WLC eMail Exchange with DEAC Executive Director

Here is the exhibit. Make of it what you will. This was the only, and the entirety of the exchanges concerning our show cause letter AFTER they surprise publicly published it. After this, all communications from them came from their lawyer, and they started copying their lawyer even on communications to our staff.

http://loveland.college/ExhibitN.pdf

Obviously you have to start at the bottom. Also note, we get the public show cause letter with no warning, this is the first official communication from the DEAC Commission after our site visit, not after months of working with us, sending in other examiners, nothing.

They give me 28 days to respond (their stupid (IMHO) book says I should get 30 days, hence our request to have a federal court force them to start following their own handbook in our complaint).

I receive it on Feb 27, it says the Executive Director is busy and isn't available until March 8. Thats 9 of our 28 days to respond right there, and I have to tell you think about how that felt, surprise public show cause and I have to sit for 9 days before I can even ask a question, dealing with public fall out and trying to figure out what is going on.

You can read the rest. Also remember during this exchange they have publicly stated on their website that we were notified January 2016. I had a donor call me and ask if I had known about this for a year, hidden it, and still solicited their donation.

Also, I am having board members resign and generally just trying to figure out what is going on.

Lastly, look at the quality of communication, and think about which organization represents as professional, and which represents as being on public show cause in the exchange.

 

After giving the email string a cursory overview, it appears that DEAC respondents are either disingenuous, dishonest, nervous or confused -- or all of the above. If the facts and dates are as you suggest, then DEAC representatives should be trepedatious about the potential legal outcome. It could be a very expensive mistake on their part, generated from bad political decisions. It looks incompetent, as well as ugly. Conversely, civil court cases can get very expensive for all involved parties.

 

In the email I sent them, each and every date I reference is supported by evidence, most of it signed letters by them. You can see the exhibit names in the first email i sent. They all exist. A big one is the 2013 MBA approval. That is in our public exhibits, I will get it online probably Friday. 2015<>2013, no way around it. And if you are looking at a school that made changes, 2 years is a pretty big deal.

Also remember, I am now publicly ruined. My name is all over the documents they publicly released.

 

We hired a trial lawyer who is very comfortable in federal court, and who is a sitting judge when not prosecuting cases, and, we are all paid up.

 

You might want to call on Michael Lambert. I wonder if his wisdom could help

 

Its a pleasing thought, but we are past all that. Plus, he built the commission from the ground up, I doubt he will be overly thrilled that we are exposing what the next generation did to it.

 

Good point.