2 SACS letters to Thames, problems! - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 16, 2004

2 SACS letters to Thames, problems!

Date: Dec 16, 2004

These letters would have scared the Levis off of any worthy administrator who cared anything about keeping his/her university in compliance.

Date: Dec 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: No Way
"These letters would have scared the Levis off of any worthy administrator who cared anything about keeping his/her university in compliance. "

Agreed. Hard to believe that Shelboo never saw them, or even that he saw them and passed them off to anyone else. If it had been an issue that he gave a hoot about, he wouldn't have passed it off to anyone else to save his life.

More and more, I believe that, back in January 04, ole Shelboo's head was filled with dreams of firing tenured professors rather than ways to avoid a SACS probation, as it should have been. Look where all of that dreaming has gotten us (and how much it has cost and CONTINUES to cost MS taxpayers. I'd be rather pi$$sed right now, if I were still paying taxes in MS.).

Date: Dec 16, 2004

Oh, Truth, your words were never truer spoken. When will everyone else wake up and realize that this guy isn't even a good imposter?

Date: Dec 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: No Way
"These letters would have scared the Levis off of any worthy administrator who cared anything about keeping his/her university in compliance. "

The Wednesday's Child thread presents a time frame which might suggest that the dome could have been so motivated to go after S/G that a response to the SACS letter took second best.

Date: Dec 16, 2004

Would any of us not pay enormous attention to this wording, from one of these letters? The same wording may be in both letters:

"Please note that Federal regulations and Commission policy stipulate that an institution must remedy deficiencies within two years following the Commissions initial action on the institution."

"At the end of the two-year period, if the institution is not in compliance with the Criteria, representatives from the institution may be required to appear for an interview with the Commission, or one of its standing committees, to answer questions as to why the institution should not be removed from membership. If the Commission determines good cause at that time, the Commission may extend the period for coming into compliance for a minimum of six months and a maximum of two years and must place the institution on Probation. If the Commission does not determine good cause, the institution must be removed from membership."