By now, astute observers should be familiar with how conspiracy stories are constructed. First, the presenter must be anonymous. You know, like the tremendously successful Q-Anon prank. Second, a collection of “facts” or “events” must be woven together to present the reader with a plausible analysis of why the theory is likely to have merit. Third, there must be nefarious people with dirty deeds pointed out as perpetrators.

While some individual facts presented concerning those making a case against WNMU president Shepard MAY be true, the connection is tenuous and unproven. Public written conjecture borders on libel and defamation.

Some facts concerning the Dr. Shepard departure are: The regents did not act as stewards of the finances and operation of WNMU. That some people, including regents, took part in 47 trips to 12 different countries over a period of 5 years is worthy of investigation ( https://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/47-trips-abroad-for-brass-of-western-new-mexico-university/article_bd4043ac-bec2-11ee-94d9-d71c7b9847dc.html ). The oversight power and will of the regents appears to have been diminished by a close relationship with the president. In November, the state auditor raised serious financial control issues with WNMU. Further, when president Shepard resigned, he was given, with no apparent resistance, a payout of $1.9 million and a $200,000 annual remote teaching position. The check for the payout happened rather quickly DURING holiday shutdown. The appearance of impropriety looks serious.

This is not to say that certain standards in education and other positive actions taken by President Shepard did not happen. He may have been very effective in some areas. The investigation into what happened is ongoing and I do not believe we need to invent conspiracies in the meantime. It is neither helpful nor does it advance the fact finding.

Sincerely and not anonymous,
Dennis Nendza
WNMU neighbor, Silver City