If the University of Mary Washington's board of visitors chooses to remove President William Frawley, his contract could make that complicated and expensive.
The 12-member board discussed Frawley's future yesterday in closed session but didn't take any action. Rector Bill Poole has declined to elaborate on the board's discussions.
Members are scheduled to meet again for a special session Monday at 1 p.m. in the Jepson Alumni Executive Center.
Frawley, who took over as president last July, was put on paid leave earlier this month after being charged with driving under the influence twice in two days.
He's scheduled to appear in court next month in Fairfax County and in July in Fredericksburg.
Frawley wasn't at yesterday's meeting.
In a statement released last week, he said he is recovering at his Maryland home from a heart disorder.
Board members have not indicated that they want Frawley gone, but if they do, they have three options under his contract: Fire him "with cause," fire him "without cause" or negotiate a resignation.
Here's what the contract says about those categories.
Members can fire him with cause for several reasons, including:
"Gross negligence" or "willful malfeasance" that harms the university.
Conduct "detrimental to the interests of the university." Frawley gets a chance to remedy this conduct "to the extent curable" within 30 days of notice.
Actions that are willfully criminal. The contract doesn't state whether Frawley has to be convicted for this clause to apply.
A material breach of his contract that damages the university.
Frawley's duties listed in the agreement include "fostering positive external relationships" with government agencies and "public and alumni relations."
Frawley would stop getting paid by the university immediately after being fired with cause.
Frawley would be entitled to 18 months pay if the board fired him without cause.
He makes $305,000 annually.
After the first six months, UMW would reduce its payments if he gets another job. He would receive deferred compensation from the nonprofit UMW Foundation, according to the contract.
The board could also accept Frawley's resignation.
Or, the university could make a deal with him in return for his leaving, such as agreeing to pay his salary for six months. This isn't addressed in the contract.
UMW's attorney Jack Knight, who works for the Virginia Attorney General's office, would not comment. Frawley did not return a call to his cell phone.
(posted by annrob, Apr.
27, 2007 8:46 am) nbsp in the headlights of public opinion. UMW regents, like Medicorp directors, can only keep house behind closed doors (interesting to see how many housekeepers they share). Though "Sweep It Under the Rug" is the action of choice, things get stickier when company's coming.
Both institutions, in my opinion, need a good housecleaning. (posted by jdmaynard, Apr. 27, 2007 8:37 am) nbsp Frawley committed a crime.
Make that two crimes. These were not petty crimes, by any means. He could have killed someone both times.
He has brought negative attention to the University. Therefore, he needs to be fired with cause and without pay. I understand it takes money to find a new President.
However, this time maybe they can find one that will keep it under control. He has violated his contract, and last time I checked, that is cause for removal without pay. He screwed up, now he has the consequences.
(posted by katstephens, Apr. 27, 2007 8:33 am) nbsp The President of UMW is charged with "fostering positive external relationships" with government agencies . Maybe you could understand one incident, but to have two incidents back-to-back is unacceptable.
This alumna believes Dr. Frawley is fostering a negative image of our institution. How can he set an example for the young adults coming to UMW, whcn his public image has been tarnished?
And why should he get paid for not holding up his end of the contract? (posted by saracup, Apr. 27, 2007 6:41 am) nbsp For the sake of the morale at the University, and the reputation of the University, the Board should simply take responsibility for the contract it signed.
In the long run, this seems like nickel-and-diming. The University already has a void of leadership. This makes it feel like even the Board can't lead.
Please act! (posted by joker567, Apr. 27, 2007 6:02 am) nbsp .
..you have to be kidding me!
If he is found guilty on these charges, I would be very disappointed if he was not removed from his position, regardless of cost. His actions are tarnishing the reputation of a fine school. Honestly, college admissions would not admit a student who had a DUI charge on their record, much less two.
Why should he be the exempt? If a student was found guilty of charges like this, I'm certain they'd be on shakier ground than Mr.Frawley is.
What do you think?
Enter your FredTalk username and password to post a comment on this story. If you are registered on FredTalk or another part of this site, use that login here.Otherwise, you can just .
News RSS