SiouxMeNow Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 for the greater good of the NDUS....any costs associated with building a "bigger house" for unky joe should come from any ndsu allocation that will be coming this year! I'd be happy with a FREE HOUSE in connection with ANY job I had and wouldn't bitch about it. It seems to have served every other ag-school president up until this jerk.... Does anyone know what he's looking for?? A masoleum for his creepy mummy body? I guess costs for linen wraps might be up and who knows what those oils the egytians used would cost now but THAT GUY needs to be wrapped up REALLY TIGHT if you know what I mean.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 The Grand Forks Herald today published the first part of a two-part series by Donald Lemon, a Chester Fritz Distinguished Professor Emeritus of educational leadership at UND. The first part is entitled: "Higher ed board fails North Dakota." This situation not only is an embarrassment as the board goes before the 2007 North Dakota Legislature, it is a national embarrassment as well. What capable and qualified person in his or her right mind would want to come here and work under such circumstances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iramurphy Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 The Grand Forks Herald today published the first part of a two-part series by Donald Lemon, a Chester Fritz Distinguished Professor Emeritus of educational leadership at UND. The first part is entitled: "Higher ed board fails North Dakota." This is a very good summary. I think a couple of things I would agree are factual. Joe Chapman has done a very good job for NDSU. He hired the marketing firm that had done a good job for the athletic department and put them to work selling the image of the entire school. They basically have declared they are good and spun when their "carbuncles" showed to an area that shines. Other than the scream yellow campaign they tried I am not sure they have made any mistakes. That marketing ploy has been asa important of a move as any he has made, in my opinion. He has pushed and pulled the cautious out of their barns and corrals to improve grant dollars and focused on technology to improve grant dollars and create collaborative programs with local and regional organizations. The D1 move was sped up by his drive and initiative and they ahve improved the Alumni giving during his tenure. What is also fact is that he is percieved as an arrogant asshole by the majority of toher NDUS presidents. He has been thumbing his nose at Chancellor Potts for a number of years and has not been willing to participate in the NDUS organization as a team player. Heoften sent one of his subordiates to meetings that the other Presidents attended. I believe it is also true that during his tenure he minions have lobbied not only on behalf of his school but against the other schools in the system. I agree with the Professor Lemon when he says the board has failed the state and the Governor has failed the state. Paulsen, who is at best a Chapman lackey who has to wipe his nose every time Chapman passes flatus, had promised 2 years ago he would get Chapman under control. Obviously, he told Potts and the board one thing and spoke otherwise behind the scenes. Now that he is Board Chair or President he will allow Chapman to do as he pleases and will protect Chapman at all costs. I assume he is a donor to Hoeven and those who choose the board members. Had the board and the Governor supported Potts and worked with Chapman to allow him to do what he did at his own school and required the common courtesy and decency that a subordinate should show their supervisor this likely wouldn't have happened. Although Chapman may look it, I don't believe he is stupid. He would have have adjusted and learned to repect his peers and Chancellor Potts and still ahve been able to do as he did for NDSU. I bleive he would also ahve been required to be truthful to Potts and the Board. His dishonesty with the board is not only unprofessional but is not acceptable. Reading the summary from the Attorney General's office only supported the evidence of his arrogance and dishonesty. The Board has displayed its incompetence first by not supporting Potts and now by trying to keep him on as a consultant. Professor Lemon is correct. The State Board and Governor look incompetnet and the President of our second largest institution of higher ed and 5th best institution of higher learning in the state looks dishonest and arrogant. It is too bad because he has done a lot of good for Fargo and that campus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanoBison Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 ... The State Board and Governor look incompetnet and the President of our second largest institution of higher ed and 5th best institution of higher learning in the state looks dishonest and arrogant. It is too bad because he has done a lot of good for Fargo and that campus. WTF are you talking about? 5th Best inst. of higher learning? p.s. I could give a rats ass about what you guys think of Pres. Chapman. The man knows how to get it done. Especially when the SBoHE is ineffective to begin with. (Here's your predicted response : your a blind follower Nano. Come up with some better smartass replies you guys are known for...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobIwabuchiFan Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 Lets start a chat topic about the following... "What documented and measurable evidence exists that shows a positive correlation between advancing a level in athletic division and academic improvement on campus?" Any takers...If so, look for my post today because this string will devolve into a comparison of academic strengths vs Potts and NDUS. BobIwabuchiFan PS NanoBison, why did you change your nerdy icon to the buffalo?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 What is also fact is that he is percieved as an arrogant asshole by the majority of toher NDUS presidents. He has been thumbing his nose at Chancellor Potts for a number of years and has not been willing to participate in the NDUS organization as a team player. Heoften sent one of his subordiates to meetings that the other Presidents attended. I believe it is also true that during his tenure he minions have lobbied not only on behalf of his school but against the other schools in the system. I agree with the Professor Lemon when he says the board has failed the state and the Governor has failed the state. I think the term 'arrogant asshole' is a little strong. There is a huge difference in opinion primarily between BSC and NDSU and the other nine schools regarding equity funding. As posted elsewhere on this site, Kupchella has missed significantly more meetings than Chapman has in the past few years. Of course if you keep repeating the statement you're bound to believe it. I have no knowledge of other NDSU administrators lobbying the legislature and you apparently have no evidence either by the sound of your post so it seems wise to let that one go. The SBOHE has a tremendously difficult job to do. They chose to let Potts go instead of giving into his ridiculous demand of giving him the power to fire a standing NDUS president. (If you read the beginning of this thread, I am sorry to have seen Potts struggle and ultimately leave when he was trying to do the job he was hired to.) The Governor most certainly has not failed the state. And if so how? Paulsen, who is at best a Chapman lackey who has to wipe his nose every time Chapman passes flatus, had promised 2 years ago he would get Chapman under control. Obviously, he told Potts and the board one thing and spoke otherwise behind the scenes. Now that he is Board Chair or President he will allow Chapman to do as he pleases and will protect Chapman at all costs. I assume he is a donor to Hoeven and those who choose the board members. I have no response to any of this. I don't know where you coming from. Had the board and the Governor supported Potts and worked with Chapman to allow him to do what he did at his own school and required the common courtesy and decency that a subordinate should show their supervisor this likely wouldn't have happened. The Board is Chapman's boss, not the Chancellor. He was not Chapman's supervisor. Although Chapman may look it, I don't believe he is stupid. Wow. I bleive he would also ahve been required to be truthful to Potts and the Board. His dishonesty with the board is not only unprofessional but is not acceptable. Reading the summary from the Attorney General's office only supported the evidence of his arrogance and dishonesty. Chapman lied to Potts and the Board? About what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 The Forum keeps pushing the ethical limits with their handling of this story. First, their most recent editorial, Forum editorial: Potts as consultant a bad idea Apparently some members of the board believe Potts could be helpful during the 2007 Legislature with such issues as presidential searches, ConnectND and management systems. The opposite likely is true. Potts would have a tough time operating at the Legislature because of the baggage he accumulated in his two years on the job. He would be peppered at every committee hearing, in the Capitol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanoBison Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 The Forum keeps pushing the ethical limits with their handling of this story. What in blazes are you talking about? Ethical Limits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSU grad Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 What in blazes are you talking about? Ethical Limits? It's actually pretty simple. Any time the Forum publishes an article or opinion praising NDSU/Fargo or criticizing UND/Grand Forks it's "pushing the ethical limits." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 It's actually pretty simple. Any time the Forum publishes an article or opinion praising NDSU/Fargo or criticizing UND/Grand Forks it's "pushing the ethical limits." NDSU grad: Congratulations for again showing ignorance by making this an NDSU vs UND or Fargo vs Grand Forks spat. Nothing could be further from the truth. Read that editorial I posted again: there is absolutely no reference to UND or Grand Forks. The Forum didn't praise NDSU or criticise UND/'Grand Forks. The Fargo editorial was nothing more than a smear against Potts' character: Any consulting he (Potts) did or advice he gave wouldn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 but they would never do that because the board will be lead by John Q. Paulsen. talk about smearing. The Forum's comment, which you interpret as a smear, is not Pott's specific. What would any expect out of an individual in his position? Threatened to resign, was taken up on the offer, given full pay for the remainder of his contract, but given the liberty to pursue any opportunities he might find. What kind of work would you expect him deliver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 talk about smearing. So I smeared John Q. Paulsen? Get a grip. It is well documented that Chapman & Co want John Q. Paulsen as the board president. The Forum's comment, which you interpret as a smear, is not Pott's specific. What would any expect out of an individual in his position? Threatened to resign, was taken up on the offer, given full pay for the remainder of his contract, but given the liberty to pursue any opportunities he might find. What kind of work would you expect him deliver?"Is not Pott's specific". So what about this quote? Potts has two problems that would undermine his credibility. Once again, Bison fans, read, and attempt to comprehend, before you comment. Potts, if he had not taken the settlement, had every right to sue the board and North Dakota government. He chose not to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Potts, if he had not taken the settlement, had every right to sue the board and North Dakota government. He chose not to. For what? Because they didn't give in to his unreasonable demands of being able to hire and fire? Because individuals spoke about how they were displeased with his performance? ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 For what? Because they didn't give in to his unreasonable demands of being able to hire and fire? Because individuals spoke about how they were displeased with his performance? ? You've got it backwards as always: Chapman was the one that was demanding that Potts be fired. Show me where Potts wanted Chapman fired. Potts wanted Chapman to quit his insubordinating ways and follow the same rules that every other NDUS president was following. So why did the board stipulate no law-suit in Pott's settlement agreement? When a board is conspiring to fire a person, even though his last review stated he did an excellent job, most lawyers would jump on that case, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 You've got it backwards as always: Chapman was the one that was demanding that Potts be fired. Show me where Potts wanted Chapman fired. Potts wanted Chapman to quit his insubordinating ways and follow the same rules that every other NDUS president was following. So why did the board stipulate no law-suit in Pott's settlement agreement? When a board is conspiring to fire a person, even though his last review stated he did an excellent job, most lawyers would jump on that case, Potts already had the power you described, what he wanted was the power to control Chapman. This power is the Board's alone. Whenever any executive leaves a position like Potts did the primary condition is the promise not to sue each other in the future. Sure lawyers would jump on the case, they'll jump on most any case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Potts already had the power you described, what he wanted was the power to control Chapman. This power is the Board's alone. Whenever any executive leaves a position like Potts did the primary condition is the promise not to sue each other in the future. Sure lawyers would jump on the case, they'll jump on most any case. You have it wrong, AGAIN! Potts wanted Chapman to follow the policies, rules and regulations that regulate ALL the University and College Presidents. When the SBoHE decided Chapman is above the polices, rules and regulations that the other Presidents are bound by, he decided to not be a part of the charade. By allowing Chapman to do what he wants, the SBoHE has shown itself to be the biggest joke in our state government. The SBoHE would not offer a settlement which includes 1. MONEY & BENEFITS and 2. keeping him on as consultant (who can pursue and work full or part time in another positon) if they 1. believe they did no wrong and 2. believe he is not NEEDED! IowaBison, try wearing a jacket when you come on this forum. Your thin skin can't keep taking all the perceived abuse you suffer when reading posts that describe your demi-god accurately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 The Herald today published Part II of Donald Lemon's op-ed on the Potts resignation. Some of North Dakota's most highly placed leaders, elected officials and others seem to have betrayed us, the citizens. Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem says they did not act illegally. But the question that keeps going through my mind is this: Did they act ethically? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiouxMeNow Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 WTF are you talking about? 5th Best inst. of higher learning? p.s. I could give a rats ass about what you guys think of Pres. Chapman. The man knows how to get it done. Especially when the SBoHE is ineffective to begin with. (Here's your predicted response : your a blind follower Nano. Come up with some better smartass replies you guys are known for...) I'd just be happy if NINNYBISON stopped using that freaky new ndsu logo!....I have to say that is really unnerving!!...I just picture the COWARDLY LION after downing a large bottle of NYQUIL....(not good my friend!:-)) AND THAT YELLOW COLOR*!!!! - drop it bud! (it screams WUSSS!!!) (*the yellow color NOT associated with unky joe's jaundice - IF he starts eating *CARROTS!!! (*sdsu refernence! - and you guys CERTAINLY ATE SOMETHING orange colored last season!!!:-) ) -- EJJJ. He might turn a real HUMAN COLOR!!!!! 21326 HOO_WHA!!!!* (*that's old school!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NanoBison Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 SiouxMeNow, you should worry more about your logo than mine. I'm not the one whose logo is in question with the NCAA... I'll continue using it since it displeases you sooooooo much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDSU grad Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 NDSU grad: Congratulations for again showing ignorance by making this an NDSU vs UND or Fargo vs Grand Forks spat. Nothing could be further from the truth. Read that editorial I posted again: there is absolutely no reference to UND or Grand Forks. The Forum didn't praise NDSU or criticise UND/'Grand Forks. The Fargo editorial was nothing more than a smear against Potts' character: That's good stuff. I never even mentioned the Chapman/Potts fiasco; I was just commenting on your apparent superhuman powers to bash the Forum anytime they take a side you oppose, while remaining quiet on some of the Herald's ridiculous commentaries over the past few years. The article in the Forum yesterday got it right. This whole mess is about inequity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 Potts wanted Chapman to follow the policies, rules and regulations that regulate ALL the University and College Presidents. When the SBoHE decided Chapman is above the polices, rules and regulations that the other Presidents are bound by, he decided to not be a part of the charade. By allowing Chapman to do what he wants, the SBoHE has shown itself to be the biggest joke in our state government. I agree completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 The SBoHE would not offer a settlement which includes 1. MONEY & BENEFITS and 2. keeping him on as consultant (who can pursue and work full or part time in another positon) if they 1. believe they did no wrong and 2. believe he is not NEEDED! I disagree. These types of agreements happen all too often. It's easier to negotiate a relatively lop-sided settlement in order to avoid litigation. I remember when I lived in Washington six years ago, the CEO of DC General Hospital, lost his job for gross negligence (he should have been thrown in jail). Instead he received of over a million dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 I agree completely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 I disagree. These types of agreements happen all too often. It's easier to negotiate a relatively lop-sided settlement in order to avoid litigation. I remember when I lived in Washington six years ago, the CEO of DC General Hospital, lost his job for gross negligence (he should have been thrown in jail). Instead he received of over a million dollars. I can see paying someone off and getting them out of Dodge ASAP if they are doing a bad job or did a bad thing. It's all about saving face in the public eye, not losing the public's confidence, yada, yada, yada. Paying off is one thing, keeping him on as consultant in addition to the payoff is, IMHO, an admission of guilt, an admission of the good job his job performance evaluations say he did and admission that the SBoHE needs him in the upcoming legislation session. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 I can see paying someone off and getting them out of Dodge ASAP if they are doing a bad job or did a bad thing. It's all about saving face in the public eye, not losing the public's confidence, yada, yada, yada. Paying off is one thing, keeping him on as consultant in addition to the payoff is, IMHO, an admission of guilt, an admission of the good job his job performance evaluations say he did and admission that the SBoHE needs him in the upcoming legislation session. I'm not sure about an admission of guilt. I think it's a sign that Potts is a good guy. My guess is that he volunteered his service. The SBOHE needs a lot of help right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.