PASADENA — Richard Koshalek, the high-profile, hard-driving president of Art Center College of Design since 1999, will not have his contract renewed when it expires in 18 months.
John Puerner, chairman of the college's 16-member Board of Trustees, speaking from his home in Santa Fe on Saturday, said the college was in the process of "crafting a communication to deliver to the Art Center community" in the next few days.
"We will provide communication ... using a new forum created by Art Center, a new on-line forum created to speak to students and faculty," Puerner said while declining to comment until Art Center staff and students are informed of the board's action.
Puerner later said he was not confirming Koshalek's contract would not be renewed.
31 comments:
I believe it when I see it.
take a closer look...
"Puerner later said he was not confirming Koshalek's contract would not be renewed."
Not sure this staff writer has clear information. Highly doubt the head of the Trustees would release this announcement to a reporter before delivering the news to the President.
This whole article seems odd. The education first petition was signed by 1400 people by Friday and the article mentions 700+ as a concrete mark for wednesday? It also mentions that the meeting was wednesday, when in fact it was on thursday. I look forward to celebrating my efforts, but this article seems uninformed.
dear anon x 3
you are all right. lets wait until Monday.
And there was a meeting on Wednesday as well with John Puerner and John Henry Baliton (ACSG President)
:O) ophelia
"An "EducationFirst" student/alumni petition with more than 700 digital signatures was scheduled to go to the board before Wednesday's meeting."
I am aware of the meeting wednesday, not trying to argue semantics, but the article leads the reader to believe that the board meeting was wednesday, since it never mentions any meeting besides that one. Perhaps just another example of the incomplete info in the article.
thank you.
Now is the time to work together. We have learned to listen to each other and to understand that even though we may disagree, the common bond is our passion for ACCD. That includes everyone from Richard Koshalek, to staff, faculty, students and alumni.
Good Morning All.
As this week's events unfurl, we should refrain from any ill mannered comments, slander, rumors, or any comment that would tarnish the work we have done. We have come this far with just a modicum of the aforementioned.
Please keep your comments civil and respectful.
Thank you,
Ophelia
I (personally) was not calling for the resignation (or non-renewal) of anyone. I merely wanted to see a fundamental shift of priorities begin to happen, along with the more immediate correction of some pretty significant "wrongs" that happened in recent weeks.
I just highly doubt that the article is correct. It sounds like Puerner flip-flopped on what he was saying. Either that ot the reporter has it wrong. Historically, the board has had a "rubber stamp" policy with the CEO.
I doubt that he ius going anywhere.
I think the gun may have been jumped, and two things come to mind:
1) Puerner is quoted about the board drafting a "communication" about their Thursday meeting, but nowhere does he say that they decliend to renew his contract.
2) Despite the fact that the reporter seems to have run with such a headline, she states that Puerner did NOT confirm any non-renewal.
Why would the chairman of the board speak "on the record" and then not confirm or deny? I see no statements upon which to draw a conlusion of non-renewal.
More likely, either the Star News website was hacked, or the reporter got her facts wrong. Notice that the link to the article no longer works. Notice the lack of sources for the claim that Koshalek has not been renewed. The article is poorly written in MANY respects.
There is no question that the article is poorly written and has many factual errors - it is bad reporting. But the site being hacked? That seems far-fetched. Most likely the reporter got some information and acted on it too hastily. As we've noted in another post, whatever the outcome of the Board's deliberations, it will take them some time to craft a public statement. Let's just wait for an official announcement.
Sorry for the confusion - The Star-News search engine is not working, and our link relied on that. The link is fixed and now points directly to the story.
http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/ci_9661295
Puerner is the former publisher of the L.A. Times. He knows when and when not to comment to a reporter.
I'm willing to bet, at best, the board tabled the vote on Koshalek to another meeting. And their agenda is not for public consumption.
I seriously doubt they gave him a "NO" vote last week.
http://www.artcenter.edu/forum/ link is off the grid.
looks like they are working on something
It's official now:
http://www.artcenter.edu/forum/announcements.php
it is over.
http://www.artcenter.edu/forum/announcements.php
Yes, it's over. Art Center can return to its roots as a trade school and retreat into the obscurity it so ardently desires.
Congratulations! You "showed them."
But do you think anyone really wins at this game?
Why do you think the knives will become any shorter? This is still academia.
All the petty grievances are still there and you'll be losing the best fundraiser you ever had. And no one really appreciated. That includes you, Ophelia.
I may have been intensely focused on correcting some specific "wrongs" that have been committed in recent weeks, but I did not really wish for an ouster of Koshalek. I was wishing he would "get it" and listen and not fall on his sword over some stupid building.
I am experienced in the long-standing "don't question our methods" culture of Art Center's leadership, so I was 100% willing to give this man a chance at changing course and correcting things (like retaliatory terminations). I'm actually sad that it took just one month for his leadership to unravel. And, for the record, I think that "no confidence" letter circulating within the academic leadership was a bit extreme and did not give him enough time to turn the ship. Perhaps everyone was thinking back to the 90's and David Brown, and how hard it was to get the admninistration to listen to things. Who knows. I think this is sad.
Yes, Art Center DID just lose the best fundraiser it ever had. But Art Center also lost sight of its soul by focusing on the wrong kinds of funds for the wrong purposes. Why not retain him in the role of fundraiser?
I was afraid that the board would do what it did. Let Koshalek take the bullet and then say to themselves "Phew, now let's go get us the RIGHT leader!"... The leadership starts with the board. The board has been lacking in strategic direction that jibes with the soul of Art Center.
Board: We're really upset over the fundamental basics of education at Art Center. If there is one "Task Force" you should support, it should be the one that does not exist yet. The task force dedicated to getting back in touch with the SOUL of Art Center. Look for elements of that soul in the petition comments from alumni and students.
Does this soul embody technology? Architecture? Excellence? Selectivity? Modernism? "Basics"? Wine tasting events? Exclusivity? Hip culture?
Just a few thoughts.
Dear Anonymous 6/24/08 2:32 PM:
Saying that it is "over" does not strictly refer to the fact that Richard's contract will not renewed.
This is simply an affirmation that we have received notice from the board of our greatest concerns. This is a positive sign of things to come, and new work has just begun.
Ophelia, in my opinion was a great moderator and advocate for students and other alumni. Whether or not she appreciated Richard for his fundraising ability is not the issue. Ophelia appreciated the need for change at Art Center, and despite whatever "petty grievances" there are/were, we cannot deny the fact that change is on the horizon.
It is not really difficult to be regarded as the best fundraiser when Art Center had a history of poor fundraising. As for the endowment, the majority of the funds raised in the past few years came from one gift, a bequest, that was set in motion before Richard Koshalek arrived at Art Center and that he is not responsible for. And his excellent fundraising skills did not extend to the DRC, seemingly, at least according to John Puerner. Just a few points, not that it matters much now.
I think there are more than 1 or 2 anonymous'. I've posted anonymously before (too lazy to log-in).
Don't start stabbing each other in the back over perceived "land grab" opportunities. Trust me, trying to jockey for some kind of "leadership" role in the aftermath is often frought with disappointment.
Folks, this is a crucial time. Don't blow it. Keep the focus on the board and the decisions they make, and their own transparency.
Thank you Bambi.In respect for you, I have deleted a comment I made.
After a few weeks of dealing with "anonymous", it gets tiring.
Now the hard work is ahead and we do need to focus. Not on the Board but on the issues that the student government presented to John Puerner.
I also deleted my reply.
Bambi
the last few weeks have been stressful to say the least. between work and ACCD, i have had a full schedule. i have been called many names and some pleasant, some not. when i put my name out, i put a face to my opinions. i never veered or backed down. i just kept moving forward. the potluck could've blown up in my face, i put my name to it by organizing it.
now, there is work to be done. but for it to move forward the students who organized this have a lot of work ahead of them. we can only help by adding our voices to theirs.
even though we may not agree, we can and have shown that we are not the focus of this by taking down our comments.
thank you and i appreciate what you have done.
ophelia
it's nice that "bambi" is considered to be better name than "anonymous."
i just hope that alumni just don't disappear now that "it's over." ha! it's just begun. wait to see the super sweepstakes for the new president. that should be entertaining.
and see how easily the majority of the trustees retreat, afraid to have any real conviction. students will go back to their work. and who will be left?
any real leaders out there?
I can't give you my real name, but I'll always give you Bambi.
I just hope for the best and hope that more people will step-up, because it would be REALLY BAD if the board goes away thinking that our CEO was the sole core of the problem (he was not).
Thanks for your nice note, O.
Dear Hamlet,
No, I won't disappear. Since you don't know me, you don't know that. I will be here.
There are many leaders out there, depending on who you are and where you are viewing from,there are many students,faculty, staff and alumni working towards improving the school.
Ophelia
This is where those who yelled the loudest typically get shelved. The administration will want to save face, so the people invited to the "healing party" will be a whole new "benign" group.
Sort of like the hand-picked members of the "task forces".
Bambi
I thank you for being an advocate for the students and for being the "loud" voice. You can now help by guiding the students with how to deal with the administration. For change to happen they will need mentors. They are half way through the summer term and we all know how hard the last 6 weeks are, so their time is limited.
Let yourself be a guide for them.
Give them your advice.
It's important to be there for them,
Ophelia
Ophelia wrote:
"I thank you for being an advocate for the students and for being the "loud" voice. You can now help by guiding the students with how to deal with the administration. For change to happen they will need mentors."
Thanks very for your kind words. Turnover on the bridge is not abundant, so I have a lot of past experiences in dealing with many of the current faces. It sounds like the board/presidency culture has not changed much either, so if I offer some words from the past, please refrain from possibly accusing me of "living" in it.
I still stand by my opinion that the ouster of Richard Koshalek is not (in itself) indicative of the collective "voice" being heard. Nate Young's departure and the running deficit are two big blows that Richard had working against him, regardless of the student/alumni petition, unrest, etc.
The big "wait and see" I'm going through is from John Puerner. He speaks of having more communication, but I know that I have personally written him three times (in addition to other board members) and received not so much as a "thanks for your input" in return. I'm sure he got more than a few emails, but probably nt so many that he could not take the time to say something back. Perhaps a "canned" response?
We'll see. Thanks again.
Post a Comment