University system defends private candidate interviews

Friday, Feb. 9, 2001 | 9:31 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- An attorney told the Nevada Supreme Court Thursday that those applying to become presidents of the state's universities or community colleges should not expect any privacy in seeking the offices.

But the general counsel for the University and Community College System of Nevada argued the law allows the regents to interview applicants in private to discuss their professional competency.

The court will rule later on the arguments.

This case arises from the Community College of Southern Nevada, where the regents sought to interview the five finalists in private.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal filed suit and received a restraining order stopping the closed sessions. The university appealed to the Supreme Court.

The key issue is whether a president is considered a "public official." The university says he is not and the newspaper claims he is. Nevada law says there can be closed door session for public officials.

Donald Campbell, representing the newspaper, said the rule in Nevada is that all meetings should be open. And exceptions to the law should be "narrowly construed," he said.

None of the five candidates, Campbell said, objected to open sessions to discuss their professional competency.

The presidency of the community college is responsible for 35,000 students, administers a budget of an estimated $50 million and even has the judicial power to issue subpoenas, Campbell said.

Tom Ray, general counsel for the university, said a public officer must be created by the Nevada Constitution or the law. These positions, he said, were created by the Board of Regents.

In addition, he said, a public officer must be "invested with the sovereign function of government." The Board of Regents, not the presidents, have this power in the university system, he said.

During his argument, Ray was questioned by Justice Cliff Young, who asked, "Why not have the public hearing? Will it cause the downfall of the Republic?"

Ray answered that there are privacy issues concerning the individuals involved.

Ray said this case has wide implications because any new definition of a public officer could be applied to other jobs, such as department heads.

But Campbell said the justices should confine their decision to the limited issue of the president.

A number of the regents were in the audience and Board Chairwoman Thalia Dondero said after the hearing that, "All we want to know is if we are operating correctly and we want to get the best people."