U-C Senate approves admissions resolution

Alissa Groeninger   Assignment editor  
Rosie Powers   News staff writer  
September 14th, 2009 - 10:56 AM
September 15th, 2009 - 1:02 AM
admissions, Campus, chancellor richard herman, President B. Joseph White, removal, resolution, U-C Senate
Recommend thisPost a commentDecrease Text SizeIncrease Text Size
Chancellor Richard Herman, left, and University President B. Joseph White, listen to public comment during the U-C Senate meeting at the Levis Faculty Center Monday, Sept. 14, 2009. The U-C Senate voted to go into Executive Session to vote on a revised resolution deciding their opinion of Herman and White's fate at the University. 
Wesley Fane The Daily Illini

The Urbana-Champaign Senate voted in favor of resolution SC.10.01B Monday, which called for the removal of President B. Joseph White and Chancellor Richard Herman.

A vote on the resolution was postponed at the previous senate meeting Aug. 31. A draft constructed Sunday night did not mention President White or Chancellor Herman. However, a more specific amendment calling for a combination of "continuity and stability" as well as "the need for a timely transition in both positions" was added during a closed Executive Session.

The senate voted 98-55 in favor of the resolution once the group reconvened.

"There was clearly a lot of deliberation, and it certainly sends a strong statement," said Brad Tran, student body president and senate member. "I'm glad we've reached a consensus."

The meeting began with statements by Senate Executive Committee chair Joyce Tolliver.

"We wouldn't have asked for this (meeting) had we not considered it very important. It goes without saying that we want what is best for the University, and we believe that passing this resolution is what is best for us right now," Tolliver said.

She said the board committed to further meetings with faculty and senate members on a regular basis in the future after a meeting with University Board of Trustees Chairman Chris Kennedy last week.

"We hope that our recommendation will be taken into account," Tolliver said. "This is a fantastic opportunity that we've been working towards for years."

The senate also heard comments from White and Herman.

"I am an independent person and not in anyone's army," White said. "I would not support bad policy, and I protected the University's autonomy. That was my job and I did it."

U-C Senate and faculty member Tom Overbye questioned the president's involvement in questionable admissions processes.

"Admissions is not a science, and it's predictive exercise that has a lot of uncertainty about it," White said. "Admits are never a problem, but there's a third bucket into which many decisions fall."

With regards to his connection to the current state of the admissions issues, White said he takes some responsibility, but distanced himself from direct involvement.

"Yes, I'm president and I have overall responsibility for what happens in the University," he said. "But I made the distinction last time between overall responsibility and distinct responsibility."

Herman asked the senate to consider continuing his involvement as a University administrator.

"I make a humble request: give me an opportunity to remain in our arena," Herman said. "Let me be given the opportunity to continue in our cause."

Faculty member Paul Diehl, professor of political science, spoke during public comment. He said that although many faculty members sympathize with pressures administrators face, many are reluctantly supporting the resolution because of the long list of unethical actions.

"Certain transgressions don't just tip the scale, they make it come crashing down," Diehl said.

The Board of Trustees will meet Nov. 12 in Springfield and will discuss the senate's resolution.

Post a commentRecommend this

Reader's Comments

Tired of being anonymous? Put a name to your comments! Login or register. Registered users can use avatar images and create new forum topics.

White doesn't get a $300,000

White doesn't get a $300,000 bonus. Herman does. White gets somewhere on the order of $475,000, if I remember correctly. He already makes $400,000 a year--as much as the President of the U.S.

Meanwhile, the rest of us who work for a living, and actually DO STUFF for the University and have to make mortgage payments get NO raise this year, and NO raise next year, and face the possibility of having unpaid furlough days. Fantastic. At least we're throwing over a million dollars down the drain this year for these two totally-corrupt administrators. That's fair. (Let's not forget how many millions have already been flushed by this stupid Global Campus fiasco that NOBODY agreed with but B. Joseph and his cronies...)

Thanks, B. Joseph. Thanks, Richard. You guys are the best.

I would think that *millionaires* (they surely must be by now) would be able to take the high road and say "You know what? I live in a mansion provided by the University, don't have to pay utility bills, don't have to make a car payment, and my retirement is taken care of--maybe it would be the honorable thing to do and forgo a salary and bonus in these tough times and instead take care of the hard-working academic staff who do have mortgages to pay and increasing utility bills..." Instead White moans about how the academic staff are hurting the University by switching jobs and increasing their salaries in the process.

Get them out of here, BoT. The sooner the better. If nothing else it will be a great way to save three-quarters of a MILLION dollars.

Administrators shouldn't get bonuses unless the rest of us, who arguably do a better job at our jobs, can get even a simple 3% raise.

An AP on Campus (not verified)    9/15/2009 - 7:27 PM

Proud of UIUC Senate

I am so proud of the faculty and student representatives of the University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign) Senate for calling for the removal of Joe White. If Joe White had half of their integrity he would not be in this mess. Unfortunately, those of us who have worked in the UI system know that this is not the first time that Joe White has failed to maintain the integrity of the University of Illinois. For example, in the spring of 2005 White received – and acknowledged – an e-mail from a UIS MBA student (and UIUC engineering alum) about improper billing by the Dean of the UIS business school; however, White looked the other way and consequently it was up to the State of Illinois Auditor General (acting on a tip from a faculty member) to catch this violation. Turns out that the Dean paid for a MBA class trip to China out of State travel funds, but – after improperly collecting money from the students – the proceeds were deposited in local funds, thus "not properly offsetting the travel expense [of] the University of Illinois ... in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles." Joe White, a man who lectures about ethics, turned his head while his cronies tried to create a “slush fund”. (By the way, the UIS B-School dean ended up blaming his secretary for the mistake, even though he wrote an e-mail to the MBA students assuring them that he was acting in accordance with U of I accounting procedures, and that he was doing so to ensure that the monies are “deposited correctly and that the funds go to the proper accounts that paid for the trip.” He, along with the Provost – who was informed about the issue prior to the China trip – is still at UIS.) Way to go Joe!

(The 2005 compliance report can be found at http://www.obfs.uillinois.edu/grantsp/FY05_A133%20audit%20report.pdf)

Former Faculty (not verified)    9/15/2009 - 3:42 PM

they have to go

They called for a "timely transition" in both positions. That's just faculty diplomatese for "they have to go," and soon not next year. The real question is what the Board of Trustees will do. Unfortunately it does sound like the president will be around for this academic year, which is too bad, because it will cost the University his $300,000 fee that he is to get this year for having the job for a certain number of years. If the Board of Trustees deny Herman his extra money, THAT would be making a statement about ethics as well as fiscal responsibility during a time of budgetary crisis.

freespeechlover (not verified)    9/15/2009 - 2:35 PM

Fire Loots Too!

Melanie Loots, the university "Conflict of Interest Officer," needs to be fired, along with Herman and White. Day after day, conflict of interest after conflict of interest, and what is she doing about it? Same as Herman and White--nothing! From nepotism to selling mutant lab pigs to the public for food, it's the same story every day, and we taxpayers have had enough. Kick the garbage to the curb and start over, this time with competent, ethical admins.

Golly Georgian (not verified)    9/15/2009 - 9:33 AM

SC 10.01A, not SC 10.01B

The previous poster is correct: the resolution that was actually approved by the Senate was SC 10.01A, rather than SC 10.01B.

The approved resolution, SC10.01A explicitly calls for the replacement of both President White and Chancellor Herman.

SC 10.01B was a last minute watered-down alternative offered by the SEC one day before the meeting which simply called for the Board of Trustees to deal with the leadership issue quickly. A the Senate meeting that last minute alternative was put aside and the Senate vote was on SC 10.01A.

alex-t    9/15/2009 - 1:33 AM

Senate Vote

As a member of the Senate, I fear that the DI's reporter fell victim to the confusion that can often appear in large deliberative bodies. First, the Senate did not approve SC10.01b. Instead, it considered that motion, but decided instead that it would vote on SC10.01a (from September 9). The difference is that 10.01a called for a transition in leadership (i.e., that the President and Chancellor should be replaced, but on a deliberative cycle). Whereas, 10.01b had not spoken about a change in leadership but instead just called for the Board of Trustees to handle the review of the Pres and Chancellor.

Thus, it cannot be said that the Senate agreed to any deal behind the scenes, that there was any white wash, or cop out. Instead, there were many Senators who spoke strongly in favor of the need for a change in leadership, even if not everyone agreed with that position or with the idea that deferring to the Board was a good or bad idea.

Art Nonymous (not verified)    9/14/2009 - 9:41 PM

More cop outs

Nobody in this scandal is willing to make the tough decisions necessary to clean the slate. Quinn isn't willing to fire the two trustees who refused to resign. The trustees are unwilling to put the hammer down on the guilty administrators. Now the faculty aren't even willing to voice their opinion. This place will never change. There's not enough incentive to do right.

Dismayed (not verified)    9/14/2009 - 3:24 PM

"White" Wash

It appears that a behind the scenes "deal" is in the works. The U-C Faculty Senate, without further open debate or discussion, has agreed behind the scenes to water down their proposed resolution which originally called for the removal of both President White & Chancellor Herman. Most disturbing is the apparent involvement of two of the newly appointed Trustees in this action. The students, faculty, and alumni of the University of Illinois should be outraged by this cowardly act which clearly indicates that a deal is being worked behind the scenes. Is this the openness and transparency that the public was promised ?
This shows that power and influence (or clout) still reigns supreme within the system despite all the promises and claims from politicians and University officials. It is shameful day for those of us who thought that they would really clean things up following this scandal. The "fix" is apparently in and those who brought this shame down upon the University must be smiling.

'80 Alum (not verified)    9/14/2009 - 11:23 AM

Post new comment:
All comments are published at the discretion of The Daily Illini. Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them and do not reflect the views of The Daily Illini, Illini Media or its affiliated and related entities, or its partners, sponsors, advertisers or content providers. Comments are intended to be a means of reaction to a specific article, podcast, or gallery and will be moderated for obscenity and hateful language. Do not submit commercial, off-topic or other copyrighted material.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.