Fix the ‘Fourth Branch’!

The early retirement “for convenience” of Chancellor Dan Klaich last week was obviously intended to release some of the pressure building in the steam engine of reform.

If anything, it should have the opposite effect.

Klaich’s resignation was inevitable after revelations involving the manipulation of research about the governance and funding formula of the Nevada System of Higher Education. In both cases, emails show system officials influenced research to ensure favorable outcomes.

And Klaich was the driving force behind that influence, conspiring with consultants to ensure the Nevada Legislature saw what the system wanted it to see. The subterfuge was detailed in emails obtained by Review-Journal reporter Bethany Barnes; if not for her persistence and attention to detail, last week’s resignation drama would never have taken place.

Former Assemblyman Pat Hickey, now a member of the state Board of Education, defended Klaich, and claimed the Review-Journal was simply pursuing a public official’s scalp and hunting for prizes. But Hickey, himself a former journalist, should know better. If there had been no evidence of misconduct, there would have been no story to write, and no need for the convenient early retirement of the man at the center of it all.

The temptation now is to consider the matter closed, another classic Nevada story of behind-the-scenes chicanery followed by a feather-soft landing. But that would be a tragic mistake; the higher ed system obviously needs changes, and now is the perfect time.

Assemblyman Elliot Anderson, D-Las Vegas, said the first action may be to remove the Board of Regents from Article 11 of the Nevada Constitution. The system has developed the attitude that it exists as some kind of mutant fourth branch of government alongside the Legislature, the executive branch and the courts. “There is this culture, they’re not accountable,” Anderson said.

Under his bill, university presidents should present budgets jointly to the Legislature and regents, and they should get protections so they’ll feel free to testify to lawmakers without fear of losing their jobs. (Anderson said he’s heard reports of system officials following presidents in the halls of the Legislature, ostensibly to monitor their contacts.) And, in the event of funding disagreements between the Legislature and the Board of Regents, lawmakers should prevail, Anderson said.

“There’s a lot of trust that needs to be rebuilt,” Anderson said.

But Regent Trevor Hayes said any stab at reform should not write the regents out of their role governing the system. “I think there needs to be some kind of autonomy, not as a separate branch of government, but the ability to address the subject that we were elected to address and that we’ve developed expertise in,” he said. The part-time Legislature has neither the time nor the specialized knowledge of higher education to take over governance of the system.

Hayes said he supports presidents making presentations to regents in an open meeting, after which the board should set funding and legislative priorities for the new chancellor to advocate in Carson City. The idea of presidents testifying independently to lawmakers on behalf of their individual institutions is a non-starter, he said.

Clearly, there’s a wide gulf to be overcome. But no matter what else, the haughty, arrogant abuses of the Klaich administration must never be repeated. “It’s always been about controlling information,” Anderson said.

And he’s right, as Barnes’ stories demonstrate: It was the uncontrolled release of information that sparked the push for reforms, Klaich’s convenient early retirement and, if we’re lucky, some changes that will ultimately benefit students and the state.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and co-host of the show “PoliticsNOW,” airing at 5:30 p.m. Sundays on 8NewsNow. Follow him on Twitter (@SteveSebelius) or reach him at 702-387-5276 or SSebelius@reviewjournal.com.