Finally. One of the main players in every questionable action the JALC board has taken is speaking out as evidenced by the large ad in The Southern Illinoisan today. He just couldn't keep quiet as his buddies are being outed. Of course, he now is outing himself. But we knew all along his hand was in this.
We find it interesting that he did this on his own without the endorsement of any other board members. We hope it means that those who have been silent for too long (Hancock, Sanders, Hopkins, and Snider) are finally going to help put an end to "business as usual."
That's exactly what it's going to take to change the culture of this Board. Maybe chairs of search committees should just put forth one name, and if the Board resists, threaten publicity and legal action--that seems to work every time. One person can't create the kind of corrupt culture that has become business-as-usual, it takes all of them, activily pursuing their own and each others hidden agendas, and/or staying silent while it goes on. Clean house.
ReplyDeleteWell said Anonymous 9:41PM (since many of us appear to be using that name)!
Deletethe reason everyone is putting anonymous on here is not to try and hide their identity but the difficulty in putting in their real name due to the system set up.
DeleteTalking about self destruction! Why would Mr. Rendleman pay money out of his pocket(he does have deep pockets though)when he has witnessed first hand what Vanhorn stated in his flyers?
ReplyDeleteHe is not even up for re-election,is he? So I think that someone had to urge the lap boy on the board or running for the board to do this dirty work for them and try to keep his friends on the board or get Mr. Kilquist elected.
It seems to me that this blog and the newspaper and political ads by new candidates are bringing paranoia to the current insecure board.
Man, these non paid "innocent" incumbents are spending alot of money. Mr. Kilquist got into his pockets beginning tonight with a TV ADVERTISEMENT on Channel 3. Gotta Love it! I thought after hearing about it he was running for Sheriff again due to his lengthy accomplishments. He failed to mention all the grievances that are filed against him.(Public record)
With the economy being so bad the newspapers,tv stations,etc.sign makers,flyers and other campaign materials being provided by the 7 people running for JALC BOARD has to make the economy better. I have never seen this much attention or work by candidates like this in 30 years at JALC. I just wonder why there is so much of a change then in the past years?
Rendleman wrote in his ad that JALC search committees must be COMPROMISED?
ReplyDeleteRendleman's add begs a lot of questions. His ad says there are candidates who " ...divide the campus over issues that have long been settled." Apparently they have not been settled. If they were, nepotism, cronyism and hiring practices would not be the central issue of the campaign; nor would they be the constant topic in the halls of Logan, in bars, at parties and over employees' dinner.
ReplyDeleteThe good ole boys thought they had finessed the situation "seven or eight years ago" when they " ...established a very stringent nepotism policy". The problem is that having a policy and following it are not the same thing. Nor are the spirit and the letter of the law the same thing. I was amazed by Rendleman's statement that " ...College policy prohibits JALC part-time employees from being promoted into full-time positions." Again, policy and practice are NOT the same thing.
His ad is an endorsement of incumbency. The fact that he took it out indicates he sees writing on the wall.
I saw that Sniders ad in the Southern doesn't match his "everything is fine, nothing to see here folks, just re-elect me and John OKeefe and things'll be great" brochure. Fact, doesn't even mention Okeefe. Ad does mention support from Bob Mees--maybe Snider thinks no one remembers or is still ANGRY about Meese double-dipping all those years after "retiring" to pull a taxpayer-funded pension PLUS getting a taxpayer-and-student-funded salary on top of it. Where are his ethical supporters?
ReplyDeleteSheila Sez, it's Mees, Mike! Can't you ever get anything right? Maybe it is the fault of the Southern again.
ReplyDeleteCan someone tell Anonymous at 7:38 posting I have no idea on what he is talking about or who he is talking about. Also can anyone tell me who supported Kilquist with his fantastic TV ad and Radio Ad?
ReplyDeleteThe paid ad was something to do with Full Time Faculty????or Long Term Faculty?
The radio station claims it ran the ad in error. At least attributing it to being paid for by faculty was the error - not the ad itself.
DeleteRight, it was a MISTAKE that they ran the add NINE TIMES saying the faculty union paid for a Killquist add. Who does business with River Radio? Okeefe, Brewer, and pals. I hear they "apologized" but you can't un-say what was said during the morning hours when people were on the way to work and to vote. Should be an investigation and if truly a "mistake" then someone should get fired. This is rotten...
DeleteWhen you pay for an ad whether it is newspaper or Radio or T.V. the sales rep must have you proof read it and sign off on it if it is ok to run
DeleteThe union signed off on their ad with the radio station and if Mr. Kilquist signed off on his he verified all of the information on the ad, therefore being liable for the mistake,not the radio station.
Hey Union if you haven't checked the paper work yet for the Kilquist ad please do yourself a favor and do so. Everyone makes a mistake but this one is HUGE. Someone needs to pay for this one.
I think Mr Kilquist is getting on the edge the night before the election. I will write my name down after this entry in to the blog so everyone is aware of who I am..
ReplyDeleteI DID NOT WRITE THE SNIDERS ENTRY AT 6:08pm..Matter of fact when have you ever read or heard me say bad things about Snider other then the fact his son is on the staff and was hired to a full time position and I felt he should get off the board so his son would not go through public scrutiny.
Mr. Snider is a very up front individual who has the right to serve on the board and run-It is only my personal opinion that it is truly unfair for the boy to be criticized for his position mainly because he was hired and recommended by the president now in place! Mr. Snider has a very good reputation in all communities unlike Kilquist,Brewer and Rendleman.
Maybe the biggest mistake by Kilquist,Rendleman,Snider and O'Keefe was that all the facts brought out in Vanhorn's flyer and advertising were FALSE and mudslinging.When did you ever see Vanhorn attack anyone PERSONALLY..it all had to do with LOGAN COLLEGE in his emails and facts presented is not MUDSLINGING; it is truth! All printed material had to do with John Logan College!
Mudslinging is apparent in certain threats made by Mr. Kilquist in emails to Mr. Vanhorn. Mudslinging was apparent in the paid advertisement by Mr. Jake Rendleman . Did you ever see O'Keefe,Snider,Graff,Hamilton,Williams go after any candidate personally in emails or public literature? NO.
This blog is good because it has allowed one candidate for this board to dig at Vanhorn constantly. Vanhorn doesn't write blogs and say Right, Bill?
The race will be over after Tuesday night and maybe everyone can relax and enjoy being alive. Things could be alot worse then what we all campaigned against- Reverse Nepotism, Political Favors,and the so called mudslinging.
My identity is very clear. I took complaints-ran for this board in this race to CLEARLY GET THE FACTS OUT. Unfortunately the incumbents and 1 challenger were constantly pointed out in all of the facts and a change to the board needs to be made to eliminate the intimidation,political favors and the terrible reputation done by the decisions which have been made by the past board.
With no board members stepping up to talk and disagree with what has been going on for years-one has to believe INTIMIDATION is a big factor in the faculty,administration,and board members decision in staying quiet publicly!
I have a very clear conscious of the way I did my campaign. I will lose absolutely no sleep at all if I win or lose in this campaign. The message was delivered-The facts are out and the citizens will vote on whether they need a change or not.
Best of luck to Snider,Graff,Williams,and O'Keefe in the election. Keep the blog going constantly..it gives people a chance to "vent"..important part of educational structure!
My personal opinion in this entire race is simply come down to: Graff and Snider are the best 2 candidates for the job!
Why? Educated female who has served on board and then got ousted by Mr. Brewer in the election following his recommendation to fill a post when the Sheriff decided to "get a job at Logan".
Snider is an outstanding citizen with good morals and has a good background in finance. People like him. Not one bad thing did I ever hear about him the entire 4 months I was talking to people other then he should step down to his son being an administrator full time.
So there it is--my recommendation for you. The best qualified individuals should get the citizens vote and just think who in the next election should be removed....BREWER AND RENDLEMAN!
I have a state rating card for you to look at if you so desire..My scores on these individuals had Graff as #1 and Snider #2. Do you think the current board can get my ratings changed?
Mike Vanhorn
Candidate for Board of Trustees
Nicely said, Mike! This campaign turned on your willingness to "out" everyone. Way to go. And you're right; Brewer and Rendleman are next.
DeleteI was just thinking about that Radio ad mistake.I could be wrong but I would imagine the Union Leaders who took out their ad had to proof that ad before it was aired.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't Mr. Kilquist have to proof his ad before it aired?
Maybe the radio and TV stations do not do that but they sure should to avoid problems like this.
Anyone know the answer to this aspect of the conflict in the advertising?
confirmed; Radio must have written approval after proofing ad
Delete