This is the fifty-second 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

February 4, 2008:

….I have been contacted by a member of the UCM Board of Governors. The board member asked me what I thought the faculty’s response would be if an offer was tendered by the Board to “buy out President Podolefsky’s contract.” I immediately asked if such an offer was forthcoming from the Board; and if so, why I was being asked to comment.  The board member stated that ‘no official discussions or conclusions had been reached,’ but that several campus leaders were being asked what they thought the reaction of their respective constituents might be if such an action was proposed. I told the board member that I would need time to consider my response. Pursuant to that conversation, I have been contacted by other leaders of campus units to see if my opinion on the “Podolefsky buy-out” had been solicited….

Anyone think that Aaron Podolefsky didn’t know that this “buyout” question was asked in late 2007?

January 15, 2009:

…In October 2008, Podolefsky became one of four finalists vying for the presidential seat at Central Washington University. At the time, Podolefsky stated “It’s not that it’s a better fit. They are an institution very much like us, that’s probably why they are interested in me,” Podolefsky said.

Some at the meeting took this as an indication that Podolefsky wanted to leave. Faculty Senate Vice President Jerry Kangas was one who shared this opinion.

“The president chose to go on that interview. When you choose to go to an interview, you’re choosing to leave in my opinion,” Kangas said.

However, others had reservations about this thinking….

[emphasis added]

February 11, 2010:

….The battle plan to hire a new president has been in the works since December 2008 when Aaron Podolefsky was in the running for the president of Central Washington University.

“Follow Aaron’s path….When Aaron was in the running for the job at Central Washington, we bagan to gear up and say, ‘If he gets a job, where are we? We need to get our processes in place.’ This isn’t something we did in a weekend or in one meeting,” Phillips said….

Except someone on the board was floating the idea of a buyout a year earlier. This mad scramble a year later doesn’t look very good in the adequately planning for contingencies column when it comes to evaluating the board, does it?

Uh, that’s a two year span of events in case you weren’t keeping track.

After the February, 17, 2010 faculty forum on the presidential search we submitted a Missouri Sunshine Law request:

From: Michael Bersin [….]

Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Subject: Request for information – RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following:

1. A copy of the confidentiality statement/agreement signed by the members of the presidential search advisory committee.

2. A copy of the “rubric” document created by the presidential search consultant and provided to/or to be provided to the members of the presidential search advisory committee.

3. A copy of the confidentiality statement/agreement pertaining to the presidential search signed by the members of the Board of Governors. Also, If the members of the Board of Governors have signed such a confidentiality statement/agreement, copies of the actual document(s) signed by the members of the Board of Governors.

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 attended a University of Central Missouri Board of Governors “work session” on December 10, 2009 at  6:00 p.m. where the board discussed the makeup of the presidential search advisory committee:

….Marvin “Bunky” Wright: …To me, something that’s gonna be extremely important for people, and particularly people that are candidates, is confidentiality. We can talk about the makeup of this group as much as we want to, but, you know, it’s gonna end up that I think that we have to have the absolute faith of these people that they are gonna keep everything confidential. Because you can wreck people’s careers by just running off at the mouth. You know that stupid Bunky Wright applied for such and such. You know, it gets back to the institution where I am and it’s goodbye. And it, it, uh, the searches that I’ve been involved in that’s a crucial point [crosstalk].

Ken Hutchinson: I saw it happen.

Marvin “Bunky” Wright: Because a lot of good people won’t apply unless they’re just absolutely certain it’s confidential.

Richard Phillips: Should we [inaudible] put together some little packet of information where if you agree to serve on the committee here’s your responsibility?

Ken Hutchinson: Look, I’d take it a step, yes, that for sure and we’ll, we’ll put that together. But I think that needs to sign a confidentiality statement and it, and turn it in to, uh, to Monica and she has on file that this. And if they don’t want to sign it then we, they don’t have to serve.

Marvin “Bunky” Wright: You know, it’s not trying to hide from the public or anybody. [crosstalk, several voices: “No”.]

Richard Phillips: But for serving the integrity of the candidates [inaudible]…

Ken Hutchinson: Yeah, good point….

Project much?

And, we did receive a reply to our Missouri Sunshine Law request:

[….]

To: Michael Bersin [….]

CC: Henry Setser [….]

Date: Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:05 PM

Subject: Re: Request for information – RSMo 610

[….]

In response to your request received on 2/18/10, wherein you ask for [….]

please find attached a copy of the Oath of confidentiality that has been or will be signed by all members of the Presidential Search Advisory Committee and the members of the Board of Governors, and the “rubric” document for use in the evaluation of applicant files.  In regard to your request for “signed” copies of the Oath of Confidentiality by both the members of the Presidential Search Advisory Committee and the members of the Board of Governors, these are considered to be the equivalent of personnel records, and are therefore, closed.

Sincerely,

[….]

Custodian of Records

Okay. On December 10, 2009 there was no discussion in the meeting of having members of the Board of Governors sign the confidentiality agreement. To be fair, between that time and their present response they could have decided that that would be a good idea. But, the thought didn’t enter the discussion in that hour long “work session” in December of 2009.

The “Oath of Confidentiality”:

OATH OF CONFIDENTIALITY

I, __________________________, DO SOLEMNLY ACCEPT AND AGREE TO ABIDE BY THIS WRITTEN “OATH OF CONFIDENTIALLY” THAT I WILL NOT DIVULGE ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE IDENTITIES OF CANDIDATES OR PROSPECTIVE CANDIDATES TO ANYONE AT ANYTIME DURING THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH OR TO ANYONE AFTER THE PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH CONCLUDES.

________________________________

Signature

___________

Date

All that’s missing is the part where they put you on double secret probation for failing to live up to it.

We asked for:

…1. A copy of the confidentiality statement/agreement signed by the members of the presidential search advisory committee…

…and…

…3. A copy of the confidentiality statement/agreement pertaining to the presidential search signed by the members of the Board of Governors. Also, If the members of the Board of Governors have signed such a confidentiality statement/agreement, copies of the actual document(s) signed by the members of the Board of Governors….

Now, we really weren’t concerned about getting to copies of the actual [signed] statements for the search advisory committee members, but, in fairness, we could see that someone might interpret our request that way if taken in isolation. You would think that someone might get clued in by the second sentence of our request in the section pertaining to the board.

What’s fascinating about the response is the assertion “…these are considered to be the equivalent of personnel records, and are therefore, closed.”

From previous discussions in open meetings we know that the confidentiality agreement/statement exists (and they gave it to us when we asked for it) and we know that members of the presidential search advisory committee won’t be allowed to participate if they haven’t signed it. So, what’s the secret? The color of ink they used to sign it? Or the date?

As for the members of the Board of Governors, we have an assertion that they have or will sign the document, but that we can’t get copies of the actual documents because they are “…the equivalent of personnel records…” Really? The members of the Board of Governors have personnel records? I’d be more convinced if someone could actually find them.

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)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Who’s the more foolish… (February 25, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a phone call from out of the blue (February 26, 2010)

HASSLER to PHILLIPS Connect-the-Dots Game! (February 27, 2010)(NYCMule)

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

This…

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

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

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

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

Marion Woods: Yep.

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

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

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

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

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

…is not compatible with this:

Missouri Constitution

Article I

BILL OF RIGHTS

Section 7

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

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

Article IX

EDUCATION

Section 8

Prohibition of public aid for religious purposes and institutions.

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

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

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

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

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

subject:Request for information – RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

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

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

Thank you. [….]

We received the following reply yesterday afternoon:

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

subject: Re: Request for information – RSMo 610

[….]

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

Sincerely,

[….]

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

[….]

November 9, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesly,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

s/

Edward L. Baker

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

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

Benoit Wesly replied on November 16, 2009:

[….]

Maastricht, November 16, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Baker,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

s/

Benoit Wesly

[….]

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

[….]

Maastricht, November 25, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Philips,

I would like to draw your attention to the following.

[….]

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

Sincerely yours,

s/

Benoit Wesly

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

December 2, 2009

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesley:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely;

Richard Phillips

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

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

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

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

Our previous coverage of the issue:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is the thirtieth 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

We had previously asked for a copy of the contract approved by the Board of Governors during their October 29, 2009 meeting. Yesterday afternoon, we received it:

[….]

date: Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:11 PM

subject: Fwd: Re: Request for information – RSMo 610

[….]

On 11/9/09, I advised you that once all signatures were obtained on the contract with Ken Hutchinson of Hutchinson Consulting, LLC and the contract complete, a copy would be provided to you.  Attached is a copy of the contract.

[….]

Custodian of Records

The contract:

[….]

October 29, 2009

Mr. Richard Phillips

Chair, Board of Governors

University of Central Missouri

[….]

Re: Management Consulting Agreement

Dear Richard,

This will confirm that Hutchinson Consulting LLC (also referred to herein as “Consultant”) offers to represent University of Central Missouri (hereafter referred to as “UCM”) in a consulting engagement to identify and present competent persons as viable candidates for the position of President of University of Central Missouri. This aspect of the consulting engagement will be supported by baker and Associates of Atlanta, Georgia, a nationally recognized executive search firm and specifically Jerry H. Baker. All fees, costs and expenses associated with Baker and Associates and Jerry H. Baker shall be the sole responsibility of Consultant. Search advertisements will include baker and Associates and Hutchinson Consulting LLC. Hutchinson Consulting LLC will also serve as the general human resources consultant on matters related to the search, including the assessment of desired leadership qualities for the next president, and consulting assistance in developing the next president’s compensation program. Hutchinson Consulting LLC shall endeavor to accomplish those items on the attached Schedule A on or about the dates specified on Schedule A, with the understanding that UCM and Hutchinson Consulting may from time to time mutually agree to an adjustment both of items to be accomplished and dates.

Hutchinson Consulting shall also assist with the preparation of performance criteria and performance indicators for communication and evaluation purposes for the new president.

The professional fee for the engagement shall be Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000.00). It will be invoiced to you in three equal installments of Twenty-Six Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-Six Dollars and seventy-Seven Cents ($26,666.67). The initial retainer invoice will be submitted not later than five days after signing this agreement. The second invoice in the same amount of the first invoice will be submitted to you sixty-five days after signing this agreement. The last invoice in the same of the first invoice will be submitted to you immediately following UCM’s signing of an Employment Agreement with the new President. Consultant shall assist in the preparation and negotiation of any such Employment Agreement. Consultant is acting as an independent contractor and is not an employee of UCM. Accordingly, UCM shall not exercise control over the method by which Consultant shall perform such work as may be requested by UCM. Both parties acknowledge that Consultant is not an employee for state or federal tax purposes and therefore not subject to tax withholding and any and all associated taxes are the sole responsibility of Consultant.

[page]

In addition to the professional fee, Hutchinson Consulting will bill direct expenses of the assignment on an out-of-pocket basis. These expenses include materials and services, report preparation, reproduction and delivery services, as well as travel (coach airfare only) and interviewing expenses. We make every effort to hold reimbursable expenses to a minimum, and will ask your approval prior to incurring major costs and prior to incurring an individual direct expense in excess of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and cumulative direct expenses in excess of fifteen thousand ($15,000.00).

We are committed to the goal of equal employment opportunity as established by various federal and state laws and regulations and as stated in UCM’s Equal Employment Opportunity Program. As such, we will not discriminate against any individual for employment because of the protected categories in said Equal Employment Opportunity Program.

Because many candidates will expect their candidacy to remain confidential, we ask UCM to refrain from any unauthorized, indiscriminate reference inquiries about candidates. When appropriate, we will inform candidates that an offer may be contingent upon successful completion of reference checks or any other conditions of employment required by UCM. At that time, references will be checked.

At the direction of the Board of Governors, Hutchinson Consulting or Baker and Associates will conduct reference checks on the final candidates, an analysis that will include both telephone reference checks and requesting and receiving written letters of reference.

As you direct, we will provide you and the committee with a status report of all the individuals involved in your search.

We will not initiate contact or otherwise recruit the candidate chosen for President of UCM for a minimum of five years, unless permission is given by the President of the Board of Governors. UCM may terminate this management Consulting Agreement at any time for any reason or for no reason and any and all incurred payments, costs and expenses shall be paid to Consultant up to the date of termination.

If you have any questions regarding our procedures or the terms and conditions outlined in this confirmation letter, please call me. If you are in agreement with these arrangements as stated, please sign both copies of the Consulting Agreement where indicated. Retain the “Client Copy” for your records and forward the “Consultant Copy” to my office.

I look forward to and am delighted to establish this relationship with UCM.

Sincerely,

s/

R. Kenneth Hutchinson

President, Hutchinson Consulting LLC

RKH/clc

Enclosures

[page]

SCHEDULE A

Hutchinson Consulting LLC

And

University of Central Missouri

2010 Presidential Search Timeline

(Timeline can be compressed if desired by the Board of Governors)

November 2009-December 2009

Appoint search consultant

After interviewing members of the Board of Governors (members of the Board of Governors are also referred to herein as the Search Committee or Presidential Search Committee), draft statement of desired leadership qualities for Board approval and possible circulation to UCM constituencies.

Draft and place advertising that incorporates desired leadership credentials.

Approve composition of Search Advisory Committee to the Board of Governors. Optional)

January 2010

Advertising appears for two consecutive weeks.

Search announcement letter is mailed to Governor, State Senator, State Representatives and key friends of UCM.

Search brochure and candidate nomination forms are printed and distributed. (Optional and may be accomplished with UCM facilities)

Search web site is assembled and made public. (Optional and may be accomplished with UCM facilities)

Nominations for members of the Search Advisory Committee are submitted to the Serach Committee Chair.

President Search Forums are scheduled and advertised: Warrensburg, greater Kansas City, Missouri metropolitan areas, select other areas in the UCM catchment area
. (Optional)

February 2010

Conduct Search Forums.

Actively solicit nominations.

Provide agenda to Board of Governors prior to meeting.

Search Committee Chair sends letter to Advisory Committee nominees inviting them to serve on committee.

Appoint Search Advisory Committee and Chair.

[page]

Schedule Search Advisory Committee meeting with Chair of the Presidential Search Committee to charge the committee and provide other search information as appropriate.

March-April 2010

Search Committee meeting with Search Consultant

Report on diversity of candidates

Distill list of candidates

Determine dates for candidate interviews.

Telephone the semifinalists to determine continuing interest and request references.

Conduct reference checks.

Determine off-campus interview site and make appropriate arrangements.

Schedule candidate interviews.

Arrange lodging, meals and travel for search committee and candidates.

Consultant guides Search Committee through preparing interview questions and formatting interview sessions.

Search Advisory Committee schedules meeting to draft interview questions and format interview sessions under guidance of the Consultant.

May-June 2010

Interview semi-finalists.

Distill pool to three to five finalists.

Telephone to determine continued interest and to advise of intensified background checks.

Schedule candidate interviews, as appropriate.

Arrange lodging, meals and travel in preparation of finalist interviews.

Complete reference checks.

Presidential Search Committee receives individual reports of committee members of the Search Advisory Committee.

Board of Governors negotiates terms with finalists.

Board of Governors appoints and announces new president.

New President Appointee and Spouse (if applicable) make campus tour for introductions.

[page]

October 29, 2009

CONSULTING AGREEMENT

The Board of Governors of University of Central Missouri

President, University of Central Missouri

Accepted By:

Signature: s/

Name: Richard Phillips

Title: Chair of University of Central Missouri Board of Governors

Date Signed: 11-16-09

CLIENT COPY

[CONSULTANT COPY also provided]

You can read a copy of the original document here (pdf).

I think I know ten people who won’t invited to be on the “Search Advisory Committee”.

Interesting. It appears that presidential candidates will likely be invited to campus for interviews after the end of the semester – when the majority of students and faculty will be elsewhere. Well, at least the candidates can be given a tour of the luxury boxes. Maybe they can get answers to our questions without paying $501.86.

Our previous coverage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 20
09)

“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)

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

From a Gentleman’s Agreement (1947):

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

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

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

Written by Rick Hellman, Editor  

Friday, 13 November 2009 12:00

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

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

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

The transcript from October 14th:

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

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

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

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

Marion Woods: Yep.

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

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

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

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

As Blue Girl wrote:

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

The public silence is deafening.

So much for action.

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

Our previous coverage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is the fifteenth 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

At the October 29, 2009 University of Central Missouri Board of Governors meeting. From left to right: University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky, Board of Governors President Richard Phillips, board member Walt Hicklin, University Counsel Henry Setser. The empty chairs in the foreground were for board members Deleta Williams and Lawrence Fick, both who did not attend this meeting and who were in the minority in voting to renew President Aaron Podolefsky’s contract almost a month ago.

At 4:45 p.m. in the Friday news dump:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE…

UCM Begins Presidential Search Process

WARRENSBURG, MO (Oct. 30, 2009) – The University of Central Missouri Board of Governors voted Oct. 29 to enter a contract with Ken Hutchinson, president, Hutchinson Consulting LLC, Columbia, to lead the search for the university’s 15th president. The vote was unanimous by those attending the meeting. Hutchinson brings unique qualifications and credentials to the presidential search process, having served 42 years in higher education administration in Missouri, retiring at the end of 2007 as vice president of human resources at the University of Missouri.

An advisor and consultant on previous university presidential searches in Missouri, Hutchinson has extensive experience with regard to executive performance programs. Hutchinson was elected as a Fellow in the National Academy of Human Resources in 2000. In addition to his personal qualifications, he maintains a contractual relationship with the leading national search firm of Jerry H. Baker and Associates, which brings additional expertise and resources to the search process.

The presidential search process, now under way at UCM, will be highly collaborative and involve input from all major stakeholder groups, according to Richard Phillips, president of the UCM Board of Governors. More details on the complete process will be announced soon.

# # #

[emphasis added]

Was there an RFP (request for proposals) or bid process before the awarding of this contract? And what is the cost of the contract? We’ll try asking those questions.

“…The vote was unanimous by those attending the meeting…” Two of the three board members who voted to renew Aaron Podolefsky’s contract were not in attendance.

“…The presidential search process, now under way at UCM, will be highly collaborative and involve input from all major stakeholder groups, according to Richard Phillips, president of the UCM Board of Governors…” I’ll venture a guess of the names of ten faculty members who definitely won’t be appointed to that search committee.

Let’s take a look at some connections:

UM associate to retire in December

By Amy Brachmann and Elliot Njus

Published Sept. 14, 2007

Kenneth Hutchinson, the UM system vice president for human resources, said he plans to stay professionally active after he leaves the UM system, but still plans to enjoy retirement…

…UM system General Counsel Bunky Wright, who also works at the UM system office, said he and Hutchinson have been friends since childhood.

“I have the greatest respect for him,” Wright said. “He’s just an outstanding person.”

Hutchinson said that although he hopes to do some professional work at a human resources firm he started, he doesn’t want to do too much…

[emphasis added]

July 30, 2003

UM approves raise for administrators

by WHITNEY POOL  

The UM Board of Curators approved a 2 percent salary increase for five administrative officials during its executive session Friday.

Vice President for Human Resources Ken Hutchinson, Vice President for Academic Affairs Steve Lehmkuhle, Vice President for Finance and Administration Nikki Krawitz, UM General Counsel Marvin “Bunky” Wright and UM Board Secretary Kathy Miller will be receiving the raise.

[emphasis added]

University of Central Missouri

Board of Governors

Plenary Session Minutes

February 26, 2009

….Mr. Phillips….welcomed and introduced Mr. Henry Setser, UCM’s new General Counsel who will begin full-time employment on March 3, 2009. Mr. Phillips expressed appreciation to Mr. Marvin Wright for his service to UCM as Interim General Counsel….

[emphasis added]

Curators hold public forums

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Jack Rollins

….noticed that no representative from Baker-Parker, Inc. was present at the forum. “Does anyone from Baker plan on attending these forums?” he asked.

Ken Hutchinson, vice president for human resources for the university, assured Combs and others that a representative from Baker would be present at all the forums except the first one…

[emphasis added]

Jerry Baker

President

Mr. Baker has been an executive search consultant since 1976. Prior to establishing the firm in 2007, he was a partner with Baker-Parker, Inc. for 16 years….

[emphasis added]

Where everybody knows your name.

Connections are always interesting.

Let’s take a look at the biographies of the current board members who voted in the 4-3 majority to not renew President Aaron Podolefsky’s contract earlier this month:

Board of Governors

Richard Phillips was named to the Board of Governors in February 2005 and currently serves as the board president….He also worked at UCM as assistant football coach from 1970 to 1972….

Walter “Walt” Hicklin was named to the Board of Governors in June 2007, and currently serves as board vice president.   He retired in 2006 as Vice President emeritus of Student Affairs at the University of Central Missouri after having served the university for 31 years….

Weldon Brady was appointed to the Board of Governors in February 2008, and currently serves as board secretary….[1964] and since that time has been a strong supporter of the university and its athletic teams….

Edward L. Baker was appointed to the Board of Governors in April 2007….A strong supporter of UCM athletics, Baker has been a member of the Mule Train since 2002…

[emphasis added]

Mule Train, Mule Train? Where have I seen that before. Oh, yes, now I remember.

Well, three out of the four board members who voted to not renew Aaron Podolefsky’s contract expressed strong connections in their board biographies to the university’s athletic programs.

Oh, wait, make that four out of four with those strong connections:

….Hicklin joined Central in 1975 as an instructor of mathematics, spent five years as the head football coach and one year a
s head track coach….

[emphasis added]

Our previous coverage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

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

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

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

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

…date: Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:40 AM

Subject:Request for information under RSMo 610

Under RSMo 610 I am requesting the following information:

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

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

Thank you…

We received the following reply today:

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

Subject: Re: Request for information under RSMo 610

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

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

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

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

…Maastricht, October 22, 2009

…Dear Mr. President,

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

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

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

I have the following questions:

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

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

Many thanks for your attention in this matter.

Best regards,

s/

Benoit Wesly

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

October 23, 2009

Mr. Benoit Wesly…

Dear Mr. Wesly:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Respectfully

Richard Phillips…

cc: Dr. Aaron Podolefsky, President

UCM Board of Governors

Governor State of Missouri, the Honorable Jay Nixon

Monica Huffman

Henry Setser

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

The public silence is deafening.

Our previous coverage:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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