1
 1   
 2   IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, OHIO,
 3                    GENERAL DIVISION
 4   PROFESSOR PETER TOWNSEND,
    et al.,
 5   
                      Plaintiffs,
 6   
         -vs-                       No.  2008 CV 0300
 7   
    ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY,
 8   
                      Defendant.
 9   
10                   DISCOVERY DEPOSITION
11   
12             The deposition of PAULA TREICHLER taken
13   on behalf of the Plaintiffs at 701 Devonshire,
14   Champaign, Illinois on March 27th, 2008, before
15   Deann K. Parkinson, Certified Shorthand Reporter
16   of the State of Illinois.
17   
18                                CSR #84-002089
19   
20   
21   
22   
23   
24   

                                                                     2
 1        APPEARANCES:
 2             MR. EVAN PRICE
              Bailey & Cavalieri
 3             10 West Broad St 21st Floor
              Columbus, OH  43215
 4             Appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs
 5             MS. KATHLEEN TRAFFORD
              Porter Wright Morris & Arthur
 6             41 South High Street
              Columbus, OH  43215-6194
 7             Appearing on behalf of Antioch
              University
 8   
              MR. WILLIAM GROVES
 9             Attorney At Law
              PO Box 1488
10             Springfield, OH  45501
              Appearing on behalf of Antioch
11             University
              937-324-5541
12   
              MR. MICHAEL SLUTSKY
13             Allison, Slutsky & Kennedy PC
              230 West Monroe Street
14             Suite 2600
              Chicago, IL  60606
15             Appearing with Paula Treichler
16   
17   
18   
19   
20                  EXHIBIT INDEX
21   Exhibit No. 2............Page 22
22   Exhibit No. 8............Page 52
23   Exhibit No. 9............Page 59
24   

                                                                     3
 1   
 2                    PAULA TREICHLER,
 3   the deponent herein, called as a witness, after
 4   having been first duly sworn, testified as
 5   follows:
 6                   DIRECT EXAMINATION
 7                      BY MR. PRICE:
 8       Q.    Miss Treichler, we met briefly, my name
 9   is Evan Price, I'm representing the faculty
10   members from Antioch College in a lawsuit they
11   brought against Antioch University.  I've got some
12   questions for you here today.  But let me begin
13   with just a little bit brief instructions.  If I
14   ask a question that is in any way confusing to
15   you, or you get lost as we're going along, let me
16   know and I'll try and clarify it.
17             If you need to take a break at any time
18   to speak with your counsel, I will note that
19   Michael Slutsky is here on your behalf.  Again,
20   let me know and that will be fine.  We can do
21   that.
22             As you know, we have a court reporter
23   here.  Court reporters are very good at getting
24   down transcription and she is trying to take down

                                                                     4
 1   a verbatim record of what is said.  The one thing
 2   that can be difficult for her is to get two people
 3   talking at the same time.  Often times in the
 4   course of a conversation I start to ask a
 5   question, you know what the question is before I'm
 6   done, and in the ordinary course of conversation
 7   we will go ahead and start answering.  That's
 8   difficult for the court reporter.  I will ask you
 9   to do your best to wait until I finish my
10   question, and likewise I will try and do my best
11   to wait until you finish your answers, okay?
12       A.    Okay.
13       Q.    Let me mention one other thing, because
14   I think it might come up, and that is the issue of
15   the attorney client privilege.  There may be some
16   questions, well, let me just make it clear that
17   I'm not seeking for any information related to any
18   communications between you and any counsel or any
19   information you receive from counsel.  And if any
20   of my questions would seem to call for any of that
21   type of information, I'm not asking for it, and I
22   don't intend to, and feel free to talk to Mr.
23   Slutsky if that is a concern, okay?
24       A.    Okay.

                                                                     5
 1             MR. SLUTSKY: And at this point I hope
 2   that the same principle applies to the extent that
 3   she is asked about any subjects which would call
 4   for any communications with her spouse, which we
 5   would assert are also privileged.
 6       Q.    Okay.  I don't intend to ask anything
 7   about that, but again, I can just ask a general
 8   question and sometimes that's the answer.  If so,
 9   let your counsel know, and or let me know that you
10   can't answer that without getting into issues of
11   privilege, okay?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    One other issue.  Have you signed any
14   agreements with respect to keeping any information
15   related to Antioch College or Antioch University
16   confidential?
17       A.    Yes.
18       Q.    Without knowing what the scope of those
19   are, but again that is something you need to be
20   cognizant of, and again Mr. Slutsky can advise you
21   on issues related to those obligations, all right?
22       A.    Yes.
23       Q.    Let me begin with a little bit of a
24   brief background.  Well, first of all, if you

                                                                     6
 1   could state your full name and your address for
 2   the record.
 3       A.    Paula A. Treichler, 808 South Lynn
 4   Street, Champaign, Illinois, 61820.
 5       Q.    And what is your date of birth?
 6       A.    January 15th, 1943.
 7       Q.    And Miss Treichler, first of all are you
 8   Miss Treichler or Dr. Treichler?  I don't want to
 9   be disrespectful.
10       A.    Doctor, Professor, either of those is
11   fine.
12       Q.    Okay.  Doctor, let me then ask you, are
13   you taking any medications or anything that would
14   affect your ability to testify today?
15       A.    No.
16       Q.    Now, I understand you graduated from
17   Antioch College, correct?
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    What year did you graduate?
20       A.    1965.
21       Q.    What was your major?
22       A.    Philosophy.
23       Q.    And after that did you continue with
24   further formal education?

                                                                     7
 1       A.    Yes.
 2       Q.    What was your next program or degree?
 3       A.    Ph.D. degree.
 4       Q.    Okay.  And where did you receive that
 5   from?
 6       A.    University of Rochester in Rochester,
 7   New York.
 8       Q.    And was that again in philosophy?
 9       A.    In linguistics.
10       Q.    And when did you receive that?
11       A.    1971.
12       Q.    I want to also get a brief work history.
13   I don't know what's easier for you going backwards
14   or forwards.  If you want to just start with sort
15   of after you received your Ph.D., tell me what
16   your first full-time employment was.
17       A.    Since 1972 I've been employed at the
18   University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
19       Q.    Okay.  That makes it easy.  And are you
20   still employed there?
21       A.    I retired in 2004.
22       Q.    Okay.
23       A.    But I teach, continue to teach.
24       Q.    Okay.  And during your 32 years there,

                                                                     8
 1   you were a professor?
 2       A.    From 1982 on.
 3       Q.    You were a full professor?
 4       A.    Oh, no.  Assistant professor, then
 5   associate, then full professor.
 6       Q.    Okay.  What were you from '72 to '82?
 7       A.    I was an administrator in a living
 8   learning program, residential academic program at
 9   the University.  And then I was a dean in the
10   college of medicine at Urbana-Champaign.
11       Q.    And then in '82 you became a professor?
12       A.    Uh-huh, yes.
13       Q.    And a professor in what area, or what
14   department?
15       A.    Communications.  I have an
16   interdisciplinary appointment, and I've had that
17   most of my -- do you want all the departments?
18       Q.    If there is any other departments that
19   you've been involved in, other than
20   communications.
21       A.    Medical humanities and social sciences
22   program.  And that appointment is in the college
23   of medicine.  And the gender and women's studies
24   program, and the Institute of Communications

                                                                     9
 1   research.
 2       Q.    Okay.  And were you a professor then
 3   from 1982 until 2004?
 4       A.    Yes.
 5       Q.    Since you retired in 2004 you indicated
 6   that you continued to teach, but have you had any
 7   other formal positions?
 8       A.    No.
 9       Q.    I understand that you are currently a
10   member of the Board of Trustees for Antioch
11   University, correct?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    How long have you sat on that board?
14       A.    My first meeting was in October of 2002.
15       Q.    What are the terms or what terms were
16   you elected to?
17       A.    The first year to my recollection I was
18   filling in a term for someone who had left, and I
19   was on for a year.  Then I was reappointed for
20   three years.  And then I was reappointed in, I
21   guess it would be --
22       Q.    '06?
23       A.    '06, for three more years.
24       Q.    Okay.  So, your current term expires

                                                                    10
 1   next year?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    How did you become a board member?  How
 4   did that come about, going back to October of
 5   2002, when you were asked to fill in?
 6       A.    Two members of the board, I was first
 7   called by a then board member named Bill Hooper
 8   who lives in Yellow Springs and is a long term
 9   family friend.  And then he and Amy Chapel, who is
10   now on the board, came to Champaign and we had
11   lunch and they explained to me what being a board
12   member involved.  And asked me if I would consider
13   it.
14       Q.    Okay.  Ultimately you agreed?
15       A.    Yes.
16       Q.    Dr. Treichler, when did you first learn
17   that Antioch University was considering suspending
18   operations at Antioch College?
19       A.    In June of 2007.
20       Q.    And that is when the decision was made?
21       A.    In that month.
22       Q.    Okay.  And what were the reasons for
23   suspending operations at Antioch College?
24             MR. SLUTSKY: I'm going to object on

                                                                    11
 1   grounds of ambiguity.  You are saying what reasons
 2   was she told by someone, what reasons does she
 3   think?  I think it's unclear.
 4       Q.    I'm just asking for her understanding of
 5   what the factual basis for the decision was; if
 6   that's clear.
 7       A.    For example, as written in the
 8   resolution?
 9       Q.    Okay.  And we have the resolution, I'm
10   probably going to ask you to look at that later.
11   I was just asking you, what is your understanding
12   of what the factual basis for the decision was?
13       A.    The reason presented, the facts
14   presented to the board, really involved a dire
15   financial situation.
16       Q.    Was it primarily a financial decision?
17       A.    Yes.  That is at least how we understood
18   it.
19       Q.    Okay.  After you became aware of that,
20   what other alternatives were presented for your
21   consideration as a board member?
22       A.    One alternative was to keep the college
23   open with no additional intervention of any kind.
24   In other words, continue the path as it was.

                                                                    12
 1       Q.    Do nothing?
 2       A.    Do nothing.
 3       Q.    Okay.
 4       A.    The second alternative was keep the
 5   college open, but -- what was the second
 6   alternative?  The second alternative was, as I
 7   recall, to keep the college open, but to suppose
 8   that we could do more cutbacks of the budget for
 9   the college, and raise more money.
10       Q.    Okay.
11       A.    So, keep it open with interventions of
12   both more money and less costs.
13       Q.    Okay.  And any other options?
14       A.    The third alternative was to suspend
15   operations at the college, and with the
16   possibility of reopening at a later date.
17       Q.    And ultimately that was the option that
18   was adopted by the board?
19       A.    Yes.
20       Q.    Did you agree with that decision?
21       A.    I did not.
22       Q.    Okay.  Why not?
23       A.    The term used was financial exigency.
24   And because that term was declared, because there

                                                                    13
 1   was a declaration of financial exigency, I
 2   believed that the terms required to declare that
 3   that condition had not been met.
 4       Q.    What in particular did you think had not
 5   been met?
 6       A.    Let me just clarify one thing.
 7       Q.    That's fine.
 8       A.    That I'm not disputing dire financial
 9   straits.
10       Q.    Understood?
11       A.    It's the use of the term financial
12   exigency.  And that declaration, in my
13   understanding, requires that there must be
14   consultation with the faculty who are to be
15   affected within the institution that's to be
16   closed, and that a shared governance model
17   requires that a discussion with the faculty seek
18   less drastic means than declaration of financial
19   exigency, and suspending operations.
20       Q.    Before the decision would be made?
21       A.    Right.
22       Q.    There should be consultation?
23       A.    Right.
24       Q.    Okay.  Apart from that sort of the

                                                                    14
 1   procedural issue, were there any other reasons why
 2   you disagreed with the decision to declare
 3   financial exigency at that time?
 4       A.    Financial exigency puts -- it limits the
 5   possibilities for taking steps to get out of
 6   financial exigency.
 7       Q.    Okay.  Such as what type of steps?
 8       A.    Such as if financial exigency is
 9   declared, decisions are taken out of the hands of
10   the faculty.  And they can no longer take their
11   own steps to reduce costs or earn more money.
12   That's my understanding.
13             Furthermore, once an institution is put
14   into financial exigency, its ability to do things
15   like recruit students, send out public
16   information, raise money, do fund raising, all of
17   those things become more difficult because it has
18   this declaration.
19       Q.    Focusing on the fund raising piece, I
20   can understand what you mean by the declaration
21   making that more difficult.  Were any efforts
22   taken before the declaration to try and raise
23   funds?
24       A.    Yes.

                                                                    15
 1       Q.    Okay.  What efforts were undertaken?
 2       A.    There was a large capital campaign on
 3   behalf of the college which as I recall was being
 4   launched the same year that I went on the board,
 5   2002.  A campaign cabinet had formed.  It was led
 6   by Robert Grinski, who had been on the Board of
 7   Trustees.  And it was in, I think a three-year
 8   silent phase in which attempts would be made to go
 9   to significant donors, get a certain amount of
10   money, and then open it up publicly.
11       Q.    Okay.  I didn't mean to interrupt.
12       A.    Go ahead.
13       Q.    The three-year silent phase being from
14   '02 to '05?
15       A.    That is my recollection.
16       Q.    Okay.  And then to open it up more
17   generally to the public in '05?
18       A.    Then to announce it, and say this is how
19   much more money we have to raise.
20       Q.    Okay.  Was that campaign successful?
21       A.    It was successful up to a point, but it
22   did not meet its goals.
23       Q.    Okay.  Why did it not meet its goals?
24       A.    There are probably many ways to answer

                                                                    16
 1   that question.  The one that, one of the points I
 2   will make is that, and I believe this would be
 3   generally agreed to, is that the college's
 4   financial situation and the university's financial
 5   situation really made it very difficult to
 6   sufficiently staff the operations that would be
 7   needed to do that kind of fund raising.
 8       Q.    Okay.  Anything else other than sort of
 9   a lack of support for the administrative support?
10       A.    One of the other major reasons is that
11   the figure that we've been given is that Antioch
12   College has roughly 17,000 alumni.  Many of those
13   alumni have felt alienated and cut off from the
14   college since the 1970s.  And many have been
15   reluctant, especially once in I guess '78 is when
16   the University structure was created.  But,
17   certainly in the eighties, nineties, and
18   thereafter have been reluctant to give because
19   they didn't trust the University.  They may also
20   not have trusted the college.  But, if it had been
21   just a college, they might have been more ready to
22   give.
23             So, it was a combination both on the
24   side of the alumni and their views of the college

                                                                    17
 1   and the University, and also the problems within
 2   the institution of reaching out to those alumni
 3   because there weren't enough staff.
 4       Q.    Other than those issues, any other
 5   problems you saw with the capital campaign?
 6       A.    Well, with the financial situation, I
 7   mean part of the problem going along with the dire
 8   financial situation was declining enrollment.  And
 9   so while that didn't directly constrain the
10   capital campaign, it had an effect certainly I
11   believe on staffing.
12       Q.    While you were on the board was anything
13   done or any steps undertaken to address what I'll
14   call the alienation of the alumni?
15       A.    Many discussions were held about it.
16       Q.    Was anything in particular done to
17   address it?
18       A.    Well, there is several aspects to that
19   situation.  There has been an active alumni
20   association and alumni board throughout even
21   during the worst of times and the best of times.
22   And that board has remained active and has done a
23   great deal for the college.  So that's one piece
24   of it, that active group.

                                                                    18
 1             There has also been, I would say
 2   erratic, periodic efforts to do a big mailing to
 3   alumni to let them know what's going on.  To keep
 4   up the newsletters and things like that.  But, I
 5   would say that I would have to answer no, overall,
 6   that there has not been really any truly effective
 7   means of reaching all those alumni changing.
 8             Oh, but the one other piece I wanted to
 9   mention is that in, I guess the 1980s, and I'm not
10   sure of when this began, but one graduate of
11   Antioch College established the Antioch
12   Independence Fund and wrote to all the alumni and
13   asked them to send her their donations rather than
14   sending it to the college, to the annual fund or
15   to some other program at the college on donations
16   to Antioch College.
17             By the time I went on the board, the
18   AIF, it was called, was up to about three-quarters
19   of a million dollars I think.  And that was just a
20   constant reminder of alienation to the alumni who
21   would get mailings from the woman who ran that
22   fund and from the college trying to, and
23   University, trying to tell people not to pay
24   attention to the fund, but to send money to the

                                                                    19
 1   college and the University instead.
 2       Q.    Okay.  You mentioned in particular that
 3   there was sort of distrust of Antioch University.
 4   Was anything done to sort of address the issues as
 5   to why people felt that way and alleviate it?
 6       A.    I think when, in 1985 or '84 when Alan
 7   Guskin was hired to be president of the college,
 8   and CEO, I can't remember exactly how those fit
 9   together at that time, but --
10       Q.    That was what year?
11       A.    Well, '85 is when his inauguration was,
12   and it was a big inauguration.  It had to be held
13   under a tent because no building was in sufficient
14   shape to be able to hold people if it rained.  I
15   mean, things had come to that.  Faculty were
16   actually out on the campus picking up papers with
17   those pointed sticks.  And he turned things around
18   for, I would say there was about a five-year
19   period when the University and college together
20   seemed as though they could go forward and thrive.
21       Q.    Right.  But, after you joined the board
22   was anything done to try and sort of restore that
23   or to address those issues?
24             MR. SLUTSKY: Again, the issues being?

                                                                    20
 1       Q.    The alienation, the distrust.
 2       A.    Apart from the capital campaign?
 3       Q.    Well, was the capital campaign intended
 4   to address --
 5       A.    It was.
 6       Q.    -- the distrust?
 7       A.    Yes.  It was.  It was an attempt to
 8   restore confidence.
 9       Q.    Okay.
10       A.    And to restore fiscal stability.
11       Q.    Going back, we sort of went off on a
12   tangent, but we were talking about the decision to
13   declare financial exigency.  Did the issue of
14   tenure play any role in the decision to suspend
15   operations at Antioch College for four years?
16       A.    I think you have to be more specific,
17   something more than just saying any role.
18       Q.    Well, was it considered?  Was it part of
19   the reason for the decision?
20             MR. SLUTSKY: Let me object just to
21   clarify, when you are speaking in terms of the
22   decision to suspend, are you limiting the question
23   to that?  Or also the decision to declare
24   financial exigency?

                                                                    21
 1       Q.    Well, and I wasn't meaning to delineate
 2   between the two.  I guess let me begin by saying,
 3   did it play any role with respect to the
 4   declaration of financial exigency?
 5       A.    No explicit role.
 6       Q.    Okay.  What about with respect to the
 7   decision to suspend operations for four years?
 8       A.    No explicit role.
 9       Q.    Was there any discussion of the issue of
10   tenure in connection with those issues?
11       A.    No explicit discussion.  In other words,
12   no discussion where someone said let us now
13   discuss the impact on tenure or the impact of
14   tenure on these decisions.
15       Q.    Okay.  Was there any discussion at all
16   regarding tenure?
17       A.    There was at the June meeting, there was
18   one comment by one of the trustees about tenure.
19       Q.    Okay.  What was that comment?  First of
20   all, who was that?
21       A.    It was Bruce Bedford, the chair of the
22   finance committee.
23       Q.    Okay.  What did Mr. Bedford say?
24       A.    It was in the context of explaining,

                                                                    22
 1   trying to get the board to understand the concept
 2   of financial exigency.  And why it might be, why
 3   it was distinct from bankruptcy.  Why it was not
 4   exactly the same as bankruptcy.
 5             And that discussion was taking place;
 6   what is financial exigency?  And Bruce Bedford
 7   said, and I'm paraphrasing, but he said we need to
 8   set aside the emotional aspects of declaring
 9   financial exigency.  It is the only way that we
10   can not have to pay tenured faculty.  At the other
11   campuses we could simply lay them off.
12       Q.    Dr. Treichler, I'm going to hand you a
13   notebook here, which has some exhibits in it.  And
14   here is a copy.  I'm going to direct your
15   attention to certain exhibits and ask you some
16   specific questions about them.
17             And let me begin by directing your
18   attention to what is tabbed, as you can see they
19   got tabs as well as they will have exhibit
20   stickers, but direct your attention to what has
21   been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 2.  Do you have
22   that in front of you?
23       A.    Yes.
24       Q.    Directing your attention there to the

                                                                    23
 1   first paragraph, about the fifth line down there
 2   is a sentence that begins, it is now clear, do you
 3   see that?
 4       A.    Uh-huh.
 5       Q.    It is now clear that the college's
 6   resources are not sufficient to sustain itself,
 7   and its options to reverse this trend have been
 8   exhausted.  Do you agree with that statement?
 9       A.    No.
10       Q.    Okay.  Why not?
11       A.    As I mentioned before, to talk about the
12   college's options and not to have consulted the
13   faculty or worked with the faculty and with the
14   campus community, if you haven't done that, then
15   you have not exhausted your options.
16       Q.    Okay.  Let me ask you this:  Was another
17   option to also approach the alumni about the
18   situation?
19       A.    Yes.  That would have been another
20   option.
21       Q.    Was that done?
22       A.    No.
23       Q.    If I could direct your attention then to
24   the next page, the first full paragraph, and I'm

                                                                    24
 1   just going to read this to help you, but the first
 2   two sentences, as a result Antioch College has
 3   survived in recent years through reliance on
 4   financial subsidies from the five nonresidential
 5   campuses of Antioch University, which are the
 6   successful survivors of the expansion initiative
 7   of the late 1960s.  And then next sentence says,
 8   but those subsidies now exceed levels that are
 9   sustainable over the long-term because they
10   deprive the nonresidential campuses of the funds
11   they need to remain competitive in their local
12   markets.  Do you agree with that statement about
13   the subsidies from the nonresidential campuses to
14   Antioch College?
15       A.    Yes, I do.
16       Q.    Can you explain what the issue there is,
17   or what the concern was?
18       A.    On the part of the residential campuses?
19   Or --
20       Q.    Well, what was the issue that was being
21   dealt with, as far as this part of the board
22   resolution?
23       A.    That by, if one of the residential
24   campuses, let's say Antioch Seattle.

                                                                    25
 1       Q.    And you mean residential or
 2   nonresidential?
 3       A.    Nonresidential campuses did well,
 4   marketed its programs well, got good enrollments,
 5   was prudent in its expenditures, and managed to
 6   come out of the year in the black, whatever that
 7   was left over would often be taken from Seattle
 8   and transferred to the college.
 9       Q.    Okay.
10       A.    So, that there was no incentive built
11   into this structure for those campuses to do well
12   or to have initiative.  They had no -- I mean,
13   they did go on doing the best they could, but they
14   could never plan ahead.
15       Q.    Because of the financial drain?
16       A.    Yes.
17       Q.    Of Antioch College, the undergraduate
18   program?
19       A.    Yes.  And I agreed with that.
20       Q.    If I could direct your attention to the
21   next page, the last full paragraph, the statement
22   there, the first sentence, yet the infusion of
23   capital necessary to substantially improve
24   buildings and undertake new construction is

                                                                    26
 1   lacking.  The renewal commission noted that while
 2   Antioch has embarked on a capital campaign with a
 3   goal of raising 65 million, only about 30 million
 4   have been committed.
 5             Is that the capital campaign you were
 6   referring to earlier?
 7       A.    When the renewal commission was
 8   established, there was, I'm not quite sure what
 9   word to use, but an effort to make a transition
10   between the capital campaign as it had been
11   envisioned to the renewal commission to obtaining
12   support for the renewal commission and its
13   initiative.
14       Q.    Okay.  And it notes there a goal of
15   raising 65 million; that was for the renewal
16   commission plan?
17       A.    I think that was the initial capital
18   campaign.  So that -- I'm sorry, repeat the
19   question.
20       Q.    Well, my question was, was the goal of
21   raising 65 million, when had that been set?
22       A.    It's my recollection that there was not
23   an adjustment, a special adjustment in the goal,
24   of what we were going to try to raise between the

                                                                    27
 1   initial capital campaign and the renewal
 2   commission.  But, I could be wrong about that.  I
 3   don't quite remember.
 4       Q.    Fair enough.  Going back to when the
 5   goal of 65 million had been set, was there a time
 6   frame set on that as to when that was expected to
 7   be completed?
 8       A.    I think it was a five or six year
 9   campaign.
10       Q.    So, it would have been around '07 or
11   '08?
12       A.    I think so.  I think so.  Yeah.  That
13   was the first year that I was on the board when I
14   really took in those things and I was kind of in a
15   fog.  It was very new to me.
16       Q.    Fair enough.  Let me ask you
17   specifically though, the inability to raise the
18   full 65 million, do you think that that was due in
19   any part to failures by the board?
20       A.    Yes.
21       Q.    What do you think the board failed to do
22   to help sustain or insure that that campaign would
23   be successful?
24       A.    Board members are expected to give at a

                                                                    28
 1   certain level according to their means.  But also
 2   to go to other prospective donors and get -- so as
 3   early as the first meeting that I went to, the
 4   outside, the firm that was the outside consultant
 5   for the capital campaign, had a plan whereby a
 6   board member would be paired with one of their
 7   staff or with the Antioch College development
 8   staff.  And we would go out across the country to
 9   different donors, and it was to be perfectly
10   coordinated and we were all to get trained in how
11   to do fund raising and approach donors.  And it
12   never went anywhere.
13             So, there were perhaps, I don't know,
14   probably three or four board members who were
15   quite experienced and who were active in visiting
16   donors and working with the development staff and
17   with the capital campaign staff.  But for most of
18   us we were never brought into that process as it
19   had been envisioned that we would be.
20       Q.    In other words, the board wasn't used as
21   a resource to help promote the capital campaign?
22       A.    Right.  And -- right.
23       Q.    Okay.  Any other failures by the board
24   to adequately support the program, other than what

                                                                    29
 1   you've already talked about?
 2       A.    Well, at each board meeting, we were
 3   given lists of -- we were given information on how
 4   many board members had contributed to the college,
 5   the University, the other campuses and so forth.
 6   And while it was always a majority, it was very
 7   rarely unanimous.  So, some board members were not
 8   giving anything.  Some were giving a great deal.
 9   And the efforts to, I think only one effort was
10   made, in my case anyway, to tell me exactly what I
11   should be giving.
12       Q.    Okay.  Let me ask you more generally
13   about the renewal program.  Or the renewal
14   commission plan that was implemented in around
15   '05, '06.  Was that a successful program?
16       A.    I thought it had considerable potential.
17       Q.    Okay.  How did it work out when it was
18   rolled out on campus?
19       A.    The report at the time is somewhat
20   different from the report in retrospect.
21       Q.    Okay.
22       A.    So I'll start with the report at the
23   time.
24       Q.    Okay.

                                                                    30
 1       A.    Was that it was very successful, and
 2   that the faculty, this was the report given us by
 3   the chief academic officer of the college.
 4       Q.    Who would that be?
 5       A.    That would have been Rick Jurasek at the
 6   time who was interim president, I think, while
 7   they searched for a permanent president.  And his
 8   report to the board was that the faculty were so
 9   excited about this new program that they wanted to
10   begin implementing it a year early.
11       Q.    And when did he make that, approximately
12   when was that report made to the board?
13       A.    I think it would have been in -- I
14   actually can't remember whether the, I think this
15   is the first year, is this the first year?  I
16   can't ask you questions, right?
17       Q.    And I can --
18       A.    I'm just trying to recall the time table
19   here.
20       Q.    Well, let me try and help you.
21   Referring you again to the report there in front
22   of you, or actually the Antioch University Board
23   of Trustees declaration of financial exigency, if
24   you could turn to, and the pages are unnumbered, I

                                                                    31
 1   believe it is page four, begins up top full
 2   paragraph, "in an effort"?
 3       A.    Uh-huh.
 4       Q.    And if you --
 5       A.    Okay.
 6       Q.    Go down?
 7       A.    To 06-07.
 8       Q.    Okay.  Students began to be enrolled in
 9   this new program in 06-07?
10       A.    Yes.
11       Q.    So, with that sort of as a starting
12   point, when did Mr. Jurasek report to you that it
13   was going very well, or that it was very
14   enthusiastically received?
15       A.    I think it would have been probably the
16   spring of '06. Possibly the summer.  But, I think
17   it was the -- I think it was the spring.
18       Q.    Okay.  Did you subsequently receive a
19   different report concerning the success of the
20   renewal commission plan?
21       A.    What we received later was the
22   information that there had been miscommunication,
23   at least this is what we on the board had been
24   given to understand.  That Rick Jurasek told the

                                                                    32
 1   faculty that he wanted, that the board wanted the
 2   program to start a year ahead of schedule.
 3       Q.    Okay.
 4       A.    But he told the board that the faculty
 5   wanted it to start a year ahead of schedule.  Now,
 6   that, so I'm just reporting what we were told or
 7   pieced together after the fact.
 8       Q.    Well, let me ask you the parts that you
 9   would know.  And that is, Mr. Jurasek did report
10   to you as a board member that the faculty was
11   requesting that it be implemented a year earlier?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    Did the board ever direct that it be
14   implemented a year earlier?
15       A.    No.
16       Q.    Now, with that plan being implemented in
17   '05 and '06 --
18       A.    Could I just go back to that last
19   question?
20       Q.    You sure can.
21       A.    The board as a whole, as an official
22   body, certainly never mandated that the program
23   start early.  But, there were at least two or
24   three board members who were on the renewal

                                                                    33
 1   commission, as was Rick Jurasek, as was Anjae
 2   Block and some other people from the college.  And
 3   what may have transpired among them, I don't know.
 4       Q.    Fair enough.  That's why I was just
 5   asking you if the board had actually directed sort
 6   of the acceleration.  But stepping back from sort
 7   of those discussions about accelerating or not or
 8   what was expected when the plan would be
 9   implemented, how did the plan actually work out
10   when it was indeed implemented?
11       A.    Well, one way to answer that might be to
12   say that several of us on the board made a point
13   of inviting faculty and students to come talk to
14   the board about their experience.  And some of us
15   made a point of speaking with individual faculty
16   who we knew had been involved in the program, and
17   if there were opportunities speaking to students
18   that we might have known.
19             And my understanding from those reports
20   was that although the accelerated start up had
21   been rather stressful, that the people actually
22   engaged in the program were pleased with it.  They
23   felt it needed revisions of course.  But, they
24   were excited and they thought it was a very

                                                                    34
 1   interesting and educational experience.
 2       Q.    Okay.  Let me ask you this:  Was part of
 3   the purpose of the renewal commission plan to help
 4   increase enrollment?
 5       A.    Yes.
 6       Q.    Was it successful in that regard?
 7       A.    There are disputes about that question.
 8       Q.    Okay.  Enlighten me.
 9       A.    If you look at the overall numbers of
10   students and the decline in enrollment from say
11   04-05, to 06-07, say over a two year period,
12   certainly there was not the growth in enrollment
13   that had been hoped for or predicted.
14             But, I have also been told that if you
15   look at which students actually left the college
16   who were already there, it was not the first and
17   second year students who were engaged in the
18   renewal commission and in the learning
19   communities.  But, it was more the third and
20   fourth year students who felt somewhat abandoned
21   and felt as though the best faculty had been sort
22   of detailed to be in the learning communities.  So
23   the first and second year students were doing
24   better.

                                                                    35
 1             But, I haven't myself sat down with
 2   numbers and class photos and figured out exactly
 3   who stayed and who left.  But, those are the two
 4   differing perspectives.
 5       Q.    Did you think that the renewal
 6   commission plan would require some time for
 7   implementation?
 8       A.    Yes.
 9       Q.    How long did you think it would take to
10   really get it up and running?
11             MR. SLUTSKY: Objection as to ambiquity.
12   When you say you, are you asking her personally?
13       Q.    Yeah, her personal.
14             MR. SLUTSKY: Or as a board?
15       Q.    Her personal?
16       A.    Well, I wasn't on the renewal
17   commission.
18       Q.    I understand.
19       A.    I did read the report.  I certainly
20   would have thought three years minimum, probably
21   five, because you would have to almost see a class
22   through.  Certainly through two years.  And then
23   you would have to see what happened then.
24             You really needed a graduating class

                                                                    36
 1   before you could judge the overall effectiveness,
 2   I think.  But, certainly three years would have
 3   given you data.
 4       Q.    Okay.  Did the board make any
 5   committment as far as how long the faculty would
 6   be given to implement the renewal commission?
 7       A.    My understanding was that it was three
 8   years.
 9       Q.    Okay.  If I could direct your attention
10   to the next page.  Actually one more page.  The
11   one with the chart at the top.  The second full
12   paragraph that begins, "in addition".  And in
13   particular, I'm not going to read it, but I wanted
14   to direct your attention, if you take a moment to
15   read through that paragraph.  In particular, I was
16   focusing on the numbers there at the bottom, the
17   decline in inquiries from 03-04 from $11,000 down
18   to less than $3,500.  And the number of
19   applications from 600 to 400 in a fairly short
20   period of time, just over a two year period.  Do
21   you have an understanding as to what caused that
22   sort of dramatic decline there from '03 to '06?
23       A.    I would say that if I were to take the
24   board meetings that I have been to, we've probably

                                                                    37
 1   heard 20 different explanations for Antioch
 2   College's enrollment at one time or another.
 3             So, it is very difficult for me to draw
 4   my own conclusions from these numbers.  In fact,
 5   the numbers themselves don't really tell me
 6   everything that I would need to know.
 7             I don't know, for example, whether -- I
 8   don't know who all this counts.  I mean, for a
 9   long time just before I came on the board there
10   was continual confusion between students by head
11   count and students by full-time equivalent.  So
12   those would be kind of almost used interchangeably
13   at times.  So, that there might be 150 bodies that
14   you were talking about, but it would add up only
15   to say 75 full time equivalents, because to make
16   it simple they were all going half time.
17             So, I would need more information about
18   that.  But, just looking at these figures, I would
19   be reluctant certainly to attribute the decline in
20   enrollments here to anything intrinsic to Antioch
21   College.  Or to the renewal commissions plan.  I
22   would be much more inclined to attribute it to
23   turnover in the admissions office, no one knew how
24   to work the postage meter, to that kind of, to an

                                                                    38
 1   administrative structural problems, rather than
 2   the programs per se.
 3       Q.    If I could direct your attention on to a
 4   couple more pages, and it's actually an attachment
 5   to the declaration itself, that begins with
 6   preamble.  Let me first of all ask you, Doctor, if
 7   you are familiar with this particular document?
 8       A.    Yes.
 9       Q.    Can you tell me what that is, or what
10   were the circumstances under which you became
11   familiar with the preamble?
12             MR. SLUTSKY: The document you are
13   referring to, just the two pages?
14       Q.    The two page preamble.
15       A.    I think that as I recall, the first time
16   I saw the preamble is when material was released
17   for the alumni weekend, reunion weekend in June.
18       Q.    Okay.
19       A.    I don't think, we didn't see this in
20   June.  I first saw it about two weeks later I
21   think.
22       Q.    So you did not see this particular
23   document until after the board had already adopted
24   the declaration?

                                                                    39
 1       A.    Right.
 2       Q.    Okay.  Of financial --
 3       A.    As I understood it, this was an attempt
 4   to clarify for the public and for alumni the
 5   reasoning that had gone into the resolutions that
 6   aren't completely self explanatory.
 7       Q.    With respect to this preamble, were you
 8   as a board member given a chance to review it
 9   before it was disseminated to the public?
10       A.    I certainly was not.
11       Q.    Okay.  If I could direct your attention
12   down to the third paragraph of that.  And ask you
13   if you would just read that to yourself.  It's the
14   one beginning with ongoing discussions.
15       A.    Yes.
16       Q.    Is that paragraph accurate?
17             MR. SLUTSKY: I'm going to object because
18   it's a very much of a compound question.  Because
19   there's a lot in that paragraph.
20       Q.    Let me ask you, is there anything in
21   that paragraph that is inaccurate?
22       A.    In the second sentence when you say,
23   when it says all options were thoroughly examined.
24   The passive voice there makes it unclear who

                                                                    40
 1   participated in that examination.
 2       Q.    Okay.  From your perspective as a member
 3   of the board, did you participate in a thorough
 4   review of all options?
 5       A.    Given that in my view a thorough review
 6   of all options would have required a discussion
 7   with and among the faculty, I would have to say
 8   that I did not believe that everything had been
 9   thoroughly examined.
10       Q.    Okay.  Focusing again on that same
11   sentence, let me ask you some specific questions.
12   It talks about all options were thoroughly
13   examined, including the prospect of requesting
14   judicial review to free the endowment from
15   restrictions.  Were you involved in examining that
16   option?
17       A.    I believe it was presented to us and
18   some of the technical difficulties of doing that
19   were reviewed.
20       Q.    Okay.  What about making severe
21   reductions in health care and retirement benefits?
22             MR. SLUTSKY: It's your question whether
23   that was presented?
24       Q.    Whether that was presented or she was

                                                                    41
 1   involved in reviewing that option?
 2       A.    I don't recall.
 3       Q.    Any discussion of that?
 4       A.    Well, it seems to me that that would
 5   have come from probably the finance committee.  I
 6   really, I can't remember discussions of health
 7   care and retirement benefits.
 8       Q.    Okay.  Then the next clause there goes
 9   on to talk about selling some or all of the assets
10   of other campuses of Antioch.  Do you recall any
11   discussion of that potential option?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    What do you recall about that?
14       A.    That it wouldn't, it really -- that it
15   wouldn't solve the problem.  It wasn't sufficient
16   to solve the problem.
17       Q.    Okay.  And then finally it talks about
18   making creative use of assets in Yellow Springs.
19       A.    Yes.  That was discussed extensively.
20       Q.    Okay.  Can you explain what that means?
21   Making creative use of assets?
22       A.    Well, I can certainly, I remember one
23   example, the one example that as I recall we
24   talked about at greatest length was taking the

                                                                    42
 1   property which is around and behind the Fells
 2   building, so let's see it would be on the --
 3   west side of Livermore Street, and creating low to
 4   mid-level housing that could be used by faculty
 5   or -- especially faculty.  But, other people in
 6   Yellow Springs, there's kind of a lack there of
 7   mid-priced housing.
 8             And it was seen that that could perhaps,
 9   that we could have these units constructed there
10   that would help faculty be able to afford housing
11   because a lot of the younger faculty especially
12   live outside of town because they can't afford to
13   live within Yellow Springs.  But also it would
14   bring in revenue and it would, by selling pieces
15   of that property, it would give us enough money to
16   actually build the structures that we needed to
17   build.
18       Q.    Okay.  Other than that particular piece,
19   do you recall any other discussion under the
20   auspices of making creative use of assets in
21   Yellow Springs?
22       A.    There was talk of when the McGregor
23   building was in the process of being kind of put
24   on the table, and the idea of it being part of

                                                                    43
 1   this research park, research and commercial park,
 2   there was discussion then of trying to duplicate
 3   the kind of incubation of innovative businesses
 4   and innovative projects that Arthur Morgan had
 5   espoused in the thirties and forties and some of
 6   the merchants in Yellow Springs indicated that
 7   they were kind of thinking along those lines also
 8   of something like a little baby Yellow Springs
 9   instrument company, or a baby Antioch book plate
10   company, or something like that.
11             So, that was another thing that was
12   actually one of the aspects of the McGregor
13   proposal that was attractive to some of us on the
14   board.
15       Q.    To help support the college?
16       A.    It would have been in part to help
17   support the college, but it would have been
18   another revenue stream.
19       Q.    If you go down to the next paragraph
20   then, the second sentence says the president of
21   the college made a valiant appeal to keep the
22   college open which was judged to be imaginative
23   and constructive, but with little promise of
24   success to sustain the college over the long-term.

                                                                    44
 1   Were you present when the president made that
 2   appeal?
 3       A.    No.
 4       Q.    Do you know, well, the president is
 5   Steve Laury, correct?
 6       A.    Right.  Yes.  Steve Laury.
 7       Q.    And when was that appeal made?
 8       A.    It was my understanding that the appeal
 9   was not made to the board directly, but to the
10   group called the University Leadership Council.
11   And to the chancellor.  And possibly to the
12   campus.  I don't know.  But, his -- he was in a
13   sense, he was not given an opportunity to present
14   it directly to the board.
15       Q.    Okay.  You mentioned a few things, and
16   let me just clarify them for the record.  The
17   University Leadership Council.  What is the
18   University Leadership Council?
19       A.    It is the presidents of the other, of
20   all of the Antioch campuses.  So, McGregor,
21   Antioch, McGregor, Seattle, Antioch College, New
22   England, and then LA and Santa Barbara, which are
23   now two presidents, but before were one.
24       Q.    And the presidents, anyone else on the

                                                                    45
 1   University?
 2       A.    The chancellor, and I don't know whether
 3   the chief financial officer is counted as part of
 4   the leadership council.  But, there were
 5   administrative staff people who would be present
 6   at those meetings certainly.
 7       Q.    Okay.  So, the appeal was made by the
 8   president to the other presidents, as well as to
 9   the chancellor, is that your understanding?
10       A.    That is my understanding.
11       Q.    Do you know what was in his appeal that
12   was imaginative and constructive?
13       A.    No.
14       Q.    Who made the decision not to share sort
15   of that appeal or the contents of it with the
16   board?
17       A.    I don't know.
18       Q.    Okay.  If you go to page two of that,
19   the last paragraph second sentence talks about as
20   difficult as it was for the board to exercise its
21   fiduciary obligation in this way, the board
22   understood that the hardship for the diligent,
23   imaginative and dedicated faculty and students of
24   Antioch College, and the broader Antioch

                                                                    46
 1   community, including alumni and residents of the
 2   village of Yellow Springs, was incalculable.  Did
 3   you agree with that statement?
 4       A.    Not a perfect sentence.  Do I agree that
 5   the board understood this, or do I agree that --
 6       Q.    Do you agree with the statement?  You
 7   yourself?
 8       A.    That the hardship was incalculable.
 9   Yes.
10       Q.    Okay.  As an alumni of the college, has
11   the possible suspension of the college harmed you
12   in any way or affected you?
13       A.    That's a hard question to answer.  I
14   think it depends on what you mean by harm.
15       Q.    I'm not talking monetary harm, if that
16   makes it easier.
17             MR. SLUTSKY:  In her role as an alum?
18       Q.    As an alumni of the college.
19       A.    So, has it been a psychic hardship?  Or
20   emotional hardship or --
21       Q.    Or perhaps harmed you as far as, in your
22   view, the prestige attached to your degree?
23       A.    No.
24             MR. GROVES: Objection.  You can answer

                                                                    47
 1   when I object unless your attorney instructs you
 2   not to.  I wasn't objecting to your answer.  I was
 3   objecting to the question.  Since it was the first
 4   time anybody else objected, I thought I better
 5   clarify that.
 6       Q.    Let me ask you this, Professor.  As a
 7   board member were you given a significant amount
 8   of financial -- well, strike that significant.
 9   Were you given financial information with respect
10   to the motion or the proposal to declare financial
11   exigency?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    And obviously you had an opportunity to
14   review that information?
15       A.    Uh-huh.
16             MR. SLUTSKY: Was that, you need to
17   answer yes or no instead of uh-huh or uh-uh.
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    Did you have any concerns about the
20   accuracy of any of that information?
21       A.    Yes.
22       Q.    What concerns did you have?
23       A.    I don't have financial expertise.  And
24   it's a lot of information.  And I am not qualified

                                                                    48
 1   to analyze the raw data myself, and I am -- I do
 2   not know how the raw data were turned in to the
 3   presentations that we were given.  And so I had to
 4   accept the judgment of other people that it was
 5   complete.  That it was accurate.  That it told the
 6   story it purported to tell.  And as an academic, I
 7   would have to say therefore that I did not feel, I
 8   didn't feel equipped to make my own independent
 9   judgment, but I did not like taking the judgment
10   of other people as self evident as it was
11   presented.
12       Q.    Well, let me ask you this:  Who were you
13   being asked to rely on as far as telling you that
14   this information is accurate?
15       A.    The chancellor, the chief financial
16   officer, a financial consultant, a consultant,
17   another consultant on governance and structure,
18   the finance committee.  That was really, I would
19   say, the major voices who were assuring us that
20   this was complete and accurate.
21       Q.    Okay.  You mentioned a financial
22   consultant.  Who was that?
23       A.    I don't remember his name.
24       Q.    Was it an independent third party?

                                                                    49
 1       A.    Yes.
 2       Q.    Since you indicated you were put in a
 3   position of relying on that information, have you
 4   since, has anything come to your attention to
 5   indicate that any of that information was indeed
 6   inaccurate or misleading?
 7       A.    Again, I have only been -- I have only
 8   heard that from people who would -- I'm no better
 9   qualified to judge than I was then.  So, again,
10   I'm taking the word of --
11       Q.    Third parties?
12       A.    Right. Whose interest would be different
13   from those who presented the data originally.
14       Q.    Nobody has shown you, to put it another
15   way?  In other words, you haven't had the data
16   shown to you or identified for you as being
17   inaccurate as opposed to people telling you?
18       A.    Right.  I guess I would say that I would
19   have to think very hard, I might be able to come
20   up with examples where I felt I had been shown.
21   But, I can't recall any now.
22       Q.    Okay.
23             (A break was taken, and the deposition
24   continued as follows:)

                                                                    50
 1   BY MR. PRICE:
 2       Q.    Professor, let me next ask you, is it
 3   accurate to state that the problem or what the
 4   declaration of financial exigency and the
 5   suspension of the college was intended to do was
 6   to prevent the college from acting as a drain on
 7   the other campuses run by the University?
 8             MR. SLUTSKY: I'm going to object on the
 9   grounds of ambiguity as to whose intent you are
10   asking about.
11       Q.    I'm asking about her understanding.  I
12   apologize if I used the --
13       A.    My understanding of the board's intent
14   or of the intent of the resolution?
15       Q.    The intent of the resolution?
16       A.    Of the two resolutions?
17       Q.    Yes.
18       A.    That would certainly be part of it, yes.
19       Q.    Okay.  And how was it envisioned or what
20   was your understanding as to how the declaration
21   of financial exigency and shutting down Antioch
22   College for four years would address the overall
23   financial concerns?
24       A.    It was my understanding that by closing,

                                                                    51
 1   by suspending operations, that there would be --
 2   well, it was discussed in different ways.  But,
 3   there would be savings in terms of the physical
 4   plant.  There would be savings in terms of faculty
 5   and staff salaries.  There would be savings in
 6   terms of the whole management of dorms, eating
 7   hall, all the things for student life that are
 8   required to be supplied.  And in addition, there
 9   was the sense that if energy to keep the college
10   open, keep it solvent, quasi solvent, sustain it
11   the way it was, were not draining the energy of
12   the chancellor, for example, that that energy
13   could be turned over productively to seeking
14   outside sources of funding in order to reopen the
15   college at a later date.
16       Q.    In addition though to cutting all those
17   costs, it would also eliminate all of the revenue
18   that was connected with the college, correct?
19       A.    If by revenue you mean tuition, alumni
20   donation.
21       Q.    Financial aid.
22       A.    Financial aid.  Yes.
23       Q.    I mean, I guess more specifically was it
24   your understanding there would still be costs

                                                                    52
 1   associated with even continuing to maintain the
 2   campus and to continue just owning the physical
 3   plant?
 4       A.    Yes, right.
 5       Q.    Correct?  And those costs would continue
 6   notwithstanding suspension, correct?
 7       A.    Yes, there seemed to be several
 8   scenarios there also, in terms of how much would
 9   be closed down.  What kind of maintenance would be
10   needed.  But, yes.  So at varying levels of
11   financial committment.
12       Q.    And there wouldn't be sufficient revenue
13   to cover those costs, I take it, with the
14   suspension?
15       A.    It was my understanding that there would
16   not be.
17       Q.    So the college would still be, although
18   closed, would still be operating in a deficit?
19       A.    Yes.
20       Q.    Okay.
21       A.    Well, it wouldn't be the college any
22   more.  It would still be costing something.
23       Q.    If I could direct your attention to
24   Exhibit 8 in that notebook, it's a document dated

                                                                    53
 1   May 31, 2007, on Antioch University letterhead.  I
 2   think it is seven pages.  But, it does not
 3   indicate an author or anything.  Did you see this
 4   document in the course of your duties as a
 5   trustee?
 6       A.    Not in this form. But this is, and I'm
 7   not sure that at the meeting we saw this level of
 8   detail, but certainly this is the power point
 9   slides that we saw at the meeting were clearly
10   based upon this, and have some --
11       Q.    Relationship?
12       A.    Yes.
13       Q.    But, now I note this document was dated
14   May 31st, was that about a week before the meeting
15   that you are referring to?
16       A.    Yes.
17       Q.    But, you do not believe that you saw a
18   copy of this document at the meeting?
19       A.    Right.  Yes.
20       Q.    Since the meeting, have you seen a copy
21   of this document before today?
22       A.    Not to my knowledge or recollection.
23       Q.    If you could turn to page four there,
24   and specifically where it has scenario two,

                                                                    54
 1   suspend operations and planned reopening,
 2   indicates there in the first sentence for a fixed
 3   period of time, three years, okay.
 4             And then it goes on to say all of the
 5   previous actions related to closure would take
 6   place, and that is referring to the previous
 7   pages, up to the chancellor's appointment of a
 8   commission.
 9       A.    Sorry, where is the chancellor's
10   appointment?
11       Q.    I think if you look --
12       A.    The first paragraph, sure.
13       Q.    Okay.  If you turn there, staying on
14   that page that you go down to July through August
15   of 2007, and it talks about chancellor and senior
16   management meets with village leaders to explore
17   land development company options, and design the
18   urban village concept of a lifelong learning
19   center and facilities of the college.  Are you
20   familiar with what that is referring to?
21       A.    Not exactly.
22       Q.    Do you recall there being any discussion
23   at the board meeting about land development
24   companies?

                                                                    55
 1       A.    It was vague.  But, there was certainly
 2   that private development company is the option as
 3   the phrase that I remember.  But, it could have
 4   been land development company.
 5       Q.    Okay.  Private development company?
 6       A.    Uh-huh.
 7       Q.    Then switching to that phrase, if that
 8   is what you recall hearing, what do you recall
 9   being discussed about a private development
10   company?
11       A.    Well, there was an effort made by a
12   number of board members to attempt to get a sense
13   of what was going on here.  And whether, I recall
14   that we were told that there were private
15   development companies that specialized in working
16   with education, higher education facilities.  And
17   an effort was made on the part of some board
18   members to determine whether those were for-profit
19   or not-for-profit private companies.  And what
20   their involvement in a project like this would be.
21   And what assurance there would be that whatever
22   they were involved in would end up being anything
23   like what was understood in June of 2007 as
24   Antioch College.

                                                                    56
 1             (A break was taken, and the deposition
 2   continued as follows:)
 3   BY MR. PRICE:
 4       Q.    Professor, I asked you a little bit
 5   about the private development company in the
 6   context of that step in July and August of 2007.
 7   Are you aware of whether a private development
 8   company has been engaged at some point?
 9       A.    No, I'm not aware.
10       Q.    Okay.  Have you heard anything further
11   about a private development company since that
12   meeting?  Since the June 2007 meeting?
13       A.    From any source whatsoever?
14       Q.    Well, in your --
15       A.    Or in the board meetings?
16       Q.    Yes?
17       A.    No.
18       Q.    Okay.  If I could ask you to turn to the
19   next page of that document, that would be page
20   five.  And it's actually the last paragraph before
21   you get to year one.  It says, if a land
22   development company, I note this is under June
23   30th, 2008, sort of the heading of items, but it
24   says if a land development company has not been

                                                                    57
 1   engaged the college would move towards permanent
 2   closure.  To your knowledge has a land development
 3   company been engaged to date?
 4       A.    It was, when we left the meeting in June
 5   '07, it was my understanding, and I can not
 6   remember whether this was in one of the
 7   resolutions or this was separate, but the trustees
 8   wanted, there was basically a pretty clear
 9   directive to the chancellor to begin identifying,
10   making contact with, moving forward on this, on
11   contacting people like this as soon as possible so
12   that we wouldn't get to the end of June '08
13   without any kind of something in the works.
14             Not having heard anything more about it,
15   one of the other committees may have been involved
16   in this, but to my knowledge we haven't.  But I
17   would assume that from the time of the reunion on,
18   in other words two weeks after the meeting,
19   certainly by the Cincinnati meeting in August,
20   that the agenda was somewhat changed.
21             So, in other words, I would not be
22   surprised if no contact had been made because of
23   sort of attempting to go in a different direction.
24   But, it may have proceeded.  I don't know.

                                                                    58
 1       Q.    Let me ask you this:  More specifically,
 2   was it your understanding in June of 2007 that if
 3   a land or a private development company could not
 4   be identified and engaged, that the college would
 5   just go ahead and proceed to permanent closure?
 6       A.    That was the where we left it, I
 7   believe.
 8       Q.    That was part of the discussion you had
 9   in June of 2007?
10       A.    Yes. Let me just go back to that point.
11   A land development company was one option that was
12   presented as a source of income for this new
13   college to open.  Okay.  I mean, if someone had
14   said this is the greatest idea I've ever heard and
15   I'm going to give you 20 million dollars, that
16   would have been acceptable also.
17       Q.    That wasn't the only possibility?
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    Okay.
20       A.    That was the most realistic one that
21   seemed to be presented.
22       Q.    Okay.  I was just trying to understand,
23   at the time that that was presented and talked
24   about, was there a discussion of a sort of a time

                                                                    59
 1   line that if this doesn't materialize, we are
 2   moving to permanent closure?
 3       A.    Yes.
 4       Q.    There was?  Do you know if that deadline
 5   and the deadline to move to permanent closure was
 6   ever disclosed to the alumni or to the public?
 7       A.    I don't know.  I don't know.
 8       Q.    If I could direct your attention to
 9   Plaintiff's Exhibit 9, the next document there.
10   Are you familiar with this particular document?
11       A.    I have seen this document before.  But,
12   I am not certain at what point.  I am pretty sure
13   that we didn't receive this in June.
14       Q.    Okay.
15       A.    So, I'm not sure at what point I saw
16   this.
17       Q.    Okay.  Fair enough.  Do you have an
18   understanding as to what this is, or what the
19   purpose of this document is?
20       A.    The University leadership in this
21   context is the team, the University leadership
22   council that the chancellor was working with to
23   come up with the whole plan of closure and
24   reopening; suspension and reopening.

                                                                    60
 1       Q.    Right.  But, I mean, was this a document
 2   that was intended -- who was this given to, if you
 3   know?
 4       A.    I don't know.  And I'm not certain that
 5   this was ever officially given to the board.  I
 6   just don't know.
 7       Q.    Okay. I think that is all the questions
 8   I have about that document, Professor, but I do
 9   have a few other things I wanted to cover.
10             Professor, who is Miss Grimes?
11       A.    Risa Grimes.
12       Q.    Who is Risa Grimes?
13       A.    Risa Grimes is the director of
14   institutional advancement at Antioch College.
15       Q.    What does she do as the director of
16   institutional advancement?  What does that mean?
17       A.    It means a person who is in charge of
18   fund raising and development.
19       Q.    How long has she been in that position?
20       A.    I think about three years.  I'm not sure
21   that has been the exact title that she has had.
22       Q.    Okay.  Do you know her, have you met her
23   personally?
24       A.    Yes.

                                                                    61
 1       Q.    Okay.  Did you know her before she took
 2   over that position?
 3       A.    No.
 4       Q.    Okay.  Have you been impressed with her
 5   work in that position?
 6       A.    Yes.
 7       Q.    Okay.  Let me ask you this:  Has the
 8   suspension of the college had an impact on her
 9   work?
10       A.    Yes.
11       Q.    What impact has it had?
12       A.    It has certainly made it more difficult
13   for her to do her job.  Her status has been
14   unclear.  Channels of reporting have been unclear.
15   And in fact although the board at several points,
16   for example, at the Cincinnati meeting, tried to
17   clarify her responsibilities, continuing
18   responsibilities, toward and for the college and
19   for its fund raising.  It's not clear to me that
20   that has been able to be carried out, given this
21   current kind of ambiguous structure of is the
22   college open, is the college closing, is it
23   suspended, what is suspended, who is paying for
24   what, etc.

                                                                    62
 1       Q.    Let me ask you this:  Sort of integral,
 2   or an important part of the plan for suspending
 3   the college and reopening it was fund raising,
 4   correct?
 5       A.    Yes.
 6       Q.    And I think even if you look at some of
 7   the plans it talks about making a fund raising
 8   effort to support the reopening of the college?
 9       A.    Uh-huh.
10       Q.    Correct?
11       A.    Uh-huh.
12       Q.    Has the Antioch University
13   administration been supportive -- well, let me
14   step back.  Miss Grimes would be a key person in
15   that effort, correct?
16       A.    One would suppose.
17       Q.    Okay.  Has the administration been
18   supportive of her efforts to raise money?
19             MS. TRAFFORD: I object to that question
20   based upon any kind of foundation for her
21   knowledge of what the administration would be
22   doing in that area.
23       Q.    Okay.  You can still answer.
24       A.    It is my understanding that -- what was

                                                                    63
 1   the question again?
 2             (At this point the court reporter read
 3   the requested portion of the record.)
 4       A.    It is my understanding they have not.
 5       Q.    How have they not been supportive?
 6       A.    There has been, there have been several,
 7   well, at least two, I would say, notices of
 8   termination issued to her.  I'm not sure I'm using
 9   the right phrase, but that her position would be
10   terminated.  There has been at least one employee
11   interjected into her operation as her superior.
12       Q.    Who is that?
13       A.    A woman named Linda Surk.  Her credit
14   cards were canceled so that she couldn't make
15   flights to go visit donors.  The rooms that she
16   had reserved for an alumni event were canceled
17   behind her back without her knowledge.
18             MS. TRAFFORD: Objection, I think this is
19   just getting into pretty gross hearsay at this
20   point without any foundation.
21       Q.    It's a deposition, it's not a hearing.
22   I'm allowed to ask.
23             MS. TRAFFORD: I know, and I'm allowed to
24   make my objections.

                                                                    64
 1       Q.    All right.  That's fine.  Go ahead.
 2       A.    That was kind of up until, at a number
 3   of points there were efforts to achieve clarity
 4   about what she would be doing and what the -- or
 5   what the office of institutional advancement would
 6   be doing, and who would be paying for it.  And
 7   what the alumni relations office would be doing,
 8   and who would be paying for that position.
 9             And that I can't sort out myself at all.
10   So, I don't know why it hasn't been a more placid
11   arrangement because it seemed as though to me it
12   should have been quite simple, that she would be
13   kept on for these, actually both offices would be
14   kept on as in support of this initiative.
15       Q.    Okay.  Dr. Treichler, what is the source
16   of your information regarding what has been going
17   on with Miss Grimes?
18       A.    I have talked with her directly on
19   numerous occasions.  She is one of the key people
20   in an initiative that I'm part of to revitalize
21   theater at Antioch College.  And has met with a
22   group that includes the Antioch College for John
23   Lithgo's sister, a number of other people who have
24   been involved in Antioch theater.  Louise Smith,

                                                                    65
 1   who is chair of the theater department at Antioch
 2   College.  And so on those occasions I've learned
 3   something of what she has told me.
 4             Then I have also had reports from third
 5   parties who were involved in one or another of
 6   these events on campus, like when the locks were
 7   changed on the offices of institutional
 8   advancement and alumni relations.
 9       Q.    Is that where she worked?  Miss Grimes
10   worked in those --
11       A.    Institutional advancement, yes.
12       Q.    Dr. Treichler, were you aware of a
13   request by President Laury in 2007 to increase
14   funding for the college from the endowment?
15       A.    This would have been from, for example,
16   from the dry funds or --
17       Q.    It's my understanding that he was
18   talking about increasing the share of the earnings
19   that went to the Antioch College.
20       A.    It may have come up.  I was not -- I
21   don't recall being personally aware of it.
22       Q.    Okay.  Dr. Treichler, are you aware of
23   the fact that there has been a proposal made by
24   the Antioch College Continuation Corporation with

                                                                    66
 1   respect to the future of Antioch College?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    Let me ask you this:  As far as the
 4   details of that proposal, are you subject to a
 5   confidentiality agreement?
 6       A.    Yes.
 7       Q.    Without getting, well, and that
 8   confidentiality agreement precludes you from
 9   testifying about these matters?
10             MR. SLUTSKY: Can we go off the record
11   for a moment?
12       Q.    We can.
13             (At this point there was an off the
14   record discussion.)
15   BY MR. PRICE:
16       Q.    My first question is foundational.  And
17   that is, are you familiar with the terms of a
18   proposal that has been received by the University
19   from ACCC?
20       A.    It's ambiguous when you say a proposal.
21   There have been exchanges.
22       Q.    There have been exchanges.  Is there a
23   most recent proposal that you are aware of?
24       A.    Yes.

                                                                    67
 1       Q.    Are you familiar with the terms of that
 2   proposal?
 3       A.    Yes.
 4       Q.    The current, shall we call it the
 5   current proposal?
 6       A.    Sure.
 7             MS. TRAFFORD: This is the current
 8   proposal from ACCC to Antioch University?
 9       A.    Yes.
10       Q.    Fair enough.  Do you regard that
11   proposal as realistic as far as moving forward for
12   Antioch College?
13       A.    Yes.
14       Q.    Do you believe that that proposal is
15   less drastic than suspending operations at Antioch
16   College for the next three to four years?
17             MS. TRAFFORD: Objection.
18             MR. SLUTSKY:  I also object at least to
19   the extent that there may be a confidentiality
20   agreement as to the terms which could be revealed
21   by asking for a comparison with something else.
22   And to the extent that I have not seen that
23   document, and can't advise Dr. Treichler as to the
24   extent to which it may affect her right to

                                                                    68
 1   disclose that, or the consequences if she does.  I
 2   object to that, at least to the form of the
 3   question, which might elicit that information.
 4       Q.    Fair enough.
 5             MR. SLUTSKY: Could we have that question
 6   again.
 7             (At this point the court reporter read
 8   the requested portion of the record.)
 9             MS. TRAFFORD: Objection.
10             MR. SLUTSKY: I need to confer with Dr.
11   Treichler.
12             (A break was taken, and the deposition
13   continued as follows:)
14             MR. SLUTSKY: Could we have the question
15   again.
16             (At this point the court reporter read
17   the requested portion of the record.)
18             MR. SLUTSKY: Let me just inquire for
19   counsel for the University whether in your view
20   the answer to that question would violate any
21   confidentiality provision that the trustees have
22   agreed to?
23             MS. TRAFFORD: I don't believe so.  That
24   wasn't the basis of my objection.

                                                                    69
 1       Q.    Fair enough.
 2       A.    I believe it would be less drastic.
 3       Q.    Okay.  That's all the questions I have.
 4   Thank you very much.
 5             MS. TRAFFORD: I have just a few just to
 6   clarify.
 7                  EXAMINATION BY
 8                  MS. TRAFFORD:
 9       Q.    Earlier, Professor, when plaintiff's
10   counsel was discussing with you the June '07
11   meeting where the different alternatives were
12   considered, and I think you indicated that you
13   didn't agree with the adoption of what was called
14   alternative number three, which was suspending the
15   operations with a reopening.  I believe you
16   testified you did not disagree, or you did not
17   agree -- you did disagree with that decision?
18       A.    I did disagree, yes.
19       Q.    I assume there was some discussion at
20   the board meeting about the various options before
21   there was a decision made?
22       A.    Yes.
23       Q.    And did you have an opportunity to, at
24   that board meeting, to speak out about any

                                                                    70
 1   concerns you had?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    So you participated in that discussion?
 4       A.    Yes.
 5       Q.    Presumably you let other board members
 6   know you didn't agree?
 7       A.    Yes.
 8       Q.    And you were given an opportunity to
 9   explain why you didn't agree?
10       A.    Yes.
11       Q.    And then is it fair to say that other
12   board members simply didn't agree with you?
13       A.    Yes.
14       Q.    Okay.  You also indicated, we were
15   talking with counsel about the distrust that some
16   of the alumni had.  And as I understood what you
17   were saying, that you put it in the time frame of
18   that alumni since the seventies had felt some
19   alienation, and you indicated that had something
20   to do with the structure of creating the
21   University structure in 1978?  Do you recall that
22   testimony?
23       A.    Yes.
24       Q.    What I was trying to understand, are the

                                                                    71
 1   alumni then who are alienated are the ones who
 2   were there previous to 1978 before there was a
 3   University?
 4       A.    It includes, the alienated alumni
 5   include that, those cohorts.  Yes.  I mean, not
 6   all alumni are alienated.  Of those who are, some
 7   predate the University.  Yes.
 8       Q.    Okay.  And certainly the ones, to the
 9   extent alumni feel alienated because of the
10   University structure, that would be the alumni
11   that were there, that predate the University
12   structure then, because the ones that came after
13   would have been in the University structure?
14       A.    No.  The alienated alumni also include
15   all of the cohorts that have been there since the
16   University was created also.
17       Q.    So, it wasn't your testimony then that
18   the creation of the University structure, was that
19   the motivating factor for the alumni alienation?
20       A.    I don't think I said that precisely.  I
21   think I said that the creation of the University
22   in 1978 did nothing to remediate the alienation
23   that had begun in the 1970s.
24       Q.    All right.  So, it was something that

                                                                    72
 1   predated the University structure?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    You indicated not all alumni feel
 4   alienated?
 5       A.    Right.
 6       Q.    Some smaller group of alumni?
 7       A.    Well, I couldn't judge which is the
 8   larger group.
 9       Q.    Okay.  Have there been discussions
10   during your tenure as a board member about
11   concerns about how to get the alumni more back on
12   track with the college?
13       A.    Yes.
14       Q.    And so this would be identified as a
15   concern?
16       A.    Yes.
17       Q.    Of you as the trustees?
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    Okay.  And presumably did they discuss
20   different ways to try to involve the alumni more?
21             MR. SLUTSKY: Objection as to what do you
22   mean by "they"?
23       Q.    Trustees, sorry.  Have there been
24   discussions at trustees' meetings about attempting

                                                                    73
 1   to improve relations with alumni?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    And did those discussions predate the
 4   June 2007 meeting?
 5       A.    Yes.
 6       Q.    When we were looking at Exhibit No. 2,
 7   the declaration of financial exigency, and counsel
 8   asked you a series of questions about whether you
 9   agreed with certain statements in there or not.
10   And one of the statements counsel asked you about
11   was whether the options had been exhausted.  And I
12   believe you indicated you disagreed with that
13   characterization.  Again, as a member of the
14   board, to the extent you had disagreements with
15   what other trustees were proposing, you had the
16   opportunity to express those disagreements?
17       A.    Yes.
18       Q.    And to the extent that, not just the
19   board, but if the chancellor came and had
20   proposals to make and you disagreed, you were
21   given the opportunity to discuss those decisions?
22       A.    Yes.
23       Q.    As I understand it the structure, there
24   are various committees of the board and different

                                                                    74
 1   trustees sit on different committees?
 2       A.    Uh-huh.
 3       Q.    Which committees did you sit on during
 4   the time frame 2002 through 2007?
 5       A.    I'm on the -- I've been on the academic
 6   affairs committee throughout that period.  I was
 7   on physical facilities, and then when the
 8   communication committee was created two years ago
 9   I went on to that committee instead of physical
10   facilities.  Then I was also on a task force to
11   examine the University structure, and on something
12   else that I don't recall.
13       Q.    What was the function of the
14   communications committee?
15       A.    It was to attempt to achieve a unified
16   voice, a brand, a logo, something that would
17   create a visible widely understood symbol and
18   meaning for the whole University and each of its
19   campuses.
20       Q.    Did you chair that committee?
21       A.    No.
22       Q.    Did that committee have any linkage to
23   the idea of reaching out to alumni as well?  Was
24   that part of the function?

                                                                    75
 1       A.    Not so much.
 2       Q.    I take it you never served on the
 3   finance committee?
 4       A.    No.
 5       Q.    And would it be true that the different
 6   committees would meet separately from the full
 7   board?
 8       A.    At times.  And sometimes they met as
 9   committees of the whole.  And the whole board
10   would meet.
11       Q.    Would it be fair to say then that
12   sometimes --
13       A.    And I'm on development.  Did I say that?
14   I'm still on development.
15       Q.    When the committees meet, would they get
16   access to information that would be provided to
17   the committees?
18       A.    Yes.
19       Q.    And would it be possible then that some
20   of the members of the different committees might
21   have access to either more or different
22   information that might make its way to the full
23   board?
24       A.    Yes.

                                                                    76
 1       Q.    And would the committees give reports to
 2   the board?
 3       A.    Yes.
 4       Q.    So could it be an occasion where the
 5   committee might have had access to more
 6   information, distill that, then made a report to
 7   the full board?
 8       A.    Yes.
 9       Q.    You mentioned you were on the
10   development committee.  What was the function of
11   that committee?
12       A.    That committee looks at fund raising,
13   trustee giving, it acknowledges gifts.  It has
14   been attempting to design a form for giving that
15   all of the trustees could use to check off and
16   send in a single check to one office.  And then it
17   would get distributed different ways.  It looked
18   at ways to increase giving and getting.  I mean,
19   it really is the kind of institutional advancement
20   committee.
21       Q.    And how long were you on that committee?
22       A.    I think since probably my second year on
23   the board.  So like 2003.
24       Q.    When you were testifying earlier you

                                                                    77
 1   mentioned some concern about somebody may have not
 2   done the best job they could have in terms of this
 3   idea of having the trustees go out with a staff
 4   person.
 5       A.    Yeah.
 6       Q.    To meet with alumni to raise money?
 7       A.    Right.
 8       Q.    Would that have been one of the
 9   functions that the development committee would
10   oversee?
11       A.    I'm not sure that oversee would have
12   been quite the right word.
13       Q.    Okay.
14       A.    That outside consulting firm kind of ran
15   the show.  Ketchum, I think it was.  They would
16   come in and do power point presentations.  They
17   set up a training program and so forth.  The
18   development committee was not particularly
19   involved with that.
20       Q.    But as a member of the development
21   committee, and a member of the board, did you
22   raise your concerns with the consultant that this
23   part of the program wasn't being implemented?
24       A.    The consultant was gone by the time my

                                                                    78
 1   concerns were clear.
 2       Q.    Okay.  And did you raise your concerns
 3   with the board itself?
 4       A.    When there was occasion to do that, I
 5   certainly asked what happened to that plan.
 6       Q.    And were you given an answer?
 7       A.    It went away.
 8       Q.    Okay.  And did you do anything to
 9   initiate an alternative to that program?
10             MR. SLUTSKY: Objection, are you
11   referring to her personally or the committee?
12       Q.    Her personally.
13       A.    I don't think so.  I don't think I could
14   claim that.  I certainly presented ideas or raised
15   issues.  But, no.
16       Q.    And when you raised issues, that was at
17   the board meeting?
18       A.    Board meeting or development committee
19   meeting.
20       Q.    And did other members of the board or
21   the development committee disagree with you?
22       A.    No.
23       Q.    Let me ask if -- let's look at the
24   development committee.  If the development

                                                                    79
 1   committee agreed with you, that it would be a good
 2   idea for the trustees to go out and do more alumni
 3   fund raising, either with a staff person or
 4   without, was there a consensus on the development
 5   committee that that would be a good idea?
 6       A.    I think in theory, yes.  Everyone
 7   thought it would be a good idea.
 8       Q.    Then why didn't they do it?
 9       A.    Because the staff that would have been
10   needed to coordinate that was not in place at the
11   time that -- I don't know quite how to express
12   this, I have to say.  I've mentioned again and
13   again the lack of staff, turnover in staff.  One
14   of the reasons that I respect Risa Grimes so much
15   was because in all of the years since I graduated
16   from Antioch College she is the only development
17   person who has ever come to Champaign to visit me
18   to talk to me about my family connections, to talk
19   to me about who I know, who I might visit, how
20   that might be coordinated.
21             But, it seems to me that at each point
22   something could actually have been gotten
23   underway, something else would happen.  Like a
24   crisis of finances so that Ketchum would have to

                                                                    80
 1   be let go.  Then we would start to get another
 2   initiative like the campaign cabinet, then
 3   something else would come up and we have to let it
 4   go.  And the same thing happened just at the time
 5   that Risa Grimes and her office would have been
 6   actually able to mobilize someone like me on
 7   behalf of raising money for Antioch College came
 8   June 2007.
 9             So, I'm not saying that it's anyone's
10   fault.  It's just very difficult to get an idea
11   and make it work in that setting.
12       Q.    And in my understanding the reason it
13   was difficult was because there wasn't enough
14   resources to fund the staff to support those
15   initiatives?
16       A.    That was certainly part of it.
17       Q.    And what was the other part of it?
18       A.    The alienated alumni.  You can't just do
19   one visit or a post card and get back 30 years of
20   relationships that weren't built.
21       Q.    Counsel had a series of questions
22   regarding the president's appeal to the University
23   Leadership Council.  Do you remember those
24   questions?

                                                                    81
 1       A.    I'm not sure that he said to the
 2   University Leadership Council.  But --
 3       Q.    Let me phrase it this way.  There was a
 4   president's appeal to keep the college open?
 5       A.    Right.
 6       Q.    In June of '07?
 7       A.    I think he asked me whether I had heard
 8   that appeal, whether I knew about it.
 9       Q.    Right.
10       A.    And I answered no.
11       Q.    And I believe you said that, is this
12   President Laury we are talking about?
13       A.    Yes.
14       Q.    And President Laury was never given the
15   opportunity to present his appeal to the board?
16       A.    To the board, right.
17       Q.    And do you know, did someone make a
18   conscious decision to tell President Laury you
19   can't present that to the board?
20       A.    I don't know.  I have no knowledge of
21   that.
22       Q.    So you know it wasn't presented to the
23   board?
24       A.    Yes.

                                                                    82
 1       Q.    But, you don't know why it wasn't
 2   presented to the board, is that right?
 3       A.    Right.  But at some point during that
 4   June board meeting we did learn that there had
 5   been a plan, and that we were not to hear it.  And
 6   I can't quite -- I really can't recall how that
 7   was made known to us.
 8       Q.    Was President Laury there at the
 9   meeting?
10       A.    Yes, he was.
11       Q.    And did you ask him well, President
12   Laury, I'd like to hear what your plan is?
13       A.    I didn't.  But several trustees did.
14       Q.    And what did President Laury say?
15       A.    He said I'm not in a position to present
16   it.  I have withdrawn my plan.
17       Q.    He had withdrawn his plan?
18       A.    I think that was roughly the language he
19   used.
20       Q.    I don't have any other questions.  Thank
21   you, Professor.
22                  EXAMINATION BY
23                   MR. PRICE:
24       Q.    Just a few follow-up questions.  Dr.

                                                                    83
 1   Treichler, we talked again about alienation a
 2   little bit.  What would be the single best thing
 3   that the University could do to address the
 4   alienation of the Antioch College alumni?
 5             MS. TRAFFORD: Are you asking at this
 6   point in time?
 7       Q.    Yeah.  Or a year ago.
 8             MR. SLUTSKY: Then it's a compound
 9   question.
10             MS. TRAFFORD: This is why I wanted to
11   get a time frame.
12       Q.    We will start June last year.
13       A.    You don't want me to say announce that
14   they are going to shut down the college, do you?
15   That is that joke that everyone makes.  And there
16   is a whole back story that it was all a plan to
17   galvanize the alumni.
18       Q.    Okay.
19       A.    But asking it in a very straight and
20   serious way, what single thing could have been
21   done?
22       Q.    To address the alienation of the alumni.
23       A.    I think it's almost impossible to answer
24   that question as of this date to go back then and

                                                                    84
 1   think what would have done it.  I mean, if they
 2   had announced we are going to close the college,
 3   what do you think?  We are thinking of closing the
 4   college, what do you think?  I have no way to
 5   predict what kind of responses there would have
 6   been.
 7       Q.    Fair enough.  Let me rephrase my
 8   question.  What is, moving to today, rather than
 9   sort of stepping back to '06, focusing on today,
10   what could the college, what in your view could
11   the University do, that would best address the
12   alienation that so many of the alumni feel towards
13   the college?
14       A.    The alienation that is felt in March '08
15   is not necessarily identical to what was felt in
16   June '07.  Okay.  So, just clarifying that.  But,
17   if your question is, to reengage the alumni, I
18   think it would be to embrace the current proposal
19   that is before us.  And make it well known.  And
20   be part of it.  And be a partner to that
21   initiative.
22       Q.    You also were asked a number of
23   questions about the functioning of the board and
24   the different committees.  Is there an executive

                                                                    85
 1   committee of the board?
 2       A.    Yes.
 3       Q.    How does that function with respect to
 4   the whole board?
 5       A.    The previous chair of the board, Dan
 6   Kaplan, felt very strongly that the executive
 7   committee should not be the decision making center
 8   of the board.  That the whole board should be
 9   informed.  I would say actually the executive
10   committee now also does as conscientious a job as
11   it's probably possible to do to keep the board
12   informed of what factors it's been presented with,
13   what factors it's taken into account in making its
14   recommendations.  The last, I mean since June '07
15   really nothing has been really business as usual.
16   And so the executive committee has had, I mean
17   they are under intense pressure in a way worse
18   than the board as a whole.  They have to be very
19   quick to respond.  They have to respond the right
20   way.  They have to have numerous conference calls.
21   And I think they have done their best under those
22   circumstances to keep us informed of most major
23   developments.
24       Q.    What about before June of 2007?

                                                                    86
 1             MR. SLUTSKY: Objection.  What, what
 2   about?  What are you referring to?
 3       Q.    The functioning of the board and the
 4   executive committee.  How did they function before
 5   June of '07 together?
 6       A.    Well, I'm not sure what aspect of it you
 7   want me to address.  I mean, I think they are well
 8   intentioned people.  I think, I mean they
 9   functioned as, they would get together, they would
10   deal with things.  They would inform us.  Or they
11   would bring things to us to make decisions about.
12   So, what's changed really, I would say is that the
13   pace, the stakes of making a faltering, of making
14   a bad decision, of not informing us of something
15   that we should have been informed of.
16       Q.    Fair enough.  No further questions.
17             MS. TRAFFORD: All done.
18             MR. SLUTSKY: We will reserve signature.
19             MR. PRICE: We are ordering it on an
20   expedited basis.  We talked yesterday, as a
21   realistic proposition if we are going to have this
22   hearing on April 1st, witnesses are not going to
23   be able to read their transcripts.  And therefore,
24   obviously subject to the court's approval, I am

                                                                    87
 1   fine with people using depositions that haven't
 2   been read, as long as the witness, if confronted
 3   with specific testimony, is given an opportunity
 4   to, if they desire to say this isn't accurate.  Is
 5   that fair?  So that's the best we can do.
 6             MR. SLUTSKY: Well, that may be in terms
 7   of the hearing next week.  But, to the extent that
 8   the litigation goes beyond next week, I still
 9   reserve signature.  And I would also request that
10   to the extent that the questions concerned certain
11   of the exhibits, that they be provided along with
12   the transcript, so that in reviewing them Dr.
13   Treichler can make sense of them.
14             MR. PRICE: You are welcome to keep that
15   copy.
16             MR. GROVES: Can the court reporter keep
17   the original so it will follow the transcript when
18   she gets to review it?
19             MR. PRICE: The original is the same
20   original I was going to use at the hearing, so the
21   only concern I will have is whether I will have it
22   by the hearing.
23             MR. SLUTSKY: The original transcript?
24             MR. PRICE: These exhibits.

                                                                    88
 1             MS. TRAFFORD: I think that is all right.
 2   We all have a set.  We will be fine.
 3             (Deposition adjourned.)
 4             (Signature reserved.)
 5   
 6   
 7   
 8   
 9   
10   
11   
12   
13   
14   
15   
16   
17   
18   
19   
20   
21   
22   
23   
24   

                                                                    89
 1                  STATE OF OHIO
    IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF GREENE COUNTY, OHIO
 2   
    PROFESSOR PETER TOWNSEND,
 3   et al.,
 4                   Plaintiffs,
 5        -vs-                        No. 2008 CV 0300
    ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY,
 6   
                    Defendants.
 7   
              This is to certify that I have read the
 8   transcript of my deposition taken in the
    above-entitled cause, and that the foregoing
 9   transcript taken on March 27th, 2008 accurately
    states the questions asked and the answers given
10   by me, with the exception of the corrections
    noted, if any, on the attached errata sheet(s).
11   
                            __________________________
12                           PAULA TREICHLER
13   Subscribed and Sworn before
    me this _______ day of
14   ________________, 2008.
    ___________________________
15   Notary Public
16   
17   
18   
19   
20   
21   
22   
23   
24   

                                                                    90
 1   STATE OF ILLINOIS    )
                         )   SS
 2   COUNTY OF CHAMPAIGN  )
 3              I, DEANN K. PARKINSON, a Notary Public
    in and for the County of Champaign State of
 4   Illinois, do hereby certify that PAULA TREICHLER,
    the deponent herein, was by me first duly sworn to
 5   tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but
    the truth in the aforementioned cause of action.
 6              That the foregoing deposition was taken
    on behalf of the Plaintiff on March 27th, 2008.
 7              That said deposition was taken down in
    stenographic notes and afterwards reduced to
 8   typewriting under my instruction and said
    transcription is a true record of the testimony
 9   given; and that it was agreed by and between the
    witness and attorneys that said signature on said
10   deposition would be not waived.
               I do hereby certify that I am a
11   disinterested person in this cause of action; that
    I am not a relative of any party or any attorney
12   of record in this cause, or an attorney for any
    party herein, or otherwise interested in the event
13   of this action, and am not in the employ of the
    attorneys for either party.
14              In witness whereof, I have hereunto set
    my hand and affixed my notarial seal March 28th,
15   2008.
16   
                             _________________________
17                            DEANN K. PARKINSON, CSR
                             NOTARY PUBLIC
18   
19   "OFFICIAL SEAL"
    DEANN K. PARKINSON
20   Notary Public, State of Illinois
    My Commission Expires 11-16-08