The Boulder Daily Camera formally asked the state’s highest court to review the Colorado Court of Appeals’ 2-1 reversal of a district court ruling against the University of Colorado regents for refusing to publicly disclose the names and applications of all six candidates interviewed for the president’s job that went to Mark Kennedy in 2019.
State lawmakers advanced legislation that would let public bodies in Colorado disclose just one finalist when choosing a new chief executive such as a city manager, school district superintendent or university president.
Calling Colorado’s open-government statutes “seriously flawed” regarding the appointment of chief executives, a Colorado Court of Appeals panel decided 2-1 that a district court judge erred in ruling that the University of Colorado regents should have publicly disclosed the names and applications of all six candidates interviewed for the president’s job that went to Mark Kennedy in 2019.
A judge has ordered a Colorado Springs school board to disclose the recordings and transcripts of executive sessions used to whittle down a group of finalists for the district superintendent’s job.
Responding to recent court rulings against the University of Colorado regents and a Colorado Springs school board, two state lawmakers introduced legislation that would let public bodies disclose just one finalist when choosing a new chief executive.
COVID-19 touched nearly every aspect of our lives in 2020 so of course it affected government transparency and public access to courts in Colorado.
Allowing the University of Colorado regents to “engage in manipulative word-play and end-run” the Colorado Open Records Act by defining the term “finalist” to mean a sole “nominee” for the CU presidency would “deal a crippling blow” to the statute, argues a brief submitted to the Colorado Court of Appeals on Tuesday by the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition.
A Colorado Springs school board improperly denied a parent’s Colorado Open Records Act request for the names and application materials of all finalists considered for the superintendent’s job, a judge ruled this week in a case similar to the Boulder Daily Camera’s successful lawsuit against the University of Colorado regents.
In a case similar to the Boulder Daily Camera’s lawsuit against the University of Colorado regents, an El Paso County District Court judge will soon decide whether Colorado’s open government laws require a school board to name more than one finalist when choosing a new superintendent.
In an extraordinary decision which can only be described as a public flailing, the Board of Regents of the University of Colorado – the governing board for the entire CU system – overwhelmingly lost a Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) lawsuit in which the Daily Camera newspaper sought to force the university to disclose the six candidates who actually were finalists in last year’s search for a new system-wide president.