Superintendent-President Anthony Beebe is being questioned about the legitimacy of his Administrator of the Year award by five former winners of the award who claim he failed to meet its minimum requirements.
The group also alleges Vice President of Human Resources Monalisa Hasson chose to give Beebe an exception to the requirements so he could still be eligible for the award, which he received last spring along with $1,000 in award money from the SBCC Foundation that he donated to the SBCC Promise Program.
Beebe wrote in a widely circulated email he was unaware of being granted an exception.
“I absolutely know of no exceptions that were made on my behalf related to the criteria for the award,” Beebe wrote in the email exchange.
All five former awardees were asked by The Channels about evidence to support their claims and why they chose to make these claims months after the award was given. Only one, former Vice President of Human Resources and the 2014 Administrator of the Year recipient, Patricia English, responded. She wrote she would prefer not to comment on the conflict.
“To grant an exception to these requirements undermines, tarnishes, and diminishes the entire program past and present,” wrote the group in widely circulated City College Pipeline emails Wednesday, requesting Beebe return the Foundation’s award money if such an exception was granted.
Geoff Green, chief executive officer of the SBCC Foundation, also wrote to The Channels that he does not want to comment.
“No exceptions were made by me or any person for Dr. Beebe or any nominee for Administrator of the year [sic]. All nominees who met the criteria were sent forward through secret ballot to a vote by members of the management team,” Hasson wrote.
Hasson and Beebe have not responded to a request by The Channels for comment.
The issue is whether Beebe was current with completing five employee evaluation reports and participated in the Management Professional Growth Program, which are both basic requirements that must be met to receive the award. Beebe wrote to the group that he was current on all his evaluations, but did not comment on whether he participated in the program.
When English asked for objective verification that all of his evaluations were completed by the time his name was included on the ballot in March, Hasson appeared to be offended by the question.
“These macro-aggressions are unacceptable. I would think if any person knows when he completed his evaluations, it would be Dr. Beebe,” Hasson wrote.
“To call to question the integrity and ethics of folks that are committed to fairness and equity is a very sad day for this institution that we all love and for its dedicated people.”
Hasson did not offer any means of verification in her reply and said she would not respond any further.
Luz Reyes-Martin, executive director of public affairs and communications, was interviewed by The Channels about the conflict Thursday.
She said the college employee who is responsible for confirming whether nominees are eligible for the award, Sharon Remacle, told Reyes-Martin she has confirmed all of Beebe’s employee evaluations were completed on time and has many documented activities as part of the Management Professional Growth Program, showing Beebe did meet those requirements at the time in question.
The college provided information upon request to The Channels about Beebe’s employee evaluations up to the time of his nomination for the award. Although it appears he submitted several evaluations late, it also appears to show all were submitted by the end of January in time for him to be considered eligible for the award.
The college also gave The Channels documents showing Beebe’s extensive doctoral work he completed and submitted as part of his participation in the Management Professional Growth Program — including his doctoral thesis — which the college says is sufficient to meet the criterion of participation in the program.
“Through the night and into this morning we did another full check of every one of those items and Sharon again confirmed there was no discrepancy, no special consideration, no exception made to that nomination,” Reyes-Martin said. “We did our due diligence to go through every record to confirm that he was eligible to be on the ballot.
“It’s really disappointing this would be called into question. It was the leadership of Dr. Beebe that guided us through one of the most catastrophic wildfires the state has ever seen and the devastating debris flow, and that was the core of why he was nominated.”
Editor’s Update:
Remacle disputes Reyes-Martin’s above quoted statement, and said she denies “confirming that there was no discrepancy, special consideration, or exceptions made to the nomination.”
