WEBVTT 00:00:07.000 --> 00:00:13.000 Hello, Michael, good morning. My name is Alapaki Nalia, Chair of the Board of Regents. 00:00:13.000 --> 00:00:21.000 I call this meeting to order. Like to acknowledge the presence of other regions, Vice Chair Lee. Vice Chair Wilson. 00:00:21.000 --> 00:00:28.000 Regent Abercrombie is on his way. Regent Haining, he is joining us by Zoom. 00:00:28.000 --> 00:00:39.000 Regent Lou, Regent, Mawai, Regent, I want to just clarify that. This is a meeting of the Board of Regents. 00:00:39.000 --> 00:00:46.000 And all the guidance governing those meetings applies. We're calling it committee of the whole so that we can do the function. 00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:54.000 These meetings will be called for the function of acting as the search committee for our next president. But the rules apply to the full board meeting supply. 00:00:54.000 --> 00:01:02.000 That's important for things like decisions we make in these meetings. Have the effect of decisions with the border regions. 00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:07.000 At this time, we'll move to public comment. Before I call on Jamie. 00:01:07.000 --> 00:01:20.000 To move forward. I wanna emphasize that today. I'm gonna be a lot more. Disciplined about asking testifiers or requiring test the fires to stay to the 3 min limit. 00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:26.000 We have lots of testimony and lots of work to do. In addition, I'm getting some feedback from folks. 00:01:26.000 --> 00:01:32.000 Who are staying to the 3 min and they feel it's unfair when Let other folks go much longer. 00:01:32.000 --> 00:01:38.000 So. As comfortable as it will be for me. We will be asking folks to wrap up at 3 min. 00:01:38.000 --> 00:01:44.000 And if you continue to go on. You're Michael get cut off or you'll be off of zoom. 00:01:44.000 --> 00:01:53.000 So thanks for your consideration at the outset. Alright, Jamie. 00:01:53.000 --> 00:02:08.000 Okay, so we did receive, the office did receive on numerous testimonies. Commenting on the presidential president show selection process both on time and late written testimony that testimony is available on our website. 00:02:08.000 --> 00:02:23.000 We also have a number of testifiers. We signed up to provide oral testimony. So I'll start by calling the individuals who signed up via to testify via Zoom and then we'll go to the. 00:02:23.000 --> 00:02:33.000 Present in the room. So first up and I got to make one more for Regents. We always have the ability to call testifiers up during our deliberations. 00:02:33.000 --> 00:02:39.000 So if there's something that someone says and you want to follow up on. You, you can follow up during regular session. 00:02:39.000 --> 00:02:45.000 Thank you. 00:02:45.000 --> 00:02:54.000 So we do have 11 people who signed up to provide testimony via Zoom, but only one person is currently in the. 00:02:54.000 --> 00:03:00.000 In our waiting room. 00:03:00.000 --> 00:03:04.000 So I'm gonna call up. 00:03:04.000 --> 00:03:31.000 Karla Hiashi? 00:03:31.000 --> 00:03:37.000 So is she in the room? So, Carl, you can go ahead and test up fine when you're ready. 00:03:37.000 --> 00:03:38.000 Oh, sorry. 00:03:38.000 --> 00:03:42.000 I like to note the arrival of 00:03:42.000 --> 00:03:45.000 So do you see me and hear me? 00:03:45.000 --> 00:03:46.000 Yes, we can see. 00:03:46.000 --> 00:03:47.000 Okay, thank you. So good morning, Regents, President Lasner and attendees. 00:03:47.000 --> 00:03:57.000 Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. Concerning the search for the next president of the University of Hawaii system. 00:03:57.000 --> 00:04:02.000 My name is Carla Hayashi. I am a faculty member at the University of Boy at Heivo campus. 00:04:02.000 --> 00:04:07.000 I am also the president of the UHPA Board of Directors. The authority to select the next president rests with the Board of Regents. 00:04:07.000 --> 00:04:21.000 The selection process, however, must be inclusive of all the stakeholders and should proceed in a timely manner intended to identify. 00:04:21.000 --> 00:04:33.000 Qualified candidates who possess the comprehensive academic and administrative knowledge of university operations. The next president must be able and qualified to take the helm of a system. 00:04:33.000 --> 00:04:41.000 That includes the R one public land brand research university campus and 4 and 2 year campuses situated across the state. 00:04:41.000 --> 00:04:54.000 Such an important position deserves the attention and commitment of numerous stakeholders. Especially those whose daily experiences will be directly impacted by this individual. 00:04:54.000 --> 00:05:01.000 We all agree that the welfare and well being of students is paramount. Their voices need to be represented. 00:05:01.000 --> 00:05:12.000 In an effort to select a new president. Employees of the University of Boys System as well as community members must also have their opportunities to be involved in a search process. 00:05:12.000 --> 00:05:26.000 Advisory body sounds reasonable. But how will you ensure that our individual and collective voices are heard, listened to, and ultimately contribute to the selection of the next president. 00:05:26.000 --> 00:05:42.000 In contrast to the short search process proposed, consider the following. Each campus typically conducts a year long search for a chancellor by including all of various stakeholders on the search committee and scheduling a series of opportunities to meet with and hear from each finalist. 00:05:42.000 --> 00:05:51.000 These public meetings along with meetings with various campus unit members. Provides the campus community the ability to evaluate each finalist. 00:05:51.000 --> 00:05:58.000 Why then do you propose selecting the next president of such a large and complex system as ours? In less than a year. 00:05:58.000 --> 00:06:07.000 This timeline is rushed and contradictory. Concerns about undue influence on this search have already been publicly raised. 00:06:07.000 --> 00:06:19.000 Relegating student employee and community voices to a pro forma advisory committee and rushing the search process only reinforces the perception that this may not be an objective and transparent search. 00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:27.000 No one is questioning your authority to select the next president. We are, however, asking that the process to identify. 00:06:27.000 --> 00:06:33.000 The next president be inclusive and transparent. Thank you. 00:06:33.000 --> 00:06:52.000 Mala. Okay, next up we have Sonia. 00:06:52.000 --> 00:06:55.000 Hello, can you all hear me? 00:06:55.000 --> 00:06:56.000 Yes. 00:06:56.000 --> 00:07:05.000 Okay, Aloha, Michael, my name is Sonia Jordana and I'm a student at the University of Ho, in the school of Ocean current science and technology. 00:07:05.000 --> 00:07:14.000 I'm speaking today to express my concerns regarding the presidential selection process finalized during the December seventh Board of Regents meeting. 00:07:14.000 --> 00:07:24.000 Generally, my concerns are regarding the failure of this search process and representing and incorporating students back of these staff and community members in the section process for the next president. 00:07:24.000 --> 00:07:30.000 My primary concern is about the lack of inclusion of these various stakeholder groups in the presidential selection committee. 00:07:30.000 --> 00:07:42.000 Which as it stands is composed of Board of Regents members. A committee of the whole composed only of BR members does not get voting representation to any stakeholders and goes against principles of shared governance. 00:07:42.000 --> 00:07:43.000 And passed to H. Model of presidential selection processes such as those in 2,009 and 2,013. 00:07:43.000 --> 00:07:54.000 There were student faculty and community representatives sitting on the presidential selection committee with voting power. Another concern of mine is the process for selecting the advisory group. 00:07:54.000 --> 00:08:08.000 The proposed advisory group is meant to represent community members, faculty, staff, students, and other administrators as to include non board members in the section process. 00:08:08.000 --> 00:08:13.000 Currently the Board of Regents holds full of authority in appointing the members of the advisory group. 00:08:13.000 --> 00:08:21.000 I instead advocate that elect existing elected student bodies at are used to select representatives of key stakeholders. 00:08:21.000 --> 00:08:27.000 The system has already elected student representation through the student caucus, which comprises the 11 student governments. 00:08:27.000 --> 00:08:35.000 There are parallel organizations for faculty that could be used to support the border. Regents in selecting representative individuals on the advisory group. 00:08:35.000 --> 00:08:44.000 I'm also concerned about the advisory group's capacity to affect change throughout the process if only able to provide advice at the request of selection committee. 00:08:44.000 --> 00:08:53.000 This does not reassure me that this group of constituents representing many key stakeholders will be given adequate access to provide meaningful input throughout the process. 00:08:53.000 --> 00:09:11.000 I urge that the advisory group is consistently integrated into the search process. In addition, considering the critical influence of the role of president on the university at Hawaii, I would also like to emphasize the importance of quality and careful deliberation over expediency in this selection process. 00:09:11.000 --> 00:09:15.000 Overall, I want to advocate for students, faculty, and staff and committee members to be included in the selection committee. 00:09:15.000 --> 00:09:27.000 And given some amount of voting power. It is imperative that those who will be most heavily impacted by this decision are meaningfully integrated into the selection process at every step. 00:09:27.000 --> 00:09:35.000 Thank you for taking the time today to consider this testimony. I look forward to seeing action towards a more inclusive search process that brings all stakeholders to the table. 00:09:35.000 --> 00:09:42.000 As you work together on making this decision for the university and for Hawaii. Muhammad, thank you for listening. 00:09:42.000 --> 00:09:46.000 Mala. 00:09:46.000 --> 00:09:59.000 Next up we have Rosiana Osman. 00:09:59.000 --> 00:10:06.000 Good morning. My name is Dr. Nadi Asman. I'm a psychology professor at UHmly College and I've been teaching at the University of over 20 years now. 00:10:06.000 --> 00:10:17.000 The presidential search process permitted interaction group final report recommends the BLR higher search firm with Hawaii experience and or a whole focused to conduct a national search. 00:10:17.000 --> 00:10:23.000 Well, this sounds like a good idea in theory. Now, where does mention they would also be a search firm with expertise in higher education. 00:10:23.000 --> 00:10:29.000 I've done some searches. I can find firms who understand how lightly sculpture or I can find firms with higher education experience. 00:10:29.000 --> 00:10:38.000 Live in diagram does not overlap. Given the mistake of urgency that a new president was behind before fall to submit the budget, which would be nice, but is not necessary. 00:10:38.000 --> 00:10:53.000 I fear this frenzied artificially time crunch search, which would be ill. Will yield either a reliable higher education church firm that is clueless about the nuances of our island culture or a firm that understands somebody but who may treat our university like a business. 00:10:53.000 --> 00:11:00.000 The former will bring it bring us candidates who will likely want to swoop in to save us and make us more like universities on the continent. 00:11:00.000 --> 00:11:08.000 Perhaps you're reminding us the presidents of Christmas past. The latter will try to impose a Walmart like business model incongruent with needs of our education. 00:11:08.000 --> 00:11:16.000 We are not Walmart. I know that many of you have strong business backgrounds, which I respect, but please allow me to explain why university cannot be treated like a business. 00:11:16.000 --> 00:11:22.000 If the university is a business and a product would be graduates. As a successful business, we would have higher retention and graduation rates. 00:11:22.000 --> 00:11:32.000 That's good. The faculty in the different disciplines would be like the vendors. We hope that we're providing the right products, which would be education to attract customers to come for a business. 00:11:32.000 --> 00:11:36.000 Cheers with the analogy falls apart. Who are the customers? The people we're attracting to the store. 00:11:36.000 --> 00:11:44.000 The students, how can it be the students because they're a final product? I do not know of any successful business model in which the customer is also the product. 00:11:44.000 --> 00:11:52.000 This contradiction is why treating higher education like a business never works. It's also part of life for profit universities lose credibility and their degrees of little value. 00:11:52.000 --> 00:11:59.000 As you move forward to decide how our university system will proceed when President Lasner steps down. I ask you remember why we are all here. 00:11:59.000 --> 00:12:04.000 Faculty administration and staff like are at this university system for one may reason. To educate our students. 00:12:04.000 --> 00:12:11.000 Without our students, there would be no need for university in. Every decision we make must have our students education and best interests in mind. 00:12:11.000 --> 00:12:18.000 And we need to remember all of our students and all their diversity across the system at all of the different campuses as we choose new leadership. 00:12:18.000 --> 00:12:31.000 As a faculty member, teaching at the only institution of TURCERY education for the islands of Valley, I can tell you that very few of my students that the supposedly typical college and demographic, most not some of my students work full time. 00:12:31.000 --> 00:12:35.000 With families to support. 00:12:35.000 --> 00:12:41.000 With that, pardon me. They cannot. 00:12:41.000 --> 00:12:49.000 That much to support, they are lucky if they can squeeze in 6 to 9 credits on top of all the other obligations, but they eventually do so with pride and distinction. 00:12:49.000 --> 00:12:53.000 For many of my students, they stop coming to class, it's not because they're lazy or unmotivated. 00:12:53.000 --> 00:13:01.000 They cannot stop working because they need to pay the bills. They cannot stop taking care of their family because they understand honor and responsibility. 00:13:01.000 --> 00:13:08.000 And in closing, I need to ask what's the rush? Before we hire president, asner, we spent over a year in the search process. 00:13:08.000 --> 00:13:12.000 I can tell you when my students look at work, it can be done quickly, but it can be done properly. 00:13:12.000 --> 00:13:19.000 When we rush the emphasis on being done rather than being done well. Okay. 00:13:19.000 --> 00:13:27.000 Last sentence, thank you. Hiring the next president is too important to the future of and it needs to be a well thought out, completely transparent process. 00:13:27.000 --> 00:13:28.000 Mahal for your consideration. 00:13:28.000 --> 00:13:32.000 At least stop the. Please wrap up. Thank you. 00:13:32.000 --> 00:13:53.000 Next up we have Christie and Nita. 00:13:53.000 --> 00:14:02.000 Aloha border regions. Happy New Year to all of you. My name is Christina Nita, chair of the Mono Staff Senate. 00:14:02.000 --> 00:14:10.000 As we come together again today on the same topic, I'm given the honor to once again testify on this topic. 00:14:10.000 --> 00:14:21.000 Of the selection of the Next president, I would like to reiterate that what we stated on last testimony that as we move forward with this presidential such process. 00:14:21.000 --> 00:14:28.000 The Manor Staff Senate. Excuse me, would like to ensure that we have a voice from inception to completion. 00:14:28.000 --> 00:14:42.000 While we know that the border regions have already been composed of members, something that we might want to look at in the future is and bring that to the table is involving shared governance in the selection of the Board of Regents appointees. 00:14:42.000 --> 00:14:50.000 From listening to and reading all other testimonies it is very clear that moving forward in this projected. 00:14:50.000 --> 00:14:53.000 Shash has major flaws and needs to be analyzed by shared governance and not just the border regions appointees. 00:14:53.000 --> 00:15:05.000 Thank you so much today for your time. Consideration and dedication to the university. Mahalanui. 00:15:05.000 --> 00:15:13.000 Mahalo. Okay, so we do have several other individuals who signed up to provide Zoom testimony, but they're currently not present. 00:15:13.000 --> 00:15:30.000 So I'm going to move to the individuals present in the room. First up we have Dustin. 00:15:30.000 --> 00:15:41.000 Letter this morning. I find my voice a little better this morning. The last time I testified I was nervous and I appreciate the opportunity to speak. 00:15:41.000 --> 00:15:54.000 I'm an LGBT studies major. I had experienced that the classic research institution story being an LGBT studies major on and off this campus. 00:15:54.000 --> 00:16:07.000 The next president to replace President Lassner should be aware of gender and sexuality studies and the hostilities we face on and off campus. 00:16:07.000 --> 00:16:14.000 Before fall, 2,023 began, a person moved into my home. Threatened me with a knife. 00:16:14.000 --> 00:16:29.000 People on staff on campus casually spoke about it. This is the educational environment I'm living through coupled with being indefinitely present last night, defunded. 00:16:29.000 --> 00:16:38.000 I'm disabled. I can't work and go to school. I was I'm experiencing violence through poverty. 00:16:38.000 --> 00:16:46.000 Because the school refuses. To fund an LGBT studies major. So please keep this in mind. 00:16:46.000 --> 00:17:01.000 With the search moving forward. Also, I will close with I testified under the authority of the Board of Regents because the administration is changing and I do act ask that the Board of Regents act. 00:17:01.000 --> 00:17:12.000 Thank you for your time. Hello. Okay, I'm gonna call the next 3 names so we know so people know who is Up next for testifying. 00:17:12.000 --> 00:17:23.000 So first, We'll have Ashley Me and Ard and then after that we'll have Branson Osama and Kyson James force. 00:17:23.000 --> 00:17:30.000 Good morning, Regents. President Lassner. I'm Dr. Ashley Maynard, Professor of Psychology at Manoa. 00:17:30.000 --> 00:17:36.000 I came here to share some highlights of the written testimony I submitted with Dr. Margaret Butler, Professor of Life Sciences. 00:17:36.000 --> 00:17:43.000 I hope you will read it and take it seriously. As we are at a serious crossroads at a university and in our state. 00:17:43.000 --> 00:17:49.000 We agree with others that there should be a fair and open presidential search process free from legislative interference and that we ought to follow the national best practice of including faculty chosen by the faculty. 00:17:49.000 --> 00:18:05.000 Students and community members in the search committee. We must also have a thorough discussion of qualifications that would make the best president of our system. 00:18:05.000 --> 00:18:13.000 Our system is unique and many ways and has only one R one research intensive doctoral granting campus, Manoa. 00:18:13.000 --> 00:18:23.000 Because we are one system, it is imperative that the president must also be qualified to be the chancellor of the flagship campus, whether they are separate positions or one. 00:18:23.000 --> 00:18:31.000 The president must have an academic background as a tenured faculty member at a research university and not be merely a convenient political selection. 00:18:31.000 --> 00:18:45.000 We must have an academic leader of to truly maximize our strengths. Hawaii is the gateway to the Pacific in geography, earth history, culture, biological resources, evolution, climate, and many fields of human endeavor. 00:18:45.000 --> 00:18:54.000 It is the reason why we serve as strategic basis for military installations. Agricultural experimental stations and federal agencies, including the East West Center. 00:18:54.000 --> 00:19:04.000 We are the only R one university for thousands of miles. Yet too often it is outside research groups that spearhead the study of Hawaii's resources. 00:19:04.000 --> 00:19:20.000 An informed academic leader could retain and motivate faculty to lead these enterprises, create opportunities to benefit from the university at every educational level, making the university's resources available to all, and drive innovation from our local communities to the world. 00:19:20.000 --> 00:19:28.000 Our institution is currently so far out of alignment that we risk veering off the proverbial road losing sight of the academic mission. 00:19:28.000 --> 00:19:33.000 While we agree that administrative concerns and an eye on the budget are important without academic leadership, particularly the Manoa campus has suffered. 00:19:33.000 --> 00:19:46.000 For example, discussions of curriculum at the highest levels have centered on mechanics and convenience of integration rather than what's best for student learning. 00:19:46.000 --> 00:19:57.000 As another example, the creation of a campus town where a College of Education now stands will have serious repercussions for educational quality in both the K 12 and the university systems. 00:19:57.000 --> 00:20:06.000 An academic leader can help bring pardon me all conversations about the institution, its resources and its future back into balance. 00:20:06.000 --> 00:20:15.000 Research teaching and innovation are central to the mission of the university and the university is central to the mission and health of the state. 00:20:15.000 --> 00:20:20.000 The best person to leave the institution will have the skills and experience not only to understand what the university does, but also to explain and defend it to others. 00:20:20.000 --> 00:20:41.000 Positioning the institution to lead and make the difference it can make. Thank you very much. Thank you. 00:20:41.000 --> 00:20:51.000 No, no, Ikea, cool. I opened an appreciation to relate to the students, to the students, to the faculty, and for all who took the time to take time to the faculty and for all who took the time to take time to testify here at this meeting. 00:20:51.000 --> 00:20:53.000 I know it's set to the faculty and for all who took the time to take time to testify here at this meeting. 00:20:53.000 --> 00:20:58.000 I know it's set during business hours. So there's often struggles with either it be class conflicts or working conflicts and then schedule. 00:20:58.000 --> 00:21:03.000 So Mahala to those who took the time off to be a part of this. Historic moment. 00:21:03.000 --> 00:21:10.000 As a community member, president of ASUH and as chair of the University of Hawaii Student Caucus. 00:21:10.000 --> 00:21:18.000 I stand on the positions that have been discussed by reelected bodies that we want more than just a voice but a choice in selecting the next president. 00:21:18.000 --> 00:21:29.000 Although the authority is vested in the Board of Regents through rights that from what some will call an illegitimate body, it does not set in stone how the regents come to the conclusion of who you select. 00:21:29.000 --> 00:21:36.000 In an ideal world, I will say as my elders taught me that the past should have a voice but never a vote. 00:21:36.000 --> 00:21:39.000 People who will not live with the lasting consequences should not be the ones deciding the fate of those who will roll through the turmoil. 00:21:39.000 --> 00:21:51.000 And in fact, we as young people should learn from the discernment of wisdom and also learn to live with the consequences of our decisions. 00:21:51.000 --> 00:22:06.000 But we live in less than an ideal world. Our student region will be ending her term during the process and with that I request that the regents grant us choice power through other means and will stand on my written testimony for those recommendations. 00:22:06.000 --> 00:22:17.000 In respect to wisdom, I appreciate the words of Regent Wilson at the last meeting that regents must be willing to take time to plan so that it may be an expedient implementation and quality. 00:22:17.000 --> 00:22:25.000 DECISION rather than be expeditious with a painfully long transition. In further response to Regents deliberations. 00:22:25.000 --> 00:22:38.000 I would say it is not about quick decisions based on what's in front of you, but a need for inclusion so that we can cover the viewpoints from where you sit, where you sit, and from where I stand so we can cut so that we can see the 360 degrees that's around us when making this decision. 00:22:38.000 --> 00:23:06.000 I close with words inspired by the farewell speech of President Eisenhower over 60 years ago, that authority and power should not overrule the opportunity and benefits of authority and power should not overrule the opportunity and benefits of, overrule the opportunity and benefits of collaboration, shared governments, and the need to engage with humility, that we must prioritize quality over expediency, the decisiveness must not be without consideration of 7 generational 00:23:06.000 --> 00:23:22.000 thinking, and that our deep biases and undue influences do not go unchecked. As we all as always the historic moment is before us and I hope that our cause for choice and not just voice will be adhered to. 00:23:22.000 --> 00:23:33.000 Mahalo. 00:23:33.000 --> 00:23:37.000 Hello, I'm my clock cool. My name is Kaisenkonola, James Fory. 00:23:37.000 --> 00:23:47.000 I'm a senior from Koi High on the Big Island. I'm a current senator for the College of Arts and Sciences for ASUH and I serve as our chair of undergraduate academic affairs. 00:23:47.000 --> 00:24:09.000 I'm here today to express my continued concerns regarding the presidential search process and its lack of meaningful state stakeholder involvement, utilizing a committee of the whole as the selection committee, although expanding the range of perspectives so ignores our university's principles of shared governance and ignores the voices of students, faculty, and our wider community. 00:24:09.000 --> 00:24:35.000 From the perspective of shareholders the current approved process by consolidating voting voting power to the Board of Regents and limiting stakeholders to an advisory group of regents and limiting stakeholders to an advisory group means that our input and involvement are minimal at best and have no lasting impact on the selection of And although stakeholder involvement is technically achieved through surveys, open forms, and the advisory group, there still remains nothing to hold the Board of 00:24:35.000 --> 00:24:52.000 Regents accountable to that input. Furthermore, surveys and open forms absolutely do not meet what should be considered the minimum for stakeholder involvement considering that speaking on what is considered an ideal candidate is drastically different than speaking on the merits of prospective presidents of the University of Hawaii and being able to vote in accordance to those merits. 00:24:52.000 --> 00:25:03.000 I continue to urge the Board of Regents to consider the inclusion of students. Faculty and community members on the selection committee and follow the president's set. 00:25:03.000 --> 00:25:16.000 The president set by past presidential search processes. Having individuals representing these groups sit in on the selection committee not only grants them a well deserved voice and vote, but also ensures that the Board of Regents is not completely out of touch with the opinions and views of their stakeholders. 00:25:16.000 --> 00:25:27.000 Failure to do so only breeds an environment of mistrust, mistrust between the university's administration. 00:25:27.000 --> 00:25:35.000 And stakeholder groups and for actors the ability of the future president to start with the full support of the student body, faculty, and community. 00:25:35.000 --> 00:25:39.000 In regards to the advisory group and is my hope that the board of Regents considers granting it a position that is more actively involved in the recruitment and selection process. 00:25:39.000 --> 00:25:53.000 Including but not limited to interviewing candidates, providing the Board of Regents recommendations, and the ability to communicate in a limited and controlled fashion with their respective stateholder groups. 00:25:53.000 --> 00:26:18.000 Remotely transparent and inclusive process. It is further paramount that the advisory group consists of representation from all 10 campuses, both student and faculty, as well as community members from across the I mean, steadfast in my position that the Board of Regents should opt to include students, faculty, and community members in the selection committee itself, and that a seat at the table is the only guaranteed way that our opinions and voices 00:26:18.000 --> 00:26:35.000 are considered and accounted for. This presidential search process represents a great opportunity to foster a healthy environment of cooperation across each every level of the University of Y system and allows every one of us to play a part in building the future of our university and by extension our beloved Carolina. 00:26:35.000 --> 00:26:44.000 And so I urge you, please do not throw this chance to wear. Thank you for taking the time to listen. 00:26:44.000 --> 00:27:04.000 Next up, One next up we have Mariko Quinn. Will be followed by and Ethan Cruz. 00:27:04.000 --> 00:27:12.000 Hello, my name is Marco Quinn and I am the current senator of the School of Ocean, Earth Sciences and Technology here at Manoa for 00:27:12.000 --> 00:27:20.000 Like many others, I'm here today to express my significant concerns regarding a presidential selection process finalized at the December seventh meeting. 00:27:20.000 --> 00:27:32.000 To begin, the implementation of the Committee of the Whole in which all regions will be included. But fails to give voting power to any external stakeholders is the decision that goes directly against the principles of shared governance. 00:27:32.000 --> 00:27:43.000 Failing to engage faculty, staff, students, and community members by not giving them a voting representative fractures trust immediately between the potential candidates and their future constituents before they even begin the job. 00:27:43.000 --> 00:27:54.000 This decision is especially concerning as it abandons the precedent of the most recent presidential search in 2,013 during which there were 3 non-regent voting members to represent several stakeholder groups. 00:27:54.000 --> 00:28:05.000 As previously mentioned, the use of the survey open forums and advisory groups as a means to technically fulfill the need for inclusivity, falls short of ensuring that stakeholders are meaningfully included. 00:28:05.000 --> 00:28:10.000 There's currently nothing in place that ensures the regions will meaningfully engage with and consider this feedback. 00:28:10.000 --> 00:28:20.000 And more importantly, these surveys and open forums are only to address the position description, which the first step in a very long selection process. 00:28:20.000 --> 00:28:37.000 While I recognize that this meeting today is meant to focus on the role of the advisory group alone, I think that it is crucial that the decision of the selection committee membership is revisited and reconsidered before we move forward in order to ensure the best possible outcome and transition for the university. 00:28:37.000 --> 00:28:39.000 At the December seventh meeting we heard several regions express concerns that bringing in representatives of different stakeholder groups would extend the duration of the search process. 00:28:39.000 --> 00:28:52.000 While I hear these concerns and appreciate these regions that are seeking to fulfill their job description by ensuring a quick change in power. 00:28:52.000 --> 00:29:01.000 I would argue that by diminishing stakeholder engagement with a small advisory group and a survey. Would function to further delay the acceptance of a new president and also cause long-term problems in the relationship between our future president and their constituents. 00:29:01.000 --> 00:29:19.000 The Board of Regents needs to consider the long-term problems that the future president will need to address and how a positive relationship with faculty, staff, students, and the community will support them in doing their job much more effectively. 00:29:19.000 --> 00:29:26.000 Taking time now to execute this search process in an inclusive way will ultimately save time in the future. 00:29:26.000 --> 00:29:36.000 The role of the advisory group should be expanded in size to include more representation for various stakeholders. The proposed group is meant to encompass a wide variety of stakeholders. 00:29:36.000 --> 00:29:44.000 And it's crucial that the Board of Regents utilize elected bodies to nominate members of the advisory committee rather than nominating them themselves. 00:29:44.000 --> 00:29:52.000 Overall, I really urge the Board of Regents to seriously consider what it might mean to fail to meaningfully include stakeholders at all steps the process. 00:29:52.000 --> 00:30:02.000 All of us here today are not here representing our own personal interests. We are here representing a collective hope for our participation in our university's future. 00:30:02.000 --> 00:30:09.000 One that could be built on cooperation and collaboration. This is a crucial moment for our university and we really hope that you listen to us and include more stakeholder involvement. 00:30:09.000 --> 00:30:24.000 Thank you so much. Thank you. 00:30:24.000 --> 00:30:29.000 Hi. 00:30:29.000 --> 00:30:42.000 Sorry, and I'm nervous up here first time. Should have got coffee, but Hello, I'm here today as a senator at large here at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. 00:30:42.000 --> 00:30:53.000 I was hesitant at first to testify out of Richard or something. Who knows? But nonetheless, I'm representing the great many students here on our campus. 00:30:53.000 --> 00:30:59.000 But one word comes to my mind when I listen to all of these things. I don't understand, I'm still a student. 00:30:59.000 --> 00:31:14.000 You know. Undemocratic. Right. That's the word that lingers over my head when I listen to all these things, not just from students, but from faculty and to people off our campus. 00:31:14.000 --> 00:31:22.000 Undemocratic. When we make the process here today, what happens in this room, but when we walk out the door. 00:31:22.000 --> 00:31:32.000 What will happen in this confusing transition of leadership at the University of Hawaii, a sense of democratic participation has become increasingly absent. 00:31:32.000 --> 00:31:42.000 A process which concerns not just every faculty member and student here at Manoa campus. But at every campus in the system. 00:31:42.000 --> 00:31:53.000 I believe that while the input and feedback from the border regions is required and can be good. And a good way of evaluating the future president. 00:31:53.000 --> 00:32:02.000 The failure to bar the very people who will be affected by this leadership should too have a voice within the process. 00:32:02.000 --> 00:32:12.000 Saying that a student poll is enough is in salting. Let us build a better University of Hawaii so we can build a better Havoy. 00:32:12.000 --> 00:32:23.000 Simple, right? I would also like to remind people. To listen to the people who were elected by the student body. 00:32:23.000 --> 00:32:38.000 We are acting on that voice. We're not here with any hatred or any group behind us or whatever reason, but we're speaking, I'm speaking from my now and I'm going to take the bullet real quick and I want to say I trust all of you. 00:32:38.000 --> 00:32:44.000 I do. You have a Kapuna, you have knowledge that I've never seen and who knows, I've seen you guys as resonates. 00:32:44.000 --> 00:32:54.000 Well, the stock is big. Might just get like 5 words. But if I'm gonna trust you, will you trust me? 00:32:54.000 --> 00:33:01.000 Will you trust the students here on our campus? Will you be able to walk out this door and hold your head up high to all the students? 00:33:01.000 --> 00:33:12.000 I know each and every one of you 2 have had all the final countdowns up there. I know each and every one of you have also taken those own risks in your own lives, even if they're small. 00:33:12.000 --> 00:33:18.000 I've seen that with you how you guys have spoken to and the system that you guys have to navigate around. 00:33:18.000 --> 00:33:28.000 But please take that step. Because we're following in your footstep to tomorrow's of what you is our Hawaii as well. 00:33:28.000 --> 00:33:45.000 Mahalo, thank you. 00:33:45.000 --> 00:33:54.000 Good day, board. I'm Ethan Hopi Cruz. I'm a student at the University of Hafayette and I'm an employee. 00:33:54.000 --> 00:34:09.000 I'm here today to express my concern with regards to the findings of the PIG. One and convey my support of the spirit of the associated students of the University of Havaya at Manoa's Senate resolution, O 500, and, 24. 00:34:09.000 --> 00:34:21.000 Demanding student faculty and community inclusion on the presidential selection committee, which explains. That we oppose the use of a search forum to vet and screen applicants. 00:34:21.000 --> 00:34:29.000 And believe that the duty of the search committee be limited and put up for further discussion for student faculty and community input. 00:34:29.000 --> 00:34:37.000 And that we demand that one, the BOR form a presidential selection committee that includes stakeholders from students. 00:34:37.000 --> 00:34:56.000 Faculty, staff, council, and consider broader community representation such as cultural practitioners. And 2, the demanded presidential selection committee be test with the recommending 2 to 4 on ranked finalists to the VOR to consider. 00:34:56.000 --> 00:35:07.000 It is in the best interests of the Board of Regents to employ the most democratic process in the election of the next president to forge rounds for a relationship of trust between the president and those there meant to serve. 00:35:07.000 --> 00:35:09.000 Thank you. 00:35:09.000 --> 00:35:16.000 All 00:35:16.000 --> 00:35:28.000 Hey, next up, next up we have will be followed by Aaron Santayo and Jarrett Leon. 00:35:28.000 --> 00:35:39.000 Here 00:35:39.000 --> 00:35:48.000 Aaron, Sentayo. 00:35:48.000 --> 00:36:01.000 Helloha Regents and President Lastner. My name is Aaron Santayo and I'm testifying today as chair of Manila Faculty Senate and as co-chair of the ACC FSC, which is the All-campus Council for Faculty Senate Chairs. 00:36:01.000 --> 00:36:09.000 First, thank you for all of your work that you continue to do for University of Hawaii and for the presidential selection process. 00:36:09.000 --> 00:36:21.000 On December thirteenth, 2,023, the Manila Faculty Senate unanimously passed a resolution that supported previous testimony that I provided on behalf of the Mano Faculty Senate Executive Committee. 00:36:21.000 --> 00:36:34.000 Today I want to reiterate that testimony on behalf of Mano Faculty Senate. We understand that according to Article 10, section 6 of the Hawaii State Constitution, the Board of Regents has the authority to appoint the president. 00:36:34.000 --> 00:36:44.000 However, we believe that the proposed University Hoy presidential selection process goes against best practice and policies of shared governance. 00:36:44.000 --> 00:36:51.000 And does not allow an official voice of the faculty to contribute to the recommendation of the next president. 00:36:51.000 --> 00:37:02.000 Hiring a president is one of the most essential tasks of the Board of Regents. You are aware, previous presidential selection committees have included key stakeholders. 00:37:02.000 --> 00:37:11.000 The selection committee must consist not only of a committee of the whole, but also a faculty, staff, students, and community members. 00:37:11.000 --> 00:37:22.000 An advisory group is very different from official participation in a selection committee. As stated in the report, an advisory group advises as requested. 00:37:22.000 --> 00:37:30.000 Where those on a selection committee can be part of all of the conversations and voice their opinion whether it is requested or not. 00:37:30.000 --> 00:37:48.000 Having a representative representative selection committee is consistent with suggestions from numerous national organizations. On behalf of the ACC FSC, I'd like to add that we passed our own statement regarding the presidential search process on December, the eighteenth, 2,023 with a unanimous vote. 00:37:48.000 --> 00:37:53.000 The ACCCFC submitted its own testimony, but I'd like to reiterate a couple of important points. 00:37:53.000 --> 00:38:10.000 First, similar to MFS and many others that are here today, we ask that there be an inclusive presidential selection committee that goes beyond the Board of Regents committee of the whole and includes stakeholders including faculty, staff, students, and community members. 00:38:10.000 --> 00:38:25.000 Second, that in additional advisory committee still be established that includes additional stakeholders. And finally, this process needs to be transparent and widely inclusive, similar to previous presidential search committees. 00:38:25.000 --> 00:38:33.000 I appreciate and welcome the Board of Regents interaction with the Manoa Faculty Senate and ACCFSC on the presidential search. 00:38:33.000 --> 00:38:55.000 Mahalo Nui for allowing me to testify today. Hello. 00:38:55.000 --> 00:39:02.000 Start. I get so aloha regents. My name is Jared Leong. 00:39:02.000 --> 00:39:10.000 I am the current UA staff council chair which represents all the staff at the University of Hawaii. 00:39:10.000 --> 00:39:22.000 And the staff council is a collection. Of staff representatives who are elected from their respective campuses, which includes most of the campus staff leadership their campus chairs. 00:39:22.000 --> 00:39:30.000 From all 11 campuses and again we include system as one of those campuses because they do have a lot of staff there. 00:39:30.000 --> 00:39:36.000 We want us to say that we stand by our written testimony. We've done testimonial for the last 3 meetings. 00:39:36.000 --> 00:39:42.000 Hopefully you guys were able to read those. We do stand by that and I do want to mention 3 main points. 00:39:42.000 --> 00:39:50.000 First, we still want to reiterate that we would like to be included in a core. Search committee and not an advisory. 00:39:50.000 --> 00:40:02.000 A role. We would like to be included from the beginning phase and that that includes being part of the process to determine the whatever firm you guys decide. 00:40:02.000 --> 00:40:10.000 And I also like to advocate for additional seats for staff, especially considering that we do have. 2 and 4 year campuses. 00:40:10.000 --> 00:40:18.000 We do want to offer a suggestion I think was similar to what the faculty were suggesting. Allow shared governance groups. 00:40:18.000 --> 00:40:34.000 On the core search committee and potentially have an advisory group with more representatives. You know, my final thought is we recognize that the that you are given the authority and responsibility to select the next president. 00:40:34.000 --> 00:40:42.000 But as I teach in my public administration, leadership course. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. 00:40:42.000 --> 00:40:51.000 And just because you have the right to. Something doesn't mean you have the right to that is the right thing to do and I believe that this board This border regions knows what's right. 00:40:51.000 --> 00:40:57.000 I know a lot of you know exactly what's the right thing to do and I'm hoping that you're willing to stand your ground. 00:40:57.000 --> 00:41:10.000 And really voice that concern today. I will be available. During deliberation, if you guys have any questions, thank you for the opportunity to testify. 00:41:10.000 --> 00:41:15.000 Okay, next up we have, Sam. 00:41:15.000 --> 00:41:28.000 Sam Peck who will be followed by Kano Barreto and Shannon Hennessy. 00:41:28.000 --> 00:41:34.000 Hello. 00:41:34.000 --> 00:41:45.000 Thank you to the regents and to President Lazner for being here today. My name is Sam Peck and I'm a senior here in the Sustainability Program at Yorkshire Manila. 00:41:45.000 --> 00:41:56.000 I'm here to testify today, to my strong belief that the presidential selection process finalized on December seventh is exclusive, colonial, and racist. 00:41:56.000 --> 00:42:07.000 Refusing to grant decision-making power to students and to the local community, the board demonstrates unacceptable disregard for the well-being of unique students and to write you as a whole. 00:42:07.000 --> 00:42:13.000 This only extends and strengthens the legacy of colonial extraction from Habitas and its people. 00:42:13.000 --> 00:42:19.000 Yes, as it clones, the bird seeks to do it as best for you and to that route through shared governance. 00:42:19.000 --> 00:42:27.000 It must grant full decision-making power to represent those from a stone body, local community, and cultural practitioners. 00:42:27.000 --> 00:42:36.000 To close, I will show this. Defining yourself through rhetoric is easy. So it is through action that you say what is really in your heart. 00:42:36.000 --> 00:42:59.000 So to the board numbers somber today and President Lazen I ask what will you say? Thank you for your time. 00:42:59.000 --> 00:43:04.000 Velina, Alco, my name is Konomo Conneil, Ventra Abbreto. 00:43:04.000 --> 00:43:16.000 I'm a freshman from Kailua. I just like to say first of all that I wholeheartedly agree with the SUH resolution related to the presidential selection process. 00:43:16.000 --> 00:43:34.000 And you know, this whole process has made me think about when I was a senior at Cala Hill High School and a representative of Manoa visited our college and career centre and I learned that the University of Huai is the third largest industry in the Hawaiian Islands. 00:43:34.000 --> 00:43:48.000 You know, an archipelago of over a million people. And so when I think about the impact that the president has, it's beyond, you know, the almost 50,000 students, even beyond the Hawaiian Islands, it gets to millions if not. 00:43:48.000 --> 00:44:10.000 Billions of people and reconsider the research that has been done historically related to such chemicals as Agent Orange and Roundup or the failed attempts to construct a 30 metre telescope on and there are very severe political consequences and you know, if the process is not democratic and it's not taking into account these. 00:44:10.000 --> 00:44:15.000 Viewpoints and these concerns then It's oligarchy really. If it's such a small number of people impacting such a massive population, even beyond our shores. 00:44:15.000 --> 00:44:32.000 And someone who's recently been organizing around the issue of the genocide in Gaza, I would also say that it's 00:44:32.000 --> 00:44:42.000 Very concerning to see an administration at this university that you know, kind of tries to, you know. 00:44:42.000 --> 00:44:49.000 Treat all sides with aloha in respect, but I mean at what point do people draw a line in the sand and say that something is morally wrong. 00:44:49.000 --> 00:44:56.000 And it's really concerning to see that that line in the Senate has not been drawn and that instead this kind of facade of, oh, we're just trying to consider everybody's opinions and what have you. 00:44:56.000 --> 00:45:04.000 It's very concerning to see an administration and a university that. Won't take the strong moral stances when lives are at stick. 00:45:04.000 --> 00:45:27.000 So that's what I'll say. But yeah. Oh look. 00:45:27.000 --> 00:45:35.000 Hello, hi Kako. My name is Shannon Polemic. I am a PhD student in the political science department here at 00:45:35.000 --> 00:45:43.000 Manoa. I joined many others today to testify regarding agenda item A. Regarding the potential action in the presidential search process. 00:45:43.000 --> 00:45:49.000 I'm primarily concerned that the presidential selection process as finalized during the December seventh Board of Regents meeting. 00:45:49.000 --> 00:45:56.000 Fails to effectively include students, faculty, staff, and community members in selecting the next president. 00:45:56.000 --> 00:46:08.000 I'm here because a trusted friend brought this issue to my attention. An issue that affects not only myself and my peers as students and graduate workers, but also my family and broader community. 00:46:08.000 --> 00:46:14.000 As residents of Hawaii, and Native Hawaiians, and even my future children as potential students of this institution. 00:46:14.000 --> 00:46:28.000 I understand the need to focus on this university itself, however, the fact is that as Keno said and so many before me said, at the leading public institution of higher education in these islands, any decisions made here will affect all of Havay. 00:46:28.000 --> 00:46:43.000 The decision for the next leader of the institution especially will impact. Those within these university walls and beyond. And we as members of the student body and community at a legend to serves deserve a voice and a choice in this selection process. 00:46:43.000 --> 00:46:51.000 With that in mind, I would like to highlight and amplify the excellent points and suggestions that ASUH and its leaders have already made. 00:46:51.000 --> 00:47:00.000 First, the implementation of a selection committee of all members of the Board of Regents, which does not give voting representation to any external stakeholders, goes directly against the principles of shared governance. 00:47:00.000 --> 00:47:12.000 As ASUH Senator of SOS, Mariko Quinn mentioned, the board ought to consider including non-board members of the selection committee with voting power as they did in 2,013. 00:47:12.000 --> 00:47:29.000 Rather than relegating them to a largely performative advisory group. Second, as Marika also suggested to expedite this process of forming the expanded committee or an advisory group with voting power, the board should utilize elected bodies to nominate members of the advisory committee rather than nominating student members themselves. 00:47:29.000 --> 00:47:40.000 For example, the student caucus represents students from all 10 H which campus. Campuses and can facilitate a brief election to select student representatives for the selection committee. 00:47:40.000 --> 00:47:47.000 Other similar elected bodies that have spoken today for faculty and staff can be utilized also in this way. 00:47:47.000 --> 00:48:03.000 Finally, I want to highlight a section from one of the sources that the permitted interaction group pick one. Employed in the 2023 article what's you need in your next president search consultant suzanne tier quotes Donald Gould chair of the board at pizza college who oversaw their recent presidential search. 00:48:03.000 --> 00:48:12.000 He said the change in leadership provides an opportunity to pause and consider where the college is today and what it needs next in the next leader. 00:48:12.000 --> 00:48:19.000 Giving all constituencies a voice in that process leads to a greater acceptance and support of the Kent, who is ultimately selected. 00:48:19.000 --> 00:48:32.000 To prevent the input from major stakeholders, this institution purportedly serves is to do it a service to both the new candidate who will be unfairly judged based on election criteria outside of their control and the institution. 00:48:32.000 --> 00:48:38.000 Given the present selection process, it's very probable that the board only selection committee will not reflect the needs or wants to the larger campus. 00:48:38.000 --> 00:48:44.000 I urge you to seriously reconsider the present presidential selection process if not for me than for the kind of university. 00:48:44.000 --> 00:48:55.000 And more broadly, hope to build one that fairly represents the people it's supposed to serve. 00:48:55.000 --> 00:49:13.000 We do have one other individual who Signed up via Zoom is online now, mister, or, PIN Tor. 00:49:13.000 --> 00:49:31.000 Bye, my name is Cardenas Pentor. I was originally supposed to be on Zoom, but now I'm here in person, And I am the ACH Senator of the Colleges of Social Sciences Health and health sciences and social welfare. 00:49:31.000 --> 00:49:43.000 I have nothing much to add from what other speakers have already said. But I do remember this one thing from one of my social work classes, which is the difference between empathy and sympathy. 00:49:43.000 --> 00:49:56.000 Sympathy is pretty much distress, understanding that someone is distressed and going through some problems. Empathy is actually taking is actually having the action. 00:49:56.000 --> 00:50:10.000 To help others. To be there. You are giving us a voice on this decision as students. And for the faculty, you're giving us a voice on the presidential selection. 00:50:10.000 --> 00:50:18.000 Whenever you give us a voice, that is sympathy. Because even though you're hearing it, it goes through one ear out the other. 00:50:18.000 --> 00:50:23.000 You're not giving us any action. You're not giving us a vote. You're not giving us a choice. 00:50:23.000 --> 00:50:31.000 Which is more effective. And it is empathetic. So I asked for a little bit of empathy. 00:50:31.000 --> 00:50:40.000 Within the selection process. Mahalanui. 00:50:40.000 --> 00:50:58.000 Me to check that conclusion, that the board office. Before I move on to agenda items, I just want to thank everybody who took the time to submit testimony or if testonian person and I also wanna, and I also thank the testifiers for honoring the time limit. 00:50:58.000 --> 00:51:10.000 Much appreciated. But also that I thought the testimony was. You know, well thought, well delivered, well crafted and especially the student testimony. 00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:15.000 I could see my fellow regents, really moved by the thought and and tensions that went into those statements. 00:51:15.000 --> 00:51:27.000 So thank you very much. Also before we move into our gender items. I gonna, use chairs prerogative and opine that I think. 00:51:27.000 --> 00:51:40.000 We're talking about the presidential process. And one of the things. I'm happy about is that we're running this process about as openly and transparently as you possibly could. 00:51:40.000 --> 00:51:48.000 We asked our big one. To do monumental list in a short period of time to propose something. 00:51:48.000 --> 00:51:57.000 For the for the intention of it being able to be seen by the public. Right. And it was it was in front of the public guy for a meeting we couldn't comment on. 00:51:57.000 --> 00:52:05.000 So lots of folks got to see it. Have feelings about it rally support and then we get to talk about it ourselves at the last meeting. 00:52:05.000 --> 00:52:12.000 I think that's why we see so many people able to come and voice their opinion. And I think that's part of this process. 00:52:12.000 --> 00:52:19.000 And today we'll get a chance to talk further about how do we incorporate. The thoughts and views of our of our community and to our work. 00:52:19.000 --> 00:52:30.000 So hopefully this is an example that our process will continue to be open, transparent, accessible, and our decisions are in mind folks are being made in the public. 00:52:30.000 --> 00:52:38.000 Like this the committee that we've set up. Is meeting agenda is open testimony at all stakes. 00:52:38.000 --> 00:52:44.000 I think that's a positive sign as well. So, but that note, move to agenda items. 00:52:44.000 --> 00:52:53.000 Further deliberation decision-making regarding the final report for the presidential search process permitted interaction group form pursuant to section 92 dash 2. 00:52:53.000 --> 00:53:02.000 Dot 5 B HRS to investigate and make recommendations regarding the presidential search process and potential action on the presidential search process. 00:53:02.000 --> 00:53:11.000 Item one is selection 2 k dot one roles responsibilities function make up and membership selection process of the advisory group. 00:53:11.000 --> 00:53:22.000 Okay, all that stated for the record. The way I'm gonna ask us to organize this conversation, because I'm sure lots of us have thoughts and feelings and suggestions. 00:53:22.000 --> 00:53:31.000 I'm gonna bucket it into 3. Categories hopefully. And the first is for us to just tackle what are we asking the advisory group to do. 00:53:31.000 --> 00:53:37.000 So we're gonna project onto the screens. We can all see it and those watching and see it. 00:53:37.000 --> 00:53:43.000 What's currently being asked or phrased. And then we get a chance talk about, do we wanna? 00:53:43.000 --> 00:53:54.000 Elaborate on that, clarify it, add to it so that so we can be. We can accept the recommendations as is or we can amend. 00:53:54.000 --> 00:53:55.000 So the first time I'm gonna, so I'm gonna note. The report says we'll provide advice to committee of the whole. 00:53:55.000 --> 00:54:09.000 As requested. The first thing I'm going to ask is if we could amend that to say we'll provide advice and recommendations to the committee of the whole as requested. 00:54:09.000 --> 00:54:17.000 And the additional recommendation and consultation with council allows us to give the advisory group. Decision-making tasks. 00:54:17.000 --> 00:54:24.000 If we leave it to advice, then it's just, you know, comments. So if we could add that, then we have the ability to give them decision-making tasks. 00:54:24.000 --> 00:54:36.000 Could I get a motion today effect? We have a motion to consider what That's okay. We should actually talk it. 00:54:36.000 --> 00:54:49.000 So within second did we add provide advice and recommendations. Discussion. Mr. Chairman, and members. 00:54:49.000 --> 00:54:56.000 I hope you can hear me. Okay, I'm having as you know, but a bit of difficulty on occasion with hearing. 00:54:56.000 --> 00:54:59.000 Prior to last year's comment on just exactly what we're talking about. 00:54:59.000 --> 00:55:19.000 I think we need to recognize the incredibly professional and helpful. Work that the. Regent's staff has done. 00:55:19.000 --> 00:55:31.000 And putting all of this together. More particularly. In the light of the testimony which I'm sure along with everybody else I've read every bit of the testimony. 00:55:31.000 --> 00:55:49.000 Including today. Every single bit. And, the what the staff has provided us in terms of previous search groups All of that going back, pre, President Greenwood. 00:55:49.000 --> 00:56:04.000 I think the decision that we made, this is in conjunction with what you just said about, Openness, inclusiveness, transparency, involving faculty, staff, students, alumni, and the broader community. 00:56:04.000 --> 00:56:14.000 The survey that's going on now. I believe is going to produce the single most open, complete. 00:56:14.000 --> 00:56:25.000 Thorough process of examining what is involved in the selection of a president that has ever taken place in the state of Hawaii and will match anything and possibly exceed anything that's been done. 00:56:25.000 --> 00:56:41.000 With any other university. Again, the staff has provided us with an enormous. Broad array of information with respect to what other universities and other what are the regions other trustees that have done. 00:56:41.000 --> 00:57:03.000 My understanding is, is that the survey that we put out which has 6 excellent questions. On it is being responded to by faculty, by staff, by students, by alumni, by the broader public in the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds. 00:57:03.000 --> 00:57:31.000 Of responses and there and these responses are coming in writing detailed writing I am told. That we are going to be the recipients and the advisory committee will be the recipients of an incredible amount of trenchant dialogue and and discussion with respect to what is expected of the university and the presidential selection process. 00:57:31.000 --> 00:57:56.000 So. I see in every one of the testimonies that we we've had so virtually every one of the testimonies we've had so far this request for the inclusion and respect for the opinions and and judgments and analysis of students, faculty, staff, the public alumni and so on. 00:57:56.000 --> 00:58:05.000 That's coming in. Literally again, hundreds and hundreds of commentaries, thousands of questions being answered in writing. 00:58:05.000 --> 00:58:17.000 So, I think we should, we need to put to rest that the advisory committee is some kind of peripheral, marginal, adjunct. 00:58:17.000 --> 00:58:29.000 To what we're doing is the regents. On the contrary, we see that if If I'm speaking generally here for what I understand we have done to this point. 00:58:29.000 --> 00:58:42.000 The advisory committee is a crucial and fundamental joined operation with us in terms of us being able to make the decision we're required to do by law and have sought to do. 00:58:42.000 --> 00:58:55.000 What does one other point there going over what's what's the previous records this is not an adverse commentary on previous regions or previous selection committees or anything. 00:58:55.000 --> 00:59:14.000 But it's crystal clear to me that And it's ironic that Having a selection committee with one special interest group represented and and an individual over here and a couple of regents and and a mishmash all put together. 00:59:14.000 --> 00:59:25.000 It doesn't work. It really doesn't work. It ends up actually truncating faculty staff and, and, students and alumni. 00:59:25.000 --> 00:59:39.000 The process we've initiated with the survey and with what is proposed for the role of the advisory committee will be the most inclusive, the most public, the most transparent, the most comprehensive body of information and perspective. 00:59:39.000 --> 00:59:52.000 That any Board of Regents will have had in the selection of a president. 00:59:52.000 --> 01:00:00.000 For the discussion on the motion to add the phrase and recommendations. 01:00:00.000 --> 01:00:13.000 Seeing that all those in favor of the addition say aye. Any opposed? Right now, the only stated assignment. 01:00:13.000 --> 01:00:20.000 You know, proactive statement to the advisory group is that at least one member advisory group will attend the open forms in each county. 01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:29.000 So. To reach Abercrombie's point. I actually also believe that this group will use an advisory body. 01:00:29.000 --> 01:00:40.000 And I'm in a very deliberate intentional way. The question I have is do we do and That will play out in the things we ask them to do. Right. 01:00:40.000 --> 01:00:42.000 And the advice we ask them to give us. That no matter what we say today with proof will be in the pudding. 01:00:42.000 --> 01:00:54.000 And I actually agree with you, Jabber. I, in us. Currently community doesn't. 01:00:54.000 --> 01:01:06.000 But the trust is clearly not there. So my question is, do we wanna add specific? Tasks for that virtual group now that we would we could add to the list and codify. 01:01:06.000 --> 01:01:12.000 Are we ready for that? So I opened that discussion up. 01:01:12.000 --> 01:01:39.000 Is that, Mr. Chairman, I quite agree with that. I'm not sure I wanna take up the time right now, but the previous, searches that have been made that come up with precisely that kind of criteria and there's whole listen here rather than Then take the the time right now, but if it. 01:01:39.000 --> 01:01:41.000 If. Maybe by the time, the end of, well, let me ask you this. 01:01:41.000 --> 01:01:48.000 Do you want, do, would you want a list of because I can, I, do you want a list of? 01:01:48.000 --> 01:01:56.000 Cause I can, I, I, it's not me personally, but I have, have lists here that, that probably are. 01:01:56.000 --> 01:02:04.000 Representative of dozens and dozens of searches that have gone to for the president. It's not a wheel it has to be invented. 01:02:04.000 --> 01:02:15.000 Yeah, it's, it's an invitation. My sense is there's some things that we might all agree would be great to get the advisory groups assistance with. 01:02:15.000 --> 01:02:26.000 And if we start to populate that now, that some trust will be built. I think it's worth articulating kind of what. 01:02:26.000 --> 01:02:36.000 In a more concrete stance. What the advisory role is going to look like because from looking at their survey responses and from hearing testimony today. 01:02:36.000 --> 01:02:46.000 Regardless of what people's opinion are on the process that we've already chosen. There is clearly a desire. 01:02:46.000 --> 01:03:05.000 To legitimize the advisory group. And I think that it should be our goal today to kind of hammer out what weight we're going to give to the advisory role like you're saying to create that public trust but also because it's important and I don't think any of our board wants to just ignore what people have to say. 01:03:05.000 --> 01:03:24.000 That's why we appreciate testimony. So I think that this should be one of our folks, our main focus today is to really ensure that there's adequate representation, there's adequate roles and that we don't just listen to them but we figure out what that role is going to be and how we're gonna interact with them going forward. 01:03:24.000 --> 01:03:33.000 Okay. 01:03:33.000 --> 01:03:42.000 It's can I float some ideas at this point? Is that sort of where this might? 01:03:42.000 --> 01:03:50.000 So let me try floating because you know, so the goal is transparency, the goal is voice and choice. 01:03:50.000 --> 01:04:01.000 Right. And, and. Honoring the constituents. So If that is since that's where we want to go. 01:04:01.000 --> 01:04:11.000 Might this group. Select the firm. I'm gonna just Throughout some ideas, select the firm. 01:04:11.000 --> 01:04:20.000 Work with the firm to evaluate. Candidates. Coming from the firm. 01:04:20.000 --> 01:04:31.000 And provide the selection committee, the Board of Regents with. Some number. Of candidates that would then Proceed to a more public. 01:04:31.000 --> 01:04:38.000 For the process. So let me just throw that out. I don't know if you want that as a motion, but. 01:04:38.000 --> 01:04:53.000 It seems like it might be premature as a motion. And it's a good example of the kind of things that this advisory group might have much of the same functions that the kind of things that this advisory group might have much of the same functions that the selection committee of the past had. 01:04:53.000 --> 01:04:58.000 But the way I interpret what. But this word did is they said, we want to be more involved. 01:04:58.000 --> 01:05:07.000 We want to do more of the left. The region ever was very expressive of this earlier. Like since we have to make the decision, why don't we do more of the work? 01:05:07.000 --> 01:05:15.000 And I respect that. So. I think we're in this place, okay, great. Well, but we certainly want to honor the role. 01:05:15.000 --> 01:05:20.000 Of our stakeholder community in the broader community. So that's for that balance. So I appreciate Regent Sochi lifting up an example, the advisory group could have much of the same functions as previous selection committees. 01:05:20.000 --> 01:05:33.000 While we still hold the ultimate. Decision. Regent Wilson. 01:05:33.000 --> 01:05:45.000 I think one of the things that's going to be critical is to define. You know, what it is we're looking for in terms of and experience the skill. 01:05:45.000 --> 01:06:02.000 To and do that in the context of really understanding and having a discussion. About what, where we headed as an institution where we need to move towards as an institution so that we can. 01:06:02.000 --> 01:06:12.000 Identify what are the key things. That we would be looking for. In a president in order to achieve that. 01:06:12.000 --> 01:06:28.000 So I think that's very critical that we. Focus on that first before we and and look at that you know is that something that is the advisory. 01:06:28.000 --> 01:06:31.000 Committee's role. I believe it should be. And would that would that be covered if the task was to come up with the selection criteria with the recruiting firm? 01:06:31.000 --> 01:06:43.000 That would be an example of something we could practically add, the advisory group would come up with that criteria. 01:06:43.000 --> 01:06:52.000 With the recruiting firm that we select. Other other thoughts? Question suggestions. 01:06:52.000 --> 01:07:02.000 If not, I'll just quickly open to rental cheekies. Point one of the other things we could do Hi, hybrid would be to give the advisory group. 01:07:02.000 --> 01:07:12.000 Much of the actual. You know, processing deliberation discussion, but they would be bringing those. Every other decisions to us. 01:07:12.000 --> 01:07:18.000 For ratification so that there's still be a balance of them being fully involved. Making the recommendations. 01:07:18.000 --> 01:07:23.000 But then we would vote for every single thing along the way. And because we're planning on meeting twice a month. 01:07:23.000 --> 01:07:41.000 That we could have that cadence reasonably. other thoughts, question. Yeah, I think we Again, reading through all of the way this has happened in the past here and elsewhere. 01:07:41.000 --> 01:07:59.000 You, you have to define the scope of your search. In order to do that, the the regions have to have what is it that they want in a president and of course the advisory committee and again believe me I've read it over and over and over again everybody wants the same thing. 01:07:59.000 --> 01:08:08.000 In fact, President Lasner, when he was a candidate, nomination. 01:08:08.000 --> 01:08:19.000 For for the presidency outlined page after page of what is expected of a president. A, the Negian. 01:08:19.000 --> 01:08:27.000 Undertaking by the way, which I'm sure he'll agree is there. So that's that's not going to be hard to do. 01:08:27.000 --> 01:08:32.000 So, first, what do we need in a president? What are we looking for? 01:08:32.000 --> 01:08:37.000 What, what, what's defining leadership needs? Right, like Ernie. Ernie says, I think. 01:08:37.000 --> 01:08:47.000 Then, you, What's required then is Are you going to have a search firm do this? 01:08:47.000 --> 01:08:57.000 As in, as an initial, step or are you gonna go to the advisory group and, and the regents working together to do this. 01:08:57.000 --> 01:09:06.000 My conclusion is that It's a complete waste of time and money. To get a so-called search. 01:09:06.000 --> 01:09:21.000 Firm in it, they have their own agendas. The, search firms take an average of 4 to 7 months or longer. 01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:32.000 Before they're ready to go. They they reach out to candidates and and and resources that are part of their agendas. 01:09:32.000 --> 01:09:39.000 And over and over again, you see in the in the history of these firm surges, 600. 01:09:39.000 --> 01:09:48.000 700 contacts are made. Then they end up with between 70 and a hundred. Actual applications. 01:09:48.000 --> 01:10:10.000 And maybe 50 nominations come in. Hundreds of contacts are made. And then when those nomination, when those applications and nominations, all the search committees, regardless of whether it's regents and trustees or whether it's a an amalgam of various interests, they immediately go down to about 15. 01:10:10.000 --> 01:10:18.000 People. The first cut cuts dozens and dozens of in the first cut. I just think it's a it's it's wasting our time. 01:10:18.000 --> 01:10:26.000 It's wasting money. It's it's it's it debilitates the the advisory committee by by having the search committee. 01:10:26.000 --> 01:10:29.000 I think we need to empower if you're going to have an advisory committee that's meaningful and empower them to get moving, get cracking. 01:10:29.000 --> 01:10:42.000 But on this point, I, one of the things I certainly I would love to see the advisory group. 01:10:42.000 --> 01:11:05.000 And powered because there are a lot of work to do. Right. And so for those who want to stick to a timeline and be expedient, like the the more we divide up that work and the more we share the the lift the you know the faster we can go while still being deliberate so I think Again, my proposal is that right now what we're what we're really discussing is. 01:11:05.000 --> 01:11:13.000 Well, how much what's being assigned to the advisory group? Exactly. Sorry, I need to interrupt. 01:11:13.000 --> 01:11:22.000 I guess I'm still trying to wrap my head around how these 2 will interact. And this is just an idea. 01:11:22.000 --> 01:11:32.000 Wonder if, you know, we're gonna agenda is everything that we're gonna be doing at the meeting if the advisor, so we know. 01:11:32.000 --> 01:11:38.000 What much what decisions will be made where we are in the process and if the advisory because they can meet. 01:11:38.000 --> 01:11:43.000 Together, yes. I just come from a, Council, what are what are the sunshine law requirements on the advisory group? 01:11:43.000 --> 01:11:53.000 Is it dependent on the functions that they are assigned? 01:11:53.000 --> 01:11:56.000 Yeah, the limitations are only on the regions if they're sitting on such a group, but not. 01:11:56.000 --> 01:12:05.000 That is correct. And we do have an executive session scheduled today in case we have to dive deeper into. 01:12:05.000 --> 01:12:18.000 These issues, but our understanding is they could move more. Absolutely. So if we have say, we got all the proposals from the search firms in and we know we're going to make a decision at the next meeting. 01:12:18.000 --> 01:12:32.000 Then we in this advisory group. They can can meet and talk about and discuss the proposals. And then we all meet and they're here and we all talk about it. 01:12:32.000 --> 01:12:57.000 I guess I'm not quite understanding. How this the vote. This this vote comes into play because I think we've shown that When we're all here and we're discussing We find consensus and alone like when we were put in pig one we did the best we could with 5 members and clearly we didn't. 01:12:57.000 --> 01:13:05.000 Have all the perspectives because we weren't allowed to and when we were able to put that out to the broader community, we got great feedback. 01:13:05.000 --> 01:13:18.000 And realize we have to change things. That was recommended in our payroll, one report. So with is that a structure that's possible where we know what's coming up, advisory can This discuss it. 01:13:18.000 --> 01:13:24.000 I'm getting the look from our legal council. What what are your thoughts, Kerry? 01:13:24.000 --> 01:13:29.000 Yes. So, again, preference would be to discuss. Fully advising you in exact session. 01:13:29.000 --> 01:13:39.000 As opposed to yes, no answers, which are in complete, but I would, respectfully. 01:13:39.000 --> 01:13:50.000 Ask Jan, VPA about the German. So I know your question, your your hypothetical broader than just the selection of the search firm. 01:13:50.000 --> 01:14:01.000 But I think there's a restrictions on. Whole of that information being published before decisions made. Alright, understood. 01:14:01.000 --> 01:14:14.000 So I. That is a little why we have to we can't enumerate exactly what. Everything that we're gonna ask advisory to do because they are gonna be limitations like that. 01:14:14.000 --> 01:14:23.000 That come up. Go ahead, others have. 01:14:23.000 --> 01:14:28.000 I'm gonna go to the regions that have questions, right? But I think. This is the right conversation in terms of how we're gonna, it's what I hear is clear. 01:14:28.000 --> 01:14:38.000 There's the intention for us is to. Is to empower this group to do a lot of the lift. 01:14:38.000 --> 01:14:50.000 And so some of this will be. They'll believe it when they see it. Some of it is what can we say today that gives confidence and the other point is it's going to help us recruit members of the advisory board if they know we're asking them to do. 01:14:50.000 --> 01:15:00.000 So that's what we're trying to do this morning. Regent H. I'm glad it was brought up about the sunshine law. 01:15:00.000 --> 01:15:15.000 Again, the material that the staff has provided us shows us over and over again and they and it mentions other states other institutions are subject to their various aspects of sunshine laws, all of which messes the process though. 01:15:15.000 --> 01:15:24.000 For everybody that testified here today. And everybody that sent in the testimony. Not one single person or one single group. 01:15:24.000 --> 01:15:34.000 Yeah, of the testimony mentions the sunshine law. With respect to the all inclusion and the and the transparency and all the rest of it. 01:15:34.000 --> 01:15:42.000 Much of it is all theoretical about about this inclusion, but the practical reality is, is the advisory group, they get to talk with one another. 01:15:42.000 --> 01:15:49.000 They get to commiserate with one another. They get to intellectually arm wrestle with one another. 01:15:49.000 --> 01:16:01.000 The regents We're hamstrung. I could use a lot stronger language than the chairman knows that I've used it in the past about what the so called sunshine law does to the border regions. 01:16:01.000 --> 01:16:20.000 We are really dependent. Upon the integrity and the and and the character and the hard work that an advisory committee can do because they can engage in conversation and discussion and analysis that we can only do essentially sometimes in executive session. 01:16:20.000 --> 01:16:26.000 So we can't bring up the the I was going to mention that we can't bring up the search firms. 01:16:26.000 --> 01:16:32.000 And do it because the second she do that you're gonna have to publish. What it is, some idiot will come in. 01:16:32.000 --> 01:16:38.000 Well, I gotta, I gotta withdraw idiot. Is that part of the minutes now? Of some group or individual with their own agenda. 01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:50.000 I guarantee you the second you bring up the search for and we do the second you bring up the search for and we do the second you bring up the search for and we do the second you bring up the search for and we do the second you bring up the search for and we do the second we have any exchange with you folks out there You're serious about what you're doing. 01:16:50.000 --> 01:16:58.000 You gotta remember, we have the sunshine law, you don't. So we have to be super careful about what we say and what we do. 01:16:58.000 --> 01:17:03.000 And what we ask because somebody is going to come in and say, oh, under the sunshine law, you gotta do this. 01:17:03.000 --> 01:17:13.000 And one of the things that's crystal clear, Mr. Chairman. From all of the reading and all of the material we got is confidentiality is absolutely crucial. 01:17:13.000 --> 01:17:15.000 If you're going to be have a successful search for a president, regardless of what criteria you set up for. 01:17:15.000 --> 01:17:32.000 You have to have confidentiality. The advisory group has to understand. This isn't a free for all that you get to engage in where you shoot your mouth off to the press. 01:17:32.000 --> 01:17:41.000 Some of the people who have testified, for example, here today, but nice sober, serious presentation to the Board of Regents. 01:17:41.000 --> 01:17:54.000 I've listened to some of the very people who testified here shooting their mouths off on television. About what's going you do that and we're gonna be in serious trouble under the the sunshine law We're going to have an advisory committee. 01:17:54.000 --> 01:18:04.000 They have to understand. They're going to have to sign confidentiality agreements. If they have to work with one another, they're going to have to have confidential understandings with one another. 01:18:04.000 --> 01:18:19.000 So my point really is here is that the search firm business, we got to be real careful. I'm against it because I know, I know for a fact the Sunshine Law is gonna come in and it's going to delay us probably for months. 01:18:19.000 --> 01:18:24.000 You will see. 01:18:24.000 --> 01:18:36.000 Yeah, you know, I go back to, you know, even when we talk about a year, some discussion about what the search firm 01:18:36.000 --> 01:18:48.000 He's me. And all of those started to talk about the thing that we've been talking about in region, Ibercombe, we talked about this has to do with the search firm. 01:18:48.000 --> 01:19:02.000 You know to me part of this is We need to focus on. What do we not only what do we want the advisory committee to do, but what do we want the search firm to do? 01:19:02.000 --> 01:19:11.000 I mean, in terms of, because to me, if you hire a search firm, you tell them these are the key indicators that we're looking for. 01:19:11.000 --> 01:19:23.000 This is what we require. You know that the person must meet these qualifications. And then to me they do their job going out and trying to identify. 01:19:23.000 --> 01:19:40.000 People would be able to do that but I still go back to the fact that we need to have in place and I think this is the as you said would be a job of the advisory committee really define first what it is we are looking for. 01:19:40.000 --> 01:19:52.000 You know, if we're going to use a simple example, if. You know, I'm the coach of a professional football team and I'm looking for a wide receiver. 01:19:52.000 --> 01:19:57.000 Okay, what are the qualifications that we need to have of a wide receiver? Well, one. 01:19:57.000 --> 01:20:04.000 The time that they can do to 40 or dashing. C how fast are, you know, what's there been directed kind of thing? 01:20:04.000 --> 01:20:20.000 And I think that's the focus. The first that has to be. Made and I think that would be a job of the advisory committee, which would be need to be made up and representative of the constituencies that we heard here today. 01:20:20.000 --> 01:20:27.000 Could I, did I float 8? Thoughts. Is that a suggestion? And I want to see Regents reaction. 01:20:27.000 --> 01:20:34.000 How would we feel about? 01:20:34.000 --> 01:20:50.000 Articulating, changing the language right now to say that This advisory group would provide. Advice and recommendations on all aspects of the presidential search. 01:20:50.000 --> 01:20:51.000 And again, this doesn't mean they make decisions. We all the decisions are still held by this body. 01:20:51.000 --> 01:21:03.000 We, that's the selection committee's job. So we can still in the future. Disperse specific decision making, but. 01:21:03.000 --> 01:21:10.000 It says that that group. Ken opine on any matter. 01:21:10.000 --> 01:21:19.000 We're just hanging. 01:21:19.000 --> 01:21:24.000 At 1 point, finally, towards the end of the testimony, I heard something that I was listening for. 01:21:24.000 --> 01:21:37.000 Which was the addition of accountability or responsibility to the word authority as our roles in this. When you throw that in for which there can always be a consequences. 01:21:37.000 --> 01:21:47.000 It changes the level of the discussion. I would encourage anyone who has doubts about. 01:21:47.000 --> 01:21:55.000 Here, start over again. Government by plebiscite usually doesn't work. It's too big. 01:21:55.000 --> 01:22:01.000 2 ways to bog down a process. One is by non-inclusion and the other is by overinclusion. 01:22:01.000 --> 01:22:08.000 Somehow or another, we're going to want at the conclusion of all of this, a group with identified responsibilities. 01:22:08.000 --> 01:22:24.000 That in in fact, is functional. Does not does not require too much retooling. There will be people who are undoubtedly going to be on happy at one end of that spectrum and people who will be unhappy at the end of the spectrum. 01:22:24.000 --> 01:22:31.000 Hold on, what we have to be able to do is satisfy our consciences that to the extent committed by the existing rules governing us to the extent permitted by the existing rules governing us. 01:22:31.000 --> 01:22:38.000 We in fact acted in good faith to the people who are sitting in the audience. And virtually in the audience right now. 01:22:38.000 --> 01:22:48.000 And that may sound a little airy fairy in its way. But I think that's. Been true. 01:22:48.000 --> 01:22:59.000 Any, any process. That mixes function with idealism. And so here's where I was. 01:22:59.000 --> 01:23:03.000 Hoping to go with this. 01:23:03.000 --> 01:23:15.000 Any time that we, and when, when you encounter a sunshine law. In any context elsewhere here. It's because somewhere along the line, 2 people lost trust in each other. 01:23:15.000 --> 01:23:24.000 There was a failure in trust and I had started the process going and now what we have is a case of over in my view at least, over scrutiny. 01:23:24.000 --> 01:23:33.000 Of people who were elected. You can't possibly get all of the stockholders into this room. On, be possible and get on some level. 01:23:33.000 --> 01:23:46.000 We're expecting the regions to be trustworthy in selection of this process. What helped assure that is the region selection process and for anyone who has any doubt about how we are. 01:23:46.000 --> 01:23:56.000 How we arrived here at these comfortable seats around a table with pleasant company. Go to the web page and have a look at the Regents Advisory Council and see the process. 01:23:56.000 --> 01:24:02.000 It won't be perfect, but it's indicative of a number of people who have made a commitment. 01:24:02.000 --> 01:24:10.000 To act in good faith on behalf of those in the universe again, spoken for much too long. I wish I had been as brief as The young man was from the Students Association, moments ago. 01:24:10.000 --> 01:24:23.000 But on that last point, if I do a quick check of Regents, how many regions, you know, we're students, our alumnus of 01:24:23.000 --> 01:24:35.000 How many students have been faculty? About me, Regents and faculty. Any staff? So to the other point, right, you say, besides the criteria. 01:24:35.000 --> 01:24:42.000 These are folks that, you know. Parent, how many parents? Right, yeah. What if you pay tuition bills to university? 01:24:42.000 --> 01:24:57.000 Yeah, this group not only has been vetted. Has deep ties to the university. Alright, yeah, Vijay, 01:24:57.000 --> 01:25:02.000 Oh, I wanted to respond to your, question. And that. Right. 01:25:02.000 --> 01:25:12.000 At any part of the process to me, I feel it's inherent that we listen to our constituents, councils, the people who have come today. 01:25:12.000 --> 01:25:23.000 I didn't feel like we were excluding them at all when we initially We're meeting coming up with this and I think 2 and a half weeks. 01:25:23.000 --> 01:25:32.000 As a pig. Meeting what felt like every other day. And so So really, I think. 01:25:32.000 --> 01:25:40.000 The the assumption that we are not going to listen or don't want to listen. Should not be construed in that way. 01:25:40.000 --> 01:25:50.000 It was never meant to be exclusive. It was actually meant to be inclusive. And I and I recall when we started. 01:25:50.000 --> 01:25:56.000 Right, who would be on this advisory committee? You could go down a rabbit hole for days and days and days. 01:25:56.000 --> 01:26:06.000 We started, you know, you could start making a list. I think the list got, by the time it got to like 30 plus members community faculty staff. 01:26:06.000 --> 01:26:17.000 The the logistical like how would you do that logistically to have every person in the room at every meeting? 01:26:17.000 --> 01:26:29.000 And, and so I think what I think what I recall is we started with the And then President Laszne, you can remind us the 4 governing bodies that are officially recognized. 01:26:29.000 --> 01:26:34.000 Was the start, right? And then you start to add on names and councils and groups. I mean, within within the Faculty Senate. 01:26:34.000 --> 01:26:46.000 I mean, there's committees and there's representation and I realize that everybody wants a piece of the pie. 01:26:46.000 --> 01:27:12.000 But, but what I think I was the most troubled about by the testimony and the, the initial survey responses which were about over 700 to date was that the meaningful inclusion which is which is what was repeated in many of the letters and in many of the testimony was that meaningful inclusion meant a seat at the table for a vote. 01:27:12.000 --> 01:27:19.000 And meaningful inclusion is a very subjective word and I think we're trying to define that which is really difficult. 01:27:19.000 --> 01:27:28.000 At this point in time because we are early on in the process. And so To answer your question, yes, right? 01:27:28.000 --> 01:27:39.000 I, I expect that we as a Board of Regents include that meaningful inclusion at every at every point of the way. 01:27:39.000 --> 01:27:48.000 And to me that's actually inherent in the process and not a separate. Item that we need to separate or address. 01:27:48.000 --> 01:28:01.000 But that is my perspective that it is included in that whole process. I do also want to say having having done recruitments for chief executive positions, having a search firm does habits benefits. 01:28:01.000 --> 01:28:21.000 I realized that because this is so visible, I think we also talked a lot about having our border region staff if there were 700 applicants just like how there were 700 responses to the survey. 01:28:21.000 --> 01:28:26.000 Someone has to vet through that, whether it be HR, someone has to make sure that they meet the minimum qualifications. 01:28:26.000 --> 01:28:34.000 Someone has to make sure that they have the academic, whatever the minimum qualifications are, desired qualifications. 01:28:34.000 --> 01:28:48.000 And that really the search firm was to be used more as a administrative and logistical tool rather than providing guidance towards the actual. 01:28:48.000 --> 01:29:03.000 Candidate. I don't know if I can articulate it as well, but really to help. T it up for us as regents and the advisory committee so that the administrative burden, I mean, I can't imagine us opening envelopes or responding to emails individually. 01:29:03.000 --> 01:29:25.000 Responding to emails individually. I mean, responding to emails individually. I mean, so anyways, that's kind of my, so anyways, that's kind of my, not one, the search firm, but really I, feel like we, have to, we how we find respect with each other. 01:29:25.000 --> 01:29:37.000 I will just say one more comment and then I'll close that the I will say the comments really struck me as there is a definite distrust of just the Board of Regents. 01:29:37.000 --> 01:29:47.000 Itself. There were some, of course, so we can't address every, error, but we are unpaid volunteer board. 01:29:47.000 --> 01:29:54.000 There are more than one, there's more than one Kanaka model. There's more than one Hawaiian on this board. 01:29:54.000 --> 01:29:59.000 That we have a student region who has voting authority, who is a part of our everyday, every single meeting. 01:29:59.000 --> 01:30:14.000 I do believe that there is distinct representation on this board. We saw it by also alum, faculty, parents, and so. 01:30:14.000 --> 01:30:23.000 If if we could the the trust goes both ways. I feel that if right and to and to the student, Mahalo for reminding us that, right? 01:30:23.000 --> 01:30:34.000 They are entrusting us to make this decision and I want to entrust in them that we will make the right decision so 01:30:34.000 --> 01:30:42.000 Okay. My thoughts and my comments were gonna be directly along the lines of reaching Paloma, also building on recent painting. 01:30:42.000 --> 01:30:49.000 Governor Abercrombie, talking about I feel like a lot of the comments and the testimony. 01:30:49.000 --> 01:31:06.000 Sort of are questioning our individual. Intentions as regents. Our desire to be open. And inclusive and just echoing what Regent Paloma said, you know, we were in pick one not was not the intention. 01:31:06.000 --> 01:31:15.000 Again, we were put in a small group. And we did the best in a very short amount of time as a starting point. 01:31:15.000 --> 01:31:26.000 And so I appreciate everyone's input here and we came to a a better informed. Decision when we put it all out there. 01:31:26.000 --> 01:31:35.000 Also I want to say along the lines of what Regent Abercrombie was saying about non-disclosure agreements and conflicts of interest. 01:31:35.000 --> 01:31:46.000 You know, I spoke about this at the last meeting and in pig one. Just about the public trust in us regions, I mean, we went through a thorough process to get here. 01:31:46.000 --> 01:31:53.000 As Regent Paloma said, we represent different groups here, faculty, staff, alumni, parents. 01:31:53.000 --> 01:32:11.000 Former students. We also file financial disclosure agreements. That's you know out there and so we're held to a high standard here so The the question to be our intention intentions here is particularly as we are volunteers. 01:32:11.000 --> 01:32:21.000 That's a little disappointing and I, and I hope we can. We can clarify that today that it's not our intention. 01:32:21.000 --> 01:32:28.000 To exclude people. I hope you can see by our discussions that we're listening and we're trying to include. 01:32:28.000 --> 01:32:37.000 Everyone. I also want to speak to Regent She is an amazing student region. I know I have not been here that long. 01:32:37.000 --> 01:32:46.000 But if, and maybe. Everyone's not watching the entire length of the meetings. We've had very long meetings. 01:32:46.000 --> 01:32:54.000 She speaks up, she's prepared, she's articulate. She speaks for the students. We all appreciate her opinion. 01:32:54.000 --> 01:33:02.000 And she's not shying away from these topics. And so to the extent that, you know, our intentions are being. 01:33:02.000 --> 01:33:09.000 Questioned in ways and She's sitting here speaking for the students. I'd like to say I think she's doing a really. 01:33:09.000 --> 01:33:14.000 Wonderful job. Thank you. 01:33:14.000 --> 01:33:30.000 Shirley. Chair, getting back to the wording, on the recommendation. I can see, modifying it to, it was advice and, and recommendation. 01:33:30.000 --> 01:33:41.000 But the additional wording you wanted was I think a little too. Wide open. I think we can. 01:33:41.000 --> 01:33:52.000 Assigned the advisory committee. What to do but if it's too wide open it's not gonna they may not be focused and productive. 01:33:52.000 --> 01:34:03.000 And, so I just. At the and recommendation, but the other wording. 01:34:03.000 --> 01:34:07.000 Shirley kinda taking the 01:34:07.000 --> 01:34:15.000 Think the task for us now is are we moving forward as it is with that small amendment, right? And we're gonna. 01:34:15.000 --> 01:34:26.000 Come up with specifics going forward or are we going to. Lay some down. Today. I, my own. 01:34:26.000 --> 01:34:38.000 I respect by Shirley's. Position that's not mine. I feel like whether we give if we form an advisory group they're gonna opine on every aspect. 01:34:38.000 --> 01:34:45.000 Of the search. As, and I think that's what I heard, Regent Promise, that why wouldn't they do that? 01:34:45.000 --> 01:34:53.000 I think I would expect them to do that because that's what we want. Yeah, so for me it's like, it's just like seeing it up front. 01:34:53.000 --> 01:34:59.000 Yeah, we get it that you're gonna give us your feedback. And we will welcome it when you give it. 01:34:59.000 --> 01:35:08.000 The issue about what task they get, I think, and if the wording could be amended so that it's clear that doesn't mean you get to make decisions on whatever you want. 01:35:08.000 --> 01:35:18.000 It's that we respect. Feedback on every aspect of the internet. Now the irony is because we create a committee of the whole. 01:35:18.000 --> 01:35:24.000 That's gonna be true for every single thing we decide because it's gonna be agendas and folks can testify. 01:35:24.000 --> 01:35:30.000 All faculty, all students, all staff can give their direct feedback to us. On anything we decide to do. 01:35:30.000 --> 01:35:38.000 The advisory group is just an elevated group that it actually kind of picks us off the hook. Because we don't have to answer to every single testifier. 01:35:38.000 --> 01:35:47.000 We can say, well, we're trusting the advisory group. We're trusting the faculty member that you appointed or remember you pointed that's who we're taking our guidance from. 01:35:47.000 --> 01:35:51.000 So it's an interesting, you know, where. Are we gonna wait the opinions of advisory group over individual testifiers? 01:35:51.000 --> 01:36:12.000 This can be interesting. I think the key word, It's up to us to. Establish the tasks for the Advisor group, otherwise it is a free for all. 01:36:12.000 --> 01:36:20.000 I'll go back to. As usual, region heading has a capacity of facilities for zeroing right in on. 01:36:20.000 --> 01:36:27.000 On the essential element. Over and over again it happens by the way. That's meant to be accomplished, a compliment, I know. 01:36:27.000 --> 01:36:35.000 Please don't go. But, and it's true, it is. And what he said, this is not a referendum. 01:36:35.000 --> 01:36:37.000 We're a representative. This is representative government. Now somebody wants to be a parliamentary system. They can go to another country or another state. 01:36:37.000 --> 01:36:50.000 They want to have referendum. They can go under another set of circumstances. We can't, no, can't we do that? 01:36:50.000 --> 01:36:54.000 But one of the reasons I think that we're here is we're representatives. And the advisory group will be representative. 01:36:54.000 --> 01:37:06.000 Of a broader opinion and so on, hopefully. So they get assigned the task. If it's wide open, I agree with, with Regent Lee. 01:37:06.000 --> 01:37:15.000 I mean, I know what you're driving at and I agree, but if, If they apply on anything, for example, search. 01:37:15.000 --> 01:37:28.000 We, we gotta decide that. That shouldn't be something the advisory committee. It gets a crack at because I can find 6 or 7 other things that we should make decisions on like like the criteria for for the task of picking the president. 01:37:28.000 --> 01:37:38.000 I don't think it should be a referendum. Out there with 7,000 participants in it. 01:37:38.000 --> 01:37:48.000 We have said we need to assign the tasks and that's what they apply on. And the like whether there should be a search firm or not, we should decide that. 01:37:48.000 --> 01:37:57.000 That's not something you want to throw out there because in terms of of time expending. If that's what's gonna be done, we're gonna be here. 01:37:57.000 --> 01:38:04.000 The past 2025. Quick side. 01:38:04.000 --> 01:38:08.000 Yeah, so who we choose and what they do this though 01:38:08.000 --> 01:38:23.000 Thank you. I think one of the things that again, at least the reading I've done, says that I think we could do with our staff and an HR firm, but if you're going to talk about search firm. 01:38:23.000 --> 01:38:29.000 I think you should get a, if you're going to do a firm at all, it should be an HR firm. 01:38:29.000 --> 01:38:34.000 They do logistics and so on. They can pull that together and then we make decisions about the cut. 01:38:34.000 --> 01:38:44.000 Was over and over and over again when you read the record of what happens with search firms is they, they have an interest in spending your money. 01:38:44.000 --> 01:39:04.000 And they're going to reach out to hundreds of people and the mainland and international and all the rest of this stuff and what happens at the end of this expensive long process that involves hundreds of people is all of a sudden you end up with 79 applications and in the first pass it's down to 15. 01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:10.000 Okay, and then, and the reason, it's talking, I do wanna just so that we're on the same page. 01:39:10.000 --> 01:39:18.000 We voted last time. To move forward with the search for a recommendation. And then based on the comments, you've made similar comments last time. 01:39:18.000 --> 01:39:27.000 We changed it so that and HR firm could be. Could, bid or partner with another, a local firm. 01:39:27.000 --> 01:39:39.000 Okay. Just mentioned that so between meetings we did come up with, well the criteria was in the pig report and then we came up with the waiting. 01:39:39.000 --> 01:39:55.000 And they so we started the RFP process. One of the things we did add that you had recommended is for the search firm to disclose if they're bringing cannabis to us. 01:39:55.000 --> 01:40:04.000 That. That. We at least know that if they're gonna You know, they have a like an agenda. 01:40:04.000 --> 01:40:12.000 You know, yeah. Regent Tochiki. I think. 01:40:12.000 --> 01:40:26.000 One of the primary responsibilities of our university is . To grow the citizenship and I have to say that in listening to the testimony one of the things because I've been very worried about our democracy. 01:40:26.000 --> 01:40:31.000 One of the things, because I've been very worried about our democracy, frankly. And so it is heartening to hear the faculty. 01:40:31.000 --> 01:40:40.000 Heartening to hear the staff and especially heartening to hear the students come forward. To have a role in this process. 01:40:40.000 --> 01:40:48.000 That said that role is a lot of work. And so those people who are stepping forward. 01:40:48.000 --> 01:40:57.000 Those those constituencies that are stepping forward are stepping forward kind of the same way that we are which is thankless. 01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:14.000 In many ways. Volunteer. And also taking on a huge and important responsibility. And I, I appreciate their willingness to do that and therefore I want to honor that I think as a body. 01:41:14.000 --> 01:41:25.000 And that means honoring that that role that voice and choice to work out from their various perspectives. 01:41:25.000 --> 01:41:30.000 Who will be the search for? Cause we heard from the 900 or so responses some very strong. Thoughts about and today as well. 01:41:30.000 --> 01:41:49.000 Very strong thoughts about, should the emphasis be of that firm? We as as a group, as a committee of the whole and I like how in the notes now we're a cow. 01:41:49.000 --> 01:41:57.000 So we have a pig and now we have a cow. But as a cow. There is no way that we can review. 01:41:57.000 --> 01:42:05.000 Nor should we. what the procurement process and, and the, the vetting. 01:42:05.000 --> 01:42:17.000 Well, we, we do have the responsibility of the final approval. Because that is the the responsibility given to us by the Constitution and the And the government, but but with the advice. 01:42:17.000 --> 01:42:37.000 And the. Recommendation. I think that word is really, really important of of the committee. So I think what I'm saying is This is building trust and and I think whether we need the broader language or the more specific language. 01:42:37.000 --> 01:42:41.000 Recommendation about the search firm. Recommendation about the the attributes that we're looking for in the in this position. 01:42:41.000 --> 01:42:55.000 Recommendation about. The vetting process and the overview of the vetting process and recommendation of the candidates. 01:42:55.000 --> 01:43:05.000 I, whether we do that specifically or, you know, as a general statement, I'm not sure. 01:43:05.000 --> 01:43:11.000 Which is necessary, but I, I do think that. That's where we are. And this. 01:43:11.000 --> 01:43:22.000 And the, to the trust component of it. I've gotten some, feedback that We take a So, give us 10 min. 01:43:22.000 --> 01:43:52.000 Built and then. We'll reconvene. 01:56:46.000 --> 01:57:02.000 Calls me back to order. Okay. 01:57:02.000 --> 01:57:08.000 All right, we're back in session. Regents, I know, we're talking talking about what is next in line, but I wanna. 01:57:08.000 --> 01:57:19.000 Set on something first. Everything I've heard from Regents is that The attention was always. To have a legitimate advisory group that is. 01:57:19.000 --> 01:57:26.000 You know, a meaningful part of the process. And we're talking today, I think we've gone to the point where we're looking, what it's not about whether it's legitimate or not. 01:57:26.000 --> 01:57:34.000 It's No, how do we do that? How do and how do we not both indicate that to our community and how do we operationalize it? 01:57:34.000 --> 01:57:52.000 What I wanna suggest and it's why we put this on our agenda. Is we moved to executive session because some of the dynamics about what we would have them do and what the operationalized that impact things like sunshine law and document sharing so If we could go into exact session, consult with our attorney, we could get some guidance on. 01:57:52.000 --> 01:58:02.000 You know, what can we articulate and how and and what needs to be avoided. If we agree, can I get a motion to go into executive session? 01:58:02.000 --> 01:58:17.000 I. All those in favor of going to executive session say aye. Any opposed? My apologies to the audience that we didn't think of this earlier and you had to take break and Come back and hear that. 01:58:17.000 --> 01:58:47.000 So. We will convene. Soon as we're done delivering our consulting with our attorney. 03:38:51.000 --> 03:38:59.000 And can you hear us? 03:38:59.000 --> 03:39:09.000 Do you know? Oh, directly direct still, yeah. 03:39:09.000 --> 03:39:14.000 I'm just kinda trying to get Wayne, make sure Wayne's online. 03:39:14.000 --> 03:39:18.000 And then we'll get started. 03:39:18.000 --> 03:39:22.000 Let the, the, glare, the glamorous life of a. My apologies for not having lunch. 03:39:22.000 --> 03:39:34.000 I that's an unacceptable oversight. 03:39:34.000 --> 03:39:37.000 We pass on that way. Thank you. 03:39:37.000 --> 03:39:49.000 Oh, I'll take, Cool. Alright, Wayne, can you hear us, Wayne? 03:39:49.000 --> 03:39:51.000 Yes, I can. 03:39:51.000 --> 03:40:00.000 Alright, okay, we're back in session. I wanna, you know, I wanna thank Regents. 03:40:00.000 --> 03:40:08.000 This is an extra meeting we added. Some of the most busiest folks around and so appreciate the service. 03:40:08.000 --> 03:40:15.000 And we're gonna go back to the conversation we're having. Before I do, I wanna just reiterate, we went into exact session. 03:40:15.000 --> 03:40:25.000 To talk to our. Our council. But all the ramifications of the way we're trying to approach this process in regards to advisory group. 03:40:25.000 --> 03:40:35.000 And the task we assigned to an advisory group have different legal components to them. So, Thank you for most patience as we did that. 03:40:35.000 --> 03:40:45.000 Consultation. What's clear is that all regions have a strong intention. For the advisory group to be a meaningful. 03:40:45.000 --> 03:40:48.000 Significant part of the process. We're not all in agreement from the earlier conversation. We're not all in agreement about how to do that. 03:40:48.000 --> 03:41:02.000 So we're gonna go back to that conversation. Again, on the screen. You can see that the what we have is. 03:41:02.000 --> 03:41:13.000 Bye'll provide advice and recommendations to the committee of the whole as requested. The only other specific task was to be part of the listening sessions. 03:41:13.000 --> 03:41:29.000 Regents. Further discussion? 03:41:29.000 --> 03:41:40.000 Okay. I, I wanna. Just reiterate how much I appreciate the, the testimony that we've received and that. 03:41:40.000 --> 03:41:47.000 That concern about voice and choice, is, where we're. We're trying to balance, right? 03:41:47.000 --> 03:41:58.000 And then it was also very helpful to think about. Where issues of having a robust. Search also means that we have to honor confidentiality and the the needs of the applicants. 03:41:58.000 --> 03:42:15.000 And so China balanced that and so this is really helpful. I think where I'm lending right now and where would like to see us go is to. 03:42:15.000 --> 03:42:24.000 Have that road best advisory. Group. 03:42:24.000 --> 03:42:40.000 Get started, but then also give it some more time to actually. Figure out who. And what they will do, but to give some of that decision-making. 03:42:40.000 --> 03:43:06.000 To the representatives on the advisory group to help us. Collaboratively work that through. So I think that's where we, what I heard in the discussion and what I'd like to see. 03:43:06.000 --> 03:43:10.000 So I will pine again. 03:43:10.000 --> 03:43:23.000 That the language as request, I think someone else also mentioned this seems to have triggered a reaction that the interpretation of that is 03:43:23.000 --> 03:43:32.000 We don't need your perspective unless we ask for it. I don't think that's the intention of the region. 03:43:32.000 --> 03:43:38.000 One of the things I'm wondering, even if we're going to Lay out the actual tasks and. 03:43:38.000 --> 03:43:46.000 Yeah, that we, that we include this group. Is substantive by the actual stuff we do with them and how we engage. 03:43:46.000 --> 03:43:58.000 And like us to find ways to try to voice significance now, right? There's never probably the way perhaps the phrase as requested has been misunderstood. 03:43:58.000 --> 03:44:06.000 What we're talking about, at least that I believe this is, is that a task and that tasks will be assigned. 03:44:06.000 --> 03:44:15.000 To the advisory group. And that's the request. The request is that the advisory group, take up the burden of the tasks. 03:44:15.000 --> 03:44:24.000 Is that make? I think that is an additional point. That's not the point I heard. 03:44:24.000 --> 03:44:34.000 What I heard is that's still as only when you need us. No, no, I understand that there were people who said that, but that's not what we meant. 03:44:34.000 --> 03:44:42.000 Only when you need it. So what we mean is as requested that there's gonna be specific specific task specific requests. 03:44:42.000 --> 03:44:48.000 Made by the VOR. But don't we still determine those tasks? Oh yeah, we have. 03:44:48.000 --> 03:44:55.000 We have to have the I mean, the advisory group can't meet in a vacuum. 03:44:55.000 --> 03:45:08.000 We're picking the president. And what's associated with picking the present. We don't wanna, them to anybody to not understand what it is that we were looking for. 03:45:08.000 --> 03:45:24.000 You, And if I can kind of clarify the thinking or my interpretation of the the thinking and discussion that we. 03:45:24.000 --> 03:45:33.000 Need to have it and have had. Yes, step one. That we. 03:45:33.000 --> 03:45:40.000 Reach out. Form. Hey group. 03:45:40.000 --> 03:45:56.000 Which would then discuss the makeup. Of the advisory. Group. Once they have done that made that recommendation that that we would. 03:45:56.000 --> 03:46:07.000 Then approve. The recommendation as to. How the advisory group would be organized, what it be made up of. 03:46:07.000 --> 03:46:16.000 And then the next step would be the advisory group would then. I have to. After we approve it, come back. 03:46:16.000 --> 03:46:28.000 And say, okay, this is going to be. The recommendation on how the advisory. Who would can be, make up the advisory group? 03:46:28.000 --> 03:46:38.000 And once that comes back for approval by the board. Then the advisory group would start its work. And come up with. 03:46:38.000 --> 03:46:47.000 All of the tasks. That would be Done by the advisory group. But that this first step assisted. 03:46:47.000 --> 03:47:04.000 So you are you suggesting that the advisory group could propose the functions that they would like to do? That's that's why I'm hearing what you're saying. 03:47:04.000 --> 03:47:10.000 One of the difficulties right now is that 03:47:10.000 --> 03:47:21.000 We don't, we don't know specifically. All that we can break off. To the advisory group to be able to enumerate that here. 03:47:21.000 --> 03:47:33.000 And it is constrained by legal considerations. But what I want to say is that to the extent that and I don't know that we're going to be able to enumerate everything today. 03:47:33.000 --> 03:47:45.000 To the extent that we can't do that. I want everyone to know that as a board what chair said is correct that we are committed to making sure there's meaningful participation here. 03:47:45.000 --> 03:47:52.000 And I also want to say there's some very strong advocates amongst the regions for that participation. So. 03:47:52.000 --> 03:48:07.000 I feel confident. That along the way when we do figure out each elements and how this is going to be broken down. 03:48:07.000 --> 03:48:17.000 That there is gonna be strong voices as a board, but also there are strong advocates. Where to say that we absolutely have to have. 03:48:17.000 --> 03:48:25.000 Meaningful participation. So I don't want that if we don't come out with an enumerated list. 03:48:25.000 --> 03:48:35.000 To think that that again is some indication that we're. Trying to take things away. But just sitting right here now, I don't. 03:48:35.000 --> 03:48:48.000 See that we can enumerate that unless any10, see is a way to do that, then, then please, you know, put that on the table. 03:48:48.000 --> 03:48:56.000 So I would concur that it'd be very challenging, particularly understanding that the legal considerations to enumerate all the. 03:48:56.000 --> 03:49:05.000 The functions. So to press this, like, so how do we give our community more confidence on the intention. 03:49:05.000 --> 03:49:13.000 I gotta propose this language at a starter. So instead of as request, they would say, committee. 03:49:13.000 --> 03:49:19.000 Provided advice and guidance or recommendations commit a whole. 03:49:19.000 --> 03:49:46.000 Okay. To help ensure that the perspectives, the key stakeholders, and the broader community are included throughout the selection process. 03:49:46.000 --> 03:50:02.000 How that's done, the legal. You know, nuance of what assignments to get that can all be worked out, but it's a much stronger statement of the intention of the advisory committee and how to view them. 03:50:02.000 --> 03:50:16.000 Vision. Kind of say back what I just heard so that I understand. When I'm, what I'm hearing is, A proposal about kind of the call. 03:50:16.000 --> 03:50:24.000 For the advisory, the call to action for the budget group. Which is a much more robust statement than it currently is. 03:50:24.000 --> 03:50:32.000 And then as I'm understanding it, the next step will be. For us to discuss. Who's in the advisory group? 03:50:32.000 --> 03:50:42.000 Okay. So kind of just. Taking little bites of this, right? 03:50:42.000 --> 03:50:52.000 So. Okay, thank you. That helps me. And so then are you looking for a motion for that language right now? 03:50:52.000 --> 03:50:59.000 Sure. We're not voting on. I would open it up and then we can discuss and both up or down. 03:50:59.000 --> 03:51:04.000 Or just discuss first, that's fine. That's how we typically have done things. 03:51:04.000 --> 03:51:15.000 Regent Evercrombie, I thought, and understand, but, We simply remove the word help and say go directly to assure that the key. 03:51:15.000 --> 03:51:29.000 Yeah, stakeholder just for you. Even more, That was essential. That 03:51:29.000 --> 03:51:36.000 I'm gonna get sassy remarks about my English again. Yeah. Are you changing? Are sure to ensure? 03:51:36.000 --> 03:51:44.000 Is that right? Our English professors. Yes, yes. That's the proposal. 03:51:44.000 --> 03:51:52.000 I'm gonna pretend I said that in the first place. Other thoughts about that language change? 03:51:52.000 --> 03:52:17.000 I would also say I think the other recommendations in the pig about the public like who should be on it and the qualifications to me that's why you guys recommended those qualifications because they will help us on our voice, but other thoughts about this. 03:52:17.000 --> 03:52:23.000 Are you ready for a motion? Showing it up. 03:52:23.000 --> 03:52:34.000 Region listen. The second. Region 2 s. Any further discussion on that language change? 03:52:34.000 --> 03:52:42.000 Seeing none all those in favor signal by saying aye Alright, any opposed? 03:52:42.000 --> 03:52:58.000 Alright. So I'll based on other conversation we've had. Are there any other proposed? Additions to that section of the report, the talk about the functions of the advisory group at this time. 03:52:58.000 --> 03:53:08.000 I reiterate that what we understand is P have to be assigned. Those tasks have to be timing of those, the legal components have to be vetted so This is not the end of it. 03:53:08.000 --> 03:53:18.000 We'll have to continue. The conversation. Are we ready to move on to who's going to be on this advisory group? 03:53:18.000 --> 03:53:26.000 Seeing no objections. Cool. One task done today. Thanks, to the work of our pay one. 03:53:26.000 --> 03:53:31.000 We have a starting list and. The way I interpret the wording, but I'll differ to you vice chair leap. 03:53:31.000 --> 03:53:41.000 This wasn't a recommendation, it was kinda open, right? Could include these, yeah. So this is a starting point, but we really have a kind of a blank slate. 03:53:41.000 --> 03:53:52.000 On who to include. You can. Can I start by including those 4 governing board? Councils sorry about terminology. 03:53:52.000 --> 03:54:06.000 Yeah, I recognize formally that have a existing relationship. And then just keep building or we could just kinda craft things as they come up. 03:54:06.000 --> 03:54:15.000 So. Let's just take that one individually for now because it says it's a substantive change. 03:54:15.000 --> 03:54:25.000 So the proposal is to add Is identified faculty staff and students as the 3 of the 4 codify groups and to add Buko as the fourth codified group. 03:54:25.000 --> 03:54:38.000 So membership would include the 4 entities that we currently reference. That's the proposal discussion. And, and I'll come to the center of the room. 03:54:38.000 --> 03:54:47.000 So it's just discussion on this. I'll just listen to just this one for now, Anyone else on this region, Malay? 03:54:47.000 --> 03:54:55.000 Yeah, so these 4 groups are faculty Senate staffs in it student ASUA. I mean, student caucus. 03:54:55.000 --> 03:55:05.000 Are, are we like going detailed in here? If I could get some help from staff, the way it's the way it's codified is, is as original why is Stating it, yes. 03:55:05.000 --> 03:55:13.000 Yes. So what we'll do is we'll confirm the actual language and but yeah, but we'll use the language. 03:55:13.000 --> 03:55:35.000 Yeah. I think that's a good. So we're gonna change this. To list the 4 groups that 4 formalized groups and I'm sorry I'm at a loss for the specific, Any other discussion? 03:55:35.000 --> 03:55:50.000 And I guess, so that, the language would be that these would be the beginnings of it and and it would be these forest established codified groups and they would each in their own bodies select. 03:55:50.000 --> 03:56:04.000 Who will sit on the my current proposal is that we handle the how do the seats get filled. Next, but I'm open if we want to talk about that now. 03:56:04.000 --> 03:56:13.000 I, my thought is that we should not be selecting. Who are the representatives of each of these groups and that they as organized and elected bodies should do that selection. 03:56:13.000 --> 03:56:29.000 Is that a would you consider that part of your proposal? Yeah. So the proposal is that those 4 groups are part of the advisory group and that they choose their own representatives. 03:56:29.000 --> 03:56:37.000 I'm going to, you, everybody first, back to you. Just because of, my reason. 03:56:37.000 --> 03:56:47.000 Joining the group. These 4 groups are is that is in my understanding they have official recognition of some. 03:56:47.000 --> 03:57:04.000 Degrees, I mean, cause there's other groups. Correct. Obviously that we recognize. so how, does, how does the 4 groups again for public purposes for the communication of the greater public out of these 4 groups. 03:57:04.000 --> 03:57:20.000 Distinguish themselves in terms of their officialness as opposed to other groups that are associated with the university. I'm not sure who's best to other groups that are associated with the university. 03:57:20.000 --> 03:57:24.000 That changes the nature of the relationship. In other words, there's a region policy that distinguishes these 4 groups. 03:57:24.000 --> 03:57:33.000 Okay, that's fine. As I said, it distinguishes the groups by specific entities too, right? 03:57:33.000 --> 03:57:46.000 Not just generically. So, Any other discussion about the So we are just going forward with these 4 groups. 03:57:46.000 --> 03:57:47.000 Is now the time that we would be talking about if we're gonna put regions on it or not or put other stakeholders on it or not or put other stakeholders. 03:57:47.000 --> 03:57:57.000 I'm talking about if we're gonna put regions on it or not or put other stakeholders on. 03:57:57.000 --> 03:58:07.000 If we agree to this one, There's other discussion about the proposal. It's been, Move the second. 03:58:07.000 --> 03:58:16.000 It has not. That's that's that your motion, Okay, is there a second? Any further discussion. 03:58:16.000 --> 03:58:26.000 Is it understood that this is for starters? Yes. Okay, see now for the discussion all those in favor by saying I. 03:58:26.000 --> 03:58:35.000 Any opposed? Motion carried so we now have 4 official members of the advisory group. 03:58:35.000 --> 03:58:50.000 Going to the recommendation. The other categories were administrators alumni. Members of the broader community between 4 and 6. 03:58:50.000 --> 03:58:56.000 Bye, Shelley. I just wanted to throw out. I mean, this is gonna come out to more than 6, but. 03:58:56.000 --> 03:59:10.000 Alumni association . H. Foundation and save from the business community. Either a wide business round table or the Chamber of Commerce of Y. 03:59:10.000 --> 03:59:20.000 I could check that. Those entities that Is it similar that we would ask them to send us a rep from their groups? 03:59:20.000 --> 03:59:21.000 Yeah. 03:59:21.000 --> 03:59:26.000 Is that so that can I send that a motion? Don't. Discuss. 03:59:26.000 --> 03:59:30.000 Sure. Okay, sure. 03:59:30.000 --> 03:59:35.000 And then I'll go to, the, the, the, of the further away. Thank you. 03:59:35.000 --> 03:59:52.000 Thank you. Thank you. How, Regent, I would like to add or at least suggest another group that would be our Regardless. 03:59:52.000 --> 03:59:57.000 And I know we can all see it. We could probably share a talk with you if we need to or make it bigger. 03:59:57.000 --> 04:00:01.000 So right now we have the alumni, if we need to or make it bigger. So right now we have the US Alumni Association, the HH Foundation. 04:00:01.000 --> 04:00:06.000 The way business roundtable chamber of commerce. 04:00:06.000 --> 04:00:13.000 And, the region Meritis group. Okay, I'm gonna go here and then there. 04:00:13.000 --> 04:00:17.000 Okay. 04:00:17.000 --> 04:00:31.000 During because I'm worried that This gets us in a big circle, right? And I'm wondering if it would be helpful to make the next proposal. 04:00:31.000 --> 04:00:43.000 That there be in addition to the 4. 2 regions in this group already. Let's before our next meeting get together. 04:00:43.000 --> 04:00:55.000 Discuss. What other community members should be in the group. And come back to the cow. So the 4 that we've already determined. 04:00:55.000 --> 04:00:56.000 We meet with who? 2 regions. 2 regions. And then they would bring us a recommended list. 04:00:56.000 --> 04:01:14.000 So the 6 people meet. Immediately. I don't know if that's possible. I don't know that each organization already has somebody in mind, but. 04:01:14.000 --> 04:01:23.000 And come back to us with a proposal about the constitution of the advisory committee. 04:01:23.000 --> 04:01:37.000 So we have, we, we're bringing a list of bodies. That could choose representatives. Suggestion here is we could actually do a process where recommendations are made between meetings and come to us. 04:01:37.000 --> 04:01:44.000 That's on a table too. Okay, that check, Regina, is your hand up? 04:01:44.000 --> 04:01:48.000 My apologies, I forgot to take it down. 04:01:48.000 --> 04:01:52.000 Again, no worries. Regent, Hawaii. 04:01:52.000 --> 04:01:55.000 So we still have to like. We voted on the first 4, but we would still have to vote on these other groups. 04:01:55.000 --> 04:02:10.000 Okay. I would just like to add, athletics from both Halo and, or I don't know. 04:02:10.000 --> 04:02:21.000 But athletics having a Rep. Rebecca Okay. So I agree with Regent Totki. 04:02:21.000 --> 04:02:28.000 This is gonna just keep going because I could say right now I want to make sure there's neighbor island representation. 04:02:28.000 --> 04:02:32.000 Make sure there's gender diversity. I mean, we could just really keep going with organizations. 04:02:32.000 --> 04:02:42.000 I do like, in theory, the idea of tasking. The the 4 groups plus the 2 regions to meet immediately. 04:02:42.000 --> 04:02:50.000 And then come up with some recommendations. But I want to ask because we did and out of the pig, we talked about a number. 04:02:50.000 --> 04:03:06.000 Was 4 to 6 out of the pig and there was a rationale for that. And so if we as a company of the whole board want to Give the 6 we're gonna meet if we go that route. 04:03:06.000 --> 04:03:13.000 Some parameters. I think now would be the time instead of having them meet, come back and say we want 20. 04:03:13.000 --> 04:03:23.000 Do we, so we can still discuss what's on our minds collectively and then. If, if we agree with Regent Tuki's idea, they'd have they'd already have a starting. 04:03:23.000 --> 04:03:34.000 Like some parameters. I just wanna put that out there because I like that idea, but I wanna see if we want parameters. 04:03:34.000 --> 04:03:43.000 I'm gonna go back to Regent Hennings. Oh, originally, Remember, and this isn't a plebiscite. 04:03:43.000 --> 04:03:53.000 Or a referendum. And for example. 2 or 3 business groups have already been named, but I didn't hear anything about labor. 04:03:53.000 --> 04:04:11.000 I didn't hear anything about unions. And if we get into that, are we talking about separate when we're talking about specific, groups representing, I didn't see anybody bring up Operation Manong. 04:04:11.000 --> 04:04:28.000 I mean, we've got certain groups already represented among the student body. There's 2 or 3 other groups in the student body that represent a significant portion, what about, All the Chamber of Commerce. 04:04:28.000 --> 04:04:31.000 Yeah, that's fine, but there's a lot of chambers of commerce out there. 04:04:31.000 --> 04:04:41.000 And I did nobody brought up OHa. So we gotta be. I think we need to take a deep breath here at this stage. 04:04:41.000 --> 04:04:50.000 And you want to talk about politics? You want to talk about lobbying? You want to talk about influencing from the outside. 04:04:50.000 --> 04:05:04.000 Listen this this Board of Regents is a paragon of virtue. With respect to being influenced compared to what's going to start the second This comes out of us that who's going to be on it? Who isn't? Now we've made a good start. 04:05:04.000 --> 04:05:14.000 These are official bodies. But I think we ought to think very, very carefully about. Exactly what we want to have here in the advisory. 04:05:14.000 --> 04:05:27.000 And recommending group. Oh, when it's finally established in terms of membership. the way I was looking at it. 04:05:27.000 --> 04:05:44.000 Trying to think. I was trying to think of names. Less in terms of what they represented because There's ethnicity, there's There's neighbor islandness, there's there's experience of various kinds so on and so forth. 04:05:44.000 --> 04:05:54.000 I I was thinking more of names of people representative of of the kind of people who I know are going to be thoughtful. 04:05:54.000 --> 04:06:02.000 Are going to be, have an eclectic. The view etc. 04:06:02.000 --> 04:06:06.000 In other words, I'm not quite sure that group think. Is necessarily what we need to have. 04:06:06.000 --> 04:06:18.000 And I'm talking about the community side now. Common. If we get into groups per se, we're gonna get up to 35 or 40 or 50. 04:06:18.000 --> 04:06:27.000 50, reasonable. Contenders. So I wish I had a more definitive answer as to how to deal with it. 04:06:27.000 --> 04:06:37.000 But, I'm thinking more about. Individual names coming. Forth that have a kind of background and experience and I that I trust. 04:06:37.000 --> 04:06:44.000 I said, other reason why after I check on this question and I'm not sure if it's like Shirley or Shocket. 04:06:44.000 --> 04:06:54.000 So I think I misread that report section about the 4 to 6 members. I thought it was faculty staffs to the administrator alumni. 04:06:54.000 --> 04:07:01.000 And then 4 to 6 community members. But the recommendation was that of all those bullets. Finding 4 to 6 people would kind of give us that broad perspective. 04:07:01.000 --> 04:07:12.000 That was the. Okay, so that's why you're saying. Well, how much members are we talking about adding to the advisory group? 04:07:12.000 --> 04:07:16.000 Yeah, and we just put 4. 04:07:16.000 --> 04:07:34.000 So, Yeah, because it's so unclear, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I was thinking the 4 to 6 too that we picked 4 to 6 individuals and they're not necessarily going, you know, what we want to bring, we're gonna bring Catholics and Mormons in? 04:07:34.000 --> 04:07:41.000 I mean, we got to be careful about a group of representatives of groups for the 4 to 6 members. 04:07:41.000 --> 04:07:55.000 Rather than 4 to 6 members whose Who's perspective. In terms of They're love for and their desire to be helpful. 04:07:55.000 --> 04:08:08.000 To the university in advancing its cause. Through its new president is recognized. For example, of a name, if she was still alive, pick Gladys Brent. 04:08:08.000 --> 04:08:12.000 For one thing. I think. Establish yourself in or if he was still alive. It was a professor of religion. 04:08:12.000 --> 04:08:23.000 At university, I'm picking people of religion at university. I'm picking people deliberately that that that wouldn't but that's what I'm talking about. 04:08:23.000 --> 04:08:32.000 There are individuals recognized throughout our community regardless of their background regardless of their their affiliations who who are respected in terms of their commitment to why I think that's who ought to be in the 4 to 6. 04:08:32.000 --> 04:08:41.000 It's clear it's a big decision. It's a big decision. I had to add up first. And the good reason was the next. 04:08:41.000 --> 04:08:47.000 I want to make sure I'm mapping all the stuff they're talking about. Number one, there's this, do we pick? 04:08:47.000 --> 04:08:59.000 We have 4 already chosen codified. To add to that, battling between groups. That would say members versus individual members is something that's on the table. 04:08:59.000 --> 04:09:19.000 The number of folks in advisory groups another issue on the table first top up. All the correct things, Regent Muy and then Regent, wanted to understand what you are saying, Raja, Abercrombie, of You're you're oh still okay with the 4 codified governance groups, but you're just talking about the additional That would be added. 04:09:19.000 --> 04:09:27.000 Okay. I, I don't know if now is the time to do that, but would like to talk about Laura. 04:09:27.000 --> 04:09:40.000 Proposal and if we go that route is it possible to say this is the max amount of people that we would want you to a point which is the 4 to 6 is one. Okay. 04:09:40.000 --> 04:09:51.000 So then we can make a cap on how many additional people from these groups that we've recommended or suggested to the advisory council from these groups that we've recommended or suggested to the advisory council that you can pick from these groups that we've recommended or suggested to the advisory council that you can pick from and one from each. 04:09:51.000 --> 04:09:58.000 However, you know, and I don't know if it would be a list, but that's what I'm understanding, right? 04:09:58.000 --> 04:10:04.000 I think it's 2 separate things that we could if we went with the. We could. 04:10:04.000 --> 04:10:21.000 Ask them to bring us back recommendations and we could we could give them. A number parameter and then they can put whatever they want in there or we could say these are the folks that we were looking for representation from these sectors or whatever. 04:10:21.000 --> 04:10:30.000 No, it's all to send him clarified that. This is once. We identified the for codified. 04:10:30.000 --> 04:10:40.000 And the 2 regions. That's a group that would then come back. Was the recommendation on? The others that we can set a limit to. 04:10:40.000 --> 04:10:48.000 Right, it's really what you're saying, right? I think that's polishing Regent Tochiki's proposal. 04:10:48.000 --> 04:10:53.000 Right. 04:10:53.000 --> 04:11:02.000 Other discussion about any of these topics, the proposed way to approach it. Number of regions, Just a little bit. 04:11:02.000 --> 04:11:08.000 Microsoft. 04:11:08.000 --> 04:11:14.000 And I can't imagine that we're going to get through without it turning into. 2 or 3 hot washes. 04:11:14.000 --> 04:11:21.000 With additional names thrown in there is inevitably going to be people that we will So like this, of course. 04:11:21.000 --> 04:11:31.000 I mean, the Department of Education has more of an investment in the university than most others. And we don't feel very foolish if we didn't. 04:11:31.000 --> 04:11:37.000 Think about them as well. Doesn't mean we have to put them in. Doesn't mean we need an extensive list. 04:11:37.000 --> 04:11:47.000 To consider. So when we're charging this small group, 4 plus 2. With our expectations. 04:11:47.000 --> 04:11:54.000 Is it not reasonable to say we're not anticipating that we get This all resolved in one. 04:11:54.000 --> 04:11:58.000 Or even to follow on meetings. 04:11:58.000 --> 04:12:05.000 I think that's a certainly likely that we don't come to consensus. I don't know, I, Wilson, I think is hand is not. 04:12:05.000 --> 04:12:12.000 That region Wilson. 04:12:12.000 --> 04:12:23.000 Thank you, Chair. So, to may understand correctly. We have this group of 4, 2 regions. 04:12:23.000 --> 04:12:33.000 And we're gonna ask them to. Come up with additional names. To make up this advisory group. 04:12:33.000 --> 04:12:39.000 Did we come up with a number total? Cause that's already 6. 04:12:39.000 --> 04:12:51.000 Or is that only the 4 and the 2 regions don't count? So. I'm just a little bit confused on the total number. 04:12:51.000 --> 04:13:09.000 I'll do, I think the recommendation was this is. The 4 that are already established for the advisory group and 2 regions would work with them to to determine the other members not the regions wouldn't be continued on the advisory group. 04:13:09.000 --> 04:13:10.000 And who would? 04:13:10.000 --> 04:13:13.000 They just help with the process of coming up with a recommendation. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. 04:13:13.000 --> 04:13:17.000 Who would decide the total numbers? 04:13:17.000 --> 04:13:27.000 That's what we're talking about. That's one of the proposals. We're talking, brought up was the current recommendation from the pig one was between 4 and 6 total members. 04:13:27.000 --> 04:13:32.000 So we're talking now one of one of the topics in front of us is do we want to put a cap? 04:13:32.000 --> 04:13:38.000 If we're going whether we put a whether we defer it to this group of 4 plus 2 regions or not. 04:13:38.000 --> 04:13:46.000 Do we wanna establish a cap number, which right now is 6. Yeah, So I just wanna. Put this on the table. 04:13:46.000 --> 04:13:56.000 One of the reasons This is along the lines of what, Governor Abbott probably was talking about regarding. 04:13:56.000 --> 04:14:04.000 The people who would be chosen. When we when we talked in the pig, We did start down this route. 04:14:04.000 --> 04:14:11.000 We had so many groups exactly what we're talking about here. And it was a little bit like Let's cap it. 04:14:11.000 --> 04:14:20.000 Because we'll know it when we see it. And so I just throw it out there. We're talking about a process. 04:14:20.000 --> 04:14:31.000 To then have another process or have another group and then we have to decide again. I wonder if we can do the 2 regions, the 4 groups. 04:14:31.000 --> 04:14:43.000 And those are already the advisory. Members. And then we have 2 maybe 2 community members or however many we want to say 2 3. 04:14:43.000 --> 04:14:53.000 And do we wanna pick those? That was the initial intention of the pig. That we would put forward names and you sort of know it when you see it. 04:14:53.000 --> 04:15:02.000 Based on their qualifications. I'm just throwing that. Out there. So we have representation from the 4 that they choose. 04:15:02.000 --> 04:15:18.000 That are already going to be on the advisory group. So we don't have a second step. Of their recommendation and then We come back what was intended with with the P one report was that we came with names. 04:15:18.000 --> 04:15:30.000 And we picked. The community members or Initially it was all everyone but now if we're narrowing it down that we're picking for the community versus. 04:15:30.000 --> 04:15:41.000 These 4 picking for the we would consider work whether an administrator and alumni get a seat of the bus left, right, that we would choose. 04:15:41.000 --> 04:15:48.000 Yes. Amongst the non 04:15:48.000 --> 04:15:58.000 Here's the next step. So. What should the make up be? How many members that's one thing and then well how did they get chosen? 04:15:58.000 --> 04:16:04.000 Is another and I get that there it's related. Regent, why? To upon on alumni. 04:16:04.000 --> 04:16:24.000 I feel like a lot of community members are already alumni. Doesn't mean that they will be, but even faculty, a lot of them are alumni, so I don't know if there necessarily needs to be a select person that functions as a alumni, whereas if there is someone who already is alumni that functions as something else. 04:16:24.000 --> 04:16:33.000 I don't know if that could kind of eliminate an extra person. Okay. Forgive me, Abigail, but. 04:16:33.000 --> 04:16:42.000 I couldn't agree more, but I think you're making the point or you're strengthening the point I made before. 04:16:42.000 --> 04:16:51.000 I think we should eliminate this idea of groups. And we should get to individual names because you're going to see a combination of factors and various individuals. 04:16:51.000 --> 04:17:01.000 And I think the number, should be 12. The reason I picked that, it's arbitrary, but it's not capricious. 04:17:01.000 --> 04:17:09.000 But that's what a jury is. And a jury, by the way, I think I've got my, my jurisprudence history right here. 04:17:09.000 --> 04:17:17.000 You know, there's enough lawyers here to tell me. I think the reason they picked 12 and not an odd number is, is they wanted consensus. 04:17:17.000 --> 04:17:35.000 They wanted the group to have to decide they didn't want 7 and 6. Or 6 and 5 like we've got 11 you can you know 6 people can you know slaughter the other 5 kind of it's one of the problems with the pig right that 5 people were in and then 6 were out So I would think to 12 and I think we should go. 04:17:35.000 --> 04:17:43.000 To individual, I think the, the other folks on the advisory committee should be picked by the. 04:17:43.000 --> 04:17:50.000 Regents. Because I think if you go to the other group, they're going to, they're going to have to take into account all. 04:17:50.000 --> 04:17:51.000 All these different groups and lobbying and all the rest of it. I think we should come up with some names. 04:17:51.000 --> 04:17:59.000 We're pretty good at that. Let's. Have some consensus, my only problem with that. 04:17:59.000 --> 04:18:07.000 Having said so, as I need to ask about where the sunshine law comes in. Everybody that I talk to. 04:18:07.000 --> 04:18:26.000 I would they consider being on advisory committee understood that they might not be that's the first thing that they might not get picked And not because people don't like them or they're bad persons or anything, but that everybody's got various criterion and everybody understood that they might not get picked. 04:18:26.000 --> 04:18:33.000 No. Maybe that some people don't want to go through that and I'm not quite sure where the sunshine all comes in on that. 04:18:33.000 --> 04:18:40.000 It's something that I would like to. Yeah, I think understanding is if we choose the. Advisory group members. 04:18:40.000 --> 04:18:49.000 Then the names we consider will be public. Then if that's the case, I don't think that might cause some difficulties. 04:18:49.000 --> 04:19:08.000 So if the if we're gonna send this to the, So under the present circumstances, the group, the codified group, I guess that's what we're talking, that's the phrase to use. 04:19:08.000 --> 04:19:17.000 I think they just ought to take up names then. And, and forget about the groups as such. 04:19:17.000 --> 04:19:33.000 And that people submit names and of respected and people who they feel would do a good job in trying to advise and consent. I'm gonna go, just me to check real quick. 04:19:33.000 --> 04:19:34.000 That's Toshi, sorry. Okay. 04:19:34.000 --> 04:19:47.000 We're gonna go, just me to check real quick. Okay. I'm gonna go to the regions, but I wanna say I think my sense and you can agree disagree. 04:19:47.000 --> 04:19:55.000 Is one of the things we should settle first is the number of members on the advisory group because that all. 04:19:55.000 --> 04:20:06.000 Informs other decisions going back to region, okay, talking a suggestion and we have another number proposed. And the report has one but I'll just put that on the table. 04:20:06.000 --> 04:20:14.000 I don't have a preference. 12 sounds good. I don't really have a for a number other than not making it too big, but. 04:20:14.000 --> 04:20:31.000 I think that my issue about us appointing or choosing names other than the confidentiality issue is that when we had the selection committee Hicked for athletics, there was a lot of issues about who was then selected. 04:20:31.000 --> 04:20:32.000 To be on that and some people, you know, wanted to be honest that they weren't on it. 04:20:32.000 --> 04:20:50.000 And then we added people and or we didn't it but it added people and and that sort of thing so I would actually prefer that the advisory group pick who else they want to put on the committee because they're gonna be the ones that are working with them. 04:20:50.000 --> 04:20:57.000 They're gonna be the ones that are on this advisory committee together and if we give a limitation to, hey, you can't have more than this. 04:20:57.000 --> 04:20:58.000 Then they're effectively able to use their voice to say who else they want their expertise from to be honest. 04:20:58.000 --> 04:21:10.000 Advisory Committee. And I think that that's in my opinion. And we don't have to agree is a way that. 04:21:10.000 --> 04:21:18.000 They have more meaningful input. Then us selecting who else should be on it. And just to confirm the recommendation. 04:21:18.000 --> 04:21:28.000 Oh, just to confirm, we're asking for a recommendation which we would agree to. Right? We're not saying they would choose who's saying give us a proposal. 04:21:28.000 --> 04:21:29.000 That's my understand. Okay. Regent, I'd like to talk back around this way. 04:21:29.000 --> 04:21:42.000 And do you just want to say coming out of the pig, the list? Of the various groups. That was not meant to be one per each. 04:21:42.000 --> 04:21:52.000 These were like suggestions of the different groups. So, and The group grouping is hard and not ideal. 04:21:52.000 --> 04:21:57.000 Along the lines of what Regent Abercrombie was saying. So I just want to clarify that coming out of the pig. 04:21:57.000 --> 04:22:06.000 It's not one per, that wasn't the intention. Okay, for we could have chosen 2 per formally recognized group, but the motion was one. 04:22:06.000 --> 04:22:14.000 So there is a motion, right, on the table now or is there not? I don't think it was moving second. 04:22:14.000 --> 04:22:21.000 Okay, so. I'm going to move. That we. 04:22:21.000 --> 04:22:32.000 Ask the the beginnings of this advisory group made up of the 4 organizations were codified. 2 regions. 04:22:32.000 --> 04:22:45.000 To meet and discuss and decide on a recommendation 2. This call. Of, other, of their membership, not to exceed 12 people. 04:22:45.000 --> 04:22:56.000 Okay, let's do a second. I'll give the regional list in the second. For the discussion on that proposal. 04:22:56.000 --> 04:23:11.000 We have a not to discuss the personnel is about the 4 groups. For groups to have. A narrow focus. 04:23:11.000 --> 04:23:14.000 With respect to their, I'm not seeing individuals on it that are narrow minded or have a narrow focus themselves. 04:23:14.000 --> 04:23:29.000 But the groups are organized for certain purposes. And the certain purposes are. All involved with certain elements of the university. 04:23:29.000 --> 04:23:33.000 And they have certain focus. 04:23:33.000 --> 04:23:43.000 They have a certain focus in in in the university. Part of the reason. That we're looking to expand the numbers. 04:23:43.000 --> 04:23:53.000 Part of the reason that we're looking to expand the numbers. Is to get a broader. Representation of broader foundation. 04:23:53.000 --> 04:24:01.000 When I say broader, again, that's not a commentary on the, on the integrity or intelligence of the individuals that would come out of. 04:24:01.000 --> 04:24:18.000 The the initial selection. But rather in terms of experience in terms of outlook and etc. Background to fill out this group that would come up possibly to a dozen. 04:24:18.000 --> 04:24:26.000 So I'm I'm a little concerned. That it's very, very difficult when you. 04:24:26.000 --> 04:24:36.000 When you represent a specific group that has a specific purpose within the, in this instance, within the university. 04:24:36.000 --> 04:24:47.000 That they're necessarily best qualified. Even if they're oriented toward it, but best qualified then to pick the other. 04:24:47.000 --> 04:24:58.000 The other 8 people. No, that That might just be a theoretical. concern of mine. 04:24:58.000 --> 04:25:07.000 For a reason I'm saying that about and emphasizing individuals. I had some people in mind that were previous administrators. 04:25:07.000 --> 04:25:19.000 At the university who were retired. Now and have had very broad national and international experience in terms of academic administration and so on. 04:25:19.000 --> 04:25:31.000 That's a name. That I was thinking of. I, there's another a person in the I'm gonna say the Hawaiian community that I came up with that isn't necessarily a affiliated with. 04:25:31.000 --> 04:25:46.000 With particular groups or any of those. My point being that can we just talk a little bit longer about how we get the other 8 names if, we approve. 04:25:46.000 --> 04:25:55.000 Of the the proposition I'm for the proposition I'm gonna vote for it but I'm a little concerned. 04:25:55.000 --> 04:26:00.000 That that the 4 groups 04:26:00.000 --> 04:26:15.000 Despite best intentions. By definition, have a starting focus that isn't as necessarily broad in terms of who's likely to be recommended. 04:26:15.000 --> 04:26:25.000 Some of what we heard in the testimony, we may have one group say. We need 5 more of us. 04:26:25.000 --> 04:26:33.000 We need 5 more faculty. We need 10 more students. You know, but so we have parameters to say. 04:26:33.000 --> 04:26:39.000 Okay, the 4 represented. We're gonna have this number, but We're giving you parameters. 04:26:39.000 --> 04:26:50.000 We need. 3 community members. We'd like to, you know, I don't know, then we're kind of categorizing again, but if we don't do that and we give these the 4 narrow focused people. 04:26:50.000 --> 04:27:03.000 Sort of just go for it. We may get Bye faculty by students. I don't think this is necessarily that that would happen. Before we go, oh, I'm sorry. Those folks have their hands up now. 04:27:03.000 --> 04:27:12.000 So I want to go Regent Wilson and the region Okay. You know, I think the codified First of all, students, students are customers. 04:27:12.000 --> 04:27:19.000 They're a large group. I mean, it's in the institution. It's been a large group. 04:27:19.000 --> 04:27:26.000 Faculty. The largest providers, staff, launches. Where was all to get the job done other than what the faculty is responsible for? 04:27:26.000 --> 04:27:41.000 So, you know, I think it makes sense that we and You know, make sense that the codified groups and the core console because of where we are. 04:27:41.000 --> 04:27:54.000 But I think the we do that first. And then let the Uber 6 to 4. And in 2 regions. 04:27:54.000 --> 04:28:09.000 Spend time looking at an opportunity to do more research and find out of the people that we should recommend, why would we recommend and what value do they add? 04:28:09.000 --> 04:28:23.000 2 the institution. And I think that's what we need to do with with the others. But the 4 that are codified, our key constituents, the greatest part. 04:28:23.000 --> 04:28:28.000 Of the institution. Faculty students and the staff. 04:28:28.000 --> 04:28:29.000 And they're not they're alone just 2 regions is the motion is with 2 regions, right? 04:28:29.000 --> 04:28:40.000 So Is there your hand up? Reasonable way. I don't oppose giving more parameters. 04:28:40.000 --> 04:28:49.000 As long as it doesn't become then us classifying again, which is like circular. I, I think though. 04:28:49.000 --> 04:28:58.000 I disagree with you, Regent Abercrombie, because Everyone has their own interests. I mean, we all come from different backgrounds. 04:28:58.000 --> 04:29:04.000 I always advocate for athletics. That was part of my interview when they said, how are you not going to be biased to things? 04:29:04.000 --> 04:29:12.000 Like we all inherently are and that's why we have the 4 because they do represent something and that's what's important is that they do serve as a representation. 04:29:12.000 --> 04:29:26.000 So I think that us, even if we narrow it down to say we need to have 3 community members or give parameters, I think that's okay because they do represent a crucial part of our. 04:29:26.000 --> 04:29:41.000 Islands community that we want input from so I don't know if if the bias I mean maybe that that term is not correct is is God, we want people that come from different communities and have different backgrounds to be giving that input. 04:29:41.000 --> 04:29:48.000 So. That's just how I see it. Good discussion. Any other discussion about the motion? 04:29:48.000 --> 04:29:58.000 We haven't taken the regions yet, but 2 regions with the 4 formerly recognize groups. 04:29:58.000 --> 04:30:04.000 Would propose to us. 1212 member by 8 had 8 members to advisory group. There's an open question about we give them more parameters. 04:30:04.000 --> 04:30:12.000 I'll just opine real quick. I agree with reason why. I have faith in those folks. 04:30:12.000 --> 04:30:21.000 I think they I don't think I don't agree they have they may Be staff members, but I don't think they don't care about other perspectives. 04:30:21.000 --> 04:30:30.000 And we'd have 2 regions in the group. We would still have to approve. So they proposed to add 8 faculty members, we probably wouldn't approve that. 04:30:30.000 --> 04:30:46.000 So I did a check there, but that's just my opinion. Other regions. I certainly never meant to imply nor did I think I, I don't think I said that I didn't think they'd, that the 4 groups and who they pick out of it would have, after all, we're not talking about 4 groups. 04:30:46.000 --> 04:30:58.000 We're talking about 4 individuals that will come from the those groups who will be representatives didn't indicate others. 04:30:58.000 --> 04:31:09.000 I don't disagree with what you said at all. Quite the opposite. What I'm what I'm driving out is I think So they're already represented. 04:31:09.000 --> 04:31:17.000 And I think they're, and, and I read, again, Friends, I ask you to think back. 04:31:17.000 --> 04:31:31.000 On all the testimony we received. Faculty, staff. students. We're mentioned occasionally alumni over and over and over and over again. 04:31:31.000 --> 04:31:48.000 Virtually none of the testimony we received. From the groups, either the groups that we have formerly picked already or representatives of the of the various other university and and college entities. 04:31:48.000 --> 04:31:58.000 Mentioned mentioned the broader community or how to how to pick somebody from that That's all I'm saying is, is the natural inclination is, is Are we going to have faculty represented? 04:31:58.000 --> 04:32:08.000 Are we gonna have staff representative? Are we going to have students represent? And the answer is yes. That's been already decided that's done. 04:32:08.000 --> 04:32:22.000 I'm just thinking that that we need to have a perhaps a different way of picking the other 8 and that maybe I'm not quite sure where the sunshine law comes in. 04:32:22.000 --> 04:32:30.000 I, I almost think we should do it. Or that. 04:32:30.000 --> 04:32:42.000 Or Maybe that a pig can be put together to recommend names to the board. I don't know. 04:32:42.000 --> 04:32:51.000 That accomplish what I hope will accomplish. I'm, it's a dilemma. 04:32:51.000 --> 04:33:13.000 I wish I had a more definitive. I apologize, I'm not more definitive. About this other than I'm concerned that we need to have a broad section from the community. 04:33:13.000 --> 04:33:21.000 Thank you. With 2 regents to. Recommend 8 additional names. Up to up to 8. 04:33:21.000 --> 04:33:29.000 And we certainly could give them all the material and the minutes from this meeting that they could consider. I would count on the region reps to do the same. 04:33:29.000 --> 04:33:37.000 Is to opine on where regions stand. Is there any further discussion about that motion before I take the vote? 04:33:37.000 --> 04:33:50.000 Yeah, I missed the first part of what you were saying. Were you suggesting that we as Regents and send names to the to the group for their consideration. 04:33:50.000 --> 04:33:59.000 I did I just was repeating them what the motion was which was . To to assign the selection of up to 8 additional members. 04:33:59.000 --> 04:34:07.000 I think I said. No more than 12 total. So that's actually Yeah. No more than 12 total. 04:34:07.000 --> 04:34:18.000 Maybe just say it that way. Members. To the formally recognized groups plus 2 regions. 04:34:18.000 --> 04:34:24.000 That's the motion on the floor that we've been discussing. So it's checking if we're ready to move to a vote. 04:34:24.000 --> 04:34:30.000 So we have a problem. Yeah, just the point of inquiry. 04:34:30.000 --> 04:34:43.000 If that passes and it moves forward. Would it be? Out of line and maybe, Kerry, you gotta tell me too, whether this in terms of sunshine. 04:34:43.000 --> 04:34:57.000 Could names from anybody. For that matter not just from regions but Could I as a region or anybody in the broader community send Names to that group for the consideration. 04:34:57.000 --> 04:35:09.000 I think we could make that part of the motion that. That they needed to. Receive the open to receiving suggestions. 04:35:09.000 --> 04:35:13.000 Hello about transparency and openness. 04:35:13.000 --> 04:35:22.000 Yep. And that their process would not be governed by Sunshine law, right? As they craft the recommendation. 04:35:22.000 --> 04:35:30.000 They can meet, they can discuss the recommendation they bring would be involved in. So yeah, so we could note for the record. 04:35:30.000 --> 04:35:37.000 As a friendly amendment or just on the minutes that the expectation is that they are open to receiving suggestions from anyone. 04:35:37.000 --> 04:35:47.000 Including regions. The one concept is if depending on the assigned task of this advisory group, the willingness of the members to. 04:35:47.000 --> 04:35:59.000 Keep things confidential. Right, so the We'd have to make it clear. That there's expectations of the folks who are recommended recommended. 04:35:59.000 --> 04:36:06.000 And we would we would opine that those members that therefore recommending need to have been spoken to and yeah. 04:36:06.000 --> 04:36:21.000 So all we would be getting back then if we proceeded this way would be the names recommended from the advisory group and the names going in would remain confidential with them while they were making their decision about recommending. 04:36:21.000 --> 04:36:30.000 As long as they're going to keep them comfortable. I'm overjoyed when Kerry is smiling. 04:36:30.000 --> 04:36:43.000 So, for the or the motioner and the seconder. Can we consider those part of the motion that the these clear expectations is that. 04:36:43.000 --> 04:36:51.000 They need to receive names, open process. And that they will keep those names confidential. What? Who they? 04:36:51.000 --> 04:37:00.000 Who they deliver it? Yeah, notes, notes onto the motion. Yeah. Okay. 04:37:00.000 --> 04:37:08.000 Okay, that's so we know what we're discussing. Is there another discussion gonna call for the vote? 04:37:08.000 --> 04:37:15.000 Okay. All those in favor. Of the motion as. Discussed and amended. 04:37:15.000 --> 04:37:20.000 This signal by saying I. Aye. Any opposed? 04:37:20.000 --> 04:37:23.000 Okay. 04:37:23.000 --> 04:37:33.000 Excellent. And so that. Actually tackles the 2 other buckets. Which was the membership makes up. 04:37:33.000 --> 04:37:46.000 And how they're gonna be determined. So the next meeting for the cow is January eighteenth. That would be quite something to accomplish by then. 04:37:46.000 --> 04:37:51.000 So we may not, yeah, if at all possible, it'd be nice to have that group. 04:37:51.000 --> 04:37:58.000 Determined. So that's the first opportunity. We certainly now have to go and we're making a request. 04:37:58.000 --> 04:38:03.000 They could certainly say, no, we don't do that for you, but I, I hope they'll be amenable. 04:38:03.000 --> 04:38:13.000 Recent caucus said they can get a representative. No better than the twentieth, so I would hope that other people can follow suit. 04:38:13.000 --> 04:38:21.000 Nice. Hello. So the next for to close up this one, we need to choose the 2 regions. 04:38:21.000 --> 04:38:31.000 That will be taking on this task. Anyone, is anyone burning to take on this role? 04:38:31.000 --> 04:38:47.000 I'm not burning. But I'd like to say, because mentioned was made. Stop me if I wrong was mentioned made in the open meeting or was mentioned made in the in the executive session about the membership. 04:38:47.000 --> 04:38:52.000 And about, well, I just want to say I'm up for confirmation. That doesn't, I do not want to be on, I'm not asking to be on that. 04:38:52.000 --> 04:39:06.000 Of the 2, quite the opposite. But I don't think that should be a consideration. We're regions. 04:39:06.000 --> 04:39:14.000 And we're doing our job. And somebody else doesn't like it. Well, that's that's something we will crowd but I I have full confidence. 04:39:14.000 --> 04:39:20.000 In the in the 3 of us that are up that we're doing a job as regents and that's the end of that. 04:39:20.000 --> 04:39:29.000 I agree. So I guess I'm starting off with anyone really want to take on this task. Regent Wilson is volunteering to be one of the regents. 04:39:29.000 --> 04:39:42.000 Vice Chair Lee is anyone else? I nominate Regent Tochiki. Are you willing to accept that nomination? 04:39:42.000 --> 04:39:51.000 Okay. It's now on the eighteenth. I'm running a conference next week. You know, I mean, so. 04:39:51.000 --> 04:39:54.000 But I, yeah. 04:39:54.000 --> 04:39:58.000 But you could send names. 04:39:58.000 --> 04:40:08.000 Okay, if there's no one else. I'm gonna ask for a motion to approve. Bye, Shirley and and Vice Chair Wilson as our representatives. 04:40:08.000 --> 04:40:15.000 To this body? Also nominate regent 04:40:15.000 --> 04:40:21.000 Are, are you willing to accept that nomination for me? No, I don't, I don't want this to be a contest. 04:40:21.000 --> 04:40:30.000 I don't think so. I'm gonna put a lot of names in though. You hear that learning? 04:40:30.000 --> 04:40:33.000 Anyone else? 04:40:33.000 --> 04:40:43.000 Can I get a motion for the 2 vice chairs to serve this role? Regent, the, Regent, Lu, second, any further discussion? 04:40:43.000 --> 04:40:49.000 All those favorite signal by saying I. All right, any opposed? 04:40:49.000 --> 04:40:56.000 And extensions. I wanna put one abstention. 04:40:56.000 --> 04:41:07.000 Not very quickly. 04:41:07.000 --> 04:41:20.000 I would. Hi, okay. So that process has been determined. We have parameters for a group, a process to select them. 04:41:20.000 --> 04:41:29.000 And urging to bring back recommendation as soon as possible. Moving on to the next. Items on our agenda. 04:41:29.000 --> 04:41:36.000 It's a quick update. We do a quick update on the survey. Folks have referenced it multiple times. 04:41:36.000 --> 04:41:46.000 Okay. So yeah, as of yesterday, we did receive 828 responses and it's gonna continue. 04:41:46.000 --> 04:42:04.000 Until February fifteenth. Okay. I think it's a great initial response. We certainly want to make sure that that continues as I encourage everyone to make sure that that continues as I encourage everyone to throw the state to fill it out. 04:42:04.000 --> 04:42:14.000 We get the once school starts again because I know our students are not looking or. Glance at their emails, can we get the university? 04:42:14.000 --> 04:42:23.000 Email that they sent it out to resend it out again. Is that possible? After break is over. 04:42:23.000 --> 04:42:39.000 Okay, thank you. Next update is was already mentioned by Shirley. You guys delegated he and I to work with administration to get the RFP out for the recruiting companies assistance. 04:42:39.000 --> 04:42:47.000 I really want to thank the team at for working over the holidays to meet those. So that got done. 04:42:47.000 --> 04:43:04.000 We do the next step that I think was not clear in the authority. Given that we want to ask for is If Regent leave vice chairly and I can continue to, make the selection of the recruiting firms. 04:43:04.000 --> 04:43:13.000 So with the assistance of someone from HR, so be 3 of us. The criteria for check has been decided. 04:43:13.000 --> 04:43:20.000 But you guys didn't formally say we could decide if we don't do that. Then we'll need to bring that here to the full body. 04:43:20.000 --> 04:43:28.000 Which will, you know, there'll be other components of that. Sunshine law issues plus time issues. 04:43:28.000 --> 04:43:36.000 With authority, we can, what's the deadline again? What is that? We're getting all the proposals back by. 04:43:36.000 --> 04:43:45.000 Yeah, so we won't be able to bring that to this board by the eighteenth. We won't be able to bring that to this board by the eighteenth. 04:43:45.000 --> 04:43:46.000 We won't get the, we won't be able to bring that to this board by the eighteenth. 04:43:46.000 --> 04:43:51.000 We won't get the, the, by then. So the soonest would be that first meeting of February, even that would be a super tight turnaround. 04:43:51.000 --> 04:43:59.000 So there's a. That's one of the other reasons to differ, but. Happy to discuss that role. 04:43:59.000 --> 04:44:05.000 You wanna say anything more about that? No, I think we're the reason for the. 04:44:05.000 --> 04:44:14.000 Human resources person is that they've done. Process before. 04:44:14.000 --> 04:44:24.000 Yep. Is that In the end. Again, going back over all the. 04:44:24.000 --> 04:44:40.000 The previous selections of president. The human resources and the staff ended up. Doing all the work. The research firm spent all the money. 04:44:40.000 --> 04:44:49.000 And went through their song and dance. And then in the end, the human resources folks here and. 04:44:49.000 --> 04:45:00.000 And whoever was stepped in. And then up doing the actual logistics. All I'm saying is I think we should have it no later than February. 04:45:00.000 --> 04:45:06.000 If they, if they haven't got proposals, you can. Deal with before then then don't do it. 04:45:06.000 --> 04:45:16.000 And I hope, I don't see any. I don't see any reason why we can't consider when they say search, I don't see any reason why we can't consider local firms. 04:45:16.000 --> 04:45:31.000 That are experienced in in organizing. Not just necessarily executive searches but But, deal and human resources deal, deal with the question of, of choosing leadership. 04:45:31.000 --> 04:45:41.000 For various companies and groups and so on. I don't know. I'm just looking at you, Diane, because of the particular. 04:45:41.000 --> 04:45:54.000 Organization you're with I'm assuming there was a companies locally who Cause I've, I've worked with local companies before that aren't necessarily professional search firms. 04:45:54.000 --> 04:46:04.000 But their HR firms and they know how to organize for selection of people to take various tasks up on the executive level. 04:46:04.000 --> 04:46:17.000 Just saying I hope that I'm confident that you could go locally and get proposals in that you could make a decision to be presented to us by February. 04:46:17.000 --> 04:46:31.000 I'm also hoping we get those proposals. So the, again, the, the thing we wanted to clarify was if the board authority to vice chairly and I includes the selection of proposals that come in. 04:46:31.000 --> 04:46:40.000 And if not, then this body wants to do that process. We can, it'll just take a little bit longer to actually get someone on board. 04:46:40.000 --> 04:46:48.000 Bye. The question, how are we getting that information out that you're looking for proposals or is that already going out? 04:46:48.000 --> 04:47:01.000 It's already been posted and so that normally is that we beat those bushes but I would say Those folks who know local firms that could do this work should be encouraging them to apply. 04:47:01.000 --> 04:47:06.000 So, at least we, we, we can't. We can't, So select them if they don't apply. 04:47:06.000 --> 04:47:15.000 Yes, no, but I just notice that information out there. So now locally. Yeah, let me yes. 04:47:15.000 --> 04:47:22.000 Well, it, you know, if it isn't, it should be because we're talking about it. 04:47:22.000 --> 04:47:27.000 I don't, I don' I couldn't opine on, okay, how the community is responding. 04:47:27.000 --> 04:47:30.000 I'm just pushing this a little right now. That somebody's listening, maybe it'll be in the paper, right? 04:47:30.000 --> 04:47:32.000 The story, you know, that be added in the paper, right? And the story, you know, that could be added. 04:47:32.000 --> 04:47:44.000 Yes. Maybe the media can say that we're actually looking for a search firm as opposed to fighting with one another. 04:47:44.000 --> 04:47:48.000 Alright, so, So this is a little bit going back. Is that okay or should we wait till later? 04:47:48.000 --> 04:47:58.000 Is it about the question I have about whether we're authorized? No. Well, can we close that one up first? 04:47:58.000 --> 04:48:03.000 And then, yeah. So if not, the issues kind of get a 04:48:03.000 --> 04:48:13.000 To authorize by Shirley and I to. Work with a member from HR to select the recruiting firm, Region Haining, moved, and lose second. 04:48:13.000 --> 04:48:20.000 See no discussion, all those in favor of saying I. Any opposed? Congratulations, more work. 04:48:20.000 --> 04:48:27.000 Don't you can go golfing. Okay. Yeah, I can talk to you. 04:48:27.000 --> 04:48:36.000 One thing I wanted to mention as, see if everyone's in agreement a parameter for the the advisory. 04:48:36.000 --> 04:48:44.000 Group. Well, the process we just approved to have the 4. And then the 2 regions to come back with names. 04:48:44.000 --> 04:48:54.000 In our pay report. We talked at length about. You know, special interests and conflicts of interest in disclosing those things and so. 04:48:54.000 --> 04:49:03.000 I, the language here was Advisory Group nominee shall disclose as a prerequisite to being considered. 04:49:03.000 --> 04:49:11.000 Any current or potential financial interests or other conflicts of interest in or relative to the University of Hawaii system when being considered for the advisory group. 04:49:11.000 --> 04:49:20.000 So I would hope that as part of screening and bringing forward these 12 names that this would have been done. 04:49:20.000 --> 04:49:29.000 In the group so that That would be embarrassing. For additionally embarrassing for people to be put forward in the 12 and then. 04:49:29.000 --> 04:49:35.000 You know, they didn't disclose this or that because they weren't asked to. So just putting that out there that that's our. 04:49:35.000 --> 04:49:41.000 Request. 04:49:41.000 --> 04:49:44.000 And that the guidance and the. This. The statement is that there's an expectation to follow those recommendations. 04:49:44.000 --> 04:49:55.000 Does that work? 04:49:55.000 --> 04:50:02.000 If, there's no other. Issues from the agenda list. We've come to that. 04:50:02.000 --> 04:50:11.000 No problem. Representative. Yeah, yes, they're gonna, what they're gonna bring, that. 04:50:11.000 --> 04:50:19.000 Up to up to 12. Recommendations yeah okay So if there's nothing else we're on to announcements. 04:50:19.000 --> 04:50:29.000 The next meeting is January, 1820, 24 at the University of Oahu. My, I didn't miss anything. 04:50:29.000 --> 04:50:30.000 I'll share my share. Lee knows that I'm not able to make that meeting, unfortunately. 04:50:30.000 --> 04:50:44.000 So he's prepared to. To run the meeting, Vision. Yeah. Did we? 04:50:44.000 --> 04:50:53.000 Make parameters for who they're gonna pick or did we not do that? It was it was not included in the motion. 04:50:53.000 --> 04:51:04.000 But my hope. We will send them the minutes and the comments and the concerns and that. Trust them to consider those things. 04:51:04.000 --> 04:51:10.000 Yep. 04:51:10.000 --> 04:51:21.000 You know, being know, well, comment, but I just wanted to emphasize everybody got the email from Christine and from Yvonne relating to preparations for the Meeting back to back. 04:51:21.000 --> 04:51:28.000 Yes, thank you. That's a important announcement at this stage. It'll be a, a new approach. 04:51:28.000 --> 04:51:39.000 2 days we started off with the best town so As a Yeah. Anything specific about that? Just making sure folks respond, right? 04:51:39.000 --> 04:51:45.000 If they need rooms and yeah. 04:51:45.000 --> 04:51:52.000 Oh wow. Okay, Monday. Yeah, folks, we didn't know we could book travel and hotels and And don't forget, it's a 2 day meeting. 04:51:52.000 --> 04:51:59.000 Alright. Okay. 04:51:59.000 --> 04:52:13.000 They've already got a Yeah. And again, and we've been saying this lots. Thank you to the staff for like this decision to do this adds a whole bunch of other work for staff including they have to travel. 04:52:13.000 --> 04:52:26.000 Right, so be away from family and things like that. So much appreciation to everyone. I also want to point out in addition just on the record in addition to that conflict of interest. 04:52:26.000 --> 04:52:48.000 Paragraph in the pig report. We also enumerated, let's see, non board member advisory group members should have the following qualities that include knowledge of the institution and its aspirations and willingness to learn more, the ability to rise above parochial concerns and mesh with a group that commits to serving the interests of the institution as a whole. 04:52:48.000 --> 04:52:59.000 The ability and willingness to maintain the searches confidentiality even after it concludes. And the ability to understand and abide by the role that we're tasking them to do. 04:52:59.000 --> 04:53:11.000 And the paragraph I read earlier would be the last requirements. I just want to emphasize. Thank you. And can I also just Assume there's no no objections. 04:53:11.000 --> 04:53:17.000 That's also the expectation we have. Of the representatives from the 4. Formally recognized groups. Yes, absolutely. 04:53:17.000 --> 04:53:26.000 Thanks for clarifying that. And back to what Regent Mawai was just clarifying that. And back to what Regent Mawai was just asking about the parameters. 04:53:26.000 --> 04:53:29.000 We did set some parameters. So,'s 12. No more than 12, but that includes the 2 regions. 04:53:29.000 --> 04:53:51.000 So it's really 6. If the The 2 regions are only for the purpose of recommendations. That if the regions are gonna continue on the advisory group that has to be in the recommendation. 04:53:51.000 --> 04:53:55.000 But they would be part of the 12. 04:53:55.000 --> 04:54:08.000 No? No, the motion was just that. 2 regions and the 4. Formally recognized groups would give us a proposed list of names. 04:54:08.000 --> 04:54:17.000 For the 12. And all 12 would be non-region. That's up to them. They could choose regions, not choose regions. 04:54:17.000 --> 04:54:30.000 Alright. And that those 4, would I assume suggestive representative from themselves and then. Community members are to be. 04:54:30.000 --> 04:54:38.000 Represented in the total 12. That's our expectation. So there are some parameters. We put on the record. 04:54:38.000 --> 04:54:47.000 Yep. Yes. And if, Regents are unclear, we can reconsider this and make sure we're crystal clear. 04:54:47.000 --> 04:54:56.000 Yeah, I was unclear when I voted on it, I guess. Cause I was thinking it was. 04:54:56.000 --> 04:55:00.000 12 total. Not. 04:55:00.000 --> 04:55:08.000 12 additional. A is 12 total. But the wording was up to 12. And total, correct. 04:55:08.000 --> 04:55:21.000 So that's 4. 4%. Regents is not included in the. Regents were only assigned to help come up with the recommendation list. 04:55:21.000 --> 04:55:31.000 So this clearly we're clearly not all on the same page. I understand. And so if we need to reconsider this vote, we certainly can. 04:55:31.000 --> 04:55:38.000 We did have a problem. When the recommendations come forward, is that subject to a vote then? Yes. 04:55:38.000 --> 04:55:49.000 Only a recommendation. Yeah. Yup. And not publicly, so I do wanna see on the record that. 04:55:49.000 --> 04:56:00.000 It was discussed that the possibility of the 2 regents. Continuing on or the 2 or any questions in general, on with the advisory. 04:56:00.000 --> 04:56:13.000 Committee board. In the future. Just to mention that publicly so that that can be considered. When the 6 come up with the 12. 04:56:13.000 --> 04:56:20.000 That they could, it was discussed to have 2 regions continue on. With the 12. Locked to 12. 04:56:20.000 --> 04:56:33.000 And Regents can certainly share. Even more of those details. The other truth is if we have tell, 12 adviser members that don't have regents and we assign them a task we could put up to 2 regions. 04:56:33.000 --> 04:56:45.000 On that task. Yeah. Yeah. Are there any implications for Sunshine law that would I think complicate that. 04:56:45.000 --> 04:56:50.000 That's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure. Right. Yeah. 04:56:50.000 --> 04:56:51.000 And it's just kind of things that I appreciate you bringing it up. Those are the kind of things we're talking about an exact session, right? 04:56:51.000 --> 04:57:05.000 Is all these details. Yep. So we're now on the same page that we voted on. The regions are assigned just to help over the recommendations. 04:57:05.000 --> 04:57:10.000 Regions could be on or not. We'll see when that comes up. And it's no more than 12 total. 04:57:10.000 --> 04:57:16.000 Okay, great. Alright, any other announcements, questions, clarifications? 04:57:16.000 --> 04:57:20.000 If not, thank you guys all for your time and energy and commitment. This meeting is adjourned. 04:57:20.000 --> 04:57:30.000 There is