The University Record, April 3, 1995
Search process still too restrictive, Regents say
By Rebecca A. Doyle
The Michigan Senate last week passed an amendment to the Open Meetings Act that will allow Michigan’s public universities to reduce to three the candidates in a presidential search before the names of those candidates are made public. Senate Bill 211 passed by a vote of 28 to 9.
The bill requires that a presidential search committee be comprised of at least one student, one faculty member, one administrator, one alumnus, one representative of the general public and at least one member–but not enough to constitute a quorum–of the governing board.
The amendment also states that a final vote on the presidential candidates may not take place less than 30 days after the final three candidates have been publicly identified, and that public deliberations by the governing board of the institution prior to a vote on the final candidates must take place in an open session.
The Senate also passed Senate Bill 212, an amendment to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exempting Michigan’s public universities from the act in presidential searches as long as the university is in compliance with the rules outlined above for presidential searches.
A suit filed against the University in 1988 by the Ann Arbor News and the Detroit Free Press was decided in fall 1993, when the state Supreme Court ruled the University had violated the Open Meetings Act during the search that led to the appointment of President James J. Duderstadt, and in subsequently refusing to disclose records of the Regents’ travel expenses, also had violated the Freedom of Information Act.
Members of the Board of Regents, with whom the responsibility for selecting a president rests, have expressed frustration at not being able to offer confidentiality to potential candidates for the top University slot.
“It is clear to me that the Open Meetings Act and the Freedom of Information Act have placed severe limitations on the university presidential search process,” says Regent Deane Baker. “Both Michigan State University and the University of Michigan experienced the loss of highly qualified presidential candidates during the search process because some candidates feared their confidentiality could be compromised.” Baker feels that publicly announcing three finalists may make potential candidates wary of being considered for the post.
“Confidentiality is a very serious matter to people who are established in positions of leadership at other major universities. It may put their careers at risk when they are publicly identified. It is a question that has to be considered,” he adds.
“The necessity to do this certainly constrains and shrinks the pool of persons from which you have an opportunity to draw,” says Regent Shirley M. McFee. “Why would anybody open themselves to that kind of scrutiny when they have no idea whether they are going to get the job?”
McFee noted that the amendment is an “improvement over what both Michigan State University and the University of Michigan have been subjected to. It is better, but it is a far cry from resolving the issues.”
Regent Nellie Varner says that the amendment still does not provide for the needs of Michigan’s public universities “in the sense that it will still make it very difficult to recruit top-level candidates for the position of president.”
“The law needs to be made practical and realistic so that those of us who have the responsiblity of carrying out the hiring function can carry it out efficiently without breaking the spirit or the letter of the law.”
Both Baker and Varner were involved in the search that led to Duderstadt’s appointment.
The bills next will be submitted to the House for consideration and, if passed, sent to Gov. John Engler to sign into law. If the House does not pass them as written, differences could be resolved in a conference committee of House and Senate members who would agree on any changes before resubmitting the bills to the two bodies.
