H.B. 352 Higher Education Alignment: transcript

Okay. Thank you. Um, and thanks for having us. It was like herding cats to get a quorum, huh? So, um, okay. So this bill, um, came about because, um, about a year and a half ago we did, um, an OLA audit on our system of higher education. And there was a couple of findings related to that audit, um, specifically about institutions acting independently that led to program duplication. Um, the competitive behavior that we've created within the system that sometimes serves us well and sometimes doesn't, um, kind of a lack of role clarity, weak program oversight, and some data gaps. So, um, the commissioner and his, um, and his board of Higher Education and his office kind of took the charge to think about how they could be responsive to this audit, specifically around programs and around how the system functions as a system. So what this bill does, and I'll just talk about it briefly, and then I'll turn a little time over to the commissioner, is it just kind of takes the first step in how do we think more like a system to best benefit our students. And so it talks about horizontal integration and vertical integration. So just to kind of give you an idea of what horizontal integration means, that means similar institutions, horizontal, similar institutions working together. So thinking about if one, um, of our regionals has a really great program in something, do we need another region to start, a regional to start that program? Or is there a way we can carry those programs across, um, and have them offered at multiple institutions? Um, and also think, think about things like faculty research and how we can create collaboration across the system. Vertical integration is, is thinking a lot about how our students experience our system, thinking about how they can start at a technical school and what the pathway might look for them to get into one of our universities, um, dual enrollment programs. We have a lot of, um, bright spots in our system where this is happening, but the idea is to accelerate that work and really make sure that our system is working as a system that it best serves our students, it best serves our taxpayers, and it, and it works, um, in a way that, um, creates some efficiencies also. So think about also shared services. So this sets, um, sets up a design, a system redesign that thinks about regions, um, and thinks about, um, how we also collaborate statewide. So with that, I'm gonna turn the time over to the commissioner. Talk.

Go Ahead. Thank you Chair. Uh, Jeff Lamber, commissioner of Higher Education. I appreciate, uh, the sponsor and allowing with me to come, uh, share the, the time with, with her and her willingness to spearhead this legislation. I, I think that she summarized it well. I, I, I think that it's, it's in incumbent upon me to to point out the fact that, uh, the idea of the uni, the, the Utah system of higher education operating like a system as new, uh, ignores the fact that this has actually been a legislative expectation for years, decades. In fact, the system was set up to operate like a system, and, and the intent was that all of the institution would have specific missions and roles, and that we would look at how those missions and roles complement each other, build on each other in a way that through partnership and collaboration, can deliver higher education more efficiently, but also increase access to centers of excellence at each institution throughout the entire state, without recreating those centers of excellence throughout the entire state. And we have had fits and starts for years trying to capture the benefits of operating like a system. It is incredibly difficult. If you look at the different states across the country, they all have different types of systems. Some don't have systems at all, and some have had varying, uh, degrees of success in operating like a system. But, but what we're seeing more and more now is that states are starting to realize that in the changing landscape of higher education, there is a significant benefit to the states, especially with public systems of higher education, to start looking at how can we better capitalize on the benefits of operating like a system in Utah is not an exception, but we do have some unique elements about the way we operate in Utah that I think gives us some significant advantages over other states. One of which is that we have a single system in our state. Uh, other states our size or larger have multiple systems. We have one system, we have a central governing board. We've brought in all of our institutions of higher education, including our technical colleges, community colleges, regional, regional universities, and research universities. No other system has that kind of breadth. And it, it creates some very exciting opportunities when we've looked at why we haven't been able to get this to operate as efficiently and as, and as successfully as possible. There's a couple things in the way. One is, we've always thought about this at as an entire state level, thinking if we're gonna operate like a system, you know, vertical integration or horizontal integration has to, has to be across the entire state. And I don't think that that's true. Uh, we have natural partnerships already developing, and these partnerships occur in regions. These regions are generally geographical. They capture the, the different types of missions and roles within those regions. So what we started thinking was, you can actually get the benefits of a system first at a regional level, and then look for statewide opportunities across regions, but only where it makes sense and not try to force it. But we see these natural partnerships in these regions. So this bill essentially gives us a framework to start operating as a system, but looking at regions as, as, as the, the, the, the fulcrum of how we take advantage of what a system can bring and, and start building on those existing relationships. Uh, we also have recognized that successful systems across the country, uh, bring all of the stakeholders together in developing what these systems will look like and helping us form those partnerships across institutions. And we have to make sure that this is one that involves faculty, staff, students, leadership at institutions, uh, community members and leaders. And so this has got to be a collaborative process in order for this to be successful as well. But this is the first step, and that is to create the structure, give the board the responsibility and charge to start looking for opportunities to vertically integrate and horizontally, horizontally integrate, and then report back. And then we start to build the partnerships from there. Uh, and so I'm, I'm grateful for the, for the leadership that the legislature already has in creating a system. What we're trying to do now is make sure that this system is operating to its highest capacity. Thank you. Thank you. With that, we'll be open to any questions.

Yes. It's, it's been on for a while, so. Okay. But I'm happy to make a motion if there's no discussion.

Then I'll, while I have the mic, I'll just say I support this bill.

Thank you. So I recommend that we pass with a favorable recommendation, house Bill 3 52 to the Phil Body of the Senate.

I'll waive. Okay.

I'd like to start by saying my bill is the proper role of government. You're gonna like it. Um, okay. So, um, about, about a year and a half ago I requested an OLA audit, um, on our higher education system, specifically around, um, how things were working, uh, across the system. And then specifically, um, how, how do we determine which programs we have and, um, if those programs are in the right place, and those types of things. So we had no lag audit. It came out about a year ago, and there were a couple of findings from that audit. So this bill that we're talking about today is part of our response to that audit from last year. So a couple of the findings were, um, that right now the institutions are acting very independently and sometimes in isolation of what each of them are doing. So you remember, we, when I talk about institutions, I'm talking about all 16. So the eight, um, degree granting institutions that are eight technical colleges. So often they're operating independently, and sometimes that leads to program duplication. It also talked about our, that our system, um, currently creates a lot of competitive behavior. And while we like competition, um, sometimes when we have our institutions competing against each other, it's not in the best interest of our students, and it's not in the best interest of our tax dollars. Um, the audit also called out that there was, um, kind of weak program oversight from, um, yui in deciding where programs should land and what kind of programs should be approved. And then that there were some data gaps, um, between even understanding what are the costs at program level, what's the ROI of programs. And so, um, with those audit findings, um, Yushi kind of took the charge this last year to say, how can we be responsive to these audit findings and thinking about, uh, programs across our state and thinking about system alignment and thinking about how we have our institutions work together for the benefit of our students. So that's what this bill is an attempt to start to do. I'm gonna have, uh, commissioner Jeff Landward here with me today, and he's gonna talk through, um, what the system approach is going to be. And then we'll talk a little bit about, um, how the bill operationalizes that. Thank you. Welcome Commissioner. Thank

You Chair. Uh, Jeff Landward, commissioner of Higher Education. It's a pleasure to be here to talk about this. Uh, this is something I'm very passionate about because, uh, one of the fundamental questions I'm always asking in every aspect of the work that we do is, what value are we providing the state and what value we're providing the students? When the legislature created the system of higher education, they created it as a system. The intent was that it would operate as a system, and they provided specific missions and roles for each institution. They created a governing, a central governing board and a commissioner's office in order to execute on capturing the benefits that a system can bring the system. Uh, the hallmarks of a good system are that you have unified student access across campuses. So in other words, we're looking at making sure that students can benefit from the value of a system no matter where they are. Strategic collaboration over competition, developing and leveraging institutional specializations, institution mission governance and leadership alignment system, strategic planning and system data collection and governance. We've taken steps sometimes, uh, in operating like a system, but we are leaving on the table other opportunities to operate like a system. And, and this is really about making sure that the system of higher education in Utah is set up to thrive and to thrive in, uh, in, in, in a future where there is uncertainty and, uh, and instability in higher education. As an industry, changing demographics, changing public perceptions, other things have put higher education in jeopardy. I don't think that Utah needs to be in jeopardy at all, because we are set up to run a system in a way to where we can develop institutions who have, uh, areas of excellence and missions that are specialized in order to meet all of the needs of the state, and that everyone in the state can have access to the specializations to that quality and to those missions through partnerships among the institutions rather than competition against each other. Utah is uniquely set up to pull this off because we have, uh, in our state a a very unique set of circumstances. One is we are a state with the largest population that only has one system. States our size are larger, generally have two, sometimes three or four systems. Uh, ours is one. We also have all of our technical colleges in our system also. That's very, very unique. In fact, our technical colleges themselves are very unique. Utah leads the way in this as well. And we have a strong central governing board rather than a coordinating council. And so you have all of the elements and, and presidents, uh, who are, uh, who can see the vision of what a system can be. What it requires is all of the institutions, all of those stakeholders, to have a unified vision of what we're trying to accomplish for students and for the taxpayers. And that's to create value and deliver it efficiently and effectively. So the question I had to ask was, why hasn't this happened to the extent that it should have? If, if it's so good for the state? Well, this is an incredibly difficult lift. I mean, there is no doubt about this. Other states have tried this. Some have some, some measure of success. Others have not had as much, much success. It requires so much buy-in. So much stakeholder engagement in planning and, and strategic thinking about what you're trying to do. One of the reasons why it hasn't really taken off in Utah to the extent that it can is because we tried to do it statewide. So there are two things that we're talking about here now. I'll briefly just talk about them. Two principles of of a good system, horizontal integration and vertical integration. Lemme start with vertical integration. This is where you take institutions of different missions. So technical college, community college, regional university, research university. They have different missions, but we want them to not be operating independently because a student should be moving through them and have the ability to move through them. So a student admitted to a technical college or a community college should have integrated admissions into the next level of institution. The research university, the regional university, the academic planning and program planning should be done in a way to where they're looking at the students within that vertically integrated system. The student services, the student advising, all of those things can be integrated with the idea that a student is part of an entire system and not just one institution. And so we want a student to be able to move seamlessly up and down in a vertically integrated group of, of those different missions institutions. Horizontal integration is moving across institutions with like missions. So for example, uh, we have a University of Utah that has a medical school, uh, and, uh, other, other, uh, graduate medical professions. We have other institutions who have interest in, in having their own programs in, in medical professions. Graduate programs, for example, uh, horizontal integration would have a system ask the first question, which is, does this program already exist? Is it done well? And if it's done well, can we explore the partnerships with that institution that already has the program with another institution to see if we can offer it on that campus so that students have access to it without duplicating the administrative costs and burden of creating a whole new department. All we're trying to do is set up an architecture to where we have a basis and a rationale to ask those questions as we make decisions about resources within our system. So, uh, the, the reason why this hasn't worked as effectively is because trying to do horizontal integration across the entire state or vertical integration across the entire state is too complicated. We have natural regions in our state. Those regions have their own industry clusters. They have their own type of population, they have different types of institutions. We think that the best way to effectively manage this system and to capture the benefits of a system is to organize it into regions and then start with partnerships within those regions. The one benefit of this is we're already doing that in a lot of ways. We've seen partnerships starting to develop between Weber State University, Ogden, Weber Tech, and Davis Tech, for example. Utah Tech and Dixie Tech are starting to develop, uh, wonderful programs of vertical integration, Southern Utah University, Southwest Tech. There are examples, but there's also huge potential to do this at an even larger scale. So you start within those regions, and then you start to look for opportunities for horizontal integration across regions and sometimes across the state. But that has to be, uh, thoughtfully done and done in a way where it makes sense for the state and for the students, not just to do it for doing its sake. So, uh, that's the structure that we're trying to set up right now. All we're asking is let's set up the structure. Let's set up the architecture and give the board the responsibility to work with institutions, to work with faculty, to work with students, to work with staff and say, now how can we make this work to benefit the state? Can we all be unified in doing this? We have some fine faculty here that I've worked with before. I will tell you that we cannot do this without faculty and without staff and without students on board. We all have to see the same vision of what this system can be and that it can benefit all of the institutions in a way to where this system can thrive in a country where higher education is struggling. So we're gonna have to work with those stakeholders and make sure that we have them helping design this. And that's the commitment that, that I intend to do, because I don't know how to design the system on my own and teach it in law school for some reason. I don't know, a Socratic method didn't fit well, but I think that there's real opportunity here. So I'm, I'm grateful for the opportunity to, to, to have this legislation. Um, and, um, one main, the last piece I'll mention is, um, so what this bill does is it tasks the system with starting this process, with setting up the kind of the organization, and then it asks them to come back to the legislature to check in, to tell us what the progress that they've made for us to be able to weigh in onto that, uh, organization and, and kind of the policies and procedures that they're putting in place. So this bill is just kind of the first step of, um, requiring that they do that and then come back to us. So if that's the bill, we're open to any questions.

Thank you very much. Um, Representative Fiefia will bring it back to the committee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for this legislation. I think it's a great idea. I think it brings efficiency, um, workforce alignment, uh, costs, uh, more aligned, uh, cost savings there. Um, I, I, I think this is a, a, a great move, but I think it's also a heavy lift in, in my experience with higher ed, I've seen institutions work in silos and try to be everything to everyone. And I get protective. It's no secret that I'm an Aggie. And, uh, we are the land grant institution, which means we are servicing all 29 counties. And when I see other universities or institutions fringe on that, I, you know, there's, there's a reason why Utah State is the Land Grant Act institution. And so my question to you is with this heavy lift, is where are the presidents? Where are the universities at? Because in order to do something like this, which I think is great, you have to have the support of everyone to buy into it, or people start working against you and the board, and we are left With the same, same issues.

Right. Yeah. Well, I'll start and then if, uh, commissioner has additional comments. Um, so the presidents have been very integral in the drafting of this legislation and in this, these conversations about what this could look like. So, um, this has not been done. Um, nobody was surprised by this bill file. Everyone knew it was coming, and everyone knew that this is the, the way that we're, um, pushing and pulling together. So, um, so the presidents are, I don't, I don't know if I want to say they're all on board and excited and super happy, but, but there's so many pockets of promise already happening in our state. And I think that they also, um, have been a little frustrated with some of the conversations around shared services statewide, because they don't see how that's completely viable in so many instances. But many of them are very interested in some shared services throughout the region. So, uh, you know, Jeff mentioned, um, Weber State, South Weber State, Ogden Technical College in Davis right now, they're, they're, um, doing Title IX together, which helps those technical colleges because they have the expertise of the university folks. And, and when they see those good things happening, they're more interested in doing this in more places. Right. And so we have a, a couple of great things that have happened as pieces of this across the state that I think we're also able to point to as successes in starting to move this forward. I dunno if you have any additional comments.

Yeah, I, I appreciate that. I mean, it's, it's a, it's a simple reality that we have to acknowledge that, that so many stakeholders have to be on board with this. We spend a lot of time with the presidents, here's my view of it. They are cautious, uh, but they are, uh, willing and excited about the potential. The thing of it is the mindset that you've already highlighted, which is they all are very protective of their institution. They're proud of their institution, and they feel a threat whenever there's a possibility that another institution could take away their students or take away their resources. I mean, that is the line in the sand that they've all had to live with for years and years and years. You are only successful as an institution if you're growing and if you have new buildings. And this is a complete shift away from that. I'm less interested in their growth. And I'm more interested, are you executing on your mission and role within the system? Well, and if a student is in the system, no matter where they are, that's the win for the system. Uh, but that is going to be such a difficult thing to do. And so every step of the way has to be a step where everybody is engaged. There's over communication, we understand the decisions we're making, and at the end of the day, we have to be able to articulate, does this make it better for students and better for the state statewide. So that's where we are right now. Uh, but there's a, the, the heavy lift is to come.

Great. Thank you for your work on this. Thank you.

Sorry. State your name. Thanks. Hi, my name's Sydney osha. I am here speaking as a resident of Wellsville, um, but also I'm president of Utah, Utah State University's chapter of the American Federation of Teachers Union. Um, and I'm faculty at Utah State University. So go Aggie. Um, but my comments today are meant to identify ways that the committee may consider refining HB 3 52 to ensure its success by preventing an unfunded mandate. If the state is going to pursue such a significant restructuring of higher education, it is important to get it right to prevent issues with accreditation and resistance, um, as it is important to have folks on board, um, and ensure fiscal responsibility. I'd like to ask you to amend HB 3 52 to add a time limited implementation fund released by HEAS upon milestones. Um, and Representative Peterson mentioned several different milestones. So those could be built in, um, HB 3 52 orders, regional products of integration, but appropriates no transition funds for the heavy lift of shifting advising systems, common course numbering catalog, remaps and shared services. Unfunded transitions end up being taxed out of instruction or student fees. And it's my understanding that neither legislators nor faculty nor likely admin at institutions want to raise student fees any higher, um, without a fiscal node and across institutional mandate like this, there will likely also be confusion around which institutions hold financial responsibility for various aspects of implementation. So, other states that have implemented similar alignment initiatives underestimated the transition costs. Um, Georgia's system led consolidations required significant it branding, uh, and process integrations and face resistance from faculty and staff that slowed implementation, um, leading to costs and delays that were not fully anticipated. Um, so thank you for your time.

Uh, my name's Sean Crossland. I'm the Vice President for Higher education, uh, for the American Federation of Teachers Utah. Uh, I'm also a faculty at one of our public institutions, uh, a FT Utah convenes a group called the Utah College Council. We have, uh, active, uh, chapters and members across the state, uh, representing a few hundred of our, uh, higher education employees. Um, I wanna start by picking up on something that Commissioner Landward said, and, and, and overall appreciative of both the commissioner and the sponsor of, of the thoughtfulness and the framing of this bill. Uh, it is a, it is a tough time to be, uh, in higher education right now. Uh, it's incredibly challenging. Uh, it's at times quite demoralizing. Uh, the, the, the federal attacks feel relentless, uh, here in this state. Last year, uh, the, the, the real location, uh, com, uh, created an immense amount of uncertainty of scarcity of faculty and staff. Not sure if they were gonna have jobs next year of students, not sure if the programs they, that they were a part of, uh, would exist. Uh, the year before that, HP 2 61, uh, uh, dismantled, uh, pretty significant and decades long efforts to, uh, make every student on campus feel like they have a place that they can belong. So it is a tough time to, to be in a higher education in addition to, uh, you know, just the, uh, just the, uh, uh, three minutes went fast. So, uh, there is a lot of opportunity here. There's a lot of things that we're really excited about. I think the, uh, the messaging of, uh, people's voice being included is, is one of the most important things. Thank you.

Greetings committee. My name is Brianne Kramer, and I'm representing the A FT Utah College Council. I'm also the president of the UCC chapter at Southern Utah University. Faculty and staff share the same goal. This bill is seeking to assist students achieving a stronger alignment to ensure easier student mobility, to ensure students access the institutions that are the best for them and their future goals. In many of our curriculum committees that faculty are already hard at work in faculty, have already conducted work over the past several years to integrate and align coursework across the system to better serve students and make it more consistent across the state for transfer credits and reduction of credit loss. The primary concern with this proposed bill is that it could lead to job loss, particularly for staff with language in line 78 through 80 of the bill, such as integrated student services and shared services. Staff are concerned that this will lead to cuts and increased workloads, which we have already experienced through the reinvestment process. Faculty are concerned about loss of institutional autonomy and additional potential program cuts. Because of the language in lines 85 through 86, faculty and staff need to be part of these efforts. Faculty and staff led mapping of departments and division can assist in ensuring accreditations are upheld. It can ensure greater communication and can result in less resistance to these types of efforts states that coupled alignment with faculty led discipline, discipline councils, and accreditation aware timelines saw fewer reversals and smoother transfer outcomes. Um, we would like to see the secured in language in the bill, and we appreciate the commit, the commitment from the commissioner to ensure that all stakeholders are involved. Thank you. I, uh, thank you

for the time to, to speak with you all today on this, and also thank you to the commissioner and to the representative for the bill. I wanna speak to concerns about local control and regional, uh, control. First, I'm Avery Edenfield, uh, speaking as a resident of Salt Lake City. Can I have you state your name? Sorry. Oh, Avery Edenfield. Okay. Uh, resident of Salt Lake, also faculty, uh, at, at a university here and member of a FT. But first I'd like to speak, uh, really quickly to the point about unhealthy competition and my experience at a school here, uh, when, when other schools like Utah Tech or the University of Utah wants to begin a program that did compete or seemed to compete, uh, with the one that I'm at, they had submitted proposals and we worked together to create distinctions so that we weren't competing with the same students. I just wanted to add that as a point of clarity. Um, that's been going on since I started at this institution. Um, so if a program is consolidated, I ask that we amend the bill to require the board to certify a local hybrid or cross registration alternative with no increase for time to degree. Um, we've seen these programs, uh, struggle and fail in Florida, um, where courses numbering was strong, but when programs were centralized with that local alternatives, communities reported reduced onsite choice and Wisconsin's restructuring. Wow. That goes fast. Uh, also, uh, saw similar, more struggles with, uh, limited capacity and not be able to serve local student populations. Thank you for your Time. Thank you.

Okay. Okay. I'm so sorry. Can you hear me? We can hear you. Uh, if you'll turn your video on. Yes. I should be able. There We go. There we go. Yep. Better practice. There we go. Okay. Thank you, um, so much. My name is Nicole Allen. I'm a local to Logan, Utah, and I also teach at one of the public universities in Utah. HB 3 52 proposes a major restructuring of Utah higher education system for a change of this sale scale to succeed. S so many people have mentioned it must earn the trust buy-in, and long-term investment of students, faculty, and institutions across the state. This requires transparent, evidence-driven processes that are clearly communicated. Um, the bill also requires that the Utah Board of Higher Education report on regional alignment by August, 2026. What the bill does not clarify is how success will be measured without clear measures, alignment risks, creating instability rather than confidence and divestment rather than, um, con uh, investment. The bill already identifies its goals in subsection four C, things like transfer pathways that reduce credit loss, requiring stackable credentials, et cetera. If these are the goals, then the reporting requirements should explicitly measure them through, through student outcomes. This includes lost credits, lost on transfer time to degree, first C credential completion job placement by region and student mobility data, showing where the students are actually moving and why. In addition, the bill should encourage a direct study of the student experience. It's something that I think is largely missing from so many of our discussions, um, asking students why they choose institutions, what their goals are, and how they make those decisions, and essentially designing these pathways of work into employment. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, Joe. Good. After afternoon, Everyone. I'm Jill Cher, current resident of Logan, Utah, an employee of one of our fine hire ed institutions. I'd like to recommend amending HB 3 52 to require regional discipline councils that include faculty and employers to finalize degree maps before changes take effect. This is how we're gonna get real pipelines that'll actually serve Utahans as a former member of the North Carolina Community College system. As you might be able to tell from my accent, I would point out that North Carolina's approach shows that faculty crafted transfer plans efficiently reduce excess credit hours by two to five hours in early years. These are small, but real gains that grow as maps mature for contrast, Texas built fields of studies with faculty led committees. And even so, studies show that major credit loss persists when local interpretation drifts. Highlighting that faculty designed program level mapping is essential. I would urge that the committee, uh, I would urge the committee that we learn from Texas's missteps and ensure that we align higher education in Utah according to the needs of Utah's by creating stackable pathways that are disciplined built. Thank you for your time and service.

What bill number is this? Three 50. Two. 52. Okay. I thought it was 3 51, but 3 52. Motion to favorably recommend Bill 3 52, uh, out of committee. Thank

You, Mr. Chair. I, I thought I understood the bill. I don't think I understand it very well at the moment, so I am looking forward to seeing how things go on the floor.

Thank you. Um, I wanna highlight a couple of things. Um, the first is that there is a fiscal no on this bill. We do know that doing all of this work is not free, and that as a state, if we're really invested in this, then, then we are going to have to, um, think about that. But this bill does not redesign the entire system. It doesn't, it, it gives us the first step. It gives the, the commissioner the authority and the requirement to start this process and then come back to us. That's what this bill does. This bill doesn't take off, you know, jump in the whole thing and tell exactly how we're doing everything. It's, it's the first step of the conversation. And then they're coming back to us so we can say, yes, you're on the right track. No, these are the concerns we're hearing. They have to come back to us before they move any farther. So I want to make sure that part is really clear. Um, second, um, UI has already been working and talking to our accreditors. So, um, they're familiar with what we're doing. They're comfortable with what we are doing. Um, we know accreditation is incredibly important, and we're not doing anything here to try and put accreditation at risk at any of our institutions. And then, um, maybe I'll say one more thing there. And then I, um, love for, uh, Jeff, just to have a second to talk about, um, how he plans to operationalize this in the next couple of months. But, um, the last thing I wanna say is, um, everyone that spoke today, I agree that we cannot do this without faculty voices and student voices being part of the conversation. Our faculty are our academic experts on our campuses. We need their help in thinking about, um, what programs are similar and what are not. What are, how do their programs align with the industry in their area? And how are they going to make sure that the competencies taught in their programs continue to meet the competencies needed in their area? That is the expertise our faculty bring. And we cannot do this well without them. Um, I'm happy to add a line that says they need to be part of this, if that's helpful. Um, 'cause that's my intention. I think that's the commissioner's intention, uh, because we know we need them to be successful and, and we want them to be part of the conversation. But maybe, Jeff, any last comments?

Yeah. Thank you. I, I appreciate the, the public comments and, and it, it highlights the complexity of, of doing this, and which is why it has to be deliberate and intentional and also, uh, done in a way that, uh, we're not rushing into decisions that are mistakes. That, that being said, there are states that have done this well, but there are states that, that have had hiccups in doing this and some even complete failures in doing it. There are so many ways that, that we can, uh, look at what they've done and make sure that we're not repeating the same mistakes. And to that point, we are, we are working with, uh, experts who have worked with states, uh, that have done this better than other states and who understand, uh, the, the complexity of this and, and helping advisors to make sure that this is what went wrong in Texas, or this is what went wrong in Georgia, but this is what went well in Georgia. So, and, and as we start to look at what we're gonna do here in Utah, do it this way instead. Uh, so, so we, we don't wanna go in this with eyes closed. We wanna go with wide open to where has this worked and, and how do we repeat that? Or hasn't it worked? And how do we not do that? And then what can we do uniquely in Utah that no one has tried? And let's try that. And that our accreditors are, are, are excited and willing to partner with us and looking at those opportunities. The other thing I would recommend, uh, is a lot of the things that have been talked about today about what we wanna try and do in the system. These are already statutory mandates. Uh, this system is already complexly, uh, regulated through state statute about what the system is supposed to do and how it's supposed to do it. The problem that I see is for us to accomplish what the legislature's already has asked us to do as a system, uh, can only be done if we try to do it a different way than what we've been talking about to this point. So that, that's what I'm really trying to accomplish, is achieve the vision of the legislature has set.

Thank you. Um, whether it's in the university realm or corporate realm, nothing's more frustrating than these different divisions working in silos, isolated, recreating the will in each of those, uh, whether it's different universities or in different regions. And I love the idea of trying to streamline efforts work together where we can use combined knowledge and learn from our mistakes or shared mistakes, right? But, uh, streamline our successes and share those successes. So it was a great bill, excited to see where the opportunities that this can create. Thank you. Thank

for its consideration. Madam Reading Clerk House Bill 3 52, higher education alignment by representative Corinne Peterson. This bill of Assert in Economic Development and Workforce Services with the vote of 8 0 2 Representative Corinne Peterson.

Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like to move the First Amendment in my name.

Yes. This amendment just, uh, adds, uh, some spec, a specific call out for our faculty, staff and students that they will be part of the conversation as we work through this alignment process and just ensures that they see themselves in this process so it can be successful. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, having had the opportunity to work in the higher education space the last, uh, couple of years, I, I think that this bill can help us continue to move our higher education system in the way that we want it to best, uh, serve our students and best serve, uh, our state. So two years ago I had requested an audit of higher education and one of the things that came out of that audit was a look at how we, uh, approve programs and how the system itself works together to ensure that programs are both available but they're not duplicated. Um, so as after that audit, um, we ran legislation last year, but then the piece of the audit that was kind of missing that we still needed to address was this, this idea of system alignment. So how do we make sure, for example, in the area where I live, where I have Weber State and Davis Technical College and Ogden Weaver Technical College in my region, how do we make sure if a student starts at Davis Tech, for example, they know exactly what they get at Weber State, that they know they can transfer, that the pathways to them for them are clear and that we're not duplicating programs within that region. Um, so what this bill does is it tasks our Utah Board of Higher Education with setting up the regions. This will not be the complete alignment. This bill doesn't accomplish all of that. But what it does is it says, we want to move this direction. We need to have a conversation about what those regions should look like. Um, and, and we have the board, uh, working through that process this summer and then bringing it back to the legislature for our approval of those regions, uh, in August. So the bill sets up kind of how that alignment will work. It gives us the opportunity then to ensure that our system is meeting students' needs. We have a lot of pockets of incredible things happening around our state, where, where institutions are working together to create this alignment. But there is a lot more work to be done. And so this bill starts us on that path. And with that, I'm open to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker with the sponsor yield to a question. Representative Peterson, will you yield to a question?

I will. Thank you. Yes, Representative Peck. Thank

You. I appreciate this bill and what it aims to accomplish, but there have been constituents in my area in ULA that are worried about what those regions will actually be. It's my understanding that there's going to be certain technical colleges, maybe junior colleges and then larger universities all put together to create kind of a funnel path to each other. And like in Tu Willow, we have a USU that's out in Twila, but they're being told, or at least they're understanding that they're going to be in the region with the University of Utah instead of with USU. They have concern about that. Um, can you speak to that and is that going to be happening to Tula County according to what you know?

Yes. First, let me say that Tula Technical College plays a very important role in Illa County. And so we'll want to ensure that that school continues to meet the needs. I know that that, um, that school's the gem of that community and they've all done a lot to, uh, ensure it's successful, including working, uh, with industry partners out there and other, um, job force opportunities so that their students are connected to that. So, um, I don't know what the regions are gonna look like, and that's part of this. We don't wanna predetermines the outcome, we want them to look, but we have thought a lot about Utah's, uh, university, or, sorry, Utah State University statewide because they kind of have a different mission than the Logan Campus. And I do think that we need to think about how Illa Tech can work with your USU extension campus they're in. I also think that Salt Lake Community College to provide some resources out to Twila Tech right now. And so ensuring that students can move easily between Twila Tech and Salt Lake Community College, if that's their desire, that's the objective, um, of this. And like I said, it's going to be a multi-year process. This is just the first step of saying let's kind of determine what regions make sense. Uh, let's make sure we think about what works for each community and ensuring that students wherever they live, can get, get the programming that they need.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I'm gonna go ahead and vote in favor of this bill, but I do hope that since this is on the record, that when these, um, are decided that they can keep in mind what each community might need or desire in their region. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. Um, we have a coordinated system of higher education where our institutions provide different roles. We have our, uh, research institutions, we have our regional, uh, universities, we have our community colleges, we have our technical colleges. And I think this is, uh, a step in the right direction towards helping those, uh, high institutions of higher education coordinate better, make us a more seamless experience for our students and, uh, really help promote our, uh, goals for higher education in the state of Utah. So appreciate the support. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, our, our system of higher education works best when we do think like a system and when we ensure that our students can move through our system in a way that makes sense for them and doesn't make them take classes over and over again. We don't want that. We want ease, ease of transfer. We want our students to see their pathways and we want them to be successful. So I hope you'll, uh, support this bill. Thank you.

President. This is, uh, kind of some ideas that have been ruminating in higher ed for a little bit. Uh, how can you know, we have institution, individual institutions making some decisions and oftentimes overlapping with other institutions without knowing it. Uh, looking at ways that can be more efficient. So the idea is how can we get more alignment within that, that group, and we've actually had some examples in, in southern Utah, kind of on their own. SUU, Utah Tech University, Dixie Tech Technical College and Southwest Technical College and Snow College have been working together, uh, collaboratively as a kind of a region to determine, you know, see if there's things that they could collaborate on, if they could cross over. And so this, the idea came coming forward out of higher ed now and proposed in this bill as we formalize that and look for, uh, having the board of edu higher education work to develop some regions where you can have at least a, a technical college and a degree grants granting institution in the same same region, somewhat patterned after what's been going on in southern Utah. They could look at, you know, shared academic programs that could shared services across campus facility, you know, faculty research, collaborations, common course catalogs, other things that can possibly bring some more efficiency and integration into the, the system and, uh, bottom line. And at the end of the day, it could potentially save money as well as improve academic performance and academic access, uh, for students. So with that, I am open for any questions.

Okay. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I would waive summation under suspensions the rules. Move the house. Bill 3 52 pass.