The Role of BoT in Protest

Gallaudet’s Board of Trustees have caused this crisis.  I will explain why:

1.  Their diversity policy is poorly written, and is weak.  It could have ensured diversity was present at the presidential search committee process- that the finalists recommended are diverse, of people with color and with qualifications expected.

2.  They could have ensured that the PSC provided at least 6 (something like that)candidates for consideration by the community- so that the BOT would not be as stuck as it was when it only got 3 from PSC, and having at least 6 would most likely have offered people of color, highest possible qualified candidates, to name a few reasons why limiting to a small pool of selectees do not work.

3.  Their policy of communicating with external stakeholders must only go through the President’s office.  Unfortunately, faculty, staff, alumni, donors, students, congresspeople, etc etc are considered “external”, when they should be “internal” stakeholders.  This is not considered “inclusive”, but rather- “exclusive”.

4.  Only 35 percent of trustees are alumni, so 65 percent of trustees do not really have the pulse of the university- I can not imagine that there could be 65 percent of trustees being alumni- and be as capable of running the university. We have Stephen Hlibok, who has run many millions of dollars financial portofolio and is connected to financial world, we have alumnis who are engineers, connected to the Federal government, and I could go on.  It is the connection to the University that’s missing at the BOT level, partially causing this crisis. 

5.  The Chair of BOT is not an alumni so any bad news it needs to break to the stakeholders- it will not be as easily received any better than if an alumni Chair breaks these news.

6.  A lot of Board activities are not transparent. If they are, we would have known that these activities understand our issues, are in the open and on campus communicating with the stakeholders. American University board of trustees now have at least two forums on campus to ensure trustees are connected, and communicating with stakeholders.  Right now it only meets three times a year

I could go on, and I hope you get the point.  The trustees choose the president, Drew. This is the cause of this crisis.  So, I truly hope the board will reform itself, to be more inclusive, accountable and transparent.  Add nonvoting trustees that are representative to the stakeholders (faculty, staff, and students).  Meet with Gallaudet stakeholders at least twice a year.  Establish a whistleblower’s policy. 

At that point, I will believe we have moved forward. If the trustees does not do any reform, the crisis continues.  The sooner it reforms itself, the crisis would then be over. Any president can come aboard and do a good job because he/she reports to the board and the board is connected to the stakeholders and any “dirt” would be uncovered without reprisals.

The mediators and arbritators or outside investigators all does not solve the crisis, but they may propose a more temporary solution. I invite you to my line of thinking, that the more perament solution to this crisis would be a true reform of the Board of Trustees, and immediate healing will begin at that time.

This would be a victory for all sides and the healing would begin.

Very Respectfully,

Paul Singleton

an excerpt of his post at GallyNet-L listserv 

GALLYNET-L@gallynet.org

reprinted with permission by the listserv moderator

e mail contact: mishkazena@aol.com