Chapter 10.03

10.03 Tenure Appeals

A. A tenure-track faculty member (“Appellant”) may appeal the denial of tenure
stemming from a regularly scheduled tenure review only by filing a written notice of appeal.

1.   The regularly-scheduled tenure review is a review which is mandatory under the applicable institution’s policies. 
 Early consideration for tenure and a review occurring after the regularly-scheduled
 tenure review are discretionary, and the procedures of this section apply only if discretionary review is granted
 and the Executive Director elects to use them.

2.      The notice of appeal must be filed within twenty (20) days of the date of the final institutional decision. 
The notice of appeal is filed when it is received by fax or in hard copy by the close of business at
 the office of the  institutional head.

a) The notice of appeal must identify the following information:

i. The Appellant(s);

ii. The decision or order from which appeal is taken;

iii. The specific findings or conclusions to which exception is taken and any other exceptions to the decision or order;

iv. The relief sought; and

v. The grounds for relief.

b) The Appellant must state all issues supporting the appeal in the notice of appeal. Failure to state an issue in the notice of appeal shall serve as a waiver of that issue on appeal.

3. The Appellant may not raise an issue or argument before the Board of
Regents that was not previously raised or presented to the institution.

B.         The institutional head shall deliver the notice of appeal, the record (as defined below) along with a concise written response
to the notice of appeal, to the Board of Regents General Counsel no later than twenty (20) days after the receipt of the 
notice of appeal by the institutional head.  The institutional head shall also send a copy of the record and the institution's
written response to the notice of appeal to the Appellant or to the Appellant's counsel.

1.   The record shall include:

a)   Copies of institutional and department policies and procedures relevant to the appeal;

b)   Confidential recommendations or reviews (refereed or others as determined by the institution) that were part of the 
tenure decision. The institution may claim privilege in the identity of reviewer or in entire content of the review or 
recommendation, in which case the Appellant will not receive that information identified as privileged.

c)   Copies of all other non-privileged materials contained in the Appellant’s official tenure file.  The institution shall notify the 
Board of Regents General Counsel whether any other items are withheld under a privilege, and shall identify those items;

d)   All official communications between the institution and the Appellant relevant to the appeal, including recommendations 
of any grievance committee or reviewing body;

e)   Documents submitted by the parties to a grievance committee or reviewing body;

f)    The written decision of the final institutional decision-maker.

2. Within ten (10) days of the date the record is sent, the Appellant may object to the record submitted by the institution.

a) Such objection shall be in writing addressed to the Board of
Regents, General Counsel, with a copy provided to the institution, and shall specify each specific objection to the record.

b) If the hearing was recorded but no transcript of the hearing has been made, either party may request that a transcript be prepared.

i. If such a request is made, a transcript will be prepared and a copy provided to each party at the expense of the party requesting the transcript unless alternative arrangements have been made for adequate cause;

ii. The Board Office reserves the right to request that a transcript be prepared at the expense of the institution.

c) If the Appellant desires to supplement the record, he or she must at
the same time identify the documents or information to be supplemented and explain the reason the Appellant believes the document or information should be included in the record.

d) The institution shall have ten (10) days to respond. The response
shall be delivered to the Appellant by the institution.

e) The Board will not consider new or additional evidence or information
that was available but not presented in any hearings or appeals at the institution.

3. The time limits specified in this subsection may be extended at the
discretion of the Executive Director. The Executive Director will notify, in writing, each of the parties of any change to the time limits.

C. Written Arguments by the Parties

1. Within twenty (20) days of the date the record is sent, the Appellant shall file a memorandum in support of the appeal. The memorandum is filed when it is received by the Board of Regents General Counsel. The memorandum must be signed by the Appellant, or by the Appellant’s counsel. Factual allegations must include specific references to the record at the institutional level. New factual material and new issues not a part of that record will not be considered on appeal to the Board.

2. The Appellant shall send a copy of the Appellant’s memorandum to the institutional head. The institutional head or designee shall file a written response with the Board of Regents General Counsel no later than twenty (20) days from the institutional head’s receipt of the Appellant’s memorandum. Factual allegations must include specific references to the record at the institutional level. New factual material and new issues not a part of that record will not be considered on appeal to the Board. The institutional head or designee shall send a copy of the institution’s response to the Appellant or to the Appellant’s counsel.

3. No further written arguments will be accepted from either party unless
requested or approved by the Executive Director.

4. If either party desires oral argument before the Board, the party shall make such a request in a separate document attached to the written argument. Oral argument shall be discretionary with the Executive Director.

D. The Appellant shall have the burden of proof on the appeal. The Appellant must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the institution’s final decision was:

1. Not supported by substantial evidence in the record;

2. Arbitrary and capricious; or

3. Unconstitutional or otherwise contrary to law, including procedural
irregularities or deficiencies materially prejudicial to the Appellant.

E. Following the review, the Board may affirm, modify, remand, or reverse all or any part of the order or decision of the institution. The decision of the Board represents final agency action. The Appellant may seek judicial review as permitted by law.