NMSU seconds regent reform

NMSU’s Faculty Senate approved a proposed regent selection process Oct. 7, bringing on board another one of the state’s research universities in an attempt to dramatically reform the state’s Boards of Regents.

The process would apply to regent selection at UNM, NMSU and New Mexico Tech, the state’s three research universities, and is supported by state senators Jerry Ortiz y Pino and Tim Keller.

Keller said the selection process should be taken out of the governor’s hands.
“I’m a big supporter of the process, and I think it’s a great way for our state to move forward when it comes to higher education,” he said.

The UNM Faculty Senate Task Force proposed tailoring the current selection process, and UNM Faculty Senate unanimously endorsed it Aug. 24. That day, Faculty Senate President Richard Wood said all three state universities must approve the selection process before it’s presented to the state legislature for approval.

Under the proposal, faculty and community members would form a Committee on Regent Appointments (CRA) whenever there is a Board of Regents vacancy or when one is anticipated. The CRA would then identify three recommended nominees per vacancy and provide input to the governor on the candidates.

During his September report, Wood presented the proposal to the Board of Regents. Among Wood’s supporters, NMSU Faculty Senate Vice-Chair Stuart Munson-McGee said altering the current process is necessary.

Keller said the proposed regent model is similar to the judge selection process.

“I like that it balances the executive authority of the governor with the expertise of the University faculty,” he said.
Ortiz y Pino said getting a constitutional amendment to reflect the process change is risky, but that route likely won’t be taken in getting it passed. He said the vetting process could be added by tweaking the Senate Rules Committee procedures.

“Getting voter approval for any constitutional amendments is always a crap-shoot and may not be necessary,” he said. “It could require that there be a separate public hearing prior to confirmation (of regents) and that the public be given an opportunity to question confirmees to get a better feel for their background and values.”