They warned us. This was the M.O. for John Lombardi wherever he has served as university president. The man is so smart, but his mouth gets him in trouble. And while he may know what he is doing and have some good ideas, his actions are quickly creating enemies and could hurt LSU.
Not long after he arrived in town, he was criticizing the TOPS program, one of the most popular programs in the state. Then, shortly after Gov. Jindal is elected, he is blasting the governor’s proposal of dedicating road monies to roads. Say what?
Now, it seems his latest misstep is to push out LSU Chancellor Sean O’Keefe – a man with more friends than Lombardi - and it becomes public just days before the National BCS Championship game. Did someone put the gris-gris on Lombardi or does he screw up like this all on his own?
I am now told that some on the board were having serious discussions with O’Keefe before Lombardi arrived and he inherited the situation. I don’t know if that’s true, but, nonetheless, it is being handled by him now – and perceived to being handled poorly given his previous bombastic adventures.
There is much talk among some powerful business leaders, LSU board members and large donors who have told me of their displeasure with the treatment of O’Keefe. This seems a bit ironic given the fact that Lombardi reportedly told O’Keefe he “didn’t have the support of the business community.” Oh really? These sentiments came from one retiree and a couple guys at a dinner – not really representative of the “business community.” (Our recent Daily Report poll showed almost 7 of 10 supported O’Keefe.)
To help out Lombardi, who would make no comment to the press on this fiasco, Charles Zewe, LSU System vice president of communication, threw his own bomb. Zewe said “the business community does not and will not dictate to LSU who stays and who goes.” If he will look at his Board of Supervisors, he will see they come from the business community and it is the board, in my opinion as a former chairman of the LSU Board, that has the final say. They meet this week.
I am not sure anyone can talk to Lombardi. He seems to do and speak as he pleases.
But I warn Chairman Jerry Shea, Jim Roy and the Board of Supervisors to step carefully in how they handle this matter and the future of LSU. Hey, I have a bomb to throw: Maybe it’s Lombardi who should be pushed out.
Comments
Posted by markrounds on January 14, 2008 at 12:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Last month you and Stephen Moret "warned" us that if collective bargaining was approved by the East Baton Rouge Parish School Board, future tax proposals were doomed because the Chamber would pull its support. This month you're "warning" us in a thinly veiled manner that John Lomabrdi's attempt to ouster Sean O'Keefe will mean "some powerful business leaders, LSU board members and large donors" will somehow doom "the future of LSU." Does everything in your world boil down to money?
Posted by gmo on January 14, 2008 at 1:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Re: markrounds comment.
Yes, everything in the business world does boil down to money--that's capitalism for you. Sure would like to make it a thing of the past, though.
Posted by jsmi128 on January 14, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am rather disappointed in your vague (and misleading) discussion of events concerning O'Keefe, Lombardi, and LSU. Although I have moved away from Baton Rouge after graduating from LSU, I do my best to stay informed about what goes on at my beloved Alma Mater and often turn to your publication for updates.
TOPS, while full of merit, cannot continue unchanged forever. A great amount of discussion is needed to ensure that TOPS continues to serve its original purpose. Even as an out-of-state resident who did not (directly) benefit from TOPS, I still have an understanding about its importance to the state as well as the somewhat negative role it plays in keeping down tuition costs despite the need to increase funding for the University, funding that should in part come from those who benefit from a University degree. The TOPS discussion is indeed part of a very large and important national debate about the rise of tuition and the weakened power of the middle class. Do not attempt to discredit Lombardi--who offered a much-needed and insightful assessment of the program--without a more honest look at TOPS.
Furthermore, it is well documented (in this publication no less) that education is one of the first government programs in Louisiana that takes a hit when it is time to trim the budget. To insist that the funding for roads is in no way connected to the money for LSU is misguided and shortsighted. Lombardi raised a valid point that you seek to dismiss in a manner reminiscent of tactics used by those who oppose progress for the fine state of Louisiana.
Again, I am quite amazed at the manner with which you waved off these concerns. Forgive me for wanting to continue a healthy democratic debate about very important policies. I am worried less about business support for the University than I am about the support and benefits that LSU can provide to ALL people in the state, rich and poor, businessman and farmer. One of these benefits is educating citizens and promoting democratic discussion. You do those same citizens no service by cheapening the debate.
Granted, you were very explicit about the value of what you had to say. Unfortunately, this treatment of the issues does nothing but obscure the deep problems that need to be addressed and instead engage in a thinly veiled attack on one man's character. Sir, at least contribute a mere two cents next time.
Posted by jsmi128 on January 14, 2008 at 5:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
One final addition to my previous post:
It is quite difficult for me to support Lombardi and advance an argument urging democratic debate when the job security of the chancellor is discussed behind closed doors and in personal emails. While the board and the president are privy to more specific information regarding the chancellor's job performance and while his job security should not hinge completely upon public opinion (which is often misinformed thanks to poor journalism), I do hope students and supporters are made aware of the evidence at the heart of the evaluation. I am not bowled over by the chancellor's performance thus far yet need to be convinced it is necessary to force him out if that is indeed the intent of the board, the president, or both.
Posted by brbiz on January 14, 2008 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
LSU spokesperson, Zewe, said “the business community does not and will not dictate to LSU who stays and who goes”
The business community plays a huge role as contributors providing insight and leadership. I would venture a guess that this same business community are major benefactors providing financial support to LSU for both academia and athletics. As McCollister says, the board of supervisors consists of business leaders. Why alienate the very group that provides a huge support system? This is short-sighted.
This is not just about the money, it is about building coalitions and not alienating business leaders who have been key to the success of the university system.
Posted by theway on January 15, 2008 at 8:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The meltdown in the LSU's President's Office started before Lombardi arrived. One need look no further than its in- house lawyer, P. Ray Lamonica, and his Board crony, Jim Roy, to find the cancer seed that then spread after the hurricanes. Follow the trail since Katrina, and you will find their fungal footprints. O'Keefe has skins on the wall. He has contacts that can help LSU and Louisiana. So is it any surprise that Lamonica and Roy want to get him gone? They've been trying for some time, but Lombardi's predecessor couldn't pull the trigger. O'Keefe is yet another victim of LSU's insecurity and arrogance. We can only hope that Lombardi will take a hard look down the hall before he launches a rocket down the way.
Posted by branon on January 16, 2008 at 12:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
First of all why should O'Keefe be holier than thou. When O'Keefe was appointed - my reaction was bravo Louisiana. here we go again. A Louisianan bureaucrat gets an ideal retirement package!
It strikes me as hypocritical of the businessreport that on one hand it espouses radical change in Louisiana but has no problems when a partisan bureaucrat appears from nowhere and gets to become the chancellor of the university. How is this chancellor not a part of the old boys network of Louisiana? Appointing one govt agency's director to lead a state university is more in tune with third world bureaucracy (and louisiana).
Having said that, the real question is whether O'Keefe has been successful. Honestly, I am still not sure what he has been successful at other than forcing a fancy new traffic system on campus.
It also annoys me that both the businessreport and the advocate are so enamored with the business school building. It reflects a complete lack of investigative reporting. The business school will offer less square footage than the faculty already have in Taylor Hall. The current dean is fighting to ensure there is a computer lab in the new business school(!). There will be only enough office room for existing faculty with no room for growth. And they are going to break ground soon even when half the costs required from private sources has not even been raised. In fact its wisdom has been openly questioned by the faculty within the business school.
Of course it looks nice from outside and it will look nice on O'Keefe's cv.
I guess some local businessmen like him. Very good. But remember political economy 101- if the politicians in a state are corrupt then so are "successful" businesses.
Maybe Lombardi is more like Jindal and would like to shake things up. Its just too bad that they may not see eye to eye.
Finally, why is business report so worried about Lombardi throwing verbal bombs. At least someone is being upfront and honest about the problems. Isnt that what Louisiana needs?
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)