When the presidents and chancellors of the 14 Big Ten universities began discussing the prospects of students returning to their campuses last fall amid the coronavirus pandemic and with football season looming, they weighed many considerations, from public health to financial impact.
But emails obtained by the Washington Post through public records requests reveal another priority: keeping their discussions from ever entering public view.
"I would be delighted to share information," Wisconsin Chancellor Rebecca Blank responded in an email chain begun in August by Michigan President Mark Schlissel, "but perhaps we can do this through the Big 10 portal, which will assure confidentiality?"
The next day, Schlissel told his colleagues: "Just FYI - I am working with Big Ten staff to move the conversation to secure Boardvantage web site we use for league materials. Will advise."
The Big Ten portal, which uses Nasdaq Boardvantage's software, allows users to communicate with one another, share meeting materials and view documents - but the school presidents value it at least in part because they see it as exempt from open-records laws.
This portal seemingly served as a primary form of communication for conference leaders, including university presidents and athletic directors, when they were vacillating over whether to stage a football season, amid varying pressures ranging from players' parents to the Oval Office. Thus the deliberations that led to the initial decision to postpone the season until the spring and the subsequent about-face that led to a cancellation-plagued campaign that began in late October remain shrouded from public view. Open-records requests to several schools for the documents and communications housed on that platform were denied.
The apparent attempt to avoid public scrutiny alarmed public records experts, who voiced concern over the possibility that the leaders of 13 of the nation's richest public institutions (Northwestern is the only private school in the conference) are taking steps to avoid scrutiny from the taxpayers who fund their universities.
"The idea that government officials would intentionally use a technological platform, seemingly with the intent of evading public records laws, is both troubling and wrong on the law," said Adam Marshall, a senior staff attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.