After Michael Martin accepted the job late last week as chancellor of
Something else happened at that Friday meeting. The Board of Regents’ decision to allow public comments at meetings was revealed as a farce. Two former professors and the mother of a student were cut off and threatened with removal from Friday’s meeting during the public comments section.
The Las Cruces Sun-News has the details.
Essentially, Regents Chairman Bob Gallagher banged his gavel and cut them off when they questioned recent statements he made, the Sun-News reported. Gallagher recently told the Sun-News the two former professors, whose firings have led to controversy, were wrongfully hired in 2004 and revealed other personnel information about them. The Sun-News says personnel files it has reviewed “failed to substantiate Gallagher’s claims.”
The mother of a student accused Gallagher at Friday’s meeting of unethical behavior for making the allegations to the Sun-News. One of the professors then asked whether other board members and administrators agreed with what he called actions by Gallagher that were “maliciously, viciously and very publicly…” He wasn’t allowed to finish the question because Gallagher’s gavel silenced him.
So much for public comment. The regents’ agenda stated that no personal attacks would be allowed. But there is a difference between an attack and criticism. Taking criticism is part of being a public official. Officials from other local governments – particularly the
Gallagher created controversy by making allegations about personnel issues in the newspaper. He should expect and allow a public response.
A public-comment period in which members of the public aren’t allowed to criticize the actions of the regents isn’t a true public-comment period. I had praised the regents recently for beginning to allow public comments, which I said was a step in the right direction. No more. This is a case of taking one step forward and two steps back.