The Board of Regents of the University of Nevada announced last week that its chairperson, Cathy McAdoo, selected an individual she thinks should temporarily replace former Chancellor Melody Rose, who resigned and accepted a $610,000 severance package in April after little more than a year on the job. The Rose resignation was merely the latest in a long, embarrassing, and expensive string of scandals involving the Board of Regents. 

Rose was the sixth Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) chancellor in the last 10 years. This statistic is surpassed only by the number of college and university leaders the system has lost: More than 40 presidents have entered and left through the revolving door of higher education administration at our seven colleges and universities over the last 20+ years. 

All of this shows Nevadans quite clearly that the ever-dysfunctional Board of Regents, led by a variety of unqualified elected officials, is immersed in a cult of personality where power is confused with leadership. The sad status quo within the Board of Regents must be changed. Nevadans deserve better outcomes for their annual $1 billion+ investment into a system that affects the lives of tens of thousands of students, families, and the current and future state economy.  

Public reaction to the latest Board of Regents announcement — they are set to appoint an interim chancellor later this week — ranges from casual surprise that this unstable group planned to act in such a way so soon after its latest embarrassment, to resigned disappointment about the lack of input, including the exclusion of many of the board chair’s fellow regents. Yes, you heard that right: many of the regents were unaware the announcement was going out and had no voice in the decision to nominate someone for one of the highest paid ($500,000+) public positions in the state. When asked to explain the process behind the candidate selection, the response from McAdoo either has been abject silence or an advisory to “read the NSHE handbook, we have a process” (to paraphrase various third parties who have interacted with McAdoo). 

According to NSHE bylaws, Chair McAdoo is indeed able to nominate a candidate for acting or interim chancellor. Core “community constituencies” are then supposed to be consulted in consideration of the candidate. The candidate is then supposed to be brought before the board for further consideration and possible approval. 

The governance language in the handbook is unwieldy — ripe for conflicts at best, corruption at worst, and inviting collusion in candidate selection. In other words, the current NSHE handbook provides for a narrow, exclusionary, and secretive approach — not one that is open, inclusive, and transparent. This latest example brings to mind an oft repeated quote from the late Dr. Robert Lang, former leader of Brookings Mountain West and the Lincy Institute. When discussing how best to solve for egregious behavior and create accountability in public agencies, he would simply say, “Governance matters. Create strong governance.” 

We have not done so, and as a result, the Board of Regents chair is now conducting a process through a very poor governance framework, with just one candidate set for fast-tracked approval and no understanding by the public of how or why this person became the sole candidate named on a meeting agenda. Were other individuals considered? If so, what were their qualifications and experience, and what criteria eliminated them from consideration? Who proposed other candidates and why? Who are the “core constituencies” who were asked to deliberate on the merits of the candidate? What major business, trade or labor labor organizations in the state were consulted, if any? What is the candidate’s position on collective bargaining? What is his experience with and knowledge of academic research? Is he well-versed in the history of the higher education funding formula and the diverse needs/wants of the various institutions? Does he understand what the profile of the college student of 2022 is? How will he ensure our community college, college and university presidents are successful? 

These are just a few of the questions we wish to have the applicant, and any that may be added, answer — in public. 

The NSHE chancellor oversees a $1+ billion annual budget for a system of seven institutions that employ thousands of employees. These colleges and universities (and DRI) are critical to workforce development and economic diversification in Nevada. It is no small task and one we should all care about. Yet Chairwoman McAdoo is asking her fellow regents to approve the appointment of an interim chancellor this Thursday, June 9^th at the quarterly Board of Regents meeting. The discussion is planned to consume a mere 10-15 minutes. This is wrong. This agenda item should not be approved, and the regents should instead adopt a new, transparent, and more inclusive process whereby all key community constituencies are included, all proposed names are vetted, and the best candidates — plural — are considered. 

If this is done, we may still end up with the same candidate currently being considered — but the process would be one of integrity and transparency, unlike the current situation: a process that is playing out behind closed doors, with very few people involved and that further erodes public trust.

In line with the arguments presented here, Brian Klaas, the author of the New York Times 2021 bestseller “Corruptible,” asks a simple question: Does power corrupt or are corrupt people drawn to power? Klass goes on to explore who gets power and how it changes them.

Spoiler alert: Power does tend to corrupt. 

Klass found that weak systems repeatedly attract bad actors, and further found that the good people who come into flawed governance systems ultimately end up playing to our worst angels over time. Klaas’s research also reveals one of the best ways to reduce corruption and bad behavior: improve the systems in which people function. Some of his advice for improving weak systems has really resonated with our community coalition work aimed at reforming the Board of Regents and NSHE:

1. Recruit incorruptible people and screen out corruptible ones. We have existing and past regents with a variety of ethics issues, and the system does not adequately allow us to address those situations.
2. Rotate to reduce abuse. Collusion is reduced when leadership rotates. We should not approve the proposed extension of leadership for Chair McAdoo and Vice-Chair Carter on June 9^th.
3.  Audit decision-making processes. Thank you, 2021 Legislature. An audit measure passed and NSHE is undergoing an inaugural audit with goals to expand its scope.  
4. Watched people are nicer people. Who watches the watchmen? All of us. Change is hard, even when everyone knows you need it, but public participation in continued policy reform work will strengthen a system desperately in need of modernization and strong governance. 

Nevada students, families and our recovering economy deserve a better higher education governance structure. In the end, all we have is each other to make needed changes that restore and maintain public trust. Because in the end, we are the public trust.  

I call upon Chairwoman McAdoo and the entire Board of Regents to delay and replay this critical process in a way that maintains public trust and serves the mission of NSHE.

Maureen E. Schafer is the executive director for the Council for a Better Nevada.