After dozens of students rallying for President Benjamin Ladner's resignation surrounded both doors of the room where members of the board of trustees were meeting yesterday, about 20 were invited in to discuss Ladner's poor spending discretion and the board's lack of oversight and transparency.
All seven trustees present at the meeting said they didn't think Ladner could continue to lead the university, after a student asked each individually to state his or her views on the president's future.
"No human would want to return to a situation like this," trustee David M. Carmen said.
Ladner hasn't contemplated resignation, he said in an interview last night after the meeting. He was invited to attend the board's meeting with student leaders and staff, but when he arrived he was asked not to join the meeting which was already in progress.
"I'm very disappointed not only for myself but for the university" that the group didn't want to hear his side. "I really think that sort of posture strikes at the heart of something valuable to a university ... the search for the truth," he said.
"There was no space" for Ladner in the discussion, and people could not speak as freely if he were there, said Student Government President Kyle Taylor, so students and staff decided to continue the meeting without him.
Board members, student leaders and staff in the meeting agreed to let some of the protestors inside after they heard them screaming at a student-organized rally six stories below.
"I asked that the board act in the best interest of the students, and then you could hear them outside," said Taylor, who was speaking when the screaming started. "I said 'You can hear them, listen to them.'"
Emily Freifeld, a sophomore in the School of Communication who asked each board member to be specific about his or her thoughts on Ladner, said it was valuable for students to get to speak straight to trustees.
"Suddenly they were letting us in, allowing us to talk directly to them," she said. "I think it was important for them to speak their opinion in front of students instead of behind closed doors."
About a dozen trustees of the 25-member board met with deans, faculty and student leaders in three separate meetings yesterday. Trustee Edward R. Carr said the AU community's sentiments were unanimously in favor of Ladner's resignation, and that hearing today's thoughts and opinions would affect their final decisions on the matter.
"We're hearing the same thing from everyone," Carr said.
Five of AU's six schools passed resolutions of no confidence in Ladner on Tuesday and undergraduate and alumni petitions calling for his removal had more than 600 signatures as of Wednesday night.
But the investigation was the result of both Ladner's poor judgment and the board's failure to oversee his spending, some trustees said.
"I owe you an apology," Carr said. "The board made mistakes. Ben made mistakes."
Leonard R. Jaskol, chair of the board's audit committee, said Ladner took advantage of the leeway his contract gave him.
"This man has no moral compass, and he cannot lead this institution," he said. "He was allowed discretion and he abused it. He was allowed privilege and he abused it. End of story."
Trustees admitted they neglected their duties in oversight and regulation by letting Ladner spend about $517,000 on travel and entertainment expenses, a amount board members said was not appropriate for the president of a service-based university.
The board has hired half a dozen firms and professionals since last March in an investigation into Ladner's spending after members of the board's six-person executive committee received an anonymous letter alleging the president spent university money on European vacations, presents for his children, a personal French chef and other expenses.
In April, the rest of the board was informed of the investigation and voted unanimously to continue the probe further into the president's travel and entertainment expenses. The full board was not informed about the whistle-blower letter until May, members said.
Divisions within the board have continued throughout the investigation because of various legalities, such as how much money Ladner owes the Internal Revenue Service, and whether Ladner's 1997 contract was valid, even though some members said they were unaware it existed until this year. For the purposes of the investigation, the 1997 contract was considered the standing contract.
Despite their disagreement about the probe's legal aspects, most of the board members present were able to agree that even if Ladner legally spent more than $500,000 of the university's money, his judgment and self-control was poorer than they expected from someone in his position.
Board members said the investigation will cost the school more than $1 million.
Board Chair Leslie Bains said the board recently received information about problems within the school beyond the president's spending.
"There are employees now that are coming forward and talking about the environment, if you will, that the have been operating in, which is very disturbing to me as a board member and very disturbing to me as a woman."
Carmen said now the board must reexamine how the investigation came about and how it was conducted.
"For me the even larger issue is how we got here," he said. "In order to make sure that we don't get back here again, we need to do some serious restructuring of the board. We have to set some major guidelines about oversight, and that's a lot of work we have to do."
Trustees plan to meet Oct. 10 to discuss Ladner's future as president.
Staff writer Megan Slack contributed to this report.
