Missouri Southern State University - Crossroads Yearbook (Joplin, MO)

Page 10 text:

An unexpected change On Saturday morning June 5, 1982, the Joplin Globe carried a story headlined “Regents Mum About Rumor.” Within a few hours Dr. Donald C. Darnton had resigned the presidency of Missouri Southern. Shock, mystery, and controversy surrounded the action for weeks. In the June 5 Globe story, written by veteran reporter Harlan Snow, the Regents neither confirmed nor denied that they had met and decided to discharge Darnton. However, late that morning Darnton informed the public information dirctor of his intention to resign, and the following statement was prepared for release to the news media: “I have had discussions over the last few days with dif¬ ferent members of the Board of Regents. This morning I tendered my resignation from the presidency of Missouri Southern State College, and it was accepted. I shall con¬ tinue to serve as president of the college through June 30, 1982. In talking with the regents I expressed my wish to call a meeting of the employees of the college and tell them personally of this decision before it was announced to the general public. That approach is consistent with the way I have handled other eve nts which are of signifi¬ cant importance to the college employees and I wanted to behave in the same way in this case. “The story in the morning Joplin Globe prevented my handling this announcement in that way, and I apologize to the college faculty and staff that they did not first hear of the decision from me personally. The Globe reporter phoned me last night and asked me about the rumor. The specific questions that were asked were such that I could honestly answer in the negative. “I have a high regard for Missouri Southern State Col¬ lege. Its faculty and staff are dedicated to offering the best possible education to the people of Southwest Missouri. I expect that they will continue to serve in a way in which all can take pride in the college. “My plans for the future are uncertain. ” “As I announce my departure from the presidency I want to say to the college and each individual member of the college—God be with you and best wishes in the years ahead . 99 In the wake of the resignation, the Board of Regents refused all requests from the news media and others to explain the action. The Chart reporters learned through their investigation that some of the regents had talked to Darnton during the week and had urged him to resign. What actually precipitated the resignation may never be known. Darnton ' s three-year tenure as president was not without upheaval and controversy. However, when he took office in the summer of 1979 it was called a “bright new beginning ' He had come to the college at a difficult time, following the death of Dr. Leon C. Billingsly, who had been the college ' s only president for 14 years. The year 1979 was to mark Southern’s emergence as a dif¬ ferent institution with a renewed dedication to quality. Over the next two years, Darnton reorganized the ad- Donald C. Darnton resigns! ministrative structure of the college, forming an Academic Services department, realigning the chain of command, and changing the four divisions of the college to “schools’’. Five new residence halls were also constructed, opening in the Fall of 1980. But many problems began to emerge. Controversy sim¬ mered over the faculty evaluation plan, with the Regents and campus chapter of the National Education Associa¬ tion at continuing odds over the type of system to be us¬ ed. In 1981—82, Dr. Darnton was beseiged by monumental budgetary problems, program examinations, major con¬ troversy on the faculty drop policy, and continuing pro¬ blems with establishment of a faculty and student liaison with the Board of Regents. The evaluation controversy continued. And finally, as if in ironic prophecy, a torrential thunderstorm descended on Hughes Stadium in the mid¬ dle of the 1982 commencement ceremonies, drenching all assembled and halting the presentation of diplomas. Whether the President’s decision to hold commence¬ ment outside despite the storm warnings issued by the weather service had anything to do with his leaving the presidency is open to conjecture. In a special edition of The Chart , it was reprted that some observers close to the Board of Regents described that decision as “the straw that broke the camel’s back.’’ If poor leadership was at the core of the dismissal, it was never publicly stated by the Regents. At the May 1982 Regents meeting, a board member had asked, “How do we evaluate the President? Do we have a system?” Less than a month later the President had resigned. Darnton continued to serve with great dignity through an extrem ely emotional time for the college and for him until July 30, 1982. The regents formally accepted his resignation in an executive session following the regular June meeting. An unusually large crowd of faculty members had gathered for the open meeting, hoping to hear some explanation from the Regents for the dramatic turn of events. None was forth-coming. Dr. Darnton | declined to offer any comments beyond his June 5 state¬ ment, saying it was “in the best interest of the college” that he not discuss it further. When asked by a Chart reporter what he considered to be his most important accomplishment in office, Darnton said, “It ' s very hard to say, and I’m not sure it’s my ac¬ complishment. But there is a large number of faculty who have a very strong sense of committment to doing the best they possibly can for students both inside and out¬ side t he classroom. That sense is theirs. It’s the heart of the institution. If, in fact, I’ve had something to do with that, then that’s the most important thing I’ve done. That’s what my role is.”

Page 9 text:

During a rare space of leisure time, President Leon enjoys a basketball game with Vivian and their son Nathan. The President ' s role as a fund raiser is exemplified in his taping of a Southern-produced Public Service Announcement promoting the 1983 Phon-a-thon. MMMMMJEIEMMMfMMMMMMJEMIMMMMMJMMJMMElEJMMIEMJEMMMMMMJEMMMMHEMJEll

Page 11 text:

“One broken arm is better than two.” This was the comment of one Missouri state college president after being notified that the budget cuts to higher education for Fiscal Year 1983 would be “only” five per cent in total. This typified the year as one of struggle—“belt-tightening” and budget slicing—for Missouri colleges and universities, as well as for the state as a whole. Three per cent of the budget is always witheld after the passage of the appropriations bill, Dr. Julio Leon, President of Missouri Southern, told the College Board of Regents in September. “In early August we received word from the governor that the funds would not be released,” said Leon. By “asking every budgetary unit to cut eight per cent” Leon said the major portion of the $194,000 cut (three per cent witholding) would be borne, but he said that there would still be a “shortage” that would have to be covered. A shortage of some $100,000. And even before a decision could be made as to where the additional cutbacks to Southern’s budget would be made more statewide cuts were initiated. Missouri Gov. Christopher Bond announced in a statewide broadcast on Oct. 4 that a further reduction of $90 million in the state’s budget would transfer into a two per cent budget cut to state higher education instituions. For Southern this meant an additional slicing of $123,330 from the College budget. Southern’s deans described the “budget cutting” in various ways, but the general feel¬ ing was that the budgets had been lean from the beginning. Dr. Michael Land, dean of the School of Education and Psychology said “I don’t think we can cut the individual budgets anymore without effecting quality.” “In my opinion,” said Dr. John Tiede, interim dean of the School of Business Ad¬ ministration during the cutbacks, “is that the last two years we have cut everything to the bone.” James K. Maupin, dean of the School of Technology, said, “We were, of course, on a very austere budget. All departments realized this and were conservative in their purchases to an extraordinary degree. It was necessary for them to use what they normally reserve and carry over tor the next year.” “If we are subjected to additional cuts,” said Dr. Ray Malzahn, dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, “I don’t see how the operating budget can be further reduced. It’s already just skin and bones.” And the states budget problems seemed to center around an overly optomistic revenue projection by the State’s Budget and Planning Division and then the General Assembly budget committees, said Mel Carnahan, state treasurer. “‘People receipts aren’t coming in on your present year,’ is what we were telling them,” Carnahan said, as he described the situation during the budgeting process for the 1983 fiscal year. Carnahan described general revenues for the months of July and August as “disasterous” while September revenues came “more in line with what the administra¬ tion had hoped for this fiscal year.” Although general revenues for the remaining months of FY 83 came in stronger , this increase was not enough to offset the effects of the “disasterous” months. And the only bright spot on the year was in relation to the $600 million bond issue which Missouri voters approved in June. The first issuance of these bonds was a $75 million portion of which Southern was allocated $285,000. Of this figure $185,000 went for installation of an elevator in the Phinney Recital Hall Music Building in order to make the Hall more accesible to the handicapped. “Emergency priority” was given to the College’s request of $62,000 to repair ventilation systems in Reynolds Hall as recommended by the North Central Association in the spring of 1982. And this allocation also came from the $285,000. Finally, $38,000 was included for the painting of the interior in four buildings on cam¬ pus. All of these projects were to be completed in FY 84. 7