Latest news with #UniversityBoards
Forbes
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
Texas Governor Signs Bill That Throttles Public University Senates
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has signed SB 37 into law, greatly restricting the powers of university ... More faculty senates. (Photo by) Texas has passed a wide-ranging law that greatly diminishes the size, influence and independence of the faculty senates at its public colleges and universities. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed Senate Bill 37 into law on June 22, the deadline for him to sign or veto legislation. The Texas State Legislature had passed the bill on May 31 after it went through several revisions. The new law, authored by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, contains several elements that significantly strengthen the power of university governing boards and central administrators over the curriculum, hiring of university personnel, program review and other academic matters. It becomes effective September 1. It also strips away much of the authority that duly constituted faculty bodies have held under the traditional norms of shared governance and shifts it to the political appointees who constitute institutional governing boards. For example, administrators and boards often have deferred to faculty opinon about general education requirements, but in Texas, that might no longer be the case because under the new law, a governing board 'may reserve the right to overturn any decision made by the institution regarding any changes to the general education curriculum.' The legislation also creates a new "Office of the Ombudsman' within the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Appointed by the governor, that office will have the power to investigate allegations that universities are not following the dictates of SB 37 and other legislative requirements, and it can threaten their funding if they don't comply with the law. However, it's the law's new constraints on the composition and role of faculty senates that have generated some of the most heated debate between opponents and proponents. Here are six ways that faculty senates at Texas institutions will be affected by the new law. According to the new law, "only the governing board of an institution of higher education may establish a faculty council or senate at the institution." If a board decided to do away with such a body, the law appears to permit it. If a board decides to authorize a faculty senate, it alone has the power to define how members are selected, consistent with other provisions summarized below. A governing board must ensure that the senate ensures adequate representation of faculty from each college at the institution, but unless the board decides otherwise, the law sets the maximum number of senate members at 60, with at least two representatives coming from each college or school at an institution. Of those 60, the bill requires that, of the two representatives from each college or school, one member is appointed by the president or chief executive officer of the institution, with 'the remaining members elected by a vote of the faculty of the member's respective college or school.' In addition, the law gives a university's president or chief executive officer the power to appoint a senate's presiding officer, associate presiding officer, and secretary. And, under the new law, it's the president who gets to specify how an institution's senate conducts its meetings. SB 37 sets different term limits for faculty senate members, depending on whether they were elected or presidentially appointed. Presidential appointees are permitted to serve six consecutive years before having to take a break for two years, but elected members are permitted to serve only two years before having to take the required two-year break. Faculty can have their senate membership removed at any time. According to the bill, faculty members could be be immediately removed from a senate for 'failing to conduct the member's responsibilities within the council's or senate's parameters, failing to attend council or senate meetings, or engaging in other similar misconduct.' In addition, they 'may be removed on recommendation of the institution's provost and approval by the institution's president or chief executive officer.' According to the bill a faculty senate 'is advisory only and may not be delegated the final decision-making authority on any matter.' In addition, a faculty senate 'may not issue any statement or publish a report using the institution's official seal, trademark, or resources funded by the institution on any matter not directly related to the council's or senate's duties to advise the institution administration.' Not surprisingly, the new law has generated a wide range of reactions. Supporters contend it will help end what they believe is the liberal bias of higher education faculty. Creighton, SB 37's author, insists the measure was necessary to increase transparency and end faculty's politicalization of universities. "For too long, unelected faculty senates have operated behind closed doors, steering curriculum decisions, influencing institutional policy, issuing political statements to divest from Israel, and even organizing votes of 'no confidence' that undermine public trust," he said. "SB 37 reaffirms that the authority belongs to the board of regents so that our universities can stay focused on what matters: educating students, conducting research and preparing the next generation of Texas leaders." A National Review columnist agreed, claiming, 'it is the professors and their fundamental disconnect from reality that are leading higher education astray. By freeing Texas schools from the grip of zealous faculty members, S.B. 37 can serve as a model for other states facing left-wing radicalism.' Critics, however, contend that the law represents big government overreach, undermines shared governance, increases partisan political influence, and jeopardizes academic freedom. Brian Evans, president of the Texas Conference of the American Association of University Professors, said SB 37 "imperils the foundations of our higher education system and threatens Texas' ability to recruit and retain faculty at the head of their fields, as well as students driven to learn and engage critically with complex subjects. SB 37 will put what we teach in the hands of political appointees rather than in the hands of faculty who have studied these subjects and understand their nuances. The passage of SB 37 is a dark day for Texas colleges and universities, with many more to come." Attempts to strip faculty senates of their influence have become an increasingly popular strategy among conservative legislators in other states, and some university presidents have even led the charge at their institutions. However, Texas's sweeping new law may represent the most aggressive state attempt yet to throttle the role of faculty in university shared governance. That's been an oft-stated goal of several of the state's elected officials, including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. As a former university president, I appreciate how frustrating the pace and the debates of faculty senates can sometimes be. But like many other administrators, I also learned how the collective voice of faculty members elected by their peers could frequently contribute to better decision-making in the long run. Texas may now have a chance to learn that same lesson.
Washington Post
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Washington Post
Virginia Senate Democrats reject Youngkin's university board picks
RICHMOND — Virginia Senate Democrats rejected eight of Gov. Glenn Youngkin's appointees to public university boards, a move intended to push back on the Republican governor's drive to give campus culture a conservative makeover. The impact of the vote, at an unusual Monday evening meeting of the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee, was a matter of dispute. While the senators said they had immediately ousted the eight from boards governing the University of Virginia, Virginia Military Institute and George Mason University, Youngkin's office contended that any removals could not occur until 30 days into the next General Assembly session, which begins in January. Among the most prominent of the eight was Ken Cuccinelli II, who as the state's hard-charging Republican state attorney general years ago sued a U-Va. climate scientist, and Caren Merrick, Youngkin's former commerce secretary. Cuccinelli declined to comment and Merrick did not respond to a request for comment. Even with this action, Youngkin appointees will still make up nearly three-quarters of members on university boards across the state, according to a Washington Post tally. Boards of visitors at Virginia public universities oversee operations at the schools, including appointing presidents and setting tuition. The move raised political tensions and perhaps the profile of the committee chairman, Sen. Aaron R. Rouse (D-Virginia Beach), one week before Democrats choose the party's nominees for lieutenant governor and attorney general. Rouse is one of six Democrats running for lieutenant governor in the June 17 primary. Sen. Ghazala F. Hashmi (D-Richmond), who does not serve on that committee but is a rival for the nomination, promptly issued a news release praising the committee's vote. 'Virginia is proud to maintain one of the strongest public higher education systems in America,' Senate Majority Leader Scott A. Surovell (D-Fairfax) said in a letter issued afterward to the rectors of every state university board. 'Our Commonwealth is home to some of the nation's oldest and most prestigious institutions, and they deserve governance that is independent, principled, and focused solely on their academic mission and service to the Commonwealth.' Youngkin spokesman Rob Damschen said the committee's action was meaningless — and expensive for taxpayers, who pay legislators a per diem of a few hundred dollars to attend meetings. 'Just days before a contentious Democrat primary, Virginians see today's antics for what they are — an obvious political sideshow,' he said in a written statement. 'This sloppy attempt to boost one of the candidates is not only completely out of order with general assembly procedures, it also costs Virginians thousands of dollars.' Youngkin appointed Cuccinelli, a U-Va. graduate, to the flagship university's board in March, after firing an earlier pick whose combative style had worn thin. The committee also voted to remove three of Youngkin's appointees to the VMI board: Jonathan Hartsock of Lexington, Stephen Reardon of Richmond and Jose Suarez of St. Augustine, Florida. From the GMU board, the senators rejected Merrick; Charles Cooper of Bonita Springs, Florida; William Hansen of McLean; and Maureen Ohlhausen of Annandale. 'As a graduate of George Mason law school, and a supporter of the school for decades, I had looked forward to helping guide the university as a member of the board of visitors, so it's certainly a disappointment,' Ohlhausen said in an email. Messages to the five other ousted members were not returned. The three schools affected have all had cultural and political tensions in recent months. At U-Va., the board passed a resolution in March requiring the school to dissolve its diversity, equity and inclusion office but allowed the university to transfer programs 'permissible' by law to other homes. Weeks later, Youngkin fired Bert Ellis, an outspoken board member, from the governing body, appointing Cuccinelli as his replacement. Since then, the Justice Department has sent a letter to U-Va. saying it was not properly following the resolution, and conservative alumni from organizations such as the Jefferson Council have called for the ouster of President Jim Ryan. At the Virginia Military Institute, the board dominated by Youngkin appointees voted against the contract extension of Superintendent Cedric T. Wins, the school's first Black leader — who had expanded DEI programs — causing an uproar among some alumni over a lack of transparency and possible racism. The 10-6 vote included two members named to the body in previous days by Youngkin: John Hartsock and Stephen Reardon. Wins blamed 'bias' and 'ideology' for the vote. Two board members resigned in the fallout — including then-president John Adams and former president Tom Watjen — before Youngkin donor and ally Teddy Gottwald was named interim president. In a final note to cadets last week, Wins, whose contract ends this month, cautioned against 'clinging to outdated traditions and attitudes' at VMI. At George Mason University, the governing board is also considering a resolution to roll back DEI policies, causing pushback from student and faculty representatives who defended the programs' importance for student success. The board delayed the vote on the resolution and did not vote on the matter during its latest board meeting in May. Responding to Trump administration executive orders and directives to end 'race-based decision-making,' President Gregory Washington has renamed the DEI office to the Office of Access, Compliance and Community. The school also ended operations of the Center for Truth, Racial Healing, and Transformation, according to GMU spokesperson Paul Allvin. At the Senate committee meeting, which lasted just over 10 minutes, senators took up a resolution to confirm the eight appointees. A motion to pass it failed on a party-line 8-4 vote, with three Republicans absent. Youngkin, like all Virginia governors, makes hundreds of appointments each year, many of them when the General Assembly is not in session. Appointments that are subject to General Assembly confirmation typically get voted on at the next regular legislative session. The Virginia Constitution states that any appointee who is not approved 30 days after the start of the session is out of a job, and the governor cannot reappoint that person to the same post. Although Youngkin's office contends that the eight cannot be ousted until the 30-day deadline early next year, Democrats note that they took up the resolution under the auspices of a 2024 special legislative session that has never officially been concluded. Under the joint procedural resolution setting out the rules of the special session, the legislature is allowed to take up gubernatorial appointments. Democrats say that just like any other piece of legislation that fails to advance out of committee, the resolution with the eight names is dead and the nominees cannot be considered for the same post again. Shaun Kenney, spokesman for Attorney General Jason S. Miyares (R), said the full General Assembly must get a chance to weigh in. Democrats narrowly control both the House and Senate, but all 100 House seats are on the ballot in November. 'The Virginia Constitution is pretty clear on the matter: Only the General Assembly is authorized to act,' Kenney said. 'It is not a committee, it is not a subcommittee, it is the entire assembly.' Ahead of the vote Monday, Democrats did not voice specific objections to the individuals. Sen. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria) noted that the General Assembly has approved thousands of Youngkin's appointees for various boards and commissions and rejected 'a handful … that we've seen as overly ideological or extreme.' He suggested the eight were 'not good choices' for the boards and lamented declining civility and an 'atmosphere of hostility' surrounding board meetings, most specifically at GMU. 'Some of the visitors do not seem to be there for academic or even university governance purposes,' Ebbin said. 'They seem to be there rather to disrupt and if they can, even to destroy.' Sen. Bill DeSteph (R-Virginia Beach) said the appointees were all highly accomplished people, including Merrick, whom the board confirmed a few years ago for Youngkin's Cabinet. 'I don't believe any one of these members is there to destroy,' he said. 'They're there to build our future workforce and to build our universities for the future.'
