Quiet, I've copied and pasted your question from an earlier thread for convenience of those reading. 

So, what were the reactions of the Board members? 

Did they buy the "I can make them act mature" line?  (Does that mean we are currently acting IM-mature?)

RE: Clean House?

(**My name is only symbolic of the fact that my Prescription ran out just moments ago!)

Quite:

This must be the justification for his sightings on teh Coast last week meeting with Virginia Newton.

Glad you have contacts to confirm what I thought was a bad case of mistaken identity.

They had a cozy lunch in the open air!

It is time for everyone to understand that the IHL Board members are not going to intervene and run the University of Southern Mississippi.  Not that anyone has specifically suggested they should, but board members are being bombarded with a problem without being offered a solution.  All they are being told is Shelby must go and national searches should be conducted for qualified individuals.  No one has developed for them a plan to see that the university runs smoothly in the interim.  That doesn't mean that they won't act and it doesn't mean they won't make sweeping changes.  But, as a Board of Directors, they will see their collective role as approving or disapproving a plan; they will not see their role as developing a plan.  It is time for university leadership to come up with a scenario that the faculty and staff can live with and that is going to mean a compromises.  The board members will not have unlimited attention span or patience for the USM situation and they will never delve into it in the detail that those who are are committed to the future of USM will.  Make it easy and simple for them - give them a plan. 

In a separate post yesterday, I suggested a compromise.  More importantly, I asked people who didn't like the compromise that I suggested to offer alternatives. 340+ hits and 14 responses later and you know how many alternative plans we had?  ZERO.  I have no pride of authorship - that's not the issue.  The issue is that the board will do nothing if nothing is proposed to them, no matter how much unrest they continue to see.  If the only plan they have comes from Tim Hudson (and rest uneasy that he is putting one together), then that might just be the plan that they accept.  For everyone who is saying Shelby must go at all cost, you are being incredibly naive about the cost of a Tim Hudson presidency.  The very nature of the way Tim Hudson operates will not allow protection from him despite recommendations about limiting his scope.  Shelby is going to go - he will never get another term - he may not finish this one but if Hudson wins the powerplay, then USM will be stuck with a slicker, more dangerous, and more corrupt enemy in the dome.  If there is any hope of bringing integrity to the Office of the President at USM, then Tim Hudson cannot occupy it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Voice of Reason?
"It is time for everyone to understand that the IHL Board members are not going to intervene and run the University of Southern Mississippi.  Not that anyone has specifically suggested they should, but board members are being bombarded with a problem without being offered a solution. . . .  If there is any hope of bringing integrity to the Office of the President at USM, then Tim Hudson cannot occupy it."

---

I am sure lots of "plans" are being suggested -- you aren't hearing about them because the Board isn't going to FireShelby for its sources.

The only agency that can make a change is the Board. We have at least one recent precedent and that is MUW. The Board is reluctant to establish a second precedent so near the first -- but the truth is that only they can act. My guess is that the first thing they will do is try to get Shelby to resign voluntarily and so save themselves themselves from an unpalatable admission of their own mistake.

There is no "plan" for the Board to develop or to ratify: there is, however, a procedure in place for what happens when a President dies, resigns, or is fired.  The one thing that isn't clear is the WHO -- as in who will be interim president. There have been lots of suggestions -- I think the reason you haven't gotten any hits is that there ismn't much to say here beyond what has already been said.

I agree with much of what you say about Hudson. I also think that virtually the entire faculty at this university is aware of his tendencies. No one is fooled. I also think that no one connected with this administration will survive for long once Shelby goes away.

I repeat: No matter what Tim believes about himself, he does not have the academic weight to run this university. Shelby was a viable inside candidate because he had national standing in his field as well as (albeit tainted) administrative experience and lots of political pull. But compared to Khyatt and Lee and their Provosts, Hudson isn't even in the ballgame as an academic leader. I didn't even think he had enough weight to be Provost -- he only got thatposition because he was appointed and because, at the time, he was Shelby's boy.  Since then he hasn't exactly accredited himself well as Provost . . .

The Board, silly as it may be at times, will not find Hudson an acceptable long-term alternative. Virginia is working Hudson because she needs a plan to propose. She's a smart lady and I sispect that Hudson isn't the only name on her list. And while Klumb may have an agenda -- I doubt that all on the Board agree that the university needs another whip . . . .

Time will tell. Hudson is slick but his slickness has worn thin. After a while all Lotharios lose to overexposure. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
Another possibility is that IHL would hire a professional "interim president." There are quite a few retired presidents who are doing this actively these days. The best ones out there are already experienced in patching up seriously damaged institutions. My bet is that Dr. James Rogers at SACS has a neat little short list of names, free for the asking. "

---

Listed below is one 'alternative' scenario for the departure of SFT.

However, the caveat is that, since the IHL Board created the situation by not doing this in the first place, that they're not likely to do it 'right the second time' -- with that, the 'interim plan for the administration of USM':

1) SFT resigns

2) The IHL board names Don Cotten as 'interim' university president and Jim Hollandsworth as 'interim' Provost of both campuses.

3) The new 'interim' administration reluctantly accepts the following resignations: Lisa Mader, Angie Dvorak, Mark Dvorak, Tim Hudson, Jay Grimes.

What a dream, eh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: hostage
 3) The new 'interim' administration reluctantly accepts the following resignations: Lisa Mader, Angie Dvorak, Mark Dvorak, Tim Hudson, Jay Grimes. What a dream, eh?"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
" I think Dr. Cotten ought to be left out of the "plan" for two reasons: (1) he shouldn't have to give up his present job for a temporary position, and (2) he should be free to apply for the "regular" presidency at USM. "

---