This is the thirty-eighth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

And you all thought we had forgotten about the tale of Aaron Podolefsky, the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors, and the radio station part-owner who talks about trees. We haven’t. We were waiting for more information.

When this story broke Blue Girl wrote:

…I contacted Mr. Hassler at the station this morning and asked him if the transcript I cite above was accurate, and he confirmed that it was, but dismissed the comments as made “just in passing…”

The transcript of the original radio broadcast:

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

Several sources provided us with information and written communications of which took place in December. One sent us a recording of a portion of a radio broadcast which supposedly took place on December 10, 2009. We have not yet been able to confirm that this broadcast took place on that date. That date is very interesting.

…Greg Hassler: …But there’s another blogger out there that has taken some things that I have said, eh, out of context and has spun them around and at, attacked me on blogs, calling me a racist, a bigot, which I’m not. They’ve also called me anti-Semitic, which I’m not. I love all people of all religions, I do. I’m not anti-Semitic.

other voice: I would agree with that.

Greg Hassler: You know what I am?

other voice: What are you?

Greg Hassler: I’m a big Mules and Jennies basketball fan, [laughter] that’s what I am….

“…The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?…”

Yes, please do tell us about the context without spinning it.

The content in the audio [transcript], supposedly from December 10, 2009, is almost a verbatim quote of an e-mail sent by Greg Hassler in response to a reporter from the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle, described in an article published on November 13, 2009:

….Hassler returned The Chronicle’s request for comment via e-mail, saying:

“First of all let me say that I am not anti-Semitic, I love all people of all religions. I have never stated anything about anyone’s religion on or off the air. People have taken a comment out of context and have spun it for their purpose….”

Another source sent us copies of two written communications, the first written by University of Central Missouri Board of Governors President Richard Phillips on December 13, 2009:

December 13, 2009

Mr. Benoit Wesley

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesley:

I spent several days in Warrensburg last week continuing to visit with University and community individuals in an effort to resolve the issue we have discussed.  On Thursday morning, December 10, the radio personality made a public statement that should resolve this matter.  Another Board member has visited with Mr. Elliott and provided him with an update of activities on our campus. I know the two of you are to meet later this week and perhaps will have a chance to visit on this matter. I personally visited with each Board member and discussed this with them and we trust this issue is behind us and we can move forward.

I do hope all is well with you and I again want to state how much our University appreciates the partnership with you and your family.  As I have stated before you are a trusted and honored friend of our University.  On your next visit to our campus I would appreciate the opportunity to visit with you.

Respectfully

Richard Phillips

[….]

[emphasis added]

On December 23, 2009 Benoit Wesly replied:

[….]

Mr. Richard Phillips

President of the University of Central

Missouri Board of Governors

[….]

Maastricht, December 23, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Philips,

I confirm receipt of your letter by e-mail dated December 13. I met with Dr. Ed Elliott. Some time ago a radioman, financially supported by the university and tremendously influenced by the Athletic Director, made an anti-Semitic public statement trying to hurt Mr. and Mrs. Podolefsky in specific and all the Jews in the world in general. I did check with professionals whether the statement about the Christmas tree indeed was anti-Semitic statement. I did receive written confirmations, that there is no doubt that the statement is anti-Semitic and of a very bad nature.

I did ask the board in writing to investigate the matter and to take corrective steps, if necessary. You did not.

I did ask you to bring the matter as fast as possible in the open session of your board meeting. You did not.

You should have taken the ‘highway’ from the beginning. You did not.

You should have openly and publicly declared, that the statement of the radioman is not to be tolerated by the university. You did not.

You should have taken public corrective steps against the radioman and against the Athletic Sports Director in order to protect the university. You did not.

You should have taken the principles and values of the constitution of the USA for granted. You did not.

You should publicly have presented your apologies for the very slow and negative approach to solve these problems to your students, faculty members and Mr. and Mrs. Podolefsky. You did not.

By writing you several times, by talking to you over the phone, I indicated how bad the statement of the radioman really was. You had the chance to clear the sky immediately. You did not.

Years ago I donated a Bell Tower. Central wanted to name the tower after my family. I did not and it became the Maastricht Friendship Tower. I am still very proud of that. It became a landmark. The Bell Tower carries a text from the Old Testament to educate students:

‘Who is wise? He who learns from every person”

You may visit that tower once and you may learn as well.

In my capacity as being a proud Jew and being the leader of the Jewish community in my region; being chairman of the Maror Foundation established by our government to rebuilt Jewish life in The Netherlands and being the first honorable consul to the State of Israel ever appointed in The Netherlands, I want to face myself every morning in the mirror. One day you may do the same.

Best regards,

s/

Benoit Wesly

CC:

Members of the Board of Governors of the University of Central Missouri

Mr. Aaron Podolefsky, President of the University of Central Missouri

Dr. Ed Elliott

Mrs. Kathy Callahan, Ph.D., College of Applied Sciences and Technology Fashion and Apparal Merchandising University of Central Missouri

Dr. Joan Mansfield, Interim Dean of the Harmon College of Business Administration of the University of Central Missouri

Mrs. Penny Kugler, Director Center for Business Internships Harmon College of Business Administration of the University of central Missouri

Enclosure: E-mail Mr. Richard Philips December 16, 2009

[emphasis in original]

It’s not going to go away on its own. One of the first lessons of crisis management and damage control is don’t let the issue fester unaddressed for any length of time.

“…You did not…”

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

This is the thirty-seventh post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

Univerity of Central Missouri Associate Athletic Director Shawn Jones speaking at the 2009 NCAA National Convention – describing the University’s relationship with KOKO radio (D&H Media):  

The transcript:

….I am the, the play by play announcer for my institution. And that is my background, uh, before getting into athletics and eventually into athletics administration. But I still, uh, am the voice of my school. So, when I arrived and I looked at our broadcasting situation our, our institution was actually paying, uh, to have the, the football and men’s basketball games on the radio. We were paying a local station and then we had the chance to go out and sell some advertising and try to recoup the costs.

Well, certainly that was a win situation for that local, uh, radio station, but it really wasn’t for us. We were losing money, still getting good coverage. Well then a new station came into the market. And we had that wonderful thing called competition. So, I said, let’s flip this.  Now, what are you gonna pay us to carry our games, because both of them wanted to carry the games. What are you gonna pay us?

So, so, we developed a situation where now where we’re at, at this point, we receive a rights fee every year. An up front amount of money, uh, that we know we’re gonna get. Then, my self, my staff and the sales staff of the radio station, we sell the advertising together. And we split the advertising where the station gets seventy-five percent, we get twenty-five percent. If I sell to somebody on their list they get the money, the, the person who’s the sales person, so they don’t lose any commissions.

The, the point being is, is we have a situation where we are true partners. We work together, but, but the onus is on them to go out and make the money. Uh, as an institution what I want to do is just get our events on there. But they’re so happy to, to be making the money and to be the home of Central Missouri Athletics and, and we’re so happy to have this great partner. And so it works very well.

And now we have football, men’s and women’s basketball, baseball, some softball games on the air. They let us use their Internet site to carry some, some softball, some volleyball. We have coach’s shows. We have a weekly coach’s show. Uh, they give us advertising now. I mean they literally give it to us, uh, and a chance to promote our upcoming events because we’re truly partners.

Uh, we don’t treat them like, uh, just a member of the media. Um, you know, and, and we share all revenues, we, we trade spreadsheets often. So, it’s a very nice situation.

And, and when you make somebody a partner it’s important when we have that, uh, that gear day that you guys all know and the coaches get their gear in. I make sure that the sports director at the, at the local station, he’s got his new shirt and his new warm ups. And, and if we have a team that is fortunate enough to advance and, and maybe participate in an elite eight or, or win a regional and, and we’re buying rings for the team, you know, I, I go to my, my boss, the athletic director, and say, can, can we get a ring for the sports director, he travels, we’ve got this partnership? And, and those are the kind of things we do. So, we’ve really created a, a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of….

The May 2005 contract between the University of Central Missouri and D&H Media (KOKO radio).

“…So, so, we developed a situation where now where we’re at, at this point, we receive a rights fee every year. An up front amount of money, uh, that we know we’re gonna get…”

Except, we can’t quite figure out when anyone made those quarterly payments. Maybe they can’t, either.

“…Uh, we don’t treat them like, uh, just a member of the media. Um, you know, and, and we share all revenues, we, we trade spreadsheets often. So, it’s a very nice situation…”

Spreadsheets? There are spreadsheets?

…But they’re so happy to, to be making the money and to be the home of Central Missouri Athletics and, and we’re so happy to have this great partner. And so it works very well…

That’s interesting. A member of the Board of Governors wrote:

…Furthermore, had I been in a situation where others were engaged in this behavior, I would not have tolerated it. The comments by the radio personality were inappropriate, and I voiced my disapproval upon learning about the incident. However, this man has no connection to the board and his comments should have no reflection on the members of the Board of Governors…

Maybe the board feels that way because none of them actually signed the ten year contract with the radio station.

Interesting. There’s a ten year radio contract (a strong association with the university), the Associate Athletic Director describes a close relationship and a situation where the radio station sports director may get a ring (another strong association with the University), but when that individual makes a comment on the radio that connection to the institution disappears? How quaint.

Maybe they should ask for their warm ups back.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (Octobe
r 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

This is the thirty-fifth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

This…

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

…is not compatible with this:

Missouri Constitution

Article I

BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 7

Public aid for religious purposes–preferences and discriminations on religious grounds.

Section 7. That no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect or denomination of religion, or in aid of any priest, preacher, minister or teacher thereof, as such; and that no preference shall be given to nor any discrimination made against any church, sect or creed of religion, or any form of religious faith or worship.

Article IX

EDUCATION

Section 8

Prohibition of public aid for religious purposes and institutions.

Section 8. Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an appropriation or pay from any public fund whatever, anything in aid of any religious creed, church or sectarian purpose, or to help to support or sustain any private or public school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other institution of learning controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation of personal property or real estate ever be made by the state, or any county, city, town, or other municipal corporation, for any religious creed, church, or sectarian purpose whatever.

In case anyone was wondering, the University of Central Missouri is a state institution. Let’s spell it out – the view that anyone should put up a sectarian symbol on state property isn’t exactly endorsed by the Missouri Constitution.

Shortly after the remarks above were made in a radio broadcast, Benoit Wesly, a benefactor of the institution asked the President of the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors what they were going to do about it. The issue wasn’t addressed at the October 29, 2009 board meeting, as it was assured to be in the reply.

So, earlier this week, we asked if there was further correspondence on the issue among the same parties:

[….] date: Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 1:27 PM

subject:Request for information – RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

1. Any communications or documents sent to the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University by Benoit Wesly subsequent to October 25, 2009.

2. Any communications or documents in reply to those communications or documents (cited above) by the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University.

Thank you. [….]

We received the following reply yesterday afternoon:

[….] date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:48 PM

subject: Re: Request for information – RSMo 610

[….]

Pursuant to  your request of December 1, 2009, in which you request 1) Any communications or documents sent to the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University by Benoit Wesly subsequent to October 25, 2009; and 2) Any communications or documents in reply to those communications or documents (cited above) by the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University, attached are two .pdf files containing these communications.

Sincerely,

[….]

A letter was sent by Edward Baker, a member of the board, to Benoit Wesly on November 9, 2009:

[….]

November 9, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesly,

I know you only through your history of generosity to the University of Central Missouri and your moving graduation address in May of 2008. Your contributions to the university have been greatly appreciated.

Being on the Board of Governors, I have been made aware of your concerns regarding our decision not to extend the contract of President Podolefsky and the allegations that anti-Semitism played some role in this determination. I have served on the board since April of 2007 and have never heard any board member or anyone else for that matter, refer to President Podolefsky’s religious beliefs in any context, derogatory or otherwise. It has simply not been a topic.

As for the implication that members of the board harbor prejudices of this nature that would influence their actions, I am deeply offended. My wife and I are partners in a hotel company whose principal owners are Jewish. We have worked closely with these people for 24 years and consider them family. To have rumors and innuendo suggest that we would embrace the bias suggested on the internet saddens and appalls us.

Furthermore, had I been in a situation where others were engaged in this behavior, I would not have tolerated it. The comments by the radio personality were inappropriate, and I voiced my disapproval upon learning about the incident. However, this man has no connection to the board and his comments should have no reflection on the members of the Board of Governors.

It is unfortunate that this accusation has been inserted into the contract renewal decision. Negative attention is drawn to the university once again, impeding a smooth transition for both UCM and President Podolefsky. The board was very careful to take every possible measure to allow Podolefsky to pursue other career opportunities. We all wish him the best in his future endeavors.

I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this further with you, should you still have concerns.

Sincerely,

s/

Edward L. Baker

We sympathize with being victimized by impertinent people on the Internets pointing out uncomfortable things. Oh, wait.

“…The comments by the radio personality were inappropriate, and I voiced my disapproval upon learning about the incident. However, this man has no connection to the board…” Really?

Benoit Wesly replied on November 16, 2009:

[….]

Maastricht, November 16, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Baker,

I did receive your letter dated November 9, 2009 for which I thank you.

I am impressed that you send me this letter in your capacity being a member of the Board of Governors of that fascinating ins
titute. I am very grateful that you took the time to send me this letter and it makes it clear to me, that there seems to be some confusion.

In my letter of October 21, addressed to Mr. Richard Philips, President of the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors, I requested information regarding a text of a radio interview between Mr. Greg Hassler and Mrs. Marion Woods with the possibility of a so-called anti-Semitic undertone. I received on October 23 an e-mail letter from Mr. Richard Philips, which was followed up by my letter of October 26, 2009. Mr. Richard Philips promised to bring the issue to the attention of your board meeting on October 29 and he will get back to me any action taken. So far I have not heard from the President of your board.

To make it clear; I am not interfering in the decision not to extend Mr. Aaron Podolefsky’s contract. I respect your opinion and I do not want to deal with this matter, as I feel to be an outsider. Mr. Greg Hassler, who works for a company that has a close business relationship with the university, made a statement as earlier indicated. Secondly he indicated in a later stadium that he is not familiar with the word anti-Semitic. I do not believe that Central should co-operate with such a person, but I will wait till I hear the outcome of the investigation I requested.

Before the Second World War 6 million Jews had friends with all types of religions. After the war those friends were still living, so you do not need to be offended at all.

Once again thank you very much for your letter and I hope to meet you in case I will return on campus.

Awaiting the reply of the President of the Board of Governors I remain with my best personal regards,

s/

Benoit Wesly

[….]

On November 23, 2009, Benoit Wesly wrote the President of the Board of Governors, in part:

[….]

Maastricht, November 25, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Philips,

I would like to draw your attention to the following.

[….]

I am deeply shocked and disappointed with the behavior of the Board of Governors. I wrote you twice a letter dated October 22 and October 26, 2009. In your letter dated October 23, 2009 you promised me to contact me with a response. So far I have not heard from you since then. [….]

Sincerely yours,

s/

Benoit Wesly

On December 2, 2009 the President of the Board of Governors replied:

December 2, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesley:

Thank you for the opportunity to visit with you over the telephone the morning of December 1, and again on December 2, 2009. I am extremely pleased to talk with you as we continue to resolve some of the concerns you have and that the twenty five year relationship between you and our University will continue.

I was saddened in learning of the events that have taken place with your family and have a deeper sense of appreciation and understanding for your concerns.

As I stated to you during our visits, I have spent a great deal of time talking with a variety of folks to examine these issues. I am sorry if you felt I was neglecting you but I wanted to continue to review these matters before reporting to you and I had been told you were out of your home country and did not want to interrupt you on your trip. I felt it would be better to visit with you after you had returned home. During our recent telephone conversations I believe you understand I was not neglecting you, I would not neglect anyone.

One of the recent findings during previous visits with folks is that the Star of David that appeared on a faculty member’s door and referenced, in a blog, was done so by a Jewish faculty member. You also had determine that was the case and we both agreed it was most inappropriate.

After our morning conversation on December 1, I rearranged my schedule and again drove to Warrensburg to continue my visits with people who are in leadership positions in the community and on campus. I also visited with the radio personality we spoke about and informed him of your concern. I am convinced this person did not mean to hurt anyone. What is clear to me in this case is that, words that may be spoken by an individual in what they may think is an innocent manor may be hurtful to others and raising the level of awareness in these matters for all concerned can be a positive outcome of this issue.

I will continue to speak with the appropriate individuals in this matter and will get back to you by December 15, 2009.

You remain a trusted and honored friend of our University and I greatly appreciate your time in talking about these issues. It is clear to me we share many of the same values and beliefs in cultivating a positive learning environment for our University that is based on mutual respect for all people. Please be assured that our Board has tremendous respect and gratitude for the partnership between you and our University.

Sincerely;

Richard Phillips

[document as provided by the University, unsigned and on plain paper]

“…most inappropriate…” Did anybody bother to talk with that individual? Just asking.

“…After our morning conversation on December 1, I rearranged my schedule and again drove to Warrensburg to continue my visits with people who are in leadership positions in the community and on campus…” And just who would that be? Just asking.

We wonder if they get it. We understand that the board of Governors may address the radio broadcast at their December 11, 2009 meeting. We plan on being there.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

This is the twenty-eighth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

From a Gentleman’s Agreement (1947):

“….But I’ve come to see lots of nice people who hate it and deplore it and protest their own innocence, then help it along and wonder why it grows. People who would never beat up a Jew. People who think anti-Semitism is far away in some dark place with low-class morons. That’s the biggest discovery I’ve made. The good people. The nice people….”

The Kansas City Jewish Chronicle came to campus this week to cover the story:

Was anti-Semitism factor in college prexy’s exit?

Written by Rick Hellman, Editor  

Friday, 13 November 2009 12:00

“….It’s not appropriate for me to speculate about Mr. Hassler’s motives,” said Podolefsky. “But I have been asked repeatedly what he has against me and Ronnie, because this has been going on for two and a half years.”

Hassler returned The Chronicle’s request for comment via e-mail, saying:

“First of all let me say that I am not anti-Semitic, I love all people of all religions. I have never stated anything about anyone’s religion on or off the air. People have taken a comment out of context and have spun it for their purpose. All I have done is question the leadership and decisions that were made by the President of UCM … It is unfortunate that people that have never met or talked to me can draw incorrect conclusions about the type of person I am….”

The transcript from October 14th:

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

Richard Phillips, the President of the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors was also quoted in the Chronicle story:

….Phillips responded to The Chronicle’s e-mailed inquiry about the matter with this:

“As you should know, discussions with regard to personnel matters of the University are not appropriate for public disclosure. Contrary to the tone and implications of your questions, the University does not discriminate as to anyone on any basis.

“I was appointed to the UCM Board of Governors in February of 2005, a few weeks after Aaron was selected to serve as president. Not once has Aaron’s religion been mentioned in any Board discussion….”

That’s interesting. There’s only one mention in the article about not tolerating people who do.

On October 23, 2009 Richard Phillips wrote in reply to Benoit Wesly:

…We have a Board meeting next week on October 29 and I will bring this matter to the attention of our Board and will get back to you on any action taken.  Please be assured our University will not tolerate discriminatory acts against any group and I will personally look into this matter…

As Blue Girl wrote:

…I attended the Board of Governors meeting. I recorded the Board of Governors meeting. I was there nearly an hour before it started. There was no discussion of the “matter,” the subject was not broached, let alone any action taken. I work for an attorney, so I utilized the resource and asked the obvious question: Is the matter of Hassler’s comments something that they could discuss in closed session? I got a one word response: “No.” Such discussion or action would not fall under the exclusionary provisions of the Missouri Sunshine Law.

The public silence is deafening.

So much for action.

“….But I’ve come to see lots of nice people who hate it and deplore it and protest their own innocence, then help it along and wonder why it grows…”

Our previous coverage:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

This is the fourteenth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

Prompted to delve deeper into the University of Central Missouri’s contractual relationship with a local radio station by the on air comments of one of the radio station’s principals, we’ve had quite an interesting journey.

Still, more than two weeks after those remarks were broadcast, the University remains silent.

We asked for a copy of the contract and the University provided it on October 16, 2009:

Paragraphs 12 and 13 from the 2005 contract [pdf] between the University and D&H media (KOKO radio) for the exclusive rights to broadcast university athletic events.

…12. KOKO/KWKJ shall pay CMSU a broadcast right fee of Fifteen Thousand and/no Dollars ($15,000.00) on a quarterly basis. Three Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty and no/100 Dollars ($3,750.00) shall be due to CMSU from KOKO/KWKJ on September 30th, December 31st, March 31st, and June 30th of each contract year. KOKO/KWKJ also will bill CMSU monthly for any phone charges incurred during the transmission of any games broadcast as outlined in No. 1 of this agreement.

13. KOKO/KWKJ will sell advertising time and will provide twenty-five per cent (25%) of the gross advertising revenue to CMSU. KOKO/KWKJ and CMSU shall review and reconcile the gross advertising sales information in a meeting prior to June 15th of each contract year. At that time, KOKO/KWKJ and CMSU shall divide the gross advertising revenue, with seventy-five  per cent (75%) of gross advertising revenue of CMSU sports radio broadcasts to KOKO/KWKJ and twenty-five per cent (25%) to CMSU…

We’re still trying to get some answers about the amounts and dates of payments that are required by the contract.

And we’re still curious about the University’s response that Board of Governors’ authorization to sign the multi-year contract was not required.

On Thursday afternoon we received a reply to our second Missouri Sunshine Law request concerning the Paragraph 12 and Paragraph 13 revenues in the contract:

[….]Date: Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Subject: Re: Request for information – RSMo-610

[….]In response to your request of October 25, 2009, for “communications concerning the scheduling, agenda, and actions of any meetings concerning compliance with paragraph 13 of the contract…,” no such written communications exist.  In response to your request for the “dates and amounts of those payments since the inception of the [KOKO/UCM] contract,” attached is a spreadsheet listing the dates payments were made and the amounts received.

 

[….]

>>>[….]10/25/2009 8:22 AM >>>

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

Concerning the following payments as required of the May 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between D&H Media and the University.

1. Under Paragraph 13 of the contract, any record of payments and communications about those payments, including, but not limited to, the specific dates and amounts for each payment made in compliance with paragraph 13.

On October 19, 2009 I specifically requested:

“…Under Paragraph 13 it is stated that the parties to the contract are required to meet annually to “review and reconcile the gross

advertising sales information.” Is it the assertion of the University, as indicated by the response to my original request, that no further

communications have taken place concerning compliance with Paragraph 13?

If the meetings(s) took place, this is a request for communication(s) concerning the scheduling, agenda, and actions of any meetings concerning compliance with paragraph 13 of the contract….”

2. Under Paragraph 12 of the contract, any record of the quarterly payments and communications about those payments, including, but not limited to, the specific dates and amounts for each payment made in compliance with paragraph 12.

On October 19, 2009 I specifically requested:

“…Under Paragraph 12 KOKO is required to make quarterly payments to the University. This is a request for the dates and amounts of those payments since the inception of the contract.”

Thank you….

[emphasis added]

Note that our request “…1. Under Paragraph 13 of the contract, any record of payments and communications about those payments, including, but not limited to, the specific dates and amounts for each payment made in compliance with paragraph 13….” was ignored.

The following information was provided in a spreadsheet attached in response to our inquiry for records concerning payments and dates of those payments in compliance with Paragraph 12 of the contract:

KOKO Giving History 05 to present (file name)

700022652

KOKO KWKJ

2005 09/03/04 3,750.00 2005M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK Check

2005 11/12/04 2,750.00 2005M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK Check

2005 12/13/04 750.00 2005M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK Check

2005 04/06/05 3,750.00 2005M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 3439

2006 10/05/05 1,601.00 2006M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 3827

2006 12/30/05 3,750.00 2006M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 4021

2006 03/28/06 3,750.00 2006M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 4222

2007 10/05/06 1,789.00 2007M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 4623

2007 12/14/06 3,526.96 2007M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 4773

2007 03/28/07 3,750.00 2007M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 5002

2008 11/09/07 291.51 2008M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 5483

2008 01/14/08 3,250.00 2008M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 5638

2008 04/17/08 3,536.00 2007M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 5862

2009 11/21/08 2,062.00 2009M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 6382

2009 04/07/09 3,750.00 2009M Mule Train Project Underwriting N CK 6693

The quarterly payments in compliance with Paragraph 12 of the contract [pdf] should each be in the amount of $3,750.00 and should be on or before September 30th, December 31st, March 31st, and June 30th. In that context this spreadsheet, provided by the University makes no sense.

We have no idea what “Mule Train Project Underwriting” is.

We don’t know which fund the reported payments were deposited in. We didn’t ask. We might do so at some point in the future.

Yesterday afternoon, in yet another attempt to get the dates and individual amounts of the annual 25% gross advertising revenue payments due the University as required by Paragraph 13 of the contract, we sent the following Missouri Sunshine Law request:

….date: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:08 PM

subject: Request for information – RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

1. In reference to the 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between  D&H Media and the University and to the document provided to me by the University on October 23, 2009 in response to my October 19, 2009 request titled “KOKO Revenues”, in the category “Compensation Remitted to UCM”, in the subcategory titled, “UCM Advertisin
g Sales Collections” for the amount of $29,000 as indicated for 2009.

a. Provide a copy of all documents, including but not limited to – copies of all checks, documents showing all individual payment amounts, and documents showing the date received for all individual payments.

2. In reference to the 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between  D&H Media and the University and to the document provided to me by the University on October 23, 2009 in response to my October 19, 2009 request titled “KOKO Revenues”, in the category “Compensation Remitted to UCM”, in the subcategory titled, “UCM Advertising Sales Collections” for the amount of $29,380 as indicated for 2008.

a. Provide a copy of all documents, including but not limited to – copies of all checks, documents showing all individual payment amounts, and documents showing the date received for all individual payments.

3. In reference to the 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between  D&H Media and the University and to the document provided to me by the University on October 23, 2009 in response to my October 19, 2009 request titled “KOKO Revenues”, in the category “Compensation Remitted to UCM”, in the subcategory titled, “UCM Advertising Sales Collections” for the amount of $27,100 as indicated for 2007.

a. Provide a copy of all documents, including but not limited to – copies of all checks, documents showing all individual payment amounts, and documents showing the date received for all individual payments.

4. In reference to the 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between  D&H Media and the University and to the document provided to me by the University on October 23, 2009 in response to my October 19, 2009 request titled “KOKO Revenues”, in the category “Compensation Remitted to UCM”, in the subcategory titled, “UCM Advertising Sales Collections” for the amount of $24,300 as indicated for 2006.

a. Provide a copy of all documents, including but not limited to – copies of all checks, documents showing all individual payment amounts, and documents showing the date received for all individual payments.

5. In reference to the 2005 contract to broadcast intercollegiate athletic events between  D&H Media and the University and to the document provided to me by the University on October 23, 2009 in response to my October 19, 2009 request titled “KOKO Revenues”, in the category “Compensation Remitted to UCM”, in the subcategory titled, “UCM Advertising Sales Collections” for the amount of $23,100 as indicated for 2005.

a. Provide a copy of all documents, including but not limited to – copies of all checks, documents showing all individual payment amounts, and documents showing the date received for all individual payments.

Please provide an estimate of the cost of the charges for providing this information under RSMo 610.026.

Thank you…

Maybe the third time is the charm.

Our previous coverage:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

This is the eleventh post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG

A gift from Benoit Wesly and his family from Maastricht, The Netherlands, the 80-foot-tall Maastricht Friendship Tower [on the campus of the University of Central Missouri] has been a campus landmark since 1998. It was erected as a symbol of international understanding. Inscribed on each side of the tower is a quote from the Jewish Mishnah, “Who is wise? He who learns from every man,” in English, Hebrew, Dutch, and Maastricht Dutch.

Given the recent rhetoric on the local radio station we were curious about the continuing silence from the University. We filled a Missouri Sunshine Law request on Sunday, effective Monday morning:

…date: Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:40 AM

Subject:Request for information under RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

1. Any communications or documents sent to the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University concerning statements made on the radio by Greg Hassler.

2. Any communications or documents in reply to those communications or documents (cited above) by the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University.

Thank you…

We received the following reply today:

date: Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM

Subject: Re: Request for information under RSMo 610

….Pursuant to your request of October 25, 2009, requesting “1) Any communications or documents sent to the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University concerning statements made on the radio by Greg Hassler; and 2) Any communications or documents in reply to those communications or documents (cited above) by the President of the Board of Governors, the members of the Board of Governors, or the President of the University,” I am attaching communications and documents that we have identified thus far.  We are continuing to search our records; if additional communications or documents are identified concerning statements made on the radio by Greg Hassler, they will be sent to you in a supplemental e-mail…

We were thinking we would receive copies of communications we’d heard about on the Campus Climate Survey from the President’s Commission on the Status of Women.

We didn’t. We sure did get something else, though.

We got a copy of a letter sent by Benoit Wesly to the President of the Board of Governors:

…Maastricht, October 22, 2009

…Dear Mr. President,

I take this opportunity to address you from Maastricht, The Netherlands, with the following.

By mail I received several times the text of a radio interview between Mr. Greg Hassler and Mrs. Marion Woods. I read the text carefully and I came to my personal conclusion, that this text has a anti-Semitic undertone. Secondly I received also by e-mail a protest sign on the door of a faculty office at the University of Central Missouri, showing a star of David with the word ‘Jude’, symbolizing the holocaust. This protest came from a Jewish faculty member.

I did understand that the radio station has an intensive business relation with the University of Central Missouri, an institution which had and still has my full support. It was a complete shock and still is, that a radio station makes such a horrible statement. I also found out, that the Christmas tree already disappeared during the time Mr. and Mrs. Patton did stay at Selmo Park.

I have the following questions:

Did you or the President of the university started an investigation to clarify the intentions of Mr. Greg Hassler and did you suspend the relationship with this radio station during the investigation. In case the answer is yes, when do you expect the outcome of this investigation and if no, why you have not started this investigation.

The fine reputation of your university is badly damaged by this radio interview. I am awaiting a positive answer, so I do not need to reconsider my relationship which was established 25 years ago with the University of Central Missouri.

Many thanks for your attention in this matter.

Best regards,

s/

Benoit Wesly

We also received a copy of the communication sent in response to Mr. Wesly by the President of the Board of Governors:

October 23, 2009

Mr. Benoit Wesly…

Dear Mr. Wesly:

Thank you for you letter of October 22, 2009 addressing issues at the University of Central Missouri.  You are a trusted and honored friend of the University and I appreciate your interest.

You are several thousand miles away from Warrensburg while I am fifty miles away yet you have information I do not have.  I do not have the text of the radio interview you speak of nor do I have official information on a protest sign.  The administration of our University has not shared that information with me or any other Board Member that I am aware of.  After receiving your message on October 22, I contacted our security staff to see if a complaint had been filed on any activity symbolizing the holocaust.  Nothing has been filed.

I have visited with our General Council on contract issues with the local radio station as this person brought to my attention requests for information on the contract between the University and the radio station.  Again, the University administration has not sent or communicated to the Board any information on this matter.

I am sharing a copy of a note I sent to our Board regarding a conversation I had with a media person in the Kansas City area last week that is self explanatory.  Make no mistake about it, our Board will not nor will our University tolerate any discriminatory act against any group.

I remain curious in trying to understand how and why a person or persons would share this with you when our Board has received nothing from our administration on this matter and why your communication copied the Governor of the State of Missouri when nothing has been sent to our Board.

We have a Board meeting next week on October 29 and I will bring this matter to the attention of our Board and will get back to you on any action taken.  Please be assured our University will not tolerate discriminatory acts against any group and I will personally look into this matter.

Thanks again for your interest in our University and for taking the time to share you’re thoughts with me.

Respectfully

Richard Phillips…

cc: Dr. Aaron Podolefsky, President

UCM Board of Governors

Governor State of Missouri, the Honorable Jay Nixon

Monica Huffman

Henry Setser

I attended the Board of Governors meeting. I recorded the Board of Governors meeting. I was there nearly an hour before it started. There was no discussion of the “matter,” the subject was not broached, let alone any action taken. I work for an attorney, so I utilized the resource and asked the obvious question: Is the matter of Hassler’s comments something that they could discuss in closed session? I got a one word response: “No.” Such discussion or action would not fall under the exclusionary provisions of the Missouri
Sunshine Law.

The public silence is deafening.

Our previous coverage:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

What started with outrage and disgust over one bigoted comment by a wanna-be shock jock who is really nothing more than a minnow in the great lakes is turning out to be far more than simple bigotry. It’s starting to look like a festering cesspool of cronyism and good-ole-boy back scratching of the first order.

Earlier today:

It wasn’t just about a tree

Our previous coverage:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

After hearing the audio of the mid October 2009 remarks made on KOKO radio by Greg Hassler we decided to do some research.

From 2006, then Central Missouri State University, now the University of Central Missouri:

…Greg Hassler is in his sixth season as the sideline reporter and pre and post-game host for Mules broadcasts. He is the Sports Director of flagship stations 1450 KOKO and 98.5 MIKE-FM….

The Associated Press ran a story on a controversial lawsuit and attorney Ronnie Podolefsky,  the spouse of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky, in January 2008, citing Greg Hassler’s criticism of Ronnie Podolefsky’s participation in the case.

From the Missouri Secretary of State:

Business Name History

Name    Name Type

THE WARRENSBURG COUNTRY CLUB   Legal Non-Profit Corporation – Domestic – Information

Charter Number:         N00001166

Status:         Dissolved

Entity Creation Date:   5/22/1957

State of Business.:     MO

Expiration Date:        Perpetual

Last Annual Report Filed Date:

Last Annual Report Filed:       0

Registered Agent

Agent Name:     GREGORY H. HASSLER

Current Name:  THE WARRENSBURG COUNTRY CLUB

Date   Document

5/22/1957       Creation Filing

12/31/1999      With/Term/Dissolve

Again, from the Missouri Secretary of State, paperwork for a limited liability company was  filed on May 22, 2000:

Business Name History

Name    Name Type

D & H MEDIA, L.L.C.  

LegalLimited Liability Company – Domestic – Information

Charter Number:         LC0039125

Status:         Active

Entity Creation Date:   5/22/2000

State of Business.:     MO

Expiration Date:        12/31/2050

Registered Agent

Agent Name:     VANCE DELOZIER

Organizers

Name:   GREGORY HASSLER

Greg Hassler is listed as one of four initial members of the company. [pdf][link changed – click on the icon to view the document]

FMS

By BroadCasting & Cable Staff — Broadcasting & Cable, 7/9/2000 6:00:00 PM MT

Construction permit for new FM in Warsaw, Mo.

Price: $47,500

Buyer: D & H Media LLC, Warrensburg, Mo. (Vance DeLozier, member/75%

owner; Greg Hassler, member/25% owner); no other broadcast interests

Seller: John B. Mahaffey, Springfield, Mo.; owns/has interest in four

AMs and 11 FMs

Facilities: 98.5 MHz, 3 kW, ant. 261 ft.

Changing Hands

Compiled by Elizabeth A. Rathbun — Broadcasting & Cable, 9/2/2001 6:00:00 PM MT

KOKO Warrensburg, Mo.

Price: $435,000

Buyer: D&H Media LLC, Warrensburg (Loree and Vance Delozier, each 37%

members); no other broadcast interests

Seller: Bick Broadcasting Co., Hannibal, Mo. (James E. Janes,

president); no other broadcast interests. Note: Bick acquired station

for $310,000 in 1999

Facilities: 1450 kHz, 1 kW

Format: AC, news/talk

On October 15, 2009 we requested the contract between the radio station and the university:

date: Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 10:30 AM

Subject:  Missouri Sunshine Law Request for KOKO radio contract information

…This is a request under RSMo 610 for the following information:

1. The multi-year contract between KOKO radio and the University of Central Missouri for coverage of intercollegiate athletics activities signed in 2005 (or possibly 2004).

2. Any and all addenda for said contract.

3. Any and all communications between KOKO radio and the university concerning compliance with that contract.

We received the following reply:

date: Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:46 AM

Subject:        Re: Missouri Sunshine Law Request for KOKO radio contract information

…Pursuant to your request, I am attaching a copy of the contract between UCM and D&H Media, LLC.  There is no addenda to the contract, nor am I aware of any other communications concerning the

contract…

May 2005 contract for broadcasting intercollegiate sports events between the University of Central Missouri (then Central Missouri State University) and D&H Media (KOKO Radio) [pdf]

Given the rumors we heard about the radio contract, we thought it might be a good idea to confirm or debunk them as warranted. So, in 2005, a few weeks before Aaron Podolefsky became president KOKO and the UCM athletic director signed a contract with a ten year term granting exclusive rights to broadcast UCM sporting events. The contract terms appear favorable to KOKO. You can read ’em yourself.

We’ve made Sunshine Law requests asking who authorized the athletic director to sign the muti-year contract.

Sent: Fri, October 16, 2009 4:12:14 PM

Subject: Information Request

This is a request under RSMo 610 for any record of an authorization by the previous President of the University delegating authority to sign a multi-year contract to the Director of the Athletic Department.

Thank You…

The University’s response:

Sent: Tue, October 20, 2009 11:00:40 AM

Subject: Re: Information Request

…In response to your request of October 16, 2009, our files do not reveal any written authorization by the former university president.

Sincerely…

And we asked another question:

date        Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 1:46 PM

subject Re: Information Request

How about the Board of Governors? Did they authorize a multi-year contract with the radio station?

Thank you for your assistance in filling this request under RSM0 610.

Thank You…

We know that the previous president did not authorize it – now we are waiting for our request on whether the BoG authorized the contract. What we know for certain is that, per University bylaws, the Athletic Director does not have the authority to make such a contract without someone higher up the food chain authorizing him to do so. We will ask what the policy was in 2005, but currently, only the Board of Governors can authorize a multi-year contract.

After reading the contract, we followed up with a request on October 19, 2009:

date: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:20 AM

subject: Re: Missouri Sunshine Law Request for KOKO radio contract information

Thank you for your response.

In reading the contract I note:

1) Under Paragraph 13 it is stated that the parties to the contract are required to meet annually to “review and reconcile the gross advertising sales information.” Is it the assertion of the University, as indicated by the response to my original request, that no further communications have taken place concerning compliance with Paragraph 13?

If the meetings(s) took place, this is a request for communication(s) concerning the scheduling, agenda, and actions of any meetings concerning compliance with paragraph 13 of the contract.

2) Under Paragraph 12 KOKO is required to make quarterly payments to the University. This is a request for the dates and amounts of those payments since the inception of the contract.

Thank you…

We received the following a few hours later:

date: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:38 AM

Subject: Re: Missouri Sunshine Law Request for KOKO radio contract information

…I am currently looking into your specific requests as outlined below and will be back in touch with you.

Sincerely…

Yesterday we received the following in response to our request:

date: Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:55 PM

Subject: Re: Missouri Sunshine Law Request for KOKO radio contract information

…In accordance with Section 610.024 1.(1) “. . . Research time required for fulfilling records requests may be charged at the actual cost of research time. Based on the scope of the request, the public governmental body shall produce the copies using employees of the body that result in the lowest amount of charges for search, research, and duplication time. Prior to producing copies of the requested records, the person requesting the records may request the public governmental body to provide an estimate of the cost to the person requesting the records.

. .”

The cost of compiling a report that responds to your request is $87.75.  The report will be made available to you once payment is remitted.

Sincerely…

Question. When we asked for the information on October 15th we were told on October 16th that the information didn’t exist. After reading the contract, we asked again on October 19th and were told on today yesterday that the information did exist. We guess we could say we’re making progress.

We’ll ante up and get the information. And we’ll post it here. All for transparency in the public interest.

We received the following in response to our Sunshine Law request about any Board of Governors authorization to sign the contract:

Sent: Tue, October 20, 2009 3:14:24 PM

Subject: Re: Information Request

…Please submit your request relevant to the Missouri Sunshine Law.  Thank you….

>>>XXXXXXX 10/20/2009 1:46 PM >>> [original request as appended in this response e-mail]

How about the Board of Governors? Did they authorize a multi-year contract with the radio station?

Thank you for your assistance in filling this request under RSM0 610.

Thank You…

[emphasis in original request added]

Well, that’s interesting, don’t you think? We asked for the information and we cited RSMo 610. Do you think the authorization came after the fact? Is there anything in writing? We’ll ask that way, too.

If it wasn’t written down, it doesn’t exist.

Selmo Park, the President’s Residence at UCM

“The thing that really upsets me, that kinda got me going originally was, for years, there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?  . . . drive by?  He stopped that.  I mean, I think every religion should be able to celebrate – uh – in their own way, but, I mean this is Warrensburg, Missouri!  This is America!”

On October 14, KOKO radio host and minority-share station owner Greg Hassler could not help himself, he had to crow a little bit about getting Aaron Podolefsky, the University President fired for committing the unforgivable sin of putting academics over athletics at an institution of higher learning. At least that’s an unforgivable sin in the eyes of a failed golf pro turned small-market sports jock.

Hassler was indignant about, of all things, a Christmas tree.

But not just any Christmas tree – he was indignant about a non existent Christmas tree!

The tree Mr. Hassler was so seemingly verklempt about was a live cedar that was on the grounds of Selmo Park, but had not had lights on it since 1999, a good five years before Aaron Podolefsky was hired as University President.

But that isn’t all…the tree was removed from the property because it had gotten so large that it obstructed the view of the residence and there was concern that the roots would cause damage to some of the infrastructure installed on the property…and we understand that it was removed around 2000. The Podolefskys did not take up residence in Selmo Park until July 2005. Quite a trick that he stopped the lighting and drive by considering the tree was gone for years before he got there, don’t you think?

We wonder if Mr. Hassler would like to come clean about his biases, or try again? We’ll be waiting…

This is a sad story about the perceived role of women in a small town. On the part of some. (Somehow I thought this would be a slow news week. It looks like I picked the wrong week to…)

Warrensburg, Missouri, population approximately 16,000, is the county seat and home of the University of Central Missouri. Whiteman Air Force Base, the primary base for the B-2 bomber, is 9 miles to the east of Warrensburg.

Aaron Podolefsky became the president of the University of Central Missouri in July 2005.

…President Podolefsky is married to Ronnie Lynn (Shapiro) Podolefsky, a well-respected attorney specializing in civil rights, employment law, and mediation…

Excellent – a smart, accomplished professional.

December 7, 2007

Former players sue Warrensburg district, coach for alleged abuse

By ALAN SCHER ZAGIER

Associated Press Writer

Six female students at Warrensburg High School and their parents have sued the school district and a girl’s basketball and softball coach over what they call a pattern of verbal abuse and sexual misconduct.

The students, identified individually only as Jane Doe in the lawsuit, say school officials dismissed their complaints and declined to investigate for more than one year – in part because of possible negative public reaction to another well-known coach getting in trouble. The school fired its football coach in 2006.

“They have ignored the complaints. They have not protected the kids,” said Warrensburg attorney Ronnie Podolefsky, who represents the students and their families. “It’s beyond belief the way they have not taken action…”

[emphasis added]

Then, this week, another part of the local story gets carried by media across the nation – except for the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal. Even the student newspaper (a weekly) at the University of Central Missouri carried this:

Abuse claims divide small town

By Alan Scher Zagier

Associated Press Writer / January 18, 2008

…The teens have been called liars, bullies and even white trash (three of the players who have sued the white coach also are white, three are black). They’ve been insulted to their faces and on Facebook and MySpace pages. Their parents’ jobs have been threatened. And the involvement of their attorney, who also happens to be the wife of the University of Central Missouri’s president, has sparked a backlash that includes efforts to oust the college leader…

…The police officer whose daughter is part of the suit said that an opposing parent tried to get him fired. Another plaintiff’s parent, who runs a store in town, said some customers have stopped shopping at his place…

…By the estimation of Hough’s supporters, the college president’s wife is out of line. They want her to stop representing the players, and if that means firing her husband — Aaron Podolefsky — then so be it…

“…It’s nothing new when the disgruntled resort to the old stereotype of an uppity wife who doesn’t know her place,” Ronnie Podolefsky said. “My career is independent and separate from the university…”

[emphasis added]

“…They want her to stop representing the players, and if that means firing her husband… then so be it…” As if this type of intimidation would accomplish anything. Those individuals appear painfully ignorant of the legal system and the obligations of legal counsel.

Well, Ronnie Podolefsky is an attorney. She’s doing her job.

If it’s not even covered in the local paper, how can the town “be divided”? You think every one of the approximately 16,000 individuals in the ‘burg have taken a “side” on this, let alone have any awareness of what has transpired? The grapevine can only do so much…  

Let’s take a look at some other cases from the past:

Protecting the Rights at Home of Those Who Defend Freedom Abroad

…Mark is pursuing a complaint against his former employer because under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), a federal law, an employer can not discriminate if an employee is called into military active duty. Additionally, the state of Iowa has a Military Code that imposes criminal charges if an employer fires or denies leave to a Reservist who is ordered to temporary active duty.

His attorney, Ronnie Podolefsky, is outraged: “The men and women being activated and deployed to Iraq deserve the assurance that the jobs this takes them from will be there when they come home. It’s not only contemptible to fire someone called up to serve our nation, it’s against the law.”

[emphasis added]

That’s a noble enterprise, don’t you think?

Here’s another one:

Case Archive Subject: Greer v. Beck’s Pub & Grille et al., No. C03-2070 LRR (N.D. Iowa, Jan. 4, 2006)

Legal Momentum Role: Represented plaintiff.

Subject Matter: Right of victim to protection from employer retaliation for having obtained a restraining order against abusive boyfriend/coworker.

Legal Momentum filed this case on behalf of Antonette Greer, a woman who was fired from her job as a dishwasher the day after she obtained a protective order against her abusive co-worker/boyfriend.

This case resulted in the first-ever ruling by a court in Iowa allowing an employee to sue for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy based on allegations that she lost her job because she got a protective order.

While the district court dismissed additional sex discrimination claims – claims that were based on the fact that the employer fired our client, Ms. Greer, while continuing to employ her abuser, despite his criminal convictions arising from the abuse – the wrongful discharge claim made new law in Iowa. The case was subsequently resolved.

Legal Momentum was co-counsel in this case with Iowa attorney Ronnie Podolefsky, and subsequently Iowa attorney Paige Fiedler.

[emphasis added]

That’s my kind of legal counsel. She’s doing her job. She’s not supposed to walk three steps behind, and to the right.