An elected board
There’s a major difference in the way a city runs versus a university.
But the way the governing bodies are selected shouldn’t be different.
While observing the Mount Pleasant City Commission, I’ve watched the commission debate long and hard regarding decisions that some would consider routine. And because those people are elected officials, they feel that it is their duty to argue and debate. Split votes are not uncommon.
While observing last week’s Board of Trustees meeting, a thought struck me: I don’t think I’ve ever seen a split vote from the Board.
It could come from the fact that the board is entirely appointed by the governor, as opposed to being elected like the boards at University of Michigan, Michigan State University and Wayne State University. Because this board is appointed, there is very little to hold the members accountable.
If the board were elected, that would provide more credibility. It would hold them accountable to the residents of Michigan and not just the governor. Good, competitive discussion would ensue at board meetings instead of unanimous approvals of agenda items that affect thousands of students.
While the governor’s appointee to the boards of the 12 smaller state universities must receive confirmation from the state Senate, most senators won’t go through the process of evaluating appointees because they have more important things to worry about (the state budget comes to mind).
Because of this hastened process, the governor effectively has exclusive control over the 12 appointed boards of the smaller universities.
Having voters decide who runs their universities is better than just allowing a government official appoint them. It holds them accountable to the public. And, at this point in CMU’s history, a little accountability wouldn’t be that bad.
