UW-Milwaukee’s former vice chancellor for student affairs, Helen Mamarchev, was under investigation for making inflammatory statements when she was abruptly fired by Chancellor Santiago in June, according to records recently obtained under Wisconsin’s public records law.

Just days before the investigation was launched – on June 12 – Santiago informed Mamarchev that he had decided to not reappoint her for the upcoming academic year. Mamarchev’s 2008-2009 appointment was set to expire on June 30.

Records show that on June 17, Santiago and Mamarchev met with senior-level officials from the Division of Student Affairs; Santiago had requested a meeting to inform the division’s leadership of his decision and to discuss Mamarchev’s exit from UWM. After Santiago left the meeting, Mamarchev purportedly made the statements in question. UWM administration is refusing to release the statements, calling them “inaccurate and inflammatory.” In a letter obtained by the Post, Santiago referred to the statements as “extremely inappropriate and unprofessional.” The day after the meeting, upon being informed of the alleged statements, Santiago initiated the probe.

“I have since received allegations that, following my visit with Student Affairs’ staff, you made a number of untrue statements to those staff members,” wrote Santiago in a June 18 letter to Mamarchev. “I will be initiating an investigation into these allegations. In the meantime, I have concluded that, given the allegations, substantial harm to the institution could result if you continue in your position during the investigation. You are therefore suspended from your current duties, with pay, effective immediately.”

Santiago further ordered Mamarchev to stay away from campus, not to communicate with students and university staff, return UWM property and to refrain from accessing electronic files. In a June 23 letter, Santiago specifically asked Mamarchev if she had violated the terms of her suspension by “seeking to obtain copies of UWM electronic files and having them sent” to her private e-mail account. It is unknown why Santiago asked this and what Mamarchev’s answer was, if she did indeed respond.

Mamarchev was summoned to the Hefter Conference Center to meet with investigators on June 24, but it is unknown if she showed up. Santiago fired Mamarchev the next day.

Mamarchev, whose salary was just under $150,000 per year when she was let go, was hired in 2007 by Santiago. Before coming to UWM, Mamarchev was the vice president for student affairs at Illinois State University. She has since put her Glendale home up for sale. Neighbors say she has moved out-of-state to work at another university, though this has not been confirmed. Repeated attempts to contact Mamarchev have gone unanswered.

Shrouded in secrecy

UWM administration has repeatedly refused to answer questions regarding Mamarchev’s dismissal; most recently last week when the Post asked Santiago to confirm obtained information. Santiago did not respond, but UWM spokesman Tom Luljak told the Post that it is university policy not to comment on personnel matters. In June, Luljak said in an interview that “it was in the best interest of the university to make this personnel change,” though he would not say why. While records the Post has obtained shed some light on the events surrounding Mamarchev’s ultimate exit from UWM, questions still linger about why Santiago initially decided to not reappoint her.

Student Association President Jay Burseth says the chancellor has also kept him largely in the dark about Mamarchev’s dismissal.

“He’s even really secretive with me,” said Burseth. “It seems like he’s trying to brush it off for whatever reason, and maybe it’s not specifically the chancellor, maybe he’s being pressured by others, but he certainly doesn’t want it discussed, and I’m interested in why.”

UWM administration wholly denied this newspaper’s public records request for investigation-related records, telling the Post that the records are protected from release because they were “created under the direction of legal counsel in anticipation of potential litigation,” and that the records are considered attorney-client privileged communications and attorney work product. Santiago would not say whether Mamarchev has threatened to sue.

The university also redacted the statements Mamarchev is accused of making from records it released, citing what is commonly referred to as the “balancing test” in the state’s public records law – an analysis that weighs the public interest in disclosing a record versus the public interest in withholding a record. The administration argues that keeping the statements secret outweighs the public interest in disclosing the statements, because, it says, disclosure “could have a detrimental effect on the privacy and reputational interests of certain individuals.” If UWM employees knew that the university would release “inaccurate and inflammatory statements” about them, the university says it might have difficulty retaining and recruiting employees.

“This difficulty in retaining and recruiting employees could in turn harm the public interest,” UWM administration wrote in response to one of the requests the Post made for Mamarchev’s personnel records. “Therefore, the public interest in withholding inaccurate and inflammatory statements outweighs the public interest in disclosing them.”

Robert Dreps, a Madison attorney and expert in freedom of information law who has represented the Post in the past, disagrees with UWM’s decision to withhold the statements Mamarchev is accused of making.

“I think the balancing test rationale is far-fetched,” said Dreps. “Releasing the precise statements for which an employee was fired would not persuade any rational person that the university might release inaccurate information about them.”

According to Dreps, while the university has a right to prepare for a potential lawsuit stemming from Mamarchev’s dismissal, the public is entitled to know why she was fired.

“I think it’s fair to say that the university is entitled to protect its litigation strategy if it’s concerned that the case might end up in court, but the public is entitled to know precisely why this woman was fired,” said Dreps.

Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center in Arlington, Va., says it is not uncommon for universities to invoke a “blanket of silence” in contentious personnel matters. Both LoMonte and Dreps told the Post that they believe UWM’s application of the balancing test is flawed, and that ultimately the statements Mamarchev is accused of making should be made public.

“The balancing test is supposed to take into account the public’s right to know,” said LoMonte. “The vice chancellor of a university has an enormous amount of authority and public responsibility. If you apply the balancing test fairly, you’ll find that there’s an overriding public interest in knowing what’s behind the story.”

Bill Lueders, the president of the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council, a statewide organization that advocates for open government, says the university’s refusal to disclose the statements also impinges on the ability of the public to hold university leaders accountable.

“I think it is unfortunate that UWM isn’t more forthcoming,” said Lueders. “If the comments were so inaccurate and inflammatory, then I think the public ought to know what they were. Otherwise, what’s to stop the chancellor from firing someone for telling a truth that he just doesn’t want to hear?”

Lueders thinks citing attorney-client privilege is a weak justification for withholding the investigative records, and says that in similar situations of alleged misconduct by public officials, a public interest in knowing about the misconduct has been recognized.

“In many other situations, those types of records are released because of the generally understood public interest in determining whether public employees have engaged in misconduct,” said Lueders.

LoMonte agrees.

“When you’re talking about a high-ranking, high-paid policy maker, there really is a public interest in knowing why decisions are made,” said LoMonte. “That’s doubly true if there are any allegations that the official engaged in misconduct.”

Student reaction

News of Mamarchev’s exit prompted a mixed bag of responses from students. Student government officials, who regularly communicate with university administrators, quickly found out, and not all were disappointed to see Mamarchev go.

Kyle Duerstein, the speaker of the Student Association Senate and oft-critic of Mamarchev, was updating his blog in June with rumors of a shake-up in Chapman Hall.

“Students rejoice,” blogged Duerstein. “With Helen gone from this role, UWM is most certainly a better place for students.”

In a statement to the Post, Duerstein cited tension between Mamarchev and the Student Association.

“While the Student Association has made progress working with the administration over the last few years, there has been tremendous animosity felt by students from Dr. Mamarchev,” Duerstein said. “I am glad that the students of UWM can look forward to moving forward with a Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs that will hopefully demonstrate a deeper passion for being a strong representative for students.”

But other student government officials, like former Student Association Chief of Staff Scott Dettman, were sad to see Mamarchev leave UWM.

“When I learned that Dr. Mamarchev had been fired, I was utterly shocked,” said Dettman. “Over the past two years, I have gotten to know Dr. Helen quite well and have had nothing but positive experiences in every encounter. I can’t help but feel that the students at UW-Milwaukee have lost an incredible mentor, advocate and friend. She will most certainly be missed.”

Jay Burseth, the president of the Student Association, says that while he was aware of the strained relationship between Mamarchev and student government, he was looking forward to collaborating with her this year.

“I really liked her as a person, but I didn’t get to meet with her very much because she was let go shortly after my election,” said Burseth. “I know there were a lot of issues with her. Many members of the SA didn’t appreciate her very much. I had no issue with her and looked forward to working with her.”

However, some students not involved in university governance say they were unaware that Mamarchev had been fired. The Post asked random students if they knew that Mamarchev was let go, and what they thought the university’s duty to notify students was.

Angela Lang, a junior majoring in international relations, says she didn’t know about the chancellor’s decision until the Post asked her about it.

“I didn’t know she was fired, this is my first time hearing it,” said Lang. “You don’t really hear too many instances of administrators being fired. My first reaction was ‘oh, I wonder what happened.’”

Jessie Mayer, a senior majoring in early childhood education, also told the Post that she wasn’t aware of Mamarchev’s dismissal. Mayer admits that she did not know who Mamarchev was, but says that the university could have notified students about the situation.

“I think sending an e-mail would have been good,” said Mayer.

Theater major London Burt, who also didn’t know that Mamarchev had been fired, thinks alerting the entire campus would have been unnecessary.

“What probably should have been done was a notice posted in her office,” Burt said.

Finding a replacement

Dean of Students Jim Hill was appointed on July 1 as interim vice chancellor for student affairs, but the loss of Mamarchev is complicating the already short-staffed division. With the vice chancellor seat now open, as well as the director of student activities position unfilled, Hill and Associate Dean of Students Tom McGinnity are managing the job duties of four positions – vice chancellor for student affairs, dean of students, associate dean of students and director of student activities – though Hill says that a decision is imminent on the director of student activities position.

Hill says that Santiago has not yet started the formal process of finding a replacement for Mamarchev, but that the chancellor could create a search committee to interview and narrow a pool of applicants. Burseth told the Post last week that he would welcome Hill as the new vice chancellor for student affairs.

“[Hill] displays professionalism and diplomacy on behalf of the students in the administration,” said Burseth. “I certainly admire and respect him as a human being and hope that I can work with him further this year.”

Chancellor Santiago did not respond to questions and a request for comment. UWM spokesman Tom Luljak and senior officials in the Division of Student Affairs declined comment. Helen Mamarchev did not respond to repeated interview and comment requests.

To download the redacted document regarding Mamarchev’s remarks, click here. The Post’s initial coverage of the story can be found here.