CU Regents discuss how to tackle difficult issues at winter retreat

Jan. 17—How to tackle divisive issues, how to respond to media inquiries and how to balance their obligations to the university and their constituents are a few of the topics the University of Colorado Board of Regents discussed during a two-day winter retreat Jan. 11 and 12.

The Board of Regents is an elected board that oversees the University of Colorado's four-campus system. The board makes decisions about the budget, new degree programs, property acquisitions and tuition prices, among other things. The regents hold a summer and winter retreat — in addition to their bi-monthly meetings — to reflect on and discuss various subjects.

Regent Lesley Smith said one of the strengths of the board is that members get along well.

"We all like each other, which is great, but there might be times when we don't tackle difficult or divisive issues because we don't want to hurt feelings," Smith said.

Within the last year, the regents have heard public comments from students and faculty asking the board to take action on issues including divesting from fossil fuels and banning concealed weapons on the CU campuses. The regents have not taken action on either item.

Regent Ilana Spiegel said it's important for the regents to be kind and respectful to each other while also being able to deal with pressing issues and keep their perspectives focused on the long term.

"Our ability to deal with any (issues) depends on our ability to trust each other and be able to disagree with each other and move forward," Spiegel said.

The Board of Regents has nine members serving staggered six-year terms. One regent is elected from each of Colorado's eight congressional districts and one is elected from the state at large. The regents are not compensated for their positions on the board, according to regent policy.

The board was created by the state constitution and is considered a public corporate board. That means the regents are not only elected as public office-holders, but they also are obligated to make their highest priority the entity that they serve, which is the University of Colorado.

During the winter retreat, the regents discussed how they balance their responsibilities to CU as well as to the people who elected them.

"If we're not able to allow our fiduciary responsibility to the university to stand alongside our responsibility to our constituents, we shouldn't be here," Regent Frank McNulty said.

The regents have a fiduciary responsibility to the University of Colorado, according to regent policy, meaning they are obligated to make the university their highest priority and act in its best interest.

McNulty said the regents' responsibilities to the university and their constituents need to walk hand-in-hand.

"To diminish or minimize the expectation we represent our constituents, I think, does a disservice to them," McNulty said.

Regent Glen Gallegos, who was first elected to the board in 2012, said previous boards discussed whether a regent is responsible to the university or the constituents.

"I think that's a place where we really need to understand what our roles are as regents, and it's important for all of us at some point in time to talk about why we're elected," Gallegos said.

Regent Wanda James said she assumes she's on the board to speak up for the people who elected her, including Black and Brown people, women and first- generation students. James is the first Black woman to be elected to the Board of Regents in more than 44 years.

"My role on this board is to make sure the University of Colorado system is open to the people I represent," James said.

The regents also have a set of norms that they follow, which are unofficial guidelines about how they interact with each other and operate. Norms were started about three years ago as a way for the regents to write down their expectations of each other.

For example, one norm the regents have is to speak with one voice, especially after a final vote. They also value disagreeing agreeably, recognizing their own biases and creating a culture of inquiry.

Another norm created by the regents is to respond to the media to reflect one voice, and the board chair is typically the spokesperson for all the regents.

Regent Mark VanDriel said there needs to be more clarity on the board about how each regent responds to members of the media. The expectation is that the regent chair will speak for the board, but VanDriel said the regents can still voice their personal opinions.

"It's very uncomfortable for me to say I'm not going to respond to someone," VanDriel said.

The regents said they have an agreement that they'll let the board know before an individual regent speaks to the media. Concerns were brought up about regents speaking to the press in a way that causes division or seems like they're going behind someone's back. They discussed having more transparency with one another and outwardly.

"Maybe part of this board is learning how to work with the press," James said.

Gallegos said the regents shouldn't be afraid to take stances on certain issues because people expect it. He said he has been on boards where some members didn't get along but the board was still effective and made progress because members understood their duties.

"We have to also know what our role is as regents and move on from there," Gallegos said.