Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

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!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

NEW: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12

Status
Not open for further replies.
Creebuzz said:
Why do I always have the feeling that the regents are the enemy of the university? And I'm not talking about just the athletic department. Is my animosity unjustified?
Click to expand...

Just spitballing here.

1) because they are selected through a general election. A small percentage of their constituency are CU boosters.
2) because boosters of CSU and DU and Mines and alumns from every other university who live in Colorado get to vote. And some of those voters hate CU.
3) because out-of-state alumni and boosters have no voice. CU has sizable OOS alum with no voice
4) because people vote down party lines, even if the candidate of their party is a moron.
 
Don't you think the sensitive nature of the case requires a deliberate approach?
 
Interesting comments. Why do Coloradans get to vote on regents and not me? Obviously, I get why, but, in reality, I'm a bigger stakeholder as an alumnus and contributed more money to the school than the average citizen.

Hopefully, they'll surprise me.
 
Creebuzz said:
Interesting comments. Why do Coloradans get to vote on regents and not me? Obviously, I get why, but, in reality, I'm a bigger stakeholder as an alumnus and contributed more money to the school than the average citizen.

Hopefully, they'll surprise me.
Click to expand...
oh they can surprise you, rest assured of that.
 
Creebuzz said:
Interesting comments. Why do Coloradans get to vote on regents and not me? Obviously, I get why, but, in reality, I'm a bigger stakeholder as an alumnus and contributed more money to the school than the average citizen.
Click to expand...

What does the state of Colorado kick into the CU operating budget each year? I believe I've read it is around 4% or so. To your point, at that small of a financial input, the state sure holds a lot of power over the university. A 4% minority shareholder in a company would not have that sort of control, even if that shareholder's name was on the building and letterhead.
 
Creebuzz said:
Interesting comments. Why do Coloradans get to vote on regents and not me? Obviously, I get why, but, in reality, I'm a bigger stakeholder as an alumnus and contributed more money to the school than the average citizen.

Hopefully, they'll surprise me.
Click to expand...

1) we pay the taxes that fund the university, and
2) no one likes you
 
Buffs35 said:
1) we pay the taxes that fund the university, and
2) no one likes you
Click to expand...

1) the university receives more dollars in federal grants than state funding. Federal tax payers are funding the univeristy, too.
2) valid point.:D
 
Big Jim said:
What does the state of Colorado kick into the CU operating budget each year? I believe I've read it is around 4% or so. To your point, at that small of a financial input, the state sure holds a lot of power over the university. A 4% minority shareholder in a company would not have that sort of control, even if that shareholder's name was on the building and letterhead.
Click to expand...

Yep. Probably should be a mix of people serving as Regents. At least one state elected official. I could actually see 4 (At-Large, Boulder, Denver, Colorado Springs) based on where the campuses are located. Then, fill the rest out with votes of the Alumni Association (maybe 5 here to overbalance the 4 true politicians with vested people). Right now we've got our 7 congressional districts plus 2 at-large to make the 9.

Good luck getting politicians to vote to reduce their power, though. :ROFLMAO:
 
Well, the State still owns the land too I believe. If CU wants to divorce itself from public oversight, it would need to purchase it's property from the State.
 
goalline said:
Well, the State still owns the land too I believe. If CU wants to divorce itself from public oversight, it would need to purchase it's property from the State.
Click to expand...

And maybe that tips the balance toward the state being the majority stakeholder. But should it be the only stakeholder represented on the Regents Board?
 
Buffnik said:
And maybe that tips the balance toward the state being the majority stakeholder. But should it be the only stakeholder represented on the Regents Board?
Click to expand...

Are there any public universities with a different model?
 
goalline said:
Are there any public universities with a different model?
Click to expand...

Good question.

Wyoming and Kansas look like they're appointed by the governor. California, too.

We can look up others, but it seems as though CU is maybe a little more democratic than the norm and that Trustees or Regents are commonly coming from government.
 
Most regents are appointed by the governor, and are power brokers.

Check out University of Georgia board versus CU's. Board members should add significant managerial depth, and are we getting that with the current members?

Edit: I linked both boards now. Look at the experience differential between the two boards. It's striking. You cannot run a large organization with a board like CU has.

http://www.usg.edu/regents/members

http://www.cu.edu/regents/meet-regents
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately in recent years some of the regents we have ended up with are people who either have some special agenda with the school or worse are individuals looking at the position as a way to make a name for themselves to use going after other political positions.

Making a name usually means rocking the boat, and may not wait until it needs rocking to do so.
 
Darth Snow said:
Big difference between us and **** bailer: we are asking for a report and will make it public. Hmm
Click to expand...

Bigger difference between us and Bailer. We don't have multiple levels of coaches and administrators leading into the president's office and the Board of Regents knowing about an ongoing culture of rape and violence against women and covering it up so we don't lose football games.
 
Darth Snow said:
Big difference between us and **** bailer: we are asking for a report and will make it public. Hmm
Click to expand...

Pretty much opposites with this stuff. Problems occur everywhere. With Baylor, the effort is to cover it up, pay it off, and control the media. With CU, the effort is to air the dirty laundry publicly and destroy our own. Neither is good. But I guess at least CU's way isn't morally repugnant while being self-destructive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top