|
|
Hank D’Alessandro
- Thread starter Halldan1
- Start date
Politico’s response, FWIW
Sometimes following public opinion is a knee jerk reaction and sometimes it is wise.
If we call the reports erroneous, we should give examples.
The info about how he reacted to the beach house stuff made me cringe. Some bad shit is going down upstairs so I am staying on the 1st floor. And keeping my mouth shut. Regardless of the morality involved, I always thought chastity for priests was a kind of sacred vow and breaking that vow to be a sin. But what do I know. If friends of mine were doing bad stuff upstairs, and I decided to sleep on the couch and keep quiet, I hope that decision would cause me shame whenever I thought of it.
I hope I have in incomplete or incorrect impression of this situation in my head. But I dont feel any better about it than I did yesterday.
If we call the reports erroneous, we should give examples.
The info about how he reacted to the beach house stuff made me cringe. Some bad shit is going down upstairs so I am staying on the 1st floor. And keeping my mouth shut. Regardless of the morality involved, I always thought chastity for priests was a kind of sacred vow and breaking that vow to be a sin. But what do I know. If friends of mine were doing bad stuff upstairs, and I decided to sleep on the couch and keep quiet, I hope that decision would cause me shame whenever I thought of it.
I hope I have in incomplete or incorrect impression of this situation in my head. But I dont feel any better about it than I did yesterday.
gives off the vibe of "we have reviewed ourselves and concluded we did nothing wrong"
to this point it's like the first episode in this season of severance. we got caught and now will be implementing major reforms like new snacks!
What a disaster. Toxic. From chastity vows to pedophilia. What an institution. You’d think it was the Middle Ages. Horrible to be lumped into this subject matter, what are we thinking?
I hope the guy is innocent and knew of nothing… Highly unlikely.
I hope the guy is innocent and knew of nothing… Highly unlikely.
One of the issues is that the report done by Latham & Watkins promised all the respondents confidentiality. If SHU releases the report that we all want to see they break that promise.
SHU refutes much of what has been reported but they're between a rock and a hard place. More will be coming out from the school, but I don't know if that will satisfy the doubters.
My question is why if in August 2019 the key findings were announced, as well as the proactive measures endorsed by the Board, to the extent permissible under Title IX and University policy is this now coming out nearly 5 years later.
Where was the outrage back then?
SHU refutes much of what has been reported but they're between a rock and a hard place. More will be coming out from the school, but I don't know if that will satisfy the doubters.
My question is why if in August 2019 the key findings were announced, as well as the proactive measures endorsed by the Board, to the extent permissible under Title IX and University policy is this now coming out nearly 5 years later.
Where was the outrage back then?
1) Reilly becomes president, makes this much more of an issue.
2) Obviously the report was leaked by a supposed aggrieved party, we can all guess who that was.
3) For now Seton Hall gets to hide behind the cloak of confidentiality but the report could be subpoenaed if any lawsuit ever gets involved.
4) Do you trust the BOR? I don't.
5) Do you trust POLITICO? I don't but the report they saw is the real deal from someone I trust.
6) There are three sides to every story. We are missing one side.
What is Hank supposed to say though publicly? Nothing? Leave your President twisting in the wind when you're trying to run a university, fundraise, etc.? He was never going to say they acknowledge they knew these things and decided to install him as President anyway. Or that none of it is true? Somehow they were able to vet out that Reilly was nowhere near any of these issues that the Church clearly had and were pervasive to them as an institution? Their own investigation yielded there was at least sexual harassment going on in the Seminary. Or they threaded some needle where Reilly was around it or adjacent to it and handled it properly?
The fact this is even swirling around the President of the university is a major problem. The question will be if the report is ever released and what SHU/BOR deemed as acceptable.
Tremendous show, btw. We're all Devon on this topic, we know something's not right in there, lol.
Let’s not forget that the BOR hired an outstanding law firm well versed in dealing with issues like this and not a local firm . In the various rankings of law firms both in overall rankings and specialty rankings they are consistently ranked in the top 5.
Last edited:
You don’t Hank. He wouldn’t put his reputation on the line as you suggest because “what else could he do”. So believe what you want. The cynicism here is breathtaking
I believe nothing. I don't like that SHU is even adjacent to this whole fiasco, which was a choice. I have no idea what's right or what's not and I'm certainly not believing his statement carte blanche. Some behaviors on the BOR in recent years have been awful too. We'll find out eventually. I hope he's right and this is all much ado about nothing.
Also seems given Reilly's position it would've been unlikely to avoid any of this. But perhaps the explanations were enough for Hank and the BOR. They're all toast anyway if there's truth somewhere in here so might as well go down with the ship.
This is an embarrassment. Top down. Shows how amazingly amateurish those charged with upper management at the school. Clean house.
That statement is classic corporate/institutional word salad. Sadly, I have been in a room and a fringe participant in a writing/editing session where something similar was being produced by a former employer. I'm far removed from campus affairs at this point in life. I do have a friend who is personally acquainted with Monsignor Reilly and who heralded his selection as President.
The Dallessandro statement, of course, completely avoids any specifics either on Politico or what Reilly knew about and ignored. Clear away the smoke and you still have a cloud hovering over our beloved Alma Mater. That cloud will almost certainly remain in place as long as there is no change in either the Presidency or the BOR. That simply ain't a good thing.
Much has changed since I left campus more than 50 years ago. But these types of administrative missteps and episodes of head-in-the-sand to ill deeds seem to have continued through the years. What a shame that a place that is so much a part of my heart can't seem to get out of its own way.
The Dallessandro statement, of course, completely avoids any specifics either on Politico or what Reilly knew about and ignored. Clear away the smoke and you still have a cloud hovering over our beloved Alma Mater. That cloud will almost certainly remain in place as long as there is no change in either the Presidency or the BOR. That simply ain't a good thing.
Much has changed since I left campus more than 50 years ago. But these types of administrative missteps and episodes of head-in-the-sand to ill deeds seem to have continued through the years. What a shame that a place that is so much a part of my heart can't seem to get out of its own way.
They were forced to remove him so they hid him for a year until the task force went away and then put him in higher positions. Oh yeah I feel great.
What a bunch of fools.
What a bunch of fools.
Board Affairs and University Strategy
I write to you as Chair of the Seton Hall University Board of Regents and an alumnus who dearly loves our university and admires the person now leading it, Monsignor Joseph Reilly. Recent news stories have falsely and unfairly portrayed him.
In 2018, following allegations of harassment of seminarians two decades earlier by the former archbishop, Theodore McCarrick, the Board and University commissioned a comprehensive review by the law firm Latham & Watkins. The review depended on the voluntary participation of many individuals, assured of confidentiality, in accordance with Title IX.
The Board reviewed the findings, and with the University, approved the implementation of personnel changes and improvements to the Seminary – University structure, and University compliance systems, including investing significant resources in its Title IX staff and policies. In August 2019, the key findings were announced, as well as the proactive measures endorsed by the Board, to the extent permissible under Title IX and University policy.
Following its review, the Board enthusiastically supported Monsignor Reilly, who participated in the Latham interviews, in holding leadership positions, and he remained in his role as Rector/Dean for the final 2.5 years of his second 5-year term. Thereafter, he applied for and took a sabbatical for which he was entitled to apply under the terms of his contract. Upon his return in 2023 he was promoted to Vice Provost of Academics and Catholic Identity. In 2024, after a national search, the Board elected Monsignor Reilly as the University’s 22nd president.
The Board has stood by and continues to stand by Monsignor and trusts his proven record of effective leadership. He is a faithful servant and the right person to lead Seton Hall.
On a personal note, I have known Monsignor Reilly for many years and witnessed his commitment to academic and student success and the infusion of our Catholic identity into all aspects of university life. As a priest, he has worked tirelessly to increase faith, hope, and peace in our community. His leadership has produced scores of dedicated priests who have done the same. Monsignor Reilly is a person of the highest integrity who has always acted to put the needs and well-being of others first.
As the Seton Hall motto says, Hazard Zet Forward, and so we shall move forward under his leadership. I look forward to Monsignor Joseph Reilly leading our beloved University for many years to come.
Sincerely,
Hank D’Alessandro ‘85
Chair
Seton Hall University Board of Regents
This line in the statement astounds me. “As the Seton Hall motto says, Hazard Zet Forward, and so we shall move forward under his leadership….” In other words, “our school’s motto loosely means ‘move forward despite the risks,’ thus, notwithstanding the risks we clearly know and face by going forward with Reilly, we’re doing it anyway…”
Pretty obvious as to what the only solution is and obvious that it won’t happen.
At a micro level this kills opportunities for NIL, as some people will feel uncomfortable. And if I’m the marketing exec at a company am I really going to pitch SHU as a good investment in NIL?
At a micro level this kills opportunities for NIL, as some people will feel uncomfortable. And if I’m the marketing exec at a company am I really going to pitch SHU as a good investment in NIL?
This might be obvious to some but not all. Unfortunately without 100% proof no one will name names for fear of a lawsuit.
Piratz, the BOR is made up mostly of tremendously wealthy and successful men. Their reputations means the world to them. I find it hard to believe they would have chosen a person in this position if they didn't feel he was 100% clean. They had access to what we all want to see and it just doesn't make sense they would have chosen as they did if Reilly was tainted in any way.
They all knew the backlash was a strong possibly yet they still voted for Reilly to be president.
Does being wealthy and successful in business translate to being smart when it comes to setting policy for a university? I don’t know the answer, just asking.
Not always. But I have a personal stake in this. Thanks to SnakeTom many years ago I was introduced to Hank. Since that time I have developed a great personal relationship with him.
Hank is as intelligent as you would imagine. He is one of the most honest people I know and he bleeds Pirate Blue as much as anyone. What he has done for the school is known only to those high in the administration. He never, absolutely never wants his deeds published.
I so wish I could just post a fraction of what he has done but he has expressivity forbidden it.
With all that said, and without any more than what I have been informed by others I would stake my life on Hank being honest knowing the possibility of the backlash on the BOR's decision if he and others chose Reilly. And the backlash was not unknown because the media caught wind of this hire before it was announced so the issues we are now facing were known and expected.
Hank is as intelligent as you would imagine. He is one of the most honest people I know and he bleeds Pirate Blue as much as anyone. What he has done for the school is known only to those high in the administration. He never, absolutely never wants his deeds published.
I so wish I could just post a fraction of what he has done but he has expressivity forbidden it.
With all that said, and without any more than what I have been informed by others I would stake my life on Hank being honest knowing the possibility of the backlash on the BOR's decision if he and others chose Reilly. And the backlash was not unknown because the media caught wind of this hire before it was announced so the issues we are now facing were known and expected.
or that you're an honorable person? usually you gotta crack a few eggs to be that successful.
The BOR may have felt Reilly was innocent or clean, but having to defend him at some point, without being able to provide proof just strikes me as a poor decision. Hank or any of them can put out a statement but it comes across as “he’s the right guy; trust us” when the optics look bad. Even if Reilly is qualified, it would have been better to go in a different direction, especially given the bad press the school had gotten from the Nyre/Marino public brawl.
Every university board has successful and wealthy people. That doesn’t ensure they will always make the right decision. Where is the win if you knew you would get public backlash?
Every university board has successful and wealthy people. That doesn’t ensure they will always make the right decision. Where is the win if you knew you would get public backlash?
Last edited:
This is on the level of PSU Sandusky, RU Julie Herman and RU Mike Rice and Barchy. Being wealthy and on any board does not mean you make good decisions. Check out what Ken Langone founder of Home Depot when he was on the board of GE. They asked him to leave for asking too many questions and criticising management decisions.
Hank puts his time and I assume $ where his mouth is when it comes to dedication to SHU. I would seriously doubt he wouldn’t have done all he could to ensure SHU had the right person at President. I do find it interesting we decided to go back to a Priest running the school after 2 Laymen were Presidents. I assume some of this was due to the school saving a lot of $ by not paying a Salary and other perks for a Layman.
Similar threads
