Steve Willson Suggests “Real” Reason for Old MCC Board’s Extending Vicky Smith’s Contract

Found in an email from Steve Willson:

The real reason the lame duck MCC board will extend Smith’s contract at their last meeting can be explained quickly and easily using a simple 4×4 grid.

MCC Pres Contract Extension Real Reason Steve Willson 4-18-13

In probability theory, this is known as a “payoff table.” No, really.

In short, this is a payoff, a naked grab for taxpayer money.

The lame duck board wants to see Smith get a big going away present, like Packard got, if the new board decides her style of leadership (recommending consultants with conflicts of interest; overseeing falsified responses to FOIA requests) is not compatible with their goals.

I just wish the [Cynthia] Kisser, [Mary] Miller and [Linda]Liddell would just come clean about their real reason and say flat out,

“We want to stick the taxpayers with a big bill if the new board jettisons Smith as we expect.”

Cover stories that Smith met the old board’s goals so the new board should be stuck with her for two more years don’t hold water.


Steve Willson Suggests “Real” Reason for Old MCC Board’s Extending Vicky Smith’s Contract — 8 Comments

  1. Get an injunction, don’t let outgoing board defraud taxpayers; if they do, jail them.

  2. Really, what a bunch of horse crap.

    “The lame duck board wants to see Smith get a big going away present, like Packard got.”

    This statement proves this site is nothing more than an opinion based blog.

    What board member would give Smith a major contract as a “going away present like Packard got.”

    Everyone knows that Packard did something wrong internally.

    Smith hasn’t done anything wrong internally.

    People might not like the idea of expanding the college, but that is no reason to fire the President.

    In the end the President can not expand the College.

    For everything this blog blames on the President, they continually fail to forget the Board as the FINAL SAY ON ALL DECISIONS.


  3. It is pretty obvious from the title of this post that it is Steve Willson’s opinion.

  4. Mr. Steffans, you are half right and 100% wrong.

    You are right, the President cannot do this alone. It takes the connivance of the board.

    But if recommending consultants with obvious conflicts of interest to provide opinions based on falsified evidence isn’t “something wrong internally”, I don’t know what is.

    If overseeing a department that responds falsely to FOIA requests isn’t doing “something wrong internally”, I don’t know what is.

    If purposely keeping your own institutional research department away from all studies about expanding the college isn’t doing “something wrong internally” then I don’t know what is.

    If hiring a big Chicago law firm to fight FOIA requests, to try to find reasons to keep things secret instead of saying, “We will release any information requested UNLESS there is a legal reason not to” isn’t doing “something wrong internally” then I don’t know what is.

    As for the 100% wrong part, please dispute my logic: IF the lame duck board does nothing, no hurt no foul.

    The new board can choose to keep Vicky or not.

    But IF the lame duck board EXTENDS Vicky’s contract, it could cost taxpayers an additional $300,000.

    Tell me EXACTLY where I’m wrong, please.

    Show me the flaw in my reasoning.

    Explain how there are other options and outcomes.

  5. Half right and 100% wrong equals 150%.

    Normally percentages are out of 100.

    However, my goal is not to stir up a hornet’s nest with the above comment.

    If the college used their own IR department, everyone would discredit the results.

    Everyone discredited the results of the external study done by NIU’s research group relating to jobs/occupations that was mentioned in the NWHerald a month ago.

    I think I recall the NWHerald said the study was worthy of lining a bird cage, a comment in my opinion not needed in the article.

    I would like to also say that comment completely showed bias and an example of bad journalism on behalf of NWHerald.

    In the end it was the Board that selected the study was done by an organization that may have a conflict of interest.

    The Board voted and the Board approved this, not the President Vicky Smith.

    She has no authority, only the Board has authority to authorize.

    I would like to thank you for mentioning the FOIA requests.

    I honestly have to read more about these requests.

    So I searched the IL Attorney General and Federal Government sites on information relating to such subjects.

    However it appears that internal documents and trademarked documents are unable to be FOIA.

    So until the study results are brought forward to a Board meeting, then it appears it can not be FOIA.

    However, like I mentioned I do not have a full understanding of what is not allowed or allowed to be FOIA.

    I did find out that well locations are not FOIA able?

    I found that interesting as a side note.

    If you would like to rebut me on this then show me the exact document from the Attorney General or Federal site that shows what can and can not be obtained and where specifically MCC is violating the FOIA.

    I am not calling you out, but please educate me on this subject.

    There is nothing wrong with hiring a Chicago law firm.

    Again if they (MCC) is violating federal law, then it should be easy to document the exact violation as it is written WITHIN the law.

    In the end Vicky’s work is done on behalf of the Board.

    Again the Board approved everything; she is doing what her board wants and has directed her to do.

    So why not extend the contract?

    If she has done what the Board wanted, I am assuming she is then performing her duties fully.

    Again she can not sneeze without board approval.

    I can understand how the current Board has a better understanding of Vicky’s job performance than the newly elected members.

    However, I have mixed feelings when a meeting is call after 4PM on a Friday to discuss her contact at a special meeting.

    This should have been on the normal agenda and not a special last minute agenda.

    I believe Vicky’s contract should be extend.

    I don’t see any wrong in her actions, but I don’t like last second meetings.

    It stinks like Obamacare with lame ducks.

    The only way this could cost the tax payers $300,000 is if she is negligent of her duties as President and requires immediate termination.

    In the end, I believe there are a lot of “Chicken Little’s” in McHenry County.

    The taxes are raising, the taxes are raising.

    I understand there are people who are upset with a possible expansion.

    However, the college does provide education at a fraction of the cost of NIU/UIUC/UIC.

    Health care and manufacturing are the two biggest employers in McHenry County.

    If you want to lower the unemployment rate, get people off from food stamps, invest in education.

    Invest in education where the jobs are available.

    However, the Board has not brought anything forward in their meetings.

    So I believe this “Chicken Little” atmosphere is a little overblown.

    I am looking forward to hearing how the college justifies expansion, what they are going to do, how the community is going to benefit, and then how they are going to pay.

    I look forward to seeing their side (MCC) and what is may cost me as a taxpayer.

    In the end Vicky works for the Board and the Board does not work for Vicky.

  6. Mr. Steffans, I personally submitted an FOIA request for average class size and received a response saying that information is not available.

    How do you decide you need to expand if you don’t know average class size?

    But, as it turns out, it’s in their annual report.

    I submitted an FOIA request for classroom utilization and was told the data is not available.

    As before, how do you decide you need to expand if you don’t know the extent to which you are using your current resources?

    But, again, the answer was false.

    I was told personally by a board member that the data I requested is regularly in their board packets.

    And when a reporter asked Vicky Smith the same question, the answer was . . . 45%!

    Beyond that, I must disagree with your entire contention that Vicky Smith is blameless in all of this.

    She is not an innocent bystander, she is fully complicit.

    She helped to hire a firm that projected 3% annual growth in enrollment for the next 40 years.

    It was based on false and limited data.

    Quite literally, they made an eighth grade math mistake in saying McHenry County population grew 74% over 20 years, that’s 3.7% per year.

    And when I say eighth grade, I checked the eighth grade math textbook at D-47.

    They ignored the fact that every single elementary district in the County is experiencing declining enrollment, that there are 20% fewer 3rd graders in McHenry County than high school seniors . . .

    Well, I could go on and on, but I already did, in open letters to the board and in letters to the Northwest Herald.

    My research can be found on this web site.

    Finally, she supported hiring a firm with an obvious conflict of interest — Power Wellness — to put together a phony “feasibility study” to justify building a 120,000 square foot expansion to the campus that would nearly have doubled classroom space and would have included a 30,000 square foot health club, a la Health Bridge in Crystal Lake.

    I have written about this extensively in open letters to the board that were posted on this site.

    So, again, to argue that all this is the fault of the Board exclusively and that Vicky Smith was completely uninvolved in all this is just wrong.

    Either she was part of it, in which case she is guilty, or she was not involved, in which case she was derelict.

    Either way, I think she should go.

  7. Mr Wilson,

    I believe if the college is going to expand their offerings, they need to justify the current room usage issue.

    45% usage across the college may not appear to justify expansion, but you can teach nursing classes in an automotive class and vice-versa.

    I would like to see the college show the community exactly what is needed, why, and why the current space can not grow with the college.

    If the information is found within Board Packet then the Board member who told you this, should be able to point out exactly what Board meeting and page this information is available.

    Just because a Board member told you, doesn’t always mean they are accurate.

    In the end Vicky works for the board.

    The board should be able to answer all of these questions you present.

    I don’t mind seeing how Vicky works with 3 new board members.

    If these 3 new members change the direction of the board, then Vicky’s direction should change with them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *