Edited by: Fern Sidman

Scott Bok, the chairman of the University of Pennsylvania’s board of trustees, finds himself at the center of a growing controversy and the potential for a no-confidence vote over allegations of failing to address ‘out of control’ anti-Semitism on the Ivy League school’s campus, as was reported by the New York Post’s “On The Money.” The situation has escalated significantly, with former UPenn trustee Marc Rowan, CEO of Apollo Global Management, launching a campaign urging donors to withhold their financial support until changes in school leadership occur, according to the “One the Money” column in the New York Post.

Bok, who also serves as the CEO of New York investment bank Greenhill & Co., faces increasing pressure from various quarters within the UPenn community. The Post’s “One the Money” reported that the board of trustees held meetings on Thursday and Friday to address the issue, with some trustees actively advocating for a vote of no-confidence to put an end to Bok’s three-year tenure as board chairman.

One trustee expressed support for the no-confidence vote, citing two primary reasons. They mentioned that Bok’s departure would have the best chance of de-escalating the ongoing crisis, and they noted concerns about the chairman’s integrity being called into question, as was noted in the “On the Money” report.

“I favor a no-confidence vote on Scott’s leadership,” one trustee wrote in an email chain reviewed by On The Money. “I request a confidential vote as soon as possible, but not later than the Friday breakfast on 11/3 on one simple question: Should Scott Bok continue as chair,” the trustee added, the “On The Money” report said.

The Post also reported that the trustee added, “Scott should voluntarily step down for 2 simple reasons – his leaving has the best chance of de-escalating this crisis, and unfortunately, his integrity is in question.”

In response to the escalating situation, Bok referred inquiries to UPenn, which provided a statement from Bok expressing support for UPenn President Liz Magill. The Post’s “On the Money” reported that Bok’s statement emphasized that President Magill and her existing University leadership team were seen as the right group to guide the institution forward.
While the UPenn administration has made efforts to address the issue, some alumni believe it has been too slow in effectively responding to increasing levels of virulent anti-Semitism that have been openly displayed on college campuses all over America and throughout the world, as was reported in the Post’s “On the Money” column. Vahan Gureghian, a former UPenn trustee who resigned last month, expressed dissatisfaction with the response, stating that it should not have required so much time and pressure to initiate an action plan to combat anti-Semitism, the report added.

The trustees are facing a challenging decision, as it is generally easier to replace a board chair than a university president. The process of finding a new president can be lengthy and disruptive. The Post report also said that as a result, some trustees are recommending specific actions for President Magill, such as making clear that hate speech on university facilities will not be tolerated and issuing an apology for allowing an event with hate speech to take place at a university-sponsored event.

The situation has generated mixed reactions among the board members. The Post report also indicated that some believe that Marc Rowan’s efforts have been instrumental in pressuring the university to address the issue, while others are more cautious, questioning whether Bok’s resignation should be a result of a ‘rich donor’s’ demands or whether it would perpetuate the ongoing crisis.

‘
The question that remains is whether this crisis can be resolved through a change in the board chair position. The answer is possibly, but the outcome may depend on Marc Rowan’s decision to suspend his campaign.