Representative Tipton, sponsor of House Bill 424, told the committee that the bill does not abolish tenure but instead requires each board of regents to adopt policies establishing a performance-review process for faculty and employees, including presidents, and clarifies that failure to meet institutionally adopted performance and productivity requirements may constitute cause for removal.

Tipton said he was unable to draft a single statutory definition of tenure that would suit all institutions and therefore left the definition to each institution’s governing board. The committee substitute narrows earlier language that would have authorized up to a six-year employment contract; the substitute sets a four‑year review cycle and asks boards to define performance standards and review timelines.

Several faculty and students testified in opposition. Julie Czeszewski, an associate professor at Murray State University, said tenure is a years‑long peer-review process and warned that removing tenure protections could “deeply complicate and confuse the process of teaching and running the university.” Bernadette Barton, a professor at Morehead State University, said tenured faculty already undergo annual reviews and cautioned that the bill could erode institutional reputation and recruitment. Student speakers, including Savannah Dowell of the University of Louisville and Michael Frazier of the Kentucky Student Rights Coalition, described concerns about academic freedom, brain drain, and the need to address enrollment decline while differing on whether the bill is the right response.

Representative Brown and Representative Stalker both recorded “no” votes and explained their votes on the record, citing concerns that existing institutional processes could address performance issues and that the bill could have unintended effects given current political debates about campus programming. Representative Brown said the existing infrastructure at universities can address employment issues; Representative Stalker expressed concern about potential negative impacts on programs and on equity-related campus work.

After debate and public testimony, the committee recorded a favorable report on House Bill 424. The clerk recorded the tally required for a committee report and the chair announced the bill “passes with the expression of opinion,” with committee sub attached. The transcript shows both supporters and opponents argued their positions; the bill’s language delegates specification of standards and procedures to boards of regents rather than prescribing uniform statutory definitions of tenure.