University of Utah president says faculty broke law by alleging ‘deceit’ from his top academic administrator​on February 12, 2025 at 1:00 pm

In a dramatic confrontation last week, University of Utah President Taylor Randall accused faculty members of acting beyond the scope of their authority — and “in contradiction of the law” — when they tried to raise concerns about his top academic administrator.

​In a dramatic confrontation last week, University of Utah President Taylor Randall accused faculty members of acting beyond the scope of their authority when they tried to raise concerns about his top academic administrator.  

In a dramatic confrontation last week, University of Utah President Taylor Randall accused faculty members of acting beyond the scope of their authority — and “in contradiction of the law” — when they tried to raise concerns about his top academic administrator.

He swiftly shut down the conversation, cutting off one professor as she tried to speak. “I’m going to have to interrupt,” Randall repeated several times before reading the language of a state law passed last year.

The measure he cited, SB192, limited the power of faculty in academic senates — confining discussions there largely to issues concerning only course curriculum and instruction — and turned most responsibility over to public university presidents instead. Randall said that means complaints about his staff and leadership are not in the purview of the faculty group.

“I’m sorry that this group has decided to use what I thought was a sacred power of the faculty to actually be able to have reasonable discussions to house a conversation like this,” he said.

The clash started when Katharine Coles, a distinguished professor of English and a former Utah poet laureate, brought up a resolution during the U.’s regular monthly Academic Senate meeting, where about 100 faculty members represent their roughly 5,000 colleagues on action related to campus.

Coles said during the meeting that the document she wanted to discuss had been signed by 23 members of the Academic Senate, including herself, meaning it could be brought up during the “new business” part of the agenda.

The resolution described ongoing frustrations that professors say they have in working with U. Provost Mitzi Montoya, the senior vice president for academic affairs who is supposed to oversee faculty and who reports directly to Randall. The document listed three alleged failings of Montoya, including that she has repeatedly overridden retention, promotion and tenure decisions made by departments — unilaterally deciding to dismiss professors who had been recommended for a permanent position.

Additionally, the resolution continued, “The provost resorts to falsehood and deceit in dealings with faculty and the Senate.” And, they said, Montoya allegedly “threatens and targets faculty and deans who disagree with her.”

Montoya, who could be seen on camera during the virtual meeting, did not respond to the allegations.

But Randall responded explosively in her defense.

“It is very difficult for me to see a body bring claims into a public meeting without allowing someone the right to take a look at those claims and to discuss them,” he said.

He continued: “I’m not trying to make people afraid. … But the reputation of the Senate, the reputation of the university, the reputation of individuals is on the line here. There’s a lot at stake.”

In a written statement later shared with The Salt Lake Tribune, he reaffirmed his support for Montoya. “She and her leadership team are tackling some of the most critical and complicated issues facing the university,” he said, including improving graduation rates and making budget adjustments.

The school’s board of trustees, which met Tuesday, also expressed support for Montoya, without directly mentioning the conflict. Board Chair Christian Gardner said: “I know these are tough times, and she’s doing an excellent job.”

Randall added in his written statement that, moving forward, he intends to work with the leadership of the Academic Senate to review “whether our Senate is appropriately implementing and following the guidance” of the new law.

Coles declined to comment after the meeting on what transpired.

Previous concerns about the provost

Randall said he was surprised by the allegations that came up during the meeting last week. But it is not the first time that Montoya has been called out by faculty at the state’s flagship university.

Less than a year ago, in April 2024, professors in the Academic Senate issued a similar statement they labeled “an expression of concern.”

“We share a concern that the practices of the provost are undermining ourvalues of collaboration, consultation and shared governance, a mismatch that is reflected in her lack of clear, timely, accurate and respectful communication with faculty as well as staff,” it read.

An electronic suggestion box was opened on the Academic Senate’s webpage for professors to add information for the body’s executive committee to consider. But beyond that, Coles said during last week’s meeting, she didn’t see any action to come out of the letter.

This time, she said, “I, myself, am reluctant to allow this to disappear.”

Harriet Hopf, the current president of the Academic Senate, noted last week that faculty members met with Randall after that earlier resolution was discussed and “there was a result from it” — largely promises from Randall to communicate better, according to an email from the president shared with The Tribune that he sent to faculty afterward.

Hopf also said only two anonymous submissions went into the electronic suggestion box, and she tried to handle those as best she could with limited information.

Before that, though, an earlier letter also came in January 2024, when some faculty sent an anonymous note to Randall and other administrators, saying they wanted to express “concerns over the failed leadership” of Montoya.

They listed problems with her allegedly using unprofessional language, creating a toxic environment and targeting individual employees. It concluded: “This letter is unsigned in fear of retaliation from Montoya.” A copy was sent to The Tribune and verified.

During their tense exchange this week, Coles pointed out those previous attempts to address faculty concerns, saying Randall should be aware of mounting discontent.

“I just want to point out that the administration, including you, have been hearing about this since last spring,” she said. “I happen to know that a delegation of very distinguished professors visited you in your office to express a range of concerns, including intimidation and the resulting fearfulness of faculty.”

That fear, she said, has only gotten worse since then, because of actions from the administration that came out of that visit.

One professor, Wayne Springer, who teaches physics and astronomy, jumped in with an example: He said a faculty member in his department was approved for tenure, then saw that decision overturned by Montoya, he said, with Randall supporting her choice.

A new law passed in conjunction with SB192 last year gave presidents at the state’s eight public colleges and universities the final say on tenure. But to Springer, Randall’s decision felt vindictive.

Hopf told Springer that the Academic Senate couldn’t talk about specific examples, because it violated the privacy of individuals. She instead asked for senators to only give generic concerns.

That spurred Coles to address Randall directly and ask him to talk to Montoya about the faculty’s allegations.

“President Randall, I believe the provost has to hear directly from you,” she said.

That’s when Randall interrupted her and silenced the conversation.

“I do not believe that this motion is actually in compliance with the law,” he said. “I am sorry to say that, but it is my obligation to actually ensure this.”

The Academic Senate voted to table the measure and send it to the body’s executive committee for further analysis and action. That group met Monday. An email to Hopf for comment wasn’t immediately returned.

A spokesperson for the U. later said the committee voted to create a subcommittee that would discuss a code of conduct for senators. They also voted to schedule a town hall to discuss the parameters of SB192.

What can faculty talk about?

Faculty at the U. have been increasingly vocal over the past few years. That includes writing petitions against the school for punishing members of a student club who rallied at an anti-LGBTQ event, standing with pro-Palestine protesters who were arrested on campus, and voicing opposition to the school closing its cultural centers in line with a new state law limiting diversity, equity and inclusion efforts on campus.

At the same time, Utah legislative leadershave tried to reel in faculty power, viewing their actions as too progressive. The Academic Senate has been one of the most historically antagonistic bodies on campus; that’s why recent legislation has aimed to limit its authority.

That has largely set up the conflict now playing out at the university, with tension over what professors can and can’t say and how they can raise concerns. Hopf had originally said during the meeting that she felt “the Senate is a place for concerns to be raised,” including the ones about Montoya, which she noted “require serious attention.”

“I do believe the raising of issues is appropriate for faculty members and is certainly covered by academic freedom,” she added during the meeting.

But she later sent an email to the members of the Academic Senate saying that the U.’s Office of General Counsel provided analysis to her on SB192, and it does limit what the body can talk about. A copy of her message was shared with The Tribune.

“The [Academic] Senate must comply with state law which establishes the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees, the President and the [Academic] Senate,” she wrote.

Hopf also said, moving forward, any new business brought up during meetings must be submitted in writing to her on the Friday prior and must pertain to “academic requirements for admission, degrees and certificates or course curriculum and instruction.”

“Other matters that fall outside the jurisdiction of the Senate will be reviewed with the university president to determine next steps,” she said.

Academic freedom, according to recently updated policy from the Utah System of Higher Education, only applies to teaching, research and what professors say as private citizens. For personnel matters, the U. directed employees to the school’s human resources office or to file complaints with the Office of Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action.

After the meeting last week, concerned faculty updated their letter to indicate they have tried those avenues before and the offices “have failed to respond to complaints.” There also is concern as Montoya ultimately oversees those offices.

Randall added, “We’re happy to take these offline and try to resolve some of the concerns.”

Montoya’s past — and moving forward

Before landing at the U., Montoya was previously terminated as provost at Washington State University, where she served for two months, ending in September 2019.

In emails at the time, as reported by The Whitman County Watch, she said she thought she was terminated because of gender bias; an independent review later found that was not the case. Montoya received a settlement from the school.

She went on to serve as dean of the the University of New Mexico’s Anderson School of Management before arriving at the U. in January 2023, where she collects a salary of $709,000 before benefits, according to Utah’s public transparency website.

Her tenure has overseen volatile campus protests, DEI rollbacks and impending budget cuts. That has been “a hard set of things to balance,” Randall said, defending the provost, and there has been a lot of recent change at the university.

“Change is unpleasant,” he said. “I’m going through it myself in my own role, because of things the Legislature and the Board [of Higher Education] and external constituencies ask.”

He typically addresses the Academic Senate each month, and when that time came after the confrontation during last week’s meeting, he said he was “going off script” from what he had planned to say.

He thanked the faculty for their dedication during difficult transitions. And he thanked Coles “for bringing up these issues.”

“Like many of you, I’ve had offers to go other places,” he said. “But what’s made the University of Utah unique its ability to innovate, its ability to sit down and talk and discuss.”

He said faculty won’t always agree with his decisions, but they are made “in the best interests of the institution from a variety of perspectives.”

He ended his remarks by stating, “I support you. I support the leadership we have. And I know we’re going to get through this.”

Note to readers • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.