May 2026

UCCS Faculty Representative Assembly Meeting

Friday May 8, 2026

Attendance:  David Havlick (chair), Joel Tonyan (past chair), Emily Mooney (incoming chair), Kylie Rogalla (secretary), Roxy Rosenthal (notetaker), David Moon, Laura Austin-Eurich, Suzanne Cook, Dylan Harris, David Weiss, Robert Mitchell, Evan Taparata, Jennifer Kling, Markus Moeder-Chandler, Jennifer Zohn, Larry Eames, Laura Austin-Eurich, Karin Larkin, Birgitta de Pree, Rhonda Glazier, Julie Torres, Joseph Lee, Douglas Risser, David Anderson, Jian Ma, Catherine Simmons, Rosely Conz, Suman Lakkakula, Marina Eckler, Gordon Stringer, David Weiss, Norah Mazel, Carole Woodall, Aaron Corcoran, Gabriela Martinez Mercier, Todd Endres, Paul Yankey, Shujia Mei, Natasha Smith-Holmquist, Daniel DeCelles, Jena McCollum, Jon Forshee, Rebecca Wood, Rachel Weiskittle, Jay Hubert, Hayley Blackburn, Stefanie Ungstad, Christina Jimenez, Brynn Adamson, Seth Porter, Brandon Vogt, Jon Caudill, Shawn Hood, Martin Key, Tae Park, Edwardo Portillos, Elizabeth Domangue, Andrew Czaplewski, Katherine Cliff

Call to Order / Approval of Minutes 

Motion to Approve: April Minutes 2026

Motion: David Havlick

Second: Unanimous Consensus

Approved. 

Report/Open Q&A Panel Conversation

Jeff Greene, Interim Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance, & Kevin Laudner, Dean of Helen and Aruthur E. Johnson Beth-El College of Nursing and Health Sciences, & Robin Parent, Vice Chancellor of Strategic Initiatives and Chief of Staff & Jennifer Sobanet, Chancellor

Jennifer Sobanet, Chancellor

  • Thanked David Havlick for his service as Chair of the Faculty Assembly; noted this was his last formal meeting in that role. Expressed appreciation on behalf of the Executive Committee, faculty representatives, and University Leadership Team for David's leadership and contributions. 
  • Acknowledged the semester has been challenging and thanked faculty and university leaders for their work and leadership throughout. 
  • Recognized the incoming Executive Committee, noting a mix of returning and new members. 
  • Mentioned Jackie Berning as a key incoming leader and expressed confidence in her continuing the strong leadership example set by David. 
  • Emily Mooney will serve in a shared governance leadership role, taking David’s place.
  • Christina Jimenez has agreed to remain involved and continue serving in this capacity. 
  • Emphasized gratitude for shared governance leadership and smooth leadership transitions.
  • Acknowledged that a vote may be held later in the day regarding a process for a vote of no confidence in the Chancellor, Lynn Vidler, and Robin Parent. 
  • Thanked David for providing advance notice of the letter proposing the action. 
  • Shared the letter with the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), Lynn, and President Solomon, and noted that there had already been substantial discussions about it. 
  • Stated that higher education is facing significant changes and challenges, and emphasized the shared goal of maintaining a sustainable, financially healthy university that can continue serving students and the community. 
  • Reflected on the concerns raised in the letter and identified a significant communication gap between leadership and shared governance groups.
  • Stressed the importance of addressing these communication issues directly and quickly. 
  • Announced plans to bring in a neutral third-party facilitator to help guide discussions. 
  • Invited current and future shared governance leaders from: 
    • Faculty Assembly 
    • Staff Council 
    • Student Government Association
      to participate in facilitated conversations over the summer. 
  • Goals of the summer discussions: 
    • Identify what did not go well. 
    • Determine areas of agreement and disagreement. 
    • Develop improved communication processes and shared governance practices for the coming academic year. 
  • Noted that President Solomon agreed to fund the facilitator and provide stipends for the six participating leaders. 
  • Expressed appreciation to those willing to participate in the process. 
  • Stated that although does not support a vote of no confidence, respects the faculty's right to pursue it. 
  • Requested that, if a vote proceeds, it be directed at her personally rather than individual members of the Executive Leadership Team, emphasizing that ultimate responsibility rests with her. 
  • Confirmed that regardless of the outcome of any vote, the facilitated summer process will move forward. 
  • Concluded by acknowledging the situation and the need to address difficult issues openly. 
  • Budget Talk
  • Noted that the university's budget had already been approved by the Board of Regents at the April meeting and that budget details had previously been shared. 
  • Focused comments on the budget development process rather than the budget itself. 
  • Explained that the university had only about 10 weeks to move from fully understanding its financial situation to presenting a budget for Board approval. 
  • Acknowledged that the accelerated timeline was extremely challenging and difficult. 
  • Recognized that the process created significant anxiety, fear, and uncertainty for many members of the university community. 
  • Noted that these concerns were compounded by broader uncertainties affecting higher education, the country, and the world. 
  • Took responsibility for the impact the process had on faculty and staff. 
  • Stated that leadership never intended to cause harm or increase anxiety and fear. 
  • Emphasized that creating additional stress for the campus community was never the goal and was inconsistent with his values and leadership approach.

How we got here: 

  • Becoming Interim Chancellor, President Solomon asked me to focus on three priorities: 
    • Fully understand the university's financial situation. 
    • Address declining enrollment. 
    • Improve transparency, communication, and shared governance processes. 
  • To address enrollment challenges, the university began developing a strategic management plan to better understand enrollment declines and identify solutions. 
  • Reported early signs of stabilization, noting that while credit hours were still down, declines appeared to be flattening. 
  • Through financial reviews, leadership discovered: 
    • A structural budget deficit, where revenue growth was not keeping pace with mandatory cost increases. 
    • Approximately $14–17 million in one-time funds being used to support ongoing expenses. 
    • Significant cross-subsidization among auxiliary units, which masked financial problems. 
    • The university was drawing on reserves to cover recurring operating costs. 
  • Leadership worked over a two-year period to reduce these financial issues. 
  • Auxiliaries that had been operating at a deficit have now returned to positive financial performance. 
  • The financial review provided a clearer understanding of the university's overall financial position and long-term challenges. 

Where we are going: 

  • The focus now is on understanding the university's market position and determining how to adapt to changing conditions in higher education.
  • The goal is to build on the university's strengths and differentiators while reshaping operations to meet future needs. 
  • The Chancellor expressed confidence that the university is in a stronger position than many institutions because: 
    • Leadership now has a clearer understanding of the financial picture. 
    • Financial reserves remain available. 
    • The institution has identified a strategic direction for moving forward. 
  • Emphasized that the challenges ahead are manageable and solvable. 
  • Plans for the summer include collaborative planning and decision-making to prepare for the future. 
  • In contrast to this year's compressed budget timeline, leadership intends to begin planning much earlier and establish clearer processes before the next budget cycle. 

Advancement (Fundraising)

  • Over the past two years, the university has exceeded its fundraising goals. 
  • Most fundraising dollars support student scholarships, helping offset the cost of attendance. 
  • Additional funds are directed toward: 
    • Research initiatives 
    • Capital projects 
  • This year's fundraising effort is close to reaching its goal, though final results are still pending. 
  • The university recently received an anonymous gift of more than $2 million designated for scholarships for Fall 2026 students. 

Enrollment

  • Clarified that enrollment targets and budget assumptions are different. 
  • The university's budget was built conservatively using a projected 2% decline in student credit hours. 
  • Current enrollment numbers are showing larger declines than the budget assumption. 
  • However, enrollment leadership believes final numbers will improve and likely outperform current projections. 

Positive Enrollment Indicators

  • Strong application and admission numbers for the upcoming fall semester. 
  • Enrollment yield process is still underway and continues throughout the summer. 
  • Leadership expects enrollment figures to improve as admitted students make final commitments. 

Encouraging Early Data

  • Approximately 20% increase in students who have completed financial aid processes. 
  • Housing occupancy is running about 5% ahead of last year. 
  • First-time freshman numbers are currently about 20% higher than at the same point last year. 
  • Chancellor described these as encouraging signs that enrollment outcomes may be stronger than current projections suggest. 

Next Steps

  • Stephanie sends weekly enrollment updates every Monday. 
  • Chancellor has asked that future reports provide additional context and explain what colleges and divisions can do to support enrollment efforts. 
  • The greatest enrollment softness is currently among returning students who have not yet re-enrolled. 
  • Leadership plans a major re-enrollment outreach campaign after the semester ends. 
  • Noted that students appear to be waiting longer to register than in previous years, making later enrollment activity increasingly common. 

Discussion - Comments/Questions

Anonymous Comment: Transparency was not the issue, it was the budget and how it was being proposed to be cut, the salary cut, that was hugely stressful not the transparency. Please continue to be transparent as that was not the issue to our stress and anxiety. 

  • Jennifer Sobanet Response: Thanked the faculty member for the feedback and said the issue of transparency and communication is something she wants to discuss further during the summer facilitated conversations. 
  • Explained that the budget process is highly volatile from January through April because the university starts with conservative projections and does not receive final information about state funding, system allocations, and cost increases until later in the spring. 
  • Leadership intentionally provided more transparency this year in response to requests from shared governance groups to keep the campus informed throughout the process. 
  • Noted that because financial projections were changing frequently, the budget reduction targets also changed, requiring leadership to discuss options that they hoped to avoid. 
  • Potential position eliminations and salary reductions were placed on the table because leadership believed they might be necessary based on the information available at the time. 
  • Emphasized that these proposals were never presented as final decisions and that leadership removed options as the financial outlook improved. 
  • Acknowledged that sharing evolving and uncertain information created significant anxiety and fear among faculty and staff. 
  • Stated that while she regrets the stress caused, she believed it was important to be transparent about the challenges the university was facing. Though recognized the tension between being open about uncertain financial projections and avoiding unnecessary alarm. 
  • Leadership needs to find a better balance between transparency and communication during periods of financial uncertainty. 
  • Takes full responsibility for how the communications were handled and said the summer facilitated discussions will help develop a better approach for future budget cycles. 

Anonymous Question: Projections for enrollment if student credit hours are down 3 to 5% next year instead of eating at minus 2% or better, how should we understand the resulting budget impact?

  • Jeff Greene Response: Reported that discussions with CU system budget officers highlighted concerns about financial volatility and how rapidly changing information is communicated and interpreted across campuses. 
  • Noted that changes in state funding projections (including possible cuts of up to 5% at one point) caused significant shifts in campus-level budget planning and expense reduction assumptions. 
  • Explained that the university is conducting an internal expense review this summer to better understand spending patterns across divisions and colleges and improve proactive financial management. 
  • Clarified the difference between enrollment measures: 
    • Student headcount may be stable or increasing 
    • Student credit hours (SCH), which drive tuition revenue, may grow more slowly due to: 
      • Higher graduate enrollment (fewer credit hours per student) 
      • More students attending part-time or working while enrolled 
  • Stated that a larger decline in SCH (3–5% vs. 2%) would require clearer, more defined strategies for managing expenses going into the fall. 
  • Emphasized that planning must be collaborative and that transparency will continue, but stressed the importance of how information is communicated so it is clearly understood. 
  • Noted that part of the challenge this year was how rapidly changing information was shared and received, contributing to confusion and tension across the system. 
  • Indicated that future budget planning will integrate the use of university reserves more directly, rather than treating reserves separately from operating budget decisions. 
  • Explained that reserves may play a more active role in smoothing financial impacts alongside expense reductions if enrollment or revenue fluctuates. 
  • Concluded that the goal is to create a clearer, more structured approach to managing volatility, including enrollment changes, expense planning, and reserve use. 

Anonymous Comment: At the LAS Town Hall – mentioned a feeling with an us versus them dynamic and no one wants that, salary cuts feel antagonistic if ELT would just commit to not cutting any salaries moving forward it would feel much better… 5 year time line is great but I was hearing about the budget crisis since I got here 4 years ago, and to be fair none of us could survive on a salary cut. 

  • Responded to concerns about an “us vs. them” dynamic between faculty and university leadership, noting that no one wants that divide but expressing that it can still feel present. 
  • Discussions about potential salary cuts, especially for faculty who feel underpaid, feel antagonistic and deepen that divide. 
  • Expressed concern that decisions made by ELT members—who are perceived as comparatively well-compensated—can feel disconnected from the financial realities of faculty and staff. 
  • Argued that faculty salaries should not be reduced in future budget processes. 
  • Requested a clear commitment from leadership that faculty and staff salary cuts will not be considered again. 
  • Acknowledged that financial pressures are long-standing and not new, but emphasized that recent escalation has intensified concern. 
  • Reiterated that salary reductions feel unsustainable for faculty livelihoods and should be removed from consideration going forward.

Jennifer Sobanet Response: Thanked the faculty member for raising the concern and acknowledged the seriousness of the issue. 

  • Explained that potential salary reductions were considered only because the university was operating under an extremely compressed timeline and facing a large required budget reduction. Described salary cuts as an emergency or short-term tool that may be used in high-pressure situations when there is little time to pursue other options but salary reductions are not a typical budgeting strategy and are not the preferred approach. 
  • Noted that with more time for planning, shared governance discussions, and strategic decision-making, leadership can rely on different tools and processes. 
  • Acknowledged that difficult financial decisions may still be necessary in the future, but said they should occur within a longer-term planning framework rather than under crisis conditions. 
  • She could not promise that salary cuts would never be considered again because she cannot predict future circumstances. However, stated that she does not anticipate using that tool in the next several years because the university now has more information, more planning time, and a clearer strategy. 
  • Committed to approaching future financial challenges in a more strategic, thoughtful, and collaborative way.

Jeff Greene Response: Expressed greater optimism about the university’s financial position than in previous years because leadership now has a much better understanding of its finances. That the next step is a deeper review of expenses to better understand spending patterns and ensure expenses are aligned with available revenue. 

  • Emphasized the importance of strengthening and growing the university’s ongoing revenue base so recurring expenses are supported by recurring revenues. 
  • Several major financial and planning projects will be completed over the summer to improve future budgeting and decision-making. The budget process going forward will look very different because of the additional information and planning now available. 
  • Reiterated that salary reductions are not something leadership wants to pursue and would only be considered in extremely serious circumstances. 
  • Argued that a strong reserve strategy can provide financial flexibility and help avoid more disruptive measures such as salary reductions.
  • Emphasized the need to understand the impacts and consequences of budget decisions before implementing them.

Jennifer Sobanet Keypoints

Growth Strategy and Enrollment Opportunities

  • Leadership believes the university is now in a stronger position because it has more financial information, more planning time, and a clearer understanding of its challenges. 
  • Emphasized a desire to shift focus away from continual budget cuts and reallocations and toward long-term growth. 
  • Noted that the university has spent many years focused on reductions rather than expansion and innovation. 
  • Stated that future success depends on defining what makes UCCS unique and why students should choose it over competing institutions. 

Enrollment Growth Priorities

Transfer Students

  • Identified transfer credit evaluation as a major barrier to enrollment growth. 
  • Community college partners report that transferring credits into UCCS can be slow and difficult, especially outside of established GT Pathways. 
  • Improving transfer processes was highlighted as an opportunity to attract and retain more students. 

Military and Military-Affiliated Students

  • Acknowledged concerns that UCCS has not been sufficiently effective in awarding credit for prior learning and military experience. 
  • Noted that work is already underway to improve those processes. 
  • Viewed military-connected students as a significant growth opportunity. 

K–12 and Concurrent Enrollment

  • Stated that UCCS has lost ground in the K–12 and concurrent enrollment market over the past several years. 
  • Community colleges have been successful in attracting high school students through concurrent enrollment programs, creating early institutional loyalty. 
  • Announced positive legislative progress on a concurrent enrollment bill that would expand opportunities for UCCS participation. 
  • Expressed optimism that this change could help UCCS reconnect with local school districts and regain market share among high school students. 

Faculty Role in Growth

  • Emphasized that opening enrollment opportunities is only the first step. 
  • Called on faculty to help develop programs, pathways, and partnerships that will take advantage of these new opportunities. 
  • Encouraged collaboration between faculty and enrollment, academic affairs, and outreach teams to convert opportunities into actual enrollment growth. 

Long-Term Vision

  • Argued that growth in transfer, military, adult, and concurrent enrollment populations can increase both student credit hours and university revenue. 
  • Framed enrollment growth as both a financial strategy and a mission-driven effort to serve more students. 
  • Stated a preference for spending time on growth opportunities rather than ongoing discussions about budget reductions. 

  • Concluded that if the university successfully adapts to changing conditions and capitalizes on these opportunities, it can thrive and move beyond recurring financial crises.

    Anonymous Comment: Questioned the characterization of the budget situation as a short-term crisis that emerged over a 10–11 week period. 

  • Noted that faculty have been hearing about budget deficits and financial challenges for years, making the situation feel longstanding rather than sudden or unexpected. 
  • Argued that the recent budget actions were treated as an acute emergency even though the underlying financial problems were well known. 
  • Agreed that the university needs a growth strategy and new sources of revenue. 
  • Expressed concern that leadership is discussing growth initiatives while simultaneously considering actions that could undermine growth, such as: 
    • Potential salary reductions 
    • Employee losses 
    • Program discontinuances 
    • Other budget cuts 
  • Questioned how the university can successfully expand enrollment initiatives, such as concurrent enrollment, if it is reducing personnel and programs needed to support that growth. 
  • Suggested that the overall process appeared reactive rather than strategic. 
  • Characterized the budget response as feeling: 
    • Unplanned 
    • Unstrategic 
    • Lacking clear guidance or a long-term roadmap 
  • Expressed frustration with the apparent disconnect between the university’s growth goals and the budget decisions being considered. 

Jennifer Sobanet Response

  • The new factor this year was a comprehensive five-year financial analysis that gave leadership a fuller understanding of the university's financial situation. That information revealed issues that needed to be addressed immediately in the next budget cycle and reserves were used to buy additional time and reduce the need for more immediate cuts. 
  • Said the 10-week timeline was about responding to the newly understood financial reality, not the length of time the budget challenges had existed and acknowledged that the compressed timeline led to more reactive decisions. 
  • Stated that leadership is now working on a more strategic and structured budgeting process and plans to share it with campus in August. 

Robin Parent Response

  • Acknowledged anonymous comment point that the budget challenges do not feel acute to faculty who have experienced years of cuts and reallocations and recognized that faculty and newer leaders may view the situation differently because they have experienced different parts of the university's history. 
  • Agreed that repeatedly facing budget reductions can create a sense of being stuck in the same cycle year after year and expressed a desire to show meaningful progress rather than continuing the same pattern of cuts and crisis management. 
  • Leadership is trying to use new information and strategies to move the university forward and a goal of creating a more positive campus environment focused on student success, engagement, and hope for the future. 

Anonymous Comment: I think that talking through hypothetical scenarios is one thing, but the kind of transparency I want to see is model parameters, where the data comes from, assumptions made, how calculations are handled, so that the colleges can understand the campus priorities and all the stakeholders can understand where we are. They also want to understand the goal right now. I'm still unclear what the vision is for UCCS in the next 5 or even 10 years. What are we building? There's some questions about like, what's the growth plan? Stream of constant hypotheticals are less interesting to me. So I think bearing that in mind would be helpful. And we agree with all of that. Yeah, we're totally like on that.

Jennifer Sobanet Ending Remarks

  • Acknowledged that the semester has been difficult for the campus community and encouraged everyone to focus on the upcoming commencement ceremony and the achievements of students. 
  • Emphasized that supporting student success is the reason faculty, staff, and administrators do their work. 
  • Recognized the contributions of faculty and staff in helping students reach graduation and the joy and pride seen during award ceremonies and graduation preparations. 
  • Appreciation for the university community's dedication to students and the broader community. 
  • Thanked attendees for their feedback, recommendations, and engagement throughout the discussion. Reaffirmed that leadership is listening to campus concerns. 

Greg Williams, Assistant Vice Chancellor of OIT & CIO

CANVAS UPDATE – The email sent approximately an hour earlier contains the most current information available. The situation is currently stable. 

  • IT is in the process of logging users out and resetting authentication tokens as a precautionary security measure. 
  • The reset is intended to protect accounts in case attackers obtained authentication tokens, even though passwords were not compromised. 
  • Users may be prompted to log in again to systems such as Canvas if their token has already been reset. 
  • The process is taking longer than usual because many organizations are conducting similar security actions simultaneously, worldwide. 
  • Expected completion was hoped for later that afternoon, though no definite timeline was available. Once users log in again, the reset should be a one-time process.

Anonymous Question: Well, as we were dealing with the uncertainty and maybe not having grades available, is there any backup of stuff from Canvas that's possible at the Canvas level, like for this kind of crisis, because losing all of that data is really not good. 

Greg Williams Response: Confirmed that backups do exist for Canvas data, but noted limitations. Stated that gradebook data is the most difficult type of information to fully back up or restore in a clean way. 

  • The university will be reviewing backup and recovery processes moving forward based on this incident. 
  • Noted that UCCS has not had a major security incident since 2014. 
  • Referenced that the attackers had issued a ransom deadline (May 12), but that situation is no longer active. Indicated that the specific threat group is known for following through on threats, but Canvas (Instructure) is no longer under that immediate risk. 
  • Emphasized that the current situation is being monitored and handled as part of a broader security response.

Anonymous Comment: Expressed concern about the university’s mandated use of Canvas as a centralized instructional system required for syllabi, course materials, and student submissions. 

  • Noted that while Canvas provides benefits, it is a third-party for-profit platform, creating dependency on an external system. 
  • Described frustration that during the security incident, faculty were instructed to quickly develop alternative methods for assignments, exams, and submissions and the expectation to rapidly recreate course processes placed a heavy burden on faculty and staff who did not cause the issue. 
  • Raised concern about the potential risk to sensitive and long-developed academic materials (lectures, notes, research) that faculty choose to share only within the course environment. 
  • Expressed anxiety about both the security threat and the expectation to maintain normal grading timelines despite system disruption. The situation created significant stress and felt overwhelming and unfair to manage at such short notice and alone.

Greg Williams Response: Acknowledged the faculty concern and empathized with the difficulty of rapidly adapting during the outage. 

  • Noted that the university relies on cloud-based tools partly because they provide stronger security and reduce the need for large internal IT staffing. 
  • Explained that maintaining and securing systems like an LMS requires significant resources, and the institution has limited staff capacity for that level of management. Indicated that there is currently only one LMS administrator, highlighting staffing constraints. 
  • The incident will lead to changes in processes and how systems are managed going forward. As we as the need to improve procedures and preparedness so the university can better handle similar disruptions in the future. 
  • Acknowledged that no system can be made completely immune to security incidents, but steps can be taken to reduce risk and improve response.

Kevin Laudner Response: Acknowledged there is no perfect solution and that incidents like this are an inherent risk of using large technology systems and expressed empathy for faculty and staff, recognizing the disruption and stress caused by the situation. 

  • Clarified that the email instructions were precautionary and intended as a conservative safeguard. 
  • Stated confidence that data and system access should be restored when users log back in. Reiterated that IT guidance is meant to minimize risk in case any residual issues occur. Noted that cyberattacks are difficult to fully prevent, as attackers are constantly evolving and staying ahead of defenses.

Closing Remarks: 

  • Just some guidance would have been helpful from leadership
  • The roster can be found at my.co.edu

Officer Reports
David Havlick, Executive Committee Chair

  • Thank you for everything this year and for being engaged and for helping me keep it together. Faculty Assembly Executive Committee, who have been my sounding board and tried to keep me from making too many more mistakes, Thank you all for keeping it together! 
  • Emily Mooney will be in my role next year, appreciate her stepping in – she brought cake a promising thing for next year!
  • Jeremy Bono – Chair-Elect for next year, so super grateful he is willing to run. 

Emily Mooney, Chair-Elect

  • Thanks to everyone for participating in the election!
  • Thank you to everyone who is willing to continue their service next year, tough times to kind of be in engaged but appreciate it!

Joel Tonyan, Past Chair

  • Thank you for your leadership David, and sorry I can’t be there to enjoy the cake!

Committee Reports 

New Business

  • Motion #1—Vote on Faculty Assembly Bylaws Revision, David Havlick 
  • Vote – Jen – Motion to take up the changes to the FA Bylaws at the first Fall 2026 FA representative meeting? 
  • Seconded – Larry Eames

VOTE – Yes, passed.

  • Vote #1—Collective Bargaining Resolution   

  • Do you vote to approve the Collective Bargaining Resolution?

    VOTE - Yes, passed. 

  • Vote #2—Institutional Base Salary Policy   

  • Do you vote to approve the Institutional Base Salary Policy?

    VOTE – Yes, passed.

  • Vote #3—Certificate Programs Policy (200-23) 

  • Do you vote to approve the Certificate Programs Policy?

    VOTE – Yes, passed. 

  • Vote #4—Faculty Qualifications Policy

  • Do you vote to approve the Faculty Qualifications Policy?

    VOTE – Yes, passed. 

  • Motion #2—Vote on Special Election 
  • Vote – Anonymous – Motion to allow all of faculty assembly to vote for the vote of no confidence. “I move that the Faculty Representative Assembly approve a special election for the sole purpose of holding a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Jennifer Sobanet, Provost Lynn Vidler, and Vice Chancellor for Strategic Initiatives and Chief of Staff Robin Parent.”
  • Seconded - Anonymous
  • Discussion –
  • I should clarify that it's a vote to allow all of campus to vote.

  • Anonymous Comment/Question: Concern was expressed that fear of retaliation may discourage some individuals from participating in the election, and a question was raised about how voter confidentiality and protection from retaliation can be ensured.

    Answer/Discussion: 

  • Efforts have been made to ensure that participants can vote confidentially and feel comfortable participating in the process. A Qualtrics ballot has been developed with two primary safeguards: ensuring that only eligible voters receive access to the ballot and ensuring that votes remain anonymous. The system is designed to prevent multiple votes from the same individual while not collecting voter names with ballot responses. 
  • If a vote were expanded to the broader faculty, similar protections would be implemented. To the extent possible, additional measures would be coordinated with institutional research or other appropriate offices to maintain confidentiality. It was also acknowledged that questions remain about the extent to which records related to the election could be subject to public records requests, and that those questions would need to be clarified. Transparency about who, if anyone, could access identifying information would be provided if such access were necessary.
  • Anonymous Comment/Discussion: I think it's important to have the vote to give those who would vote against those confidence to have a chance to voice their position and those who would vote for to vote their position. So it's not just a vote for no confidence. It's a vote to express where you are on that question. I don't see it as a hostile vote election, it's giving everyone a chance to speak on this.
  • I concur, I don't see any compelling argument to take that opportunity away from our colleagues.
  • Anonymous Concern: Concern was raised about scheduling the vote from May 18–22, after commencement, because participation may be lower during that period. The speaker noted that approximately half of eligible voters participated in the previous special election, but the outcome was decisive enough that turnout did not raise questions about representation. If turnout is substantially lower and the results are close, however, it could be more difficult to determine whether the outcome reflects the views of the broader faculty. At the same time, it was acknowledged that interest in this issue may lead to higher participation than in previous elections.
  • Anonymous Discussion: The speaker acknowledged concerns about the proposed timeline but emphasized that it is important to bring the matter before the full faculty for a vote. They argued that representatives have a responsibility to encourage participation among their constituent groups, even after the semester has ended. The speaker also stressed the importance of clear communication regarding how voting data will be stored, who will have access to it, and what information will be collected, in order to address concerns about confidentiality and potential retaliation. However, they did not view those concerns as a reason to delay or avoid the vote. Instead, they suggested that strong voter participation would help address such concerns and encouraged representatives to actively promote awareness of the election and participation in the voting process.
  • Anonymous Discussion: The speaker offered a contrarian perspective, suggesting that the censure vote and the possibility of a future vote of no confidence may already have had a positive impact on administrative decision-making. Specifically, they noted that proposed pay cuts and other measures had been removed from consideration, and argued that faculty pressure may have contributed to those outcomes. The speaker expressed concern that proceeding with a vote of no confidence now could diminish its effectiveness as a governance tool in the future. Given that some of the most concerning proposals have already been withdrawn, they questioned what additional effect a no-confidence vote would have and suggested that it may be wiser to reserve the option for future circumstances if needed.
  • Anonymous Question: Was it May 18th or 15th? Answer: It was clarified that the special election would run from May 18–22. The bylaws require both a one-week notice period and a Monday–Friday voting window, making May 18 the earliest permissible start date. Clarification, if approved, the motion would require a one-week notice period before the election. The vote would therefore take place during the earliest allowable window, May 18–22, consistent with bylaws requiring a Monday–Friday election period.
  • Anonymous Comment/Discussion: The speaker encouraged broader and more intentional outreach to faculty beyond email, noting that multiple communication channels—such as face-to-face conversations and informal networks—should be used to increase participation. They emphasized that faculty representatives have a responsibility to actively engage their constituents and encourage voting participation. The speaker also acknowledged concerns about retaliation as legitimate, but argued that shared governance necessarily involves the willingness to proceed with formal votes even in the presence of risk or discomfort, suggesting that avoiding such processes would undermine meaningful governance. Finally, they stated that while confidentiality concerns are understandable, the voting process would be structured so that only aggregate results (vote totals) would be reported.
  • Anonymous Comment: The speaker emphasized that faculty composition will change in the fall and argued that the vote should proceed now so it reflects those who have been engaged in the discussion, rather than being delayed and presented later to new faculty without context.
  • Anonymous Comment/Question: The speaker stated that the faculty they represent are generally attentive to email communications and expressed no concern about outreach within their department. They then raised a procedural question regarding vote confidentiality and transparency, asking whether it is appropriate or necessary to also communicate the threshold or requirements for validating the outcome of the vote in relation to confidentiality concerns. The speaker suggested that clarity on how vote validity would be determined should be included in communications to the broader voting body, and asked for guidance on whether this issue is germane to the discussion. Answer: It was clarified that the default assumption for the vote is that participation by a majority of those who cast ballots constitutes a quorum, and that the outcome would be determined by a simple majority of votes cast.
  • Anonymous Comment: The speaker noted that faculty would still be on contract during the early part of the voting period and encouraged those concerned about timing to vote on May 18–19, while also highlighting that outreach and participation efforts could continue throughout the week.

  • Anonymous Comment: The speaker acknowledged some discomfort with the timing of the vote but emphasized that representatives have a duty to act on the expressed wishes of their constituents. They noted that if there is significant interest among faculty in holding the vote, representatives should feel responsible for moving the process forward despite concerns about the schedule.

     

  • Debate on the motion is closed; you will get a Qualtrics vote through your email, you need to vote by the end of this meeting.
  • "I move that the Faculty Representative Assembly approve a special election for the sole purpose of holding a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Jennifer Sobanet, Provost Lyn Vidler, and Vice Chancellor for Strategic Initiatives and Chief of Staff Robin Parent."
  • Do you support holding a special election on the vote presented?

VOTE – Motion passed. 

  • Will send out everything today, as reps it is your job to share. If people are worried about voting while on contract, urge them to vote on the 18th and 19th. Look for a ballot starting on May 18 for that week and as many of you know, we continue to struggle to get ballots to everyone, so if by noon on the 18th, email David and he will work to get you a ballot. I will try to clarify and communicate the Quora and all the assurance that the votes are truly anonymous and if not, then who will see the names, etc. 
  • THANK YOU DAVID!

Motion to Adjourn

Laura Austin-Eurich motioned to end the meeting; Karin Larkin seconded; passed.

  • Next meeting: Friday, August 14, 2026, 12:00-2:00 pm in Hyflex Format; Dwire 103 or MS Teams