6 Resolutions to begin returning PSAA to the alumni

[Mary QBA]

I'm posting this for Dr Jim Smith, our Alumni Council representative to the Penn State Alumni Association. Here's the full text of his proposal, and what the current bylaws look like with the proposed amendments.
---

Our first Alumni Council Meeting is coming up shortly, on October 29th and 30th at the Penn State Alumni Association offices on main campus. This meeting is important because it is the first opportunity we, your elected Alumni Council representatives, have to undo some of the recent bylaw changes that were passed at the Spring Alumni Council meeting.

After consulting with my fellow recently elected colleagues, and with important contributions of some existing reform-minded Alumni Council members, I have proposed six resolutions with the goal of improving the independence and transparency of the Alumni Association.

These resolutions were distributed last week to the entire Alumni Council, twenty days prior to the meeting, per the bylaw requirements for making amendments. Five of these resolutions are bylaw amendments, and one is a resolution to publicly release information about the organization and its finances that the organization had already committed to publicly release but has not yet done so.

To summarize these resolutions:

Resolution 1: Make the Alumni Association Executive Director a sole employee of the Alumni Association. Currently he/she has a dual reporting role to both Penn State University and the Alumni Association. In addition to improving the independence of the Association, this change may also improve the quality of candidates for the position of Executive Director of the Association, since a position with two bosses is less desirable than one with a clear organizational reporting structure.

Resolution 2: Make the use of Robert's Rules of Order mandatory. The use of Robert's Rules protects the rights of every member of Alumni Council to represent their constituents, both of the majority and of the minority.

Resolution 3: Ensure that members of the Alumni Council are able to enforce the bylaws through legal action if required, without risk of being removed from the council.

Resolution 4: Restore the process for nomination by petition that was recently eliminated from the bylaws. Without this process, neither Dr. Morgan, nor myself, would be able to represent you this year.

Resolution 5: Clarify that the Alumni Council oversees the actions of the Executive Committee.

Resolution 6: Direct the Executive Director and President to comply with the Alumni Associations past representations to the IRS on its annual tax form, which include making its financial statements publicly available. If interested, you can see examples of these past tax returns (IRS form 990) on the psaaforall.org website, and the representation made to the IRS about public availability of documents. In particular, take note of Part VI, Section C, Line 19 of each Form 990.

I will be formally presenting these resolutions at the full Council meeting Friday, October 30th. Assuming the Association follows Robert's Rules of Order, these resolutions will be seconded by one of my colleagues, the resolution will be discussed, and a vote of the Council members present will be taken. If a majority of those present vote to pass the resolution, the bylaws will be amended.

These resolutions are a good start down the path of improving the governance, transparency, and independence of our Alumni Association. There will be more changes to come, and I am encouraged by the willingness of the new PSAA President, Kevin Steele, to work with me to ensure these resolutions were provided to all Alumni Council members in advance of the meeting, providing them ample time to consider them.

Please contact me with your questions and thoughts on the proposals I am putting forth. It is only with your support that we can make the Penn State Alumni Association the voice of the alumni and members.

WE ARE doing this For the glory.
Jim Smith

 

[jhsmith409]

If you support these amendments, you can help by contacting your local alumni association chapter and your college's alumni association chapter. In addition to the folks that you directly elected to the Alumni Council, the representatives from local and college chapters can vote at the meeting at the end of this month.

 

[bjf1984]

If you support these amendments, you can help by contacting your local alumni association chapter and your college's alumni association chapter. In addition to the folks that you directly elected to the Alumni Council, the representatives from local and college chapters can vote at the meeting at the end of this month.

Well done.

Nice package of proposals to address the fiasco earlier this year......and the "drift" that has been taking place for many years.

All very sensible (so, we know who WON'T like them). Good luck, and I hope you get a ton of support!

Either way.....if it does turn out that you and the elected members of Council are indeed a minority voice, I hope that you all will do all you can to at least make these proposals - and the rationale behind these proposals - as public as possible.

 

[91Joe95]

Good stuff.

 

[fairgambit]

I'm posting this for Dr Jim Smith, our Alumni Council representative to the Penn State Alumni Association. Here's the full text of his proposal, and what the current bylaws look like with the proposed amendments.
---

Our first Alumni Council Meeting is coming up shortly, on October 29th and 30th at the Penn State Alumni Association offices on main campus. This meeting is important because it is the first opportunity we, your elected Alumni Council representatives, have to undo some of the recent bylaw changes that were passed at the Spring Alumni Council meeting.

After consulting with my fellow recently elected colleagues, and with important contributions of some existing reform-minded Alumni Council members, I have proposed six resolutions with the goal of improving the independence and transparency of the Alumni Association.

These resolutions were distributed last week to the entire Alumni Council, twenty days prior to the meeting, per the bylaw requirements for making amendments. Five of these resolutions are bylaw amendments, and one is a resolution to publicly release information about the organization and its finances that the organization had already committed to publicly release but has not yet done so.

To summarize these resolutions:

Resolution 1: Make the Alumni Association Executive Director a sole employee of the Alumni Association. Currently he/she has a dual reporting role to both Penn State University and the Alumni Association. In addition to improving the independence of the Association, this change may also improve the quality of candidates for the position of Executive Director of the Association, since a position with two bosses is less desirable than one with a clear organizational reporting structure.

Resolution 2: Make the use of Robert's Rules of Order mandatory. The use of Robert's Rules protects the rights of every member of Alumni Council to represent their constituents, both of the majority and of the minority.

Resolution 3: Ensure that members of the Alumni Council are able to enforce the bylaws through legal action if required, without risk of being removed from the council.

Resolution 4: Restore the process for nomination by petition that was recently eliminated from the bylaws. Without this process, neither Dr. Morgan, nor myself, would be able to represent you this year.

Resolution 5: Clarify that the Alumni Council oversees the actions of the Executive Committee.

Resolution 6: Direct the Executive Director and President to comply with the Alumni Associations past representations to the IRS on its annual tax form, which include making its financial statements publicly available. If interested, you can see examples of these past tax returns (IRS form 990) on the psaaforall.org website, and the representation made to the IRS about public availability of documents. In particular, take note of Part VI, Section C, Line 19 of each Form 990.

I will be formally presenting these resolutions at the full Council meeting Friday, October 30th. Assuming the Association follows Robert's Rules of Order, these resolutions will be seconded by one of my colleagues, the resolution will be discussed, and a vote of the Council members present will be taken. If a majority of those present vote to pass the resolution, the bylaws will be amended.

These resolutions are a good start down the path of improving the governance, transparency, and independence of our Alumni Association. There will be more changes to come, and I am encouraged by the willingness of the new PSAA President, Kevin Steele, to work with me to ensure these resolutions were provided to all Alumni Council members in advance of the meeting, providing them ample time to consider them.

Please contact me with your questions and thoughts on the proposals I am putting forth. It is only with your support that we can make the Penn State Alumni Association the voice of the alumni and members.

WE ARE doing this For the glory.
Jim Smith

Excellent. Let's get on board and help move these forward.

 

[ElizabethMorganforPSAA]

I will be supporting these resolutions at the council meeting. I hope anyone that knows a present council member will let them know they support these bylaw changes.

 

[PennSt8er]

One alternative might be to simply quit the PSAA altogether and keep your money in your wallet. That's what I did.

 

[fairgambit]

One alternative might be to simply quit the PSAA altogether and keep your money in your wallet. That's what I did.

I have a lifetime membership. At one point I called them and asked the procedure to resign and they said if I wished they would take me off their mailing and e-mail lists, but my name would stay on the membership rolls until I died. Once a lifetime member, always a lifetime member.

 

[lauriestanell4alumnicouncil]

I believe we need to pounce so to speak, because there are only 2 meetings a year... In order to make a positive impact and bring our alumni association back to our alumni. Jim's resolutions and changes are imperative to this end and will hopefully with a concerted effort reverse many of the swiftly proposed and pushed thru changes to the bylaws made this Past spring.... It's the only way...

 

[lauriestanell4alumnicouncil]

And I agree we need to let the masses know

 

[fairgambit]

I believe we need to pounce so to speak, because there are only 2 meetings a year... In order to make a positive impact and bring our alumni association back to our alumni. Jim's resolutions and changes are imperative to this end and will hopefully with a concerted effort reverse many of the swiftly proposed and pushed thru changes to the bylaws made this Past spring.... It's the only way...

We really need everyone here who believes as you do to contact a couple of friends and spread the word. It doesn't take much to send a text or e-mail.

 

[BobPSU92]

Excellent job. Let's do it.

 

[lauriestanell4alumnicouncil]

I just posted the bylaw changes again on Facebook- please share with PS alumni you know! We need a huge ROAR for positive changes to happen!

 

[psu00]

I will be supporting these resolutions at the council meeting. I hope anyone that knows a present council member will let them know they support these bylaw changes.

I hope if there's a debate on these resolutions that you get those that oppose them to state why they do. Make them state why they oppose them and what their motivation is to oppose common sense changes.

 

[lauriestanell4alumnicouncil]

Trust me... We the elected alumni council delegates are determined to have all of council accountable for decisions and actions... Transparency for us all.

 

[PSU73]

I agree with the proposals and support our alumni elected delegates in making a concerted effort towards the passage. I've posted the above by Dr. Jim Smith on our local alumni FB page. I will go back and ask members to acknowledge their support.

 

[tk819]

I will be joining the other newly elected Council members in fighting for these changes. It is round 1.

 

[Evan Ceg]

I doubt there's any way the University will agree to Resolution 1. The University doesn't look to the Alumni Association for governance advice. The only reason to have an alumni association is to garner support for the University, it's an extension of the University's fund-raising effort. That's why the Alumni Association's executive director (which, by the way, there hasn't been one since Roger Williams retired) reports to Rod Kirsch, senior vice president for Development and Alumni Relations.

If there's a university alumni association anywhere in the country that's unmoored from its university's administration, I'm not aware of it.

I'm not acquainted enough with existing AA by-laws to offer an opinion on whether the Alumni Council can vote itself "independent" from the University's administration.

 

[ApexLion]

I doubt there's any way the University will agree to Resolution 1. The University doesn't look to the Alumni Association for governance advice. The only reason to have an alumni association is to garner support for the University, it's an extension of the University's fund-raising effort. That's why the Alumni Association's executive director (which, by the way, there hasn't been one since Roger Williams retired) reports to Rod Kirsch, senior vice president for Development and Alumni Relations.

If there's a university alumni association anywhere in the country that's unmoored from its university's administration, I'm not aware of it.

I'm not acquainted enough with existing AA by-laws to offer an opinion on whether the Alumni Council can vote itself "independent" from the University's administration.

About 20 percent of all alumni association's do not report to the institution. Approximately another 15 percent of alumni associations report to a foundation board (this is where donor pressure and malfeasance often creeps in btw) and another approximately 15 percent of alumni associations do not report to an institution or a foundation (all are small school alum associations). In all, we are part of the 54 percent of institutions that place their alumni association under the thumb of the powerbrokers.

I think its time we lead the way and truly realize the potential of our alumni network. Our association could become the standard bearer of independent large-scale associations, unfettered by boards of trustees.

But this resolution is actually not about that specifically. If you read her resolution carefully you would see she is removing the obvious conflict of interest. Our alumni association can have a leader that is not in dual roles of askiser to the BOT and gladhandler to the big donor alums who are connected to the despicable ashles on our BOT. Instead, the leader could actually focus on alums. I'm sure you would agree that would be in the best interests of Penn State.

 

[Evan Ceg]

Good research on alumni association governance, ApexLion, thanks.

I would just caution that the PSU Administration is under no obligation to follow the direction or counsel of the Alumni Council whether it's anchored to the Administration or not. Penn State already gives far more governance prerogative to alumni through nine seats on the BoT than do most universities, who typically have one or zero seats on boards allotted to alumni.

At the end of the day, the leverage alumni have over Administration policy and practice is through donations, or through withholding same, when such policy or practice directly contravenes an individual donor's wishes.

 

[bjf1984]

Good research on alumni association governance, ApexLion, thanks.

I would just caution that the PSU Administration is under no obligation to follow the direction or counsel of the Alumni Council whether it's anchored to the Administration or not. Penn State already gives far more governance prerogative to alumni through nine seats on the BoT than do most universities, who typically have one or zero seats on boards allotted to alumni.

At the end of the day, the leverage alumni have over Administration policy and practice is through donations, or through withholding same, when such policy or practice directly contravenes an individual donor's wishes.

You still peddling your vacuous bullsh^t?

 

[Evan Ceg]

Yep, except it's not nearly as vacuous as your juvenile name calling and cartoonery. How about actually offering a point-by-point debate. Nah, too much to expect.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

If there's a university alumni association anywhere in the country that's unmoored from its university's administration, I'm not aware of it.

^^^^^^^^ Although not wrong, totally vacuous and meaningless drivel. This, along with a total lack of awareness. ^^^^^^^

Yep, except it's not nearly as vacuous as your juvenile name calling and cartoonery. How about actually offering a point-by-point debate. Nah, too much to expect.

You have to make a point to engage in "point-by-point" debate!

 

[ApexLion]

Good research on alumni association governance, ApexLion, thanks.

I would just caution that the PSU Administration is under no obligation to follow the direction or counsel of the Alumni Council whether it's anchored to the Administration or not. Penn State already gives far more governance prerogative to alumni through nine seats on the BoT than do most universities, who typically have one or zero seats on boards allotted to alumni.

At the end of the day, the leverage alumni have over Administration policy and practice is through donations, or through withholding same, when such policy or practice directly contravenes an individual donor's wishes.

I think you would agree and everyone would agree (except a handful of BOT members and their big-time donor connections) that we do not effectively tap the vast power of our alumni association. Participation in alumni activities and decisionmaking is conveniently low. Even their own surveys demonstrate poor buy-in. Why? Because the few tell the many and the many have frankly, given up. I saw this firsthand in the early 90's when I attended association events at main campus. As a chapter rep, I was appalled when national basically gave us our marching orders instead of paying attention to local chapters. It starts at the top. There is no reason for the Alumni leader to be a) hand-picked by the BOT and cronies, b) serving a dual role on the BOT while purporting to represent alums and c) to be a mouthpiece for the BOT as we saw with the Sandusky scandal.

This is another area of our university that is long overdue for a housecleaning and realignment.

 

[bjf1984]

Yep, except it's not nearly as vacuous as your juvenile name calling and cartoonery. How about actually offering a point-by-point debate. Nah, too much to expect.

OK Douchebag:

The key governance issue here at PSU - obviously - is not the governance of the PSU AA....it is the governance of the University as a whole. The PSU BOT (your idols)


And:
The issue isn't whether or not a Trustee is or isn't an Alumni.
The issue isn't whether or not the electoral body is comprised of Alumni.
THE ISSUE IS WHETHER OF NOT THE TRUSTEES ARE ACCOUNTABLE!!

As opposed to the self-replicating unaccountable Cabal of Scoundrels that prostitutes Penn State University.
______________________________________________


The most common form of BOT Governance for B1G Universities is:

A BOT composed ENTIRELY of ELECTED members.

UNL.....8 voting members, all elected in state-wide elections (state I divided into 8 regions, each region elects a trustee)
MSU.....8 voting members, all elected in state-wide elections
UMich....8 voting members, all elected in state-wide elections

OR by a combination of members directly elected by the Alumni, or through a legislative body elected by the citizens.

Indiana.....9 voting members, 3 elected by alumni, 6 selected legislatively
Illinois....11 voting members, appointed legislatively
Purdue.....9 voting members 3 elected by alumni, 6 selected legislatively
Iowa.....9 voting members, appointed legislatively
Minnesota......12 members, 8 elected by congressional districts - 4 at large elections
Wisconsin......14 members, appointed legislatively
Ohio State....16 members, primarily governor appointed.

NO ONE has the unaccountable, self-replicating control group process that controls and prostitutes Penn State.

But....AMAZINGLY....your "expert governance consultant" (yes, I am including YOU in with the scoundrels you so worship) found - after extensive research - that a 30+ member board, of whom the majority are vetted by NOONE.....was "normal"
_________________________________________________

That blubbering bag of pigsh^t that your boys hired (Holly Gregory) actually came to this conclusion:

" Penn State’s 32 total trustees is equal to the mean of the 20 universities surveyed, while its 30 voting members is slightly above the mean (26)."

I take it that the ability to add/subtract/multiply/divide was an "optional" qualification for that POS mercenary that your boys pimped out. You get what you pay for.


You can peddle that pigsh^t elsewhere Junior.

Now......in my "juvenile" tradition:

 

[Evan Ceg]

A. I don't idolize anyone on the BoT, further, I've never communicated with a Penn State BoT member, but that kind of assumption makes the discipline of argument so much easier for you, doesn't it?
B. My point focused on whether the Alumni Association would or could become independent of the Administration. I didn't address the stewardship of the BoT as a whole, nor the total number of BoT members, as you did immediately above. But nice rant, anyway, Barry, some of which I actually agree with, minus the invective.

 

[bjf1984]

I didn't address the stewardship of the BoT as a whole, nor the total number of BoT members.

Uh....yes you did:

"Penn State already gives far more governance prerogative to alumni through nine seats on the BoT than do most universities, who typically have one or zero seats on boards allotted to alumni"......EvanCeg..Today..1:31pm
____________________________________________________


And now that your bullsh^t BOT-bot Propoganda gets called out, where is your:

"......point-by-point debate...." EvanCeg...Today..1:48pm
____________________________________________________

Now, just so as not to disappoint you:

And then you can go cuddle up in the bunker with CR and the boys.

 

[Evan Ceg]

Yes, I talked about the proportion of Alumni influence on the BoT, not the total number of BoT members. My statement that you cited is factual. However, since you brought it up, I do believe the the total number of BoT members is too great, as it (a) facilitates the "80-20" rule and therefore (b) empowers the Executive Committee. Unfortunately, none of the talk of needed BoT structural reform has addressed the prerogatives or selection of the Executive Committee.

If other universities have 30 or more board/trustee members, then I would argue that they also have too many. Once you get above 20 on any non-profit board, you begin seeing board members who are little more than names on a letterhead. I will concede that the committee structure the BoT instituted about two years ago has improved member engagement.

While I'm not happy that the number of board members remains almost the same, I otherwise support Yudichak's reform bill. It's so much better than anything the BoT has implemented as internal reform.

When other threads devolve into tit-for-tat between posters, I stop reading. As this thread seems to have become that between you and me, Barry, I'll say good night.

 

[bjf1984]

Yes, I talked about the proportion of Alumni influence on the BoT, not the total number of BoT members. My statement that you cited is factual. However, since you brought it up, I do believe the the total number of BoT members is too great, as it (a) facilitates the "80-20" rule and therefore (b) empowers the Executive Committee. Unfortunately, none of the talk of needed BoT structural reform has addressed the prerogatives or selection of the Executive Committee.

If other universities have 30 or more board/trustee members, then I would argue that they also have too many. Once you get above 20 on any non-profit board, you begin seeing board members who are little more than names on a letterhead. I will concede that the committee structure the BoT instituted about two years ago has improved member engagement.

While I'm not happy that the number of board members remains almost the same, I otherwise support Yudichak's reform bill. It's so much better than anything the BoT has implemented as internal reform.

When other threads devolve into tit-for-tat between posters, I stop reading. As this thread seems to have become that between you and me, Barry, I'll say good night.

LOL

Ciao

Give my best to CR! You guys really have to come over for a beer sometime!