Category Archives: EMU President

BoR extends Martin’s contract

This isn’t really news since it has been coming for a while, but as this EMU press puts it, “EMU Board of Regents extends contract of President Susan Martin.”

Two things I’ll mention for now.  First, this press release contains a somewhat useful chart on comparing university presidential salaries, and at $300K (Martin got a raise from $292K) she is in the middle of the pack for presidents of public universities in Michigan, but at the bottom of the list for presidents of MAC institutions.

Second, what a difference a year makes.  A year ago, Martin was under fire for drunken behavior at an alumni event– or not, depending on who you listen to on this. But the BoR put a letter in Martin’s file warning her about this and other “undisclosed incident(s),” and it sure looked like she the BoR was getting ready to not renew her contract.

So what happened? I have two theories and both of these things could be true:

  • If she did have a problem with too many cocktails at the wrong time and the wrong place, then she successfully cleaned up her act. And good for her if that was necessary and/or the case.
  • There’s been a change of membership on the Board of Regents, and the folks who were most interested in chasing her out of town– notably Roy Wilbanks– are now out of the picture.

Any other thoughts?

In any event, good for Susan Martin and good for EMU, I think. Her new contract is for 2 years with a 12 month sabbatical she gets whether she does or doesn’t become a professor. If I had to guess, I’d guess that at that point, she probably wouldn’t teach again and instead retire. Or maybe that’s just what I would do.

Coleman retiring from U of M (and I am willing to bet who will NOT be their next president)

From the freep the other day comes “Who’ll fill Mary Sue Coleman’s shoes as U-M president? Big job requires big search.” This isn’t exactly a surprise: Coleman will turn 70 next year, which makes it a decent time for must of us to retire.

So a lot of the article is speculating on who will be the next president at the University of Michigan, and a lot of that speculation strikes me as, well, uninformed as to how these things work.  For example, in this speculative paragraph:

In Michigan, there are several university presidents with ties to U-M, either as students, faculty or staff. They include Stephanie Bergeron, president of Walsh College, David Eisler, president of Ferris State University, Thomas Haas, president of Grand Valley State University, and Susan Martin, president of Eastern Michigan University. Lloyd Jacobs, president of the University of Toledo, also has ties to U-M.

“We’re looking for the best person,” said Newman, who was on the board when Coleman was hired. “We’re looking for somebody who understands who were are, what we stand for and what our vision is.

If any of those people even get an interview for the job, I’ll buy a University of Michigan sweatshirt and watch the next Iowa-Michigan game and chant “Go Blue!” next November.  Not gonna happen.

“EMU regents expected to extend President Susan Martin’s contract”

Say, do you remember all those articles and posts last summer about the Board of Regents needing to rein in Susan Martin and her drinking and such, and how she might be on her way out as President at EMU?  Remember how we even had discussions here about all this, about “Questions Remain” about the BoR and keeping Martin? Now, not so much.

As annarbor.com had it today, “EMU regents expected to extend President Susan Martin’s contract.”  A few quotes:

Eastern Michigan University President Susan Martin’s contract is expiring in July and the Board of Regents is poised to extend it— possibly even as early as the board’s public meeting Tuesday.

While Martin and the eight-member board have at times had strained relations during her five-year tenure —the board in May reprimanded her for an argument she had with an alumnus and has told her to improve communications with regents— board chair Francine Parker says the governing body has confidence in Martin.

“The board is 100 percent behind Susan Martin. Each and every one of us,” Parker said.

The board is looking to discuss Martin’s contract Tuesday, but the vote may be delayed. Martin’s contract is expected to be renewed, multiple sources confirmed.

and:

“I have been here since 2005. I’ve gone through three or four presidents, three or four provosts, a couple of scandals and it’s only been in the last several years, under the leadership of Susan Martin, that things have stabilized enough and the college has moved forward in a positive direction,” said Perry Francis, a counseling professor and vice president of the faculty senate at EMU.

“That’s not to say that the president hasn’t had her moments that I’m sure she’d rather forget,” he said, “but show me any leaders who haven’t had moments they’d like to forget.”

and:

Faculty union president Howard Bunsis, a business professor at EMU, declined to comment for this article, saying “it’s a board of regents decision.”

Well, I for one am happy that they are renewing Martin’s contract. She’s not perfect of course, and maybe this is a good opportunity for her to reflect seriously on some of the criticisms– the biggest one I’ve heard is she has a tendency to micromanage, though since I don’t have a lot of dealings with administrators at that level, I don’t really know– and to make the next however many years at EMU that much better.

“EMU President Susan Martin falls short of multiple goals in review”

From annarbor.com comes “Eastern Michigan University President Susan Martin falls short of multiple goals in review.” Here’s a quote from the opening paragraphs:

Tension that surfaced between Eastern Michigan University’s governing board and president last year appears to remain an issue at the Ypsilanti school.
In a fiscal 2011-12 performance review, EMU regents said president Susan Martin fell short of enrollment goals, failed to develop a strategic vision for the school and inconsistently consulted regents prior to making decisions.

“All regents should feel informed and updated on all matters requiring board engagement to their particular level of interest and satisfaction,” the October 19, 2012, review states. “Performance in this regard has been inconsistent. Board input on significant policy direction merits more serious attention.”

The review was obtained by AnnArbor.com through a Freedom of Information Act request. It was signed by former regent Roy Wilbanks and current regents Francine Parker, Mike Morris and Mike Hawks, who asserted that regents were “sometimes not alerted to major issues affecting the campus” and cited Martin’s decision to close satellite campuses without informing regents.

The actual letter annarbor.com got via FOIA is here as a PDF.

I haven’t seen the previous job evaluations so it’s hard to compare, but it’s kind of a lukewarm review, not at all surprising given that Martin’s contract is up in July 2013 and obviously the Board wants to be in a position where they can get rid of Martin if they want to. Though given the positive trends– enrollment is up, fundraising is up, on-campus housing is up, etc., etc.– I’m not sure that they’ll want to get rid of her. Or will be able to easily get rid of her since I think Martin probably has the support of students and faculty, more or less.

Personally, I think Martin has done a pretty decent job overall– I’d probably give her a B+ as a grade– and I think EMU ought to keep things stable and renew her contract. I think there has been a lot more “good” than “bad” in what she’s done or not done.  I do agree with two things that the board says needs improvement:

The review said Martin hadn’t presented a strategic plan for the school, which she was supposed to have completed by June 2009. “This goal remains unmet,” the review states. “This should remain an area of focus for you and the institution as a whole.”

The regents wanted Martin to evaluate services provided to students and staff, such as the ombudsman and human services offices, but said in the review that Martin failed to complete those tasks. Regents also told Martin she did not properly handle layoffs and payroll issues.

I’m not a big fan of elaborate strategic plans, but I would agree there perhaps ought to be at least some plan, and I think a review of the ombudsman function in particular ought to be revisited.

So, rehire Martin or a new presidential search in 2013?

“EMU President Susan Martin to speak about personal ‘trials and triumph’ at campus event”

I missed this one earlier in the week: from annarbor.com comes “EMU President Susan Martin to speak about personal ‘trials and triumph’ at campus event.” Here are the opening paragraphs:

Eastern Michigan University President Susan Martin will speak at a March event about trials and triumphs she’s experienced in her life and career.

The March event, “Trials and Triumph of an American Woman,” is being hosted by the EMU student organization B.L.A.C.K., Black Leaders Aspiring to Critical Knowledge.

B.L.A.C.K. hosted a similar event last year, when former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick spoke during its Second Chances and Redemption Series event in 2011.

First off, it kind of seems like Susan Martin hasn’t really been very visible this school year. I’m not suggesting she’s in “hiding” or something; it just seems like she’s had kind of a low profile since last summer’s Board of Regents’ warnings about (alleged) drinking issues.

Second, I’m not sure it’s a good idea to be following Kilpatrick as a speaker in a “Second Chances and Redemption Series” of any sort.

 

Snyder calling for 2% increase in higher ed funding

I heard this story on WEMU this morning, but I couldn’t find a link on their web site. So from annarbor.com comes “University of Michigan says Snyder ‘moving in right direction’ by proposing 2% increase for higher ed.” It’s good news generally, though as the article points out, this comes on the heels of a 15% cut a couple years before. Here’s a quote from Susan Martin in the piece:

“We applaud initiatives that recognize the importance of higher education in helping to prepare our state’s workforce to meet the needs of evolving industries and technologies,” Martin said. “There is a direct correlation between a state’s investment in higher education and economic growth.”

“Eastern Michigan University president, bosses at odds”

From today’s Detroit Free Press comes “Eastern Michigan University president, bosses at odds,” which takes us back to and beyond the drunken argument (or not) about some kind of Huron-esque statue with an alum in Washington, D.C.  Here’s a quote:

Behind the scenes, though, Martin’s support among her bosses — the university’s Board of Regents — has been slowly eroding, even before an incident in April in which she got into an argument with the head of an alumni group while having drinks at a Washington bar, a Free Press review of her personnel files and e-mails revealed and multiple sources on both sides confirmed.

The Washington incident earned Martin a letter of reprimand. The regents warned her to control her drinking in public or risk being fired. The letter was made public in July after the Free Press requested Martin’s personnel files under the state’s Freedom of Information Act.

Now, with Martin’s contract up at the end of this school year, renewal appears to be far from a slam dunk.

There’s lots of interesting things kind of buried in this article, so read the whole thing.  Basically, you’ve got Martin trying to actually be president “and a board that is heavily involved in the day-to-day operations of the university,” and because folks like Wilbanks would like to keep involved, renewing Martin’s contract is not a done deal.  Though Wilbanks is also quoted as saying “If we really wanted to get rid of Susan Martin, we got all the ammunition we needed (in Washington).”

Then you’ve got board member James Stapleton being accused of some “unethical actions” by the rest of the board, actions that essentially amount to Stapleton trying to use his role on the board to help his business contacts and also to use his board membership to get involved in too many things at EMU, like hiring and firing people.

Also buried in this piece is what I believe is a previously unseen email/quote from  that alum in D.C.:

She also heard from Michael Ferens, the Washington alumnus who had been involved in the April 23 incident: “I just don’t understand why the Regents used our situation (which is long resolved). I just don’t like this situation. I am positive this storm will pass. I have a new appreciation for the personal agenda and politics you are faced with. I just don’t like this and don’t appreciate me or my chapter being the trigger for this whole thing.”

The other thing that’s interesting or at least difficult to sort through is both sides of this are potentially true. Maybe Martin did get a little out of hand after a few too many cocktails, and maybe this April incident wasn’t the first. At the same time, it’s probably true that our board of regents– or at least Wilbanks and Stapleton– wants to be far too involved in the day to day operations. Though I have to say that the most recent faculty contract negotiations which appear to have been “board free” makes me wonder if that part of the story isn’t being exaggerated as well.

Stay tuned as the Welch Hall dramas continue…..

“Roy Wilbanks: EMU ‘Regents had to protect’ university with Susan Martin letter”

Just when you thought it was done, annarbor.com has another Martin drinking (or not) scandal, “Roy Wilbanks: EMU ‘Regents had to protect’ university with Susan Martin letter.”  This one has a few interesting additions, bits of information, and interviews.  Some highlights (for me, at least):

Wilbanks declined an interview request, after offering a short, prepared statement last that concluded, “We will continue to move forward. And to that end, the chair is supportive of the president.”

However, in the emails obtained this week by AnnArbor.comthrough a Freedom of Information Act request, Wilbanks offered a little more insight. He wrote to EMU alumnus Len Capelli that if the EMU community “can stick together” the university “will get through this difficult time.”

Capelli emailed Wilbanks July 12 to express displeasure in the information being leaked to the media about the incident. The posting of the information on the EMU website followed a FOIA request by the Detroit Free Press.

“The Board of Regents has prided itself on transparency, and yet who leaked the information to the press has not been discussed,” Capelli wrote. “… Why was it released now, what good could this expose possibly do for the university?”

Wilbanks responded to Capelli and said he has “no idea who the source is.”

BTW, based on a quick google search, I think Capelli is another D.C. alum, so maybe he has a different take on the “drunken” (or not) “argument” (or whatever it was).  Then there’s this:

In response to emails from AnnArbor.com, Wilbanks said all regents knew the letter would be going into Martin’s file; and he would not disclose information on “prior incidents” mentioned in the letter or the time frame during which a conversation about so-called prior incidents took place.

Once again, mum on these “prior incidents,” and once again, I am left wondering what he’s talking about.  And again let me ask:  can anyone actually recall something that happened at some kind of event that raised some eyebrows?  Remember, you can post here anonymously….

Also our own Eric Brown is quoted at some length:

Alumnus and former president of the EMU Alumni Association Board of Directors Eric Brownwas part of the 2008 search committee that subsequently chose Martin to be president.

Brown said he was not notified of the president’s 2005 drunken driving arrest at Grand Valley State University.

“One of the things she stated in the initial release of emails is she spoke about transparency, but if that’s the case, she would have disclosed all of that during the interview session,” Brown said, referring to the 2005 arrest.

Brown said if he had known about Martin’s arrest, he would not have supported her selection.

He’s also concerned that the two presidents before Martin left their positions following controversy. Martin replaced John Fallon, who was fired in 2007 for assisting in the cover-up of student Laura Dickinson’s murder on the Ypsilanti campus.

“It’s embarrassing that we have another situation bringing a black mark to the university,” he said.

I actually agree with this:  what I mean is if I had been on that search committee and only found out four years later about that drunk driving conviction, I’d be pretty pissed off too.  I think the board, the head-hunting service, and whoever else knew about this when Martin was being interviewed in the first place should have disclosed this, just as they should have disclosed all potentially relevant information about all of the candidates.  Now, it’s far too hypothetical for me to even guess if that means we would have hired one of the other candidates had we known about this, but I definitely see Brown’s point.

As for “another president bringing controversy:”  that seems par for the course for most university presidents nowadays, I’m afraid.  I don’t know what the average is nowadays, but it sure seems like the tradition a generation or so ago where you’d have someone be president for decades is long gone.  Most seem to last about 5 years, and they either move on to another job or they leave or get fired as a result of some kind of disgrace, manufactured or otherwise.

The article also quotes several EMU folks who say mostly positive things about Martin.  I agree a lot with Decky Alexander, who said:

…she finds the situation “strange.” She credits Martin for increased campus safety, infrastructure changes and renovations.

“She’s done several things to create a good team here,” Alexander said. “There is a lot to be said. She’s about the university. Find me somebody that doesn’t believe that. If you were here five years ago, it was totally different.”

A strange situation indeed.

“Phony Outrage”

Sorry I didn’t find this until now, but emujeremy has a nice write-up about the whole Martin thing at Eagle Totem.  Check it out.

“Susan Martin and EMU’s Regents: Questions remain about future relationship”

Annarbor.com has an editorial that I assume is kind of a “wrap-up” to the angry and/or drunken presidential scandal, “Susan Martin and EMU’s Regents:  Questions remain about future relationship.”I largely agree with their summation, too.

I think Martin did do the right thing in agreeing to counseling and donating money to drinking awareness on campus.  That’s a no-brainer:  if she doesn’t have a drinking problem, counseling will amount to an educational opportunity and a good show.  Of course, maybe she’ll go to counseling and say “hey, maybe I do have a drinking problem” and that will help change her ways which will be good for her as a person and good for her as president of EMU.  But as I have said repeatedly here, I for one don’t know if Martin does or doesn’t have a problem.

I’ve heard rumors and there have been several comments over the last few days that imply previous drunken incidents since she’s been president.  But what I haven’t read here or anywhere else is actual examples of these incidents, and given the attention this has received in the local and even national press in the last week, you’d think that someone would step forward and offer some detail of some other incident of an argument or misbehavior or something.  There was that report of Martin somehow locking her keys in the trunk with that drunk driving arrest, but that was 2005 and before she was president.  Where is the other troubling Homer Simpson drunk dance moment?

So what else has she done since then that is worrying the Board?  After all, as this annarbor.com editorial points out, “The letter of reprimand seems like a surprising and aggressive step from the recents, who have supported Martin in her official evaluations.”  What’s changed and changed (apparently) so rapidly?

If the worry is over “undisclosed incidents” that the Board is unable or unwilling to disclose, then I think a lot of us are going to continue to be suspicious of the Board’s motives.  If these undisclosed incident(s) are serious and the Board doesn’t want to talk about them because they’re embarrassing or there are legal issues or whatever, then it’s a cover-up, and as we all know at EMU, that’s never a good thing.  But if these undisclosed incident(s) are as trivial as the disclosed one– that is an argument with an alum about a stupid Huron statue– then it’s a frame-up job by the board in an effort to set up to fire Martin for some reason, or at least not renew her contract.