I do think it is important to clear up a common misconception about the last search process. It has been alleged as fact that the search committee made a recommendation for three viable candidates to the board in 2007. This is simply not true. Though I am not at liberty to discuss those candidates for obvious confidentiality reasons, it should be pointed out that one candidate had withdrawn from the selection process, and a second didn’t even meet the search criteria. In essence, the board was given the choice of one candidate, which is not a choice. If the board is confined to choosing one candidate based on stakeholder input, it is the equivalent of conceding its governing authority. That we will not do.
It doesn't matter whether the one candidate was a strong candidate, you gotta have a choice. Like when you have one candidate without stakeholder input, that's a choice.