May 21, 2009 09:13 PM UTC
Judge finds 'reasonable belief' CSU broke law in Blake appointment
29 Comments- by: BobMoore
(This seems to be getting kind of serious, doesn’t it? – promoted by Colorado Pols)
FRIDAY MORNING UPDATE: Here’s a link to the Coloradoan story from this morning wrapping up Thursday’s activity:
http://www.coloradoan.com/arti…
Several posters were interested in Gov. Ritter’s stance. Here it is:
Through his spokesman, Gov. Bill Ritter reiterated his support for Blake’s selection.
“Joe Blake is a strong leader who is committed to leading CSU forward. The governor continues to believe CSU will be very well-served with Joe as chancellor,” Ritter spokesman Evan Dreyer said.
“We understand there are questions and concerns about the process, and we look forward to a quick resolution based on the judge’s review of the tapes,” Dreyer said.
Also, here’s the Chieftain story:
http://www.chieftain.com/artic…
See below for all of my Thursday posts.
It’s just the first step in the lawsuit, but a judge ruled Thursday morning that there was “reasonable belief” that CSU’s Board of Governors violated the state open meetings law when it named Joe Blake as the sole finalist for chancellor.
You can read an early version of Trevor Hughes’ coverage here: http://www.coloradoan.com/arti…
The judge is requiring that CSU give him the recording of the entire four-hour executive session May 5 that led to Blake’s selection. He’ll review the recordings and can order some or all of the contents to be made public if he finds a violation of the Colorado Open Meetings Law.
I’ll update later.
2 p.m. update, in the form of an additional thought:
In excluding the public from the chancellor selection process, the Board of Governors’ position has been “trust us,” and that was echoed in court Thursday. But the board’s own recordings and filings show that members have repeatedly violated the law in the selection process. They need to abandon the “trust us” approach and involve the public, as the law requires, in making critical decisions.”
2:40 p.m. update, 3 groups call for CSU to restart chancellor search process. Release follows.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 21, 2009
CONTACT: Chantell Taylor – 303-626-2100 / ctaylor@coloradoforethics.org
Jenny Flanagan – 303-292-2163 / JFlanagan@CommonCause.org
Steve Fenberg – 720-244-2062 / steve@neweracolorado.org
COALITION CALLS FOR RESTART OF CSU CHANCELLOR SEARCH
Today, Colorado Ethics Watch, Colorado Common Cause and New Era Colorado, joined together to call on the CSU Board of Governors to rescind its closed door decision naming Joe Blake as the sole finalist for CSU chancellor. The groups also called upon the Board of Governors to start a new, transparent search process to consider a number of qualified applicants, including Mr. Blake. The group decried the process as tainted by a lack of transparency and apparent conflicts of interest.
Mr. Blake participated in the controversial decision in December 2008 to split the chancellor position from the position of president of the Fort Collins campus of Colorado State University. On April 29, 2009, he formally submitted his application for the new chancellor position. On May 6, in a closed-door meeting that was called in haste while the legislature was considering a bill to change the process for selecting a chancellor, the Board of Governors voted to name Mr. Blake as the sole finalist for the position. The process that resulted in the selection of Mr. Blake as the sole finalist and denied students and the public a meaningful opportunity to provide input on this critical hiring decision, and it has been challenged as a possible violation of Colorado’s Open Meetings Law.
“The process smacks of favoritism and insider dealing,” said Chantell Taylor, director of Colorado Ethics Watch. “In his capacity as vice chair of the board, Mr. Blake participated in creating the lucrative new chancellor position then submitted his own application and was selected as the sole-finalist in a rushed, closed-door session that apparently violated open meetings laws. This is an assault on principles of open, honest government.”
Jenny Flanagan, executive director of Common Cause, said the public has a right to a fair and open process in the decisions that affect their community. “The Governing Board knew their closed-door meetings would offend the public but went ahead anyway. Blake may be the right candidate for this position, but this was not the right process. The governing board must take steps to repair the situation.”
“The closed-door selection process flies in the face of everything higher education should stand for-fair and open discourse with integrity,” said Steve Fenberg, executive director of New Era Colorado. “These decisions should include the input of students, faculty, and the broader community of citizens of Colorado-the very populations our public universities and academic institutions exist to serve.”
Colorado Ethics Watch is a nonpartisan, nonprofit watchdog group that holds public officials and organizations legally accountable for unethical activities that undermine the integrity of state and local government. For more information, please contact Chantell Taylor at (303) 626-2100 or visit www.ColoradoforEthics.org.
Colorado Common Cause is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization working for open, honest, and accountable government. For more information, please contact Jenny Flanagan at (303) 292-2163 or visit www.ColoradoCommonCause.org
New Era Colorado is a non-profit organization reinventing politics for our generation through innovative social and political action. For more information, please contact Steve Fenberg at (720) 244-2062 or visit www.NewEraColorado.org.
UPDATE 7:13 p.m. Here’s CSU’s response to the call for a search re-do.
Colorado State University System
Statement
May 21, 2009
The Colorado State University System Board of Governors stands behind its process and firmly believes it complied with the Colorado Open Meetings law with regard to its May 5, 2009 discussions and interview of Joe Blake. Mr. Blake recused himself from the board as he was being considered as a candidate/applicant for the chancellor position as recommended by the 15-member search committee.
There have been opinions expressed about the search process, but the facts are that the board took steps to ensure the process leading up to and through the five-month search was open and that as many voices from constituent groups had the opportunity to be heard. The board asked two respected Coloradans, Dick Robinson and Diane Evans, to facilitate a series of open CSU stakeholder forums around the state and on campuses to solicit input on desired attributes for a new chancellor. The input was recorded in a report that was used to create the position description and it was given to the search committee to help guide them in identifying qualified candidates.
The board decided to not hire an outside search firm, which saved the university up to $100,000. Instead it appointed a 15-member search committee comprised of highly regarded and respected business and civic leaders who could go out on their own and recruit qualified candidates. Every search committee meeting was publicly noticed so that the public could attend and share comments with the committee or hear the committee’s discussions during public sessions.
The search committee reviewed nearly two dozen applications, interviewed three candidates and unanimously decided to forward two candidates to the board for its consideration.
During the board’s interview process, student and faculty representatives were involved in the entire executive session where the search committee presented its report on the recommended candidates; there was a discussion of candidates, the candidates were interviewed; and there were post-interview deliberations. Most importantly, student and faculty board representatives asked questions of the candidates and expressed their opinions during the interview and discussion stages.
In the spirit of openness, a recording of the full boards discussion, interview and deliberation relating to Mr. Joe Blake as a candidate was voluntarily released by the board, May 20, 2009, so that the public would have the opportunity to hear the basis of the full board’s (includes student and faculty representatives) decision to select Mr. Blake as the finalist.
Today there was an initial hearing about whether the board complied with Colorado Open Meetings law in its chancellor candidate interview process with Mr. Joe Blake. The judge decided he will review in private the entire recording to determine if further disclosure is required.
The opinions about the board’s process have nothing to do with decision to name Mr. Joe Blake a finalist for chancellor, in fact, several entities have publicly supported the board’s selection of Mr. Joe Blake.
Could someone PLEASE stick a microphone in Govenor Ritter’s face and ask him what he thinks of this whole flap?
Joe Blake was the guy carrying the governor’s water during the legislative session on one of the biggest tax (er, fee) increases in our state’s history — does Bill Ritter think he’s being treated fairly in this fracas — or does he think Blake is being rolled?
that’s really the key question here.
he’ll have plausible denability, so the crap will fall to the “official decision makers”.
Just incredible!
That dog didn’t hunt the first time, but here you are with the same bullshit. All it reflects is your ignorance of how this process worked, as well as the makeup of the CSU board. But obviously stupidity won’t stop you from making shit up.
Ummm, sounds like they want it wrapped up and moved along. This is getting in the way of their plans at the Chamber.
The guv issued a vanilla statement supporting him?!?!?! Amazing. That’s totally evidence of collusion. Lock him up. {rolls eyes}
If that isn’t a signal that he approved of Joe all along, then maybe this is…
but I dislike dumb conclusions more.
It might be harder to get Ritter’s views on this than it has been to get the tape recordings.
Story will have Ritter reaction.
He softly tosses Joe Blake under the bus. So that’s what he gets for supporting the Guvs. failed tax increase on ONG.
I guess that move to support Pinnacol’s customer base is creating more problems.
but the issue isn’t Blake, it’s the board’s selection process. The governor can back Blake, say he’s a great candidate, but that the board should conduct its business in public.
See above…Guv says Joe’s great, now move along, move along, nothing to see here.
I’m telling you the Guv’s plans (CSU, Chamber, etc…) are being delayed by the continual drumbeat on this issue.
NewEra, Common Cause, and Colorado Ethics Watch. This is a big, big deal.
It used to be the newspapers that did this. The fact that we have these 3 stepping up to fill this void makes me less worried about the how newspapers will be replaced.
The Coloradoan, Pueblo Chieftain and Colorado Independent are the ones who filed the lawsuit which actually brought this information out.
The three organizations DemZorro mentioned issued a press release basically wishing upon a star. The three newspapers did the actual work, spent the actual money, and took the actual risk to get the story out.
If you think this is evidence we don’t need newspapers, you could not be more wrong.
And GO NUGGETS!
sxp already handled that ridiculous statement, but David, what you say is outrageous. The Coloradoan, Chieftain and Independent figured this out, hired the lawyers, and have been dogging this from the beginning.
They are the “3 stepping up,” not the three nonprofits who issue a press release after the newspapers HAVE ALREADY DONE THE WORK — and at no small expense, I might add.
Ok, that’s what I get for working off their press releases. Big mistake – sorry.
Apologize to sxp and the news organizations!
But I’m sure the apology will be accepted. And tip your newspaper carrier …
We see this has already been repudiated. Absolutely this was a fourth estate win, sometimes it’s the liberal activist orgs who do the legwork and feed the story to the press but not this time. A very important distinction actually, and encouraging to see.
If the Judge finds reasonable belief that CSU broke law in Blake appointment, well I guess there is a corresponding action that must take in process. In relation to public awareness, the financial binds happen nowadays. One of the more common financial binds people are getting into involve bills around the home. Lately, the cable industry has been raising rates. Cable prices have been rising because cable service has expanded to Internet service. People are willing to spend their hard earned cash, but lately a lot of people have been forced to cut back. Cable companies have been raising their rates because of pressure for them to encroach on consumer access to download services like BitTorrent. It means that to get the kind of competitive service consumers want, they have to get payday loans to get out of the financial binds caused by cable bills. Well, it is up to you guys if your willing to spend more even in times of recession.
See for more details: http://personalmoneystore.com/…
That’s just…amazing. So you’re selling payday loans by complaining about cable rates on a post about CSU on a Colorado blog?
[Starts slow clap]
payday loans and how people use them to finance their cable bills, which have doubled in the last decade.
I didn’t see the tie into CSU.
That’s what makes it so amazingly audacious.
[is still slow-clapping]
So you support payday lending? You’re saying the post is reckless, bold, and in defiance of the ‘common’ wisdom?
For now, I’ll ignore Carmelo’s interesting suggestion this is related to payday loans and rising cable bills.
What the CSU statement rather audaciously leaves out in this is that the JUDGE believes the board BROKE THE LAW — that’s why he’s proceeding with the in camera review of the rest of the minutes.
The CSU statement’s torrent about the interview process and “stakeholders” doesn’t disguise the demonstrable fact the board held a closed meeting to discuss a board member up for an appointment — a clear and unarguable violation of the law.
And the recordings the board released “in the spirit of openness” verify the board reached a decision in secret, which is another violation of the law.
It’s great CSU saved some money by not hiring a search firm and blah blah blah, but the lawsuit is about open meetings violations, not whether Blake was a good choice. CSU’s blizzard of obfuscation doesn’t change that fact.
(emphasis added because it’s easy to lose sight of the point if you throw out enough words to obscure it)
It definitely looks like they’re trying to respond to their critics rather than blunt the specific charges. Even then, they’re hardly reassuring. They have all of one faculty member from CSU on the board. Oh, and he can’t vote. But he TOTALLY said stuff during the meeting, so everything’s cool, right? And they collected input during an open forum, so everyone got a chance to speak. Of course, a lot of that input had to do with academic experience, and Blake has none, but they absolutely collected the input and put it in a report that can gather dust on their desks. Anyway, plaudits to the intrepid journalists tracking this down.