Hawaii Senate Bill SB3186

Hawaii 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/26/22
• Refer: 1/26/22
• Report Pass: 2/15/22
• Refer: 2/15/22
• Report Pass: 3/4/22
• Engrossed: 3/8/22
• Refer: 3/10/22
• Enrolled: 3/21/22

Caption

Proposing An Amendment To Article X, Section 6, Of The Hawaii Constitution To Repeal The University Of Hawaii Board Of Regents Candidate Advisory Council.

Impact

The proposed amendment, if passed, will alter the structure of governance at the University of Hawaii by providing the Governor with greater discretion in appointing regents. This adjustment is intended to streamline the leadership selection process within the university system, potentially allowing for more responsive and flexible governance. Lawmakers believe that removing the candidate advisory council will empower the Governor to appoint individuals who may better align with the administration’s objectives and priorities for higher education.

Summary

Senate Bill 3186 proposes a constitutional amendment to Article X, Section 6 of the Hawaii Constitution, which aims to repeal the requirement for the Governor to appoint members of the Board of Regents of the University of Hawaii from a candidate pool presented by the candidate advisory council. This change would enable the Governor to appoint regents directly without being constrained by a limited selection of qualified candidates. The bill seeks to simplify the appointment process and enhance the Governor's authority in educational governance by removing this advisory layer.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 3186 appears to be mixed. Supporters argue that the current candidate advisory council process is cumbersome and limits the Governor's ability to place qualified individuals on the Board of Regents. On the other hand, opponents claim that the council plays a crucial role in ensuring a diverse and qualified pool of candidates, and its elimination could undermine the checks and balances established in the appointment process. This division reflects broader debates about governance and accountability in the state's education system.

Contention

Key points of contention revolve around the perceived benefits of streamlined governance versus the risks of diminished oversight in regent appointments. Proponents worry about the removal of the candidate advisory council, fearing it may lead to a less transparent process favoring political appointments over qualifications. Meanwhile, detractors of the bill point to the importance of maintaining a structured advisory system that reflects a broad spectrum of community input in the governance of higher education.