Posted on 03/13/2005 11:49:51 PM PST by ajolympian2004
By John C. Ensslin, Rocky Mountain News March 14, 2005
A majority of CU regents said Sunday they oppose any financial settlement with Ward Churchill, aborting an attempted buyout of the controversial professor's contract.
"I'm almost certain there's not going to be a settlement," said Steve Bosley, one of five on the nine-member board who has decided to oppose a deal.
Two others said any chance of their supporting a buyout was extremely slim.
The opposition represents a reversal by the board, which voted 7-2 in a closed session last month to authorize interim University of Colorado Chancellor Phil DiStefano to explore the possibility of persuading Churchill to take an early retirement in return for a cash settlement.
It also leaves the board with one less option this week when a committee chaired by DiStefano is expected to deliver its report on Churchill's academic record.
The report is the university's response to the firestorm over an essay Churchill wrote concerning the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
In the essay, the tenured ethnic studies professor compared some of the victims in the World Trade Center attack to Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi bureaucrat who oversaw the extermination of Jews during World War II.
Those statements led several public officials, including Gov. Bill Owens, to call for Churchill's dismissal.
David Lane, a lawyer representing Churchill, said Sunday the demise of any buyout proposal means his client will be continuing as a professor at CU for quite some time.
"I guess they (the regents) better get used to having Professor Churchill around," Lane said. "The issue is not should they fire him or buy him out. The issue is can they fire him."
If CU administrators seek Churchill's dismissal, that will start a lengthy process that includes a faculty review of the case. Lane noted that 200 CU faculty members have signed a petition defending Churchill's rights to free speech.
"Ward Churchill likes his job, and he would be happy to keep it until he decides to retire," Lane added.
Several regents interviewed Sunday said they had been willing to consider a buyout as a way to avoid a protracted legal battle that would follow if they did fire Churchill.
But several said they changed their mind last week after reading about a Canadian professor who alleged in 1997 that Churchill had plagiarized an essay she wrote on Indian treaty fishing rights.
Churchill and his lawyer vigorously deny the allegations by Dalhousie University professor Fay G. Cohen. Last week, officials of the Nova Scotia school sent an internal report on the allegations to CU officials.
"At this point, I've changed my mind," said Regent Pat Hayes. "Originally, I thought that a settlement would get him (Churchill) off the campus. But as this has gone through all its iterations, I decided last week that I couldn't support it any longer.
"The more I heard about, the more I wondered what else is out there. And when push came to shove, I just could not support giving him a nickel."
Two other regents, Peter Steinhauer and Tom Lucero, said they were opposed to any buyout from the start.
Regent Cindy Carlisle said she also had decided last week to oppose any buyout, but said it had nothing to do with the plagiarism allegation.
"I think one has to come down on the side of principle on this and let due process take its course," Carlisle said.
Regents Michael Carrigan and Paul Schauer said they felt any buyout option now is extremely unlikely.
"I think we would have an immensely difficult time justifying any type of financial settlement," Carrigan said.
Regents Jerry Rutledge and Gail Schwartz could not be reached for comment.
One day after threatening to lead a recall of any Republican regent who voted for a buyout, former state Sen. John Andrews praised the regents for their position.
"I would applaud that display of backbone on the part of the regents," Andrews said.
Several GOP regents, however, pointedly said they had made up their mind last week or earlier, prior to Andrews' recall threat, and not because of it.
Contact John at: ensslinj@RockyMountainNews.com
Finally someone with a backbone.
Good news for the taxpayers. Fire the SOB for cause.
Firing is too good for this FRAUD.
He should be forced to repay his YEARS of state salary to COLORADO citizens PLUS restitution to the deceived PARENTS that forked over huge tuition amounts based on college course descriptions found in their catalogs.
Bringing this FRAUD up on HATE-CRIMES against humanity is a good legal start...lets see him tried at the HAGUE.
Isn't lying on your resume' enough to fire someone?
Usually it is, but in this case Churchill has an Arts & Sciences dean and others still at the University of Colorado who have given him glowing reviews over the past few years. Todd Gleeson and Phil Distefano should be investigated after Churchill is fired. One reason the buyout option came up in the first place is that a lawsuit by Churchill, if fired, will prompt a discovery phase that will uncover the corruption at CU in regards to Churchill. A buyout keeps the facts swept under the rug forever regarding him and the ones behind promoting him without adhering to 'normal' standards for granting tenure, hiring a professor, etc.
I'd like being a tenured English professor, though I only have a BA. I know that I am more qualified that Ward and I won't have plagiarism (essays or art) and a multitude of other baggage catching up with me.
"I'd like being a tenured English professor, though I only have a BA. I know that I am more qualified that Ward and I won't have plagiarism (essays or art) and a multitude of other baggage catching up with me."
And you'd be a lot easier to listen to....
"Isn't lying on your resume' enough to fire someone?"
Churchill claims having a MA. CU published Churchill's MA credit in the Ethnic Studies department's faculty outline. Yet neither CU nor Churchill can produce a copy or the original of Churchill's Masters thesis.
Furthermore, Churchill never signed CU's required (of faculty and administration)loyalty oath to the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.
Probably, Churchill will claim he didn't sign the oath because he is a "conscientous objector" while he invokes the First Amendment as his defense for Hate Speech and chronic plagiarism.
UC doesn't have to be intimidates by this rotten poseur.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.