The House Committee on Higher Education met on February 11 to hear testimony on Senate Bill 38 and to consider the following interim charge:

“Interim Charge #1: Monitor the agencies and programs under the Committee’s jurisdiction and oversee the implementation of relevant legislation passed by the 86th Legislature. Conduct active oversight of all associated rulemaking and other governmental actions taken to ensure intended legislative outcome of all legislation, including the following:

  • HB 449, HB 1735, and SB 212, which relate to sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking at public and private postsecondary educational institutions. Monitor the process by which institutions of higher education adopt policies on sexual assault prevention, victim outreach programs, and disciplinary hearings. Monitor rules and regulations at the federal level that could necessitate changes to state law.
  • SB 16, which relates to a student loan repayment assistance program for peace officers. Monitor the process by which the Higher Education Coordinating Board implements the loan repayment program and administers the grants to eligible peace officers.”

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics the committee took up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the hearing, but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

Dr. Harrison Keller, Commissioner of the Higher Education Coordinating Board

  • Gives personal background concerning his experiences, and career, in education
  • The coordinating board is shifting from a regulatory entity to more of a resource and advocate
  • 60×30 is not on track; goals need to be refined that focus on credentials of value
    • Wants to focus on 25 and older population who will have some college but not a degree
    • Focus on what is going to drive value and opportunities in the job market
  • Given the size of Texas’ economy, more than three universities should be in the top 200
  • Need to make long term investments in infrastructure and student & staff talent
  • 60×30 is silent on research and development universities; policy needs to focus on innovation
  • Already working on changing the curriculum approval process
  • Aim to share Coordinating Board’s data and make it more accessible as a resource
  • Turner – how was the 60×30 plan adopted and how should we amend/create a new one?
    • 2015 Blue Ribbon Commission guided the process
    • Does not want to do away with the plan, but some parts need tweaks or updates
    • The board is interested in pursuing these changes
    • The BRC held stakeholder meetings; we should hold meetings as well
  • Turner – who created the Blue Ribbon Commission?
    • The Higher Education Coordinating Board
  • Turner – who adopted them?
    • The board as they were a part of the state strategic plan for higher education
  • Button – you mentioned there are deficiency in the R&D; what would be the impact of these changes?
    • We have been making progress and the legislature has made investments in individual universities (gives a list of the universities)
    • Governor Abbott was right – multiple Texas universities should be a part of the top 10 public research universities nationwide
    • R&D are not included in 60×30, but will require policy intervention and investment
    • Need to invest in digital and physical infrastructure, faculty and student talent, and in recruiting Texas students before out of state schools who can provide scholarships to offset their tuition
  • Turner – out of state recruitment is an issue; the committee prioritizes research institutions to attain tier 1 status; discusses necessity to address the issues mentioned during appropriations
  • Howard – concerned about access/ affordability; 60×30 focuses on debt, what will you?
    • Everyone should have access that leads to high quality credentials
    • TX has done well in providing need-based aid funded by sustained Texas grants
    • The return on investment information is more visible and is incorporated into advising
    • Wants to focus on: poor students with full scholarships, middle class students outside of financial aid and non-traditional students
  • Howard – those need-based grants have been given out to many students, but they are getting less overall; excited to work with you due to your experience in the legislature
  • Wilson – questions about R&D
    • Workforce development needs to be a focus
    • Many R&D grants are towards classified research; cannot open the doors to everyone
  • As the legislature is thinking about strengthening R&D infrastructure, it would be a mistake to look at traditional business model of institutions
    • Need partnerships with private industry
      • Need more flagship partnerships
  • Tuner – last session CPRIT funding was renewed
    • The Coordinating Board’s mission is to support your legislative agenda

Interim Charge #1: Monitor the agencies and programs under the Committee’s jurisdiction and oversee the implementation of relevant legislation passed by the 86th Legislature. Conduct active oversight of all associated rulemaking and other governmental actions taken to ensure intended legislative outcome of all legislation, including the following:

HB 449, relating to certain notations on student transcripts

Dr. Wanda Mercer, Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Services University of Texas System

  • Discusses the rulemaking process
  • Online students can be suspended, and therefore can receive a notation on their transcript
  • Decisions remain at campus concerning process for removal
  • Campuses are at liberty to create their own notations
  • Campus’s decision on what to do when they receive those notations
  • Thankful to Turner’s staff
  • Campuses currently working on final wording and are complying

Paula Arredondo, Registrar, Texas State Technical College (resource witnesses)

Dr. Stacy Silverman, THECB (resource witnesses)

David Halpern, Assistant General Counsel Texas A&M University System

  • Provided advice and counsel to the rulemaking committee
  • Texas A&M had a provision similar to HB 449 in place May 2018
  • Rule requires staff to ask questions of students relating to non-juvenile or post-secondary institution crime during the admission process
    • Acknowledges the national debate on efficacy and propriety of these questions
  • Rep. Tuner – they have to disclose post-secondary or criminal? What about Title IX?
    • Required to disclose criminal convictions or incidents of serious crimes of violence or sexual misconduct at another institution
      • Committees then evaluate recency latency and severity of their charges
  • Turner – do you find applicants are truthful?
    • Due to technical mishaps, convictions or institutional violence are over-reported
  • Turner – now that rulemaking is over, is there something the legislature needs to change?
    • Murphy – I do not have anything; we need to watch implementation
  • Turner – was effective this or last semester?
    • Silverman – effective fall 2020

HB 1735 and SB 212, relating to sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence and stalking at public and private postsecondary institutions

Dr. Stacy Silverman, THECB

  • Described the negotiated rulemaking process and participants fall 2019
  • HB 1735 and SB 212 directed the Coordinating Board to provide oversight to ensure all higher institutions are in substantial compliance
  • Recommended Title IX coordinator training which has already been posted
  • Rulemaking is related to mandatory reporting from all institutions of higher education
  • If institutions do not report, depending on the nature of violation, the Coordinating Board may asses an administrative penalty to not exceed $2 million
    • Coordinating Board is required to provide written documentation explaining the penalty
      • why and will be allowed to
    • Mentions a sexual assault fund
  • Turner – when does this report need to be turned in?
    • Jan 1st, 2021
  • A compliance specialist
  • Administrative penalty structures resources for compliance purposes

David Halpern, Assistant General Counsel Texas A&M University System

  • Describes rulemaking process
  • SB 212 rules went into effect January 1st, 2020
  • All employees are responsible for compliance to SB 212
    • TX ATM has had that requirement for years
    • Responsibility employees
  • All systems on their way to start Title IX training

Krista Anderson, Systemwide Title IX Coordinator University of Texas

  • UT’s templates for reporting are now going to be implemented statewide
    • Helped to clarify how to reconcile confidential reports and disposition
  • Not comp reflected annually; institutions can provide additional data through other reports
  • Schafer – can you define the who is receiving the reports?
    • The language refers to a “responsible employee”
  • Schafer – who do they report to?
    • A Title IX coordinator or deputy
  • Schafer – how many Title IX coordinators are required on campuses?
    • At least one, but it is at the institution’s discretion for the number of deputies
  • Schafer – would an investigation begin at that point?
    • No, since it is a third-party report; some preliminary work needs to happen before
  • Schafer – what about victims’ rights?
    • They can participate, but the institution needs to decern the seriousness of allegations and other considerations
  • Schafer – a Title IX coordinator could continue the investigation even after the victim says no?
    • There could be instances where that occurs
    • Schafer – give an example
    • If someone has been making threats of violence to others or themselves
  • Schafer- could it just be offensive language?
    • There would have to be something more than that
    • Halpern – a hostile environment; the language states “persistence or pervasiveness”
  • Schafer – it could just be offensive language; would a coach have to disclose to a student that anything they tell them could be reported?
    • Halpern – SB 212 states that all employees are to report  
  • Schafer – you are supposed to stop a student while they tell you something in confidence?
    • Anderson or Halpern – Yes, these interruptions are allowed and advised in training
  • Schafer – states he voted no on the bill as the victim does not have max amount of choice and support; there is no restricted or unrestricted report like in the military
    • Anderson – victim does have the right to pursue and can access resources and accommodations; mentions in training the use “gentle interruptions”
    • Anderson – Title IX offices and investigators outreach to victims if it is from a third party and they decide what they want to do
  • Schafer – at least one choice has been taken away; has concerns about “gentle interruptions”
  • Turner – Schafer has good points, but that is the bill’s intent is like public education reporting
  • Frullo – is a part time employee bound by SB 212?
    • They are bound if they fall under place of employment
  • Frullo – if is from a second job… if they were a mediator… not working as a university employee… what about scope of employment?
    • Halpern – job is to comply with the law, there is a provision that is intended to reduce the chilling effect
      • Employee does not include any individual who is enrolled at the institution
  • Wilson – asked if Title IX coordinators have additional responsibilities
  • Anderson – requires they are designated but it does not have to be their only role or responsibility
  • Halpern – intent on duties imposed upon them by the legislature, realize ability to meet demand of increase reporting they need more staff 

Nelly Herrera, Deputy General Counsel for Texas State University System

  • Appreciated opportunity to collaborate with experts on Title IX
  • Wanted to stay within parameters of the law and stay true to intent of legislature

Rachel Rolf, General Counsel at Trinity University

  • Private institutions do have some differences and unique challenges
  • Range from just a few hundred to 17k
  • Title IX coordinators wear many hats at the institution
  • Don’t have same resources due to level of their size
  • Committee did make several recommendations that will be helpful such as
    • Templates
    • Training Resources
  • Challenges
    • Confidentiality – flexibility for student concerns but not employee concerns
    • Religious institutions – concern on how this impacts the sacrament of confession
    • Administrative reporting requirements – there is an exemption for 1,500 students but institutions may be sometimes just above or just under so law applies intermittently as a result
  • Schaefer – employee who may be a victim cannot talk to a trusted colleague and ensure that conversation stays between them
    • Do not have ability to designate confidential employee resource
    • There may be some who are certified as “advocates” that may be utilized on small campuses
  • Schaefer – does faculty know they can’t have these conversations with fellow employees
    • Working hard to explain, develop syllabus language and tear cards as an example
    • Difficult issue they are working hard to address 

Katherine Strandberg, Texas Association Against Sexual Assault

  • Reviewed background on why legislation was passed
  • There are currently three separate trainings that overlap
  • Not sure if survivor entered training will be offered across the board
  • There is some question about student employees that have to be reporters, believes it should be up to individual institution
  • Howard – appreciate efforts and work that went into this, reporting is one of the sticker elements. Thanks to Chancellor McCall for giving up a seat so TASA could be a part of this.  Ask witness to continue working with them.
  • Turner – appreciates feedback as bills as implemented, feedback from students and faculty

SB 38, relating to the offense of hazing

Dr. Margarita M. Arellano, Dean of Students at Texas State University

  • Hazing is an issue for all education – higher education and public education
  • Hazing can be hard to address because it is rooted in tradition, but should never give up
  • In 2017 Suspended all Greek organizations and did a task force and came to some changes
  • Changes in area of recruitment, new member education, risk reduction training, advisor certification, accountability, created a moratorium
  • Put moratorium in prominent space
  • Bill has inspired them to continue to look for change
  • Have implemented a risk manager for Greek organizations

Jud Horras, North American Interfraternity Conference

  • Visible independent public accountability is the number one thing to stop it
  • FERPA protects the identify of students
  • Recommend MOUs between campus admin and local law enforcement on duty to report
  • Important that you can report the violation and have immunity, example of bystanders
  • Prosecute these students as it will be the best deterrent

Robin French, Parents and Alumni for Student Safety

  • President of his chapter when he was in school
  • Very unhappy at his current fraternity
  • Talks about rogue fraternities and students at UT are not safe, there is hazing going on all the time
  • Felt punishment after killing a second person due to hazing the organization’s punishment was to go to time-out
  • Now a fact group in Austin and trying to make an improvement and make campus safer at UT
  • Until there is personal accountability and criminal charges filed, nothing will change
  • School administrators are under a lot of pressure from very influential alumni, thinks change will need to come from legislature that requires investigation and prosecution

Jay Maguire, End Hazing

  • Turner – believes there is key language in legislation regarding providing immunity and encouraging reporting which hopefully leads to consequences, what do you see in early stages
  • List some larger institutes could be models but there are some small and larger institutions that still need to do work to get compliance
  • Point of website is to make it easy for parent to find out if the organization has been in trouble before and what they have done
  • Issue of personal accountability being absent is difficult to fix, some may be reluctance to damage influential donors and alumni
  • Argues institutions using FERPA to shield perpetrators
  • Recommends setting up a hazing task force and set up an ombudsman or czar which would take heat off of University Presidents
  • Stucky – shouldn’t we be addressing this issue in younger grades
    • Agrees, experts should be brought in (gives example of State of Ohio)
    • Hernandez – some suggestions are too simplistic and they are much more complicated but no one has influenced her, it is very complicated and they have wealthy students so sometimes they see an attorney for each student
  • McGuire – notes he is talking about statewide and does have specific examples, problem does exist
  • McGuire – UT has pilot program funded by private foundation, reaching out to high schools that are main feeders for some of the universities and religious organizations to provide more support
  • Hernandez – training they are doing is bystander behavior, if you see something wrong then speak up
  • Turner – committee wants to continue to monitor how laws are working as they are being implemented, wants to know if students are getting the information and acting on it, understands the definition of hazing and that there are consequences

SB 16, relating to a student loan repayment assistance program for peace officers

Chris Jones, CLEAT

  • Thanks them for passing bill that established the program
  • Concerns include getting information where it needs to go and how to apply
  • Program is first come first serve, see that as a problem. Officers hired in Sept 1 and cannot apply yet, mass influx for loan applications when it finally opens
  • Recommends taking applications now so officers can start applying for loan reimbursements
  • Some members want to know why it does not apply to them, would like a fix to address officers who have been doing the job for a long time

Charles Pulse, THECB

  • Reviews the program specifics
  • Implementation started with adoption of rules, Oct. 2019 and effective Dec
  • Jan 2020 the official webpage was launched to provide information to potential applicants
  • Outreach will begin over the summer
  • Application will begin in September
  • Likely demand will exceed eligible funding, funding will be on a first come first serve basis
  • Would need double the funding in next biennium and even higher to bring in new participants 
  • Tuner – is there an estimate on eligibility
    • Not currently
    • Estimate well over 1k that they can fund will apply

Dallas Reed, Texas Municipal Police Association

  • Huge benefit to buy down education
  • Thanks them for their work

Frederick Frazier, Dallas Police Association

  • Thanks Rep. Stucky for the work put on the bill
  • Recruitment is severely down
  • This is a tool to entice them
  • It is hard to go back and retro address
  • Beta test is here, he says
  • Argues those who voted against the bill should be ashamed of themselves
  • Stucky – knows we want to take care of everyone but for now we want to recruit new people, thinks bill has a great future and a beta test to see how much money they will need to have
  • Turner – committee will want to know number of applicants and awards with funds available so they can see what is possible when they craft the next budget