Meramec students, faculty and staff defend former vice president of student affairs Stephen Petersen at board of trustees meetingBy: Carlos Restrepo
– Editor in Chief –
Following Stephen Petersen’s removal, a large part of the student and faculty population at STLCC-Meramec were outraged and puzzled by this decision. However, it was at the March 25 board of trustees meeting that faculty, staff and students finally came together to express their opinions freely and out of anonymity.
Out of the 13 people that spoke before board members, 10 addressed the Petersen issue. It was a mix of students, faculty and staff. They were all given a two-minute limit imposed by the board when there are “large crowds desiring to address the board.”
Michael Roman, Student Governance Council president, had a speech prepared, representing his and the SGC’s plurality opinion regarding Petersen’s removal.
“We believe that Dr. Petersen is the heart of the student affairs side of our campus. He has proven time and time again that his interests lie with the students,” Roman said. “In a regular meeting of the SGC, we decided unanimously to support him.”
Roman also said that the removal of Petersen meant a loss of both “leadership and friendship” to the students.
“When you take the heart away from the college, you take away its soul,” Roman said.
However, shortly before Roman was able to finish his speech, Joann Ordinachev, board of trustees chair, announced Roman’s time was over.
When it was his time to speak, Eric Meyer, English professor at Meramec, condemned Ordinachev and the board for doing this.
“I am a little disappointed that you cut a student short,” Meyer said. “The student [Roman] was representing all of thousands of Meramec students.”
After this statement, Meyer went on with his words of support for Petersen.
“We were very fortunate to have someone of his caliber walk through our doors…” Meyer said. “…He deeply cared about the college and especially our students. He cared about St. Louis Community College, and when I saw him represent us nationally and all over St. Louis, he made us look very, very good.”
Meyer continued even after his time limit was over – and over Ordinachev’s hit of the gavel. In his words Meyer did not mention any particular administrator but was clear to indicate that some administrators use the institution as a “stepping stone.”
“We cannot sit here and let a temporary administrator run the college into the ground, doing damage that will take years and years to repair. We all have to live with the long-term consequences of terrible decisions,” Meyer said. “The deciders will be long gone. Remember this: we hire administrators collectively; we give them the power to lead us, not to boss us around and create a climate of fear. I am not scared anymore. They have a power through our collective consent and we have to make it very clearly be known that when that power has been abused, we suffer, our students suffer, and our future students suffer. We then, the faculty and staff, have not just a right, but a responsibility – a duty to speak up and to take action to ensure that the administration is doing what is right, not for the short term, but what it’s right for the long term of the college.”
The audience attending the meeting applauded, while Ordinachev stressed the rules of the meeting.
“Again I ask that you please respect this board – and this board respects you – and all of you that have come up here, until now, have been very diligent in using two minutes. A lot can be said in two minutes, and we are listening… Please adhere to the two-minute rule,” Ordinachev said.
Student Vincent Hayden, vice president of communication for Phi Theta Kappa, who demanded transparency in the decision making process of the administration.
“It maybe in board policy that a probationary employee does not have to be given a reason, but it is unethical in this situation. We demand a reason,” Hayden said, as he turned around to face Meramec president Paul Pai and saying determinedly, “Dr. Petersen was a good fit for our campus.”
Hayden went on to say that “In his [Petersen’s] vision, he always put the students first and it is sad that his vision will not be fulfilled.”
The board then adjourned the meeting.
STLCC Chancellor Zelema Harris, Ph.D., said that it was good for the students to come to the board meetings and voice their opinions.
“I think it is very important for the process to work to hear from students their comments seriously,” Harris said. “Their involvement means they are going to be better students and ultimately be better citizens.”
Harris also said that the comments faculty, staff and students make at board will matter.
“They do make a difference, believe me. Not every statement – but I think that the fact that those who have come down here have taken their time to voice their concerns means that they love what they are doing and they love their campus,” Harris said.
Chancellor Harris also confirmed that the handling of probationary administrative contracts is between her and the president, and that the board does not get involved thought it can “certainly influence it.”
“They can talk to me about something they are not comfortable with,” Harris said.
National Educators Association speaks up
John Messmer, Ph.D, political science professor, is one of the seven representatives of the National Educators Association at Meramec. Messmer said the NEA collected the opinions of faculty regarding the dismissal of Petersen. All were submitted anonymously, but represented a similar feeling.
“I am very bothered about Dr. Petersen’s situation. It should not be secretive. The morale is very bad at Meramec. People are afraid of losing their jobs; this is almost like a dictatorship. It should be Pai, not Petersen, who should be fired,” stated one of the opinions submitted to the NEA representatives.
However, after NEA representatives had collected these opinions, and pronounced officially at the board of trustees meeting, some members of the NEA felt as if though not enough was being done about the issue.
“Put it bluntly, we do have some representatives – and these are the faculty representatives – that are more reluctant than others to act quickly and decisively when it comes to this issue,” Messmer said.
Messmer said that the problem is that some representatives are not as energetic to move forward as others. Although there is general agreement on some issues, all representatives must agree.
“A lot of faculty would tell me that there is a consensus to move fast when it comes to two things: protesting the firing of Dr. Petersen specifically, and more generally, protest the leadership of Dr. Pai,” Messmer said. “I agree with that. However, this can’t be something that can be done by just the most energetic of us that are representatives. This has to be with the consensus of all of us that are representatives. Sometimes democracy is aggravating.”
Messmer said one of the steps that can be done to solve the tension between students, faculty and President Pai is to offer a reason as to why Petersen’s contract was not renewed.
“To president Pai’s credit, he still sticks by ‘he’s not a good fit.’ That’s not good enough,” Messmer said. “A good leader works to make it a good fit, especially when that good leader realizes that this is a person that works well with others without exception.”
However, Messmer said Petersen’s issue is not the only cause of the tension.
“This is beyond the Petersen’s issue. Reinstating Dr. Petersen will be a long way in easing the tension that exists. I think we are a forgiving lot,” Messmer said. “I think theoretically that could ease some of the tension, but realize, criticism specifically of Dr. Pai runs longer and deeper than just the Steve Petersen issue – that’s just the final brick in the wall.”
Collin Reischman and Andrea Royals contributed to this article.
