31 responses so far ↓

• 1 ed // Oct 23, 2008 at 5:37 pm

  I’ve always heard it was 10% of the bond. Not sure if that’s true. I have to believe they took his passport already, and he’s been under close watch since this all broke.

  My questions are about money. They said they froze all his assets, so what’s he using to live on…mortgage, food, etc. And what will he use to pay (what I’m sure will be) a HUGE legal bill???

• 2 BHG // Oct 23, 2008 at 5:49 pm

  Yeah, I think only a portion of it has to be put up in cash. And they usually take your passport and won’t let you leave the western district without permission from the court.

  I advise you to sign up for a PACER account with the federal court system if you have not already — you can view and download/save PDF documents for 8 cents a page (and I think they stop charging if it’s beyond 30 pages). They don’t have the minutes from the bond hearing up yet but they probably will later tonight or tomorrow. And during the case you can keep up with motions, etc. And once you sign up once on PACER you can use it for other federal courts in the country, too.

• 3 investigator // Oct 23, 2008 at 5:54 pm

  It was an “unsecured bond”, meaning he posted none of it… he will only have to pay it if he gets in trouble or otherwise violates condition of his bond. His passport was seized during the Secret Service’s initial search warrant performed back in June.

• 4 jake // Oct 23, 2008 at 6:00 pm

  investigator: You’re the best. Thanks for answering those questions.

• 5 ed // Oct 23, 2008 at 6:57 pm

  Investigator,

  Can you answer any of my “cash flow” questions from post #1? I’ve been curious about this since it all started.

  Thanks.

• 6 jake // Oct 23, 2008 at 7:22 pm

  Felner made plenty of legitimate money in his position at UofL and he made tons more illegally. So, one would be able to reason, he kept plenty of the money he earned legitimately. (While he was spending the other, of course)

• 7 ed // Oct 23, 2008 at 8:01 pm

  Of course! And I guess that could well be the case. But at the news conference yesterday, Huber said all his assets were seized. I took that to mean “all”…especially since I’m sure the feds have some hefty fines in mind for him. And, if I were the feds, I wouldn’t be distiguishing between his legitimate money and stolen money. I’d be seizing it all for now, until everything was sorted out…and paid back.

• 8 Billy Budd // Oct 23, 2008 at 8:10 pm

  At the risk of talking about something I know nothing about, I think the US attorney may have used the word ‘seized’ to mean ‘placed a lien upon’ or ‘made an offical claim against.’ I don’t think a prejudgment seizure is possible–there is no legal judgment against Felner.

• 9 Steve // Oct 23, 2008 at 8:18 pm

  Billy, I think you’re exactly right. Personal assets can be frozen but not appropriated until criminality is established by due process of adjudication.

  Hugs!

• 10 ed // Oct 23, 2008 at 9:42 pm

  Billy and Steve,

  That’s exactly what I meant and we’re saying the same thing. They are holding (freezing) his assets until everything is cleared up. I certainly wasn’t suggesting they’ve actually taken it before a trial.

  I just don’t see them giving him access to any money in any account….frozen….legit….none of it. So…just wondering what he’s living on and what he’ll pay his lawyer with. That’s really all I’m wondering.

• 11 Novena // Oct 23, 2008 at 10:48 pm

  “The Psychologists Come Marching In”

  What about the possibility of Bobby faking his research? If it, too, is fraudulent, school districts acting on it have been doubly duped. (Of course, educational research is seldom put into practice, which might well be a blessing in this case.)
  P.S. Why is it that some so-called “psychologists” can turn out to be such frauds (see Bruno Bettelheim, plagiarist supreme, and Sir Cyril Burt, cooker of data to make genetics seem the key to IQ)? Does Bobby, the feloner psychologist, follow in that infamous tradition?
  P.P.S. That subject could be the foundation for a future doctoral dissertation, though it will take much longer to research than that of Dr. Deasy. But which one doesn’t?

• 12 Cheese // Oct 23, 2008 at 10:57 pm

  Does anyone know who were the co-investigators on the NCLB grant? Typically there would be some other professors listed on a $500,000 plus sized grant. Why did they let years go by without being concerned that no research was being done and no reports or papers were being published?

• 13 Factsman Returns // Oct 24, 2008 at 12:04 am

  Novena et al, you are right a bout the moral obligation of PIs on such a grant to nowhere.
  NCLB or N$LB?
  The Ass. Dean for Research I believe is employed to monitor such obligations and along with any other dept. chairs or officials/administrators of the Univ. “HAS” to report any wrongdoing that can place the institution at risk…

  but hey, when Jim & SW still condone violations of faculty governance, encouraged hostile unprofessional behavior and bullying, condone cronies and nepotism, overlook annual evaluations of these CEHD administrators. …. well you now know, feces happens and we have another year of it ahead.

  So Jim R. now distracts attention from a money scandal with announcng more money, forget the issue of ethics in academe, Burt could cook data here all day like Success for All folks have…
  What would an accountant know about the ethics and quality of research? only$$$$$$$ ??

  Fact-or Prediction?

  There will not be decent candidates for Dean of CEHD until Ramsey and S.W. are removed…so the super intend ent can populate the college with more flunkies, cronies. nepotism,tenure and promote them all while others with integrity earn it the hard way. and life goes on…..

  Meanwhile,
  No accountability for the accountant(s) of the state’s second Univ., they apparently will be allowed to parade as leaders and pass as Ky’s best…..ho long?

  Karma?
  As far as Rewards for the goonies of lil Bobby’s CEHD shop, sabbaticals have to be in principle earned, justified by serious researchers / scholars…and approved by a competent Provost and faculty governance,
  this should be fun to watch…
  inept crooks still in charge running the college?
  deciding their own sabbaticals, shorting others? sounds familiar….tax payers should not have to pay for the stained parachutes, where are our elected officials?????
  Is this not like stealing too?

  Bubba’s pleasure is not the issue but rather addressing the (lack of) competency of those who allowed and aided this sicko to inflict damage for so long..(human and institutional)..yet somehow this is not allowed to be addressed by faculty governance, the wolves are not evaluated and the sheep are fleeced… only the money stolen from the feds counts
  Ky dollars are no good…….We need Moliere’s talent Novena, what a play….maybe someone who has lots of time on their hands?

  For CEHD insiders-
  Remember Bobby submitting the same “research” on schools in R. I. at AERA every year with the same crew of co-authors? Oh such rigor and groundbreaking findings! They found Bobby’s programreally worked and raised test scores?
  Schools kept paying for the same tale over and over …the Provost bought it
  call it
  ” The sub prime research scandal”, meanwhile poor children got cheated from needed resources and so much more….Bubba won’t like that..

  Yeah , right Bobby you were all about the “kids”, Anne Northup still believes in you and Marty Bell will cook you steaks for all that hard work when you come out.

  Maybe we will find some “research” articles based on all those AERA paper sessions. Where are those people anyway?

  ———
  Did they desecrate the Grawemeyer Award in Education on this watch???
  That family is not HAPPY JR & SW

  –Stop more Crap from The administration, return faculty governance which you stole!
  We the Faculty of the CEHD and staff and students accept your resignations if you only had the decency to take responsibility for the damage done, for the bobby you unleashed upon us and almost Wisconsin.
  You did not listen then, try listening now?

• 14 blowin' in the wind // Oct 24, 2008 at 8:52 am

  The superintendent is too busy heading for Canada to support the polar bears to do anything else right now–but watch out when he starts cutting the budget for next year…Since when did the deans start doing the hiring? …in any reputable college it is the faculty who approve new hires first.

• 15 Give us a break... // Oct 24, 2008 at 10:18 am

  Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, the University administration is now approaching the whole Felner thing as though they are the good guys. They have set up so many different committees, etc. to deal with procedures, paper, etc. – setting up a smoke screen – that it looks on the surface like they are addressing the problems, but they really aren’t. For example, now they are offering “group counseling” to faculty and staff who were hurt by this – one-shot sessions in the Planetarium with the University’s EAP to show their concern. Is this how you deal with group PTSD? They have a counselor training department right there in the College. Why don’t they ask their own psychologists to explain what effect a tyrant leader had on the minds and hearts of CEHD faculty and staff – and what steps they might take to deal with it?

  Everything Ramsey does is orchestrated to show concern but it is just surface crap. (How many times is he going to recite the list of committees he’s formed to address the mess?) The players are the same, the work environment is still an unsafe place to speak out, and requests to deal with concrete issues/hurts that occurred under Felner are pretty much dealt with by saying “the appropriate procedure was followed” or “We need to leave the past behind and look to the future.”

  The future with the same leadership in place is more of the past. The Courier Journal challenges the University again today in an editorial to make some real change, but unless someone who really understands and acknowledges what went on has some control, nothing will change.

• 16 Novena // Oct 24, 2008 at 10:32 am

  “Faculty Hires in Dante’s Inferno”

  Blowin’, you need to keep in mind that you’re talking about UofHell. At any decent college, the dean would not, ex cathedra, hire faculty. During Bobby’s reign, it was not unusual for the faculty to not even meet his hand-picked candidate. When they did, it was pro-forma rubber-stamping most of the time. Many faculty cowered in fear about what “psycho dean” might do. The losership team either openly supported such practices or looked away in sheep-like fashion (for personal rewards and/or similar fear and trembling at the feet of a monster).
  Do you think JR & SW knew this? To put it optimistically, the dollar sign could’ve caused their tunnel vision. Yet the rest of us had to pay for it in blood and tears for years. Now, what is Blake up to in his hiring practices? Comments? P.S. Once again, when is UofL going to advertise for the dean of education position? The state of KY waits . . . and waits . . . and waits.

• 17 Novena // Oct 24, 2008 at 10:45 am

  “Come on, JR, Put Me on a Committee”

  Break, you’re a keen observer of administrative “decison-making.” Like politics, it is at least 90% a PR-shell game–and that is just what JR is playing. He endlessly prattles on about committees “lookin’ into things.” This means: CYA at its most naked. Remember, JR is a politician, not an academician (like his bud Blake?). JR does not want to reflect on the past because it will bite him in the ass. Indeed, the future of UofL should be one without JR, master plumber of smoke screens.

• 18 AtUofL // Oct 24, 2008 at 10:59 am

  JR and SW you need to go.

• 19 Bob // Oct 24, 2008 at 11:45 am

  The PR folks finally have clicked in to present a positive spin for UL in this mess. Too little, too late, one hopes.
  Let’s hear why UL chiefs didn’t inform Wisconsin in spring ’08 about Felner issues. UL claims credit for initiating the investigation while they were willing to keep Wisconsin in the dark about the man UL endorsed as one of that state’s Chancellors? They continued to send out and to each other glowing comments on the man and all his “improvements” for the College, dismissing faculty/student pleas for help, etc. All while they now say they were informing the Feds of their suspicions about Felner. Ramsey at the time was trying to set up lunch with the Dean to get notes on how to continue Felner’s “success” so as to make sure the Indians didn’t get control of the reservation. Why then would we believe Prexy and Provost support faculty and shared-governance?
  Why then are we to believe UL’s claims that they get credit for turning in Felner? Sounds more like cya to me.

  They turned him in to the Secret Service because they suspected criminal actions and at the same time recommended him to Wisconsin and took notes on how to continue the man’s “successes” at UL? Do the President and the Provost really think the university community and the rest of us are that stupid?

  The trial will be interesting as surely it will expose in part at least those at UL who failed in their responsibilities in the various facets of this mess. Lots of UL offices should have been doing their jobs of oversight and control–and just plain ethics. That centers on President and Provost, it should go without saying. Are they what we should call unindited co-conspirators?

• 20 Worried // Oct 24, 2008 at 12:42 pm

  Bob is so right. Shirley Willihnganz has a lot of explaining to do, still. Her apology is appreciated, but it is not enough. Please explain how it was you could have known about Felner’s criminal actions and continue to write emails in support of him, saying, “I will really miss you” in an email dated as late as May? There is something not truthful here and for ethical reasons must be explained.

  Still, as one who continues to walk nervously in the halls of the CEHD and quietly just try to get along, I would vote to remove Felner’s leadership team before bothering with the provost or president. (The lame president didn’t know what was going on.) I want my immediate environment changed so we can all breathe more easily and get back to work. I want some trust and respect back. That can’t happen when members of Felner’s team, some of whom inflicted much of the cruelty, continue to “lead” us.

• 21 Curious // Oct 24, 2008 at 2:21 pm

  Anyone, please provide information. I would love to listen to Jake on Francene show. I tried on WHAS.Com. But it did not work for me.

• 22 doctoral student // Oct 24, 2008 at 4:40 pm

  Let’s remember that the cost of the careers, the dignity, the morale of CEHD, and the absolute destruction of many of the great people who worked in CEHD is on the same level as Felner’s financial dishonesty. People who spent their entire careers working toward high levels of academic rigor were systematically destroyed and humiliated by this man. He actually worked hard to think of subtle ways to word things, to delay action, to make little comments that were hurtful, to harass, to ignore, in ways that people not involved would not notice the devilish intent, but to the recipients, were unbelievably painful. We can’t begin to measure the cost of this human pain and career destruction. I, too, want Worried to walk the halls able to trust the environment and feel respected, and allowing any part of the Felner leadership team to remain in place will prevent the CEHD from continuing to work toward excellence. I can’t imagine that his leadership team is still in place and that people still feel nervous in our halls, but I feel it, too. At least the healing has begun, but I fear that it will take a long time for CEHD to get really healthy and productive.It looks like the former dean will be in a place where this won’t happen again. People really DID complain about this. We were not heard. People were afraid of retaliation, because it really happened (for example to the people who participated in the vote of no confidence). One more thing: Since when, in any type of organization, does progress and growth have to involve the kind of nasty destruction that President Ramsey felt was necessary (that Felner was causing and Ramsey said it’s the type of thing you would expect to see)? There are plenty of examples of organizations that have grown and embraced change in a much more sophisticated manner. The technique Felner used is OLD SCHOOL and certainly not what a college of EDUCATION and HUMAN DEVELOPMENT would teach to its students. We are supposed to be leaders and teachers here, after all.

• 23 Novena // Oct 24, 2008 at 5:47 pm

  “Someone Knows Education Is Life”

  Doctoral student, you are a universe apart from the hapless, uncaring, cavalier administrators you cite at UofL. Had they thought and acted as you do, Felner would not have been enabled to play madman and destroy countless lives and careers. You seem to be a compassionate person while Ramsey concerns himself with PR fluff and “keeping the Indians on the reservation.” You speak of openness; he, of repression. John Dewey would have despised the ethos at UofL’s CEHD, i. e., its non-educative, non-growth experiences perpetuated by Felner, JR, SW, and the lame “losership” team. I am so glad that you’re going into the world of education living the real principles and practices of human development. You are teaching us more than we have taught you.

• 24 Elaine // Oct 26, 2008 at 11:00 pm

  Could someone please define, in the case of Felner, the distinction between money he “stole” and money he “legitimately” earned?

• 25 jake // Oct 26, 2008 at 11:02 pm

  Earned: Anything from a paycheck.

• 26 SC // Oct 26, 2008 at 11:27 pm

  Wow Elaine, that is a very complex question.

  One could argue he legitimately earned his initial six figure salary if he had been competent (which he was not).

  One could suggest he legitimately earned money for U of L through his grant projects, but since he actually was only a Co-Pi on two tiny little grants before the $600K DOE Earmark Northup got for him, and since he diverted those DOE funds to his sham center in Illinois — hard to call that legitimate.

  And since he and the Provost colluded in 2005 or 2006 to increase his already excessive salary by another $56K (and did it with internal CEHD monies instead of the Provost openly going to the Board and asking them to approve a $56K raise for him); hard to call that legit.

  And there is of course his $30-45K annual bonus as a Distinguished University Scholar that he received for his scholarship and research prior to coming to U of L (which of course we now know he was nicely compensated for to the tune of about $1.7 million at the expense of URI); and which was also renewed by the Provost even though he had not accomplished any measurable research after he became Dean.

  And since he prevented any form of accounting or financial disclosure to anyone; and punished anyone who dared to ask for budget information; and suspended any meetings of the Planning and Budget Committee during his tenure — it is impossible to know whether even any of his executive expenditures were legitmate.

  Of course, one of our six audits/reviews/committees — is I am sure reviewing all 5 years of his spending to confirm that each and every dollar was legit, beneficial to the CEHD, U of L, and the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

  So I am not sure I answered your question — but appears to be a fine line between what Felner stole and what he earned while at U of L. We can only hope he gets what he so justly deserves.

• 27 marie // Oct 27, 2008 at 1:39 am

  And let no one forget that Felner may be the “best-known” tyrant that U of L can claim due to the mishandling of grant money, etc. but there are others: the relentless PTSD-inducing ‘unsafe’ work environments that no amount of documentation or attempts at a discussion could remedy or alleviate.

  It’s entirely the luck of the draw or as it’s been said: “Up to the discretion of the supervisor.” Policies are rarely applied equally.
  My EAP counselor explained that U of L allows the supervisor to define the employee, so that person, with their biases and limitations very much in tact, is the filter through which the employee’s contribution to the institution is viewed. This is problematic in many ways.
  You are tethered to the supervisor in a way I’ve never experienced in any other job.

  But you do wonder, where do they get this stuff?
  As in several postings above…(the intent was)”to delay action, to think of subtle ways to word things (&) to make little comments that are hurtful, to harass, ignore in ways that people not involved would
  not notice the devilish intent, but are unbelievably painful to the recipients.”
  This makes it easier later for people to
  chalk things up to a “personality difference”.
  The similarities in style among the bullies is remarkable.
  So when and where was the training?

• 28 Novena // Oct 27, 2008 at 5:39 am

  “Legit Trips to Rhode Island?”

  SC,
  You covered Elaine’s question quite well– with one blaring omission. Remember all those personal trips Bobby took to Rhode Island to visit wifey #4 (or #5, I lose track)? Wasn’t that money tacked on as a kind of salary addition to make it look clean? Mighty good work, if you can get it–right SW?
  P.S. The Commonwealth needs to sharpen its audit pencils on that one.

• 29 ed // Oct 27, 2008 at 8:09 am

  Lots of very blurry lines when it comes to all the money stuff. Bush would call it Fuzzy Math.

  If I were the feds, there’s no doubt at all that I would be freezing every penny of his until it was all sorted out….and a verdict or plea was reached.

  Sorry, I don’t mean to be difficult, but I’m just not AT ALL buying into the concept (at this point) of “earned” money and “stolen” money. Especially….ESPECIALLY….with 1.7 still unaccounted for, in my mind it all becomes “stolen” money until everything is settled and sorted out.

• 30 Elaine // Oct 27, 2008 at 7:09 pm

  SC, Novena, and Ed: thank you getting my
  point. I see
  from today’s blog that he only requested
  human subjects approval for one study
  in five years. So, I guess that supports the
  notion that, just because he was paid a
  salary, does not mean he “earned” that portion of his income any more than he earned the
  misappropriated portions.

• 31 Novena // Oct 27, 2008 at 10:07 pm

  “He Was Not Good, But Got Plenty”

  Elaine, thank you; and your succinct analysis is on point. Bobby “earned” hardly anything legitimately during his UofL tenure. Yet he got a huge salary (he bragged it was one of the highest of any education dean in the land); high honors (the desecration of “University Scholar” status for doing close to zero scholarship), etc.
  Indeed, Jake’s tireless work, his worthy website and its commenters have conributed far more to any restoration of UofL’s integrity as an institution (regardless of what Jr, SW, SS, KK, RR, etc., might say) than the immense damage Felner caused it.

Leave a Comment