Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: Immaturity abounds

Thursday, Dec. 19, 2002 | 8:52 a.m.

SO, WHO is going to apologize to us?

This thing with the Board of Regents -- we have to call it a thing because that is what you call something when you don't know how else to describe it -- is getting really silly.

Not that it wasn't silly when it started because it was all of that. It started with one member of the board snooping around in the records of university students and personnel. One of the students just happened to be a fellow who called that regent an "idiot" in the school newspaper, and the personnel invasion just happened to be of a county commissioner who works part time at the university.

Now I am certain that both of those acts of snooping and the many others that were apparently conducted were just coincidences and no ulterior motivation should be ascribed thereto. I think that's the way the lawyers would say it. But that bit of Pollyanna did not placate others on the board and a shouting and name-calling battle ensued.

It even deteriorated to talk radio -- that bastion of positive and constructive community thought -- on which one of the regents referred to the snooper as an orangutan. It didn't help that the object of the animalistic epithet is an African-American woman who happened to take the comparison as a racial slur which, quite frankly, was not beyond the realm of reason even though the offending regent pleaded innocence and ignorance to the charge.

So, there you have it. Sort of. Soon conflict-of-interest charges started hitting other regents and the whole thing deteriorated to some kind of school-yard name calling that was unbecoming of elected officials. Although, what is unbecoming of politicians in other states is sometimes quite fetching in the Silver State!

The regents needed a champion before the public started to pay attention to the nuttiness and implosion occurred. Along with individual apologies being made with reckless and feckless abandon, a tactical move of epic proportions took shape and an overarching, far-reaching, meaningless group apology was presented for public consumption.

That creative bit of apologia was designed to send the sordid mess to the archives and show off the regents to the voters as responsible people determined to do the public's business in the field of higher education.

Alas and, mostly, alack the macro mea culpa didn't take. And we find ourselves back in the middle of the muddle with little chance for extrication that doesn't involve a mass spanking or some other sort of public humiliation.

It took less than a week for what appears to be the most sensitive member of the Board of Regents to lash out at what she still claimed to be her detractors. Or is the term, attackers?

And now the fellow in charge of the group hugfest is thinking about retracting his good idea and resurrecting the "fine mess they got themselves into" all over again. What is it about the holiday season that brings out some of the worst in some people? Or is it the water?

What should be most obvious about this report is that I haven't used any names. Heaven knows the regents-cum-children have used enough names to last an entire six-year term! The reason is that the names are not important right now. What is important is the behavior and what it represents.

Already there is talk about legislation designed to give the governor or the Legislature, or a combination of the two, the right to appoint members of the Board of Regents. There is a belief among some people that the quality of public servants would improve should that happen.

There was a time when my immediate reaction would have been "no way" to any such idea, but I have to say that there is some merit in, at least, discussing those ideas now.

I would have opposed such a plan earlier because I don't believe that we should take from the voter another opportunity to directly elect our public servants. If we can do that in the name of education, we can rationalize the appointing of our judges in the name of justice. And that is an area where I still believe the voters should be heard -- loudly and without interference from any middlemen.

So, in a few short weeks we have gone from a churlish outbreak of immaturity to the potential of removing from the voters an opportunity to speak out on Election Day. Our Board of Regents has taken us from the ridiculous right into the slime.

So, I ask again. If this group is so anxious to apologize to each other, who among them will apologize to us.

Remember us? The voters?