What Wendt Wrong?

Settlement Details Released

2007-08-29T13:41:00.000-05:00

The Telegraph Herald reported today that Jeffries has accepted the University of Dubuque's settlement offer of $50,000.

In the article, Jeffries explains that he originally sought $140,000 plus reinstatement of tenure; however, he raised his demand to $500,000 after the University's own expert witness testified that tenure was worth $1 million.

Jeffries is said to have settled "because he wanted to be able to speak about the case publicly, did not want his former UD colleagues to have to testify against their employer in a trial and wanted to keep the university from continually appealing the issue."

See also the Chronicle of Higher Education article regarding the settlement.

As a result of this news, we will no longer update the blog, except perhaps if we come across further news relating to the Jeffries ordeal. We thank our readers for contributing their thoughts. We pray that the University's leadership will have the new-found wisdom to avoid administrative blunders such as those that precipitated Jeffries' termination, and we hope that the institution's future proves to be brighter than its recent past.

Letter from Charles Nadler

2007-03-21T19:53:00.000-05:00

Awhile ago, Charles Nadler, who represented the faculty in collective bargaining from 1975 until 1982 and who defended the faculty against the Board's 1999 lawsuit, sent us the following letter (we apologize for the delay in posting this):

Dear Editors:

Thank you for standing up and joining the long line of people who have stood up against the tyrants at the University of Dubuque. Those who criticize you for remaining anonymous are shameful. Anyone who has observed the behavior of President Bullock and the Board, knows or should know that anyone employed by the University, or who is a student there, is in serious danger from them, if they speak up.

I write as an interested outsider, who represented the faculty in collective bargaining from 1975 until 1982, when I went to law school. I was one of the attorneys who defended the faculty against the lawsuit brought against them by the Board, and which was won in June of 1999, by the faculty. I am also a former three time president of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union.

It appears that the University has sunk to a new low in four respects. First, it has apparently required faculty to agree that if they criticize the administration in any way for any reason, their salary is forfeit. This is close to involuntary servitude. However, legally, the employment relationship in a private entity is nearly such. Second, its lawyer has attempted to subpoena records belonging to a student, apparently in order to find out which, if any, faculty or staff are "bad mouthing" the administration. Presumably, this is so the administration can know whom to punish. Third, the University appears to have indicated that the subpoena would go away if the suit by Professor Jeffries were to be dropped. This sounds like a form of extortion to me. Were an attorney to say such a thing in Colorado, he/she would be subject to discipline. Fourth, the University appears to have been making noises threatening the blog you have provided to air these issues. I think your blog is quite fair and has little in the way of "flamimg" or anything else that could be considered nasty.

I am afraid this is what happens when a cabal of businessmen, who think that just because they have made a few bucks, they know how to run an academic institution!

Again, thank you for your public service. I hope you will keep it up!

Sincerely yours,
Charles H Nadler

Letter from a Former Prospective Student

2007-03-21T19:38:00.000-05:00

We received the following letter from a woman who had considered going to UD, but changed her mind after finding out about the Jeffries ordeal:

This whole scandal [...] is behind my decision to not go to [the University of Dubuque]. I just could not bring myself to going; I had set up an appointment to meet with them about starting in September (as a returning adult student, in nursing), but had to cancel.
I simply could not go to a school that does something like this. I told them why I could not go to their school. I don't think it matters to them, but I had to speak up, and speak out.
I wonder how many others couldn't be bothered -- or if high school seniors don't care about such things?
--A.

Please visit "About What Wendt Wrong"

2007-03-21T19:30:00.000-05:00

We have published a post on "About What Wendt Wrong" regarding some common questions and concerns surrounding the request for volunteers to scan and fax court documents. We encourage interested readers to check out that post.

Motions to Exclude Now Available (UPDATED)

2007-03-21T19:06:00.000-05:00

The download site now contains both Professor Jeffries' and the University's motions to exclude evidence. Please post summaries, thoughts, or comments under this thread.

Letter from Figuli (to Jeffries' attorney)

2007-03-17T00:55:00.000-05:00

A letter from Figuli (counsel to the University) is available on the download site. In this letter, Figuli explains on a point-by-point basis why he thinks the Jeffries case is without merits.

Please post your thoughts or comments regarding this letter here.

UD's "Expert Witness" Testimony Available Online

2007-03-16T14:10:00.000-05:00

We have posted two letters frow two of the UD's potetial "expert witnesses" on the download site. Please post your thoughts or comments regarding the content of these letters here.

NOTE: Jeffries has filed a motion to exclude in regards to these two witnesses. We will be posting that motion in the next day or so.

IMPORTANT UPDATE & CALL FOR ASSISTANCE

2007-03-16T12:56:00.000-05:00

Because we have been unable to update the What Wendt Wrong site with the frequency required, we have decided to institute a new format for the blog (at least for the next few months).

We will be posting links to court documents as we receive them. However, unlike in the past, it is unlikely that we will provide summaries or interpretations of the documents. We are going to leave that to you! Please post comments, interpretations, etc. in the comments field of the relevant post.

AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT CALL FOR ASSISTANCE:

We have set up a fax number for receiving copies of court documents. The Jeffries' file at the Dubuque County Courthouse looks as if it contains at least 300 pages of documentation. We invite each of you to head down to the courthouse (at your leisure), look through the files, and copy what you think it relevant. If you then fax those pages to us, we will post them for other readers to download. To request our toll-free fax number, email us at whatwendtwrong@yahoo.com. Thanks.

Belcastro Letter to the Editor

2006-09-26T21:53:00.001-05:00

A letter to the editor by Dr. Frank Belcastro, a former professor of psychology at UD, has been published in the Telegraph Herald.

Prof. Belcastro suggests that the University subpoenaed Jason Price as a means of putting preasure on Dr. Jeffries to withdraw the lawsuit. Belcastro notes, "If the university thought Jeffries' lawsuit was weak, it would not resort to victimizing an innocent person."

Telegraph Herald Editorial

2006-09-17T11:11:00.001-05:00

Today, the Dubuque Telegraph Herald Editorial Board issued an opinion regarding the University's subpoenaing of Jason Price. "It is one thing for the university to stifle public criticism among its employees," they write in reference the Jeffries ordeal, "That will be an interesting court decision. However, it is another matter when the university drags a student's private communications into the fray. When a citizen has information or questions about public entities or private organizations of public interest or concern, he or she should be free to communicate that. Otherwise, the threat of invasive subpoenas would have a chilling effect on public accountability."

Kudos to the TH Editorial Board for taking a stand on this important issue. We certainly agree that such actions on the part of UD serve to undermine everyone's willingness to speak up and speak out on University policies.

Judge Quashes Price Subpoena

2006-09-16T21:18:00.001-05:00

Today, the Telegraph Herald reported that Judge Monica Ackley has quashed Jason Price's subpoena. The article goes on to say that the University's attorney plans to file a motion regarding that ruling next week.

We were overjoyed to hear that Price is in the clear--at least for the time being.

One element of the article, however, has caught our interest: Kari Koch, president of the UD student government, was quoted as saying, "We don't feel that it's appropriate for a student government association to take a stand one way or another in regard to the case." Koch supports the SGA position by stating, "We have an incoming class of 470 students this year, and they are 470 students who don't know there is a lawsuit (pending) right now and don't know who Professor Jeffries is."

We vehemently disagree with the SGA's position on this matter. Many of the students who are or have been involved with this blog entered UD only years after the infamous "Transformation." During our time at UD we became increasingly aware of the fact that the administration's actions during those difficult years had a profound and ongoing effect on the campus. Witness, for example, the high turn-over rate of faculty members, the heavy reliance on contingent employees, the sudden "retirement" of such professors as Robert Miller, and, of course, the Jeffries ordeal. It might be objected that these cases or trends are all unrelated, but we are not convinced. Professor Miller, for example, was a staunch critic of the administration during certain stages of the Transformation; when the appropriate time came (only a few years ago), he was forced out of the University. In that case, there was a clear impact on students such as ourselves who came to UD well after the Transformation had become "old news".

The fact of the matter is that UD administrators seem to be creating a very odd work environment for faculty. And that surely has a profound impact on current and future students. These students should feel not only entitled, but obligated to take a stance on issues of such importance.

At most institutions of higher learning, the student government fulfills the role of advocate and voice of the students, and that typically entails government representatives passing opinions on university policies and becoming involved in university business. For example, the Indiana University Student Association's mission reads: "IUSA is a congregation of Indiana University students that work to protect student rights, enrich student life, and improve Indiana University. Students join together to voice common concerns, hopes, grievances, and most importantly, to take action to realize an even stronger University" (emphasis added).

In regards to UD, the important question isn't whether or not the students (new or returning) do, in fact, know or care about the Jeffries affair. The real question is, "ought they know?" We, of course, think the answer is a clear and resounding, "Yes." And to that end, the student government can serve an important role.

NOTE: We wanted to clarify one point that may be lurking in the back of our reader's minds: our criticisms of the University's administrators are not directed at the faculty at large. We have nothing but respect for many of the faculty members, and we think that one of the University's redeeming qualities is the fact that it has some very dedicated professors who go out of their way to meet student's needs.

Register Article Presses Important Issues

2006-09-02T01:25:00.000-05:00

On September 1, the Des Moines Register published an article which addressed former UD student Jason Price's subpoena and various other issues surrounding the Jeffries controversy.

Today's article is somewhat unique among those previously published to the extent that it explores some possible consequences of the University's actions. In particular, the article reports that Brian Cooper, the executive editor of the Dubuque Telegraph Herald, has expressed concern that the University's actions against Price and Jeffries, "might have a chilling effect on other people who might want to come forward and express concerns about how our public institutions or governmental bodies conduct their business."

Randy Brubaker, an editor at the Register is reported to have added, "“Certainly this has the potential to have a chilling effect, but not only for the media. It seems to me that a college or university, private as well as public, ought to be society’s most open marketplace of ideas - a place where students and faculty can ask questions and debate issues. This action would raise the question of whether freedom of speech is valued at the University of Dubuque.”

The article further reports that Peter Smith, one of the many vice presidents at UD, "doesn’t think the subpoena will have much effect on the willingness of students and faculty to speak out on issues since it’s directed at just one individual."

Mr. Smith's thoughts on this matter seem to illustrate just how out of touch UD administrators are with the issues at hand. In an almost laughable quote, Smith attempts to calm worries that the University is creating a hostile work environment by explaining, "People criticize the university in bars, gas stations, in private homes and public places and restaurants across the city, and there’s no prohibition against that.” Smith's obliviousness to the real concerns and fundamental issues at stake (viz., those raised by Cooper and Brubaker) is frustrating to say the least.

This frustration is compounded when one considers how utterly ironic it is that the upcoming Wendt Center keynote speaker will be Lynn Brewer, the famed Enron whistleblower. Brewer, who will speak on October 25, will presumably talk of her experiences as an executive who blew the lid on the injustices and illegal activities that occurred in that infamous corporation. We can all imagine Brewer's superiors saying, "You know Lynn, it's okay to criticize Enron when you're at the gas station or a restaurant, but let's not air our grievances in the media."

Given the University's own policies regarding such matters, one has to wonder why such a guest speaker was even invited. What could Brewer possibly say that doesn't expressly contradict the University's policies on some level?

As a final note, we strongly encourage everyone to call UD and register to attend Brewer's keynote address. With any luck Brewer may be available to field questions. And that has the potential to be very interesting.

Motion to Quash Price Subpoena Filed

2006-08-12T14:24:00.000-05:00

According to Iowa Courts Online, on August 4, 2006, a motion to quash (or dismiss) Jason Price's subpoena and to deny the University's application for a contempt ruling against the former UD student and former editor of this site was filed.

Rumor has it that Mr. Price's hearing was to be held last week. We have been unable to determine whether the quash motion was granted. In the near future we hope to obtain a copy of the new filing and find out what the results of the hearing were (if indeed the hearing took place).

PLEASE NOTE: This post has been updated. We previously reported, "...on August 4, 2006 Prof. Jeffries' attorney filed a motion to quash..." We have deleted this line because we realized that Mr. Price's lawyer may have filed the motion (rather than Prof. Jeffries'). We will investigate this matter further and report what we find.

Price Subpoena Available for Viewing

2006-07-19T14:04:00.000-05:00

We have posted Jason Price's subpoena on our download site. Although the entire document contains of wealth of interesting information, of particular interest is the University's demand that Price turn over any and all communications he has had with the following individuals:

Paul Jeffries
Janet Jamieson (UD professor)
Alan Lisk (UD professor)
Chris Daniels (association to UD unknown)
Tim Rupert (student)
Kate Conway (student)
Alfred Reims (student)
Lyle Vander Broek (UD seminary professor)
Alice Oleson (UD professor)
Jane Morgan (UD academic support staff)
Rachel Daack (UD professor)
Ann Pelelo (former UD professor)
Jon Barz (UD professor)
Jerry Zurcher (UD professor)
Bonnie Sue Lewis (UD seminary professor)
Ralph Scharnau (former UD professor)
Robert Miller (former UD professor)
Julia McDonald (former UD professor)
James Lindsey (former UD professor)
The Des Moines Register or any employee or agent thereof
The Telegraph Herald or any employee or agent thereof
The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) or any employee or agent thereof
Internal Revenue Service

There are a number of new court documents available at the Dubuque County Courthouse, which we hope to post in the next few days. These include the University's contempt filing against Mr. Price and an "Order to Compel," which Dr. Jeffries' lawyer has filed against the University. Check back for updates regarding these documents.

Humor Substantiated

2006-07-11T01:01:00.000-05:00

Buy the shirt at-cost here.

Rumor Substantiated

2006-07-10T09:34:00.000-05:00

Two days ago we reported that rumors were circulating that the University's lawyers had subpoenaed a former UD student in regard to the ongoing Jeffries case. Today we confirmed that Jason Price was, indeed, served a subpoena soon after his UD graduation ceremony in May. At that time, he was commanded to appear on June 5th for a deposition. Mr. Price was further commanded to turn over all communications regarding this website, his financial records, and many other personal documents. Furthermore, he has been asked to turn over any and all communications with Professor Alan Lisk, former UD student Tim Ruppert, Professor Alice Oleson, Professor Jonathan Barz, Professor Rachel Daack, and approximately fifteen other students, professors, or individuals associated with the University. (We will be providing a complete list of names in the next few days.)

According to court documents, Mr. Price refused to obey the University's subpoena. Consequently, at the end of June, a charge of contempt was filed against Mr. Price by the lawyer's representing UD. As far as we can tell, this filing is still under the court's consideration and Mr. Price has not yet been found to be in contempt.

UD administrators have known for some time that Jason Price was, at one time, involved in the editing of this website. In December 2005, Mr. Price was "outed" as an editor by a faculty member. Soon afterwards, he was requested to meet with President Bullock regarding his involvement. Prior to this meeting, Price and the editors agreed to permanently cut his access privileges to the site. Now although Mr. Price was involved with this site, and although he has been outspoken about his belief that Paul and Ruth Jeffries and the entire UD faculty have suffered an injustice at the hands of the current administration, it is not clear how his personal e-mails, financial statements, phone records, etc. relate to the actual lawsuit. Rumors have been circulating that the University is attempting to connect Dr. Jeffries with the editors of this site in some way or another.

We will be posting Mr. Price's subpoena and the contempt filing as soon as possible. The document is currently not available for scanning, but is expected to be made available late this week or early next week.

Strange Rumors Abound

2006-07-08T21:23:00.000-05:00

Rumors (and thus far they are only rumors) have been flying that a former UD student has been subpoenaed by the University. The story being circulated is that the University's lawyers are attempting to make the case that Professor Jeffries spoke against the University in violation of his contract's gag order. It is further claimed that the University has put pressure on faculty members to make similar claims.

We would be greatly interested in hearing more about this story. If anyone has any information, please contact us at whatwendtwrong@yahoo.com.

Update Regarding UD's Answer

2006-04-21T18:36:00.000-05:00

We previously posted what we said was an incomplete copy of UD's answer to Jeffries' petition. We have finally received the two extra pages. However, it turns out that these only contain signatures. While they are not essential to making sense of the document, we will eventually post a revised file for those who are interested. PLEASE NOTE: Since finals are rapidly approaching, it may be awhile until we can scan and upload the documents.

IMPORTANT: Chronicle of High Education Article Available for Viewing for Limited Time

2006-04-04T23:50:00.000-05:00

The nationally circulated Chronicle of Higher Education posted an article today regarding Professor Jeffries' lawsuit. It appears that non-subscribers to the Chronicle may view the article for only four more days.

Some points of interest:

Dr. John Stewart is reported to have said that, aside from Dr. Jeffries, no other professors have complained about the gag clause, which is said to appear in all faculty contracts. Furthermore, he denies that such a clause hinders academic freedom. This may be contrasted with Stewart's sworn testimony, which was offered at Jeffries' unemployment hearings and was reported by the Des Moines Regsiter on Sunday, April 2. That article reported:

"It would certainly be difficult, yes," Stewart said.

Perhaps in Dr. Stewart's mind intimidation and fear are not sufficient conditions for hampering academic freedom, but we are not convinced.

As a further note, the Chronicle's article also reports that Professor Jeffries has accepted a position as assistant professor of philosophy at Ripon College. We wish Paul and Ruth all the best, though we cannot help feeling saddened by the fact that they have been forced to start afresh.

Register Article Regarding Jeffries' Unemployment Hearings

2006-04-02T15:26:00.000-05:00

Today, the Des Moines Register ran an article regarding Professor Jeffries' unemployment hearings.

According to the article, "Jeffries' attorney asked Stewart whether he felt that the threat of having to repay one's salary for criticizing the school created an 'intimidating and fearsome situation' for the faculty," to which Dr. Stewart responded, "'It would certainly be difficult, yes'."

The Register interviewed a number of officials at other Iowa colleges regarding the issue of whether faculty ought to be free to criticize administrators. Bruce Haddox, vice president of academic affairs at Simpson College (whose position is comparable to Dr. Stewart's at UD) is reported to have said, "Generally speaking, faculty are trained and bred to criticize [...]. What would life be without faculty criticizing the administration?"

Indeed.

Wendt Initiative Overview

2006-02-22T01:23:00.000-06:00

We have posted a 9-page overview of the Wendt Initiative on our download site. This overview was composed by the University and was distributed last year.

UD's Answer Available for Viewing...

2006-02-22T01:17:00.000-06:00

...Well, sort of.

We have posted four out of six pages of UD's answer to the Jeffries petition on our download site (PDF format). Unfortunately, the copy that we had was missing the last two pages, which we didn't realize until we were in the process of scanning it.

We will head down to the courthouse as soon as possible to pick up another (complete) copy, at which time we will re-post the document. We apologize for the inconvenience. Please check back within a week for an updated file.

TIP: Download Jeffries' petition (which is referenced in the answer).

NOTE: If the dowload site does not open (i.e., if you get an error message) that means our bandwidth allotment for the hour has been reached. Please check back at a later time. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Simple "Protocol" or Sexist Etiquette?

2006-02-22T00:35:00.000-06:00

We have obtained a memo, which was sent to the Wendt Scholars in preparation for their "Annual Wendt Character Scholars Award Reception," which we have posted on our download site.

The document contains "a few matters of protocol," which are quite interesting, including:

"A man is always introduced to a woman. No woman is ever introduced to a man..." (emphasis added).
"A younger person should never call an older person by his/her first name unless asked to do so" (emphasis in original).
"When a man is introduced to a woman it is her decision whether or not to offer her hand, but if he puts out his hand, she must give him hers" (emphasis added).

Of course, we acknowledge that there is something to be said for keeping up decorum and being polite, but we would urge people to consider whether such sexist etiquette is really befitting of a Christian college. Does not our faith require us to be strongly egalitarian? Do we really want to send this sort of message about how men and women should interact socially?

Site Updates

2006-02-20T00:18:00.000-06:00

Please view our methodology site to read a post regarding site updates.

Des Moines Register Article

2006-02-19T23:47:00.000-06:00

The Des Moines Register ran story today regarding Iowa university presidential salaries. Among other things, the Register reports of the University of Dubuque's president, "Bullock in 2004-05 received $295,705, which is more than the salary of the Robert Koob, the president of the University of Northern Iowa. Koob, who oversees a student body enrollment that is more than 10 times the size of the University of Dubuque, is paid $242,610 this year."

The article further reports, "The University of Dubuque's trustees in 2004-05 increased Bullock's compensation by 9.5 percent. The increase came when the university was being criticized for not granting tenure to a professor, an issue the prompted some students to begin blogging on the topic."

Of course, the editors of this blog take issue with the notion that Jeffries was not granted tenure, but this is--of course--the University's official position.

Be sure to read the rest of the article.

Another Sort of Wendt Initiative...

2006-01-08T20:10:00.000-06:00

It seems that Richard Wendt, multi-millionaire and benefactor of UD's Wendt Initiative, has been involved in many other sorts of initiatives, many of which seem to be quite opposed to the Christian social justice mission.

In 1999, the Northwest Labor Press (NLP) reported that Wendt was intimately involved in passing the so-called "JOBS Plus" measure in Oregon: "[T]he measure, as written, was to abolish unemployment benefits, food stamps, and welfare benefits, and use the money to put the former recipients to work in subsidized or unsubsidized jobs at 10 percent less than the minimum wage. Wendt gave over $180,000 in cash and in-kind contributions to the campaign for the measure" (emphasis added). The measure was "[b]ased on an idea Wendt had been mulling over for 20 years [...]."

The arguably immoral and economically dubious plan was slightly modified after Barbara Roberts was elected governor. "Under the terms of the compromise," NLP reports, "unemployment, welfare and food stamps would not be abolished. Instead, a portion of their funding would be diverted to fund a subsidy for employers who would hire from the unemployment and welfare rolls."

One such employer was JELD-WEN, Inc., the company founded by Richard Wendt in the 1960s, and the source of his wealth. According to NLP's 1999 report, "Since the statewide JOBS Plus program began in July 1996, 130 workers have been placed in 13 Jeld-Wen companies. That amounts to between $600,000 and $800,000 in welfare, food stamp and unemployment benefits converted to a wage subsidy for the largest privately-owned company in Oregon. Just under half of the JOBS Plus placements were hired permanently by the Jeld-Wen companies at the expiration of their subsidized term; most of the remainder have found jobs elsewhere."

It certainly seems that Dick Wendt recouped his $180,000 investment in the measure.

It is striking that this shrewd business move was the brainchild of the man who is effectively bankrolling the University's "ethics across the curriculum" initiative. Would our UD business professors, who are to incorporate ethical teaching in their class sessions, recommend such a cunning and profitable maneuver? We certainly hope not.

Telegraph Herald Article, II

2005-11-30T13:13:00.000-06:00

On Wednesday, November 30, the Dubuque Telegraph Herald ran another article pertaining to the Jeffries lawsuit. According to the article, "the codefendants [the University and Dr. Bullock] acknowledge that Jeffries had a tenure-track contract but deny that the university granted him tenure."

A reader of this blog recently reported (see comments section) that "President Bullock acknowledged [Jeffries] tenure to various people on campus including the faculty." Whether this is true or not is a matter of factual significance (from our point of view). We have heard that Professor Jeffries was asked by John Stewart to present a case of academic misconduct against a fellow faculty member because he was the tenured ethics professor. Should it end up being the case that Drs. Stewart and Bullock did indeed make statements to the effect of (or explicitly stating that) Jeffries was tenured, there would seem to be a serious discrepency in the University's position.

We would be interested in hearing from faculty members on this issue. Did Dr. Bullock make statements to the effect that Jeffries had been granted tenure? While such a discrepency may not matter in court, it certainly raises concern among those of us interested in seeing the University fulfill its mission.

NOTE: We have attempted to pick up a copy of the University's answer to the Jeffries petition at the Dubuque County Courthouse. Unfortunately, we were told that the file has been checked out by the judge involved in the case. We will post the document on our download site as soon as possible.

Recent Developments and Upcoming Posts

2005-11-28T09:22:00.000-06:00

First, according to the Iowa Courts website, on November 10 the University of Dubuque filed an answer to Jeffries' petition. We hope to have this document posted by the end of the week on our document site.

Second, we have received a number of requests to post a synopsis of (or response to) President Bullock's November 16 meeting with the faculty and staff. Unfortunately, as of yet we have not received enough information to make a confident and informed response to the president's statement. One thing that we have heard consistently from many sources is that Dr. Bullock is of the opinion that we are attempting to either personally attack him or create strife among the faculty by posting salary information. Whether this is Bullock's true opinion or not, it is a valid concern. In light of this, by the end of the week we hope to post a concise, yet thorough explanation of our interest in administration and faculty salaries on our methodology site.

Finally, we wanted to note that we will not be responding to any one particular point raised by Drs. Ebertz and Crandall in the comments section, though we appreciate the fact that they (and Dr. Lisk, et al) shared their thoughts with us. We agree that we should all take seriously what we write on this site; as a result, we want to urge those who will be posting comments to be thoughtful and considerate when choosing their words. As a matter of policy, we will not delete any existing comments, since they are not, strictly speaking, off-topic.

It is About the Mission Statement

2005-11-15T19:24:00.000-06:00

According to information from posts on the website, on Wednesday November 16 there will be a meeting for faculty led by the President that will discuss the Dr. Jeffries tenure revocation, the response of the UD community, and the intent of the editors of this website. With that in mind, the editors of this website want to clarify our intent in publishing this website and our hopes for the University of Dubuque.

It is important to note that our desire is not to denigrate or destroy the image of the school. In fact, the opposite is true, we want to see the university flourish and succeed in its mission of intellectual and moral education. We applaud the University for accepting the charge of trying to create a community that examines the moral and theological components of life. A person only has to look at the action plan for 1998-2008 to realize that there are successes at UD, and we share in the excitement and joy of the successes.

In January of 2004, President Jeffrey Bullock wrote a guest viewpoint for the Presbyterian magazine the Outlook regarding the Mission Statement at UD as well as its role as a Christian institution. The President eloquently describes the extreme importance that the mission statement plays in the life of the university:

I know that at the University of Dubuque, there are a variety of opinions about what our mission statement does and does not mean, and that is OK. But one thing is for sure: the mission, clearly stated, is a living, breathing part of our community life together, and for the mission to be real, to ring true, we must be a community in which a critical mass of people are practicing their Christian faith commitments on this campus day in and day out. If we are faithful in the realization of our Christian mission, there will be plenty of room in this community for people with different faith traditions, or for no faith commitments at all. Hospitality is key to the Reformed understanding of Christianity— and as a Christian school we will be hospitable to all those who see truth and live in love.

The editors of the website could not agree more with the President that the mission statement is an integral part of the university. We agree with the President's assertion that the mission statement must be part of the entire community. We also desire to see the school practice the mission statement in Christian love. It is because of the expressed mission of the University that we are upset, dismayed, and saddened at what has recently transpired. We desire nothing more than to see the school succeed in its lofty goal to help mold the character of all who dwell in it. That is why we are calling for repentance and reconciliation for the transgressions the school has made in handling the Jeffries tenure contract. It is a tragedy that two devout Christians cannot find a way to reconcile their differences. This situation shows the community of UD that we have a long way to go in seeing the mission statement instantiated, as we all truly desire it to be.

In his article, Dr. Bullock wrote that the “pursuit of truth through the testing and application of ideas is always best achieved when fully cognizant of our success as well as our failure…” We too urge the school community to be cognizant of our failure to live up to the mission statement. Moreover, we are urging the administration to hear our words not as bellicose agitators, but as members of the University of Dubuque family, earnestly desiring to see the University to continue to succeed and flourish. The university has grown in numerous ways the past few years, and we are proud of that. However, we have seen instances where the community has failed in its mission. The administration has urged the community at University of Dubuque to "have an opinion about what is right and what is wrong…”and we have voiced what we have seen as a state of affairs that is morally deficient at the school. We have declared what we have seen as inequities in the institution, and have called for reform. We have asked for transparency in the administration’s decisions. We have asked for an open environment where students and faculty feel safe in voicing concern over what we see as failure to live up to the mission statement. We urge the faculty and administration to address these issues in the meeting on Wednesday. We urge the administration to be aware of its failures and the dangers in unilateral decision-making. In short, during the life of this website, we have asked, and continue to ask, for the school to allow the complete UD community to take part in the fulfillment of the mission statement.

Regarding Our Recent Hiatus

2005-11-12T01:23:00.000-06:00

On Thursday, November 10, we received a comment that stated, "The school is looking into filing an injunction to have this blog removed from the internet." After various readers questioned the legitimacy of this claim, we received yet another post which said, "The rumor about the injunction is a fact and the school['s] lawyers are going to argue that [this site is] making defamatory remarks about Jeff Bullock and the school's administration." (Read more...)

Facts Called into Question

2005-11-09T23:18:00.000-06:00

An anonymous comment left in response to our post, Regarding the "Other Side" of the Story tipped us off that President Bullock has sent a response to the University's faculty members regarding some of the questions raised on this site. According to the reader, "The response does... call many of the so-called facts posted on this site into question such as Pres. Bullock's salary, and other 'misrepresented public information'."

We are very interested in hearing on what grounds our report of Dr. Bullock's salary could be called into question. To this end, we have sent a request to the president to provide us with his response and we have urged him to make an address to the student body. As we noted in our e-mail to him, we, the students, alums, and friends of the University, are the ones who have a primary stake in the institution's practices.

Although we have double-checked our reports of the president's salary against the latest IRS filing, we strongly urge all our readers to examine the University's IRS 990 forms for themselves. If a discrepancy is found, we ask that you please report it to us at: whatwendtwrong@yahoo.com

Jeffries' Petition Available for Downloading

2005-11-09T14:28:00.000-06:00

We have obtained a copy of Dr. Jeffries' petition (which lists the allegations against the Univeristy and President Bullock) from the Dubuque County courthouse, and we have posted it on our download site.

Some of the interesting allegations mentioned in the petition include:

The University sent a letter to Dr. Jeffries on May 17, 2005 notifying him that he had received tenure (p. 2)
Dr. John Stewart announced at a faculty orientation meeting that one reason Professor Jeffries had been terminated was because he questioned the University's contract provisions (p. 4).
"The University breached its contractual obligations to Dr. Jeffries by terminating him without just cause, by failing to give him notice of termination as required by the faculty handbook, by failing to follow the required procedures in the faculty handbook and by repudiating its tenure contract with Dr. Jeffries without just or adequate cause" (p. 3).
Dr. Stewart also "likened Dr. Jeffries' actions to discovering that he has an 'addiction,' or had been inappropriately altering numbers in the budget" (p. 4).

UD's 2005 IRS 990 Available for Viewing

2005-11-08T14:11:00.000-06:00

We recently obtained a copy of UD's 2005 IRS 990 from the University, and we have posted it here for downloading (re-direct to our download site).

As we previously reported, Jeffrey Bullock's salary from May 2003-May 2004 increased by 54% to $225,896. According to the new 990 form, the president's compensation increased by $88,579 between May 2004 and May 2005 to a grand total of $314,475. Furthermore, Mr. Garfield's salary increased from $83,538 to $97,999 during that same period.

We will be posting a "Show Me the Money, Part III" entry in the next day or so, in which we will provide a detailed list of director and non-director raises as they compare to our prior reports.

For those who may be interested in expressing concern over Professor Jeffries' situation, pages 15-17 of the 2005 990 form contain the mailing addresses of the University's current trustees.

Show Me the Money, Part I (Corrected)

2005-11-08T12:00:00.000-06:00

NOTE: We have made corrections to the dates associated with Alan Garfield, Richard Chesterman, and Tammy Walsh's reported salaries.

The University of Dubuque has worked hard to come back from a near financial death just a few years ago. The school has sacrificed programs, and according to their own statements, been financially cautious in many ways, including faculty and staff salaries and raises. The school has added teaching specialists instead of full-time tenured professors, has raised tuition, and has instituted a mandatory residence requirement for undergraduate students--all, one assumes, to create financial stability. This would lead one to conclude that salary increases in such an environment would be minimal. Look again:

Jeffrey Bullock (University President):
5/31/1999 - $115,000
5/31/2000 - $117,012
5/31/2001 - $140,000 (20% raise)
5/31/2002 - $140,000
5/31/2003 - $146,705 (5% raise)
5/31/2004 - $225,896 (54% raise)

John Stewart (VP for Academic Affairs):
5/31/2002 - $74,772
5/31/2003 - $92,721 (24% raise)
5/31/2004 - $98,749 (7% raise)

Tracy Wagner (VP of Finance and Auxiliary Services):
5/31/1999 - $85,000
5/31/2000 - $86,487
5/31/2001 - $93,500
5/31/2002 - $90,111
5/31/2003 - $92,583 (3% raise)
5/31/2004 - $109,633 (18% raise)

Brad Longfield (VP/Dean of the Seminary):
5/31/1999 - $72,150
5/31/2000 - $70,000
5/31/2001 - $74,100
5/31/2002 - $76,000
5/31/2003 - $85,000 (12% raise)
5/31/2004 - $90,333 (6% raise)

Alan Garfield (CGIM Faculty Member and Chair):
5/31/2002 - $70,087
5/31/2003 - $78,260 (12% raise)
5/31/2004 - $83,538 (7% raise)

Richard Chesterman (Physical Education Faculty and Chair):
5/31/2003 - $68,750
5/31/2004 - $81,393 (18% raise)

Tammy Walsh (former Dean of Student Life):
5/31/2002 - $66,298
5/31/2003 - $84,133 (27% raise)
5/31/2004 - $90,924 (8% raise)

This information was compiled from the University of Dubuque's publicly available 2004 federal 990 tax forms. We are in the process of double-checking the figures and percentages.

A Budget is a Moral Document

2005-11-07T16:06:00.000-06:00

Sojourners President Jim Wallace asserts that one should recognize the country's budget as a moral document. It would seem equally true that an institution's budget, especially a Christian University's, would also be a moral document. A budget is a manifestation of the beliefs and ideals that an institution holds dear.

It is with this in mind, that the editors present the salaries of the Presidents from other colleges and universities of similar size and stature of the University of Dubuque. Given the tenuous financial history of the University of Dubuque, one wonders if the current allocation of salaries truly reflects a correct understanding of Christian values? If the goal of the Wendt initiative is to create an environment where strong moral character is cultivated, how does the asymmetrical budget of the University of Dubuque correspond to the Wendt initiative goal?

Area Schools and Salaries of Presidents:

$98,196 Blackburn University President Miriam R Pride
$151,524 Loras College President John Kerrigan
$165,000 Cornell College President Leslie H. Garner
$170,000 Central College President David Roe
$176,364 St. Ambrose College President Edward Rogalksi
$177,786 Coe College President John Phifer
$176,985 Simpson College President R Kevin Lagree
$177,043 Buena Vista University President Frederick Moore
$187,635 Luther College President Richard Toregerson
$225,896 University of Dubuque President Jeffrey Bullock

All of these salaries are from 2004 990 tax documents that are public records and readily available from Guidestar after an initial free signup. For more information on our sources and methodology please see our methodology page

Show Me the Money, Part II (Updated)

2005-11-06T12:01:00.000-06:00

We recently located and reviewed publicly available documents regarding Revenue Anticipation Notes (RANs) issued by the Iowa Higher Education Loan Authority to UD. This information is quite informative in regards to the financial situation of the University.

To explain...

In 1999, former UD math professor Dr. Julia K. McDonald noted that the University's administration had cited, at that time, a projected deficit for the 1998-1999 fiscal year of $1.35 million. This (in addition to other financial concerns) was used to justify reductions in salaries and the cutting of programs at the institution.

Interestingly, the 2004 RAN document contains a section in which the University projects a $1.9 million deficit for the 2004-2005 fiscal year. Additionally, UD's total liabilities dramatically increased from $15.6 million in 2003 to $28.3 million in 2004, as reported in a 2005 RAN document (see page 35). As we previously reported, Jeffrey Bullock, the president of UD, received a 54% raise between May 2003 and May 2004. As far as we can tell, it would have been during this timeframe that the University would have made their projection of a $1.9 million 2004-2005 deficit, while at the same time experiencing the dramatic leap in total liabilities.

The Pressing Questions

Rumor has it that faculty pay raises above the typical 2-3% "across the board" increase are non-negotiable due to the fact that the institution is still working through its financial problems. Why then was Bullock granted a 54% raise when the yearly deficit was expected to be over $1.9 million and the liabilities had skyrocketed? What could reasonably justify the president's raise? Furthermore, what could reasonably justify Associate Professor Alan Garfield's 12% raise between 2001 and 2002, and his 7% raise between 2002 and 2003?

It seems that some professors are exempt from the 2-3% "across the board" increase. What criterion is employed to determine who can negotiate a raise and who cannot?

For those of us concerned with Professor Jeffries' termination, this is a serious question, particularly since it is believed that one reason his tenure contract was revoked was due to the fact that he wanted to discuss the possibility of a pay raise.

Telegraph Herald Article

2005-11-01T14:12:00.002-06:00

On Monday, October 31, the Telegraph Herald ran an article regarding Professor Jeffries' lawsuit. The brief article contains very little substanative information, although it is worth noting that John Stewart is credited with making the decision to withdraw Jeffries' tenure contract.

The Story Thus Far, Part I

2005-10-29T13:44:00.000-05:00

As we understand it, in May 2005 the Board of Trustees unanimously granted Professor Jeffries tenure and authorized that he be given a tenure contract, which he received in June. At some point later in the summer Jeffries was informed that the school was revoking the tenure contract and instead he was offered a probationary tenure-track contract.

Jeffries was not allowed to appeal the decision.

Because the probationary contract would nullify his existing tenure contract, Jeffries refused to sign the new contract. After his refusal to accept the probationary contract, Jeffries was told that his services were no longer required, and he was asked to vacate his office at the University.

From what we have been able to piece together, the events leading up to the decision to revoke Jeffries's tenure began when the administration had requested that Jeffries, in his role as a tenured faculty member and as the Wendt Professor of Ethics (a.k.a., the "campus ethicist"), present evidence against a fellow faculty member who had been accused of wrongdoing. According to reports we have received, Jeffries refused on a number of grounds, first and foremost because he was, indeed, the so-called campus ethicist; he did not want to alienate himself from his colleagues for fear they would no longer trust him in that capacity. Furthermore, as far as he could tell, he was not obligated by the terms set forth in the faculty handbook to engage in any such activity.

From what we can gather, Jeffries was charged with having an uncollegial attitude.

Rumor has it that the University is claiming that a memo Jeffries sent to some administrators asking to discuss a few things in his contract constituted a counter-offer to his tenure contract, and thus the University was justified in taking the tenure contract off the table. Because Jeffries refused to sign the probationary contract on the grounds that it would nullify his existing contract, it seems that he did not intend his memo to be interpreted as a counter-offer.

NOTE: We will be updating this story as more information is made available.

Background Reading on Professor Paul Jeffries

2005-10-28T17:25:00.000-05:00

The following articles partially convey the active role Professor Jeffries played at the University of Dubuque:

"UD Professor Selected for National Study" UD press release.
The Valparaiso Project (www.PracticingOurFaith.org) awarded Dr. Jeffries a grant to pursue a project titled, "Practicing Our Faith for Non-Traditional, Pre-seminary Students."
In March 2005, Professor Jeffries presented a paper (PDF file) at Drury University's Eighth Annual Undergraduate/Faculty Interdisciplinary Research Conference regarding his Valparaiso grant project. This paper provides an interesting look into the role he had at the University and the passion with which he approached his position.
Page eight of UD's Summer 2005 edition of Alumni News (PDF file) contains a brief article detailing Professor Jeffries's accomplishments during the prior academic year (interestingly enough, this edition came out after his tenure had been effectively revoked).

Background Reading on the Wendt Initiative at UD

2005-10-28T15:07:00.000-05:00

The following websites provide information pertaining to the Wendt Initiative at the University of Dubuque:

"UD Receives Substantial Endowment Gift to Establish Wendt Character Initiative" press release.
Description of the Wendt Center and the Wendt Character Scholarships.
"Wendt Center for Character Education to Hold Inaugural Fall Conference" press release.

Background Reading on the University of Dubuque (Updated)

2005-10-28T14:48:00.000-05:00

For those interested in reading up on UD's past problems, the following websites may prove insightful:

Academe's article regarding the UD Board of Trustee's 1998 lawsuit against the faculty of the University.
Former UD professor Julia K. McDonald's 1999 letter to the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), titled Crisis at the University of Dubuque.
The AAUP's report on the University of Dubuque.
The Chronicle of Higher Education's coverage of the AAUP report.

University of Dubuque IRS 990 forms available for downloading and viewing.

2005-10-28T14:11:00.000-05:00

The University of Dubuque's IRS 990 forms are available for viewing as PDF files. To view the 2003 filing, click here. To view the 2004 filing, click here.

These documents contain quite a bit of interesting information, including the amount of compensation provided to directors, officers, and administrators, and the amount of compensation provided to the five highest paid employees. Furthermore, each filing contains a list of officers, directors, and trustees.

Pay particular attention to the increase in compensation between the 2002 and 2003 fiscal years for the top five highest paid employees.