The Northern Star Editorial Board believes the Board of Trustees’ decision to override the presidential search is not in the best interest of the university as a whole.

After a university president retires or is no longer in office, it is regulation among most universities for the Board to appoint a presidential search committee to select the next university president, according to the American Association of University Professors. 

Following the resignation of Doug Baker on June 30, 2017, NIU’s Board announced they would follow in this suit, an act commended by the Northern Star considering the corruption of past searches, which yielded negative results.

The Board said they wanted employees of NIU and the community to be involved in the search efforts after announcing Lisa Freeman as acting president on June 15, 2017, according to an Aug. 31, 2017, Northern Star article. This was a big promise and positive change, considering the 2013 search for Baker was confidential and lacked transparency.

The search was announced to begin in September and would take about nine months to complete, according to a Sept. 21, 2017, Northern Star article. A search committee was set to begin work during the spring semester of 2018, beginning the preliminary search. However, that search never happened.

NIU spokesperson Joe King said one of the benefits the Board saw in eliminating the search process related to finances. He said while he does not have an official number, the search would cost well into six figures.

“[Overriding the process] eliminates the need for an expensive search and, should they choose [Lisa Freeman], it will mean a lot less time spent,” King said. “As you bring in a new leader, they have to get to know you, they have got to develop their part. she’s been here for over seven years and knows about the university.”

While saving the university money may be positive for the administration and university as a whole, an override of the search deprives the student body of the unbiased trial of a presidential search. The Editorial Board feels the university took the easy way out and discounted any other applicants who may have been a better fit by not even allowing them the chance to apply.

By overriding the search right around the time it was supposed to begin, the Board is failing to keep their promises, and is, once again, disappointing the student body by failing to do their due diligence.

“The search itself is an opportunity for a university or college to take stock, consider new directions, and identify the individual best suited to lead the institution into its future,” according to American Association of University Professors.

The Editorial Board would like to remind readers our editorial does not reflect our opinion of Freeman, only the fact that the search process has been dismissed, discounting any other potential applicants.