Section: Education

September 21, 2008

SUNO responds to Times-Picayune article

NEW ORLEANS, LA. - In response to the Times-Picayune’s September 20,
2008 article “Case tells of scheme at SUNO,” Southern University at
New Orleans (SUNO) issues the following statement:

The September 20, 2008 article in The Times-Picayune titled “Case
tells of scheme at SUNO” appears to suggest wrong-doing perpetrated by
Southern University at New Orleans. This is contrary to the presiding
judge’s ruling that the whistle blower law which the plaintiffs sought
to be protected by does not apply in this case. Specifically, the judge
stated that for the whistle blower law to apply, it “requires that a
law was actually violated by the employer.” The judge simply found
that the plaintiffs believed that laws had been violated. The judge
adjudicated that the plaintiffs be reinstated, but did not honor their
petition filed for payment of financial damages. The reinstatement
judgment will be appealed by SUNO per the advice of the Southern
University System’s attorney.

It is worth mentioning that the Louisiana Board of Regents’ internal
auditor testified at a court hearing that SUNO did not violate any rules
or regulations with the University’s Dual Enrollment program. The
internal auditor explained that it is routine for adjustments to be made
on initial enrollment data submitted by post-secondary institutions
until they are finalized. Court reports will show that the internal
auditor testified that SUNO’s submittal fell into this category. It
is also important to note that the University’s fall 2006 final
enrollment data was verified by the Louisiana Board of Regents.

The truth is that the two plaintiffs involved had become disgruntled
employees months prior to the inception of the Dual Enrollment program
at SUNO because their requests in the spring of 2006 for salary
increases had been denied. Specifically, in a letter dated May 1, 2006,
Linda Tolbert-Mosley requested a salary adjustment from $41,200 to
$65,000. At the time, Tolbert-Mosley, one of the plaintiffs, served as
the director of retention. Dr. Victor Ukpolo, Chancellor of SUNO, met
with Tolbert-Mosley regarding her request and explained that it could
not be honored at that time. He testified in court that she vehemently
stated that he would regret denying her salary request. This event
occurred a few months prior to the start of the normal fall 2006
enrollment process, including the newly established Dual Enrollment
program. Similarly the other plaintiff, Timotea Sanchez Bailey, then
director of admissions, had verbally requested a salary increase that
was also not honored.

It was also clearly documented during court hearings that a significant
number of the “ghost” Dual Enrollment students were, in fact,
entered into the computer system by Bailey. She did not refute this
during the hearings. Additional irregularities that surfaced during the
hearings showed that in many cases students who were originally admitted
as regular freshmen in the fall of 2006 were redirected into the Dual
Enrollment program by Bailey. This is yet another fact that she did not
deny in court. This was done in spite of a directive from Dr. Ukpolo
that all students in the program must meet the criteria as outlined by
the Louisiana Board of Regents.

Dr. Ukpolo, in an August 12, 2006 e-mail to Bailey wrote, “Let me go
on record on this issue again for clarification. While we have given
students provisional admission, it is still the responsibility of the
admissions office to ensure that all students meet the requirement for
unconditional admission to SUNO, including providing whatever documents
are missing in their files. Provisional admission does not equate to
admission unless all necessary requirements have been met.” This was
in response to an August 11, 2006 e-mail from Bailey indicating that she
had entered students into the system. In spite of the directives from
Dr. Ukpolo, court records show that she continued to enroll “ghost”
students into the Dual Enrollment program.

The Dual Enrollment program, now known as the Early Start program, has
grown into an outstanding program. SUNO will appeal the court’s
ruling that the plaintiffs be reinstated in their previous positions.

END

Eddie Francis