Tensions between state lawmakers and the College of South Carolina‘s Board of Trustees hit a boiling level over the previous week with the introduction within the legislature of a bill that will dismiss each board member and minimize its membership practically in half.
With multimillion-dollar teaching buyouts, concerns over campus–building names, and a divisive presidential search that led to scrutiny from an accreditor, the flagship campus, in Columbia, has been mired in destructive publicity over the previous couple of years. And lawmakers have put a lot of the blame for that on the trustees. The legislature’s proposal to shake up the board, which handed the Home this week, 113 to 1, adopted a string of terse interactions between trustees and lawmakers.
Throughout hours-long hearings on March 28 and 29, a panel of legislators grilled present board members about these controversies, and finally refused to approve the reappointments of 5 longtime trustees. The Faculty and College Trustee Screening Fee, which incorporates the Senate president and Home speaker, is charged with reviewing proposed campus trustees. Its choice to not endorse 5 trustees — C. Dorn Smith, the present board chair; Thad Westbrook, the vice chair; C. Edward Floyd; John von Lehe; and Charles Williams — for re-election leaves their future membership in limbo even when the board-restructuring invoice doesn’t go.
“This simply doesn’t actually create plenty of confidence in y’all’s competency, do you perceive … that perspective?” mentioned Sen. Dick Harpootlian, a Democrat, to one of many board members, in keeping with a video of the listening to. “Isn’t it time that we do extra than simply rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic? I imply this college has had its ups and downs so long as I’ve lived in Columbia.”
In the course of the listening to, legislators expressed frustration in regards to the board’s administration of the college’s finances. They targeted a lot of their questioning on the thousands and thousands of {dollars} that the college had lent to its athletics division to purchase out soccer and basketball coaches’ contracts, and on the college’s 2019 presidential search that was disrupted by accusations of political meddling.
The lawmakers echoed the college’s accreditor, which in 2020 mentioned that the board had buckled to political stress when it appointed Lt. Gen. Robert L. Caslen Jr. as president. The accreditor mentioned that South Carolina’s governor had exercised “undue influence” by calling board members to induce them to vote for Caslen, a former superintendent of the USA Army Academy at West Level. The legislators additionally pressed trustees on their choice to spend hundreds of {dollars} to fly out to satisfy with Caslen in individual when he was a candidate.
Caslen, whose appointment sparked protest among some students and faculty members, resigned in Might 2021 after admitting he’d plagiarized a part of a graduation speech.
A number of trustees mentioned throughout the listening to that the board wanted extra oversight, and so they admitted that the presidential search had been dealt with poorly.
“Politics simply don’t belong in working a college,” mentioned Williams, one of many trustees not authorised for re-election by lawmakers. “We’re supposed to search out the very best individual for no matter job. We’re supposed to present the perfect route and coverage. We don’t have to get entangled in micromanaging anyway.”
Williams mentioned he had not initially been a supporter of Caslen, however as soon as he acquired the job, the trustee tried to “do the whole lot” he may to make Caslen profitable.
On the Quick Observe
Within the state Home, lawmakers opted to skip committee debate on the board-restructuring invoice, voting unanimously to “quick monitor” the laws to the Home ground, a step that will give it a greater likelihood of passing earlier than the session ends, in Might. The laws nonetheless must go the Senate and get the governor’s signature to change into regulation. Gov. Henry McMaster lately told reporters that the invoice appears “OK” to him, in keeping with The State.
Essentially the most hanging side of the proposal is its dismissal of all present board members on June 30, 2023, although the invoice wouldn’t stop them from working for re-election, in keeping with Rep. G. Murrell Smith Jr., a Republican and one of many invoice’s sponsors.
The laws would additionally overhaul the board’s construction by reducing the variety of trustees, from 20 to 13, and now not electing board members out of judicial circuits. As an alternative, the legislature would elect one member from every of South Carolina’s seven congressional districts and 4 others who reside within the house counties of the college’s eight campuses. The governor would appoint the ultimate two voting members. The governor, the student-body president on the flagship campus, and the alumni-association president would all function nonvoting members.
The legislature’s transfer to overtake the Board of Trustees to such a level is uncommon, in keeping with Terry MacTaggart, a senior fellow on the Affiliation of Governing Boards of Universities and Schools. He mentioned whereas many state legislatures have pushed payments to dictate training coverage or curricula, this invoice is uncommon as a result of it focuses on the efficiency of the board fairly than ideology or political priorities.
“You requested if smaller is healthier,” MacTaggart mentioned, referring to board measurement. “Sure it’s, however much more vital is who will get appointed and the tradition of accountable governance, and the legislature is chargeable for these two issues.”
A College of South Carolina spokesperson declined to remark past saying that the board operates beneath the legislature’s purview. A request for remark despatched to the board’s normal e-mail tackle wasn’t answered.
“If the board is as dysfunctional as you say it’s, why on the planet would we re-elect any of the present members again of their present seat?” Jay Lucas, the Republican Home speaker, requested Williams throughout the listening to.
“Y’all are those who elect them,” Williams mentioned, “and in the event you suppose that change ought to be made, all you want to do is make it.”
