Saturday, May 27, 2017

Demand Rider Keep Westminster in Princeton As Part of Rider Through 2019


The Coalition to Save Westminster Choir College in Princeton just released its latest proposal for saving the world renowned Westminster Choir College - in Princeton.  It has proposed that Westminster Choir College spin off from Rider as an independent institution and continue to reside on the Princeton campus property.

This position differs from that taken by the Rider AAUP.  The AAUP position opposes the decision made by Dell Omo and the Board of Trustees to move toward separation from Westminster.  The Rider AAUP calls for Westminster Choir College to remain in Princeton as part of Rider University.

i would like to offer a compromise means to move forward while maintaining the integrity of these two varying positions.

We all should unite around these demands:
1. Current AAUP contract continues as-is for next 3 years unless AAUP decides to make any concessions it deems reasonable.



2. Rider for now extends for 1 year until spring 2019 WCC in Princeton as part of Rider. That is not a contradiction for the Coalition because it gives them another year to line up the resources.

Also, for anything the coalition does, any new institution has to recognize the AAUP - its current contract and all current staff.  Anyone that leaves on their own accord, fine - they can hire replacements according to the AAUP contract at the beginner new-hire rate

Otherwise they stick with current staff.

The 1 year extension helps all, Rider University. AAUP and the coalition.

It also unites students with faculty with alumni.

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Confronting the Organizations that Are My Accuser

The following is my Facebook comment on my encounter with a person who has a key role in the “coalition” and the alumni council,  The leader of those two groups recently touched off a smear against me resulting in false rumor and innuendo against my character.

The good news is in response to my Facebook comment I finally got some words of support.    The following was my Facebook comment on the matter – followed by the supportive comments.

Depicted is an example of the kinds of smear that was touched off by the head of those two organizations.

My Facebook Comment:

Recently in one of the efforts I am involved in - the head of two prominent groups involved in that same effort felt a need to publicly distance their group from me personally. It resulted in one forum a piling on including much smear, character assassination, rumor and innuendo - falsehoods.

The organization did nothing to dispel the rumors and innuendo their public pronouncement touched off.

While I disagree that there was any need for them to make the public distancing statement - I had made clear - even in a paper I printed that I am fully and solely responsible for my own views - I could understand that they felt a need to do it.

However - as these were my former colleagues - once it touched off the venomous reaction - even one person saying "he must be stopped " (lol) - they should have stepped in to clarify that they had not intended to unleash such wrath - that what was being 
said was false - and then they should have deleted the thread all together - none of that happened.

Yesterday I was able to talk to a top member of this group - not the one that started the public on-line bashing. She took umbrage to me raising it openly with her - denied any connection to the bashing (which I concurred - her name was not connected to it). She said that I should take it up with the person that started it (I did but there was no reply).

However - I do believe that if you are part of an organization and the head of your group - inflicts such harm on behalf of your group - you can not just say you have "nothing to do with it" because you do - if you are a spokesperson for the same group - you hold collective responsibility for the actions of those who act in the name of your organization.

The following is the positive feedback I have received.

I have great appreciation to you for supportive words!

Elizabeth Faraone 

Anyone who rejects you rejects that which is good. https://www.facebook.com/images/emoji.php/v8/f14/2/16/1f618.png😘
Love you!

Vincnt Todaro 

Bob: I don't know what happened with your associates there. But I will say you are one of the VERY FEW people I see who posts on social media and also engages in TRUE activism. Most of what I see is masturbatory and cowardly (faux activism). Social med
ia is infamous for being a place where nut jobs, assholes, and idiots run free. There is no filter. So perhaps you should take what is said with a grain of salt, or just lambaste these people. Whatever makes you feel better and sets the record straight. Funny, just tonight I was out and bumped into a classmate of mine, whose wife had been a bitch to me on FB. I got the feeling I was not wanted by either for conversation, but I don't know for sure. But the bottom line is, I really, truly don't care (Last year she took umbrage with my praise of Colin Kaepernick. She told me he was a "jackass." I found this confusing considering this is the same woman who advised me to stop being "so negative' on FB. She twice tried to engage me by calling Colin a jackass, and I told her I had already written about 5,000 words on social media about Colin and I was not going to waste my time going over things I had spent so much time on. For this, she unfriended me, but not before one of her typically sub moronic and nasty responses. Anyhow, be well and solidarity.

Name Withheld for now.

 
I agree completely. Be prepared to defend public statements made by group members or get out of leadership position. Also-I'm sorry you've got to deal with shittyness. No-backbone cowards are the reason we're in ALL the messes.

Elizabeth Faraone

Maybe the organization that smeared you is infiltrated by the FBI.

Bob Witanek

Sometimes that is not even a necessary component for counter productive character assassination to be attempted.

Elizabeth Faraone

I know. Only big egos are needed.


Name withheld for now

No good deed goes unpunished! 


Illegitimi non carborundum.

Name withheld for now

Oh my. Bob, how many times has this happened to me or someone near me. once they start circling the wagons and shooting inward....get the hell out of the middle of it. The do gooders are just as programmed to be contentious and disagreeable as the bad doers.

Monday, April 24, 2017

Open Letter: AAUP Continuing to Fight for Westminster - I Stand with AAUP!

THE FOLLOWING IS A LETTER FROM AAUP ON THE CURRENT WESTMINSTER SITUATION TAKEN FROM A FACEBOOK POSTING BY AN AAUP MEMBER AND REBLOGGED HERE WITH THAT MEMBER'S ENCOURAGEMENT!

Please read this letter from the AAUP demolishing the president's decision to sell Westminster. Please share your feelings with the president about this ill-advised decision. Do not give up on keeping Westminster a part of Rider.
The following letter was sent to Rider University's Board of Trustees on April 24th, 2017. The letter was from the Executive Committee of the Rider University Chapter of the AAUP.
Attached and below find the AAUP Executive Committee's analysis of the Board of Trustees decision to "sell" Westminster Choir College. Simply put, we find the decision to “sell” Westminster is a terrible idea. Its de-acquisition will not alter Rider’s financial position or improve its long-term viability . Instead, it will surely lead to a loss of both reputation and endowment. We urge the Board of Trustees to rescind this decision and to begin the long, hard task of rebuilding trust with all of Rider’s stakeholders.
An Open Letter to Rider University’s Board of Trustees
On April 7th Inside Higher Ed published an article by Rick Seltzer (https://www.insidehighered.com/…/rider-university-plows-new… westminster-choir-college-sale) on the decision by President Dell’Omo and Rider University’s Board of Trustees to sell Westminster Choir College. This article reinforced our opposition to the decision to disaffiliate Westminster from Rider.
Where I was when Dell Omo was moving in on his announcement
to close Westminster - with security back in my face!

Our opposition to the divestiture of Westminster Choir College is based on several key positions: the clear lack of financial gain from divestiture, the significant loss of reputation (or diminished brand) for Rider, and the significant negative short term impact of divestiture.
What follows is a summary of our position on Rider’s divestiture of Westminster Choir College. The quotes below are from that article unless otherwise noted.
First, the article makes clear that divesting ourselves of Westminster will not in any significant way alter Rider's fiscal position. While it is true that at the time of the merger that took place in 1992 Westminster was in deep economic trouble with "falling enrollment, degenerating facilities in Princeton and heavy debt," it is also true and far more relevant that, “by 1996, [university] officials told the Times that Westminster, which [then] had 350 students, was no longer losing money.” And even now, in 2017, President Dell'Omo has admitted that "Westminster isn’t a major drain on Rider’s overall finances.” So, if the sale of Westminster will not have a significant impact on Rider’s overall finances why was the decision to sell it made?
By way of explanation, President Dell’Omo asserts “that the strategic goals of the University will neither be achieved by keeping Westminster at its current location in Princeton, nor by consolidating Westminster onto the Lawrenceville campus” (“Important update from the Rider University Board of Trustees,” March 28, emphasis added), This of course begs the question. What are these strategic goals? Who established these goals? Any such change in the University’s goals and direction were certainly not developed with faculty input. More importantly, why might not these goals (whatever they are) be achieved with Westminster remaining at its present location and continuing as part of Rider University?
It is in his interview with Inside Higher Ed that President Dell’Omo reveals his real motivation when he says “Rider needs cash to develop high-demand programs in areas like science, engineering and technology.” These words make apparent that President Dell’Omo intends to eliminate a world-class program, which is operating at full capacity in order to build new facilities. Where is the evidence that such areas are or will be in high-demand at Rider? Is Rider presently turning away qualified applicants from our existing science programs? Where is the evidence that we will be able to develop a successful engineering program when we have absolutely no tradition in that area? And why does President Dell’Omo not have confidence in his ability to fund raise to cover these new capital expenses. Equally important, this decision was made without any faculty input. When the above-named programs were presented to the Academic Policy Committees for approval, there was no mention made that implementation would require additional academic facilities that would be paid for by the shuttering of Westminster and the sale of its land. Shared governance demands that information regarding the far-reaching implications of such decisions be given to those who are charged with making them. None was provided. And what will befall Rider if no windfall profit is realized by the disaffiliation and/or dismantling of Westminster? Will the administration then cancel its plans for these new programs?
Any attempt to secure a windfall profit from the destruction of a unique world-class institution in order to build new facilities is both morally bankrupt and unlikely to succeed. Certainly it places the potential for a small one-time cash inflow above the lives of both the faculty and students who are dedicated to this cultural gem. Rider acquired Westminster in return for the promise to maintain the institution. Those who manage institutions of higher education should not operate like corporate raiders who take over companies to strip them of their valuable resources and then abandon the remains. Rider did not "buy" Westminster in any sense. The two institutions merged in order to benefit both parties; no money changed hands. If the merger no longer benefits both parties (and we do not believe this to be true), then Rider should help Westminster find a new partner on the same basis as the merger that took place in 1992. Rider did not buy Westminster and it does not have the moral right to sell it.
The successful sale of Westminster is an unlikely proposition. There is no known example of a not- for-profit institution of higher education selling a college or even some element of one of its colleges. Interviewer Seltzer pointed this out by saying "The decision to openly sell a nonprofit college and its land is all but unheard of in higher education," and President Dell’Omo freely admitted that “this is such virgin territory . . . These kinds of transactions don’t take place.”
This is, of course, not to say that mergers and acquisitions have not taken place among institutions of higher learning, but only to emphasize that they do not involve the exchange of money. Universities and colleges do, upon occasion, sell underused property. But that is not the case here; the property in Princeton is not only being used for the purpose for which it was donated but is also doing so at full capacity.
President Dell’Omo suggests that the acquisition of Westminster would involve either moving the programs to another locale, or that the new acquiring institution pay for the value of that land where the university resides. Either of these possibilities is likely to make finding a new partner impossible. However, administration has made it clear that the 2018 academic year will be the last year for Westminster Choir College at its current location. This leads to the conclusion that the most likely scenario, indeed the only realistic scenario, is that the world-renowned Westminster Choir College will be closed and dismantled for uncertain and improbable financial gain.
Additionally, there is serious question as to the Board of Trustees’ having the legal right to any proceeds of such a sale of the property. As the attorneys for the Coalition to Save Westminster have already told the Board of Trustees:
Because of the restrictive covenant that encumbers the property in Princeton, the proceeds from its sale would have to be used in a manner consistent with its charitable purpose. In other words, the proceeds from a sale of the Princeton campus could only be used for the continued operations of WCC (or another institution with a similar mission) and could not be used for the general operations of Rider.
We are not attorneys and cannot judge the strength of this argument but, at the very least, even after having destroyed a world-class music program, Rider’s administration would be unable to make use of any funds realized by the sale of the Princeton property without incurring a prolonged legal fight. What we do know is that at the time of the merger with Westminster Choir College, Rider entered into an agreement with the Princeton Theological Seminary (which then was to gain ownership of the land where Westminster Choir College was located, if Westminster was no longer on that land) which guaranteed that institution 2 million dollars from any future sale of the property in return for any future rights in that land. Further, all previous studies of this issue by outside consultants are consistent with information provided to us by a commercial real estate agent who works in the Princeton market that puts the value of the land at no more than in the mid-teens "on a good day." Additionally, almost 20 million dollars of Rider’s endowment is dedicated to Westminster Choir College functions and would most likely need to be divested from Rider’s endowment as part of the process of shuttering Westminster Choir College.
So any financial gain from the sale of the Westminster Choir College property would require subtracting 2 million dollars which must be paid to the Princeton Theological Seminary, and subtracting the almost 20 million in the funds which would be removed from Rider’s endowment. Assuming Rider were able to sell the property for 15 million, these deductions would effectively eliminate any financial gain from the divestiture of the property.
Why would Rider’s current administration pursue an untried path that is likely to lead to the destruction of a world class cultural gem, the shattering of faculty lives and the dreams of present and future students for the morally questionable possibility of a small one-time infusion of cash?
In summary, we ask the question, what does Rider risk by destroying Westminster?
1. Losing its reputation for dealing fairly with students.
Students come to institutions with the expectation that the institution will stand by its promise to allow them to graduate in their chosen major. The administration has already undermined that promise when it abruptly laid off faculty and eliminated majors and minors in October 2015. While that decision was reversed, we still suffer from its impact. Now we will become known for closing one of our colleges on a year’s notice, leaving over 400 students without the ability to receive the degree we had promised them. This loss of reputation is likely to be particularly hard felt in the Arts since as the Lawrenceville Student Government succinctly put it:
“With this loss, the university has identified retaining world-class artistic programs as the least of its priorities,”
2. Losing both a large portion of its endowment and the donors who provided it.
The choir college, which had no endowment to speak of in the 1980s, now has an endowment of about $20 million -- part of Rider’s approximately $50 million overall endowment. Those monies which were given specifically for the purpose of running Westminster programs will have to be used for those purposes or, if Westminster ceases to exist, be given to a successor institution or similar institution or, barring those two possibilities, be returned to the donors or the estates of those donors. Certainly, a 40% reduction in the value of our endowment is going to reduce Rider’s ability to borrow and will likely lead to a further downgrading of our bond rating.
3. Losing the value of other recent fundraising at Westminster.
As the Insider Higher Ed article reports, “The Princeton campus has seen an infusion of donor money in recent years. It has led to millions of dollars in renovations and the construction in 2014 of the first new building to go up on campus in almost 40 years.” If Westminster is closed or forced to move its programs to another campus, it is likely that the donors behind those millions of dollars in renovations and construction are going to demand that those funds be returned since they are no longer being used for the purpose for which they were given. At least one donor of significant funds has already put the administration on notice that he intends to so insist.
4. Losing access to a strong alumni and donor base.
The Westminster donor and alumni base is particularly loyal and generous and obviously they will no longer have any interest in contributing to the institution that destroyed their alma mater. We must also ask what sort of message this sends to other potential donors? Why would anyone invest in an institution that might with every new president change its direction and perhaps abandon the very program for which he or she had elected to provide financial support?
5. Losing revenue in the coming academic year.
In the coming academic year significantly fewer students are going to attend Westminster and thus Rider will see a dramatic decline in revenue with little or no reduction in its expenses.
Simply put, the decision to “sell” Westminster is a terrible idea. Its de-acquisition will not alter Rider’s financial position or improve its long-term viability. Instead, it will surely lead to a loss of both reputation and endowment. We urge the Board of Trustees to rescind this decision and to begin the long hard task of rebuilding trust with all of Rider’s stakeholders. For its part the AAUP will use all the means at its disposal to reverse this ill-considered decision.
AAUP Executive Committee,
Art Taylor, President
Elizabeth Scheiber, VP
Jeff Halpern, CGO/Contract Administrator
Joel Phillips, AGO
Dave Dewberry, Treasurer/Financial Secretary
Kathy Price, Recording Secretary
Jason Chui, At-Large Member
Kathleen Pierce, At-Large Member
Bryan Spiegelberg, Immediate Past President

Sunday, April 23, 2017

Solidarity with Striking Puerto Rican University Students

The following was posted by Puerto Rican student leader on Facebook as a call to solidarity - solidarity messages can be sent to the following Facebook account:

Thay Moya
 added 2 new photos.
1 hr


For my English speakers here in Puerto Rico, in the U.S., and globally, here is a press release about whats going on here with our public education system and the government. Join us in solidarity!
SHARING is caring y'all so lets make this viral!
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 23rd, 2017
A CALL TO ACTION FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO
On April 7th 2017, at approximately 2:00 AM, students at the University of Puerto Rico- Mayagüez Campus elected to join the systemic university wide strike by a landslide popular vote in response to the proposed budget cuts towards the UPR system. The University of Puerto Rico, established in
1903, is the only public university system in the country not only servicing a very diverse student body but also offering the largest and most diverse course offerings, research, and services to the community in the Caribbean. Under the oversight of the U.S. Fiscal Control Board and Governor Ricardo Rossello’s administration, the government has proposed a budget cut of $512M representing more than 60% of the actual budget which is already in deficit. A budget cut of such magnitude represents the potential collapse of our public university system, the cease of critical services to the Puerto Rican community, the elimination of crucial research utilized by the local and global community, and threatens the ability for Puerto Rican people to access public and affordable education necessary to strengthen our workforce and rectify our economic crisis.
In the face of overwhelming evidence pointing towards government corruption, students are using the systemic strike to pressure the current governing bodies to cease the
proposed budget cuts, provide economic transparency to the Puerto Rican people, and engage in effective dialogue with the students. Thus, students have declared the termination of the strike conditional upon the meeting of these five demands: (1) that the debt be audited, (2) students not be penalized for engaging or openly expressing viewpoints in favor of the strike, (3) zero cuts occur to the university budget, (4) a reform to the university system take place, (5) and lastly that tuition not be raised and tuition waivers remain intact. Behind university gates students are working on proposals to present to the government as alternatives to the proposed budget cuts to the UPR system as well as viable solutions to the island wide economic crisis.
The pressure generated by the strike to date has produced a meeting between Gov. Rossello and student council presidents of all 11 campuses which resulted in limited dialogue from Gov. Rossello and zero negotiation. Frequent communications have also been sent out by the acting President of the UPR system, Nivia A. Fernandez, favoring a cessation of the student strike even in the face of losing the public university system. Mass media outlets such as El Nuevo Día, Metro, and Lo Se Todo have also contributed to movements in opposition of the strike using fear tactics and misinformation.
This is an urgent call to the Puerto Rican diaspora, institutions of higher education in the U.S., the community of foreigners living on the island, and the global community to stand in solidarity with the University of Puerto Rico and its students. Many government and university officials are refusing to open necessary channels of dialogue with students. Voices outside of the island are necessary in the transmission of correct information and to increase pressure towards the Puerto Rican government and Fiscal Control Board. Without the University of Puerto Rico system, Puerto Rico collapses leaving approximately 3.5 million people in the middle of a financial crisis, with less educational opportunities, less services, and minimal tools to produce viable solutions for the country.
# # #


Tuesday, April 11, 2017

WCC Closing a la Frederick Douglass: No Plow, No Thunder, No Lightning, No Roar of Mighty Waters and . . . No WCC in Fall 2018

Time for some Frederick Douglass reality check - WCC got 1 year left and instead of unifying to try to change that equation - I have come under scurrilous and baseless attack for the methods of struggle that I chose to embrace and that I have proposed and promoted - I think some are trying to tell themselves that something was won on March 28 but the AAUP statement responding to the decision is a far more sober assessment.

I have been vilified for saying as much and folks say they want to be positive and hopeful. That's all well and good - have at it - but come this time next year the wrecking ball from the meme my son made last year (when I participated in a quasi successful effort to save WCC yet to the detriment of faculty and the AAUP) will be casting a dark shadow.

This is the part of the famous quotation that relates to those that have participated in my smearing for my suggestions of a more active and sustained kind of protest than what students and alumni offered:

"If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the roar of its mighty waters."


Here there has been disparaging of my agitation and we did NOT plow the ground. There has been no thunder and lighting and there has been no roar of mighty waters and come 2018 . . . as it seems . . . unless we heed the call of AAUP to continue the fight to demand that Westminster continue . . . there will be no Westminster.

Sunday, April 9, 2017

Open Letter to Alumni Council

Dear Leaders and Members of Westminster Choir College Alumni Council,

Apparently there is some confusion among your members and followers.  I hope this letter will provide clarification.

I wish you every success with your pending events around Westminster Choir College Alumni reunion.

I have come to the attention of some Facebook comments suggesting that I had intentions to attend and possibly even disrupt these events.  I did not see any corrective comments from your leadership in response though such correction could have been made after the information I have been provided was collected.  I assume that the leadership of your council did not initiate these innuendo and falsehoods about me.

Do you know where this idea began, that I was intending to attend and / or disrupt?  I have not been personally invited to your festivities.  I was vaguely aware of the event but it was not really on my radar at all.  Saving Westminster is only one of many issues that I am involved in.  Others include stopping Rider's attempt to destroy the AAUP, Rider’s anti-immigrant policies, I just coordinated a NJ statewide response to the US bombing of Syria, I am one of the statewide coordinators of Decarcerate the Garden State and am supporting the organization efforts of COSECHA around A Day Without Immigrants for May 1 2017.  Point being – I am very busy so I was not even thinking about your important event and I apologize for that.

Can you please dispel any rumors among your membership that I had any intention to disrupt your event?  I am not sure where they got that idea into their head but there was an awful excessive amount of discourse – one even suggesting the need to call security to invite my exit to stop my non-disruption during my non-attendance of the event.

A couple of other things.  One of the alumnus suggested she wanted to “steal” my banner (I have two actually).   If you want to borrow one or both for your events – all good.  It does not imply that you agree with my approach to fighting to save Westminster – it implies that you agree to the slogan on the banner: Save Westminster Choir College – Support Beloved Faculty.



Also if you want a stack of historical O Westminster papers to share with your members – even if you do not absolutely agree with the perspective – it is mostly about how the plight of Westminster Choir College is tied to the plight of Westminster (and Rider) faculty and the AAUP – I can share them.


If you want neither of these things that’s fine too – no worries.

While I am not intending to organize any kind of demonstration around your events – it would not be a bad idea for YOU to organize maybe a 1 hour evening twilight candle light vigil that you can all sing some hopeful songs of struggle to Save Westminster Choir College.

I have no idea how this ugly innuendo and rumor and demonization of my character occurred, to have several people worrying about me disrupting an event I had not even been invited to nor had any intention of attending let  alone disrupting.  It would not have been horrible to have actually been invited to the events – to have a table there with my information – or whatever – or even to break bread with your members.  After all we have been fighting for the same thing even if some of your members disagree with my perspective on how to struggle in a place like Rider University.  But given the attitudes of some of your members and their wild and vivid imaginations – I am not expecting such an invite right away and at this point to be honest it is I who would be a little nervous being around them!

Any way – you want to borrow the banners and / or you want some papers to share with the membership, contact me.

But most importantly please ask your members to stop creating stories and feeding innuendo and rumor about my intentions toward your events.

Of course I wish you every success with it.

Sincerely,
Bob Witanek

Call or Text 908-881-5275