honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Thursday, May 8, 2003

McCubbin's statement

 •  McCubbin broke no rules, U. of Wisconsin files show

The following is the text of a statement issued last night by Dr. Hamilton McCubbin:

Once again, unfounded allegations about me concerning events that were long ago determined to be groundless have surfaced in the local media.

Five years ago, before I was selected by the Kamehameha interim board of trustees, I raised an issue that I felt the trustees should consider if they were to offer me the position of chief executive officer of the Kamehameha Schools. I raised the issue because I had nothing to hide, having survived a thorough investigation into the serious, though meritless, allegations so heavily reported yesterday in the Honolulu print media, especially The Honolulu Advertiser.

The University of Wisconsin-Madison, where I was a tenured professor and dean of the School of Human Ecology for 15 years, investigated a claim from an assistant professor that had been filed with an agency of the state government. The university's investigation concluded that there was neither professional misconduct nor policy violations. The university then, months later and unbeknownst to me, paid a monetary settlement to the complainant. I was never consulted about the settlement and was not privy to the reasons behind the settlement; after all, as far as I knew the truth was (and is) that I had been completely exonerated of the baseless claims.

Contrary to published reports in The Advertiser, the complainant's settlement with the university did not require me to leave the university, nor was my resignation a condition of the settlement. The file compiled by the university contains an exhaustive refutation of the claims. In fact, as part of the settlement that I was just shown today for the first time, the complainant was required to leave the university system. There was no merit to her claim and there is no merit to the statement that I had to leave the university as part of the settlement. This one-sided perspective is not based upon a review of the critical files compiled by the university that refuted the complainant's charges and serve as the basis for the provost's executive assistant's report that the investigation "did not produce any findings of professional misconduct or policy violations."

The university's decision to bring the matter to closure resulted not only in a financial payment to the complainant, but it ended her further consideration for promotion and tenure [career-long employment]. Furthermore, the settlement requires the claimant's resignation six months later, preceded by an unpaid leave. This settlement was not disclosed to me at any time; I was not party to the settlement. Of critical importance, the settlement itself makes it clear that "...payment hereunder will not be construed as an admission of liability or wrongdoing by any official or employee of the university. ..." At that time I was an employee of the university.

In 1999, I divulged the situation to Admiral Kihune, then chairman of the interim board, who was conducting the board's due diligence review. Upon conclusion of their review I was offered the position.

This occurred five years ago and should not be a topic of discussion today. My family and I suffered through this chilling episode once. We will not participate further in the media's character assassination. Enough is enough.