The Baptist Standard | The Texas Baptist Newsjournal
     
 
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Home arrow News arrow Baylor withdraws proposal to alumni association (Updated)
Register Register Help Tools
Subscribe to our FirstLook weekly
e-mail preview

 
Baylor withdraws proposal to alumni association (Updated) Print E-mail
By Ken Camp, Managing Editor   
Published: October 28, 2009

WACO—Baylor University has withdrawn its proposal to the Baylor Alumni Association, citing lack of a positive response to a request that the group  give up its independent nonprofit status and come under the authority of Baylor administration.

Baylor President David Garland and Regents Chair Dary Stone sent a letter Oct. 27 to Baylor Alumni Association President David Lacy and Executive Director Jeff Kilgore formally withdrawing the offer.

“Regrettably, to date we have had no formal response of any kind” from the alumni association, the letter said. “Instead, we have seen opinion articles from your president and executive vice president criticizing our proposal, the university and its governing bodies. We have not seen a single instance in which you have publicly discussed the merits of the proposal directly and the impact it could have enhancing national alumni relations at Baylor.”

In an interview five weeks before the offer was withdrawn, Stone had said regarding the proposal to the alumni association: “There is not a timeline established. There’s no deadline. They can take as long as they need to consider the offer.”

But from the perspective of Baylor’s administration and regents, the alumni association failed to demonstrate they were considering the offer. In their letter to the alumni association, Garland and Stone particularly noted the association had—at its recent Baylor Homecoming meeting—publicly launched a five-year plan built on the premise of the association’s independence from the school.

“All of these activities present a clear message that our proposal, though made in good faith, is effectively and de facto declined by the BAA,” the letter stated. “Therefore, out of respect for your desire to be independent and separate from the university, we believe it is in the best interest of Baylor that we formally withdraw our proposal.”

The correspondence added that if the alumni association decides in the future “to explore the possibility of becoming part of a robust, in-house alumni relations program within the university, we will be pleased to consider that possibility at your request.”

In an interview, Garland said he was “disappointed” by the alumni association’s actions after the offer was made in mid-September. The combined impact of the alumni association’s failure to respond directly, actions taken at the group’s annual meeting and public comments by the association’s officers—rather than any single action—prompted the university to rescind the proposal, he said.

Withdrawal of the proposal came as “welcome news for many alumni,” said Jeff Kilgore, chief executive officer and executive vice president of the Baylor Alumni Association.

“This decision is certainly in the best interest of doing what’s best for Baylor. This allows everyone to focus on the important work that needs to be done moving forward, and not on unnecessary distractions,” he said.

Given “the clear and strong voice of alumni” who reacted negatively to the proposal of bringing the alumni association under university administration, the withdrawal “probably shouldn’t come as a surprise,” Kilgore said.

Still, alumni association officials disagreed with the rationale offered by the administration and regents for withdrawing the proposal.

The association had not formally responded to the offer because it was “deep into the process of gathering feedback” from its members and putting together a committee to study the matter, Kilgore noted.

On its website, the Baylor Alumni Association had invited members to comment on the proposal that the association give up its independent status and become part of Baylor’s administrative operations within its development division. The association posted responses under three categories—in support of the Baylor Alumni Association’s independence, in support of Baylor University’s proposal and “mixed responses.”

“As of Oct. 27, 88 percent of the responses received are in support of the BAA’s independence, while 7 percent support Baylor’s proposal and 5 percent are mixed,” the website stated.

The alumni association wanted to give the university’s proposal “the due diligence it needed before a response was given,” Baylor Alumni Association President David Lacy said.

“We have worked non-stop since Sept. 19 gathering feedback from the members we represent. Given the fact that we were taken by surprise when presented the proposal, the BAA did not take it lightly,” Lacy said.

The alumni association had wanted to conduct its study quietly and respond in due time, Kilgore insisted. But the officers of the organization felt compelled to speak publicly once the university launched “a massive public relations campaign” two days after presenting its proposal, seeking endorsements of its offer and offering criticisms of the alumni association.

“We were compelled to respond in kind,” Kilgore said. “It was not our intention to criticize but only to restore a balance of context and fact to the conversation.”

Regarding the alumni association’s five-year plan, Kilgore noted the organization began work on it a year ago, and the issue of the Baylor Line—the association’s magazine—that presented the plan already was far along in the production and printing cycle before the university presented its September proposal.

Garland said in an interview the university will honor the alumni association’s desire for independence and relate to the organization “as we would relate to any other independent organization.” At the same time, Baylor will continue to strengthen its own alumni relations initiatives, he said.

Alumni association officials expressed their desire to move on and work with the university.

“For the sake of peace and unity for all of the Baylor family, we will put this issue behind us, focus on our job and get back to work serving alumni and supporting our alma mater,” Lacy said.

Kilgore echoed that sentiment, stressing the importance of improved communication between the alumni association and the university.

“It is important to the Baylor Alumni Association that we continue to find ways in which to work together with the board of regents and university administration in the areas of fundraising, communications and external programs and continue to express a desire to do so,” he said.

“In return, we hope that the university will also renew its own commitment to the Baylor Alumni Association in allowing us to serve our own mission and purpose unimpeded by recent efforts.”

The task of relating to Baylor alumni and seeking the best interests of the university is a big job “that will take all of us,” Kilgore added. “I hope the Baylor tent is big enough for everyone.”








Reddit!Del.icio.us!Google!Live!Facebook!Slashdot!Technorati!StumbleUpon!Spurl!Newsvine!Blinklist!Furl!Fark!Yahoo!Ma.gnolia!Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
Comments (2)Add Comment
...
written by feathers, October 31, 2009
Thank you Ken Camp for a much more balanced and professional reporting of this Baylor administration action than President Garland urged us to read in the Waco Tribune. That piece just fanned the fires that need to be quenched. All concerned, Baylor administration, Regents, BAA officers, directors, and members need to honestly, and openly build on the 'olive branch statements' offered by BAA officers and President Garland. We need to reach some clearing of the hostile atmosphere before due consideration is given to the selection of a new, permanent president at Baylor. And in my view it is the Regents that have been poking people in the eye with a stick! Cy Fletcher, Baytown, Class of '57
Reality of the Situation
written by Bbear1978, November 04, 2009
The previous commentator apparently does not share the view of the Waco Tribune’s editorial that criticized the BAA leadership’s critical words regarding Baylor’s offer and BAA’s recent adoption of a long-term plan that assumes no change in its relationship with the University.

There are two fundamental realities that the BAA leadership seems unwilling to face. First, the BAA’s relationship with Baylor does not represent a model relationship of an alumni association. In fact, NO major private university has the BAA arrangement. Second, the BAA is a minority organization, representing less than 15% of Baylor alumni. I am a life member of the BAA, but I joined the organization 30 years ago when it was viewed as an enthusiastic supporter of the University. At the time, the BAA was the best forum to receive information about what was going on at Baylor.

Neither of these reasons for BAA membership is relevant today. First, the BAA leadership through its publication was been openly critical of Baylor’s strategic plan – a plan that has resulted in an amazing revitalization of its campus, academic reputation, and commitment to faith-based higher education. It is the reason so many parents and students are choosing Baylor (including my children)!

The second reason that membership in the BAA is not necessary (and is counterproductive to the University) is that Baylor has developed a service called the Baylor Network that is performing a great job in meeting the modern needs of its approximately 140,000 graduates.

Sadly, the BAA leadership missed a golden opportunity. Instead, it has chosen a take a path down the road of declining influence and relevance. That is essentially what the Waco Tribune said in its editorial. This is painful to say as a long-time BAA life member - but, in my view, it is the reality of the situation. A point to remember is that we are alumni of Baylor University, not of the BAA.

Please read our Comments Covenant. Readers alone are responsible for the content of the comments they post here. The comments are subject to the site’s terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the Baptist Standard. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.
Write comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register
busy
 
< Prev   Next >
Copyright © 2007-2009 The Baptist Standard, All Rights Reserved.