This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Steve Bosley would like a word.
per wiki, "Established under Article IX, Section 9 of the Constitution of Colorado". @Not Sure is right -- it would take a constitutional ammendemnt.
It's in the Colorado constitution. You'd need a constitutional amendment to get rid of it.
It's also very uncommon for Democratic Regents to act like Kroll. Trying to paint all dem regents with the Kroll brush is a nice whipping boy, but the real problem we have right now is that the AD whose hire was approved by Republican regents and then given a big raise by Democratic regents **** the bed with a coaching hire that everyone knew was very questionable.
I'm not reading it the same. The language is "There shall be nine regents of the university of Colorado who shall be elected in the manner prescribed by law for terms of six years each." I'll let our lawyer members correct me, but I'd read that to be the size of nine is fixed unless the constitution is ammended.
Technically, the BoR reflects the total number of Congressional representatives the state has. So that number will increase to ten once the new districts are drawn. I’m any event, I like the idea of de-politicizing the BoR with a sizable number of appointee positions. The trick would be that those positions have to be added over a period of time, not all at once. Not that I think Polis would screw it up, but you don’t want one person deciding half the Regents all on his own.
can you cite a source? that seems contradictory to the constitutional article I quoted above: "There shall be nine regents of the university of Colorado.."
The only source I can site is my own knowledge of how it has historically worked. There’s a regent for every congressional district plus two elected at large.
Based on my recollections, Hokie is right. There used to be three at large, now there's two, soon likely to be one.
There was a movement afoot in the State Legislature after the board selected Kennedy as president, to "stack the deck". Essentially the plan was to keep the elected Regents and add Regent seats that would be appointed by the Gov. This would not have required amending the State Constitution. That movement died when D's gained control of the board.
thanks dude.
I get all that, but WHY? Why did CU get to a point where local kids want to leave?
^^^^^This I thought I was on the wrong web site...
It used to contain diverse views. Until the Republicans went full fascist. Then all the sane Pub voters on this forum switched to the party that still believes in democracy.
Or came to the conclusion that both parties are completely full of ****.
I have no doubt as to your opinion(s) it is interesting how one person can speak for so many assuming they vote as they post on a web site.
Spot on...it's come down to "who's the better liar" second term the most polished liar.
Your failing is that you want to believe that a conserve would engage in arena they have no chance for fairness..not going to happen here better off to troll and have fun reading the circle jerk.
