A measure passed late Sunday by the Michigan State University board limiting when and how statewide elected trustees can dissent after a board resolution gets approved is “fairly overreaching” and “concerning” to several higher education experts.
And MSU’s near doubling of President Kevin Guskiewicz’s salary also prompted the Faculty Senate’s leader on Monday to express “grave concerns.”
The revised code of ethics and conduct calls for a “duty of loyalty” and asks trustees to raise concerns before the board takes action to protect the integrity of the board’s “deliberations and processes.” After the board votes, trustees will not “undermine” and will support the majority decision of the board even if they disagree, according to the resolution.
The board resolution also called for trustees to sign a “statement of acknowledgment” by May 24. If any trustees refuse to sign, they will be met with sanctions, including being blocked from MSU events that don’t require them to be there in their formal board capacity, the loss of tickets to games, the loss of reimbursements and the loss of university-funded legal representation, the resolution said.
“Michigan’s popularly voted, elected constitutional officers do not surrender their First Amendment rights as a condition of service,” Democratic Trustee Rema Vassar, who had been disciplined under older ethics rules in 2024, said before the vote.
Michigan State’s revised code of conduct’s rules around what trustees could and couldn’t say are harsher than those at other institutions, said Nick Down, the associate director of external affairs at the American Council of Trustees and Alumni. Down, who watched the meeting in its entirety, said he was also concerned about the way the board’s vote took place.
“The revisions as a whole are a little overreaching,” he said. “I was watching the board meeting last night, and almost more concerning was the lack of process that took place in reaching this decision. Normally, a decision like this would be vetted by a board committee, and there would be a public comment period at the meeting where people could share their thoughts. I didn’t see any of that here.”
MSU’s meeting was held virtually at 8 p.m. Sunday night and contained no opportunity for the public to speak. The meeting’s official notice went out 12 hours before the meeting began.
Board Chair Brianna Scott, D-Muskegon, did not respond to multiple inquires from The Detroit News about why the meeting was held on short notice and what the urgency was. But Scott said during the meeting that the trustees had the right to call meetings whenever they wanted to do “what was right.”
Along with the revised code of conduct, co-written by Scott and MSU General Counsel Brian Quinn, the trustees voted to nearly double President Kevin Guskiewicz’s salary.
Expert says more time may have led to ‘extensive’ revisions
Down said he believed the meeting might not have been received as it had if trustees were able to have enough time to peruse through the “extensive revisions” he said had taken place.
“(The American Council of Trustees and Alumni) feels that how this could have been avoided or done better had the university followed its own policies around how changes are made,” Down said. “We’ve heard multiple stories of trustees having to vote on substantive decisions without having time to vet what they were expected to vote on.”
Down added that university trustees shouldn’t just be loyal to the institution. As stewards of a public university, trustees are beholden to the taxpayers first and must take into account how the institution benefits the surrounding community, he said.
James Finkelstein, a professor emeritus of public policy at George Mason University and a higher education expert, said he had concerns about the way the meeting was handled and the new expectations placed on trustees.
“Pretty remarkable set of votes to take during a Sunday night, a presidential raise going along with a new code of conduct,” Finkelstein said. “What if the Legislature passed a law and then said: After we do so, no one can talk about it? They’re elected officials, not employees.”
Scott justified the need for the board vote by pointing to recent behavior by several of the trustees.
“A few members of the board have continued to act against our own governance guidance and consultation given to us by national experts, undermining the president, the administration and decisions made by this board, attacking members of the administration and trying to interfere in personnel matters and spreading misinformation to constituent groups outside of and within the university, and that has got to stop,” Scott said before the vote.
Three trustees ― Mike Balow, the board’s sole Republican, and Democrats Dennis Denno and Vassar ― voted against the measure.
Every public body has the right to make its own rules, said Eric Lupher, president of the nonprofit Citizens Research Council of Michigan in Livonia.
“This is a board that has put its own foot in front of itself, fighting itself,” he said. “This (resolution) doesn’t show they’re willing to hear other points of view or earnest conversations about the issues. This is an important state institution; this might not be the way to go about righting it.”
Lupher said that while the last thing a public institution should want to be is completely in agreement, there was a time and place for trustee dissent.
“Dissent after a board vote isn’t ideal. What purpose does it serve?” he said. “I wouldn’t encourage it, but I don’t think it’s a deal breaker. … On the face of this (resolution) it doesn’t look good, but after a period of time we might see that our fears were unfounded.”
During a special, late-night virtual meeting in March 2024, the board decided to ask Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to remove Vassar and Denno. At that meeting, the board voted 6-2 to punish them by restricting their duties through the end of that year. The disciplinary actions were taken after a report found that they had violated the board’s ethics policies and bylaws. Vassar and Denno opposed their own punishment.
Whitmer decided in June 2025 not to pursue such action.
“A prior restraint on the political speech of elected trustees on matters of direct concern is constitutionally suspect on its face, and it demands independent review,” Vassar said during Sunday’s meeting.
The Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges was the consultant the board used to arrive at this measure, MSU Vice President for Communications Emily Guerrant told The Detroit News. The organization declined an interview but provided a statement to The News.
“Many college and university governing boards maintain ethics or conduct policies that address confidentiality, fiduciary responsibilities, and expectations for board members following official board actions,” the statement read. “While approaches vary among institutions, effective governance generally depends on balancing open dialogue and transparency with the board’s responsibility to deliberate constructively, protect confidential matters, and govern in the best interests of the institution. Questions regarding the interpretation or application of specific policies are ultimately matters for each individual institution and applicable state law.”
A guide from the Association of Governing Boards available online suggests trustees “direct their loyalty to the institution they hold in trust, not to their appointing authority or electorate” and “uphold the governing authority of the board and the authority of the administration and faculty.”
Ethics change comes along with a presidential salary increase
The board voted to nearly double President Kevin Guskiewicz’s salary amid trustee concerns he could leave for another job. Six of the trustees voted “yes.” Balow was the sole “no” vote on the increase, and Vassar abstained.
Purdue University President Mung Chiang resigned on Monday to take the top job at Northwestern University, starting July 1.
Guskiewicz’s base salary will rise from $1,029,210 to $2 million, and his unvested employer award will increase by $50,000, from $200,000 to $250,000 per year.
“In a time of budget cuts and fiscal austerity on campus, Faculty Senate leadership expresses grave concerns about doubling the salary of the president,” Faculty Senate Chair John Aerni-Flessner said in an emailed statement. “While we appreciate the president’s leadership, the optics of raising the salary to such levels at a time when units are letting go of valuable colleagues are not good.
“While a salary increase may mollify people in the short term, it does not solve structural problems that a governing board should be focused on — namely, the overall fiscal and regulatory health of the institution. Effective leaders share in the burden of tough times. Money that is in the general fund or raised through fundraising should be directly supporting world-class education and research at MSU.”
Before he stepped down after a brain cancer diagnosis, incoming University of Michigan President Kent Syverud was expected to receive a base salary of $2 million. Finkelstein said this wasn’t a comparable situation, and the board didn’t explain the salary increase well enough.
“(The trustees) said it was comparable, comparable to who?” he said. “A comparison to the University of Michigan fails on at least two levels. They aren’t comparable institutions. … Syverud was appointed after a national search. MSU is saying, “We already have a president” who’s saying he’s happy here, but let’s raise it anyway. … It’s difficult to justify this.”
Trustee Sandy Pierce said during the meeting that she assumed donors would pay for the increase, and it would not come from the general fund.
But Vassar argued that Pierce could not say with certainty that the increase would not come out of the general fund. She added that Quinn himself acknowledged that salaries and new contracts were not typically done in special meetings without the other party’s awareness.
Finkelstein said Pierce’s assertion was concerning.
“Asking donors to fund doesn’t relieve the board of fiduciary duties and raises more questions,” he said. “If someone’s getting half their salary from donors, who do they actually report to? … And how will they find donors to continue to fund this? The board is creating a substantial financial liability.”
This piece was originally published by The Detroit News on May 19, 2026.