Colorado Regents Pick Controversial Former Politician as System President

A divided Board of Regents voted 5 to 4 on Thursday to appoint Mark R. Kennedy as the new president of the University of Colorado system. The vote on the popularly elected board was split along party lines, with only its Republican majority supporting the former Republican congressman.

Kennedy, who has been president of the University of North Dakota since 2016, was named unanimously as the board’s sole finalist in early April. But that choice was soon clouded with controversy over Kennedy’s record at North Dakota as well as his votes against same-sex marriage and abortion rights during his time in Congress.

A report by the system’s Faculty Council also questioned material on his curriculum vitae and his level of support for tribal colleges and historically black colleges as well as efforts to protect “Dreamer” students, who were taken to the United States as children of undocumented parents. Kennedy countered the council’s report with an open letter that said his record had been misconstrued.

Those disputes were highlighted during a contentious meeting of the board that lasted nearly 90 minutes and included public comments by a range of speakers who all opposed Kennedy.

Monica Edwards, a master’s student at the university’s School of Public Health, said it was “abundantly clear” from public forums held last week that most faculty members and students in the system feel Kennedy is not equipped to be president.

“It is terrifying to have someone who opposes abortion in charge of our medical school,” Edwards said.

The Dark Ages and the Future

Leaders of faculty, staff, and student governance bodies also spoke of widespread opposition to Kennedy as president.

Nancy Moore, chairwoman of the university system’s Staff Council, said the public forums had revealed Kennedy as not prepared to answer key questions about how he would handle difficult issues in the system.

And she questioned what it meant when Kennedy described the Colorado presidency as the “capstone” of his higher-education career: “We need someone to move the university forward,” she said, “not have someone ride out the last 10 years of his career.”

Like the vote, however, views of Kennedy were broken along partisan lines. John Kroll, vice chairman of the regents and a Democrat, said he had spent a significant amount of time with Kennedy since Kennedy was named the finalist, and found him to be a “decent person and a capable leader.”

Kroll said Kennedy would not move the university system backward, but was too divisive to move it forward. “I have come to the conclusion,” Kroll said, “even though he is very talented, he is not deserving of my vote.”

Republicans on the board said Kennedy was the best person for the job because of his experience in politics, business, and higher education. And they tried to assure the audience that Kennedy’s conservative views would not have a negative impact on policies that protect diversity and inclusion on the system’s campuses.

Glen Gallegos, one of the Republican board members, said he had heard a mix of reactions to Kennedy’s appointment, but felt comfortable with the candidate because the individual campuses already have solid leadership.

“One person,” he said, “cannot move this university into the Dark Ages or into the future.”

Eric Kelderman writes about money and accountability in higher education, including such areas as state policy, accreditation, and legal affairs. You can find him on Twitter @etkeld, or email him at eric.kelderman@chronicle.com.