When Virginia Supreme Court Justice D. Arthur Kelsey asked Sweet Briar College attorney Woody Fowler "why [he is] contesting this so strongly," he voiced the question asked daily by several thousand #SaveSweetBriar supporters.
In what can only be described as the most bizarre moment in an already confounding case, Scott Shank has ordered a group of students -- spending their summer learning the ins and outs of business development under the tutelage of a much-loved and revered professor -- to cease & desist all activities regarding fundraising for the 501(c)3 charity of their choice: Saving Sweet Briar, Inc.
As part of the Business Seminar class, students design, create, and market one or more products to sell on a website. As in years past, students plan to use the proceeds to: 1) reinvest in the program;
Never before has the college placed restrictions on which charities students may support.
Perhaps Mr. Shank forgot that Saving Sweet Briar, Inc. is not a party to the litigation placed before the college. Saving Sweet Briar's sole mission is to
... wait for it ...
Save Sweet Briar.
As has been noted, alumnae have no standing in a court of law (humph) and have instead spent the past three months raising $16.5 million for the continued operation of Sweet Briar College and supporting the students that the college has failed (and failed...and failed...).
Channeling the Honorable D.A.K. (yeah, I know: it doesn't work as well as Notorious R.G.B.; so sue me), I can't help but wonder: Are you farking kidding me!?
Why in the ever-loving fudge pie (soooooo good) are the interim president, the Board of Directors, and many of the college's senior staff fighting so hard to close the school?
Mr. Shank speaks of
Welcome to your most important business lesson yet, my Vixen sisters: dealing with those who would rather be right than do right.
Perhaps Mr. Shanks should pick up the book "confederacy of dunces"...he'll have plenty of time to gain some literacy when he's unemployable after it's revealed his awesome accounting skills contributed to a five million increase of tuition discounting with a net loss of 100 students combined with an eight million dollar revenue decline for that loss of 100 students... At the helm co-pilot...maybe he can get a job driving a truck?
ReplyDeleteWasn't getting a CDL and driving a truck one of SBC's suggestions to faculty?
DeleteThe tone of that email is like a 2yr old stomping his feet up and down the stairs in anger.
ReplyDeleteLet's put him time-out!
DeleteIsn't a Shank an improvised implement to stab other inmates in the back? Just saying... seems fitting...
ReplyDeleteIsn't a Shank an improvised implement to stab other inmates in the back? Just saying... seems fitting...
ReplyDeleteThe question posed by the judge from the highest court in the Old Dominion-"why is [SBC] contesting this so strongly?" - is a question that has been asked by the national media, parents, students, alumnae, bond holders, faculty and staff, the humble caretakers of the land whose ancestors also worked the good earth, Amherst County Attorney, not-for-profit quarterlies, educators, the UK Daly Mail --in short the entire nation and increasingly, the world.
ReplyDeleteThe Interim President, the Chairmain and the Board have eviserated the student body, created a toxic and ugly situation, shown a complete lack of affection and loyalty to the institution equating to unequivocal hostility. They went rogue and now, cornered in their cave, prefer a shoot-out rather than a negotiated peace with some sense of dignity. This continuing conduct rises to the level of moral corruption, if not something more sinister. J. Rodgers, parent, brother and cousin to SBC women.
No wonder Paul Rice was being escorted by two security guards when he was seen on the campus during Reunion weekend.
DeletePrecisely, Jim Rodgers.
ReplyDeleteWhy would Rice go to reunion?
ReplyDelete