GPSA to hold vote on Krebs question
Graduate students will have a chance to voice their opinions about UNM athletics and two University administrators in a GPSA vote.
After two hours of deliberation during its meeting on Monday, the Graduate and Professional Students Association decided to hold an online election to give graduate students a chance to vote no-confidence in Athletics Director Paul Krebs and Vice President of Human Resources Helen Gonzales. Students can also voice their opinion about the amount of student fees allocated to the Athletics Department.
Possibly related:
- Daily Lobo Spotlight:Dominique Maffucci/Freshman/Astrophysics · Feb 9
- MyUNM portal to go down for upgrades · Feb 9
- Senator pulls for ethics reform · Feb 8
- Students ask for sustainable garden · Feb 8
- Question of the Week: How are you going to cope with a tuition increase? · Feb 4
More than 30 graduate and professional students attended the GPSA meeting in the SUB to discuss holding such an election.
The resolution passed with 15 council members in favor, five opposed and three abstentions.
GPSA Council Chair Danny Hernandez said several members of GPSA deliberately stalled proceedings. As a result, Hernandez said important details of the meeting didn’t get worked out. When and how the election will be held still has to be decided.
“The people who don’t want the GPSA members to vote on this election were able to stall the meeting,” he said. “By the end of it, all we were able to vote for was whether or not we could have a special election.”
Hernandez said GPSA will have to wait until the next GPSA meeting on Dec. 5 to work out the details of the election.
Hernandez said he and GPSA President Lissa Knudsen consulted many graduate and professional students about having an election regarding Krebs, Gonzales and athletics.
“The resolutions that were on the agenda were influenced by many graduate students, calling and e-mailing Lissa and I,” he said. “These items were consistently brought up.”
Sid Solano, elections chairman of GPSA, said he didn’t have enough time to talk to other graduate students to decide if they wanted to participate in a special election. He said GPSA members were trying to rush the issue and didn’t give graduate or professional students enough time to think about it.
“Anyone who has been through a few of our council meetings know that that’s usually how we proceed,” he said. “It takes us a long time to debate the issues and that’s kind of the whole reason I wanted us to have a four-hour council session to discuss the issues. That way we could do it completely and thoroughly instead of in a rushed manner.”
- |
by Daniele Miesem
The only thing we really need to deliberate here is whether it’s appropriate to give graduate students a voice via the online election regarding our monetary investment in athletics, Krebs, and Gonzales. Do grad students feel strongly about how their money is being spent here? As a body, are they as upset about what’s been going on as the grad students who have approached Knudsen and Hernandez?
I don’t think there’s much to debate here. The election will be in accordance with the GPSA constitution and bylaws, and the results of the election will NOT directly result in drastic action being taken. It will simply be an opportunity for grad students to voice their opinion about how their money is spent, and for that opinion to be known when people are deciding how our student fees are to be distributed.
At the end of the day- if the results of the election say that grad students feel we should withdraw all of our funding from athletics and voice no confidence on Krebs and Gonzales- what difference does that actually make? We have no ability to decide how our money is spent. Krebs and Gonzales won’t be fired on the spot. This election is just and only a way to voice an opinion.
So why do we need four hours to deliberate whether grad students can do so?
After two hours, we agreed to have an election. Well, that’s a start. Next we work out which issues to ask for GRAD STUDENTS’ opinion on. We shouldn’t be debating the issues themselves; we should be discussing the issues that grad students in our departments are concerned about and want to say something about.
by UNM Alumni
The UNM’s administration’s image is forever tarnished by their outright refusal to do the right thing. The cover up and sebsequent destruction of the documents pertaining to the assault on Gerald, by Locksley has affected their credibility and public trust.
Due to this dysfunctional administration the Student/Athletes, staff and anyone who cares about the UNM is affected. I have chosen not to attend anymore UNM football games, as I feel strongly that a stand must be taken. Schmidly, Gonzales, Krebs, Locksley and Garbiso; should do us all a favor and resign.
by Franklin
Disgusting, when AD Krebs was asked what kind of behavior would result in a suspension for the coach. “He responded that he wasn’t intimately familiar with the university’s personnel rules and defended his decision to reprimand Locksley.” Don’t forget that the idiot Schmidly justified that crook Krebs salary and position by stating the Athletic Department need someone with deep knowledge of UNM Policies and Procedures (which was not evident in his handling of the assault on Gerald by Locksley)
by We Will Not Be Silenced!
UNM’s Zipped Lips Simply Don’t Cut It
Just because top University of New Mexico officials declare they’re done talking about the Mike Locksley debacle doesn’t mean the story’s over for campus leaders, staff, Lobos fans and other New Mexicans.
UNM President David Schmidly and Athletics Vice President Paul Krebs announced they were done answering questions about the matter — even in the face of new disclosures that call the university’s mishandling of the whole affair further into question.
Regents President Raymond Sanchez backed that position on Tuesday when he declared there would be no independent investigation into “Locksley-gate” — allegations the head football coach punched and choked assistant coach J.B. Gerald, and the university’s subsequent bungling of the investigation that raises real questions of a cover-up.
Locksley admits putting his hands on Gerald but has said he wouldn’t exactly call it a punch. Sanchez, meanwhile, says no new information has surfaced to warrant an outside probe — that despite the emergence of new notes from an interview with an assistant coach who said Locksley had threatened Gerald with physical violence in an earlier incident and that players felt responsible for Gerald being mistreated. Sounds a bit like kids in a domestic violence situation who think it’s their fault daddy’s hitting mommy.
These were notes of interviews conducted by Shannon Garbiso, the Athletics Department employee responsible for handling human resources functions for athletics. Garbiso’s notes have a much truer ring to them than the subsequent made-for-litigation investigation conducted by the Human Resources Division brass and university lawyers.
The new information turned up around 5 p.m. Friday after UNM officials said they had inadvertently failed to turn over the back side of one of the witness accounts. They blamed it on a copying error.
The call for an independent investigation has come from several quarters, including the Journal and UNM Staff Council President Elisha Allen, who calls the matter “a local and national disgrace.”
Locksley, in an interview with KOAT-TV, didn’t help the hunker-down strategy when he said, when asked about calls for an independent investigation, “The only comment I can make on that, you know, is that President Schmidly’s comment on the investigation and the job that Vice President (for Human Resources) Helen Gonzales did was thorough and, ah, got to the result that they were looking for.”
Maybe Locks made a Freudian slip. Oops.
Schmidly and Paul Krebs deny they’ve cut a deal where Locksley bails out after the season. They seem to think silence will make it go away. Not likely.
Locksley-gate is now a national embarrassment. Perhaps this misguided strategy is based on the fact the situation has been mishandled in so many ways, from an initial investigation by the wrong department to the incredible shredding of Garbiso’s notes.
This week we find out Schmidly had not read the witness statements, yet was able to decide he was satisfied with the university’s investigation and Locksley’s punishment — a 10-day suspension that cost the coach about $29,000 in withheld pay. A spokeswoman says that’s not something he would normally do.
He does, however, reiterate he still has confidence in Locksley, Krebs and Gonzales.
Locksley’s temper gave UNM a black eye, but university brass has turned it into a festering wound. It’s shameful and a slap in the face of taxpayers who foot the bill and deserve forthright leadership of the state’s flagship university.
A full investigation of the entire affair is in order.
As for Locksley, Schmidly and Krebs, they are paid a combined $1.75 million in public money. They should keep answering questions until New Mexicans are satisfied their answers are giving them their money’s worth
by Boycott UNM Athletics
Through the investigative revelations of ESPN OutSide the Lines, KRQE News 13 and many others; the obvious lies and cover up by AD-Paul Krebs, HR Helen Gonzales, President Schmidly and coach Locksley has been exposed. This is our university; yes, I said our university the actions of this corrupt administration has brought public humiliation on our beloved institution. I have not attended a UNM sporting event since this embarrassing incident; nor will I purchase another ticket until this matter has been adequately resolved.
by Wes Henderson
Why is this even a story? Go ahead and vote it is not like the GPSA even gets a final say in what happens to Krebs or the Athletic Deportment. It seems like a mood point, this situation has that feeling of the President Schmidly situation from last year. It is getting old and the Daily Lobo and other people like the GPSA need to let it go, like everyone outside the fishbowl of Albuquerque. It is time to move on and talk about the positive things going on in the Athletic Department, like both UNM basketball teams and the great job by UNM cross country teams. Oh wait, that can not happen the Daily Lobo loves to drag out the negative just like their big bother at the Journal.
by Danny
Well said all, except I personally would not be so harsh on Ms. Gonzales. She’s just a pawn in Schimdlius’ evil plan to make the University of NeaMexiopolis into a barren and desolate land.
See the following for better reading:
http://www.dailylobo.com/index.php/article/2009/11/a_longlost_tale_of_corruption_cronyism_and_a_wicked_king
by Concerned lobo
Wow. Didn’t realize GPSA has the power or authority to vote no confidence in administrators. I thought that right was reserved for the Faculty Senate, who work with the administration on a daily basis.
And I love how come SFRB time, GPSA always tries to find a way to cut athletic funding. Oh, brother.
by Concerned grad student
As a graduate student, I wish the GPSA would stop and think about how voting no confidence in Gonzales will seriously hurt us when it comes to issues that actually CONCERN GRAD STUDENTS, like our HEALTH INSURANCE and BENEFITS. I doubt we’ll have her support after this…
by Lobo Joe
What a joke this fiasco has turned out to be. Cut our already significant losses-dump Krebs( Mr. Incompetent), Locksley( Mr. Sid Vicious), Schmidly( Mr. Inept) and Gonzales( Ms. CYA and keep my job).
by ched macquigg
“They seem to think silence will make it go away. Not likely.”
In fact, very likely.
It is the way it always works, just ignore the outrage until it goes away. There are already people arguing out loud, and in writing on this thread, to forget about it; it is water under the bridge.
It is just like a school yard bully, taking your lunch money and asking, So whadya gonna do about it?
The answer is nothing. And the next time they demand our lunch money, it will be handed over again, and again, and again.
by Outraged Student
From the Dominatrix Sex Scandal to Locksley’s assault on Gerald and other cases were the UNM administration has mishandled: This quote from Sharon Warner is true: “The similarities to the Locksley case are really quite striking, because in both cases somebody abused their power relationship,” she said. “Then the University pretended to do an investigation and the truth didn’t come out but they just said, ‘We’ve investigated; here are our findings; now go back to work.’” They want us to ignore all their immoral, dishonest and incompetent acts; it will not happen. GPSA should address the corruption that plagues our university.
by Parent
AD-Paul Krebs, HR VP Helen Gonzales, President David Schmidly and Coach Mike Locksley have abused their power; Parents, students, faculty and taxpayers need to band together to put a stop to their corruption. Some are forgetting the value’s that a university is supposed to be instilling in our student athletes; integrity, morality, the value of winning through hard work, teamwork and determination. What coach Locksley has shown is the total opposite and the UNM administration has upheld this by deception, covering up and lying. We can not afford to keep quiet to appease this worthless group of morons.
by Shame
This video from KRQE News 13 reveals the deeply rooted corruption that exists at the UNM administration; ESPN OutSide the Lines interview with the assistant coach that Mike Locksley assaulted revealed more of the same; it is devastating and embarrassing for our university. http://www.krqe.com/dpp/sports/sports_blog/sportsblog_krqe_albuquerque_sports_office_short_locksley_and_otl_200911012043
by Corrupt Krebs Exposed by Emails
Emails reveal administration tension in Locksley incident
Eyewitness News 4 has uncovered what University of New Mexico officials were saying behind the scenes as the investigation into football coach Mike Locksley unfolded.Posted at: 11/25/2009 5:23 PM | Updated at: 11/25/2009 6:08 PM
By: Jeremy Jojola, Eyewitness News 4, and Kurt Christopher, KOB.com
Investigative reporter Jeremy Jojola filed a records request more than a month ago to obtain emails regarding the incident. In one of those emails, UNM athletic director Paul Krebs writes that he is worried about his own future. He also expresses frustration over leaks in the department and how the story unfolded.
It all began with the September 20th scuffle between UNM head football coach Mike Locksley and former assistant coach J.B. Gerald. Statements said an argument over football plays resulted in Locksley lunging at Gerald. Locksley was initially verbally reprimanded by the university and later placed on a ten-day suspension.
A month after Eyewitness News 4’s record’s request, the university did provide emails that had been sent out by Krebs during the time he was dealing with the media swarm.
In one email to a media consultant, Krebs writes about an October 13th ESPN article that broke the news about Locksley’s suspension: “Story broke on ESPN. Not sure how or where the leak came from as none of my staff knew except Greg [Remington] and Kurt.”
Krebs asks the consultant, “Any last minute advice? Feel like he may take me down with him.”
In another email sent to the same consultant, Krebs writes, “It is incredible how many people are using this as an opportunity to bash Mike [Locksley] and taking shots about everything about him.”
The emails also reveal an effort to get J.B. Gerald to speak about the incident. Nine days after the scuffle, athletics spokesman Greg Remington wrote to Krebs, “J.B. coming forward and saying something [positive] would sure soothe the situation.”
Krebs responded, “Suggest you try and reach out to him.”
Also among the emails is criticism about a sports reporter with The Daily Lobo school newspaper, Isaac Avilucea, who requested Locksley’s phone records and text messages. Associate director of athletics, Richard Pickering, writes to Krebs, “I just want to be careful dealing with Isaac because we know he will be subjective in his reporting and will look to portray us in a negative light.”
Krebs responds, “If we have to release them, we will. No way to spin numbers.”
Avilucea calls the “subjective” reference conjecture aimed at trivializing the true issue.
Eyewitness News 4 also requested emails sent out by UNM coach Locksley. We were told by the university that no sent emails exist from the coach.
Attempts were made to get comments from the university regarding this story, but calls and emails to the athletic department were not returned.
Read the UNM emails released to Eyewitness News 4by Sign up now to FIRE LOCKS!
WINLESS
FIRE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEAD FOOTBALL COACH MIKE LOCKSLEY BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!
FANS OF LOBO FOOTBALL, UNITE!
VIST OUR FORUMS AND SIGN OUR GUEST BOOK!
http://fire-mike-locksley.com
MIKE LOCKSLEY IS IN OVER HIS HEAD
• New Mexico finished the season 1-11, its worst record since the 1980’s. Many of those losses were blowouts.
• Coach Locksley admitted striking an assistant coach during a “physical altercation”.
• As of 10-10-09, Locksley had been blown out in 5 out of 6 games.
• Loss at home to undermanned and less talented NMSU squad.
• Poor leadership and example for student athletes — physical violence in the workplace.
• Talented recruiting class not yet in the works, despite Locksley’s supposed expertise as recruiter.
• Rapid decline in football game attendance, and general apathy toward program under Locksley.
• Segment by ESPN Outside the Lines alleges cover up and previous anger management issues.
________________________________________
Despite big promises and big words, University of New Mexico Lobo head football coach Mike Locksley delivered only a single victory in 2009, at a cost of $750,000 to the taxpayers of New Mexico. That’s right, $750,000 per victory — what a bargain. The Lobos finished near the bottom of the NCAA in most important offensive and defensive statistical categories — so much for Locksley’s bragging assertion that another number would need to be added to the scoreboard — if it was needed, it was needed on the opposing team’s side this year. Coach Locksley was hit with an EEOC complaint earlier in 2009 that has now been settled, with his former employee being given a newly created, higher-paying position, back pay, lifetime season tickets to UNM sporting events, and an undisclosed, behind the scenes settlement. Coach Mike Locksley has admitted to striking assistant coach J.B. Gerald in a “physical altercation”, and it appears possible that this incident may result in a lawsuit against UNM, as Coach Gerald has opted to leave the team, and retain an attorney. Locksley has also failed to land the recruits he could supposedly deliver, losing two of his top three recruits in 2009 to their failure to qualify. Another one of Locksley’s highly touted recruits briefly left the program and returned because of the controversy surrounding the gerald situation.
The University of New Mexico pays Coach Mike Locksley $750,000 annually, or approximately $14,423.08 per week. Has Coach Mike Locksley done anything to demonstrate that he is qualified to be a head football coach at this level? Is Mike Locksley representative of the values of the University of New Mexico Lobos, or the state of New Mexico? Does he really deserve this kind of money, based on performance, or should the University of New Mexico have terminated him for cause when they had the opportunity to do so? We feel the answer is a resounding “yes”, based on his record, performance, and behavior. Mike Locksley was a very bad hire.
The taxpayers of New Mexico and fans of University of New Mexico Lobo football deserve more coaching and more integrity for their money. It is time to recognize the mistake made by Paul Krebs in hiring Coach Locksley, and sever ties with Coach Locksley, before the program suffers irreparable damage. New Mexico Lobo football cannot survive 5 more years of Mike Locksley, and this style of management, or lack of coaching ability. Our student athletes deserve better leadership.