A9
- Thread starter Bobpsu
- Start date
I voted in every BoT election since I graduated in 1986 and may break that streak this year. Does it really matter?? And I sure as hell won't be voting in future alumni council elections. The PSAA has been exposed as a big scam.
I remember reading a quote about how shocked the British public was when the Bismarck sunk the Hood.
It was talking about the fact that Hood was outdated and overmatched, went something like
"She had been imbued with a strength that she did not possess"
It was talking about the fact that Hood was outdated and overmatched, went something like
"She had been imbued with a strength that she did not possess"
Despite record alumni voting since 2012, the B&I crowd have cited "low alumni voter turnout" as supporting evidence for elimination of the alumni-elected trustee seats. If you're ok with having no representation on the board of trustees, then not voting is your ticket.
It would be interesting to hear the A9 tell us how they have made a difference as a BOT Member. I believe in most cases, they would see value where we do not. Once you are on the inside you lose sight of what the outside really wanted when they supported your candidacy.
If he is running, I am voting for Barry for BOT. Only reason .... can he stir the pot?
If he is running, I am voting for Barry for BOT. Only reason .... can he stir the pot?
I believe that under 5% of alumni have voted in these past several elections. Really, alumni probably have more representation than peer public Universities.
As we know, the BOT is bloated. They should probably eliminate 15 seats, 5 of which should be alumni trustees.
You - clearly - know "dick" about the governance Board at PSU (or what could be considered "peer" institutions)
Funny, that
.......since I've posted details here on more than one occasion - and I do know how you so much like to C-J that stuff.
Last edited:
Hope that was for getmyjive11You - clearly - know "dick" about the governance Board at PSU (or what could be considered "peer" institutions)
Funny, that
MSU - 8 trustees total, two elected by the general population of Michigan every two years (8 year terms)You - clearly - know "dick" about the governance Board at PSU (or what could be considered "peer" institutions)
Funny, that
OSU - 19 trustees total (two student trustees), three charter trustees are elected by the board themselves, the rest are appointed by the governor of Ohio
Wisconsin - 18 members, two student members and 16 members appointed by the governor.
Illinois - 13 members, 9 appointed by the governor, one is the governor and three are students
Minnesota - 12 members - All appointed by the state government (one must be a student)
Nebraksa - 12 members (four student members without a vote). The 8 voting members are elected by their district.
Iowa (shared with ISU and NIU) - 9 members appointed by the governor
See the trend? Where do you see alumni elected officials in any of these?
They should eliminate 15 seats, none of which should be Alumni seats. Fixed it for you troll.
All of which is faulty logic when you consider the total number of people who vote in the B&I or Ag Society elections.
It's an easy argument to make that regarding Penn State, the alumni elected members would be more willing to do what's in the best interest of the university since in most cases they don't have anything to gain by being on the board. Contrast that with the B&I members, many of whom use their positions for either personal or professional gain. Benefit from capital construction projects? Yes. Use university address lists to bombard young graduates with credit card solicitations to benefit the bank where you're employed? Check. Collude with politicians to gain a favorable settlement for your pharmaceutical company? Oh yeah.
What happens with such low turnouts is that you get a group of trustees who care more about honoring a former coach than they do looking out for the good of the University. Groups like PS4RS can get a relatively small band of people together and overtake the election.
As I have posted above, most public Universities don't even have alumni elected trustees/regents. Most have their members appointed exclusively by the governor or elected via the general public. The thought being that this is a better representation of the state.
Alumni Elected Trustees have done an excellent job within the framework. Change in framework is sorely needed!
Why would you give us MSU and UMINN as examples? Their boards are even more dysfunctional than ours. MSU PAID a sex predator to abuse it's female athletes for about 20 years. Sheesh.
I'm just throwing out peer institutions. Is there a large public University with the same or more alumni elected representation that PSU has? Heck, how many can you find with ANY such representation?
A broad-based, statewide election (possibly also including alumni who are not residents of the state), is - by far - the most righteous "responsible-governance-compatible" format
But EVERY TTEE must be authorized (elected) AND accountable via the EXACT same method......anything else is a complete irreparable "turd in the hot tub"
That is as simple a truth from a "proper governance" standpoint .......
as "2+2=4" is a simple truth from a mathematics standpoint
And yet - even today - not a single soul with standing will even approach the subject (likely because "every single soul with standing" - or one of their Masters - realizes a personal benefit from the corrupt system that has constipated the University for decades)
And the structure has - remarkably - only gotten WORSE over the last five year's
And this Governance Abortion just continues on.
A situation that was clearly FUBAR at Penn State more than FIFTEEN YEARS AGO - when I was lecturing and teaching on this stuff........
A situation that was clearly FUBAR nearly a decade ago - when I put forward the manifesto/reform proposal on this situation ........
Just.....Comtinues.....On
And unless and until the Alums or the PA Taxpayers begin to raise Holy Hell, it ain't gonna' change
If what we have been going through for 5 1/2 years ain't enough to catalyze Alums and Taxpayers into widespread action to demand responsible governance - - - I don't know what will
Which makes the "pissing away the opportunity" due to the A9's abysmal governance failures all the more damaging.......they ass-humped the "easiest" opportunity (relatively speaking) we will ever have
It will be a lot more difficult moving forward......than it would have been if we struck when the iron was hot
Last edited:
At how many public universities where the state has a greater hand in selecting the trustees does the state contribute less than 6% of the operating budget of the university(ies)? At how many public universities are trustees selected by special interest groups that contribute nothing to the university?
(Raising hand)
I know, I know!!!!! ..........ONE........and I know which one it is!!!
And now, they ain't even elected by "Special Interest Groups" ...... The existing assholes and Scoundrels just invite their friends to the Tea Party (or the graft orgy) whenever they want - - - - - and no one says a damn word
Kinda like the Michigan model where they are directly elected by the residents of the state, though I'm sure that I could find somethings wrong with it if I gave it more than five seconds of thought.
Since when did this become an "A or B" argument? People are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time (at least most of us are
Very clear that you're drawing your sample for that observation from outside of this board.
Well, I believe that OSU is at around 18% with zero alumni elected representation. So maybe that should be the high point?
FWIW, I'm not against alumni representation, but it already is too high. They should be there to give a voice to the alumni, not to control decisions (which seems to be what people here want).
Yes - let's have folks who NO ONE voted for ......
folks who NO ONE authorized to act on behalf of the University ......
folks who are accountable to NO ONE.....
folks with loooooong histories of malfeasance and serving their own self-interests......
Control Decisions
That's F-ing brilliant!!!!!!! Even for a moron like you.
I believe the alumni trustees would be perfectly happy with a small board that is elected by the voters of PA. The B&I people and the Ag people would fight it to the death. They need a big board controlled by a self-perpetuating elite to keep milking the cash cow called PSU. And therein lies a key difference between "us" and "them."
I'm all for having a hybrid system of governor appointments and commonwealth elections.Yes - let's have folks who NO ONE voted for ......
folks who NO ONE authorized to act on behalf of the University ......
folks who are accountable to NO ONE.....
folks with loooooong histories of malfeasance and serving their own self-interests......
Control Decisions
That's F-ing brilliant!!!!!!! Even for a moron like you.
If we had that, the Paterno issue would have been resolved (favorably to Paterno) a long time ago. But your heroes that run the BOT won't allow the issue to be resolved, nor would they allow the hybrid system you tout. Your bile is aimed in the wrong direction, jive turkey.
Maybe they want that because the people controlling the decisions have proved to be incompetent.
Ted Brown is the Board's Village Idiot......and every "village" has one
Not really fair to use him as an example of anything
That would be like using You as the standard-bearer of the Astro-Turfers
The point being, if Ted Brown is the "village idiot" and a small, organized group of alumni were able to get him re-elected, shouldn't that be concerning? A massive University with a 5+ billion dollar budget and a special interest group of alumni got a guy re-elected who's #1 priority is honoring an ex coach. How is that any better than what we have now?
