Anyone who thinks the search for the University’s next chancellor should be closed is nothing more than a reactionary idiot.

Let’s consider what fresh horrors the legacy of former Chancellor James Oblinger brought upon this fine institution of research and learning. We all know why he is now the “former” chancellor: Mary Easley.

The backroom dealings that brought Easley here are well-documented in a damning series of e-mails between Oblinger, former Provost Larry Nielsen, former Chairman of the Board of Trustees McQueen Campbell and representatives for Mrs. Easley. We all remember the outrage we felt when we found out about her 88-percent salary increase from the summer of 2008, despite the increasingly dim economic picture and looming budget cuts in state funding. And we can all recall the absurdity of the excessive severance packages Oblinger and Nielsen received after resigning.

And even now, the corruption surrounding the Easleys continues to grow, with recent news about the fraudulent deals which they unwittingly were involved with at a coastal residential development. With each new bit of news out regarding the Easleys, the wound on the University’s reputation continues to fester and decay.

I met with Chancellor Jim Woodward last Wednesday to discuss the proposed indebtedness fee for renovating and expanding Talley Student Center. My impression was that Woodward wants to give students something to look back on and be proud of when they are alumni.

I’ve got a better idea for how he can make future (and current) alumni proud of N.C. State and benefit students: give the University a clean slate by throwing open the search process for the new chancellor.

For starters, this gives the University the opportunity to seize control over its public image. Considering it required federal subpoenas to gain access to the incriminating e-mail exchanges between the various parties involved in the Mary Easley fiasco, transparency is something the University needs a lot of right now. By making the search for a new chancellor completely public and transparent, University administrators can hopefully set a tone for the next administration, where there will be no secrets (unless we want to lose any semblance of a reputation).

Transparency is also a great way to screen candidates. Think of it this way: would you rather have a small committee with limited resources look for possible problems with nominees for the chancellor’s office, or students, faculty and the media?

An open search will not scare off potential applicants to the job. We are a big University with excellent academics in multiple fields and have strong ties to the industries students enter into with a NCSU diploma — however, out of superstition, I refuse to comment about our athletics.

But the best result of an open search would be accessibility. The search needs to put candidates out where the students are — optimally, every potential chancellor should spend a few hours out in D.H Hill or the Brickyard during lunch. Yes, managing the budget in times of economic uncertainty is important, as is keeping in touch with alumni and donors. But there will be no students in later years, and therefore no alumni, if the next chancellor does not stay in touch with current students.

Until then, the people who are opposed to opening the search for our next chancellor are like those fools who try to stand between Ahab and his white whale.