An email sent by Wohlpart to the Faculty Senate’s Executive Committee one day before the vote requested they delay the vote, citing a piece about mediation in the Faculty Code as the main reasoning, with Wohlpart stating he believed in productive mediation.
According to the Faculty Code, “Methods of conflict resolution reasonably available … should have been exhausted before bringing a motion for a vote of no confidence to the Senate.”
Lindsey explained in an interview that the piece in the Faculty Code that mentions mediations offers mediation as an example, not as a necessity. “There are multiple ways of which you can try to work through these issues,” Lindsey said. “The petitioners, the 49 who signed the document, felt like they had already done everything that they could … The Executive Committee reviewed what they wrote, and based on our experiences too, agreed.”
Amason addressed Wohlpart’s letter during an interview, stating, “There was a whole week to raise that concern. Where was that? … That’s part of what I’m pointing out here is that it’s a timing issue.”
In his official email response to all faculty on Feb. 10, Wohlpart stated that “as I only received the petition from Faculty Senate two days before the Senate vote, I have not been given the opportunity to respond to its contents or been consulted on its accuracy.” Another senator, History Professor Marilyn Levine, shared a similar sentiment to Amason, at the meeting, stating, “I will say, the faculties are the heart of the campus, and unfortunately, we have a president who doesn’t even want to be this. It is three years too late. We should not allow reasonable trepidation and a not so subtle attempt at intimidation to depress from doing the right thing.” Separately, Senator and English Professor Anne Cubilie said she was “appalled” at lack of communication by administration regarding the neo-Nazi posters found around campus in early February. “I was appalled I didn’t know about this until I found The Observer article last Thursday,” Cubilie said. “I was equally appalled that the administration, outside from noting no crime has occurred, had no comment on the issue.”
Student Government Response
ASCWU Student Body President Hondo Acosta-Vega appeared at the Senate meeting to represent ASCWU in lieu of Student Senate Speaker Aylin Parrazol Bravo. During his statement, Acosta-Vega made it clear that the student government body will be staying out of the conflict between the university president and the Faculty Senate. “We would not want the Faculty Senate to tell us how to do our jobs, and we don’t want to tell you how to do your jobs,” Acosta-Vega said. “And so ASCWU will not be taking a side in this, nor making any kind of statement on the matter other than a complete state of neutrality.”
Amason and Erdman both expressed positive positions on ASCWU’s decision, with Erdman stating that the decision is “a good move” and Amason claiming they’re “doing the right thing.”
Wohlpart’s Response
Wohlpart sent out an email to all CWU faculty this past Tuesday afternoon, detailing his response to the various allegations shared in the faculty petition and by the FSEC.
In the email, Wohlpart stated that he had not been given a chance to comment on the contents of the petition, and that the petition, as he reported, contained various inaccuracies. “Please note that I could have responded to the petition when the Faculty Senate received it on Jan. 20 if it had been shared with me at that time,” the response stated. “Even though it was rejected by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, this offer [mediation] remains open, as my focus has always been, and continues to be, on listening and building bridges.” He further dedicated the second half of his email response to pointing out “inaccuracies” in the faculty petition, writing, “I suggest that much of the information that you have received is inaccurate or incomplete, including the many unverified and unsubstantiated claims in the petition.”
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator