Trustees damage credibility, trust

IU's board of trustees met with President Myles Brand in two groups of four Sept. 9 to discuss the impending dismissal of Coach Knight. Not voting on anything means the trustees and Brand did not violate the letter of the so-called "Sunshine Law," but they did violate the spirit of it. Trustees are people to whom the University has been entrusted, but it is hard to trust people when they are deceptive. Brand and the trustees have damaged the trust bestowed upon them.\nBecause trustees President John Walda was out of the country, only eight trustees were available to meet. A group of five trustees would have constituted a majority, requiring public notification of the meeting 48 hours in advance, according to the Indiana Code. So, trustees avoided having a quorum; trustee Cora Breckenridge told the IDS that Brand said he didn't want a quorum of trustees present.\nBrand called the gatherings informal, the IDS reported Sept. 9, and although those present at the meetings could not vote without a quorum, they did discuss the Knight situation, and Brand asked the trustees their opinions and advice. According to Indiana Code 5-14-1.5-2, official action means to receive information, deliberate and make recommendations, which is just what the trustees did. They discussed the issues and gave their perceptions on the situation. \nThat same code also states the official action of public agencies be conducted openly, unless otherwise expressly provided by statute. The law was written so the public can be informed of public agencies' actions. Yet the people were not fully informed of the trustees' discussions, although those deliberations were matters of official action. The trustees might not have voted, but the public still should have been present at the group's deliberations -- to listen and provide input.\nIf the trustees were trying to do what was best for the University, they should not have had to go behind the public's back to accomplish it. And if it was worth holding a meeting at all, it should have been worth waiting to hold an official, public deliberation. But it seems Brand and the trustees just wanted to meet in secret, away from public scrutiny. They didn't want to have to face public reaction to the question of firing Coach Knight.\nDid the trustees do anything illegal? Not exactly, because they did not meet in a majority or have a vote. They knew the way the law read -- down to the letter -- so they could bend it without breaking it. But because their gatherings included official actions, deliberations and recommendations, they did violate the spirit of the law, damaging their credibility and the public's trust in the board and the University administration. \nStaff vote: 9-0-0