Updated to include a Facebook comment posted by John Daly’s wife below

The Mott Community College Board of Trustees teased it last week, when a motion to skip their previously approved (and industry standard) process of using a search firm to find the college’s next president and instead offer that role to someone whose higher education experience dates back to July failed by one vote, 4-3. Tonight, they tried again and were successful.

Last week’s meeting, which was derailed by a board chair hellbent on airing his personal grievances, a seemingly neverending series of procedural mishaps and confusion, and … no joke … the board chair seeming to egg on a physical altercation with another elderly board member, was mercifully recessed after three painful hours. It was continued on November 25. The full recording can be watched above.

Of note, before the evening’s big news, during the President’s Report, a slide was mysteriously changed. In last week’s board packet, a slide for winter enrollment had a point in time comparison showing that enrollment was down nearly 14 percent from the same time the previous year as of November 14.

At tonight’s meeting, the slide showed a much rosier enrollment picture, with a .1 percent increase from where it was at last year as of November 24.

I’ve worked at universities long enough to know that enrollment numbers can fluctuate for a variety of reasons, but that’s a pretty dramatic turnaround on those numbers in less than two weeks. Hopefully, for the college’s sake, they’re accurate, but this board and their handpicked president haven’t exactly earned good faith.

And note that I said “president” in that last paragraph rather than “interim president,” because the board once again showed that the only thing its majority is committed to is behaving unethically. Jeff Swanson, who just a week ago, voted against hiring Shaunda Richardson-Snell, flipped his vote tonight. Last week, Swanson said (correctly) that hiring her in the rushed, bad faith process this board has used, without any input from students, faculty, or staff, would not set her up to be successful as president. He was right. Unfortunately, he isn’t courageous enough to stand by that conviction.

Four trustees — Swanson, Everman, Janet Couch, and Wendy Wolcott — voted in favor. Three — Art Reyes, John Daly, and Michael Freeman — voted against. All three expressed disgust with the actions of the majority. Daly, who had previously been aligned in most voting decisions with this board’s majority, and Freeman, both left after airing their criticisms. Reyes stayed, but made sure to call the board’s actions a “travesty” one last time before the meeting ended.

I’ve written about Swanson and his dishonesty before. He lied in a meeting about writing a motion that he clearly did not write (he was not writing at any point before the lengthy motion was read). He also could barely read it himself. He’s often confused about procedure during meetings. He’s discussed his desire for the college to “run like a business” and then votes with a board majority that has spent recklessly and needlessly on legal fees, extra staff, and other expenses, has advocated for and implemented a disjointed presidential search process that actually only considered one candidate, has meetings that spiral out of control, and is responsible for creating a toxic environment at the college. None of those things represent anything “business”-like.

I challenge anyone to watch Swanson’s bumbling, confused contributions to any board meeting and conclude that he’s a person who should be making high level education decisions at a college or any educational institution for that matter.

But at least Swanson does attempt to contribute sometimes. During her tenure on the board, Couch rarely says more than a word or two, if she even attends. She also is often confused by procedure. Tonight, she accidentally voted yes on a motion she was opposed to and had to be allowed to change her vote. It’s hard to say why she’s even on the board, and she has certainly never said herself what interest she even has in Mott.

Wolcott, who had originally voted to accept a grant from the CS Mott Foundation to help fund a national search, tonight changed her mind, voting in support of offering Richardson-Snell a contract without a search and to rescind her own previous motion to accept the grant and do a search.

Wolcott referenced a “silent majority” she has heard from in favor of Richardson-Snell’s hiring. I don’t know if it’s a lie, but I find it extraordinarily hard to believe, and as I said above no one in this board majority has operated in good faith. They are unethical, dishonest, and all deserve to be treated suspiciously until they prove capable of being truthful and transparent with the public.

Everman is the worst of them all, and there isn’t much more that can be said about him that hasn’t already been written in previous posts. He’s been caught in lies. He insults and bullies people. He is focused on his own personal grievances at the expense of anything else at the college.

I don’t know if Wolcott really has heard from a “silent majority” of employees that for whatever reason never shows up to support Richardson-Snell (unless you count the handful of letter writers who have submitted comments from outside of Genesee County at the behest of a dishonest pastor with a dystopian political agenda) publicly.

I do know that I also have a few anecdotes about Mott’s board from collecting recall signatures, and from talking with faculty, staff, students, and community members at various events. Just thought I’d share a few of my own experiences since Wolcott felt the need to share hers:

• Dislike for Everman is bipartisan. Like, hilariously bipartisan. He’s been a Genesee County politics minor player for many years now, and the number of people who don’t like him because of various clumsy power grabs he’s attempted (mostly unsuccessfully) on obscure boards over the years is truly astounding. Everman wasn’t a target of the recalls because he was up for re-election this year, but I will always cherish the stories many people shared unprovoked of what a pain in the ass he is.
• Also, and somewhat illustrative of the above point, he fainted in a public meeting last month, and the room (even his allies on the board) barely moved in response. To see a man laying on the floor and no one rushing to help or even ending their chit chat was wild. There was a handful of pastors in the room, and they didn’t even go over there! At least say a prayer or something, y’all! Incidentally, my partner, who is first aid trained, went to help him, and he was super rude to her. Also, one of his colleagues on the board thinks he faked it.
• Of the three people subject to the recall, I met SO MANY signers who couldn’t wait to sign the Wolcott petitions. There are many people dissatisfied with her tenure at Mott, but who were also motivated by her family’s negative impact on Davison politics. Her son, Matthew Smith, turned several Davison School Board meetings into a circus, has never met a publicity stunt he doesn’t love, and narrowly survived a recall attempt himself. Davison isn’t exactly a progressive hotbed, and voters there still tossed Smith and his ultra right wing messaging off their School Board. Wolcott’s dishonest attempt to run for Genesee County Commission as a Democrat also failed. So to the many people I know who are disgusted with Mott’s board, look to Davison for an example of how to stay strong, organized, and stand up to people like Wolcott, Swanson, Everman, and Couch. Keep pushing for good, transparent government, keep talking to people about this board’s ineptitude, keep encouraging people impacted by their decisions to attend meetings, and vote these people out the next chance you get.
• I have had this website/Facebook page up for almost five months, I have had several events out in the community, a lot of my contact info is public, I am on Mott’s campus to teach one day per week … and I haven’t heard from a single person who has said, “Hey, you aren’t being fair to this board or to the person they picked to be president of the college.” I haven’t heard from a single person who has said, “They’re really doing some good things.” Not one board member or member of the administration has said, “Hey, here’s one really great thing Richardson-Snell has done since taking over.” Not formally, not informally. Even at last night’s meeting, Richardson-Snell’s list of accomplishments were so superficial and lacking in any sort of detail it was laughable. Do people who support them within the college exist? Certainly. To call them a “silent majority” is nuts. I would bet there are MANY more people who are not supportive, but also fear retaliation or aren’t in a position where they can speak out without worrying about their job. There are also many others who just aren’t aware of what this board has been up to since their meetings traditionally have low attendance. People want good, stable government bodies that you don’t have to watch constantly because you never know what shady bullshit they’re going to try to pull. Mott’s board has four sneaky, dishonest, unethical people who are intent on avoiding responsibility for their decisions. Having good, transparent local government is a bipartisan issue. Daly, a Republican, is even clearly fed up with the politically motivated actions of this board majority and said as much last night.
• In a Facebook post after last night’s meeting, Daly’s wife said so as well, writing: “It looks like the fix was in, because why did she (Richardson-Snell) buy her new house two months ago, long before today? Also, why did Wendy Wolcott talk to 27 staff members before she voted today?” Here’s her full comment:

Lastly, public officials are answerable to the public. If you would like to tell Everman, Wolcott, Couch, or Swanson how you feel, here are their Mott email addresses:

• andy.everman@mcc.edu
• wendy.wolcott@mcc.edu
• jeffrey.swanson@mcc.edu
• janet.couch@mcc.edu

I have no idea if they even check or respond to those emails. They all do also have to file campaign finance reports, if you would like to look up their additional contact info. If you go to this website, and search their last names, you can find campaign documents with personal phone numbers and personal email addresses. I’m not going to post those here, but if you’d like to go find them, those are considered public documents for elected officials and fair game for contacting the people who represent you.

I honestly don’t know what’s next. In true Mott board fashion, some procedural confusion still remains — I was under the impression that 2/3 of the board needed to support recalling and re-voting on a motion. Both Richardson-Snell’s hiring and the decision to rescind acceptance of the search firm grant were previously decided motions that they decided to re-vote on, and neither majority represented 2/3 of the board (both were 4-3 votes). My hope is that Mott’s unions, or others in the community who care about the college’s future and have legal expertise, will weigh in at some point. But I just know that’s beyond my expertise.

What I keep circling back to is the batshit Qanon postcard that went out to voters in Genesee County in the fall and violated campaign finance law by not saying who paid for it. So far, here are the things that have happened:

• Jeffrey Swanson, who was endorsed on the postcard, was re-elected
• Candice Miller, who was endorsed on the postcard, was elected
• Richardson-Snell, who the postcard author said needed to be hired as permanent president, has been installed without a search or even an interview with another candidate
• The mailer, which came to Wolcott’s defense for some undisclosed thing Everman allegedly did to her, endorsed replacing Everman and he was replaced (just not by their chosen candidate, which so far is the only thing that hasn’t materialized)

What’s left on the to-do list? Not much! They just have to “end the woke diversity regime at Mott,” “force resignation of radical Left faculty and administration,” and “oppose the foreign push for the Genesee County megasite.” Now, they have the permanent president in place to carry out whatever they decide those last three gibberish items entail.

Incidentally, Swanson and Wolcott both put out lukewarm statements distancing themselves from that mailer, but both are also clearly benefitting from it.

I honestly don’t know if I’m right, that people are upset about this travesty, or if Wolcott’s “silent majority” theory is more accurate. But I do know that if people are truly upset about this, do truly care about the college’s future, and continue to not participate, then Wolcott is the one who gets to speak for you.