The Observer, March 10, 2006
Volume XXXVIII, Issue 20
Faculty, administration discuss vote of no confidence with Case students
Every chair in the Thwing Atrium was filled Tuesday night as students and faculty gathered to listen to the Arts and Sciences faculty explain the votes of no confidence in President Edward Hundert and Provost John Anderson. After the faculty spoke, Hundert and Anderson discussed their actions and the direction of the university. The meeting ended with an hour-and-a-half discussion for students only.
Joseph White, chair of the political science department and Cyrus Taylor, chair of the physics department and former chair of the Faculty Senate Budget Committee, opened the night with an explanation of the vote.
"That first week of classes, [the school] hit a financial brick wall," Taylor said.
"I have been watching with continued dread which seems to be since President Hundert arrived," White said. "President Hundert's whole approach was what I call hype and hope." He explained "hype and hope" as the process of hyping, or marketing, a plan, and then hoping for good results.
White was also critical of how the Seminar Approach for General Education and Scholarship (SAGES) was implemented. "President Hundert announced we would do SAGES without the consultation of the faculty," White said.
He continued onto other issues including poor fundraising, the Vision Investment Plan, the rebranding, and Case's affiliation with University Hospitals (UH).
"They messed up the fundraising thoroughly," White said. Then when speaking of the affiliation with UH, White pointed out that the new partnership has still not been signed.
Explaining the reason for the vote, White cited the current budget situation and the way that is has been handled.
"There are no details," White said. "These are massive cuts without the least bit of consultation. All [the administration] wants you to do is pay the consequences."
Regarding the budget, Taylor took issue with secrecy in the administration and the difficulty the Faculty Senate Budget Committee had with getting information about the budget. "There is a good deal of questioning going around about what to do next. But the board of trustees has the power. They are what matters," Taylor said.
After a five-minute break, Hundert and Anderson took the microphone.
Hundert began by providing some background to his period at Case. He said that when he got to Case, the university was concentrating more on graduate education but that he wanted to create a better undergraduate experience.
"We are trying to create the kind of exciting undergraduate experience that would attract applicants from across the country and in fact the world," Hundert said.
He then reassured students that despite the budget problems, the classes they are used to will not be cut. "The last thing I want is for students to be concerned that we are going to cut core areas," Hundert said.
Anderson added that the cuts will come from the central administration.
"It is important to keep the resources in the hands of the faculty. We will take the $12 million from central administration. We're going to generate more revenue, and cut nonessential administrative services. This is budget challenge, not a crisis," Anderson said.
Anderson explained why the Faculty Senate Budget Committee got their information when and how they did.
"The Board of Trustees are our boss; they like to see the information first," Anderson said. He then spoke on where the money comes from and the endowment.
"Revenues are important, I'm not going to lie. How large we should be 20 years from now is for someone else to decide." Anderson said
After Hundert and Anderson, only students were able to stay and take part in the open discussion.
Alex Hamberger started off by saying that he was "almost shocked" by the faculty's attitude. He was critical of their "character slanders." "I understand they have valid concerns, but [the faculty's] talk was honestly kind of shocking," Hamberger said.
USG member David Gasser agreed with Hamberger's issue with the faculty's tone. "I have concerns about the tone of the faculty, but I recognize that these accusations are serious and are on a personal level against the leadership of the president and provost," Gasser said. "The faculty's accusations should not be dismissed even if they are personal because they are very serious questions about the university and about the future and the vision. Why didn't the president and provost give anything concrete?"
Hamberger also looked at the other people who were at fault.
"I appreciate the vision of the president and provost," Hamberger said. "How much of these budget issues fall on the shoulders of Hundert and Anderson? I have to imagine that other people are approving his decisions."
Vice President of Academic Affairs Nicholas Bonazza mentioned the idea of putting forth an initiative in USG asking for further clarification from both the administration and the faculty.
