I support a second vote by the Board of Trustees on the motion to appoint Dennis Kessler as the president of MCC.

Of the three remaining finalists, two are highly qualified to become MCC's next CEO. If the recommendations of the two search committees had been followed, we would have had two candidates to chose from. I can think of no good reason to restart the search. The Board should revote. To do otherwise invites the possibility that the rewritten job qualifications will be watered down to more easily allow another unqualified candidate to make their way onto the list of finalists.

Yes, I support this motion. Kessler has the vision, enthusiasm and qualifications to lead MCC to the next level. He understands the economic climate of Monroe County and has a sincere belief in the ability of education to change lives.

I absolutely do not support an up or down motion to approve Kessler, because the same up or down motion will apply to smith.

Prior to moving forward with anything I believe the trustees need to be vetted by the SUNY board. Examine all of the trustee's involvement with Ren Sq, directly or indirectly, and the kick backs and benefits those individuals would receive by appointing an inside man like Smith to the post.

The MCC trustees need to be investigated and removed from their posts if wrongdoing is discovered. Until this happens SUNY should appoint an interim President (Note I did not say Maggie Brooks should appoint) until the investigation concludes and action is take. Then and oly then should the process resume.

This whole situation is about more than just appointing a new President for MCC. it affects the entire community, the tax payers, the direction of the county, it's image, it's future.

Throw the bums out.

People have this misconception that Maggie Brooks would appoint an interim. I think that her statement about Spina makes it appear that this is a case. The media needs to be clearer that Brooks does not have this role!

Conflicts of interest are a serious problem with this Board. But I still think they should revote on the motion to appoint Kessler.

Yes, I do think there should be a revote on Kessler.

God no. I attended Kessler's open hearing--he was a disaster. He couldn't answer a single question with a clear, logical answer--he stumbled all over the place. The only reason people are gushing over Kessler now, is because he is more palpable than Smith--that was the reason the Board even forwarded him. Ordinarily he would not be qualified for a larger position in the College than a professor of business or law. He has NO experience in higher education administration or governing an educational insitution. He should never have been included. The reason he got five votes on the Board was b/c the Spraggs faction united with the Kessler faction to stalemate the Smith contingent (ie. the five hacks). He probably won't re-apply for the job though, so we don't really need to be concerned.