The history of the University of Hawaii Board of Regents (UH BOR) is reviewed and compared to other public university governing boards, and recommendations are offered to increase the board's effectiveness. Based on a review of the literature on public university governing boards, a consensus of opinions is used as a basis to evaluate the UH BOR. The current constitutional and statutory provisions for the BOR are critiqued, and changes in the laws affecting the BOR (number of members, term of office, qualifications, ex officio membership, and specifically delegated powers) are traced historically. In addition, the following demographic information about the 112 Regents are examined: age, ethnicity, gender, education, vocation, place of birth, residence during term of office, political affiliation, and religious preference. These factors are also compared with national data. The views of current and former regents concerning the main roles of the board during their terms of service and their views of the ideal governing board are also considered. Finally, recommendations are discussed, including the following: the 2- and 4-year terms should be replaced by longer terms; and regents should focus on policy-making rather than execution of policy. (SW)