UF’s Board of Trustees defended both their selection of Dr. Santa Ono as the sole candidate for the university’s presidency and their search process in a seven-page response to a letter from a trio of state Republican leaders.
The June 18 letter from Sen. Rick Scott and Reps. Byron Donalds and Greg Steube to the Board of Trustees called for a more open and transparent presidential search process. In the letter, the three lawmakers also outlined their objection to Ono, whose selection as the 14th president was rejected on June 3 by the Florida Board of Governors.
Ono, the lone finalist presented by UF’s Presidential Search Committee, had unanimous support from UF trustees but was rejected in a 10-6 vote by the Board of Governors.
In their letter, Scott, Donalds and Steube point to a 2022 state law, which prevents the release of any personal information for state college and university presidential applicants.
“… It (the law) seems that it is being abused by creating an unfair system that allows much of the selection process to be shielded from the public,” the letter says. “It is our hope the Florida Legislature reviews how this law has been implemented and considers changes next year …”
In a response letter dated July 3, the Board of Trustees states that the search process for Ono “was indeed open, collaborative, and transparent.”
The letter says the search committee started the process by holding 10 listening sessions with students, faculty, administration, staff, alumni, donors and members of the community “to hear firsthand what qualities the UF community wanted in its next leader.”
The letter also repeated arguments made during the selection of Ben Sasse as the 13th UF president – that top universities rarely name more than one candidate and that other candidates for the position only wanted to be named publicly if they were the sole finalist.
“Every sitting executive considered for the job made clear that they would only participate if the process guaranteed confidentiality…,” the Board of Trustees wrote the lawmakers. “Confidentiality enabled us to engage top candidates who would not have otherwise participated.”
The Board of Trustees letter also rejected claims from the Republican lawmakers that the selection process didn’t address concerns about Ono’s candidacy and beliefs.
“Dr. Ono faced tough questions every step of the way, and the Search Committee and Board of Trustees were keenly aware of all aspects of his candidacy, including his ideological evolution,” the Trustees’ letter states.
Scott, Donalds and Steube were among several Republican leaders who spoke out in opposition of Ono, even before his rejection by the Board of Governors.
In their letter, the three lawmakers list two reasons why they were against Ono, who had stepped down as the president of the University of Michigan when he was announced as UF’s sole finalist.
The letter first points to Ono’s slow response to stand up for Jewish students as pro-Palestine activists set up encampment on the University of Michigan campus last spring.
“… putting Jewish students in danger and failing to uphold even the most basic standards of leadership was a complete disqualifier for us,” the letter said.
The Republican lawmakers second objection to Ono centered on his “long history of statements in support of DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) initiatives.”
In their response letter, UF trustees wrote the lawmakers’ objections to Ono “are not grounded on facts.”
In the letter, the Board of Trustees references a statement Ono made at the Board of Governors meeting about the removal of pro-Palestinian encampments at Michigan: “university leadership at Michigan wanted to remove the encampments immediately but prioritized doing so in a way that avoided violence. And that is exactly what they did.”
UF trustees also disagreed with the lawmakers’ statement that Ono’s comments on DEI “disqualify him” as UF’s next president.
“We are concerned that much of the current discourse has relied on selectively edited materials promoted by actors with their own agendas and does not reflect the totality of Dr. Ono’s record and, importantly, where he stands today,” the UF trustees’ letter says.
“Under Dr. Ono’s leadership, Michigan dismantled its expansive DEI bureaucracy. He stood firm, even amid differing views within his governing board. He expressly said to our Board of Trustees and our Board of Governors, ‘I did not come to Florida to bring DEI back. I came to make sure it never returns.’”
In their letter, UF trustees also said they were disappointed that Scott, Donalds, Steube, and Ono’s opponents on the Board of Governors did not give him a chance to respond to questions about his record, saying they never “met, spoke with him or gave him a fair opportunity to address the concerns they raised before forming their opinions.”
“Dr. Ono was available and willing to engage in good faith,” the trustees’ letter said.
UF’s trustees did not elaborate on where the current presidential process stands in the letter but said they “remain fully aligned with Florida’s higher education vision and to guiding the university forward in a manner that best serves our students, faculty, and the state of Florida.”
The Board of Trustees has set a special meeting at 11 a.m. on July 23 to consider a proposal to increase out-of-state student fees.
An agenda for that meeting has not yet been released.
Nick Anschultz is a Report for America corps member and writes about education for Mainstreet Daily News.