Today, I would like to talk to you about something you probably don’t know about: The Board of Regents. What does it really do? As far as I can tell, and I’ve done some reading, it’s the governing body of our beloved Eastern Michigan University. Its members are appointed by the governor, and they serve eight-year terms. This is all laid out by Michigan constitution that states:
“Other institutions of higher education established by law having authority to grant baccalaureate degrees shall each be governed by a board of control which shall be a body corporate. The board shall have general supervision of the institution and the control and direction of all expenditures from the institution’s funds.”
The board appoints a president and provides oversight to ensure he or she doesn’t do anything ill-founded or fiscally irresponsible.
That’s good; their purpose is to keep the school from going under both managerially and economically. My question for you is this: Is it a necessary part of the institution?
I’m led to believe it’s not. One of the regents resigned recently. It wasn’t really a surprise move by any means, as Mohamed Okdie, the regent in question, hadn’t been to a meeting in two years.
Let me repeat that: this guy, who is appointed by the governor, only attended six meetings between the time he was appointed to when he resigned. If even the regents can’t take their job seriously, how am I to be held in a different regard. It’s a joke, really.
Granted, it is legally necessary, but is it actually necessary?
Last week, President Susan Martin had a question-and-answer session at the Student Center. One of the questions was on the basis of the heat going out in some dorm rooms on the recent snow day.
Her answer precluded that due to tuition not being raised, the school was having problems keeping up with its expenditures. A similar question and response dealt with Internet problems in certain buildings.
The decision to not raise tuition, while wildly popular, should perhaps have been delayed until after the multitude of renovation/creation projects around campus had been completed. To me, it just doesn’t seem intelligent to spend more than previous years without increasing revenue.
All of that said, how does the board know what would be best for students? I have been here for three years now, and I barely know how its decisions have affected me.
Is it actually making the school a better place, or just trying to charge more for people to come here? How is it that this governing body is able to control an institution without the say of its population?
The Board of Regents is in charge, but does it actually need to be?
Could we not just do what it does ourselves, but with our interests in mind? I think we could and that we should.
