EDITORIAL:

Take 2: Unopposed candidate should drop out of race

Sat, May 26, 2018 (2 a.m.)

In the Sun’s editorial Friday, we presented what we felt was a tidy recommendation for a problem facing voters in Nevada Board of Regents District 4.

With the unopposed candidate for the district seat being grossly underqualified, we urged the state parties and voters in the district to identify and support qualified write-in candidates.

But to our considerable surprise and dismay, we learned after we published the editorial that Nevada law does not allow for write-in candidates.

We’re suitably regretful about this, but we are resolute in wanting to see the position filled by a higher-quality candidate.

We urge McMichael to drop out of the race or vow to resign the position when he wins it. Both scenarios would result in a vacancy on the board, which would be filled by gubernatorial appointment.

By stepping aside so Nevada’s governor could choose a replacement, McMichael would deserve praise and set an example for some of the current board members, who also have no business being in their seats and should also give them up.

McMichael has indicated that he wants what is best for the state, which is commendable. And he deserves credit for stepping up and seeking a public leadership position.

But in this case, yielding the seat to a candidate with more experience in higher education and a better grasp of the issues facing Nevada’s universities, colleges and community colleges would be doing the right thing for Nevada. Besides, for people like McMichael who want to provide public service, there are many other options. He could no doubt find a more fitting place to serve than the regents board.

Should McMichael not pull out, we would urge voters to prepare to mount a recall action. Although it was to McMichael’s credit that he filed his candidacy, he would be doing the state a disservice by joining the board.

That much became clear during an interview with the Sun, in which he said he decided to run for the board by default. He explained that as an employee of the federal government, he was limited to nonpartisan offices, and the board of regents was the only one for which he met the requirements. (Which, for the record, are minimal: Candidates must be 18, have lived in the district for 30 days and be a qualified voter. There’s not even a filing fee.)

McMichael also said he was attracted to the position because “it gives me all the free time I need to pursue other things. If it was a salaried position, I’d be stuck in an office or have to go over a lot of paperwork.”

As we stated in Friday’s editorial, the regents position is too important to be filled by someone who is less than fully committed to it and isn’t qualified for it. Performing the duties responsibly involves poring through documents hundreds of pages long and developing a working knowledge of the uniquely complex world of higher education.

Whatever happens, we’d still encourage the parties and voters to identify suitable candidates.

We goofed in our first take on this topic, but it remains critical to get the right person into the District 4 seat.

Back to top

SHARE