The search for the next University of Hawaii president is turning into the latest battleground for control of the massive state public university system, with some state lawmakers exerting heavy pressure to try to influence the selection and pushing to have current President David Lassner vacate the post earlier than his expected departure at the end of 2024, according to several officials close to the process.

The situation is politically fraught especially because while the 11-member UH Board of Regents is the body tasked with handling the presidential search, three regents — board Chair Alapaki Nahale-a, former Gov. Neil Abercrombie and attorney Lauren Akitake — still need to be confirmed by the state Senate in the next Legislature.

Nahale-a, in a Honolulu Star-Advertiser interview Tuesday, declined to point a finger at a specific lawmaker or lawmakers. He said he hopes the historically tense relationship between them and UH can eventually improve. But he confirmed that some regents have been targeted by pointed efforts to influence aspects of the presidential search.

“I have heard that the regents’ networks are giving them feedback on who the next president should be, what the process should look like, and I’m getting that feedback, too, from an array of places. I think that’s fine,” Nahale-a said. “I love the fact that lots of people think they know who should be the next president or what they should look like. Everybody in Hawaii should absolutely care about who the next UH leader is. So I love the fact that there’s lots of people with strong opinions.

“But you’ve got to trust the process,” he continued. “I think anyone’s effort to push an individual regent to behave in a certain way kind of misses the point. … Process is so important, so that (everyone) contributes to the ultimate decision, not undermine or privilege one perspective over the other. I think that’ll be a big part of the conversation on Thursday.”

The UH Board of Regents is scheduled at 9 a.m. Thursday to discuss and act on a recommended presidential search plan during a special meeting at UH Manoa, in the first-floor conference room of the Information Technology Building.

Nahale-a also acknowledged that there is “a particular array of folks who think the (current) president should leave sooner. That’s a decision for all regents. The time to do that would have been on his evaluation. That’s not what the evaluation determined. …

“While we’re trying to recruit, I don’t agree with the opinions that having an interim president somehow is good for the university,” Nahale-a continued. “I’m very confident that there is a lot of advantage to having the person that’s been leading us stay the course while we’re working on the transition. That seems to be an ideal way to get this done.”

Christian Fern, executive director of the University of Hawaii Professional Assembly, the union representing UH faculty, decried undue attempts to influence the regents.

“The University of Hawaii needs to conduct a thorough search for a successor to UH President David Lassner and ensure there is a smooth transition. Attempting to circumvent protocols and best practices in finding a successor is not fair for the university community,” Fern said in a statement.

“The University of Hawaii should operate autonomously,” he continued. “It’s always discouraging when legislators step outside of their defined scope of responsibilities and attempt to promote their own agenda and interject their personal beliefs in the affairs of the university. We hope the regents take their roles seriously, act with integrity and in the best interests of the university, and take a stand against the undue influence exerted by certain legislators.”

Three state senators — Donna Mercado Kim, Donovan Dela Cruz and Michelle Kidani — have clashed often with UH officials over various issues over the years, and said in February that they felt it was time for Lassner to resign. They said then that there was not one particular problem that led them to feel Lassner should step down, but a pattern they perceived of too-slow progress by the university to meet the needs of students and the state.

All four members of Hawaii’s congressional delegation, the executive director of the UH faculty union and the head of the state House Higher Education and Technology Committee were among those who came then to Lassner’s defense.

In September, Lassner announced that he will retire “at the end of 2024,” but said he was not forced out. A specific end date has not yet been set. In a Star-Advertiser interview, Lassner outlined a long list of goals for his final year and said “anyone who expects me to act like a ‘lame duck’ will be sorely disappointed.”

Requests for comment Tuesday from Kim and Dela Cruz did not receive an immediate response.

The regents Thursday are expected to discuss and vote on recommendations of the Presidential Selection Process Permitted Interaction Group, or PIG1 for short, made up of regents Akitake, Wayne Higaki, Gabe Lee, Laurel Loo and Diane Paloma.

Among its recommendations, the committee proposes that:

>> The board should hire a search firm with Hawaii expertise and/or a Hawaii focus to conduct a national search. It recommends issuing a request for proposal by Dec. 15; setting a response deadline of Jan. 16, 2024; and selecting a search firm by Jan. 31.

>> The duties of the UH Manoa chancellor should be separated from the UH president’s responsibilities.

However, Nahale-a said that such a complicated change should be decided on by the Board of Regents. Fern added in a separate interview that also consulting with the union on such complex governance issues has been an important past practice.

>> The board should engage in a “listening phase” to gather input from faculty, staff, students, alumni, donors and other constituents, using a survey, and open forums in each county, and incorporate the feedback when drafting the position description.

>> The board should create a second Presidential Search Permitted Interaction Group, or “PIG2,” as a search committee to develop a pool of candidates, screen and recommend to the BOR a list of three finalists.

“We recommend PIG2 work with the search firm to keep its activities confidential to minimize lobbying regarding who makes the list of finalists. PIG2 activities shall be kept confidential and shall not be communicated to other BOR members, until the final report is produced,” the recommendation said.

>> The search process should include a separate advisory group to include nonboard members representing groups such as faculty, staff, students, administrators, alumni and members of the broader community.

>> The overall timeline should be to launch recruitment from Feb. 15 to April 15; evaluate candidates from April 16 to May 16; make a selection in June; and appointment in the fall. The target date for the new president to start would be Aug. 1 but no later than Dec. 31, 2024.