Penn Staters For Responsible Stewardship
Statement on State Rep. Scott Conklin’s Proposed Changes to PSU Board

DECEMBER 11, 2012 — “Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship is in favor of any changes to the composition of the Penn State Board of Trustees which will result in the removal of the members who were present as of November 2011. We will remove them or replace them one way or another. They have demonstrated irresponsible leadership and absolutely no defense of the University for more than a year. They continue to hold others accountable to a standard they are unwilling to impose on themselves. They have been secretive with contracts, such as that of Louis Freeh, refusing to provide a scope of work and/or letter of intent after repeated, reasonable requests. And, they have been spending with reckless abandon, most recently more than $400,000 for two months of work by an Athletics Integrity Monitor, when what we really need is a Board of Trustees Integrity Monitor.”

Members of Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship plan to meet with Auditor General Jack Wagner early next week regarding his recommendations and will release a detailed formal statement following that meeting.

Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship with more than 15,000 members nationwide, was formed to effect positive change within the Penn State University Board of Trustees. For further information on PS4RS, please visit http://www.PS4RS.ORG, email, follow PS4RS on Facebook, or follow PS4RS on Twitter at @PS4RS.

Link to PDF:

2 thoughts on “PS4RS Statement on State Rep. Scott Conklin’s Proposed Changes to PSU Board

  1. This is a story about Penn State University and agencies working under the Pennsylvania State Department of Welfare and how they, working with various attorneys with an evident conflict of interest, along with Penn State attorney Wendell Courtney and others, and specific judges within the judicial system, covered up this Edcuational Fraud lawsuit, twisted it into sexual harassment, and denied the Plaintiff the right to a trial and a jury all the way up to the US Supreme Court. All of which began over Penn State and Head Start’s negligence in the proper placement of plaintiff’s childcare clearances – astonishingly, within three weeks after the May,1998 Jerry Sandusky investigations began.

    The University initially failed and removed the student for a “confidentiality violation” for pictures that had never been developed, despite the fact that a recent photo had appeared in the plaintiff’s hometown newspaper, with every child’s picture and their names written under it. Where is the line drawn? How can Penn State allow these agencies to create their own rules after the fact – what parent would ever finance an education – that could end like this?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s