As Ohio lawmakers push forward a sweeping reform bill that could reduce the independence of higher education institutions, the presidents of the state’s public universities have made a calculated choice to remain silent.
That choice was on full display Feb. 11 when more than 200 students and faculty members flooded the Statehouse to testify against Senate Bill 1, legislation that includes a ban on faculty strikes and eliminates diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Not a single university president joined them to speak up for their own institutions.
The lobbying group known as the Inter-University Council, which bills itself as the “collective voice” of Ohio’s 14 public universities, decided to neither publicly support nor oppose the legislation, according to public records reviewed by Signal Ohio.
These records, which include meeting minutes and communications with university leaders from mid-January to mid-February, were obtained through a request made to the University of Akron.
The decision to stand down came on Jan. 14. Ohio State President Ted Carter, Cleveland State President Laura Bloomberg, and eight other top leaders met that day as part of an IUC meeting, according to meeting minutes from the group.
There, they and three IUC employees “reached consensus:” The IUC would not take a formal position or actively engage publicly about the bill, which wouldn’t be officially introduced for eight more days.
It was decided that former Republican state lawmaker and current IUC President Laura Lanese would spearhead any direct communication with individual lawmakers, minutes show.
The IUC also urged university leaders to reframe the conversation if asked to comment. Instead, they should focus on the “many positive things Ohio’s public universities do and do well, both regionally and for the state,” meeting minutes show.
IUC said institutions could still respond as ‘they deem appropriate’
Lanese, the IUC president, declined to answer specific questions posed by Signal Ohio, including a request to provide more insight on the strategy to stay quiet in public and not testify before lawmakers.
She did provide a statement that, in part, says because the group represents institutions “with vastly different academic offerings, organizational structures and funding and resources,” leaders were still free to respond on their own.
“Each university is able to respond to proposed legislation as they deem appropriate based upon their unique institutional makeup,” she wrote.
Still, every university remained publicly silent. The chief sponsor of Senate Bill 1 took notice. Republican State Sen. Jerry Cirino reportedly said that IUC’s neutrality over the bill was a sign that the presidents were at least not overwhelmingly opposed to his vision for higher education reform. A group of student organizers later said it was “incredibly disheartening to see that Ohio’s public universities refuse to stand up for their students.”
University presidents declined IUC committee’s recommendations for changes to Senate Bill 1
In emails and memos, IUC and its members repeatedly reiterated their belief that Senate Bill 1 – which now sits with the Ohio House after easily passing the state senate – will become law with no changes.
They used phrases such as “highly probable” and “will likely pass” to describe it.
Records show summaries of Senate committee meetings floated electronically between IUC’s leaders and its members. Detailed analysis about the bill did as well, including some produced by an outside government relations firm hired by the IUC.
One memo showed the IUC’s government relations committee – a group composed of the government relations staffers at member universities – proposed eight recommendations for changes to Senate Bill 1 as it made its way through the legislative process.
“The intent of these recommendations … is not to change the bill but rather improve its implementation mechanisms,” they wrote before detailing its proposals.
One suggestion was to ask lawmakers to clarify the bill’s current language banning diversity, equity and inclusion work. The committee worried that “overly vague” language could lead to the elimination of student support services, such as those for veterans and people with disabilities.
The committee also recommended that lawmakers consider not automatically eliminating programs intended to attract students to high-demand fields, even if they have low enrollment. The bill’s current language proposes wiping out all programs with low enrollment.
In the end, records show university presidents collectively chose not to sign off on any of those suggestions.
“The concern is that we will push our luck by requesting a new round of changes to SB1, especially given the likelihood of the bill passing as is,” leaders noted in one summary.
Part of their hesitation, they noted, was that they already made multiple recommendations — some of which were made to a previous, related bill known as Senate Bill 83. It was also written by Cirino.
That bill was introduced in 2023, the same year the IUC wrote to Cirino about their “serious concerns” over it. Though the measure didn’t end up making it out of the Ohio House, that legislation eventually became the basis of new Senate Bill 1.
IUC president Lanese signed that lengthy 2023 letter. It said the IUC supported lawmakers’ “goal to ensure that our institutions are centers for the free exchange of ideas and debate.”
The letter also addressed what it saw as “serious concerns,” including that ending DEI efforts would be harmful because such programs help “more students achieve the American Dream of success via a college education.”
This year, the IUC chose not to write a public letter about concerns over Senate Bill 1 to lawmakers.
IUC lobbied on behalf of universities on other matters
It’s not uncommon for universities or corporations to lobby behind the scenes on legislation and to move as a group. The IUC has taken public stances in the past for other measures. Just last year, for example, they testified in support of a measure they believed would help foster “a safe, inclusive, and respectful educational environment for all students.”
But when it comes to the current education reform bill, no university president stepped outside of the IUC’s recommendation to testify during Senate hearings. A few leaders eventually nodded to both the bill and other federal changes in campus-wide emails as outcry grew.
Youngstown State University President Bill Johnson, the former Republican U.S. Congress member who’s been leading the university since 2024, offered the closest thing to praise for state lawmakers.
In a LinkedIn post after the bill passed the Senate, he said state lawmakers “have once again demonstrated Ohio’s willingness to take the lead to tackle tough issues and solve hard problems,” though the post didn’t explicitly identify what he believed those issues or problems were.
Universities keep tabs on students, employees testifying on Senate Bill 1
Despite not appearing before lawmakers themselves, leaders at the University of Akron closely tracked those who testified at the February committee meeting – especially their own employees and students, records show.
“I saw probably 8 or so testimonies from people either affiliated or claiming a connection to UA,” Matthew Akers, the university’s special assistant to the president for government relations, wrote in a Feb. 12 email to university president R. J. Nemer and vice president of communications Tammy Ewin.
Akers added that he appreciated that the university’s faculty senate chair announced she wasn’t officially representing UA during her testimony.
“Not all of the folks who claimed connection to UA made such statements,” Akers wrote.
UA’s senior leaders also monitored related press coverage, records show.
What type of coverage is missing when it comes to higher education in Ohio? Our reporter Amy Morona wants to know what you think! Send her a note by filling out this form.
IUC indicated they’d be willing to talk budget
While the IUC chose to not publicly discuss Senate Bill 1, records show there was a topic university leaders were keen to talk about: The upcoming two-year state budget.
IUC records show several universities expressed “an interest and a willingness” in eventually testifying before the state’s finance committees about their budget needs.
The IUC eventually asked for a modest 2% increase in the funding pool known as the state share of instruction, records show. Ohio’s colleges depend on state support, though the amount they receive has dwindled in recent years.
One summary of a government relations committee meeting, records show, indicated members thought they should focus on getting “a budget favorable to higher ed priorities passed.”
But betting on staying neutral and quiet on Senate Bill 1 didn’t pay off for the institutions.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s budget proposal didn’t include that 2% funding bump after all. The governor’s plan calls for just a 0.1% boost next year.