We are hearing that FAMU should have a draft copy of its 2005 financial audit, from the State Auditors General Office, by June 2nd. The University will have 30 days to respond to the audit before it become final.We understand that the University and state auditors have been meeting to "hammer out" details of the audit which is "unusally late". FAMU, along with all state universities, turned in its paperwork to the state on September 30, 2005. Most Universities began receiving their final audits in Feburary 2006.
Once the state auditors deliever FAMU its draft report it becomes a public document which the University must provide to citizens upon request, under the state's public records law. If you have problems securing the document from the University the State Attorney General's Office will be more than happy, we are told, help you get it.
See: Under the Microscope
See --> Auditors Website
What is the likelihood of FAMU handing the public a draft copy of the audit?
ReplyDeleteNONE. That would be too much like doing the right thing. LOL.
ReplyDelete1:33 p.m.,
ReplyDeleteAlthough this document is a public document and you should be able to get a copy under the Florida public document request law, I doubt very seriously if the BOT or Castell is going to release a copy.
What's puzzling is the length of time it has taken to get a draft prepared for FAMU.
FSU used a new software accounting system also this past year, but were able to get their audit done and completed by the March reporting cycle.
What will be FAMU's reason for being the only university without an audit completed before the new fiscal year?
We've been told by the Attorney General's Office the University SHOULD provide a copy of the DRAFT audit to anyone who request it. And, if they don't please call them back. We'll post the AG's phone number and the particular Division that handles public records request on June 2nd. With the AG running for Governor, they want to be very helpful.
ReplyDeleteAlso, we've been told once you take a look at the DRAFT, you'll understand why this audit has taken an unusually long time to complete.
I wonder if C. Bryant is going to go into Jim Corbin's old bag of tricks and pull out the race card. I can see the headlines: "FAMU Sues State Auditor General on Allegations of Racism."
ReplyDeleteOur current FAMU "leadership" always seems to find a white person to conveniently scapegoat. But this one is going to be a hard sell. After firing Larry Reese and Elwood McElhaney (both white) on charges of incompentence, FAMU's going to have a hard time when it tries to justify keeping this current financial administration team.
Why emphasize the fact that Reese and McElhaney are white? Does this fact exempt them from being incompetent? Anonymous at 1:04 AM is showing his (white)colors.
ReplyDeleteThe race card was used most disingenously in order to run Fred Gainous out-of-town. The argument that Jim Corbin, Roosevelt Wilson, and others made was that Gainous was trying to hand the university over to white people.
ReplyDeleteThey used Gainous' appointments of Reese and McElhaney, the proposed FAMU-TCC agreement, and Gainous' white trustee support were used as examples.
While Corbin et. al. were generating the racial hysteria, the real danger went unnoticed: the efforts to rig FAMU's presidential search process in favor of Castell Bryant.
No Reese and McElhaney's race does not exempt them from incompetence, but their race was used to make a public argument that white people were trying to take over the university. And this was one of the factors that helped drum up public support for Gainous' firing.
You can bet the farm that Castell Bryant won't receive the same punishment Gainous did for failing to get FAMU's financials in shape. Why? Because no one is engaging in race-baiting against her and trying to paint her as a "sell-out."
The bottom line is that Fred Gainous was fired because he was incompetent. Your race-baiting theory may be true. However, race is a factor in our society--the racist zings and letters to the Democrat illustrate this fact.
ReplyDeleteThe FAMU-TCC agreement required both FAMU students and faculty to go to TCC for classes. Gainous agreed to this without FAMU faculty input. You are apparently a supporter of Gainous and the FAMU-TCC agreement, so you apparently think that the FAMU faculty should be told to act “professionally” when they go to TCC campus, as was explicitly stated in the FAMU-TCC agreement. It was apparent that TCC wrote the agreement which said that the FAMU faculty must be told to behave “professionally while on TCC” campus, among many other things that made FAMU less than an equal partner in this agreement.
By making such an agreement, Gainous acquiesced in a racist belief that FAMU faculty needs to be told to act professionally. The racist nature of this agreement is also concealed in the fact that it enabled white students at TCC who are reluctant to take a class on predominantly black campus to take it if offered on a predominantly white controlled campus. The fact is that white students refuse to come to FAMU. Also, Gainous made a student housing deals with a white landlord which seems to explain his enthusiastic supports among whites and added to the perception that he was at least naive.
You point to Reese and McElhaney’s race as a factor in mobilizing public opinion against them and Gainous, but it was Gainous’ incompetence that galvanized public opinion against him and those who supported him--race may have been a useful catalyst in bringing his incompetence to public attention. As to Castell Bryant not receiving the same punishment that Gainous received, suffice it to say that if she makes the same dumb decisions that Gainous made, she will be treated the same.
Well stated argument. I'll address it point-by-point:
ReplyDeleteYou claim Gainous was incompetent. I disagree. Gainous was a puppet; and a puppet is a mere reflect of its handlers.
It wasn't Gainous' idea to purge all the senior officials from the controller's office and leave FAMU's Division of Fiscal Affairs in a state of confusion; it was Corbin's. It wasn't Gainous' idea to move to DIA without a feasibility study or a sturdy finance plan; it was Corbin's.
Corbin, in particular, was very interested in the process that would determine who received the new vendor's contracts associated with the DIA move.
Corbin also permitted Bill Jennings and Challis Lowe to get pieces of the action. Jennings acted as if the law school was his personal possession (remember the meeting he called on the Cunningham law chair). Lowe was given a free hand to influence many lucrative consulting contracts that were given to her friends (including KPMG).
Corbin wanted Gainous to take his orders on ALL major contracts and personnel decisions. But Gainous believed he needed to appease both black and white trustees in order to stay in office. When Gainous kowtowed to Barney Bishop on housing, Leerie Jenkins on construction contracts, and Randy Hanna on the TCC agreement, Corbin exploded.
Corbin, Jennings, and Lowe turned against Gainous because he was helping white trustees acquire university money that they (the black trustees) wanted.
Gainous' efforts to appease Bishop and Hanna gave Corbin, et. al. the ammunition they needed to make a racial argument for his firing.
However, beyond the disingenous race-baiting, it was a simple economic issue. Corbin and Co. believed they, as black trustees, had a divine right to personally control all things financial at FAMU and they were not going to share it with any else.
I agree that accepting an articulation agreement completely on TCC's terms and conditions is a bad idea. Gainous should have gotten the faculty's support.
But with that being said, isn't it interesting that Mary Diallo blasted Gainous for disrespecting the faculty during the articulation agreement issue, but remained silent when Castell Bryant spat upon shared governance?
You claim that if Bryant makes the same dumb mistakes Gainous did, then she will be fired. Well, the sad news is, Bryant has inflicted WORST damage than Gainous ever did. Gainous did not inflict multi-million dollar losses in recruitment and research. Gainous did not turn back the clock on the progress in financial aid by hiring an unqualified JUCO administator (Ken Tague). Gainous did not put an unqualified JUCO administrator in charge of our academic affairs division (who is on her way out).
Yet, the very people who called for Gainous' blood are silent about Bryant's destructive financial and academic decisions. Not only have they failed to hold her accountable, they've rewarded her incompetence with bonuses and salary raises.
Racial hysteria and personal agendas are blinding FAMUans today just as much as they did at the end of Gainous' tenure. If we are truly serious about ending racism in all forms, we must criticize both whites and blacks who resort to race-baiting rather than rational thinking.
Your Machiavellian viewpoint of politics at FAMU is very interesting. I am sure you believe in the democratic process, and since FAMU is predominantly black, why shouldn’t blacks have “a divine right to personally control all things financial at FAMU?” Do you think there would be “racial hysteria” at FSU, if blacks were as prominent in FSU’s “control” as whites are in FAMU’s “control?” FSU’s Wetherell is a dictator, but I don’t hear you criticizing him; but when Castell Bryant dictates there is much criticism.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that you would have been happy to keep Gainous as a “puppet” president of FAMU. Castell Bryant may not be the ideal president for FAMU, but she certainly is not a “puppet.” Some of Bryant’s decisions are unpopular; but one thing is undeniable, she has managed to stop the daily negative publicity that the university was receiving. I question her decision to stop actively recruiting new students, but that is a temporary thing.
You said: “If we are truly serious about ending racism in all forms, we must criticize both whites and blacks who resort to race-baiting rather than rational thinking.” Race is a factor in our society and to think that it will be eradicated seems naive. However, I believe that until the day comes when race no longer is a factor, we should not let others determine our destiny.
Maybe the point that the poster was making is that Gainous was a puppet, and did not have control over anything let along the running of the university. He answered/responded the way those trustees who had a personal interest in the finances of the university requested.
ReplyDeleteIt may not be well known, but Corbin wanted his wife's firm to handle the 401K / Optional Retirement Plan for FAMU. This was shut down by Humphries before leaving, but for all we know if probably is a done deal now with Castell/Greenleaf.
Many forget that from the beginning of the FAMU BOT Castell has been involved in a very sinister way in trying to grab control of FAMU.
These (the Castells, Corbins, Holmes, Jennings, Jenkins, Bishops of FAMU) people are not concerned about moving the FAM to another level in higher education, but what deals can be cut for those in their inner circles. The first 4 have been too involved from the very beginning of these BOTs.
Unfortunately, Gainous seemed not to have any morals, conscious, or respect for the legacy of other presidents that suffered and sacrificed before him.
He never earned that $400,000 salary and benefits package; he never earned the respect of the faculty, staff, students, alumni and corporate supporters, because he did not have to! His annual salary was more than the last three permanent presidents' salary before him.
He greatest job as president was to keep those few trustees happy and involved in the day-to-day running of the University and he failed at that miserably also.
As far as Reese, we will never know what he was or was not capable of doing because Corbin, Castell, Holmes and others were too busy trying to micromanage his office, and calling and dropping in daily.
Corbin basically hired the interim controller, the interim purchasing director, and several other key individuals in our finance offices and gave the nod of approval for contracts, purchases, etc.
Reese was never given to the opportunity to fail. However, his predecessor, Tom Hanna was and he failed miserably and left a big mess. Please note that he has not been involved in any financial scandal in his present position in Ohio.
What's puzzling is that Mary Diallo, allows Challis to ignore the faculty concerns and table them for the next meeting. This is becoming routine. Where is the outrage Mary Diallo had for Gainous, why isn't this same outrage targeted at Castell for her lack of shared governance and disrespect for the university constitution?
Anonymous @ 12:09 p.m.,
ReplyDelete"Some of Bryant’s decisions are unpopular; but one thing is undeniable, she has managed to stop the daily negative publicity that the university was receiving."
Are you smoking crack? You cannot honestly tell me that you believe the negative headlines have stopped since she became de facto permanent president. Let me run down the list: destroyed the university's recruitment apparatus, fired Billy Joe under false pretenses, fired the law school dean without due process, refused to give a raise to DRS employees, has generated 5 lawsuits in a year and a half from the United Faculty of Florida, got hit with a Title 9 lawsuit, expelled the Kappas who were allegedly involved in hazing incidents without due process, delayed construction of the teaching gym and DRS, hiring an incompetent Dr. Austin as provost, endangered the School of Pharmacy's accreditation by trying to move millions from their budget over to other university departmets, taking years to fill dean positions, and last but not least, a SUPER late audit report.
These headlines ARE consistent. They're a big reason why our enrollment is down.
That about sums up TCW positive press.
ReplyDeletePass the crack pipe!
ReplyDeleteThere are already some good responses to latest comments in defense of Bryant. I'll add a few points.
ReplyDelete>>>why shouldn’t blacks have “a divine right to personally control all things financial at FAMU?”<<<
I'm not opposed to blacks being in control of FAMU. I'm opposed to corruption and hypocrisy.
No trustee (black or white) has a special entitlement to FAMU's money. It is unethical for any trustee to cut side deals and try and treat FAMU like a personal piggybank.
Trustees who use their positions of power to personally profit from our university are engaging in corrupt activities. Black trustees who engage in corrupt activities and then use the race-card to attack white trustees who are doing the same thing are hypocrits.
Thievery is thievery. A black thief is no better than a white thief.
>>>Do you think there would be “racial hysteria” at FSU, if blacks were as prominent in FSU’s “control” as whites are in FAMU’s “control?”<<<
I have no doubt that FSU would not let a group of blacks assume control of the institution. But this is not an excuse for using lies, deception, and hypocritical arguments to attack the white people who sit on FAMU's BOT.
>>>It appears that you would have been happy to keep Gainous as a “puppet” president of FAMU. Castell Bryant may not be the ideal president for FAMU, but she certainly is not a “puppet.”<<<
I had no problem with firing Gainous. I have a problem with the continuing manipulation of the presidential search. The backdoor politics and personal agendas are preventing FAMU from getting good presidents. If FAMU had presidential searches with integrity, then Fred Gainous and Castell Bryant would have never been hired. If FAMU had presidential searches with integrity, then we would have a highly qualified president right now.
With Fred Gainous, we got a spineless puppet. With Castell Bryant, we got a vengeful, incompetent, destruction machine who is sending our university backwards.
Anonymouos @ 2:34 has already done an outstanding job of countering your ridiculous assertation that Bryant has some how gotten rid of the negative press surrounding FAMU.