Curators discuss having a voting student member

By Elliot Njus

Published April 8, 2008

Members of the UM system Board of Curators sounded off at a meeting Friday on a bill that would give one student representative a vote on the board as early as 2011.

The bill would give a student the ninth seat required by the Missouri Constitution if the state loses a congressional seat after the 2010 census. The Missouri Revised Statutes requires the board include no more than one member from each of Missouri’s nine congressional districts.

The board includes a student representative without voting rights.

“The board, in the past, has had a fairly staunch indication that we are happy with the status quo that we have as far as the voting concern,” Curator Don Walsworth said.

Curator Doug Russell said he has been opposed to a voting student member of the board.

“I’ve got some personal concerns about a governing board that becomes basically a constituent board,” Russell said. “We’re made up now of nine lay members, and I think that’s the wisdom of those that drafted the Constitution, the constitutional board, and I think it’s important that it stay that way.”

Russell said he’s glad the board has a student representative, and student representative Tony Luetkemeyer has performed well, but he doesn’t think a student should be a voting member.

Curator Bo Fraser said the board should have the opportunity to examine alternatives to a student curator.

“If indeed we do lose that congressional seat, as it looks like we might, I guess I would hate the see us at this point in time foreclose any options that might be out there,” Fraser said.

Fraser suggested giving a seat to a “wild card” curator who graduated from one of the four UM system campuses who doesn’t live within the state of Missouri.

He said the majority of the trustees of the Missouri University of Science and Technology live outside of the state.

Luetkemeyer defended the student curator bill.

“This is something that students have found very important for a number of years now, something students have lobbied for very actively over the course of the past five to six years,” Luetkemeyer said.

He said there was reluctance to create a student representative before the position was first proposed and similar resistance to including the student representative in closed session meetings.

“I think this is the natural progression of what’s been going on the past 24 years, and I think that even though the board members are apprehensive to what’s going on right now, I think that everybody would find that having a voting student curator would be useful to this board and this university,” Luetkemeyer said.

He said students aren’t stakeholders in the university, but rather shareholders.

“I think that given our stake in the university, given how much we contribute to the university’s budget, it’s appropriate and it’s equitable to have at least one voting student on the Board of Curators,” Luetkemeyer said.

Board Chairwoman Cheryl Walker suggested amending the Revised Statutes to allow two members to serve from one district. She said the learning curve involved in the curator position requires a longer term than the two-year student representative term. Curators serve six-year terms.

“I’m still learning,” Walker said. “I’m still gathering information about each and every campus, and from my perspective, that’s another complicating factor which would make me opposed to it as well.”

Curator David Wasinger said he didn’t have enough information to form an opinion on the bill. He said he would like to meet with other universities’ regents, but he’s open to the idea.

The bill passed the Senate in a 31-2 vote Thursday.