Link to HA story:

http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050305/NEWS01/503050301/1002

Does Mississippi have an open meetings law? A sunshine law that would mean that anyone could attend because it is an organized meeting about a public institution? Or does that not apply because it is being held on private property?

As far as I am concerned, this is a true declaration of war on their part; now the business community is stepping publicly into the fray; let's get it on. While the ADP has suggested in today's article that it is not involved in this meeting; the perception states otherwise. If this is what the business community wants, then so be it. My question is, will there be other members of the business community who support faculty and the varied missions of the University banning together to offset the perception being cast by this select group that feels it has a better vision of what a University should be than those who work there???? And for Mader to assert that the Administration has had little to do with this meeting is absurd. Perception is reality!!! Besides, does it appear that my Daddy raised a fool. Be real.

Years ago there was a book entitled, "In Search of Excellence." In the book, the author, Tom Peters, chronicled the resurgence of businesses brought about by a change in leadership that emphasized the importance of the knowledge of the front line worker in the production process. The author described successful businesses that moved from a top down management style to a "team" style that depended on the front line worker to provide valuable information and who was asked to participate in the new vision of the company. Harley Davidson was one of those companies profiled in the PBS program based on the book.

This small group of business people and the present Administration are well advised to revisit that text. In my estimation, a very, very dangerous precedent is being established. While admirable that the business community is concerned enough to be involved, why hasn't this involvement occurred through more traditional channels, such as the "strategic planning" process??? Why the "invitation" only, in a private location type of meeting???

Furthermore, this situation smells of a similar meeting that was held the night before the canning of the previous deans with business leaders at the President's house to inform them of the University reorganization, when the University community itself had not been informed. The smell coming from the Coke plant seems very familiar these days. The taste of Pepsi products seems more attractive to me of recent.

This has all along been and still is a battle over "economic development" and as long as the framers get to choose the terminology, define the arguments, and present the "facts" then people who care about education, quality of life and long-term sustainable economic growth in South Mississippi will lose. 

If the event invitees are primarily community business leaders, it would be logical to include Dean Doty and perhaps former Dean Gunther.  Both have a "business" perspective (i.e., they are not nasty/naive/commie/etc. Liberal Arts types) and could thus help clarify some internal organizational issues that the attendees might not be aware of. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Amy Young
" Easter Bunny! Surely you don't think "Liberal Arts types" are nasty, naive, or communists? Amy Young, Liberal Arts Type"

---

Amy,

Of course not--just my obviously inept attempt to inject some humor.  My point, however, is that some who will be attending the meeting would agree with the characterization.

E.B.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Strange Bedfellows
"This is an angle that has simply not received enough attention.  Conservatives and Liberals, Republicans and Democrats, Arts Professors and Business Professors, Scientists and Nurses, Librarians and Teachers are UNITED in their opposition to a team of administrators who, through their ignorance and ineptitude are ruining the University of Southern Mississippi.  Who, among Shelby's inner circle, has any knowledge of higher education at a better university? Maybe they will invite the commissioner of higher education to speak at the meeting."

---

Strange,

Exactly.  And my (half-way) tongue-and-cheek suggestion for having Doty and Gunther attend is that even these "business" types are likely to express reservations about Thames' leadership.

I suppose the real question is whether the purpose of the event is to try to understand the situation at USM or just to organize a united front to keep Thames--probably the latter.

E.B.

Anti-administration forces should be heartened by this development.  Highly visible efforts to show business community support for SFT's continued presidency in the runup to Thames' evaluation by the IHL will blow up in the organizers' faces, proving in retrospect to be a gross miscalculation.  In the first place, the dome's prints are apparently all over it, despite Ms. Mader's half-hearted denials; clumsily orchestrating adulation is just plain tacky.  Second, analysis by the Hattiesburg American will demonstrate that the majority of organizers have profited handsomely from doing business with the university under Thames, suggesting a motive of pure financial self-interest.  Third, the faculty have not choice but to react to this provocative action, demonstrating once again to legitimate opinion leaders (notably the print media) that Thames is a bellicose polarizing force, and not an effective university leader.  Fourth, and most important, the blatant efforts of anti-faculty business people to chart the future of the university will not sit well with Crofts and the IHL; whatever they envision for the future of USM, they cannot appear to be "muscled" into a decision by mouthy outsiders.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: another misstep
"Anti-administration forces should be heartened by this development.  Highly visible efforts to show business community support for SFT's continued presidency in the runup to Thames' evaluation by the IHL will blow up in the organizers' faces, proving in retrospect to be a gross miscalculation.  In the first place, the dome's prints are apparently all over it, despite Ms. Mader's half-hearted denials; clumsily orchestrating adulation is just plain tacky.  Second, analysis by the Hattiesburg American will demonstrate that the majority of organizers have profited handsomely from doing business with the university under Thames, suggesting a motive of pure financial self-interest.  Third, the faculty have not choice but to react to this provocative action, demonstrating once again to legitimate opinion leaders (notably the print media) that Thames is a bellicose polarizing force, and not an effective university leader.  Fourth, and most important, the blatant efforts of anti-faculty business people to chart the future of the university will not sit well with Crofts and the IHL; whatever they envision for the future of USM, they cannot appear to be "muscled" into a decision by mouthy outsiders."

---

 

AM,

You've got it!

Many of these people have pulled strings with the IHL Board in the past.  But their roles weren't heavily publicized.  The Board's reputation is taking another pounding.  Any of those Board members who are getting sick of Thames--for whatever reason--now have additional incentive to give him his walking papers.

Robert Campbell

A bit of information I heard is that Commissioner Crofts has been informed of this meeting via a copy of the article in The Independent.  If an IHL Board member is involved with this there could be consequences with SACS.  Faculty Senate is on top of things and may produce a statement next week.  The IHL Board meets the week of spring break and some are concerned that many faculty will not be around to react to possible events at the IHL Board meeting.  The words “no confidence” were raised again yesterday at the FS meeting in connection with these activities.  One science professor mentioned having a vote of the whole faculty. CoST members will not stand by and watch Liberal Arts be attacked by the barbarians (no longer at the gate, but in the dome).

quote:

---

Originally posted by: nmfa
"another mistep is exactly right. No point in arguing merits of liberal arts or actual facts of mismangagement this is only about money. Exclusive contracts for softdrink concessions and machines; exclusive contracts for the university auto fleet; exclusive contracts for the paving of roads; look at each of the ten names and look at the business they get from shelby. All the fluff and dander about liberal arts this and that is just their inept way of trying to make sure they keep the money flowing from the shelby to their bank accounts. And by the way, there is no tier one tech school in the country, not one, that does not also have among the top liberal arts programs in the country: cal tech, MIT, are might powerful in the liberal arts and we all know that no carnegie status accrues to places that cant prove phds are coming out of more than two or three disciplines. Go find a tech university that has said they dont want to teach music, philosophy, literature, languages, history, and then tell me its marvelous status and its enormous endowment? you cant. This is money money money"

---

If your've read the article, I suggest you read it again. A quote from the Saturday 3-5/05 HA

 "Deciding on the guest list was difficult, Lacy said, but organizers wanted to "really make sure that this group of people is knowledgeable on exactly what Southern Miss means to the community."

More like SFT cronies!!!!!  This meeting is an orchestration of the "dome" trying to build support for SFT prior to the March IHL meeting.  Only a select few have been invited to this meeting and Mader's prints are all over this.  How can IHL afford to have SFT another four years????????

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
""The media is not being invited in order for attendees to more freely express their opinions, Lacy said. However, area residents who have not been invited and wish to attend may obtain an invitation by contacting the event's organizers, she said." ============================= This person probably did not intend to issue such a wide-open invitation (the only qualification mentioned is being an "area resident"), but there it is, in print.  I hope that as many people as possible on this board will take up the offer and try to get an "official" invitation.  If they are refused, I hope they will report that fact to the media so that the public will know that this whole meeting is a rigged farce.  It would be great if a few dissenters could actually get in and stir things up.  I bet these folks would not want to mess with the eloquent John Ower or Bill Scarborough, etc., etc., etc. By the way, many of the best "tech" universities in the country also have strong Liberal Arts departments.  MIT and Cal Tech are two examples."

---

PS: isn't Kevin Walters an "area resident"?

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Joker
" Even though the media is not invited doesn’t mean they won’t be outside taking pictures and interviewing attendees.   "

---

Excellent point.  Wouldn't it be nice if protesters were outside the meeting asking to be admitted, so that the media would have an even better excuse for covering the event?  If the protesters are refused admission, that would make the meeting look even more rigged than it already does.