Update: Doug Clark posted on the A&T situation, so perhaps it was he, not Johnson, who wrote the editorial.
Yes, I criticized N&R editorial page editor Allen Johnson for his knowledge (or lack thereof) on the details of the David Wray lawsuit, but I give him credit for letting N.C. A&T have it even after Guilford County District Attorney Doug Henderson said no charges would be filed following a stinky audit:
The university has, in fact, uncovered a number of financial problems in recent years and addressed them with systemic changes. That’s encouraging. The Triad economy sorely needs a healthy and prosperous A&T.
What is not so encouraging is the manner in which A&T has communicated about these issues to the public. When it communicates at all.
An A&T spokeswoman offered no comment in response to Henderson’s decision and instead launched into a cheery recitation of A&T’s rankings in research funds and in engineering, psychology and accounting graduates.
In fact, the university appears less open and forthcoming now than before. That’s neither useful nor acceptable. As a state institution, A&T ultimately is answerable to the taxpayers, who have every right to know what’s going on there, in a timely and straightforward manner.
I’m not sure how Henderson concludes that Office of Naval Research oversight relieves program manager Anita Huff of responsibility for inflated stipends paid to her husband when the audit states that the program’s principal investigator “admitted that he had given almost complete administrative control over the grant and contract to the grant’s Program Manager.” Doesn’t seem like a coincidence to me.
As for former Chancellor James Renick’s expenditures from a Pepsi vending contract that supposedly “for “student scholarships, travel, and salaries that supposedly “benefitted the university,” Henderson concluded that Renick “did not act in bad faith or with criminal intent.” Indeed, I’m sure Renick thought what he was doing was perfectly fine. And that’s the problem.
