What’s next for Auburn? (1/17/04)
(This story ran as a sidebar in a package about the resignation of Auburn University’s president.)
Jack Stripling and Jason Nix
Staff Writers
A name for Auburn University President William Walker’s replacement was circulating
hours before his resignation Friday. Ed Richardson, former Auburn City Schools Superintendent
and current Alabama State Superintendent of Education could be recommended to serve as AU’s
interim president.
Trustee Jimmy Rane said Friday night that the board would meet Tuesday at 2 p.m. and
Gov. Bob Riley had a choice in mind that he would present to the board. That choice, according to
several sources, is Richardson, who is currently an AU trustee by virtue of his position as state
superintendent.
“It’s been out there and it may have been attributed to me, but that should come directly
from the governor,” Rane said. “He’s got a man in mind and I’m sure all that will be confirmed
when we meet Tuesday.”
Richardson, who earned his bachelor’s, master’s and doctorate degrees from AU, isn’t
handling the present duties of governing the university. That job is in the hands of Donald Large,
AU’s executive vice president.
“The process of finding a replacement will begin immediately,” Gov. Bob Riley said in
statement.
Former AU Trustee Charles Glover said in the last years of his tenure he saw a move by
powerful forces on the board to push Richardson into the top spot.
“It’s just what’s happening in the background,” he said.
Andy Hornsby, vice president of AU’s alumni association, said the organization would look
forward to working with Richardson. His sentiments, however, weren’t shared by an AU senator.
“It’s worrisome about what will happen next,” Judy Sheppard said. “This interim president
is very problematic. I’m not sure what Dr. Richardson’s qualifications are.”
Richardson could not be reached for comment.
John Mouton, chairman of the AU Senate, said he hopes the faculty will be involved in the
selection of the interim president. Walker began as an “interim” president, and gave himself a termlimit of three years. The word “interim” was, however, removed from his title by the board of
trustees despite strong AU Senate opposition.
AU Associate Professor Conner Bailey said the university now has the opportunity to hire a
president who can better lead the school through its probationary period with its accrediting agency.
The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools placed AU on probation Dec. 9.
“I hope the board will appoint an interim president with a strong academic background, a
person beyond reproach,” he said. “I believe a person like Wayne Flynt, Taylor Littleton, Steve
McFarland or Larry Gerber would send a message to SACS that the university is serious about
fixing its problems. A person of that stature would serve well in getting the university past the
problems posed by this probation.”
Bailey questioned what he called Walker’s “aggressive stance” toward SACS as well as the
AU faculty. “Walker’s approach to SACS was pugnacious in nature. We need a leader that will
work with SACS to deal with the problems that led to the university’s being placed on probation.
We need someone who understands that the governing of the university is a matter of comanagement between the administrative staff and the faculty.
“(Former AU President William) Muse had a kind of respect for the faculty. Not to say
Walker did not, but I felt that Muse listened to what the faculty had to say and took it into
consideration. He didn’t always agree, but he listened.”
Bailey took particular exception to comments Walker made to an AU senator at a Dec. 11
meeting. “Candor in a president is a good thing, but when you have the president of the university
comparing the faculty to a lynch mob, that shows a disrespect. It’s an embarrassment. At this point,
Walker was the wrong type of personality to help us negotiate out problem with SACS.”
Three trustees jetted 100 miles at AU expense (1/21/04)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
Rather than make the two-hour drive, three Auburn University trustees were flown from
Birmingham to Auburn at the university’s expense Tuesday.
Paul Spina, John Blackwell and Byron Franklin were flown to Auburn to ensure they could
attend an important trustee meeting, AU Board Secretary Grant Davis said.
“It was critical that we have them here,” Davis said.
The trustees made it to the meeting and approved Ed Richardson’s appointment as interim
AU president. None of the trustees expressed that they would be unable to attend the meeting
barring air travel, Davis said. Davis could not confirm the cost of the trip, nor could the office of
communications and marketing as of late Tuesday.
“I know we needed to be here in a hurry, but I do have a job and I have to get back,”
Franklin said.
When asked if he thought the venture was an extravagance, Franklin said “I don’t know. I
do have to go back to work today. It’s something I need to do.”
Davis confirmed that AU Trustee Golda McDaniel was also flown in from Columbus, Miss.
According to Mapquest.com, the distance from Auburn to Birmingham is 109.65 miles.
Five more get axe at Auburn (8/25/04)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
A painful promise was kept at Auburn University Tuesday, when five AU employees lost
their jobs in what’s been billed as a cost-saving measure.
AU Interim President Ed Richardson called upon administrators last month to recommend
cuts in their departments, and those suggestions spelled troubling news for a handful on the Plains.
Bob Lowry, editor in AU’s office of Communications and Marketing, was among those told
their positions would be eliminated. He saw the handwriting on the wall months ago. Since
Richardson fired Betty DeMent as vice president of alumni affairs in March, Richardson has
proclaimed his ongoing string of firings was far from over.
“Absolutely, (it’s) created a culture of fear,” Lowry said. “This supposedly is about
reorganization and budgetary problems, but where’s the hiring freezes? Raises will be given this
year. There are no restrictions on travel ... The education budget is going to be increased.”
Lowry, who’s been with AU for 14 years, charges there may be something more nefarious at
play than an administrative shuffle. Richardson has stated the need to cut fat at AU while bringing
on a new construction consultant, a new attorney and a new firm to conduct polling for the
university. The mixed signals have Lowry convinced these firings are more about old scores than
fiscal prudence.
“I think there’s people being targeted,” Lowry said. “You can start with Betty DeMent and
go down the list.”
The list contains 14 people who’ve shifted to lower-paying positions or were let go under
Richardson. Among them is Janet Saunders, executive director of affirmative action. Saunders was
notified Monday that her position would be eliminated in conjunction with large-scale changes in
AU’s administrative structure. Her firing was immediately met with boisterous resistance from
some faculty.
Willie Larkin, AU’s first-ever black Senate chair, said Saunders’ firing is part of a series of
“boneheaded” decisions made on Richardson’s watch. In an e-mail to fellow faculty, Larkin
questioned Richardson’s sensitivity to minorities like Saunders and called on others to express their
dissatisfaction.
“This decision outrages me because it demonstrates an unhealthy pattern of total disregard
for women and ethnic minorities within the university’s central administration,” Larkin wrote.
Six female administrators have been removed from high-level positions at AU since
Richardson took the helm in late January.
“I think it’s adding up to a return to the old boys club,” said Mary Kuntz, director of
women’s studies at AU.
More men than women have actually been removed from positions under Richardson, but
his core group of six advisers as well as his two most recent hires have all been men.
“The effect is that the decisions are again being made almost exclusively by white males,”
Kuntz said.
Frances Kochan, interim dean of the College of Education, has also been asked to step down
from her post. She vied for the permanent dean’s position but wasn’t selected, and a new rule
requires that interim deans serve no more than one year.
“I’ve had a wonderful time and we’ve done so many good things together in the college,”
Kochan said. “It’s been a great experience for me.”
Under a policy crafted by Provost Tom Hanley, interim deans will no longer be permitted to
pursue permanent positions. Kochan and then-interim business dean John Jahera, however, were
grandfathered in since they applied for permanent positions prior to the policy’s implementation.
Neither were given these jobs, but Hanley said there was no predisposition to reject interim deans
out of hand.
“That’s not true at all,” he said. “I think we’re looking for the best person for the job.”
As any organization would, AU faces the possibility of wrongful termination suits or other
litigation in the wake of these personnel shifts. DeMent has consulted an attorney and Richardson
recently told the Opelika-Auburn News the two parties are working to see if an agreement can be
reached without litigation.
Other potential legal issues appear to be surfacing as well. Lowry has consulted an attorney
and indicated that he felt he was a victim of age discrimination. Lowry said he expressed these
concerns to his boss, John Hachtel.
“I asked why my job was eliminated when we just hired a new editor half my age two
months ago, and Mr. Hachtel would not answer my question,” said Lowry, 58. “He got up and left
the room.”
AU did hire a new associate editor recently who is some 30 years younger than Lowry and
makes $42,000 less than he did as editor. AU officials say she was hired to assist upper-level staff
like Lowry, not to replace him.
As Richardson’s focus moves from athletics and alumni to administration and faculty, he’ll
no doubt inherit a new chorus of critics. Thus far, faculty have generally expressed support for his
efforts to move AU off academic probation. These latest moves, however, may have tapped a nerve
among AU academics who’ve seldom been shrinking violets in the face of controversy.
Larkin offered this foreboding message Tuesday evening: “I think the honeymoon is over.”
THE BOX BELOW RAN WITH THIS STORY:
The Gender Question
As more and more administrators, coaches and Auburn University employees are fired and
positions are eliminated, some at the university are seeing what they call a troubling trend. Critics
charge that AU Interim President Ed Richardson hasn’t made efforts to keep women in high-profile
positions. Here’s a breakdown of AU staff who’ve been removed or transferred to lower-level
positions under Richardson:
WOMEN:
1. Betty DeMent, vice president of alumni affairs, fired
2. Christine Curtis, Richardson’s special assistant, resigns under pressure and takes 20 percent pay
cut
3. Rebekah Pindzola, interim dean of liberal arts, told to resign under provost’s new interim dean
policy*
4. Frances Kochan, interim dean of College of Education, told to resign under provost’s new
interim dean policy*
5. Janet Saunders, executive director of affirmative action, told her position is eliminated**
6. Elizabeth Peel, director of alumni programs and services, told her position is eliminated. She’s
been offered another position which pays 23 percent or nearly $16,000 less than her $69,600
salary.**
MEN:
1. David Housel, under public pressure announces he’ll retire as athletics director
2. Cliff Ellis fired as head basketball coach
3. Steve Renfroe fired as head baseball coach
4. Pete Pepinksy told his position in Communications and Marketing will be eliminated Oct. 1
5. Buddy Mitchell, removed from position as executive director of governmental affairs and told
he’ll be fired at year’s end
6. Bob Lowry, told his position as editor in Communications and Marketing will be eliminated**
7. Tim Meeks, told his position as manager of development programs will be eliminated**
8. Dan Rosenthal, associate director of planning and analysis, told his position will be eliminated**
*AU Provost Tom Hanley instituted a policy that requires interim deans to step down after a year.
**Positions eliminated this week.
SACS concerned about AU diversity (9/24/04)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
Widespread complaints of unfair and perhaps discriminatory hiring practices are mentioned
at some length in a report issued by Auburn University’s accrediting agency. But the university only
made the charges public after six months.
AU officials say it was their “interpretation” that SACS’ permission was required before the
report was released. Such permission is not required in SACS’ view, and AU only sought
permission three days ago.
“It’s their call,” said James Rogers, executive director of SACS. “I didn’t make the decision
one way or the other (about releasing it) ... I just assumed they’d already released it.”
SACS’ report details concerns made by three “highly credible” professional-level staff who
allege managers fill positions with “friends and fellow church members” to the exclusion of blacks
and other non-white groups. The report also mentions complaints the SACS team heard
“constantly” regarding AU’s tendency to promote interim staff into permanent posts. AU has since
instituted a policy forbidding interim deans from seeking permanent positions, but the university
never mentioned the SACS report when the Opelika-Auburn News first reported on the change.
“Allegations of favoritism or cronyism ultimately undermine the collegiality and shared
governance that characterize successful universities in the United States,” the report states.
The SACS report does not comment on the five criteria for which AU was placed on
probation in December. A separate team will investigate this matter during a visit next week. The
combination of the visiting team’s findings and those of the team that issued the late March report
will ultimately determine the fate of AU’s accreditation. The SACS report praises AU’s
cooperation, but raises concern that AU’s self-assessment was “all but silent” with regard to its
diversity commitment.
AU’s omission of diversity efforts is not a surprise to Janet Saunders, who was recently
fired as head of the office of affirmative action.
“That’s a philosophy of the administration,” Saunders said. “If we don’t write about it and
we don’t talk about it, we don’t have to defend it.”
A number of faculty have expressed dissatisfaction with Saunders’ ouster as well as the
decision to place the office of affirmative action under the umbrella of the department of human
resources. Senate Chairman Willie Larkin said it was tantamount to “the fox guarding the hen
house.”
In a letter dated July 30, Saunders informed Interim President Ed Richardson that the shift
of the office into human resources “creates a potential conflict of interest,” rather than eliminating
such conflicts. The office of affirmative action is effectively now under the control of the very
department it should be monitoring, Saunders contends.
SACS’ report, while raising concern, ultimately gives the university the benefit of the doubt.
“Because the Interim President has been clear and unhesitating in his commitment to address these
issues (and indeed had no role in the writing of the silent self study), we take his words of
commitment at face value,” the report states. “It is entirely conceivable that the omissions noted
above are accidental ...”
The omissions are not accidental in Saunders’ view. She asserts that the concerns SACS
cites, such as promoting white individuals over blacks with the same qualifications, are ongoing at
AU. “We’ve got some die-hard folks who are not willing to work with people of color,” Saunders
said.
To remain in good standing with SACS, the university is more or less obligated to take
action with regard to recommendations made by the accrediting body. SACS had just two
recommendations. It recommended a policy that would describe what constitutes a student’s
permanent record. SACS also recommended the university develop a process by which it can
regularly evaluate its consortial agreement for the Marine Environment Sciences Consortium. AU
addressed both recommendations in its July response.
SACS: Miller, Lowder ties a problem (11/13/04)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
Auburn University’s long nightmare may be far from over.
A multimillion dollar financial relationship between trustees Jack Miller and Robert Lowder
was cited as a potential violation of the university’s Code of Ethics in a report issued by the
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools - an agency that could pull AU’s accreditation in
December.
The report marks SACS’ first overt echoing of a commonly held belief on the Plains:
Lowder’s business ties are a problem. The Opelika-Auburn News reported Thursday that Miller and
his law firm did nearly $3 million in business with Lowder in 2003 alone.
“The relationships between Trustees Lowder and Miller appear to violate the Board Code of
Ethics,” a Special Committee from SACS stated.
AU revised its Code of Ethics this year in an effort to show SACS it was guarding against a
minority of board members controlling the majority of the board. The code states that trustees must
make the betterment of AU their sole concern. Complaints have often surfaced that those dependent
on Lowder for income have allegiance to Lowder – not AU.
AU Interim President Ed Richardson, who has publicly said the university was in good stead
with SACS, said he was surprised and frustrated by the committee’s findings. Richardson and AU’s
newly established auditing committee both concluded Lowder couldn’t have control over a majority
of board members since he reported to have ties to just six of the 14.
“The standard clearly says ‘does the minority influence the majority?’ It doesn’t say does
one person have a relationship with somebody else,” Richardson said. “So they’ve exceeded their
standards in that regard.”
Whether SACS went beyond its published standard may be a moot point. A committee will
review the SACS report in Atlanta next month and use it to decide whether AU should be removed
from probation, continued on probation or lose its accreditation.
To comply with SACS’ recommendations regarding financial ties, the board authorized
Richardson to hire an independent firm to determine if the trustees’ relationships meet the Code of
Ethics standard. Richardson, however, said he wasn’t optimistic a review could be completed
before SACS makes its decision Dec. 7. He also said he was somewhat in the dark as to what more
could be done.
“No current standards or guidelines exist for such a review,” he said. “That puts us at a very
distinct disadvantage in terms of a target.”
One option that isn’t at Richardson’s disposal is to kick Lowder off the board. The
appointment of trustees is provided for within the state constitution, but there’s no provision for
removing a trustee.
Lowder quickly fled from the trustees’ meeting after it concluded Friday, refusing to answer
questions when approached by the Opelika-Auburn News.
Other trustee ties
Miller is not the only board member with financial ties to Lowder. Trustee Jimmy Rane, like
Miller, is a director at BancGroup where Lowder is chief executive officer. His service as a director
entitles him to stock options and a fee of $2,500 per quarter. Rane said Friday that he had no
intention of severing ties with Lowder.
“That’s the most absurd, ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard in my life,” Rane said.
Rane said he and other trustees all relied on their own moral standards, regardless of SACS’
findings. “I don’t think that SACS is the governing body of Auburn University as far as its day-today activities,” Rane said. “They make recommendations and suggestions as far as how they should
conduct themselves. But on the specific day-to-day operations that’s left to the board of trustees, I
believe.”
Is AU committed?
AU was also cited in December for failing to show a commitment to the accreditation
process, and SACS mentioned lingering concerns about AU’s commitment in its recent report.
Trustees had to re-affirm in writing this commitment, which they did Friday.
The issue of commitment to accreditation no doubt stems from former AU President
William Walker’s decision to sue SACS. Though Walker was victorious in the suit, the decision to
litigate appears to have helped land AU on probation. Richardson, when appointed in January,
made dropping the suit one of his first orders of business. He said Friday that he’ll stand by that
decision regardless of SACS’ findings next month.
“The university will not sue SACS,” he said. “I think that was a problem before and we will
not do that. I would say to you, though, that certainly I would appeal – you can appeal a decision –
to say ‘if you’ve done this to me, tell me why. That’s what’s missing here’.”
Richardson isn’t the only one scratching his head about the committee’s report. John
Mouton, past chairman of the AU Senate, said he felt “angst” about AU’s situation. Mouton said it
appears impossible to prove minority control of the board does not exist, adding that AU won’t
have time to implement SACS’ recommendations before the December ruling.
“We’re in checkmate,” he said.
Though Richardson has made public commitments to address SACS’ recommendations, it’s
clear he questions the fairness of the report.
“I think Auburn has received closer scrutiny than most,” he said. “I think part of that is
Auburn’s own fault by allowing controversy to swirl around it for some time ... I think Auburn is
held to a higher standard by the media, and I think it’s being held to a higher standard by SACS.”
Richardson may push for trustee removal amendment (12/08/04)
(This story ran as a sidebar to a package about Auburn University’s removal from probation)
JACK STRIPLING
STAFF WRITER
Calls for the ouster of Auburn University trustee Robert Lowder are about as common on
the Plains as cries of “War Eagle,” but it remains all too clear that firing a trustee in Alabama is
impossible even under the most dire of circumstances.
Though AU’s probation with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools was
officially lifted Tuesday, many thought Lowder — often regarded as a burr in the board’s side —
would have to go to secure the university’s accreditation. AU Interim President Ed Richardson
never publicly called for Lowder’s resignation, but he said Tuesday that it may be time to push for a
constitutional amendment allowing for trustee removal.
In a teleconference with news media, Richardson said he may include such a proposal in
AU’s legislative platform this year.
Efforts to affect the trustee process have been legislative struggles in the past, and a removal
provision would likely be the most controversial. Last year, Sen. Ted Little, D-Auburn, pushed a
bill that would allow the governor to remove trustees at universities on probation. The bill, cosponsored by Gerald Dial, D-Lineville, met a quick death in the Legislature, but Little said the time
may be right to resurrect it. Richardson’s support, Little said, would be key.
“If Dr. Richardson is of the professional judgment that he is willing to essentially put his
name on the line and say that (a trustee removal process) is needed for the betterment of higher
education in the state of Alabama ... then I think that you’re going to get a lot of individuals (who
would consider it),” Little said.
After leading AU off probation with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools,
Richardson may have unique credibility in the eyes of lawmakers, Little said.
“He’s a person that’s probably become as knowledgeable of SACS as any college president
in recent years in Alabama due to the turmoil that we’ve been in,” Little said.
The lack of a trustee removal provision was a centerpiece of Gov. Bob Riley’s most recent
presentation to SACS in Atlanta. After SACS issued a report that questioned the ethics of Lowder’s
business ties to fellow trustee Jack Miller, Riley attested that Lowder’s removal still wasn’t
necessary. Nonetheless, those who attended last week’s meeting say Riley told SACS his hands
were tied if the accrediting body wanted Lowder or Miller gone.
Lowder could not be reached for comment, and his assistant said he had not likely
responded to any media inquiries Tuesday.
The lack of a removal mechanism for trustees is an issue that affects all of the state’s
institutions of higher education, and Richardson said other schools may find accreditation at risk
until an amendment passes. Little agreed.
“This is the time for us to essentially come together in a coalition of trustees of the 16
universities of higher education in the state of Alabama and to say ‘we support legislation that even
(could) effect ourselves’,” Little said.
Faculty upbeat, guarded (12/08/04)
(This story ran as a sidebar in a package about Auburn’s removal from probation)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
As news that Auburn University was off academic probation hit campus Tuesday, professors
were knocking on doors to spread the good word. But for a university that may be high on elation,
there’s still a healthy dose of skepticism.
Some faculty are in wait-and-see mode, upbeat about an opportunity to bring trust back to
Auburn but mindful that the progress of the past year could easily be undone.
The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools said Tuesday it was convinced, by and
large, that AU has addressed the problems of trustees overstepping their bounds and meddling in
presidential affairs.
It will be no small chore, however, to convince faculty — some of whom have reported
trustee problems for more than a decade — that everything is A-OK.
“I have very mixed feelings,” said Virginia O’Leary, an AU professor of psychology. On the
one hand, O’Leary said, removal of probation is a great relief to faculty. Yet, she expressed concern
that problems with AU’s trustees may not have been sufficiently addressed.
The search for AU Interim President Ed Richardson’s successor will not doubt be a key step
in proving to faculty that real change has occurred on the Plains. The absence of faculty input in the
trustees’ appointment of both Richardson and his predecessor, William Walker, was widely viewed
as an indication that faculty had no real say in the direction of the university.
Richardson has said he’ll step down in about 1 1/2 years — a commitment that’s being
closely monitored. Faculty are already drawing up plans for the presidential search, vying early for
involvement in the process.
Though he’s never named names, Richardson — like Walker before him — has been
dismissive of faculty who’ve voiced opposition to him and his administration.
Though he said Tuesday he felt a duty to bring a climate of greater trust to the university,
Richardson characterized some faculty as lost causes.
“It’s just a handful of people that have been and continue to be pushing other agendas and I
think that’s their prerogative,” Richardson said.
“You’re always going to have some that will be upset with something.”
But even a handful of faculty can cause big headaches for Auburn presidents. The Joint
Assessment Committee, which filed the 2001 complaint that led to probation, was comprised of just
six people.
Richardson garners praise
While trust may still be in short supply, Richardson is commended by faculty who wanted
probation lifted at all costs. Another year of probation would be a further black mark on the
university, and though faculty weren’t responsible for the problems they surely inherited the fallout.
“I would say that it is a red letter day for Auburn,” said Willie Larkin, AU Senate chair.
“Everybody’s elated.”
Larkin, who has at times been critical of Richardson, said Tuesday that he felt some formal
recognition of Richardson was in order. The AU Senate, which has previously passed resolutions
calling for resignations and voting no confidence in AU leaders, should also step up and give credit
where credit is due, Larkin said. Larkin said he will likely push a resolution commending
Richardson for his efforts in removing probation.
“I know there will be a lot of faculty who will be vehemently opposed to it, but that’s what
I’m going to do,” he said.
There is little doubt the removal of probation presents a window of opportunity for AU
faculty, who may find a way to forgive and forget — or at least forgive — past transgressions.
But if AU was to put its house in order, did it have to come at such a high cost?
“If (probation) is what it took to get it done, I think it’s to our benefit that it took place,”
said John Mouton, past chair of the AU Senate. “I don’t know if anything else would’ve worked.”
The state, long obsessed with Auburn’s saga, will be watching to see how Auburn —
practically out from under SACS’ thumb — adapts to a bit of freedom.
“I think it is going to depend on how the trustees and the president deal with the fact that the
probation has been lifted,” said Judy Sheppard, an AU associate professor of journalism. “It’s really
always been up to them. And it’s still up to them.”
AU removed from probation (12/8/04)
(This is the main story in a package about the university’s removal from probation with its
accrediting agency.)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
ATLANTA — A relaxed and grinning Ed Richardson entered the third floor cafe of the
Marriott Marquis hotel in this city Tuesday morning, striding with the confidence of a man who
will be forever credited with ending Auburn University’s long battle with its accrediting agency.
It is officially over: The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools has removed AU’s
probation and re-affirmed its accreditation for the next 10 years. After a year under the harsh
spotlight of public opinion, SACS has told AU that it has sufficiently addressed the problems of
trustee micromanagement of the university that initially led to probation.
But a lingering question for AU’s interim president remains: Can there finally be healing on
a campus long marred by public strife and discontent?
“I don’t think the hostility will completely disappear,” Richardson said. “I think you’ve got
some people who are pushing different agendas which are not what’s in the best interest of Auburn.
I think they’ll still be out there pushing it. You’ll always have people that are easily persuaded. But,
if you’re asking overall, I really do believe this is going to enable us (to move forward).”
SACS’ ruling brought a sigh of relief to campus. Had AU lost accreditation, tens of millions of
dollars in federal grants and membership in the NCAA would have gone with it. AU’s standing as
an academic institution would have suffered greatly, and many suggest the economic losses to the
state as a whole would be devastating.
Auburn faithful will no doubt be watching to see how the last nagging chapter of the SACS
episode plays out. AU still has to submit a follow-up report in September, which Richardson says
will be focused on criteria for evaluating AU presidents and the trustees’ conflict of interest policy.
The present policy requires trustees to sever business ties between each other or resign if such
relationships violate the board’s Code of Ethics.
SACS cited the multimillion-dollar financial relationship between Robert Lowder and
fellow trustee Jack Miller as a potential ethics violation. Given the call for another report on the
conflict of interest standards, it appears SACS still isn’t convinced AU’s policy has enough teeth.
“I anticipate there will have to be some procedures for sanctions,” Richardson said.
Richardson didn’t elaborate on what those sanctions would be, but he said he’d likely
encourage trustees to adopt a tougher policy at their April meeting.
James Rogers, executive director of SACS, said the agency plans to keep its eye on AU, but
he gave a positive review of the steps the university has taken since it was placed on probation a
year ago.
“They have addressed the issues and it’s been a challenging period for the university,”
Rogers said.
Richardson issued a statement of reconciliation Tuesday, directed to what is perhaps the
only institution in the country that commonly calls itself a “family”: “I am convinced that if all
Auburn people put aside whatever differences may have existed in the past and concentrate on
working together for the common good, this university’s future will be filled with promise.”
AU Trustee Charles Ball also expressed hope for the future, alluding to AU supporters and
faculty who’ve been highly critical of university leaders.
“I hope that we can leave behind whatever animosities there may have been in the past,” he
said.
Searching for a successor
Richardson got an endorsement Tuesday from the very man who appointed him: Gov. Bob
Riley. In a released statement, Riley called Richardson’s leadership the reason for key changes in
the operation of AU’s governing board.
“The lifting of probation is an acknowledgment that there has been real change at Auburn
University,” Riley said.
Riley’s appointment a year ago of Richardson, who was a trustee at the time, was in large
part attributed to the fact that Richardson planned to retire in just a few years. Finding his
replacement is sure to be the faculty’s chief concern in the coming year, and Richardson said he
planned to approach the trustees to request that a search begin. But Richardson, AU’s second
interim chief in four years, wouldn’t say when he’d prompt the board to find his successor.
“As soon as you announce that, you in essence become a lame duck,” Richardson said.
Judy Sheppard, an associate professor of journalism who’s been critical of AU
administrators and trustees, said she hoped the presidential search would be forthcoming and mark
a new day at Auburn.
“I’m relieved about (getting off probation),” Sheppard said. “I do hope that what we do now
is go full speed ahead into the future — let’s start looking for a new president and start learning
lessons.”
Richardson’s tenure, if it stays under three years as he’s said it will, would be a blip on the
radar at many universities. But despite his critics, many of whom begrudge his blunt talk and harsh
tactics, Richardson has probably secured himself a notable space in the university’s history. Though
he’s conscious of this, Richardson said there are still chapters left to be written.
“My legacy, if you will, will be dependent on if I have established the conditions necessary
for my successor to have a long and productive tenure as president,” he said. “Certainly, (lifting
probation) is a major step in establishing those conditions. But it is one step.”
THE TIMELINE BELOW RAN WITH A PACKAGE ABOUT AUBURN UNIVERSITY’S REMOVAL
FROM PROBATION (DEC. 8, 2004)
SACS: A Troubling Timeline
April 9, 1999: Auburn University trustees kill AU’s Ph.D. program in economics against the
wishes of then-AU President William Muse and a faculty program review committee. Then-trustee
Ed Richardson co-chairs the committee that moves to eliminate the program. The move stirs
dicontent among faculty.
Jan. 31, 2001: Auburn University President William Muse confirms rumors that he’ll step down
when his 10-year contract ends March 1, 2002. The announcement comes on the heels of comments
from trustees that Muse’s contract will not be renewed.
The late Jimmy Samford, then a trustee, signs a joint statement with Muse promising a widespread
presidential search that will include faculty, alumni and students and be headed up by a notional
search firm. Nearly four years later, no such search has begun.
Feb. 8, 2001: East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C. confirms Muse has accepted post as
chancellor at ECU.
Feb. 12, 2001: AU trustees appoint then-provost William Walker interim president — six months
before Muse was to leave AU.
March 15, 2001: Muse tells a faculty panel trustees were “clearly infringing upon the authority of
the president.” In a subsequent interview with historian Wayne Flynt, an AU professor, Muse
details a sordid history of micromanagement led by trustee Robert Lowder. He notes particular
interference by Lowder in athletics, saying Lowder played a key role in pushing head football coach
Terry Bowden to resign in 1998.
April 24, 2001: In the wake of nine no confidence votes in the trustees by various AU constituent
groups and censure by the AU Senate, an ad hoc committee issues a formal complaint to the
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. The Joint Assessment Committee cites possible
violations of SACS criteria. Trustee financial relationships and interference in athletics are cited as
potential problems.
Aug. 3, 2001: AU sues SACS, stating that SACS didn’t allow for due process. AU argued that it
was entitled to 30 days to prepare a response for SACS, but the accrediting agency chose to
investigate before even seeing AU’s response.
Aug. 30, 2002: An independent investigator, Richard Bradley, is authorized by court order to
investigate the JAC’s complaints about trustee micromanagement.
Dec. 13, 2002: Bradley issues a report on AU that finds trustees compliant with SACS standards.
The report is deemed inadequate and Bradley is sent out again. His next report, which contained
financial information about trustees, is sealed by court order Sept. 8, 2003 and remains sealed to
this day.
Jan. 17, 2002: A federal judge sides with AU in its suit against SACS, saying the accrediting body
didn’t allow the university due process. Then-interim President Walker says the ruling “clearly
vindicates the decision by the university to file the lawsuit.” U.S. District Court Judge J. Owen
Foster also limited the scope of SACS’ investigation.
Dec. 6, 2003: Walker, AU Trustee Earlon McWhorter and then-AU Senate Chairman John Mouton
meet with SACS in Nashville, Tenn., days before the accrediting agency issues its decision.
Dec. 10, 2003: SACS places AU on one-year probation, the most severe sanction available other
than removal of accreditation.
Dec. 11, 2003: Walker goes before AU Senate for a grueling question and answer session. Walker
is visibly frustrated, accusing one faculty member of “lynch mob” behavior and alluding to a SACS
official as a “two-bit bureaucrat.”
Faculty expressed dissatisfaction with Walker’s leadership, including his decision to secretly court
a football coach in the company of two trustees. The “Jetgate” scandal brought national
embarrassment to the university. The AU Senate stops short of calling for Walker’s resignation,
opting instead to pass a resolution of no confidence.
Jan. 16, 2004: Mired in scandal after “Jetgate” and probation with SACS, Walker resigns.
Jan. 21, 2004: Ed Richardson, a trustee, is appointed interim president of AU. He promises to
restore institutional control to the president’s office. He begins his term Jan. 26 and says he’ll step
down in 2 1/2 years. Richardson’s abrupt appointment draws criticism from faculty.
Feb. 6, 2004: Richardson says he will drop lawsuit against SACS.
May 7, 2004: Trustees unanimously re-affirm commitment to the accreditation process by role-call
vote. The board also creates an auditing committee to look at financial ties among trustees.
Additionally, the board approves a resolution abolishing the athletics committee — a body long
viewed as a mechanism for exerting undue influence on athletics.
August 12, 2004: Trustee Audit Committee, comprised of three trustees, meets to review financial
disclosures provided by board members. The committee declares that none of the relationships
allow a minority of trustees to control the majority of the board. Two relatively new trustees,
Virginia Thompson and Charles McCrary, serve on the committee with Earlon McWhorter,
president pro tem of the board.
Nov. 4, 2004: A SACS special committee issues a report stating it remains concerned about trustee
financial relationships. It specifically cites the relationship between Robert Lowder and Jack Miller.
Outside of this concern, however, the university is given a clean bill of health.
Nov. 12, 2004: Trustees certify in writing a commitment to the accreditation process. The board
also authorizes Richardson to hire an outside firm to audit trustee relationships.
Dec. 2, 2004: Richardson sends a copy of two firms’ independent audits of trustees to James
Rogers, executive director of SACS. Richardson provides only cryptic details about the reports, but
says he doesn’t believe they will hurt AU’s case.
Dec. 3, 2004: Richardson and Gov. Bob Riley meet with a SACS team in Atlanta, making a last
effort to remove probation.
Dec. 7, 2004: SACS removes probation.
Financial Connections:
Miller does nearly $3M in business with Lowder (Nov. 12, 2004)
Jack Stripling
Staff Writer
In the same year that financial ties among Auburn University trustees helped land the
institution on probation, Jack Miller did nearly $3 million in business with fellow Trustee Robert
Lowder.
A 2003 annual report released to Colonial BancGroup stockholders indicates that Miller’s
law firm, Miller, Hamilton, Snider and Odom, L.L.C., received approximately $2,647,660 in legal
fees for services provided to BancGroup, where Lowder is chief executive officer. Miller also
received a $100,000 year-end cash bonus, use of the company jet and a company vehicle.
The Miller/Lowder ties are likely at the heart of concerns still held by AU’s accrediting
agency, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. SACS, which placed the university on
probation in December, has issued a report to AU that contains additional recommendations for
getting off probation by year’s end. Chief among these concerns, AU Interim President Ed
Richardson says, are financial links between trustees. Though he said he was unsure of the course
AU will take to resolve the issue, Richardson said the university will likely seek an outside source
to review trustee business dealings.
“That is probably the case ... I would rather wait until Friday, and then we’ll have the
answers I think more specifically,” Richardson said.
The trustees will meet in Auburn on Friday, which is when Richardson says he intends to
release SACS’ much anticipated final report.
Miller and Lowder did not respond to repeated interview requests for this story.
Minority control still central issue
When SACS issued probation, it stated that AU wasn’t guarding against a single trustee or a
minority of trustees having control over the majority of the board. SACS’ concern that financial ties
among trustees might make one beholden to another, leading to minority control, led to AU’s
creation of an internal auditing committee. Trustees were required to declare, under penalty of
perjury, all financial relationships they had with other board members.
The committee examined the trustee forms, which stated relationships but didn’t provide
dollar amounts, and declared none were a problem. At the time, Richardson said the reports “clearly
confirm that SACS standards aren’t being violated by this board of trustees.”
“If I had any belief, based on what I saw, that we did not meet the SACS requirement, I
would have jumped up and down,” said Charles McCrary, a trustee and auditing committee
member. “I pretty well speak my mind and I don’t have an ax to grind. I just call things like I see
it.”
The auditing committee had a narrow charge, which was to ensure a minority of members
didn’t control the majority. In its August meeting, the committee suggested Lowder’s business
dealings were only a problem if they existed with a majority of members. Lowder declared links —
some less significant than others — to six of the 14 trustees.
“I’m not going to get into trying to judge people’s individual business relationships as long
as it’s not illegal, immoral or unethical,” McCrary said. “The key is sunshine and making sure
everything is out in the open. And I think this board and this university is under quite a bright
spotlight and there’s probably no dark corners that a light hasn’t been shined.”
In Lowder’s submission to the committee, he also cited a business relationship with fellow
Trustee Jimmy Rane. Like Miller, Rane is a director at BancGroup, which entitled him to
compensation of $10,000 in 2003. Rane did not respond to an interview request Wednesday.
Andy Hornsby, the newly elected president of the AU Alumni Association, said he wasn’t
surprised by the disclosures trustees issued to the auditing committee; the relationships with
Lowder are long-standing and widely known. But Hornsby said he did not share the view that such
relationships don’t create a potential problem for the board.
“I still have those concerns,” he said. “And I think a lot of Auburn people do.”
The Breakout Box Below Ran With This Story:
Miller’s Ties
As a director of BancGroup, executive committee member and legal counsel, Auburn
University Trustee Jack Miller and his firm received the following compensation:
— Legal fees of $2,647,660
— Employment-related expenses of $41,845
— Use of company vehicle for personal use, valued at $4,204
— Use of company aircraft, valued at $2,215
Year-end cash bonus of $100,000 (paid in 2004)
This makes for a total of $2,795,924 in fees, bonuses and other compensation.
Rane’s Ties
As a director of BancGroup and member of the Asset/Liability Committee, Auburn
University Trustee Jimmy Rane is entitled to the following compensation:
— $2,500 in fees per quarter, equal to $10,000 for 2003.
— $1,000 for each board meeting attended. The board met four times in 2003.
$500 for each BancGroup Committee meeting attended. The Asset/Liability Committee met four
times in 2003.
Assuming Rane attended all board and committee meetings and elected to receive cash instead of
stock, he would have been entitled to $16,000 in compensation in 2003.