Faculty and union leaders press board for clarity on reserves and program decisions

Multiple faculty leaders and union representatives used the public comment period to press the Board of Regents for clearer explanations of system reserves and for stronger shared-governance on program approvals.

Louise Williams, president of the Connecticut State University AAUP chapter, said recent media coverage left legislators and faculty unsure about the system’s financial position. "When news items like this appear, we feel like fools, naive dupes, tripped by managers who are hiding something," Williams told the board, urging immediate, detailed explanations of reserve levels and calls for reserves to be used for classroom needs and faculty hiring.

Carrie Swanson, president of the Southern AAUP chapter and a library acquisitions coordinator, described the effects of earlier mitigation actions on staffing and workload: "Previous rounds of mitigation ... have reduced the number of full and part time faculty, have reduced reassigned time for compensation for non teaching work, reduced the number of staff, and have left employees with unreasonable workloads and decreased morale," she said.

Faculty speakers also raised procedural concerns. Lisa Lancor, chair of computer science at Southern, described a multi‑year effort to design a master’s in data science that faculty said met workforce demand and required no additional system cost; she said the proposal was repeatedly delayed and ultimately approved only as a below-threshold concentration after being denied on duplication grounds. Lancor said the experience has eroded trust in the program-approval process and asked for faster, clearer pathways for faculty-initiated curricular innovation.

Other public commenters reiterated worries that Charter Oak’s creation of an education school and other system-level actions risk duplicating programs and drawing students away from on‑ground institutions. Faculty asked the board to produce a transparent plan for reserves, to prioritize classroom resources and faculty hires, and to improve communication with presidents and faculty governance bodies.

Why this matters: Faculty morale, shared governance and how the system uses reserves affect instructional quality and the ability to recruit and retain both faculty and students. Several speakers said those issues should guide the board’s legislative and budget advocacy.

Board and system leaders responded that they would improve communications and that system officers are working with presidents and provosts to streamline academic program approval. Chancellor Chang acknowledged the concerns and committed to continuing conversations with faculty and presidents.