Like the Watergate scandal, it wasn’t the crime, but the cover-up.
The sad tale that now threatens to encompass the University of Wisconsin System and make the already tenuous relationship with republican legislators more volatile began after now former Vice Chancellor Paul Barrows admitted to having a relationship with a graduate student. After the admission, Mr. Barrows took a leave of absence.
Barrows has characterized the affair as adult and consensual. Chancellor John Wiley has called the affair inappropriate but claims that it did not break any rules.
Despite Mr. Barrows’ use of some 588 hours of sick leave during his nine-month absence, there is considerable debate over whether or not the leave was medically authorized. Mr. Wiley claims that the university has a note from Mr. Barrows’ physician authorizing the leave, while Mr. Barrows has stated the leave was not medically authorized.
When the press broke news of the affair and questionable leave, rather than come clean with details, the UW administration has stone-walled attempts to gain access to records that would reveal the entire story. In the face of public calls for transparency, the administration has repeatedly claimed that the ongoing investigation, started by legislators demanding answers, precluded any release of documents to the public.
The idea that the documents’ release would somehow undermine the investigation is as ludicrous as it is facetious. Just as in the case of the three professors recently convicted of felonies, the “due process” argument simply doesn’t hold water. The principle question is whether or not the extended leave was medically authorized. Either it was or it wasn’t. If UW has records that prove it was, UW acted in good faith. If it does not, these records show there was some sort of error in judgment and a significant cover-up behind the matter. In both these instances, Mr. Barrows comes out relatively clean.
The only other reasonable explanation is that Mr. Barrows gave UW officials a bogus or altered physician-authorization letter. If this were the case, it would be Mr. Barrows on the line — no doubt criminally — and he should be dismissed immediately.
In none of these situations could releasing the documents undermine the investigation or harm the reputation of any entity or individual beyond what will eventually come out with the report, which should be released by Sept. 23.
The UW System has argued that releasing the letter from Mr. Barrows’ physician, which Chancellor Wiley has stated exists, would violate confidentiality laws. If so, there are plenty of corollary documents that should explain the situation without releasing truly sensitive material. E-mails or letters must have come from the human resources department or Mr. Wiley acknowledging receipt of the letter. There are dozens of other documents involved in the paper trail that could be released to the public.
While UW officials hide behind their lawyers, Mr. Barrows has hired his own to hide behind. He could easily stop the conjecture by agreeing to release the physician’s letter. Yet Lester Pines, Mr. Barrows’ attorney, has consistently denied requests for its release. Mr. Barrows has largely disappeared from view, now speaking to the press only through his lawyer.
Neither side of this problem seems to be acting in good faith with Wisconsin’s taxpayers or the students, faculty and staff of the UW System. In a time of increased pressure from legislators to squeeze every last bit of life out of a dime, when UW finds itself under fire for not only this, but for the use of “back-up positions” and its questionable professor-termination process, it would be wise of UW officials to simply come clean.
William Cameron is a University of Wisconsin alumnus.
