Collections: 
0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

Image 4 of 2007 - Board of Regents Meeting Minutes.

Part of Murray State University Board of Regents Meeting Minutes.

item | thumbnails | details | text | pdf
4. 4 RESOLUTION , Two and one half years ago this university found itself plagued and embarrassed by an athletic program that was out of control. Since that time consultants representing the NCAA, outside athletic professionals, and the depositions in the Dennison lawsuit certainly confirm that conclusion. Fortunately at that time we had a President and a Board that was willing to take a l stand, make a decision, and to refuse to “sweep the problems under the rug.” r ` l Decisions regarding athletics and other high profile University programs that must l be made by responsible Presidents and Boards are never easy, and in public universities ` in particular, are often vigorously opposed. l In Murray’s athletic situation the opposition came in the form of a well financed l and politically charged law suit filed first in Frankfort and transferred to Federal Court in l Paducah. V That lawsuit has cost the university hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost employee time, diversion from proper university focus and attomey fees. All of those costs are continuing. However, on the positive side, the courts saw fit to summarily dismiss practically every allegation made against the University, the Board and the President causing the Plaintiff to practically beg for a settlement. l Also as a result of the un1vers1ty’s willingness to confront this condition, the l present athletic department is now being run in an exemplary manner and has regained l the respect worthy of the excellence all have grown to expect of Murray State University. l l Though it may seem peculiar that the Board would permit the insurance company l to settle this matter, even though it appears to have been won, when we are confronted l with a well financed lawsuit sometimes a settlement is in the long run cost efficient ‘ simply to avoid an appeal of the Judge’s favorable ruling and the remote possibility of a l costly trial. l Our decision today to permit United Educators Insurance Company to negotiate a t settlement with their funds alone was strongly opposed by some of our members, but { finally agreed because the problem we sought to correct has been corrected, and a further forced expenditure of university funds and time that should be used for educational purposes alone should be avoided. *»•·»•· Ms. Hays seconded and the roll was called with the following voting: Mr. Adams, no; Ms. Burr, yes; Mr. Ellison, no; Mrs. Ford, yes; Ms. Hays, yes; Dr. Morgan, no; Mr. Stout, no; Mr, Taylor, abstain; Mrs. Travis, no; Mrs. Winchester, no; and Mrs. Buchanon, yes. With four ayes; six no’s; and one abstention, the motion failed. ‘ Mr. Stout moved to approve continued payment of fees and costs associated with implementation of the Settlement Agreement; however, he moved to revoke any further indemnification of fees and costs incurred that are inconsistent with implementation of the settlement agreement. Ms. Hays seconded and discussion followed. Mr. Stout amended his motion to read as follows: Mr. Stout moved to amend the motion to approve continued payment of fees and costs associated with

Hosted by the University of Kentucky

Contact us: kdl-help@kdl.kyvl.org

Contributors: