Changing the BOT

[Nitt1300]

In the interest of full disclosure, I split time between PA and New England, and I'm not a registered voter in PA anymore- so I'm talking without walking on this.

But from some discussion yesterday, it's apparent that the legislature is either unwilling or unable to confirm the current Governor's appointments to the BOT, and this is helping to preserve the old guard's control.

I have to believe that we have enough alumni to either force the legislature's hand or to vote enough of them out to change the balance.

 

[fairgambit]

In the interest of full disclosure, I split time between PA and New England, and I'm not a registered voter in PA anymore- so I'm talking without walking on this.

But from some discussion yesterday, it's apparent that the legislature is either unwilling or unable to confirm the current Governor's appointments to the BOT, and this is helping to preserve the old guard's control.

I have to believe that we have enough alumni to either force the legislature's hand or to vote enough of them out to change the balance.

We may have enough alumni, but we don't have enough of them that are committed to change. I know friends who are are with me on nearly every Penn State issue, and yet vote for politicians that act contrary to those issues. Their reason is that they are not single issue voters, so they tend to put economic and social issues ahead of those of Penn State. I can't say I blame them. I have done it myself.

 

[Nitt1300]

We may have enough alumni, but we don't have enough of them that are committed to change. I know friends who are are with me on nearly every Penn State issue, and yet vote for politicians that act contrary to those issues. Their reason is that they are not single issue voters, so they tend to put economic and social issues ahead of those of Penn State. I can't say I blame them. I have done it myself.

I guess that makes sense if someone believes that the state legislature actually has much impact in those arenas.

 

[Sharkies]

What can someone who lives in PA do to help?

 

[Nitt1300]

What can someone who lives in PA do to help?

If it were me I would write my representatives and ask where they stand on approving Wolf's nominees to the BOT, and on making changes to the BOT in general- and making it clear that my future support or opposition depends on their stance.

Most politicians really care about only two things- votes and campaign contributions.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

But from some discussion yesterday, it's apparent that the legislature is either unwilling or unable to confirm the current Governor's appointments to the BOT, and this is helping to preserve the old guard's control.

That's not accurate.

There are 6 Governor Appointed trustees on the BOT. The mechanism for their becoming trustees is that the Governor nominates them, and the PA Senate has to approve them. Over the years, regardless of the political parties that were in the Governor's office and in control of the PA Senate, there have been a number of instances where nominated trustees are not approved by July 1, which is when the terms for Gov. Appointed trustees start. The Governor and the PA Senate are usually actively involved in budget negotiations at that time, so it's not a great surprise that the nominees don't always get proper consideration in time.

To address this, the Bylaws of the BOT allow trustees to serve until their replacement "is duly elected or appointed." So each year, the 2 Governor Appointed trustees whose term runs out on June 30th usually end up serving beyond that date. While each situation is unique, in general the replacement trustees are approved by the PA Senate during the fall.

As with anything involving politicians, the nomination by the Governor and then the approval by the Senate usually involves some degree of horse trading. It is what it is.

Gov. Wolf took office last January. His 2 nominees were approved in the fall (I think it was October; not certain). He'll be nominating 2 additional candidates this year.

In short, the PA Senate's actions in terms of approving the Governor's nominees for the PSU BOT have not aided the old guard on the BOT to keep control of the BOT.

There is a bigger issue that does involve the PA Legislature. There have been a number of battles over governance reform of the BOT have been taking place since Nov. 2011. As a subset of those battles, there is a serious debate as to whether the the BOT can make changes to the composition of the BOT, or if such changes can only be made by the PA Legislature. The Legislature feels that only it has the power, and the BOT feels they have the power to make changes. Each side is reluctant to take the issue to court, as there is uncertainty as to who would win. So the current situation is that the BOT has passed several changes to the composition of the BOT -- the most significant took place in Dec. 2014. Legislators that have an interest in this are confident that they could pass legislation about the composition of the BOT that would trump the BOT's actions. However, while bills have been introduced in the legislature in recent years to reform the BOT, they have never made it out of committee, in either the PA Senate or the PA House.

 

[Nitt1300]

That's not accurate.

There are 6 Governor Appointed trustees on the BOT. The mechanism for their becoming trustees is that the Governor nominates them, and the PA Senate has to approve them. Over the years, regardless of the political parties that were in the Governor's office and in control of the PA Senate, there have been a number of instances where nominated trustees are not approved by July 1, which is when the terms for Gov. Appointed trustees start. The Governor and the PA Senate are usually actively involved in budget negotiations at that time, so it's not a great surprise that the nominees don't always get proper consideration in time.

To address this, the Bylaws of the BOT allow trustees to serve until their replacement "is duly elected or appointed." So each year, the 2 Governor Appointed trustees whose term runs out on June 30th usually end up serving beyond that date. While each situation is unique, in general the replacement trustees are approved by the PA Senate during the fall.

As with anything involving politicians, the nomination by the Governor and then the approval by the Senate usually involves some degree of horse trading. It is what it is.

Gov. Wolf took office last January. His 2 nominees were approved in the fall (I think it was October; not certain). He'll be nominating 2 additional candidates this year.

In short, the PA Senate's actions in terms of approving the Governor's nominees for the PSU BOT have not aided the old guard on the BOT to keep control of the BOT.

There is a bigger issue that does involve the PA Legislature. There have been a number of battles over governance reform of the BOT have been taking place since Nov. 2011. As a subset of those battles, there is a serious debate as to whether the the BOT can make changes to the composition of the BOT, or if such changes can only be made by the PA Legislature. The Legislature feels that only it has the power, and the BOT feels they have the power to make changes. Each side is reluctant to take the issue to court, as there is uncertainty as to who would win. So the current situation is that the BOT has passed several changes to the composition of the BOT -- the most significant took place in Dec. 2014. Legislators that have an interest in this are confident that they could pass legislation about the composition of the BOT that would trump the BOT's actions. However, while bills have been introduced in the legislature in recent years to reform the BOT, they have never made it out of committee, in either the PA Senate or the PA House.

Tom- thanks for the insight- clearly I don't know this as well as you do. So let me ask- why ISN'T this moving through the legislature? And who is holding it up?

 

[Tom McAndrew]

So let me ask- why ISN'T this moving through the legislature? And who is holding it up?

That's more complicated than you might think.

The new Governor, Tom Wolf, is a democrat. Both the Senate and the House are controlled by the republicans. They have some fundamental differences on a number of issues. PA's fiscal year ends on June 30th, so there is supposed to be a budget in place by July 1. That doesn't always happen, but even when it doesn't the two branches usually resolve their differences within a month. Well, here it is January and PA is still without a budget. The result is that almost nothing is being done in the Legislature, as no big issues are being taken up until the budget is resolved. (NOTE: do not turn this into a political discussion. I'm simply stating some facts to someone that doesn't live in the Commonwealth.)

If you go beyond the past year, there are a number of factors. In random order, you have these things in play:

- former Gov. Corbett did not approve of the bills that were introduced
- the old guard is fighting behind the scenes against the bills, while the alumni-elected trustees are fighting behind the scenes for the bills
- many legislators agree that there is a problem with the PSU BOT, but few of them agree on the ideal solution
- there hasn't been a groundswell of support for the bills from voters. in parts that's because the bills have been locked in committee
- there are also factions to deal with. The Agricultural Societies have 6 slots on the BOT, which is pretty inconsistent with how many Ag students there are at PSU, or how important Ag is in the State (it use to be far larger than it is today). At the same time, many legislators come from Ag districts, so what many see as a correct rebalancing of trustees, they see as an attack on their interests. I'm focusing on Ag for this example, but pretty much every potential change would hurt some interest
- Sen. Jake Corman represents the area around PSU Main, and is the Senate Majority Leader (basically, the #2 guy in the Senate). He's been tough to pin down on BOT reform in the legislature. He was a co-sponsor of one of the earlier bills. He's not gotten behind the latest bill, and unless he does it's unlikely to ever pass the PA Senate

The issue is rather complicated, and there are many other reasons that I could list. I've highlighted some of the major ones.

 

[Nitt1300]

Thanks Tom, even though that all sounds pretty discouraging in terms of making any real progress on that front.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Thanks Tom, even though that all sounds pretty discouraging in terms of making any real progress on that front.

Discouraging is an accurate description. Try to imagine what it's like to be one of the alumni-elected trustees.

As an aside, the BOT is in the middle of a development retreat. They had several experts on BOT governance come to speak with them yesterday and today. (All are more qualified than Holly Gregory, the lady the old guard hired to help with governance reform, then basically pushed aside as they rammed through their "A+" proposal in Dec. 2014, but I digress.)

One can only hope that collectively they become a better Board over the course of this event.

 

[demlion]

Seems like we are talking about a couple different things in this thread--let me try to separate them.
1) Confirmation of Wolf's appointees by the State Senate--Appointed by Gov. Wolf midyear, unlikely per Tom to be approved before Fall; already got his first two approved in October; and
2) Passage of a bill reforming the makeup of the BoT--(Yudichak's or some other)--appears to be, if not dead in the water, then treading water at best;

The first change is slow but would appear to be relatively sure to result in a majority at least slightly more favorable to our view. The second change appears to be much less certain at this time.

Of course there are other avenues from which change might result, for example, the courts. Recently a group of Alumni Trustees got a court order permitting them to review the Freeh documents. There ought to be some chunks of truth to be had from that review, but it is a task the OG BOT paid Louis Freeh a good %age of 8 million dollars to review, and our Trustees are going to have to do it themselves. A daunting task.

The Paterno lawsuit is going forward and may yet produce a bounty of both documents and court rulings which will drive change either directly on the board through resignations or indirectly thru spurring the legislators to act.

There is, in the face of this, one thing which is unavoidable. There was a serious breach of trust by the OG BoT in 2011/2012. There is NO trust between them and us for all practical purposes. That trust has to be rebuilt. A permanent loss of trust by the alums for the University will color everything the Board does from now on, and will go on coloring the University's perception in the eyes of its most devoted followers.

How do you rebuild a trust you have breached?
1. You admit the harm you did;
2. You confess the motives which caused you to commit the breach;
3. You speak up to validate the feelings of the victim (e.g.,In a personal dispute: "I treated you with disrespect when I yelled at you. You had a right to fair and respectful treatment from me and you did not get it. You have a right to be angry at me;") and
4) You set goals and become openly accountable to the victim for the changes you need to make to assure the victim that the breach of trust will not happen again.

Note there is no mention of telling people to "move on" in this list. Or "get over it." Even if the legislature acts and the courts rule our way, this stuff will have to happen for the trust to be rebuilt. And, nobody from the outside can make it happen. We have to do it.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

One can only hope that collectively they become a better Board over the course of this event.

For sure.....when this happens:

Hopefully - after the fiascos of the 2012 "victim" settlements, and the 2014 "Corman Victory" - none of our elected Trustees are willing to make the same mistake thrice.....and barter on the assumption that there is any advantage to be gained by appealing to the intellect, fairness, and decency of the OG Scoundrels.

Sometimes you have to "Horse-trade" to get something done....but when the folks you deal with - in exchange for your horse - repeatedly give you nothing but more HORSE SHIT.....

NO MORE DEALS!!!!!!

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Tom- thanks for the insight- clearly I don't know this as well as you do. So let me ask- why ISN'T this moving through the legislature? And who is holding it up?

Corman....as the point man.....

And whomever is pulling his strings (which is a whole 'nuther interesting conversation).

 

[Nitt1300]

I just find the whole situation to be incredibly frustrating, guess I was hoping for a simple solution that wouldn't take another 4 years.