I agree with most of what you said except for one inaccuracy and that is that the Rice regents DID NOT announce their intentions and have openly acknowledged that the entire process was indeed kept secret. That is at the heart of the matter and it goes beyond KTRU. This is really about what voice Students and Alumni have in their university. If KTRU can be sold off secretively what is next? The Rice Media Center? The Rice Gallery? What other under-performing asset can be sold on a whim?

This is nothing new and students and alumni can indeed force the Board to yield to their wishes when they take a stand be it the 2000 battle for KTRU or the 2004 battle between the administration and supporters of Rice athletics. The bottom line is whose University it is - the Students' or the Boards'. If the students approved the plan to sell KTRU after a serious discussion between both sides, then there would be little controversy. Unfortunately, that did not occur here.

UH complicity lies solely in what appears to be acquiescing to Rice's demands for secrecy. The vague nature of the agenda on the UH board meeting appeared to many as be an attempt to obfuscate the sale of KTRU for the benefit of Rice Inc.'s Board. If intentional, then it speaks poorly of the UH board.

Joe you are the man!! :)