LTE from former PSU Trustee...
- Thread starter bjf1984
- Start date
Horst has been on this kick for a while. He had a P-N LTE in November 2011 right after TSHTF.
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2011/12/former_penn_state_trustee_chan.html
I had never heard of Bob Horst before, but I like him.
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2011/12/former_penn_state_trustee_chan.html
I had never heard of Bob Horst before, but I like him.
I've met and spoken with Bob several times. He always makes good points about the BOT. I respect Bob, and always pay attention to his comments about the history of the BOT, and his suggestions on how to improve it.
Bob Horst has been submitting editorials since long before 2011. He wrote one in March 2002 and another in February 2003 on the topics of BOT governance and the Business & Industry trustee elections. Neither are readily accessible on the web anymore (that I could find) but I did save one, included below. The article by Leto in 2002 is also definitely worth a read.
----- By Justin Leto, 5/2/2002
Trustee Elections Hijacked by Multi-Billion-Dollar Insurance Company [PMA]
http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html
Snipped from the end of the article:
Besides the investigation in 1996, calls for reform have largely gone unanswered. After persistent inquiries from Robert Horst, former Chairman Junker eventually replied: “I will not respond again to further correspondence from you on this subject.”
Old Main has maintained silence on the matter as well. Officials declined an invitation to respond to Horst’s March 17th CDT editorial. Likewise, Penn State spokesman, Tyson Kendig, declined an invitation from Voices to comment on the specific allegations, but maintained that, “Penn State’s trustee election process is held up as a model for universities across the country.”
----- Robert Horst, 2/21/2003
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/...013336/penn-states-trustee-coup-reflects.html
(no longer available on webarchive for some reason; a copy is provided below)
PENN STATE'S TRUSTEE COUP REFLECTS A DEEPER CRISIS
By Robert L. Horst
February 21, 2003
All engineers and industrial professionals in Pennsylvania take notice. You have been snookered by a coup in the boardroom at Penn State. When the school was established as a land-grant college in 1862, its mission was to teach "agriculture and the mechanic arts." The governing board was expanded in 1875, adding trustees from engineering societies to those from agricultural societies to reflect this founding mission of Penn State. Now, engineers and practitioners of the mechanic arts have been amended out of the Penn State charter as the electors of six "industrial" trustees on the 32-member university governing board. It is a coup because it was spearheaded by trustees who occupy ill-gotten industrial trusteeships and who have now assured their own re election. Note that an analogous election process for the six "agricultural" trustees by delegates from agricultural societies remains unchanged by the amendment. E.R. "Ed" Hintz Jr., the current board chairman, and E.P. "Ted" Junker III, the previous chairman, hold seats that were hijacked from the designated engineering and industrial constituencies, using delegates who were employees of PMA Capital Insurance, a public corporation with which the university has had a long-term, multimillion dollar business relationship, and State College residents who were recruited by PMA. (See CDT, March 16, 2002, or www.centredaily.com/archives.) Frederick W. Anton III, chairman of PMA Capital Corp., has assisted Penn State in facilitating elections of industrial trustees for over two decades. Some have called him the 33rd trustee.
Both Hintz and Junker — and the other four industrial trustees — have now guaranteed their positions as brokers in a power bloc of trustees that has controlled the governance of Penn State in recent years. There is no further need for contrived elections. The stealth maneuver is revealed on the university Web site (www.psu.edu/trustees) in recently posted minutes of the Nov. 22, 2002, board meeting. The coup was accomplished by amending the charter to eliminate the election of six trustees by engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical delegates, and replace that process with a "selection group" of board members who will recommend trustee candidates from business and industry. The selection group is a five-member subset of the current board, and three of the five will be industrial trustees. Such apostolic-like succession ensures that all future trustees from business and industry will be tainted because of the actions of their predecessors who will have ordained them. Those to be selected for 2003 will be confirmed by the total board at the May 16 meeting at University Park. While it may be perfectly acceptable and legal to amend the charter, doing it quietly and without the usual public relations fanfare begs the question on what other shenanigans or crises are under cover. The process that improperly assigned the industrial trustee seats to non-industrial benefactors ostensibly began in 1986. Even after the scam was discovered, documented and reported to the board and university President Graham B. Spanier in 1996, the cover-up and stonewalling continued for another six years. Changing the charter is a big deal. In the past, suggesting a change to the 1855 school charter was considered almost sacrilegious, and there had been no amendments to it for the last 40 years. The first amendment in 1862 changed the school name to The Agricultural College of Pennsylvania, and there had been only a dozen amendments since then. I suspect that Hintz and Junker will attempt to put a ribbon on their successful coup by nominating their chief benefactor for a prestigious university award, such as honorary alumnus.
Now, the unethical and, I believe, illegal process that rewarded selected benefactors with trusteeships under the guise of a publicly-exhibited democratic election has been codified. The selection process will continue, but there will be no more fake and contrived balloting by delegates. A shameful chapter in Penn State governance is now history. But the environment and principals that permitted it are still active. The deeper crisis continues. The university will soon celebrate its $1.3-billion Grand Destiny capital campaign. Let all residents of the commonwealth ask what will Penn State's "Final Destiny" goal be as a "molder of men and women" — students, alumni, and future trustees with exemplary character and integrity. The Penn State alma mater states it best: "May no act of ours bring shame."
Bob Horst, of Lancaster, served as Penn State trustee from 1992 to 1995.
----- Opinion by Robert Horst, 12/4/2011
Former Penn State trustee: change should start at the top
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2011/12/former_penn_state_trustee_chan.html
----- By Justin Leto, 5/2/2002
Trustee Elections Hijacked by Multi-Billion-Dollar Insurance Company [PMA]
http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html
Snipped from the end of the article:
Besides the investigation in 1996, calls for reform have largely gone unanswered. After persistent inquiries from Robert Horst, former Chairman Junker eventually replied: “I will not respond again to further correspondence from you on this subject.”
Old Main has maintained silence on the matter as well. Officials declined an invitation to respond to Horst’s March 17th CDT editorial. Likewise, Penn State spokesman, Tyson Kendig, declined an invitation from Voices to comment on the specific allegations, but maintained that, “Penn State’s trustee election process is held up as a model for universities across the country.”
----- Robert Horst, 2/21/2003
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http:/...013336/penn-states-trustee-coup-reflects.html
(no longer available on webarchive for some reason; a copy is provided below)
PENN STATE'S TRUSTEE COUP REFLECTS A DEEPER CRISIS
By Robert L. Horst
February 21, 2003
All engineers and industrial professionals in Pennsylvania take notice. You have been snookered by a coup in the boardroom at Penn State. When the school was established as a land-grant college in 1862, its mission was to teach "agriculture and the mechanic arts." The governing board was expanded in 1875, adding trustees from engineering societies to those from agricultural societies to reflect this founding mission of Penn State. Now, engineers and practitioners of the mechanic arts have been amended out of the Penn State charter as the electors of six "industrial" trustees on the 32-member university governing board. It is a coup because it was spearheaded by trustees who occupy ill-gotten industrial trusteeships and who have now assured their own re election. Note that an analogous election process for the six "agricultural" trustees by delegates from agricultural societies remains unchanged by the amendment. E.R. "Ed" Hintz Jr., the current board chairman, and E.P. "Ted" Junker III, the previous chairman, hold seats that were hijacked from the designated engineering and industrial constituencies, using delegates who were employees of PMA Capital Insurance, a public corporation with which the university has had a long-term, multimillion dollar business relationship, and State College residents who were recruited by PMA. (See CDT, March 16, 2002, or www.centredaily.com/archives.) Frederick W. Anton III, chairman of PMA Capital Corp., has assisted Penn State in facilitating elections of industrial trustees for over two decades. Some have called him the 33rd trustee.
Both Hintz and Junker — and the other four industrial trustees — have now guaranteed their positions as brokers in a power bloc of trustees that has controlled the governance of Penn State in recent years. There is no further need for contrived elections. The stealth maneuver is revealed on the university Web site (www.psu.edu/trustees) in recently posted minutes of the Nov. 22, 2002, board meeting. The coup was accomplished by amending the charter to eliminate the election of six trustees by engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical delegates, and replace that process with a "selection group" of board members who will recommend trustee candidates from business and industry. The selection group is a five-member subset of the current board, and three of the five will be industrial trustees. Such apostolic-like succession ensures that all future trustees from business and industry will be tainted because of the actions of their predecessors who will have ordained them. Those to be selected for 2003 will be confirmed by the total board at the May 16 meeting at University Park. While it may be perfectly acceptable and legal to amend the charter, doing it quietly and without the usual public relations fanfare begs the question on what other shenanigans or crises are under cover. The process that improperly assigned the industrial trustee seats to non-industrial benefactors ostensibly began in 1986. Even after the scam was discovered, documented and reported to the board and university President Graham B. Spanier in 1996, the cover-up and stonewalling continued for another six years. Changing the charter is a big deal. In the past, suggesting a change to the 1855 school charter was considered almost sacrilegious, and there had been no amendments to it for the last 40 years. The first amendment in 1862 changed the school name to The Agricultural College of Pennsylvania, and there had been only a dozen amendments since then. I suspect that Hintz and Junker will attempt to put a ribbon on their successful coup by nominating their chief benefactor for a prestigious university award, such as honorary alumnus.
Now, the unethical and, I believe, illegal process that rewarded selected benefactors with trusteeships under the guise of a publicly-exhibited democratic election has been codified. The selection process will continue, but there will be no more fake and contrived balloting by delegates. A shameful chapter in Penn State governance is now history. But the environment and principals that permitted it are still active. The deeper crisis continues. The university will soon celebrate its $1.3-billion Grand Destiny capital campaign. Let all residents of the commonwealth ask what will Penn State's "Final Destiny" goal be as a "molder of men and women" — students, alumni, and future trustees with exemplary character and integrity. The Penn State alma mater states it best: "May no act of ours bring shame."
Bob Horst, of Lancaster, served as Penn State trustee from 1992 to 1995.
----- Opinion by Robert Horst, 12/4/2011
Former Penn State trustee: change should start at the top
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2011/12/former_penn_state_trustee_chan.html
Bump.
Trustee Elections Hijacked by Multi-Billion-Dollar Insurance Company [PMA]
By Justin Leto, 5/2/2002 | http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html
On May 9th, Penn State will host a delegate convention to elect 12 of its 32 trustees. Among the 12 seats up for election are the 6 industrial trustees. For those in the know, this group represents the “power bloc” of the board. Three of the last four Board Chairmen came from this group. Ed Hintz was elected chairman of the board in January 2001. Ted Junker served as chairman between 1998 and 2000. Both men were elected by delegates representing organized industrial societies.
Or were they?
The corporate charter of the university, which is codified in Pennsylvania law, mandates that the six industrial trustees “shall be members of and represent…organized engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical societies or associations.” Each of these societies or associations nominates 3 delegates from each county in the commonwealth. If all 67 counties participate, a maximum of 201 delegates could participate in the industrial trustee elections.
But Robert L. Horst, a former Penn State trustee and a professional member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), questions how the university implements these mandates.
In a March 17th article published in The Centre Daily Times, Horst questioned why neither Junker nor Hintz meet the description for industrial trustees specified in the charter. Horst wrote, “neither man has industrial credentials in any sense—education, practice, or profession-nor the savvy to represent technical constituencies.”
His description of Junker and Hintz are accurate.
Edward R. Hintz, Jr. is president of Hintz, Holman, and Hecksher, Inc., a private money management firm in New York City, which he founded in 1974. According to the Penn State trustee website, Hintz’s firm specializes in “investment management for individuals.”
Edward (Ted) P. Junker III was former vice chairman of PNC Bank Corp. He also served as vice chairman and board member of PNC Bank’s national association, PNC Bank, NA.
Another current industrial trustee, L. J. Rowell, is chairman of the board of Provident Mutual Life and also serves as a board member of the PMA Insurance Group.
But their lack of technical credentials does not in itself violate the charter. If they are elected by organized industrial societies or associations, maintain membership in those organizations, and act as a representative of those constituencies, they qualify.
Given this fact, the integrity of trustee elections depends on the delegate selection process.
According to Paula Ammerman, Associate Secretary of the Board and Director of the Penn State Trustees’ office in Old Main, the university determines the qualification of each industrial society or association. Letters are sent to the acting secretary of each qualifying organization, which allows them to then nominate three delegates per county chapter. Ammerman could not provide an exact figure at the time, but estimated that the number of qualifying organizations was over 150 throughout Pennsylvania.
In instances where more than one society or association exists in a particular county, the nominated delegates from those societies must caucus and elect three delegates amongst themselves to represent their county.
Out of 150 qualifying societies and organizations, PMA Capital sends almost all of the delegates. Out of 65 delegates registered in the 1998 industrial election, 60 were registered as PMA delegates.
In 1909, Bucks County industrialist, Joseph R. Grundy, founded the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association (PMA). The association served as a legislative lobby with a stated mission of “defending free enterprise and fighting for lower taxes, reasonable regulation, and sensible labor law.”
But a lot as changed since 1909. PMA is now much more than an industrial “association.” It has morphed, subdivided, and restructured into a number of for-profit insurance ventures with combined assets of over $3 billion.
There’s PMA Capital Corporation, a risk management company headquartered in Philadelphia that owns and operates three specialty businesses:
A PMA annual report described the 2000 restructuring: “PMA Capital Insurance Company…now has statutory capital and surplus of more than $500 million, which gives us a more desirable profile than having separate operating companies capitalized at less than $300 million each [emphasis added].”
The not-for-profit arms of PMA include the PMA Foundation, which owns a quarter of PMA Capital Corporation, and the legislative lobby.
Penn State has a multi-million dollar business relationship with PMA Insurance.
The integrity of PMA delegates questioned
Robert Horst served as an alumni trustee from 1992 until he was unseated in the alumni trustee elections of 1995. A fellow trustee suggested that he run as an industrial trustee, which he did in 1996.
“Other trustees had told me that PMA controlled the [industrial trustee] election, but I didn't know what that meant,” Horst said.
Horst had heard other board members refer to Frederick W. Anton III as the “33rd trustee” because of the influence PMA wielded over the election of industrial trustees. Anton is PMA Capital Corporation’s Board Chairman and has been known to financially support a number of right-wing causes through the PMA Foundation.
But it is ultimately up to the university to qualify delegates and organizations.
“PMA has no organized county-level chapters or members. The university violates its charter by giving delegate credential cards to PMA for Pennsylvania counties in which it has no members,” said Horst.
“PMA then assigns the delegate credentials to recruited employees and fake delegates who, in turn, nominate Penn State trustees and cast ballots for them,” he added.
“I am not going to debate the status [of PMA],” Ammerman said in response to questions about the involvement of PMA Insurance.
She echoed the qualifications required by the charter, which specifies that the societies and associations be regularly organized and in existence at least three months preceding the time of the trustee election.
Horst talked with dozens of delegates at the 1996 election and discovered that every delegate he spoke with had been recruited from the streets and retirement communities of Centre County – an obvious violation of the 3-delegate-per-county allowance.
One delegate he spoke to was a resident of State College, the spouse of an elected State College official, yet she voted as a Clinton county PMA delegate.
“After the election, she asked me what the letters PMA stood for,” Horst recalled.
The day after the election was held, Horst notified Penn State President Graham Spanier of his findings. Spanier charged the caucus of industrial trustees to investigate themselves. They found little fault with the process, but tacitly agreed that delegates should represent their counties of residence “if possible.” As it turned out, PMA heavily recruited Centre County residents to serve as “proxy” delegates from nearly 40 different counties.
In 1997, Horst attempted to vote as an IEEE delegate from Lancaster County. At the election a university lawyer and the associate secretary of the Board informed him that he was ineligible.
“Although I was a delegate, I could not cast a ballot because the three votes allotted to Lancaster County were cast by three PMA employees [emphasis added],” said Horst.
This time, instead of recruiting Centre County residents, PMA had sent their paid employees to elect the industrial trustees. A far cry from what most would consider “members” of “organized engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical societies or associations,” which are qualifications voting delegates are required to meet.
Even though Horst was an IEEE member, there officially was no county-level chapter of IEEE where he resided -- only a regional Susqehanna chapter.
In the 1998 industrial trustee election, Horst discovered that a PMA insurance branch located in Blue Bell, PA served as headquarters for the “Penn State Project.” The project coordinated PMA Capital employees who were provided delegate credentials and accommodations in State College for the weekend of the election.
Besides the investigation in 1996, calls for reform have largely gone unanswered. After persistent inquiries from Robert Horst, former Chairman Junker eventually replied: “I will not respond again to further correspondence from you on this subject.”
Old Main has maintained silence on the matter as well. Officials declined an invitation to respond to Horst’s March 17th CDT editorial. Likewise, Penn State spokesman, Tyson Kendig, declined an invitation from Voices to comment on the specific allegations, but maintained that, “Penn State’s trustee election process is held up as a model for universities across the country.”
link: http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html ------------------------------------
Many thanks to Bob Horst for his many insights over the last half-decade. Wish more former trustees would come out and share their thoughts, as well.
Agreed. Whole article's worth a read. Re: The incestuous relationship between PMA and the PSU BOT. Also interesting to see mega-banker Ted Junker (appointed via B&I) serving as chairman of the Penn State Board of Trustees from 1998-2000 (when Jerry Sandusky was granted emeritus status and access to PSU football facilities with guest privileges [with TSM kids, against Joe's wishes]). Right now, a lot of hush-hush people are floating Ira Lubert's name (and I'm inclined to agree with them -- hello, he gave Sandusky/TSM free access to his camping facilities in Altoona), and I'm down with that, but I hope we're not overlooking Ted Junker.Trustee Elections Hijacked by Multi-Billion-Dollar Insurance Company [PMA]
By Justin Leto, 5/2/2002 | http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html
On May 9th, Penn State will host a delegate convention to elect 12 of its 32 trustees. Among the 12 seats up for election are the 6 industrial trustees. For those in the know, this group represents the “power bloc” of the board. Three of the last four Board Chairmen came from this group. Ed Hintz was elected chairman of the board in January 2001. Ted Junker served as chairman between 1998 and 2000. Both men were elected by delegates representing organized industrial societies.
Or were they?
The corporate charter of the university, which is codified in Pennsylvania law, mandates that the six industrial trustees “shall be members of and represent…organized engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical societies or associations.” Each of these societies or associations nominates 3 delegates from each county in the commonwealth. If all 67 counties participate, a maximum of 201 delegates could participate in the industrial trustee elections.
But Robert L. Horst, a former Penn State trustee and a professional member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), questions how the university implements these mandates.
In a March 17th article published in The Centre Daily Times, Horst questioned why neither Junker nor Hintz meet the description for industrial trustees specified in the charter. Horst wrote, “neither man has industrial credentials in any sense—education, practice, or profession-nor the savvy to represent technical constituencies.”
His description of Junker and Hintz are accurate.
Edward R. Hintz, Jr. is president of Hintz, Holman, and Hecksher, Inc., a private money management firm in New York City, which he founded in 1974. According to the Penn State trustee website, Hintz’s firm specializes in “investment management for individuals.”
Edward (Ted) P. Junker III was former vice chairman of PNC Bank Corp. He also served as vice chairman and board member of PNC Bank’s national association, PNC Bank, NA.
Another current industrial trustee, L. J. Rowell, is chairman of the board of Provident Mutual Life and also serves as a board member of the PMA Insurance Group.
But their lack of technical credentials does not in itself violate the charter. If they are elected by organized industrial societies or associations, maintain membership in those organizations, and act as a representative of those constituencies, they qualify.
Given this fact, the integrity of trustee elections depends on the delegate selection process.
According to Paula Ammerman, Associate Secretary of the Board and Director of the Penn State Trustees’ office in Old Main, the university determines the qualification of each industrial society or association. Letters are sent to the acting secretary of each qualifying organization, which allows them to then nominate three delegates per county chapter. Ammerman could not provide an exact figure at the time, but estimated that the number of qualifying organizations was over 150 throughout Pennsylvania.
In instances where more than one society or association exists in a particular county, the nominated delegates from those societies must caucus and elect three delegates amongst themselves to represent their county.
Out of 150 qualifying societies and organizations, PMA Capital sends almost all of the delegates. Out of 65 delegates registered in the 1998 industrial election, 60 were registered as PMA delegates.
In 1909, Bucks County industrialist, Joseph R. Grundy, founded the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association (PMA). The association served as a legislative lobby with a stated mission of “defending free enterprise and fighting for lower taxes, reasonable regulation, and sensible labor law.”
But a lot as changed since 1909. PMA is now much more than an industrial “association.” It has morphed, subdivided, and restructured into a number of for-profit insurance ventures with combined assets of over $3 billion.
There’s PMA Capital Corporation, a risk management company headquartered in Philadelphia that owns and operates three specialty businesses:
- PMA Re - a property/casualty reinsurance company. (Renamed to PMA Capital Insurance Company in 2000).
- PMA Insurance Group – a workers’ compensation and integrated disability management insurance company.
- Caliber One – an excess and surplus management company.
A PMA annual report described the 2000 restructuring: “PMA Capital Insurance Company…now has statutory capital and surplus of more than $500 million, which gives us a more desirable profile than having separate operating companies capitalized at less than $300 million each [emphasis added].”
The not-for-profit arms of PMA include the PMA Foundation, which owns a quarter of PMA Capital Corporation, and the legislative lobby.
Penn State has a multi-million dollar business relationship with PMA Insurance.
The integrity of PMA delegates questioned
Robert Horst served as an alumni trustee from 1992 until he was unseated in the alumni trustee elections of 1995. A fellow trustee suggested that he run as an industrial trustee, which he did in 1996.
“Other trustees had told me that PMA controlled the [industrial trustee] election, but I didn't know what that meant,” Horst said.
Horst had heard other board members refer to Frederick W. Anton III as the “33rd trustee” because of the influence PMA wielded over the election of industrial trustees. Anton is PMA Capital Corporation’s Board Chairman and has been known to financially support a number of right-wing causes through the PMA Foundation.
But it is ultimately up to the university to qualify delegates and organizations.
“PMA has no organized county-level chapters or members. The university violates its charter by giving delegate credential cards to PMA for Pennsylvania counties in which it has no members,” said Horst.
“PMA then assigns the delegate credentials to recruited employees and fake delegates who, in turn, nominate Penn State trustees and cast ballots for them,” he added.
“I am not going to debate the status [of PMA],” Ammerman said in response to questions about the involvement of PMA Insurance.
She echoed the qualifications required by the charter, which specifies that the societies and associations be regularly organized and in existence at least three months preceding the time of the trustee election.
Horst talked with dozens of delegates at the 1996 election and discovered that every delegate he spoke with had been recruited from the streets and retirement communities of Centre County – an obvious violation of the 3-delegate-per-county allowance.
One delegate he spoke to was a resident of State College, the spouse of an elected State College official, yet she voted as a Clinton county PMA delegate.
“After the election, she asked me what the letters PMA stood for,” Horst recalled.
The day after the election was held, Horst notified Penn State President Graham Spanier of his findings. Spanier charged the caucus of industrial trustees to investigate themselves. They found little fault with the process, but tacitly agreed that delegates should represent their counties of residence “if possible.” As it turned out, PMA heavily recruited Centre County residents to serve as “proxy” delegates from nearly 40 different counties.
In 1997, Horst attempted to vote as an IEEE delegate from Lancaster County. At the election a university lawyer and the associate secretary of the Board informed him that he was ineligible.
“Although I was a delegate, I could not cast a ballot because the three votes allotted to Lancaster County were cast by three PMA employees [emphasis added],” said Horst.
This time, instead of recruiting Centre County residents, PMA had sent their paid employees to elect the industrial trustees. A far cry from what most would consider “members” of “organized engineering, mining, manufacturing, and mechanical societies or associations,” which are qualifications voting delegates are required to meet.
Even though Horst was an IEEE member, there officially was no county-level chapter of IEEE where he resided -- only a regional Susqehanna chapter.
In the 1998 industrial trustee election, Horst discovered that a PMA insurance branch located in Blue Bell, PA served as headquarters for the “Penn State Project.” The project coordinated PMA Capital employees who were provided delegate credentials and accommodations in State College for the weekend of the election.
Besides the investigation in 1996, calls for reform have largely gone unanswered. After persistent inquiries from Robert Horst, former Chairman Junker eventually replied: “I will not respond again to further correspondence from you on this subject.”
Old Main has maintained silence on the matter as well. Officials declined an invitation to respond to Horst’s March 17th CDT editorial. Likewise, Penn State spokesman, Tyson Kendig, declined an invitation from Voices to comment on the specific allegations, but maintained that, “Penn State’s trustee election process is held up as a model for universities across the country.”
link: http://voicesweb.org/archive/pe/trustee0502.html ------------------------------------
Many thanks to Bob Horst for his many insights over the last half-decade. Wish more former trustees would come out and share their thoughts, as well.
Last edited:
Much of the BoT has been sneaky and corrupt for decades. Increasing the seats to dilute the Elected Trustees was a disgraceful move. Either the Courts or the Legislature need to step in to end the BS.
I am going to try to shorthand this, simply because I suspect there is something I have wrong here. PMA, which has been for decades PSU's insurer, ALSO had a direct hand in selecting the B&I trustees who ran the University for decades. And these were the same decades, am I right about that?
Specifically, did we not find out a few weeks ago in the PMA vs. PSU case that from 92-99 there was an exclusion in place which meant that PSU was not covered for on campus child sex abuse during those years? Did the PMA-selected trustees during those years know about Sandusky? Did they exclude the coverage in order to limit PMA's exposure? Is it mere coincidence that the exclusion ended with the retirement of Jerry Sandusky?
Setting aside all other considerations, I cannot imagine why, during the 90s, a time when the President of the United States was accused of various forms of sexual harassment and abuse, a giant org like PSU willfully excludes from its liability coverage any claims for sex-related anything. I have never known of such an exclusion. Jerry Sandusky or no, you have no coverage if a grad assistant successfully hits on a 17 yo student? If a branch campus teacher hits on a 15 yo summer student? No coverage? That alone seems to be a negligent failure by the trustees to protect the assets of the University.
But if the PMA-selected trustees did not know about Jerry, then why did the exclusion end when he retired?
IF the PMA-selected trustees warned PMA about the risk of Jerry, and played along while PMA cut out the coverage, then they sold the University down the river, selecting the interests of their PMA backers over the interests of the University. I have always felt there were lots of people on the BoT who knew more about this than Joe did.
Kudos to Horst for fighting his lonely fight years ago. It did not work. Seems impossible to assume it could.
I could make lots of money in the insurance business if I had advance knowledge of where to find the risks and exclude them.
Why does PSU have the same risk insurer for all this time? How many times has this insurance business been sent out for bid since PMA became the insurer. Were there other times when oddball insurance exclusions popped up and PSU paid the claims itself? Another question: what was the premium paid to reinstate the coverage after Jerry retired?
Disclaimer--what I have written here is incendiary, I know. As I indicated, I may have the facts wrong. Happy to have that pointed out if it is true.
Specifically, did we not find out a few weeks ago in the PMA vs. PSU case that from 92-99 there was an exclusion in place which meant that PSU was not covered for on campus child sex abuse during those years? Did the PMA-selected trustees during those years know about Sandusky? Did they exclude the coverage in order to limit PMA's exposure? Is it mere coincidence that the exclusion ended with the retirement of Jerry Sandusky?
Setting aside all other considerations, I cannot imagine why, during the 90s, a time when the President of the United States was accused of various forms of sexual harassment and abuse, a giant org like PSU willfully excludes from its liability coverage any claims for sex-related anything. I have never known of such an exclusion. Jerry Sandusky or no, you have no coverage if a grad assistant successfully hits on a 17 yo student? If a branch campus teacher hits on a 15 yo summer student? No coverage? That alone seems to be a negligent failure by the trustees to protect the assets of the University.
But if the PMA-selected trustees did not know about Jerry, then why did the exclusion end when he retired?
IF the PMA-selected trustees warned PMA about the risk of Jerry, and played along while PMA cut out the coverage, then they sold the University down the river, selecting the interests of their PMA backers over the interests of the University. I have always felt there were lots of people on the BoT who knew more about this than Joe did.
Kudos to Horst for fighting his lonely fight years ago. It did not work. Seems impossible to assume it could.
I could make lots of money in the insurance business if I had advance knowledge of where to find the risks and exclude them.
Why does PSU have the same risk insurer for all this time? How many times has this insurance business been sent out for bid since PMA became the insurer. Were there other times when oddball insurance exclusions popped up and PSU paid the claims itself? Another question: what was the premium paid to reinstate the coverage after Jerry retired?
Disclaimer--what I have written here is incendiary, I know. As I indicated, I may have the facts wrong. Happy to have that pointed out if it is true.
Hintz's name needs to come off a certain building after the damage he has done to PSU.
Yeah, there was a culture problem all right, the effin' GREED culture.
Demlion
The only thing I would point out is that Sandusky got clearance in 1998 from state agencies and the DA. Also, it would have been known about the retirement agreement with access to the campus given to Sandusky. If there was suspicion, 1998 knowledge could have helped to put that to rest. However, if there was suspicion, then you would think the retirement agreement would have continued that clause. I think Sandusky fooled everyone.
The only thing I would point out is that Sandusky got clearance in 1998 from state agencies and the DA. Also, it would have been known about the retirement agreement with access to the campus given to Sandusky. If there was suspicion, 1998 knowledge could have helped to put that to rest. However, if there was suspicion, then you would think the retirement agreement would have continued that clause. I think Sandusky fooled everyone.
To be fair, Hintz doesn't come remotely close to the half a billion plus he's cost the university, nor the damage to its good will and reputation.
Seems plausible, but I still want to know whose idea it was to exclude the coverage in the first place, and an explanation of how that just happened.
I guess I would still like to know whether any other major University ever had such an exclusion in their insurance policy in the 90s. The 50s? Okay, the whole society was in denial about this in the 50s. Nobody could be in denial in the 90s, could they? I mean, in terms of insuring for possible risks.
When Sandusky was not charged with a crime in the 98 incident, that did not change the fact that PSU might still be liable for civil damages.
^^ You're asking all the right questions, @demlion. Paging @rmb297 and @JmmyW for additional insight and clarification.
ANOTHER under-the-radar fact: When the Big Ten Network launched in 2006, a five-person BTN Board of Directors was quietly announced:
- Big Ten President Jim Delany
- Fox Sports Chief Operating Officer Randy Freer
- Fox Sports President Bob Thompson
- New York Mets Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board Fred Wilpon
- Former Chairman of the Penn State Board of Trustees Ted Junker
There's your under-the-radar direct line of communication between the PSU BOT and Jim Delany.
Things that make ya go hmmmm....
cc: @Zenophile @Nellie R @Frank Sheeran
Thanks ChiTown. I look forward to seeing any clarification Jimmy/Ray can provide. The power bloc has woven a pretty tangled web here. Does not mean we are going to be stopped from untangling it.
Can anyone name a major University like PSU that ever excluded child sex abuse claims from its insurance policy? I suppose there is a chance that there are some self-insured schools. That would not surprise me, but excluding just one sort of coverage? Who does that?
While I agree with most of your points and you raise some important questions, I'll point out that I don't think our society was quite as sue-happy in the 1990s as they are today. That might be a reason for the coverage as it was--they didn't think they needed it. Wrongly, as it turns out, but that is hindsight.
First, they had the coverage before that time, then there was an exclusion written. The first Catholic Church CSA lawsuits in PA were filed I think in 1987 in, of all places, the Altoona Diocese.
Second, I think you will find there was plenty of litigation in the 1990s. Plenty. Indeed what is the purpose of having an insurance company exclude a risk if you are not worried that PSU might be sued as a result of the risk?
Last edited:
Like I said, it's a good question to ask. Had the BOT not been asleep....
So, PMA "appoints" BOT members, who in turn buy multiple insurance plans from PMA? Can Sen. Yudichak, in his oversight capacity of state related schools and charter reform, compare similar policies and premiums through the last 20 years with Temple and Pitt to see if our BOT where exercising their fiduciary responsibility or more likely involved in............mischief.
Sen. Yudichak..........I know it is not politically expedient, but please dissolve the 1855 charter that was amended last in 1862 and start over with a new cast of characters. This experiment has failed!
Sen. Yudichak..........I know it is not politically expedient, but please dissolve the 1855 charter that was amended last in 1862 and start over with a new cast of characters. This experiment has failed!
Just how deep IS the rabbit hole? It's already looking pretty deep.
Pitt and Temple would be an excellent place to begin our search for Universities which had exclusions in their insurance policies for CSA in the 1990s. Would also be interesting to know if Temple's Board's insurance company had exclusions for Board members drugging and raping employees.
Btw, not only did PMA appoint them, but somehow PMA Insurance managed to have exclusions in place for the last 8 years Jerry was employed. A remarkable coincidence, give what later turned out to be going on.
As I recall, litigation became more prevalent in the 70s because every Tom, Dick and Harry wanted to be a lawyer. IIRC, law school also provided a military deferment beyond college (ahem, Vietnam) but I may be wrong about that. Result, way too many lawyers needing to earn a buck. Also, IIRC, the 70s was when lawyers began advertising, a practice considered well below the vaunted esteem of the lawyer. The demand for law school acceptance was so great that students in my area who didn't get into Villanova, Penn or Temple, opted for Widener which was unaccredited at that time. Please correct me if I'm wrong about the deferments.
This stuff scares me as an alum because logic swings Sandusky back to a character being protected which then begs the question why and by whom?
Scares me, too. The suggestion that this was a systematic effort is truly frightening, especially when I reflect that I gave these people one of my kids and a lot of my money for 4 years.
The truth can certainly scare us, and maybe more than that. But remember, in terms of money Sandusky was protected anyway, since if PMA did not pay, PSU would. I would love to see the documents regarding the decision to exclude coverage, both from the insurer's side and the University's side. And also the docs regarding both PMA's and PSU's decision to cancel the exclusion.
Look no further than the nearest shredder, methinks.
"HE" did it? How about Sandusky and the administrators who decided not to let the pros handle the situation?
Press release 06-01-2016:
Blockhead epidemic out of control. Center for Disease Control in Atlanta concludes that the condition is incurable and hopefully fatal.
getmyjive said, "'HE'" did it? How about Sandusky and the administrators who decided not to let the pros handle the situation?"
Are you deliberately being obtuse, or don't you have the capacity to understand simple facts? "... administrators who decided not to let the pros handle the situation?" Really? Notifying the PROS at TSM wasn't enough?
Are you deliberately being obtuse, or don't you have the capacity to understand simple facts? "... administrators who decided not to let the pros handle the situation?" Really? Notifying the PROS at TSM wasn't enough?
Didn't the PROS handle 1998? Of course the PROS also handled the AF affair. It took them more than 3 years and then they still screwed it up. Maybe the PROS that the auditor general exposed as not answering the phone much of the time. God what an idiot.
I'm deliberately saying that Sandusky and the Administrators screwed us. The Pros at investigating these claims were the police. If they went to the police and let them figure it out, PSU would be fine right now.
Yeah, the police figured it out in 98. Maybe we needed the PSP that lied under oath at the JS trial. Or the one who thought the back up QB was one of Sandusky's abused kids. If not for one of the mothers.........I'm not sure the police found a victim. Ray can clarify that.
Getmyjive said, "The Pros at investigating these claims were the police. If they went to the police and let them figure it out, PSU would be fine right now."
I asked if you were being deliberately obtuse or lacked the capacity to understand the facts.
Based on the above quote, I'm going to have to go with the Combo.
When the problem was reported to mandatory reporters who should have reported it to the police, the message died.
Please don't say that they reported a watered down version. That would add duplicitous to the Combo, like supersizing the drink or fries.
I asked if you were being deliberately obtuse or lacked the capacity to understand the facts.
Based on the above quote, I'm going to have to go with the Combo.
When the problem was reported to mandatory reporters who should have reported it to the police, the message died.
Please don't say that they reported a watered down version. That would add duplicitous to the Combo, like supersizing the drink or fries.
Last edited:
Yup. Just like we'd be fine if they had only called ChildLine.
Look, if you're going to use a screen name to be a board apologist, that's your call. But for heaven's sake, put some real effort into it.
Last edited:
To getmyjive's point: how closely do you expect Joe Paterno was to selecting what sorts of incidents would and would not be insured in 1992? I daresay that was likely out of Tim Curley's league as well. You've told us whose job it was to keep Jerry away from kids in 2001. Whose job was it to make sure PSU had coverage if there was child sexual abuse on campus from 92-99?
Who was the University's risk-management person in 1992-1999? You know, the guy (?) who reviews the risks PSU must shoulder vs the risks covered by insurance?
Who was the University's risk-management person in 1992-1999? You know, the guy (?) who reviews the risks PSU must shoulder vs the risks covered by insurance?
