On May 8, the University of West Florida (UWF) Board of Trustees held a special meeting to discuss the university’s strategic plan and other important topics. Chair Rebecca Matthews led the meeting, which included committee meetings following the general board discussion.
- New trustees Rebecca Moya, Paul Bailey and Chris Young took a more aggressive stance than they did in their previous meetings – before being confirmed. .
- Though rejected by the Senate committees on higher education and ethics, Kissel is still a trustees for 45 days after the session, and Gov. DeSantis can reappoint him.
- Though he was a Pensacola State College trustee until yesteday, Zach Smith somehow had a wealth of knowledge about alleged past DEI actions at UWF.
Here’s a summary of the key points covered:
Chair Rebecca Matthews welcomed the board’s newest member, Trustee Zach Smith, who was appointed effective May 7. She also shared her positive experiences attending UWF’s 2025 spring commencement ceremonies.
“It really was a wonderful event for the students, families, friends, all those that were in attendance,” Matthews said. “President Saunders and all of UWF really did a smashing job delivering a memorable day to all of the graduates.”
Strategic Plan Updates
One of the meeting’s primary focuses was the university’s strategic plan, which was developed in 2022 and approved by the Board of Governors. Chair Rebecca Matthews explained that immediate changes are needed to bring the plan into compliance with current Florida law, particularly Senate Bill 266 (passed in 2023).
- President Martha Saunders elaborated: “Since that time, there have been some changes in the legislation that creates some problems with some of the language in the plan. We would like to amend some of the language without changing the substance of the plan, and then work with you moving forward to create a new strategic plan.”
Trustee Rachel Moya expressed concern about the timeline: “We’re also technically out of compliance. So that’s what I meant by my comment about it was like we’re behind since that passed in 2023.”
Chair Matthews acknowledged this point: “We definitely, we have moved too slowly to comply with Senate Bill 266, and this is even something I did, I didn’t say it explicitly that way, at least in the Senate Ethics and Elections committee in my last testimony, but I did say that we would be doing a review and the strategic plan is certainly part of that.”
Florida Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Requests
President Saunders provided an update on data requests from the Florida Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), explaining the extensive information requested across multiple deadlines. The university reported 287 grants and almost 4,000 journal publications in their submissions.
The discussion became particularly heated when President Saunders informed the board about two canceled grants:
- An NIH RISE grant for financially disadvantaged students
- An NSF Noyce grant for educating science and math majors using social justice models in high-needs schools
Trustee Chris Young pressed for more information: “Do we have more to be concerned about? It seems like we’re revising our mission after we receive the grants to fit a narrative that I guess doesn’t comply with those grants causing them to be canceled. I mean, is this just the tip of the iceberg or after when we look under the hood some more, are we going to find more issues? And I mean it’s causing me some heartburn here.”
Trustee Adam Kissel aggressively questioned the details of the Noyce grant, pointing out discrepancies between public statements and grant documentation: “So my question may be more for the provost than the president. I’m not sure who knows the answer to this is, so what was the university saying to the government versus what it’s saying this week? I’m trying to reconcile these two different positions.”
- Provost Jeremy Kuhl explained that while the social justice theme had been removed from the program goals, it remained in the title and abstract. This prompted Trustee Kissel to ask, “So is this just another example of changing the language, but in this case, changing the substance rather than only changing the language and not the substance of the program?”
Contentious Exchanges Over Past Programming
Tensions escalated further when newly appointed Trustee Zach Smith directly challenged President Saunders about past university programming:
“I’ll be frank with you, some of the things I’ve seen are very concerning to me,” Smith stated.
He proceeded to question Saunders about university-sponsored events, including a drag show called “Drag Me to Hell” and programming related to certain authors and speakers.
When President Saunders indicated she was unfamiliar with some of the events, Smith pressed further: “What are the safeguards, Dr. Saunders?” and later said, “I appreciate that answer Dr. Saunders, but again, I’ll be frank, that doesn’t give me much comfort.”
- Ambush? This line of questioning prompted a sharp rebuke from Trustee Alonzie Scott: “I see one trustee ambush our president. I’m not very happy about that Trustee Zach Smith at all. Essentially what I see you doing, I’ve read your book, ‘Rogue Prosecutors and How Radical Stories Lawyers are Destroying American Communities.’ I can tell you, you’re about as radical as I’ve seen in any place I’ve ever been.”
Trustee Susan James also intervened: “Chair Matthews, I’m sorry that we’ve gotten so far off your planned agenda. I would hope that we are all working together to solve the problems that are really important… I’m pretty unsettled by the way this direction is going.”
Questions About DEI Priorities and Leadership
Trustee Adam Kissel pointedly questioned President Saunders about her stance on diversity, equity, and inclusion:
- “You just said to me a minute ago that now you support the current SUS policy. And so I’m just wondering where your professional judgment is and has changed when equity had been a core value of the university until just a couple years ago now it’s not. I’m just having a hard time understanding where you really stand.”
President Saunders responded: “Well, I can assure you I’m going to stand in compliance and support with the state university system. My personal feelings are one thing, but we are state university and we rely heavily on the support from the state and I will say as embodied by the governor. And as these priorities change, we change with them.”
Positive Data Amid Controversy
Despite the heated exchanges, Trustee Rachel Moya brought attention to positive trends at the university:
- “My other question is do the numbers that you have available on student enrollment also show positive student enrollment growth? And if so, what roughly is it the percentage of growth right now?”
President Saunders confirmed: “Fall enrollment was up 3%, spring enrollment and we measured year to year, fall to fall. Spring enrollment was up 6%. Summer numbers are still at play. Yesterday’s report was they were up 5%.”
- Moya emphasized the importance of accurate information: “I want us to continue as trustees to operate in the facts and bring light to the true information.”
Meeting Conclusion
Student Government Association President Trista Bennett urged the board to focus on students: “I would just encourage everyone to act or speak in the best interest of what our students want here at the university.”
The meeting concluded with President Saunders agreeing to provide several follow-up items to board members before the board took a short break and proceeded to committee meetings.
Kissel is divorced. Let’s ask him some personal questions about where he stands on marriage. Did he mean it when he said his vows? Did his personal values change since then? Did he even mean it when he said “I do?” Surely his opinion didn’t change in the years between the marriage and the split?!
DeSantis acts like he owns all the colleges and universities in the state. Not to mention the school boards, counties and other locally elected officials. I’m so tired of his strong arm tactics used to “protect” citizens from imaginary dragons.
I do not understand Young and Kissel’s lines of thinking, especially on the Noyce Grant. The original parameters were “for educating science and math majors using social justice models in high-needs schools” so the original abstract was written to align with this. This was the original intent for the funds– it’s WHY they were awarded the funds– so there was nothing wrong if UWF executed the program to the specifications at that time. To wit, UWF shouldn’t be expected to return the 800k that’s already been spent. Admin could not have known that anything social-justice adjacent would be taboo in a few years’ time. Desantis is really acting like a nutjob here. Even if the parameters have changed based on some self-serving proclaimations, give UWF time to administratively pivot, which it sounds like they’ve done as the grant relates to actual scope, having just missed removing two words written many years ago on a 25 page proposal. Three years ago, my daughter applied to several colleges, and many essay questions were asked about the importance of diversity and equity– the ‘modem topical’ at that time– not in a cloying way for the most part, and not intended to make straight, white males feel badly about themselves. Parity, in all things, was the push, and much of that push was based on years and years of inequity. To suddenly say this school is uncontrollably “woke” is hogwash and total pandering. I hope the community continues to show its strength when it comes to this attempt at an ambush, as it’s terribly sad what’s happened to New College. BTW, I have zero issue with ANY university offering ANY class. If it’s a class that might be offensive to you, simply don’t take it. And if you worry mistakenly taking a course and then being exposed to other religions, feminism, or societal inequalities is going to indoctrinate your adult child, you didn’t do a very good job raising said child to have any courage in his or her personal convictions.
This is so obviously a trumped up smear campaign. I was shocked at how poorly Smith acted. And his examples of DEI were shoddy and misinformed: online reference to a drag show by student groups from 2019, recent comments by a one time guest speaker brought in years ago, and a nationally reviewed and respected book on anti racism that is held in the library. First off, the University has no control over student groups and doesn’t censor student group social media. Secondly, the University can’t be responsible for recent statements by someone who was once brought to speak at a time when the BOG mandated DEI programming and was never employed by the university. And third, to cherry picks book like that smacks of censorship on par with moms of liberty.
This is so obviously a hit job and a flimsy attempt to set the groundwork to oust a successful and beloved president. All of these examples are from years ago because UWF has been compliant with legislation but the new BOT members are obviously political pawns getting their marching orders from the governor who has no idea about what UWF really is. His attempts to brand the University as an indoctrination camp for his own embattled political agenda is sad, dishonest, and misplaced. They’re fishing in an empty lake.
Save UWF indeed.
The guvnah and his power play is way out over his skis.
This was clearly a coordinated attack on the UWF president. Someone in Tallahassee has been feeding these folks information and orchestrating everything from that election of Yenor as chair to this set of honestly unimpressive accusations. Sunshine laws seem foreign to these people. In the full scope of what the university does and the job of a president, these “concerns” look a lot like ginning up a campaign to oust a successful, plain dealing university president. DeSantis seems to think he owns the university. Does he really want to keep picking fights with the folks in this region just trying mind their own business and do honest work?