Elam appointed VP of Business Services/Administrative Delegation
May 28th, 2009FYI
http://www.msjc.edu/forms/news.asp?Q=918
The MSJC BOT voted 4-1 (Motte dissenting) to ratify the administrative appointment of Becky Elam to the position of VP Business Services, effective 07-20-09 Resolution 2008/09-159.
Prior to the meeting a “pink” corrective sheet was distributed as a “Revised Exhibit” with the S/P’s recommendation seeking BOT approval to confirm the administrative action.
Motte objected to the resolution because the district provided NO info to her as trustee, regarding the contractual status of the hire, i.e., terms, salary level, car allowance, expense account, fringe benefits, retirement, etc. Motte requested a copy of the proposed/executed contract.
Blog:
Kadow reprimanded Motte. No info was disclosed in response to Motte’s inquiry.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Perhaps the BOARD MAJORITY should be reprimanded. They approved an employment contract for a vice president not knowing the terms and conditions, and then denied a request for this public document from a board member. Why? Don’t they need to provide a reason? It’s OK for administrators to give employment contracts to each other without board review? Really?
My problem is with Kadow.
What right does he have, publicly asking a board member, “And THAT’S why you’re voting no?”
A board member can vote any way he or she wants to, for any reason.
This is the same type of nonsense that has landed the district in the unfortunate position it is in. Another lawsuit and now 5 former employees are engaged in civil suits against 1 department. These are not the only lawsuits against the college either, merely the most recent.
The BOT majority has somehow been fooled into believing that their “job” is to just agree with the administrators without any review, regulation or investigation. I would like to see how many issues that were brought before the BOT with a recommendation of approval were actually denied. Additionally, I would like to know how many issues were “tabled” to allow the BOT adequate time to educate themselves on the issue before casting a seemingly irresponsible vote.
The current BOT has proven themselves useless by allowing the administration to direct their moves. Voting on any issue, especially when it effects others, should not be taken lightly.
After reviewing the BOT meeting minutes of the past, it appears that Ann continuously acts professionally and with her business mind she votes for the “best interest of the district” repeatedly. I wonder why she is always seeking so much resistance and opposition from the others. What is their hidden agenda? What are they hiding?
Time will tell.