PSU board to debate Freeh report at special meeting

It's been more than two years since former FBI director Louis Freeh issued his blistering report that accused Pennsylvania State University leaders of conspiring to cover up child sex abuse by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky.

Penn State's board of trustees has scheduled a special meeting for next week to look at that report anew and if some board members have their way, vote on whether the report should be accepted or rejected.

The board meeting is scheduled for 11 a.m. next Tuesday, Oct. 28, in Ball Room C of the Nittany Lion Inn for the purpose of discussing the report, said alumni-elected board member Al Lord. The meeting was scheduled at the request of Lord, who came on the board in July. Board members will meet in private before the public session, which will be streamed live on the university's website.

Lord, former head of student loan lender Sallie Mae, acknowledged that the majority of the board members seem to be against reopening the report — which faulted former Penn State President Graham B. Spanier, former administrators Tim Curley and Gary Schultz and late football coach, Joe Paterno for failing to report the allegations against Sandusky. But, he said, it's important to have the conversation and at least have the board consider taking a stance, he said.

"I think it's time we talk about these things, whether we win, lose or draw," said Lord, who has been backed by the other alumni-elected trustees but opposed by members who have guided the university since Sandusky was indicted in November 2011, as well as others.

Lord first raised the issue in July. The board at that time agreed to postpone the conversation until September. In September, the board again agreed to continue to try to negotiate agreement on the matter.

"My look at the Freeh report (is that) it more than any single document is what divides the university," Lord said. "It divides alumni. It divides board members and the board, other than a few moments at the last meeting, never really examined it in any detail."

The university has adopted more than 100 recommendations outlined in the report, including changes in governance and university operations. Board leaders have said that they do not agree with everything in the report but have not taken a vote on it.

"It's the rest of the report (not the recommendations) that has indicted the university without any push back," Lord said. "I think we're supposed to push back."

Lord and board member Anthony Lubrano, a Chester County businessman and alumni trustee, have called on the board to repudiate Freeh's findings on university leaders' culpability. Lord repeatedly has cited the report's flaws and said it offered no proof that administrators conspired to cover up the allegations.

He noted that it's been nearly three years since the grand jury indicted Sandusky, now in prison serving a minimum 30-year term, and Schultz and Curley and two years since Spanier was charged with conspiring to cover up the allegations.

"All these things hang in limbo," Lord said. "It's my feeling that the board, regardless of the views of guilt or innocence, that the board has a responsibility to complete its assessment of the Freeh report, good, bad or indifferent."

The National Collegiate Athletic Association used the report in handling down its sanctions against Penn State, including a Bowl ban, scholarship losses and a $60 million fine. The NCAA has since rolled back the Bowl ban and re-instituted all scholarships for next year.

Lord said board members on both sides of the issue have been talking and trying to reach a compromise on how to proceed.

"We hope we have one resolution to bring forward that both sides agree on," he said. "I don't know what the probabilities for that are.

"It's possible that we'll come to a compromise. It's possible that we'll vote on the original resolution and the board will be split. It's possible that the majority might introduce its own resolution."