Release of Dobelle's next review discussed

By Beverly Creamer
Advertiser Education Writer

University of Hawai'i Regents expect to throw open for public discussion whether or not to change long-standing privacy policy and make President Evan Dobelle's next annual performance evaluation public in some form.

DOBELLE

"We've learned that a number of institutions do that and some regents said, 'Well maybe we should discuss that,' and I'm one of them," said Kitty Lagareta, who chaired a meeting of the Committee on Personnel and Legal Affairs yesterday to finalize Dobelle's second-year evaluation begun last summer.

"We want to be respectful of the president," said Lagareta, "but anybody who may say I don't want any information shared publicly, we've got to figure out what we need to do about that. ... I think it's worth a really good discussion."

Lagareta said public discussions will, of course, include Dobelle, and maybe even public input.

In response, UH spokeswoman Carolyn Tanaka said Dobelle would welcome being part of any discussion regarding that issue.

"He is very excited by open discussion about his third-year evaluation because we've done some very good things here in the last three years," Tanaka said.

Lagareta said the regents have been looking for guidance on this issue from public institutions in other states, experts in the field and their accrediting agency. Also, they are awaiting a legal opinion from the state Office of Information Practices to provide guidance about whether making a personnel evaluation public overrides an individual's right to privacy.

Carlotta Dias, a staff attorney with OIP who is working on the opinion, said there isn't a lot of precedent in Hawai'i on this issue. "Our great task is balancing President Dobelle's privacy interests with the public's right to know ... how the president is performing his job and how the UH is functioning."

Lagareta said some institutions in other states do a summary of the evaluation of their top administrators, while "some institutions do a news release that gives an overview.

"I think that's up for discussion here," she said.

But she also expressed strong views that public employees should be scrutinized publicly.

"I sort of come from the view that when you sign up for a big public position, the public's going to want to know, and probably has a right to know, how you're doing ... whether you're the governor or a legislator or the head of our largest public education institution."

Lagareta said she and board chairwoman Patricia Lee had a "very good discussion" with Dobelle yesterday morning before the committee meeting and resolved the one remaining undisclosed issue that had kept last year's divisive evaluation from being complete.

"I think we're satisfied," said Lagareta. "We are all done with it."

For his part, Dobelle agreed that yesterday's discussions of the second-year evaluation had been both "productive and positive."

But the evaluation — which is believed to be highly critical — resulted in discord after Regent Ted Hong called on Dobelle to release it. In accord with long-standing board policy on personnel matters, regents' chairwoman Patricia Lee has said the board will not release the document, and yesterday Lagareta also said the second-year review should not be made public.

"Since he was not told, and this institution has never released it (evaluations) publicly, we're feeling that, out of respect, perhaps it should not be released," Lagareta said.

Bill Weary, a national authority on assessing both boards and presidents of institutions of higher education, notes that most states "are very clear that personnel records are confidential."

Weary also said in a recent interview that presidential assessment "works best when it focuses on improving the president's performance.

"If it's something 'done to' the president, it's flawed," said Weary, who jointly wrote the book, "Presidential and Board Assessment in Higher Education."

"If the board puts together a group of individuals without consulting the president on who's to be interviewed, or determining the criteria on the terms of the assessment, that's something 'done to' the president," he said.

Weary said standard practice for presidential assessment involves the board asking the president for names of people with whom he or she has worked most closely as possible subjects for interview.

Dobelle said he had no input on who was interviewed for his second-year evaluation and was not asked for suggestions.

Reach Beverly Creamer at bcreamer@honoluluadvertiser.com or 525-8013.