4 honor: Resinstate Sullivan rally brings thousands to Lawn

The institutions of higher learning that are state funded need to understand that the tax base has diminished in most states due to unemployment.

There is no money tree boys and girls

Frank Speaker looks more and more like a Dragas shill. Why resign and not fight? Perhaps to spare the university the trauma. Perhaps because what person of dignity wants to work where she is not wanted. No one has suggested that Ms. Sullivan resigned as part of a plan to try to return. I would expect it is only with great reluctance that she will return if the chance is given to her. Indeed, returning to try to work under these circumstances will take great bravery and fortitude. Maybe she is willing to do so because it is important for the University that the precedent be set that removal of a President can only come after due process and sincere, open deliberation and only then for just cause. This principle if far more important than the personal desires of Ms. Sullivan. I expect she knows this.

Well why didn't she stick to principle ? Why not request due process before the Board ? Due process would involve some trauma . The institution would have to go through the trauma to deliver due process . She elected to forego due process . Why so hasty a retreat ? You can't have it both ways Old Wahoo. You have not answered why she quit so hastily , just speculation . Transparency on her part would be preferable to swarming the Lawn and rampant speculation .

I apologize to the other participants for this cut and paste of a response I posted in another topic. I just couldn't see crediting Frank Speaker (what's with these self-congratulatory aliases?) with a freshly written response, his questions seeming to lack thought and to be mainly posed in order to stir up animosity.

Trolls are never happy unless they're trying to get themselves cornered by people smarter than they are.

So here's my response to Rod, offered now as a reply to Frank Speaker.

@Rod -

Technically, Sullivan was not removed. She technically removed herself by resigning. It's what's called a "forced resignation."

It usually comes about by convincing the individual that it's in his/her interests and in the interests of some institution they value for them to resign rather than force a vote.

They'd probably say "either resign now, or we'll announce that we're calling a vote - a vote we've already engineered - first thing in the morning, and we'll fight payment of severance in court, which will be traumatic for everyone."

If Dragas and Kington convinced Sullivan that they had the 2/3 majority lined up, and that they would offer Sullivan a face-saving "explanation" ("philosophical differences") and offered her a severance payment (or simply guaranteed an existing agreement would stand) - then Sullivan could be expected to resign and then go directly to her attorney.

It's what I'd advise anyone to do in that circumstance.

The rally for honor was outstanding and it appeared to me that there were at least 4K people there, maybe more. I don't believe there would have been any room left on the lawn if this had been tried by Helen Dragas in the middle of the academic year when most everyone affected by this was in town and on grounds.

Does anybody know if we can obtain the full text of all the speeches. They were all fantastic. I especially liked Dean (former Curry) Breneman's and Mitch Green's (Prof of Philosophy) as well as the Dean of Nursing. I had hoped The Hook would have obtained and published these - but I know how busy this newspaper and staff have been! Please tell me where I might read them all!

Thanks

Old Wahoo, actually Frank Speaker has been posting comments bordering on lunacy for some time now, both under that name and sometimes as "Dakota." He/She is a Canadian murder/true crime groupie who was drawn to the Hook because of its coverage of Morgan Harrington's disappearance and who likes to pop up from time to time to comment on local issue of which she has no knowledge. A high priced PR firm would never hire someone so illiterate and uninformed.

Kyle-- here is a link to transcriptions of many of the speeches at yesterday's rally--
http://pages.shanti.virginia.edu/Faculty_Senate/rally-for-honor/

Why do you guys insist that the Rector/Vice-rector lied by representing to Sullivan that 16 members supported her resignation? This was reiterated by Carol Wood, University VP Public Affairs, on the steps of Madison Hall at Sunday, June 10th press conference. She caused confusion by calling them "votes," which led to even more misinterpretation. So much since then is attributable to these 2 key misunderstandings, from the get-go.

Is anyone else offended by the scolding letter the governor has sent to the UVa community decrying the 'frenzy' of the last 12 days? He seems rather piqued which only points to his tacit approval of Sullivan's dismissal. I hold no UVa degrees, my diplomas are of a modest size, and typically am not a great UVa fan, but I have actually felt UVa pride these last 14 days. Please make an effort to go to the lawn tomorrow afternoon in support of the UVa community.

Think Globe makes some very astute observations. Also perhaps the Dragas qualities as stated, calculating, ruthless, persuasive is exactly what the Governor wants for the leader of the BOV, making her his ideal candidate.

Has anyone at The Hook been able to find out what process would be required to reinstate President Sullivan? Some people commenting on the Governor's statements have been surprised by the inclusion of the point that it takes a 2/3 vote of the BoV to remove the President.

My understanding is that the (currently believed to be) legal steps have been:
1) Sullivan resigned
2) This resignation was accepted
3) The BoV voted to name Dean Zeithaml as (interim) President

Does this mean that it will actually take a 2/3 vote to first remove Zeithaml before Sullivan could be reinstated? It is interesting that in his letter to the BoV, Zeithaml did not resign his position, but just "suspended further negotiations."

http://www.virginia.edu/presidentialtransition/120622zeithaml.html

@BOV Process - That line of inquiry is very important. I hope the forces on the BoV that are working toward a solution are considering the procedural stuff very carefully. Given that they have Heywood Fralin on their side, I would suspect they are.

I've served on boards but not sure of the procedures required here. It may be that a simple majority can move and pass a resolution overturning the executive committee's acceptance of Sullivan's resignation. That alone would leave things in a slightly ambiguous state but one that potentially could be resolved if Zeithaml makes it clear that he is resigning or doing whatever he needs to in order to give up the position (if he even has a position).

Good question BoV Process. And it is particularly appropriate since this debacle stems from an apparent lack of attention to proper and fair process, in the first place.

E. Mendenhall -- you have identified another good question -- where did the sloppy language come from in the first place? Did Ms. Dragas feed the info to Carol Wood?

My opinions on the details of the mess have evolved to this -- although it is fairly common to offer employees, even high ranking ones, the opportunity to resign instead of being fired, why didn't Ms. Dragas bring up the matter in an executive session of the BoV rather than counting noses surreptitiously? In the absence of information to the contrary, I am led to the conclusion that she was not convinced her view would prevail in a full discussion. Sure, there would have been a chance of leaks, even from an executive session, but the BoV has been pretty tightlipped for two weeks, so that doesn't seem to have been legitimate concern, if it ever was one.

Weevil makes a good point -- U.Va. had quite a few problems before being gifted with the recent scandal. The groundwork for the Board's approach had already been laid by U.Va. in the way that it managed itself - it was hardly transparent or democratic and this disenfranchised many U.Va. workers, minority students and other non-traditional segments of the community. At some point the U.Va. paradigm caved in upon itself because the institution did not abide by its own creed. The current response by the U.Va. community is a somewhat idealist response, wishful thinking about the way U.Va. is supposed to be rather than what it was.

It's my understanding that those seeking and supporting a living wage are in the forefront of the effort to reinstate President Sullivan.

As opposed to this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/mcdonnell-att...

"No Living Wage for Staff at Mr. Jefferson's University? Well, let's think about what that says...to the world."

Mr Jefferson had no problems paying many of his employees nothing, because they were slaves.

Seriously, leave the Living Wage out of this fight. We need a unified front. No point in bringind this up

The University of Virginia owned slaves as well. What a poor way to start a University dedicated to Freedom and Democracy Mr. Jefferson! At the present time we are focused upon the corporate takeover of our university so we are, in the interest of unity, setting aside our age-old unredressed grievances at U.Va.

However it would help if the speakers at the rallies were more racially diverse! It was good that VP for Diversity & Equity (Dr. Marcus Martin) was allowed to speak on Sunday. Dr. Martin wasn't on the speaker's list however and his remarks didn't say a thing about how Diversity and Equity factor in to the present scandal. I hope that U.Va. doesn't think for a minute that everything was perfect before Pres. Sullivan's ouster. In fact, I think that the institutional practices at U.Va. laid the groundwork for the present scandal.

1. Wisconsin dude: Tax the heck out of the corporations and the extremely wealthy, Let's start with going back to corporate and wealth taxes of the Eisenhower administration. Our tax rates have never been so regressive. We would not be having this problem at UVA or any other public university if state politicians had not gone all corporate because our political system has been put up for sale by conservative decisions like the Citizens United case allowing the rich to buy politicians both dem and rep.

2. For all we know President Sullivan was just doing the bidding of the BOV on the Living Wage campaign and was picking her battles on that. But I hope when it comes up again, the lawn will be as full as it has been.

3. With regards to the Slavery and race issue, there is validity here. UVA has a long way to go here. But I do know that the UCARE group had recently met with President Sullivan about their action plans and change to improve UVA's history. I know that she listened and was engaged in these initial conversations and she was planning on following up on these discussion of reconciliation and repair this summer. The current issues surrounding transparency and honor should be a good foundation for further work here and I am confident that President Sullivan will attend to it in a way that no other UVA President ever has.

Let's get everyone out for Tuesday. Would love to see 4000 on the Lawn. A lot of local folks didn't come out. Its like it does not affect them or its not their fight.

This has financial ramifications for the local economy as Szakos said yesterday. It is about all public higher education. Please citizens of Charlottesville please support public education by coming out on Tuesday at 2:30 on the lawn. There are thousands of you who are not speaking out who could just come out and stand.

And, Farrell reportedly applied for the job of UVa President when President Casteen retired.

@Bleed: "when President Casteen retired"

Or was pushed ahead of his own timeline.

Totally counts. I was thinking about about citizens of Cville who might have the freedom to come out. I feel for the Staff who cannot speak out often for fear of losing their job, We saw this in the living wage campaign. I was really glad the Facutly Senate created an action team for outreach to Staff.

Tom Farrell is the gov's brother-in-law, correct? Definitely a puppet-master, that old devil Tom.
Tom has has a reputation for having friends on both sides of the aisle.
Tom has a reputation for a few other things, also.
It is hard to imagine that anyone would seriously think Tom has the gravitas to be a U president.....hmmmm, not gravitas, I think, scruples , maybe the word.
He's always done good things, right?
Tom's had a good life, has a good family , we are sure, and enjoys his big corporate salary.
Tobacco been very very good to Tom.
He believes global warming is real!!!! really!

"Why do you guys insist that the Rector/Vice-rector lied by representing to Sullivan that 16 members supported her resignation?"

Arithmetic. First of all, Dragas and Kington told Sullivan that they had 15 votes. 16 would have been unanimous. But three BOV members have since said that they knew nothing about Dragas' plans to seek Sullivan's resignation. If three weren't even asked, then Dragas' couldn't have counted more than 13 votes in favor. It is, of course, possible that what Dragas and Kington told Sullivan was mis-reported -- if they simply said that they had enough votes to oust her (ie, 12), then that may have been true; but if they said 15 or 16, then they almost certainly were lying.