On Oct. 28, Penn State’s business and industry, agriculture, student, and governor-appointed trustees defeated a proposal to have the board perform its fiduciary duty by finally evaluating the Freeh report. Here are the meeting’s key takeaways.
When an alumni-elected trustee raised detailed credible and responsible objections to the Freeh report, another responded, “Mr. Chairman, we have none. We have a deadline to meet; I would urge that we move along with the vote.”
When another trustee said, “Do we value expediency above integrity? I don’t want to stand behind this report one more day.”
Chairman Keith Masser replied, “Any other comments? Are we ready for the vote?”
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to the Centre Daily Times
Masser’s priority, and that of his faction, was clearly to watch the clock rather than the well-being of Penn State.
Business and industry trustee Richard Dandrea then argued that the board could not assess the Freeh report for the same reasons that Freeh’s own investigation was not credible, although I doubt he meant it to come across this way.
When an alumni trustee cornered Kenneth Frazier by asking whether Freeh’s work was thorough and complete, Frazier had to answer “No.”
This means Frazier publicly and recklessly accused four Penn State employees of failing to protect children on the basis of what he knew to be a superficial investigation.
Karen Peetz, whose unauthorized affirmation of the Freeh report on Penn State’s behalf gave the NCAA the excuse it needed to impose the sanctions, was absent from the meeting.
William A. Levinson