USC’s Beleaguered President Said He Was Stepping Down. Some Professors Are Wondering What’s Taking So Long.

Updated (8/1/2018, 2:30 p.m.) with information from the university about the acting president and the search process.

Some faculty members at the University of Southern California are calling for a “formal resignation” from C.L. Max Nikias, the president who said two months ago that he was stepping down.

In May, after a pair of controversies shook USC, the university’s Board of Trustees announced Nikias’s resignation. But the board has dragged its toes in naming an interim president and beginning an executive search process, some faculty members say. In an open letter dated August 1, faculty members urge the board to name an interim president before students arrive on campus in mid-August.

“We remain grateful for the great gifts left to the university by President Nikias,” the letter states. “But the only way to repair the university’s image and to bring the community together again is to move forward with new leadership.”

Nikias’s formal departure would come after a long period of tumult for the university. Last summer, the Los Angeles Times revealed that a former dean of the university’s medical school used illicit drugs and consorted with drug dealers and prostitutes. The report was followed with news that a former campus gynecologist, George Tyndall, remained on staff after decades of complaints that he engaged in inappropriate behavior with student patients; some former patients also allege sexual abuse. Tyndall was suspended in 2016. He later resigned and took a payout from the university, prompting outrage from faculty.

The letter, which had more than 600 signatures on Tuesday afternoon, is the second letter spearheaded by a group of faculty members who have dubbed themselves the “Concerned Faculty of USC.”

The first, written in May, urged the board to replace Nikias after what the writers said was a gross mishandling of the sexual-misconduct scandal. That letter has garnered nearly 500 signatures since it was written. The board initially affirmed its confidence in Nikias before reversing course and announcing his resignation on May 25.

In a statement to The Chronicle, a spokesman for USC said that Nikias is on vacation, and that Provost Michael Quick will reassume the duties of acting president, a post he has held all summer, when he returns from a vacation on Monday. James Staten, chief financial officer, is acting president while Quick is away.

Rick Caruso, chairman of the Board of Trustees, has interviewed four recruitment firms and will make a recommendation to the board when it meets on August 7, the spokesman said. The board will also vote on the formation of a presidential search committee.

Ariela Gross, a professor of law and history, helped write the letters. Gross said that some faculty members believe that a few trustees are “standing in the way” of Nikias fully stepping down, and that the August 7 meeting influenced the timing of the letter.

Gross said in an email that the Concerned Faculty of USC knew Quick was the acting president, but that designating an acting president “is not the same as an interim president.”

“We are glad that Caruso is moving forward with the presidential search process,” Gross said. “However, we cannot have a credible search process that any presidential candidate would want to participate in until it is clear that President Nikias has stepped down. That is the key issue to be resolved at the August 7 meeting.”

Rick Caruso, chairman of the Board of Trustees, could not be reached for comment.

‘A New Beginning’

The second letter’s tone is a departure from that of the note sent in May, which called Nikias’s handling of the sexual-abuse scandal a “breach of trust.” Gross said the time for debating Nikias’s merits or share of blame is over.

“His stepping down was announced,” Gross said. “The incoming students, their parents, our full community believed that is what is happening, and to go back on it now would be a disaster both in terms of perception and reality in being able to move forward.”

Gross said the sentiment on campus is close to unanimous that Nikias should step aside, even among those who initially had reservations about assigning him blame in the controversies.

Tom Hollihan, a professor of communications who signed both letters, said that it is time for the university to have a fresh start.

“The Board of Trustees made a commitment that they were going to make a change, and they asked for patience, and I think faculty are very patient,” Hollihan said. “But we think it would be in the best interest of the university if there was a new interim president to welcome the new class, so that the new year really marks a new beginning.”

Hollihan said he he knew several students who were victims of Tyndall’s alleged abuse, and feels “great sadnesses” for them. “There are many admirable attributes to this president, and it’s a great tragedy, I think, to see his career come to this sort of end,” Hollihan said. “But I think in this case, the person at the top has to assume responsibility for the institutional culture that allowed this to occur.”

Hollihan expressed hope that a leadership change would usher in a new area of faculty governance, something he said the university has never been very open to.

Uncertainty about the presidency has caused problems on campus already, Gross said. This summer, the administration announced a new policy that barred faculty and staff from bringing minors to campus in most cases. Gross said the university did not consult with faculty before the change, and retracted the rule after an outcry.

Though upset about the policy itself, faculty members also felt that administration didn’t have the authority to issue such new policies, Gross said.

“To lead us in new directions, you have to be a legitimate leader,” Gross said. “And I think no one feels like that’s the case anymore.”

Follow Claire Hansen on Twitter at @clairechansen, or email her at claire.hansen@chronicle.com.

Correction (7/31/2018, 2:45 p.m.): The original version of this article stated incorrectly that the new open letter had 219 signatures on Tuesday afternoon. The correct number is more than 600, and the text has been updated.