of bullshit. Along the way, the university suffered another public relations disaster. That is “true” leadership?

    During this opera bouffe, President Nails revealed his character to anyone who cared to examine it. His undated and unsigned memorandum to the “CSU Board of Trustees,” written in a desperate and unprincipled tone, uses any vile means necessary to muddy the waters by engaging in innuendo and character assassination. When directly confronted about the letter, President Nails courageously denied authorship, although he never corrected newspaper reports attributing the letter to him. His commitment to the university clearly includes a desire to destroy the institution, if necessary. That is “true” leadership?

    Now that Governor Quinn has thrown Chicago State to the wolves, President Nails is free to engage in one of his favorite pastimes: vindictive retaliation. This is the glue that holds his administration together, as slavering loyalty and obsequiousness are requirements for service in the Nails’ administration. Those administrators who point out that President Nails has no clothes are usually shown the door. That is “true” leadership?

    Perhaps President Nails is convinced that he has “won” or that somehow that parade of bloviating fools and their political connections provide some kind of validation for his toxic administration. Far from it. He may well find that his victory here is Pyrrhic, that his vindication is fleeting. Indeed, I think that his behavior during the past few weeks demonstrates that, along with his already proven inability to do the job here, he does not possess the requisite integrity to occupy any position of leadership.

    Tuesday, March 26, 2013

    Glenn Meeks Just Fired

    The Subsidiary of the Southside African American Political Machine, formerly known as Chicago State University, has lost one of its more courageous colleagues. Glenn Meeks, VP for Finance, was just fired this afternoon.

    Apparently the Governor's announcement yesterday taking out three of the Board of Trustees' members who had been investigating Watson's hiring actions has emboldened Watson to fire the man who brought us up from the basement of the financial abyss over the past two years. Glenn Meeks, untenured and unafraid to speak up is the first in what no doubt will be a series of firings.

    What a morally bankrupt and cynical little place we have here. If you support our role as subsidiaries to Emil's machine then keep your head in the sand. Faculty may be the only ones to call a halt to this aggressive, vindictive reassertion of "presidential power."  This is the place you want to work? Start speaking out if you do not.

    The Senate Higher Ed Appropriations Committee and the Senate Executive Appointments Committee (Boards of Trustees) both meet tomorrow. Get on the phone and leave a message with ALL of these people telling them your opinion of the goings on at CSU, the need for new leadership, the need to keep Rozier and the other trustees, the patronage plundering that Emil Jones has practiced through his hand-picked President Watson. Tell them something.  It may not work, nothing may work, we may remain a patronage dumping ground forever, but we have to try to liberate CSU from the most egregious abuses of this most corrupt political machine.

    The Senate Higher Education Approp committee decides what to recommend the Senate spend

    on a university’s appropriation request. They also perform oversight in this function. This

    committee next meets on March 27, 2013 at 11 a.m.

    Senate Higher Education Appropriations

    Dan Kotowski (847) 656-5416

    Donne E. Trotter (773) 933-7715

    Melinda Bush (847) 548-5631

    Thomas Cullerton (630) 903-6662

    Napoleon Harris, III (708) 232-8780

    Michael E. Hastings (708) 283-4125

    Mike Jacobs (309) 797-0001

    Steven M. Landek (708) 430-2510

    Andy Manar (618) 635-2583

    Pat McGuire (815) 207-4445

    Steve Stadelman (815) 987-7557

    Heather A. Steans (773) 769-1717

    Chapin Rose R (217) 607-1853

    Pamela J. Althoff (815) 455-6330

    Jason A. Barickman (309) 661-2788

    Darin M. LaHood (309) 693-4921

    Karen McConnaughay (847) 214-8245

    Matt Murphy (847) 776-1490
     

    The Senate Executive Appointments Committee vets gubernatorial appointments to boards and

    commissions and then sends the recommendations to the Senate for a vote.

    Executive Appointments

    Antonio Muñoz (773) 869-9050

    William Delgado (773) 292-0202

    James F. Clayborne, Jr. (618) 875-1212

    Mike Jacobs (309) 797-0001

    David Koehler (309) 677-0120

    Kimberly A. Lightford (217) 782-8505

    Andy Manar (618) 635-2583

    Ira I. Silverstein (773) 743-5015

    Tim Bivins R (815) 284-0045

    Kirk W. Dillard (630) 969-0990

    David S. Luechtefeld (618) 243-9014

    Wm. Sam McCann (217) 245-0050


    Monday, March 25, 2013

    Quinn--just get it over with--who needs a board of trustees anyway? Emil picks and Emil calls the shots and don't you forget it...


    I had deja-vu all over again today. O Governor Quinn What Art Thou? It's amazing isn't it how greatly concerned Gov Quinn has become over little old CSU. Why just four years ago (it seems like yesterday) faculty were begging the governor to remove the Board of Trustees for violating their own by-laws in a very phony search for a new president at CSU. Why just four years ago, the faculty asked Governor Quinn to stop the railroading, I mean, presidential search process at CSU, because there were three unfilled, vacant trustee seats and one seat held by a member with an expired term (it had been expired for 2 years). Why just four years ago Governor Quinn could not listen to these puny pleas and petitions to stop the use of our school as a patronage dumping ground. Ah how naive we were back then--to think that our puny petition to Governor Quinn could save us from the clutches of southside politicians and their ministerial minions. No, he turned his attention to wiping out the board of trustees of the Univ of ILL and left its southside sister school to continue to be feasted upon by the entrenched political hacks and would-be powerbrokers. In a timeline of activities from that 2009 period these three dates culled from a timeline that we kept on the whole search prez search process remind us of how Quinn was so unresponsive then.

    APRIL 22, 2009 RALLY OF STUDENTS, FACULTY, AND ADMINISTRATORS ON CAMPUS PROTESTING THE BOT AND THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS; FACULTY SENATE LETTER DELIVERED TO GOVERNOR QUINN REQUESTING REMOVAL OF THE BOT OF CHICAGOSTATE

    April 25, 2009 Chicago Tribune Lead Editorial, “March to mediocrity” SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO HAVE GOV. QUINN ADD NEW MEMBERS TO THE BOT AT CSU ANDSTOP THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS

    May 2, 2009 Chicago Tribune “Quinn and ChicagoState”,CRITICIZES GOV. QUINN’S FAILURE TO RESPOND TO REQUESTS FOR INTERVENTION IN THE PROCESS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH AT CSU

    There is also an article that ran in Inside Higher Education called O Governor Where Art Thou? I cited Jack Stripling's article about just this thing in October of 2009, so it seems worthwhile to remind folks of that here. If you want to make your heart sink reread it.
    Stripling, Oh Governor, Where Art Thou?--Oct 1, 2009

    As for now, 2013, Mirabile dictu! just four years later, Governor Quinn is all ears to cries for his intervention at our little CSU.  Emil Jones and the ministers told him that they must keep their control over things like the CSU Board and Wayne Watson still wants to be president so dammit get rid of that pesky board of young ideas. The old guys still want the power.  How dare a state board of trustees think that it has control over a president of a state university. In less time than it took for the ink to dry on that "contract" with Gary Rozier that Watson reneged on, Quinn announced that the three offending trustees are out.

    So, if you've been hiding your head in the sand these past four years you cannot hide any longer from the dirty truth that you have wanted to avoid: the place you work and study is run by and for politicians and we serve them, not the state of ILL, not the students of Illinois and Chicago and we will never be able to be much better than this while this situation remains no matter how many students we teach, grants we bring in, programs or outreaches we run. Quinn should just dispense with the board altogether and just let Emil Jones run the show, why go through this travesty of letting boards rule presidents? Any board that comes in now will be ruled by Jones and Watson, won't it? Oh wait, HLC regs say something about boards needing to be autonomous from political and other outside influences... reminder: accreditation has not yet been officially granted btw.

    When I was hired in the mid-1990s the then dean of Arts and Sciences at CSU asked me "why I would want to work at a school like CSU?" I took that question to mean the southside African American student body, the smallness of the place etc. It is not an uncommon question to ask at an interview. I now think there was more of a subtext to it. I was not from Chicago.  Aside from what I read about the place in the university's catalogue I had a limited idea of its history and place in the ILL system.

    If I were a dean now asking a candidate why they wanted to work at CSU, I'd spell it out --why do you want to work at a patronage pit where every new president gets to bring in his people, throw out all the others from the previous administration whether they are good or bad, where each new administration gets to re-make CSU in his/her own vision with incomprehensible reorganizations, where administrative promotions are based on who you know and your relationship to them and how loyal you are to them personally, where you will be tested as to how well you can screw your colleagues in order to curry favors from the president for your own micro-empire at the school, where a president will try to micromanage your curriculum and standards instead of fundraise like presidents at regular universities do (donations from daddy Jones notwithstanding), and where the prevailing attitude is--"they'll appoint another president but he/she will be worse than the one that preceded them." The last is a direct quote that I have heard uttered by jaded senior faculty who knew and accepted what teaching at a patronage pit meant. I stopped listening to it when I stopped getting angry and started getting active about changing this skewed and screwed up situation here.

    For today, maybe we're back to being a patronage pit state institution, but maybe not tomorrow. A lot of faculty care, but a lot of faculty need to heed what it means when an institution no longer even has the veneer of operating as an independent institution and start showing where they stand on this. When an old politician and his machine has the power to name who the president of your institution will be and who will or will not be on its board of trustees then the question to those of us already tenured here, like the dean's question to me years ago, is not why do you want to work at a school like CSU, but why do you tolerate working at a school that works like this?

    Below is part of the timeline to the Presidential Search of 2009 that we kept. Heave a heavy sigh and have a read through.
      FYI:  PSAC=Presidential Search Advisory Committee [faculty, staff, students, administrators]

         March 24, 2009 Board officially announces Carol Adams and Wayne Watson as presidential search finalist candidates. PSAC MEMBERS INFORMED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE REST OF THE CAMPUS COMMUNITY VIA GENERAL EMAIL ANNOUNCEMENT.

          March 27, 2009 Faculty Senate polls Council of Illinois University Senates about their respective presidential searches

          March 31st, 2009 Emergency executive session meeting of the Faculty Senate is convened to discuss the presidential search process

          March 31, 2009 Board announces campus interview schedule for presidential search candidates (APRIL 13 & APRIL 14 8am-7:30pm)

          April 2, 2009 Chicago State University: Faculty, students criticize 2 finalists for president as political insiders

          APRIL 7, 2009 FACULTY SENATE ISSUES STATEMENT CONDEMNING THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS AND URGES FACULTY TO WEAR BLACK ON THE DAY OF THE INTERVIEWS

         APRIL 9, 2009 BOT ISSUES PRESS RELEASE VIA PAT ARNOLD: “CHICAGOSTATE UNIVERSITY TRUSTEES ISSUE STATEMENT REGARDING PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS”  INCLUDES HOLLINS GROUP DOCUMENT “DRAFT PRESIDENTIAL CRITERIA”

          APRIL 9, 2009 PSAC MEETS SEPARATELY TO DISCUSS PSAC QUESTIONS FOR CANDIDATES AT THE CAMPUS INTERVIEWS

         APRIL 10, 2009 BOT VIA PAT ARNOLD EMAILS RESUMES OF CAROL ADAMS & WAYNE WATSON TO CSU COMMUNITY

          APRIL 10-11, 2009 BOT TRIES TO BLOCK PRESS FROM ATTENDING CAMPUS INTERVIEWS (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, CHI-TOWN DAILY NEWS, CHICAGO SUN TIMES)

         APRIL 11-12, 2009 (?) BOT RESCINDS PLAN TO BLOCK MEDIA AFTER MEDIA PROTEST VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT

         APRIL 13, 2009 CAROL ADAMS INTERVIEW; CHICAGO TRIBUNE ARTICLE APPEARS: “STATUSQUO UNIVERSITY

         APRIL 14, 2009 WAYNE WATSON INTERVIEW

          APRIL 15, 2009 PSAC MEETS SEPARATELY. DETERMINES TO RESIGN AT NEXT MEETING IF BOARD REFUSES TO SCRAP CANDIDATES ADAMS AND WATSON IN LIGHT OF THE NEGATIVE CAMPUS REACTION AT THE INTERVIEWS. RESIGNATION STATEMENT IS DRAFTED.  

           APRIL 17, 2009 BOT & PSAC MEET TO DISCUSS ADAMS & WATSON INTERVIEWS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. 7-PAGE MEMO GIVEN TO PSAC MEMBERS FROM MARK DUNN DATED APRIL 16, 2009, RE: “SEARCH PROCEDURES AND THE CAMPUS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.” REITERATES THAT “THE CAMPUS ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS NO ROLE THAT ALLOWS IT TO VETO OR CALL FOR THE TERMINATION OF THE SEARCH PROCESS…AND SUCH A RECOMMENDATION IS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED TO BE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE CHARGE TO THE CAMPUS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND HAS NO ‘OFFICIAL’ FORCE OR BINDING EFFECT.”  IN RESPONSE, 13 OUT OF 15 PSAC MEMBERS SUBMIT THEIR RESIGNATION AND WALK OUT FROM THE MEETING CITING THAT “IT WOULD INAPPROPRIATE TO LEGITIMIZE A LESS THAN TRANSPARENT OR PARTICIPATORY PROCESS BY RECOMMENDING EITHER OF THE TWO FINALISTS FOR THE POSITION OF CHICAGO STATE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT…”

          APRIL 21, 2009 FACULTY SENATE UNANIMOUS VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE IN THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND CONDEMNS THE CSU PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS.

       APRIL 22, 2009 RALLY OF STUDENTS, FACULTY, AND ADMINISTRATORS ON CAMPUS PROTESTING THE BOT AND THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS; FACULTY SENATE LETTER DELIVERED TO GOVERNOR QUINN REQUESTING REMOVAL OF THE BOT OF CHICAGO STATE

          April 25, 2009 Chicago Tribune Lead Editorial, “March to mediocrity” SUPPORTING EFFORTS TO HAVE GOV. QUINN ADD NEW MEMBERS TO THE BOT AT CSU AND STOP THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS

          APRIL 27? 2009 RESIGNATION OF TRUSTEE JIM REYNOLDS MADE PUBLIC

          APRIL 29, 2009 BOT MEETING CONFIRMS APPOINTMENT OF WAYNE WATSON AS PRESIDENT OF CSU; GREAT OPPOSITION TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THOSE PRESENT

         May 2, 2009 Chicago Tribune “Quinn and ChicagoState”, CRITICIZES GOV. QUINN’S FAILURE TO RESPOND TO REQUESTS FOR INTERVENTION IN THE PROCESS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH AT CSU

         MAY 4, 2009 PRESIDENT FRANK POGUE SENDS “OPEN LETTER TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, CHICAGO STATE UNIVERSITY” ASKING FOR A RETRACTION FROM TRUSTEE FINNEY FOR COMMENTS HE MADE TO THE CHICAGO CRUSADER THAT POGUE WAS FOMENTING OPPOSITION AT CSU SO HE COULD REMAIN AS PRESIDENT. 

         May 06, 2009 CHICAGO TRIBUNE, “In the room: Chicago State President Wayne Watson [Updated May 11 with a response from Wayne Watson]. TRUSTEE LEON FINNEY AND WAYNE WATSON COMMENT THAT A “SMALL, BUT BELLIGERANT MINORITY” ARE BEHIND PROTESTS AGAINST WATSON’S APPOINTMENT

          MAY 11, 2009 WAYNE WATSON SENDS MEMO TO CSU COMMUNITY VIA CSU EMAIL PUBLIC RELATIONS RETRACTING STATEMENTS MADE TO CHICAGO TRIBUNE ON MAY 6, 2009

         MAY 11, 2009 BETTER GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION MEETS WITH MEMBERS OF FACULTY SENATE, PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND UNION TO DISCUSS BOT VIOLATIONS AND SPECIAL INTERESTS

         MAY 12, 2009 FACULTY SENATE CONVENES A FULL FACULTY MEETING TO DISCUSS ISSUES CONCERNING THE BOT; OVER 150 FACULTY, STAFF, AND ADMINISTRATORS ARE IN ATTENDANCE 

          MAY 13, 2009 BOT MEETING, PRESIDENTIAL CONTRACT APPROVED FOR WAYNE WATSON, $229,166 PER YEAR; CSU FACULTY SENATE FORMALLY REQUESTS BOARD TO RECONSIDER APPOINTMENT; TWO SOUTHSIDE MINISTERS SPEAK ON BEHALF OF WATSON, THREATEN TO BRING THEIR CONGREGATIONS TO CAMPUS FOR THE NEXT MEETING; MUCH CRITICISM OF BOT IN THE COMMENT PERIOD

     

    As we expected: the fix continues Quinn replaces Rozier & 2 other Trustees

    We will never be free of the old pols --see Jodi Cohen's article below. Quinn is so concerned about keeping his political hacks happy that he stepped in to make sure they all stay in power. What a disgraceful state and city.  He kept his distance in 2009. If anyone has any thought that our processes at CSU are not flawed, this should change your mind.

    Thank you Gary Rozier and company for trying to make real change happen. Apparently it will have to be a harder fought struggle, but these politicians are absolutely shameless and so hypocritical that they will do anything to keep power. Why am I not surprised?

    Let's raise some hell about this, shall we?


    Tribune for March 24th
    Quinn replaces 3 board members

    updated

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/education/ct-met-chicago-state-board-0325-20130325,0,6402877.story

    Sunday, March 24, 2013

    Look Who's Talking...And Saying what?

    Even though we have fallen off the pages of the Chicago Sun Times and the Tribune--it seems CSU can be found in a few news venues.

    After all these months the old pol Rev. Leon Finney, former trustee and wannbe CSU prez, appeared in a March 17th/18th article by Wendell Hutson. See below.

    Hutson_Finney defends hiring of Wayne Watson

    DNAinfo.com Chicago –March 18, 2013
    Ex-Chicago State University Board Chairman Defends Hiring of Wayne Watson
    by Wendell Hutson
    http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130317/chatham/ex-chicago-state-university-board-chairman-defends-hiring-of-wayne-watson#.UUdxDB3qVKs.email

    He said based on what the board knew about Watson, the longtime chancellor at City Colleges of Chicago before he was hired at Chicago State, he was the best candidate.

    But he acknowledged the decision wasn't popular on campus.

    "I had to push his candidacy through," he said.

    Finney claimed the faculty opposed the appointment because "The faculty made it clear they wanted one of their own elevated to the position."

    But many faculty and campus leaders thought the school should have opened the process to national candidates.

    The faculty even took the unprecedented step of sending Gov. Pat Quinn a letter asking him to remove the trustees and bar them from appointing a president. Quinn declined to do so.

    Finney is lying when he says that the Faculty had a candidate that they were trying to promote or push through. No such person existed (we were not even allowed to review all the cv’s that were submitted). We wanted a voice, we wanted the Trustees to hear our concerns, we wanted transparency of process. Reverend Finney’s reign of terror as Chair of the Trustees has subjected CSU to some lawsuits that have cost the university and a few are still pending. Interesting how this article admits that CSU’s  power structures are controlled by the likes of Finney and Jones. Dr Watson was the “best candidate” from among their cronies.

     
    Dan Kelly in the online rag called the Chicago Observer takes a fairly critical look at WW referencing his days at City Colleges. Lots of connections there. Tit for tat between Emil Jones and WW did not begin at CSU. And Kelly refers to the conflict in leadership in the African American community--the old guard of Jackson, Jones, Finney, Watson vs. a younger set of which Gary Rozier probably represents and some of our own on campus though many are keeping low profiles.  So check out this article at:can-chicago-state-university-rebound-from-current-administration?

    Chicago Daily Observer, March 13, 2014
    “Can Chicago State University Rebound from Current Administration?”
    Daniel J. Kelly
    http://www.cdobs.com/archive/featured/can-chicago-state-university-rebound-from-current-administration/

    Kelly writes:
    Former Illinois State Senate President Emil Jones succeeded in making the university into his personal bailiwick. His enduring monument to himself, the 7,000 seat “Emil and Patricia Jones Convocation Center,” a multipurpose, taxpayer funded arena, would make Roland “Tombstone” Burris envious. Jones has come out of retirement to defend Watson in the current crisis.

    What makes the media circus so interesting is that it appears to be an intergenerational struggle between Chicago’s long established African American political elites and ambitious newcomers. Old Guard allies of Reverend Jesse Jackson are backing Watson, while their youthful rivals favor his prompt removal.

    And an interesting comment on this article from CSU Supporter:

    Dr. Watson has made several positive changes at CSU. For example, he has helped open the campus to the community with a wide range of campus events, and he has worked to improve athletics on campus and to support the academic achievement of student athletes. However, he has not been able to help the University develop, distribute and follow the policies that are needed to allow the employees to effectively and efficiently do the day to day business of the University. He likes to call numerous meetings with little to no notice which is disruptive to people who have other scheduled meetings with students or colleagues. He is also very skilled at addressing the specific issues of an individual – he often steps in to help a student or employee with a specific issue – but he does not work to fit the underlying problem. I also believe that Dr. Watson is committed to increasing standards at CSU, but he has never been willing to approach faculty members as allies in this process. He generally begins from a position that assumes conflict and opposition. He then skips over the process of seeking input before enacting new plans and agendas. When these poorly planned efforts fail, he blames those that he did not consult at the beginning of the process.

    Well said.

    Last but definitely not least is the southside's own Hermene Hartman (remember when Finney gave her that nice public relations contract for a few months at CSU in the summer of 2009?) she's as thick as thieves with the old guard so there is a retch-warning issued when you read her article in N'Digo.

    N'Digo_Governor Quinn Must Step in (March 14, 2013)
    Hermene Hartman

    http://ndigo.com/index.php/governor-quinn-must-step-in-chicago-state-university-affairs/#comment-10777
    Hartman's shilling for WW in "Quinn Must Step In" is a mediocre investigation of cobbled-together half-truths, twisted statistics, wishful thinking, and bombastic self-righteousness befitting her subject. It might play on parts of the southside but not on 95th and King Drive. In her telling WW stepped in to save an all but falling down CSU whose accreditation was hanging by a thread. But for his efforts and blah blah blah we survived. Had she just been reading Walt Whitman's O Captain! My Captain! before she wrote it?...Did Dr Watson invent sliced bread too?  And more interesting, is Hartman tipping the hand of the Watson party with the plaintive cry for Gov Quinn to intervene? Ironic that the Watson party is trying to get Quinn to do for them what he wouldn't do for the Search Advisory Committee and Faculty Senate in 2009 in face of Leon Finney and Emil Jones' shenanigans that served CSU up to Dr Watson with that trumped up "search." Quinn wouldn't intervene in the travesty of that search process even though there were actual vacant seats needing to be filled (WW was brought in via a rump board of trustees to use a Cromwellian image). Will he take out the offending trustees Rozier and Scott and stuff some other FOWayne or FOEmil up there? No doubt Emil and the alderman and the ministers are sending a barrage of messages to hizzoner. No doubt so and so will talk to so and so who will talk to so and so who may get to talk to the big cheese. The nexus of cronyism is broad and deep in the state of ILL. They'll get to him eventually.

    Back to N'Digo. Read it, but don't bother trying to post a comment on Hartman's article. Either she is not taking criticism (sounds like others we know) or it has been too long and no one over there is minding the store vetting the comments. Seems odd that not one single comment since March 14th has appeared.  Was she ever accepting them in the first place? At any rate,  I'm posting below the counterpoint to Ms Hartman's propaganda that one of our CSU colleagues tried unsuccessfully to post this week. (Why do they even bother giving a place for comments on the N'Digo site if they won't take them?)

    From a CSU faculty member to Ms Hartman:

    There are a number of problematic comments in this article, which is essentially a pro-Watson propaganda piece. First, audit findings in Fiscal 2011 more than tripled from the previous administration, to 41 from 13. Notably, the University of Illinois system, with three campuses and better than 76,000 students had 43. In fiscal 2012, audit findings dropped slightly, to 34. In the same period of time, the University of Illinois system had 37. These figures are not positives for the Watson administration.

    Second, your claim that “One of every five African Americans who receive a college degree in the State of Illinois earned it from CSU,” is simply incorrect, as a look at the Illinois Board of Higher Education Website reveals. Unfortunately, the most recent graduation figures on their website come from 2010. At that point, Chicago State granted 3.4 percent of all degrees conferred upon black students in the state of Illinois. What is true is that Chicago State confers upon black students just over 18 percent of all degrees granted by public universities in Illinois. However, these numbers have been steadily declining, with the percentage of black graduates from Chicago State dropping each year from 5.9 percent of the state total in 2001 to 3.4 percent in 2010. All this information is easily obtainable, if one takes the time to look for it.

    Third, Chicago State University’s accreditation was never at risk. The assertion that the university “was on the verge of losing its accreditation” until Wayne Watson saved it is nonsense. What is true is that the university received a “focused visit” in 2010 that addressed some specific issues, primarily administrative. The faculty are obviously pleased with the Higher Learning Commission’s report, but there are continuing problems cited in the report: notably communication and enrollment management issues. In any event, it seems likely that the people who work at the school have a better feel for its internal workings than a group of people who spend two days (mainly with administrators) at the school every few years.

    Fourth, in the article’s eighth paragraph, you use a quote taken out of context to support your implication that the Board of Trustees are a problem, specifically with their overreach. You claim that the CSU Board goes: “beyond routine Board governance activities.” Here’s the entire quote directly from the HLC report: “The Team believes that the current level of Board involvement is beyond routine Board governance activities, and the ongoing turnaround situation of the University may justify it.”

    Fifth, your assertion that a “small group of faculty members gave Watson a vote of no confidence because “He has invaded their workspace with responsibility and accountability with the establishment of post tenure evaluation,” is a complete distortion of reality. In truth, the contract containing the post-tenure evaluation passed with better than 80 percent faculty support. Few faculty disagree with some form of evaluation for persons who have tenure and we do not think everyone at the school discharges their responsibilities competently. The Academic Senate is a representative body elected by all tenured and tenure-track faculty on campus. Prior to the no-confidence vote, senators polled their departmental faculty and received an overwhelming endorsement of the no-confidence motion. In addition, university staff were able to cast their votes for or against a no-confidence motion through a website. The web voting resulted in 86 percent in favor of a no-confidence motion. Your generalizations about “responsibility and accountability,” are meaningless. To what, specifically, are you referring? These kind of sound bite lines may fool uninformed readers but they are no substitute for substantive evidence.

    To summarize, I hardly expect everyone to agree with our position that Wayne Watson should not continue as president of Chicago State. That said, the argument that Governor Quinn should suddenly replace certain Trustees would be far more compelling if any of Wayne Watson’s supporters had made the same argument in 2009, when a Board with numerous vacancies hired him as president of the school. Nonetheless, if I were a friend of Wayne Watson, I would certainly be vocal in my support for his presidency. However, if you are going to use evidence to support your position, it should at least be presented in a forthright manner. At least try to get some of your facts correct.


    Friday, March 22, 2013

    Useful Summary of Wayne's Higher Ed History

    This article from the Chicago Daily Observer summarizes much of what Wayne's critics have been saying for years.  It doesn't get everything correctly but provides a good summary in a brief article.  One of the incorrect or misleading assertions that this article makes has to do with the Faculty Senate no-confidence vote.  The author repeats Wayne's claim on his WTTW interview; only 28 faculty voted no confidence.  This assertion has no merit.  Each Senator represents her or his department.  This essentially means that 28 departments voted no confidence not 28 faculty members.  This is why WTTW should be ashamed of themselves for such a one-sided presentation of the facts.  Had the Faculty Senate been represented in their piece on Watson this lie could have been corrected on the spot.  Now as it is journalists and others repeat the lie.

    The link to the Daily Observer piece is http://www.cdobs.com/archive/featured/can-chicago-state-university-rebound-from-current-administration/



    Thursday, March 14, 2013

    Another Kind of Cronyism

    On March 1, 2013, the Chicago Tribune quoted Wayne Watson as saying that there was "no cause to terminate him based on 'any type of personal relationship that was improper.' " However, Chicago State University's Human Resources Policy states clearly that his relationship with another university employee is, in fact, improper. The policy reads:

    "Managers and supervisors may not be involved in close personal relationships with another employee if they are able to influence or make decisions regarding his or her hiring, salary, performance evaluation, advancement opportunities or any other conditions of his or her employment. Please note that this goes beyond simply refraining from relationships with employees directly in the manager’s chain of command. If you find yourself in this situation, consult with HR for advice. Handling decisions like these appropriately promotes a professional work environment and complies with University policies." I guess Wayne Watson neither read that part of the manual nor had anyone tell him of its existence.

    Certainly, Cheri Sidney has benefited materially from her relationship with Wayne Watson. She was hired in 2009 for a new senior management position (Assistant Director of Human Resources) for which she had inadequate qualifications. Despite her lack of qualifications, the president subsequently promoted her to her current position, Associate Vice President of Enrollment Management, at her current salary of $110,004. Frankly, this hiring and promotion provides a textbook example of how cronyism works in public institutions.

    Monday, March 11, 2013

    No Patronage Here

    During his appearance on WTTW last Thursday, Wayne Watson claimed that he had eliminated patronage hiring at Chicago State. Of course, since he said it, it must be true. Part of the problem is that a patronage hire can be difficult to identify. What does one look like? It might be useful to offer a theoretical look at how a “crony” hiring might unfold, as none of us have ever seen one since that kind of thing does not occur at this school. Let us use the fictional position of Vice President of Enrollment Management for this exercise in hypothesizing.

    Say you’re the president of Patronage State University and you want to put one of your long-time loyalists into this very important position and pay her/him a nice salary. You could begin by having Human Resources, managed by one of your hand-picked and loyal administrators, write an opaque job description that fair leaves one breathless as it meanders through a number of jargon-filled, nonsensical desired qualities. Stuff the announcement with meaningless fluff like the ideal candidate will demonstrate “forward thinking,” be a “team player,” and exhibit a “thick skin; self-confidence and a positive attitude; consistent effective prospecting skills (looking for the Old Sourdough?)–knowing how to reach the decision maker; effective listening and questioning; sincerity, trust, believability and warmth.” Whew! Although the description must include minimum job requirements, they can be ignored if a suitable applicant pool can be created, one filled with candidates even more unqualified than the person you have already chosen for the position.

    Do not leave the application period open for too long. After all, thanks to the job description, any qualified candidates may take several weeks to understand what the job really entails. A few days should be sufficient. After this job description generates a small pool of a dozen or so candidates, most who could not qualify for a position at WalMart, your chosen candidate looks pretty good. Although s/he does not possess the minimum qualifications for the position, things are proceeding according to plan.

    The final piece is extremely important. Convene a search committee that includes at least two other loyal supporters. Perhaps the Director of Human Resources, and your current girlfriend if she happens to occupy an important position at Patronage State. Remember, the important thing is to get your candidate’s file through the committee and to your desk, where you can do anything you damn well please. After all, you are the president aren’t you?

    Finally you see it, the file you’ve been waiting for. You grab it with a rapidly beating heart and make arrangements with the Human Resources folks to do all the paper work. Soon it is done, your crony is in place and you can sit back and relax, knowing you have done a service to the entire university community, which is truly your only consideration. After all, you are a “true leader.” Your political masters will be pleased and marvel at your cleverness. Finally, you make a mental note to reward your Human Resources Director with a nice raise and buy your girlfriend some flowers.

    Thank goodness this kind of thing does not happen here at Chicago State.

    More on the New Financial Aid News

    Here's the chronological tally of the 129 students who received financial aid while failing to make satisfactory progress: 5 in 2007-08, 29 in 2008-09, 37 in 2009-10, 58 in 2010-11.

    Saturday, March 9, 2013

    We're In the News Again!

    The Chicago Tribune has a new story about Chicago State. This time, it's the denouement of the enrollment scandal of 2011. You remember that one, hundreds of ineligible students received financial aid and it was all the fault of previous administrations. When our glorious leader found out about it he stopped it immediately. This is simply another attempt to spin a completely unnecessary scandal that a competent administration would have avoided. According to the story, Chicago State will have to pay back nearly $312,000 to the Federal government, a figure the university negotiated down from $614,000. Most interesting, of the 129 ineligible students, 57 received financial aid in 2010-11, Wayne Watson's second year as president. That's 44 percent of the total. In Elnora Daniel's final year, the year Watson claimed the practice began, only 5 ineligible students received federal financial aid. Exactly how long should an administration get to identify and correct a problem of this magnitude? Here's the link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/education/ct-met-chicago-state-financial-aid-20130309,0,3135350.story?track=rss

    Friday, March 8, 2013

    "Just what happened here?" "Is this church?" "Again with the delay?"

    ...Well, I looked at my watch
    I looked at my wrist
    Punched myself in the face
    With my fist
    I took my potatoes
    Down to be mashed
    Then I made it over to
    That million dollar bash
    Ooh, baby, ooh-ee
    Ooh, baby, ooh-ee
    It's that million dollar bash...

    --Bob Dylan

    Ah yes, another go-around on the CSU Merry-go-round and where it stops, nobody knows...

    At any rate, after a week of thinking about it, the CSU Board of Trustees decided to play it cautiously once again, as one commentator said, a Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement policy. I was thinking of my fifth-grade nun, Sister Mary Reginette, telling us that a dilemma is like a mule tied evenly between two feeding troughs who dies from starvation because he can't decide which one to eat.

    So just what happened here? The Board voted NO to Dr Watson's sabbatical (uh-oh, shoulda taken that deal last week--$250,000 for a year off of "research" although Dr Watson seemed ultimately to need a family leave, but why quibble at these distinctions now). So that deal is off. The Board also said it found enough evidence to pursue an investigation into various allegations about Dr Watson's actions (was this in hiring? I can't remember) and they were giving him and his attorney some time to respond to these allegations--June? Unfortunately, this is going to drag out through April, May and into June. No resolution about this until the end of June of this year. The board also voted to delay election of new board chairperson. The next board meeting is in May.

    So just what happened here? What does this all mean? Not sure yet exactly. The church and community leaders and I guess Emil Jones seemed to take it as a vindication of Dr. Watson with all the righteous Jesus language and promises to be more involved in CSU. These same folk said more or less the same thing when Leon Finney brought them up to advocate on Emil's choice in 2009 at the Trustee meeting back then. They come, they go, they really are disconnected from the place. I am not their audience why should I listen to them?

    So just what happened here? There was no vote to retain or dismiss Dr Watson as president. He is still in the president's office. No police force is hustling him off campus.  But there is a big matzo ball hanging out there. Is he a lame duck? Death by a thousand paper cuts? What does the Trustees' investigation have on him? If he and his lawyer can't explain himself then will we be going through all this in June? Does the board plan on firing if he can't explain this item? Since there is no money on the table any longer can we hope for him to just resign and leave peacefully? (I know, I know LOL).

    Matzo Ball #2. How  is governance on this campus going to take place? Relations between the President and the Board, the President and the faculty, are now so abysmally low with many sides distrustful. Can these relations heal? Does anyone even want to try? Not a lot of love lost across campus constituencies. 

    Public Comment after the Board's announcement of all the above.  I stopped listening to it after the third or fourth minister got up and started talking Jesus to us and fire and brimstone about putting Wayne Watson on trial as if we all weren't sinners. Oy veh.  I wasn't their intended audience anyway so why bother listening.  What do these church people really know about CSU? And puh-leeze, Victor Henderson, VP Angela Henderson's husband, Dr Watson's "personal" attorney, spouting scripture in his public comments? This after a week of slimey tactics maligning two board members, the provost and the president of the faculty senate and a most aggressive campaign to portray his client as, well, a modern-day Jesus Christ. What is the definition of blasphemy these days?  Hypocrisy seemed to rule. Self-described "taxpayer" Hermene Hartman, publicist for the southside politicians, bitterly claimed her right to 20 or 30 minutes of fame at the microphone (or that's what it felt like anyway) when told her two minutes were up exclaiming on something or other about Dr Watson. Alderman someone or other was there, but no Jesse Jackson, some rep. I was really hoping to hear that guy. I left when godfather Emil Jones got up to bloviate about the challenge to his power over his personal fiefdom we call CSU. As a faculty member, I wasn't his audience anyway.

    The highpoint of this long afternoon as it often has been was our students. They are tuned in and turned on to us and most spoke more eloquently than all the bluster coming out of the southside minsters' mouths. This was where the sincerity was all day, their hearts were in it. I only wish it hadn't had to end in tears for a couple of them. At any rate, we'll see them and ourselves through the next few months of limbo.