April 27, 2026
Dear Campus Community,
On behalf of the PSU Board of Trustees, I want to thank those who attended, presented, and participated in our meeting on April 3. This message will summarize the discussions and actions of the Board at that meeting and respond to statements made during the portion of the meeting devoted to public comment.
Reports and Resolutions
The Board received reports from President Cudd, the Faculty Senate Presiding Officer, the President of the ASPSU, PSU’s Associate Vice President for Government Relations, and the PSU Foundation CEO. The Board also received reports from our three standing committees and approved two resolutions, both based on recommendations from the Board’s Finance, Administration and Audit Committee (the “Finance Committee”). The first authorized submission of a capital project proposal to the Higher Education Coordinating Commission for renovation of Millar Library. The second adopted the Finance Committee’s recommendations for tuition and mandatory enrollment fees for the 2026-27 academic year.
Article 22 Consultation
Our meeting also included a consultation with President Cudd regarding a possible retrenchment under Article 22 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (the “CBA”) between PSU and the PSU Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (“AAUP”). Under Article 22, the President may declare that a condition exists requiring departmental or program reductions or eliminations after following certain procedures. The CBA describes this process as a “retrenchment.”
On March 9, as the campus community is aware, President Cudd notified the Faculty Senate, the AAUP, and the campus community generally of the possible need for retrenchment. The retrenchment process requires, among other things, that the President then consult with the Board about the possible need for retrenchment before declaring the need for the reductions or eliminations.
Because Oregon law does not allow faculty, staff and student trustees to participate in Board discussions involving collective bargaining issues, only at-large trustees could participate in the Article 22 consultation. All trustees, however, were able to offer comment on the President’s efforts to address our fiscal challenges following her report earlier in the meeting.
The Article 22 consultation began with General Counsel Starke describing the processes the University is required to follow under Article 22, including the timeline and other steps the President is required to take. President Cudd then discussed the reasons she had initiated the Article 22 process and how the process relates to her overall efforts to resolve the University’s structural financial deficit. Following President Cudd’s presentation, the at-large trustees were each given an opportunity to ask questions of President Cudd and offer comment. The consultation concluded with an acknowledgement that Article 22 involves a multi-step process and that significant additional analysis and communications would occur before the President reaches any final decision on retrenchment.
Response to Public Comment
We also heard public comment on several topics.
One faculty member suggested that PSU’s tuition rates should be higher in light of what our peers are charging and that one way to deal with our structural deficit would be to more aggressively increase our tuition rates. How much to raise tuition each year is a question we debate after recommendations from the President and our Vice President for Finance and Administration. Given the make-up of our student body and PSU’s mission to serve as an engine of social mobility, we have attempted over time to keep our tuition increases at or below the overall rate of inflation, even while our expenses have grown in excess of revenue growth. This has enabled us to offer our students a quality education without their having to take on unreasonable levels of debt. That said, we will continue to consider tuition levels as part of our efforts to address the deficit.
Other commenters expressed concern over the possible elimination of particular programs or courses as part of the Article 22 process and that downsizing the PSU workforce will place PSU on a downward trajectory from which it cannot recover. It was again suggested that all reductions be paused while PSU seeks additional state investment and invests in increasing enrollment. One commenter suggested that the Board should be engaged in conversations about personnel reductions directly with the AAUP and that failure to so engage shows a lack of respect for the PSU community.
The Board has discussed these issues at length and has responded to similar comments in prior communications. Given the significant declines in our enrollment since 2019 and demographic projections for the future, the Board has concluded that failure to reduce our existing cost structure is likely to exhaust PSU’s reserves long before we can reasonably expect material increases in state support or enrollment. While our enrollment has been in decline, PSU has invested in student recruitment and repeatedly appealed for increased state funding, yet those efforts have failed to put us on sound financial footing. While we expect PSU’s leadership to continue those efforts, we also believe it would be fiscally irresponsible to assume those efforts will be sufficient to address the deficit.
With respect to where reductions should occur, the decision of what specific actions to take in order to address our structural deficit is a decision for the President to make after appropriate consultation with the Board and compliance with the University’s commitment to shared governance and its contractual obligations. The Board’s role is not to determine which programs should be reduced or eliminated or to manage the details of these reductions.
It also is not a proper role for the Board to engage directly with the AAUP to determine how to address the University’s fiscal crisis. Personnel management and labor relations are the responsibility of the President, and it would be inappropriate for the Board to communicate directly with AAUP on issues that are subject to the CBA. The Board also has a fiduciary and statutory duty to ensure that PSU operates in a fiscally responsible manner. We appreciate that some members of the AAUP believe that duty can be fulfilled without reducing personnel. We respectfully disagree with that assertion.
Finally, we do not agree with assertions that reductions in programs and personnel will create a death spiral for PSU or render it incapable of providing a high-quality education for our students. Personnel reductions are unfortunate but necessary when an organization’s costs significantly exceed revenue over time. To suggest that PSU cannot make such reductions and continue to be a great university is unfair to the vast majority of faculty and staff at PSU who will continue to serve students once we complete whatever restructuring is needed to align our costs with our revenues.
There were also requests during public comment that PSU negotiate a license for students to use certain software products and that the Board examine the impact of return-to-work policies on PSU’s Sponsored Projects Administration division of its Research & Graduate Studies department. Those requests have been referred to the appropriate members of the President’s senior leadership team for follow-up.
Closing Thoughts
As was noted several times during our meeting, and at prior meetings, these are extremely challenging times for PSU. While there are significant disagreements within our community on how to address these challenges, I firmly believe we will collectively meet them in a way that creates a stronger institution better positioned to serve our students. In the meantime, I encourage any members of the community who wish to provide additional input for consideration as part of the Article 22 process to utilize the email address mentioned at our meeting: article22@pdx.edu.
Thanks for your continued support of PSU and our students.
Sincerely,
Wally Van Valkenburg
Chair, PSU Board of Trustees
PSU's Board webpage provides various resources, including the yearly calendar, meeting notices, meeting recordings, and the Board of Trustees feedback form, where you can share meeting feedback, general comments, or recommendations on characteristics or candidates to consider when filling a trustee vacancy.