"I’m sure that there’s a Brooklyn-specific backstory to this, but it has to be read against the background of plummeting applications, especially to lower-tier-but-expensive schools like Brooklyn. Making it easier to get rid of faculty may be essential to their survival, enough so that they’re willing to take the inevitable hit in terms of recruiting."
Says Instapundit. What part of that hurts the Brooklynites the most? I'm guessing "lower-tier." Brooklyn comes in at #80 on the U.S. News ranking. I think people at that level would like you to consider them "second tier."
I suspect the new definition of "Adequate Cause" for termination of tenured faculty is a gesture of some kind, intended to show students that their opinion really matters but highly unlikely to lead anyone losing his job. Maybe it creates some pressure on faculty not to be toxic. I doubt it. The really toxic people tend to be delusional. Put some pressure on that person citing the "Adequate Cause" provision and watch what happens. Maybe you could do it well enough that the person will relocate or retire, but it might get bizarre. If toxicity is encapsulated, do you lance it?
(Note: I was a visiting professor at Brooklyn Law School in Fall 2007 and Spring 2008, but I have no idea whether this rule relates to any specific person who might be poisoning the experience there or whether it's a fairly empty gesture.)