Choosing the University's next president is serious business. So far, The Cavalier Daily has done well at keeping up with the process. Continuing that good work is about to get much more difficult. John "Dubby" Wynne, rector of the University's Board of Visitors and chairman of the committee charged with finding the University's eighth president, would not get into specifics when a reporter asked about what the committee discussed during its most recent meeting. "Everything is confidential from here on out," he said.
The search for a new president will continue, according to Wynne, "until we find somebody who is superb. Then the Board of Visitors will choose that person and we will at that point announce who that person is." Such secrecy doesn't sound very Jeffersonian to me.
Wynne trotted out the tired old line that many people in his position have used: Candidates may be reluctant to have their interest in becoming president of the University become public for fear of losing whatever job they have now. Perhaps. But I wonder why the University would want a president too afraid or ashamed to say he or she is interested in the job.
Besides, choices made behind closed doors can keep important information from the public and the University community. And that can lead to bad choices. Not too many years ago, a Virginia university used a similarly secretive process to choose a president. That university's trustees did not share with anyone outside their board room that the new president had serious health problems - problems that the trustees said had been resolved. The new president died less than two years after taking the office.
Near the beginning of the University's search, the search committee released information that included a statement for R. William Funk, described as "the University's consultant and a veteran of more than 300 presidential searches." Funk told the committee that the presidential opening at the University "has created more excitement and interest among higher education leaders than any in the last five years."
"People understand how important your institution is to this country," he said. "As we move through this process you will have the opportunity to consider some of the very best candidates in the nation." The University has received nearly 200 nominations, according to what University spokeswoman Carol Wood told The Cavalier Daily, so apparently there is a good deal of interest in the University's presidency. But there's a long way to go before the committee gets that long list whittled down.
"This is all the preliminary," Wood told The Cavalier Daily, "looking at who they believe should make it to move to a list of possible candidates." So that gives the committee a good long time to reconsider this secrecy.
Such concealment is not uncommon among universities that consider themselves too important to be open, but that certainly doesn't make it right. Many colleges and universities keep the selection process secretive until they've culled the list to a group of finalists. Often, three finalists are announced. They visit the university or college to meet with various constituencies and to give the board that will choose the president a chance to see how the candidates interact with those groups and how those groups react to the candidates. I'm not talking about covert discussions with small groups of handpicked representatives. I'm talking about public, town hall meeting style gatherings that often include folks from the surrounding community.
In recent months, New Mexico State University, Gallaudet University, and the University of Rhode Island announced finalists in their searches for new presidents. Does that mean people are willing to publicly declare their interesting in leading New Mexico State but a similar process at the University would scare candidates away? I mean no disrespect to New Mexico State when I say that's absurd.
And I still wonder why the University would want a president too ashamed or afraid to publicly declare an interest in the job. If the candidates really are too timid to say they're candidates, they may be too timid to effectively lead the University. Virginia's Freedom of Information Act allows discussion of personnel matters such as these in closed meetings, but it doesn't require any such secrecy. So the trustees are free to open up the process if they wish. But I don't hold out much hope.
I noticed that the agenda for a recent search committee meeting said they were going into "executive session" to discuss presidential candidates. There's no such thing as an executive session under the state's Freedom of Information Act. Many years ago, legislators realized that was the wrong term for such secret sessions. The language in the law now is "closed meeting," defined as a meeting from which the public is barred.
A public institution of the University's standing and history should not be so secretive.
Tim Thornton is The Cavalier Daily's ombudsman. His column appears Mondays.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: When it comes to art, it pays to pay attention
By Delaney Hammond | YesterdayEven among people who value the arts, carving out space for critical engagement with — rather than just passive consumption of — art has been an endeavor I have treasured.
PARTING SHOT: You only get what you give
By Delores Cyrus | 2 days agoThe people at this place have taught me that letting others in, while not always easy, is always worth it.
PARTING SHOT: Life lessons
By Miriella Jiffar | 2 days agoThroughout my time on the Life Desk, I’ve wondered what breathes life into this University.
