xt72fq9q2m3q https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt72fq9q2m3q/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 19891428 minutes English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1989-14-dec28. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1989-14-dec28. 1989 2011 true xt72fq9q2m3q section xt72fq9q2m3q
Minutes of the Special Called Meeting of the Board of Trustees of
the University of Kentucky, Thursday, December 28, 1989.
The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky met in a
Special Called Meeting in the Board Room on the 18th floor of the
Patterson Office Tower on the Lexington Campus at 2:00 p.m. Lexington
time on Thursday, December 28, 1989. The call for the Special Meeting
had been issued by the Chairman, Mr. Foster Ockerman.
A. Meeting Opened
Mr. Foster Ockerman, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 2:07
p.m., and the invocation was pronounced by Mr. William B. Sturgill.
B. Roll Call
The following members of the Board of Trustees answered the call
of the roll: Mr. Foster Ockerman, (Chairman), Mr. Ted B. Bates,
Professor Raymond F. Betts, Mr. William E. Burnett, Jr., Professor Mary
Sue Coleman, Mr. Tracy Farmer, Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Jr., Mrs. Edythe
Jones Hayes, Senator Walter D. Huddleston, Mr. Sean Lohman, Dr. Nicholas
J. Pisacano, Professor Judith Rhoads, Mr. James L. Rose, Judge Robert F.
Stephens, Mr. Jerome A. Stricker, Mr. William B. Sturgill, Judge Julia K.
Tackett, and Mr. Billy B. Wilcoxson. Governor Albert B. Chandler was not
present for the roll call but did arrive during the meeting. Absent from
the meeting was Judge Henry R. Wilhoit, Jr. The University
administration was represented by President David P. Roselle; Chancellors
Peter P. Bosomworth, Robert E. Hemenway and Charles T. Wethington; Vice
Presidents Edward A. Carter, Wimberly C. Royster and Eugene R. Williams;
and Mr. John C. Darsie, General Counsel.
Members of the news media were also in attendance. A quorum being
present, Mr. Ockerman declared the meeting officially open for the
conduct of business at 2:10 p.m.
C. Statements by Mr. Ockgiman
Mr. Ockerman stated that there were two items on the agenda, but
before beginning with the agenda, he had some statements to make.
1. During the period of the interim presidency, the Board
expects to move forward with the cooperation of the faculty
and administrative staff toward the attainment of the goals
and objectives set forth in the recently adopted Strategic
Plan. He noted that the Plan has been made public and is
available for review.
2. The Board will conduct a search for a new president. The
search will be done in accordance with the Governing
Regulations and policies of the University and will be
nationwide in scope.
- 2 -
3. The Board will continue to give full support to the current
athletic policies, including the scholastic programs which
have earned recognition. The Director of Athletics and the
coaches, including those not yet on board, can rely on the
Board's commitment.
D. MeetingiFormat
Mr. Ockerman explained the format for ruling on items to be
presented. He called attention to a motion previously circulated by Mr.
Forgy and stated that he would address Mr. Forgy's motion. He said that
Mr. Forgy's proposed motion raises serious questions and could be the
subject, in his judgment, of litigation. The proposed motion, in his
opinion, would be an amendment to the Governing Regulations relating to
the election of an interim president or the selection of a president or
both. He stated that, because the proposal is an amendment to the
Governing Regulations, it must lay on the table for a period of 30 days.
Further, he said that a motion of this nature is not within the call for
the meeting.
Mr. Ockerman went on to say that Mr. Burnett had requested that he
be recognized for the purpose of making a motion for the Board to convene
in Executive Session. He explained that Mr. Burnett's motion would have
priority over Mr. Forgy's motion. He, therefore, would recognize Mr.
Burnett at the end of his statement.
lie stated that if the Board votes to go into Executive Session, he
would recognize Mr. Forgy for the purpose of making his motion at the
conclusion of that session and before a vote on the report of the
Board-Faculty Committee. He explained that he would then rule on the
motion as previously stated and Mr. Forgy may appeal to the Board from
the ruling, if he desires. He then recognized Mr. Burnett.
E. Motion for Executive Session
Mr. Burnett moved that the Board of Trustees go into Closed
Session to discuss matters which might lead to the appointment of certain
individual employees and for deliberations on the sale of real property.
His motion was seconded by Mr. Sturgill.
Mr. Forgy remarked that the Board was meeting to discuss questions
of public importance, questions that have brought the attention of the
Commonwealth to the Board Room. In his opinion, it would be a serious
mistake on the part of the Board to go into an Executive Session and
conduct the matters behind closed doors. He emphasized that any votes or
positions taken should be taken with the full scrutiny of 3.7 million
people in the Commonwealth who support the institution with their tax
dollars. He, therefore, voted against Mr. Burnett's motion and asked Mr.
Ockerman to instruct the Board as to what exemption the Board would go
into Executive Session under the open meetings law.
- 3 -
Mr. Ockerman stated that the motion related to the discussion of
personnel to be employed by the University. He asked Mr. Darsie to
comment on the appropriateness of the motion.
Mr. Forgy stated that he would like to make a point before Mr.
Darsie spoke. He said that his motion did not relate to the employment
of personnel but to the instruction of a committee appointed by Mr.
Ockerman. In his opinion as an attorney, the motion is not subject to
any exemption under the open meetings law.
Mr. Ockerman informed Mr. Forgy that the Board was not going into
Executive Session to consider his motion. The motion was to go into
Executive Session to consider the election of an interim president. And,
the purpose of going into Executive Session under the motion would be to
discuss the personnel that would be involved in the selection process.
Mr. Forgy asked Mr. Ockerman if he had been instructed by legal
counsel for the institution that any vote could be taken in Executive
Session.
Mr. Ockerman replied, "No, I have not. We do not propose to take
a vote in the Executive Session."
Mr. Forgy asked Mr. Ockerman to indicate the purpose of the
Executive Session.
Mr. Ockerman reiterated that the purpose was to discuss the
personnel that would be considered for interim president.
Mr. Forgy asked, "Why does that have to be done in Executive
Session? Why can that not be done in the open?"
Mr. Ockerman replied, "That will be determined by a majority of
the Board when it votes on the motion."
Mr. Forgy expressed the opinion that a Closed Session would be a
mistake, and said that he hoped the members of the Board would not vote
for the motion.
Mr. Ockerman called for any other comments and then asked Mrs.
Hayes to call the roll. Upon a vote being taken on Mr. Burnett's motion,
the result was as follows:
Mr. Ted B. Bates X
Professor Raymond Betts X
Mr. William Burnett X
Professor Mary Sue Coleman X
Mr. Tracy Farmer X
Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Jr. X
Edythe Jones Hayes X
Honorable Walter D. Huddleston X
Mr. Sean Lohman X
- 4 -
(Vote Continued) Yeas Nays
Mr. Foster Ockerman X
Dr. Nicholas J. Pisacano X
Professor Judith Rhoads X
Mr. Jim Rose X
Honorable Robert F. Stephens X
Mr. Jerome A. Stricker X
Mr. Sturgill stated that he was in favor of the motion, and said
that the Board should sit among themselves to talk about personnel
matters. In his opinion, there can be a better exchange of ideas,
and he has never approved of conducting University business
relating to personnel in a public gathering. Therefore, in
keeping with his beliefs, he voted yea.
Mr. William B. Sturgill X
Honorable Julia K. Tackett X
Mr. Billy B. Wilcoxson X
Mrs. Hayes reported that there was a tie vote.
Mr. Ockerman stated that the motion to go into Closed Session was
defeated because of failure to attain a majority. He then asked for any
other motions in this regard. There being no other motions, he called
upon Mr. Burnett for a report of the Board-Faculty Committee.
F. Motion by Mr. Forgy
Mr. Forgy stated that he had a motion before the Board and
expressed the opinion that his motion did not amend the Governing
Regulations. If it did, it would be a simple matter for the Board by
majority vote to waive the 30-day provision with regard to the Governing
Regulations. He stated that his motion did not speak to the Governing
Regulations or the method of selecting a president. He reviewed his
motion and indicated that his motion should take precedence over the
committee report because it may alter the committee report.
Professor Coleman asked, "May I second the motion of Larry Forgy,
if allowed?"
Mr. Ockerman replied, "Yes, indeed."
Mr. Forgy read his motion: "Resolved, that the Joint
Board-Faculty Committee appointed pursuant to Section III-2 of the
Governing Regulations of the University be instructed that no person be
considered for interim president of the University if that person is or
intends to become a candidate for president of the University of
Kentucky."
- 5 -
G. Mr. Forgy's Motion Ruled Out f Ordgr
Mr. Ockerman said that he would rule that the motion is out of
order for the reasons he had given in his earlier statement.
Mr. Forgy appealed the judgement of the Chair to the full Board.
Mr. Ockerman asked for a second to the motion of appeal.
Professor Coleman seconded the motion.
Mr. Ockerman called for discussion. He stated that the motion of
appeal will be voted on and asked Mrs. Hayes to call the roll.
Mr. Forgy stated that he did not wish to engage in a debate with
the Chairman with regard to the motion but the Chairman had characterized
his motion in ways that he thinks should be clarified. He repeated that
his motion in no way amends the Governing Regulations and in no way will
subject the institution to litigation. He said that his motion was a
very important motion to many people. In his opinion, the Board should
hear the motion and vote on it on its merits, not on the procedural
aspect of whether he can present the motion.
Senator Huddleston remarked that he did not believe any member of
the Board is more sincerely interested in doing what's best for the
University than Larry Forgy. He stated that he had considered very
carefully Mr. Forgy's motion and had read all of the numerous
communications that he had received. He had concluded that there is no
necessity for the Board, at this particular time, to put restrictions on
how the selection of a new president for the University will occur. In
his opinion, many of those who support the motion are supporting it
because of particular personalities that might be involved. He stated
that that was not the case with him. He commented that he had tried to
consider the issue strictly in a neutral fashion: how the Board could
best name the best person to head the University. He stated that is the
Board's obligation and indicated that he had tried to investigate this in
every manner available to him. He concluded that it is not a fact per se
that an individual serving as interim president of the University should
be totally removed from the possibility of being considered as a
president. Everyone would like to have the ideal person with the
scholastic requirements, credentials and ability to run a major
organization. Unfortunately, it is not easy to find all those
qualifications in one person. In his opinion, the search committee ought
to be unfettered by preconceived notions about personalities or
procedure. It ought to be free to conduct an open, national search for
the best person it can find. And, for that reason, he supported the
position of the Chairman. He stated that the Board should not impose
these restrictions.
Mr. Ockerman commented in regard to his technical position as Mr.
Forgy had spent some time discussing and thinking about the proposal. He
indicated that Mr. Forgy had put him in a position of thinking about how
- 6 -
he was going to rule on the proposal. He stated that he had consulted
with Mr. Darsie, Counsel for the University, as to the technical position
that he should take, and Mr. Darsie agrees with his position. He called
on Mr. Darsie for confirmation.
Mr. Darsie stated that he agreed with Mr. Ockerman's position. He
cited Section X of the Governing Regulations which states only one
qualification for any appointment and that is that all appointments
should be made on the basis of merit. It was Mr. Darsie's opinion that
Mr. Forgy's motion would constitute an amendment to the Governing
Regulations.
Mr. Forgy stated that he did not want to place Mr. Darsie on the
spot with regard to the matter, but that he had also discussed the matter
with Mr. Darsie and received a contrary opinion.
Mr. Ockerman replied that Mr. Forgy may not have asked the right
question.
Mr. Forgy stated that following his discussion with Mr. Darsie he
had come to the conclusion that there was no necessity for amending the
Governing Regulations. Therefore, there was no reason to waive the 30
day rule. In his opinion, it is the correct legal interpretation, and he
urged it on the Board.
Mr. Ockerman explained that it is his responsibility to make a
ruling on the technical point. He had utilized his own resources and had
also consulted with Mr. Darsie. He noted that Mr. Darsie concurs with
him. He then asked if there were further questions on the appeal. He
repeated the motion: "The motion is to appeal the ruling of the Chair
which ruled Mr. Forgy's motion out of order." Those desiring to sustain
the ruling of the Chair were to vote yes on the motion and those desiring
to override the ruling of the Chair were to vote no. Upon a vote being
taken on the motion, the result was as follows:
Yeas NAYa
Mr. Ted B. Bates X
Professor Raymond Betts X
Mr. William Burnett X
Governor Albert B. Chandler X
Professor Mary Sue Coleman X
Mr. Tracy Farmer X
Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Jr. X
Edythe Jones Hayes X
Honorable Walter D. Huddleston X
Mr. Sean Lohman X
Mr. Foster Ockerman X
Dr. Nicholas J. Pisacano X
Professor Judith Rhoads X
Mr. Jim Rose X
- 7 -
(Vote Continued) Yeas Nays
Honorable Robert F. Stephens X
Mr. Jerome A. Stricker X
Mr. William B. Sturgill X
Honorable Julia K. Tackett X
Mr. Billy B. Wilcoxson X
Mrs. Hayes reported that the motion carried 10 to 9.
Mr. Ockerman stnted that the ruling of the Chair was sustained.
He asked if it was the desire of the Board to go into Executive Session
or if they desired to hear the report of the Committee in open session.
Mr. Forgy remarked that the Board had already voted on the
Executive Session question.
Mr. Burnett asked for a recount of the vote and moved that the
Board go into Executive Session.
Mr. Forgy pointed out that there had been votes added to the
meeting since the Executive Session motion failed.
Mr. Ockerman stated that he was not trying to shut out anybody and
asked the Committee to give its report in open session.
G. Board-Faculty Committee Recommendationi-
Mr. Burnett reported that the Committee recommends that the
Trustees employ Charles Wethington as interim president.
Professor Coleman asked to hear the minority report from the
Committee.
Professor Rhoads noted that the motion had not been seconded and,
therefore, was not on the floor.
Mr. Stricker seconded the motion.
Mr. Ockerman stated that the motion was now on the floor.
Professor Coleman asked to hear the minority report and the vote
from the Committee.
Mr. Burnett reported the vote was four for Dr. Charles Wethington
and three for Dr. Peter Bosomworth.
Mr. Ockerman asked if anyone else desired to make a comment.
Mr. Lohman asked, "Why was there not a student representative on
the Committee to recommend an interim president?"
- 8 -
Mr. Ockerman stated that the regulations provide for
representatives of the faculty and representatives of the Board. The
regulations do not provide for a student representative on this
particular committee. He stated that he followed the Governing
Regulations in making the appointments.
Mr. Darsie explained that the Board-Faculty Committee is unlike
the Search Committee for a President, and there is not a provision for a
student on the Committee.
Mr. Wilcoxson moved that the Board accept Dr. Wethington by
acclamation and Mr. Farmer seconded the motion.
H. Comments from Dr. Roselle
Dr. Roselle asked to address the Board so he could depart the
meeting. He indicated that he had talked to most of the members
individually and thanked them for their support during the last 2.5
years. He expressed appreciation to the members and stated that hle was
proud of some of the initiatives they took together. He stated that one
leaves an institution with some regret and his major regret is the
inability to provide appropriate recognition for the members of the
faculty and staff in the form of salaries and in the form of making the
University the kind of institution that makes it easy for them to
accomplish their scholarship and their educational programming.
He reminded the Board that the search for the president is serious
and important work. He said that he hoped they did it well because the
University deserves that. He said, "none of that's as important as is
the question of who the faculty and the staff of the institution are
going to be." He stated that he hoped the Board would look towards those
people to be a part of the solution to any difficulties incurred budget
wise or administrative wise. In conclusion, those people are the heart
and soul of the institution. He also expressed hope that the Board would
treat those people in an encouraging and caring manner and support the
enterprise in which they are so very important.
Mr. Ockerman stated that Dr. Roselle has a fine record of
accomplishment at the University, and that the Board thanks him. The
University and the Commonwealth are better off for his having been here,
and the Board regrets his leaving. He recognized the contribution of
Mrs. Roselle and remarked that Mrs. Roselle has been very interested and
active in a vivacious, spirited manner in the affairs of the University
and the community. He stated that Dr. and Mrs. Roselle would be missed.
I. Recommendation Returned to Floor
Mr. Ockerman continued with the motion on the floor to make the
election of Dr. Wethington unanimous.
- 9 -
J. Nomination by Mr. Forgy
Mr. Forgy rose for the purpose of a nomination. He stated that
this was not personal to him and had nothing to do with any individual.
The individual in question has been a friend of his for 22 years. He
remarked that his motion was defeated, and it is time for the Board to
vote on the question in a direct sense. If the interim president of the
institution is also a candidate for the president, it will be impossible
to conduct a competitive. open, unbiased, national search for the next
president of the University of Kentucky. If the Board does not install,
as interim president of this institution, an individual who is not a
candidate for the job, several symbolisms will attach to the action
whether they are true or not.
Mr. Forgy said, "The first will be that everyone will think the
whole selection process is cut and dried and that the interim president
has the inside track and no one else need apply. The higher education
community in this country is a close-knit fraternity. Word will go out
in that fraternity that anyone who becomes a candidate in our search is
wasting his or her time."
He continued, "The second symbol, members of the Board, that we
will erect is that after almost 40 years of slow progress in extracting
the University of Kentucky from the political process she is right back
in it. This Board well knows the political winds of this Commonwealth
always blow briskly, and, at times like today, they blow at gale force.
But, there is another certainty about those winds. They change direction
abruptly. The prevailing wind of today may only be a memory tomorrow.
Thus, the decision has been wisely made years ago by our predecessors on
this Board, and by the leadership of this state, that the state
university, the flagship institution of this state, must stay above tb-
fray to grow and prosper. We must preserve that independence, Mr.
Chairman, or do irreparable injury to this institution."
He said, "The third perception we will build, if the interim
president is also a candidate for the permanent job, is that that
individual, whoever it might be, did not attain the exalted office of
president on the merits alone but also on politics. The history of this
institution proves that those who live by that sword also die by it.
This University has had only nine presidents in its almost 150 year
history. It is a good job, a respected job, and an important job for
Kentucky. It must be held by a person who has come through a
foreordained competitive process that was fair and open. That can only
occur, Mr. Chairman, if all candidates have had an equal place at the
starting line. If the process is damaged, then the individual it
produces is also damaged."
In concluding, he said, "A final symbolism we will create if we do
not proceed in the manner that my nomination suggests is that this Board
holds a callus view toward the opinion of its faculty. A University, Mr.
Chairman, is not bricks and mortar. It is an aggregation of scholars
- 10 -
teaching bright, young minds. The young minds will be here. They will
continue to be here. They are our children. But, the scholars come or
stay here because they so desire. And, one of the greatest problems any
University has is to recruit and retain qualified faculty. This Board
simply must not appear disdainful of its faculty's views. While this
Board holds the untimate sovereignty of the institution and must make a
decision, it must not turn a deaf ear to those who are concerned and who
are with the students, the essence of the institution. This Board is
superfluous to the educational process except for the direction it
provides. All the faculty request here, all the minority report of the
interim committee request here is an open, unbiased, competitive,
national search. No backroom deals."
Mr. Ockerman interrupted by saying, "Which I have committed this
Board to and which we will have, Mr. Forgy."
Mr. Forgy remarked that for the reasons he had stated, he would
like to place in nomination the individual who finished second in the
interim selection committee process, Dr. Peter P. Bosomworth. He stated
that he had known Dr. Bosomworth for 25 years. He noted that Dr.
Bosomworth has been the Chancellor of the University of Kentucky Medical
Center for almost 20 years. He is a man of unusual intelligence,
character and rectitude. As head of the Albert B. Chandler Medical
Center, he has coped with a job that borders on the job as president of
the University of Kentucky. In his opinion, he could conduct the
business of the University in an effective way during the interim period
and would not be a candidate for the permanent position. He commented
that it was with great pride and a sense of honor that he suggest Dr.
Bosomworth's 20 years of service be rewarded by appointing him interim
president.
Mrs. Hayes stated that she serves on another university Board, and
she assured the members that the selection of a person as interim
president had not affected the national search for a president of that
university. She noted that it depends on how professional one is and how
the Board decides to treat the matter.
Mr. Stricker stated that he appreciated everyone's comments and
that he understood both sides of the argument. The most important issue
as a Trustee is to select a president of the University. He indicated
that he had discussed Mr. Forgy's position with many friends and alumni
of the University and everyone had expressed to him that no one should be
excluded from the process in electing a new president. In his opinion,
the University's future is now and not two years from now when the next
legislature meets. The University needs the best possible interim
president to help achieve the maximum funding in 1990 from the
legislature and to lead the University in the 1990's. In order to
attract and keep good faculty, the University needs higher salaries. It
needs an interim president who can help achieve this. He stated that it
is wrong to exclude the interim president from being a candidate for the
president. He concluded that the University needs the best person to
become interim president and the best person to be president. Both
processes should not exclude anyone.
- 11 -
K. Main Motion Returned to the Floor
Mr. Ockerman reminded Mr. Forgy that there was a main motion on
the floor which had been seconded. The motion was made before Mr. Forgy
made his nomination; therefore, Mr. Forgy's nomination is out of order
until the main motion is resolved.
Mr. Ockerman called on Mr. Darsie for a ruling on the vote
necessary to adopt Mr. Wilcoxson's motion. Mr. Darsie ruled that the
vote would have to be unanimous for Mr. lqilcoxson's motion to carry. Mr.
Ockerman said, "Is it the will of this body that the election of Dr.
Wethington be by acclamation?
After a vote was taken, Mr. Ockerman reported that the vote was
not unanimous; therefore, the motion died. He then went back to the
motion of Mr. Burnett which was a main motion, and had been seconded, to
elect Dr. Wethington as interim president.
Mr. Forgy interrupted and asked, "...does the Chair intend not to
consider my nomination?"
Mr. Ockerman stated that the main motion of Mr. Burnett was to
elect Dr. Wethington as the interim president. The motion had been
seconded, and it would close out the nominations.
Mr. Darsie agreed that according to Robert's Rules of order, Mr.
Burnett's motion constitutes a main motion, and it should be voted up or
down before other main motions are considered by the body.
Upon a vote being taken on the motion to elect Dr. Wethington as
the interim president, the result was as follows:
Yeas NU.
Mr. Ted B. Bates X
Professor Raymond Betts X
Mr. William Burnett X
Governor Albert B. Chandler X
Professor Mary Sue Coleman X
Mr. Tracy Farmer X
Mr. Lawrence E. Forgy, Jr. X
Edythe Jones Hayes X
Honorable Walter D. Huddleston X
Mr. Sean Lohman X
Mr. Foster Ockerman, Sr. X
Dr. Nicholas J. Pisacano X
Professor Judith Rhoads X
Mr. James L. Rose X
Chief Justice Stephens stated that he supported Mr. Forgy's
motion. Hle commented that it was obvious that the votes were
there for Dr. Wethington. He stated that he preferred the interim
president not be a candidate for the office. However, Dr.
Wethington is an excellent choice, and he believes that it is
important that the Board give its support to Dr. Wethington.
- 12 -
(Vote Continued) Ieas NUys
Honorable Robert F. Stephens X
Mr. Jerome A. Stricker X
Mr. Sturgill stated that the next 60 to 120 days are crucial to
the affairs of the institution, and he expressed great concern
that the University send the proper signals by saying the
University must have a free, open and honest search. He stated
that he had discussed the issue in some detail with Mr. Ockerman
and Dr. Wethington. He reminded the Board that the University
only receives 38 cents of its budget dollar out of the General
Fund. Therefore, it must look to the private sector, to the
foundations, and developments, both state and federal, for dollars
to carry on research and studies that the institution needs to
make up the other 62 cents. He reported that beginning January 1,
199U, he would be chairman of the University's Development Council
to oversee the fundraising efforts which last year totalled more
than $22 million. He expressed hope that the Board would
recognize the importance of that and send the proper kind of
signals from the meeting - signals that the Board is concerned
about the institution and that it is going to put aside any
personal agendas that any of the members may have. He stated that
he has never marched to the beat of the faculty or student drum,
but he is very sensitive to their causes. He encouraged the Board
to realize that it must unite for the future of the University.
It must send the proper signals, that it has confidence in Dr.
Wethington and that each of the members know that he must play a
vital role in the next several months or even years of this
institution. He expressed hope that the Board would support Dr.
Wethington as the interim president of the University and send the
message that the Board will conduct and have a free and open
search for the most competent person to head the institution.
With that, lie voted yes.
Mr. William Sturgill X
Judge Tackett stated that this has been a very difficult decision
for her - mostly because of the pain that she felt about Dr.
Roselle's leaving the University. She felt there was pain and
also anger about the situation. She stated that Kentuckians
sometimes put themselves down and act like there is no one within
the border who can run the ship. In her opinion, Dr. Wethington
can run the University. He is the strongest leader that the
University has at this time. She did, however, express concern
that it would not be an open, national search, and toward that end
she asked Mr. Ockerman to appoint a search committee that had both
segments of the Board included in equal numbers. The University
needs a very strong president that can talk about handling
problems of the Commonw