From the Ann Arbor News comes “Jim Vick passed over for AD job at Ypsilanti schools.” In a way, the story repeats the news that was posted yesterday in this comment from Mark Higbee. Higbee is quoted in the article, too.
There were two passages in the piece that stood out for me:
Board members did not discuss their views of Vick before voting, a development that was questioned by an audience member.
[Board President David] Bates replied that six board members attended a human resources committee last week where the issue was discussed.
“Every member of the board did not make their decision lightly,” Bates said.
Bates also said that the public had already made up their minds about the issue and whatever board members would say would not change their opinions.
I’m just not entirely sure what Bates is getting at here; I don’t know if it is what he said, but it seems like it might really be confusing writing/reporting.
And then there’s this too:
After the meeting, Bates told The News that board members wanted a candidate with more recent high school experience. According to Vick’s resume, he was a 12th grade English teacher and wrestling and track coach in Cleveland, Ohio, from 1969 to 1973, before moving to EMU in 1973.
This, on the other hand, makes an enormous amount of sense to me.
Regardless of what you think of Vick as a “nice guy,” his abilities as an administrator, and his role (or lack thereof) in the Dickinson murder cover-up, it seems to me that this isn’t enough specific high school experience for this job. There is a big difference between secondary schools and universities, and anyone who teaches or works at one or the other can tell you that.
And yes, this was a loooong time ago. I believe I was in first or second grade when Vick wrapped up his high school career.
As a friend of Jim and Helen’s, I am disappointed in some of the postings. Yes, Mr. Higbee, I read your comment in the Ann Arbor News. I graduated from EMU in 1995. The Vick’s helped me out a few times when I was on campus. They were of even greater help in the two years that I lived in Ypsi following graduation. My apartment was broken into while I lived in Triangle West. Jim and Helen opened their home to me and I stayed there for a few days.
There have been other times when they have allowed me to stay in their home.
I am thrilled that Jim had several supporters at the meeting last night. I wish Jim and Helen well, and know that they are strong.
I am also sad that the opposition was so strong because I truly believe that the Vicks are a great asset to this community and Jim would have done a super job. At the same time, I am not sure if an AD was a good fit for him. It would be very sad to see them move out of the area. But that would not be the first time the Ypsi community shoots itself in the foot.
I also read Mark’s statement in the Ann Arbor News and, while I respect and fully support his views of course, I could not disagree more.
Wish Jim and Helen all the best
Colleen,
I don’t understand your point. Do you mean that because Jim Vick did some really kind things on and beyond the job for you and others back in 1995, that he should be “excused” for his part in a violation of federal law that involved the school, a murder cover up, and very large fine that cost the school $350,000? Not only that, but as others pointed out, being concerned with the “PR” put the public at risk.
Can you explain why you indicate that Jim Vick should have some sort of “credit” in terms of his part in a federal crime? I can’t imagine if Mr. Vick was pulled over for say speeding, you arguing a police officer to not give him a ticket because of his acts of kindness in 1995. It would be irrelevant to the discussion…as is your current point.
Yes, you should remember your friend Jim Vick for his kindness, but you can’t “excuse” his wrong doings because of blind loyalty and emotionalism.
Part of college is the experience and teaching of personal responsibility. Why should administrators be any different?
What I’ve noticed in the comments about Vick for this job and in previous discussions about his involvement in the Dickinson murder cover-up is that people who know Jim feel far differently about him than those who don’t. People who have had personal contact/relations with him seem to have absolutely nothing but good things to say. People who are looking at his work experience/performance have a different view. I suppose this is always the case, but it just seems to be even more extreme in this situation.
This tension is very much at work with the situation with this Ypsi High job. I think it’s fair to say that the only reason why Vick was being seriously considered for this position was because of his friends in the community and in the Ypsilanti School District. If he applied for a similar job in a similar district in Ohio or New Jersey, I suspect he wouldn’t get the job, either.
Steve, you’re absolutely right that Vick was a candidate only because of his connections. He is otherwise unemployable in education..
But I think you’re not entirely right that “people who know Jim feel far differently about him than those who don’t.” Not everyone who knows Jim personally is out there defending his conduct — although lots of Jim’s friends and proteges and former subordinates have done so. Lots of other folks who knew Jim at EMU are pleased that he’s gone, and are appalled by the campaign to rehabilitate his reputation, which always rests on the unsupportable claim that Vick was unfairly treated by EMU. In point of fact, he could have been fired “at will” by Eastern, and instead was a given a generous severance package and allowed to resign instead of being fired.
I know Jim Vick fairly well. I am outspoken about his misconduct. Lots of folks who knew him better than me don’t feel they can afford to be outspoken – Jim’s friends still run the Division of Student Affairs, and they reasonably fear retaliation. How many of defenders of Vick’s conduct in the murder cover up have been promoted at EMU since Vick left the payroll?