A Wake-Up Call to PASSHE Students, Parents and Alumni Donors - Part 11

The Definition of “Malfeasance”

As we saw last time “malfeasance,” according to Dictionary.com, is “the performance by a public official of an act that is legally unjustified, harmful, or contrary to law.”  (Emphasis added.)
 

The Definition of “Shall”

According to Dictionary.com, when used in laws—the word “shall” means “must;” or “is obliged to.” 

The Act 188 Statutory Purpose of the PASSHE System of Fourteen Universities

According to Act 188, Section 20-2003-A; Purposes and General Powers (a):

“Its purpose shall be to provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.” ¹

 
PASSHE’s 14 universities include Bloomsburg, California, Cheyney, Clarion, East Stroudsburg, Edinboro, Indiana, Kutztown, Lock Haven, Mansfield, Millersville, Shippensburg, Slippery Rock and West Chester.

The Board of Governors’ Failure to Deliver PASSHE’s Statutory Purpose

 
We have previously documented the fact that the Board of Governors has failed since 2002 to deliver PASSHE’s statutory purpose of “High quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.” 
 
Specifically, we have given evidence that the quality of the education provided to PASSHE students has been falling,² and that it has not been provided at anything like the lowest possible cost to the students.³ 
 
Moreover, we have also documented the even more damaging fact that the PASSHE Chancellor and Board of Governors have gone to great lengths to avoid public mention of PASSHE’s statutory purpose, apparently in the mistaken belief that as long as they never say it, they have no obligation to try to do it.
 
To fail to deliver PASSHE’s statutory purpose to the students—had they really been trying to accomplish it—would be regrettable.  But for the PASSHE Chancellor and Board of Governors to pretend they have no obligation to obey that law, and instead to state publicly, and publish widely⁴ in PASSHE’s Strategic Plan, their own made-up version of PASSHE’S statutory purpose—is an arrogant violation of the law.   
 

Two Additional Examples of Malfeasance by the PASSHE Board of Governance

Last week, we cited two interrelated examples of actions by the PASSHE Board of Governors that were clearly “contrary to law,” thereby justifying the use of the term “malfeasance” to describe them:  1) The Governor (rather than the Board of Governors) deciding PASSHE’s annual tuition increases over a twenty-year period; and 2) PASSHE’s political (rather than fact-based) annual budget requests over the same period.

This first example, like the one involving PASSHE’s statutory purpose, is directly contrary to law: Act 188 specifically grants the tuition-setting authority not to the Governor but to the Board of Governors.

 
The second example, where the Chancellor directs the fourteen PASSHE presidents to submit annual budget requests containing predetermined funding levels unrelated to the actual financial needs of the universities—so as not to “embarrass the Governor”—helps facilitate the first example.  With “political” budget requests, a Governor can set annual tuition levels without fear of contradiction from legitimate budget requests which as “public documents” could become public under the State’s Right to Know Law.
 
As the chief executive officer reporting directly to the PASSHE Board of Governors, it is unlikely that any Chancellor would blatantly direct the fourteen presidents to do something contrary to the dictates of the Board of Governors.  And the Board of Governors, most of whose members are political appointees nominated by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate, can generally be counted on to support the Governor’s wishes—as evidenced by the Board’s abject abdication of responsibility regarding tuition increases.        
 

Still Another Example of Malfeasance by the PASSHE Board of Governors

 
We will now describe another very specific mandate from Act 188 that was violated by the PASSHE Chancellor and Board of Governors during my entire twenty years as a PASSHE university president.
 
I refer to Section 20-2007-A - Commission of Presidents - which reads verbatim as follows:
 
“The Commission of Presidents of the System shall consist of the presidents of the several institutions who shall annually select one (1) of their members as chair-person. The commission shall recommend policies for the institutions and shall act in an advisory capacity to the chancellor and the governors. The commission shall meet quarterly and additionally at the call of its chairperson or the chancellor. A majority of the presidents shall constitute a quorum.” (Emphasis added.)
 
Unfortunately, the above section of Act 188 of 1982—the law that created and ostensibly guides the State System—was mostly ignored by the Chancellor and Board of Governors during my 20 years in PASSHE—despite the fact that the law says “The commission shall (not may) recommend policies for the institutions and shall (not may) act in an advisory capacity to the chancellor and the governors.”
 
All three chancellors from 1992 to 2012 (McCormick, Hample and Cavanaugh) viewed the Commission of Presidents pretty much the same way—with fear and loathing.  Note that by law the Chancellor is not a member of the Commission—not even an ex-officio member.  So the Commission of Presidents, by law, could and did meet without the Chancellor present—which no chancellor seemed happy about.
 
During Chancellor Cavanaugh’s time between 2008 and 2012, the presidents, as a group of individuals, met monthly with him--at his request and with his agenda--in a free-for-all type discussion in which presidents offered individual advice and suggestions—which the Chancellor was free to accept or not.  During those years:   
 
·         The only ideas from individual presidents that ever got to be considered by the Board of Governors were those few which Chancellor Cavanaugh happened to agree with.
 
·         And none of the consensus ideas of the presidents as a Commission of Presidents ever got to the Board of Governors for consideration because, despite the legal mandate that “The commission shall recommend policies for the institutions and shall act in an advisory capacity to the chancellor and the governors,” Chancellor Cavanaugh and the Board of Governors simply decided otherwise.
 
To be continued.  
 
¹ https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/6772880/act188-pdf-405k.
² https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/6794551/privatization-without-a-plan-chart-9-and-caption-january-23-2014-pdf-387k.
³ https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/6802256/privatization-without-a-plan-chart-20-and-caption-january-29-2014-pdf-390k.
⁴ https://www.keepandshare.com/doc/7490741/strategic-plan-2020-rising-to-the-challenge-10-14-pdf-2-1-meg.