In the past weeks, we have presented our vision for what the Young Trustee selection process ought to be. But it is just as important to note the characteristics and mechanisms that the process ought not include.

First, the selection process should not be longer and should not follow a different timeline. A year-long system or one that spans part of the Fall and Spring semesters would provide little time for seniors in leadership positions running for Young Trustee to prove themselves. In addition, it would eliminate the possibility for juniors, who often study abroad, to be fully involved in the selection process.

Even worse, a prolonged selection would politicize a process that should above all else be about selecting a technocrat. Increasing the total length of the selection timeline would force candidates to become quasi-public figures and pressure them to meet with organizations and individuals to make their case. Face time and politicking would trump quality and experience.

An application deadline in the first weeks of the Spring semester is also sensible. Potential Young Trustees have time to complete their applications over the long winter break, which is not as cluttered as a typical Duke student’s summer or Fall semester.

Second, the person in charge of facilitating the YT selection process should not be appointed by Duke Student Government or any other student organization. Instead, they should be elected by the student body at large. This drastically reduces issues of bias associated with the process, especially if coupled with the stipulation that the student in charge of the process agrees not to run for Young Trustee in the future.

The leader of the YT selection process should be elected in the Spring DSG elections in order to ensure high voter turnout and avoid Fall elections that drastically over-represent luninformed freshmen voters. And even if elected alongside other DSG officers, this position should remain independent from the DSG Executive Committee to further prevent conflict of interest.

Third, the selection of the Young Trustee should not involve anyone other than students. The student chosen for the position should bring new and challenging perspectives to the Board of Trustees once appointed, and involving Board members could jeopardize this result.

Creating any role for faculty members in the nominating or selection process is also misguided. The Young Trustee position is designed to give voice to the student perspective, and the involvement of faculty members would counter this purpose.

Fourth, the process should not be void of opportunities for organizations and individuals to offer their input—both negative and positive—about the candidates for Young Trustee. Instead of trying to keep conversation neutral, the process should seek to gather as much evidence as possible about the character and quality of candidates’ leadership and service.

Reforming the Young Trustee selection process is an inherently difficult task. Although no perfect process exists, Special Secretary for the Young Trustee process Amanda Turner should steer clear of the above stipulations in the by-laws she presents to DSG this Wednesday.