It is with great sorrow that we come together today with the departure of our president and dear friend, Fr. Julio Giulietti, S.J. We have all come here to seek the truth, and to know and understand what has happened within the university walls and what has become of the reputation of WJU. In this light, please invite anyone to read the blog and feel free to comment as you wish.

Any posts with profanity are not welcome, otherwise, please speak your mind. You are a part of this university and we want to hear your voice!

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

What happened? - from the eyes of Rev. Edward Glynn, S.J. (a series of emails)

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 10:49 am
Subject: Fwd: special meeting of WJU Trustees

Since the Boards of Directors and Trustees have scheduled special meetings this coming Wednesday, August 5, 2009, I am sending with this email the content of my email to the Directors this past Saturday, August 1, 2009.

Ed Glynn

My brother Jim is dying.  He would be 82 years old  this coming September 30th but will not make it since he was declared brain dead yesterday and according to his wishes he is not being kept alive by extraordinary means.  Such means were withdrawn yesterday, July 31st.

Since I presume I will be in Clark’s Summit, Pennsylvania,  for  my brother Jim’s  wake,  Mass and burial sometime next week,  it is highly possible that I will not be able to be,  present for the  Wednesday, August 5, 2009   special  meeting of the Wheeling Jesuit University board of directors.

I regret that I may not be  present for the meeting because I was looking eagerly forward to participate.  In case I am not present I am now sending all of you some comments, observations and judgments regarding this meeting.

On July 13, 2009, I send an email to our Board Chair, Bill Fisher, to ask the following questions:

Bill, what else is on the agenda for the special August meeting of th e board of directors?  If it is only the assessment of the president, how can we do an accurate assessment and one helpful to the institution if we don't  have input from the faculty, administration, staff, students and alumni/ae?

Bill responded by email on July 13th :  “ This is the only agenda item.  I copy Mr. Scheye as he is contracted to all of what you mentioned ,  the time table I am not sure.”

Thus I emailed this message to Tom Scheye on July 13th :  “Bill  without answering my question  sent you a copy of my question to him.  Do you have an answer to my question?”

Bill emailed me this comment on July 13th:  “I was hoping Tom Scheye would answer your question.  We are going to discuss what is complete at that time.”

Tom Scheye on  July 14th by email responded:

My assessment will not be complete until I have had the chance to interview members of the faculty, staff and student body, and those interviews will wait for the beginning of the new semester.  However, I wil l send the Directors an edited version of their own comments in time for the August meeting, and I have suggested to Julio that he complete his self-assessment so that might be available to provide context for the Directors’ comments.  In short, the Directors will not have my assessment in August, but they will be able to see what their fellow Directors’ comments are.  Hope that helps.

Consequently on July 14th I sent the following email to Bill: CBill, here is Tom's reply.  I still have my question.  Why are we having a special board meeting that has only one agenda item and this agenda item will only be half prepared? It seems weird to me.”

On July 16th I emailed the following to Bill:  “Bill, in case you have not recei ved my July 14th email containing my questioning to you, I am sending it again.

Bill responded on July 16th:

Serious decisions need to be made about the direction of the University. You will receive a packet of information that might clarify things.

I exercise my right as Board Chair t o call the meeting a majority of the board has told me they want one.

         If you feel strongly it is a waste of time, you may ask to be excused.

I have now received the packet of information  and this packet of “information” makes clear what Bill’s agenda was and is.

I judge Bill’s sending out a second set  of directors’ comments indicating in red and blue unfavorable and favorable comments respectively to be highly manipulative and insulting.  Each director can read and can make his or her own interpretation.  We do not need the chair to do each director’s interpretation.  Otherwise WJU might as well have a board of one director.

Since this was supposed to be the evaluation of the directors I find the lengthy comments of the university’s lawyer to be very inappropriate. Legal counsel is not a member of board of directors.

As you can read in  the evaluating comments of directors that you received this past  Friday, I have clearly stated my  own judgment regarding the university attorney:

If I were the WJU president, I could never in the future trust the board’s legal counsel personally nor professionally.  His phone call to the administrative assistant to the president to ask her whether in his phone call with the president that had just concluded there had been anyone else in the president’s office was politically crude and personally dumb.

I have no idea what Bill’s inclusion of his resume in the packet of “information” was an attempt to prove.

During the last four decades at a dozen and a half  institutions of higher education located all over the United States I have been working as a faculty member and administrator  or  serving on their boards.  All these institutions are larger and more complicated than Wheeling Jesuit University.  During these nearly forty years I have not experienced such a  similarly inappropriate  presidential evaluation and   calling  of a special  board meeting to consider the  half completed presidential evaluation.

I have no idea what Bill’s inclusion of his resume in the packet of “information” was an attempt to prove.

This special board meeting that is being called to consider the   not yet  completed evaluation of the president  (Only the directors’ evaluations have been received  and none from other major constituents of the university, such as students, faculty members, administration, staff and alumni/ae.) is a continuation and an institutionalization of the dysfunctionality  of the WJU board of directors and is a grave disservice to Wheeling Jesuit University by the board of directors.

I have not shared any of the above email correspondence with the WJU president.  As far as I know, he knows nothing about them.

Ed Glynn

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 9:35 am
To: Ed Glynn, sj (WJU Board); Tom Gleeson, sj; Brian O'Donnell, sj (Jesuit Community, WJU)
Subject: FW: special meeting of WJU Trustees

Here is the call-in info for the Trustees meeting at 1:45 EDT on Wednesday.

Pass code: *******

Gerard L. Stockhausen, S.J.
University of Detroit Mercy

From: Gerard Stockhausen
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2009 10:20 AM
To: Ed Glynn, sj (WJU Board); Tom Gleeson, sj; Brian O'Donnell, sj (Jesuit Community, WJU)
Subject: special meeting of WJU Trustees

Ed, Tom, Brian,

Should the WJU Board of Directors take any action regarding the WJU president during its August 5 meeting, we, the trustees (not including the president), may have to take some action as well.

I am therefore calling a special meeting of the WJU Board of Trustees by conference call at 1:45 PM EDT on August 5.  The only agenda item will be to discuss any action(s) taken by the Board of Directors at its August 5 meeting, and to take whatever action the Board of Trustees needs to as a result of action(s) taken by the Board of Directors.

I hope this time works for all of you.  If not, please let me know immediately.

My assistant, Emmy Yousey, will follow up with conference call information.

The good news in all of this is that my new hip is doing quite well, and that I will be taking part in all of this from Waupaca!


Gerard Stockhausen, S.J., Ph.D.
University of Detroit Mercy


  1. As a citizen of Wheeling and an admirer of Wheeling College for many years it is striking to me that there is little to no media presence from the University regarding this matter. Where is the public relations and marketing department? Who is taking responsiblity for the now tarnished image of this once pristine institution? Just because people aren't asking the questions directly doesn't mean that people aren't forming opinions on how this was handled. I can only imagine the impact this will have on recruitment, retention and overall community public opinion.

    It really seems to me like the tail is wagging the dog on this one. The BOT, the Bishop, or whomever is calling the shots and the University community as a whole is left to react (or not) to whatever direction they have chosen to go. It is a shame that schools like Bethany and West Liberty (who certainly have had their share of scandal over the years as well) appear to be more on the ball than Wheeling Jesuit. The Communication person declines an interview? Mr. MacAteer was unable for comment? Say *something* Wheeling Jesuit...don't let nearly 60 years of image go down the tubes because of an inability to respond to a crisis.

    I can honestly say that while I have always held Wheeling Jesuit in high regard, I'd think twice before having my son or daughter send an application.

  2. One point is overlooked here. The faculty should get a lot of credit in this chaotic administrative ordeal. I would be glad to send my children to the Jesuit. Our children are not educated by the Board or the President but by the faculty. They have been able to consistently deliver high quality education (US News ranking still in top 20!!!), despite all these problems, Presidential changes and low salaries.