The demise of college presidents. And colleges.

 My first close encounters with college presidents were as a journalist.  Part of my editorial duties were to cover higher education.  This put me in contact with the college presidents in my newspaper's coverage area.  At the time, little of the contact involved the financial and business aspects of their jobs.  They had vice presidents and directors to do most of that work.  What I reported on mostly was scholarly, research, and teaching projects in which they were involved.  At that time, the role of a college president was not to be a CEO, but to be the lead scholar in the enterprise of learning and teaching.  My experiences with such learned people led to my transition from journalist to professor.  Back then, most college presidents held their jobs because they were active, accomplished scholars.

Today, fund-raising and the public relations needed to attract funds is the dominant activity of a college president.  Whatever attention they pay to academics is related to increasing enrollments to maintain the tuition stream.  That is reflected in the resignation notice for Timothy Downs, the Northern State University president who left his job last week.  The notice stated that he was responsible for "new facilities...funded by donations that amounted to more than $110 million."  Then it added that he instituted "nearly 20" new programs and increased the number of graduate credits conferred by 30 percent.  He had also increased the freshman enrollments and the retention rate of freshmen going into their sophomore year.  These activities all had the emphasis of producing revenue, not scholarly accomplishment.  

Dr. Down's Ph.D. is in organizational communications.  I am certain he knows that his resignation announcement raises questions.  It certainly did for statehouse reporter Bob Mercer.  The announcement contains discordant elements.  When presidents leave for another opportunity, the new opportunity is usually specified.  And, the departure was immediate.  Usually, an announcement is made in advance of the departure so that a search for a replacement can be organized and the departing president can hand off his duties in an orderly way.  Bob Mercer hit a wall of obfuscation when he tried to get answers to the questions raised by Down's sudden departure. 

I retired from NSU 20 years ago, so I am not privy to the talk about why and under what circumstances Downs left.  I sorely miss my late colleague in history, Bob Thompson, who in retirement had coffee on campus everyday and could gather accurate information in a way that made the CIA look like amateurs.  Whatever facts are being covered up, the handling of the resignation announcement broadcast a loud and clear message that something was wrong,    Dr. Downs seems to have disappeared into the murk of misdirection.  That is not a healthy indication from an organization which is supposed to operate and support the handling of honest information with forthrightness and  integrity.  The Regents and legislators questioned about Downs' leaving have decided to play hide-the-reason. 

However, there are things going on with the legislature and the regents that have portentous implications.  Gov. Noem has appointed three people to the Board of Regents this month:  Tony Venhuizen, her former chief of staff;  Tim Rave, a former legislator, president and CEO of the South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations from Baltic; and Jeff Partridge, also a former legislator and currently  president of Partridge Financial Services in Rapid City. Of the nine members  on the board, only one has been involved with academics.  

This is happening at a time when the Regents are working to meet the demands of a law passed by the 2020 legislature to form a task force to look for ways to save money:

      Section 2. The task force examination shall include the following:

1. (1)  The possible combining of administration at all levels of operation within an institution;

2. (2)  The possible combining of operations and functions across multiple institutions;

3. (3)  The possible combining of the administration of programs across multiple institutions;

4. (4)  A review of the duplication of program offerings;

5. (5)  A review of the academic majors with low enrollments and low numbers of graduates;

6. (6)  A review of functions outside the core missions of teaching, learning, and research;

 (7) A review of the operations and functions provided  as an efficiency through the central office of the Board of Regents;

(8) A review of the viability of the university centers; and 

(9) Any other possible cost-effective measures the task force determines are worthy of examination.

Some of the legislators have said some menacing things in regard to their intentions:

Representative Steven Haugaard said the regents have the duty. “They just haven’t been doing it.” He asked whether each of the six universities needs a president and whether South Dakota needs all of the campuses. He acknowledged discussions are hard because they dramatically affect communities.

“The ultimate hammer is the allocation of funds from the Legislature. We can certainly cut off a hundred million dollars as an incentive if they don’t do their job,” Haugaard said. 

If a college president raises $110 million for his institution and the overseers are expressing the intention of hacking away at its budget, the president has cause for concern.  And so do people donating the money.  It is not hard to see where there might be a collision of intentions.  Looking at it from the president's perspective, one can understand where one there might be occasion for a president to tell the regents to take the job and shove it.

That may not be the case.  But what Haugaard's words do is send a strong message to potential applicants for the job of president.  No qualified, serious-minded person would consider the job.  And with that attitude in play, fund-raising may well be impossible.

President Downs and Northern Foundation president Todd Jordre announced their resignations in the same week.  Regents point out that they have no control over the Foundation and the two resignations were pure coincidence.  However, they and the legislature do have control over the funds.  

Gov. Noem is  a part of the GOP anti-academic force.  Her regents will carry out the anti-intellectual vendetta that has been mandated by law. And that legislators are excited about.  

As for Northern, is a campus with two new dorms and an unfinished athletic stadium for sale?  

____________________________________________________________________________________

• **The members of the task force to look for ways to cut costs in state higher education.

  Brian L. Maher, regents’ executive director and CE

    Sen. Ryan Maher, Isabel; Sen. Reynold Nesiba, Sioux Falls; Rep. Hugh Bartels, Watertown;

• and Rep. Chris Karr, Sioux Falls; representing the Legislature’s Joint Committee on

  Appropriations

•   Regent Jim Thares, Aberdeen; Regent Joan Wink, Howes; and Regent Barb Stork, Dakota

  Dunes

•   USD President Sheila Gestring, BHSU President Laurie Nichols, and SDSU President Barry

  Dunn

•   Jim Neiman, Hulett, Wyo., Neiman Enterprises CEO

•   Tyler Tordsen, Sioux Falls, southeast regional director for U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds

•   Paulette Davidson, Rapid City, Monument Health CEO

•   Elsie Meeks, Pine Ridge, Lakota Funds board chair

•   Nadifa Mahamed, Sioux Falls, South Dakota State University student

•   Hal Clemensen, Aberdeen, Agtegra Cooperative Board of Directors

•   Jon Veenis, Sioux Falls, ELM Resources CEO (retired)

•   Jim Lochner, Dakota Dunes, Tyson Foods COO (retired)

•   Doug Morrison, Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls School District director of research, innovation, and

  accountability