The Florida State University System Board of Governors approved a regulation giving its chair authority to approve university presidential finalists before they are presented to trustees, despite concerns about undermining the integrity of search committees.
The Florida State University System Board of Governors tangled on Wednesday over proposed changes to its role in university presidential searches, debating whether the chair should retain the authority to approve finalists before they are presented to university trustees.
At issue was an amendment to Board of Governors Regulation, which governs the search process for public university presidents in the state. Under the current process, university search committees recommend a list of finalists for campus visits and present them to the university’s board of trustees. The proposed rule would require the Chair of the Board of Governors to approve the list of finalists before they are sent to the trustees.
The proposed amendment would remove search committees’ formal approval authority, limiting the role to reviewing candidates without the ability to reject them.
Rogelio Tovar, the Florida International University Board of Trustees Chairman, expressed concern that the chair’s veto power could undermine the integrity of university search committees, which include trustees, faculty, and students. He noted that these committees dedicate large swaths of time and effort to vetting candidates, and allowing the chair to override their decisions without justification could devalue their work.
He further claimed that such a practice could discourage engaged individuals from serving on future committees, as their contributions might be easily dismissed.
“If you have a committee that feels like you have one person on that committee that has veto power, you’re going to have a real struggle putting together an effective committee,” Tovar said. “It won’t be the type of leadership you want on that committee, because people will say, I’m not going to waste my time if I just feel like I’m going to be overridden.”
Board of Governors member Eric Silagy also pushed back on the proposed motion, bringing forth an amendment to remove the Chair of the Board of Governors’ approval power over presidential search committee recommendations, replacing it with a review role. Silagy advocated for a more measured approach to the Chair’s role in the process, but the board voted against his amendment, opting to keep the Chair’s proposed approval authority.
“There is an opportunity for the board chair to be involved … and having conversations with the search committee chair, and giving a lot of direction,” Silagy said of his proposed amendment. “What it will do, I believe, is give a lot more clarity and transparency as to what the roles are of the search committee members.”
After Silagy’s amendment failed, the regulation in its original form, which retained the Chair’s authority to approve the list of finalists, was approved.
Those in support of the motion, however, cited a need to maintain oversight and ensure confidentiality in the process. Under Florida law, the names of presidential candidates are concealed, under the claim that it avoids potentially jeopardizing a candidate’s current positions. University of Florida Board of Trustees Chair Mori Hosseini contended that without the chair’s approval authority, rejections could occur publicly, potentially damaging candidates’ reputations.
“Confidentiality is really important, he said. “Let’s not beat around … the Board of Governors want to have more visibility on the selection of presidents. “The University of Florida experienced it when we did the last search, we had no less than two sitting presidents of top 10 universities apply for University of Florida presidency … No one is out of their mind to apply for a job if they don’t get selected, that everybody will know about it.”
Discussions also touched on broader concerns about the balance of power between the Board of Governors and university trustees, with some members suggesting that trustees, who are closer to their respective universities, should have more control over the process.
“We trusted the Board of Trustees to do the job. If they didn’t do the job, then we as the Board of Governors came in, right? That is changing. Make no mistake about that… More and more, the Board of Governors is getting more involved,” Hosseini said, though he added that he “ultimately trusts” the changes being made.