University of Arizona Shared Governance Dispute: President Refuses Traditional Memorandum

The University of Arizona (UArizona) is at the center of a growing controversy as President Suresh V. Garimella has become the first leader in the institution's modern history to refuse signing the traditional Shared Governance Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). This document, which outlines the standards and processes for faculty involvement in key university decisions, has been a cornerstone of collaborative leadership at UArizona for decades.6229 Faculty leaders express concern that this refusal signals a potential shift away from established practices, especially amid the university's recent financial recovery and broader national debates over faculty influence in higher education.

Shared governance refers to the principle where faculty, administrators, staff, and sometimes students collaborate on institutional decisions, particularly those related to academics, curriculum, budgets, and personnel. At public universities like UArizona, it is not just a tradition but a legal requirement under Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) § 15-1601(B), which mandates that "faculty members of the Universities, through their elected faculty representatives, shall share responsibility for academic and educational activities and matters related to faculty personnel" and "participate in the governance of their respective Universities."11463

Historical Context of Shared Governance at UArizona

UArizona's commitment to shared governance dates back to the faculty constitution established in 1947, which laid the groundwork for faculty participation in university affairs. The pivotal moment came in 1992 with the passage of ARS § 15-1601(B), inspired by Senate Bill 1202, ensuring faculty roles in policy development subject to the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR) and presidents. This law distinguishes Arizona's public universities—UArizona, Arizona State University (ASU), and Northern Arizona University (NAU)—by embedding faculty involvement statutorily.103

Unlike ASU and NAU, which maintain shared governance documents without annual presidential signatures, UArizona has uniquely required presidents to endorse an MOU. The current version, updated between 2020 and 2022 and signed by former President Robert C. Robbins, formalizes consultation processes. It commits the president and provost to solicit faculty advice on budgets, academic policies, and administrator selections, while the Faculty Senate pledges active participation.61

The Memorandum of Understanding: Key Provisions Explained

The MOU is a non-binding yet symbolic agreement that operationalizes shared governance. It defines faculty roles in:

• Academic and Curricular Policies: Faculty Senate leads development, with administrators consulting elected representatives for broad acceptance before implementation.
• Budget and Strategic Planning: Via the Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee (SPBAC), faculty provides input on allocations and priorities.
• Administrator Searches and Reviews: Search committees include at least 50% faculty, elected or appointed, ensuring peer input in hiring and evaluations.
• Dispute Resolution: Step-by-step consultation: discuss with Faculty Senate Chair, escalate if needed, and presidents explain deviations publicly.

If disagreements persist, the president holds final authority but must justify actions to the Senate. The Shared Governance Review Committee, comprising Senate and SPBAC leaders plus administrator appointees, monitors compliance and reports annually.61 This structure fosters transparency, diversity in appointments, and broader campus input through surveys and town halls.

For more on the full document, see the UArizona Shared Governance MOU.

President Garimella's Refusal: Timeline and Initial Reactions

Suresh Garimella, former Purdue University provost, assumed UArizona's presidency in October 2024 amid recovery from a severe financial crisis. Shortly after, as the Shared Governance Review Committee began updating the MOU, he declined to sign—marking a break from tradition. Faculty Senate Chair Leila Hudson, an associate professor, noted Garimella's administration has reiterated non-endorsement without explanation, despite university spokespeople not responding to inquiries.62

Hudson called shared governance a "feature, not a bug," crediting it with exposing mismanagement under Robbins. She highlighted Garimella's selection process excluded elected faculty and tasked him with governance restructuring, raising fears of faculty subordination. Social media buzz, including posts from Inside Higher Ed, amplified faculty concerns about corporatization trends.49

Roots in the 2023-2024 Financial Crisis

UArizona's turmoil traces to a $177 million deficit revealed in late 2023, escalating to $240 million projections, triggered by online program revenue shortfalls and administrative overspending. Robbins' December 2023 plan included layoffs and cuts, but Faculty Senate critiques illuminated opaque finances. Shared governance forums pressured transparency, contributing to Robbins' April 2024 announcement to step down by 2026 (or sooner).104105

ABOR bailout of $210 million stabilized UArizona, but recovery involved 500+ layoffs and program trims. Hudson argues the MOU's processes could prevent future crises by mandating faculty budget input.

Arizona State Politics and Legislative Pressures

Republican lawmakers, like Reps. Travis Grantham and David Livingston, introduced HB 2735 in 2024 to replace "share responsibility" with "consult," shifting power to presidents. Vetoed by Gov. Katie Hobbs, it reflected tensions post-UArizona crisis, with critics like Theodore Downing calling "consultation meaningless."62 Garimella's refusal occurs amid these dynamics, potentially emboldening further challenges to ARS § 15-1601(B).

ASU and NAU presidents sign no equivalent MOU, but all three universities collaborate via the Arizona Faculties Council. For state law details, review ARS § 15-1601.

Comparisons with Peer Institutions: ASU and NAU

ASU's University Senate emphasizes shared governance as a "keystone," with faculty input on policies but no presidential MOU signature ritual.102 NAU's Faculty Senate handles curriculum and personnel via committees, pledging support through signed pledges historically, yet without annual MOUs.68 UArizona's approach is more formalized, making Garimella's stance distinctive.

National Trends: Erosion of Faculty Influence?

Across US higher education, shared governance faces pressures from financial strains, political interventions, and corporatization. A 2025 AACU-AAUP survey found one-third of faculty reporting academic freedom declines.91 State legislatures in 2025-2026 proposed curbing faculty roles, echoing Arizona. Deloitte's 2026 trends highlight revenue erosion pushing admin-led decisions.87 At Penn, faculty decried breakdowns amid turmoil.89

• Financial crises prioritize speed over consultation.
• DEI/political mandates bypass senates.
• Adjunct growth dilutes tenured voices.

Stakeholder Perspectives: Faculty, Administration, Students, and Beyond

Faculty view the MOU as vital for accountability; Hudson warns of morale hits and recruitment challenges. Students, via Associated Students, often align with senates on curriculum. ABOR prioritizes stability post-crisis; lawmakers seek efficiency. Administrators argue flexibility aids agility. History professor Eduardo Pagán notes Arizona's relative protections historically.

Potential Implications for UArizona and Higher Education

Without the MOU, unilateral decisions risk repeating financial errors, eroding trust, and inviting lawsuits or accreditation scrutiny (e.g., WSCUC references past MOUs).38 Impacts include faculty exodus (UArizona lost 200+ in 2024), stalled innovations, and weakened rankings. Nationally, it exemplifies tensions balancing autonomy with oversight.

Path Forward: Solutions and Outlook

The Shared Governance Review Committee continues updates; negotiations could yield a revised MOU. Best practices include:

• Transparent town halls for buy-in.
• Hybrid models blending speed with input.
• Legal affirmations of ARS § 15-1601(B).
• Training on governance for leaders.

Optimistically, dialogue could strengthen UArizona, modeling resilient collaboration amid 2026 challenges like enrollment cliffs and AI disruptions. For full coverage, read the Inside Higher Ed analysis.62

Photo by Sean Benesh on Unsplash