…The fool, or the fool who follows him?

This is the fiftieth 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

As reported in today’s print edition of the Muleskinner, the student newspaper at the University of Central Missouri, on February 25th in open session the University’s Board of Governors unanimously approved the content of a letter to be sent to Benoit Wesly concerning their opinion of the on air radio comments by Greg Hassler:

February 24, 2010

Mr. Benoit Wesly

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesly:

The Board of Governors is responsible for the governance of the University of Central Missouri, and in that capacity has enacted rules, regulations, and policies that clearly specify that discrimination is forbidden at the University. The Board reviewed the matter of the statement attributed to the radio announcer and does not believe the content of the statement was discriminatory, nor was it intended to be discriminatory.  The [text obscured] has been advised that Mr. Hassler made a public statement thereafter, stating that he meant nothing discriminatory and apologized for any controversy caused by his comments….

….Mr. Hassler is not an employee of the University of Central Missouri and is not authorized to issue any statement on behalf of the University. It is indeed unfortunate that what was apparently an innocent comment has been blown out of proportion. The Board takes claims of discrimination very seriously, but it would appear that the remarks were not of any negative impact upon this university, and frankly drew no attention or comment whatsoever until following the orchestrated release of your first communication and subsequent communications about the statement.

The Board is regretful that you have chosen to to take the word of whoever is providing you information over the efforts of the Board and Board President to rationally review this situation. We thank you for your past contributions to the University. It is unfortunate that you have further chosen to withdraw future support of this institution and its students. You certainly have the right to your opinion to do so, and you have exercised that right because you disagree with the Board. This matter is deemed to be closed. We will find a way to keep the institution and its students from being disadvantaged.

Sincerely,

s/

Weldon Brady, Secretary

UCM Board of Governors

“…Mr. Hassler is not an employee of the University of Central Missouri and is not authorized to issue any statement on behalf of the University…”

Uh, his radio station (he’s a minority owner) has an exclusive ten year contract [pdf] with the University to broadcast its sporting events. And he’s certainly a ubiquitous presence in the University’s athletic program publicity.

“…has been advised that Mr. Hassler made a public statement thereafter, stating that he meant nothing discriminatory and apologized for any controversy caused by his comments…”

Here’s the on air “apology” from December 10, 2009:

…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….

…Hassler told The Kansas City Star that his remark “was spun out of context” and he apologized on the air in December.

“I said that is not what I meant,” Hassler said. “I have nothing against anybody at all. I am not anti-Semitic.

“Did I actually say I was sorry? No, but I think that could be considered an apology. The whole thing is just silly…”

Ah, yes, a silly non-apology apology. That would work for a governing board, I’m sure.

“…The Board is regretful that you have chosen to to take the word of whoever is providing you information over the efforts of the Board and Board President to rationally review this situation…”

That’s a recurring theme. Not too concerned about the comment, but certainly are concerned about the exposure.

….You are several thousand miles away from Warrensburg while I am fifty miles away yet you have information I do not have….

….I remain curious in trying to understand how and why a person or persons would share this with you….

….you know, this Wesly guy who lives in Denmark, this, you know, he’s Dutch, lives in Denmark. How does he even hear about this from a little radio station in Warrensburg, Missouri….?

Which fool is leading?

Shining the light of day on anti-Semitism can get uncomfortable, especially when one is on the receiving end of the public scrutiny.

“…We will find a way to keep the institution and its students from being disadvantaged….”

The immediate resignation of the board members who approved such a disingenuous letter would be a good start in achieving that shared goal.

Apparently the Board’s opinion doesn’t hold complete sway in the community. There was a letter to the editor in yesterday’s Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

….What is difficult to understand is why the board tolerated Hassler’s attacks. They certainly did not need Hassler to help them select a new president. So what, really, was Hassler’s role?

My personal perspective is that the board and Hassler have a hidden agenda. Some day that will all come out.

An agenda? Really?

And which fool is leading? Greg Hassler or the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors?

…Who’s the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools for spin (February 20, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools rush in… (February 21, 2010)

This is the forty-ninth 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

Yesterday we posted on the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors’ successful attempt to acquire the gift history of benefactor Benoit Wesly. We also asked if they inquired about others’ gift history. We received no documents indicating such.

There are implications involved in a public entity acquiring information in Missouri – if anyone asks them what they have, they’re supposed to let that anyone know. The University of Central Missouri Board of Governors, as a public entity, is subject to the Missouri Sunshine Law. We are aware that the University of Central Missouri Foundation has previously declined requests for information, supposedly because they are not subject to the requirements of Missouri’s public records statutes. Apparently that depends on who is doing the asking.

After initial resistance from the Foundation…

…The Foundation’s legal counsel, Stinson, Morrison, Hecker LLP, recommends that all donor information be kept confidential. Their interpretation of the law is that we have the ability to keep such giving history private.

We feel that were it to be known that the Foundation releases such information to outside agencies or individuals, we would experience a chilling effect on our ability to solicit and secure future gifts…

…they apparently relented, even though our Sunshine Law request did not turn up any documents explaining this change in policy or even acknowledging such.

What would make the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors discard the advice of nonprofit fundraising professionals?

….1. Is it your legal counsel’s specific opinion  that the information requested be denied Mr. Wright and/or UCM’s Board of Governors, or is it a general recommendation that all donor information be confidential.

2. Is it your opinion that Mr. Wright or the university is “an individual or outside agency?”

3. If I were to make a similar request as past president and emeriti Foundation Board member, would that request be denied. Further, if a Foundation Board officer and/or Foundation Board member made a similar request, would it be denied?

4. Is it your position and the opinion of the legal counsel that the Missouri Sunshine Law does not apply to the Foundation?….

[emphasis in original]

It must be all in how you phrase the question. And what would prompt them to ask for that information for one specific donor and not for others? Is there a specific price point for doing the right thing?

From the records we acquired via our Sunshine Law request directed to the Board of Governors we have been able to ascertain that Benoit Wesly has given $408,250.00 to the University through the Foundation, with another $90,000.00 pledged. The content of the three page document listing that gift history is below the fold.

[page 1 of 3, unnumbered] COPY

Payment Jun 12, 2009 Soft $3,250.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award Fac Staff

    $3,250.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award for Stude

Payment Sep 30, 2008 Self $1,750.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award Fac Staff

    $1,750.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award for Stude

Pledge Sep 23, 2008 Self $50,000.00 $45,000.00 Active 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award Fac Staff

    $50,000.00 $45,000.00 Active 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award Stude

Gift Aug 28, 2008 Self $15,000.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund Presidents Fund

Gift May 15, 2008 Self $3,500.00 2008 Foundation Annual Fund Presidents Fund

Gift Oct 12, 2006 Self $3,500.00 2007 Foundation Annual Fund Presidents Fund

Gift Nov 03, 2005 Self $3,500.00 2006 Foundation Annual Fund Presidents Fund

Gift Oct 12, 2004 Self $3,500.00 2005 Foundation Annual Fund Fashion Merchandising Program

Gift Sep 09, 2003 Self $3,500.00 2004 Foundation Unrestricted The Central Annual Fund

Gift Mar 27, 2002 Self $3,500.00 2002 Foundation Unrestricted The Central Annual Fund

Gift Apr 07, 2000 Self $3,500.00 2000 Foundation Annual Camp. Hospitality Management Association Scholarship Endowment

Gift Apr 21, 1999 Self $3,500.00 1999 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

[page 2 of 3, unnumbered] COPY

Gift Feb 03, 1998 Self $3,500.00 1998 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 25, 1997 Self $3,500.00 1997 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 25, 1996 Self $3,500.00 1996 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 25, 1995 Self $3,500.00 1995 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 22, 1994 Self $3,500.00 1994 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 23, 1993 Self $3,500.00 1993 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 06, 1992 Self $3,500.00 1992 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 18, 1991 Self $3,500.00 1991 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 20, 1990 Self $3,500.00 1990 Foundation Annual Camp. Presidents Fund

Gift Apr 20, 1989 Self $3,500.00 1989 Annual Campaign Presidents Fund

[page 3 of 3, unnumbered] COPY

Gift Jun 12, 2009 Soft $3,250.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award Fac Staff

    $3,250.00 2009 Foundation Annual Fund UCM Maastricht Medallion International Award for Stude

Gift May 30, 1997 Self $5,000.00 1998 Foundation Annual Camp. Ardon-Doron International Scholarship

Gift May 13, 1997 Self $100,000.00 1997 Foundation Annual Camp. Miscellaneous Restricted

Gift Dec 16, 1996 Self $100,000.00 1997 Foundation Annual Camp. Miscellaneous Restricted

Gift May 03, 1996 Self $100,000.00 1996 Foundation Annual Camp. Miscellaneous Restricted

Gift Nov 03, 1995 Self $5,000.00 1996 Foundation Annual Camp. Ardon-Doron International Scholarship

Gift Apr 27, 1994 Self $5,000.00 1994 Foundation Annual Camp. Ardon-Doron International Scholarship

Gift Jun 29, 1992 Self $5,000.00 1992 Foundation Annual Camp. Ardon-Doron International Scholarship

Gift Jun 30, 1990 Self $250.00 1992 Foundation Annual Camp. Special Scholarships

[emphasis in originals]

Now that the Board of Governors and the Foundation, through its action in releasing that information to an “outside individual or entity”, have opened this Pandora’s box, we have an idea of others’ gift history we’d like to acquire. We’re making a list.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools for spin (February 20, 2010)

This is the forty-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

The student newspaper at the University of Central Missouri, the Muleskinner, published the following unsigned lead editorial in its February 18, 2010 edition (page 4, voices, and yes, we asked):

Board Of Governors’ Secret Selection Process Wrong For University

UCM’s Board of Governors isn’t totally inept – it can still spin the truth and fib fairly well.

The Board decided on Feb. 4 that the presidential search would be conducted in secret. Board President Richard Phillips sent a letter to the campus community stating that candidates would be reluctant to apply to UCM if the names of our applicants were made public because they expected retribution from the candidates’ current employers….

….This decision obviously stems from the Board’s reaction to UCM President Aaron Podolefsky’s having an interview or two over the years.

The Board fails to realize that very few Boards of Governors or Regents are as vindictive and petty as they are….

….The only possible reasons for conducting the presidential search in secret are:

1) The Board actively plans to violate the law in hiring a candidate.

2) The Board already has its choice for president and the search is just a sham.

3) The Board realizes that they will be unable to secure viable candidates of an equal or greater caliber than the president they just threw away like last night’s leftovers.

4) The Board has no confidence in itself and is running scared of potential controversy….

….It is time the Board of Governors starts working in the best interests of the University instead of acting like a high school clique.

It is important to note that Aaron Podolefsky only started interviewing for other positions after Richard Phillips made an inquiry of then Faculty Senate President Jack Rogers in late 2007 about possible faculty reaction to the Board buying out the president’s contract.

Coincidentally, we filled some Missouri Sunshine Law requests.

From: Michael Bersin [….]

Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:22 AM

Subject: Request for information – RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following:

1. In the period from December 1, 2009 to this date – any communications or documents sent or received by the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors or any member of the Board of Governors concerning the giving or gift history of Benoit Wesly to the CMSU/UCM Foundation.

2. In the period from December 1, 2009 to this date – any communications or documents sent or received by the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors or any member of the Board of Governors concerning the giving or gift history of any other individual to the CMSU/UCM Foundation.

Under RSMo 610.026 I am requesting a waiver of any copying fee since this request is “in the public interest because it is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of the operations or activities of the public governmental body and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.”

Thank you. [….]

We received the following somewhat testy reply:

[….]

To: Michael Bersin [….]

Date: Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Subject: Re: Request for information – RSMo 610

[….]

On February 17, 2010, you made a request for records under the Missouri Sunshine Law and asked for a waiver of fees since  you viewed the request to be in the public’s interest.  Be advised that this fee is being waived not because it is in the public’s best interest, but because the cost of providing the documents to you is very minimal (70 cents).

The requested information is available and may be picked up from my office in ADM 202.  I will leave it in an envelope at the front desk.

[….]

Custodian of Records [….]

[emphasis in original]

Okay. We still think it’s in the public’s interest to know what a public entity is doing.

Does this mean we’re going to get back the $87.75 we paid for one page?

This is the start of what we got for the seventy cents we didn’t have to pay – an e-mail addressed to Joseph Kremer, Chief Development Officer and Executive Director of the UCM Foundation:

[….]1/28/2010 10:32 AM [….]

I have had a request from the Board to obtain information from the Foundation concerning the history of Mr. Ben Wesly’s giving to UCM. Please advise if and when this information can be provided. Thank you. [….]

Now, we have to ask, why would the Board of Governors want to know the details of Benoit Wesly’s giving to the University of Central Missouri Foundation?

Speaking of spin, a letter to the editor written by an individual appeared in the February 8th edition of the local paper, the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

…If we allow this European to hold UCM hostage over this perceived derogatory comment, then we are throwing our sense of right and wrong under the bus in order to continue to receive his favor. If his gifts came with strings attached then those strings should have been identified prior to his giving, and our accepting them. I feel that his gifts come at too high a price. Possibly we should rename the Maastricht Friendship Tower, and call it the Wesley Hostage Tower….

Or, we could spell Benoit Wesly’s last name correctly and call it a draw. Wait, who else keeps spelling Benoit Wesly’s last name incorrectly?

Back to the Board’s request for information. Joe Kremer replied:

[….] 1/28/2010 5:38 PM [….]

After consultation with Dale Zank, president of the UCM Foundation Board of Directors, we have asked our legal counsel, Stinson, Morrison, Hacker LLP, to weigh in on the request. We are sensitive to the issuance of donor information to any outside individual or agency, and feel it appropriate not to respond until counsel has had an opportunity to present their opinion.

Respectfully [….]

Another e-mail to members of the Board of Governors explains:

[….]

To:  Richard Philips; [….] Wright, Marvin

Date: 1/29/2010 3:19 PM

Subject: Fwd: Release of Donor Information

CC: Setser, Henry

Please see the response to the inquiry/request for information pertaining to Ben Wesly’s giving.

[….]

Joseph Kremer 1/29/2010 2:57 PM [….]

The Foundation’s legal counsel, Stinson, Morrison, Hecker LLP, recommends that all donor information be kept confidential. Their interpretation of the law is that we have the ability to keep such giving history private.

We feel that were it to be known that the Foundation releases such information to outside agencies or individuals, we would experience a chilling effect on our ability to solicit and secure future gifts.

The giving information regarding the Tower referenced in the article (“the 1997 article in UCM’s Alumni Today said his gift was more than $300,000”) is public information, and can be thought of as accurate.

Dale Zank, president of the Foundation Board, will be calling Weldon Brady to discuss with him our position.

Thanks. [….]

Joe Kremer

Chief Development Officer

Executive Director, UCM Foundation [….]

Weldon Brady, a member of the Board of Governors, wrote a letter to Joe Kremer:

February 1, 2010

Mr. Joe Kremer

University Director & Chief

  Development Officer

University of central Missouri

ADM 201

Warrensburg, Missouri 64093

Dear Joe:

In reviewing my e-mails over the weekend, I first learned of the request of fellow Board of Governor member Marvin Wright for donor information and must say I was surprised by your response.  I presume your reference to me in your response is because of my liaison to the Foundation, which in and of itself seems to confirm, of course, the affiliation between the university and the Foundation.

In order that I may be prepared to answer any questions that may arise regarding this issue, would you please afford me the following information:

1. Is it your legal counsel’s specific opinion  that the information requested be denied Mr. Wright and/or UCM’s Board of Governors, or is it a general recommendation that all donor information be confidential.

2. Is it your opinion that Mr. Wright or the university is “an individual or outside agency?”

3. If I were to make a similar request as past president and emeriti Foundation Board member, would that request be denied. Further, if a Foundation Board officer and/or Foundation Board member made a similar request, would it be denied?

4. Is it your position and the opinion of the legal counsel that the Missouri Sunshine Law does not apply to the Foundation?

Thank you Joe for your prompt response to these questions.

Sincerely,

s/

Weldon Brady, Secretary

Board of Governors

Cc: UCM Board of Governors

Dale Zank, UCM Foundation Board President

Dr. Aaron Podolefsky, University President

[emphasis in original]

Evidently somebody changed their mind, but they didn’t do so in writing. We got the list.

We received no other communications or documents concerning other donors in response to this Missouri Sunshine Law request.

As of March 1, 2010 Joe Kremer has accepted a position elsewhere and will no longer be working for the University or the Foundation.

Well, we do know that the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors are subject to the Missouri Sunshine Law. Kind of explains one of the practical aspects of Joe Kremers’s position, doesn’t it? If the University and the Foundation are one and the same, we’re going to request some information we’re interested in from the Foundation.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

At least when Jake Blues came up with a desperate last minute excuse you could laugh:

…Honest… I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. It wasn’t my fault, I swear to God…

This is the forty-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

The Muleskinner, the University of Central Missouri student newspaper, ran a front page article in today’s dead tree edition titled, Remark Under Fire: Debates arise over ‘anti-Semitic’ statement. They managed to get a quote from KOKO radio announcer and part owner Greg Hassler:

….Hassler has said on air and during interviews that he didn’t consider the comment anti-Semitic.

“I am not an anti-Semite,” Hassler said. “Actually what I did was misspeak. I meant the tree on the quadrangle. I didn’t say it was because he was Jewish. I should have phrased it better….”

What Greg Hassler said on the air in October:

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…

[emphasis added]

You’d think a quick thinking media professional wouldn’t misspeak twice. And there’s that ‘religion’ thing.

And our intrepid radio professional on live radio on February 2, 2010? Not a word about misspeaking:

…Greg Hassler: I’m not the problem. No question about that. The problem’s gonna leave in June. That’s the problem. And it’ll be gone soon, we just have to wait. Okay…

Despite lame excuses the problem is not going to go away in June.

Update –  The University of Central Missouri Faculty Senate met yesterday afternoon and approved motions to send the following letters in their name:

February 10, 2010

Dear Mr. Wesly,

We, the Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri, are grateful for your twenty years of friendship with our university.  We are saddened that you feel the need to end your relationship with UCM over the anti-Semitic comment of a person who has a contract with the university.

The Faculty Senate does not endorse or approve the use of offensive language or comments.  In fact, we support the anti-discrimination policy in place at UCM.  That policy explicitly states a “policy of nondiscrimination  in regard to age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, Vietnam Era veterans and persons with handicaps and disabilities.”  Our community creed includes an item that indicates we strive to be “an open community, by creating and maintaining effective channels of communication and by accepting and respecting individuals whose values, beliefs, and life experiences may be different from my own.”

We want you to know that the Faculty Senate does not endorse or approve of comments that are offensive to any of the groups described above.  We are horrified that anti-Semitic remarks have been made, but more than that, we are appalled that our university has failed in our commitment to expressed beliefs.  Please accept our sincere apologies and understand that we will continue to work towards an open community.  We hope you will renew your long-term friendship with the university.

Sincerely,

The Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri

And after the letter to Benoit Wesly was approved by a unanimous vote, the following letter to Richard Phillips, the President of the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors, was approved with a few dissenting votes:

February 10, 2010

Dear President Phillips,

This letter is prompted by the following statement that appeared in the Kansas City Star on Sunday, February 7.

Board President Richard Phillips said Monday that the remark [by a local radio personality] should not have been made, but the university did not believe it was anti-Semitic.

There is no evidence to support this belief.  The remark has never been investigated by an inclusively representative university body.  No one, not even the President of the Board of Governors, has the authority to assert the university does not believe the remark was anti-Semitic.

Because it suggests a belief held by the entire Central community-students, staff, and faculty-we fear your statement will have a detrimental impact on recruiting and retaining good students, staff, and faculty.  More seriously, your statement about the beliefs of the entire university community says to the state, country, and the rest of the world that Central is a university that tolerates discrimination.

We, the Faculty Senate, respectfully suggest that you either clarify or apologize to the entire Central community for making a statement about the beliefs of the community that you have no evidence for and that is clearly wrong.

Sincerely,

The Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri

No, the problem is not going away in June.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

This is the forty-fourth 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

Everybody is getting into the act now that other media are actually covering this story. And by everybody we mean those ubiquitous commenters on-line (with some really interesting repetitious themes) and in letters to the editor. In today’s Warrensburg Daily Star Journal there were two letters to the editor. One, titled “UCM donor will be missed” and another, titled “Donor will not be missed” [with a broken link]. Let’s take a look at the second letter, from the dead trees edition of the paper:

I read the Jan. 28 Muleskinner articles regarding Benoit Wesly being disturbed over the alleged, anti-Semitic comment.

I must say that I feel that this is much ado about nothing….I do not see any reference to anti-Semitism in the comment.

Possibly Mr. Wesly is not privy to the first amendment, contained within the bill of rights, regarding freedom of speech. Or possibly he feels that his donations to UCM give him the authority to usurp this amendment….

….The proper way to withdraw his support would be to do it quietly, not with the fanfare he has generated….

….Our friends at Missouri Valley College need to be watching this closely. Mr. Wesly could decide to try and place pressure on them if they do something which would cause them to fall from his favor….

Uh, Missouri Valley College is a private institution. It is not governed by this article in the Missouri Constitution:

Missouri Constitution

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.

Greg Hassler, with a continued, and very public, association with the University of Central Missouri, stated on the air:

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…

[emphasis added]

So, the thing that got Greg Hassler, an individual with a clear association with the University, “started” with his upset was that the president of the University of Central Missouri, who is Jewish, did not decorate a tree on state property for sectarian purposes, which would have violated the establishment clause, and which was actually cut down five years before he got here. Greg Hassler injected religion into this. Those are his words. According to our letter writer, it’s no big deal?

….The proper way to withdraw his support would be to do it quietly, not with the fanfare he has generated….

What, Greg Hassler can say what he did (yes, he can) and how dare Benoit Wesly say anything about it in public? Only Greg Hassler can say what he wants in public? No one else?

If our letter writer had been paying attention he would have known that Benoit Wesly made inquiries about the situation months ago, originally out of the public eye (If it weren’t for that pesky Missouri Sunshine Law we wouldn’t know that part). The Board of Governors didn’t address the situation.

So, the simple question for our letter writer, who appears to be outraged by Benoit Wesly’s reaction, do you think what Greg Hassler said was accurate and appropriate? Just asking.

It’s so inconvenient when anyone shines light on any unpleasantness. Instead, we should all clap louder.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

This is the forty-third 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

On Thursday I was contacted by the Muleskinner, the student newspaper at the University of Central Missouri and asked if I would sit down for an interview with them to talk about people’s differing perceptions of the tree statement broadcast on KOKO radio by Greg Hassler in October. I told the reporter I would have to think about it. I did and I called him back to set up our meeting. We sat down for a conversation on Friday morning. The transcript:

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner:…It seems like a lot of people, I’m positive you’ve read the comments ’cause I saw your blog, so, a lot of people in our area don’t grasp the anti-Semitic component of what he said.

Michael Bersin: Um, hm.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Why can some people take that in an anti-Semitic way? Um, I guess, depending on your point of view it probably seems, probably like, you know, the giant Christmas tree in the center of the room for, to pull a bad example I guess, given the circumstances, but it’s there. You know, some people might look at it and, oh yeah, you’ve got a big plant and some people will, it’s a Christmas tree. Well, why, why would, I guess, yourself, Mr. Wesly see that in ant-Semitic way where, obviously, Mr. Hassler doesn’t see anything in it.

Michael Bersin: Well, well I don’t know if he doesn’t see anything in it, [cross talk] first.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Okay.

Michael Bersin: Uh, and, and I’ll get to that. One of the, the things, first, that you need to first consider is the Missouri Constitution has the strongest establishment clause of almost any other state constitution. It’s actually in two places, uh, one in the Bill of Rights and one under education. And the language is very explicit. Uh, and it’s been in there for a long time, it’s not something new.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm.

Michael Bersin: The University of Central Missouri is a state institution. So, have you heard the recording of it, the audio? Of what he said?

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: I haven’t heard the audio. I’ve seen transcripts….

…Michael Bersin: Right. Uh, so the, I’ve been here for twenty years. And when people have put up seasonal decorations, that’s what they call them. The institution or anybody associated with the institution, when they put up seasonal decorations, didn’t call anything a specific sectarian holiday decoration because they’re not supposed to. Because of the Missouri Constitution and this is a state institution.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Okay.

Michael Bersin: So, people who say, well, there’s always been this thing out here and they interpret it as a sectarian symbol are clearly ignorant of the history of the state, the Constitution, and they way that the, the institution itself dealt with it.

Uh, now this is something that’s striking, getting back to the perception, whether it’s, uh, anti-Semitic or not. In one of the first communications that Richard Phillips, the President of the Board of Governors, in the early exchanges between him and Ben Wesly, which we got through Sunshine, Missouri Sunshine Law request, one of the first, one of the questions that Richard Phillips asked is, “How did you find out about this?” And Ben Wesly, uh, I’d have to go back and look, but it’s sort of, his response was along the lines of, “What does it matter?”

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm.

Michael Bersin: Now, in his recent radio broadcast, uh, most recent radio broadcast that we put a transcript up, Richard, uh, excuse me, um, Greg Hassler, in his radio broadcast raised that point. He said, how did, how did Ben Wesly find out about this? And my question is, if Hassler has no problem with what he said, then what does it matter that anybody else heard it, read about it, or found out about it? That tells me that he knew the meaning of what he said, if he’s complaining that other people are finding out about it. Because if you don’t think that your statement will have that kind of impact then you shouldn’t really care who hears it, or who, who reads it.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Now [crosstalk]…

Michael Bersin: Now, on top of that, what I find fascinating, too, is, there’s a majority owner of the radio station. Has anybody asked the majority owner of the radio station whether this is the view of the radio station? Or how they feel about that comment, on the air, of the station that they own?

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: You know, I have a question for you about that, I mean, there may be, yes there’s controversy, but it is essentially rural Missouri and is a rural Missouri radio station. Um, they’re not getting the negative feedback they’d get in the, in a community that, a larger community that would have more Jewish people, more people that would point out that that, that comment at, if not anti-Semitic, is definitely narrow minded [inaudible] sectarian view.

Michael Bersin: Well, well that, that’s actually insulting to a small rural community to say that. You don’t want to label, uh, you know, an entire community as ignorant. Uh, that’s actually really sad to do that. Uh, that’s really sad to do that.

But, you know, this really isn’t about, um, Hassler. He can spew what he wants.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm.

Michael Bersin: Uh, the real problem is the Board of Governors of the university. Uh, they tell us, you know, they tell us, um, by the way they’ve reacted to this, uh, a lot about themselves. And when this first happened, one of the things I said was, I don’t know which is worse, that he said it, that people make excuses for it, or that the university community, now largely, has remained silent. And whatever anybody says, is, he has very clear strong association with the institution.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Well, obviously he does and I guess you have been involved in the, the battle to get access to a lot of those records that are being.

Michael Bersin: And, and there’s a lot more to this story, you know, on, on all kinds of levels. Um, this is just one part of it, uh.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: This, this story is limited and, and I know that there’s so much more to explore here.

Michael Bersin: Right.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: But this is limited to just why is a comment such as Hassler’s anti-Semitic? You know, we’re, and where is [crosstalk]…

Michael Bersin: We, we can really just dissect it. [crosstalk]

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: And where is that line [crosstalk]…

Michael Bersin: Well.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: …between boorish, a boorish behavior and ill thought out comment [inaudible]?

Michael Bersin: Well, well [crosstalk]…

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: And that’s [crosstalk]…

Michael Bersin: …the whole thing about it is it’s really, uh [crosstalk]…

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: …’cause obviously people don’t understand.

Michael Bersin: The idea that you, you, you start, you’re problem with somebody starts because they didn’t put a sectarian religious symbol up in their res, uh, in front of their residence, which is state property, which the Missouri Constitution says in no way, shape or form should any public money ever be used, period….

….Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: So, the problem starting with…

Michael Bersin: …with the statement is saying that, one, he said his problem with Aaron Podolefsky started when he didn’t put up a sectarian religious symbol on the grounds of his residence which is state property, which on the face of it, that’s what the Constitution of Missouri says you don’t do. Nobody can tell somebody to put up a sectarian symbol on state property, or hold them accountable in some fashion because they didn’t do it. It’s ridiculous on its face.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm.

Michael Bersin: And then to say, well. This is Warrensburg, Missouri, this is America.

I’ve lived here twenty years. Um, I’m American. To somehow say that because I don’t put up a sectarian religious symbol on state property makes me an outsider in my own country, in the community that I live in, and that I’ve lived in for twenty years? How do you think I would take it?

On top of that, Ben Wesly has walked away. Aaron and Ronnie Podolefsky will be leaving here. I have to remain here. But at least I [now] know more about the community I live in and the institution that I’ve been teaching at for the past twenty years.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: So, is this providing a, a more negative view towards the community for yourself, or possibly for other [crosstalk] people, [crosstalk] or?

Michael Bersin: No, what is,  no,  there are, uh lots of great people at this university and in this community. And, oh yeah, they get it.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Does it feel more closed than it did before?

Michael Bersin: No, not at all. What it really is, is, uh, you know, there are people that don’t understand all kinds of things, either through ignorance or whatever, and they’re everywhere. But the real thing here is the university and the Board of Governors should know better.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm. Now, I have to ask, are you tenured?

Michael Bersin: Oh, yes.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Okay. ‘Cause one thing I think I’ve been just hearing, not [inaudible] on this story, is that there are a number of people that haven’t spoken up because they aren’t tenured. [crosstalk] And they…

Michael Bersin: And, and I understand that, uh, there. There’s a practical aspect on, on a personal level you do feel vulnerable, but on a larger level, if somebody retaliated against a faculty member for speaking out on something even if, if they weren’t tenured, on something that really shouldn’t be, you know, uh, which is not relevant to the, the criteria for, for granting of tenure, uh, generally you should feel, you know, pretty good about it. But, the, the other side of the coin is, people who have tenure and the protections. Uh, what tenure allows, uh, tenure only allows you this, tenure only gives you, uh, the ability to speak out. Uh, what that means is that the university can dismiss a tenured faculty member for cause, but they have to show the cause. The faculty member does not have to prove why they should stay, the university has to prove why they should go.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Okay.

Michael Bersin: And so when a faculty member has tenure there’s protection of, of being able to speak out. And, if you have the ability to speak out, you have the obligation to speak out.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Now, what good [will] come out of this comment and this, uh, this whole issue?

Michael Bersin: Well, shining the light of day on anything is always a good thing.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: I mean, obviously there’s, uh, there’s more interest in what the Board of Governors is doing and how they’re doing it. That might be a good thing. But, specifically, this kind of comment, I was speaking with, uh, Karen…with the Anti-Defamation League about, you know, she sees it as an opportunity to, to open dialogue on these kinds of comments and, and the impacts of that. Um.

Michael Bersin: And, and, uh, this is interesting, uh, when people talk about, uh, understanding it’s really, it’s about empathy. It’s about what you do and say and understanding what kind of impact it has on others. And some people will never get, but the Board of Governors, while on some levels if, if you’ve read their communications, understand that there’s a problem, but I don’t think they quite understand how it affects other people.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Now, one of the comments on our web site said that, you know, the entire conflagration could have been handled with the Board of Governors, a simple investigation and a letter to Hassler saying, you know, we don’t approve of that. Um, is that a reasonable point and could that have happened [crosstalk] when Mr. Wesly first…

Michael Bersin: Well, you know, Hassler can say what he wants.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Right. [cross talk] But the board…

Michael Bersin: Uh, and he, you know, and, uh.  Probably. You know, basically it just takes a, the Board of Governors should have just said, this is not what this university is about. Uh, and then that sends a clear signal to the university community. You know, um, and, and institutions of, you know, higher education institutions, uh, are supposed to be, especially the state, you know, a state institution, are supposed to sort of lead the way. I mean, that’s the reason for the, uh, this university’s existence.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, hm. So where do we go from here?

Michael Bersin: I don’t know. Uh, I don’t know. You know, nobody, I don’t think anybody knows.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: [inaudible] I know Mr. Hassler’s a private person, he, well, public figure in the aspect of his radio show, but he’s not an employee of the university. Um, while, yes, he’s a contract in the university, or his radio station does.

Michael Bersin: Have you, have you read the contract? [….] There’s a clause in the contract. The university has approval for on air talent.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Okay. [….] So, then according to that contract the university could say we don’t want you broadcasting our game [crosstalk]. You’re [inaudible] doing the voices for our game.

Michael Bersin: [….]If, if the university so chose.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Right, okay.

Michael Bersin: At least as, as I have read it. I’d have to go review it, again. But I believe that clause is in there. [….]

From the contract [pdf]:

…2. CMSU shall provide the talents and services of the play-by-play and color announcers for all athletic events outlined in No. 1 above…

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Um, so, I understand the, what I, I think, and I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but I understand what you’re saying about the comment. How did it make you personally feel? I read somewhere that you, you posted a, a photocopy on your door. Um, that’s a pretty strong statement.

Michael Bersin: I’ve had to, uh, I’ve had to endure all kinds of things, sometimes really small, you know, and you let it go, uh, and larger things my entire life. And that’s part of the thing about understanding other people’s experience. It’s not one thing. It’s something that history says we can’t get away from, and we know it. And you, you don’t, uh, you know, sometimes you put it behind you and you, you know, in the background. But I’ve had to endure, uh, little things and sometimes bigger things my entire life, uh, and for people to tell me it’s not a big deal or it is a big deal, that’s not their decision. That’s my decision.

It’s not something that I can get away from. So depending on somebody’s life history and what they’ve been through, if you’re, if you understand that then you’re not gonna be so quick to diminish they way somebody feels about something. Ben Wesly’s life experiences are very interesting, but so are mine. And so is my family history.

And Ben Wesly made some comments about that in some of the early responses with the members of the Board of Governors. And if you read some of the comments or, or some of the written communications from one of the members of the Board of Governors you can see that, it’s one of them actually, one of the communications says, oh, I understand a little more now. Uh, or at least they put that in word, those words out, we don’t really know if they understand or not.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Trying to figure out how to phrase this. Um, with just the vast number of people we have in our country and the, the completely different backgrounds that so many people have, um, you know, be they immigrants [….] how can you avoid offending somebody with any comment.

Michael Bersin: That’s really, uh, uh, an interesting point. Uh, you try to understand it. You, you don’t go after people because of their background, or where they came from, or their religious background. You, you engage people based on the power of their ideas, or, or the, uh, usefulness of their ideas, the intelligence of their ideas, or, their, their actions as, as individuals. You can criticize people for what, how they acted in the public sphere based on what it means to be an American. So, uh, if you’re an American citizen and you’re here and you participate in Democracy and you work and you live and you, you’re productive member of, of society and everything else, uh, yeah you can criticize people for what they do, but, you, you don’t criticize them for their background or their religious background. And you don’t try to impose your own religious views on somebody, at least from the perspective of the state. The state doesn’t do that. And nobody has the right or the ability to do that, to impose that.

Can Greg Hassler put up a Christmas tree at his home? You bet. Can Greg Hassles wear a tee shirt that says Merry Christmas any, anywhere he wants, including on this campus? You bet. [….] What he can’t do is, he can’t say that the president of the University of Central Missouri needs to put up a Christmas tree. Well, he can say that, it’s just that it’s not relevant. I mean, he can say that, it’s just not relevant. And anybody who understands what this institution is would look at it, laugh at it on its face, and say, that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard.

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: What would an ideal resolution to this be for you?

Michael Bersin: I don’t know. [crosstalk]

Pat Nolan, Muleskinner: Or is there?

Michael Bersin: I don’t know. You know, I’m just one person. I don’t call the shots. Uh, and, and that’s actually the, the interesting thing about it. Uh, you know, it’s just individuals. Uh, I can speak out, but I only speak for myself.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

This is the forty-first 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

Yesterday: “A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party…

Benoit Wesly spells his last name with one “e”. You wouldn’t know that, or evidently, bother to check if you wrote for the Kansas City Star.

Yael T. Abouhalkah, an opinion columnist for the Star, weighed in on the story with an on-line opinion piece: Jewish benefactor’s actions hurt University of Central Missouri

What, from that headline you’d think that the evil Ben Wesly has victimized the university?

Where to start?

“There must be a lot more behind the scenes to the story of why Benoit Wesley pulled the plug on his significant, longtime contributions to the University of Central Missouri…”

No shit, Sherlock. Might I be so presumptuous as to suggest reading the previous forty posts conveniently linked below the fold here?

“…The remarks in question were made by Greg Hassler, part-owner of a radio station that broadcasts UCM sporting events.

Special note: He’s not even paid by the university….”

Special note: the university pays him in meals, lodging, and warm-up suits. Oh, and his radio station has a ten year exclusive contract [pdf] with the university. With, you know, clauses in it. Like payments. And advertising revenue. And sloppy bookkeeping when it comes to advertising revenue.

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…”

…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….

And, evidently, jewelry.

…But it’s interesting to note that Podolefsky appears to take the incident quite seriously,…

No shit, Sherlock. That would be our second iteration of that colorful expression for those of you keeping score. This has got to be some kind of record for us.

…not realizing it’s one of those occasionally silly things that gets said on the radio…

Yeah, it was never the ugly culmination of a series of broadcast barrages loosed over a lengthy period of time about Aaron Podolefsky and his spouse:

…On Jan. 18, 2008, AP Writer Alan Scher Zagier filed a story headlined “Abuse claims divide small town,” saying Ronnie Podolefsky “has been a particular target in a town long-accustomed to cordial relations with the Central Missouri campus.” He wrote that Hassler’s “on-air broadsides against Podolefsky have fueled the criticism…”

Greg Hassler was doing his live radio broadcast happy dance the day following the released news that the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors were not going to renew Podolefsky’s contract, something Hassler advocated. And Hassler helpfully articulated what got him started in his disdain for the university’s president:

Greg Hassler: ….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?

“…The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally…”

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.

The University of Central Missouri is a state institution. Let me repeat that, so it sinks in. The University of Central Missouri is a state institution.

For anyone to (incorrectly) assert that an individual should be held accountable for halting the placement of a sectarian symbol on state property in Missouri, and further, to state that that’s what started their “upset” originally with individuals who are Jewish, would indicate stupidity of epic proportions, appalling ignorance, anti-Semitism, or some combination thereof. Helpfully, the Star editorial columnist has eliminated two of the four as possibilities. I feel so much better now, as I’m sure the Podolefskys do, too.

…And it’s a shame that a remark made on a radio station by someone not even paid by the university has led to the loss of millions of dollars in future funding for education at the university.

A shame indeed. And who’s fault is that?

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….”

But, we repeat ourselves.

Are we all living in a movie starring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell?

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

…four months late.

In today’s Kansas City Star – they finally covered the story: Radio host’s remarks cost University of Central Missouri a big benefactor

This is the fortieth 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

The Star published a substantial (for them) story on-line and on page A5 in today’s Kansas City Edition:

…Hassler told The Kansas City Star that his remark “was spun out of context” and he apologized on the air in December.

“I said that is not what I meant,” Hassler said. “I have nothing against anybody at all. I am not anti-Semitic.

“Did I actually say I was sorry? No, but I think that could be considered an apology. The whole thing is just silly.”

Podolefsky said he didn’t think it’s silly…

A source has since confirmed that the following is from a December 10, 2009 radio broadcast:

…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….

As we noted on January 26th:

…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…

“…Did I actually say I was sorry? No, but I think that could be considered an apology. The whole thing is just silly…”

Evidently Ben Wesly doesn’t think so and some at the University didn’t appear to understand that.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

This is the thirty-ninth 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

Previously: “A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control

A source provided us with a copy of an e-mail sent by Ben Wesly on December 23, 2009 to University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky:

From: [….]

To: “UCM President Aaron Podolefsky [….]

Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:55:33 +0100

Subject:

Dear Aaron,

As you may know, over the last couple of weeks I have been in close communication with Mr. Richard Philips, President of the Board of Governors of the University of Central Missouri. I strongly protested against the fact, that the Board tolerates anti-Semitism, which is for me and my family and all the Jews in the world unacceptable.

The Board should have taken a strong position against the radioman and the Athletic Director responsible for the contract with the radio station and should have made a public statement to announce corrective steps. The Board has chosen not to do so.

Please note that I cannot accept the honorable invitation to teach on campus Spring 2010 and that I have canceled immediately my commitment to sponsor the USD 100,000 Maastricht Friendship Award as well as our positive discussions in establishing a memorial for my brother Leon, who was murdered by the Germans.

I have decided, with tears in my eyes, to finish the over the last 20 years built relationship with the university. Each morning I need to face myself in the mirror. Yesterday, today, but also tomorrow.

Wherever you and Ronnie may go, please stay in touch.

Best regards,

Bella and Benoit Wesly

Enclosure: e-mail Mr. Richard Philips dated December 15, 2009

[….]

That didn’t go well.

In today’s edition of the Muleskinner, the University of Central Missouri student newspaper, was a front page article under the byline of Lora Powell on donor Benoit Wesly’s disassociation from the institution. The article relates the initial October radio broadcast and the various communications in that aftermath between Benoit Wesly and individuals at the university. The published edition also carries the full text of the December letter from Wesly to University of Central Missouri Board of Governors President Richard Phillips.

The institution and those associated with the original radio broadcast don’t appear to have the capacity or the desire to admit a mistake or indicate an ability to learn from that mistake. Sadly, that would have probably solved their problem if they had demonstrated such awareness in October. That is the short lesson on how not to attempt damage control.

They’re probably not too concerned about mirrors, either.  

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

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)