Considering the current state of affairs in Kansas concerning higher education, it appears greater attention needs to be given to the selection of those invited to serve on the Kansas Board of Regents.

Last week, three members of the nine-member board attended their last meeting. All three were eligible to serve another four-year term if reappointed by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, but for one reason or another, all three – Bill Docking of Arkansas City, Lew Ferguson of Topeka, and Deryl Wynn of Kansas – chose to leave this important board. Maybe they knew the governor did not intend to reappoint them or maybe they wanted more time to pursue other interests.

Whatever the case, the governor has three vacancies to fill. Docking did a superb job as chair of the regents and set a high standard for successors to match. He spent considerable time traveling the state, being a strong spokesman for higher education. He was followed by Clay Blair of Kansas City, who also did a first-class job in telling the story of higher education and learning about conditions on all of the campuses. Blair was not reappointed by Gov. Bill Graves.

The experience and commitment of Docking and Blair to higher education will be difficult to replace.

Ferguson was Associated Press bureau chief in Topeka and had vast knowledge of the inner workings of the Kansas Legislature and the turmoil of higher education. He had a ring-side seat for many years to the political warfare, turf wars and egos that colored the Kansas political scene and knew where the bodies were buried. He should have been able to use his knowledge for the benefit of regents institutions and higher education in general.

Wynn, a Kansas City attorney, had an active practice and, it is reported, didn’t have the time to devote as much attention to the Regents as he would have liked.

Years ago, the state’s governor could nominate whomever he or she wished, hopefully the best possible candidates regardless of where they lived in the state or what university they may have attended. However, some in the state thought too many regents were Kansas University graduates, so new guidelines were adopted to make sure regents came from a wide area of the state and that there was a fairly even balance between KU and Kansas State University graduates.

Likewise, years ago, it was a practice not to have a regent who lived in the home city of a regents university. This eliminated anyone from Kansas City, Kan., Lawrence, Emporia, Hays, Pittsburg and Manhattan. This policy has been partially abandoned as it eliminated a large population base.

However, a governor today still has statutory limitations as well as unofficial guidelines to consider in the selection of regents.

Regardless, current policies should not be used as an excuse not to seek out the very best to serve on the Board of Regents. In some ways the fate of the state’s higher education system rests in the hands of the regents.

They are supposed to oversee how the state universities are run, approve major polices for the institutions, decide whether the chancellors and presidents are performing in an acceptable manner and be the best and most effective spokespeople for higher education. Chancellors and presidents are paid well to represent and run their respective universities, and the public and legislators have every reason to look upon these individuals as being biased in their pleadings to taxpayers and legislators.

Many of the efforts and programs espoused by university leaders could be looked upon as being self-serving. On the other hand, regents, while overseeing the schools, also serve as the public’s representatives to higher education. They represent taxpayers as well as universities, community colleges and vocational-technical schools. The only chips they have in the game are to do what they can to provide the best possible educational environment for the young people of Kansas.

Consequently, it is important these men and women have stature in the state and the respect of the public, as well as state lawmakers. Only the very best men and women should be considered for this board. This is no place for political pay-offs or IOUs.

In past years, representatives of each state university gave great attention to the selection of nominees to be considered as regents. Officials of the school’s alumni associations would review alumni lists to select several individuals whom they thought would be good representatives of the institution and would put up a strong fight for the best interests of the school. There was a great deal of politicking. It’s likely this continues today, but times have changed, and the various school representatives should be smart enough to realize mere cheerleaders for their schools are not going to get the job done.

State funding for higher education is slipping year by year. Now is not the time to try to reward some loyal alumnus with an appointment to the Board of Regents. Higher education needs the most knowledgeable, committed, respected, honest and courageous men and women to serve on this body.

Regents deserve to be the best of the best, not political awardees. It is a tough, demanding job, and the manner in which these men and women carry out their challenge and obligation will play a large role in determining the health and excellence of the state’s system of higher education.

They are the men and women who must have the courage to crack down on college and university presidents if they think these educational leaders are not getting the job done, and they must be effective and highly respected individuals when dealing with state legislators. They cannot be blinded by loyalty to a given university, and they must operate in a manner that is truly politically and geographically bipartisan.

Gov. Sebelius has the opportunity to nominate three truly superior individuals to the Board of Regents. It will be interesting to see whom she chooses. Through these nominations, the public will gain insight into her commitment and interest in higher education.