Guest commentary: CU Regents right to fight open records ruling on presidential candidates

Coloradans want and need the very best in leadership for the state’s flagship university. Serving as president of the University of Colorado system of four campuses, nearly 70,000 students, 30,000+ employees, an almost $5 billion annual budget is a huge job. Selecting that person is a significant responsibility, one the Colorado Constitution vested in the university’s governing body, the nine-member Board of Regents, which is elected by the people of Colorado.

I served as a regent for 12 years and chaired the search committees that brought both Hank Brown and Bruce Benson to the CU presidency. Doing so gave me unique insight into the process.

The board recently voted 5-4 along party lines to appeal a lawsuit the university lost in a case filed by the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper. It contends the regents violated Colorado’s open records laws by not disclosing the names of six candidates the board interviewed before naming Mark Kennedy sole finalist.

I fully support the board’s decision to appeal.

The issue isn’t about whether there should be one or three or six publicly named finalists for the CU presidency. The issue is about two things: first, assuring the authority and autonomy of the Board of Regents to do what it is charged with doing by the Colorado Constitution (and by Coloradans who elected them); and second, to get the best person for the job. CU’s president shouldn’t be determined by court rulings or by media demands under catch-all calls for transparency.

CU is a public university and as such is obliged to be open to the public (despite the state funding less than 6% of the university’s budget). Yet that does not mean everything is an open book. CU, like all colleges and universities, has exemptions to open records laws in certain matters relating to property, legal matters and personnel issues.

The presidential search process is far from the “secret” one some claim. I worked with two excellent search committees with representatives from a wide cross-section of CU’s audiences – students, faculty, staff, deans, alumni, donors, community members. We sought and got wide input on and off CU’s campuses. We hosted town hall meetings around the state to engage many people. Yet the search committee and later regents also needed to have private conversations that protected candidate confidentiality, as we promised them.

I know from experience that the kind of leader CU needs often will not even consider the job if that person is about to be part of a slate of finalists. Neither Hank Brown nor Bruce Benson would have (they have been clear about that), and CU would have lost out on two of the most successful presidents in its modern history.

This isn’t just about CU. Most Colorado universities that have selected a leader in recent years have named a sole finalist – CSU, UNC, Metro State and others. This is common practice here and around the country.

It’s ironic that the 5-4 regent vote to appeal the court ruling came exactly one year to the day from when the board voted 9-0 to name Mark Kennedy sole finalist. Four members of the board quickly changed their minds and (party line) votes after public outcry about Kennedy’s record 15 years earlier in Congress. The same four voted to not appeal the lawsuit two weeks ago.

It’s ironic because after the 9-0 vote, nobody on the board or in the media seemed concerned about a sole finalist. No lawsuits were filed in the previous three CU presidential searches, all of which named a sole finalist, or when CSU, UNC and Metro did the same thing. It seems that the angst was over the result. That’s also interesting, since as far as I can tell, Mark Kennedy is doing a good job.

The Board of Regents had to appeal the ruling in the lawsuit. To not do so would cede the authority not only of this board, but all future boards, to be able to select the best president of CU. Which is just what Coloradans expect and need them to do.

Steve Bosley served on the CU Board of Regents from 2004-16. He is founder of the BolderBoulder.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.