For some time, many people interested in Kansas University and the school’s intercollegiate sports program have wondered whether the KU Athletic Corp. really had any power. Is the board a powerful body, as many had long thought, or was it merely a necessary window dressing for the university’s sports program?

Powerful, influential alumni used to vie for positions on the board, and faculty members thought their presence guaranteed faculty interests, concerns and input would be considered.

KU Athletic Director Lew Perkins now has answered the question about the role and power of the athletics board. At the group’s Friday meeting, Perkins made it clear the board isn’t that important.

At a time when many are questioning whether intercollegiate sports are getting out of hand and expressing concern about the spending appetites of those who run Division I college athletic programs, Perkins told a faculty member, “I don’t report to the (KUAC) board; I report to the chancellor.” Perkins added that if the chancellor wants input from all 19 members of the board, he is free to ask for it. “That’s not my decision to make,” he said.

At Friday’s meeting, KU faculty member Bill Tuttle had questioned Perkins about the controversial priority system Perkins has championed for tickets to KU basketball games. Tuttle said, “I’m on this board, but I’ve had no input on an issue that affects hundreds of people (faculty members) who expect me — who elected me — to represent them.”

Apparently, Tuttle was the only faculty member of the board who had the courage to speak up and question the ticket policy at last week’s meeting. The others apparently either agreed with Perkins’ plan or were intimidated by the physically imposing AD and were hesitant to speak up.

The question of the role of the board, however, was addressed by member Reid Holbrook, a Kansas City attorney. “If you look at the bylaws,” he said, “it says that we as a corporation are responsible for things like hiring and firing the athletics director, deciding his salary, setting department policy.”

He added, “That’s fine, but for whatever reason, over the years, that’s changed. We’ve evolved into a board that’s purely advisory.”

Holbrook heads a committee charged with overhauling the board’s bylaws. He was involved in a similar effort with the KU Alumni Association, and his plan for that body continues to draw mixed reviews. His panel’s recommendations for the KUAC board are due at the Feb. 27 board meeting. At that time, board members, KU faculty members, those in the athletic department and the public will find out who is calling the shots: Chancellor Robert Hemenway, Perkins or the collective thinking and wishes of the board.

It is not a healthy situation, but in recent times, board members have had little, if anything, to do with the actual hiring of coaches or athletic directors or determining their salaries. It is reported that Hemenway and then-acting athletic director Drue Jennings hired KU basketball coach Bill Self without ever having met him; they met the new coach for the first time after flying him to Lawrence to meet the media. Perkins was hired by Hemenway with the help and advice of athletics consultant Chuck Neinas of Colorado. Salary packages for coaches are negotiated by Hemenway and others, not members of the athletic board.

So the upcoming KUAC board meeting should help clear the air. Do the board and its members have any clout or is it merely a nice-sounding powerless organization with Hemenway and Perkins in control of the athletics program? It’s obvious this is the understanding Perkins must have had when he accepted his high-paying job. Faculty, alumni and students have had a very limited voice in the recent affairs of this board.