It seems like the ability to cover legal fees is something that would have been thought through before deciding to file a lawsuit, particularly for someone that constantly questions the BOT about finances.
Barry needs our help. Please read.
- Thread starter TiogaLion
- Start date
Evident from his filing that Bary thought he could fight this without the benefit of counsel. He either found out different or determined that his chances were better with representation.
Here's Bagwell's FOIA case 10 years after it was filed. Not even sure where it's at now. You know who wins in these cases? Lawyer$.
PJam,
Are you saying if your name is associated with Barry's campaign that the BOT might respond with hostility, to repress your criticism or opposition of the current board's non-transparency.
Sounds like fascism-control - Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin, or Francisco Franco
Last edited:
IMO Bagwell would have been the single best trustee elected since 2011. But unfortunately thanks to PS4RS completely running the show regarding who was elected back then, we were never afforded the opportunity.
No Step. What I'm saying is my family and extended family have chosen to support Penn State, not tear it down.
My name will never be associated with anything Barry does. This latest change of BOT bylaws falls solely on him. With him leaking to Spotlight PA and the WSJ article, what did he think was going to happen? They were just going to open their books for him after they read those articles? Everyone that voted for him wanted him to go in and shake things up. Well, these are the results. A board that is more shuttered than ever.
Do I have all the answers to fix it? No. But I sure as Hell won't be publicly dragging my University through the mud every time I get an answer I don't like, like Barry does.
It starts in Harrisburg. An elected official sits on the BOT along with his appointees. Rally the troops, get petitions signed and get in their ear come election time telling them how many votes you carry showing them the petition. Hard work? Sure.
On the other hand, if you can't get enough people to sign a petition to move the needle, you've found that people really don't care.
As it is now, thowing rocks at an Abram tank ain't working.
Last edited:
I think he's just anti nutsAre you “anti-transparency”?
For one, you and your family across the country get to read negative articles in the Wall Street Journal about how bad Penn State is.
How do I give any Fs what some liberal Ivey leaguer writes in the NYT? I’d like to solve the 10-3 problem
Last edited:
WSJ is a conservative newspaper.
People who brag about cars and boats would be my guess, thanks for asking.
Yeah, the Wall Street Journal is the standard-bearer of right-wing US newspapers.
Between his go fund me and his website he is up to about $8000, So there are some believers out there
To be honest, “Big Nate” in the WaPo is on my go-to list every morning. For two weeks Nate’s dad Marty has been practicing for throwing the first pitch in some minor league game and Nate is convinced that Marty will end up embarrassing him. Marty throws a perfect strike but afterwards the mascot points out that his fly was undone. Lol.
Last edited:
Barry and his posts have become the Fox News of the McA board. It doesn't surprise me he's up to that because of the crowd that channel gets.
I 100% disagree.
(I originally deleted this but this was done too late and transparency demands I put it back up.)
Last edited:
So, the Good News:
Several months back we identified the Attorney I felt would be the best partner for this case, knowing that we were entering into a very substantial undertaking.
We hoped that she and her firm would be both interested and available - yes on both counts.
The Court Website will be updated in the next several days, but, yes, we have made an agreement.
Couldn't be more pleased.
There has been a ton of work already done - those who have helped know who they are, and they know they have my most sincere gratitude.
That said, we are still in the (likely) early stages of a process that will involve a lot of work (and will require a lot of resources - ie $) to come.
So, share the news with your PSU circle - and let them know I am very appreciative of whatever help they can provide. The more we can raise, and the sooner we can raise it, the better.
WE ARE just getting started. I think it is fair to say that this is a very critical moment in time for Penn State, and for Penn Staters.
Several months back we identified the Attorney I felt would be the best partner for this case, knowing that we were entering into a very substantial undertaking.
We hoped that she and her firm would be both interested and available - yes on both counts.
The Court Website will be updated in the next several days, but, yes, we have made an agreement.
Couldn't be more pleased.
There has been a ton of work already done - those who have helped know who they are, and they know they have my most sincere gratitude.
That said, we are still in the (likely) early stages of a process that will involve a lot of work (and will require a lot of resources - ie $) to come.
So, share the news with your PSU circle - and let them know I am very appreciative of whatever help they can provide. The more we can raise, and the sooner we can raise it, the better.
WE ARE just getting started. I think it is fair to say that this is a very critical moment in time for Penn State, and for Penn Staters.
I stand by that Jim. He never has or will bring anything positive about PSU. It's all negativity and gloom and doom.
Seriously? PSU has more cheerleaders than it needs. Barry is trying to make PSU better. Without focusing on its shortcomings they can't be improved.
Barry has been shît talking PSU for years. He went through 5 different handles on the old board because he berated everyone with foul language that disagreed with him and got banned often. Never a positive word said about PSU. Now he's the savior. SMDH
Savior? No. But if PSU continues along its current path, it won't look like anything you know and love.
Politicians have been telling me that about our Country since 2015. It's getting really effing old.
The difference between "our Country" and PSU is that PSU can't print money (or levy taxes).
I believe Barry's campaign is to address the governance, educational and financial shortcomings of the BOT,
Not to promote or improve the win-loss record of the f'en "Farm football Team" which we will shortly own.
@PSUJam - the BOT thumbs it's nose to Harrisburg.
The BOT has been trying to privatize The Penn State University for the last two decades.
The stars may finally be in motion and starting to aline in that direction.
Below is a link to the PA Auditor General's Report
LINK:
The Pennsylvania State University - Performance Audit Report for the Period January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2017 (paauditor.gov)
Our performance audit of PSU presents nine findings centered on the following three issue areas
as explained further in Appendix A – Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:
1) Governance, which includes a follow-up to the weaknesses highlighted in our 2012
special report on PSU’s governance.
2) Campus security, to include specifically PSU’s compliance with the federal crime
reporting law, known as the “Clery Act” and PSU’s compliance with conducting
certain required background checks under state law.
3) Tuition affordability, and the extent to which PSU is appropriately identifying and
controlling tuition cost drivers.
o Size of PSU’s Board. In 2012, we recommended reducing the size of PSU’s
Board from 32 voting members based on best practices recommended by higher
education experts. PSU has since taken the opposite position and increased its
Board size to 36 voting members (with an additional two nonvoting members for
a total of 38 members). We continue to believe a smaller board would benefit
PSU’s governance, as would an improved constituency selection process for
“business and industry” representatives on PSU’s Board. PSU disagrees.
o Transparency and accountability to Pennsylvania’s taxpayers. We strongly
believe that PSU and the General Assembly must work harder to eliminate the
special dispensations given to PSU, its Board, and its affiliates. Specifically, PSU
should not be exempted from the good governance safeguards of the
Commonwealth’s Right-to-Know Law and the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Act (Ethics Act). These exclusions were present in 2012 and should be
removed as soon as possible. PSU disagrees with our findings and believes it is
already sufficiently transparent and accountable.
PSU’s tuition has grown at rates that exceed common economic indicators, such as the
consumer price index (CPI). PSU’s tuition is the highest of its Big10 peer public
research universities. PSU’s Board is responsible for setting tuition rates, and tuition is
one of the primary revenue sources for the University.
In our review, we found that PSU’s expenses are outpacing its revenues. As expenses
continue to outpace revenue, PSU will need to find additional revenue to meet its
expenses. The most likely source of this revenue will be from tuition because state revenues are flattening out.
Our analysis of PSU’s acceptance rates at University Park showed that in 11 of the last 16
years, including the last seven consecutive years, nonresidents had higher acceptance
rates than Pennsylvania residents. PSU stated that it has never intentionally favored
nonresident students over Pennsylvania residents in the recruitment and acceptance
process in order to increase revenue or otherwise. While we concur that PSU has no
specific policy or strategic directive that favors nonresident students in the acceptance
process, this condition could be a consequence of not adequately controlling expenses.
The trend of increasing acceptance rates for nonresidents should be a concern for PSU’s
Board because any admission preference should be to residents, whose taxpayer-provided
support is intended to benefit.
Last edited:
Answer the question, what do I get? Free market will lower tuition prices. Making me pay double (I was in Chicago when 1 and 2 attended state) is good business. Are any of you who are calling for a smaller board (smaller government) liberals?
You clearly aren't perceptive enough to understand.
Understand that a group of elected officials are acting in self interest at the cost of everyone outside the clique? A story as old as America. What I also understand is Barry is making no promises on A what the lawsuit will yield and B how long he’ll stick it out.
Looks like he’ll get his 10k, good for him. Does he continue when round 2 costs 40k? Looks like a schit investment to me. I suggest every alum with a high school kid send his kid elsewhere. Profits go down, things will change.
Looks like he’ll get his 10k, good for him. Does he continue when round 2 costs 40k? Looks like a schit investment to me. I suggest every alum with a high school kid send his kid elsewhere. Profits go down, things will change.