Stall tactics

On campus interviews for the next University of Arizona president begin next week. Five to seven applicants will meet with faculty, administrators, students and the general public to stake a claim on the university's top administrative position. The inter view process is a unique opportunity for the entire campus community to voice its hopes and concerns for the future of this institution.

Unfortunately, though, the Presidential Search Committee refuses to disclose the names of the candidates until Friday afternoon. With the first interview slated for Monday, the university community is left with inadequate time to prepare for these "public " interviews.

Committee member Jonathan Schmitt explained that the names will be released only a couple of days before the interviews because, "as soon as we release their names they will be under intense scrutiny."

Too bad. Anyone who is qualified to take the helm of a Research 1 university must be able to handle such pressure.

The committee is concerned that the candidates will also come under criticism when the faculty and administration of their attendant campuses discover that they are interviewing for a position at another institution.

Valid point. However if the interviews are open to the public, why hide this information until the last minute? The sentiments about the candidates at their home campuses will be the same whether this information is released sooner or later.

As for the UA campus, releasing the names of the candidates as soon as possible would be beneficial. Public scrutiny will provide the committee with greater insight on each individual's candidacy.

The free flow of information allows the public to make informed decisions and ask intelligent questions. But the committee wants to keep the public in the dark as long as possible. This tactic can only shield the candidates from having to answer tough que stions. It serves no benefit to the university.

Presumably, by holding open interviews, the committee is giving the public the right to scrutinize. Withholding the names of the candidates until just before the interviews implies that the public doesn't really count in the process.

Granted, the search committee will make the final recommendation for the next president, but shouldn't the committee be accountable to the larger community it represents?

The candidates will begin their campus visits Monday, however the opportunity to meet with them is wasted if the public is not provided with more information in advance. The committee should not wait until the last possible minute, Friday, in providing th e public with the information it deserves.