President’s February Highlights And Updates
David Lassner

David Lassner

University of Hawaiʻi President David Lassner made his report to the Board of Regents at their meeting on February 23, 2017.

Highlights include:

View previous reports to the board.

This Post Has One Comment
  1. February 24, 2017

    Subject: Concerning Why White, Robel, And Ramaswamy Withdrew From The Manoa Chancellor Race

    Throughout the course of history events have been recorded—some accurate; some inaccurate—and in some cases events have been lost to history because they have not been recorded. The press release issued by University of Hawaii president David Lassner regarding why all three of the Manoa campus chancellor candidates withdrew from the race in the final stages of the selection process falls largely into the latter two categories because (i) the real reason why the three candidates all said “No” to the UH was not officially recorded; and (ii) the Pollyannaish press release was misleading to the extent that it inaccurately recorded this historical state event.

    As is often the case, the corollary to the distribution of a superficially attractive communiqué is the even wider—and uncritical—distribution by the mainstream media concatenating links upon links into an unbreakable chain of misinformation until—presto!—untruths become the truth.

    Contradictory to the administration’s positive spin, it is not a coincidence that all three finalists unexpectedly withdrew in the final stretch of a lengthy executive search. Operating from behind the curtain via communicating enlightening records, reports, and on-the-ground intelligence reflecting the less than stellar landscape and state of affairs within the UH bureaucracy, I was able to rationally persuade the candidates that the UH presented a poor pick. This is the real reason why all three finalists quit the race. Deciphering the staggering occurrence of the identical act of withdrawal by all three candidates, one could reasonably deduce that the finalists were implicitly protesting the UH administration’s record and tarnished reputation by electing to pull out of negotiations.

    A resounding theme made known to the candidates was the UH administration’s lingering historical record of injustice. Specifically, it has been assiduously documented that the UH administration has speciously withheld my lawfully earned diploma for twenty years. The attendant question, then, is why did three administrators outside the UH discern straightaway what administrators inside the UH have refused to recognize for two decades? The answer is clear—the UH administration is blinded by bias, favoritism, and closed-mindedness. In an administrative scandal implicating UH administrators, the UH administration erected various defense mechanisms to thwart external excoriation resulting in a bureaucratic state of denial.

    The small cadre of senior-level administrators at the UH are abysmal at policing themselves. Does anyone think for a second that the UH executive administration will sue itself or find fault with its own actions? Elevate your consciousness, be magnanimous, don’t be petty and mean-spirited is what I would write on the UH administration’s report card. If these changes come to pass, then the ominous clouds that have gathered over Bachman Hall for many years will begin to dissipate and peace will carry the day.

    David A. Mihaila

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *