OU President Denied Plans To Resign, Amid Rumors Of Donor Dissatisfaction
Days before announcing his retirement, University of Oklahoma President Jim Gallogly denied he was leaving his position as rumors of donor displeasure spread on campus.
When asked whether there was truth to the rumors or whether he’d be resigning Gallogly said Thursday, “I have no idea what you’re talking about.”
With his resignation now officially announced, it’s unclear whether he was telling the truth at the time.
In recent weeks, OU’s Board of Regents have met in a series of lengthy, closed door meetings to discuss ongoing investigations at OU. The only investigation known to the public is an investigation being done by Atlanta based law firm Jones-Day regarding allegations of sexual assault and misconduct against former OU President and Vice President, David Boren and Tripp Hall, respectively.
During those meetings rumors began to percolate that there were disagreements between Regents about whether to release the findings of the Jones-Day investigation. There were also rumors that high-level university donors had begun to express displeasure with Gallogly’s handling of the investigation, according to a source close to the Regents.
Gallogly also said Friday, May 10, he wasn’t “personally involved” in the Jones-Day investigation telling reporters he did not have knowledge of whether Jones-Day, the Board of Regents or OU were working with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. His comments were criticized by David Boren’s first accuser Jess Eddy.
“I'm concerned that President Gallogly doesn't know what's going on with the investigation that only [Chairman] Rainbolt-Forbes only does. That there may be a lack of communication between the Board and the President,” Eddy said Friday.
In his statement to announce his retirement Sunday, Gallogly said the findings of the investigation would include an appeal process in which he would not take part.
“The sitting president of the university is normally a part of the Title IX appeals process. Given I am departing, I will not serve in the appellate process role going forward and a third party, yet to be appointed, will take my place.”