SUNY Deputy General Consigliere Marti Anne Ellermann, Freedom of Information, Open Meetings, and journalist ethics

SUNY Deputy General Consigliere Marti Anne Ellermann on (among other things) the written threat by the President of the SUNY-wide judicial administrators' group Clarence L. McNeill ( http://www.albany.edu/staff.php ) not to contact SUNY Albany's Records Access Officers and others, essentially her advice on the banning of FOIL requests for specific people (one, at least) who have the nasty habit of making FOIL requests relevant to serious crimes committed by SUNY: “I suggest no response.”

Did Ms. Ellermann not make an Oath of Office "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of New York, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of ______________________, according to the best of my ability", or does she simply not take such an oath seriously?

"New York State Sunshine Laws, Open Meetings and Freedom of Information Law" PowerPoint by D. Andrew Edwards and Marti Anne Ellermann:

"Open Meetings Law does not apply to advisory bodies"; "Open Meetings Law does not apply to non-SUNY entities i.e. ASCs, Foundations"; denying students entrance to community college senate meeting is "exercising a 'quintessentially governmental function'" http://www.slideserve.com/elma/update-on-new-york-state-sunshine-laws-open-meetings-law-and-freedom-of-information-law-foil

Why would the SUNY Deputy General Counsel propagate such legal counsel? It would seem a conflict of interest for SUNY to provide it for SUNY foundations, aside from which: wouldn't every SUNY foundation have its own consigliere?

SUNY system administration indicated they do not keep records of who the FOIL officers are for University Foundations. Surprisingly, perhaps, they did not deny that the foundations are subject to FOIL or that they have Records Access Officers, which would have been the obvious response to make if they're not: https://www.muckrock.com/foi/new-york-16/suny-university-foundations-records-access-officers-4908/

.

The Committee on Open Government has repeatedly held for over twenty years that SUNY foundations and similar organizations are subject to FOIL:

July 15, 1993. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f7802.htm

"In a decision that involved what may be characterized as an adjunct of a public institution of higher education, it was held that a community college foundation, a not-for-profit corporation, and its records are subject to the Freedom of Information Law. As stated by the court:

"'At issue is whether the Kingsborough Community College Foundation, Inc (hereinafter 'Foundation') comes within the definition of an 'agency' as defined in Public Officers Law §86(3) and whether the Foundation's fund collection and expenditure records are 'records' within the meaning and contemplation of Public Officers Law §86(4).

"'The Foundation is a not-for-profit corporation that was formed to 'promote interest in and support of the college in the local community and among students, faculty and alumni of the college' (Respondent's Verified Answer at paragraph 17). These purposes are further amplified in the statement of 'principal objectives' in the Foundation's Certificate of Incorporation:

"'1 To promote and encourage among members of the local and college community and alumni or interest in and support of Kingsborough Community College and the various educational, cultural and social activities conducted by it and serve as a medium for encouraging fuller understanding of the aims and functions of the college'.

"Furthermore, the Board of Trustees of the City University, by resolution, authorized the formation of the Foundation. The activities of the Foundation, enumerated in the Verified Petition at paragraph 11, amply demonstrate that the Foundation is providing services that are exclusively in the college's interest and essentially in the name of the College. Indeed, the Foundation would not exist but for its relationship with the College" (Eisenberg v. Goldstein, Supreme Court, Kings County, February 26, 1988).”

April 19, 1996. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/otext/o2599.htm

May 17, 1995. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f8835.htm

September 3, 1996. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f9667.htm

October 31, 1997. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f10401.htm

“I have received your letter in which you questioned the status of what you characterized as ‘shadow agencies', Health Research Inc. (HRI) and the SUNY Research Foundation (the Foundation), under the Freedom of Information Law. You suggested that both are not-for-profit corporations and that requests for records made to those entities were not answered.

“From my perspective, based on the terms of the Freedom of the Information Law and judicial decisions, the records of those entities fall within the coverage of that statute."

July 28, 2000. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f12228.htm

("Shadow agencies" describes SUNY foundations pretty accurately!)

May 21, 2001. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f12685.htm

January 17, 2002. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/13140.htm

“I believe that the records of SUNY college foundations fall within the requirements of the Freedom of Information Law, irrespective of whether a foundation has an independent responsibility to comply with that statute."

February 6, 2006. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/otext/o4130.htm

October 30, 2007. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f16851.htm

October 28, 2008. http://docs.dos.ny.gov/coog/ftext/f17411.html

Etc.! One wishes at some point the NYS Department of State's Office of General Counsel would have intervened given how many decades SUNY has been ignoring the advisory opinions of the NYS Department of State's Committee on Open Government. Or the NYS Attorney General, or the NYS Inspector General, or the US Attorney General, or the US Inspector General, etc.

A bill making the law more explicit that SUNY foundations are subject to FOIL has been obstructed, presumably because of the extent of corruption it would expose if FOIL requests were properly complied with by SUNY foundations:

Odato, James M. “FOIL too close for SUNY comfort; Some opposed to opening SUNY foundation files that may reveal its power.” Albany Times Union. March 30, 2014. http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/FOIL-too-close-for-SUNY-comfort-5362100.php

Note that article fails to acknowledge that the publisher of the Albany Times Union George Randolph Hearst III is the President of the Board of Directors of the University at Albany Foundation, a rather significant and relevant potential conflict of interest, and thus a significant lapse in journalistic ethics to omit. Did it not occur to Mr. Odato to disclose that, or did he know Mr. Hearst wouldn't want it disclosed, or did Mr. Hearst prohibit it from being disclosed?

If Mr. Hearst were committed to journalistic ethics (which he’s not) or freedom of information (which he’s not) he could, as President of the Board of Directors of the University at Albany Foundation, step forward and admit that SUNY university foundations are subject to FOIL, could he not? He won’t - presumably because it would incriminate him (though his failure to do so arguably incriminates him nearly as well).

At least the SUNY Research Foundation now explicitly acknowledges it is subject to FOIL:

"The Research Foundation complies with New York’s Freedom of Information Law (FOIL)."

https://portal.rfsuny.org/portal/page/portal/The%20Research%20Foundation%20of%20SUNY/home/Contact%20RF/how_to_get_info_about_rf/foil

Ironically, the SUNY Research Foundation appears to have acknowledged it is subject to FOIL due to the litigation by the Times Union, the newspaper published by the President of the Board of Directors of the University at Albany Foundation George Randolph Hearst III (the head of one of that class of foundations which claims not to be subject to FOIL, a fact which the same Times Union reporter again failed to disclose):

"The Research Foundation of the State University of New York has reversed its long-standing position and agreed it is subject to the state's Freedom of Information Law.

“Officials at the giant research arm of the public university system also agreed to use $30,000 from its $1 billion annual budget to pay legal expenses of the Times Union, which filed the lawsuit that forced the turnaround.”

Odato, James M. “SUNY ends FOIL test; Research Foundation agrees to public access; Times Union gets costs.” Albany Times Union. January 5, 2012. http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/SUNY-ends-FOIL-test-2444633.php

The Times Union also got to recoup its expenses for its two-faced litigation (two-faced in that I don't see George Randolph Hearst III's Albany Times Union instituting a similar lawsuit against George Randolph Hearst III's University at Albany Foundation anytime soon).

As SUNY Albany "professor" Michael Barberich lectured to his students: "Ha! We'll just skip over ethics."

UAlbany's mistreatment of human subjects since 1977 (if not earlier)?

The University at Albany Handbook at http://www.albany.edu/senate/handbook_section1.htm has a number of bad links, of which the following are just a selection:

• Rules of the New York State Ethics Commission http://www.dos.state.ny.us/ethc/eisg.html (redirects to http://www.jcope.ny.gov )

• Research Foundation Conflict of Interest statement http://www.rfsuny.org/tto/conflict.pdf

• Office for Sponsored Programs http://www.albany.edu/research/osp/ (had a slow redirect to http://www.albany.edu/research/OSPindex.htm but now goes to http://www.albany.edu/osp/index.php )

• University’s Policy and Procedures on Misconduct in Research and Scholarship http://www.albany.edu/senate/Misconduct_draft_version_Sept_2004.htm (works - but still only a draft after almost ten years?)

• Research Safety and Compliance http://www.albany.edu/researchcompliance/contact.htm

• Research Involving Human Subjects http://www.albany.edu/researchcompliance/IRB/IRB.htm

• Research Involving Animal Subjects http://www.albany.edu/researchcompliance/IACUC/IACUC.htm

• Research Involving Radioactive Materials http://www.albany.edu/researchcompliance/IBC/IBC.htm

• Research Involving Recombinant DNA http://www.albany.edu/researchcompliance/contact.htm

I reported it to SUNY system administration on November 2, 2012. SUNY system administration, predictably, didn't care. Worse - they like things being the way they are: wrong.

Nedra Abbruzzese-Werling, [Non-]Compliance Administrator and "Special" Assistant to the Senior Vice Chancellor and General Consigliere, State University of New York: "You have no idea Marti!!! Here is his response to my short, sweet 'thank you for your e-mail … I have referred it to the campus.'" Her e-mail was not short and sweet but curt, dismissive, and dishonest: as supposed Compliance Administrator she was complaining I was bringing matters of non-compliance to her attention - essentially doing part of her job for her, without pay. Why would anyone in their right mind complain about that?

Marti Anne Ellermann, Deputy General Consigliere, Office of General Consigliere, State University of New York: "I suggest no response."

From the other side of the mouth: "Ensuring the protection and welfare of living things is critical to the integrity of good science and research."

"SUNY and [Research Foundation] RF Best Practices for Human Subjects and Animal Subjects." August 2013. http://portal.rfsuny.org/portal/page/portal/The%20Research%20Foundation%20of%20SUNY/home/info_researchers_administrators/human_animal_subjects/files/human_animal_subjects_memo.pdf

Ensuring the protection and welfare of living things IS critical to the integrity of good science and research. Wouldn't it be nice, therefore, for SUNY Albany to acknowledge that and finally see that The University at Albany Handbook stops returning "404 Page Not Found" for "Research Involving Human Subjects," "Research Involving Animal Subjects," and so on? Not in Ellermann or Abbruzzese-Werling's minds.

Either Barney Fife or Cletus Hogg would make a better Deputy General Counsel than Ellermann. Could she really have graduated from the Columbia University School of Law?

That human subject research policies would be given so little proper attention at SUNY Albany is disturbing (though again, unsurprising).

"The State Health Department begins hearings today on whether Albany State University should be fined for violating state law on experiments using human subjects. [...] State Health Commissioner, Robert Whale, charged that not all human subjects had been properly warned about possible side effects of the tests."

"Albany Psychogical Experiment Hearings Begin." Statesman [Stony Brook, NY] October 7, 1977: 3. http://dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/bitstream/handle/1951/28257/Statesman,%20V.21,%20n.%207.pdf

“The first case to arise under New York's 1974 law governing research with human subjects has been settled, with university researchers admitting 35 violations involving 'at least 975 subjects.

"Experiments were not properly authorized or supervised, and some subjects were endangered by faulty equipment such as an electric shock machine, officials of Albany State University admitted yesterday. […]

“The case at Albany came to light because of complaints by a psychology graduate student."

"SUNY Albany Admits Violations, Health Department Settles Case." Statesman [Stony Brook, NY]. October 28, 1977: 2.

http://dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/bitstream/handle/1951/28266/Statesman;jsessionid=3D114ED433A8C4D6DEB031F0DDB2A6F2?sequence=1

"Research Involving Human Subjects." October 17 1977. http://old.suny.edu/provost/MTP/mtp77-18.pdf

"Smith, R. Jeffery. 'SUNY at Albany Admits Research Violations,' Science 198 (18 November 1977), pp. 708.

"This is a brief statement of Albany's owning up to violations of the rights of human subjects. Specifically, Science reports that this University was guilty of: 1) not obtaining the voluntary, informed, and written consent of the research participants; 2) failing to make a fair explanation to each participant of the risks involved; 3) failing to have the experiments reviewed by an approved institutional review board; and, 4) failing to supervise the experiments properly.

"It is reported here that Albany could have been fined $975,000. Whalen suspended the $100,000 fine which was imposed.

"What is interesting is that the reporter deals only with the superficial facts of the case. For example, there is not a suggestion of what actually went on at the school, what the research involved, how that work was done, who had been hurt. There is not a word about Brock Kilbourne and yet he is one of the few who was really injured in all of this. The reporter seems to have decided the 'important' facts of this case. This is illustrative of how much of any deviance story gets told."

http://www.albany.edu/~scifraud/data/sci_fraud_0479.html

"Assurances of Compliance with Human Subjects Research Regulations." August 20, 1981. http://old.suny.edu/provost/MTP/mtp81-10.pdf

"The case of Brock Kilbourne and the University at Albany is still, to me, outrageous. Brock as a graduate student was a TA to a senior professor in his department. That senior professor had been engaged in research involving student subjects and, according to Brock, had endangered the lives of those students. Young Brock "blew the whistle" on his professor. The department involved stood behind the professor and the University at Albany tried to stonewall the investigation by the NY State Health Department, the agency charged with investigating the charges. The heroic behavior of the whistle-blower in this case was completely ignored: what has never been forgotten was that he had been a whistle-blower.

"Eventually, the University was found to be guilty of abuse of students and severely fined. Brock, as whistle-blower, got nothing: nothing from his department, nothing from the University. He was forced out of the graduate program. The idealist who did what he thought was right slipped between the cracks and was ignored by the University and the department. Far from helping him, the University and the department tried to weasel their ways out of their difficulties and, as they saw it, Brock Kilbourne was one of their difficulties: he was no hero to the department and no hero to the NY State Department of Health. Brock, for blowing the whistle, was at best forgotten, at worst, as he learned later, to continue to pay for his whistle-blowing.

"I was able, through friends, to get Brock another graduate appointment and he did finish his Ph.D. He went on to marry Maria. They left for the other school [University of Nevada Reno http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Division/Research/Library/LegHistory/Minutes/1979/Senate/HumResFac/4-24-79.pdf] and were told, several months after their acceptance into that program: 'If we had known what you did back at Albany, we never would have accepted you here.' Then, as now, Brock's whistle-blowing continues to cost him dearly: he has been unable to find work in his chosen field."

Higgins, A. C. "Science's Dark Side." Discussion of Fraud in Science listserv. April 11, 1992.

SUNY Albany isn't one to learn from its mistakes. (And, as I've found, it is willing - even eager - to turn to terrorism to deal with whistleblowers, even backing threats with their armed, corrupt so-called police department.)

"Last week, university spokeswoman Mary Fiess released this statement on the matter: 'The university imposed the suspension because of serious concerns that the experiment did not meet the standards governing such projects on campus. While we're working to gather all the facts in this case, we cannot comment further.'

A memo sent to all psychology professors and graduate students last week instructed them to refer calls 'looking for information on any psychological research conducted in our department' to the university's public relations office.

"According to three sources -- two faculty members and a graduate student -- the school's Institutional Review Board, which monitors human research, closed the project when a student complained late last spring. The student, sources said, was not allowed to leave a lecture that was part of Kelley's experiment. Refusal to allow a subject to leave an experiment violates National Science Foundation guidelines.

"Despite the inquiry, Kelley, a fully tenured professor who earned $67,000 last year, is slated to teach two graduate courses in the fall."

Brownstein, Andrew. "UAlbany suspends implants research." Albany Times Union. August 25, 1999: B1.albarchive.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=5943057

Brownstein, Andrew. "Implant researcher goes on paid leave." Albany Times Union. November 12, 1999: B1. http://albarchive.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=5956759

Why is it that students have to bring such crimes to the public's attention? Why aren't there members of the faculty, staff, administration who will do so?

"As vice president for student success, James Anderson [...] has stepped down from that job in a shake-up he won't discuss. It's more high level turnover at a 17,000-student state school that has seen plenty of it.

"That includes the recent departure of Officer in Charge Susan Herbst , who was running the school in the wake of President Kermit Hall's death.

"Philip announced the student affairs leadership change in this Nov. 1 e-mail to faculty and staff obtained by Campus Notebook:

"'After due deliberation and subsequent discussions with VP Anderson, it was mutually agreed that he would step down from his administrative post to return to the faculty where he is tenured in the Department of Psychology.'

"Philip didn't say what prompted the move - or whether others might be coming. Christine Bouchard, a UAlbany veteran who was associate vice president, is now the interim vice president for student success. Also, the Office of Diversity and Affirmative Action will now report directly to the president, among other structural changes.

"The $230,000 salary Anderson was earning as of March made him one of UAlbany's top-paid employees. Philip credited the administrator - a protege of the late Hall's - with working on a diversity plan and a sexual assault task force.

"Asked by Campus Notebook about his move, Anderson would say only this: 'It was a mutual agreement.'

Parry, Marc. "Another administrative change at UAlbany." Albany Times Union. November 8, 2007: D3. http://albarchive.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=6427675

Under both Anderson and Bouchard, UAlbany submitted false Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act reports. Under both Anderson and Bouchard, UAlbany did not properly maintain its sexual offender registry. Etc.

When I reported the deranged Michael Barberich's inappropriate “joke” about how “we [the class] could hook up [one of his minority teaching assistants he named] to electrodes and shock her until she screams”, Communication Department chair Jeanette "Mengele" Altarriba didn't reply. When I wrote again to note my disapproval of her dismissive attitude, she claimed she'd addressed matters through internal mechanisms to do so. Her claim seems to have been a lie. I asked how she "addressed" things when they kept getting worse and what "internal mechanisms" she used, but she refused to reply. Perhaps on the basis of her sociopathy she subsequently became the Psychology Department chair and then Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education.

UAlbany: a college that's doing everything it can to discourage victims from reporting

"a college that says, 'Nope, no rape here!' is likely a college that's doing everything it can to discourage victims from reporting, as numerous investigations have found – and a campus with a low reporting rate is likely a campus where rapists are free to keep finding more victims, as statistics show that most undetected rapists continue to offend. On the other hand, a university with a relatively high number of reported rapes is likely to be a place where victims expect to be taken seriously, and where rapists come to know that they may face real consequences."

Friedman, Jacklyn. "Choosing a college? Look into campus rape rankings before you start packingEvery university has a rape problem. But when administrators discourage victims from reporting, potential students need to ask tougher questions." The Guardian. April 25, 2014. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/25/college-campus-rape-statistics-reporting

UAlbany bullshit (indicating they're a "college that's doing everything it can to discourage victims from reporting"):

RESPONSIVENESS TO COMMUNITY CONCERNS ‐

100% of all crimes are followed up;

99% of calls for service were responded to within four minutes or less.

3. POLICE ACTIVITY ‐

University at Albany Police Department cleared 50.3% of its crime cases; the national average is 20%.

http://police.albany.edu/UPDAnnualReport2012.pdf

UAlbany Police don't respond to some calls for service at all. "Followed up" is vague bullshit: hanging up on a student or deleting an e-mail reporting a crime could constitute "following up."

"It's not in anyone's interest to hide numbers, to hide incidents." - "Chief" J. "Frank" Wiley

        "one audience member asked if victims of sexual assaults were being discouraged from pressing charges.

        "'My very first response to that is, why would you think they would be discouraged?' Wiley said.

        "Wiley said his officers review all the options for victims, which include whether to press charges or go through the university's internal disciplinary process.

        "Wiley said university police honor victims' choices.

        "'It's not in anyone's interest to hide numbers, to hide incidents. And the reason for that is simply this: The damage to the credibility of the police department and the institution is far greater if that were to occur. We do not have a senior administration that has ever considered doing anything like that. I have never received any pressure to keep numbers down.' [...]

        Officer Jennifer Fila [...] who has been on the UAlbany force since 1998, said victims are not discouraged from pursuing criminal charges.

        "'We explain the process of each, and we leave it completely up to the woman [sic],' she said.

        "The department always honors victims' request, said UAlbany Police Capt. Aran Mull

Crowley, Cathleen F. "Handling of rape case defended; UAlbany police chief says officers followed protocol in dealing with alleged assault." Albany Times Union. October 26, 2006: A1. http://alb.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=6365244

Victims are in fact discouraged by SUNY Albany - through threats issued by SUNY Albany. SUNY Albany police officers do not review all the options for victims. SUNY Albany police do not honor victims' choices. SUNY Albany police no hide numbers and incidents. Wiley, Fila, and Mull apparently aren't very good at telling the truth.

"NY Budget Grand Slam"*

From: "Governor Andrew M. Cuomo"

Subject: Historic Passage of State’s Fourth Consecutive On-Time Budget

Date: April 1, 2014 at 9:05:34 PM EDT

Today, New York State passed its fourth consecutive on-time balanced budget, for the first time in more than 40 years since Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, Assembly Speaker Perry Duryea, and Majority Leader Earl Brydges – proof that Albany’s legendary dysfunction and gridlock are a relic of the past. Truly a NY Budget Grand Slam, this budget builds on the State’s progress over the past three years in order to grow the economy and create new opportunities for New Yorkers and their families.

The 2014-15 State Budget maintains the fiscal discipline that has characterized the last three years of progress by holding the growth in spending below two percent, while also making broad tax cuts that will help homeowners and businesses thrive. It also contains targeted investments that will transform our schools, ensure safer, cleaner, and fairer communities, and restore the public’s trust in government."

Do the people writing that stuff actually believe it? Or do they feel that releasing it on April Fool's Day gives them license to write such BS?

Passing an on-time (allegedly) balanced budget doesn't prove "dysfunction and gridlock are a relic of the past", won't "restore the public’s trust in government", etc. A LOT more has to be done before such claims could realistically be made.

As for it being a "grand slam," there's the problem of the Legislators and Governor achieving it through performance enhancing....

"[Michael W. Barberich] must have issues of some kind to be acting the way he does, right?"

"The Faculty Senate of the University of Wisconsin at Whitewater has responded to a controversy over a surreptitiously obtained classroom video of a guest lecturer lambasting Republicans by moving to bar students from recording and disseminating such footage. [...]

"Kyle R. Brooks, the freshman who recorded the video that triggered the controversy, expressed frustration that the institution had responded to his producing the video rather than what it depicts: a guest lecturer denouncing many Republicans as racist, classist, sexist, homophobic, and dishonest.

"'People should have been upset that he came into the classroom and said that,' Mr. Brooks said, 'but instead they were upset that I recorded it and made it public.'"

Schmidt, Peter. "Campus Stung by Controversial Video Moves to Ban Recordings in Class." Chronicle of Higher Education. March 28, 2014. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Campus-Stung-by-Controversial/145595/

I get that classroom recordings can sometimes be a problem or be seen as a problem. I sympathize with Kyle R. Brooks to some extent: UAlbany's Vice President for Student Success Christine Bouchard evidently vociferously defended the free speech rights of even such as the Westboro Baptist Church and the free speech rights of Jim Deferio (see http://minervawept.blogspot.com/2013/08/speechless.html) while being OK with SUNY Albany threatening me and my mother for my having reported academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation to the point of even threatening me not to communicate with anyone at the university other than chronic liar, threat-writer, and professional incompetent Clarence L. McNeill. Quite a double standard, or maybe it's not because Bouchard shows she's rather consistent about the kind of speech she'll staunchly defend (homophobic hate speech) and the kind she despises (the reporting of academic dishonesty, sexual harassment, and retaliation at SUNY Albany). If she's not a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, she wouldn't have trouble finding a home there.

However, banning classroom recordings can be problematic.

When I'd asked then-Communication Department Chair Jeanette Altarriba about whether Michael W. Barberich's lectures were being recorded (so that I could provide her documentary evidence of his academic dishonesty and sexual harassment rather than just my testimony), she wouldn't even give me a straight answer.

CKP to Jeanette Altarriba, November 9, 2011 11:11 AM:

"Does [Michael W. Barberich], or do any of his TAs, record the class? Or had he given permission to any students to record the class? If so, he should have mentioned that when you said there was no recording of the class, it seems to me. It would have helped if there were a recording."

Jeanette Altarriba to CKP, November 9, 2011 3:55:32 PM:

"To my knowledge, the class is not recorded, but the recording of a course is not typical. It would involve some express permissions by students and instructors and express statements as to what can/cannot be done with those recordings. Signed statements are best, in this regard, ahead of time."

CKP to Jeanette Altarriba, November 21, 2011 10:24 AM

"If he gave permission to a student or students to record the class, or if he or any of his TAs do so, you could hear his jokes for yourself if you have any doubt about what I'm telling you. It seems to me you must doubt it, or otherwise it seems to me you would have acted more decisively to put a stop to what he's doing."

Jeanette Altarriba to CKP, November 21, 2011 10:30:41 AM:

"As Chair of the Department of Communication, I do not take lightly any comments or reports from in-class behaviors that offend students or otherwise make them uncomfortable. As you brought issues to my attention, they have been addressed through internal mechanisms to do so."

CKP to the so-called Office of Diversity and Inclusion misled by Title IX "Coordinator" Tamra Minor, December 3, 2011 1:14 AM, excerpts:

"Can professors make jokes about sexual penetration, pornography and violence against women? Can department chairs defend professors who do that? Do students have to remain in such a class when they don't want to, but need the class to graduate and are given no other option, even when they repeatedly ask for help? [...]

"On October 27th I asked a professor I knew in the Women's Studies department [Janelle Hobson] if I should report the joke to your office as well. She wrote back on the 28th in part 'Give him a chance to apologize or acknowledge offense before taking it to the ODI. You don't really want to take it to that level unless you think his behavior will cause discrimination to you or someone else.' [He didn't ever apologize or acknowledge offense: far from it - he kept engaging in such behavior and retaliated against me for reporting it] [...]

"What happened after the chair [Jeanette Altarriba] spoke to the professor [Michael W. Barberich] about the sexual penetration joke he'd made? Did it stop?

"It didn't stop. [...]

"I mentioned the joke he'd made about how we could shock one of his TAs until she screamed. She [Jeanette Altarriba] didn't reply. That was really disheartening. The encouragement she'd originally given me, the seriousness with which she had seemed to be treating the matter, now seemed to be so much smoke blown in my face, a way of getting me out of her office and dropping the issue. The issues I'd raised 'have been addressed through internal mechanisms,' she wrote me, a bit of empty bureaucratic writing if there ever was. She'd defended him as doing his best,' thus denying that I'd raised any issues, putting me down as expecting 'perfection.' And worst of all, nothing had changed, things had only gotten worse: how things been 'addressed' if nothing had changed?

"I e-mailed the Women's Studies professor [Janelle Hobson] I'd e-mailed earlier, telling her about the other jokes he'd made, including the one about how we could shock one of his TAs until she screams. Had it reached the point where I could contact the ODI, I asked?

"I didn't receive a response [from Janelle Hobson]. That was disheartening too, and a couple other people I have respect for that I'd e-mailed for advice, people who had been responding to me up until then, also greeted my e-mail about that with total silence [...]

"I've continued to force myself to go to the class, only because I absolutely have to [the chair wouldn't let me drop it], because the department chair tells me that it's almost over, because nobody will stop these things from happening and I don't seem to have any real options, haven't been given any, haven't gotten the help I so desperately need. I would drop the class in a second if it weren't required, even though I can't really afford to lose the tuition money, even though I would hate to have to stay at UA another semester to make up those credits somewhere else if I were permitted. Despite the majority of my professors at UA being good or even great (despite the chair mocking the idea of quality professors), the chair feels this situation is acceptable for a student to endure, for me to endure. Would you agree?

"In a way the chair's lack of expressed concern, the lack of real change, has bothered me as much or maybe in some ways more than the professor's behavior. When people in a position to do something turn their back, or do nothing: that really hurts. It is a stab right to a person's heart and soul. What good is power if it can't be used for good?

"Other professors at UA, at other colleges, retired professors I know, friends, family: some of them have repeatedly warned me that by pressing these issues I will make a 'target' of myself [for retaliation]. I e-mailed the chair mentioning that, and she said those people were giving me bad advice, and that I'm not a 'target.'

"One professor who I've communicated with for years [William Husson], I'd been informing about what's been going on, and he told me in private that he feels uncomfortable being told about those things by me. He works with [Michael W. Barberich]; he's not friends but is friendly with him, and he doesn't want to feel like he has to pick sides, and wanted me to stop discussing it with him. [...]

"it was disheartening. Nor wanting to hear about it, wanting to maintain the status quo: that is taking sides, in a way. And it's saying in effect, 'he's a good guy, I don't want to hear anything he's doing that's wrong that would make me change my opinion.' Others have advised me in no uncertain terms, 'drop it.' Or 'handle this after graduation, while you're not still in a class with him where he's in a position of power over you,' which of course he currently is. He could give me a bad grade, or fail me, or have me disciplined, or perhaps expelled, hurt me any number of ways, or so it seems to me. [I didn't expect he'd file a false police report about me claiming I was some kind of active shooter, but on December 6, 2011 he did.] Or people say variations on those, things like (to paraphrase): 'that doesn't sound like him,' 'maybe you're losing sight of everything he does right!', 'nobody's ever reported him before,' 'think about what reporting it would do to his career,' 'worry about what he could do to you: he will fight, he will retaliate, and I can't tell you exactly what he will do to you because I don't know.' The man's behavior already scares me as it is; the defense of him by the chair [Jeanette Altarriba] scares me; these warnings dismay me and scare me even more.

"Is it any wonder he (or anyone like him) hasn't been reported before, when so many voices are quick to do their best to discourage the reporting of terrible acts. Maybe other people HAVE tried but were successfully discouraged. I have an e-mail from a couple years back that another adult learner at UA sent me that said this professor's class had reduced her (like me) to tears, and that she only got through it because of the kindness and support of another professor she had that semester [a professor who's since left UA]. Like me, she was grateful for the quality professors at UA; they deserve more recognition! [...]

"I've expressed an interest to the chair in having his class recorded, or having someone come to observe it, so that I am not all alone in what I'm honestly reporting. There's so many reasons why other students might not: they're young, busy, working, fearful, accepting: who knows. [...]

"I'm being beaten down for trying to get help, not just for me, but for the other students, for future students. In a way even for the professor [Michael W. Barberich], who must have issues of some kind to be acting the way he does, right? It's absolutely, completely terrible and I would not wish it on anyone. No student, not a single one, should have this experience at UA, or anywhere else for that matter.

Middle States Commission on Higher Education's odd ideas regarding accreditation

"Accreditation in the United States is a form of quality assurance for higher education [...] Accreditation means that the for-profit is a 'real' institution of higher education [...] I just served on a committee for my institution's re-accreditation by Middle States, and I can tell you, we didn't just mail it in." Kevin Kinser, University at Albany, State University of New York

http://www.higheredjobs.com/HigherEdCareers/interviews.cfm?ID=237

Yeah, right.

"I'll go back to the way accreditation is organized. It is supposed to be a self-assessment and assumes that the institutions involved have a mission that supports quality instruction. This means that if an institution doesn't care about quality, but only wants accreditation, it would be pretty easy to fake it for the accreditation purposes. I think this is one of the biggest problems facing accreditation right now. It wasn't set up to ferret out deception." - Kevin Kinser, University at Albany, State University of New York

That much he did get right.

Making complaints to the Middle States Commission on Higher Education is fairly pointless. If MSCHE learns of crimes committed by universities they have accredited, evidently they will not revoke accreditation or help see to it that the guilty parties are prosecuted. Instead, they will help the university evade prosecution by (supposedly) bringing them back into compliance. What's the point of accrediting universities if accreditations cannot be lost, and are so meaningless?

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education also burdens complainants by requiring them to detail every single one of their complaints at once. In the case of SUNY Albany, that's an awful lot: a book's worth, conservatively. MSCHE will knowingly permit universities they've accredited to continue to violate 1-14 accreditation standards until such time as the complainant they've given a nearly impossible task can detail every single complaint.

I'd provided proof to MSCHE of failures on the part of SUNY Albany to comply with accreditation standards on a number of occasions. In an May 26, 2013 at 4:08:07 PM e-mail to Christina D'Argenio, Executive Assistant to the President Middle States Commission on Higher Education, I'd provided evidence that (among other things) SUNY Albany's Police had mismanaged their sexual offender registry, that I'd reported it to SUNY System Administration, that SUNY's Compliance Administrator and Special Assistant to the Senior Vice Chancellor and General Counsel Nedra Abbruzese-Werling had tipped people at SUNY Albany that they'd been reported and put them in charge of investigating themselves and she'd complained about non-compliance being reported to her, and that SUNY Deputy General Counsel Office of General Counsel State University of New York Marti Anne Ellermann suggested to Ms. Abbruzese-Werling that she stop replying to reports of non-compliance. Christina D'Argenio, Executive Assistant to the President Middle States Commission on Higher Education replied to the e-mail on May 29, 2013 at 4:17:01 PM, thereby indicating she'd received evidence of violations of MSCHE standards. How much concern she expressed about such things as SUNY Albany Police mismanaging the campus sexual offender registry and SUNY system administration doing little or nothing about that: none.

Standard 4 includes this: "The governance structure includes an active governing body with sufficient autonomy to assure institutional integrity" http://www.msche.org/publications/CHX-2011-WEB.pdf. MSCHE was provided evidence that SUNY Albany has such problems with institutional integrity that it permits their police to mismanage a sexual offender registry, and that SUNY system administration has such problems with institutional integrity that they'll tip off criminals that they've been reported, put them in charge of investigating themselves, and then suggest that no responses should be sent to complainants.

"Standard 6: Integrity

"In the conduct of its programs and activities involving the public and the constitutuencies it serves, the institution demonstrates adherence to ethical standards and its own stated policies, providing support for academic and intellectual freedom."

SUNY Albany and SUNY are severely lacking in integrity. They do not adhere to ethical standards and their own stated policies. As for support for academic and intellectual freedom, where does President of the SUNY-wide judicial administrators group Clarence L. McNeill threatening someone never to contact anyone at the university other than himself fit in with that? Or Jeanette Altarriba refusing to grant academic accommodation to a student, instead forcing the student, as a condition of receiving his degree and graduating, to be further subjected to the unprofessional, offensive, and alarming behavior of a professor the student reported for academic dishonesty and sexual harassment? Or Jeanette Altarriba getting promoted to Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education after she'd engaged in academic dishonesty, quid pro quo sexual harassment, and retaliation while a department chair?

Standard 9 includes the observation that "institutions, and particularly those with residential populations, should be attentive to a wide range of student life issues, including mental health and safety." How attentive is SUNY Albany to student safety when, for example, their campus police chose not to properly maintain their sexual offender registry?

If anyone can ever accomplish manage to detail every single complaint they have all at once, it's unclear as to whether MSCHE has ever really helped bring a university back into compliance.

That the United States Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation would recognize the Middle States Commission on Higher Education as an accrediting body is obscene.

From: Christina DArgenio

Subject: Re: SUNY Albany Police oversight

Date: May 31, 2013 at 4:12:02 PM EDT

To: Christopher Philippo [...]

Dear Mr. Philippo,

Please submit one complaint detailing your concerns about the University of Albany’s alleged non-compliance with the Commission’s 14 accreditation standards (http://www.msche.org/publications/CHX-2011-WEB.pdf) along with compelling, written evidence to support your complaint. Your complaint must be submitted in writing, typewritten or printed from a computer, and sent via US Postal Service or an express carrier such as FedEx or UPS. Be certain to sign your complaint. The Commission cannot accept complaints that are unsigned, or that are submitted via e-mail. Address your complaint to:

President, Middle States Commission on Higher Education

3624 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104

The parameters on how to file a complaint are contained in the following link: http://www.msche.org/documents/HowtoFileaComplaintwiththeCommission.PDF. Please review this document carefully.

Please note that the purpose of the complaint procedures is to ensure that an institution is in compliance with the Commission's 14 accreditation standards, and the institution’s own published policies and procedures, not to settle disputes between individuals and institutions.

The Commission’s procedures on Complaints Involving Member and Candidate Institutions were created to address non-compliance with the Commission’s 14 accreditation standards or an institution’s standards, policies, or procedures. They are not intended to be used to involve the Commission in disputes between individuals and affiliated institutions, or to cause the Commission to interpose itself as a reviewing authority in individual matters of admission, grades, granting or transferability of credits, application of academic policies, fees or other financial matters, disciplinary matters, contractual rights and obligations, personnel decisions, or similar matters. Nor does the Commission seek any type of compensation, damages, readmission, or any other redress on an individual’s behalf.

Should the Commission determine that the University of Albany is in non-compliance with one or more of its standards, the Commission would work with institution to bring it back into compliance.

Lastly, you will either need to get the student’s permission to share his name and circumstances with the Commission or redact his or her name from the complaint.

Please note that neither the Commissioners nor the members of the Commission staff can discuss complaints over the telephone. Everything must be in writing. Should you have any questions, please write to info@msche.org.

Sincerely,

Chris

Christina D'Argenio

Executive Assistant to the President

Middle States Commission on Higher Education

3624 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104

Phone: 267-284-5025

Fax: 215-662-5501

cdargenio@msche.org

>>> Christopher Philippo [...] 5/31/2013 7:16 AM >>>

Again related to Standard 9 (and perhaps others, to be detailed in the complaint), again quoting page 34:

"The quality of campus life often contributes significantly to student learning; therefore, institutions, and particularly those with residential populations, should be attentive to a wide range of student life issues, including mental health and safety"

There's a number of reasons to be concerned about the university's attentiveness to student life issues like mental health and safety. If one needs to report SUNY Police for some reason, it is seemingly impossible to learn to whom one may report them, who has jurisdiction over them. The question is ignored or (as with the Albany County Sheriff's Office) answered with an "I don't know and I couldn't find out"-type response.

If it would be OK, may I submit several distinct complaints? It might make it all more manageable on both our ends.

Christopher K. Philippo

---

"Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act" 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f) (17)

"Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to permit an institution, or an officer, employee, or agent of an institution, participating in any program under this subchapter and part C of subchapter I of chapter 34 of title 42 to retaliate, intimidate, threaten, coerce, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the implementation of any provision of this subsection."

---

“Make you the world a bit better or more beautiful because you have lived in it.” - Edward W. Bok

MSCHE cannot provide any examples of how it has ever worked with an institution to bring it back into compliance. Perhaps they have never really worked with an institution to bring it back into compliance? That's about the only reason I can think of as to why they'd be completely unable to provide any examples, even non-identifying ones.

From: MSCHE info

Subject: Re: SUNY Albany Alma Mater authorship and history?

Date: December 19, 2013 at 11:40:21 AM EST

To: Christopher Philippo [...]

Dear Mr. Philippo,

The Commission cannot provide you with examples nor is the Commission aware of any civil rights findings against SUNY.

Sincerely,

Chris

Christina D'Argenio

Executive Assistant to the President

Middle States Commission on Higher Education

3624 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19104

Phone: 267-284-5025

Fax: 215-662-5501

cdargenio@msche.org

>>> Christopher Philippo [...] 12/8/2013 2:07 PM >>>

On Dec 4, 2013, at 2:19 PM, Christina DArgenio wrote:

Should the Commission determine that the University of Albany is in non-compliance with one or more of its standards and/or the institution’s own published policies and procedures the Commission would work with institution to bring it back into compliance.

Might there be examples on your website or that you could give, not identifying the noncompliant institution(s), of some general and specific ways that the Commission has worked with institutions to bring them into compliance?

Is the Commission working with all the SUNY campuses that the US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights found to be out of compliance in order to help bring them into compliance? http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-

Christopher K. Philippo

From: Christopher Philippo [...]

Subject: Re: SUNY Albany Alma Mater authorship and history?

Date: December 19, 2013 at 11:42:27 AM EST

To: MSCHE info

On Dec 19, 2013, at 11:40 AM, MSCHE info wrote:

The Commission cannot provide you with examples nor is the Commission aware of any civil rights findings against SUNY.

That’s OK, though I’d asked about “general and specific ways that the Commission has worked with institutions to bring them into compliance”, not about civil rights findings against SUNY specifically.

Thanks for responding.

Christopher Philippo

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education, as can be seen above, had the audacity to claim to be unaware of any civil rights findings against SUNY when their claim was followed by the link I'd provided them to a US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights' press release stating in part:

OCR concluded that grievance procedures adopted by SUNY and/or individual campuses were inadequate to provide for the prompt and equitable resolution of complaints of sexual harassment, including sexual assault and violence. In addition, OCR reviewed 159 individual cases of alleged sexual harassment from four of SUNY’s individual campuses visited during the review (SUNY Albany, SUNY New Paltz, SUNY Buffalo State College, and SUNY Morrisville). OCR determined that the vast majority of these cases involved reports of sexual assault or violence sufficiently serious to create a sexually hostile environment for the affected students. In some of the instances, OCR found deficiencies, including complainants not receiving prompt or adequate investigations of their complaints; not receiving notice of the outcomes of their complaints; not being provided equal opportunities to attend prehearing conferences and/or present evidence and witnesses at the hearing."

http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-reaches-agreement-state-university-new-york-address-and-

MSCHE is a joke.