It was the last meeting of the school year for the Connecticut State University System's Board of Trustees, and farewells were in order.
There was the valediction to the student members of the board, given praise by the board's chairman, a plaque thanking them for their service, a handshake and a chance to speak, followed by applause from about 100 attendees.
And there was the brief and awkward goodbye to Southern Connecticut State University president Cheryl Norton.
Reading in a monotone from a sheet of paper, Chancellor David G. Carter spent 15 seconds on his send-off for Norton, who has served as president at the university in New Haven for almost six years.
"I wish to express my appreciation to President Norton for her many contributions to Southern Connecticut State University during her tenure as president," he said. "I wish her the very best as she embarks on her sabbatical leave."
Following his remarks he did not look at her, nor did the two speak before or after her last Board of Trustees meeting Thursday.
Within seconds of the meeting being gaveled closed, Norton was headed for the exit, leaving behind a room full of stunned colleagues and her leather notebook with the SCSU emblem filled with her business cards and other job-related materials.
Norton leaves Southern at the end of this month, having been dismissed by Carter in November.
Both Norton and Carter were mum on the events surrounding her departure.
"I cannot talk about it," Norton said.
"I will not talk about it," Carter said.
Despite Norton's February announcement that she was stepping down "for personal and professional reasons," and an official description of her departure as a "retirement," The Connecticut Mirror disclosed last month that Norton actually had been dismissed by Carter in a Nov. 17 letter. Lawyers later negotiated a separation agreement.
The agreement states that Norton's departure "is not related in any way to her work performance or for disciplinary reasons," but give no other reason. As part of the agreement, Norton and CSU officials agreed not to comment on the separation.
But that didn't stop nearly a dozen professors and the student board member from Western Connecticut State University from speaking against the way her departure was handled during a public forum following Thursday's meeting.
"The presidents will end up thinking that they have to stay under the grips of the chancellor in order to retain their job," said Steve Larocco, an English professor at Southern, adding that that Norton's dismissal "consolidates power to the chancellor."
Larocco was referring to Carter's dismissal of Norton under a new policy that had been adopted by the executive committee of the CSU trustees just eight weeks earlier. The new policy allows a chancellor, with approval of the trustees' chairman, to dismiss a president without cause. Previously, approval by the entire 18-member board was required.
Complaints about Norton's dismissal continued after the meeting.
"It was a hush job. She didn't need to be fired. She was a good president. I have not been able to find anyone who would have agreed she needed to be fired," Will Hochman, an English professor at Southern, told a group of professors talking after the meeting.
They agreed with him.
Brian Johnson, president of Southern's Faculty Senate, said he is "tired of being side-stepped" by the board in his request for a review of the policy.
"No one really knows what happened. Let them bring the policy to the light of the full board. We've been seeking transparency and dialogue and we've been rebuffed every step of the way," he said.
Johnson said he is "clueless" to why Norton was fired, since "all the measures of how our university is doing have been great."
The group of critics may have spurred one trustee to act, as Gail Williams voiced her concern with the policy following the public forum and asked that the full board review the new policy's merits.
There is no guarantee the item will be placed on a future board of trustees agenda, but it is on the agenda of state lawmakers. Members of the Higher Education Committee to promise a full investigation in the coming month. Neither Carter nor Norton would say whether they will testify, but Sen. Mary Ann Handley, D-Manchester, said as co-chairwoman of the committee she has the power to subpoena them to testify. Whether she plans to go that far remains to be determined, she said.
Having worked with Senator Kevin Sullivan on the legislation to expand and enhance the Connecticut State University System I can assure you that David Carter’s actions are exactly the opposite of what the Legislature intended when it developed the law pertaining to the powers of the Chancellor. CSU is a great university but this type of abuse of power is more than unsettling, it is, I believe a violation of both the spirit and the letter of Connecticut law.
For what specific (actual) reasons was she pushed out? What did she do, or fail to do? Everyone's focusing on the process, which makes sense, but what's the cause here?
It is a very sad state of affairs when we, the residents of CT, allow a democratic system that was in place for decades to change and be run like a dictatorship. I did not realize we left the USA!
In all seriousness how can we allow one person to make the decisions regarding the presidents of the CSU system without the BOT as a whole voting in such a measure as has been done in the past.
I do believe that the tiers within the BOT and their roles have been reversed. The Chancellor has a position
Shaking up Southern is exactly what is needed. Norton had six years to change the culture there and she failed. Check the DHE figures -- 13% four graduation rate for full-time students. Remember the Channel 3 report in poor control of equipment - Southern loses where more than the other three CSU schools combined. They have had IT breaches, cost over runs on construction jobs and money stolen by someone in their Bursar's Office. Read the State Audit reports for even more stuff. I am glad Carter had the guts to make a change.
Read MoreThen the board of trustees should have fired her.
If the facts are what they are, explain why it matters. If the Board really has a problem with Carter over this matter, then they can fire him. The Chancellor has no influence over who gets appointed to the Trustees so there is an independencfe oversight of the Chancellor. I really think the Southern faculty are afraid of getting a kick-butt President that will shake them out of their dysfunctional world. Someone that will hold them accountable. Southern should be the lead school in CSU rather than its embarrassment. After six years of President
Read MoreHmm, let's see, an expensive settlement for SCSU's first female president, who turned around a faltering institution; the placement of a male buddy in her stead; the strategic leak of the letter that triggered the dispute that was settled - a leak that was intended to damage her future prospects. Anyone else think Civil Rights may not apply to women in the CSU System? Anyone else think the letter leak is a late hit in a longstanding game of sex discrimination and harrassment? Where is the state's civil rights division - or Obama's for that matter?
Norton's agreement can
Read MoreTurned around a faltering campus???? Your whole arguement falls apart there. The statistics (go to DHE web site) do not show a turnaround. Connecticut state government (including the CSU System) needs to more agressively terminate poor performing employees. Whether it is a clerk at DMV or a President of a college. For too long the leaders have not had the guts to terminate those basically stealing a paycheck. I am sure Norton tried and she is probably a decent person but she has not been able to change the culture at Southern. It is an
Read MoreOh, and while she's at it Norton should sue Mikey S. for libel among other things. Any takers for my bet that Mikey's really the chancellor or his buddy (both are really inspiring leaders, don't you agree)?
I believe that when an investigation is launched, you will find more than you bargained for. Anyone who dares question Carter, or raises issues regarding his management team or adherence to state regulations is going to be sent out in the coal bin - he will make sure of that. I was the second security officer to be summarily fired by Carter after pushing for a risk assessment and asking for improvements in the rather bleak security picture there. Carter will bring the system down if he is allowed to continue to silence all who dare question
Read MoreHaving for a brief time been a security officer under Carter, I can unequivocally state that he has no interest in the spirit of state legislation. I was fired after pushing for an assessment of security risk - heaven forbid I turn up issues! I was told more than once that, as a special executive branch of state government, the System Office was not obligated to comply with mandates that every other state agency must follow. Arrogance!
As the former Security Officer for CSUS under Carter, I can state from personal experience that Dr. Norton was eager to have a risk assessment performed on her IT security and had taken steps to put it in the works. However, I was severly chastised by Carter and his direct reports for speaking with Dr Norton and was further expressly forbidden from doing a risk assessment - and was shortly thereafter summarily fired myself.
Please be careful about making assumptions - the whole story of CSUS has barely begun to appear in the light of public scrutiny.