Harper College odd silence on Ender’s expenses

Anyone who follows this space regularly knows we are big supporters of Harper College in Palatine in general and its current president, Kenneth Ender, in particular.

The college is growing in stature and adapting to meet the changing student and business community needs of the 21st century.

And since his arrival, Ender has articulated a compelling vision for a partnership with community leaders and symbiotic educational institutions that has invigorated both Harper and the Northwest suburbs.

Yes, we’ve been very impressed and consider the Daily Herald’s Opinion Page voice to be allied with the goals Ender espouses and Harper strives to achieve.

So we feel almost like a disappointed friend in viewing the tact Ender and the board are taking in response to today’s On Guard report by Politics and Projects Writer Kerry Lester on Ender’s use of his largely unmonitored personal expense account.

As Lester points out, the community college imposed a hiring freeze and a 9 percent increase in tuition rates last year to deal with the challenges of an unsettled economy.

But at the same time, Ender spent $1,150 out of his expense account for candy and nuts for administrators, board trustees and college foundation members; $418 for alcohol for a party at his home that included his twin brother; and $553 for a golf outing with staff; as well as a number of other expenses that totaled almost $25,000 over one year.

None of this is a huge amount of money, considering the overall size of Harper’s budget, and frankly, at least two other suburban community college presidents spent more in expenses in the past year.

And we respect the fact that Ender took no pay raise in 2010.

But they are legitimate expenses to question at a time when students are being asked to pay more, spending elsewhere at the college is under scrutiny and property taxpayers are being stretched.

Ender’s response has been an atypical silence. Where one of the great strengths of his administration has been communicating Harper’s vision throughout the community, he has chosen not to communicate about this.

Likewise, members of the board, one after another, refuse to comment, deferring questions to board Chair Diane Hill.

Hill, meanwhile, has simply not responded to repeated attempts to reach her for comment. While we can’t be sure, we feel like her lack of response is strategic.

That’s a shame. And poor strategy.

We don’t view their silence as “declining” to comment. That connotes an option, that it’s a reasonable choice not to speak.

We view it as “refusing” to comment. That connotes an obligation that they have defied.

And make no mistake about it, Harper’s leadership has an obligation to the community to explain its rationale. And an obligation to itself to do so if it intends to continue to foster community support.