Does any of this sound familiar?? At least the Board of Trustees knew who to hire to cover THEIR Butts–even if it meant throwing Penn State and Joe Paterno and State College under the bus. The Board of Trustees was interested in ONE Thing–keeping themselves protected at the expense of everyone else. Failure of their fiduciary duties and so much more!!
Universal Entertainment Corporation announced that Judge Michael Chertoff, the former U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary, has issued an assessment castigating last year’s report by Former FBI Director Louis J. Freehconcerning the affairs of Japanese gaming entrepreneur Kazuo Okada and his
affiliated companies. According to Judge Chertoff, the Freeh report was”structurally deficient, one-sided, and seemingly advocacy-driven.” Moreover, its conclusions, “simply are not credible.” Instead, Judge Chertoff found
Freeh’s report to be “deeply flawed” and “lack[ing] basic indicia of a credible
Freeh’s report was prepared on February 18, 2012 at the behest of Wynn Resorts, Limited. At the direction of Steve Wynn, Wynn Resorts turned around and used the report that same day to rationalize the forcible redemption of 24,549,222 shares of Wynn Resorts held by Aruze USA, Inc., a company whose ultimate majority owner is Mr. Okada. At the time, Aruze USA was the largest single shareholder in Wynn Resorts, owning close to 20% of Wynn Resorts’ outstanding stock.
Although Aruze USA’s shareholdings had a market value of at least 2.7 billion U.S. dollars at the time, Wynn Resorts provided Aruze USA with just a non-transferrable, fully subordinated, $1.9 billion, ten-year note in exchange. Wynn Resorts’ stock price rose $6.71, or 5.9%, per share the next day, providing tremendous financial gains to Steve Wynn and the other Wynn Resorts Directors who had just stripped Aruze USA of its shareholdings based on the Freeh report.
Statement from Kazuo Okada
In response to the independent analysis provided by Judge Chertoff, Universal Entertainment founder and Chairman Kazuo Okada said, “This confirms what I have maintained since the day the Freeh report was issued and the Wynn Board moved to strip us of our stake in a company we helped found — that the Freeh report was prepared carelessly and improperly, and contains a number of clear errors. It’s obvious that this biased report was part of Steve Wynn’s campaign to eliminate me as a rival to his power within Wynn Resorts.’”
According to the summary, the Freeh report’s most significant shortcomings include:
-- Timing that implies that Wynn Resorts commissioned the report for a clear purpose: to justify ousting Mr. Okada from the Board and redeeming Aruze USA's 20 percent stake in the company at a substantial discount; -- Consistently pairing grave and far-reaching conclusions with scant and unreliable supporting evidence and incomplete investigation and analysis, including broadly alleging a "practice and pattern" of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) violations without sufficient detail to meaningfully evaluate these incidents; -- Reaching legal conclusions through deficient legal analysis, including asserting a bad faith, possibly criminal violation of Philippine law while ignoring key aspects of the legal analysis Wynn Resorts commissioned from a local law firm; and, -- Failing to provide any meaningful explanation of its process and citing documents that are of dubious provenance or otherwise unreliable, as well as relying on potentially biased interviewees. Excerpted from the Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2013
STATEMENT OF ACCREDITATION STATUS
|Chief Executive Officer:||Dr. Rodney A. Erickson, President|
|Enrollment (Headcount):||74371 Undergraduate; 13024 Graduate|
|Carnegie Classification:||Research – Very High Research Activity|
|Degrees Offered:||Postsecondary Certificate (< 1 year), Postsecondary Certificate (>=1 year, < 2 years), Associate’s, Bachelor’s, Postbaccalaureate Certificate, Master’s, Doctor’s – Professional Practice, Doctor’s – Research/Scholarship;|
|Distance Education Programs:||Yes|
|Accreditors Approved by U.S. Secretary of Education: American Bar Association, Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar; American Physical Therapy Association, Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education; American Psychological Association, Commission on Accreditation; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Council on Academic Accreditation in Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology; Commission on Acceditation of Healthcare Management Education; Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education; Commission on English Language Program Accreditation; Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology; Liaison Committee on Medical Education; National Association of Schools of Art and Design, Commission on Accreditation; National Association of Schools of Music, Commission on Accreditation; National Association of Schools of Theatre, Commission on Accreditation; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education; National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission|
|Other Accreditors: Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences; Accreditation Council for Education in Nutrition and Dietetics (ACEND); Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education; Accreditation Board for Engineering & Technology; Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications; American Academy of Forensic Science; American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians; American Chemical Society; Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International; Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business-International (AACSB); Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business; Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education; Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education; Council for the Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs; Council on Rehabilitation Education; Institute of Food Technologists; Landscape Architecture Accreditation Board (LAAB); National Accrediting Agency for Clinical Laboratory Sciences; National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB); National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE); National Association of Schools of Public Affairs & Administration (NASPAA); North American Wildlife Technology Association; Pennsylvania State Board of Nursing – Licensing; Pennsylvania Department of Education; Professional Golfer’s Association (PGA) of America; Society of American Foresters; Society of Wood Science and Technology|
|Branch Campuses: Dickinson School of Law, Carlisle, PA; Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA|
|Additional Locations: Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies, Malvern, PA; Penn State Abington, Abington, PA; Penn State Altoona, Altoona, PA; Penn State Beaver, Monaca, PA; Penn State Berks, Reading, PA; Penn State Brandywine, Media, PA; Penn State DuBois, DuBois, PA; Penn State Erie, The Behrend College, Erie, PA; Penn State Fayette, The Eberly Campus, Uniontown, PA; Penn State Greater Allegheny, McKeesport, PA; Penn State Harrisburg, Middletown, PA; Penn State Hazleton, Hazleton, PA; Penn State Lehigh Valley, Center Valley, PA; Penn State Mont Alto, Mont Alto, PA; Penn State New Kensington, Upper Burrell, PA; Penn State Schuylkill, Schuylkill Haven, PA; Penn State Shenango, Sharon, PA; Penn State Wilkes-Barre, Lehman, PA; Penn State Worthington Scranton, Dunmore, PA; Penn State York, York, PA|
|Other Instructional Sites: Abington Hospital, Abington, PA; Aria Health, Philadelphia, PA; ARIS-SON, Abington, PA; Clearfield Area High School, Clearfield, PA; Community Education Council of Elk and Cameron Counties, St. Marys, PA; Downtown Conference Center, Altoona, PA; Erie Regional Skill Center, Erie, PA; Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA; Kraft, Wilkes-Barre, PA; Lancaster Center, Lancaster, PA; Lebanon, Lebanon, PA; Mount Nittany Medical Center/Clinics in Centre County, State College, PA; Northern Tier Center, Towanda, PA; Penn State Continuing Education at Williamsport, Williamsport, PA; Pittsburgh Mills Mall, Tarentum, PA; Proctor & Gamble, Mehoopany, PA; Regional Learning Alliance, Cranberry Twp., PA; Sallie Mae, Hanover Twp., PA; Shaver’s Creek, Petersburg, PA; The Penn State Learning Center (Lewistown), Lewistown, PA; Tobyhanna Army Depot, Tobyhanna, PA; Westmoreland County Community College, Youngwood, PA|
|Status: Member since 1921|
|Last Reaffirmed: November 15, 2012|
Most Recent Commission Action:
|November 15, 2012:||To accept the monitoring report, to note the visit by the Commission’s representatives, to remove the warning, and to reaffirm accreditation. To request a monitoring report, due November 1, 2013, documenting (1) the impact on the University budget and the identification of sources of funding to cover the requirements of (a) the report of the U.S. Department of Education regarding the University’s compliance with the Clery Act and associated penalties; (b) updated estimates of the projected costs and liabilities associated with related litigation and the implementation of the Freeh Report recommendations and the NCAA Consent Decree requirements; and (c) the recommendations that are articulated in the report of the external monitor called for by Recommendation 8.3 of the Freeh Report (Standard 3); and (2) developments associated with the revision of the Bylaws of the Board of Trustees to accommodate (a) the expanded involvement of faculty, staff, and students on Board committees and (b) the dual reporting accountability to both the Board and the President of key positions, including that of the General Counsel and the Directors of Internal Audit and Compliance (Standard 4). The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2014-2015.|
Brief History Since Last Comprehensive Evaluation:
|November 18, 2010:||To accept the Periodic Review Report and to reaffirm accreditation. To request a progress report due by April 1, 2012 documenting evidence of further progress in: (1) the establishment of learning goals at the program level in all programs; and (2) the use of appropriate assessment of the attainment of learning goals at the program level, including use of direct measures of the assessment of student learning and evidence that assessment results are used to improve teaching and learning (Standard 14). The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2014-2015.|
|March 1, 2012:||To accept the Commission-requested information report, to remind the institution that the Commission must continue to be informed of any further developments that may result in changes in mission, programs, personnel and/or budget arising from the institution’s investigation or that may result in a change of status with external oversight bodies, such as the NCAA, and to request that the institution provide to the Commission copies of all relevant reports from its investigation or to its external oversight bodies. To further remind the institution of the progress report due by April 1, 2012 documenting evidence of further progress in: (1) the establishment of learning goals at the program level in all programs; and (2) the use of appropriate assessment of the attainment of learning goals at the program level, including use of direct measures of the assessment of student learning and evidence that assessment results are used to improve teaching and learning (Standard 14). The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2014-2015.|
|June 28, 2012:||To accept the progress report. To remind the institution that the Commission must continue to be informed of any further developments that may result in changes in mission, programs, personnel, and/or budget arising from the institution’s investigation or that may result in a change of status with external oversight bodies, such as the NCAA, and to request that the institution provide to the Commission copies of all relevant reports from its investigation or to its external oversight bodies. The next evaluation visit is scheduled for 2014-2015.|
|August 6, 2012:||To warn the institution that its accreditation is in jeopardy based on information contained in the institutionally commissioned Report of the Special Investigative Counsel (Freeh, Sporkin & Sullivan, LLP, July 12, 2012) and the Binding Consent Decree Imposed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association and Accepted by the Pennsylvania State University (July 23, 2013) and insufficient evidence that the institution is currently in compliance with the Requirements of Affiliation 5 (compliance with all applicable government policies, regulations, and requirements) and 9 (institution’s governing body responsibility for the quality and integrity of the institution, for ensuring that the institution’s mission is being carried out, and for making freely available to the Commission accurate, fair, and complete information on all aspects of the institution and its operations) and with Standard 4 (Leadership and Governance) and Standard 6 (Integrity). To note that the institution remains accredited while on warning. To request a monitoring report due by September 30, 2012 documenting steps that have been taken and are planned to ensure the institution’s full compliance with Requirements of Affiliation 5 and 9 as well as Accreditation Standards 4 and 6. In addition, to request that the monitoring report also address Accreditation Standard 3 (Institutional Resources) with regard to the institution’s capacity and plans for addressing financial obligations that will or may result from the investigation and related settlements, etc. A small team visit will follow submission of the monitoring report. To remind the institution that the Commission must continue to be informed of any further significant related developments, including the provision of copies of any and all relevant external reports. The due date for the next evaluation visit will be established when accreditation is reaffirmed.|
Next Self-Study Evaluation: 2014 – 2015
Next Periodic Review Report: 2020
Date Printed: April 15, 2013
Branch Campus – A location of an institution that is geographically apart and independent of the main campus of the institution. The location is independent if the location: offers courses in educational programs leading to a degree, certificate, or other recognized educational credential; has its own faculty and administrative or supervisory organization; and has its own budgetary and hiring authority.
Additional Location – A location, other than a branch campus, that is geographically apart from the main campus and at which the institution offers at least 50 percent of an educational program. ANYA (“Approved but Not Yet Active”) indicates that the location is included within the scope of accreditation but has not yet begun to offer courses. This designation is removed after the Commission receives notification that courses have begun at this location.
Other Instructional Sites – A location, other than a branch campus or additional location, at which the institution offers one or more courses for credit.
Distance Education Programs – Yes or No indicates whether or not the institution has been approved to offer one or more degree or certificate/diploma programs for which students could meet 50% or more of their requirements by taking distance education courses.
EXPLANATION OF COMMISSION ACTIONS
An institution’s accreditation continues unless it is explicitly suspended or removed. In addition to reviewing the institution’s accreditation status at least every 5 years, actions are taken for substantive changes (such as a new degree or geographic site, or a change of ownership) or when other events occur that require review for continued compliance. Any type of report or visit required by the Commission is reviewed and voted on by the Commission after it is completed.
In increasing order of seriousness, a report by an institution to the Commission may be accepted, acknowledged, or rejected.
Levels of Actions:
Grant or Re-Affirm Accreditation without follow-up
Defer a decision on initial accreditation: The institution shows promise but the evaluation team has identified issues of concern and recommends that the institution be given a specified time period to address those concerns.
Postpone a decision on (reaffirmation of) accreditation: The Commission has determined that there is insufficient information to substantiate institutional compliance with one or more standards.
Continue accreditation: A delay of up to one year may be granted to ensure a current and accurate representation of the institution or in the event of circumstances beyond the institution’s control (natural disaster, U.S. State Department travel warnings, etc.)
Recommendations to be addressed in the next Periodic Review Report: Suggestions for improvement are given, but no follow-up is needed for compliance.
Supplemental Information Report: This is required when a decision is postponed and are intended only to allow the institution to provide further information, not to give the institution time to formulate plans or initiate remedial action.
Progress report: The Commission needs assurance that the institution is carrying out activities that were planned or were being implemented at the time of a report or on-site visit.
Monitoring report: There is a potential for the institution to become non-compliant with MSCHE standards; issues are more complex or more numerous; or issues require a substantive, detailed report. A visit may or may not be required.
Warning: The Commission acts to Warn an institution that its accreditation may be in jeopardy when the institution is not in compliance with one or more Commission standards and a follow-up report, called a monitoring report, is required to demonstrate that the institution has made appropriate improvements to bring itself into compliance. Warning indicates that the Commission believes that, although the institution is out of compliance, the institution has the capacity to make appropriate improvements within a reasonable period of time and the institution has the capacity to sustain itself in the long term.
Probation: The Commission places an institution on Probation when, in the Commission’s judgment, the institution is not in compliance with one or more Commission standards and that the non-compliance is sufficiently serious, extensive, or acute that it raises concern about one or more of the following:
- the adequacy of the education provided by the institution;
- the institution’s capacity to make appropriate improvements in a timely fashion; or
- the institution’s capacity to sustain itself in the long term.
Probation is often, but need not always be, preceded by an action of Warning or Postponement. If the Commission had previously postponed a decision or placed the institution on Warning, the Commission may place the institution on Probation if it determines that the institution has failed to address satisfactorily the Commission’s concerns in the prior action of postponement or warning regarding compliance with Commission standards. This action is accompanied by a request for a monitoring report, and a special visit follows. Probation may, but need not always, precede an action of Show Cause.
Suspend accreditation: Accreditation has been Continued for one year and an appropriate evaluation is not possible. This is a procedural action that would result in Removal of Accreditation if accreditation cannot be reaffirmed within the period of suspension.
Show cause why the institution’s accreditation should not be removed: The institution is required to present its case for accreditation by means of a substantive report and/or an on-site evaluation. A “Public Disclosure Statement” is issued by the Commission.
Remove accreditation. If the institution appeals this action, its accreditation remains in effect until the appeal is completed.
Other actions are described in the Commission policy, “Range of Commission Actions on Accreditation.”
The judge who presided over the grand jury investigation of Jerry Sandusky and senior Penn State officials denied Tuesday motions to throw out pieces of evidence against the men before a preliminary hearing, saying their lawyers are using stall tactics to delay the case.
In a 16-page ruling, Feudale singled out one issue in making his decision: whether he has the jurisdiction to entertain such motions.
The judge also denied a motion to throw out the grand jury testimonies of Spanier and former university general counsel Cynthia Baldwin as well as to bar Baldwin from taking the stand during a yet-unscheduled preliminary hearing.
“In the view of this court, the motions extant are in effect legal chimera’s (sic),” Feudale wrote, calling them “concepts perceived by this (j)udge as legally creative, imaginative but implausible and serve only to delay the administration of justice in this simple case involving whether Spanier, Curley and Schultz did or did not commit the crimes alleged.”
The judge’s ruling would appear to give the Curley, Schultz and Spanier cases the green light to proceed to a preliminary hearing in a case that has been on hold since the men were arraigned in suburban Harrisburg in November. The men were indicted using Baldwin’s testimony as well as evidence that was turned up in the Freeh report.
The defense lawyers had argued in court papers that Baldwin violated attorney-client privilege when she testified to the grand jury against the men. The lawyers also have said their clients thought Baldwin was representing them at the grand jury, but Baldwin has said she was representing the interests of Penn State.
Feudale’s decision came after the prosecuting attorneys and the defense lawyers gave oral arguments Jan. 24. The judge also said his decision was based on an “extensive and careful review” of records related to the case.
Feudale firmly believed he does not have the jurisdiction to handle the requests. Instead, his role as the supervising judge of the grand jury is to keep its proceedings secret, and his duties ended when he accepted the grand jury presentment that a majority of the grand jurors approved by a vote.
Feudale said even if he had jurisdiction, he does not think the defense lawyers’ motions have legal merit.
“Even if attorney Baldwin exercised poor judgment and/or improper ethical conduct in her handling of the Sandusky investigation; such does not (in this court’s view) provide a defense to any crimes,” Feudale wrote.
Feudale said he does not believe Baldwin violated attorney-client privilege, and the appropriate course for that would be to take the matter to the attorney disciplinary board or a civil court — not a grand jury.
Voting begins today in the contentious election for three alumni seats on Penn State’s Board of Trustees. The trustees race once generated little interest in the general public, let alone the 560,000 Penn State alumni across the country. But that changed last year following scrutiny on the actions of university leaders in the aftermath of retired assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky’s arrest in November 2011 on child sex abuse charges. Any of the university’s 560,000 alumni can vote, though they must first contact the Board of Trustees office. Voters can cast ballots online or through the mail. Voting ends May 2, with results to be announced the following day at the trustees meeting
If you did not get your ballot, be sure to contact the alumni office!!!!!
I recommend you Vote for Scott Kimler!!!!!!!
Scott is one of the 6-person Executive Committee on PSU-ReBOT.org – which formed as a direct result of the Sandusky scandal. Our group mission has been to reform the Penn State Board of Trustees. We embarked on several initiatives to improve Penn State, which include:
-Supporting the Faculty Senate “BOT Vote of No Confidence” by making presenting at the January 2012 meeting and collecting more than 4,500 petition signatures
-Embarking on an ambitious research project to collect & evaluate governance metrics from 60+ land-grant and BigTen universities for peer review comparison with Penn State
-Advocate for Alumni BOT election reform, which resulted in:
-first-ever Meet and Greet during Blue/White weekend;
-first-ever 86-candidate straw poll (Scott) http://goo.gl/dG478 and
-a single, interactive web-page with candidate information for all 86 candidates “Super Table” (Scott) – http://goo.gl/NjPnc
-Work with existing Board members to advocate reform (spring 2012)
-Work with former Auditor General Jack Wagner and his staff on governance reform (summer 2012) http://goo.gl/bqfRS
-A letter-writing campaign to BOT members urging Wagner reform recommendations (Jan 2013) – http://goo.gl/76DLz
In addition to strategic planning and leadership duties on the Executive Committee, I am also responsible for PSU-ReBOT.org web properties. I designed, created and maintain the http://www.psu-rebot.org website, the Facebook page and the @psu_rebot Twitter presence. PSU Board Relevance – Demonstrated daily commitment to improving Penn State, for over a year. I didn’t wait for a seat on the Board to make a positive impact, I got involved and have applied myself to the task of improving Penn State with both purposeand resolve. Through my involvement, I am aware of the history of decisions the Board has made post-Sandusky, have made many contacts with members of the Penn State community including members of the current Board, various members and leaders of alumni groups, Penn State faculty and many students. As a Board member, I can hit the ground running and am eager to continue reform efforts in person and working with other reform-minded Trustees. My web development and social media abilities will be an asset to the ‘tip-of-the-spear’ efforts for transparency, openness and trust desperately needed within the Penn State Board of Trustees.
Middle States is The Middle States Commission on Higher Education
Hmmmmmm Wichita State. Louisville. Michigan. Syracuse.
These will be the four schools squaring off today to decide which teams will make up the national title game Monday night.
Mark Emmert‘s Final Four news conference even had little to do with the upcoming national semifinals. It was mostly him defending his past after a troubling report about his career as a university president was released earlier this week. The NCAA president even got into it with CBS Sports reporter Dennis Dodd, who has said in recent months that Emmert should step down. Wichita State, Huh–Emmert and Triponey!! Syracuse, hey Bernie!!–
Guess who was the President of the Middle States in 2012 that threatened Penn State? Barbara Gildenstein, president of the College of New Jersey under whom Vicky Triponey serves as Vice President of Student Affairs. Middle States accuses Penn Sate of potentially violating four different areas of their accreditation requirements, relating to the following:
■Compliance with all applicable government policies, regulations, and requirements. (Affiliation 5)
■Institution’s governing body responsibility for the quality and integrity of the institution, for ensuring that the institution’s mission is being carried out, and for making freely available to the Commission accurate, fair, and complete information on all aspects of the institution and its operations. (Affiliation 9)
■Leadership and Governance (Standard 4)
■Integrity (Standard 6)
Triponey was a lightning rod for controversy due to her policy implementations at both Penn State and before that the University of Connecticut. Spanier hired Triponey in 2003 knowing her controversial background at UConn (hired by Mark Emmert); he supported her actions vis-a-vis Paterno for a time; and the biggest clashes came after the 2004 season when Spanier had tried to strong-arm Paterno’s resignation, or at least get Paterno to plan a retirement timeline. The team started winning again in the 2005 season, and after that Spanier appears to have stopped supporting Triponey, i.e. he gave up trying to get Paterno to retire, for the time being at least. By 2007 Triponey was out at PSU.
In one email to Spanier in Sept. 2005 she wrote, “I do not support the way this man is running our football program.” Um, whose football program?
Did Paterno cause Triponey’s demise at Penn State? Almost certainly.
Did Paterno have a reputation for using his power to fire people, or get them fired? No, he didn’t.
Could Paterno wield his clout forcefully? Yes.
Vicky L. Triponey of Wichita State University has been named vice chancellor for student affairs at the University of Connecticut, Chancellor Mark Emmert has announced. Triponey, who is interim vice president for student affairs at Wichita State, will join UConn March 31. She will report to Emmert.
2003 Vicky Triponey came to Penn State from UConn
Triponey was hired in 2003 by Graham Spanier after a rocky and controversial stint at the University of Connecticut. Within months of her arrival at Penn State she began a campaign aimed at consolidating power within her Office of Student Affairs and crushing or eliminating anything or anyone that challenged that power. (note: this is also Mark Emmert’s tenure which is now under review and scrutiny by USAToday).
In a series of emails to Dr. Spanier, Triponey insisted that she alone had the responsibility to discipline the players involved and indicated that suspension or expulsion was called for. Joe Paterno pointed out that since the incidents were off-campus and everyone involved was facing criminal trials, it was necessary to wait for DUE PROCESS to take its course
When I served as the Graduate Student Association president, I was a very outspoken opponent of FAB. In particular that these students were not elected, and that university employees would hold 40 percent of the voting power. That meant that they had only to convince 20 percent of the students to agree with their voting bloc.
Not only did I voice my concern as a member of the Cabinet of Student Leaders, but I also put every monkey wrench in the system that I could as a member of the Student Activity Fee Board. In order for Triponey to wrestle control of student money away from students, they had to amend the “Guiding Principles” of the activity fee.
I was personally intimidated by Triponey, who threatened that by announcing the proposed changes to the Guiding Principles, I was disseminating confidential information and suggested that I be remanded by Judicial Affairs (funny that I was a member of that steering committee as well).
I informed Triponey & Co. that I was the president of a branch of the student government. As such, any communication with me was also a communication with the 10,000 graduate students across the university. They have a right to know about the dealings of their elected officials and their activity fee funds.
After reading many of the Collegian Articles during 2006, it appears that Triponey’s main effort was to wrestle student control of student activities away and into the hands of salaried individuals. Money was severely cut to student organizations, USG disappeared, etc, etc. Ms Triponey also attempted to take over control of student discipline, a move that was opposed by faculty and staff – not just Joe Paterno!
Dr. Spanier asked for her resignation, acknowledging the mistake he had made four years earlier.
Now, fast forward to 2011–Mark Emmert and Vicky Triponey–Payback time!! Vicky Triponey’s issues with Joe Paterno get full coverage with the Freeh Report AND Mark Emmert who is now conveniently at the NCAA–Mark Emmert hasn’t stayed in one place too long, either!! Check out his work history–and a disaster occurred everywhere he went–Scandal and Dirt left everywhere in his wake!! (note: I have heard from Vicky Triponey and she states that she and Mark Emmert have had no communication in at least 10 years). Her employment history below:
Interim Vice President for Student Affairs
The College of New Jersey
January 2012– Present (1 year 4 months)Ewing, NJ–took Vicky 4 years to find a job!! She applied for and was rejected for other positions during the 4 year hiatus!
Vice President for Student Affairs
Penn State University
July 2003– July 2008 (5 years 1 month)
Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs
University of Connecticut
April 1998– June 2003 (5 years 3 months)
Interim Vice President for Student Affairs
Wichita State University
July 1997– April 1998 (10 months)
Associate Vice President for Campus Life
Wichita State University
September 1994– July 1997 (2 years 11 months)
Assoc. Dean of Student Life and Services
Wichita State University
June 1989– September 1994 (5 years 4 months)
Coordinator of Student Orgs. & Media
University of Georgia
March 1983– August 1986 (3 years 6 months)
Asst to Dean of Student Life/Dir of Orientation
University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown
February 1980– March 1983 (3 years 2 months)