Pennsylvania House Bill HB1472

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/21/25
• Refer: 5/21/25

Caption

In higher education accountability and transparency, providing for economic and workforce impact review by State-related universities; and imposing duties of the Department of Labor and Industry.

Summary

HB1472 would amend the Public School Code of 1949 to require State-related universities to conduct an economic and workforce impact study before closing any campus beginning with the 2025-2026 school year. The bill applies to Pennsylvania State University, the University of Pittsburgh, Temple University, Lincoln University, and their branch campuses. It directs the Department of Labor and Industry to select an independent research institution to perform the study on behalf of the university. The study results must be sent to legislative leaders on the House and Senate Appropriations and Education Committees, the Department of Labor and Industry, affected local governments, and any legislator whose district includes the campus. A board of trustees would be prohibited from approving a closure if the study shows significant harm to the local community or if students would not have reasonable and affordable alternatives for postsecondary education. The bill also makes compliance a condition of receiving state appropriations, and it takes effect immediately.

Impact

The bill would add a new accountability requirement to the Public School Code for State-related universities by conditioning state funding on compliance with campus-closure review procedures. It would not ban closures outright, but it would create a mandatory pre-closure review process and could effectively block closures that fail the statutory harm or access test. The measure also assigns the Department of Labor and Industry a new role in selecting the independent reviewer and expands notice obligations to legislators and local governments affected by a proposed closure.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the available context suggests the bill is framed positively as a transparency and accountability measure. Its findings emphasize protecting communities, workforce training, and students from the effects of campus closures, indicating support for preserving access and local economic stability. No formal vote history or transcript is available here to show organized opposition or amendment activity.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the bill’s restriction on university autonomy: State-related universities and their boards of trustees would lose discretion to approve a campus closure if the study finds significant local harm or inadequate student alternatives. Another likely issue is the funding leverage, since compliance is tied to receipt of state appropriations, which could be viewed as a strong state mandate. Local governments, students, and communities would likely support the measure, while university administrators may object to the added procedural burden and the potential for state-level interference in campus planning.