An act to add Section 89500.5 to the Education Code, relating to public postsecondary education.
AB 2068 would change the process for selecting presidents of California State University campuses by creating a more structured, public, and participatory search procedure. Under the bill, a campus president could not resign or vacate the office without written notice to the CSU Trustees and Chancellor. Once notice is received, the Trustees would have 30 days to form a nine-member Presidential Search Committee before any recruitment begins.
The committee would include representatives of faculty, staff, students, campus administration, alumni, and the surrounding community. It would be responsible for defining the qualities sought in a president, creating a job description, setting scoring and ranking criteria, recruiting candidates statewide or nationwide if needed, screening applicants, interviewing the top five, and recommending three finalists to the Trustees and Chancellor. The Chancellor, working with the committee, would then host a recorded public forum for the finalists, and the Trustees would be required to appoint one of those three candidates after reviewing the forum recording in closed session.
If enacted, AB 2068 would add Section 89500.5 to the Education Code and impose new statutory requirements on CSU presidential vacancies and searches. It would limit the discretion of CSU leadership by mandating notice of resignation, a prescribed committee structure, timelines for each stage of the search, a public forum requirement, and a final appointment from among three finalists. The bill would directly affect the CSU Trustees, the Chancellor, campus constituencies, and prospective presidential candidates, while increasing transparency and formal public participation in campus leadership selection.
The bill appears to have been received positively by at least a majority of the committee, as reflected in the recorded 7-3 vote to do pass and re-refer the measure to Appropriations. The absence of transcript excerpts limits insight into detailed debate, but the structure of the bill suggests support for greater openness and shared governance in CSU hiring. At the same time, the fact that the bill was held under submission in committee indicates that there may have been reservations about implementation, process, or policy implications.
The main points of contention are likely to center on governance and control of the presidential hiring process. Supporters would favor the bill’s transparency, public forum, and broader stakeholder involvement, while critics may object that it constrains the Trustees and Chancellor, adds mandatory procedures and deadlines, and could complicate or slow down searches. The requirement that finalists participate in a public forum before any offer is made may also raise concerns about candidate privacy, recruitment competitiveness, and the ability to attract applicants willing to undergo a highly public process.