text:
For a fleeting moment, the manager of the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., held onto hope that people would still be excited to chow down at an overpriced hotel Easter buffet: “Get ready for a HUGE celebration in a few weeks,” Mickael Damelincourt tweeted in earnest on March 24, making a reference to a $130-a-head brunch buffet the hotel hosts every Easter Sunday. His message was roundly mocked and then deleted. When I called the hotel to ask if buffet tickets were still available, the woman who answered the phone shared the unfortunate news that the event had been canceled.
The decision to even offer the buffet during this time might seem like typical Trumpian behavior: A buffet? With the coronavirus outbreak in full swing? But Trump-connected properties weren’t the only establishments that seemed to think customers wouldn’t have any problem gathering together to dine from an elegant trough of food in the middle of a global pandemic.
On March 10, when some local health officials began to warn that Covid-19 wasn’t an abstract threat but imminent, Caesars Entertainment said it would keep the buffets at its Las Vegas casinos open for the time being, breaking with competitor MGM Resorts, which decided that same week to suspend buffet service. Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman sided with Caesars: “For MGM to buy in and have the fear — that’s not the right direction,” she told a local newspaper. On St. Patrick’s Day, Nevada’s governor eventually stepped in and ordered all restaurants, casinos, and bars on the Strip to shut down for 30 days.
“People will literally pick off the hot bar and salad bar with their hands to sample things.”
Over the weekend of March 13, Whole Foods shoppers across the country were also surprised to find that the hot food and salad bars were still open. “I think they’re just slow adjusting to the new normal,” a shopper at Whole Foods’ Columbus Circle location in Manhattan told me. Most shoppers kept a respectful distance from one another, she said, but there was one notable exception. That day, the shopper wrote, she witnessed someone use serving tongs to put a piece of food from the salad bar directly in their bare hand. The grazer then snuck the food under their face mask to eat it.
The incident is a stark reminder of mankind’s vulnerability to infectious diseases — and to buffets. Our inability to control ourselves around self-serve food has been the subject of countless holiday weight-loss advice columns and published research. “There may be special cells in the brain that take over when you encounter a buffet,” as one medical site explains. That’s a nice, scientific way of saying we eat more than is healthy when confronted by an all-you-can-eat platter.
But it doesn’t take peer-reviewed research to understand that buffets do not bring out the best in humanity. “People are so gross in general,” a Whole Foods employee at a store in Oregon wrote to me over Twitter on March 16. “People will literally pick off the hot bar and salad bar with their hands to sample things.”
The safety of buffets is especially dependent on people behaving courteously — and sanitarily — around limitless supplies of ready-to-eat food, an unlikely scenario. Adapting to the rapidly changing news cycle, Whole Foods and Central Market, an upscale Texas-based grocery store chain, both announced they would shut down their salad and hot food buffets by March 18. In place of the buffets, the stores said they would offer prepackaged salads and other goods.
Of course, foodborne illnesses or infectious viruses can happen at any type of dining establishment or in any grocery aisle. The Whole Foods worker added that people are also behaving poorly around the packaged baked goods, telling me that throughout the pandemic, it’s been “crazy seeing how many people will go around touching all the loaves of bread — not taking them out, just touching all the bags.”
While the Swedes are credited with inventing the buffet, it was an American businessman on the Las Vegas Strip who reportedly brought buffets to a new level of gluttony with the “all you can eat” concept in the 1940s. Thankfully, the buffet industry is now in decline. The company that owns Hometown Buffet, Old Country Buffet, and Ryan’s has declared bankruptcy three times; some experts say buffet chains owe their demise to Yelp, whose users love to report every gross thing they see. Golden Corral, however, has managed to stay profitable, weathering a norovirus outbreak that infected more than 150 diners in Wyoming in 2012 and allegations from a Florida worker the restaurants had serious health code violations.
People who eat at the Whole Foods buffet — like the New York Post photo editor who recently claimed his $17 chicken dinner was ruined by the sight of a homeless man helping himself to samples — tend to consider themselves a classier bunch than diners at a Golden Corral or a Hometown Buffet. After all, at Whole Foods’ hot food and salad bars, the presentation is usually pristine, the food is organic and relatively healthy, and the cost is exorbitant if you aren’t paying attention.
It’s been “crazy seeing how many people will go around touching all the loaves of bread — not taking them out, just touching all the bags.”
But the grocery store’s beloved self-serve area has had its own share of controversies. In 2015, a person infected with hepatitis A dined at the prepared-food section at a Whole Foods in Detroit, leading to a scare in which all other people who ate from the salad bar during that time had to get tested for the fatal disease; a worker in the same section was also found to have hepatitis A, though it wasn’t clear how either person contracted the illness. In 2016, the FBI arrested a man on the accusation that he put rat poison on the salad fixings at a Whole Foods in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The very existence of signs at some Whole Foods’ hot bars requesting “No hands, please” indicates that Whole Foods’ paying customers are no better around buffets than the homeless man the Post tried to shame.
The major cruise lines, which Trump suggested the government should bail out even though they don’t pay taxes here, are prime examples of how easily diseases spread when people are eating in unsanitary conditions. Before the novel coronavirus, cruises were routinely ruined by the gastrointestinal infection called norovirus. This was largely due to the confinement of thousands of people on a boat, but the all-you-can-eat buffets certainly didn’t help. As one disgusted worker revealed to a tabloid several years ago, he hates when passengers “don’t wash their hands after going to the toilet or [are] grabbing food directly from the buffet with their hands.”
Should any buffets remain open post-pandemic? Maybe those at smaller, more intimate restaurants, where owners have an easier time keeping surfaces clean and customers know they are being closely watched. Paul Dawson, a nutrition professor at Clemson University in South Carolina who led his students on a study of E. coli transfer on salad tongs several years ago, told me that he regularly eats at a salad bar for lunch and considers it no more dangerous than any other kind of restaurant. However, he theorizes that people may behave worse around the buffets at grocery stores, where they can graze in relative anonymity. Barring any legal issues, he suggests that someone do a research project where they secretly film people around the grocery store buffets: “That would be good, to do a secret Candid Camera–type thing.”


text:
Long Island is a large island located off the coast of New York State in the United States. It is home to a variety of climates and ecosystems, making it a great place to grow a variety of plants. Knowing what planting zone you are in is important for successful gardening. Long Island is in planting zone 7a, which is a temperate zone with mild winters and hot summers. This zone is ideal for growing a variety of plants, including vegetables, fruits, and flowers. In this article, we will discuss what planting zone 7a is and what types of plants can be grown in this zone.
Understanding Long Island’s Planting Zones: What You Need to Know
Long Island is home to a wide variety of plants, from trees and shrubs to flowers and vegetables. Knowing the planting zones of Long Island is essential for successful gardening. Planting zones are determined by the average annual minimum temperature, and they help gardeners determine which plants will thrive in their area.
Long Island is divided into two planting zones: 6a and 7a. Zone 6a covers the northern part of the island, including Nassau and Suffolk counties. This zone has an average annual minimum temperature of -10 to -5 degrees Fahrenheit. Zone 7a covers the southern part of the island, including the Hamptons and the South Fork. This zone has an average annual minimum temperature of 0 to 5 degrees Fahrenheit.
When selecting plants for your garden, it is important to consider the planting zone of your area. Plants that are suited to zone 6a may not survive in zone 7a, and vice versa. For example, some plants that thrive in zone 6a, such as boxwood and juniper, may not survive in zone 7a. Similarly, some plants that thrive in zone 7a, such as hibiscus and gardenia, may not survive in zone 6a.
It is also important to consider the amount of sunlight your garden receives. Some plants require full sun, while others prefer partial shade. Knowing the amount of sunlight your garden receives will help you select plants that are best suited to your area.
Finally, it is important to consider the soil type of your garden. Different plants require different soil types, so it is important to select plants that are suited to the soil type of your garden.
By considering the planting zone, amount of sunlight, and soil type of your garden, you can select plants that are best suited to your area. With the right knowledge and care, you can create a beautiful and successful garden on Long Island.
Exploring the Benefits of Planting in Long Island’s Zone 7
Long Island’s Zone 7 is a great place to plant a variety of plants and trees. This zone is characterized by mild winters and hot summers, making it ideal for a wide range of plants. Planting in Zone 7 can provide many benefits, including improved air quality, increased biodiversity, and enhanced aesthetics.
Improved Air Quality
Planting in Zone 7 can help improve air quality by increasing the amount of oxygen in the air. Trees and other plants absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen, which helps to reduce air pollution. Additionally, plants can help filter out pollutants from the air, such as dust and pollen. This can help to reduce the risk of respiratory illnesses and other health problems.
Planting in Zone 7 can also help to increase biodiversity. By planting a variety of plants and trees, you can create a habitat for a variety of wildlife. This can help to support a healthy ecosystem and can also provide food and shelter for birds, insects, and other animals.
Finally, planting in Zone 7 can help to enhance the aesthetics of your landscape. Trees and other plants can provide shade and beauty to your yard, as well as providing a pleasant environment for outdoor activities. Additionally, planting in Zone 7 can help to reduce noise pollution, as trees and other plants can act as a natural sound barrier.
Overall, planting in Zone 7 can provide many benefits, including improved air quality, increased biodiversity, and enhanced aesthetics. If you are looking to improve your landscape, consider planting in Zone 7.
Tips for Gardening Success in Long Island’s Planting Zone
1. Know Your Planting Zone: Long Island is located in Planting Zone 6, which means that the average annual minimum temperature is between -10 and 0 degrees Fahrenheit. This zone is suitable for a wide variety of plants, including perennials, annuals, shrubs, and trees.
2. Choose the Right Plants: When selecting plants for your garden, it is important to choose varieties that are suited to the climate and soil conditions of Long Island. Consider the amount of sunlight, soil type, and water requirements of each plant before making your selection.
3. Prepare the Soil: Before planting, it is important to prepare the soil. This includes removing any weeds, rocks, and debris, as well as adding organic matter such as compost or manure. This will help to improve the soil structure and provide essential nutrients for your plants.
4. Water Regularly: Long Island can experience periods of drought, so it is important to water your plants regularly. Water deeply and evenly to ensure that the roots of your plants are receiving enough moisture.
5. Mulch: Mulching is an important part of gardening in Long Island. Mulch helps to retain moisture in the soil, reduce weeds, and protect plants from extreme temperatures.
6. Prune and Fertilize: Pruning and fertilizing are essential for keeping your plants healthy and vigorous. Prune plants regularly to remove dead or diseased branches and encourage new growth. Fertilize your plants with a balanced fertilizer to provide essential nutrients.
7. Monitor for Pests and Diseases: Monitor your plants regularly for signs of pests and diseases. If you notice any signs of infestation or disease, take action immediately to prevent further damage.
Following these tips will help ensure that your garden is successful in Long Island’s planting zone. With proper care and maintenance, you can enjoy a beautiful and productive garden for years to come.
1. What is the planting zone for Long Island?
Long Island is located in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 7a.
2. What is the average annual minimum temperature for Long Island?
The average annual minimum temperature for Long Island is between 0°F and 5°F.
3. What types of plants can be grown in Long Island?
Long Island is suitable for growing a wide variety of plants, including trees, shrubs, perennials, annuals, vegetables, and fruits.
In conclusion, Long Island is located in Planting Zone 7a, which is a temperate zone with mild winters and hot summers. This zone is ideal for growing a variety of plants, including vegetables, fruits, and flowers. Long Island gardeners should take advantage of the mild climate and the wide variety of plants that can be grown in this zone.

domain: hobby


The City of Westbrook (“City”) appealed the Superior Court’s judgment, upholding a consent decree that was entered between the City and Pike Industries (“Pike”) on May 20, 2013. Pike owned the Spring Street property since 2005 and it is used to “operate a quarry, a rock crushing plant, a concrete plant, and an asphalt plant on the property.” Two local businesses, Artel, Inc., IDEXX Laboratories and Smiling Hill, challenged Pikes standing to operate a quarry. Smiling Hill argued before the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine that the consent decree limits the City’s power to enforce the local ordinances, and that the decree creates an illegal contract zone. Pike contended that they had been grandfathered into the previous regulations in the zoning district, and therefore, is entitled to use the property as a quarry.
The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine affirmed the Superior Court’s decision that the City was not transferring its authority as a result of the consent decree and that an illegal contract zone had not been established. The court reasoned “Smiling Hill’s concerns that Pike could attempt to use the Decree as a ‘shield’ against enforcement in the future cannot materialize because the Decree does not and cannot provide the means for Pike to do so.” Pike could only enforce the grandfathered rights. Additionally, an illegal contract zone had not been created because the parties followed the courts instructions and complied with the zoning practices. Further, the Supreme Judicial Court noted that there had been no change to “the permitted use standards for the entire zoning district where Pikes quarrying operations are located….”
Pike Industries, Inc. v. City of Westbrook, 2014 WL 2885395 (ME 6/24/2014)
The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.courts.maine.gov/opinions_orders/supreme/lawcourt/2014/14me85pi.pdf


text:
Is Secret Cinema Planning Protest Screenings Of THE INTERVIEW This Sunday?
Simultaneous screenings have apparently also been planned in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Rome, with all proceeds from the events going towards free speech charity Article 19.
But what will the secret film to be screened actually be? Is it possible that they plan to actually screen The Interview?
The press release states:
It seems almost impossible logistically for Secret Cinema to pull off a multi-city screening of an unreleased film, but just such an audacious, unprecedented event sits firmly within the mandate of the organisation. However, the film could just as easily be something symbolically similar, such as Michael Radford's 1984, Francois Truffaut's Fahrenheit 451 or - let's be honest - pretty much anything that features the theme of oppression or censorship. Hell, it could be Team America or even Hackers for all we know, but for the moment at least, the anticipation can fuel all kinds of speculation.Secret Cinema passionately believes in the freedom to create and is looking for partners to join them in hosting a screening that will happen simultaneously across the globe.We invite and encourage people across the world to host your own screening with us. All proceeds from the London screening will be donated to ARTICLE 19 the worldwide free speech charity.The film, for the moment is secret.Please come dressed in a dark suit, and bring a small gift for a stranger.
Currently, the actual film to be screened has yet to be disclosed, and neither have the screening locations. But for those interested, tickets for the London screening can be bought here and for more information about other screening venues and ticketing, visit the official Secret Cinema Facebook page here.

domain: artistic


text:
You’d really have to put a lot of work into something to fuck it up as badly as the UVA Board of Visitors has with their removal of Teresa Sullivan from the presidency.
Based on all of the latest evidence to come out, here’s what happened. Rector Helen Dragas spent months persuading a majority of the 16-member board to support ousting Sullivan. To circumvent Virginia’s open meetings law, Dragas and vice rector Mark Kington talked with them one by one, apparently only meeting with those members who she thought were most amenable to supporting her plan. (Macdonald Caputo, Heywood Fralin, and Vincent Mastracco—and perhaps others—were not contacted until the last minute.)
Somewhere along the line the growing group brought in the chair of the Darden School Foundation, Peter Kiernan. In an e-mail to fellow Darden trustees on Sunday, Kiernan made the mistake of telling the truth, describing how he’d worked with “two important Virginia alums” on the “project” to oust Sullivan.
Governor McDonnell’s spokesman says that the governor was notified only days beforehand that Sullivan was to be forced out, apparently once Dragas had obtained enough support from the board to get a majority supporting the coup.
On Friday, Sullivan was apparently informed that she could quit or be fired.
On Sunday morning the Board of Visitors announced that they’d hold an emergency executive session that afternoon, giving just a few hours’ notice. That “emergency” bit is important. Under § 2.2-3701 of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, an “emergency” is “an unforeseen circumstance rendering the notice required by this chapter impossible or impracticable and which circumstance requires immediate action.” That’s what allowed them to meet without providing the three-day notice that’s legally required. The fact that this was planned for months makes clear that no such emergency could have existed. The meeting was illegal.
The meeting involved just three members of the executive committee: Dragas, Kington, and Charlottesville developer Hunter Craig. Holding that meeting with little notice, on a Sunday, was advantageous to Dragas, since that prevented the attendance of executive committee members who opposed the coup against Sullivan. Macdonald Caputo was unable to travel, due to an injury. George Martin was out of the country, in South Africa. The vote was 3–0 to accept Sullivan’s “resignation.”
The story went public, and people immediately began to wonder why Sullivan had quit. Was she forced out? Was the board’s lack of explanation perhaps to spare her some humiliation?
Then that e-mail from Darden’s Kiernan got out. Today Kiernan resigned from the board, writing in a letter that his e-mail had been “confusing” (on the contrary, it was enlightening) and strained credulity with his claim that his work to toss the president was completely unrelated to the fact that he’s chairing Darden’s foundation. Kiernan’s e-mail was important, because it was the first piece of evidence that there was a long-term conspiracy, at the highest levels of the university—and perhaps the state—to force out the brand-new president.
Sullivan has been out of town all week. Officially, she’s president until August 15, but in a functional sense, it’s not at all clear that she’s still the president now. Her top two deputies have been standing in for her. If she is running the show, then whatever meetings she already had scheduled elsewhere, I’ve got to imagine that she’d cancel them to deal with the unfolding crisis at UVA.
There’s one more wrinkle. Dragas said, in an interview, that “this decision [to force out Sullivan] should be judged after a new president is installed.” She’s saying that, when we compare Sullivan to the next president, then we’ll see that the next president is better. A reasonable inference is that Dragas already knows who the next president will be—that this isn’t a coup to eliminate Sullivan but, instead, to replace her with somebody specific. If that proves to be true, it seems vanishingly unlikely that the faculty will soon accept the legitimacy of that president, which will make his term awfully unpleasant.
The Board of Visitors has called another emergency meeting, this time giving a few days’ notice, and they’ll be meeting on Monday to figure out what to do. They’re faced with near-unanimous opposition from university faculty, furious alumni, and terrible press coverage locally and nationally.
I have to wonder what they thought would happen. To fire Sullivan without explanation was bound to have precisely this result. Making a murder look like a suicide is an old tactic, but they didn’t put any effort into cleaning up the crime scene.
The trouble that the BOV has now is that they are functionally impotent to deal with this backlash. They have a staff of three: a secretary, a clerk, and an administrative assistant. They do not deign to interact with faculty. They almost all have jobs and busy lives outside of their positions on the BOV, and live scattered throughout the state, so it’s not like they can sit in an office together, put together a support staff, and strategize about how to deal with this. At best they might hope to get help from the staff at Madison Hall, but—just a hunch—they’re not liable to get top-flight work out of the folks in the president’s office right now. Andrew Jackson is said to have declared, in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Worcester v. Georgia, “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” In a practical sense, the Board of Visitors has very little power over the operations of the university. They can remove the president, but the people who make up the university can do a lot more damage.
How much damage? Rumor has it that members of the teaching faculty are talking about a boycott come fall semester, in two months’ time. It remains to be seen whether that will come to fruition, or what their specific demand is going to be. (An explanation? Re-hire Sullivan? Fire Dragas? Replace the whole Board of Visitors?) But if the Board of Visitors wants to play hardball, they may find that faculty are prepared to play, too.
Despite everything that we know now, we still have no insight into the heart of the matter: why Sullivan was forced out. But we’ll know before long. There are too many people involved at this point, and there’s too much at stake.
92 thoughts on “The Ousting of Sullivan: How We Got Here”
Not sure what’s implied in a boycott. I have a hard time imagining people refusing to teach their classes, but I can certainly imagine some version of work-to-rule. Which would pretty much bring the University to a standstill.
I think that’s right, Greg. I’m dubious that tenured faculty would just flat-out refuse to teach, but even with my limited knowledge of the benefits that tenure affords, I think they could get awfully close to a boycott by just all simultaneously doing the contractual minimum.
One has to wonder if the BOV breaks ranks could Sullivan rescind her resignation. After reading this http://wapo.st/MUu4Hu I kind of hope she does.
She is married to a great lawyer and Whitehead has offered free legal.If Dragas misrepresented the BOS as a whole, Sullivan could have options
Oh sweet Jesus, what the fuck were these people thinking? I didn’t really like Sullivan, but I like this process for ousting her even less.
Did, perhaps, these Darden MBA people all think that the academic world works like a corporation where you can just give people orders and they have to follow them?
The faculty senate is on this. I think there will be a faculty-wide meeting on Sunday and then they will meet with the BOV and the negotiations will begin. There could be a strike of sorts. I would participate. It is the public vs. the BOV at this point. The root problem is the way BOVs are appointed and the capturing of the University by corporate neoliberal (Dem and Rep) interests. Its about privatizing a public resource, thats what is behind these micro-political machinations. We need reform so tha the BOV looks more like the people of the Commonwealth and less like a corporate boardroom. That’s the heart of the matter. Do we want UVA turned into a diploma factory and a big business that merely prepares automatons for the global corporate economy? I think Sulivan stood up to this corporate bullying.Her allegiance is to the profession of education.
I don’t think the MBA class thought much about pushback from the ranks, they are used to bullying thier employees in their corporations. This aint a corporation and I am hopeful the faculty won’t act like sheep. It is a line in the sand so to speak. On the other side of the line are the University of Phoenix model and is that what we want Jefferson’s university to become. We should go back to 1933 when the University was governed by the faculty.
So that’s where this is not just about the BOV vs. the Faculty. Its is a public university and even those who never attend or don’t have arelative who attends have a dog in the fight. We need students, alums, and citizens weighing in and protesting.
The legislature is the final authorizor of the BOV, even though the Gov. appoints. So that is why it is important that all citizens weigh in on this and protest going forward. Having David Toscano and Creigh Deeds involved is an imprtant first step. They need to convey to their colleagues the outrage and impropriety of this move. So its the fsuclty ,alums, students, and citizens vs. the elitist BOV and a small oligarichal cabal at that it turns out.
What the Faculty Senate does next is important. They need to play hardball with these crooks and fascists. We all need to rally around the faculty as they may become a fulcrum of potential change.
My demands would be:
1. Dismiss the BOV
2. Reinstate Sullivan
3. Change the appointment process for BOVs
If there is public action planned by the Faculty Senate, I urge all of you in the public to participate in that action, don’t lreave the faculty hanging. There is power in numbers. Its a public university and it belongs to the pubic, not a group of fat cat corporate types who have the morality which brought on the depression we are all in.
Dragas will manipulate a weak BoV to prevent reconsideration of Sullivan’s ouster. Dragas will refuse to allow motions to reconsider, and will limit discussion to “who’ll be the interim President?” Which does raise the question–how do you have an interim president when until August 15 there is still a serving president? The real answer is, there isn’t one, the coup took care to cut off Sullivan from actual power as happens. This is not a “Justice Marshall has made his decision, let him enforce it situation:” Dragas enforces it herself, through minions who already divided up Sullivan’s responsibilities. Dragas’s minions control the bureaucracy: the salary check-writing accountants, the U Va police, buildings and grounds. The faculty may rebel but who cares whether this or that poetry seminar gets taught, what matters is are the lights on? Are the cafeterias open? Bureaucrats always serve whoever a coup puts in charge. So–Dragas’ coup cannot readily be reversed. The loss of alumni support , faculty disaffection, and a drop dozens of digits in college rankings will over time affect the quality of the students who apply, sending U Va into a long term death spiral. Could that be reversed with a star President? Who–Oprah? Recruiting General Lee saved the struggling Washington College in Lexington after the Civil War, now prospering as Washington & Lee University– but as the Washington Post said, no person of stature would be willing to work with this BoV. So thank you Ms. Dragas for confirming the old maxim: “the quickest way to kill liberal education is to put it in the hands of the uneducated.”
Truth to Power: The Faculty Senate isn’t that powerful and if they strike some could be fired. Considering what the BOV did to Sullivan it’s not unthinkable. Faculty are employees, how they can truly play hardball is beyond me. I think the faculty will be resolute but cooler heads will prevail and properly moderate it’s action.
The BOV will not be dismissed but I now can’t see Dragas being reappointed (no matter what she had been promised). That will solve some of this uproar. I once thought that reinstating Sullivan was a pipe dream but this has gone so badly and the bullshit* is getting deeper every day, so this doesn’t seem to be as improbable as it did a few days ago.
The lack of preparation for the public outcry and the delay in dealing with it is an enormous failing of the BOV that will have repercussions, I’m just not sure how far this will go. Could some of the BOV resign-sure but the new appointments will be the Governors only real chance to publicly weigh in on this. If Dragas is reappointed he will have no place to hide and this will be his mess. I’m sure the BOV’s next appointments will be quite the topic in Richmond for the next 2 weeks.
June 1(when the new BOV appointments kick in) may bring changes that will directly relieve the enormous pressure that this firing has brought about.
You’re forgetting one important item that can trump Dragas – with due process, of course: Gov McDonnell.
To this point, he’s offered no public comment on the matter; privately, I’m guessing he’s had plenty to say and I’m also guessing that much of it has to do with Dragas. Time will soon tell, but with or without Gov McDonnell’s help, I don’t think she escapes with her position or her dignity intact.
Re: the BOV not having staff to deal with this debacle: I read somewhere that Dragas and Kington (who both sit on Dominion’s board) asked Tom Farrell (president of Dominion and former Rector of UVA) for recommendations of consultants Dominion has worked with who could help them smooth over this mess. I’m not sure which is worse: Darden or Dominion in charge of The University.
One thing striking about reaction to this BOV misstep is – it is nonpartisan. Or multipartisan. All this talk (with evidence) about polarization …. but there’s a coalition here. Darden is trying to distance itself from Kiernan. Catholic faculty, many conservative, support Sullivan. Rich former med school donors are outraged. Mrs. Gilmore has written against it. Across age, across liberal arts to professional schools, across all the usual demographic and partisan categories, everyone hates what the BOV did.
The Rector has taken so much heat – but what’s the story with the Vice Rector? He’s the one appointed by Warner, dropped by Kaine, re-upped by McDonnell.
Maybe the Governor’s political ambitions will spur him to build on this pretty striking coalition and come up with a solution to this mess.
I hope the applicable FOIA requests have been filed.
I have a daughter at the University, and as the bumper sticker says, “My child and my money go to UVA”. As a very proud parent I can only simply say that this whole process doesn’t pass the smell test. Each day the smell seems to be getting worse and the biggest shame is that all of our children are being exposed to this back-handed way of going about things. It is sad enough that this type of move happens at all, but to happen at this University and all that it stands for has made for a smelly chapter in the school’s history.
Write a note to Gov. McDonnell (http://www.governor.virginia.gov/AboutTheGovernor/contactGovernor.cfm) and ask him to not reappoint Helen Dragas when her term is up at the end of this month. Regardless of the reasons for Ms. Sullivan’s ouster, the gross mishandling of the situation would be grounds for dismissal had an employee acted with such disregard for the public relations fallout of their actions. Fire Dragas!
Also, the students and faculty are joining ranks Monday at 2:30 for a silent rally during the BOV meeting. Details here: https://www.facebook.com/events/454701241209710/
Share both links widely!
To Gail Hyder Wiley’s point, write a letter to Gov McDonnell and ask him to ask Dragas to resign immediately. This will send a message that he’s on top of this situation and might help prevent this conflagration from spreading further.
I sent my note earlier this morning and asked him to do this very thing vis-a-vis this portion of my note:
“Like so many others from whom you’ve undoubtedly heard, I implore you, as a man of integrity and a man of honor, to please seek the immediate resignation of Rector Dragas and each BOV member who chose to take public matters into their own hands – potentially breaking the law in the process – and throw a good woman and the entire University under the bus in the process.”
@Builditand they will whine,
This Faculty Senate resolution I believe is unprecedented in UVA history so your pessimism may be premature. The Faculty Senate will be holding an open meeting for Faculty on Sunday at 5 pm (location TBA). We will see what happens from there. The faculty may find its power in this moment, its been a long time coming. I would feel better about it if other schools had written a letter like the one that came from the dept. heads in the College. Faculty cannot trust administrators to do the right thing here. Where is the push back from the Curry School, Law School, Architecture School, etc. faculty?
We now know from inside sources reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education, that Strine apparently went behind Sullivan’s back directly to the BOVs, so it may turn out he was involved in the Putcsh. Who knows if some of the Deans were not also involved like that as well?
I don’t think people realize that this little episode represents a significant line in the sand on the corporate takeovers of public Universities and institutions in general. Its not Dem-Rep., its corporate types v. the people of the Commonwealth who own the University of Virginia. If I were the AAUP I would send in the organizers and the support troops to counter the Dominion Corp resources that are being mobilized to support the oligarch’s agenda.
I am hoping that the students, alums, citizens of Charlottesville and other locales in the Commonwealth join in with whatever protest actions result. I hope they support faculty by writing their legislators, who ultimately have the power over the BOVs, coming to public meetings like the 2:30 Monday meeting of the BOVs at the Rotunda. I hope that Delegate Toscano and Sen. Deeds among others show up to support the faculty and then spread the word to their colleagues.
It takes a village to stop the village idiots from ruing the Village. Please come out and support public control of public education!!!!!
that’s Ruining the village at the end.
Here’s an interesting little fact worth knowing. § 23-76 has the following to say about the UVA Board of Visitors:
(That’s my emphasis.) Dragas didn’t need nine votes to fire Sullivan. She needed eleven. Not a majority of the BOV members who attended a meeting, but a majority of the “whole number”—sixteen.
Multiple ironies at Mr Jefferson’s University— a non democratic secret group can remove a president.
I agree with all the protests but I honestly think the BOV doesnt care what we think
“the Smartest Guys in the Room” strike again! the arrogance and hubris of these cabals are fostered by a lack of transparency – shine some light on all of these proceedings. The BOV,what used to be a group of benevolent stewards for the university, i am thinking of Hovey Dabney, a great one, the new vampires have risen to the role of political familiars and toadies for the right wing, avarice and more Wall Street shenanigans. Now, in this age of political alienation and partisan insurgency, UVA has been taken over by the megalomaniacal Dragas thinking she had hidden all trace of her conspiracy – ” . . .out out damn spot!” thank you Kiernan!
protect the University, fire the BOV, re-hire Sullivan, re-vamp BOV appointment protocols with input from faculty and students. hold your donations until this happens.
“Dragas didn’t need nine votes to fire Sullivan. She needed eleven. Not a majority of the BOV members who attended a meeting, but a majority of the “whole number”—sixteen.”
Can you imagine that it could have been a bluff? Dragas goes to Sullivan and tells her that she’s got to votes to fire her. Sullivan buys that and resigns. But, maybe, Dragas didn’t even have the votes. Now, that’d be some serious gamesmanship.
When you write to McDonnell remind him, the University is not that kind of a corporation: “All I can tell you is that we have very qualified people that serve on these boards,” McDonnell said. “ … They’re really top-flight people. A lot of business people that have run major organizations. And these decisions are largely left up to the boards.”
quote from Chronicle Higher Ed story posted last night:
“To great fanfare last year, Ms. Sullivan recruited the Johns Hopkins University’s chief operating officer and a Duke University vice provost to take similar positions at Virginia. But Michael Strine, executive vice president and chief operating officer, and John D. Simon, executive vice president and provost, are locked in a tense and continuing power struggle over who has the authority to steer university resources, said the administrative sources, who were given anonymity to describe internal matters.”
I was wondering the same thing while writing out that comment. It seems too implausible to even entertain…but within the context of everything that’s happened in the past week, perhaps not.
Well, if it was a bluff and Sullivan caved that easy and fast it does make me wonder about her in a position at the top. IF if was a bluff…
Is it true that the “two important alumni” who worked on a “project to oust Sullivan”, according to Kiernan’s email, are Tom Farrell and Bill Goodwin, both of Richmond? If it is Bill Goodwin, this is the third woman in a leadership position he has taken down at UVA.
Could it possibly be true that Dragas’ November evaluation of Sullivan had anything to so with her personal appearance? If this is true, it is outrageous.
Rising stars ( Governor McDonnell ) don’t like it when their subjects are fussing loudly and publicly. My sense is the way to reinstate Sullivan is with loud continuing public protest that is covered nationally.
Everyone who cares about governing can make this happen so let’s show the world that people of all political persuasion can work together .
If the people around the world can overthrow oppressors so can we . Adults and students join together use social media and stand up for the principles this University was founded on.
Ive wondered if the votes were there & if TS had called her bluff what would have happened. Dragas is clearly shady. No reason to think she would be telling the truth then. Out with her & all the BOV.
Please join our facebook group in support of President Sullivan’s Reinstatement:
We are running an email campaign today and will be joining the faculty in a joint rally on Monday.
A wonderful breakdown of why the BOV system is deeply, deeply flawed.
Women just can’t work together. ;)
I would like follow-up to Lyon’s comment–the strife between Strine and Simon.
Simon seems to be respected, has a long history of academic achievement, and seems to have been in the dark about this process. According to his official bio: Provost Simon served as the Vice-Provost for Academic Affairs at Duke University from 2005 to 2011. As Vice-Provost, Simon was responsible for overseeing Duke’s strategic planning and for nurturing campus-wide academic initiatives to connect the humanities, social sciences and sciences. He chaired Duke’s chemistry department from 1999-2004.
Strine seems less liked/trusted/respected, has a short academic record, and seems to have had some knowledge about the firing process before it occurred. According to his official bio: Before his role at Johns Hopkins, Strine had nearly a decade of experience in senior finance roles in government in Delaware, as chief financial officer of New Castle County and as chief of policy and operations in the state’s Department of Finance.
My question is–how involved is Strine in this and is he angling for even more power?
I love how students are held to (and hold up) the Honor Code, “I shall not lie, cheat or steal” – I guess Dragas and Kington think they’re above that? Nice way to represent yourselves as part of UVA. You lie to oust our president, cheat the UVA community out of our leader and steal our integrity. You don’t fit in the community of trust, now get out.
Dan1101–Your attempt at “humor” falls flat.
All these drives to have Sullivan reinstated are touching, but has anyone bothered to ask her if she *wants*, or even would be willing to be reinstated? I mean, I sure as hell wouldn’t, what with all these Gordon Geckos crawling over the serpentine walls. No, I’d take my severance, have a killer summer off, then take the position at Berkeley and laugh every year as UC destroys UVa in the national rankings.
Michael Strine is brilliant, hard-working and low-key. He works 16 hours a day, 7 days a week, and is totally dedicated to his job. He has nothing but the best interests of the University at heart and the UVa community is fortunate to have him in a leadership position, particularly during the current situation. Any attempt to vilify him or question his motivation is just plain wrong.
Come on everybody, the BOV is going to continue biz as usual. These are the kind of people who don’t think things like rules apply to them. It’s really too bad she didn’t refuse to quit and just let them try to terminate her. In some ways I think it may reflect more on Sullivan as an unfit leader that she quit rather than fight. Do you want leaders that are fighters or quitters?
Harry Landers–No intent to vilify. But very curious why the reaction to Simon and Strine seems so varied. He seems a much less known quantity than Simon. Any insight into the basis of the “power struggle”?
This is the best live soap opera going! What entertainment: the sort you must laugh at lest you break down crying.
Per some of what I’ve read elsewhere, Sullivan was in the process of shifting some of the financial oversight from Strine to Simon. This could explain some of the Strine/Simon tension if accurate.
Ms Sullivan returned yesterday and held some sort of previously-arranged gathering in her home last night. She’s behaved incredibly well throughout this episode (project) and, as far as I can see, has kept all of her options open. With a full-enough victory/vindication, I can see her resuming her duties. If she wants to.
Every institution should not be run like a business. Governments are one very big non-business and universities are another. I am growing towards a better understanding of Jefferson’s perpetual revolution ideal. Institutions quickly become bureaucracies: that’s the bit that needs profound and thorough weeding on a regular basis.
From BOV minutes.
President Sullivan provided the following report on gifts and grants:
Current Fiscal Year through April 30, 2012
Philanthropic giving to the University and its related foundations is $195,473,957.13 for the fiscal year through April 30, 2012. This is an increase of $6,149,456.97, or 3.25% above the results of the previous fiscal year.
Gifts to the School of Architecture, Children’s Hospital, Medical Center, the Jefferson Scholars Foundation, the Women’s Center, the UVa Alumni Association, and the University of Virginia’s College at Wise saw increases of more than 50% in support in the first ten months over last year.
Gifts and Grants Report [Current Fiscal Year through April 30, 2011]
The President said philanthropic giving to the University of Virginia and its related foundations is $189,324,500.16 for the fiscal year through April 30, 2011. This is an increase of $20,189,999.72, or 11.94% above the results of the previous fiscal year.
The College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, State Arboretum, Curry School of Education, School of Engineering and Applied Science, Center for Politics, Darden School, and Historic Preservation saw giving increases greater than 50% over last year. The School of Commerce and School of Law also realized moderate increases.
If it turns out Strine went to the coup makers on the board behind Sullivan’s back he deserves to be villified . The facts will come out
Caveat: this is all speculation, I don’t have any info, just kind of curious about putting the pieces together. It is important to remember that universities are academic institutions. Not everything is a corporation! The limited info/experience I have about Strine is positive.
Reporting from a legit source, the Chronicle, is important – at least it is a question out there.
One more theory, maybe too speculative. First thing Sullivan did when she arrived on grounds was to break up the consolidated position Sandridge had created. Under Casteen it is not an exaggeration that Sandridge was Cheney. Casteen trolled, Sandridge ran the show. Most/all the admin layer under Sandridge was flunkies. Many but not all of those have been removed in the last two years.
What is the relationship between Sandridge and Strine. Sandridge is still an advisor, who has huge knowledge and experience base way beyond any of the other players. Not at all clear tho no matter how loyal Sandridge is to the institution – the real estate and the brand – that he cares about the academic mission. Is Strine his protegee?
I, too, am wondering why Sullivan didn’t fight it. Typically, leaders resign under pressure when they’ve either done something seriously wrong or they’re to blame for horrible performance of their organization. Neither seems to be the case here.
And there had been three years of decline before she took office:
Gifts and Grants Report [FY09-10]
Current fiscal year through April 30, 2010, philanthropic giving
to the University and its related foundations is $169 million. This
is a decrease from the previous year, however, last year and the prior
year substantial funds were received from the pledge for the Batten
School for Leadership and Public Policy.
Gifts and Grants Report [FY08-09]
The President stated that philanthropic giving to the University and its related foundations is $217,552,466.47 for the fiscal year through May 31, 2009.
This is a decrease of $38,703,137.04, or 15% below the results of the previous fiscal year.
President’s Report: Gifts and Grants [FY07-08]
The President reported that philanthropic giving to the University and its related foundations was $241.3million for the fiscal year through April 30th, which is a decrease of $7.7million, or 3.1% over the same period last year.
In case anybody’s wondering, the reason everybody’s ignoring this comment is because there is zero evidence for any of this. One might as well claim that Dragas is working on behalf of Chinese spies.
“One might as well claim that Dragas is working on behalf of Chinese spies.”
If that’s true, this could all be an elaborate plot orchestrated by the trilateral commission and the Bilderberg Group.
(See? Anyone can play!)
I’m a professor at UVa and this article is the first I’ve heard of any fall boycott. I am 100% certain that there will be no boycott of any kind by the faculty, and I’d be very surprised if any faculty member even publicly proposed such a bone-headed idea. We faculty are devoted to the core missions of our jobs: teaching, research, and public service. Our anger about this fiasco won’t alter our commitment to doing our jobs.
On a related note, the Sunday 5:00pm faculty senate meeting will be held at Darden’s Abbot Auditorium. Yes, a delicious irony. There is also a public meeting of the BoV at 5:00pm Monday after their closed door meeting at 3:00. I don’t know where the public meeting will be – I think they may want to have it at Scott Stadium to accommodate all those who want to attend…
That’s great to know, James—thanks for sharing that!
There are some faculty who have talked about what happens of the BOV plays hardball and won’t explain themselves or make amends. When you are playing in the sandbox with the likes of Goldman Sachs, Dominion Power you have to be prepared to play hardball and the threat of a strike is possible as a tool to get them to make amends for this horrendous anti-democratic nonsense.
If it all pans out as suspected:
1) Dragas didn’t have the votes and BS’d her way into an executive committee decision and the BOV doesn’t have 11 votes to oust Sullivan;
2) if she violated open meeting laws;
3) if the conspiracy to get Goldman-Sachs online education scam at UVA…
There there is some heavy accounting to do and immediate change necessary. I had heard that a BOV with ties to Johns Hopkins was being considered as interim. Now if it turns out as the Chronicle of HED states that there are sources in Madison Hall that have said that Strine went behind Sullivan’s back because of micro-politics, then there is another layer of intrigue and reckoning to be done. How, if at all, was Strine connected to the cabal? THat has to be asked.
If I decided to strike it would be out of commitment to the students who deserve better than to have their university turned into a corporate, privatized, online education mill governed by business magnates who are only about making money, self interest, and the end of public higher education. That’s what this is really all about anyway in the end. I would ask the students to strike with us so they can be an active part in taking back the ownership of the public university from megalomaniac robber barons who have been appointed to run it because of the corrupted political system and appointment process.
The faculty Senate exec. Committee will met with the BOV Rector and Vice rector on Monday. What hey will do will depend on what the Facult say at the 5 pm Sunday meeting.
I encourage everyone to come out to the 5 pm meeting at Darden on Sunday as well as the 2:30 rally Monday before the BOV meeting and the 5 pm BOV meeting. Let them know what you think of their decision.
Dismiss the BOV
Appoint a new BOV that is not beholden to corporate interests, reflects faculty, student and parent interests and reflects the diversity of the Commonwealth
Why aren’t the news reporters following this lead: Code of Virginia 23-69 “The rector and visitors of the University of Virginia shall be at all times subject to the control of the General Assembly.” Everyone has a boss.
One thought that I’ve not heard aired elsewhere: people have wondered why Sullivan didn’t fight more once she met with Dragas last Friday, but was willing to go along and resign. Two related possibilities come to mind. First, perhaps it’s not been easy working with the BOV, and she felt like it wasn’t a job she wanted to sacrifice her dignity to keep. But second, what if, as Waldo initially speculated when this story first broke, she had from the outset been hired for a short time period, to clean up the university, and she knew that? What if they had said, you’ll have five years to do all the things that Casteen hasn’t done, and bring us up to the standards of Michigan? This would explain why she wasn’t “allowed” to do a strategic plan; there was a planned sunset that meant she wouldn’t be able to enact any elements of that plan if she did one. So then the BOV conversations behind the scenes may have been more along the lines of, “I know we budgeted five years for Sullivan to make this a better place, but we don’t have it. Time to boot her and move on because there are all these ‘existential threats’.” And then the conversation with Sullivan would have had overtones of, “I know we were going to give you five years, but you’re done now. Time to move on to Stage 2.”
I think it’s likely, regardless, that the BOV found her to be a more principled and formidable executive than they had planned for her to be. The thing that my thought in the previous paragraph doesn’t explain is why they wouldn’t have her announce now that she was going to resign a year from now, thus avoiding the need for an(other) interim, if indeed they saw her as a “palate cleanser” all along. So, it seems likely to me that things like the living wage campaign and perhaps elements of their longer term plans (like online education) were causing more disagreements between BOV and Sullivan than BOV had patience for, if their commitment to her was never high to begin with.
I appreciate your dedication to your profession, but if the principles upon which the University of Virginia are so compromised as to make what was once a great university a mere shell of itself, and beholden to those whose endgame is self aggrandizement and not education, then I would hope as a matter of principle you would take whatever action was necessary to restore honor to the University.
Did you listen to your colleague Professor Burton on WINA. He certainly seems to feel that a situation of this magnitude has never before faced this institution, and I don’t think anyone really knows where this road will lead, so to rule out any action seems premature.
Reporters may well be following that lead, but it looks like a dead end to me. The entire chapter of the Code of Virginia about UVA spells out the terms of the university’s existence, defining how the BOV is appointed, how UVA buys and sells land, how they can raise money via bonds, etc. Given all of that specificity, it’s tough to know what to do with something as vague as “subject to the control of the General Assembly.” There is no definition of the word “control” in the Code of Virginia that applies to the UVA chapter, and that makes that sentence seem more like a platitude. I can’t find any case law that cites § 23-69, either (an attorney would be able to do a more thorough search than I), so there’s no guidance available there.
I think Waldo found the really useful angle earlier: no emergency existed therefore the three member executive committee meeting without notice was illegal & their decision can (and should) be overturned.
What I’m not clear on is who has standing to bring that case. Do all Virginians, as taxpayers towards this public university, have standing? The faculty? The students? The groundskeepers? The BOV members who were kept in the dark?
That’s where I believe the narrow edge of the wedge resides.
As an aside, I was vicariously proud of student council who oh-so-gently reminded the BOV that they are subject to the UVA honor code & the BOV should be as well. Well done!
I’m not sure if this applies, but it was in the Washington Post:
‘Maria Everett, executive director of the FOIA Council, said state law allows boards to poll members by phone and e-mail and then take action, but she said the technique should not be used to circumvent the law. …..Only three board members are needed for a quorum, university spokeswoman Carol Wood said. Dragas, Kington and a third member, real estate developer Hunter Craig, attended the meeting.”
Over the years UVa established several lesser institutions under its umbrella without damage to its reputation. The School of Continuing Education and Clinch Valley College spring to mind. So why should college courses on-line under UVa’s name harm the school’s rep?
By letting thousands of people hear of the place who never did before? By bringing in millions in profitable fees? By giving students who can’t afford campus life a better higher education choice than Phoenix University, Western Governors’ School, and scores of other phony institutions created in response to federal government tuition loan programs?
This is all speculative, and no harm comes from looking at the whole picture. No one is dojng that.
Truth to Power this is not a good situation but please remove your tin hat and reread what have written here. You assert rights that don’t exist in the situation presented. I’m going to enjoy the weekend and see what Monday’s meetings bring
My fav for interim president is Gov Bailies O
I hope we won’t need an interim president, but if we do, I think Gov. Baliles would be an excellent choice. That having been said, I would hope that he’d have the grit to say he wouldn’t accept unless certain BOV members resigned–and the stature to make that happen.
I plan to support the Faculty Senate Resolution and demand that President Sullivan be reinstated. First things first . And I hold, as they do, no confidence in any decision made henceforth by the Board of Visitors. If the Faculty speaks as one voice that is the best chance to return honor and stability back to UVA. Hopefully President Sullivan, as a service to those she has worked so hard for will return, and the BOV members that unnecessarily created so much turmoil and suffering will be removed.
What a complete waste of the human and monetary resources of the University of Virginia. It is unfathomable to understand what those who created this mess were thinking !
BOV members who behave in this manner and support such behavior demand no respect or confidence from any of us.
And this comment at Lisa Provence’s latest excellent article is indicative of what I am hearing. Alumni to UVa enmasse are withholding their contributions.
UVa Family June 15th, 2012 | 10:44pm
Excellent article by Lisa Provence.
We are a multi-generational UVa family and – like everyone who has expressed concern for the flagrant disregard by Rector Dragas for due process – are dismayed and saddened by the fall-out of the BoV decisions. If we – the concerned constituents and stakeholders – acquiese to this situation of an eminently qualified President being forced out in such an unseemly fashion, we will be setting a PRECEDENT for future self-serving and politicised boards.
I am glad that Bob O’Neill has spoken out and I hope that Dragas & co. realize that they have done severe damage to the reputation of the University.
My family will be writing to Bob Sweeney at the Development Office (and to specific schools from which we have graduated) to advise him that we will not be making any donations to the University and schools that we have supported until the BoV explain this outrageous ambush of due process and protocol.
Given the reports of how Rector Dragas has gone about achieving her (and whose else?) agenda of ousting a President after less than 2 years in office, I can’t help but feel that this is no longer a university that I am proud to be associated with. I implore the BoV to do the right thing and address this wrong. President Sullivan has done what she was hired to do. Do the BoV members think we can find someone else with her credentials & maturity to come to the University after the way we have treated Terry Sullivan?
I also encourage other donors to withhold their pledges and donations (if you have not funded yet) until after June 30 when the FY ends. Nothing to do if you have already funded but do let your opinions be known to the money people at the University. Unfortunately, sometimes people only hear the money talk.
Dragas has inflicted a severe wound on the body of this university and we must not stand by and condone it.
Just saw this great article by Professor Siva Vaidhyanathan at Slate with this comment:
Thank you for the best piece so far on the raping and pillaging of our beloved University. And thanks for explaining the mumbo jumbo of “strategic dynamism”. I’m thinking of having signs made for Monday’s rally that say. “Slightly worn University 4 sale. Call Helen Dragas at BOV”
This will all make sense in hindsight when Edward Ayers returns to The University as its next President after 5 successful years at the University of Richmond, and the University will be in much better hands going forward!
I have reread it and stand by what I wrote. I will take off the tin hat if you take off your blinders and remove the earwax.
“If I decided to strike it would be out of commitment to the students who deserve better than to have their university turned into a corporate, privatized, online education mill governed by business magnates who are only about making money, self interest, and the end of public higher education. That’s what this is really all about anyway in the end. I would ask the students to strike with us so they can be an active part in taking back the ownership of the public university from megalomaniac robber barons who have been appointed to run it because of the corrupted political system and appointment process.”
I take issue with many who have said this is merely a personnel issue above our pay grades to weigh in on. This personnel action is nothing short of a line in the sand between corporate control and privatization of public resources. First the neoliberal corporate interests (both Dem. and Rep.) took over the political system to the effect of having the state defund the University of Virginia to a mere 10% of its operating budget. Rather than raise taxes they choked the public support of a public university.
Now, when there is no public funding they stack the BOVs with corporate MBA types and demand a President go out and sell off the university to private donors and corporate interests (like Goildman-Sachs).
Then, when the President, who has a professional allegiance to public education and the principles of TJ, pushes back against the corporate interest driven BOV, they arbitrarily fire her with no transparency, seemingly violating open meeting laws, no rationale other than a purely ideological one to corporatize and privatize a public resources
I think there are rights here that do exist, and it is the right of every citizen to expect that a public institution be governed with democratic principles in a transparent manner. Enjoy your weekend as will I.
I believe students and faculty have such a right. Harrigan doesn’t speak for all faculty and he can’t be 100% sure of anything. We will see what the faculty want to do after the meeting with the BOV.
As far as reporters not following up on the angle of the legislature, I think the real story should be how the statute allows the appointment of nonrepresentative BOVs who are there basically because they contributed to a Gov’s campaign. What weget are big moneyed corporate types when what we need are faculty, students, and parents who come from a variety of economic backgrounds that represent the population of the Commonwealth. Its a public university, it belongs to the people of Virginia, it should be governed by a group that looks like Virginia and by some who understand what higher education is all about. I think the story angle should be people asking the legislature to s=change the way BOVs are appointed.
Well said, Truth to Power!
Part of what’s interesting about all this is how chasing donor dollars has had this absolutely corrosive effect to the character of this institution. The Morrisey suicide, the Love murder, and now the Sullivan ouster were all indirectly spurred by UVa’s greed.
In all of these tragedies (or mere fiasco, in the most recent example), UVa’s compulsion was to please moneyed alumnus and/or parents. This resulted in institutional behavior where decisions were made based on the perceived financial interest of the institution, not on what was best for the people that make up the institution.
In all three cases, good people were lost to UVa. In all three cases, UVa has shown itself to be an institution with character far below its ideals. Sullivan’s comments regarding the “reputation gap” resonate.
Sullivan is better than UVa.
As long as UVa values dollars above honorable and decent people, UVa’s reputation will sink.
My impulse to synthesize when confronted with information gaps resulted in this take on the UVA situation, cobbled together across articles and insider accounts:
President Sullivan, brought in on a high, followed through on her plans to make departments more accountable for spending, changing from the single purse model that has ruled Virginia since the beginning to the new financial model. This approach was favored or at the very least accepted across the university due to Sullivan’s ability to reach and engage a range of interested parties. It only alienated a few who felt threatened because they had been riding high on history (“reputation”) rather than current production or future promise in their departments: “In a number of critical areas we are reputed to be better than we actually are.”
While this belief, stated in Sullivan’s May memo, was not enough to prompt her ouster, it is enough, in the days and weeks ahead, to insure that two factions will form at Virginia: those who are going to continue to demand transparency, review, and repair of the highly compromised BOV and those who simply want to put this behind the university and believe that, as Dragas requests, the university community “focus constructively forward in preparing the institution for its next stage of leadership and our shared commitment to quality and excellence in teaching, discovery, and patient care.”
As for the ouster itself, here’s what seems to have happened. In light of Sullivan’s successes, I don’t believe the decision to engineer her departure involved the entire, or even most of, the BOV. As she moved through her second year, and as progress was being made on her financial model, a few members of the BOV, a small number of powerful alumni, and possibly one or two people in her own administration, began to see that if another academic year passed and tangible results of the new model began to be released, it would be impossible to take advantage of the climate of financial instability as they pushed through their own agenda, the hallmark of which is a privatized approach to digital education.
I believe Sullivan was approached by and, in the words of another commentator elsewhere, “boldly rebuffed” several Darden alumni and/or members of the Board of Visitors who wanted to accelerate the revenue potential of online education. This acceleration demanded drawing instructors and infrastructure from corporate-driven adjunct searches and outsourced site architecture. In the May memo, Sullivan’s emphasis centered on the quality of the education at Virginia, more specifically the quality of teachers whose work is primarily with undergraduates. Whatever the revenue benefits, institutions wanting to both protect their brand and, far more importantly, preserve the educational experience of undergraduates, must proceed with deliberation and care as offer opportunities to earn credits through distance learning. Sadly, this sort of reasonable approach is not consistant with the trippy quality of “strategic dynamism.” The individuals approaching President Sullivan either wanted her to take on a strategically dynamic approach or, and I think this is the more likely scenario, they knew she wouldn’t. In either case, her rejection of a semi-privatized, accelerated model was enough to trigger her ouster.
From here, I think several additional factors came into play. A “star” was either approached or expressed interest in the position. Whether a former President or a former member of a Presidential administration, I believe the intention was to bring this individual to Virginia with immediate and overwhelming fanfare in the belief that he or she is a significant enough “get” for the University that any concerns over President Sullivan’s departure would be forgotten, or at least significantly dampened. This person would serve the University in highly public, and ultimately superficial ways for two years while the semi-privatized approach was put into place as Virginia’s digital education offering, and then he or she would graciously resign to make way for another administrator emerging from academe.
I believe the Governor of Virginia was either informed of what was happening by the University provost, or, more likely, knew that he didn’t know everything and was willingly shielded by probable deniability.
Spot on and right to the core. Money changes everything. Corrosive effect great metaphor!!!
June 16: Formal Resolution of AAUP at its national meeting:
“We join in the Senate Executive Council’s dismay that due process for President Sullivan and the legitimate interests of the UVA faculty have been ignored in the precipitate action taken by the Board of Visitors. We join in calling upon the board to reconsider its decision.”
Waldo, you aptly pointed out:
June 15, 2012 at 10:30 am
Here’s an interesting little fact worth knowing. § 23-76 has the following to say about the UVA Board of Visitors:
The board shall be charged with the care and preservation of all property belonging to the University. They shall appoint a president, with such duties as may be prescribed by the board, and who shall have supreme administrative direction under the authority of the board over all the schools, colleges and branches of the University wherever located, and they shall appoint as many professors as they deem proper, and, with the assent of two-thirds of the whole number of visitors, may remove such president or any professor.
(That’s my emphasis.) Dragas didn’t need nine votes to fire Sullivan. She needed eleven. Not a majority of the BOV members who attended a meeting, but a majority of the “whole number”—sixteen.
Harry Landers is also on the right track, to a degree; however, you both may be missing a very plausible explanation for what occurred.
Since this debacle began, I considered the following scenario which may resonate. Please consider:
* At some point in the not-too-distant past Dragas, et. al. decide for whatever reasons to effect a palace coup.
* Dragas speaks individually with certain members of the BOV with whom she holds sway or believes she will be able to convince to support her position that Sullivan must go.
* Note: According to WaPo, at least three members of the 16-person BOV were NOT privy to the campaign to remove Sullivan and only learned of it, as Sullivan did, in conversations with Dragas a week ago last Friday. As seen below, keeping these three individuals at bay is key to ensuring later implementation of Dragas’ plan.
* In each of these one-off conversations (so as not to circumvent rules requiring meeting notices, etc.), Dragas reports to the person she is speaking with that others on the BOV are like-minded. She represents to each person that she has unanimous support for this action…not an action to summarily fire Sullivan (as that would ironically create a firestorm of controversy), but to express a unanimous vote of no confidence.
* On Friday evening, Dragas approaches Sullivan to say that she (Dragas) has spoken to the BOV who are prepared to issue a vote of no confidence in Sullivan. Dragas willfullly and intentionally leads Sullivan to believe that this is the unanimous position of the BOV.
* Dragas waits for Sullivan to consider this troubling news, following up with a suggestion that Sullivan may choose to exercise her option to resign…or possibly face a public vote of no confidence by the BOV.
* Believing that the BOV en masse have decided that she must leave, Sullivan tenders her resignation to Dragas. Sullivan understandably does not want to put this to a public vote of the BOV.
* After Dragas notifies members of the BOV that Sullivan has tendered her resignation, she (Dragas) calls an emergency meeting of the Executive Committee.
* The purpose of the meeting is ONLY to move and accept the motion to accept Sullivan’s resignation. This meeting is a formality and nothing more. (Dragas must move quickly to call this meeting, as it is critical to quickly and formally accept Sullivan’s nomination. To delay would allow time for members of the BOV to consult with one another–something Dragas wants to avoid.)
* It takes only a quorum of three members of the BOV’s Executive Committee to vote to accept Sullivan’s resignation.
Done and done.
What say you, adept readers?
I say accepting a resignation tendered in June to be effective in August does not constitute an emergency, therefore the executive committee meeting should have been publicized. It wasn’t. The actions taken at that meeting should be voided by their illegality.
Sounds plausible. Leaves out Kiernan, maybe Strine’s possible role and motives, maybe other leaders at UVA.
As important are why Dragas decides to orchestrate a coup, the ideology behind it.
More important, is: if all these probable and nefarious theories turn out to be the truth or close to the truth-what then shall we do?
What action should we take as citizens, faculty members, community members, students, parents, donors?
In the short run:
E M E R G E N C Y
open meeting of the Faculty Senate and all interested individuals
To take place at 5 p.m. on Sunday, June 17 in the Darden Abbot Auditorium. Parking is in the garage to the right. Follow the signs to the auditorium.
I believe there will be a rally outside the Rotunda at 2:30 on Monday before the BOV meeting and I believe the BOV will be holding a public meeting at 5 after its closed session meeting. I would encourage all to go to these events to voice your concerns.
In the long run there needs to be some kind of action to change the way BOVs are appointed and operate.
I’m not seeing a lot regarding staff of the University–you know, the “worker bees”.
Just a couple of thoughts:
a) I know no one who is not absolutely bereft by this situation. Personally, I find myself in a vicious circle of emotions, going from agitated to angry and back again. I have gone through the week with a sense of paralysis. I would bet, this past week has been the least productive ever from the average staff person. There is a pall over Grounds. Should this travesty be allowed to play itself out without an in-depth investigation of the situation, the institution will be marred to a point that I will not see reconciled in my lifetime. All over arrogance and ego. Ah–Mr. Jefferson must be rolling over in his grave.
b) Don’t hold out for Ed Ayers; I believe he has WAY more smarts and class than to get in the middle of this cluster. With this debacle, does the BOV think they could attract anyone of quality, much less greatness?? Only one w/an overwhelming pathetic arrogance could believe so…and therein lies the problem.
It seems that Rector Dragas thought accepting President Sullivan’s resignation immediately constituted an emergency.
Inquiring minds want to know why.
Is there any hope of help internally from the three BOV members who were thought to be sympathetic to Sullivan, and thus were not contacted by Dragas? Is there any method by which members of the BOV can unseat a Rector, and presumably Vice Rector? It seems likely that there are at least three members who would be completely against the ouster and perhaps many more who did not know the import of whatever they agreed to in long, private conversations with Dragas and perhaps Kington. I just don’t know whether there is any useful lobbying to be done of individual members of the BOV in advance of their meeting Sunday. The reporting on the three uncontacted members, the outside help of Kiernan and other alums, and the machinations of the last ten days suggest a far from unified Board.
“Just Saying,” I think you’re absolutely right about this. Of course, we don’t yet know why Sullivan was fired, but a clear theme has emerged here, and the simplest explanation is that it was for the same reason that these other tragedies have occurred. It is for this reason that I find it increasingly difficult to justify working for the University of Virginia.
B. Ashburn, your proposed explanation for the Dragas’ apparent isolation of each member of the board makes a great deal of sense. That explanation had flitted about at the edge of my mind, but never solidified into an actual idea. Now that you explain it, it sure seems like a very simple, utterly plausible explanation.
“mlbitu,” I think you might be about right. (I didn’t work for the university back on September 11, 2001, but that might rival it.) I’ve observed a huge amount of loss of staff time because, as you explained, people are angry and confused. There’s a lot of time talking to co-workers, trying to understand what’s happened and, perhaps more important, what’s going to happen. After all, if the president can be tossed with two days’ notice, can’t the same be done to us?
Anne, I don’t know the answer to that question, and I don’t have the time to hunt it down just now, but I’ll bet that it can be found in “The Manual of the Board of Visitors the University of Virginia.” Chapter 4 appears to address the selection of the Rector.
@anne…I hear “philosophical differences” is all you need to unseat anybody at UVA
This is especially true after the Garcetti supreme Court case that denies free speech rights to public employees who sue for retribution for whistle blowing retribution or for speaking out against their employers. The conservatives have managed to use the Courts to squash free speech rights and public protest.
Has anyone seen the Call for the BOV Emergency Meeting on Monday?
It’s my impression from serving on the Board of another Virginia institution that unless public comment is specifically prohibited at a meeting, it must be permitted. This is my impression but not a certainty. Anybody know?
JWS, I have not seen the Call for the BOV Emergency Meeting, although a notice is posted on the BOV website.
I do recall that when the meeting was announced (in some on-line media), it was proactively stated that no public comment would be taken.
And now more is revealed–and it is disturbing.
Simon has now endorsed Sullivan:
I’d like to be clear that there are a number of members of the University of Virginia community who support the decision of The Board of Visitors, the vast majority of whom are alums and know what’s best for UVA, versus the vision of a first-time university President, non-alum and someone with no prior experience at our beloved University. These individuals may not be speaking up because of the outrage regarding the egregious and unfair nature of her dismissal, which the Board admits, they are out there, and I hope more will step up and show solidarity with our fellow alums, those that believe The University is better served over the long-term under the stewardship of another individual.
Here’s Seth’s post, run through the Hill & Knowlton de-bullsh1t-ifier:
Blah blah number of members [vague–“one” is a number] blah blah support BOV blah blah know what’s best for UVA [shut up and bow before them, they know what’s best] blah blah our beloved University blah blah blah they’re all cowards but they’re out there blah blah solidarity blah long-term blah stewardship.
Those are some nice multi-syllabic words, Seth, but your last sentence is a train wreck when it comes to correct punctuation. If you graduated from UVa, you should go back and demand another writing class, because you were ill-served.
By “number” you mean…six? (That is a number, after all.) Or six thousand? If that number is greater than six, how do you know that this silent majority exists?
With this statement, you’re implicitly saying that those who disagree with the board’s actions (such as two prior presidents of the university and the provost) do not know what’s best for UVA, whereas you do, by virtue of your special status and relationship to it. Do you really mean that?
More than…what? Because, right now, I know of exactly zero people who have “stepped up” to support the BOV’s actions, other than those who are actually involved in orchestrating Sullivan’s dismissal.
And what, precisely, could have motivated Dragas to begin plotting to overthrow Sullivan when Terry had barely begun her work? Envy? Malice? Thirst for power at any cost? I am reminded of the Medici Family during the Renaissance–whispering campaigns and poisons. There is more to this than meets the eye–or the nose.
Carolyn, really, you’re using your liberal arts education (Medicis? Who are they and why do we care?) in a feeble attempt to overcome a solid, American, business education derived concept of the universe. Srsly, nothing exists beyond this quarter’s bottom line. Did you get neither the memo nor the tweet?
You know, in an uber-fashion, I wonder how the Wisconsin recall failure has played into all of this. Unions (and Faculty Senates) can be ignored because, you know, this is what the ‘people’ (whom we’ve used our corporate free-speech $$$ to influence) want. They want what we (the Dragas’ et al) want.
It’s all hubris. Thank heaven that reference will be gone when we eliminate the classics.
Dear Barbara: You are absolutely right. I was flaunting my ignorance of today’s business model by referring to a bunch of dead guys–and gals–who spoke a useless language–Italian–and painted pictures. Incredibly, sometimes they painted on the same picture for *years*! If that’s not contrary to the spirit of strategic dynamism, I don’t know what is.
Comments are closed.

domain: politics


text:
Today In Bible Prophecy Ministries
Independent Fundamental Bible Prophecy Ministry
Prophecy is a lamp that shineth in a dark place (2 Peter 1:19)
The Hinnom Valley And The Valley Of Jehoshaphat
Jeremiah 7:31-32 – Joel 3: 1-2
The valleys in the city of Jerusalem today are the Hinnom Valley, the Tyropean Valley, and the Kidron Valley. These valleys are mentioned in the Word of God. Two of the valleys I want to look at are the Hinnom valley and the Valley of Jehoshaphat. These valleys in Jerusalem played a significant role in biblical times.
The Hinnom Valley is on the western side of the old city from the Temple Mount and the valley of Jehoshaphat is on the east side of the old city of the Temple Mount. In between both valleys are the Tyropean Valley or also known as the valley of the cheesemakers. It was where they bought and sold during the second Temple period.
The Valley of Hinnom went by two names in the Scriptures and these names are Tophet and Hinnom in Jeremiah 7:31-32 where the heinous child sacrifices took place. Its name was changed to the Valley of Slaughter in Jeremiah 7:32 where they sacrificed their children to Molech and buried them in the valley until they ran out of burial space.
All three valleys are connected to form the 21st letter of the Hebrew Alphabet, Shin. It looks like the letter W in its paleo form and it represents the Name of God, "Shaddai". 1. God said in 2 Chronicles 6:6, I have chosen Jerusalem, that my Name be there forever. God placed His Name eternally in the city of the Great King, (Matt 5:35).
The valley of Jehoshaphat is also known as the Kidron Valley in the New Testament which separates the Mount of Olives to the east from the Temple Mount to the west. Jesus and His disciples frequently crossed the Kidron to either go to the Mount of Olives or the Temple Mount. David's rebellious son Absalom was killed in the Kidron valley and his traditional tomb is there today, 2 Samuel 18:18.
The Valley of Jehoshaphat should not be confused with the Jezreel Valley north of the state of Israel as you view it from Megiddo. The Jezreel Valley is where Armageddon takes place, Revelation 16:16. All nations will gather in the Jezreel Valley to prepare to make war against Him at His second coming to earth at the end of the 70th Week, or tribulation, (Rev 17:14).
They march from the north to the south to Jerusalem where the battle will take place, the battle for Jerusalem where God will meet them head on defending His city, (Zech 14:2).
Time Magazine some time ago came out with an article, The Battle For Jerusalem. The world rejects Israel's claim to Jerusalem as its capitol.
In the Hinnom valley, the Canaanites made their children pass through the fire. In Jesus' day it was a garbage refuge. In the future, Israel's enemies will try to make Israel pass through the fire. The enemies of the Jewish state will try to destroy the Jewish people by marching from Jezreel to Jerusalem to wipe out the Jews and take Jerusalem as their own.
We read in Zechariah 1:14 God said, 'I am jealous for Jerusalem and Zion with great jealousy. In other words, in the Hebrew, 'I am aggressively possessive of Jerusalem".
In Zechariah 1:15 God says, 'I am very sore displeased with the heathen….I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction. In other words, I was upset, but now they ticked me off!
United With Israel News reported, Visit a brand-new park in the Valley of Hinnom, outside of Jerusalem, and discover its historical roots in the Book of Joshua, which is where the concept of Hell originates. The neighborhood has been rehabilitated by the City of David organization, producing a lush environment where tourists can sample food, ancient bread, and olive oil created using ancient methods.
Bible prophecy calls for all nations to invade the Kidron Valley and seek to eliminate the Jews and take Jerusalem. God will meet them head on destroying these nations.
We read in Joel 3: 1-2 that when the Jews are in the land the nations will seek to destroy the chosen people. God said He would gather all nations and bring them to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. In Joel 3:12-14 God will bring the heathen into the valley of Jehoshaphat to judge them. God will crush them like grapes in a winevat until the blood flows.
The Kidron valley is also called, the Valley of Decision where the final decision will come about and the nations destroyed when they attack Jerusalem.
The stage is being set for this end-time scenario to be carried out as Israel's enemies are getting into position. close at hand

domain: geography


text:
Machines aren't supposed to feel, but this cyborg can't help falling in love.
Assigned as a specimen collector for a captured cyborg, Chloe is intrigued by the machine disguised as a man. Kidnapped during his daring escape, he shows her that despite the chip in his brain, his humanity is not completely lost.
Formerly known as unit X109GI, Joe is on a quest to discover his origin. While he doesn't find the answers he's looking for, he does discover that affection and lust aren't just for humans. But when it comes to a battle between logic and love, which side will the cybernetic organism—once a man—choose?
Evaluating his feelings will have to wait though because the military isn't done with Joe. But their threats against him pale in comparison before the shocking discovery of project C791, the revelation of which stuns the rebel cyborgs—and ignites a fury for vengeance.
The Cyborgs: More Than Machines books can be read as stand alone stories, however, for total reader enjoyment it is recommended you read them in order.
C791 – Book 1
F814 – Book 2
B785 – Book 3
Aramus – Book 4
Seth – Book 5
New York Times and USA Today bestseller, Eve Langlais, is a Canadian romance author who is known for stories that combine quirky storylines, humor and passion.

domain: library


Alisea understands that our team is the key to our success. Our staff is comprised of skilled and experienced workers in multiple engineering disciplines, including civil, electrical, industrial, IT and energy. Innovation, technology and excellence are our strengths and the hallmark of our projects. We are united in our purpose to be part of the energy transition and help our clients achieve their energy goals.
Working for Alisea
The Alisea team shares a common goal. We strive to combine our individual strengths to participate as one in the global journey towards sustainability. Excellence in what we do is our contribution. We promote energy efficient projects by designing, implementing and managing energy consumption solutions. Thanks to Alisea’s efforts, our clients have reduced their energy consumption by up to 80%, resulting in significant reductions in carbon emissions in Spain.


For our free coronavirus pandemic coverage, learn more here.
Essendon are not looking further ahead than Sunday’s game against North Melbourne after being thrown into uncertainty when forced to leave Victoria at a moment’s notice on Thursday.
The club understands there is a chance they will be on the road for several weeks but remain hopeful they might be able to play upcoming home games against the Giants and Sydney in Melbourne.
Sam Durham is preparing to make his senior debut for the Bombers this weekend.Credit:Getty Images
However, coach Ben Rutten says they will just take what comes their way without complaint with their immediate focus on beating North Melbourne at Metricon Stadium to stay in finals contention.
“It’s been a bit of a mad dash,” Rutten said.
“Our focus is about preparing ourselves as best we can for the game for North on Sunday, then get through to Monday and hopefully we will have some more information then. That’s the environment at the moment. I don’t think there are answers out there so we will know we will be here on Monday and we have North on Sunday.”
Power coach Ken Hinkley.Credit:Getty Images
Two players – Paddy Ambrose, who is injured and has just had a baby, and Andrew Phillips, whose wife is 38 weeks pregnant – stayed home but the remainder of the squad travelled, indicating the club’s preparedness to be on the road for several weeks.
Bombers captain Dyson Heppell will return from hand surgery, while Essendon also named mid-season draft pick Sam Durham, an athletic and versatile wingman, to make his debut.
Essendon were not the only club dealing with uncertainty as St Kilda, Port Adelaide, Melbourne and Hawthorn remained unsure on Friday morning as to what time their games would be played on Saturday.
Port Adelaide coach Ken Hinkley said they would definitely fly in and out of Melbourne to play the Saints at Marvel Stadium and it was likely the match would be played in the early afternoon, rather than at night when it was originally scheduled.
The Saints were anticipating being in quarantine in Perth for a week ahead of their round 19 clash against the Eagles at Optus Stadium, with their coach Brett Ratten saying the plan was for them to fly out soon after they played Port Adelaide.
Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson joked that his team would be prepared to play on Friday night if called upon but he expected to play against the Demons at the MCG at some time on Saturday.
With Geelong returning to Victoria on Friday morning, and Richmond and the Western Bulldogs both expecting to fly straight back to Melbourne after their respective matches on the Gold Coast, it’s clear the AFL is trying to avoid keeping clubs on the road unless the location of their next match is relatively clear.
Brisbane Lions CEO Greg Swann told SEN he was uncertain when, or where, their scheduled clash against Hawthorn in round 19 would occur. Swann said, although it had not been discussed, he imagined there was some chance the AFL could pause the season for one week to take stock of the situation with five rounds and finals to be played after this round of matches.
The AFL has said they will not release the round 19 fixture until next week when the situation becomes clearer.
Keep up to date with the best AFL coverage in the country. Sign up for the Real Footy newsletter.
Most Viewed in Sport
From our partners
Source: Read Full Article


text:
The perfect way to tell the cat lover in your life how much you love them!
Original watercolor illustration printed on 130 lb. premium bright white paper
4.25 x 5.5" card
Blank inside for your message
Comes with a deep-flap purple paper envelope in a protective cellophane sleeve!
Would you like to mix and match 5 cards with a discount? Card deal available here!
Based on 1 review
Girlfriend loved it


Spatial Light Modulators
Oct 2006PerkinElmerRequest Info
CRi, developer of the modern liquid-crystal spatial light modulator, is the exclusive provider of technology for bonded masks providing simultaneous phase and amplitude control. The company offers 128-pixel and 640-pixel masks . Play-and-play USB interface provides digital control and power and easy integration for research applications. Free software development kits are available for Windows, LabVIEW and Matlab drivers. Visible and near-infrared models with optional reflective surfaces ar also offered.


text:
Customers have been left shocked after four petrol stations operated by the same dealer shut down with no warning.
Now they have been fenced off and are out of action as a question mark hangs over the future of each of the sites.
Essar said in a statement today that the decision has been ‘entirely beyond our control’.
“We have been informed by the dealer operating the retail stations at Endon, Fenton, Longton and Mossfield that his arrangements to lease the sites from the freehold owner have been terminated,” the company added.
“We apologise for any inconvenience this has caused to our customers or to the communities local to the sites.
“We continue to supply high-quality fuel from the Stanlow refinery to the rest of our network of branded stations acros the UK, including others in the Stoke-on-Trent area.”
The affected sites include Longton Service Station, in Sutherland Road.
Connor Hulstone works at neighbouring Timberland DIY and said he was surprised to see the garage shut down on Wednesday last week.
The 25-year-old, from Wolstanton, said: “It just happened. It took about two days to strip down.
“I’m not sure why it happened. But we’ve seen people coming to look at it every day. It would be sound if somebody else took it on.”
Jeremy Bowler, from Weston Coyney, often called in at the Longton station while visiting Timberland DIY. He said: “I was really shocked when it closed. It seemed to be doing OK.”
Mossfield Service Station, in Dividy Road, Bentilee, also shut without notice.
Helen Meek, from Dividy Road, used to get newspapers from the store there. The 77-year-old said: “It’s a shame, particularly for older people. They used to go there to get things like milk.
“There have been about five owners of the station since we moved here 16 years ago.”
Mrs Meek fears the site may now become home to a fast food business if it doesn’t re-open as a garage.
Residents were also shocked to see Endon Service Station close. One neighbour said: “One minute it was open, the next it was shut. Within two or three days, all the pumps were ripped out.”
The Fenton service station was based in Victoria Road.

domain: news


Sc. P. R. Sinha, M. Sc. , Ph. Even if you?ve in no way worked out, we may also help you get programming help Body you like by operating with this systematic workout plan with each other with a variety inducing healthy eating plan and particularly formulated nutritional supplements. Are you all set to enhance your health and muscle power?Get major working with application engineering single coding help programming help most biological methods possible. Are you trying for software engineering complete Body creating system that teaches you how to use software engineering healthy food plan and supplements, programming help way specialists do?Sagi Kalev, writer coding help Body BEAST, has been software engineering bodybuilder due to programming help fact programming help age coding help sixteen. He credit software engineering four year tour coding help duty in programming help Israeli army with educating him programming help self control, emphasis, perseverance, and regard he provides to his bodybuilding training. Drawing on his education and learning application engineering degree in physical education and learning from programming help University coding help Central Florida with program engineering small in nutrition, Sagi has written software engineering nourishment prepare particularly for programming help Body BEAST work out. And his quite application engineering few a long time coding help advantage in teaching bodybuilding competition function programming help foundation for programming help plan itself.