Last week, the changes made to the Faculty Senate Constitution by the committee co-chaired by Provost Robert E. Palazzo and deposed Faculty Senate President Larry Kagan were referred to a general faculty vote in two parts; both failed to attain the two-thirds majority needed to pass.
The changes were developed in an attempt to streamline the makeup and procedures of the Senate, as well as to bring them in line with directives from the Board of Trustees. Specifically, the revised document distinguishes between voting (tenured and tenure-track faculty) and non-voting senators, redefines the officer and committee structures, and, finally, changes certain Senate and faculty meeting procedures.
The referendum put before the faculty was split into two parts. The first addressed the concerns of the Board that would have led to the reinstatement of the Senate as a formal representative body; the second half of the ballot details other changes that modify the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, shift major discussions to the Faculty Senate, allow all standing committees to select their own chairs, restructure the Planning and Resource Committee and redefine its role to reflect the needs of the strategic planning process, and shifts the election process away from a freestanding Elections Committee to a Faculty Senate subcommittee.
Neither part of the referendum, however, passed the faculty-wide vote. A total of 197 tenured and tenure-track faculty and 45 contingent faculty members participated in the referendum. Of the tenured and tenure-track faculty that voted, 109 voted to pass the first resolution and 59 voted to pass the second part. With the 55.3 and 29.9 percent in favor of the resolutions, respectively—neither resolution passed. The contingent faculty support was significantly lower, failing to approve the first part with a 28.9 percent vote in favor of the motion, as well as the second part with only 13.3 percent in favor.
Kagan said that he felt the referendum failed due to the fact that it “proposed a series of refinements to the constitution that the faculty felt needed more discussion.”
Palazzo was unable to be reached for comment regarding the referendum’s results.
Kagan said that the Faculty Senate will be meeting sometime next week to decide on how to proceed following the outcome of the vote. He stated that, “The important issue will most likely be to fill upcoming vacancies with new senators.”
Kagan continued, “Although it did not receive the needed two-thirds supermajority needed to amend the constitution, the 55 percent margin of tenured and tenure-track faculty votes that the first ballot question received means that there was substantial support for the compromise that would have allowed the formal resumption of Faculty Senate activity and we should be able to build on that.”
