University of Colorado Student Union

Legislative Council

February 7, 2008 #68LCR2 – Call for Transparency in Presidential Selection

Sponsored by: Boyce Postma Leg. Council President

Hadley Brown Tri-Executive

Dustin Farivar Leg. Council Vice President

Daniel Ramos Representative-at-Large

Authored by: Boyce Postma Leg. Council President

Hadley Brown Tri-Executive

Call for Transparency in Presidential Selection Process

Resolution History

The Presidential Search Committee was formed in March of 2007 to select candidates for the position of President to the University of Colorado system. Ten months and $200,000 later, a limited number of candidates were presented to the Board of Regents. The Board of Regents, based on habits established in previous years, selected one finalist by a 7-2 vote.

Resolution Summary

The University of Colorado Student Union does not believe that the presidential selection process met the necessary levels of transparency and inclusion needed to assure constituents that the candidate selected is most appropriate for the job: The current practice of selecting only one finalist does not give constituents a choice in the selection of their president. Additionally, student input during the process was marginal. Since only one student served on the search committee, this council feels that students on all four campuses were not adequately represented and that our voices were not heard. It should be noted that the single participating student cast an abstaining vote.

The public forum that took place on the Boulder campus was scheduled for Monday, February 4, 2008, a mere two business days after the Board of Regents announced the selection of a sole finalist for the office of the president. Students have protested the haste of this process, since it did not allow them the opportunity to arrange their schedules or to prepare in other ways for the forum. Additionally, many students understandably did not know about the forum on campus, since it was only slightly publicized—late on Friday afternoon and on the day of the forum. The forum was scheduled for a midday time slot during one of the most popular class times. Despite these scheduling limitations nearly 300 people heard Mr. Benson speak, while many others were turned away once the inadequately small room reached capacity. Certainly the hasty process as well as the poor timing severely hurt student’s opportunity to participate in the process. A second public forum was arranged for each campus, largely due to the insistence of student leaders.

Much of the advertising for the forum on the Boulder campus was done by UCSU and students at large, not by the Presidential Search Committee, the Board of Regents, or the administration. The council feels that this lack of communication from the university’s governing bodies is unacceptable, especially considering the importance of this decision for all members of the campus community.

Lastly, even though sheets for audience members’ evaluation of the candidate were provided at the public forum, there is no indication printed on the sheets or elsewhere, about how the comments on these sheets will be taken into consideration by the Regents as they make their final decision. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that public comment on the sheets will be considered at all.

Whereas: Selecting only one finalist in presidential searches gives students no choice in the selection of the president who will serve them; and

Whereas: Having only one student on the Presidential Search Committee does not adequately represent students on all four campuses of the CU system; and

Whereas: The time scheduled for the candidate’s open forum was too immediate following the Regents’ decision to nominate him; was poorly publicized by university and elected officials; and was scheduled during one of the most popular class periods for students; and

Whereas: The evaluation-sheet process for public recommendations regarding the candidate are inadequate, and guidelines for Regent consideration of comments provided are absent; and

Whereas: The sum result of all of these process shortcomings is that members of the public have almost no voice in the selection process and students are particularly marginalized.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:

Section 1: The University of Colorado Student Union hereby resolves that the selection process for the position of President of the University of Colorado should be changed to improve transparency and student involvement.

Section 2: The UCSU insists that the Board of Regents require seats on future presidential search committees for one student representative from each campus for a total of four student seats and that this requirement be codified.

Section 3: The UCSU insists that the Board of Regents not vote until a significant, established amount of time passes after the second public forums take place on each of the campuses.

Section 4: The UCSU insists that the Board of Regents and other process facilitators work with student leaders to develop a better mode for students to voice their comments about this candidate and future candidates.

Section 5: This resolution shall take effect upon passage by the Legislative Council and upon either obtaining the signatures of two Tri-Executives or the elapse of six days without action by the Tri-Executives.

Section 6: Upon passage, this resolution shall be distributed to the Board of Regents, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, and the public through standard media.

Vote Count

2/7/08 Passed Special Order Acclamation

________________________ _______________________

Boyce Postma Hadley Brown

Legislative Council President Tri-Executive

_______________________ _______________________

Charles Gilford III Sara Davine

Tri-Executive Tri-Executive