LETTERS SUBMITTED TO DEAN BERNARD DOBRANSKI CONCERNING THE TERMINATION PROCEEDINGS AGAINST AMSL PROFESSOR STEPHEN SAFRANEK:

Dear Dean Dobranski,

As I am sure you are aware, there have been significant rumors regarding termination proceedings against Professor Safranek. As far as I know, these rumors are unsubstantiated; however they are of such weight and substance that they are causing a great disturbance among the student body.

While I fully understand that my position on the Honor Board in no way carries the authority of speaking for the student body as a representative, some students, and even some alumni, do not fully understand my proper role and have brought their concerns to me. Accordingly, I feel I must pass on these concerns and beg resolution of the issue.

Assuming the rumor is untrue, please make an official announcement that no adverse action is being taken against Professor Safranek.

If perhaps, and I pray fervently this is not the case, there is adverse action being taken, I implore reconsideration. The faculty, students, alumni, administration, parents, benefactors, staff, etc. view each other as members of a holy family brought together by God for a very special purpose. Adverse action, or rumors of adverse action, against such an honored and favored member of our family will be seen as undermining that family and, quite frankly, against our holy mission.

True or not, the longer these rumors remain unaddressed, the greater the hold they will take. To permit this to continue will be catastrophic to the morale of all involved and to the ultimate material success of our mission. As our Lord instructed us: "Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate: and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand." (Matthew 12:25). In the end, it will not matter who bears responsibility; unless the Ave Maria community is assured that we will all be treated with the dignity and respect every one of us deserves, the result can only be tragic.

Thank you for your consideration of these concerns.

Respectfully, and in the Love of Christ,

Hugh R. Slayden
Member
Honor Board of Ave Maria School of Law

**********

Dear Dean Dobranski,

As I am sure you are aware, numerous rumors are circulating that you or the law school administration have begun what have been termed “termination proceedings” against Professor Safranek. While I do not know the veracity of these rumors, I am devastated that such action would even be considered against a man I had the honor of being a student of for half of my legal education at Ave Maria. As you know, I do sincerely respect you and the generosity and kindness you provided me during my time at Ave Maria and that is why I am bringing my concern directly to you. Perhaps even more significantly, I raise this concern in light of the many close friends I have at Ave Maria who I want to share in the same benefit of being taught by Professor Safranek that I was blessed with while an Ave Maria student. To deny these faithful Ave Maria students that opportunity would be a disservice to the students and a discredit to the institution.

Amid these rumors, there is no explanation of why such a severe action is being considered or has been taken to begin a process of terminating Professor Safranek’s employment as a law professor at Ave Maria. Furthermore, what is the process and why would a process be initiated against a law professor? The reason why these rumors ignite is because there is a lack communication between the administration and the student and alumni bodies. I have no comprehension why a man who has sacrificed and dedicated himself wholeheartedly to the students of Ave Maria would be subjected to a less than dignified removal. If these rumors are in fact true, I would sincerely hope that you and the rest of the administration would look at your own actions in light of our law school’s mission. I have now observed countless criticisms by this administration charged at alumni and the alumni group I have now become a part of at attempting to destroy the law school. If speaking up for the proper respect and human dignity of those within our community is wrong, then I went to the wrong law school or went to one where the mission has become nothing more than merely words with no meaning. I believe that not to be the case, but I would consider such an act against Professor Safranek to be an act in a reign of terror and a seriously flawed application of the mission of Ave Maria within its own administration. If this administration is not going to treat individuals with the respect and human dignity that our school is built on, the administration is failing us because you have accepted the responsibility to provide us a shining example of the ability to live that mission within our law school community to prepare us to bring it to the legal communities we enter as graduates.

I sacrificed tremendously to come to Ave Maria like many other students and as someone who now serves as a representative of Ave Maria through a law degree, that comes with an even greater expectation that I will serve the school by living out its mission. I sincerely hope that my disappointment and discontent over these recent rumors proves to be unfounded and inaccurate because no such action is being pursued against Professor Safranek. Again, I am coming to you directly as opposed to blindly accepting what may be rumors on the blogs that we have been cautioned against following as being demeaning to our institution on numerous occasions. In my years as a student at Ave Maria, Professor Safranek taught me more than contracts or how to create a law, he taught me personal integrity and what it means to be a Catholic. In fact, he sat behind my parents when I was baptized Catholic in Ave Maria’s chapel. If we are a different law school to educate a different kind of lawyer, then we should have a different kind of professor. That different kind of professor is Professor Safranek. Despite being in the midst of studying to take the bar examination in July as a new alum, this matter is of too great importance for me simply to ignore as Ave Maria and its community has touched my life as more than simply a place I went to law school and because of that, I must seek the truth. I was trained at Ave Maria to use my legal mind which goes beyond case law and statutes. I would appreciate your response to this matter. Thank you for your time and consideration.

In Christ, Mary & St. Ives,
Laura C. Hoffman, ‘07

**********

Dear Dean Dobranski,

It has come to my attention that numerous problems are occuring at our law school that may affect not only the quality of my education but the core values that we ALL at the school profess to hold dear. Please address my concerns in a Catholic Christ-like manner with openness and candor and enable this dialogue to allay not only my fears but those of many others.

To begin with-I do not want to address ANY questions about the Florida move. My AMSL will always be the community of friends I made at school in Ann Arbor, the wonderful faculty I have met and learned from, and the administrators who helped me along the way in a truly Christ-like manner. Your AMSL may be different from mine but that is not the issue here.

Primarily I will address some issues of faculty retention, or lack thereof as I see it, which directly affect the quality of my education.

1. Professors Lee and Strang have departed from our School. Both of these men are fine individuals as both Christians and as professors and were fully dedicated to the mission of our school and to their students. I know because I had them for class and saw them in the community at large where they each displayed their commitment to our school. My question is why are such dedicated men leaving our school and what did you do to try and retain them?

2. Professor Safranek is a fine individual as well and for the same reasons. He is fully committed to the mission of our school and he fully lives his Catholic Christian faith. Why is an attempt apparently being made by the administration to terminate this professor from the school he -with others as well- helped found?

3. What is the process for termination of faculty members and who initiates and implements it?

4. As a Catholic school which professes the openness of the Church and Christ, should we have a cloak and dagger type termination process for any employee, let alone a founding faculty member?

5. Apparently Professor Bromberg is leaving our school as a full time professor thus continuing the hemorrhage of faculty-main and necessary faculty whom are dedicated to our school, our mission, and we the students- and I want to know who will be teaching my fall 2007 Wills, Trusts, and Estates class?

5A. If Bromberg will not be teaching the class, will it be taught by some one of his caliber and knowledge or will my quality of education be affected in this vital and bar tested field? I do pay good money for my education her at AMSL-receiving no assistance from the ever generous Ave foundation- and would like to get my moneys worth.

6. With all the recent faculty departures-all highly respected individuals and dedicated Catholic Christians-and the numerous staff and administration changes in the just the last two years alone what assurance do you give me that the quality of my education is remaining at the same high level as when I first became a member of this community?

7. Since Jesus never had this kind of turnover in His ministry and you, as the head of our school, do have this kind of turnover, have you ever considered that you may have lost your way and deviated from the original purpose-to provide the best Catholic legal education possible with the best faculty and students in addition to a great administration-causing others to break affiliation with you and our school?

Thank you for what attention you can give to my concerns and the time it takes to not simply read and respond to them but to prayerfully consider them in the guidance of the Holy Spirit. May God bless you and hold you accountable for all that you do for our Heavenly Father -especially through our school. God bless your wife and family as well as our AMSL family.

Respectfully and sincerely,

Peter Ortega
Elected to the Honor Board by my peers in 2006
Class of 2008

---

EXCERPTS (ITALICS) FROM THE RESPONSE SENT BY DOBRANSKI TO MULTIPLE ALUMNI:
AveWatch comments in plain text.

***

Dobranski:
Be assured, however, that no member of our faculty, staff, or student body has ever or will ever be punished for expressing his or her views about the Board's decision to relocate to Florida.

While I believe there are numerous good reasons to relocate, agreement with that decision has never been a prerequisite for continued employment here, as evidenced by the voluminous discussion, both for and against the decision of the Board, on paper, via e-mail and on the internet. You will recall, in fact, that I held open-door office hours myself and invited feedback from faculty, staff, and students before the relocation decision. Again, no one who objected to relocation has ever or will ever be punished for expressing their views.

This is, emphatically, not the case. Consider:

+ last month when Dobranski told the Ave Maria Alumni Board of his intention to "curb involvement" with Alumni until their public opposition to the administration's governance stopped

+ the booting of AMSL co-founder and Professor Emeritus Charles Rice, a voice of concern about governance issues as far back as 2001; the May 10, 2007 "Chronicle of Higher Education" said that Dobranski "decided not to renew Mr. Rice's contract as a visiting professor after he circulated another letter that disparaged the Board of Governors"

+ the note sent to alumni by Charles Roboski, AMSL Associate Dean for Admissions and External Affairs, in which he equates public opposition to governance as an "effort to undermine the reputation of the law school" and that "... I think it is critical that further efforts to undermine the decision [of the Board to move] must stop..."

+ the AMSL administration's refusal to allow Alumni Board members to freely communicate with their alumni constituency on matters concerning governance

***

Dobranski:
Unfortunately, I cannot talk about confidential personnel matters. For that reason, I cannot confirm or deny the rumor [of termination proceedings] you referenced in your e-mail.

Has Dean Dobranski maintained the same confidentiality about Professor Safranek with Board members and administrators, including Tom Monaghan? If those who are to determine Safranek's fate in the termination process have already been biased against him by one-sided information and accounts, then the proceedings are stacked, tainted, and should be stopped.

***

Dobranski:
We have an outstanding faculty here and I will announce shortly the addition of three new faculty members who will contribute to the excellence in the classroom that you have come to expect. In addition, there are many extremely well - qualified and well-credentialed men and women, strongly committed to our mission, who have expressed a desire to become members of our faculty if vacancies occur.

---

ALUMNI RESPONSES TO DOBRANSKI'S AFOREMENTIONED COOKIE-CUTTER REPLY:

Dear Dean Dobranski,

I appreciate your response dated July 3, 2007 to my letter of June 28, 2007 regarding the rumors of the potential termination of Professor Stephen Safranek as a law professor at Ave Maria. I write again in response to issues you raised in your initial response and to again seek clarification on these matters.

First, the content of my letter never referenced anything regarding Florida or the relocation of the law school. Never once did I mention Florida or the decision to relocate. The decision to relocate the law school is independent of my current concerns. While I realize that has been an issue of debate among all members of our entire law school community, my letter was particular to Professor Safranek and the process of terminating a law professor at Ave Maria. If such rumors persist, it would seem to me that you and the administration owe us a duty to provide some clarification on these matters and as I have previously stated, the reason these rumors ignite and intensify is by an unwillingness to disclose any information to us as you have already now continued to perpetuate through your response. Furthermore, this continued silence on such matters publicly only casts negative light on Ave Maria which goes against your stated commitment to attract both prospective students and law professors. I know this to be true from discussions I have had with prospective students that are hesitant to make a commitment to an institution with uncertainty on these matters that directly impact the quality of education received. I suspect that in the world of higher education, rumored instances of removing tenured faculty members who have as respectable credentials and achievements as those of Professor Safranek could not in any way improve the reputation of an institution that is already under scrutiny from a decision as major as one of relocation.

Also, while you have claimed that these matters are confidential, this did not respond to my direct questions of the actual process of terminating a law professor and what possible grounds generally would initiate a termination process which I would imagine in the least would be available for public disclosure. I did not ask if Professor Safranek was being terminated for any disagreement of the relocation decision either. My purpose in asking these questions was to become educated in the termination process that has been established by the law school. I am concerned that this continued claim of confidentiality by the administration is a constant source of the failure of adhering to the preservation of Ave Maria’s mission based on the dignity of the human person and in direct opposition to the Catholic Church’s document on Catholic higher education provided in Ex Corde Ecclesiae:

It is the honour and responsibility of a Catholic University to consecrate itself without reserve to the cause of truth. This is its way of serving at one and the same time both the dignity of man and the good of the Church, which has 'an intimate conviction that truth is (its) reality ... and that knowledge and reason are sure ministers to faith'(7). Without in any way neglecting the acquisition of useful knowledge, a Catholic University is distinguished by its free search for the whole truth about nature, man and God. The present age is in urgent need of this kind of disinterested service, namely of proclaiming the meaning of truth, that fundamental value without which freedom, justice and human dignity are extinguished. By means of a kind of universal humanism a Catholic University is completely dedicated to the research of all aspects of truth in their essential connection with the supreme Truth, who is God. It does this without fear but rather with enthusiasm, dedicating itself to every path of knowledge, aware of being preceded by him who is 'the Way, the Truth, and the Life'(8), the Logos, whose Spirit of intelligence and love enables the human person with his or her own intelligence to find the ultimate reality of which he is the source and end and who alone is capable of giving fully that Wisdom without which the future of the world would be in danger. (Paragraph 4)

A Catholic University pursues its objectives through its formation of an authentic human community animated by the spirit of Christ. The source of its unity springs from a common dedication to the truth, a common vision of the dignity of the human person and, ultimately, the person and message of Christ which gives the Institution its distinctive character. As a result of this inspiration, the community is animated by a spirit of freedom and charity; it is characterized by mutual respect, sincere dialogue, and protection of the rights of individuals. It assists each of its members to achieve wholeness as human persons; in turn, everyone in the community helps in promoting unity, and each one, according to his or her role and capacity, contributes towards decisions which affect the community, and also towards maintaining and strengthening the distinctive Catholic character of the Institution. (Paragraph 21)

This extraordinary document calls for an active and participatory role of members in the community of a Catholic institution in events that impact the entire community directly. As a Catholic institution, there is an even higher call for us as students and alumni to seek the truth and we are trusting that our inquiries will be met by those in positions of authority with truth, charity, and generosity in response. If we expected any less, we would be failing our part in fulfilling our institution’s commitment to maintaining a true Catholic identity.

Finally, an open door policy is an appreciated and respectable invitation only if this open door is fully accompanied by openness for communication. The absence of openness for communication is analogous to inviting a guest over for dinner but not being an entertaining and sociable host. I am sincerely disturbed by this very limited communication in response to my openness through generosity and care in addressing concerns that I know countless classmates and alumni join me and support me in sharing with you. Again, I appreciate your initial response but I am disappointed and disheartened that you significantly overlooked the primary concerns I have raised. Thank you for your time and consideration.

In Christ, Mary & St. Ives,

Laura C. Hoffman, ‘07

***

Dear Dean Dobranski,

I am very concerned about the response I received to my June 29 email. I understand that you may feel that you cannot respond to the rumors of Professor Safranek’s termination directly, but that is not what disturbs me. I am concerned because my emails concern did not address the issue of moving to Florida, yet that is the only issue your cookie cutter response dealt with. I was concerned as to the process which would be used to remove any tenured faculty member, as well as when in that process, if ever, the students and potential students would receive notice of such an event. You have told us repeatedly that if we had concerns we should bring them directly to you because your door is always open. I feel that I did take my concern to you, and I would like to note that I have learned an open door policy means little when a closed mouth policy is also in place.

Our school was founded on the principles of faith and reason. I believe that reason must guide us in all our endeavors, but our faith is what moves us forward. While I do not know the truth or falsity of the discussions I hear around my alma mater, I am very concerned that these discussions are occurring at all. Professor Safranek has been a beacon of light for the students, and the world, on behalf of Ave Maria School of Law. He was instrumental in guiding my understanding of the law, as well as my understanding of myself. I am grateful to have studied under his watch, and consider him one of the finest professors I have had the privilege to encounter. As a founding member of the school, he understands the importance of our mission, as I hope you do as well. Unfortunately, I am concerned that that mission has been lost somewhere along the way. I do not know whether the path has been lost because its novelty has worn off, or because it is being spearheaded by greed. Either way, the loss of focus is disturbing.

You addressed my alumni constituents and me with distain when you informed us you would no longer attend the alumni meetings because of the Alumni Board’s disagreement with your position on governance and the planned move to Florida. You accused them of not following the mission to the point of breaching their duty to their beloved alma mater. I assure you, they have not. On the other hand, I believe if any termination proceedings are convened it would be a grave wrong to the institution we have all come to love, and it would be a breach of your duty to my alma mater. Professor Safranek has always had the best interests of Ave Maria in his mind and on his heart, and has always acted accordingly. To attempt to terminate him at this time, in the midst of an ABA “fact finding” (since you claim it is not an investigation), a request for acquiescence to a major change, and the public relations disaster surrounding the governance concerns (whether you believe those concerns to be perceived or actual) would be an ill advised step at best, and a reckless venture at worst.

I would like to think that the mission of Ave Maria has not become hollow. I have seen many institutions, some of which I considered prior to attending Ave Maria, where the mission was nothing more than a card sent out to the incoming class. Ave Maria was different. It was a place where the students, faculty, staff, and administration lived the mission. In recent times, however, I wonder if the administration takes the mission as seriously as it says. I have seen uncounted acts that indicate this, from the treatment of students at “town hall meetings,” to the way concerns were addressed by individual board members, to the language used in the most recent letter to the alumni. To say that I am surprised the administration would lash out at Professor Safranek would be incorrect, given its recent track record, but surprised or not, I am still saddened and disappointed.

I spent my years at Ave Maria not only learning the law, but learning about personal integrity and community. I was taught to be the best person that I could be, by Professors who demanded it of me, like Professor Safranek. I hope that incoming students continue to have the opportunity to learn under the watch of Professor Safranek’s tutelage. He is truly a remarkable man in a less than remarkable world.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
~Beverly M. Griffor
Ave Maria Class of 2007

Tags: employee-treatment, dean-amok