Faculty Senate Vote - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Faculty Senate Vote

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Brave souls, continue the good fight. CISE rep - did you vote no confidence? Just curious.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Excuse me, let me rephrase that to CISE Rep on FS, did you vote to look for a new president?

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Faculty Senate voted 38 - 2 to request that the IHL Board begin immediate search for new president. Declined to act on Scarborough's traditional "No Confidence" vote. "

Vote was 39-2

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Faculty Senate voted 38 - 2 to request that the IHL Board begin immediate search for new president. Declined to act on Scarborough's traditional "No Confidence" vote. "

I small correction Ram. The vote was 39 -2 for the motion which is part of a 3 page letter to the IHL Board calling for the search (to begin in spring 2005) to find a replacement for SFT when his term ends in spring 2006. It mentions that the faculty are dedicated to working hard for SACS accreditation and point out that this transition will not affect SACS schedule. Although the motion and letter does not mention the words "no confidence" the Senate considers the motion to be a polite way of saying the same thing. In addition the Senate still has that option if for some reason the message is not clear. The letter details the many issues that have arose this year(8/1/04- present) to make the reasoning clear to the Board.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Magnolia
"Vote was 39-2"

39/41 = 95.12 %

A tad over 95 percent!

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Thank you.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Bill's idea did have tremendous merit and to be on that fast track offensive might have served us well in hindsight.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

I found it especially interesting to hear the Senators who explained that their constitutents did not have confidence in SFT and wanted him out, but didn't want the Senator to vote No Confidence. They just thought it was bad PR to use the words "No Confidence". It appears that virtually all faculty have no confidence in the administration but some are afraid to say so because the PR machine could use it to kept him in power. It is very hard to find faculty who are against a no confidence vote because thay DO have confidence the administration.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

It will be interesting to see how/if the C-L and S-H cover this.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Magnolia
"Vote was 39-2"

My apologies. The error may be entirely attributed to haste. Contrary to the views of my spouse, alcohol was NOT a contributing factor.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Since I am on the outside looking in, I can say that I am pleased with the wording of the vote taken by the Facsen tonight.

You have stated that you don't have confidence in SFT, without using those words. Yes, you number one priority is to get SACS off your back. I don't know what that will take, but I know that all of you care deeply about USM and want to see your insitutition lifted from the depths of despair back into the light.

Continue the war against the little tyrant that the IHL forced upon you, keep up the good work to restore the integrity of USM.

NO QUARTER

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Should read your number one........................

Sorry about that, mind went faster than fingers.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"My apologies. The error may be entirely attributed to haste. Contrary to the views of my spouse, alcohol was NOT a contributing factor."

Alcohol? Celebrating already?

Date: Feb 2, 2005

WDAM Home
coreAdsCreate('SpH490x25', 'aff');

February 2, 2005
New Anti-Thames Vote in USM Senate

Email to a Friend

Printer Friendly Version

coreAdsCreate('180x150', 'aff');

The USM Faculty Senate says it wants a new university president.

The Faculty Senate voted 39-to-2 Wednesday night for a motion asking the College Board to begin a national search this spring to find a successor to Shelby Thames.

In a letter that will be sent to the College Board Thursday, the Faculty Senate says the Thames administration has been marked by controversy and misjudgments, and that "we believe a second four-year term for Dr. Thames is not in the best interest of USM or higher education in Mississippi."

Thames' four-year term is currently set to conclude in May 2006.

Faculty Senate President David Beckett says a vote from that group is the equivalent of a vote from the whole faculty.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Hattiesburg American

Faculty Senate calls for Thames to be replaced
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050202/NEWS01/50202004

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Not only SFT, but remove DANA, Malone, Mader, Grimes, Lassen, and others I may have temporarily forgotten.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

The title I want to hear:

Faculty Senate SPANKS Shelby Thames

Date: Feb 2, 2005

The resolution that was passed today is actually very reasonable. Factoring in the time to solicit applications, screen them, interview, etc., if IHL doesn't begin the process shortly it will end up with the same kind of farce we saw 2 1/2 years ago.

Too bad Klumb has already announced that the board won't listen to this.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Who were the "2" in the "39-2" vote? Anyone know?

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: cialis
"Who were the "2" in the "39-2" vote? Anyone know?"

Everybody knows.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: The Shadow
"

Everybody knows."

"I" don't know!!!

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"The resolution that was passed today is actually very reasonable. Factoring in the time to solicit applications, screen them, interview, etc., if IHL doesn't begin the process shortly it will end up with the same kind of farce we saw 2 1/2 years ago. Too bad Klumb has already announced that the board won't listen to this."

Invictus, I didn't read that in Klumb's statement. He said there was no one to replace SFT NOW. IHL searches take about a year. They have ample time to begin the advertisements, collect resumes during the summer, conduct interviews in the fall and make a selection in the spring. Let's see what happens once the board reads the letter and deliberates on the issues and the options they have left.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

I've put a bulletin about the 39-2 vote on Liberty and Power, whose blogging software seems to have been restored to health.

http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/9974.html

The Board could replace Thames on an interim basis well before the Spring semester is out. But having an end in sight will give USM a chance to recover.

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Does the 39-2 vote mean that 39 faculty senators did not get raises and do not make more than they did in 2002, while 2 senators did get raises and thusly make more than they did then?

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Shadow,

Unless the resolution passed via secret ballot, there's no reason not to publish the names of the 2 Senators who voted against it.

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Thamesian Interpretation
"Does the 39-2 vote mean that 39 faculty senators did not get raises and do not make more than they did in 2002, while 2 senators did get raises and thusly make more than they did then?"

Money, Money, Money! That is all we want! Feed Us! FEEED USSSS! We will be quiet if you simply FEEED USSS!

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Shadow, Unless the resolution passed via secret ballot, there's no reason not to publish the names of the 2 Senators who voted against it. Robert Campbell"

It was a secret ballot.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Shadow, Unless the resolution passed via secret ballot, there's no reason not to publish the names of the 2 Senators who voted against it. Robert Campbell"

Robert and Shadow, all the ballots were secret.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

A hearty dose of approbation is due our faculty and their Senate. In a move that exemplifies academic leadership, they have exercised a reasonable approach and avoided the inflammatory "No Confidence" language that is no less signaled by their resolution. The IHL board has no grounds on which to accuse the faculty of anything other than a sensible proposal to end the insanity.

Now that the Faculty Senate has set the example, if Walt Cain and crew have even a shred of common sense, decency and courage, they will act with all due speed to pass a resolution affirming the Faculty Senate's statement. This is the sort of united front that clearly must be put forward for the effort to succeed.

As a student, I call on the SGA to step up to the plate and act in the interests of its constituency. The alumni association shouldn't be far behind them, either.

Thank you, senators, for doing the hard thing, the right thing. Speak truth to power!