Selection process for student regent debated
Concerns arise over regents’ amount of control over decision
By Michael Howerton
Daily Bruin Staff
SAN FRANCISCO — Though the UC Regents will announce the new
student regent today, there was growing concern at last week’s
meeting that the selection process deprives the students control
over choosing their representative.
The criticism stems from the selection process which denies the
student body final approval over their own regent. Traditionally,
the applicants are first narrowed down by the nine campus
presidents to nine candidates, from which the University of
California Student Association sends three finalists before the
Board of Regents to select the student regent.
"(Selection is based on) the views of the regents and the Office
of the President of what a student representative should be," UCLA
president York Chang said of the selection procedures. "That
defeats the purpose of having a student regent. The students should
have complete say in who will be their regent."
The association is working on a proposal to revise the student
regent selection procedures, said Kimi Lee, the association’s
executive director. The proposal might be ready to bring before the
board for a vote in the next few months.
"The regents control the entire process," Lee said. "They write
and collect the applications, they withhold references and they
decide. We should be able to forward one name and that should be
the student regent."
Central to the criticism is the disparity between the selection
procedures for the faculty regent and the alumni regent, who are
elected directly from their constituencies, and the student regent
who has to be approved by the others on the board.
"The alumni and the faculty choose their own regent, we only
want the same respect as all the other constituents have in
selecting their regent," said Chang, who worked in the student
regent selection process last year as an association board
member.
Also pointing to the dichotomy between how faculty and alumni
regents are chosen and how the student regent is chosen, Alumni
Regent Judith Levin said that it is time to begin discussions about
changing the selection procedures.
"It is logical that students can put forward their candidates
without approval from the board," she said. "We need to take time
to evaluate the process as to whether it would serve their needs
better."
The current student regent, Ed Gomez, said he agreed
completely.
"It is time to give the students not first grade privileges, but
Board of Regent privileges."
In defense of the existing practice, Regent William Bagley, a
member of the committee that chooses student regents, said that the
only way to ensure the selection of a student representative that
the rest of the regents could work with was to involve the regents
in the selection.
"We have a process where the regents are involved in the
selection. The student is better received and has more credibility
with the regents so that they can represent the students better,"
Bagley said.
He also alluded to some tension within the board over the
usefulness of having a student regent on the board. "Some regents
think that the student regent is not productive at all," he
said.
Representatives of the student body have also expressed concern
over the effectiveness of the student regent, viewing the
appointment as a token acknowledgment by the regents who then
ignore and neutralize the students concerns in session.
"Structurally, the student regent is not meant to be a powerful
position," said Jess Bravin, a UC Berkeley law student and a
student regent candidate. He explained the student regent holds the
position for just a year while the other appointed regents have 12
year terms.
But many agree that role of the student regent may not rest in
the voting power so much as it does in the power to bring student
issues before the board for discussion.
"(The student regent) can still be a important player depending
on how the position is used," Bravin added. "Also, the symbolic
value, in that the students can participate, is an important
institutional message to send."
Chang agreed that the student regent has "potential to create
dialogue and build bridges."
"They give a perspective to the students about what’s going on
on the board. There are limitations on what a single student regent
can do, we need to squeeze for the most potential we can," Chang
said.
Concerns about the student regent selection process come in the
midst of growing tension throughout the UC system over what many
perceive as the increasing isolation of the Board of Regents from
other university groups.
Since the board voted to end affirmative action programs at last
July’s meeting, much of the criticism concerning the board’s
refusal to listen to student and faculty voices has centered around
charges of politicization of the regents.
"A lot of people work hard to keep the selection process of the
student regent as apolitical as possible, (because) the other
regents are supposed to be apolitical," said Leo Trujillo-Cox, a
UCLA law student and one of the candidates for student regent.
"The tension is a direct reaction to the inherent politicization
of the rest of the regents," he said. "Direct election would only
increase (the politicization), but it feels appropriate because the
rest of the regents are so political. A covenant has been
broken."
Additionally, student concerns can be more easily ignored when
the regents have the right of final approval, Bravin argued.
"By the nature of the roles, the students will be in opposition
to certain things (that the regents support)," Bravin said. "The
student regent has traditionally been the loyal opposition and,
because of this ,built in oppositional nature; to have an adversary
choose the representative of the other party is awkward."
With the current climate of frustration and tension between the
board and the student organizations, Trujillo-Cox said that the
current selection system might be the best process in which the
student regent can carry a sense of credibility both with the board
and with the student body.
"It is a compromise that allows credibility to be maintained on
both sides," he said, "but credibility erodes a bit on both sides
as well."Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu