In 2025, Gov. Ron DeSantis tried to transfer two major institutions—the University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee (USF-SM) and the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art—to New College of Florida to continue his personal crusade for higher education reform. He was met with community uproar, and the plan failed.

But DeSantis didn’t give up. While The Ringling isn’t on the forced transfer list this year, USF-SM is and could disappear. In his proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year, the governor called for the full transfer of “assets and liabilities” from USF-SM to New College, including the campus’ facilities as well as its outstanding debt. The draft text indicates that any newly enrolled students whose offer of admission comes after the effective date of the act cannot “designate the USF Sarasota-Manatee campus as the student’s home campus of USF,” effectively ending the possibility to study at USF-SM, at least in name. As part of the agreement, New College will take on USF-SM’s $53 million facilities-related debt and pay USF a monthly total of $166,617. Should New College not succeed in making these payments, the facilities will revert back to the University of South Florida, though in what capacity is unclear. 

The Florida Legislature has already begun making headway on this proposal. On Monday, the Florida House’s Higher Education Budget Subcommittee passed the associated bill, HB 5601, through its first step with a 9-4 vote. The House’s draft budget also includes a transfer of roughly $22.5 million in funds from the University of South Florida to New College, assuming the bill’s passage. The Florida Senate budget, on the other hand, does not explicitly mention any transfer of funds or facilities between USF-SM and New College. 

In reaction to DeSantis’ initial proposition, leaders from USF-SM came out with a community letter pleading to not “end USF Sarasota-Manatee’s 50-year history.” 

“We write today because the Governor’s budget proposes shutting down the USF Sarasota-Manatee campus within six months,” reads the letter, signed by former USF-SM staff members and community leaders like former Sarasota County Schools superintendent Lori White and former USF-SM regional chancellor Dr. Karen Holbrook. “The stated motivation? To give New College of Florida access to modern dorms, academic facilities and land for athletic fields—resources NCF has not built for itself. It is easier to displace the students, faculty, staff and supporters who built this campus with donor investment and USFSM student fees than to undertake that work independently. This is unacceptable.” 

USF leaders say this transfer will impact 2,000 current students and 40 accredited campus degree programs, including an emphasis on workforce-lacking areas like nursing, teacher education and tourism/hospitality. About 95 percent of graduates stay and work locally in the community. 

We sat down with Dr. Laurey Stryker, former president of USF-SM, and Dr. Anila Jain, current vice chair of the campus board, to discuss the ongoing efforts in advance of a Feb. 25 community meeting from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the campus’ Student Center Ballroom. This interview has been edited and condensed for length and clarity. 

Why didn’t this plan go forward last year? 

Dr. Laurey Stryker: "Last year, there was not a specific proposal. It was a shadow game that this was something that was going to end up being put in the budget late in the legislative process. It never happened. I do think [it was because of] community support. We had 150 people. We got together in just a few weeks. We obviously targeted our legislators with messages and got a fair amount of people informed. But I think it was a combination of approaches—I did let them know that the community had not been consulted at all about whether this was a good idea, and that we were opposed."

This year, DeSantis’ budget proposal and the Florida House Higher Education Budget Subcommittee’s actions make this seem more concrete. What kind of community organizing have we already seen? 

Stryker: "Well, the thing that started was a community letter that targeted our legislators, the governor, the legislative leadership, the USF Board of Trustees, the Board of Governors. That basically was a letter with 26 either former or current board members, board trustee members, president of the alums, and all that. Within a week [of the Governor’s budget proposal], we had that community letter stating the opposition. Since that time, it's been a lot of contact with our legislators. We do have the Save USFSM website, and we also have a Facebook page. What we've been encouraging people to do is to tell their story—I was a veteran, and I went here, or, This is where I got my training to become a teacher, and now I'm a principal. There are all these stories in the community, so we've been trying to get those stories and get them told to our legislative delegation."

Dr. Anila Jain: "Our students are behind us 110 percent, because it affects them more than anybody else. The student government had resolutions from all three campuses supporting USF-SM not being taken over, because so many of our students work here in this community. They live here in the community, and they may not be able to go out of town to get an education, because they have families and they're working. The [local] Faculty Senate also passed a resolution in support of keeping this campus, because a lot of the programs that are offered here are not offered at New College, and they wanted to be able to stay here. I would say 95 percent of our students don't leave the area."

As the former president of USF-SM and current board member, respectively, are you both stunned by these efforts? How do you perceive them?

Jain: "It's shocking for an institution that's been here for 50 years. We offer so many diverse programs that [New College] does not offer. They will not be able to do nursing and accounting and education. Our students would have to look elsewhere. For a lot of our State College of Florida students, they go two years there, and they come straight here. Having lived in this area 60-plus years, I never thought this would happen. We could coexist without any problems."

Stryker: "Working together, our whole deal was to create this university town—to cooperate across the campuses, and especially the adjacent ones. We've been sharing services over the years. No one at USF has ever said, “We don't want New College to succeed.” Only about 10 percent of their students are from this area, and 95 percent of ours are. So there was not an overlap on our mission." 

What do you have planned for the community meeting Feb. 25? 

Stryker: "It’s 4:30-6 p.m. at the Student Ballroom on the campus. It's sponsored by Save USF-SM, which is a mix of alumni leadership, former and current campus board members, former USF trustee members and community members who have depended on this campus,  employers. It will be to inform people about the proposal. 

"What we see in the community is that people don't understand. Either they think that New College is going to just take the students, faculty, staff, programs, and now it would be under that banner instead of USF. It’s really taking the facilities. We'll have conversations around what that means for employers, for students and for faculty in our programs. It’s a call to action, and that action has got to be with our legislators." 

Jain: "We've also asked some of our major donors to attend and explain why they gave the amounts or the scholarships they did. They went to this campus, and they have an affinity for their hometown campus, because they might not have been able to finish their degrees if it had not been for this campus. And you’re talking about many donors in the seven figures and above."

What is the temperature of the community, notwithstanding parties already interested in USF's future?

Jain: "I think a lot of people don't really understand what's going on. They're looking at two different entities, and they're not getting the bigger, complete picture. One is a liberal arts college, but with the majority of students from out of town. The other one is a part of a major university that is part of the American Association of Universities. A lot of people do not understand the dynamics of the two separate entities."

Stryker: "When you explain this to people, they're shocked that this could actually be being considered. For taxpayer value, USF students are basically $22,000 a year in operating expenses [per student]. New College is at $83,000 a year. As a taxpayer, it doesn't make sense. What I’ve seen is shock. When they really hear about it, they think it’s so outrageous that it won’t actually happen. 

"The proposal also calls for monthly payments from New College to USF to the tune of roughly $166,000 for outstanding debt on the facility. From a debt perspective, higher education leaders have said this also doesn’t make a lot of sense."

Jain: "And if they renege on that, then it comes back to us, to USF. But I'm looking at what we're doing to our students and our faculty. They're getting a beautiful campus. They have the land right there. There's been talk about privatization of New College, but they're getting the benefit of everything from our campus."

Will you talk a little more about what you said is the public misconception of what this proposal will actually do? It’s not that New College will now be controlling USF. It’s that USF's physical campus and facilities become part of New College, and there will no longer be any new USF students. 

Stryker: "Basically, you’ll be shutting down USF Sarasota-Manatee by July 1. That means July 1, when you ride by that campus, it will no longer be a USF campus. The sign may not have changed yet, but it will be New College. Under the bill, New College is supposed to give us instructional space. It's not a full service. It's not the career service, the veteran services, all that they have expected on that campus. Our average student is over 4.0 GPA—those students aren't going to hang around for a classroom experience without all the advising and all the other services. We're going to lose them to the community. They may go to another USF campus. They may go somewhere else."

Would New College be able to continue with USF-SM’s trademark programs in subjects like nursing and business if this were to go through? 

Stryker: "No. Nursing, business, tourism, accounting, social work, education—all these programs are accredited programs, and they take investment and time [to create]. USF essentially already had all those programs. It would take years for New College to add them, and it would take the state and a lot of private investment. The reason we’ve had 40 accredited degrees is because we’ve gone to our community and said, 'Will you help us start our MBA program?'"

You mentioned the community letter, but I'm assuming there have already been some discussions with legislators in some capacity.

Stryker: "After the session last year, we went and met with every legislator. And really, to a person, they all said, Well, we know we need USF in this community. But now, when we're getting down to what happens in the Legislature, they're not standing up. We should have legislators that are putting out public press releases saying, 'I love New College, I love USF, and we cannot sacrifice one for the other.'"

How likely do you think it is that this is going to happen?

Stryker: "I think this is a very specific goal of the governor and what he has determined New College needs. In fact, New College President Richard Corcoran has said that the takeover of the USF facilities means we get $200 million worth of facilities 'move-in ready.' For New College, I'm sure it's a great idea. [They] get free facilities. But for the community, it means losing a USF, nationally ranked university, and giving that access to our students. This is the last session the governor will be governor, but we're going to have to live with the consequences forever. I think our delegation should be able to stand up to that reality."

Why is it so important to the area that we keep USF Sarasota-Manatee an institution individual and separate from New College? 

Jain: "The last time New College was under the umbrella of USF, they were having financial difficulties, so they separated from us. Now, over the years, without the dorm facilities and with the new structure of their programming, and so many of the students that came to New College, they got a great education at state tuition rates, and they came from all over the country. You look at a lot of their alumni—they have done very well in their respective fields. 

"Our students have a totally different background. They are very unique. They are community-minded. It just doesn't make sense to so many people that we speak to why we can't just leave well enough alone. They're getting the better end of the deal. They've got this beautiful campus on Sarasota Bay. Everything is there for them."

Stryker: "When you look at the loss to the community, it's the loss of a top-rated, proven institution that has offered 40 accredited campus degree programs and access to the big USF, which has 200 programs. We haven't even talked about graduate education, because at New College, they have a few master's [programs], but we have all the master's programs. The graduate education would be lost. We've built these programs that are aligned with the workforce needs, and we’ve had our local organizations and businesses and foundations invest millions to build these programs. It's a loss of a big investment."