Can Penn State trustees voice views that oppose the board? Fenchak lawsuit continues
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Centre County judge to decide if trustee lawsuit over PSU bylaws can proceed
- Barry Fenchak alleges board rules silence dissent and target critical members
- Penn State defends bylaws as legal, citing need to avoid public confusion
A Centre County judge is set to rule whether a lawsuit can move forward that alleges Penn State’s governing body adopted unconstitutional bylaws to silence dissent and unfairly targeted a former member for his critical questions.
Former alumni-elected trustee Barry Fenchak alleged the board of trustees’ bylaws — which require members to support majority decisions and not publicly criticize the university — amount to a “draconian gag order.”
In filings and a courtroom hearing Thursday, Penn State’s attorneys asked Centre County Judge Brian Marshall to dismiss the case. The university argued the bylaws, which were passed with a 27-6 vote, are a standard and lawful way for the board to govern itself.
Marshall did not indicate when he will issue his ruling. The frequently outspoken Fenchak and the board have been at loggerheads more than a year, and recent court filings did little to show the dispute is slowing down.
Penn State’s attorneys framed Fenchak’s latest lawsuit as a self-serving attempt to drag a judge into the board’s governance. The university also defended the restrictions as a way to prevent confusion that it said could result if trustees were to speak publicly as a “Board of one.”
“Mr. Fenchak essentially argues that the Board has no power to regulate anything that a Trustee might say about the University, regardless of the medium, the capacity in which the Trustee speaks, or what the Trustee may reveal about the inner workings of the Board,” attorney Andy R. Stanton wrote. “Setting aside the examples of his own behavior that Mr. Fenchak agreed would justify removal, that position is practicably unworkable.”
In a forceful and colorful response, Fenchak’s attorney Terry L. Mutchler said her client is fighting a “lip-locked Board that prides secrecy, uniformity, and uninterrupted rubber-stamping.” With his persistent questions about some of the board’s financial decisions, Mutchler said the board changed its bylaws to target and permanently remove him.
“The Board is building, brick by brick, a fortress to protect whatever actions they wish to take and to insulate themselves from public comment and criticism,” she wrote. “The Defendants are now targeting Mr. Fenchak because he threatens the walls of this fort by speaking up against the Board’s actions that are harmful to the University.”
A previous ruling from Marshall suggests the university may have a slight edge. In that decision, the judge found the bylaws are “inoffensive and are likely not inconsistent with the law.” Penn State also put forward evidence that other universities have similar provisions.
The board’s next meeting is scheduled for Sept. 11 at the Nittany Lion Inn.