Public Meeting of the UBC Board
what did we do?
Four decisions where made during the UBC Board of Governors’ meeting, Wednesday September 24, 2025. Approval of the President’s priorities for the year, endorsement of the ‘strategic refresh,’ and approval of two major building projects, one at UBC-V, the other at UBC-O. Also heard in public session were presentations from the three student societies who represent UBC students.
While the public session only lasted two hours, the Board met in closed and in camera sessions from 8:30am till sometime after 2pm.
The president’s priorities are brought to the board for approval as a condition of his employment contract. This was the third time B-A Bacon has come to the board with his annual priorities. The president does more than these eight priorities, but these items become part of the evaluation of his performance as per his contract.
In response to priority 5 I asked the president how he planned to advocate for research that produces intangible benefits. In the current mode university leaders appear to highlight only that research that can be tied to direct economic benefits and spin off. Our university does a good job talking up the commercialization and innovation to industry side. I wanted to hear how our university’s president plans to support and advocate for research beyond that which can be commercialized.
Bacon said his own research was not directly commercializable and he believed there was an important place for ‘curiosity-led’ research. He turned the mic over toVP Research and Innovation GailMurphy who said they came to UBC because of it’s broad-based research program and her office supported many kinds of research.
The President’s priorities were approved.
The revised university strategic plan, called the ‘strategic refresh,’ was also presented and endorsed.
Posted above is the glossy summary page of the seven ‘strategic direction.’ It has been my experience that these plans have more impact in external relations then they do for grassroots faculty and staff. Yet such documents are not with effects on the base.
It is important to note a focus on core research throughout the ‘refresh.’ At the same time there is a utilitarian sensibility that pervades the document. The refresh appears to grant greater weight to sectors of our university that can produce commercializable outcomes. It was reassuring to hear the president and vp research both explain how their vision is more holistic and includes the full diversity of research and scholarship at UBC.
Two major building projects were granted Board approval. The St John’s College redevelopment at UBC-V and a new student recreation building at UBC-O
The UBC-V project, called Lowermall Precinct Student Housing Redevelopment by the administration, was brought forward for ‘Board 2’ approval (There is a fairly detailed description and process for the various levels of Board approval. For the interested details are posted here).
Board 2 approval request for the Lower Mall Precinct (LMP) Student Housing Redevelopment – Phase 1 project is provided as part of the project management process for construction projects over $10,000,000. The Board of Governors has delegated to the Property Committee the authority to make decisions on its behalf for construction projects between $10 million and $20 million. The aggregate estimated value of the Lower Mall Precinct (LMP) Student Housing Redevelopment – Phase 1 project is $561,910,000.
Current residents of St. John’s college had written to express concern with their relocation plan.
The Lower Mall Precinct Redevelopment Project is a fantastic effort which would increase housing provision for future graduate and post-graduate students significantly at UBC. However, the project’s current capital budget and risk assessment contains a critical oversight in the planning process—it fails to account for the significant and tangible damages to the 174 graduate students who will be displaced by this project and become ‘collateral damage’ to this process. The impact of this disruption will cascade to our respective departments and thus UBC as a whole. Thus, we, the 174 current graduate student residents of St. John’s College (SJC), urge you to ensure these costs are properly addressed and for UBC Housing to commit to developing rehousing plans in close consultation with current residents before granting further approval.
Several governors asked the administration to clarify the relocation plan. Andrew Parr, AVP Student Housing shared this response:
All SJC students wanting continued housing will be given an offer and will be moved to another residences, likely in MD, Pond or Tbird. They will have the ability to give room type and roommate preferences but availability of space will dictate which unit type they will be offered.
We are working with SJC staff on a different meal plan for [these] students, if they want it. They will be moving into units with kitchens so may not want to pay for a meal plan as they do now at SJC
SJC staff are thinking about programming, common meals etc in order to maintain the community they enjoy at SJC
More technically, we adjusted the contract language for the SJC housing contracts and inform students of this reality well in advance and before the signed the current year contract. Specifically the current contract term ends on April 30, 2026, prior to relocation under a new contract.
We will be continue to engage with SJC staff and residents regularly.
Board 2 approval was granted.
A great deal of the substantive work of the Board is now done in committee by smaller subsets of governors and online rather than in person. While efficient, it does remove aspects of public scrutiny and full board attention. Decisions made in committee come to the full board, but as part of an omnibus consent agenda and are rarely mentioned or discussed in any significant way in the full public arena of the board meeting.
The public portion of Wednesday’s Board meeting was streamed and can be viewed here.
Perhaps UBC could undertake a public outreach and education program detailing commodity fetishism and reification in the name of knowledge transfer?