DPN Leader’s Ultimatum To BOT (revised)

BoT actually rebuffed Covell’s efforts. elizabeth

 

Board of Trustees                                                                                         October 16, 2006

GallaudetUniversity

800 Florida Ave, N.E.

Washington, D.C.  20002

Via Facsimile:  202-651-5508

Dear Gallaudet University Board of Trustees:

The purpose of this letter is to offer my services to mediate and resolve the current crisis at Gallaudet University. I have a wealth of experience resolving situations of this nature, including my involvement as a DPN leader in 1988.

It saddens me that I have to resort to writing a letter because my efforts to communicate with members of the Board were refuted. I am unclear why members of the Board advised me to meet with President Jordan when he does not have authority to agree to any recommended solutions. The authority to make decisions to rectify this situation rests primarily with the Board of Trustees. Based on the Board’s response to my request, I can see immediately that cause of chaos and destruction on Gallaudet’s campus is a governing body and institutional leaders who are not following established leadership practices and procedures.

I want you to know that my desire to meet with the Board is fueled by a hope to help resolve the crisis at Gallaudet University. I am offering myself as a negotiator, not as a person who wants to add to or become embroiled in the crisis. My experiences at DPN had a significant and profound effect on me on emotional, mental and physical levels. I am hesitant to get involved again in another crisis on Gallaudet’s campus. I have “been there, done that” and I have absolutely no desire to repeat that experience.  I want you to understand that I do not make this offer lightly as it comes from my heart and is the result of countless discussions with Deaf people across the country. 

I am not making this offer because I support either the Board or the students.  In my opinion, the Board and the students are both right and wrong!  The only reason I am offering to mediate these circumstances is because of my loyalty to Gallaudet University as an invaluable institution.  I will not allow the Board, I. King Jordan, Jane Fernandes, faculty, staff, students, alumni or anyone to tarnish and degrade Gallaudet and consequently, the deaf community.

There is always a solution to a problem.  I would not even make this offer if I was not so confident that a resolution can be achieved.  As in any negotiation, both sides will not walk away completely satisfied but everyone involved will be able to “save face” and end the crisis. As a governing board, you are obviously in the midst of a crisis. This crisis is constantly and rapidly escalating, perhaps beyond the point of no return.  In a few days, the crisis will reach no man’s land and one side will have to concede in order to return to normalcy.  Do I care which side? Heck no, I do not!  I only care about Gallaudet, period!

 

I have not spoken up or lent support to either side since this whole thing started in May.  I followed the events closely.  I am not here to place blame or point fingers but I do expect the individuals involved to accept responsibility. In my professional opinion, there are at least 10 problems that have been created by and consequently, can only be resolved by the Board of Trustees. Many of these problems may merely be public perception but in a crisis of this nature, the community member’s understanding and acceptance of the problem is the key to the solution.

1)      The Board appeared to rush the search, screening, interview and presidential selection process.  It is unheard of for a university to complete those tasks within a 6 month period.  It is a common practice for search processes to consist of an average of 12 to 18 months.  Why the rush?  Why the urgency?  President Jordan was not resigning his post until December 2006. I do not support the position that there needed to be an extended transition period for the incoming President. Dr.
Jordan did not have a transition and did very well. A qualified person assuming leadership in a functional governing system would not need transition time.

2)      Despite the stance that the search process was “transparent”, the Board ignored recommendations regarding who should be considered in the pool of final candidates. These recommendations were made by search committee members comprised of Gallaudet students, faculty and administrators. What evidence exists that the Board considered this feedback? Why is the Board hesitant to share details of their deliberation on the matter?

3)      The Board ignored qualified candidates who obviously exceeded the qualifications of two other candidates in the final pool.  Did this happen because the Board wanted to “stack the deck” in favor of one candidate over the three? I am left to wonder what would have happened had happened if more qualified candidates were named among the final three.

4)      The Board seemed shocked at the Gallaudet community’s negative reaction when the decision of Jane Fernandes’ appointment was announced. Was the Board out of tune with what was happening on Gallaudet’s campus?  Did the Board really receive comments and feedbacks from the community or were they in the dark?

5)      The Board allowed or delegated that President Jordan take care of the mess created by the announcement of the next President. Why do you believe that the Gallaudet community would listen or work with President Jordan? He is a figure head for the university. The Board is fully aware that their duty is to convey and work through this information with the campus community and community-at-large. This is one of the primary reasons why students, faculty and staff do not believe they are being heard. Perhaps it would have been a better idea for I. King Jordan to resign on the day of the announcement. Due to recent events, students are now reporting they do not even recognize Dr.
Jordan as the President. Without a recognized leader,Gallaudet
University is sure to collapse.

6)      The transition period between Fernandes’ appointment and
Jordan’s retirement is too long. A 7-month transition is a very long time. Even the President of the
United States does not go beyond a 3-month transition. These timelines are in place for a reason; so that citizens can make the change with minimal down time. As a consequence, President Jordan’s legacy has been tarnished.

7)      The Board is adamantly standing by their decision to appoint Dr. Jane Fernandes when they have received a majority vote of no confidence from faculty and staff of Gallaudet and Clerc Center. What happened to the process of faculty governance? Do board members truly believe that Dr. Fernandes will be able to effectively and successfully work with those faculty and staff given these circumstances?  What will board members do if those faculty and staff continue to refuse to work and cooperate with Dr. Fernandes?  What will board members do if Dr. Fernandes fails to carry out the duties of the presidency due to lack of Gallaudet community support?

      I have not seen any significant dialogue between the Board and Gallaudet community; only accusations, justifications and insults hurled at one other. The Board’s reaction has been defensive and paternal at best. Even the memos posted on the Gallaudet website are embarrassing, filled with defensive statements and accusations. No one is actually listening to or communicating with one another.  The Board has an obligation to be assertive in this instance, regardless of the outcome. The Board’s primary duty and obligation is to protect Gallaudet and I feel they have failed to perform that critical duty.

9)      The Board is apparently divided among itself about the decisions made, the crisis, and what to do next.  I also believe that the Board has lost confidence and trust among each other and each member is now scrambling to survive. These positions are evident by the resignations and lack of participation of certain board members.  There is also evidence that certain board members are “bad-mouthing” one another. This horizontal violence against our own is an indicator of poor leadership. Board members cannot escape the responsibility of the decision made. All board members should be held accountable regardless of their level of participation (active or passive). This situation should be managed in a head-on fashion; or board members should kindly get out of the way and make room for new members who will tackle the crisis proactively.

10)  The Board is currently at an impasse. There is no end in sight and no tangible or hopeful solution in front of us. The situation can only get worse if proactive conversations and solutions are not implemented immediately. I personally don’t give a hoot about who is right or wrong OR who can hold their position the longest. Board members should be leading by example and for goodness’ sake, negotiate. I recommend confined negotiations among board members and key leaders in the Gallaudet community (students, faculty, alumni, staff, etc.) until there are workable solutions identified to end this crisis.

 

It is likely the Board believes if they change or rescind their decision now, they will be creating a precedent. There is probably concern that any decision or action the Board makes in the future will be challenged. However, board members must know that establishing precedent is not the main issue. When was the first and last time the Board of Trustee’s decision was challenged? Only in 1988 when the Board picked a hearing candidate over a qualified deaf candidate as the next President of Gallaudet.  It could be argued that a precedent was created in 1988. No one has challenged the Board’s decisions before and after 1988. Students and faculty are not abusing the precedent set by DPN. It is a matter of sometimes waging important battles in order to win the war. We are people who are embroiled in our own oppression. We do not have skin color or a geographic area to set ourselves apart. As Jane Fernandes states, this second protest is a symptom of our need for change, not a personal attack on her abilities. This protest is a movement for us to move to the next level and be treated with equality and respect in our society.

I also believe board members are forgetting that they are in the United States of America.  Our beloved country’s government is established by the people, of the people, and for the people. We hold our inalienable rights to challenge our government and even overthrow the government those rights are challenged. Throughout America’s history, there have been times when the government did not represent the people. The interests of the government are not always the interests of the American people. In these instances, Americans had to assert their will directly and overruled the government’s decisions and actions; asserting the supremacy of the will of the people over the will of the government.  It is very clear in our Constitution that the government is subservient to the people and only exists for the purpose of serving the people. 

The Board of Trustee is a body that represents the best interest of Gallaudet University. The interests of Gallaudet are integrated with the interests of the deaf community. It could be argued that the students, alumni, deaf community, faculty and staff are asserting their will on the Board because the Board did not or failed to represent them, listen to them and take their interests into consideration.  It does not matter if the Board’s decision was sound and just. This protest implies that the Board failed to serve the Gallaudet community.  The Board became subservient to Gallaudet community.  Whether that was intentional or not, the Gallaudet community has challenged the Board and the Board needs to address their concerns completely.

The last major issue the Board has is leadership. I have no opinion of Dr. Fernandes’ abilities as I do not know her personally. I know of her and am aware of her impressive credentials and qualifications. Based on my experiences working with state level boards, I believe the Board is divided and in turmoil.  The Board has lost several members and has no strong leader since a long time chair, Dr. Anderson resigned.  The Board is currently run by an Interim Chair.  The Board is going to rely and depend on Dr. Fernandes to set the leadership tone at Gallaudet in less than three months from now.  I do not see how that can be accomplished or even remotely possible. The Board is in a mess. Gallaudet is in a mess. Everyone is angry, hurt and bitter about the entire process. Dr. Fernandes faces widely held opposition and will not be afforded cooperation by anyone who would want to see her succeed. The Board and Dr. Fernandes have gotten a vote of no confidence by the Faculty Senate. The Board, President Jordan and Dr. Fernandes have lost the ability to lead. The leadership is practically nil at Gallaudet at the moment and will be for months to come. The Board will have to admit and acknowledge that situation to the students, faculty, staff, alumni and deaf community who have taken control of the situation.  The only thing that the Board, President Jordan and Dr. Fernandes can do now is to utilize the laws to protect the authority and positions held.  The laws can only go so far as they are usually used to intimidate protesters not as the means to end the protest.  Gallaudet cannot and will not survive without a clear leadership. Threats (expulsions, termination) and intimidations (arrests, police presence) actually provide more fuel to the fire of the situation and ultimately benefit and increase the resolve of the protesters. Not only that, it angers those who were sitting on the fence to jump in. The Board needs to cease all threats and intimidations and begin a meaningful dialogue.

To conclude, I would again like to make a formal offer to assist the Board in resolving this crisis. If my offer is rejected and I am at Gallaudet, I will do whatever is necessary to protect Gallaudet
University and the deaf community from further damages (reputation, perspectives, views and so forth).  The Board of Trustee will lose.  I am not intending these words as a threat….it is my promise.  I am choosing to join this battle because the outcome will contribute to the never-ending war for equality, respect, independence and accessibility for all individuals with a hearing loss.

Thank you for your time and consideration.  I await the Board’s decision by Wednesday, October 18, 2006 at 12 noon. 

 

No Justice, No Peace,

 

Gerald “Jerry” L. Covell

Declaration of Independence“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”. 

cc:        I. King Jordan, President; Gallaudet University           

              Dr. Jane Fernandes, President-Designate           

             Gallaudet University Community           

             Deaf Community 

Reprinted with permission by the author