Search for Florida International University’s next president will be secretive. It’s the law | Editorial

As Florida International University begins the search process for its next president, state lawmakers will have us believe that finding the most qualified person for the post hinges on one thing: secrecy.

The argument goes that if the public is kept in the dark, qualified professionals will be more comfortable throwing their hat into the ring knowing their identities are protected.

It was under this premise that lawmakers passed Senate Bill 520, which went into effect in March with Gov. Ron DeSantis’ signature. The law creates a new public-records exemption — there are already more than 1,000 of them in Florida — that conceals information about applicants vying to become president of a state college or university. Their personal information will not be made public until a final pool of candidates is created, or 21 days before a president is chosen.

Democrats had the votes to stop this bad bill, but four of them sided with Republicans in approving it. What a shame.

In the coming months, Florida will test whether trading transparency for the hope of quality pays off. We don’t believe it does. Lack of public scrutiny and political meddling are best friends.

Public in the dark

FIU is one of four public universities — including the University of Florida — that have launched national searches for a leader under the new statute, the Herald reported Sunday.

Former FIU President Mark Rosenberg resigned in January in the midst of a university investigation over allegations that he made unwanted advances at a younger female employee. The head of R. William Funk & Associates, the search firm hired by FIU, told the Herald the new law will help identify Rosenberg’s successor because, “The very best candidates are often the most reluctant to go public about their candidacy.”

Even if that’s the case, more important than knowing who the top finalists for a job are is knowing who didn’t make the cut. Under the new law, we will not know the latter.

How can we determine if Candidate A truly is the most qualified if we never know who candidates B, C and D are? We’re supposed to trust the judgment of a university’s board of trustees, but those are often filled with political appointees in a state where we have seen plenty of red flags for partisan interference in higher education.

For example, three UF professors were barred from serving as expert witnesses in a lawsuit against Florida’s voting restrictions (the university reversed its decision after public outcry). A UF faculty report released in late March found the university violated its own hiring procedures when it brought Dr. Joseph Ladapo on board for a tenured position. Ladapo, DeSantis’ pick for state surgeon general, received “preferential treatment on the basis of his political opinions,” the report states.

Under DeSantis’ belligerent leadership, who can blame us for worrying that SB 520 might help his administration to put ideologues in charge of state universities?

The search for Florida State University’s president last year explains why SB 520 is concerning. When it became public that Education Commissioner Richard Corcoran, a former House speaker and DeSantis ally, was one of the candidates, FSU’s accrediting agency raised concern about a potential conflict of interest. Corcoran is a member of the state university system’s Board of Governors, which has the final say over the candidate selected by a school’s board of trustees. This was before SB 520, so FSU released a list of 22 candidates last May that, besides Corcoran, also included two other former Republican politicians, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

Amid the controversy, Corcoran didn’t become a finalist. Richard McCullough, then vice provost of research at Harvard University, eventually became FSU’s president.

Would the outcome have been different had the public been kept in the dark?

That lawmakers themselves often vie for university president positions makes SB 520 appear even more self-serving. Former FSU President John Thrasher, for example, used to be a House speaker.

That doesn’t mean someone with political ties cannot be a successful university president. Some may argue that might actually help presidents in the crucial task of fundraising and in their ability to impact state policy and funding. And to William Funk’s credit, in the case of FIU, he has held a series of meetings to get public input as the presidential search kicks off.

But that’s not the point.

If secrecy is indeed the best path to attract a top-notch university president, we hope FIU can prove that. No matter its benefits, any law that increases the potential for back-room dealings, in the name of the public’s best interest, is a bad idea.

This story was originally published April 14, 2022 at 6:00 AM.