At least four local news agencies (COLDNews, WMOM, MCP, and COMA) sent a representative to an otherwise mundane agenda-ed meeting of the West Shore Community College (WSCC) Board of Trustees, where the only thing on the docket was to levy the current millage.  Since the college is well into their summer break, you wouldn't expect a lot of interest in the meeting.  Yet a wide swath of campus staff and administrators showed up with an agenda all of their own concerning WSCC President, Dr. Kenneth Urban, and it is extremely likely they tipped the media as to what they planned.

If you have not been paying attention to the latest drama out on Stiles Road, here's a brief recap.  Dr. Urban was hired by WSCC in May 2015 to mend the wounds the previous president, Charles Dillon, left after he was caught driving very drunk through Manistee, and stuck the college with a costly severance package as he shamefully retired before the axe fell. 

After his first year Dr. Urban had mixed reviews (the board publicly said Urban could continue to make progress on leadership and building the campus community), that continued in a May 15, 2017 board meeting.  A four hour session for the board's evaluation was held in closed session that day, but when they did reopen the meeting, it was noted:

“The consensus of the board is that Dr. Urban has met expectations in some of the areas evaluated by the board, but the board continues to note areas where it feels that Dr. Urban can make progress including some elements of leadership, decision-making/problem-solving and building the campus community.  The Board looks forward to meeting with Dr. Urban in the near future to establish goals and metrics for continuous improvement.”

Shortly thereafter, Dr. Urban released a 12 page self-evaluation that some have labeled as self-serving, pedantically explaining his job as President of the campus to the board and community, examining his various activities, and attempting to explain why some of the critical evaluations may have been based on misperceptions.  You may judge for yourself what the document amounts to, but I find it more informational and a welcome bit of transparency to an often secret world of campus politics.

What troubles me about this June 1st meeting, is that college staff apparently arranged a media event to attack Dr. Kenneth Urban at this meeting, surely knowing that President Urban was out of the state and would not be at the meeting to defend himself or his record against the onslaught.  The main thrust of the assault was leveled by someone who looks quite a bit like a plump Dr. Urban, Faculty Association President Dr. Matt Sanderson.

Sanderson had his own lengthy six page argument contesting the findings of Dr. Urban's self-evaluation, and urging Urban to resign by June 30 (Sanderson's Full Statement: June 1, 2017).  Among the problems he saw with Dr. Urban, within the five main points he proposes:

1.  unsupported 'leadership issues'

2.  collaborative leadership issues

3.  the consequences of not practicing collaborative leadership

4.  the lack of leadership by Urban

5.  Urban is not a leader and not a good fit

While some specifics are offered, many of the explanations fall short in proving Dr. Sanderson's theories about Dr. Urban's leadership problems.  He states:  "President Urban only listened to team discussions and then went back to his office to make decisions all on his own."  Doesn't that describe actual leadership?  Making the right decisions even when they are not popular. 

If you read cursorily through the six pages, Dr. Sanderson's criticisms of Dr. Urban's leadership is more of a complaint that he isn't a team player, and doesn't listen to what Sanderson believes is the right thing to do. 

In the COLDNews coverage of the meeting, it has Dr. Brooke Portmann complain about low morale, and divisiveness due to Urban not being collaborative in his decision making.  Student Services Administrator Irma Hinojosa, restated Sanderson's lament:  "(Dr. Urban) acts like he's receptive when you talk with him, but when he puts it into action, he does the total opposite of the advice you gave him."  Again, that's part of leadership, listening to all points of view, then doing what you think is right.  Irma went on to declare that even during the darkest days of granting Dr. DUI Dillon and Julie Van Dyke massive payoffs due to their malfeasance, that the college "was never in this situation, never."

Beyond the generalizations of the established faculty and staff about Dr. Urban's lack of 'leadership', while disproving their hypothesis with their anecdotes, I find that statement hard to believe.  Dr. Sanderson admits 'everyone' says the same thing:  "President Urban is a nice guy and a good person, but he is not a leader..."  Perhaps leadership is defined by Dr. Sanderson as talking smack about the big boss while he is out of the office and vulnerable. 

The only thing I see here is a big congregation of rats talking big while the cat is out of the house. 

Board members wisely declined requests to comment after the meeting, after voting to certify the 2017 tax levy of 2.1175 mils for operations and .9732 mils for capital improvements.

Views: 710

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I hate to see all this divisiveness at the college but situations like this usually occur when the leadership is actually leading and not bowing to subordinates. Could it be that Dr. Urban is a conservative and has found himself surrounded by a liberal progressive thinking faculty that is trying to maintain the progressive and Marxist slanted agenda like most college campuses are doing these days. Could this be a struggle between the left and right just like what is occurring all across the Country. The tactic used by Urban's detractors resembles methods used by the left to pounce on and eliminate conservative thinking and promote leftists ideology.

I saw that as a likely scenario.  I must confess that during this last semester of classes I drove a student out there four times a week and usually hung around for a few hours until they were done, doing research and writing articles in the student center.  I saw Dr. Urban a few times, he seemed nice and non-imposing, I never heard nothing bad said about him by students or other college employees I ran into. 

The college atmosphere seems mostly apolitical among the students and most of the faculty, but I would not be surprised that the motivations of the insurgent professors at the head of the movement are partly due to Dr. Urban's actual leadership qualities making him look like a small-time Donald Trump. 

It should be recalled that Irma Hinojosa was an apologist for Dr. Charles DUI Dillon who stood up at a meeting where he was suspended for his drunk driving arrest and said:  “I am an employee here at West Shore and have worked at the college for 28 years.  I hold Dr. Dillon with the highest regard as a friend and colleague. It could have happened to any one of us. Any one of us could have done this. He is a true leader and has been here for us.”

She lost any credibility for judging college presidents by saying that outrageous and untrue statement.  Irma should have been disciplined by her peers at the time for saying Dillon driving superdrunk was illustrative of real leadership.

Last night, Dr. Urban resigned. 

Board of Trustees Chairman Bruce Smith described it as a mutual decision and an amicable parting.

"We came to the decision mutually. It was about having a good fit for our college and we do believe this is best for our students and community," said Smith.

WSCC says Dr. Urban was appointed president of college in July of 2015. He came to WSCC from Nicolet College in Rhinelander, Wisconsin, where he served, for one year, as the interim president. Previously, he served as Vice President of Teaching, Learning and Student Success.

Trustees have appointed Vice President of Administrative Services Scott Ward as the interim president. Ward previously served as interim president during the 2014-15 academic year.

The language used by the faculty, other administrators, and even board members throughout the sacking of Dr. Urban, and Dr. Urban's unrefuted self-evaluation, leaves me with the belief that he had too much leadership skills, rather than the lack that his critics proposed.  He was willing to make the tough decisions that were unpopular, and he showed how difficult that is when you talk about modern day campuses.  I wish him luck, and hope to get a better reason as to why he was forced into resignation in the future.

How stupid does Smith think the public is. After they called for Urban's head and finally got it they expect the citizens, who pay the bills, to believe that Urbans departure was a mutual decision. Right, just as mutual as a fish agreeing to be a sharks meal. I bet there is a huge pile of money being transferred to Urbans bank account via the Colleges treasury. Just how much of the taxpayers money has the board thrown out the window over the dismissal of the former leader and the dismissal of the current leader. And so the musical chairs for the college president continues. Sounds like there is a problem with the board and they had better straighten up or they will find themselves walking the streets looking for another cushy college job.

I'd have to agree with most, and surmise that he was too strong for some of the staff. With the way society has become, I'm not surprised he got ran out by them. Guessing they couldn't handle it. Seems no one online (other X and Torchees) see it possibly being that way too.

Surprisingly, the COLDNews two stories on the topic haven't elicited any serious comments on their Facebook posts, but the MCP's story regarding terms of the resignation (Urban will receive $12,000 per month for the next year) has generated about 50 comments, many critical of this deal and with the college's board. 

The other local media are keyed about reporting what is happening, not about why it is happening, beyond what they are told.  College presidents are not fired due to some general perception that their leadership skills are somehow behind the curve, something like that should have been discovered through their comprehensive vetting in their selection process, they are fired because of some specific act(s) that bothered key stakeholder(s) of the college. 

What has been presented by the college publicly does not indicate any good reason, and they should be held to account for their misuse of public resources in this matter, like they should have in their previous severance deals with Chuck DUIllon and Julie Van Dyke.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service