Hobbs vetoes bill that aimed to strip power from U of A Faculty Senate

PHOENIX — Gov. Katie Hobbs has quashed a legislative attempt to strip power from faculty at the state’s three universities and consolidate it with the university presidents and the Arizona Board of Regents.

The Democratic governor vetoed legislation Friday that would have removed language in existing law saying the faculty senates at each university “shall participate’’ in the governance of their school. The bill sent to Hobbs by the Republican-controlled Legislature would have replaced that wording to say the faculty senates would “consult’’ with their respective schools and the regents.

It also would have spelled out that the authority to approve academic degrees or create new departments rests with the regents, who can delegate that “only to a university president.’’ It also said the university president could not then give that authority to others.

While the legislation would have applied to Arizona State and Northern Arizona universities as well, it was a direct outgrowth of the financial problems at the University of Arizona.

“Faculty play a key role in the shared governance of a university’s academic and research affairs,’’ Hobbs wrote in her veto message Friday. “Limiting their management participation in the academic affairs of the institution has the potential to weaken the institution and limit the perspectives and expertise included in decision making.’’

Rep. Travis Grantham, a Gilbert Republican who proposed the bill, said Friday there are some people in the university system who understood his purpose.

As for others, “The people who are so married to the term ‘shared governance’ and who are clinging to it so fiercely and are trying to run the universities from the mid-level management down, faculty down, those people I have found to be pretty politically extreme toward the left,’’ he told Capitol Media Services.

“They don’t seem to want a university president to do a university president’s job,’’ Grantham said. “They want to do that job for them.’’

Grantham said he doesn’t intend that as an indictment of the entire faculty.

“The faculty and staff that wants so-called ‘shared governance’ the way they would like to define it — definitely left or lefter-leaning of the groups,’’ he said.

Grantham attributes at least part of the university’s financial problems to the inability of UA President Robert C. Robbins to have total control. He contrasted that with Arizona State University, saying its president, Michael Crow, “runs the operation from the president down.’’

“But what was going on at the U of A was a more holistic approach,’’ Grantham told colleagues during hearings on the measure, a model described as “shared governance.’’

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

He said there was no basis for that in the law. “They’re supposed to take inputs from their faculty and students,’’ Grantham said. “They’re supposed to allow students, faculty to mold policies and make decisions in the university system. But they’re not supposed to be able to freely spend money, commit the university to things like that.’’

Legislative approval of the measure came over the objections of faculty including Mark Stegeman, a member of the UA Faculty Senate.

“The Faculty Senate has very little authority,’’ he testified at a committee hearing. And while Stegeman said that body has approved creation of new programs and degrees, all originated from proposals submitted by university administration.

The legislation would eliminate the ability to veto a program because “those things would stop coming through the Senate and we would not generate a very fruitful discussion about those programs,’’ Stegeman told lawmakers, adding that would be a mistake.

“The Faculty Senate … asks questions that I think the members of this panel would ask if they themselves are there: Is there a return on investment for this program — or are the new administrative positions justified?’’ he said.

Grantham, however, argued to colleagues during hearings that his proposal didn’t undermine the role of faculty.

“I’m actually strengthening that,’’ he said, even though his bill would have eliminated the language saying the Faculty Senate has the power to “participate in the governance of their respective universities and shall actively participate in the development of university policy.’’

“Universities should be run from the top down,’’ Grantham said, testifying that his measure “clarifies the president is the president.’’

He pointed out his proposed new language said the regents and the university presidents “shall consult’’ with the faculty through their elected representatives “regarding academic and educational activities and matters related to faculty personnel.’’

Rep. Oscar De Los Santos, a Laveen Democrat and the assistant House minority leader, said there was no need for the legislation — especially if the underlying issue was the budget deficit at the UA.

The measure “weakens the power of the faculty over academic and educational programs specifically,” De Los Santos said. “That has nothing to do with the budget or management.”