Why does the search for MCC's next president seem so clear to me and yet it is so

clouded by controversy? All one needs to do is objectively look at the facts to

see the clarity of the search process. It began with determining the proper
qualifications for the next president, setting up search committees, and making
recommendations.

To begin with one must look at the qualifications that were used in the
presidential search process. Qualifications were made available through section
604.3 of the SUNY Code of Rules and Regulations. These qualifications include:

* appropriate qualities, credentials, academic experience, and accomplishments

evidencing strong leadership ability
* diverse backgrounds and capabilities encouraged to apply
* an earned doctorate is generally recommended but not required
* successful academic administrative experience
* qualities of leadership and ability to maintain effective relationships with
trustees, faculty, students, administrators, alumni, and community
* commitment to mission of public higher education and specifically to college
for which the candidate is being considered
* distinct promise of ability to build productive community relationships
* distinct promise of ability to generate external support
* commitment to principles of diversity and equal opportunity
* personal traits including character, intelligence, integrity, humor,
fortitude, judgement, flexibility, openness to new ideas, sensitivity to human
values and capacity for hard work

In addition, the Board of Trustees (BOT) posted their qualifications for the next
president of MCC. The qualifications include:

* earned doctorate from an accredited institution preferred; minimum of

master's degree required
* commitment to mission of MCC and role of liberal arts, career/technical
education, student development models, and developmental education in achieving
its mission regarding workforce issues and economic development
* a commitment to teaching excellence and student success
* substantial senior level administrative experience in a community college or
university setting, or business or government experience, including demonstrated
success in legislative advocacy, fund raising, public negotiations, public
advocacy, inter-governmental relations, shared governance, strategic planning,
learning and support services, and interaction with public-policy-making Board of
Trustees
* experience in commitment to fostering partnerships with community leaders
including business, industry, labor, health groups, non-profit institutions,
school districts, and higher education institutions
* knowledge and sensitivity to the economic, social, political and business
characteristics of the Rochester area or comparable geographical settings
* advocates and actively supports diversity initiatives in college and
community
* qualities, credentials and accomplishments evidencing strong leadership
ability and support of the teaching and learning process
* commitment to maintaining active involvement in League for Innovation, the
American Association of Community Colleges and other educational associations that
reinforce the college's national reputation

Desired Qualifications:

* strategic thinker, with record of achievement in program and resource

development
 * a motivator and consensus builder who can translate vision into ideas and
then into actions
* enhancing college's enrollment market share and advancing its image
* background in collective bargaining process
* success in generating private and public support from individuals,
corporation, foundations and grants
* commitment to the importance of co-curricular programs in a community
college setting

Secondly, search committees were set up. The first committee was the Presidential
Search Advisory Committee. It is an 18-member broad-based committee with
representation from students, faculty, staff, alumni, business and community
leaders, trustees, and the MCC Foundation. Len Redon from Paychex and past chair
of the MCC Foundation served as chair. The second committee was comprised of
members from SCAA (Special Committee on Administrative Affairs). SCAA provided a
parallel role in the search process and was under the leadership of Mary Timmon's
as the chair.

After researching all of the applicants, both committees completely independent of

one another, recommended the same two candidates - Dr. Spraggs and Dr. Enders.

Now that the process has been completed, six Board of Trustee members led by John
Parrinello, decided to add two of their own local candidates to the list of
finalists. Both of these candidates, Mr. Smith and Mr. Kessler, were in the
original candidate pool, but rejected by both search committees. Despite 39
impassioned pleas by faculty and students at the March 24 board meeting to accept
only the two candidates originally recommended by the search committees, the names
of Smith and Kessler were added. The main reason for the addition of these two
names was given as the desire to have local candidates added to the group of
finalists. However, nowhere in either set of guidelines for choosing a president
put forth by SUNY or the Board of Trustees, did it state that the candidate should
be local.

One would think that after John Parrinello's success in getting two local
candidates added to the finalists, he would let the process continue. Now,
however, he plans on making a motion at the April 3 special Board of Trustees
meeting to abort the entire process. He gives 17 reasons for this move, in a
letter to Mr. Guon, the chair of the Board of Trustees. These arguments were
eloquently rebutted by Robert Leopard, a professor of Biology at MCC, which I will
include:

* The former chairperson of the Board appointed a Presidential Search

Committee without consulting the Board of Trustees. (The bylaws of the MCC BOT
provide for appointments of committees by the chairperson and the board had many
months prior to share this concern.)
* The former chairperson of the BOT threatened to "go public" after her
resignation. (What does this have to do with aborting the present search?)
* The former chairperson of the Board selected a head hunter without the
knowledge and consent of the full BOT. (Why isn't retaining the use of a qualified
head hunter not considered a positive action?)
* Mr. Parrinello didn't get placed on the Search Committee as he requested.
(What does this have to do with aborting the present search? It makes it seem like
Mr. Parrinello didn't think the people who were on the committees were capable.)
* There were no ads placed locally for candidates for the MCC Presidential
Search until members of the Board complained. (Smith and Kessler did apply and
they were both rejected. If other local people were interested and didn't know MCC
was looking for a new president, then they would certainly be considered living
under a rock and not desirable candidates at all.)
* "Confidentiality is most important and anyone agreeing to serve on a search
committee must respect this principle." Before most BOT members knew the names of
the finalists, their names and profiles were leaked to the press. (Since we don't
know who leaked the names of the candidates, how do we know it wasn't a BOT
member?)
* The heads of the 2 committees announced the names of the finalists, which
coincidentally, were the same from each committee, although, each Committee
assured the Board there was no collusion. We need attendance lists to determine if
each Committee Member was eligible to vote. (Both committees selected the same two
finalists and if any member did not vote then how seriously did they take their
commitment to the search process.)
* During the March 24 BOT meeting, approximately 39 speakers were allowed to
present their views to the Board, many of the 300 people in the audience cheered
for the BOT members who voted not to add the 2 names to the finalists and booed
the BOT members who voted to add the 2 names, one person accused me (Parrinello)
of "single-handedly destroying MCC, public announcements were made about taking a
vote of no confidence against the BOT, and a faculty member accused the BOT of
shifting their allegiance towards the interest of constituencies external to the
college, (What does this have to do with aborting the present search? These points
made by Parrinello are examples of freedom of speech and have no bearing on the
search process.)
* The Faculty Senate wrote a letter stating that : "Some people have
questioned the commitment of the Board members to place the college's interests
above their own individual pursuits." (This has nothing to do with aborting the
search process.)
* I have been told by a highly placed source at MCC that he/she was told by
SUNY that if Smith's name is submitted to SUNY for approval, that he will be
"DOA". "I cannot believe that the SUNY Board of Trustees will reject whomever's
name is forwarded to them as the MCC BOT choice as Presidents in view of the fact
that the process has been followed." (The biggest contradiction by Parrinello yet.
Why if the process has been followed, does he want to abort it?)
* Someone from MCC met with one of the finalists recommended by the Search
Committee for 2 hours and discussed his application. (This has nothing to do with
aborting the search process.)

In closing, it is clear that the procedures for choosing MCC's next president were
determined by looking at qualifications outlined by SUNY and the Board of
Trustees, utilizing two independent search committees chosen by a faculty group
(SCAA) and the BOT, and then making recommendations for presidential finalists,
which were the same 2 men by both committees.

Nowhere in the qualifications of candidates did it say that the individuals should
be local. The two local candidates that were added by the 6 BOT members were
rejected by both search committees. There was ample opportunity for local
candidates to apply for the job of MCC's next president. If you live in this area
and didn't know about the search, you don't deserve to be a candidate. None of
John Parrinello's reasons to abort this search process are valid and he actually
contradicts himself when he stated "I couldn't believe the SUNY Board of Trustees
would reject MCC's BOT'S recommendation for president in view of the fact that the
process has been followed."

These are the facts and direct quotes from Parrinello. Look at the facts
objectively and it is clear that the search process should not be aborted.