Your editorial was excellent in advocating Regent Wallace Hall’s termination of service as a UT System Regent, by whatever means.
According to the Hardin Report to the Transparency Committee, Hall has repeatedly violated important standards of conduct for a fiduciary, having disregarded multiple warnings from many responsible sources.
Under these circumstances, in my opinion, a “no confidence vote” by the Board of Regents is, as you say, “the very least” that should happen.
I am concerned with your statement “if none of those things happen” (which I interpret to include the “no confidence vote”).
Never miss a local story.
I submit that a vote of “no confidence” should not satisfy the Transparency Committee in lieu of impeachment, if Hall does not resign.
The Committee should “move forward with the impeachment” even if there is such a vote.
The only long term solution to this kind of problem, and others like it, is removal of the offender from office and denial of the opportunity to vote and to disrupt the orderly administration of an academic institution.
The specter of “chilling” legitimate exercise of good governance is a false justification for opposing impeachment in this case.
This is the easy case because of the extreme conduct.
This brand of conduct should, at the “very least,” be “chilled.”
The conduct of Regents Gene Powell and Alex Cranberg should also be examined closely by the Transparency Committee.
Thank you for speaking out on this issue that affects the governance of all of higher education in Texas and the appointive process, as well as excellence in education in Texas generally.
— Gordon Appleman, Fort Worth