1. (1) The faculty and chancellor of each institution, after consultation with appropriate students, shall establish rules and procedures for the appeal of a nonrenewal decision. Such rules and procedures shall provide for the review of a nonrenewal decision by an appropriate standing faculty committee upon written appeal by the faculty member concerned within 20 days of notice that the reconsideration has affirmed the nonrenewal decision (25 days if notice is by first class mail and publication). Such review shall be held not later than 20 days after the request, except that this time limit may be enlarged by mutual consent of the parties, or by order of the review committee. The faculty member shall be given at least 10 days notice of such review. The burden of proof in such an appeal shall be on the faculty member, and the scope of the review shall be limited to the question of whether the decision was based in any significant degree upon one or more of the following factors, with material prejudice to the individual:

   1. (a) Conduct, expressions, or beliefs which are constitutionally protected, or protected by the principles of academic freedom, or
   2. (b) Factors proscribed by applicable state or federal law regarding fair employment practices, or

   3. (c) Improper consideration of qualifications for reappointment or renewal. For purposes of this section, “improper consideration” shall be deemed to have been given to the qualifications of a faculty member in question if material prejudice resulted because of any of the following:

      1. 1. The procedures required by rules of the faculty or board were not followed, or
      2. 2. Available data bearing materially on the quality of performance were not considered, or
      3. 3. Unfounded, arbitrary or irrelevant assumptions of fact were made about work or conduct.
2. (2) The appeals committee shall report on the validity of the appeal to the body or official making the nonrenewal decision and to the appropriate dean and the chancellor.
3. (3) Such a report may include remedies which may, without limitation because of enumeration, take the form of a reconsideration by the decision maker, a reconsideration by the decision maker under instructions from the committee, or a recommendation to the next higher appointing level. Cases shall be remanded for reconsideration by the decision maker in all instances unless the appeals committee specifically finds that such a remand would serve no useful purpose. The appeals committee shall retain jurisdiction during the pendency of any reconsideration. The decision of the chancellor will be final on such matters.

History

History: Cr. Register, January, 1975, No. 229, eff. 2-1-75.