​The Executive Committee of the State University of New York’s University Faculty Senate strongly condemns the targeted violence of March 16. We call for solidarity with Asian, Asian American, and Pacific Islander communities in Atlanta and across the nation. We must work to create a world that is safe and just for everyone. 
  That the murder of eight people, including six Asian American women, is not universally acknowledged as a hate crime demonstrates the need for continuing education about the diverse histories of Asian American and Pacific Islander communities and Diasporas in the United States. 
  It should go without saying that racism, xenophobia, and misogyny have no place in our educational institutions. We continue to advocate for diversity, equity, inclusion, anti-racism, and social justice in formal and informal settings, in hiring and in retention, in curricula and pedagogies. 
  Working together, our SUNY communities can become the change we want to see and help bend the arc of justice. SUNY and UFS will be judged by our actions and results. 

Cephas Archie, Chief Equity Officer, City of Rochester, NY
Timothy W. Gerken, Associate Professor of Humanities, SUNY Morrisville
Sinikka Grant, Associate Professor of English, SUNY Cobleskill
Walter E. Little, Professor of Anthropology, University at Albany, SUNY

​​Systemic racism and poverty are endemic in the United States. This is playing out in high relief across the country in protests against police brutality. George Floyd’s murder by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was just the latest in a constant stream of police overreach and abuses that resulted in injuries and deaths. The repeated documentation of such unjustifiable behaviors has become commonplace in recent years, and as a nation we must recommit to actions that drive systemic change.Higher education is one of many institutions involved with responding to and offering suggestions for those affected by this violence. All institutions are structurally limited, so we need diverse approaches. We believe university and college Criminal Justice programs can play a significant role in developing safer and healthier policing practices.
Fatal police shootings are increasing annually, and Blacks are killed at disproportionately higher rates than Whites. Black men are 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police than White men. Most concerning is that “for young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.” However, it is important to remember that all minoritized citizens have a greater chance of being injured or killed by police use of force than White citizens.

For nearly two decades, Joe Hildreth has curated exhibitions of artwork created by students across the system, including the annual SUNY Student Art Exhibition and Best of SUNY competition at SUNY Plaza.
Over the years, Joe has sought to expand the list of shows into public spaces in an effort to increase exposure for SUNY’s high quality art programs. At times, SUNY Student Art shows have been hosted by the Governor’s office in Washington D.C., the New York State Museum, and the Albany International Airport. A year ago, Joe curated a remarkable six, simultaneous exhibitions. He installs every piece at every location, a physically grueling task that can take up to three days.
In August Joe is curating a Virtual Abstract Art Exhibition on the SUNY System Art web page. The page currently hosts a Virtual Pride Exhibition he curated. For Joe, these exhibitions are a labor of love, providing visual evidence of the wealth of talent in the SUNY System.
“Each work is a clear snapshot of what’s on a student’s mind, their concerns, fears, and hopes, and as a single person’s voice, is worthy of attention,” he said.
Joe urges viewers to give all student artworks the attention they deserve. “There is something the student wants to say, and if you give it time, you will be able to hear it,” he said.
A longtime professor of art at SUNY Potsdam, Joe became interested in faculty governance, eventually serving as president of the SUNY Faculty Senate, a position he held from 2001 to 2005.
Today, as professor emeritus, he has lifetime access to the art facilities at SUNY Potsdam, where he continues to create works in his preferred media: intaglio printing and stone lithography, both complex processes that demand strong analytic skills. The making of art, particularly drawing, was one of his favorite childhood activities.
He was equally interested in the natural world. He started college as a pre-med major, but graduated with an MFA in printmaking and a minor in painting. Not surprisingly, Joe draws his artistic inspiration from the natural world, biological objects and the surrounding landscapes.
Reprinted with permission from the SUNY System Newsletter. 
​

The SUNY University Faculty Senate values everyone, even though it is asking your campus for less money for you.
 
Maybe that sounds odd. Let me explain. UFS “charges” each campus a fee for each senator to cover various costs and expenses. In these tight financial times, we think that the fee might be a hindrance for some campuses to fully participate. Since we want everyone to be as fully involved as possible, the Executive Committee unanimously agreed to lower the fee, which means we value senator so much that we’re trying to make them more valuable (by charging less) to their home campuses during this pandemic.
 
Your campus pays UFS $6,000 per senator. We use those monies to fund all of our operations (save our office manager’s salary + benefits). To wit, senator charges cover

•   Our fall planning meeting (about 120 people)
•   Our three plenaries (about 80 people each plenary)
•   Our summer planning meeting (about 30 people)

 
We help sponsor (read: we fund):

•   The SUNY Undergraduate Research Conference
•   Travel of the president and vice president when they represent the Senate across SUNY spaces (not much travel in these coronavirus days).
•   Travel of  committee liaisons
•   Travel for CGLs to attend our plenaries

 
To put this in context, our costs, therefore our senator charge, had been going up incrementally, and then in the last recession (remember 2008?), we cut back the per-senator charge to $4,000 because we had lots of money in our stabilization account, in excess of $100,000. When Pete Knuepfer was president the funds were being depleted at a somewhat alarming rate because our receivables (also known as campus charges) was nowhere near our actual expenses; we drew about $20,000 each year from the fund. This was part of the master plan to spend down our monies and hover around $25,000 for rainy days.
  
We also put $25,000 toward the purchase of a car so we could get the car of our dreams rather than whatever SUNY would give us from the motor pool. (For the record: a 2017 Subaru Legacy Sedan, with the critical-in-Upstate-NY all-wheel drive).
 
We needed a new car for those 2,500 miles per month, but cash was running low. So, as the stabilization funds continued to dwindle, we met with SUNY’s budget people and discussed incrementally ramping our per-senator charge back up so that we'd go from $4,000 to $6,000 over a period of years, increasing by $300 per year, starting is 2017-18. Then, as our stabilization fund dipped dangerously low, all parties agreed to increase our per senator charge sooner than later. This means that last year (2019-2020) our campus charge increased from $4,800 to $6,000.
 
 
Fast forward to today, when every campus (and System Administration) is looking for any and all possible ways to save money. We do not know what the future will bring regarding travel. If we cannot all attend meetings in a common physical space we’ll stream it (at an increase in AV costs). Other expenses will increase both for us and the host campus. And, at least for this year with those stringent travel restrictions on our campuses, UFS will need to pick up the costs for everyone traveling to a plenary. (Normally we only cover costs for CGLs plus non-senator Executive Committee members.)
 
So, for the coming year your campus charge is $4,500, not $6,000.
 
Your value to UFS? Priceless!

​Leadership changes happen all the time in higher education, and with each change comes a chance to make a choice: Do we continue down the “because we’ve always done it this way” road, or do we embrace the moment and let the winds of change freshen things? Do we learn from successes and failures of others?

The imminent departure of Chancellor Kristina Johnson offers the State University of New York Board of Trustees a rare opportunity to engage us all. In a time of unprecedented emotional, physical and fiscal challenges facing higher education the board’s process for selecting Chancellor Johnson’s successor needs to be open and transparent. Such a process will not only let SUNY identify the best possible candidate(s), but also give the next chancellor a greater chance at success with a broad coalition of engaged partners. A search overseen by a large enough committee represents the interests and experiences of key constituencies within and outside SUNY.

Secrecy has increasingly become the modus operandi of search committees, particularly for senior leaders. I respect the need for protecting potential candidates because most have to be encouraged to apply (the reason we use search firms), and they do not want to risk their current position. So early stages of the search must be done in confidence.
On the other hand, when a final group of candidates has been identified by the search committee it is important that candidates be vetted beyond the search committee so a broader cross-section of parties can offer their own insights into the finalists. More eyes may see something about candidates that may not have been clear to the search committee.

​
Two examples make my point:

First, I was president of UFS when Dr. Johnson was selected to be the 13th chancellor, and I served on the search committee that was established to recommend candidates to the Board of Trustees. (The other faculty member on the committee was the president of the Faculty Council of Community Colleges.) The committee had 22 members, of which eight were members of the board (including the two faculty trustees and the student trustee), five were presidents of SUNY institutions (representing the full range of types of campuses in the system), and the other nine were from the general public and included some prominent alumni, academic, business, and political leaders (though no elected officials). 

While this was certainly a broadly based group, it was also large enough that a single voice sometimes could be lost. SUNY board and search committee Chair H. Carl McCall, however, ensured that all members could participate at whatever level their schedules and commitments allowed.
 
The committee reached strong consensus on final candidates, independent of any significant external influence, though cognizant of the political realities in a state like New York. Ultimately a single candidate emerged as other finalists withdrew from consideration, as is often the case.
 
The principal criticism I have of the process was that, in the final analysis, there was little opportunity for voices outside the committee to be heard as finalists were being considered. I assert that it can be feasible to involve more people in evaluation of candidates and still retain confidentiality (assuming, of course, that those who meet with finalists adhere to confidentiality agreements).

Second, Contrast that experience with what occurred in the presidential search at the University of Wisconsin system in 2019-20. There, the search committee was small, consisting only of members of the UW regents (their board of trustees), including the student regent, and campus chancellors (i.e., presidents). Faculty and outside voices were absent, despite urging from the governor and other sources that the committee be more representative. Following a national search, Jim Johnsen, then president of the University of Alaska system, was announced as sole finalist. The statement from the Board of Regents indicated that other finalists had withdrawn from consideration, again as is commonly done when it is clear which candidate has the board’s backing. However, in this case the choice of the search committee and Board of Regents was an academic with a very checkered history in Alaska. Faculty voted no confidence in his leadership in 2017, and both faculty and students voted no confidence in his leadership in 2019. I can only surmise that the lack of additional voices at the table led to the choice of a candidate who would be unlikely to meet with broad approval from faculty. Indeed, Dr. Johnsen’s candidacy lasted only a few days after he was announced as sole finalist, as he withdrew subsequent to outcry from faculty.
​
The important lesson here, I believe, is that for a system leader to enter with broad backing and the highest likelihood of success, the search process must be as broadly based as possible. That means a broad committee, yes, but also a mechanism at the finalist stage to provide sufficient review by key constituencies before the SUNY Board of Trustees makes its final decision. This needs to be done in a way that protects the confidentiality of candidates, so access beyond the search committee and the board does need to be limited. And, because we are a state system, the next chancellor needs to be acceptable within the seats of political power.

Timothy W. Gerken, PhD
Chair of the UFS Committee on Equity, Inclusion, and Diversity
Associate Professor of Humanities
SUNY Morrisville

The University Faculty Senate of the State University of New York, through a recently passed resolution, has asked Chancellor Kristina Johnson to join a long list of colleges and universities that have made standardized tests (i.e. SAT, ACT, GRE) optional for admissions. If adopted, SUNY would become the first system of higher education to make such a move.

While UFS resolutions do not create policy, they do advocate for positions that the body believes will benefit SUNY. The UFS resolution supports the 2015 SUNY Board of Trustees Diversity Resolution and recent guidance from Governor Andrew Cuomo, which directed the board to “reexamine” its “existing plans to ensure these plans are furthering New York’s goals of diversity and inclusion.”