BOT unanimous vote
- Thread starter Bobpsu
- Start date
This is what Tom posted in the other thread:
And the election results:
Chair -- Ira Lubert (34-0)
Vice Chair -- Mark Dambly (20 votes), Allie Goldstein (14 votes)
And we get the same old re-tread excuses from the A9:
"We couldn't stop it anyway"
"It's sooooo hard"
"We are working behind the scenes"
I say to them STFU and do your job.
The job of a PSU Trustee is brutally DIFFICULT - - - we all know that.....but these decisions are brutally EASY. And they only make the job harder for everyone - and hurt all of the University - when they (the Trustees) FAIL to do the right, obvious, clear thing
They rolled over for Ira the Terrible.
Do you know that or was the vote published as unanimous since he was on the only person nominated?
Making it unanimous says to the world, "we agree with this choice." You can see it the way you want to see it. This is my way of seeing it.
Exactly. Just like many other votes once they have a consensus from unofficial votes they will make another votes so it the can announce it was unanimous.
Good job by the PS4RS puppets. Unreal.
So after all that shit Lubrano talked about Lubert he still voted for him.
Well, we know what to do. Vote people out until we get people in there with some cajones, Anthony included.
Well, we know what to do. Vote people out until we get people in there with some cajones, Anthony included.
Holy sh!t... where was the good BOT? First they voted for fake 'victim' payouts and now this??? What a complete cluster F#ck this is. No wonder the media continues to drive the narrative
Paging Lubrano and Lord
Paging Lubrano and Lord
Didn't they always have some crappy rule that called all votes unanimous, once a majority were cast? Maybe I am not remembering correctly.
Nah. Page no one. Pink slips all around. They had their chance.
It was a unanimous vote. All 34 Trustees present voted "Yes" for Lubert
This is the last time I am going to make this post.
Let's page Adam Taliaferro instead. He would have abstained.
At least abstaining would have shown a modicum of testicular fortitude.
As REPRESENTATIVES of US......after campaigning, and asking US to entrust them with those seats:
EVERY MEMBER of the Alumni Elected Trustees expressed a vote in favor of electing IRA LUBERT to the Board Chair.
Not run against him.......
Not vociferously "oppose"....
Not "oppose quietly".....
Not even an Adam Talieferro "abstention"......
Not even a whispered "Aye"
VOTED FOR IRA LUBERT......after singing praises to him.
Acting on OUR authorization.
Just let that sink in for a moment.............
How much more "not right" can you get?
First, I am sorry for not posting last night.
Second, I want all of you to know that I understand, better than most, your disappointment and frustration.
Third, I know you would like to understand the thinking that supported our decision to vote as we did. So I will try to explain this to you.
The process for the election of Chair and Vice Chair provides for an opportunity during the Executive Session, in this case yesterday morning, for the candidates to make remarks and for the Board to ask questions of those candidates. This in fact what happened. The issues raised by many on this Board were raised and discussed. The
We know we are elected by the alumni and we make decisions based on what we believe is in the best interests of OUR school, always considering the impact of these decisions on the alumni.
That brings me to our decision in the elections yesterday.
We have much work to finish. My fervent belief is that our decision yesterday got us closer to the completion of that work. We'll know soon enough.
As I told Ira, now he has to earn it.
For some of you, my explanation will not suffice. I know some of you feel your elected Trustees failed you. I am truly sorry if that's the case.
For the past 4 1/2 years I have spend more time on Penn State working to correct what I feel is a false narrative than anything else in my life. I know many of you have been working equally hard. So I do feel your pain.
I told you from the outset that OUR strength is in OUR numbers and that the tortoise won the race.
Please don't give up. Some think they can divide and conquer the alumni. Let's prove them wrong.
Second, I want all of you to know that I understand, better than most, your disappointment and frustration.
Third, I know you would like to understand the thinking that supported our decision to vote as we did. So I will try to explain this to you.
The process for the election of Chair and Vice Chair provides for an opportunity during the Executive Session, in this case yesterday morning, for the candidates to make remarks and for the Board to ask questions of those candidates. This in fact what happened. The issues raised by many on this Board were raised and discussed. The
We know we are elected by the alumni and we make decisions based on what we believe is in the best interests of OUR school, always considering the impact of these decisions on the alumni.
That brings me to our decision in the elections yesterday.
We have much work to finish. My fervent belief is that our decision yesterday got us closer to the completion of that work. We'll know soon enough.
As I told Ira, now he has to earn it.
For some of you, my explanation will not suffice. I know some of you feel your elected Trustees failed you. I am truly sorry if that's the case.
For the past 4 1/2 years I have spend more time on Penn State working to correct what I feel is a false narrative than anything else in my life. I know many of you have been working equally hard. So I do feel your pain.
I told you from the outset that OUR strength is in OUR numbers and that the tortoise won the race.
Please don't give up. Some think they can divide and conquer the alumni. Let's prove them wrong.
Anthony, you said:
"We have much work to finish. My fervent belief is that our decision yesterday got us closer to the completion of that work. We'll know soon enough."
Could you please elaborate on this? Thank you.
"We have much work to finish. My fervent belief is that our decision yesterday got us closer to the completion of that work. We'll know soon enough."
Could you please elaborate on this? Thank you.
Thank you for the explanation.
Though I may not like or understand the choice yesterday, you've earned my trust. I'm still with you.
Four and a half years of hot air and no results.
You voted for and then praised a guy who you said has obvious conflicts of interest and had breached his fiduciary duties in not vetting the settlements, etc.
That just doesn't add up.
I think they've been proven right. A record number of alumni voted in the 2012 BoT election because they were unhappy with how the alumni trustees handled the Sandusky mess. They wanted someone who would at least give them a voice in the governance of the university. The same applied in 2013 and 2014. The alumni base is still divided today just as it was in November 2011 because is feels like nobody is listening.
So where do we stand now?? The latest is a unanimous vote to give the most powerful BoT position to a guy who had ties to TSM - the very organization which looked the other way when it came to reports about Sandusky. This is the same guy who worked on the settlements in which the university paid several million dollars to make it all go away and which also protected TSM (and himself). And that's just the stuff we know about. Now Lubert has free rein to obfuscate to his heart's content.
Some say the A9 shouldn't makes waves or waste votes for a losing cause as if that would somehow prevent them from talking a stand in the future. "Go along to get along" is what many people thought about the November 2011 A9. Has anything really changed?? Ira must be a smooth talker behind closed doors since not one person cast a "no" vote or an abstention. What if information comes out which proves Lubert was acting in his own self interest?? The A9 would be on record as singing his praises and voting for his chairmanship. I cast my BoT alumni votes thinking I could in a very small way help affect positive change in university governance. It turns out I was being naive. Even if the A9 was constantly tilting at windmills at least they'd be showing they were trying to fulfill their promise of making the university better.
Last edited:
Is the approach by Lubrano et al., "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer"?
It feels like the approach is "This BOT thing is a sweet gig with free meals and luxury box tickets. Now I know why people don't want to leave."
I'm confused about your "earn it" statement. Why was Ira given something he hasn't earned?
Thank you for keeping us informed. And to those making disrespectful posts to Mr. Lubrano, please show some class.
I respect a lot of what you have done
I empathize with the challenges you have faced
The nine of you sold OUR f$cking voice
Shame on ALL of you
The Scoundrels didn't "divide and conquer"......
WE were stronger than that - year after year we stood strong, and kept fighting against incredible odds and despite numerous setbacks.....we kept fighting even when all the politicians, the media, the lawyers and judges where exposed as charlatans
WE kept fighting - and we worked like the Devil to support our voices on the BOT
The Scoundrels didn't "divide and conquer" US - we were too tough for them,,,,,,,,so they bought you guys - and you all stabbed us in the f$cking back for them!!!!
Last edited:
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on this but to describe the job as a "sweet gig" is ludicrous. I think you fail to understand the time, energy, aggravation, personal sacrifice and MONEY that these people have had to put forth to do what they do. Doesn't sound so sweet to me.
I'm not naive enough to assume the A9 traded their vote for nothing, but the optics are hideous.
Ira would have to walk this back all the way to January 2010 to make it remotely reasonable. Very public apologies to all, restored jobs, etc. Now, assuming that's a pipe dream, if all we get is the statue and some lame acquiescence to SuePa, that's not good enough. But I guess we will see what the trade is for soon enough.
Ira would have to walk this back all the way to January 2010 to make it remotely reasonable. Very public apologies to all, restored jobs, etc. Now, assuming that's a pipe dream, if all we get is the statue and some lame acquiescence to SuePa, that's not good enough. But I guess we will see what the trade is for soon enough.
I agree with this sentiment. It is also difficult to allow someone who has lacked his fiduciary responsibility to this point a chance at the top.
Why do I feel that Ira is sitting at home saying" I can't believe they trusted me?"
Anthony, I'm sorry but this just isn't enough. Please ignore the insults that are coming your way from the fringes- but don't think that the rest of us aren't terribly concerned and disappointed. Many of us voted for you and the other eight alumni trustees as an act of faith. Now you come with this, which does not explain in any way what were the factors that made you all vote the way that you did. Honestly, with this response you're treating your fellow alums as children at the kid's table. I think most of us are done with accepting anyone doing that.
WHY did you all vote that way? Was there some new info shared that proved that we've been wrong all this time? If there is- we want to know. We DESERVE to know. If not that, what factors were involved? And no, I simply do not give the smallest portion of a damn that it was an "executive session" and therefore secret. We're had enough damn secrets. It's time to turn the lights on.
I'd like to stay onboard, I really would. Give me a reason to.
EVERY ONE of the A9 cast those votes that bent us over and humped all of us in the a$$.......no doubt
And they are ALL deserving of scorn for that
The shame is - and this is not to excuse the folks like Anthony L - the couple of folks who do try to "communicate their intentions" (which is a losing battle - since there is no excuse) bear the brunt for the c$cks@ckers who hump us up the a$$ - - and DO NOT even give us the wrap-around explanation - - - - the guys like McCombie and Lord (and Capretto) and the like
And they are ALL deserving of scorn for that
The shame is - and this is not to excuse the folks like Anthony L - the couple of folks who do try to "communicate their intentions" (which is a losing battle - since there is no excuse) bear the brunt for the c$cks@ckers who hump us up the a$$ - - and DO NOT even give us the wrap-around explanation - - - - the guys like McCombie and Lord (and Capretto) and the like
I mean, what do you all expect? The A9 have zero leverage and will never have any leverage which is why all this fighting is nothing more than a waste of time. How about focusing efforts into the future of the University instead?
