State University System to solicit Attorney General’s opinion on FAU presidential search suspension

The State University System’s Board of Governors (BOG) will present a proposal during its meeting on Friday to submit a request to Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody seeking a legal opinion regarding the basis for Florida Atlantic University’s (FAU) presidential search suspension.

A proposed board action can be found within the BOG’s meeting agenda that pertains to the potential pursuit of a legal opinion from Moody. The Board is seeking clarification as to whether FAU’s presidential search committee was within its legal standing under Sunshine Laws to utilize an anonymous preference survey held outside of formal meetings and submitted to an external entity as a means to facilitate discussions.

“In light of the Board’s oversight and governance role regarding the university presidential search and selection process, the Board will consider approval to submit a request to the Florida Office of Attorney General, to seek a legal opinion regarding whether a committee governed under the Sunshine Law can use a preference survey that is conducted off the record, outside of a meeting, and anonymously submitted by the committee members to a third party, in order to streamline discussions, is consistent with the requirements of the Sunshine Law,” reads the agenda.

The State University System of Florida suspended the search for the next president of FAU in July due to concerns over self-described anomalies throughout the process.

In a letter composed by University System Chancellor Ray Rodrigues to FAU Board of Trustees Chairman Brad Levine, the university system board highlighted instances of transparency breaches during the selection process. These violations allegedly involved inappropriate inquiries regarding a candidate’s sexual orientation, gender, and preferred pronouns, potentially contravening regulations set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

“At least one candidate reported he was requested to complete a questionnaire and answer if his sexual orientation was “queer” and whether he was a “male or transgender male,” reads Rodrigues’ letter. “In a separate and required survey, the same candidate was subsequently asked if his gender was “male, female, or other” and what his “preferred pronouns were.” These inquiries are wholly irrelevant, inappropriate, and potentially illegal.”

Rodrigues voiced reservations regarding the use of a straw poll within the search committee’s evaluation process, where committee members were tasked with assessing their preferred candidates from a pool of nearly 60 applicants. The Chancellor’s letter further emphasized that these rankings were confidentially submitted to the contracted search firm, leading to apprehensions regarding transparency and adherence to state statutes.

Levine defended the university’s presidential search methodology during FAU’s most recent trustee meeting on August 15, outlining the tools used to aid in the university’s search for its new leader, including the scrutinized straw poll distributed among search committee members.

“The Chancellor identified two areas of concern,” commented Levine. “The first involved a preference survey that the committee members utilized when determining which applicants to interview. At the time we had nearly 60 applicants. At that time, rather than taking an exorbitant amount of time, Trustee [Barbara] Feingold made a wise proposal that the members individually submit a list of their top candidates. The expectation was that this would allow us to demonstrate consensus, The Board of Governors’ representative on the committee enthusiastically endorsed the suggestion, saying he had previously used such methodology in prior searches.”

Levine further pointed to a legal opinion provided by constitutional lawyers which states that the use of the preference survey does not violate any standing state law. He also added that the university had no involvement in composing questions sent to applicants, delegating responsibility to consulting firm ABG.

“The preference survey was just that — simply a survey. It was not a vote,” remarked Levine.

Levine further elucidated that ABG routinely features similar questions on contracted survey projects for its internal data. The Board of Governors’ Inspector General has been provided with ‘thousands of pages’ of requested material for the state investigation, according to Levine, and is expected to complete the inquiry in November.

“We feel strongly that our search complied with all legal requirements and we would like to resume our search as soon as possible,” he concluded.