Buffaloed in Colorado

By: Doug Cosper Did Boulder's dogged Daily open door for CU chief's exit?

The Colorado Daily's staff didn't want to bring down Colorado's top educator. They just wanted him to answer some questions.
But University of Colorado (CU) President John Buechner (pronounced Beek-nur) dismissed the feisty little Boulder newspaper's queries about his recruiting a close friend to lead his 630-million dollar educational initiative, designed to bring CU into the next century.
The university's silence and the Daily's doggedness conspired to produce a novel approach to flushing out a story. The technique proved effective beyond anyone's imagination.
"I can tell you it has been a tough five months for this paper," recalled Daily Editor Pamela White, 35. She heads a news staff of four, only one of whom has a journalism degree.
An early tip led Daily reporters to Fran Raudenbush, a longtime friend of Buechner's who was quietly spearheading his educational initiative. When the Daily began asking questions, the wagons circled immediately. The university refused to release her contract, saying she officially was employed by a private foundation.
Buechner, 65, refused to take questions regarding Raudenbush, White said. In fact, Buechner refused to talk to the Daily at all. "I was told he wouldn't answer a [Daily] question about the weather," White said.
It was not the first time the paper offended a CU administration. The school's board of regents cut funding to the daily in 1970 when the then-school newspaper crossed administrators editorially. The regents expected the paper to wither and die, but it survived and eventually moved off campus as an independent.
On the Buechner story, the Daily turned to the courts to break the silence. It filed a lawsuit in May, and a month later took delivery of almost 8,000 pages of documents. Included was Raudenbush's contract, which showed that her salary was 141,000 dollars ? more than most CU deans ? and that she had been named "executive consultant" to the president.
Then, said Terje Langeland, a Daily reporter, "The university went on the offensive against us."
The president's office assured all comers that the paper lacked credibility, White said. A regent charged that the Daily was a third-rate supermarket tabloid with a "hidden agenda." Even higher-education reporters for the big area dailies wagged fingers at the Daily's confrontational style. The staff's sense of isolation grew.
"That made us more determined," White said. "When you have a public official who so flagrantly wants to ignore questions about his administration, I think that raises the alarm to an even higher pitch."
The Daily still faced a wall of silence at CU. "We were getting absolutely nowhere," said White. The reporters decided they would try to ask their questions in public. That strategy ended with campus security escorting Brian Hansen, a Daily reporter, in an armlock out of a regents' meeting.
"That's when I started walking around my office saying, 'What can we write? What can we write?'" said White. "That's how the editorial arose. I thought, 'You know, if we can't deal with this as a news story, then the only other option is the editorial page.' We had been counseled by our attorneys that when talking to people, simply state the facts. That thought ? 'State the facts' ? sort of stuck in my head. 'Why don't we write an editorial ? just state the facts and ask the questions?'" were:
?"Why did you hire someone with no formal experience in higher education ? who does not
Under the headline, "Public Has a Right to Know," the Sept. 28 Daily published a column of background followed by the key questions it had tried in vain to ask Buechner. Included have the support of a significant portion of the faculty ? to help determine the future of a
publicly funded university?"
?"Why did you allow Raudenbush's contract to be stamped 'Confidential'?" (The questions got personal. They asked Buechner to explain circumstantial evidence, including hotel and cell phone records, that could be interpreted as evidence the two were romantically involved.)
?"Are you and Raudenbush having ? or have you ever had ? a romantic relationship?" (Buechner had denied any such relationship only privately to the regents.)
"We slammed it on the front page and kind of held our breaths," White said. "The result was deafening silence."
Finally, on Oct. 11, the Daily got some support. The Denver Rocky Mountain News ran an editorial scolding the regents for choosing to "smear the messenger" rather than address the Daily's questions. And it repeated four of the questions behind big black bullets.
Then, on Oct. 12, the Boulder Daily Camera reported on Page One regents' concerns that Buechner was "distracted" by the Raudenbush issue.
On Oct. 14, Buechner abruptly resigned. He cited a lack of full support from the regents as his chief motivation ? even though the nine-member board unanimously pledged its full support the next day in an attempt to persuade him to reconsider. Regarding the Daily's investigation, Buechner said only that it had "absolutely nothing" to do with his decision.
Buechner didn't answer the Daily's questions, he said through a spokesman, because he was not party to the Raudenbush contract.
"We don't buy it," White said, pointing to the contract, which lists the president's office as a party.
White insisted that the Daily "never, ever worked on this with the thought of driving [Buechner] out of office. "There was no need for resignations or dramatics," she said. "If there was an explanation, why wouldn't he just tell us?
"He could have just answered the questions."
(Editor & Publisher WebSite:http:www.mediainfo.com) [Caption]
(copyright: Editor & Publisher October 30, 1999) [Caption]