Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 10:06 a.m.

Craig, I'll answer both of your posts here. As to the first: Not only did the Board attend the retreat, but so did the College's leadership--the President, the vice presidents, several of the Deans, the head of IT, etc.... It's not that the Board needed to be away from "mundane issues," it's that the college's leadership needed to be so that some forward thinking and planning could happen. Perhaps "mundane" was a bad choice of words--"day-to-day" might be better. Having participated in such retreats for other organizations, they are, I can tell you, invaluable, and much work gets done that would not happen if they happened with in the confines of the organizations' offices. Which leads to the second point. Was the $9000 expenditure "necessary"? Who knows, but given that such retreats are an annual event for the WCC leadership, and given the glowing reviews the College received from the HCL team (the HCL also evaluated the Board), and given that the College appears to be being extraordinarily well run, I personally am willing to accept such retreats a necessary. And given that the cost of this retreat represents roughly.009% of the College's budget (no, there is not a decimal error there), it seems a reasonable cost that reasonable people ought to be willing to bear. Good Night and Good Luck

Craig Lounsbury

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 9:41 a.m.

"And if a $9000 weekend once per year is what is necessary to allow that Board to do its job, to oversee a college whose budget now approaches near $100 million per year, and to insure the continued high quality of the education that WCC provides, well... $9000 seems a bargain." I agree that $9000 would be cheap of it were necessary to allow the board to do their job. However nobody yet, has made a case that it is "necessary" to do the job. Are you suggesting that the job that requires "hundreds if not thousands of hours worth of work annually" could not happen without a weekend retreat?

Craig Lounsbury

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 9:13 a.m.

I stand corrected on my point "Mr.Ghost". However lets examine your claims that "Retreats such as this permit much to be accomplished away from the phone, away from the secretary, away the possibility of being interrupted routinely with relatively mundane issues." 1. Away from the phone. Which phone? The one in their pocket? Surely you can turn that one off. The one at the desk of their day job, or at home? The alternative to a retreat isn't a conference call. Do they each have a phone in front of them at the normal meeting site? If so perhaps pulling the connection at the back of the phone would solve the problem. 2. Away from the "secretary": Which secretary are you talking about. It can't be the one at their day job. That issue is solved in the same fashion as the day job desk phone issue above. Is this a communal secretary for the board? Do these volunteers each have a secretary provided for the position? Are we talking "personal secretaries"? What sort of secretary cannot be told "do not bother me between the hours of... except for extreme emergencies"? 3. "away the possibility of being interrupted routinely with relatively mundane issues": Now that we have solved both the phone and the secretary "problem" without an actual retreat what would be another source for " relatively mundane issues"?

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 8:16 a.m.

Craig wrote: "Don't forget to add 'away from those pesky tax payers who elected them.' After all its called a "retreat" because they are retreating from the public eye to make decisions about our public institution." Sorry, but no. The meetings were publicized as required by the MOMA. People were there, including the press (which was preforming the duty the founders expected it to play--understanding, as they did, that citizens could not first-hand observe the operations of their government). And, most importantly, if the decisions and discussions were meant to be kept from public view, that we are discussing it here suggests total failure in that regard. Finally, given that there are seldom if any members of the public at WCC's board meetings, the Board does not need to go to Detroit to escape public view. Good Night and Good Luck

Craig Lounsbury

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 8:01 a.m.

"Retreats such as this permit much to be accomplished away from the phone, away from the secretary, away the possibility of being interrupted routinely with relatively mundane issues." Don't forget to add "away from those pesky tax payers who elected them" After all its called a "retreat" because they are retreating from the public eye to make decisions about our public institution.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 7:22 a.m.

Stunhsif wrote: "Good job Lonnie Scott, without your analysis this story would never have come to light." Yeah, this story would never have come to light--that is, of course, unless one counts the stories that ran in the Ann Arbor Chronicle (where it first broke), in the WCC Voice, and on A2.com two months ago. Again, regarding Rutledge and the rest of the WCC board, this is a non-story except for those who who are clueless. Sunflower, however, gets it right about this being a litmus test of Mr. Scott's character and integrity and of the style of campaign he expects to run. Good Night and Good Luck

KeepingItReal

Sun, May 30, 2010 : 7:20 a.m.

Initially, I was excited about Lesko's announcement to run for Mayor of Ann Arbor. Now. I'm seriously having second thoughts. While I have some issues and concerns about our current Mayor, I'm not sure that we need someone in office who do not respect the truth.

stunhsif

Sat, May 29, 2010 : 11 p.m.

Good job Lonnie Scott, without your analysis this story would never have come to light. Your insight may help get a Republican elected, just kidding, people around here don't think for themselves!

sunflower

Fri, May 28, 2010 : 8:56 a.m.

This story gives me much reservation about Lonnie Scott. If he is mud-slinging already, what will he do later on? If elected, will he blame all the mistakes and wrong-doings on others? Going straight for David Rutledge's throat right away just might be a show of Mr. Scott's character and integrity. Bad vibes coming from this one.

The Picker

Thu, May 27, 2010 : 6:52 p.m.

Doesn't WCC have a fine culinary arts program? 9k would have gone a long way and would have kept the money in the school where it belongs.

CareyJernigan

Thu, May 27, 2010 : 9:10 a.m.

Cheep shot at Rutledge. As a Trustee, he attended a retreat planned by the college, as part of his duty as an elected official.

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Thu, May 27, 2010 : 7:57 a.m.

One last point: Ypsilivin threatens the Board and the College with voting down the next WCC millage. That is, of course, the right of every voter in Washtenaw County. Of course, the only people who will be hurt by this will be students because tuition will go up even more and/or programs and course offerings will be cut. Anger at the WCC Board for a $9000 weekend = pain for more than 13,000 students. Yea, that's logical. Good Night and Good Luck

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Thu, May 27, 2010 : 7:24 a.m.

Lets stipulate up front that this was politically tone deaf given the tenor of the times. That said: 1) This was not AIG going to a retreat golf outing at Pebble Beach. This was a working retreat, the records of which are readily available except for those sessions where personnel issues were being discussed. Retreats such as this permit much to be accomplished away from the phone, away from the secretary, away the possibility of being interrupted routinely with relatively mundane issues. 2) The college chose the Book Cadillac, a local business that had just recently reopened at huge expense to private investors. It is not clear that that that investment will ever be realized given the states and the citys economies. The College, then, was trying to support one part of an important new economic venture in downtown Detroit 3) The board members, all of whom have other jobs on which their livelihoods depend, do this job with zero compensation. They put in hundreds if not thousands of hours worth of work annually for this job. Despite their day jobs several are routinely on campus at WCC (Jerry Jernigan, when he was trustee, wandered the halls talking to students, staff, and faculty, and was known to simply pop into an office to talk to administrators and faculty). 4) Board members have donated substantial sums to the WCC Foundation, the charitable arm of the college that funds tuition and other resources for in-need students. Their connections (which someone chose to denigrate above) ARE important in this regard, as an important role of the board is to strongarm their friends and business colleagues to support the various functions of the Foundation. 5) Of the people who have served on the WCC Board for the last 15 years, only David Rutledge has attempted to use that position as a springboard to higher office (and it is not yet clear if Mr. Rutledge will succeed). This is not a position political elites use to further their careers. It is something committed citizens do to serve their community. 6) Someone raised the issue of perks. Perks!! You must be kidding me. Anyone who thinks the WCC Board of Trustees have perks for this thankless job should run for election to the Board so that they might discover first-hand just what those perks might be. WCC provides a quality education to its students. The Higher Learning Commission, the body that accredits colleges and universities in the North Central Region, just gave WCC a 10-year clean bill of health during its visit in the Fall of 2009. Let me be clear that this almost NEVER happens. At the very least, most colleges are required to file follow-up reports that address noted shortcomings. Many are required to undergo re-inspection. WCC was not required to do any of this. The HLCs findings are a measure of the high quality job being done by WCCs instructors, staff, administrators, and, yes, by its Board of Trustees. And if a $9000 weekend once per year is what is necessary to allow that Board to do its job, to oversee a college whose budget now approaches near $100 million per year, and to insure the continued high quality of the education that WCC provides, well... $9000 seems a bargain. Good Night and Good Luck

jcj

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 10:01 p.m.

Rutledge, who has been on the college's board nearly 13 years, defended the expenses, saying "they were budgeted". So that makes it OK? What? Are you kidding me? Times are hard enough without this "trustee" willy nilly endorsing spending $180 on a meal!

H.

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 8:32 p.m.

I am no math wiz, so somebody with some expert knowledge help me out here if I am wrong. In 2009, the CC taxed homestead properties 3.6856 mills. There was a total property tax value of $15,312,121,625 in Washtenaw County in 2009 (that is fifteen billion and change). Multiplying those figures divided by 1,000 means the CC received $56,434,355.46 in property taxes asumming all properties are taxed at homestead rates (which they are not). Then reading an AA.com article, it stated "About half of WCC's income comes from property tax revenue, which has fallen, said Steven Hardy, vice president for finance at WCC." (http://www.annarbor.com/news/higher-tuition-on-the-way-at-washtenaw-community-college). So does this mean the CC gets over $100 million in revenues? I went to the WCC website to confirm these numbers via a budget or audit. Funny how I could not find a budget or financial audit posted on the website. Is it there and I cannot find it, or is not posted for a reason becuase the Board doesn't want these revenue figures (if somewhat accurate) out in the open? I do not know the facts. I am just asking the question. It is hard to judge matters until all line item expenditures are reviewed. The jury is out for now. Since I cannot vote in this district, it doesn't really matter.

YpsiLivin

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 8:28 p.m.

Elizabeth said: I also think it needs to be clear that WCCs President Larry Whitworth said he made all the arrangements himself, and that it wasnt the boards decision. It also needs to be made clear that David Rutledge said that the board retreat was a budget item and the board of trustees is ultimately responsible for approving the budget. It also needs to be made clear that when the decision to spend more than $9,000 on the board retreat was made, the president decided to spend the Washtenaw County taxpayers' dollars outside the county and the board went along with that. It also needs to be made clear that when you decide to raise tuition by 10%, you make that decision IN FRONT of the people who will be picking up that tab rather than running to an adjacent county on a weekend junket while spending $4,000 of taxpayer money on ONE dinner. Sorry Mr. Rutledge and Mr. Bailey but you've made yourselves look bad. Worse, you've made the College look bad. The voters may or may not remember you when you seek re-election, but the voters WILL remember this the next time the College asks for millage or bond money. Then you'll find out the real cost of that $4,000 dinner.

KeepingItReal

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 8:27 p.m.

My concern is not the money spent to cover the cost of the retreat. While politicians will play up their "experience" which is usually code speak for having connections and being part of the good ole boy network, which means that nothing changes because in order to survive in the political environment, all kinds of deals are cut regardless of whether it's in the best interest of their constituency. What I would like to see Mr. Rutledge and other candidates emphasize is leadership. Our state government is in dire need of leadership, visionary leadership. We need leadership that will push policies that will help to solve our state economic crisis...we need leadership that will help keep our young people and talent in the state...we need leadership that will provide direction in solving our educational and prison crisis. While I'm not downplaying experience, I'm looking for leadership. So I say to Mr. Scott and the other candidates running in the 54th, where's the leadership.

H.

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 7:59 p.m.

I like how 3.8 to 4 mills of all homestead property taxes in Washtenaw Co. is going to the CC, yet they feel the need to raise tuition 10%.

Elizabeth

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 7:51 p.m.

Im the writer of the original articles in The Washtenaw Voice who reported on the $4,000 dinner and Id like to set a few facts straight. Scott said he considered $180 an excessive sum for a single meal. Yes, most people do. However, when reading the second story, one can see that after the wine, gratuity and tax, the meal came out to about $96 per person. While still a high sum, it is not $180 (which was quoted in the original story before we received the itemized receipt that included alcohol). I also think it needs to be clear that WCCs President Larry Whitworth said he made all the arrangements himself, and that it wasnt the boards decision.

GoblueBeatOSU

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 6:51 p.m.

Rutledge clearly doesn't get it. Just another individual that believes he can live fat off the tax payer. "If my opponent can't find anything better than that to come after me with then I would say I will stand by the $4,000."...Scott is right to bring this up. As a tax payer I am sick of these fat cats in government having a party on my dime. The meeting was fine, but it should have been at WCC. Ann Arbor.com needs to request all expense receipts that Rutledge has been a part of. Time to see if this is a trend. Ann Arbor.com also need to look into Rutledge's expenses as a Washtenaw County Road Commissioner. If he is a facilitator at other retreats, like Chicago, that is fine, as long as Washtenaw County tax payers aren't paying a dime towards his expenses.

John of Saline

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 6:32 p.m.

WCC trustees are not paid for their work and they are expected to represent the taxpayers....and so you think you're entitled to expensive food and other "perks" to make up for your representation? Not to mention they couldn't be bothered to patronize a restaurant inside the county they claim to serve. No, better to spend a LOT of money elsewhere! Richard W. Bailey, you're part of the problem.

Ryan J. Stanton

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 6:03 p.m.

I'm relaying the following comment e-mailed to me by Richard W. Bailey, WCC trustee (1976-2008): WCC trustees are not paid for their work and they are expected to represent the taxpayers. Trustee Freeman did not pass up the retreat because he objected to the cost of the dinner. He simply was not doing his job of overseeing our tax dollars at this fine institution. The dinner was for the trustees and for WCC administrators who had drawn up various strategic plans for the future of the College. Trustee Rutledge has provided excellent leadership for the College, and if he is successful in being elected to the state legislature we may hope that the state will pick up its fair share of running WCC. Meanwhile WCC is doing a wonderful job of education and job training for displaced workers. There are more than 14,000 students there now and they benefit from the fine facilities and low tuition. Successful leadership among the trustees comes from an atmosphere of trust they share and their knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the administrators they employ on our behalf. A night in Detroit getting aquainted is surely a modest cost to pay for excellence.

SMAIVE

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 5:55 p.m.

Think WCC trustees are the only ones with expensive taste? Check out the hosting habits of Deans, Directors, Faculty and Coaches at our local universities...

Michigan Reader

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 4:51 p.m.

The WCC trustees spent government money--not taxpayer money. "Title",or ownership, is transferred to the collage via the tax laws. If you doubt this, try not paying your property taxes, and see if you can keep the money for your own uses. As an analogy, is the money you have in your wallet/purse/bank account your employer's? Is the money your employer gets the property of its customers? It's another matter altogether if you want to vote against a public offical for spending government money like this, while raising the cost of attending WCC.

YpsiLivin

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 4:11 p.m.

Rutledge, who has been on the college's board nearly 13 years, defended the expenses, saying they were budgeted. The fact that the Board planned to waste taxpayer dollars is irrelevant. Each person on the board was elected. When they ran, they knew the position they were seeking was unpaid. They were essentially volunteers and they understood that they were donating their time to the College. Also, you can't compare public sector volunteerism to what "industry" does. If "industry" wants to spend money frivolously, it's private money. If the WCC Board of Trustees wants to lard up the budget so they can have weekend getaways compliments of the taxpayers, that's something altogether different. The Music Department recently lost a bunch of space in the Morris Lawrence Building, which was then extensively remodeled and given to the Board of Trustees as meeting space. Curious, since the Board already had meeting space in the Student Center Building. Besides getting $180 dinners and commandeering academic space, what other consideration is extended to the Board of Trustees? The College should come forward with a detailed list of exactly what perks/gifts the trustees receive in exchange for their time.

ladydi

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 4:01 p.m.

Mr. Rutledge spoke at last week's WCC Honor's Convocation and spoke about being raised primarily by his grandmother in poverty. I only wish that he knew that the middle class families in Washtenaw County that sacrifice to pay property taxes are paying for the dinner that "wasn't even good" to him. I am disappointed by your statement, Mr. Rutledge, as I'm sure that dinner was better than the Ramen soup I'll be serving to my family tonight!

Lokalisierung

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 3:42 p.m.

Rutledge said his only regret was that it wasn't even a good dinner. "We shouldn't have spent as much as we spent for what we got," he said. Entitlement - Check

Top Cat

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 3:37 p.m.

Mr. Rutledge's actions and response are those of a career political hack with a strong sense of entitlement. Hopefully he will be sent a message by the voters that this is not deemed acceptable.

Lokalisierung

Wed, May 26, 2010 : 3:28 p.m.

Not a good use of 7% of my property tax dollars.