Highlighted Responses to Baylor University's Proposal

I have just read the comments by Jack Loftis, Paul Powell, and Bill Hillis regarding the proposal made by the Baylor administration and Board of Regents for the Baylor Alumni Association to terminate its independent 501(c)(3) status and fold into the administration. I admire all three of these Baylor servants greatly, and appreciate their different points of view on this most important issue.
 
Jack Loftis hit the nail on the head as far as answering the question, "Why is this happening?" Apparently, the current administration and Board of Regents is so insecure in their efforts to acquire and maintain absolute control of the Baylor universe that they cannot tolerate the possibility of differing views on matters affecting the Baylor family. Lack of editorial control of the Baylor Line magazine is central to that perceived insecurity.
 
I served as chair of the Board of Regents from 1995 through 1997. The crisis de jour at that time was over the relationship between Baylor University and the Baylor Health Care System in Dallas. With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, I realize that many mistakes were made during that upheaval—most of which can be laid at my feet. Several issues of the Baylor Line reported on these missteps in judgment, much to my chagrin at the time. I now feel that the Line's objective reporting to the Baylor family did as much as anything else to resolve those issues in a manner that allowed both institutions to survive and thrive—independently.
 
I can assure you that, if the editorial content of the Baylor Line had been controlled by the administration at that time, the voice of objectivity and reason would have been absent from discussion within the Baylor family.
 
Paul Powell and Bill Hillis emphasize the uniqueness of Baylor. I cannot, for the life of me, understand the rationale behind the argument made by the administration and Board of Regents that the independence of the Baylor Alumni Association should be terminated because it is "unique" (although not completely so, as shown by Jeff Kilgore). I would greatly appreciate it if the administration and regents would identify the institution(s) to which Baylor should conform. If conformity to other institutions is the goal of this group of governors, then I greatly fear for the future of Baylor. Why would any family sacrifice tens of thousands of dollars to send their child to a school in Waco, Texas, if the school’s ultimate goal is to conform to another institution?
 
The uniqueness of Baylor University should be celebrated, not eliminated. The independence of the Baylor Alumni Association is a strength to be promoted, rather than a nonconformity to be condemned. Perceived insecurity should be replaced by embracing Baylor's distinctive nature and role in educating future leaders of our state, nation, and world.
Randy Fields '70, MBA '71, JD '77
San Antonio

Baylor University President David Garland recently appeared before a meeting of the Student Senate where he was quoted as saying the Baylor Alumni Association has given Baylor a black eye. Using that same logic, recent decisions by the university’s administration and board of regents—the SAT scandal, the tenure debacle and revolving-door presidencies—have given Baylor bruised shins, fever and a stroke.

In 2008, at the request of Baylor’s regents, an independent consulting group performed a feasibility assessment of Vision 2012’s Imperative XII—specifically, achieving a $2 billion endowment. The group concluded Baylor had lost $400 million in donations because of perceptions of in-fighting.

In a more recent study, U.S. News & World Report disclosed that alumni giving at Baylor was down from 29 percent in 2006 to 18 percent.

When you look at these findings, it’s tempting to hang them around the neck of the Baylor Alumni Association, to say that the poor fundraising can be attributed to a black eye caused by the independent BAA. To do so, however, is to misdiagnose what has caused these reports.

Since 2003, regents have continued to marginalize the alumni association while cautioning Baylor Student Government and Faculty Senate members from coming to the BAA’s defense. Baylor’s regents and administration want us to look forward mostly because they’re worried by what we might conclude when we look to the past.

In light of the university’s recent actions towards the BAA, it’s quite remarkable what the alumni association has been able to accomplish, given the near-death blow administered by then-President Robert Sloan’s administration. In 2002, under Sloan’s direction, Baylor hired out from under the BAA many of the alumni association’s staff. Those employees took with them the master plan for what has now become the Baylor Network. The mere fact that the BAA is still alive—and performing alumni services—is a testament to our alumni and the care they exercise for their beloved alma mater.

Since 2002, the BAA has continued to progress, mostly because Baylor students and alumni have much at stake in the university’s future. Baylor’s public relations office cannot be relied upon to deliver a full picture of campus issues, something that the BAA can do through the editorial independence of its magazine, The Baylor Line.

In recent years, the BAA has shed light on many controversial issues surrounding Baylor, including the presidential search, faculty/tenure issues, then-President John Lilley’s attempt to phase out the interlocking BU, the SAT scholarship scandal, the post-election rope-swing incident from last fall and many other stories that have failed to grace the pages of Baylor Magazine.

The BAA objectively reports on issues critical to our university. In recent years, the negative light cast upon Baylor has originated solely from decisions made within Pat Neff Hall.

The BAA’s independence is special. So is Baylor. It is the only higher education institution of its kind, and what makes Baylor unique is its calling. Baylor is called to be in the world but not of the world. We are one of the few institutions of Christian higher education to command great respect nationwide.

The regents have built their case for the BAA takeover on “best practices,” claiming Baylor’s alumni association is like none other in higher education. But no one else is quite like Baylor. Only Baylor walks such a thin line between secular and faith, striving to be a place of uncompromised academic excellence while retaining its Christian identity.

Baylor’s core values have traditionally stood on the freedom of thought. An internal alumni network would not provide the appropriate forums or freedoms to express challenging questions of university leadership. It takes the entire Baylor Line to preserve what makes Baylor so special.

Quite simply, we have too much at stake. We need voices to continue Baylor’s special calling. And we need an editorially independent alumni association.

Allan Marshall '07

Waco

I am writing this letter because I am concerned about Baylor University, my alma mater, and about the negative publicity that has resulted from its long-standing battle with its own alumni association. It is abundantly clear to me that the principle players on all sides of the debate all love Baylor very passionately. And it is this passion that has caused them to debate the issues so fiercely.

I graduated from Baylor in 1979. I joined the Baylor Alumni Association a short time after that as an annual member, and at some point I became a life member. I am very proud to be a member of the Baylor Alumni Association, and I am very proud of my association with the entire Baylor family, both past and present. I have been privileged to have made some donations to Baylor over the years, and I hope to be in a position to make further donations. I believe in the mission of Baylor and I want nothing more than to see Baylor succeed and prosper for many generations, serving many more hundreds of thousands of students.

I was asked by my very good friend David Lacy to become a member of the board of the BAA this past January. I have attended all three alumni association board meetings this year and have received literally hundreds of emails from the association and about the association. The commitment and passion of the board members and the staff is apparent and impressive. I reviewed the mission and purpose of the BAA and found them to be very compelling. The purpose of the Baylor Alumni Association, as stated in the organization’s Constitution and Bylaws, is as follows:

“The purpose of the Association is to provide the support of benevolent, charitable, and educational undertakings by extending financial and other aid to Baylor University and to students thereof, by generally encouraging sentiments favorable to education and by promoting union of and good fellowship among former students and friends of Baylor University; to coordinate all alumni activities; to serve the general alumni organization of Baylor University; and to maintain administrative agency and executive personnel needed to provide for a continuity of alumni activity, interest and financial support for Baylor University.”

I also am well acquainted with several of the members of the Board of Regents of Baylor. And I have a great deal of confidence and respect for their leadership and commitment to Baylor.

When I joined the BAA board, I was only vaguely aware of the conflict between the BAA and the regents. Upon attending the first meeting, however, I became intimately aware of the issues and the depth of the frustration and animosity that exists. I considered that perhaps I didn’t belong in this group because I did not share their disdain for the Board of Regents. Certainly, I didn’t want Baylor people to think I believed the same things as these people. But then I decided I should stay involved to try to offer some balance, a counter point of view, or a different perspective. Most troubling to me was my longtime friendship with David Lacy and my desire and conviction not to do anything to damage that relationship.

In the September BAA board meeting where Mr. Bob Beauchamp presented the proposal from the Board of Regents to the BAA, I was hopeful that the proposal would be viewed as a means to preserve the mission of the BAA while diffusing the divisiveness between the two groups. And while the BAA has not responded yet to the proposal, the divisiveness continues. During that meeting, it was agreed that only David Lacy and Jeff Kilgore would offer public comment so that the BAA spoke with one voice. Because of my respect for David and for the BAA, I have remained silent. But now, a number of people have begun to speak out, and I feel compelled to do the same, largely because my perspective is so different from many of the other BAA board members.

As I see it, and I have told this to my fellow BAA board members, I believe there is a time and place for an independent voice, for a counter perspective, maybe even a watchdog type of organization regarding Baylor. I just do not believe that is the role of the Baylor Alumni Association, nor would that be the role of any alumni association affiliated with any university in the world. It simply does not make sense.

In my opinion, the “alumni association,” in whatever form, must convey a consistent and positive message about Baylor to potential donors, to alumni, and to the general public 100 percent of the time. No exceptions. Many on the board of the BAA feel that it is their duty or obligation to expose the perceived negatives at Baylor, and I do not agree. There is nothing wrong with having an organization that fills that role, but clearly it is not the role or the purpose of the BAA. It is not in the mission statement. It is not in its own definition of the “purpose” of the BAA.

Let’s face it. Over the years, a group of people who have not been happy with the decisions of the Board of Regents decided that they could make their voices heard by utilizing the vast resources of the university and its alumni network through the BAA. About twenty years ago, they convinced the administration to allow them to be independent. And it is essentially the same group of people running the BAA today.

I do not believe that the views espoused by the leadership of the BAA are representative of the greater Baylor family nor of the collective alumni of the university. Importantly, even if those were the views of a large group of alumni, it still would not be within the mission or purpose of the BAA to publicize those views and criticize the Board of Regents.

I encourage the BAA board to accept the proposal by the Board of Regents to bring the BAA in-house at Baylor and make it a stronger and more vibrant alumni organization. I also encourage the vocal few on all sides of the debate to lay down their swords and unite for the good of Baylor. In my view, if the BAA does not agree to the proposal, the university will have no choice other than to cut its ties with the BAA and carry out the mission and purpose of the BAA by means of an in-house organization.
Paul L. Foster '79
El Paso