ADVERTISEMENT

Regent Sahai: 'Maybe we dropped the ball'

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,340
62,340
113
NIce of him. Still doesn't explain why they hired the least qualified finalists and ignored all faculty and staff input:

A member of the Iowa Board of Regents said Thursday that the board may have “dropped the ball” during the search for a new University of Iowa president, but urged the UI community to give the new president a chance.

Regent Subhash Sahai, a physician from Webster City, told his fellow board members Thursday that he was “angry, mad and most importantly sad” upon learning last month that a majority of the board had met with incoming UI President Harreld this summer before the search committee had begun evaluating applications.

“And I think my words at the time … were, ‘I am pissed,’ and that’s not the language I usually use,” said Sahai, who received his medical degree from UI in 1973.

Sahai said he has since had conversations with President Bruce Rastetter and President Pro Tem Katie Mulholland, who assured him that the early meetings with Harreld did not prejudice them against the other three finalists for UI president.

Although having no reason to doubt those assurances, Sahai said, the early meetings did create the perception that the search process was “less than impartial." The revelation of the meetings further added to the already intense negative backlash among many UI faculty, students, staff and community members.

“To the people of the university, state, alumni, I can only say that maybe we dropped the ball,” Sahai said.

Hundreds of members of the UI community protested outside Wednesday’s board meeting in the Iowa Memorial Union on the UI campus. They interrupted the meeting to deliver a printout of an online petition – with about 1,000 signatures – calling for the board to reverse its appointment of Harreld as president.

“The people at the university love this place, and their anger is understandable,” Sahai said.

The board’s Sept. 3 selection of Harreld was unanimous, but came after 90 minutes of closed-session discussion.

“I want people at the university to know that we had passionate, intense and rigorous debate about the choice for a candidate,” Sahai said. “I’ve always maintained that a decision of this magnitude requires a unanimous support. ... Right or wrong, I stick with it, and I think the majority of the people on the board at the time felt it was the thing to do.”

Sahai praised Harreld’s efforts to reach out and meet privately with his critics over the past few weeks. He urged the incoming president to continue those efforts after officially beginning the job next month.

“Finally, I beseech the principals of the university to give Mr. Harreld a chance with utmost sincerity,” he said. “Your and our future depends on it.”

http://www.press-citizen.com/story/.../regent-sahai-maybe-we-dropped-ball/74390392/
 
  • Like
Reactions: mstp1992
22.....Not Fair! How many more days until he gets a free "parenting" lesson/critique from you? I think you ought to share with more than just me. Otherwise, people might talk.......

Ciggy has never volunteered that kind of personal information.

He may copy/paste compulsively, but doesn't portray an air of narcissism.
 
Ciggy has never volunteered that kind of personal information.

He may copy/paste compulsively, but doesn't portray an air of narcissism.
Is self-deprecating part of narcissism, 22? I learned a long time ago son that my shit smells just like most other Democrat's does. Narcissistic....not moi. It's living with folks like you that taught me to smile, shake my head and walk away.
I may be a lot of things but narcissistic ain't one of them. I can be dismissive and I can be a prick and I can choose to ignore. But more oft than not, I'll allow folks to be who they want to be and more importantly, I will not judge people I do not know. I do like the point in life I have reached.
 
Is self-deprecating part of narcissism, 22? I learned a long time ago son that my shit smells just like most other Democrat's does. Narcissistic....not moi. It's living with folks like you that taught me to smile, shake my head and walk away.
I may be a lot of things but narcissistic ain't one of them. I can be dismissive and I can be a prick and I can choose to ignore. But more oft than not, I'll allow folks to be who they want to be and more importantly, I will not judge people I do not know. I do like the point in life I have reached.

Ok, then you're just vain.
 
I will not judge people I do not know.

Actually, this is how this whole thing began.

You criticized Ryan's(who you "do not know") approach to parenting.

I threw the flag on what you have voluntarily boasted about.
 
I honestly can't stand the thought of my son choosing to be taught by the faculty at University of Iowa, based solely on their ridiculous attitude toward this hiring. What a terrible example to set. Hopefully some major changes happen between now and when that might be an issue.
You're an asshole, too.

You obviously have no idea why there is so much discontent among the faculty. Therefore, your opinion is irrelevant.
Hopefully, your son can overcome his genetic traits he inherited from you.
 
You're an asshole, too.

You obviously have no idea why there is so much discontent among the faculty. Therefore, your opinion is irrelevant.
Hopefully, your son can overcome his genetic traits he inherited from you.

I understand wop what you're saying. Because in today's corporate America, one is usually fired for "not being a team player."
WE need more corporatism in today's higher education....WTF does one need to major in Art History for? Hell, you can get a business degree and become a shift manager for your local WalMart or Walgreen's.
The faculty needs to understand how to cow-tow and eat the corporate BS as it is ladled. After all, In Terry We Trust.
 
You're an asshole, too.

You obviously have no idea why there is so much discontent among the faculty. Therefore, your opinion is irrelevant.
Hopefully, your son can overcome his genetic traits he inherited from you.
That was a revealing post, thank you for speaking up.
 
I understand wop what you're saying. Because in today's corporate America, one is usually fired for "not being a team player."
WE need more corporatism in today's higher education....WTF does one need to major in Art History for? Hell, you can get a business degree and become a shift manager for your local WalMart or Walgreen's.
The faculty needs to understand how to cow-tow and eat the corporate BS as it is ladled. After all, In Terry We Trust.
Um, actually no, that's not at all what I was saying.
 
I respect the guy for speaking up, but he should have taken the final step. This hiring was pushed by Rastetter and the woman from the Dutch enclave and he should have said so.

There is no crisis in higher education. They simply want to take away state support from the UI (and the others) because they don't want to pay taxes for them. Harreld is their hatchet man. Look for a push to cut jobs and monetize patents. The whole concept of producing good citizens who think critically is out the window. Rastetter gave $5 million to the football program. He is like a lot of people on this board and in this thread. They like and follow the Hawkeyes, but hate the University of Iowa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SchmittyHawks32
I respect the guy for speaking up, but he should have taken the final step. This hiring was pushed by Rastetter and the woman from the Dutch enclave and he should have said so.

There is no crisis in higher education. They simply want to take away state support from the UI (and the others) because they don't want to pay taxes for them. Harreld is their hatchet man. Look for a push to cut jobs and monetize patents. The whole concept of producing good citizens who think critically is out the window. Rastetter gave $5 million to the football program. He is like a lot of people on this board and in this thread. They like and follow the Hawkeyes, but hate the University of Iowa.

Sometimes JR you just cut to the real issues with no bullshit. Well done. Terry B. has NEVER been a friend of education...ever! He has a hard-on for any type of "educational" union and public servant unions in general. He's riding his horse out for the final time and he's flippin' the bird at these folks all the way. He will have no political capital when he leaves office. And has never had to worry about a real job for most of his adult life.
 
The faculty needs to understand how to cow-tow and eat the corporate BS as it is ladled. After all, In Terry We Trust.

If you're going to attempt to hang with learn'ed academics, than please try to avoid obvious WOB's.
 
Last edited:
I wish Hillary could show as much courage as that regent just did about her eff ups.
 
if the regents had hired one of the other candidates no one would be complaining about the "process"
Your right LWade! Because the process for "them" was all the same.....,,.It was "the winner" who received special considerations. That is the whole point of the faculty's angst. The process was nothing more than a "set up"!
 
I guess I don't understand why it's wrong to seek out a candidate that you want? I mean this nicely, but this happens for almost every job, you guys can't really be that dense? And he's right, if they had hired one of the other candidates and still met with this guy ahead of time none of you would complain about the process. It only bothers you because the guy you wanted didn't get the job.
 
I guess I don't understand why it's wrong to seek out a candidate that you want? I mean this nicely, but this happens for almost every job, you guys can't really be that dense? And he's right, if they had hired one of the other candidates and still met with this guy ahead of time none of you would complain about the process. It only bothers you because the guy you wanted didn't get the job.

So you see nothing wrong with the process? What if a Dem would have done this and hired someone with little or no resume to run an educational institution of higher education?
Small....as my father used to say....any public official needs to be purer than freshly driven snow. Anything else just leads to endless and often times groundless speculation and idle chat. It's just easier (and much smarter) to be above board at all times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Your right LWade! Because the process for "them" was all the same.....,,.It was "the winner" who received special considerations. That is the whole point of the faculty's angst. The process was nothing more than a "set up"!

This is what you think and hope happened. the truth is that neither of us know.

Harreld seems to have done what every other smart job seeker does, network and try to find an edge vs other candidates. the other three seemed to sit on their ass and rely on the good ole boy academia system to come through for them.
 
This is what you think and hope happened. the truth is that neither of us know.

Harreld seems to have done what every other smart job seeker does, network and try to find an edge vs other candidates. the other three seemed to sit on their ass and rely on the good ole boy academia system to come through for them.
LWade...there are a lot of smoking guns out there regarding the process as laid out by Branstad and Rastetter and the BoR.....Questions that Transparent Terry will never answer so we will never know...which allows the endless speculation to continue.
Meanwhile the U of I continues to take an undeserved rap from its peers based on the reaction of the faculty and the action of the BoR.
 
This is what you think and hope happened. the truth is that neither of us know.

Harreld seems to have done what every other smart job seeker does, network and try to find an edge vs other candidates. the other three seemed to sit on their ass and rely on the good ole boy academia system to come through for them.
You're the one who's being dense about the whole process. It's clear to anyone who looks at the entire search and public forum charade that Harreld was selected without the others being afforded an equal opportunity for the job.

The problem is this, if the BoR wanted a 'corporate-type' of candidate for the final position why in the world did they present 3 eminently qualified candidates from the academic world who they knew full well would be completely acceptable to the university community, and only one 'corporate-type' who again they knew full well would NOT be acceptable for the vast majority of the university community? Rastetter and the BoR would have to complete buffoons to not know this was going to be a controversial selection based on the way they handled it.

If they wanted a corporate-type the proper thing to do would have been to identify 4 candidates with similar backgrounds as Harreld and then present them to the campus. Rastetter is just a spiteful and disgusting human being, and yes I've had personal encounters with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
You're the one who's being dense about the whole process. It's clear to anyone who looks at the entire search and public forum charade that Harreld was selected without the others being afforded an equal opportunity for the job.

The problem is this, if the BoR wanted a 'corporate-type' of candidate for the final position why in the world did they present 3 eminently qualified candidates from the academic world who they knew full well would be completely acceptable to the university community, and only one 'corporate-type' who again they knew full well would NOT be acceptable for the vast majority of the university community? Rastetter and the BoR would have to complete buffoons to not know this was going to be a controversial selection based on the way they handled it.

If they wanted a corporate-type the proper thing to do would have been to identify 4 candidates with similar backgrounds as Harreld and then present them to the campus. Rastetter is just a spiteful and disgusting human being, and yes I've had personal encounters with him.

Oh come on. There is absolutely no chance the faculty would have accepted that process either.
 
I guess I don't understand why it's wrong to seek out a candidate that you want? I mean this nicely, but this happens for almost every job, you guys can't really be that dense? And he's right, if they had hired one of the other candidates and still met with this guy ahead of time none of you would complain about the process. It only bothers you because the guy you wanted didn't get the job.
If one of the academic types would have been hired it would have occurred because the process was transparent. Public institutions of higher learning are not the same as corporations, and the hiring process has to be fully transparent.

Think of it this way, wouldn't you want to have your new boss have a background similar to your own; someone who understands the nuances of the field?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Oh come on. There is absolutely no chance the faculty would have accepted that process either.
Perhaps not, but we will never know, will we? IF another approach was used...a more open and honest approach.....the faculty would have had more impact initially and they would not have been "shang-hai'd" at the end. There is a bette rway to make "a change" even if it is for change-sake only. Ambushing folks is a short term resolution with serious long term repercussions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
If one of the academic types would have been hired it would have occurred because the process was transparent. Public institutions of higher learning are not the same as corporations, and the hiring process has to be fully transparent.

Think of it this way, wouldn't you want to have your new boss have a background similar to your own; someone who understands the nuances of the field?
Academia isn't that complicated. That's an excuse not a reason. The guy ran strategy for an organization exponentially more complicated than the uiowa. I'm sure he can grasp the nuances of the job.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT