OT: Alumni Trustees file suit against PSAA

[simons96]

LINK (it's the CDT so feel safe to click)

from Deb Biedel, here's the full statement from the trustees:


April 14, 2015-- Penn State Trustees Edward (Ted) B. Brown III, Anthony P. Lubrano, William F. Oldsey, and Alice W. Pope today filed suit in Centre County against the Penn State Alumni Association ("PSAA") asking that their names be placed on the ballot for the 2015 PSAA Council election.

"With heavy hearts but with moral certainty we take this action" the Trustees said. "The willful violation of its own bylaws by the leadership of the PSAA to keep our names off the ballot forces us to bring suit against the alumni association of the university we love and serve."

"We made this decision in the knowledge that we must fight on every front to prevent Penn State from becoming the playground of a self-appointing oligarchy. The current Board of Trustees leadership, not content to minimize the alumni of this great university in the board room, have now reached into the workings of the PSAA to expand their power."

"The effort of this small, insular group to create a seat on the Board of Trustees for the outgoing President of the PSAA, in order to pad its majority, will not be accomplished without honest men and woman standing in opposition."

"Let us remember that the PSAA is organized under the university and as such is not a wholly independent organization. The Executive Director of the PSAA works at the direction of the university administration and yet claims autonomy."

"At every turn, the alumni are being stripped of their collective voice in our great school. Neither the Executive Board nor the President of the PSAA are selected in a direct, open election. All power within the PSAA has devolved to them. Now they boldly propose new bylaws that will snatch the remaining alumni voice and silence it. These new bylaws will tolerate no discussion or dissension. PSAA volunteers and alumni who give generously of their time, energy, and resources deserve far better governance than this."

"Interestingly, the PSAA appears to admit it has broken its bylaws, in actuality and in spirit, and substituted an arbitrary and capricious system to select candidates to appear on the ballot. Otherwise, why would the PSAA propose an entire set of bylaws to apply only to the May 2015 PSAA Council election?"

"What do the leaders of the PSAA fear? In the end, this matter can be resolved quickly by placing our names on the ballot and allowing the nearly 180,000 members of the PSAA to choose for themselves who they want to represent them on Council."

 

[ApexLion]

the playground of a self-appointing oligarchy

20 years in the making.

It took Sandusky to cast some sunlight on this situation. Now our trustees are suing our alumni association which has become a puppet organization for the cabal. Great. I'm so proud of my alma mater.

What do they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant? Let's hope so.

 

[91Joe95]

It truly is sad what the bot is doing to this great university.

They not only have tarnished its great reputation, but have actively fought all attempts to repair the damage.

 

[simons96]

Re: It truly is sad what the bot is doing to this great university.

Originally posted by 91Joe95:
They not only have tarnished its great reputation, but have actively fought all attempts to repair the damage.

I've seen this in small town politics as well. it isn't about ideology or a way of life, or doing what is best for the constituents.

it is about preserving the fiefdom.

 

[Ten Thousan Marbles]

I suggest we all continue to maintain our PSAA memberships....


It is a way to have some future say in what happens.

The other thing to do, for those who have the stomach for it, is to get involved in your local chapter. Very involved. And, eventually, lead for change. (Depending on your chapter, you may have to maintain deep cover.)

 

[JerseyRon]

Re: It truly is sad what the bot is doing to this great university.


This sounds like Faber College from "Animal House."

 

[Zenophile]

+1

nfm

 

[PSUcubbie]

How would flooding their FB page help? Comments just get deleted or what?

?

 

[Aoshiro]

Re: I suggest we all continue to maintain our PSAA memberships....

Originally posted by Ten Thousan Marbles:

It is a way to have some future say in what happens.

The other thing to do, for those who have the stomach for it, is to get involved in your local chapter. Very involved. And, eventually, lead for change. (Depending on your chapter, you may have to maintain deep cover.)

I see a lot of local chapters sponsoring events like Jay Paterno's book signings that indicate that they are not necessarily in sync with the PSAA people in Old Main.

 

[rifraf]

Re: I suggest we all continue to maintain our PSAA memberships....

Also voice your displeasure with Roger Williams. He does respond (at least so far). I just sent him another e-mail - maybe with enough input they will reconsider.

 

[ApexLion]

Many of the local chapters have been at war with the association


at one time or another. Try visiting the annual meeting and see and hear the condescending main office. Its fun. Trust me.

Local chapters are the only ones that oppose the creeps on the BOT.

 

[tk819]

The PSAA thinks they are within their rights to arbitrarily disqualify candidates because they see their current bylaws as (deliberately) vague enough to allow it and to permit justifications for doing so after the fact. They have no problem making up the rules as they go along. On the other hand, the alumni trustees see these actions as clear violations of the current bylaws. It will be up to the courts to decide. It is sad it has come to this. The reasonable, simple solution would be to let the voting alumni, rather than a nominating committee of insiders, make the decisions about who should be on the Council.

 

[Aoshiro]

Originally posted by tk819:
The PSAA thinks they are within their rights to arbitrarily disqualify candidates because they see their current bylaws as (deliberately) vague enough to allow it and to permit justifications for doing so after the fact. They have no problem making up the rules as they go along. On the other hand, the alumni trustees see these actions as clear violations of the current bylaws. It will be up to the courts to decide. It is sad it has come to this. The reasonable, simple solution would be to let the voting alumni, rather than a nominating committee of insiders, make the decisions about who should be on the Council.

Yep. And the fact that they didn't choose this course shows that they are not reasonable.

 

[bjf1984]

Someone needs to .....


"make them an offer they can't refuse".

Anyone seen Frank S.?

 

[KC-KS-Lion]

Pursuing things legally is usually the last resort.

In hindsight, I think trustees Brown, Lubrano, Oldsey, and Pope wish they had pursued it earlier.

 

[Aoshiro]

Originally posted by KC-KS-Lion:
Pursuing things legally is usually the last resort.

In hindsight, I think trustees Brown, Lubrano, Oldsey, and Pope wish they had pursued it earlier.

Earlier than what?

What the heck are you talking about?

 

[tk819]

Re: Many of the local chapters have been at war with the association

I believe one of the proposed changes to the bylaws is to keep the council meetings closed to all but current council members and invited guests. How does that work to encourage participation across a diverse group of alums?

 

[psu00]

Yep. It's been pretty clear to most I think that the old guard was going to manipulate all they can to get their way- whether on the BoT issues or PSUAA. I hate resorting to lawyers more than anyone but it's clear to me that thats the only way you'll get the old guard to be forced to follow the rules. I'm surprised it's taken so long to get to this point. I assume the next lawsuit will be to get access to unaltered Freeh documents. I hope part of any suits requires Psu to pay all attorney costs since it was their BS that required the lawsuits to begin with.

 

[KC-KS-Lion]

Earlier than now and as a first step vs. (or in parallel with) holding out an olive branch and waiting to see what happens, because after all these episodes the end with any new saga is more than painfully clear.
This post was edited on 4/14 4:53 PM by KC-KS-Lion

 

[simons96]

and here is Roger Williams' reply


(he has also requested Council Members not to comment on the current litigation)

Protecting our Mission of Service to Alumni and Alma Mater


In the strange world that American higher education now inhabits, anything can happen and often does. That's especially true at Penn State, where the post-Sandusky era has given rise to an eruption of once-unimaginable events.
In the latest such instance, four University trustees are seeking to extend their power by running for seats on the governing board of their University's alumni association. On Tuesday, the Penn State Alumni Association was informed that a lawsuit has been filed by four alumni-elected University trustees-Anthony Lubrano, Ted Brown, Bill Oldsey, and Alice Pope.
They want their names placed on the ballot for the spring 2015 Alumni Council election, in which 32 candidates are already vying for 10 seats on our 86-member governing board.


During the fall and winter, the Alumni Council nominating committee, in evaluating 44 nominees for the spring election, approved 30 and disapproved 12. Two others dropped out of the nomination process, but two more were later added when the Alumni Association opted not to oppose their petitions. The four alumni trustees were among those not approved.
The nominating committee had determined that two groups of individuals should not be permitted to run for Alumni Council:
1) University administrators and trustees, whether sitting or emeriti; and 2) nominees currently engaged in lawsuits against the Alumni Association or the University.


There are at least three major reasons for excluding administrators and trustees: 1) the potential for disproportionate influence in Alumni Council proceedings; 2) the potential for conflicts of interest, especially in regard to our mission; and
3) and, most worrisome, the potential for compromising the Alumni Association's independence and autonomy as a
501(c)(3) non-profit organization mandated to promote and enhance the general welfare of the University.


The Alumni Association is not an auxiliary arm of the Board of Trustees nor does it wish to become one. But it would be easy for trustees, by virtue of their inherent power, to dominate our proceedings and divert us from our mission and service-oriented focus. And if four are allowed to run this year, how many more would follow suit the year after?


So we're going to make our stand. We are concerned that our 144-year-old mission could be weakened, if not undone. The Alumni Association is not a watchdog, agitprop, or activist group with a political agenda. Rather, it is an ecumenical,
politically neutral service organization. In hundreds of positive ways, we support our beloved alma mater and the broad and
fast-growing constituency of more than 174,000 members and 631,000 alumni.


Our governing board, the 86-member Alumni Council, is composed of members who are dedicated to an ethic of
service, altruism, and volunteerism. In the main, our council members have come up through the ranks, serving in volunteer leadership posts in our more than 300 affiliate groups: college and campus alumni societies and their affiliate program groups, geographically-based chapters, and alumni interest groups. They also serve as admissions volunteers, career mentors, and leaders in the many advisory and fund-raising organizations across the University. We do not want to see them displaced by those who already have gained for themselves a tremendous opportunity to serve Penn State as an administrator or trustee.


Last November, the Board of Trustees granted seats to three new "stakeholder" constituencies: the Alumni Association, students, and faculty. Some have asked why it's okay for the Alumni Association to have a seat but not for trustees to be granted equivalent privileges. The answer is that we are not equivalent organizations, in power or in mission. The trustees represent, and govern, the entire University; the Alumni Association is only one stakeholder in that governance-one of 36 voices, which hardly constitutes disproportionate influence. The trustees are not, to our knowledge, agitating for voting seats with the student or faculty governance bodies, so one might ask, why target the Alumni Association?
The Alumni Association's new seat on the Board of Trustees is a confluence of interest, not a conflict. Our articles of incorporation define us as a body organized "for the specific purpose of promoting and enhancing the general welfare of The Pennsylvania State University as an agency for education, research, and public service and to encourage and stimulate interest among students, former students, and others in the programs, progress and welfare of The Pennsylvania State University."


That mission is what's at stake, and that's why we must continue to guard ourselves against undue and inappropriate influence.


Roger L. Williams '73, '75g, '88g
Executive Director
Penn State Alumni Association

 

[pmjoe]

Re: and here is Roger Williams' reply

Where was this sent/posted to?

 

[simons96]

Re: and here is Roger Williams' reply

Originally posted by pmjoe:
Where was this sent/posted to?

shared from a friend

 

[oilman]

How are the PSAA and the NLC associated? The NLC is run about the same way! How does PSU own the stadium and therefore the seats but the NLC says who gets them?

 

[91Joe95]

Looks like a few trustees just got crossed off Rogers' Christmas card list.

Woe is them.

 

[coveydidnt]

update?