xt79p843rg46 https://nyx.uky.edu/dips/xt79p843rg46/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 19810923 minutes English University of Kentucky This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed.  Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically.  Physical rights are retained by the owning repository.  Copyright is retained in accordance with U. S. copyright laws.  For information about permissions to reproduce or publish, contact the Special Collections Research Center. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1981-09-oct23-ec. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1981-09-oct23-ec. 1981 2011 true xt79p843rg46 section xt79p843rg46 









    Minutes of the Special Called Meeting of the Executive
Committee of the Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky,
Friday, October 23, 1981.



    The Executive Committee of 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 1 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time) on Friday,
October 23, 1981.

    A.   Meeting Opened and Acting Secretary Appointed

    Mr. William B. Sturgill, Chairman, called the meeting to order
at 1:20 p.m., and the invocation was pronounced by Mr. Clay.     The
Chairman, in the absence of the Secretary, Mrs. Betty Pace Clark,
appointed Mr. Homer W. Ramsey as Acting Secretary of the Executive
Committee of the Board of Trustees.

    B.   Roll Call

    The following members of the Executive Committee answered the
call of the roll: Mr. William B. Sturgill, Mr. William R. Black,
Governor Edward T. Breathitt, Mr. Albert G. Clay, and Mr. Homer W.
Ramsey. Members of the Board of Trustees attending the meeting
were Mr. Britt Brockman, Governor Albert Benjamin Chandler, Mrs.
Sally Hermansdorfer, Mr. W. Terry McBrayer, Professor William F.
Wagner,   and  Professor  Constance  P.  Wilson.    The  university
administration was represented by President Otis A. Singletary;
Vice Presidents Jack C. Blanton, Peter P. Bosomworth, Donald B.
Clapp, Art Gallaher, Raymond R. Hornback, John T. Smith, Charles
T. Wethington, and Robert G. Zumwinkle; Dr. Wimberly C. Royster,
Dean of the Graduate School and Coordinator of Research; and Mr.
John  C.  Darsie,  General  Counsel.   Members of the various news
media were also in attendance. The Secretary reported all members
of the Executive Committee present and the Chairman declared the
meeting officially open at 1:22 p.m.

    The Chairman said that in keeping with Dr. Singletary's long-
standing policy of wanting the Trustees fully advised of all
developments at the University, President Singletary had asked him
to call a special meeting. Mr. Sturgill added that the meeting
would not be an action session but would be an information session
on some actions that Dr. Singletary, as President, had taken. He
then recognized President Singletary.

    President Singletary thanked the members for their attendance
and reiterated that the meeting was rot an action session but an
information   session.     He  stated  that   three  separate  items
concerning the Tobacco and Health Research Institute would be
reviewed:   (1)  a  personnel action, (2) a proposal to strengthen
and improve the Institute, and (3) a status report by Acting
Director Layten Davis on the current operation of the Institute.




 






-2-



    President Single.tary announced that he had relieved Dr. Gary
Huber of his administrative duties as Director of the Tobacco and
Health Research Institute. He then read a copy of a letter which
he had delivered to Dr. Huber:

     October 22, 1981

     Dr. Gary L. Huber
     Department of Medicine
     MN-670 Medical Center
     Campus 00847

     Dear Dr. Huber:

         On April 7, 1981, you were temporarily reassigned
     from your administrative duties as Director of the
     Tobacco and Health Research Institute and placed on
     full-time duty in the College of Medicine, where you
     hold a tenured professorship. At that time, I asked Dr.
     Layten Davis   to  serve as Acting Director     of   the
     Institute, which he agreed to do. Since then, I have
     taken no further action with respect to the directorship
     of   the   Institute   pending   a   resolution  of the
     investigation conducted by the Commonwealth Attorney.   I
     have now been informed by that official of his decision
     not to seek an indictment in the case. -

         Upon receipt of that information, I immediately
     asked Dr. Wimberly Royster, Dean of the Graduate School
     and   Coordinator   of   Research,   to   give   me  his
     recommendation as  to  the  directorship.   I have now
     received   a   formal   statement   from   Dean  Royster
     recommending that you not be restored to the position of
     Director of the Institute. After careful consideration,
     I have decided to accept Dean Royster's recommendation.
     This letter is to formally notify you of your removal as
     Director of the Tobacco and Health Research Institute,
     effective immediately, and your permanent assignment to
     full-time service in the Department   of Medicine.    As
     indicated to you in an earlier conversation, this action
     is based upon our perception of what is in the best
     interests   of   the   Institute   and   upon  your  own
     unsatisfactory administrative performance. This action
     in no way affects you position as a tenured professor in
     the College of Medicine.

          I am given to understand that your counsel, Mr.
      Charles Calk, is in agreement with Mr. Darsie and that
      an   appeal   of  this decision   via  the  University's
      grievance process would, in the circumstances of your
      case, be of little utility. In any event you may, if
      you wish, appeal my decision directly to the Hearing
      Committee of the Board of Trustees of the University.
      Mr. Darsie informs me that he has furnished Mr. Calk
      with   a   copy   of  the  document  setting  forth  the




 






-3-



    Committee's responsibilities. Please advise me within
    twenty (20) days of your intentions with respect to an
    appeal.

         In accord with your statements to me, it is my
    understanding that you are prepared to make restitution
    as to amounts of money which are rightfully due the
    University. This will, I assume, occur as soon as
    details    are   negotiated    by   your   attorney    and
    representatives of the University's business and legal
    offices.


    Sincerely,

    /sIO. A. Singletary

    Otis A. Singletary
    President

    President Singletary reminded the Trustees that when he first
addressed this matter three separate concerns about Dr. Huber's
performance were identified: scientific judgment and standards,
possible  violations   of  law,  and   administrative   competence.
President Singletary stressed that the action to remove Dr. Huber
as Direttor of the Institute was based not on Dr. Huber's role as
a scientist nor on any of the alleged problems that were of a
legal nature, but on the unsatisfactory administrative performance
of Dr. Huber and on what he, President Singletary, was convinced
is in the best interests of the Institute. He stated emphatically
that the scientific reputation of Dr. Huber was not at issue.
Further, with regard to possible violations of law, word was
received from the Commonwealth Attorney, the civil authority with
jurisdiction, of the decision not to proceed further with an
investigation of possible violation of law, and the University
accepts that decision of   the  Commonwealth  Attorney.   President
Singletary added that with this personnel action involving both
the solution of the problem of the administrative role and a
statement of intent to make restitution for the dollars in
question the University's interests have been served and no
further action is indicated.

    President Singletary next discussed the report of the ad hoc
committee of scientists appointed to advise him on the scientific
aspects of the research program. Because the committee's report
was important in the formulation of his own thinking on this
matter, President Singletary reviewed the report at some length,
and he announced that copies of the report would be available to
the news media. He stated that he agrees with much in the report.

    President   Singletary    said   he   asked  the  committee   for
scientific evalution in three areas: (1) the past accomplishments
of the program, (2) the general thrust of the program as now
envisioned, and (3) two specific allegations about Dr. Huber. The
committee not only responded to the three requests, but also




 






-4-



provided unsolicited comments on problems  of management   and  on
some  of  the  individuals  involved.   President  Singletary then
referred to a remark in the introductory comments    of  the  report
which  stated  that "...the intertwining of problems of management
and personalities with the paramount issues of science frequently
diverted   the   attention  of  the   committee  from  its  primary
objective. .'.  He said he  wanted  to make    it  clear  that  the
committee  was  brought  in to advise on scientific matters and he
believes their expertise is  essentially   scientific  rather  than
managerial.

    In  its  introductory  statement the committee recognized that
the Institute "offers unique opportunities   for  furthering man's
knowledge on this important and timely issue," that an excellent
facility has been constructed, and that the Institute's   proximity
to  the  faculty  and  facilities  of the   University   offers the
potential for an excellent and needed scientific environment. The
committee also noted the availability of approximately $3.5
million per year as a solid funding base for the Institute.

    The  committee  described  the   past  accomplishments  of  the
program as disappointing and undistinguished, though this general
criticism is not to be interpreted to mean that all research has
been of mediocre or poor quality.    Factors  contributing  to  the
situation included lack of peer review, lack of continuity of
funding, failure of the University to fulfill its responsibility
of oversight, lack of communication, and lack of direction.

    President  Singletary  said  he   found "very little to quarrel
with" in this analysis, but he disagreed with the committee's
contention that the University had failed to provide the Institute
with managerial oversight. He stressed that the University of
Kentucky has many research institutes and that it hires directors
whose responsibilities are to run them properly. He said he does
not accept any interpretation that the central administration of
the University is, or   should  be,   involved  in  the  day-to-day
activities of the institutes.

    The  committee  expressed   its  endorsement  of  the  research
program proposed by Dr. Huber, but noted that the proposed program
thrust  is  not  exclusive  and   a number   of  equally acceptable
alternatives exist. President Singletary emphasized that nothing
in  the  committee's  report suggests the thrust of the program is
anything except scientifically valid and acceptable.

    President  Singletary  then discussed two specific allegations
which  he  had  requested   the  committee  to  investigate:     (1)
irregularities  in the exposure of experimental rats to smoke, and
(2) data changes. The committee's report exonerated Dr. Huber of
any  wrongdoing  in  these  two   incidents, and suggested that the
allegatiorns  were  inappropriate  and  perhaps   even   malicious.
President Singletary stated that the University administration did
not believe that there was anything to the allegations but did not
feel  they  could  be  ignored.    He  further stated that upon the




 






-5-



advice of Legal Counsel, John Darsie, the investigation of these
two allegations was made a part of the charge to the committee.

    The ad hoc committee of scientists recommended the following:
(1) that the Tobacco and Health Research Institute be maintained
and supported, (2) that a campaign be undertaken to provide the
public with a better understanding of the Institute's missions and
goals, (3) that a mechanism of external evaluation be established
to assess the scientific research supported by the Institute, (4)
that continued support from the University include the appointment
of tenure track faculty and the provision of a middle-management
administrative position to help with the day-to-day operation of
the Institute, and (5) that the Institute's focus remain on a
narrow and clearly defined path, similar to that initiated by Dr.
Huber.

    President Singletary said he is in agreement with all of the
committee's  recommendations   except   the   one   dealing   with
appointment of tenure track faculty which he does not feel the
University can afford to fund.

    The committee concluded its report by stating that the Tobacco
and Health Research Institute is a valuable asset for the
University, and that it is to the advantage of both the University
and the Institute for close ties to continue.

    President Singletary then turned to his own analysis of the
situation. He emphasized that he believes the Tobacco and Health
Research Institute is a solid, substantial program with a good
foundation. He said that the University needs to continue its
support for the Institute and that he would like for it to become
a center  of  excellence.   He  then  listed  five  administrative
actions which are being taken in order to strengthen and improve
the Institute:

     1.  The conduct of a search for a Director of the Institute.

     2.  The  creation  of a scientific advisory board to provide
            oversight and set policies under which the Institute
            will operate.

     3.   The  strengthening  of  the  mechanism  for outside peer
            review of all projects (already implemented).

     4.   The  establishment of the position of Associate Director
            for Administration (already implemented).

     5. The inauguration of a program of public awareness for the
            Institute.

    President Singletary called on Dr. Layten Davis for a brief
status report. Dr. Davis, who has served as Acting Director of
the Institute since April, reported on the daily operation of the
Institute, on present administrative procedures, and on the status
of the research program.




 







-6-



    President   Singletary   recognized   Mr. Joe Burch, Acting
Associate Director for Administration at the Institute, and
praised both Dr. Davis and Mr. Burch for the leadership they are
rendering to the Institute.

    The Chairman thanked President Singletary for his report on
the Tobacco and Health Research Institute. He also thanked the
Board members for their attendance.

    There being no further business to come before the meeting,
the Chairman declared the meeting officially adjourned at 2:15
p.m.

                                      Respectfully submitted,




                                      Homer W. Ramsey
                                      Acting Secretary
                                      Executive Committee
                                      Board of Trustees