Michigan State University trustees approved an updated ethics policy on May 19, renewing internal conflict over whether the rules are meant to strengthen governance—or to limit trustees from challenging board decisions. The approval happened during a special Sunday night meeting, according to reporting distributed by the Associated Press, alongside a decision that nearly doubled President Kevin Guskiewicz’s salary to $2 million.
The revised ethics policy requires trustees to “support and not undermine decisions made by the majority of the board,” and it includes provisions addressing trustees’ obligations to uphold the university’s reputation, avoid misleading or false statements about the institution, and not disclose confidential information. The policy also says trustees will act after board decisions in a manner consistent with their fiduciary duties, including “the duty of loyalty.”
The policy spells out consequences for noncompliance, including public censure, denial of access to university events, removal from leadership roles, prohibition on representing the university, and referral to Michigan’s governor for potential removal from office. Those enforcement provisions drew immediate criticism from at least one trustee, who said the rules could chill dissent.
Trustee Mike Balow told the AP story that he does not plan to sign the new policy, describing it as an “abomination” and warning it could be “weaponized” against trustees who ask tough questions. Balow also said the policy did not go through proper channels and argued that attempts to codify loyalty conflict with what he said should be trustees’ first obligation—to the people who elected them.
Balow specifically raised concerns that the policy’s structure could be used to target trustees for unpopular statements. In his account, the rules could allow retaliation against trustees who challenge prevailing views within the board, and he argued that trustees should be able to speak on issues they consider important even if the discussion disrupts other board members.
Board chair Brianna Scott defended the changes, saying the board updated the policy to reinforce responsibilities already entrusted to trustees and that it had not been updated since 2020. She also said trustees were working with guidance developed with the Association of Governing Boards and that the organization’s recent feedback had amounted to a “failing grade,” according to the AP report.
Scott also addressed why the board acted during what was described as a special Sunday night meeting, saying there was “never the wrong time to do the right thing.” She argued that the policy was not intended to suppress speech or prevent trustees from asking hard questions, while also saying that she believes the president has been frustrated and that the board wants an environment in which he can succeed in leading Michigan State University.
Scott’s remarks came as the controversy spread beyond the board meeting. State Sen. Jim Runestad, R-White Lake, said in a Facebook post that the university’s elected trustees were about to “gag its own members,” adding that the policy would bar public discussion of board decisions and questioning who trustees ultimately answer to.
Another trustee, Rebecca Bahar-Cook, said in support of the approach that the policy does not stifle discussion or asking hard questions, but she said there is “a time and a place” for debate—citing committee meetings and board meetings as the appropriate forums. She said re-litigating issues after votes are taken does not help the board move forward and leaves it “stuck,” according to the AP report.
The ethics policy approval also intersected with how trustees handled the university’s top leadership. The reporting said Balow argued that the push for the revisions began after Scott called for an emergency meeting on Wednesday, and that Scott told the board that to keep Guskiewicz as president they needed to provide him a raise and approve the revisions to the ethics policy. The meeting on Sunday night culminated in a 5-3 board vote on the policy and the compensation decision.
Balow also said he asked a board-related official, identified in the AP report as Secretary Stefan Fletcher, whether Scott or the university’s attorney had asked him to benchmark the policy against other boards’ ethics rules. Balow said Fletcher told him that no such benchmarking request had been made.
In addition to Balow’s objections, the AP report described challenges and constitutional questions raised by Trustee Rema Vassar. Vassar said she plans to ask Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel to review the ethics policy and said she believes it could promote a culture similar to one she associated with the period leading up to Larry Nassar’s criminal case. She also compared how dissent was treated in that era to the effect she fears the updated MSU policy could have.
For context, the Associated Press report said the Association of Governing Boards’ spokesperson described ethics policies at universities as addressing confidentiality, fiduciary responsibilities, and expected board conduct, while balancing dialogue and transparency with the board’s responsibility to deliberate constructively and protect confidential matters. The spokesperson said interpretation or application of policy provisions is ultimately up to each institution and applicable state law, according to the AP story.
Michigan State University spokesperson Amber McCann told the AP report that the ethics policy at another public university—Wayne State University—had been consulted during the process, but she said she was unsure whether that other university’s rules include the same repercussions for policy violations.
As the May 19 vote sets the updated framework for trustee conduct, the dispute inside the board remains centered on what the policy is designed to prevent: whether it is a practical governance guide that aims to preserve confidentiality and fiduciary duties, or a constraint that could be used to punish trustees who question decisions publicly.