Alamo Colleges community should have a voice in the selection.
The “transparency” trustees claim to observe during the chancellor search is more like a titanium vault than a thin veil. The few elite are allowed, but no “average Joes.”
The only candidate revealed to the public was the Palo Alto College president because he had been selected finalist for the position. No other candidates were made available for public feedback or questioning.
What is the board of trustees afraid true transparency will induce?
Is the board afraid to hear the voices of the thousands of students spending a large amount of their time and money at the Alamo Colleges?
Or are they trying to squelch the faculty and staff?
Any of those parties could disagree with the trustees’ idea of the best candidate. If that were the case, the board should want to know that.
Students could support the board’s chosen finalist, which is equally as important to take into consideration.
Was the goal to select a candidate who best suits the trustees’ interests, with little concern for other stakeholders’ opinions? One should hope not.
It is crucial for students and employees across the Alamo Colleges to offer input on chancellor candidates because the actions of the new chancellor affect them.
Ideally, after the board boils down the applicants, students and employees would hear the candidates speak about how they plan to approach the role of chancellor.
We have a finalist, now listen to the Alamo Colleges community. You have to wait 21 days anyway.