Tuesday, February 11, 1997
REGENTS:
Jess Bravin, board members disagree on scope of responsibilityBy
Tiffany Lauter
Daily Bruin Contributor
Is the role of the student regent to be the voice of the
students or a rubber stamp for the board’s majority?
Jess Bravin, the current student regent, appears to disagree
with other members of the board on the answer.
"If regents are suppose to go along with the majority, why have
a Board of Regents at all?" Bravin said.
However, at least one board member disagrees with Bravin’s
assessment.
"It is important for the person to think first as a regent and
second as a student," said Regent Roy Brophy of the student regent
position. "(For the) last couple of years, (Ed Gomez, 1995-96
student regent) and Bravin have voted as students. The student
regent is not there to vote the students’ perspective every
time."
While Bravin has voted against measures that might adversely
affect students  including most fee increases  he has
also voiced opposition to the privatization of the university
medical centers, the University of California’s adaptation of
policy keeping products made with forced labor in other countries
out of the UC system, and the board’s observance of the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
"I find it utterly absurd for Regent Brophy to say that I have
not voted in a way that best serves the university’s interests,"
Bravin said. "My record speaks for itself."
Bravin illustrated the difficult task of keeping the two
identities separate in an interview with the Daily Californian:
"When I say something they agree with, it’s ‘Regent Bravin,’ but
when I disagree with them it’s ‘Student Bravin.’"
To better understand how other college regents and trustees
interact with their boards, Bravin organized the first-ever
conference of student governing board members.
The event, attended by more than three dozen students, addressed
the problem students face being both a student and an
administrator.
Bravin said he was pleased overall with the results of the
summit and hoped the conference will become an annual event
encouraging universities without student regents to create such
positions on their boards.
Clearly, Bravin has not jumped on the majority bandwagon. On
several occasions, his has been the only dissenting vote, creating
some friction between himself and the rest of the board.
Bravin believes the bad blood between the regents and himself is
due to a variety of issues, including his outspoken views on the
politics of the board.
A major concern with some regents is the fact that Bravin has
written several articles for the Los Angeles Times, Washington
Post, and San Francisco Chronicle regarding university policy.
Some regents deem this practice embarrassing and harmful to the
university, but Bravin feels that it is his duty to keep the public
informed about university policy.
"I look at it this way: I am in a public office, and I have to
justify to the people of California my position on issues and my
actions taken. They can agree or disagree," Bravin said.
He believes it is the job of the university to promote
discussion of issues and creative ways to approach them.
"The Board of Regents is a political entity," Bravin said. "I
know that several regents oppose having a student regent. … But
to say that all regents are against the student regent is not
accurate. I am very close to some of them."
Regent Velma Montoya, appointed to the board by Gov. Pete Wilson
in 1994, agreed that the student position is not favored by all
members.
However, she finds a student regent’s point of view necessary
for her to properly serve the parents, students and administrators
of the university.
Montoya describes Bravin’s outlook and drive as a colorful
addition to the board.
"It is up to each student regent what the role will be," Montoya
said. "Jess has pushed issues that are more than what affect
students, such as financing. He is generally concerned and I find
that refreshing. He does his homework and knows the issues."
And even while some board members appear to disagree with many
of Bravin’s views, a proposal to eliminate the student regent
position last March was shot down before it could even get on the
agenda.
In accepting the position, he wrote that "there will be times
when a student regent must dissent from policies favored by the
majority … a university is a place where ideas should matter, and
where people should feel safe to express their ideas and explore
their implications."
But whether that exploration is acceptable in a student regent
is being discussed by a special committee on the role of the
student regent.
The committee’s goal is to present recommendations to enhance
the selection process of student regents to UC President Richard
Atkinson by March 1.
Setting out to define clear boundaries of the student regent’s
responsibilities and dispel any misconceptions about the position,
committee members hope that the university community might give
them an insight into how the community understands the student
regent’s role.
The committee will also examine the recruitment, application,
and nomination for the position as compared to the selection
process used for other members of the board at the UC and by other
colleges with student trustees and representatives.
According to committee chair Carol Hock, the student regent and
the Student Body President’s Council (SBPC), now the University of
California Student Association (UCSA), had independent
relationships with the board when the student regent position was
created in 1974.
Under the previous structure, UCSA had the opportunities to make
official presentations before the regents, thus eliminating
reliance upon the student regent to represent UCSA’s concerns.
These presentations continued until January 1994, when the Board
of Regents instituted a public comment period.
The board assumed that any student would have the opportunity to
address the board during such time and therefore the presentations
by UCSA were unnecessary.
Without these presentations, UCSA has become increasingly
reliant upon the student regent to address their concerns before
the board.
This may have consequently led to the perception by both
students and many board members that the student regent was the
"student representative" to the board.
It is expected that campuses would not adopt any new procedures
from the committee’s recommendations until the 1998-99 student
regent application process which begins next Fall.