HARTFORD – The future of the Connecticut State College & Universities Chancellor Terrence Cheng hangs in the balance following a hearing on state legislation that would require more fiscal accountability following the results of an audit of the CSCU system.
In a hearing of the General Assembly Higher Education and Employment Advancement Committee Feb. 11 in the state Legislative Office Building, Cheng issued an apology for his misuse of public funds and promised he has already begun repaying the state for the $25,000 he owes. Only days before, the Connecticut College State Senate gave Cheng a vote of no confidence in a 31-2 vote, citing the findings of a state audit that showed misuse of state funds by Cheng and other CSCU executives.
“I have served our students, faculty, staff, and institutions to the best of my ability,” Cheng testified in his opening statement. “However, I acknowledge that my actions have raised serious concerns about financial oversight and transparency. This has caused frustration and diverted attention to what matters most – the success of our students and our institutions. And for this I take personal responsibility and I am extremely sorry.”
In a separate Q&A with committee members, Cheng elaborated on what his plans are to rectify the situation.
“In this moment, I agree the trust is in very, very bad shape,” he said. “We are going to do everything we can do right now to take those steps. I want to take a moment also to say that, for the record, my mistakes – as egregious as they seem – were never done with mal-intent or from a place of capriciousness or malfeasance. Mistakes, absolutely. But always on behalf of our students.”
During the Q&A portion of the hearing, Rep. Kate Farrar (D-West Hartford) raised the question of how the state would be repaid for the chancellor’s misuse of state funds.
“What concerns me about that is that I thought the oversight was really about the decision-making regarding the best use of state resources, not just the public perception of that,” Farrar said. “I’m coming to you for the answer in relation to the overpayment that was allotted for housing allowance. Can you share with the committee when that will be repaid in full?”
Cheng explained his intent behind the mistake he made in his improper expensing while also describing how he will pay back the state.
“I want to agree with you that it’s not just an error in assessment of public perception,” the chancellor said. “It is in judgment as well. You have my promise that I will exercise a much more scrutinizing unscrupulous lense in those kind of decisions from now and into the future.
“As for the repayment, I believe the total repayment is for $25,000. I believe every pay period, a few hundred dollars are taken out of my paycheck and put towards that.” (He later was given information at the hearing stating it will be paid back in full by July 9, 2026 at a rate of $300 per paycheck.)
Republican Rep. Seth Bronko of Naugatuck took off the gloves as he spoke with Cheng.
“The reality is trust has been shattered,” Bronko said. “And only compounded by the vote of no confidence. This policy change and enacting these new safeguards and oversights it’s low hanging fruit. It’s kind of the obvious reaction to the problem. The core of what we are talking about here is really the heart of the matter. I wish I could say I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed. But, I am mad because the actions speak to not just a lack of awareness, a lack of perception. Almost a willful disregard of taxpayer money.”
Seth Freeman, president of the 4Cs SEIU 1973, also testified at the hearing. He went as far as calling for Cheng to be replaced as chancellor.
“Chancellor Cheng has failed to be a champion for CSCU students, failed to advocate and fight for CSCU students and to fight for the resources that CSCU students need,” Freeman said. “And that the faculty and staff in our community college system, certainly the faculty and staff that comprise the CSCU Senate, that particular shared governance body felt that we need a new and frankly a better leader at this time. So, the request is to have the Chancellor replaced.”
Vote of no confidence
Sen. Minority Leader Stephen Harding (R-Brookfield) and House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora (R-North Branford) praised the College Senate’s no-confidence vote regarding the chancellor’s questionable spending habits.
“We commend Connecticut’s State Colleges and University System staff for courageously speaking out,” the said in a prepared statement. “It is deeply troubling that they — not the Governor or a majority of the system’s Regents — are the ones leading the fight to correct this blatant misuse of taxpayer dollars and betrayal of students and parents.”
They went on to assail Cheng’s alleged “pocketing” of $21,000 in moving expenses despite never relocating to Connecticut. They also admonished the governor, most Regents, and Chancellor Cheng himself for what they called a “feeble and inadequate response.”
Accountability legislation
The legislation being considered would require the Board of Regents for Higher Education and the Board of Trustees of The University of Connecticut to establish policies concerning the use of a purchase card (P-card) and a state vehicle, a residency requirement for certain executive positions and uniform training. It also calls for the Board of Regents to establish an internal audit office and comply with a post-audit examination by the state comptroller; and that each constituent unit to submit data for inclusion on public databases maintained by the comptroller.
The legislation was prompted by Comptroller Sean Scanlon’s audit last year of CSCU fiscal spending and accountability practices. His audit found leaders’ whose misuse warranted further detail in this report were the system’s chancellor, Southern Connecticut State University’s interim president, and Charter Oak State College’s president.
Also called into question was Cheng’s state residency requirement that is spelled out in his employment contract.
“I don’t think you are outlaying public funds inappropriate way,” Cheng told Rep. Farrar. “My terms of the contract are that I am to establish a home in Connecticut in my first year in my position. We live about 6 minutes away from the Ridgefield border.
“Ultimately, we determined that establishing a second residence in Hartford will allow me to not only execute my duties as chancellor but to maintain the health and stability of my family.”
He went on to defend his actions by stating since he splits his time between his New York residence and the Hartford home that he meets the requirement and any related expense.
“We have several campuses in Fairfield County,” he said. “When I am going to Stamford, Housatonic or Norwalk, I will utilize my primary residence. But when I go to Quinebaug Valley or any of the central Connecticut locations, I utilize my Hartford residence.”
