BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2132
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 2132 (Lara)
As Amended August 24, 2012
2/3 vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |51-26|(May 30, 2012) |SENATE: |24-14|(August 28, |
| | | | | |2012) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |51-27|(August 29, | | | |
| | |2012) | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: HIGHER ED.
SUMMARY : Requires the California State University (CSU) and
requests the University of California (UC) to consider community
service for the purposes of appointment, promotion, retention,
and tenure review. Specifically, this bill :
1)States legislative intent that CSU and UC develop and adopt
tenure policies aimed at encouraging the service that is
provided by faculty members both to the campus community and
to the community outside the campus.
2)Requires the CSU Board of Trustees and requests the UC Board
of Regents accomplish all of the following during the next
review of the retention, tenure, and promotion policies at
each campus or before the end of the 2017-18 academic year,
whichever occurs first:
a) Recognize and reward service as appropriate for each
discipline, documenting the significant service
contributions of a candidate for tenure before those
service contributions may be used as a basis for a
favorable tenure decision.
b) Consider the extent to which forms of service, including
AB 2132
Page 2
those listed below, may be recognized for purposes of
appointment, promotion, retention, and tenure review:
i) Serving on community boards and committees;
ii) Engaging in civic activities;
iii) Working in outreach programs developed to promote
cultural diversity in the student body;
iv) Consulting with governmental or nonprofit agencies
established to address student and community needs;
v) Developing programs for underserved populations;
vi) Research and creative activities that benefit
communities;
vii) Consulting with or addressing student and community
organizations; and,
viii) Any other service activities that are focused on
improving the health and well-being of society.
c) Develop and distribute transparent criteria for tenure
that include service, both to the campus community and the
community outside of the campus, as a critical factor in
the evaluation of a candidate for tenure.
d) Consult with academic senates and student and community
organizations and take actions consistent with applicable
collective bargaining agreements in fulfilling the
provisions of this bill.
The Senate amendments :
1)Change the implementation date from the 2013-14 academic year
to the next review of the retention, tenure, and promotion
policies at each campus or before the end of the 2017-18
academic year, whichever occurs first.
AB 2132
Page 3
2)Make clarifying and technical changes, primarily outlining the
types of activities that may be considered as public service
for the purposes of tenure.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version approved by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS : The process for awarding faculty tenure has
traditionally been left to the public higher education segments,
and community service is currently one of the major categories
for which faculty members are evaluated for tenure at both UC
and CSU, along with teaching, research, and professional
competence. The segments have adopted comprehensive policies
for faculty appointment, retention, promotion, and tenure
reviews. Systemwide policies regarding tenure are in place,
personnel manuals and faculty handbooks provide transparent
criteria for tenure review, and service appears to be an
established criterion in the faculty review process.
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
"This bill would require the California State University and
request the University of California to consider community
service for the purposes of appointment, promotion, retention,
and tenure review.
"While I value the service contributions of faculty members,
this bill is duplicative of existing systemwide policies that
already identify service as a criterion for faculty reviews and
personnel decisions.
"I believe that the extent to which service is considered in
such decisions should be a local, campus-based decision."
Analysis prepared by : Sandra Fried / HIGHER ED. / (916)
319-3960
FN: 0005998
AB 2132
Page 4