The University of Hawaiʻi Board of Regents is facing a legal challenge over how it hired President Wendy Hensel and approved a new senior‑adviser position, with critics alleging too much happened out of public view. Public First Law Center filed a lawsuit this week in state court asking a judge to unseal the board’s executive‑session discussions on Hensel’s hiring, her early evaluation and the creation of the adviser role. The complaint stops short of trying to undo either hire, but it seeks access to minutes and recordings, along with changes to how the university handles public testimony and remote participation.
What the suit alleges
As reported by Honolulu Civil Beat, the lawsuit argues that regents leaned too heavily on open‑meeting exemptions when they interviewed finalists for the presidency and later signed off on what the complaint characterizes as roughly $1 million in combined annual compensation for Hensel and her senior adviser. “The goal is two‑fold,” Public First Law Center attorney Ben Creps told Honolulu Civil Beat. “One is to get compliance with the law but also to better understand the decisions that did happen behind closed doors.”
The complaint also claims multiple 2025 and 2026 meetings lack proper minutes, accuses the board of curbing public testimony by requiring advance registration and faults regents for attending meetings remotely without giving the public a link to watch.
Board records show the appointment and pay
According to official university meeting records, the Board of Regents interviewed presidential finalists in executive session on Oct. 16–17, 2024, then publicly approved Hensel’s three‑year contract on Oct. 17. The agreement set a $675,000 annual salary and a $7,000 monthly housing allowance. The minutes describe a mix of public forums, confidential surveys and executive‑session interviews that regents reviewed before making their choice.
Those minutes, which outline the closed‑door session and the open vote on Hensel’s compensation, sit at the center of the fight over how much the board could legitimately shield from the public, according to the Board of Regents minutes.
Who Hensel hired and at what cost
After taking office, Hensel brought on Kim Siegenthaler as a senior adviser to drive technology and student‑success efforts across the system. The university announced the hire in March 2025, positioning Siegenthaler to coordinate Banner modernization, AI planning and other systemwide projects, according to UH News.
The lawsuit points to reporting that the Board of Regents created the adviser role and approved a $250,000 annual salary after waiving a formal recruitment process, as detailed by Honolulu Civil Beat.
Legal context: Sunshine law and OIP guidance
Hawaii’s open‑meetings law generally requires that hiring, firing and evaluating top public officials happen in the open, unless very specific privacy interests justify closing the doors. The state Office of Information Practices revisited earlier guidance after courts raised concerns about parts of a prior opinion.
OIP’s formal opinion and subsequent court rulings narrowed when boards can lawfully keep deliberations private. Those interpretations form the legal backbone of the Public First Law Center complaint. For the agency’s analysis of executive sessions and potential remedies, see OIP Opinion F24‑03.
What’s at stake and next steps
The case now moves through the First Circuit, where a judge will decide whether the regents’ executive‑session practices ran afoul of the Sunshine Law and whether the public gets to see the disputed minutes or recordings. If the court orders more disclosure, it could spur the Board of Regents and other state boards to adjust how they use search consultants, manage remote attendance and structure public testimony when hiring senior leaders.
