|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Feb 4, 2018 13:57:34 GMT -5
I was talking about the cost. It's a good move.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 14, 2018 21:10:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 15, 2018 5:33:03 GMT -5
Ugh, brand new website...404 errors.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 7:23:08 GMT -5
Ugh, brand new website...404 errors. Saw it earlier in the day... Someone from faculty Senate leaked a statement denouncing the sale to a personal art blog before it was released. In a bit of irony, they dedicate a significant portion to denounce the administration's poor communication and the ensuing PR nightmare, while they themselves are leaking internal-only communication, with multiple senate members confirming it. It's all very 'sour grapes' and less-than-great look for the entire university disguised as a last ditch effort.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 15, 2018 7:31:19 GMT -5
Ugh, brand new website...404 errors. Saw it earlier in the day... Someone from faculty Senate leaked a statement denouncing the sale to a personal art blog before it was released. In a bit of irony, they dedicate a significant portion to denounce the administration's poor communication and the ensuing PR nightmare, while they themselves are leaking internal-only communication, with multiple senate members confirming it. It's all very 'sour grapes' and less-than-great look for the entire university disguised as a last ditch effort. Well that person should be shit-canned. What is the mission statement of the faculty senate?
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 7:34:11 GMT -5
Saw it earlier in the day... Someone from faculty Senate leaked a statement denouncing the sale to a personal art blog before it was released. In a bit of irony, they dedicate a significant portion to denounce the administration's poor communication and the ensuing PR nightmare, while they themselves are leaking internal-only communication, with multiple senate members confirming it. It's all very 'sour grapes' and less-than-great look for the entire university disguised as a last ditch effort. Well that person should be shit-canned. What is the mission statement of the faculty senate? The blog noted the faculty Senate's portion of the website was currently down as an additional parting shot, but I'd guess it doesn't include leaking statements or talking to the media independent of the university.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 15, 2018 7:44:36 GMT -5
Faculty members, and particularly tenured faculty members, are allowed to speak with whomever they want. It's not like a corporation where something like that can get you fired. They have "academic freedom", and a few of them were annoyed before when someone from the administration came to them back in January and told them not to speak to the media - you just don't do that to University faculty at any institution.
I'm less concerned about the sale of the art (I've made my position clear on that and had respectful disagreements with faculty members about it), and more concerned with what appears to be a growing distrust or disconnect between administration and faculty. That needs to work in harmony for the University to right the ship, and the faculty is the face of the University to the students - they are the front line. We've devoted significant "keystrokes" to the coach situation, but this, I think, shows some deeper seeded issues going on right now that I hope get fixed.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 8:18:16 GMT -5
Faculty members, and particularly tenured faculty members, are allowed to speak with whomever they want. It's not like a corporation where something like that can get you fired. They have "academic freedom", and a few of them were annoyed before when someone from the administration came to them back in January and told them not to speak to the media - you just don't do that to University faculty at any institution. I'm less concerned about the sale of the art (I've made my position clear on that and had respectful disagreements with faculty members about it), and more concerned with what appears to be a growing distrust or disconnect between administration and faculty. That needs to work in harmony for the University to right the ship, and the faculty is the face of the University to the students - they are the front line. We've devoted significant "keystrokes" to the coach situation, but this, I think, shows some deeper seeded issues going on right now that I hope get fixed. I'm well-versed in the challenges associated with academic freedoms - but I'm not talking legality - it usurps the University and Faculty Senate leadership, including appointed President, Chairs, and Provost. It's a lousy move and a real dirty play. You don't solicit positive change by leaking documents and running to the 'media', not that any 'real' media is willing to pick up this story at this point. You only further the divide that the blog post rants against - I view it as quite hypocritical. The same organizers are pushing a new Facebook group - Friends of the La Salle Art Museum - planning a March 20th 'protest' on campus. They claim to have gotten their hands on the Art Museum's policy on deaccessioning, which was ratified by the BoT. They're claiming this is against the BoT-confirmed rules - and they acknowledge the BoT's authority to make those rules in 2009 - but what they don't accept is that they voted on this matter when the deaccessioning was decided, and the President and BoT do not need to consult with or confirm decisions with the Faculty Senate. You can't defend yourself against a group's decision by arguing their authority while using a defense built upon a rule established by the same group's authority - they rule the land, they set the rules, they amend the rules, and they create the exceptions. Got an issue with it? - Pony up and become a Trustee.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 15, 2018 9:52:45 GMT -5
Life is pay to play.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 10:10:42 GMT -5
That's kinda where I'm at on the issue - have found that faculty, in general, have always felt their opinion was more important than it is, or that they should have more say than they do. It's not unique to La Salle.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 15, 2018 10:24:36 GMT -5
The faculty I've spoken with was more concerned with the way (or the perceived way) this was carried out, and I think their letter addresses that. They were thrilled with the new age of transparency brought on by the new administration, but felt this was done without transparency.
Regarding faculty and the importance of their opinion...they are on the front lines much more so than the administration with the students...the students being the main source of revenue for the University. I would venture that most of us remember our experiences with professors more fondly and with more detail than we do with anyone in an administrative function. Happy faculty makes them want to be more active and can help with having more engaged students, who ultimately will become more engaged alums.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 15, 2018 10:40:40 GMT -5
The same organizers are pushing a new Facebook group - Friends of the La Salle Art Museum - planning a March 20th 'protest' on campus. Heard about the protest. I think it was specifically designed to coincide with The Day of Giving, and I've seen some faculty members posting on Facebook statements like, "Not another penny to La Salle." (The faculty have been very generous in the past to donating financially). It bothers me to see that, but I respect their right to protest in that way and own it...and it's no different than some of what people have posted on here about refusing to support the program or donate to the Explorer Fund while G is still coach.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 11:59:20 GMT -5
It bothers me to see that, but I respect their right to protest in that way and own it...and it's no different than some of what people have posted on here about refusing to support the program or donate to the Explorer Fund while G is still coach. Ditto on the first part, but I do feel it's a bit different when the University, in many cases, has entrusted a great deal in these same people, and has made a significant investment in most of them in the form of tenure. They're saying it's a slap in the face, but the whole deaccesension was framed as a move to protect the university's academic pursuits, but because they're - for lack of better phrase - butthurt as hell about it, they're literally preaching the exact opposite of what Hanycz said. It's a shame - I get they want transparency, and I'm glad they liked the transparency this administration brought initially, but it's foolish of them to make demands like this against university that has had their financial struggles so publicly documented. Try getting laid off -- they need to be asked if those that got laid off got to make demands like this? Were they consulted beforehand? Because that might be the next option for them, and at this rate they might be more deserving of that fate than those that got laid off. I know some of those that got the axe - it sucks, it's a fact of life, and while academic freedoms exist, it doesn't mean you're inherently right to criticize your employer, moral high-ground or not.
|
|
|
Post by manayunk53 on Mar 15, 2018 12:54:19 GMT -5
It bothers me to see that, but I respect their right to protest in that way and own it...and it's no different than some of what people have posted on here about refusing to support the program or donate to the Explorer Fund while G is still coach. Ditto on the first part, but I do feel it's a bit different when the University, in many cases, has entrusted a great deal in these same people, and has made a significant investment in most of them in the form of tenure. They're saying it's a slap in the face, but the whole deaccesension was framed as a move to protect the university's academic pursuits, but because they're - for lack of better phrase - butthurt as hell about it, they're literally preaching the exact opposite of what Hanycz said. It's a shame - I get they want transparency, and I'm glad they liked the transparency this administration brought initially, but it's foolish of them to make demands like this against university that has had their financial struggles so publicly documented. Try getting laid off -- they need to be asked if those that got laid off got to make demands like this? Were they consulted beforehand? Because that might be the next option for them, and at this rate they might be more deserving of that fate than those that got laid off. I know some of those that got the axe - it sucks, it's a fact of life, and while academic freedoms exist, it doesn't mean you're inherently right to criticize your employer, moral high-ground or not. Anytime I try to read a serious post that you make, I find myself instantly distracted by watching the G headbashing clip repeatedly.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 15, 2018 13:02:48 GMT -5
Anytime I try to read a serious post that you make, I find myself instantly distracted by watching the G headbashing clip repeatedly. That's the point - because I'm really just a giant moron.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 16, 2018 14:16:00 GMT -5
The same organizers are pushing a new Facebook group - Friends of the La Salle Art Museum - planning a March 20th 'protest' on campus. They claim to have gotten their hands on the Art Museum's policy on deaccessioning, which was ratified by the BoT. They're claiming this is against the BoT-confirmed rules - and they acknowledge the BoT's authority to make those rules in 2009 - but what they don't accept is that they voted on this matter when the deaccessioning was decided, and the President and BoT do not need to consult with or confirm decisions with the Faculty Senate. You can't defend yourself against a group's decision by arguing their authority while using a defense built upon a rule established by the same group's authority - they rule the land, they set the rules, they amend the rules, and they create the exceptions. Got an issue with it? - Pony up and become a Trustee. They come off as really whiny on that Facebook page. I took a look and they seem to now be claiming this was against the rules voted on by the BoT in 2015 or something? They complained that a letter that got back from the BoT was full of admin-speak and condescending. Honestly, I read the letter and thought it was fine and not condescending at all, and acknowledged the difference of opinion. Page seems to have some non-La Salle people complaining on it as well...which is humorous to me.
|
|
|
Post by explorerman on Mar 16, 2018 18:21:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SICguy84 on Mar 16, 2018 18:41:11 GMT -5
I mean, at some point, one wonders was the decision to sell fucking worth all this? I am inclined to believe those making the decision did not fully envision the negative press generated. And I stand by my original assessment these months later that this unwise. We'll see if donations to Day of Giving are impacted at all over this (or I guess the basketball situation). And now we have a state AG, (Shapiro...aka mini Rendell) who never met a camera he didn't love, sniffing around this. Great. Philadelphia Magazine March edition(awful rag) profiled a select number of Philadelphia area colleges about campus life. This "controversy" was mentioned under La Salle. University response letter I found on Facebook. www.dropbox.com/s/t0she09a6p5l9jh/Friends%20of%20La%20Salle%20Art%20Museum%20response%20letter%203.15.18.pdf?dl=0(This will be the similar response when we "protest" the drop down to a small one bid conference - final and irrevocable, move along people!)
|
|
|
Post by explorerman on Mar 16, 2018 19:03:19 GMT -5
Yeah.. I continue to be surprised how much news this makes and I am even further surprised how aggressive the Faculty has been.. Would they prefer to be laid off? Further studies/programs to be eliminated?
Believe it or not, the University is in a better spot financially (income statement wise) then they were a few years ago.. The cash bleed was just unbelievable.. You do have to wonder what the hell people were looking at for a few years there..
Colleen is probably the only party right now in the entire situation whom I trust..
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Mar 16, 2018 20:00:48 GMT -5
Yeah.. I continue to be surprised how much news this makes and I am even further surprised how aggressive the Faculty has been.. Would they prefer to be laid off? Further studies/programs to be eliminated? Believe it or not, the University is in a better spot financially (income statement wise) then they were a few years ago.. The cash bleed was just unbelievable.. You do have to wonder what the hell people were looking at for a few years there.. Colleen is probably the only party right now in the entire situation whom I trust.. It is scary the higher education that is teaching our kids. Many are out of touch with reality.
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 16, 2018 20:44:53 GMT -5
Yeah.. I continue to be surprised how much news this makes and I am even further surprised how aggressive the Faculty has been.. Would they prefer to be laid off? Further studies/programs to be eliminated? Believe it or not, the University is in a better spot financially (income statement wise) then they were a few years ago.. The cash bleed was just unbelievable.. You do have to wonder what the hell people were looking at for a few years there.. Colleen is probably the only party right now in the entire situation whom I trust.. It is scary the higher education that is teaching our kids. Many are out of touch with reality. Is there somewhere that I can find out how many students major in what. How many art history majors does La Salle have? I still think La Salle's available undergrad majors list is way way way too long.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 16, 2018 22:37:41 GMT -5
It is scary the higher education that is teaching our kids. Many are out of touch with reality. Is there somewhere that I can find out how many students major in what. How many art history majors does La Salle have? I still think La Salle's available undergrad majors list is way way way too long. I think the university leadership tends to agree.
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 17, 2018 10:31:47 GMT -5
I am inclined to believe those making the decision did not fully envision the negative press generated. This is true, and was the reason for the note out to alums after the decision was made instead of before. They acknowledge this was a swing and a miss in assessing the impact. We live in very angry and divisive political times where people want to continually have something to be outraged about. Reading this article and the rhetoric around the protests, it just feels like that..like wanting to be outraged about something and this is cause du jour. I see both sides of this issue, and I think the underlying struggle is the shift in higher education to needing to run more like a sustainable business while still preserving the underlying liberal arts educational mission. A lot of faculty get into education to avoid that "business" aspect of things, so you have this natural and growing tension between "purist" educational pursuits and an administration's responsibility for a P&L statement in a competitive educational marketplace to provide the resources needed for that purist educational environment.
|
|
|
Post by durenduren on Mar 17, 2018 11:15:24 GMT -5
My favorite Phiily.com comment on this -
"This sale is an absolute travesty. Works displayed in a museum ostensibly belongs to the public. The public was owed part of this discussion. For the university to cart the art off during the shadowy reaches of the night is a pure demonstration of how heartless and shady the sale really is.
We are entitled to this art. This wasn't a private gallery. This is a MUSEUM. The distinction is important."
Ha, stop it silly person. It's private as private can be. If it's a mistake, it's La Salle's mistake to make. The AG's review process, from my understanding, is standard procedure for any non-profit - if you give a justifiable reason, you are generally green-lighted.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,476
Likes: 6,373
|
Post by MisterD on Mar 17, 2018 11:42:52 GMT -5
"I will NEVER go to La Salle's art museum after this. Also, I've never gone before this either."
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 17, 2018 12:16:18 GMT -5
My favorite Phiily.com comment on this - "This sale is an absolute travesty. Works displayed in a museum ostensibly belongs to the public. The public was owed part of this discussion. For the university to cart the art off during the shadowy reaches of the night is a pure demonstration of how heartless and shady the sale really is. We are entitled to this art. This wasn't a private gallery. This is a MUSEUM. The distinction is important." Ha, stop it silly person. It's private as private can be. If it's a mistake, it's La Salle's mistake to make. The AG's review process, from my understanding, is standard procedure for any non-profit - if you give a justifiable reason, you are generally green-lighted. I enjoyed this comment: "That's quite a display of artistic talent by those protesters. Perhaps their works should be hung in the gallery as well."
|
|
|
Post by JoeFedorowicz on Mar 17, 2018 12:53:11 GMT -5
"I will NEVER go to La Salle's art museum after this. Also, I've never gone before this either." Basically
|
|
|
Post by GlitterBro #2 on Mar 18, 2018 13:31:14 GMT -5
Front page of Sunday's Inquirer...but as PT Barnum said, “There's no such thing as bad publicity.” Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by gymrat67 on Mar 18, 2018 18:32:39 GMT -5
I am inclined to believe those making the decision did not fully envision the negative press generated. This is true, and was the reason for the note out to alums after the decision was made instead of before. They acknowledge this was a swing and a miss in assessing the impact. We live in very angry and divisive political times where people want to continually have something to be outraged about. Reading this article and the rhetoric around the protests, it just feels like that..like wanting to be outraged about something and this is cause du jour. I see both sides of this issue, and I think the underlying struggle is the shift in higher education to needing to run more like a sustainable business while still preserving the underlying liberal arts educational mission. A lot of faculty get into education to avoid that "business" aspect of things, so you have this natural and growing tension between "purist" educational pursuits and an administration's responsibility for a P&L statement in a competitive educational marketplace to provide the resources needed for that purist educational environment. What I have trouble understanding in all of this is how it is possible that the University and the BOT did not anticipate the risk and potential scope of the largely, if not entirely, foreseeable negative repercussions and implications of this naïve, ill-advised and wholly avoidable public relations catastrophe ? Who at La Salle has not heard and read about the nationally - reported Brandeis University Rose Art Museum " Deaccessioning " controversy ? Who at La Salle is unfamiliar with the PA AG's Office recent interventions in the Milton Hershey Trust fiduciaries matters ? Who at La Salle is oblivious to the infamous Philadelphia historical controversies and protractive litigations involving the Stephen Girard Estate Trust and the Barnes Foundation ( Art Museum ) Trust ?
The last time I checked, the current University Administration includes several well-compensated EVPs, including a Chief of Staff - VP for external affairs & liaison with state and local government and an in-house general counsel ( who also oversees the work of the major Phila. law firm on retainer as outside corporate / legal counsel ), wholly apart from and in addition to the input and business advice of the Board Chairman, Mr. Zarrilli and the rest of the BOT. Accordingly, reasonable minds are caused to somewhat incredulously wonder :
( 1 ) Who all were consulted in advance on this decision and who researched the applicable law and the potential legal implications of unilaterally ( apparently ) " deaccessioning " the valuable donated works of art selected to be auctioned off ? Who rendered or authored the legal opinions involved in the BOT's ultimate decision to move forward ? and
( 2 ) Conversely, if La Salle's inside general counsel and / or outside corporate counsel had cautioned the University and BOT against the proposed Plan to deaccession the Art works in question, citing concerns about possibly unleashing one or more of a list of readily foreseeable, potentially open-ended, uncontrollable negative consequences, and / or triggering the potential applicability of known adverse or unsettled legal precedents, who all then made the ultimate decision to " damn the torpedoes " and assume the risk of proceeding with the proposed sales anyway and why ?
|
|
|
Post by coachd on Mar 19, 2018 8:52:20 GMT -5
The Art of the Art Deal. Time to drain the BOT swamp at 20th & Olney.
|
|