SMOKE AND MIRRORS? OR APPLES AND ORANGES?

As we watch the cold mist out our windows, this MLK weekend, lets review a few things that happened in 2016 at our favorite subject, John A. Logan College.  The big events were

• the firing of 55 employees
• the promise to bring them back
• the failure to do so
• the Larry Peterson reorganization plan that was to revitalize enrollment

The focus of this post will be the difficulty of determining the success, or lack thereof, of the last point.  At the March 2016 BOT meeting, the layoffs occurred, including of tenured faculty.  No explanation has ever been given of the criteria used to identify who was to be terminated.  Then Interim President Ron House stated that this was only a budgetary measure and that the intention was to bring these people back.  Months have gone by.  His interim status has changed to permanent.  Some, who have allowed themselves to acquiesce to the new regime, have been promoted to vice presidencies and deanships.  The new regime includes meeker faculty (grateful to have been called back or no longer trusting their tenure) and part time teachers attempting to fill the shoes of long time staff who are putting houses on the market, seeking jobs out of state, starting over in their 50s and those leaving higher education all together.  ...Sorry!  We will return to this subject many times.  It's just important to remind ourselves as the new year starts, that everything is not OK for everybody.  ...On to today's subject:  enrollment counts. 

In the next month, JALC will be reporting Spring 2017 enrollment.  Before that happens, let's review the gibberish that was given the Southern Illinoisan on September 11, 2016, regarding this Fall's enrollment.  Seriously.  Follow the link to see what was provided to the Southern.  The press, public and governing boards are always interested in one thing, each term.  Is enrollment up or down?  The only way to determine this is to compare a given term to the same term of the preceding year or years.  Comparisons must be exact.  Apples to apples.  Inexact, or changing, methods, lead to errors, mistrust and accusations. 

Director of Institutional Research, Eric Pulley, reported to the Board of Trustees, August 30, that Fall 2016 enrollment was up 16.3% (552 students) over Fall 2015.  This includes, for Fall 2016, 3,948 credit seeking students.  For Fall 2015, it includes 3,921 credit seeking students minus a made up number of 784 plus a made up number of 259, for a total of 3,396.  The 3,396 was subtracted from 3,948 to come up with a supposed increase of 552 (or 16.3%). 

Confused?  You should be.  This is an attempt to compare apples to oranges.

JALC apparently did not conduct a purge Fall 2015.  However, to arrive at these numbers, they claim to have taken an average percentage of registrations that are usually purged, arrived at a number (759) and subtracted it from the original 3,921.  They then added back an estimated number of people they thought would have re-registered if they'd been registered in the first place, got purged and then decided they really wanted to come.  This number was 259.  So, 3921 - 784 + 259 = 3396.  This is the number they subtracted from 3,948 to get their 552 student increase.  ...The problem is two fold.  First, they literally made up numbers for Fall 2015 and, second, they failed to subtract real people from the Fall 2016 count that they subtracted by guestimate from the Fall 2015 count. 

This makes a difference two ways.  The lower 2015 numbers appear to be, the better 2016 enrollment will look.  Failing to subtract the purged 2016 students inflates the 2016 number and, again, makes Fall 2016 enrollment look better. 

This may not be nefarious, but it also fails to give the Board, ICCB, the press or the public an accurate picture of the College's enrollment.  Changing procedures makes comparisons difficult.  Deciding not to conduct a traditional procedure, such as the purge, will make longitudinal studies impossible. The institution should accurately report the results, take the one time PR hit that the lower numbers would cause and move on.  Headcounts should be made at the same time, in the same manner, each year, comparing like terms (fall to fall; and spring to spring, not fall to spring).  Some of the confusion may be due to unfamiliarity with new reporting tools.  The term 'Higher Reach students' is used in both the information given to the Southern, and in the report given to the BOT on August 30.  This seems not to be a class of students, but, we suspect, Jenzebar student information system vocabulary. 

Let's review the numbers and then compare apples to apples and see what we get.  We've made a chart, below.  Using Mr. Pulley's numbers to subtract the non-credit courses from each year, we agree with his counts of credit seeking students enrolled in advance of the purge (3948 - 3921 = 27, an increase of 0.7%).  Then we diverge.

The Southern quotes Matt Berry, of the Illinois Community College Board as saying, " The fall enrollment reporting will include everyone who is enrolled in credit bearing courses...  If a CPR course leads to a certification and provides college credit, the student would be counted in fall numbers.  If the purge occurred before data was reported, but within the reporting time frame and the student was no longer enrolled due to the purge they would not be counted in the enrollment numbers as they are no longer enrolled at the college."  We interpret this to mean that if a student was enrolled Fall 2015, at the time of the count, they should be included.  If there was no purge that year, they were enrolled and should be counted.  Conversely, we interpret it to mean if students were purged, as 249 were in Fall 2016, they may not be included.  For Fall 2016, 3,948 were registered.  Those students minus the 249 purged leaves 3,699 enrolled for Fall 2016.  That 3699 - 3921 registered for Fall 2015 is -222, a loss of 5.7% from the previous year. 

If we use the guestimates for Fall 2015, giving us the 3,396 number, we must subtract the purge for Fall 2016.  Again, that's 3,699.  The difference, 3699 - 3396 = 303, an increase of 8.9% over Fall 2015.  Respectable, but not the 16.3% increase. 

So, there it is.  They are down 222, or up 303, but they are not up 552.  That, even by their methods, would be apples and oranges. 

		Fall 2015		Fall 2016		diff.		% diff.
Credit and non credit enrollment		4313		4406		93		2.2%
Non credit (Continuing Ed and Center for Business and Industry		392		458		66		16.8%
Headcount of enrolled credit seeking students prior to purge		3921		3948		27		0.7%
Number of students purged		0		249		249
Actual headcount, after purge		3921		3699		-222		-5.7%
Guestimated FL 15 purge		784		249		-535		-68.2%
Headcount, after guestimated '15 purge		3137		3699		562		17.9%
Guestimated returned after purge		259		0		-259
Headcount, after guestimated '15 purge plus returnees		3396		3699		303		8.9%

HERE WE GO AGAIN

It’s December… Are YOUR Board Election Petitions Filed?

 So many of you have been checking in lately we guess it’s time to ramp MW back up. We stayed out of all the shenanigans last spring, since our original goal was to share info about trustees and candidates prior to the last BOT election. So THAT went well.

 Here we are, with three seats open. Will this election be a game-changer, or bring more of the same? As much as we hope for a breath of fresh air, we predict same old same old.

 Nothing better (more influential, high-profile, or interesting) has come along for Mr. Poshard, so we predict he will run for the seat he was appointed to. Trustee R. Hancock was overheard saying to a variety of people that the board “had to” choose Mr. Poshard, since he helped them pass various bond schemes when he was a legislator. We can’t figure out why he wants to get down in the mud with this crew, but the allure of public office seems irresistible.

 Mr. Brewer was overheard last spring saying 40 years was enough and that he was not going to run again. If only. Where else could he experience the sanctity of the closed session? (NOTE: the person who posted the video of his ridiculous statement has been fired, after the administration pulled off some clever maneuvering to dismantle the union which protected her.) But really, does anyone think he wouldn’t have just as much influence as a private citizen (they are hiding Mr. Peterson somewhere, but his blueprint is still being followed despite mounting evidence that his absurd plan for saving the college from itself is a complete disaster)? So who cares, really?

 And Ms. Hancock. Like Ms. Graff, pretending to support the beleaguered teachers, but in the end voting lockstep with the evil cabal of Mr. Brewer, Mr. Rendleman, Mr. Kilquist, and her bro-in-law (and father of JAL administrator) Mr. Hancock. So again, who cares, really? Except her nephew?

 Do you know someone who is running? Please post! Tell us where to send money!

BLINDLY STUMBLING TOWARD THE FUTURE

What will John A. Logan College look like in the future?  This summer?  This Fall?  Two years from now?  Having fired (we at Muddy Williamson are not constrained by terms like RIF, layoffs, converted contracts; if you're unemployed, you've been fired) 55 people, most of them faculty, how does the school carry on?  Many of those fired were tenured professors.  If the make up of the faculty is to be so radically changed, will this be the same school?  Some of those dismissed were renowned for their teaching, student leadership and scholarly authorship.  Rumor, and the attitude of the administration, indicate that quantity and specifics of the individuals selected for dismissal was of a purpose.  That purpose was to work their way through some with less seniority in order to get to some the administration would prefer disappear.  Rumor has it that at least one board member has been bragging that they got rid of some "bad apples".  If true, the stated reason for the firings was a lie. 

Interim President Ron House has said that it is their intention to call back as many of the 55 as possible.  Thirteen people were called back Tuesday night.  The reporting is garbled.  WPSD TV-6 apparently had a different reporter on hand, as did the Southern Illinoisan, who sent their Perry and Franklin counties reporter.  Putting it kindly, the Southern's article, in this morning's paper, was gibberish.  However, assuming that at least the quotes are accurate, or close, Interim Vice President of Administration Larry Peterson, crows about the reorganization, put in place after the ouster of former President Mike Drieth, but says nothing about the massive faculty layoff.  Of those brought back, few were faculty.  Of those staff mentioned in the article, some were to fill newly created positions.  Nothing brings on the ire of taxpayers and legislators like growing administration at a time of budget constraints. 

Peterson refers to checks and balances, with an astounding lack of self awareness.  Everyone at the school acknowledges that he is the de facto president, with Ron House a figurehead. Given the top down, good old boy, nature of the administration of John A. Logan, checks and balances are a joke.  The institution is currently run by Don Brewer, Bill Kilquist, Larry Peterson and Jake Rendleman, reporting lines be damned. 

Interim President House says there is no timeline to recall faculty but that there is a two year window, during which it can take place.  Two years is a long time not to know where the mortgage payment is coming from, what to do about health insurance or whether to enroll the children in school the next term.  It's also a long time for a college to have it's core faculty gone.  While there are reports that most of the recalls were in the biological sciences, not so much for social sciences (none) or English (none). 

Course staffing aside, who will run the college in two years?  If memory serves, the Logan Board said a permanent president would be in place in nine months.  The clock started ticking in October.  That would mean July.  How will they get quality candidates to apply?  To come to Illinois?  To dive into the chaos that is now Logan?  To work for a micromanaging board?  In the wake of the mysterious firing of Mike Drieth?  Larry Peterson is also an interim and supposedly done in December.  Board chairman Don Brewer's term will expire next year.  Who will inherit the shell they have made of the College and what form will that shell take?

BUSINESS AS USUAL

Well, the agenda is out for the next board meeting and there are MORE administrative positions being created and bestowed upon those who didn’t apply for them. This has happened repeatedly, and yet NO ONE SEEMS UPSET. Why are the teachers and staff not rioting in the streets??!! 

Jobs filled so far with NO search: President, Vice President for Administration, Dean, Associate Dean of Admissions, Director of Cirriculum (sic—that means the college didn’t spell it right on their website, but no worries, they have a HIGHLY QUALIFIED person in charge of “cirriculum” with YEARS of experience in that area, if by “years” you mean “zero years”), Director of Advisement (same number of years of experience in advisement) and now Director of Term Faculty.

So, they (whoever “they” are) take someone out of Continuing Ed (which doesn’t seem to have suffered any budget cuts, unlike almost every other cash-strapped school in the state), and drop her in as the person who signs off on new part-time teachers. Hmmm. Part-time President House said the college will replace full-time teachers with part-time ones who are JUST AS QUALIFIED, and the person who will determine that was given a job she didn’t even have to apply for!! Nothing fishy about THAT!

Another fishy item on that agenda is the “closed session minutes” one, most likely related to the complaint filed by Everyone’s Favorite Student Trustee. The Open Meetings Act is pretty clear that those minutes have to be kept for months, so they can’t be voting to destroy them like they do pretty regularly. What are they up to? Right, business as usual…

TRANSPARENCY, SECRECY AND SNOOPING

The ongoing controversy over the actions that the John A. Logan College Board of Trustees took, behind closed doors, March 3, continues.  This Sunday, the Southern Illinoisan mocked the Board's claim of the "sanctity" of the executive session, pointing out that if students were to behave as Ms. Husch claims the Board did, the students would be in violation of the student conduct code. 

According to Ms. Husch, another Board member said, “You want to talk about poor decisions? Well, here’s the poor decisions of Brandi,” as the Board member presented a folder with evidence of past mistakes Husch had allegedly made.  What was in that folder?  More importantly, where did the information come from?  If it was academic, and part of her record, accessing the information was a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act.  If it was of a medical nature, it would be a HIPPA violation.  If it was of a criminal nature (no matter how small an offense) how would a Board member obtain such information?  Some arrests and convictions are public records and can be obtained by anyone on the Internet.  Some police reports can be obtained via FOIA.  However, if they were obtained outside standard protocol required of any citizen, then that brings up some questions.  Were they obtained by calling friends within law enforcement?  If so, and if this violated any laws protecting a citizen's records, the violators must be exposed and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  Would any current Board members have the opportunity to do such a thing?  Who could it be?

Lets, for the sake of argument, assume two things.  One, that Husch is telling the truth and, two, that the information in the folder was obtained legally.  Revisit the description of the action in that room. 

• "this same board member then produced a folder that documented some...past personal mistakes."

 

This public body spends tax dollars.  It employees hundreds of people.  A folder was produced for the purposes of intimidating a fellow Board member.  Husch was a student trustee; her vote was merely advisory.  If they would do that to her, what might they do to other Board members?  Has this happened in the past?  Has it influenced votes?  Has the use of folders with incriminating information been used outside of Board meetings?  Have members received visits at, or phone calls to, home? 

 

Maybe this was the first time.  Even so, can the message be lost on other Board members?  Get in line, or we'll embarrass you.  If this kind of intimidation has taken place, what about other kinds?  Has the employment of family members been threatened?  Has the employment of Board members been threatened through the political connections of the dominant Board members? 

 

This is serious stuff and the citizens, tax payers and voters of the John A. Logan Community College District need to pay attention.  Oddly, as serious as this is, the Chairman's and the legal counsel's reactions have been laughable.  The word "sanctity" will become lore in southern Illinois.

 

Patrick Hewson, the College's legal mouthpiece, told WPSD-TV that "When things are discussed in executive session, things can get heated".  Well, yes, sometimes when people get excited they raise their voice.  But, do they spontaneously produce a folder of documents?  Hewson, in his full statement said that the Board relies on Roberts Rules of Order, and it is this, not the law that should silence Husch.  Really?  Roberts Rules of Order prevents the transparency of a public body?  Roberts Rules of Order isn't taken that seriously in an 8th grade student counsel.  Hewson says members have an obligation to remain mum, just not a legal obligation.  But, isn't that the only kind a lawyer is paid to opine upon?

WHAT SHAMEFUL THING DID THEY DO?

Public bodies are allowed to go into executive session for a limited amount of reasons, usually to discuss personnel issues.  This is to protect the personnel being considered for hiring, promotion or dismissal, not to protect the politicians from embarrassment.  The recent controversy surrounding student trustee Brandi Husch leads one to believe that the John A. Logan Board of Trustees exceeded the limits of what they may do in executive session.  Ironically, they are now attempting to use that very shroud of executive session secrecy to protect themselves from ridicule, or even a description of their actions while in executive session.  

As members of the public we would assume that there is a sense of decorum and seriousness that these elected officials keep during executive session.  This expectation would certainly apply to the session in question.  The Board was discussing the dismissal of 55 loyal employees.  That's all they were supposed to be discussing.  

Ms. Husch claims she became the subject of their discussion.  That is off limits.  She is an elected official.  Secrecy and the "sanctity" of the session does not apply to discussion of her.  Even the Board's own attorney unintentionally admitted as much.  When asked if, when discussion veered away from the topics on the agenda, there was a "legal obligation" to refrain from revealing the content of discussion, he responded that there was "an obligation".  Well, he's the lawyer, but we can all see that, beyond his spin, his real answer was 'no'.

He responded to Ms. Husch's accusations, on WPSD-TV Channel 6, by saying, "When things are discussed in an executive session, things can get heated,"  Perhaps.  But the "executive session" exception to the Open Meetings Act wasn't designed to hide heated discussion.  It is to protect employees and potential employees, who are under discussion.  Those who were supposed to be under discussion, March 2 were the 55 employees whose livelihoods were at risk.  If the discussion strayed off into one of Ms. Husch, then it was not she, but Chairman Brewer and the remaining members of the Board who were in violation.  And maybe not of the "sanctity" of the executive session, but perhaps in violation of the Open Meetings Act itself.  

All of this leaves unanswered questions.

• What exactly happened in that room March 2?
• What Board members bullied and shamed the student trustee?
• Did Chairman Brewer fail to act to stop this activity?
• Did other members attempt to stop it?
• If not, why not?
• Bullying and shaming sound an awful lot like intimidation and extortion.  Is the Board's legal counsel saying that such "heated discussion" can take place, behind closed doors, that may affect hiring and firing of staff and the votes of Board members?

BULLIES AND THUGS

If Sarah Graham's report, in the Southern Illinoisan is accurate, the John A. Logan Board of Trustees is scared. Gavel-banging, interrupting, fake-indignation scared. Lawyering up scared. What could have happened in the sanctity of that inner sanctum that they have to work so hard to hide it?

 

They have a long history of destroying verbatim minutes.  They also have a long history of intimidating, bullying and threatening. Here’s hoping they picked the wrong young woman to try to hush up.

 

If Brand Husch isn’t in a position to sue for emotional distress, at the very least she should be talking to Lisa Madigan’s office and probably the state college board. And she better FOIA those minutes before they have a chance to vote to destroy them.

 

Interestingly, tonight, the "Freedom of Information" link on JALC's home page, goes not to a FOIA page but to the Free Support Services Available page.  The Freedom of Information page is here, as is Logan's FOIA Officer's contact information. 

Leap Day may be remembered as Black Monday

The mismanagement of local and state politicians has hit the area hard today.  There are rumors that Big Brothers/Big Sisters of Southern Illinois is closing.  If true, this is a tragedy that impacts young lives, when they are most vulnerable.
 
Bad news at John A. Logan College is not a rumor.  Notice of Recommendation of Reduction in Force letters went out to dozens of employees.  Two special meetings of the Board of Trustees will be held Wednesday, March 2.  The first will be at 5:30, from which the Board will go into executive session.  The second is at 7pm.  The agenda for each meeting provides for public comment.  To be considered are the elimination of 15 non-teaching professional staff, 35 full time faculty and 5 Teamsters.  That's 20 people who support students or teaching and eight non-tenured, and 27 tenured, faculty. 

As a union spokesman told the BOT, at their last meeting, this is not all the fault of the state (though, surely, most of it is).  Some of Logan's financial problems are of the Board's own making.
Regardless of who is to blame, it is cruel and unnecessary to put the entire college through the trauma it is now experiencing.  The part time temporary president and a part time temporary vice president are making decisions that will have far reaching consequences that will outlast their theoretically short tenures.  All employees are operating under a cloud and, while one assumes that only a fraction of those who received letters will be eliminated, everyone holding a letter tonight has to assume the worst.  The unions, the public, alumni and local legislators should hold the administration and the Board's feet to the fire.  There needs to be a rationale, publicly given, for each position eliminated and for why each individual has been singled out.

Right now, everyone has to assume the worst:  that some will be lost regardless of length of service, quality of service or prestige brought to the College.  Some may be lost as old scores are
settled.  In all cases, careers will be disrupted, families uprooted and institutional memory lost.  ...All this because a college got cute with credit hours, and finances, and two generations of
legislators neglected their jobs.

Logan BOT ducks responsibilty

With 40 to 60 layoff notices on the way and students waking up to the reality of a potentially decimated college, the John A. Logan College Board of Trustees looked everywhere but in the mirror for a culpret on which to afix blame.  According to Channel 3, last night's board meeting brought out a newly assertive faculty union and tearful and frustrated students.  It did not bring out anymore self awareness on the part of the Board, as they blamed every other politician, past and present, from local reps to the governor, for the financial pickle they're in. 

So, if they knew he wasn't dissing Logan, why was he sacked?

Well, it appears journalism is alive and well in southern Illinois.  Maybe it just takes a politician forcing a reporter to file a FOIA to get the journalistic juices flowing.  In any event, Channel 3 has clearly decided to start looking under rocks.  Good for them! 

Maybe instead of replacing the president, the BOT should have been reconsidering their choice of attorney. 

UPDATE:  An interesting quote, from the ICCB minutes referenced in the news article linked to above:  "Chairman Giannoulias expressed disappointment in the actions of JALC. He went on to say that the College’s President, Dr. Mike Dreith, has been extremely helpful and worked very hard in trying to investigate this matter and come up with solutions. Dr. Dreith has been a very strong and ethical leader during this difficult time and the ICCB Board appreciates his leadership."

Campus coup has real costs

Presumably, anyone reading this blog already knows that the John A. Logan College Board of Trustees removed President Mike Dreith, officially, last night.  The legal fig leaf is that he has resigned.  And bully for him; he gets a healthy severance package.  

It seems that some members of the Logan BOT have never wanted Dreith.  As time has went on, the cost of their desired result has increased.  His original contract had a buyout clause that would have allowed his termination, without cause, with a payout equal to only six months' pay.  According to a copy of his contract published by the Southern Illinoisan, it appears that Dreith made $177,979.00 per year.  Six months' worth of that would have been $88,989.50.  However, the Board has voted to pay him a total of $290,000 not to work.   

We will be told that appearances are deceiving because the $290,000 figure covers a 20 month period.  OK.  But he still will not be working for the College.  Ron House will be Interim President.  Board Chairman Don Brewer says the search for a permanent replacement will only take nine months and that House will only make $4000.00 a month.  OK.  Four thousand dollars times nine months is $36,000.00, in addition to what they'll have to pay Drieth. 

If the cost is to come from contingency funds, is this the best use of those funds?  The state budget process is in chaos and higher education is expected to take one of the biggest hits, when the Governor and General Assembly finally settle.  Weren't those funds for a rainy day?  

Drieth looking. SIU down and looking for yet another interim chancellor

Well, we've been in hibernation.  Readers, here, apparently have not.  We see comments, on old posts, over the last several months.  Well, here is some fresh news to chew on: 

Southern Illinoisan: JALC president is a finalist for job in Kansas  The subtitle was, "Report:  Dreith called decision to take JALC post 'worst mistake'

And, over in Jackson County, Southern Illinoisan: SIU Enrollment drop leads to $5.3M loss

In other news: Daily Egyptian: Dunn could be done with double duty soon  What the article doesn't point out is that Koropchak was also a vice chancellor and dean of the Graduate School.  ...They also skipped a bit of the search history.  The BOT reinterviewed TWO of the Chancellor candidates, not just the "preferred" one.  That left current interim provost Susan Ford (Koropchak's interim successor at the Graduate School) apparently still holding the fort. 

Time for a Fresh Start at Logan

On Friday, April 3, The Southern Illinois endorsed Ray Hancock, Brad Heuring, and Mandy Little for the three open positions on the John A Logan Board of Trustees. This election for the Logan Board on Tuesday, April 7 gives the college a unique opportunity to elect 3 new people to the Board.

As the Southern Illinois stated, John A Logan is facing a deficit of “anywhere between $2.5 million and $3.8 million” in the next fiscal year.  There are many contributing factors to this perfect financial storm. First, although enrollment at the college has remained steady over the last several years, the number of credit hours taken by those attending students has dropped steadily over the last 5 years.  Second, the State of Illinois most certainly will reduce its contribution to the college this coming year because of its financial condition.  Third, and perhaps the biggest factor, John A Logan can no longer count the health credit hours generated at Logan’s Community Health Center.  The credit hours generated at the Health Center represented $1.7 million in revenue for Logan in the last 5 years.

So, with these daunting financial challenges it is refreshing to see the possibility of electing a brand new slate of Board members. On Monday, March 2, the John A Logan Political Science Department sponsored a candidate forum. In attendance were Bill Alstat, Ray Hancock, Brad Heuring, Mandy Little, and John Sanders. Jake Rendleman chose not to attend and participate in the forum.  At the forum Hancock, Heuring, Little, and Sanders each demonstrated that they not only understood that challenges John A Logan is facing today, but they also articulated a passion for the quality education that John A Logan provides.  Alstat has a nice resume, but didn’t communicate an understanding or passion about education.  Rendleman just didn’t show up, maybe that shows us how important education is to him.

Since the forum, John Sanders has been appointed to the State Board of Education and has resigned from Logan’s Board.  Sanders has been a good Board member and will be missed. But Sanders departure gives voters in Logan’s district to elect brand new people to the Board for the first time in many years.  Let this be a change election and elect a new slate of candidates who can bring new vision and ideas to John A Logan College.

Using Logan's logo

Driving around Williamson County, this weekend, one sees lot's of yard signs popping up like crocus.  Many are for candidates to be on John A. Logan's Board of Trustees.

A couple questions spring to mind.  One, is it permissable to use the Logan logo in partisan ads?  Two, if not, why are current Board chair Jake Rendleman and former president Ray Hancock displaying the Logan logo on their yard signs?

It gives the impression that their campaigns have an institutional endorsement.  If it is not OK to be doing this, when will Steve O'Keefe and/or the Logan legal counsel be insisting that Mr. Rendleman and Dr. Hancock cease and desist?

Leadership, A.W.O.L.

So, much has happened in the last week!  Carterville fired its police chief.  Carbondale mayoral candidates are squabbling about who to replace their fired chief with.  The Jackson County States Attorney announced their would be no indictment in the case of Praveen Varughese., leaving many unanswered questions.  The John A. Logan College Board of Trustees approved a plan that will result in the layoff of a combination of full and part time staff.

The Political Science Club, at Logan will sponsor a forum for candidates seeking election to the Board.  The forum is tomorrow (Monday) night, March 2, in the Tarpin/Crisp Rooms, at John A. Logan College.  (UPDATE:  We've learned that the location has changed to the Batteau/Ivy Rooms.)  Rumor has it that one of the candidates for re-election, Board Chairman Jake Rendleman, will be absent.  Given the current climate on campus, recent layoffs, budget pressures and recent close scrutiny from the media, one would think a candidate would arrange his schedule to accommodate the only real opportunity the public will have, during the campaign, to compare the candidates.

Hopefully, this is an unfounded rumor.  However, if true, one has to assume the absence is not due to any emergency, given that word of Rendleman's intended absence has been circulating for days.  If he has some previously scheduled medical procedure preventing his attendance, he should publicly announce that.  Otherwise, non-participation is an insult to his fellow candidates, the student body and the voters of the district.  It would be the height of arrogance to believe that simply because of incumbency one could simply run on past experience and reputation and not be subject to probing inquiry and debate.  The forum starts at 6:00, tomorrow night.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:

There are six candidates vying for for three seats on the Logan Board.  Here's what we know, or think we do, so far.

Ray Hancock:  Another Hancock on the board?  Yes, Ray Hancock comes with baggage.  His sister-in-law Jackie is already a Trustee, and the hiring of his son Barry when Ray was president raised one of the first cries of nepotism at JALC.  But he is genuinely concerned about the college, he certainly understands budgets, and he has a backbone.  Now that the BOT can't fire him, he might be the best choice to stand up against Brewer and his ilk.

Mandy Little:  Mandy Little is a former student trustee.  Student trustees have no power and their votes don’t count.  They can, however, make one symbolic vote – oppose any tuition increases. Mandy didn’t do that as student trustee.  She’s already been sucked into the “club.”  Student trustees generally make poor board members – remember Cecelia Dunbar?

John Sanders:  John Sandershas been a decent board member and so far, we see no reason to oppose his re-election.  He just needs to show his backbone more than playing the occasional role of board buffoon.

Jake Rendleman:  As we pointed out above, he may play hooky from the candidate forum.  Lacking a really good excuse, that's a real slap in the face to the voters.

Bill Alstat:  Bill Alstat serves on the Jackson County Board and is tight with the Jackson County
Democrats in the style of Brewer and Kilquist.  So far, Alstat has demonstrated an incredible lack of knowledge of higher education and the very serious issues facing JALC.

Brad Heuring:  Brad Heuring is a public school administrator who at least should understand some of the issues facing the college.  He is a former Logan student and athlete.

The Southern Illinoisan had another Voice of the Southern editorial regarding Logan today.  It's unclear that they understand that people have already been given notice that they've lost their jobs. This should be a subject of tomorrow night's forum.

After the candidate forum, conducted prior to the last JALC Board election, WJPF posted the audio recording and we linked to it.  If they do so again, we will link to them again, so those who don't have the opportunity to attend can hear the candidates full answers.

Pizza Czar?

Excerpt from an email sent from President Drieth to JALC employees:

“At last night’s Board of Trustee’s meeting, Trustee Bill Kilquist said he would no longer vote for approval of college expenditures as long as the college continued to spend “so much money on travel and pizza.” He said he wanted one person to ultimately approve travel so there was accountability. 

As the President, I agreed to accept that role. Until further notice, all out-of-state travel must be approved by the President. 

 I will be studying the pizza data to determine if our consumption merits a new policy.”

People are losing their jobs and Trustee Kilquist is worried about pizza?  It is that lack of vision and insight that helped get JALC into this mess in the first place. Just what higher education needs – pizza data!

The education part won't suffer?

“  …I do not feel that the education part itself is going to suffer."  What does the John A. Logan College Board of Trustees Chairman mean by this?

In the January Board of Trustees meeting, the Board, under the leadership of Jake Rendleman, had the opportunity to cut almost $100,000 in college expenses without firing any fulltime faculty or staff.  Before a packed house, and after some articulate and passionate speeches, the Board decided to table the issue.  By tabling the golf issue, Mr. Rendleman, and the Board, gave a pass to the golf team, but set up the firing of full time faculty, who contribute to the College’s core mission: Teaching!

Not to pick on the golf team, but the central question is:  does the John A Logan Board of Trustees choose the sports programs, and the Community Health Education Complex over its core mission of providing an accessible quality education to residents of Southern Illinois?

On its January 28 newscast, WSIL-TV reported, “The chairman of John A. Logan College's board is revealing even he was surprised that the men's and women's golf coaches weren't informed until Saturday that their program was on the chopping block.” It’s hard to believe that Jake Rendleman was surprised.  He starts almost every day of the week at John A Logan College at the Community Health Education Complex.  After he works out, he then goes to the John A Logan Administration offices and wants to know what’s going on.  Can anyone really believe that Jake Rendleman didn’t know about the golf team’s dismissal?  Rendleman was first elected to a 6 year term in 1997.  He has already served 18 years on the Board of Trustees; one would think that by now he knew everything there is to know about the college.

Jake Rendleman is running for reelection to the John A Logan Board of Trustees.  In the meantime, tonight, the Board has a choice to make.  Education? Or, sports and the Community Health Education Complex?

The quality of Logan's courses is something that won't be cut, the Chairman insists. We’ll soon see.

It's a snow day

It's a snow day at SIU, John A. Logan and the local schools.  A good day to catch up with some old newspapers.  JALC Board member, John Sanders, had a letter published in the Southern Illinoisan, last week.  Mr. Sanders points out that the Board could have handled the proposed abolition of the golf program a little better.

He also responds to the Southern's opinion that the Board must "demand" a comprehensive plan from the administration.  That reminds us that, at the last BOT meeting (when it became obvious that the golf cut was turning into a fiasco), a member (not Sanders) complained that the Board needed better leadership from the administration.  Is that a fair complaint?

And... we're back!

Two short years ago, we created this blog as a way to share our observations on some interesting goings-on in, and around, Williamson County.  We quickly got fixated on the culture and governance of John A. Logan College, as it was at the start of the election season for the open JALC Board of Trustees seats.

Well, it's election time again.  So, we've roused ourselves, mid-winter, to take a look around.  And just in time, too!  There is controversy regarding the Community Health and Education Complex, a related budgetary emergency, and elbow throwing as the taste of fear is in many mouths.  Tuesday morning, readers of the Southern Illinoisan woke up to this unsigned editorial, the Voice of the Southern:  Golf.  An unsigned editorial is a big deal.  It's not the individual ravings of a staff writer given some space to fill, but the institutional position of the paper.  Logan got called out.  In chronological order the column relates a quick series of contradictory events that set a program up on a pedestal, invited prospective student athletes to participate and then nearly killed the program.

For those unfamiliar with the events, they are well summarized in the Southern's editorial.  For more background, see the news articles that preceded:  Logan golfers land Hamlton County's Vaughn, Golf standouts to be induced into Logan's Hall of Fame and JALC Board tables vote to cut golf.  

Five days later, there was this:  Logan women's golf signs Effingham twins.  School board elections of any kind tend to be boring.  This one won't be.

Happy Anniversary!

It's been just over a year since Muddy Williamson first appeared in the blogosphere following the JALC Board of Trustees Candidates Forum in February 2013.  We've made 58 posts, had over 350 comments, and are closing in on 27,000 hits! 

 

Our original purpose of changing the face of the JALC Board of Trustees was accomplished with the defeat of John O'Keefe and the election of Cheryl Graff.

Board members with integrity continue to step up to deal with the antics of Brewer, Rendleman and Kilquist.  It's not perfect, but it's better.

 

We will leave this blog open for comments, but we won't be making additional posts for now.  Before the cheering from our detractors starts, remember that we have had an impact.   JALC taxpayers will continue to keep a watchful eye on the Board.  And there will be more elections and just like Arnold, Muddy Williamson will be back.