THE BOARD MEETING GENERAL SESSION OF THE APRIL 10 BOARD OF REGENTS MEETING IS NOW BEING
[B. CALL TO ORDER/PUBLIC MEETING]
[00:00:08]
CALLED TO ORDER. STEPHANIE, WILL YOU TAKE ROLL, PLEASE? GLEN, CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE SAY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AS WE DO IN EVERY PUBLIC MEETING? WE'RE NOT IN PUBLIC YET. YES.WILL YOU LEAD THAT, PLEASE? I'D BE HAPPY TO. THANK YOU.
IF YOU'LL ALL JOIN ME, PLEASE, IN SAYING THE PLEDGE.
THANK YOU, SUE. NOW, WE'RE READY TO GO.
THIS MORNING BECAUSE THIS IS AN ELECTED BOARD, AND BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OF COLORADO REQUIRE AND DESERVE TRANSPARENCY IN THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND BECAUSE THIS BOARD TAKES ITS ROLE SERIOUSLY, TODAY IN OPEN SESSION, THE BOARD OF REGENTS WILL CONSIDER A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING UNIVERSITY COUNCIL TO APPEAL TO PRAIRIE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING COMPANY VERSUS BOARD OF REGENTS CASE TO THE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS.
ALTHOUGH INDIVIDUAL REGENTS HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS ON THIS MATTER, A RESOLUTION PASSED BY A MAJORITY VOTE IS AN ACTION OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS.
WHILE THIS ISSUE IS IMPORTANT.,THIS BOARD OF REGENTS REMAINS FOCUSED ON THE CRITICAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH COVID-19, THAT ARE AFFECTING THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO.
AND THIS MORNING, THIS BOARD, BECAUSE OF ITS PROCESS AND ITS ROLE TO THE CITIZENS OF COLORADO, IS JUST FOLLOWING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND DOING WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN ELECTED TO DO.
WITH THAT, THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THIS RESOLUTION.
RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD OF REGENTS AUTHORIZES UNIVERSE COUNCILS TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER IN CASE 19 CU 3 3 7 5 9.
PRAIRIE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING COMPANY LLP VS.
THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO TO THE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE WILL BE DEALING WITH THIS MORNING.
AS IS THE CASE EVERY REGENTS, ONCE WE MAKE A MOTION AND SECOND IT, EVERY REGENT WILL HAVE TWO TO THREE MINUTES TO DISCUSS TO MAKE THEIR CASE.
WHATEVER. AT THE END OF THAT, THEN WE WILL TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE.
UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS, DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED CHAIR GALLEGOS.
SO MOVED BY REGENT SHARKEY, SECONDED, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND BY REGENT HILL.
OK, WITH THAT IS OUR DISCUSSION.
AND I THINK AS USUALLY THE CASE, WE WILL START AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ROLL CALL ALPHABET . REGENT CARSON, IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR QUESTION OR WHATEVER WITH REGARD TO THE RESOLUTION, NOW IS YOUR CHANCE TO MAKE.
IT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A STATEMENT TO MAKE.
THEN WE CAN JUST MOVE FORWARD, BUT WE'RE GONNA GO MOVE THROUGH ALL OF OUR REGENTS BEFORE A ROLL CALL VOTE. SO, REGENT CARSON, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.
I'M READY TO VOTE WHENEVER WE VOTE.
I WOULD HAVE A QUESTION FOR DAN OR PAT.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO ASK FOR AN EXTENSION FOR THIS APPEAL BECAUSE OF WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THE CORONAVIRUS? I CAN ANSWER.
[00:05:03]
WE'VE ALREADY SOUGHT AN EXTENSION.THE DEADLINES FOR BEING ABLE TO APPEAL ARE NORMALLY CONTROLLED BY RULE OF THE COURT OF APPEALS. THE COURT HAS THE ABILITY TO EXTEND THAT DATE.
BUT ORDINARILY WILL ONLY GRANT ONE OR TWO EXTENSIONS FOR A BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ASK FOR A SECOND ONE BECAUSE OF THE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND WOULD THAT AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO APPEAL IN THE LONG TERM.
I'M SORRY, I WAS ON MUTE EARLIER AND I WOULD HAVE SAID JUST WHAT PAT DID.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE COULD SEEK A SECOND EXTENSION.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT WOULD BE GRANTED.
AND GIVEN THIS CASE AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE HAD AN EXTENSION, IN ORDER TO HAVE A BOARD MEETING TO CONSIDER THIS, I'M NOT SURE OF WHAT OUR ANSWERS WOULD BE WITH THAT.
WHAT'S THE WORST THING THAT HAPPENS, DAN? I MEAN, DO THEY JUST SAY NO AND THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION RIGHT THEN? EXACTLY. IS ANYONE ELSE SUPPORT THAT IDEA? I THINK, HEIDI, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THIS ORIGINAL RESOLUTION, YOU CAN DO THAT WITH A SECOND AND THEN WE CAN VOTE ON.
I AGREE WITH THE SENTIMENT THAT RIGHT NOW IS NOT A GOOD TIME TO BE PUTTING THIS OUT AND AIRING THIS CONVERSATION.
BUT I THINK IF THERE'S A CHANCE THAT WE CAN EXTEND THIS TO A TIME WHEN THINGS ARE LESS VOLATILE AND THE SITUATION WITH EVERYONE'S HEALTH AND SAFETY ISN'T SO CRITICAL, I THINK IT WOULD BE IDEAL AND IT'S WORTH A SHOT.
SO, GLEN, HOW DO I DO THIS? SO IF I COULD ENTER IN.
LET ME JUST PUT SOME GUARDRAILS ON THAT.
WHILE I THINK THAT WE COULD ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.
I THINK THAT EXTENSION WOULD BE LIMITED TO A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, 10 DAYS TO TWO WEEKS, PERHAPS. I THINK OUR LIKELIHOOD OF ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION UNTIL THE COVID PANDEMIC IS RESOLVED IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
WHAT IF WE ASKED FOR THE EXTENSION TO BE UNTIL THE GOVERNOR LIFTS THE STAY AT HOME ORDER? AGAIN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HIGHLY UNLIKELY.
I KNOW IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY, DAN, BUT I THINK WE'RE IN HIGHLY UNLIKELY TIMES.
I THINK THAT MIGHT BE THE APPROPRIATE THING TO DO TO JUST ASK.
IF SO DIRECTED, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT.
HEIDI, SO YOUR AMENDMENT WOULD BE WHAT? REQUESTING THAT THE COURT GIVE US AN EXTENSION UNTIL THE GOVERNOR LIFTS THE STAY AT HOME MANDATE.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT? [INAUDIBLE] I'LL SECOND IT. IT'S CARSON.
ALRIGHT, JOHN CARSON SECONDS THE AMENDMENT THAT HEIDI PROPOSED THAT WE SEEK ANOTHER MOTION.
WE'LL OPEN THAT AMENDMENT UP FOR DISCUSSION NOW, SO AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT ALL TALKING AT ONCE, WOULD YOU RATHER ME CALL ON YOU OR LET'S DO THAT? HOW ABOUT WE START WITH REGENT SMITH THIS MORNING? NO DISCUSSION. REGENT SCHOEMAKER.
ARE WE TALKING NOW ABOUT THE AMENDMENT OR THE ENTIRE--THE AMENDMENT.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT TODAY IS THE DEADLINE.
SO WE EITHER FILE AN APPEAL TODAY ALONG WITH THE REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OR I THINK IF WE FILE. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, DAN.
BUT IF WE FILE A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION TODAY AND IT'S NOT GRANTED, THEN WE ESSENTIALLY WAIVED OUR RIGHT TO APPEAL.
LET ME JUMP IN ON THAT, WHICH IS BY OPERATION OF RULE OF THE COURT, THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION AUTOMATICALLY STAYS THE DEADLINE, TO WHICH IT'S OPERABLE.
BUT IF THE COURT WERE TO DENY THE EXTENSION, IT WOULD HAVE IMMEDIATE IMPACT THEN.
SO IF YOU FILED A MOTION TODAY, IT WOULD STAY THE DEADLINE FOR TODAY.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT STAY WOULD LAST.
THANK YOU. REGENT SHARKEY: I AGREE WITH REGENT GANAHL THAT THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME FOR US.
THIS IS A DIFFICULT TIME FOR OUR COUNTRY, FOR OUR STATE AND OUR UNIVERSITY.
IT'S A DIFFICULT TIME TO BE MAKING THESE KIND OF CHOICES.
I CERTAINLY, AS YOU ALL KNOW, SUPPORT AN APPEAL.
HOWEVER, GIVEN THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE APPEAL BEING DELAYED IS UNLIKELY.
[00:10:10]
AND GIVEN THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE OUR MINDS ON A VOTE ANYTIME IN THE NEXT 10 TO 14 DAYS OR NEXT MONDAY, THIS BOARD STANDS WHERE IT STANDS.AND I THINK WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE A VOTE.
AND AGAIN, IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'VE COME TO THIS POINT.
BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT THE AMENDMENT BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED THAT THE COURT WILL NOT AGREE TO A DELAY. AND THEN WE'VE LOST OUR RIGHT FOR ASKING FOR THE APPEAL.
AND I DON'T WANT TO LOSE THAT OPTION TO ASK FOR THE APPEAL.
REGENT KROLL. YEAH, I THINK IT WOULD BE.
SO CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION FROM DAN AND OR PAT ON THIS? SO IF WE WERE TO REQUEST AN APPEAL...EXCUSE ME, IF WE WERE TO REQUEST AN EXTENSION AND THE EXTENSION WAS NOT GRANTED, WE WOULD EFFECTIVELY HAVE TO SOMEHOW COBBLE THIS ALL TOGETHER VERY QUICKLY TO HOLD A VOTE ON THIS, WHICH PROCEDURALLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE COULD ACCOMPLISH THAT. MAYBE SOMEONE COULD ENLIGHTEN ME.
BUT I DON'T KNOW, AS THE DOMINOS FALL, IF IT'LL LEAVE EVERYONE WITH THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF OPTIONS. LET ME ADDRESS THAT.
MY OPINION IS, AS PAT SAID, WE WOULD, BY FILING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION, THAT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY EXTEND OUR TIME TO COMPLY UNTIL THE COURT RULES.
IF THE COURT DENIED IT, OUR TIME FOR EITHER APPEALING OR NOT WOULD TRIGGER THAT DAY.
FOR US TO HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING [INAUDIBLE] IT REQUIRES A 24 HOUR NOTICE UNDER THE COLORADO OPEN MEETINGS LAW.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY KIND OF THE CATCH 22 I THINK THAT YOU'RE ENVISIONING.
CAN I JUMP IN WITH ONE FOLLOW ON TO THAT, WHICH IS THAT ORDINARILY, IF A COURT DENIES A MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION, THEY WILL GIVE YOU A VERY BRIEF PERIOD.
THE COURT MIGHT SAY YOU HAVE TWO DAYS TO FILE ON A DENIAL, BUT DAN'S RIGHT, WE WOULDN'T CONTROL THE TIMING ON WHAT THE COURT WOULD DO.
WOULDN'T IT BE ALMOST I MEAN, WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO GIVE US THE LEGALLY ALLOWED TIME TO GET TOGETHER? AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY TO SAY IF THEY DENY THE MOTION IN MY AMENDMENT THAT WE PUT A VOTE FORWARD, LIKE THAT WE HAVE THE VOTE ALREADY DONE TODAY THAT WOULD GO FORWARD? I THINK THAT IF THE BOARD VOTED AND HAD ALREADY TAKEN THE ACTION TO AUTHORIZE THE APPEAL, THAT THE COURT WOULD LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU'VE ALREADY TAKEN THE ACTION, THEREFORE, JUST GIVE THE NOTICE OF APPEAL.
OR COULD WE PLAN A MEETING FOR MONDAY AS A BACKUP? IF THEY DENY THE APPEAL AND HAVE IT READY TO GO AND NOTICED.
WE COULD DO THAT, BUT WE DON'T KNOW--WE WOULD NOT CONTROL THE TIMING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN TERMS OF HOW THEY WOULD RULE.
I DOUBT THAT THEY WOULD RULE ON IT TODAY.
WE JUST CAN'T PREDICT WHEN THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
SO, WHAT'S POSSIBLE HERE? INSTEAD OF JUST LOOKING AT WHAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, WHAT'S POSSIBLE? WELL, LET'S CONTINUE WITH OUR DISCUSSIONS.
AND THEN IF THERE'S A NEED TO CLARIFY, WE'LL DO THAT AFTER, OKAY? OKAY. REGENT HILL AT THIS THIS POINT.
YEAH. BUT I'D LOVE TO VOTE FOR ANY NON VIRUS RELATED ISSUES UNTIL AFTER THE VIRUS RESPONSES IS LARGELY OVER, SINCE THAT CONTINUES TO BE BY FAR OUR MAIN FOCUS.
BUT IF WE DO GET AN EXTENSION, IT'LL BE AT MOST A COUPLE WEEKS.
SO LOGISTICALLY, I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS.
I'M HAPPY TO VOTE ON THIS TODAY.
REGENT GANAHL: JUST WANT SOME CLARIFICATION OR IF THERE'S POSSIBILITIES OR OTHER WAYS WE CAN DO THIS TO HONOR WHAT'S GOING ON IN SOCIETY AND DO A NON-CORONAVIRUS VOTE AFTER THIS IS AT LEAST CLEAR THE AIR A LITTLE BIT.
I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD THING TO DO.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, TODAY I DON'T HAVE A CREATIVE PROCEDURAL SOLUTION FOR THAT.
[00:15:03]
I THINK THE COURT OF APPEALS IS CONTINUING TO HEAR CASES.THE COURT IS CONTINUING TO STICK WITH ITS DEADLINES IN TERMS OF FILING APPEAL.
AND AS I MENTIONED, WE'VE ASKED FOR ONE EXTENSION HERE.
I THINK I'D SEE YOU WERE PRETTY GOOD AT LEADING THE WAY AND DOING THE RIGHT THING, OR AT LEAST I THINK WE ARE.
AND SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY HAVE OTHER DECISIONS TO MAKE OR OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON, I THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE TO ASK THE COURT TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND THAT I GET WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING ABOUT IT.
IF THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT OUR APPEAL RIGHTS GO AWAY WITH THIS DECISION IMMEDIATELY, THEN YEAH, I AGREE WE GO FORWARD WITH THE VOTE.
BUT I THINK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER WAY TO APPROACH IT.
DAN AND PAT, I WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO BRING IT UP NOW.
I THINK. WHILE WE CAN ASK FOR ANOTHER EXTENSION, I BELIEVE THAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION, AS YOU SUGGESTED TO THE GOVERNOR, LIFTS HIS EXECUTIVE ORDER.
I THINK THE COURT IS UNLIKELY TO GRANT THAT, IN WHICH CASE WE WILL BE BACK IN THIS FORUM IN A RELATIVELY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.
I THINK AT LEAST WE TRIED AND IT SENDS THE RIGHT MESSAGE.
SO, I MEAN, THE ONLY THING I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET BACK TOGETHER. THAT'S MY WORRY.
[INAUDIBLE] I DON'T THINK THERE'S A HARM DONE, EVEN IF IT'S A FEW WEEKS.
LET'S CONTINUE ON REGENT CARSON.
I'M GOOD. LAST COMMENTS FOR ON THIS AMENDMENT.
AND THEN I'M GOING TO ASK EFFIE TO DO A RULE CALL ON WHETHER THIS AMENDMENT PASSES OR DOESN'T PASS. ANYONE ELSE WITH THE COMMENT WITH REGARD TO THIS AMENDMENT, HEIDI, HAVE YOU MADE YOUR POINT? YEAH.
I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. I'M STILL NOT CLEAR.
SO WE DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO RECONVENE IF WE ASKED FOR THE EXTENSION, IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING OR DO WE KNOW, PAT, THAT THERE WOULD BE REASONABLE AND GIVE US THE 24 HOURS TO RECONVENE? WE'RE ALL AT HOME. WE'RE STUCK AT HOME.
WE'RE WE'RE DOING OTHER STUFF, BUT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO RECONVENE PRETTY QUICKLY.
LET ME ADDRESS THAT. I THINK THAT WE COULD IF WE WENT FORWARD, WE COULD REQUEST THAT EXTENSION AND WE COULD ASK THAT IN THE EVENT THE COURT DENIED OUR MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION, THAT THEY WOULD GRANT US 48 HOURS SO THAT WE COULD PUBLICLY NOTICE A MEETING AS WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO UNDER LAW AND AND VOTE ON WHETHER TO APPEAL IT OR NOT.
WE COULD ASK THAT. I THINK THAT IT IS LIKELY THE COURT WOULD GRANT US IF THEY DENIED THE EXTENSION, THAT THEY WOULD GRANT US THE TIME FRAME TO CONDUCT A MEETING.
I THINK THAT. WE DON'T KNOW THAT.
AND MY NORMAL PRACTICE, I'VE DONE MORE THAN 100 CASES NOW, AND THAT'S TOO MANY CLOSE TO A HUNDRED CASES AT THE COURT OF APPEALS.
GENERALLY, IF THEY DENY AN EXTENSION, THEY WILL GIVE IT SOME PERIOD OF TIME TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE. SO I AGREE WITH DAN THAT IF WE ASKED FOR THE ABILITY TO CONVENE ON SHORT NOTICE IN ORDER TO IN THE EVENT THE EXTENSION WAS DENIED, THAT WOULD LIKELY BE GRANTED.
CAN I JUST MAKE ONE QUICK POINT? I JUST DO NOT SEE THE POINT OF HAVING TWO MEETINGS ON THIS TOPIC IN A SPAN OF THE NEXT WEEK OR TWO. I JUST I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GAIN.
WE'VE ALL KNOWN ABOUT THIS LAWSUIT FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
WE THE. [INAUDIBLE] WE'VE HAD YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD IT IN FRONT OF US FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND I THINK WE JUST NEED TO [INAUDIBLE] MOVE ON.
OK. I THINK THAT WE'RE READY FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT.
HEIDI, PUT IT, WHICH WAS TO POSTPONE THIS AND SEE WHAT THE COURT SAID.
AND WITH THAT EFFIE, WILL YOU DO A ROLL CALL? YES. [INAUDIBLE] CAN WE CLARIFY? SO WE ARE VOTING ON THE AMENDMENT.
SO IF YOU VOTE YES RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE VOTING TO ASK FOR AN EXTENSION.
BECAUSE WE DO NOT KNOW THE TIMELINE FOR AN EXTENSION, MY VOTE IS NO.
[00:20:03]
I'M SORRY. NO.BECAUSE I WE HAVE BEEN BRIEFED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON TWO DIFFERENT OCCASIONS WE'VE BEEN WE'RE WELL AWARE OF ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED AND OUR OPTIONS AND THE EXTENSION WILL NOT CHANGE.
I DON'T BELIEVE OUR MINDS WE WOULD BE RECONVENING EVEN IF WE WERE TO GET AN EXTENSION, WE WOULD BE RECONVENING AGAIN LIKELY EARLY NEXT WEEK.
AND FOR THAT REASON, I VOTE AGAINST THE AMENDMENT.
OK. SO WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE VOTE IS 6 TO 3, NO.
SO WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND WE WERE TO.
REGENT GRIEGO WITH REGARD TO COMMENTS ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
THANK YOU. FIRST AND FOREMOST, OUR FOCUS AND RESOURCES NEED TO GO TO THE MOST CRITICAL SITUATION WE HAVE EVER EXPERIENCED IN HISTORY THE CORONAVIRUS AND THE FUTURE OF OUR UNIVERSITY PROTECTING OUR STUDENTS, FACULTY AND STAFF ARE THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE.
I DO NOT SUPPORT THE BOARD OF REGENTS MOTION TO APPEAL THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT COURT. I BELIEVE THE COURT'S DECISION IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF COLORADO. TRANSPARENCY IS CRITICAL TO MAINTAIN AND HOLD PUBLIC OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE.
IN MY OPINION, THE APPEALS TO THE DISTRICT COURT DECISION UNDERMINES TRANSPARENCY IN OUR DEMOCRACY. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD FOCUS OUR WORK ON REVIEWING AND CLARIFYING OUR POLICY SO THAT TEACHING BOARDS HAVE CLEAR GUIDANCE TO RESPECTFULLY SERVE THE PEOPLE OF COLORADO.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, REGENT GRIEGO.
REGENT HILL. I'LL BE VOTING YES.
THE TIMING ON THIS APPEAL PROCESS IS VERY UNFORTUNATE.
AND VIRUS IS UNFORTUNATE AND ALL THAT IT IS CAUSED.
BUT THE UNIVERSITY BUSINESS DOES CONTINUE TO GO ON AND THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE TODAY WILL IMPACT THE FUTURE OF THIS UNIVERSITY LONG AFTER THIS THE NINE OF US HAVE LEFT THE SPORT. THIS BOARD HAD AN OPTION TO NAME ONE MORE THAN ONE SOLE FINALIST.
THE BOARD OF REGENTS CHOSE NOT TO NAME ONE SOLE FINALIST.
WE WERE ALLOWED THAT OPTION AND HAVE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY.
WE HAD THAT OPTION A YEAR AGO.
I APPRECIATE THAT THIS BOARD OF REGENTS HAS HAD THOSE OPTIONS AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO TIE THE HANDS OF THE FUTURE BOARD IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY.
SO I SUPPORT THE LEGAL ADVICE THAT WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN FROM OUR LEGAL TEAM AND I WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF AN APPEAL.
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE APPEAL FOR THE REASONS THAT REGENT GRIEGO STATED, BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS THE FACT THAT I WAS A BUSINESS ATTORNEY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.
I HAVEN'T PRACTICED FOR A LONG TIME, BUT FROM REPRESENTING A LOT OF CLIENTS WHO WERE SUED, I DID NOT DO LITIGATION.
AND WHAT I KNOW IS THAT WHEN IN AN INSTITUTION LIKE OURS OR LIKE ANY SMALL BUSINESS, FRANKLY, WE'RE VERY LARGE BUT SMALL BUSINESSES HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM WHEN THEY ARE SUED.
YOU GET YOUR BACK UP, YOU KNOW, AND WHERE THE REGENTS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO.
AND WE LOST IN DISTRICT COURT.
SO OUR OUR NATURAL INCLINATION IS TO FIGHT.
[00:25:06]
[INAUDIBLE] NATURAL INCLINATION BECAUSE OF COBIA, BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS THAT OUR UNIVERSITY IS GOING TO FACE IF WE CANNOT HAVE A NORMAL FALL SEMESTER.AND BECAUSE I JUST BELIEVE IN TRANSPARENCY, I GRADUATED FROM JOURNALISM SCHOOL FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WE FOLLOWED A PRACTICE THAT IN GOOD FAITH THAT WE HAD ALWAYS PRACTICED IN THE PAST RECENT PAST.
AND THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE [INAUDIBLE] JONES AND I DID ACTUALLY READ THE OPINION.
OH, YEAH. THAT WON'T SHOW ON TV WILL IT? OH, HERE WE GO. IS PERSUASIVE TO ME.
NOW, I UNDERSTAND REASONABLE ATTORNEYS CAN DISAGREE ON THAT.
THE INSTITUTIONS ATTORNEYS BELIEVE WE SHOULD FILE AN APPEAL.
BUT I THINK THAT THE COURT WAS RIGHT AND WE SHOULD ACCEPT THE RULING AND MOVE ON.
REGENTS SMITH. I AGREE WITH WHAT REGENT SHOEMAKER AND GRIEGO SAID.
WE ARE A PUBLIC INSTITUTION AND I STRONGLY BELIEVE IN A TRANSPARENT PROCESS WHEN WE DO OUR WORK AND I WILL BE VOTING NO.
AND THIS IS THE STATEMENT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.
PEOPLE OF COLORADO DESERVE THAT WE HAVE THE VERY BEST LEADER OF COLORADO'S FLAGSHIP UNIVERSITY AND THEY EXPECT THE BOARD OF REGENTS TO DELIVER ON THAT.
WE TAKE THAT RESPONSIBILITY SERIOUSLY AND WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE WITH OUR PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH PROCESS.
COLORADOANS ENTRUSTED THE RESPONSIBILITY TO HIRE THE BEST LEADER WITH THE BOARD OF REGENTS IN THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION.
WE DO NOT MAKE THE DECISION TO HIRE A PRESIDENT IN A VACUUM, WE SEE THE SEARCH COMMITTEE COMPRISED OF A WIDE AND APPROPRIATE CROSS-SECTION OF THE UNIVERSITY'S CONSTITUENTS, INCLUDING STUDENTS, FACULTY, STAFF, ALUMNI, DONORS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OTHERS.
WE SOLICIT INPUT THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
UNIVERSITY COUNCIL HAS RECOMMENDED THAT WE APPEAL THE COURT'S RULING NOT BECAUSE WE ARE OPPOSED TO TRANSPARENCY, BUT BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAINTAIN THE AUTONOMY OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS TO MAKE THE BEST DECISION FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AS A PEOPLE EXPECT IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICULATES.
WE DO NOT WANT THE COURTS TO MAKE THAT DECISION OR TO IMPOSE ARBITRARY NUMBERS OF [INAUDIBLE] FINALISTS.
MOST EVERY HIGHER EDUCATION GOVERNING BOARD IN COLORADO AND THE MAJORITY OF THEM AROUND THE COUNTRY MAINTAIN THE AUTONOMY TO CONDUCT PRESIDENTIAL SEARCHES AND BALANCE TRANSPARENCY WITH GETTING THE ABSOLUTE BEST CANDIDATES AND EVENTUALLY PRESIDENTS.
WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO SELECT THE BEST LEADERS.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE COURT RULING SO MUCH AS IT IS FOR THE BOARD TO BE ABLE TO SELECT THE BEST LEADER.
FUTURE BOARDS TO BE ABLE TO SELECT THE BEST LEADERS.
WITH THAT, EFFIE, I THINK WE'RE READY FOR A ROLL CALL ON THE THE RESOLUTION.
AND IF YOU WANT ME TO READ THE RESOLUTION, I CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT AS WELL.
HERE, HERE'S WHAT THE ROLL CALL WILL BE ON.
RESOLVE THAT THE BOARD OF REGENTS AUTHORIZE UNIVERSITY COUNCIL TO APPEAL THE DECISION TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER IN CASE 19CU 3 3 7 5 9 PRAIRIE MOUNTAIN PUBLISHING COMPANY LLP VS.
THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO TO THE COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS.
THAT'S WHAT OUR VOTE WILL BE ON.
SO, EFFIE, WOULD YOU DO A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES. REGENT CARSON.
I ASSOCIATE MY SELF WITH THE ELOQUENT COMMENTS OF CHAIR GRIEGO AND VOTE AYE.
I THINK GLEN SAID IT VERY WELL.
I WILL VOTE AYE. REGENT GRIEGO.
REGENT SHARKEY. THANK YOU, CHAIR GALLEGOS FOR YOUR VERY SUCCINCT STATEMENT, AN ACCURATE STATEMENT, AND I WILL BE VOTING IN SUPPORT OF APPEALING.
[00:30:01]
MY VOTE IS YES.YES. IT'S 5 TO 4 IN FAVOR . OK, RESOLUTION CARRIES.
APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S TIME THIS MORNING.
IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE TRANSPARENT AND TO HEAR FROM THE REGENTS.
AND BECAUSE WE ARE ELECTED REGENTS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THAT HAPPENS.
KEN [INAUDIBLE] WILL BE HELPING TO FIELD QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE MEDIA.
AND WITH THAT, I WOULD HOPE THAT NOT I WOULD HOPE.
I KNOW THAT THIS BOARD FOR THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF HAS BEEN INVOLVED DIRECTLY IN HELPING TO MAKE DECISIONS AND MAKING SURE THAT OUR STUDENTS AND STAFF WERE SAFE WITH REGARD TO COVID-19.
THIS BOARD WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT.
SO WITH THAT, THIS MEETING IS NOW ADJOURNED.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. REGENT KROLL AND [INAUDIBLE] MAKE THE MOTION AND A SECOND.
SECOND. SECOND BY REGENT SMITH.
BE SAFE. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.