Students protest their lack of input in appointment of Napolitano

After the recent controversial appointment of Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano as University of California president, some students expressed concerns about a lack of student input in the search process.

A special search committee of 10 UC regents announced the nomination of Napolitano on July 12, shocking many people because of her lack of educational experience.

Now, some students who presented to the Special Committee to Consider the Selection of a Presidentthat picked Napolitano say they are concerned that they did not have a large enough role in the search process.

UC policy dictates that four advisory committees be created to ensure that different groups in the UCare adequately represented in the presidential search process – one each for faculty, students, staff and alumni.

Knowledge of the candidates actually being considered for the nomination, however, is limited to the special search committee and the Academic Advisory Committee, which is composed of UC faculty. Committees of UC students, staff and alumni only suggest what qualities they would want in the next president, as well as recommend candidates.

In mid-March, the student, staff and alumni committees gave their own presentations to the special committee on what they would want to see in the next president.

The alumni asked for a charismatic, corporate-savvy president who could manage UC funds effectively and find sponsors for the University, said Mary Schuler, UC Riverside Alumni Association president and member of the Alumni Advisory Committee. She said the committee members also wanted someone who could understand challenges students go through.

Staff committee members asked for someone who could effectively manage the UC as a public research institution, said Jason Valdry, director of technology at UC Irvine. They also wanted someone who would bring national recognition and public policy experience to the UC.

Students asked the regents for somebody who would keep the UC affordable and accessible to students, said Raquel Morales, UC Student Association president and chair of the Student Advisory Committee.

The students also asked for a nontraditional candidate, said Angela Arunarsirakul, a UCLA alumna who served on the advisory committee. The UC had never before had a president who was female or represented a racial minority, which students emphasized in their presentation, she added.

In that respect, Arunarsirakul said she thought the regents took into account what students had to say.

Members of the staff and alumni committees said after Napolitano’s nomination that they felt listened to.

But now that Napolitano has been appointed, Morales and Arunarsirakul said they are skeptical that students had a considerable impact on the presidential search.

Members of the three advisory committees – especially the committee of students – said they asked the regents for somebody who would focus on the values of diversity and inclusion.

Students in particular requested somebody who would enhance and protect a healthy campus climate, defined as an environment where students “generally feel welcomed, respected and valued by the University,” according to a UC regents report on campus climate.

Many undocumented students, however, said they felt Napolitano’s office’s history of deporting record numbers of individuals from the United States compromised campus climate for them.

“Just consider if there’s an undocumented student in the UC whose family member has been deported because of Napolitano’s policy,” said Seth Ronquillo, a fourth-year film and linguistics student and co-chair of Improving Dreams, Equality, Access and Success, a UCLA undocumented students group. “How would they feel if this person in UC leadership has deported them?”

Arunarsirakul said this dissatisfaction among some students led her to doubt that student input was considered in the presidential search, or that there was enough student involvement in the search.

“Campus climate, which is a little unclear right now, is perhaps something that might not have been taken into consideration, in particular since Napolitano can be a polarizing figure for students,” Arunarsirakul said.

She said she was disappointed the Student Advisory Committee would not receive any updates about the presidential search after the students’ single 40-minute presentation to the regents in March.

The candidates being considered for nomination are kept confidential to protect their current jobs, said Robert Powell, chair of the UC Academic Senate and head of the Academic Advisory Committee. His committee was the only advisory committee to know who the potential candidates were and help narrow down the original list of 319 candidates.

If candidates’ peers found out they were looking for another job, it could negatively reflect on themselves, Powell added.

“I understand transparency, but there are times when a process needs confidentiality,” Powell said.

Still, Arunarsirakul said she thought the involvement that the advisory committees did have was negligible.

Three advisory committees briefly met with Janet Napolitano on Thursday before the UC Board of Regents approved her appointment as the next leader of the University.

Arunarsirakul said in an email that it was frustrating that the committees were allowed to meet with Napolitano right before she was expected to be approved, when little could be done to influence the appointment.

The regents board almost unanimously approved Napolitano’s appointment on Thursday. Only Student Regent Cinthia Flores voted against Napolitano.

“It was disheartening to see such a high position was chosen with barely any student input,” Morales said. “(Napolitano) has a lot of work to do with the student body in order to engage them and gain their trust.”