Before King took over, NMC was operating on sound footing. under the leadership of NMC President Carmen Fernandez. The CNMI’s main post-secondary institution succeeded in securing re-affirmation of its accreditation.
However, following this accomplishment, King secured the chairmanship and summarily suspended President Fernandez and launched a political investigation to discredit Dr. Fernandez and find the legal grounds to remove the college president from office.
To achieve her political goal of removing Dr. Fernandez, King hired a Guam law firm to the tune of $25,000 for six months at $175 per hour. King has incurred this extraordinary legal expense at the expense of funding for students.
These legal bills fall on top of the reported $40,000 per year already paid to NMC’s regular legal counsel.
To add further insult to injury, King is now paying $160,000 per year for the employment of TWO college presidents, Dr. Carmen Fernandez, who was suspended, and Lorraine Cabrera, King’s hand-picked college administrator. Taken together, King is now incurring total costs of more than $200,000 for trying to remove President Fernandez. This is money that NMC desperately needs during a time of austerity. This money could be better used for NMC facility improvements and student services.
Because of King’s aggressive actions, the emphasis at NMC has dramatically shifted from educating students to paying legal bills and waging public relations campaigns to cover up King’s unprecedented actions.
At a time when funds are scarce, can the Legislature justify increasing NMC’s budget for legal fees and two college president salaries indefinitely? If Dr. Fernandez is removed without proper legal grounds, will our community continue to finance Janet King’s legal fees in extended litigation that would only bring down the CNMI’s only public post-secondary institution?
When Janet King was not the NMC chair, she frequently criticized the college and questioned Dr. Fernandez. Now that King is the NMC chair, she expects us to believe that all is well with the college, while legal bills continue to mount with no clear end in sight and accreditation remains at even greater risk.
As some concerned NMC students have said, “We need a president, not a king.” Indeed, restoring the president, who helped secure re-affirmation, and removing King, who is now gravely risking accreditation, would seem to best serve the interests of the college and the students it serves. NMC does not need an embedded lawyer embroiling the college in protracted litigation at student expense.
To the board, reinstate Dr. Fernandez for time is of the essence and much had been lost at the helm of a KING.
GREGORIO CRUZ JR.
Taotao Tano
