Regents’ refusal to see big picture underscores flaws in Nevada system

Let’s say you’re an up-and-coming university administrator who’s looking to take the next step on your career ladder. Now, let’s say UNLV President Len Jessup has left the university and there’s a search for his successor.

You do a Google search using the keywords Jessup and UNLV, and here’s what you find:

Jessup was the university’s fourth president in the past 12 years, and the fifth if you count an interim who served for a year.

Jessup left midway through a five-year contract under pressure by members of the Nevada Board of Regents.

News stories about his departure indicate that Jessup had faced harsh public criticism from some members of the board. However, other stories during Jessup’s three years at UNLV highlighted significant progress in a number of areas — the start of a medical school, fundraising records, enrollment increases, a deal to use a new NFL stadium, support from both the business and donor community and much more.

Knowing all of that, would you apply? Probably not, which is why the best outcome of last week’s turmoil surrounding Jessup would be for the third-year president to stay put and the regents to work constructively with him to resolve their issues.

It’s time for the regents to act like adults. They need to put aside whatever personal animosity they may have for Jessup — or worse, self interests or agendas of their own or their political influencers — and do what’s right not only for the university but for Southern Nevada.

This cannot be understated: The actions of a handful of regents are doing severe damage to UNLV, and that damage will be long lasting. It could take a decade to repair what the regents have done and it comes at a time when so much positive change was happening at the university.

It is up to the regents to back off, behave in the interest of Nevada’s higher education and find a detente that allows Jessup to continue to lead effectively and UNLV to be stable.

Jessup may have made mistakes, but they have not resulted in the type of scandal that typically results in the ouster of a university leader — sexual assaults, financial impropriety, academic cheating and so forth.

Rather, the university is on a healthy trajectory in almost every respect. Fundraising and enrollment are up, the university is tracking toward becoming a top-level research institution, the medical school is preparing to welcome its second class of students, new facilities are being built and the leadership team that Jessup has built around him is UNLV’s strongest ever.

The community has benefited from what Jessup has built.

The medical school will transform Southern Nevada if allowed to reach its potential, not only improving our quality of life by providing excellent health care but by sparking growth in our medical industry and thereby strengthening our economy.

Jessup, with his outgoing and personable style, also has formed relationships with business leaders that will boost both UNLV and the regional economy. While working with such organizations as the Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce and the Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance, he’s raised awareness about research and educational opportunities at UNLV that will make the community more attractive to businesses looking for a place to start up or expand.

In the process, Jessup has attracted a large and vocal group of fans.

Some of the regent ringleaders of this absurd spectacle seem baffled at the seismic response in Las Vegas to their targeting of Jessup. They shouldn’t be — this is what happens when a strong leader arrives and the community sees palpable gains. The community believes in this president.

Pushing him out would be terrible. The regents’ mismanagement of the situation has already cost the medical school a $14 million gift for its educational building, and another megadonor is reconsidering a $25 million gift along with future contributions. On Friday, the donor of an $8 million gift for a scholarship endowment fund said he would rescind it if Jessup were to resign or be ousted.

If Jessup were to leave, the high achievers he’s recruited to his leadership team would undoubtedly head for other places too. That’s the thing about A-list talents — they can go wherever they want to go.

And then would come the problem of finding a new president, one willing to undergo regular beatings at regents meetings no matter how successful he or she has been.

After this fiasco, one could only conclude that the next president is damaged goods. Worse, it could suggest the next president was predetermined before all of this and the instigating regents are conspiring — outside of process required by open meetings laws — on some kind of patronage position.

This doesn’t happen everywhere in higher education.

In many states, regents are appointed by the governor — not elected, as is the case with Nevada’s 13-member board — and serve mostly in a supportive, advocative role.

Here, the situation surrounding Jessup has unleashed a torrent of pent-up frustrations with the structure of Nevada’s system, including that it draws candidates who aren’t as qualified as regents in other states. The reason: The positions are down-ballot and draw little public attention, making them unattractive.

To be sure, the Nevada board has drawn strong, responsible people, including several members of the current board.

But the board’s history is smeared with low-level political jousting and the type of mismanagement happening with the regents now — carping, micromanaging and not seeing the big picture.

With Jessup, the board has an opportunity to move beyond and show it can lead responsibly.

For the sake of UNLV and Southern Nevada, board members need to step it up.