An Inept Administration
Washburn University is a public institution serving a very important function for this community. The public is entitled to a diligent, intelligent, and ethical administration ensuring that the taxpayer's funds and the students fees are utilized to provide the maximum return on this community's investment.
While many of the actions and inactions of this administration fall short of being corrupt, they also fall short of fulfilling the fiduciary duty that each administrator has to the public. They administer the institution as though they were not accountable to the public for the use of their funds. The administration awards contracts (or not) based on RFP's (or not), only loosely adheres to any budgets, transfers funds at will, provides inconsistent reports to the Board, and engages in poor hiring practices.
Jerry B. Farley, President
The Topeka Capital-Journal warned this community that President Farley would be Washburn University's biggest cheerleader when he was hired in 1997. In February, 2005, a Capital-Journal editorial again referred to President Farley as Washburn University's head cheerleader. This is an appropriate portrayal; he does enthusiastically promote Washburn University. No matter what. To listen to him in virtually any environment, you hear only the cheers. People like to hear good news. Unfortunately, loud cheerleading has never compensated for a poor team playing on the field or court.
At Washburn University, the hard work takes place in the classrooms. As anyone involved in sports knows, even the best players cannot reach their full potential if inadequately coached. The administration, as the coaching staff for this team, is falling extremely short of providing the resources, policies and guidelines to allow these players to reach the top of their game, and this institution's mission of providing quality instruction suffers. Washburn needs a head coach, not a cheerleader.
Ron Wasserstein, Vice-President Academic Affairs
Appointed by President Farley in May, 2001, Ron clearly toes the line in this administrative position. He, along with most of the senior staff, plays along by going along with the executive staff. So, it is appropriate that the faculty have finally taken things into their own hands to form the Washburn University Faculty Senate, since their issues are clearly not being adequately addressed by the current administration.
High salaries are paid to persons in executive positions, in part, because of the risks they should take in speaking out for the positions that they represent. Rather than deferring to the administration, Ron should be pushing harder to address the implementation and administration of merit pay, the lack of retirement benefits for faculty teaching summer school, and the lack of resources and support for faculty in the classroom. He, more so than most administrators, is aware that "lack of resources" is just a nice way of saying that we don't really care about your concerns.
Wanda B. Hill, Vice-President Administration
When hired in 1999, Wanda Hill was introduced to the Board of Regents by President Farley as the "top of all the excellent candidates" from a very strong pool of candidates. What President Farley did not share with the board is that this "excellent candidate" had left a previous university Senior Associate Vice President for Business and Finance position after an internal audit uncovered irregularities on travel vouchers that resulted in a refund to the university from Wanda Hill. He also didn't mention that she had been asked to seek employment elsewhere when working as an Executive Director for a university foundation. Nor did he mention that when applying for the position of Vice-President of Administration at Washburn University, Wanda Hill was on a paid administrative leave from her employer as the result of an ongoing management review that had uncovered a host of problems, including the handling of contract bids, employee hiring, and sketchy reports to the Board.
Denise C. Ottinger, Vice-President Student Life
The lack of an effective "head coach" makes it difficult for even a senior administrator to perform well. It is very challenging to effectively advocate for the students' interests within an administration that is not really concerned with student life and learning. Issues that should have received louder advocacy include safety issues, such as fire/smoke alarm systems in student life areas and bat quano abatement in academic areas. Also, the administration has inadequately addressed how the student's meal plan is limited to the Union Market, rather than including the Corner Store, resulting in thousands of dollars forfeited each year by students back to the University.
Carol L. Vogel, Affirmative Action Director
The public expects minimal qualifications to be met in positions that have far ranging consequences for an organization like Washburn University. There is no area that has a larger impact on the university than its hiring and other personnel practices. These personnel practices have huge, long-term affects on the ability of the institution to fulfill its mission and to manage its fiscal affairs. In an organization the size of Washburn University, it is difficult to understand how the Equal Opportunity and Sexual Harassment Policies can be effectively administered by one part-time person. This is another area where stronger advocacy is required to meet the stewardship requirements of public funds. Questionable and inconsistent hiring practices, inequitable salary distributions, and poor termination policies that create large liabilities for the university, are just some of the areas that should receive poor performance marks. But honestly, when an employee reporting discomfort with the pressure to go out for drinks after work with her supervisor is told by the Affirmative Action Director to try going to lunch with this supervisor because she may have "rejected the person socially", one has to wonder what qualifications are held by the person in this position.