抖阴ap

The Denver Post sent a questionnaire to each of the candidates on Colorado鈥檚 primary ballot to give voters a little more insight into their platforms. Their answers (very lightly edited for spelling and formatting) are below. For more coverage of the 2016 Primary election, check out .

---

Jump to a candidate:
Jack Kroll • Lucky Vidmar

---

Why are you running for office?

I am running for CU Regent because I have spent my career helping students go to college. I devoted my career to getting students to college because I saw many of my fellow Denver South High graduates prevented from pursuing a degree because of a lack of money. As an Assistant Director of Admissions at CU-Boulder it is my job every day to help students realize their dream of a college education. As Regent, my main focus will be to ensure that a college education at CU is accessible and affordable to all Coloradans.

What is the biggest problem you see with your party?

While I am proud to support Bernie Sanders for President I think the Democratic Party faces a significant challenge of unification behind the likely nominee, Hilary Clinton. As we did in 2008, we must overcome our differences and unite behind the leader of our party鈥攊f we don鈥檛 the consequences will be “yuge”.

What three policy issues set you apart from your opponent?

My opponent has attacked me for my stance against the recent $170-million CU football stadium renovation. While I am an avid sports fan and a devoted Broncos and, unfortunately, Rockies enthusiast, the world of college athletics has gotten out of hand. In fact, over the past five years the University has made over $24-million in bailout loans to the athletics department to cover losses. Losses that were incurred, in part, as a result of paying golden parachute clauses in the contracts of fired football coaches. I say we build up our students, not our stadiums.

My opponent has been critical of my stance in support of the Fight for 15 at CU. Whether someone is a janitor or an adjunct faculty member鈥擨 think every CU employee should be able to afford to send their student to CU. Sadly, that is not the case.

At a debate on the CU-Denver campus my opponent bemoaned CU鈥檚 seeming tendency to hire a vice chancellor for just about everything and was critical of the fact that CU employs a vice chancellor for diversity. While I agree with my opponent on the fact that CU鈥檚 administration is cumbersome at times, I absolutely disagree with him on his stance against having upper-level administrators championing diversity. So much more work needs to be done to enhance our university鈥檚 diversity that it is vital we have top leaders championing this cause.

What are the biggest areas of agreement between you and your opponent?

My opponent and I agree on many issues, namely that education is too expensive. We agree that CU needs to bring down its administrative costs, that there needs to be more diversity in our student and faculty ranks. We also agree that CU is an amazing institution that drives so many good things in Colorado.
I have a ton of respect for Lucky and I have been honored to run in this race with him. We both have a strong passion for serving CU and the people of our district.

What should be about rising tuition rates?

We have a national crisis of rising education costs. In-state tuition and fees at public universities across America rose nearly 300% in the last 20 years. At CU-Boulder the rate of increase has been a staggering 431%. The Board, which sets tuition each year, is often left with the choice of bad or worse. Declining state funding, a focus on keeping up in a overly competitive market place for new students, and rising costs leads to the Board being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

But there are many things the University can do to combat these rising costs. First we can take a look at the debt the CU itself holds. Much of the focus in the national consciousness is on student debt, but little attention is paid to the debt universities themselves carry. CU is over $1.6-billion in debt and the cost of borrowing is in part passed on to our students through tuition and increased fees. Cutting down on the debt we carry as an institution will help us keep tuition increases to a minimum moving forward.

We should also be making direct loans to students. Right now a typical student who borrows through federal student loan programs will pay interest around 6.8%. The university loses out on all those interest payments and only capitalizes on the one-time direct payout to the university from the loan originator. Instead, CU should make loans directly to our students at a significantly lower interest rate, which would lower the total lifetime education costs for our students while simultaneously allowing the university to increase its revenue. It抖阴ap a win for our students and for CU.

While CU鈥檚 administrative costs are low relative to our peers (28% lower), and the Board and President Benson both deserve credit for this, there is still more we can do to decrease our overhead costs and streamline our operations. Likewise, more collaboration between campuses and more online course offerings will allow us to deliver high quality education to Coloradans at lower costs.

Another glaring problem that is relatively low-hanging fruit is our policy with respect to transfer credit. Right now thousands of potentially transferrable college credits for our transfer students鈥攅qualing hundreds-of-thousands of dollars in saved tuition for our students鈥攇o unevaluated by our faculty. We must incentivize our faculty to evaluate these courses for transfer and thus save our incoming transfer students thousands in tuition over the course of their careers at CU. We should view transferable college credits not so much as accomplishments towards a degree but as a very illiquid form of currency. By creating liquidity in the transfer credit world CU would actually open up more sources of revenue for itself as an institution and at the same time help both our students and ourselves.

Lastly, TABOR has to go. With the ratcheting down effects of TABOR, Colorado is on pace to be completely divested in higher education by the year 2025. That should terrify us all. Public education is a right. A century ago many people thought a universal high school education was not necessary鈥攖hey were wrong. Times have changed. Some sort of post-secondary education is now necessary for most middle-class jobs. If we do not wake up to this reality as a country and as a state we will lose ground as an economic superpower. If we force so much of our younger people into debt to get an education they will lose their purchasing power as consumers and this will in turn slow our economy and contribute to an ever widening wealth disparity in America. Let抖阴ap subsidize education to both give Coloradans more disposable income to drive our economy forward and allow every student the opportunity to pursue their dreams.

How would you increase diversity among the student population?

As your next Regent, in order to increase the diversity of our university, I would move to increase scholarships for diverse communities, increase funding for retention and support programs, and focus on hiring diverse faculty members.

Much of our scholarship money on the Boulder campus is awarded to students on the basis of test scores. In fact, a majority of large-dollar scholarships in our country are linked to high-stakes testing. Often ACT and SAT scores are a better indicator of a student’s affluence as opposed to a student抖阴ap academic capabilities. To increase diversity we need to push our financial aid to those students who need it the most. Nearly 30% of all incoming CU-Boulder freshman, many of whom come from outside Colorado, receive scholarships and have no financial need–if we want more diversity we need to get the money to those students who need it the most.

Additionally, we need to focus efforts on retaining those diverse students who do attend CU, where graduation and retention rates for minority students lag significantly behind those of white students. By investing in support programs and focusing on retention we can create more sustainable communities of diverse students on our campuses.

I would also grow programs like the BA/BS-MD pipeline program that I pushed for while at CU-Denver that admits Denver area students from challenging socioeconomic backgrounds directly to CU鈥檚 medical school from high school. These students must attend CU-Denver and maintain certain academic thresholds, but are guaranteed admission to medical school at the end of their undergraduate career. We created this program as a response in part to a temporary accreditation the medical campus was given six years back as a result of what the accrediting committee determined to be a lack of student diversity.

What also cannot be ignored in this discussion is a lack of diversity within the faculty ranks. While CU has made strides (and certainly there is much more work to be done) in increasing the diversity of its student body the institution has struggled, as have many other institutions of higher education, with attracting and retaining minority faculty members. We know from research that student抖阴ap are much more likely to persist in their education if they can make a meaningful connection with a faculty member or advisor on campus. With so few faculty of color on our campuses our student communities of color face a greater challenge in creating those vital relationships. The Board has the responsibility of approving tenure track faculty appointments, as such I will push of department chairs and deans to produce candidates for tenure that not only exemplify academic excellence but also align with the university鈥檚 existing and explicit commitment to diversity.

Is the focus on political correctness harming the traditional liberal arts education, and if so, what should be done about it?

The ability to freely exchange ideas is a pillar of our country鈥檚 university system. Colleges are places where people from all walks of life can come together to challenge their understandings of the world and each other. That being said college campuses should not be safe havens for individuals who wish to promote hate speech or otherwise invoke intolerance.

As someone who holds CU degrees in economics and English, both of which are classified as liberal arts, I found my time as a student at CU-Denver to be a very rewarding experience in understanding the role of political correctness in our college environments.

As the only candidate who works on a college campus (CU-Boulder) I see this debate unfold daily. I think much of the arguments against political correctness come from a perspective that we live in a post-racial, post-gender, post-sexuality society where, the argument is made, we do not need to be overly concerned with issues relating to gender equity, sexual orientation, or race. I can say, frankly, that those arguments typically come from a background of privilege and are misguided at best.

That being said, many people will and should point to the case of sociology professor Patti Adler on the Boulder campus as an instance where political correctness potentially put the University at odds with its mission of promoting academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas.

But the Adler case, to me, highlights a bigger problem facing universities in our country. With so many public universities becoming beholden to a customer base of students paying tens-of-thousands of dollars in tuition each year, institutions have millions of dollars on the line. With such big stakes, it抖阴ap natural for administrators to adopt a corporate mentality and cower in fear of a big public relations scandal鈥攍est such a scandal result in a loss of reputation and a subsequent loss in revenue.

So to me, the perceived focus of political correctness is more a focus on maintaining a good public image as a result of sound business practice. And that universities become big businesses should be our greater concern.

Back to top

Why are you running for office?

I came to CU in 1990 as an 18-year old kid escaping the civil war in Yugoslavia. I was a first-generation college student and English was not my first language. But, with a lot of help from many people, I earned two engineering degrees from CU-Boulder, went on to start a software consulting business, and later went to law school at night while working full time. Today, I am a patent lawyer helping innovators and inventors.

My American Dream story began at CU. I am running to be your CU Regent to pay forward all the opportunities that Colorado has given me and to make sure that my story can be repeated all over Colorado. CU is a major economic driver for Colorado. It is the state鈥檚 third largest employer. Its 60,000 students will be the life-blood of Colorado鈥檚 workforce of the future. The foundational research at CU spurs new technologies and start-up companies. To lead CU into an optimistic future, I bring my life and business experience, my leadership skills, and my unique perspective and vision.

What is the biggest problem you see with your party?

On the campaign trail, I鈥檝e heard from many Democrats that the declining state funding of higher education is the reason for increased tuition at CU. I have studied the past 20 years of CU budget documents in detail. Based on my analysis of those numbers, state funding levels explain only a small portion of the tuition increase at CU. The rest is caused by the explosion in spending, most of which is not directed to classrooms, research labs, or faculty salaries. We have to be honest about the causes of tuition inflation if we are going to address and fix it.

What three policy issues set you apart from your opponent?

We have a fundamentally different approach to tuition policy. My opponent has supported tuition increases as high as 9.3% (in 2011). At that time, he was quoted as saying that CU should provide 鈥渁 quality education, not a cheap one.鈥� He also proposed increases in student fees, which are making up more and more of the total college cost burden. His justification for the increase was that other schools charge higher fees. This reflects the prevailing mindset at CU where tuition and fees are increased simply because there are some people who will have no problem paying. This is what is making CU less and less accessible to Colorado families.

I will bring a diametrically opposite approach, where we ask whether and why tuition and fees need to go up every year. We will begin by evaluating whether CU鈥檚 current expense structure makes sense in the 21st century. We will look at best practices from our peer universities who are innovative and creative in increasing retention and graduation rates. 鈥淭his is how we鈥檝e always done it鈥� will no longer be a reason for continuing with ineffective and damaging policies.

Another difference relates to financial aid. My opponent blames CU鈥檚 athletic department for CU鈥檚 levels of financial aid. This may be an easy campaign applause line, but it is inaccurate, na茂ve, and shortsighted. CU鈥檚 athletic department is not the reason that tuition has tripled, and CU鈥檚 football stadium has nothing to do with financial aid. I fully support our student-athletes and strongly believe athletics programs serve many important and positive roles. Instead of bashing CU鈥檚 athletic boosters, I will work with them to show them the benefits of investing in academic programs, which most of them already do. To address financial aid levels, we will need a Regent who is creative and persistent in finding additional sources of funding, both private and public.

I have 20+ years of real world experience as an engineer and a lawyer, in both public and private sectors. I have overseen and managed complex operations with billion dollar outcomes. I have the independence and leadership skills necessary to demand accountability and transparency from CU鈥檚 bloated administration. And, I bring a unique perspective of an immigrant and first-generation college student to build campuses that are safe, inclusive, and welcoming to all.

What are the biggest areas of agreement between you and your opponent?

We broadly agree on the main issues that face CU today: dramatic tuition inflation that is putting CU out of reach of many Coloradans; a culture that is not inclusive and welcoming, particularly at CU-Boulder; and, the over-reliance on adjunct faculty who are treated and paid poorly.

What should be about rising tuition rates?

Tuition inflation did not happen overnight, and we won’t fix it overnight. But, we will start by openly admitting that the current tuition level and its trajectory for the future are unsustainable and severely damaging to the people of Colorado. We will stop the assumption that tuition must increase every year, and the only question is by how much. Instead, we will focus the entire university on delivering even better education and research outcomes using new and different models that will drive down the overall cost. This will certainly mean controlling the administration costs. But, it will also require us to look to 21st century ways for organizing instruction and research. This means a lot more than simply putting courses on-line. It will require us to reimagine what a public university is and does. Many universities around the country are doing this, and CU will join them as a leader in innovation and creativity.

How would you increase diversity among the student population?

CU cannot continue the practice of admitting students and then simply wishing them “good luck” when they arrive on campus. We have to build a culture of shared accountability for the success of each and every student. This goes beyond having yet another 鈥渧ice chancellor for diversity.鈥� CU will not be satisfied by merely getting students to CU. We will have a shared commitment to getting them through college, on time, with little or no debt. Every single person associated with CU has to be empowered to promote retention and graduation of our students, as well as be held accountable when a student drops out. Everyone will be responsible for nurturing a culture of welcome and inclusion on all campuses.

Is the focus on political correctness harming the traditional liberal arts education, and if so, what should be done about it?

A key point of a university, especially a public university like CU, is to expose students to ideas and viewpoints that may be new, unusual, difficult, offensive, or even repulsive. The Board of Regents must not do anything to diminish that very important aspect of a true liberal arts education. That said, openness to all ideas is not a license to bully or offend for the sake of bullying or offending. The right to speak freely comes with consequences. The traditional liberal arts education is precisely about striking this balance between rights and consequences. If there is more than one way of communicating a message, it is entirely appropriate to convey respect for others and to take into account our shared humanity. This does not mean that we should censor our speech or the speech of others. The right to free speech is not about promoting speech we like; it抖阴ap about protecting speech we disagree with.

Back to top