MOTI ON OF ADMONI SHMENT AND CENSURE OF WALLACE L. HALL J R.

AND
RELATED FI NDI NGS
The House Sel ect Commi t t ee on Tr anspar ency i n St at e Agency 1
Oper at i ons ( t he commi t t ee) , pur suant t o i t s i nvest i gat i ve and 2
over si ght aut hor i t y and i t s dut y t o moni t or t he conduct of 3
i ndi vi dual s appoi nt ed t o of f i ces of t he execut i ve br anch of 4
st at e gover nment , i s conduct i ng an ext ensi ve f or mal 5
i nvest i gat i on of al l egat i ons of mi sconduct commi t t ed by Wal l ace 6
L. Hal l J r . whi l e a nomi nee f or and as a member of t he Boar d of 7
Regent s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em( t he Boar d) . 8
The i nvest i gat i on conduct ed by t he commi t t ee uncover ed 9
numer ous wi l f ul act i ons by Mr . Hal l t hat const i t ut e ei t her 10
mi sconduct , i ncompet ency i n t he per f or mance of of f i ci al dut i es, 11
or behavi or unbef i t t i ng a nomi nee f or and hol der of a st at e 12
of f i ce. The commi t t ee has pr evi ousl y f ound i n t he af f i r mat i ve 13
t hat gr ounds f or i mpeachment exi st . 14
At t hi s t i me, t he commi t t ee chooses t o act by adopt i ng t hi s 15
mot i on f or admoni shment and censur e whi l e hol di ng, f or now, i n 16
abeyance f ur t her pr oceedi ngs, i n par t f or our own r easons and 17
al so as we cont i nue t o moni t or devel opment s of ot her agenci es 18
e.g., t he act i ons of t he Tr avi s Count y Di st r i ct At t or ney s 19
of f i ce. However , t he commi t t ee r et ai ns f ul l j ur i sdi ct i on and 20
cont i nui ng over si ght . The commi t t ee may i mpose f ut ur e act i on, 21
i ncl udi ng t he adopt i on of ar t i cl es of i mpeachment whi ch al r eady 22
may be bef or e t he commi t t ee. Fur t her act i ons wi l l be t aken as 23
war r ant ed. We ar e mi ndf ul t hat Mr . Hal l s act i ons have been 24
undet er r ed dur i ng t hi s i nvest i gat i on. Thi s t empor ar y per i od 25
1
al l ows t he Boar d, Mr . Hal l , ot her i ndi vi dual r egent s, and Boar d 1
and Syst em empl oyees t o al t er , change, and i mpr ove t hei r 2
conduct , and al l ows t he commi t t ee by and t hr ough i t s co- chai r s 3
and t hose appoi nt ed t o moni t or t hese pr oceedi ngs t o exer ci se 4
over si ght and r epor t t hese f i ndi ngs back t o t he f ul l commi t t ee 5
and t o make appr opr i at e r ecommendat i ons when necessar y. 6
BACKGROUND 7
I nst i t ut i ons of hi gher educat i on i n t he St at e of Texas ar e 8
a cr own j ewel of t he st at e. The gr aduat es of t hese school s have 9
shaped our economy and ar e l eader s i n t hei r chosen f i el ds, i n 10
t hei r communi t i es and i n our st at e and beyond. The st at e wi l l 11
cont i nue t o excel and cr eat e abundant oppor t uni t i es onl y i f 12
t hese i nst i t ut i ons cont i nue t o t hr i ve. 13
Because of t hei r i mpor t ance, t he oper at i on of t hese 14
i nst i t ut i ons has been over seen by t wo ent i t i est he Texas 15
l egi sl at ur e and t he boar d of r egent s f or each i nst i t ut i on. Si nce 16
t he est abl i shment of t he f i r st publ i c i nst i t ut i on of hi gher 17
educat i on i n 1876, bot h t he l egi sl at ur e and t he boar ds of 18
r egent s have shar ed t hese r esponsi bi l i t i es. Thus, l egi sl at i ve 19
r evi ew of t he oper at i on of i nst i t ut i ons of hi gher educat i on i n 20
t hi s st at e ( and of al l ot her st at e agenci es) i s not hi ng new. 21
The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em ( t he Syst em) i s composed of 22
ni ne uni ver si t i es and si x heal t h sci ence cent er s. I t empl oys 23
over 87, 000 peopl e and educat es 216, 000 st udent s a year . Mor e 24
t han one out of ever y 150 peopl e i n Texas ei t her at t end or wor k 25
f or an i nst i t ut i on wi t hi n t he Syst em. The Syst em i s gover ned by 26
a boar d of r egent s, composed of ni ne vot i ng member s and one non- 27
2
vot i ng st udent r egent . Onl y t he Boar d, act i ng as a Boar d, i s 1
st at ut or i l y char ged wi t h t he over si ght of t he Syst em.
i
The r ol e 2
of each r egent , as a boar d member , i s anal ogous t o member shi p on 3
a cor por at e boar d. No i ndi vi dual boar d member may t ake bi ndi ng 4
act i ons on behal f of t he ent i r e boar d. Each r egent i s appoi nt ed 5
t o t he Boar d by t he Gover nor and conf i r med by t he Senat e, but 6
t he r egent s dut y i s not t o t hose who appoi nt ed t hem or 7
conf i r med t hem, but onl y t o t he syst em s i nst i t ut i ons and t he 8
st at e. 9
I n t he spr i ng of 2013, t hi s commi t t ee at t empt ed t o expl or e 10
i ssues r el at ed t o t he Boar d, t he Syst em, and Mr . Hal l concer ni ng 11
not onl y conduct under t aken by Mr . Hal l but al so t he Boar d s and 12
t he Syst em s i nt er act i ons wi t h t he Cancer Pr event i on and 13
Resear ch I nst i t ut e of Texas ( CPRI T) and t he Uni ver si t y of Texas 14
Law School Foundat i on. I t has been suggest ed t hat t he 15
l egi sl at i ve exami nat i on of execut i ve br anch appoi nt ees i n t hi s 16
mat t er i s unpr ecedent ed. To be accur at e, not hi ng coul d be 17
f ur t her f r om t he t r ut h. Execut i ve br anch appoi nt ees ar e 18
r out i nel y exami ned by l egi sl at i ve commi t t ees. Legi sl at i ve 19
commi t t ees of t en, by r epor t or by st r ong wor ds f r om t he dai s, 20
have suggest ed t hat execut i ve br anch appoi nt ees consi der 21
al t er nat i ve cour ses of act i on, al t er t hei r met hod of doi ng 22
busi ness, or r emove t hemsel ves ei t her f r om t he si t uat i on at hand 23
or f r om st at e ser vi ce. Legi sl at i ve di sappr oval of execut i ve 24
br anch appoi nt ees act i ons has r esul t ed i n r est r uct ur i ng or 25
di ssol ut i on of agenci es and t hei r boar ds, r educed agency 26
appr opr i at i ons or i ncr eased budget ar y r evi ew, i ncr eased 27
3
over si ght or audi t s, and, i n some cases, t he vol unt ar y 1
r esi gnat i on of one or mor e appoi nt ees. 2
Two r ecent exampl es st emmi ng f r om t he expr essi on of 3
l egi sl at i ve di sappr oval i ncl ude t he r esi gnat i on of a member of 4
t he boar d of di r ect or s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas I nvest ment 5
Management Company ( UTI MCO) f ol l owi ng quest i oni ng by a Senat e 6
commi t t ee and a vot e of no conf i dence i n t he ent i r e Boar d of 7
Di r ect or s of t he f or mer Texas Yout h Commi ssi on by a j oi nt House 8
and Senat e commi t t ee. I n al l such cases, t he l egi sl at ur e act s 9
f or t he sol e pur pose of ensur i ng t hat bot h t he l egi sl at ur e and 10
t he st at e agency i n quest i on cont i nue t o saf eguar d t he asset s of 11
our st at e. 12
For t he l ast year , t hi s commi t t ee has hear d t est i mony, 13
r evi ewed evi dence, and car ef ul l y consi der ed addi t i onal 14
i nf or mat i on pr ovi ded t o t he commi t t ee by Mr . Hal l s at t or ney 15
r el at ed t o t he act i ons of Mr . Hal l , t he Boar d, and t he Syst em. 16
The commi t t ee engaged speci al counsel who gat her ed a number of 17
i t ems of i nf or mat i on and engaged i n a l engt hy and cost l y at t empt 18
t o r et r i eve document s f r om t he Syst em and t he Boar d. The 19
commi t t ee r ecei ved a r epor t f r om i t s speci al counsel , whi ch has 20
been made publ i c. Al l t hose i nvi t ed t o t est i f y bef or e t he 21
commi t t ee appear ed, except f or Mr . Hal l . 22
Whi l e opt i ng not t o t est i f y, Mr . Hal l i nst ead par t i ci pat ed 23
vi gor ousl y i n t he commi t t ee s pr oceedi ngs t hr ough hi s pr i vat e 24
counsel . Mr . Hal l s pr i vat e counsel at t ended commi t t ee 25
pr oceedi ngs and sent t he commi t t ee sever al l et t er s asser t i ng Mr . 26
Hal l s posi t i ons and def endi ng Mr . Hal l s deci si ons, whi ch 27
4
i ncl uded decl i ni ng t o appear bef or e t he commi t t ee, decl i ni ng t o 1
pr ovi de t he commi t t ee wi t h a l i st of possi bl e wi t nesses, 2
decl i ni ng t o submi t any document s t o t he commi t t ee, and unt i mel y 3
r esponses t o t he commi t t ee s r equest s f or document s and 4
i nf or mat i on. Mr . Hal l ( and t he ot her member s of Boar d) al so 5
r ecei ved t he assi st ance of hi r ed out si de counsel . I n addi t i on t o 6
pr i vat e at t or neys, Mr . Hal l was r epr esent ed by l awyer s empl oyed 7
by t he Syst em, i ncl udi ng t he gener al counsel f or t he Boar d and 8
t he gener al counsel f or t he Syst em. Mr . Hal l was i nf or med of al l 9
cont act s bet ween t he commi t t ee and any por t i on of t he Syst emand 10
Boar d. Mr . Hal l r equest ed f r om t he Chancel l or and was gi ven 11
access t o t he Boar d s out si de l awyer s not es of wi t ness 12
i nt er vi ews and was t ol d i n advance of t he r el ease of Boar d and 13
Syst em document s.
i i
I n an act descr i bed as unusual , Mr . Hal l 14
cont act ed di r ect l y t he gener al counsel of t he Syst emt o have hi m 15
r emi nd a wi t ness, on t he eve of t he wi t ness s t est i mony bef or e 16
t he commi t t ee, t hat t he wi t ness was not al l owed t o di scuss 17
cer t ai n mat t er s.
i i i
Addi t i onal l y, Mr . Hal l was gi ven t he 18
oppor t uni t y t o r evi ew and edi t l et t er s and r epor t s f r om t he 19
Chancel l or addr essed t o t hi s commi t t ee r el at i ng t o t hi s mat t er . 20
Mr . Hal l ( and at l east one ot her r egent ) caused t he Chancel l or 21
t o r equest t hat wi t nesses who t est i f i ed bef or e t he commi t t ee 22
r evi ew and, i f appr opr i at e, change or al t er t hei r t est i mony.
i v
23
Mr . Hal l f ur t her appear s t o have suggest ed t hat per sonnel act i on 24
was appr opr i at e f or t hose who f ai l ed t o change t hei r t est i mony.
v
25
I nt er est i ngl y, Mr . Hal l act ual l y has as much, i f not mor e, 26
i nf or mat i on about t he mat t er s bef or e t hi s commi t t ee, because he 27
5
cont r ol s i t ei t her per sonal l y or t hr ough hi s r ol e as r egent 1
super vi si ng t he act i ons of hi s gover nment l awyer s and out si de 2
counsel , t han t he commi t t ee does. 3
Whi l e t he commi t t ee coul d pur sue addi t i onal l eads and 4
i nf or mat i on, i t has det er mi ned i t has suf f i ci ent i nf or mat i on at 5
t hi s t i me upon whi ch t o base an assessment of Mr . Hal l s 6
conduct . 7
FI NDI NGS 8
A. At Ti mes Dur i ng t he Event s under I nvest i gat i on, The 9
Uni ver si t y of Texas Boar d of Regent s Suf f er ed a Loss 10
of I nst i t ut i onal Cont r ol 11
I n t est i mony pr ovi ded by Chancel l or Ci gar r oa, t he 12
Chancel l or descr i bed an oper at i onal change t o t he wor ki ngs of 13
t he Boar d. The Chancel l or i ndi cat ed t hat a new pol i cy was 14
i mpl ement ed t hat al l ows any r egent t o r equest any i nf or mat i on 15
f r om any i nst i t ut i on.
vi
Thi s was a si gni f i cant shi f t f r om pr i or 16
Boar d pol i cy.
vi i
Al t hough t he Chancel l or , as t he CEO of t he 17
Syst em, mi ght t r y t o di scuss t he scope of a r equest wi t h a 18
r egent and mi ght suggest t he r egent achi eve t he same r esul t s i n 19
a di f f er ent manner ( e. g. suggest a compl i ance audi t r at her t han 20
a r egent r equest ) , t he Chancel l or was power l ess t o i n any way 21
l i mi t or modi f y a cl ear l y bur densome or cost l y r egent r equest . 22
I n f act , t he Boar d chose t o i mpose l i t t l e t o no i nt er nal 23
ci r cui t br eaker or over si ght on i nf or mat i on r equest s. The 24
Boar d was not not i f i ed of an i ndi vi dual r egent s r equest s, t he 25
cost t o t he Syst em of t he r equest s, t he ef f ect of t he r equest s 26
on Syst em s oper at i ons, or t he danger s t o t he Syst em f r om 27
oper at i ng i n t hi s manner , i ncl udi ng t hr ough t he exposur e of 28
6
conf i dent i al i nf or mat i on or i nf or mat i on t hat a r egent i s not 1
al l owed t o vi ew. I t i s i mpor t ant t o not e t hat Syst em and 2
component i nst i t ut i ons empl oyees r ai sed r ed war ni ng f l ags 3
r egar di ng t hi s met hod of pr ovi di ng i nf or mat i on t o t he Boar d.
vi i i
4
Cer t ai nl y, Mr . Hal l , t he Chancel l or , and bot h t he gener al 5
counsel t o t he Boar d and t he gener al counsel t o t he Syst em wer e 6
awar e of t hese concer ns. Fur t her , each was awar e t hat er r or s had 7
occur r ed i n t he pr oduct i on of document s. Emai l s pr oduced t o t he 8
commi t t ee i ndi cat ed t hat each became at l east accept i ng of t hei r 9
r ol e i n enabl i ng t hese act i ons.
i x
10
Two ot her event s by i ndi vi dual r egent s al so demonst r at e 11
t hat oper at i onal cont r ol of t he Boar d had si gni f i cant l y er oded. 12
Fi r st , a r egent uni l at er al l y deci ded t o secr et l y r ecor d an 13
execut i ve sessi on of t he Boar d.
x
I t i s i mpor t ant t o not e t hat t he 14
Boar d i s not composed of per sons who do not under st and t he 15
cor por at e wor l d or t he del i ber at i ve pr ocess. At t he ver y l east , 16
such conduct was unaut hor i zed and pecul i ar . At some poi nt , 17
knowl edge of t he r ecor di ng was gi ven t o t he t henchai r man of t he 18
Boar d, ot her Boar d member s, and t he Boar d s counsel .
xi
Al t hough 19
cl ear l y r esponsi ve t o a document r equest made by t hi s commi t t ee, 20
t he Boar d s l awyer s f ai l ed t o del i ver t he r ecor di ng t o t hi s 21
commi t t ee or even make i t s exi st ence known unt i l sever al mont hs 22
af t er t he document r equest was t o have been f ul f i l l ed. We ar e 23
unawar e of any act i on t he Boar d t ook r egar di ng t hi s ser i ous 24
br each unt i l af t er t he exi st ence of t he r ecor di ng was made 25
publ i c. 26
Fi nal l y, i n spr i ng 2013, t wo l egi sl at i ve r equest s f or 27
7
i nf or mat i on wer e submi t t ed t o t he Boar d. Af t er t he document s had 1
been gat her ed and bef or e t hey wer e submi t t ed t o t he r equest i ng 2
l egi sl at or , Mr . Hal l r equest ed, and was al l owed by t he Boar d s 3
gener al counsel , not onl y t o r evi ew t he document s but al so t o 4
change t he desi gnat i ons of cl asses of i nf or mat i on on some of t he 5
document s. Thi s met hod of handl i ng t he l egi sl at i ve r equest s i s 6
anot her i ndi cat i on t hat by t he spr i ng of 2013, t he Boar d had 7
al l owed i t sel f t o become, i n ef f ect , ni ne i ndi vi dual Boar ds of 8
Regent s, wi t h each one act i ng as i f i ndi vi dual r egent s wer e 9
aut hor i zed t o i mpl ement changes i n t he Syst em s day- t o- day 10
oper at i on whi l e i gnor i ng l ong- st andi ng l aw and pr ot ocol s. Whi l e 11
a maj or i t y of r egent s chose not t o act as Mr . Hal l di d, t he 12
r emai ni ng r egent s f ul l y suppor t ed, wer e unawar e of , or at l east 13
chose t o t ake no publ i c act i on i n r esponse t o Mr . Hal l s unusual 14
act s. I nst i t ut i onal cont r ol was cl ear l y di mi ni shed. 15
B. Regent Hal l Br eached hi s Dut i es t o t he Boar d of 16
Regent s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em 17
Fr anci e Fr edr i ck, t he gener al counsel f or t he Boar d of 18
Regent s, i n t est i mony bef or e t hi s commi t t ee out l i ned her 19
under st andi ng of t he dut i es of a r egent : 20
Q: How i s a r egent s dut y def i ned? 21
A: The dut y of t he boar d i s def i ned by st at ut e, but t he 22
common l aw def i nes t he dut y of any t r ust ee or di r ect or as 23
i nvol vi ng t wo pr i mar y dut i es - - 24
Q: Uh- huh. 25
A: - - t he dut y of car e and t he dut y of l oyal t y. Some 26
peopl e wi l l add on a t hi r d dut y, t he dut y of obedi ence, but 27
I t hi nk t hat ' s act ual l y subsumed i n t he dut y of car e. 28
The dut y of car e r equi r es a r egent i n t hi s case t o be 29
di l i gent i n seeki ng i nf or mat i on i n maki ng t hei r j udgment s. 30
The dut y of l oyal t y r equi r es t he r egent t o put t he i nt er est 31
of t he Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em ahead of al l ot her 32
i nt er est s i n maki ng deci si ons on behal f of t he boar d. 33
Q: I n your opi ni on, what woul d const i t ut e abuse of of f i ce 34
of by a r egent ? 35
8
A: Conf l i ct of i nt er est , f ai l ur e t o put t he i nt er est s of 1
t he Uni ver si t y ahead of per sonal i nt er est s, and cer t ai nl y 2
per sonal conduct unbef i t t i ng a r egent . I mean, I know 3
we' r e not t al ki ng about t hat t oday, but i f someone wer e t o 4
be convi ct ed of a f el ony or some ot her cr i me of t hat 5
nat ur e, I t hi nk i t woul d unf i t t hemf or t he posi t i on
xi i
6
She f ur t her t est i f i ed: 7
A: I t hi nk t hat Wal l ace Hal l i s a ver y pr i nci pl ed man. I 8
t hi nk hi s hear t i s good. I t hi nk t he di st r act i ons t hat 9
have occur r ed over t he l ast sever al year s ar e unf or t unat e 10
and ar e st ar t i ng t o det r act f r om what i s i n t he best 11
i nt er est of t he Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em. And I t hi nk 12
t hat s t he best answer I can gi ve you.
xi i i
13
Ms. Fr edr i ck s t est i mony i s t hat , at a mi ni mum, t he 14
di st r act i ons caused by Mr . Hal l ar e unf or t unat e and ar e 15
det r act i ng f r om t he best i nt er est of t he Syst em, a vi ol at i on of 16
hi s dut y of l oyal t y t o t he Syst em. Thi s i s t he most f avor abl e 17
t est i mony t hat t he commi t t ee hear d r egar di ng Mr . Hal l s 18
per f or mance of dut i es. Ot her per sons t est i f i ed t hat Mr . Hal l 19
ei t her vi ol at ed st andar ds of car e f or a r egent or , 20
al t er nat i vel y, hi s act i ons wer e gr ounds f or i mpeachment .
xi v
At 21
l east one ot her r egent char act er i zed Hal l s conduct as 22
har assment and an abuse of power .
xv
23
The dut i es of a r egent ar e set by l aw. At l east t hr ee ar eas 24
of Texas st at ut es gover n t he di schar ge of a r egent s dut i es. 25
Fai l ur e t o compl y wi t h t hese l aws woul d t her ef or e const i t ut e 26
mi sconduct , mal f easance, or mi sf easance and woul d const i t ut e a 27
br each of a r egent s dut y. Fi r st , Subchapt er G, Chapt er 51, 28
Educat i on Code, set s f or t h br oad st at ut or y dut i es and 29
r esponsi bi l i t i es f or hi gher educat i on gover ni ng boar ds such as 30
9
The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em Boar d of Regent s. Sect i on 51. 352 1
of t hat subchapt er pr ovi des, i n per t i nent par t : 2
( a) I t i s t he pol i cy of t hi s st at e t hat t he gover ni ng 3
boar ds of i nst i t ut i ons of hi gher educat i on, bei ng composed 4
of l ay member s, shal l exer ci se t he t r adi t i onal and t i me- 5
honor ed r ol e f or such boar ds as t hei r r ol e has evol ved i n 6
t he Uni t ed St at es and shal l const i t ut e t he keyst one of t he 7
gover nance st r uct ur e. I n t hi s r egar d each gover ni ng boar d: 8
( 1) i s expect ed t o pr eser ve i nst i t ut i onal 9
i ndependence and t o def end i t s r i ght t o manage i t s own 10
af f ai r s t hr ough i t s chosen admi ni st r at or s and 11
empl oyees; 12
( 2) shal l enhance t he publ i c i mage of each 13
i nst i t ut i on under i t s gover nance; 14
( 3) shal l i nt er pr et t he communi t y t o t he campus 15
and i nt er pr et t he campus t o t he communi t y; 16
( 4) shal l nur t ur e each i nst i t ut i on under i t s 17
gover nance t o t he end t hat each i nst i t ut i on achi eves 18
i t s f ul l pot ent i al wi t hi n i t s r ol e and mi ssi on; and 19
( 5) shal l i nsi st on cl ar i t y of f ocus and mi ssi on 20
of each i nst i t ut i on under i t s gover nance. 21
Addi t i onal dut i es appl i cabl e speci f i cal l y t o The Uni ver si t y 22
of Texas Syst em Boar d of Regent s ar e cont ai ned i n Chapt er 65, 23
Educat i on Code. 24
Addi t i onal l y, a number of cr i mi nal of f enses r egul at e t he 25
per f or mance of publ i c of f i ci al s such as a UT Syst em r egent , 26
i ncl udi ng t he cr i mes associ at ed wi t h abuse of of f i ce i n 27
Chapt er 39 of t he Penal Code, but any cr i mi nal act i vi t y r i si ng 28
t o t he l evel of abuse of of f i ce woul d al so be f ai r l y descr i bed 29
as mi sconduct , mal f easance, or mi sf easance and const i t ut e a 30
br each of a r egent s dut y. 31
Fi nal l y, a r egent i s bound t o compl y wi t h st at e and f eder al 32
l aws r est r i ct i ng t he use or di scl osur e of t he t ype of pr i vat e 33
and educat i onal i nf or mat i on a r egent may have access t o i n t he 34
10
cour se of hi s or her dut i es. The most not abl e and r el evant of 1
t hese l aws i s t he Fami l y Educat i onal Ri ght s and Pr i vacy Act of 2
1974, 20 U. S. C. 1232g. FERPA pr ot ect s per sonal l y i dent i f i abl e 3
st udent i nf or mat i on and pr ohi bi t s t he di scl osur e of t he 4
i nf or mat i on wi t hout per mi ssi on of t he st udent or a par ent of a 5
st udent under 18 year s ol d. 6
Fol l owi ng a r evi ew of t he evi dence, we f i nd t hat t her e i s 7
evi dence t hat Mr . Hal l vi ol at ed t he dut i es of car e and l oyal t y 8
as descr i bed by Gener al Counsel Fr edr i ck and t he st andar ds of 9
car e out l i ned by st at ut e. 10
A non- exhaust i ve l i st of t hese vi ol at i ons of t he Regent s 11
f i duci ar y dut y i s set out bel ow: 12
1. FERPA Vi ol at i ons 13
I n 2013, Fr anci e Fr edr i ck, t he gener al counsel of t he 14
Uni ver si t y Of Texas Boar d Of Regent s, became awar e t hat Mr . Hal l 15
was i n possessi on of t wo i ndi vi dual st udent r ecor ds, at l east 16
one of whi ch i s pr ot ect ed under f eder al pr i vacy l aws. Mr . Hal l 17
t ol d her t hat he had t he document s.
xvi
She det er mi ned t hat Mr . 18
Hal l had no l egi t i mat e educat i onal i nt er est f or hol di ng t hose 19
document s. 20
Mr . Hal l t ol d Ms. Fr eder i ck t hat he want ed t o br i ng t hose 21
document s t o t he of f i ce of t he At t or ney Gener al . Agai n, she t ol d 22
hi m t hat t he document s cont ai ned FERPA pr ot ect ed i nf or mat i on and 23
shoul d not be pr oduced.
xvi i i
xvi i
Mr . Hal l nonet hel ess br ought t hose 24
document s t o t he of f i ce of t he At t or ney Gener al and al so 25
f or war ded t hem t o hi s pr i vat e at t or ney. Mr . Hal l f ai l ed t o 26
t el l Ms. Fr edr i ck of t hose act i ons at t hat t i me. Ms. Fr edr i ck 27
11
event ual l y t ol d Mr . Hal l t hat she woul d need t o r et r i eve t he 1
FERPA- pr ot ect ed document s f r om hi m. He sai d t hat he woul d 2
dest r oy t he document s, t hen t ol d her f or t he f i r st t i me t hat he 3
had di st r i but ed t he FERPA document t o an at t or ney at t he of f i ce 4
of t he At t or ney Gener al .
xi x
She ar r anged f or t he document t o be 5
r et r i eved and dest r oyed.
xx
6
I n August 2013, Mr . Hal l asked Ms. Fr edr i ck t o appr ove 7
l anguage i n a dr af t l et t er t o t hi s commi t t ee pr epar ed by Mr . 8
Hal l s pr i vat e l awyer . As Ms. Fr edr i ck r ead t he dr af t of t he 9
l et t er , i t became cl ear t hat Mr . Hal l had gi ven a copy of t he 10
FERPA- pr ot ect ed i nf or mat i on t o hi s pr i vat e l awyer and t hat he 11
had f ai l ed t o di scl ose t hat act i on or seek t he r et ur n or t he 12
dest r uct i on of t he document s, as r equest ed by Ms. Fr edr i ck. 13
At some poi nt af t er Mr . Hal l s pr i vat e l awyer sent a l et t er 14
ment i oni ng t he FERPA- r el at ed mat er i al t o t he commi t t ee, Mr . 15
Hal l s pr i vat e l awyer s r et ur ned t he FERPA i nf or mat i on t o t he 16
Syst em. The Syst em under t ook no i nvest i gat i on of t he dat a br each 17
nor was i t ever di scussed by t he Boar d. I n f act , Ms. Fr edr i ck 18
consi der ed t he dat a br each not si gni f i cant . 19
Under t he ci r cumst ances, Mr . Hal l s act i on can onl y be 20
consi der ed knowi ng, wi l l i ng, and i nt ent i onal . Hi s Syst em l awyer 21
per sonal l y counsel ed hi m t hat t he document s r el at ed t o st udent s 22
of t he Syst em wer e pr ot ect ed under f eder al pr i vacy l aws and 23
shoul d not be possessed by hi m and coul d not be di st r i but ed t o 24
ot her s. I n det er mi ni ng t hat he shoul d not possess t he 25
i nf or mat i on, t he Syst em f ur t her made a det er mi nat i on t hat he had 26
no l egi t i mat e educat i onal i nt er est i n vi ewi ng t he dat a. 27
12
Af t er bei ng t ol d t hi s, he i gnor ed t he Boar d counsel s 1
advi ce and di st r i but ed t he FERPA- pr ot ect ed mat er i al t o mor e t han 2
one t hi r d par t y. Mor eover , he mi sl ed Ms. Fr edr i ck by cl ai mi ng t o 3
have dest r oyed t he document s, when he i nst ead al l owed hi s 4
pr i vat e counsel t o keep t he document and use i t i n Mr . Hal l s 5
pr i vat e l egal mat t er s. Mr . Hal l s pr i vat e counsel , over whom Mr . 6
Hal l had unquest i onabl e aut hor i t y, f ai l ed t o r et ur n t he 7
pr ot ect ed i nf or mat i on pr ompt l y when r equest ed. 8
St udent s who at t end an i nst i t ut i on wi t hi n The Uni ver si t y of 9
Texas Syst emshoul d not have t o wor r y about t hei r pr i vacy r i ght s 10
bei ng wi l l f ul l y vi ol at ed by a member of t he Boar d of Regent s- no 11
mat t er t he r easoni ng of t he r egent . Mr . Hal l s act i ons i n t hi s 12
r egar d wer e si mpl y wr ong and vi ol at ed hi s r egent al dut i es. 13
2. Unaut hor i zed Advocacy Bef or e CASE 14
I n 2012, an i ssue ar ose r egar di ng t he account i ng and 15
r epor t i ng of a gi f t val ued at appr oxi mat el y $44 mi l l i on made t o 16
The Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n i n t he cour se of a capi t al 17
campai gn. The Uni ver si t y sought cl ar i f i cat i on of t he account i ng 18
st andar ds f or t he gi f t f r om t he Counci l f or t he Advancement and 19
Suppor t of Educat i on ( CASE) . I n a nut shel l , t he Uni ver si t y 20
sought one i nt er pr et at i on of t he CASE r ul es, whi ch woul d have 21
al l owed t he r epor t i ng of t he gi f t , but Mr . Hal l per sonal l y 22
pr ef er r ed anot her i nt er pr et at i on t hat woul d have di sal l owed t he 23
r epor t i ng of t he gi f t . The Boar d as a whol e di d not t ake any 24
of f i ci al act i on at t hat t i me t o suppor t Mr . Hal l s i ndi vi dual 25
vi ews. 26
13
Wi t h t he knowl edge and consent of t he Syst em, t he 1
Uni ver si t y under t ook di scussi ons wi t h CASE r egar di ng t he 2
appr opr i at e met hod of account i ng f or t he gi f t . The Syst em 3
Chancel l or agr eed t hat t he Uni ver si t y s act i ons wer e not 4
i mpr oper - " Any UT Syst em i nst i t ut i on may pr esent an ar gument t o 5
CASE i f i t has a j ust i f i cat i on t o do so . . . . " 6
Mr . Hal l , act i ng i ndependent l y, asked Syst em per sonnel t o 7
br i ef hi m on t he i ssues, and ul t i mat el y pr epar ed t o i ndi vi dual l y 8
oppose t he Uni ver si t y s ar gument s. 9
Whi l e r egent s may have br oad aut hor i t y t o i nf or m t hemsel ves 10
of mat t er s af f ect i ng t he Syst em and i t s component s, t her e i s no 11
aut hor i t y f or an i ndi vi dual r egent t o per sonal l y under mi ne 12
[ t he] i nst i t ut i onal i ndependence of UT Aust i n, t o act i n a 13
manner t hat det r act s f r om, r at her t han enhances t he publ i c 14
i mage of , UT Aust i n, or t o act i n a manner t hat does not 15
nur t ur e UT Aust i n, i n vi ol at i on of t he st at ut or y obl i gat i ons 16
of a r egent pr escr i bed by t he Educat i on Code. Fur t her , under 17
The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em Regent s own r ul es, an i ndi vi dual 18
r egent i s pr ohi bi t ed f r om maki ng publ i c st at ement s on 19
cont r over si al mat t er s wi t hout advance Boar d appr oval . I t i s 20
cl ear t hat t he Boar d di d not di scuss, much l ess appr ove of , Mr . 21
Hal l s act i ons unt i l af t er Hal l t ook t he unusual st ep of f l yi ng 22
t o Washi ngt on D. C. t o at t end a pr evi ousl y- schedul ed CASE meet i ng 23
r egar di ng t he UT gi f t . He had ar r anged f or t he gener al counsel 24
of t he Boar d and anot her Syst em empl oyee t o l i st en t o t he 25
meet i ng by conf er ence cal l . Mr . Hal l s act i ons at t he meet i ng 26
can best be descr i bed as shambol i c. Rat her t han mer el y obser vi ng 27
14
t o i nf or m hi msel f , he act i vel y i nt er j ect ed hi msel f i nt o t he 1
meet i ng as an opponent of t he Uni ver si t y s posi t i on, 2
i nt er r upt i ng and ar gui ng wi t h counsel f or t he Uni ver si t y who was 3
pr esent i ng t he i nst i t ut i on s posi t i on. When t he hear i ng 4
concl uded wi t h t he Uni ver si t y appear i ng t o have achi eved i t s 5
desi r ed r esul t , Mr . Hal l f ol l owed t he CASE execut i ve conduct i ng 6
t he meet i ng t o hi s of f i ce and pur sued a pr i vat e di scussi on wi t h 7
hi m about t he mat t er . Af t er t he meet i ng, Mr . Hal l cont i nued hi s 8
campai gn by emai l , and asked t hat t he Uni ver si t y s at t or neys who 9
r epr esent ed t he Uni ver si t y bef or e CASE be t er mi nat ed wi t hout 10
pay. 11
Mr . Hal l s act i ons- t aki ng an unaut hor i zed publ i c posi t i on 12
on a cont r over si al mat t er i n di r ect conf l i ct wi t h t he 13
i nst i t ut i on s posi t i on and mi cr omanagi ng t he over si ght and 14
pot ent i al di smi ssal of UT Aust i n s at t or neys- i s out si de t he 15
pr oper scope of r egent al conduct and exceeded t he aut hor i t y t hat 16
Mr . Hal l al l eges he was oper at i ng under . He f ai l ed t o suppor t 17
t he i nst i t ut i on as r equi r ed by st at ut e. Thus, Mr . Hal l vi ol at ed 18
hi s f i duci ar y dut y as a r egent . 19
3. Conduct i nconsi st ent wi t h st andar ds demanded of ot her s. 20
Mr . Hal l has i nsi st ed t hat Syst em empl oyees and of f i cer s 21
per f or m each of many r equest ed t asks wi t h al most Pr ussi an 22
ef f i ci ency. Hi s emai l s t hr eat en empl oyment r et al i at i on i f hi s 23
wi shes ar e not car r i ed out near l y i nst ant l y. I n a sense, Mr . 24
Hal l s emai l s cont ai n hi s own per sonal st andar d of what conduct 25
i s appr opr i at e f or a Syst em of f i cer . But Mr . Hal l does not meet 26
t he hi gh st andar ds he expect s of ot her s. 27
15
a. Fai l ur e t o pr ovi de or r et r i eve al l document s i n 1
r esponse t o a publ i c i nf or mat i on r equest 2
I n t he spr i ng of 2013, Mr . Hal l caused an i nqui r y t o be 3
conduct ed r egar di ng why cer t ai n document s wer e not pr ovi ded i n 4
r esponse t o an open r ecor ds r equest . The Syst emdevot ed a number 5
of r esour ces t o r esol vi ng t he i ssue. 6
I n t he summer of 2013, Mr . Hal l pr epar ed meet i ng not es on 7
hi s comput er at a Boar d meet i ng. Wi t hi n a shor t t i me, t he Syst em 8
r ecei ved a publ i c i nf or mat i on r equest f or al l Boar d member s 9
meet i ng not es. Mr . Hal l f al sel y r esponded t hat he had no 10
r esponsi ve document s. However , af t er t he Syst em r esponded t o t he 11
r equest or t hat i t had no r esponsi ve document s, Regent Hal l , i n 12
an unr el at ed mat t er , f or war ded t hose ver y not es t o a Syst em 13
empl oyee t o pr ove a poi nt he was maki ng at t hat t i me. Mr . Hal l s 14
own emai l pr oved t he r esponsi ve document s exi st ence and t hat he 15
mai nt ai ned i t at t he t i me t he publ i c i nf or mat i on r equest had 16
been made, but f ai l ed t o pr ovi de i t t o a member of t he publ i c 17
under Texas Publ i c I nf or mat i on Act . Put t i ng asi de t he cl ear 18
st at ut or y dut y t o pr ovi de such i nf or mat i on, t her e i s no 19
i ndi cat i on t hat Mr . Hal l showed t he same l evel of concer n f or 20
hi s f ai l ur e t o i ncl ude r esponsi ve document s t o an open r ecor ds 21
r equest as he shows f or t he Syst em. 22
b. Fai l ur e t o cooper at e wi t h an of f i ci al i nvest i gat i on or 23
pr ovi de r equest ed document s 24
I n J une 2013, Mr . Hal l met wi t h t he At t or ney Gener al s 25
of f i ce r egar di ng i t s i nvest i gat i on of t he Uni ver si t y of Texas 26
Law School Foundat i on. The Boar d of Regent s had by of f i ci al 27
Boar d act i on asked t he at t or ney gener al t o under t ake t he 28
16
i nvest i gat i on. At t hi s meet i ng, Mr . Hal l pr ovi ded t he of f i ce of 1
t he At t or ney Gener al wi t h FERPA- pr ot ect ed st udent i nf or mat i on 2
t hat he had been advi sed by t he Boar d s l awyer not t o pr ovi de. 3
At t he concl usi on of t he meet i ng, t he st af f of t he At t or ney 4
Gener al asked f or a swor n wr i t t en st at ement f or Mr . Hal l s 5
concer ns. Mr . Hal l agr eed t o pr ovi de t he st at ement . 6
Subsequent l y, Mr . Hal l deci ded not t o pr ovi de any such 7
swor n st at ement . The At t or ney Gener al s of f i ce r epeat edl y 8
cont act ed Mr . Hal l or hi s pr i vat e l awyer s, who i ni t i al l y 9
r esponded t hat a l engt hy swor n st at ement woul d be i mmedi at el y 10
f or t hcomi ng, t o ascer t ai n when and whet her Mr . Hal l mi ght 11
pr ovi de t he swor n st at ement . Much l at er , Mr . Hal l s l awyer s 12
i ndi cat ed t hat Mr . Hal l woul d not pr ovi de a swor n st at ement 13
unl ess i t was mai nt ai ned i n conf i dence and not pr ovi ded t o t he 14
l egi sl at ur e. Ul t i mat el y, Mr . Hal l s at t or ney t ol d t he at t or ney 15
gener al s of f i ce t hat Mr . Hal l had mor e pr essi ng mat t er s t o 16
at t end t o t han pr ovi di ng a swor n st at ement f or t he 17
i nvest i gat i on, despi t e t he f act t hat ever y ot her r egent had 18
compl i ed wi t h t he r equest . Agai n, t her e i s no i ndi cat i on t hat 19
Mr . Hal l demonst r at ed t he same l evel of cooper at i on f or an 20
i nvest i gat i on as was expect ed of ot her s. 21
c. Fai l ur e t o cor r ect mi sst at ement s 22
I n a l et t er pr ovi ded t o t hi s commi t t ee, t he Chancel l or has 23
pr ovi ded cl ar i f i cat i ons t o t est i mony by cer t ai n Syst em 24
empl oyees. As has been pr evi ousl y di scussed, t he Chancel l or was 25
r equest ed by Mr . Hal l and ot her s t o have some wi t nesses change 26
t hei r t est i mony; t he Chancel l or s cl ar i f i cat i ons wer e of f er ed 27
17
when t he ot her wi t nesses opt ed t o st and by t hei r t est i mony. Mr . 1
Hal l r evi ewed t he Chancel l or s l et t er bef or e i t was del i ver ed t o 2
t he commi t t ee. Two i t ems have caught t he commi t t ee s at t ent i on. 3
Fi r st , t he Chancel l or at t empt s t o mi t i gat e Mr . Hal l s 4
i nappr opr i at e handl i ng of FERPA document s by over l ooki ng t he 5
f act t hat Mr . Hal l was war ned not t o di st r i but e t he st udent 6
i nf or mat i on, t hat Mr . Hal l f ai l ed t o i dent i f y al l t he par t i es t o 7
whom he di st r i but ed t he i nf or mat i on, and t hat Mr . Hal l 8
i nt ent i onal l y kept t he i nf or mat i on and l et hi s pr i vat e l awyer 9
use i t mont hs af t er bei ng t ol d t hat i t was f eder al l y pr ot ect ed. 10
Second, t he l et t er at t empt s t o chal l enge t he basi s of 11
t est i mony pr ovi ded by a component empl oyee, even t hough i t i s 12
cl ear f r om emai l s sent af t er t he l et t er was del i ver ed t hat t he 13
Chancel l or had no i dea how t he i nf or mat i on was det er mi ned or 14
even i f an er r or had, i n f act , been made. I n shor t , Mr . Hal l s 15
demand t hat mi sst at ement s be cor r ect ed appear s t o appl y onl y t o 16
cor r ect i ons t hat woul d benef i t hi m. 17
I n advocat i ng f or cl ar i f i cat i ons t o wi t ness t est i mony, 18
Mr . Hal l di sr egar ded st at ement s by ot her syst em empl oyees 19
suppor t i ng t he al l egedl y i naccur at e t est i mony. For exampl e, Mr . 20
Hal l chal l enged a por t i on of t he t est i mony of Uni ver si t y 21
Pr esi dent Power s, and cont i nued t o di sput e t hat t est i mony even 22
af t er t he Syst em s vi ce chancel l or f or ext er nal r el at i ons sent 23
an emai l acknowl edgi ng t hat t he t est i mony was cor r ect . 24
Mr . Hal l al so made demonst r abl y f al se r epr esent at i ons 25
r egar di ng FERPA- pr ot ect ed i nf or mat i on i n hi s possessi on. Af t er 26
bei ng t ol d by t he Boar d s gener al counsel t hat he coul d not 27
18
di scl ose a par t i cul ar FERPA- pr ot ect ed document t o t he at t or ney 1
gener al , Mr . Hal l sai d t hat he had dest r oyed t he document . 2
I nst ead, he r et ai ned possessi on of t he document and shar ed i t 3
wi t h hi s pr i vat e at t or ney, whi ch t he Boar d s gener al counsel and 4
ot her s at t he Syst em l ear ned of at a l at er t i me. I t i s uncl ear 5
what , i f any, act i on was t aken t o addr ess t hat br each when t he 6
Syst eml ear ned of i t . 7
At best , Mr . Hal l s mi sr epr esent at i ons and shocki ng l ack of 8
candor r ef l ect poor l y on al l who par t i ci pat ed i n pr ovi di ng t he 9
i nf or mat i on t o t he l egi sl at i ve commi t t ee. 10
A. Mr . Hal l s Appoi nt ment Appl i cat i on 11
I t i s cl ear t hat Mr . Hal l s appl i cat i on f or appoi nt ment t o 12
The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em Boar d of Regent s was i ncompl et e. 13
He f ai l ed t o convey i nf or mat i on t hat he was awar e of r egar di ng 14
per sonal l i t i gat i on wi t h whi ch he was i nvol ved. Mr . Hal l s 15
expl anat i on i s t hat t he Gover nor s of f i ce t ol d hi m i t was 16
accept abl e t o omi t t he i nf or mat i on, but t est i mony by t he 17
Gover nor s of f i ce does not ver i f y t hat al l egat i on. 18
I n any event , i t i s cl ear t hat t he ci r cumst ances 19
sur r oundi ng Mr . Hal l s appl i cat i on di d cont r i but e t o t he change 20
i n pr ocess of t he Senat e i n r evi ewi ng appoi nt eeseach appoi nt ee 21
must now f i l e i nf or mat i on on a separ at e f or m desi gnat ed by t he 22
Senat e. At t hi s t i me, our i nqui r y r egar di ng def ect s i n Mr . 23
Hal l s appl i cat i on must hal t because t he Gover nor s of f i ce does 24
not adequat el y t r ack what i t ems i t advi ses ar e not r equi r ed on 25
appoi nt ee appl i cat i ons. However , i t mer i t s consi der at i on whet her 26
19
a bet t er met hod of r ecor dkeepi ng mi ght be mor e appr opr i at e i n 1
deal i ng wi t h appoi nt ees appl i cat i ons i n t he f ut ur e. 2
CONCLUSI ON 3
Chai r man Fost er r ecent l y made a poi nt ed obser vat i on t hat i s 4
cent r al t o our i nqui r y- t her e i s a f undament al di f f er ence i n t he 5
under st andi ng of t he r ol e of a r egent and t he conduct of a 6
r egent bet ween Mr . Hal l and ot her s. The commi t t ee t oday at 7
l engt h set s out i t s under st andi ng t hat Mr . Hal l s act i ons have 8
cr ossed t he l i ne f r om r emai ni ng i nf or med and engaged t o 9
vi ol at i ng hi s r egent al and f i duci ar y dut i es. The commi t t ee want s 10
t o be cl ear t hat i t expect s and encour ages r egent s ( and al l 11
member s of t he gover ni ng boar ds of st at e i nst i t ut i ons) t o ask 12
har d quest i ons and exer ci se due car e i n over seei ng t hose 13
i nst i t ut i ons. Fr aud, cor r upt i on, wast e, or mer e i nef f i ci ency ar e 14
common f oes t hat t he l egi sl at ur e and ot her gover ni ng bodi es ar e 15
char ged t o i dent i f y and r oot out . That sai d, t her e ar e r i ght 16
ways t o conduct af f ai r s and t her e ar e wr ong ways t o manage t hem. 17
An ends- j ust i f i es- t he- means appr oach i s i nappr opr i at e i n t hi s 18
cont ext . Not onl y di d Mr . Hal l s demands and conduct cr eat e a 19
t oxi c envi r onment on t he Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n campus 20
and wi t hi n t he Syst em, but t he manner i n whi ch t hat conduct was 21
under t aken was si mpl y not const r uct i ve t aken as a whol e. Mr . 22
Hal l s conduct became so di st r act i ng and di sr upt i ve t hat t he 23
Boar d Chai r man cal l ed f or hi s r esi gnat i on. Fur t her , t he cost s 24
and expenses t o t he Uni ver si t y and Syst em at t r i but abl e t o Mr . 25
Hal l f ar exceed t he cost of t he l egi sl at ur e s i nvest i gat i on of 26
hi s conduct .
xxi
Test i mony r ecei ved by t he commi t t ee put s t he 27
20
est i mat ed cost of sat i sf yi ng Mr . Hal l s demands at ar ound $1 1
mi l l i on. I t i s i nconcei vabl e t hat ot her l ess cost l y and mor e 2
appr opr i at e avenues coul d not have been pur sued t o achi eve t he 3
desi r ed r esul t s. Pr osecut or s ar e not per mi t t ed t o vi ol at e t he 4
l aw t o enhance t hei r odds of obt ai ni ng a convi ct i on. Si mi l ar l y, 5
t he commi t t ee cannot condone t he wr ongf ul conduct of a r ogue 6
r egent r egar dl ess of hi s st at ed goal s. 7
The commi t t ee al so adopt s t hese f i ndi ngs and concl usi ons i n 8
an ef f or t t o cl ear t he decks. I t i s not l ost on t he commi t t ee 9
t hat i n t he comi ng mont hs, a new Chancel l or of t he Syst em and a 10
new pr esi dent of The Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n wi l l assume 11
t hose posi t i ons. The commi t t ee i s al so awar e t hat t he component 12
i nst i t ut i ons of t he Syst em wi l l hi r e t housands of new 13
pr of essor s, empl oyees, and ot her per sonnel . The commi t t ee t akes 14
t hi s act i on t o gi ve t hose i nst i t ut i ons not i ce of i t s f i ndi ngs 15
and t o r el at e t he commi t t ee s expect at i ons t hat t hese i ssues 16
r el at ed t o t he Boar d, t he Syst em, and t he Syst em s component 17
i nst i t ut i ons wi l l not f est er . The commi t t ee i s al so awar e t hat 18
hundr eds of t housands of st udent s and pr ospect i ve st udent s wi l l 19
appl y t o or at t end i nst i t ut i ons i n t he Syst em and t housands of 20
pat i ent s wi l l be seen at Syst em heal t h car e i nst i t ut i ons. The 21
commi t t ee i s cer t ai n t hat t he manner i n whi ch pr i vacy i nt er est s 22
ar e pr ot ect ed wi l l r ef l ect wel l on t he Syst em. 23
The commi t t ee i s mi ndf ul of sever al r ecent changes i n t he 24
oper at i on of t he Boar d and seeks t o encour age addi t i onal 25
pr ogr ess. The commi t t ee r emai ns t r oubl ed and r ej ect s t he pl ai nl y 26
f al se asser t i on t hat t he Boar d i s not empower ed t o t ake act i on 27
21
r egar di ng Mr . Hal l s behavi or . The Boar d, by r ul e, can deci de 1
how t o moni t or and pol i ce i t s own member s behavi or . The Boar d 2
has t he abi l i t y t o over see i t s member s act i ons. Al l of Mr . 3
Hal l s act i ons t ook pl ace on t he r egent s col l ect i ve wat ch. Each 4
r egent ei t her agr ees wi t h hi s act i ons, or unt i l r ecent l y, t ook 5
f ew vi si bl e st eps t o det er t hem. Ther e shoul d be no doubt t hat 6
t hi s commi t t ee i s l ooki ng not onl y at Mr . Hal l s act i ons, but 7
t he Boar d s act i ons as wel l . 8
I n t he end, t he commi t t ee has deci ded, i n par t , t o r el y on 9
t he car ef ul l y cr af t ed deci si on- maki ng model t hat t he Chancel l or 10
used i n det er mi ni ng whet her t o r ecommend t he r ecent di smi ssal of 11
t he Pr esi dent of The Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n, whi ch bot h 12
t he Execut i ve Vi ce Chancel l or and t he Chai r man of t he Boar d of 13
Regent s agr eed was an appr opr i at e l evel of r evi ew. The 14
Chancel l or st at ed t hat di smi ssal was war r ant ed, even i f t he 15
of f i cer or empl oyee had br oken no l aw, no r ul e was vi ol at ed, 16
t hat t he empl oyee or of f i cer was passi onat e, and ever y 17
quant i t at i ve measur e was exempl ar y, i f t he det er i or at i ng 18
ci r cumst ances of a wor ki ng r el at i onshi p had occur r ed, or was 19
coupl ed wi t h per si st ent behavi or i ndi cat i ng a f ai l ur e t o change, 20
and a r eal i zat i on t hat t he f ocus of al l cont r over sy cent er s 21
ar ound a si ngl e i ndi vi dual . These condi t i ons al one r equi r e t he 22
r emoval of t he per son f r om t he pr obl em i n t he best i nt er est s of 23
t he i nst i t ut i on. Many have suggest ed t hat what i s i n t he best 24
i nt er est of t he Syst em concer ni ng Pr esi dent Power s may al so be 25
appl i cabl e t o Regent Hal l . Wi t h t hose t hought s i n mi nd, and 26
gi ven t hat t hi s commi t t ee does not have t he uni l at er al aut hor i t y 27
22
t o si mpl y r emove Mr . Hal l f r omof f i ce, t he commi t t ee i ssues t hi s 1
publ i c admoni shment and censur e of Mr . Hal l . 2
Even i f t he commi t t ee wer e t o accept al l of Mr . Hal l s 3
st at ed r easons f or hi s act i ons, hi s met hods mer i t censur e. Most 4
t r oubl i ng i s t hat al most ever y one of Mr . Hal l s goal s coul d 5
have been accompl i shed i n a way t hat woul d not have r equi r ed 6
t hi s commi t t ee t o meet or i ssue t hi s censur e. Hi s act i ons, 7
separ at e and apar t f r om hi s st at ed goal s, deser ve consequences. 8
Speci al counsel t o t he commi t t ee descr i bed Mr . Hal l as a r ovi ng 9
i nspect or gener al i n sear ch of a pr obl em r at her t han a 10
sol ut i on. The commi t t ee hopes, and ant i ci pat es, t hat Mr . Hal l 11
and t he ent i r e Boar d of Regent s wi l l r ecei ve t hese comment s and 12
cr i t i ci sms and move f or war d mor e pr oduct i vel y. Accor di ngl y: 13
WHEREAS, t he mi sconduct , i ncompet ency i n t he per f or mance of 14
of f i ci al dut i es, or behavi or unbef i t t i ng a nomi nee f or and 15
hol der of a st at e of f i ce demonst r at ed by Wal l ace L. Hal l J r . 16
i ncl uded: 17
A. Whi l e hol di ng of f i ce as a member of t he Boar d of 18
Regent s, Mr . Hal l ei t her i mpr oper l y obt ai ned, 19
r et ai ned, or di scl osed or caused t o be di scl osed 20
conf i dent i al st udent i nf or mat i on and f ai l ed t o r et ur n 21
or dest r oy t he same i nf or mat i on when t he di scl osur e 22
was di scover ed wi t h di sr egar d f or or i n vi ol at i on of 23
t he l aw, t he r ul es and pr act i ces of t he Boar d of 24
Regent s, or t he best i nt er est s of The Uni ver si t y of 25
Texas Syst em; 26
B. Whi l e hol di ng of f i ce as a member of t he Boar d of 27
23
Regent s, Mr . Hal l subst ant i al l y i mpeded t he abi l i t y of 1
t hi s commi t t ee t o car r y out i t s dut i es i n ai d of t he 2
l egi sl at ur e' s cor e const i t ut i onal f unct i ons of 3
over si ght of t he execut i ve br anch of st at e gover nment 4
and of exami nat i on of t he conduct of st at e of f i cer s by 5
f ai l i ng t o pr ovi de t o t he commi t t ee or pr event i ng t he 6
commi t t ee f r om obt ai ni ng i nf or mat i on essent i al t o i t s 7
i nvest i gat i on, act i ons t hat demonst r at ed a wi l f ul 8
di sr egar d of t he r esponsi bi l i t y of a st at e of f i cer t o 9
assi st t he l egi sl at ur e i n car r yi ng out t hose dut i es; 10
C. Whi l e hol di ng of f i ce as a member of t he Boar d of 11
Regent s, Mr . Hal l r et al i at ed or t hr eat ened r et al i at i on 12
agai nst Syst em and Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n 13
per sonnel who t est i f i ed bef or e t he commi t t ee dur i ng 14
t he commi t t ee' s i nvest i gat i on of al l egat i ons of 15
wr ongdoi ng commi t t ed by Mr . Hal l wi t h di sr egar d f or or 16
i n vi ol at i on of st at e l aw, t he r ul es and pr act i ces of 17
t he Boar d of Regent s, or t he best i nt er est s of The 18
Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em; 19
D. Whi l e hol di ng of f i ce as a member of t he Boar d of 20
Regent s, Mr . Hal l di sr egar ded t he best i nt er est s of 21
The Uni ver si t y of Texas at Aust i n and The Uni ver si t y 22
of Texas Syst em by per sonal l y advocat i ng bef or e t he 23
Counci l f or Advancement and Suppor t of Educat i on 24
( " CASE" ) agai nst t he devel opment i nt er est s of t he 25
Uni ver si t y wi t hout t he aut hor i zat i on of t he Boar d of 26
Regent s, wi t h di sr egar d f or or i n vi ol at i on of st at e 27
24
l aw, t he r ul es and pr act i ces of t he Boar d of Regent s, 1
or t he best i nt er est s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas 2
Syst em; and 3
WHEREAS, t he conduct of Wal l ace L. Hal l J r . as out l i ned i n 4
t hi s mot i on, has br ought di sr upt i on and si gni f i cant har m t o The 5
Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em, t he St at e of Texas, and t he ci t i zens 6
of t hi s st at e; and 7
WHEREAS, i f t her e wer e any quest i on r egar di ng t he 8
appr opr i at eness of Mr . Hal l s act i ons as a member of t he Boar d 9
of Regent s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em, one need onl y 10
exami ne t he r equi r ed changes t o t he oper at i on of a number of 11
st at e agenci es, i ncl udi ng t he Texas Senat e and The Uni ver si t y of 12
Texas Syst em, r esul t i ng f r om hi s act i ons, t he cost s i ncur r ed by 13
The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em i n hi s def ense, and t he 14
r eput at i onal har m t o t he Syst em, and because such act i on 15
r equi r es a f or mal di sappr oval and censur e; now, t her ef or e, be i t 16
RESOLVED, That t hi s commi t t ee does her eby admoni sh and 17
censur e Wal l ace L. Hal l J r . f or mi sconduct , i ncompet ency i n t he 18
per f or mance of of f i ci al dut i es, or behavi or unbef i t t i ng a 19
nomi nee f or and hol der of a st at e of f i ce; and, be i t f ur t her 20
RESOLVED, That t he commi t t ee appoi nt one or t wo member s of 21
t he commi t t ee t o be assi gned an of f i ci al , ongoi ng over si ght r ol e 22
over t he Boar d of Regent s of The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em, The 23
Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em, and The Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em 24
component i nst i t ut i ons. For t he pur poses of t hi s over si ght 25
r ol e, t he assi gned member s wi l l have t he aut hor i t y of t he f ul l 26
commi t t ee, i ncl udi ng t he power s of t hi s commi t t ee under Chapt er 27
25
665, Gover nment Code, commi t t ee st af f and r esour ces assi gned or 1
desi gnat ed, as wel l as any aut hor i t y gr ant ed an i ndi vi dual 2
member . I n per f or mi ng t he over si ght r ol e, t he assi gned member s 3
may r equest meet i ngs wi t h Boar d, Syst em, or uni ver si t y 4
per sonnel , i ncl udi ng t he member s of t he Boar d, t he Chancel l or , 5
and component i nst i t ut i ons' pr esi dent s. Over si ght document and 6
r epor t r equest s wi l l be t r eat ed as i f i ssued f r om t he f ul l 7
commi t t ee. Boar d, Syst em, and component i nst i t ut i on per sonnel 8
may cont act t he assi gned member s di r ect l y wi t h concer ns about 9
t he act i ons of Mr . Hal l , ot her r egent s, t he Boar d, or Syst em. 10
The Syst em wi l l keep t he assi gned member s appr i sed of al l 11
devel opment s dur i ng t he sel ect i on and i nst al l at i on of a new 12
Syst em chancel l or and new pr esi dent of t he Uni ver si t y of Texas 13
at Aust i n. The Syst em wi l l cont i nue t o pr ovi de mont hl y r epor t s 14
t o t he commi t t ee' s co- chai r s and t o t he assi gned member s. The 15
assi gned over si ght member s may r evi se t he par amet er s of t he 16
mont hl y r epor t and r equest new r epor t s f r om t he Syst em or 17
component i nst i t ut i ons, i ncl udi ng but not l i mi t ed t o r equest s 18
f or i nf or mat i on on t he per f or mance of t he Boar d, i ndi vi dual 19
Regent s, t he Syst em, or component i nst i t ut i ons; i nf or mat i on on 20
i nt er act i ons bet ween t he Boar d, i ndi vi dual Regent s, t he Syst em, 21
and component i nst i t ut i ons; est i mat es of t i me expended by any 22
per son and al l cost s f or r esponses t o i nf or mat i on r equest s f r om 23
t he Boar d or i ndi vi dual Regent s; and descr i pt i ons of al l 24
i nf or mat i on t r ansmi t t ed t o t he Boar d or an i ndi vi dual r egent 25
t hat i nvol ves or t ouches on t he pr i vacy r i ght s of a st udent or 26
any ot her per son wi t hi n t he Syst em or a component i nst i t ut i on 27
26
wi t hi n t he Syst em, i ncl udi ng i nf or mat i on pr ot ect ed under f eder al 1
or st at e st at ut or y or common l aw. The assi gned member s shal l 2
i nf or m t he commi t t ee r egar di ng t hei r f i ndi ngs on a mont hl y 3
basi s. Fur t her , t hi s mat t er wi l l r emai n an agenda i t em f or each 4
r emai ni ng meet i ng of t he commi t t ee and r epr esent at i ves of t he 5
Boar d and Syst em wi l l be asked by t he commi t t ee t o t est i f y at 6
each of t hose meet i ngs; and, be i t f ur t her 7
RESOLVED, That t he commi t t ee r ecommends t hat t he cost of 8
t he commi t t ee' s i nvest i gat i on be i mposed agai nst t he Syst em and 9
t hat such r ecommendat i on be f or war ded t o t he appr opr i at e House 10
and Senat e commi t t ees and t o t he Legi sl at i ve Budget Boar d. I n 11
assessi ng t hi s cost , i t i s t he i nt ent i on of t he commi t t ee t hat 12
t he cost not be bor ne by t he st udent s or empl oyees of t he 13
Syst em, not be passed on t o any component i nst i t ut i on, and not 14
af f ect i n any way t he qual i t y of t eachi ng, r esear ch, or st udent 15
l i f e. I t i s t he i nt ent i on of t he commi t t ee t hat t hese cost s be 16
pai d out of t he oper at i ng f unds of t he Syst em of f i ces or t he 17
Boar d; and, be i t f ur t her 18
RESOLVED, That a wr i t t en copy of t hi s mot i on be f or war ded 19
t o t he gover nor , t he speaker of t he house of r epr esent at i ves, 20
t he l i eut enant gover nor , t he secr et ar y of st at e, t he Legi sl at i ve 21
Ref er ence Li br ar y, t he Texas St at e Li br ar y and Ar chi ves 22
Commi ssi on, t he pr esi di ng of f i cer of t he Boar d of Regent s of The 23
Uni ver si t y of Texas Syst em, and Wal l ace L. Hal l J r . as t he 24
of f i ci al st at ement of admoni shment and censur e of Mr . Hal l by 25
t he commi t t ee. 26
27
i
Tex. Gov t Code 65. 11, 65. 31.
i i
UTS- 098708 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 130) ; UTS- 103741 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 143) .
i i i
Fr eder i ck Test i mony 130: 16- 131: 9; 136: 21- 25.
i v
UTS- 102861- 67 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 179) ; UTS- 102859 ( Har di n Repor t exh.
183) ; UTS- 102857- 58( Har di n Repor t exh. 186) ; UTS- 103063 ( Har di n Repor t exh.
190) .
v
UTS- 103063 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 190) .
vi
Ci gar r oa Test i mony 96: 2- 97: 19.
vi i
Caven and Bar nhi l l Test i mony 27: 2- 30: 17.
vi i i
UTAVP\ RHA 000085 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 43) ; UTAVP\ RHA 000121- 22 ( Har di n
Repor t exh. 58; UTAVP\ RHA 000101 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 53) .
i x
E. g. UTAVP\ RHA 000101 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 53) ; UTAVP\ RHA 000124- 26 ( Har di n
Repor t exh. 59; ) UTS- 034425- 28( Har di n Repor t exh. 92) .
x
UTS- 116795.
xi
Id.
xi i
Fr eder i ck Test i mony 37: 20- 39: 6.
xi i i
Fr eder i ck Test i mony 95: 10- 16.
xi v
E. g. , Caven and Bar nhi l l Test i mony 31: 23- 32: 11, 33: 1- 21.
xv
UTS- 0737- 97 ( Har di n Repor t exh. 83) ; see UTS- 0238700- 01 ( Har di n Repor t exh.
89) ( descr i bi ng Hal l s act i ons as di vi si ve and an abuse of power ) .
xvi
Fr eder i ck Test i mony 46: 4- 50: 5
xvi i
Id.
xvi i i
Id.
xi x
Id.
xx
Id.
xxi
Power s Test i mony 236: 18- 23, Dec. 18, 2014 ( est i mat i ng t hat t he cost of
r espondi ng t o Mr . Hal l s i nqui r i es exceeded a mi l l i on dol l ar s) .
28