Tuesday, January 28, 2014

Can't Shut Down the Blog, but maybe the Faculty Senate...


TO:            Chicago State University Faculty

FROM:      Wayne D. Watson

DATE:       January 28, 2014

RE:             Faculty Senate – Constitution and Actions         

The University greatly appreciates a functioning Faculty Senate and the value it provides to the overall campus.  Accordingly, as a follow-up to the correspondence dated October 31, 2013, regarding the Faculty Senate not operating in accordance with its 2011 Constitution as a duly constituted University organization, it is important to communicate the status of this issue to the general faculty body of CSU.  The Faculty Senate has failed to respond and comply with the previous requests made during meetings with the executive team and through University correspondence throughout the Fall 2013 semester.

These concerns arise out of the September 20, 2011 Faculty Senate meeting where the Senate suspended the rules without following the requirements of the Faculty Senate’s 2011 Constitution and changed the calculus for representation on the Faculty Senate.  This action changed the Faculty Senate’s membership representation structure prescribed by its Constitution.  Since the October 2013 correspondence, a new document purported to be the Faculty Senate’s Constitution was placed on the Faculty Senate’s website.  Article IX of the Faculty Senate’s 2011 Constitution states:

“Proposed amendments shall be presented in writing to the members of the Senate at least one week in advance of a regularly scheduled meeting or at least two weeks in advance of a special meeting during the academic year.  Approval by a two-thirds majority of the Senate members present at a duly-convened meeting at which a quorum is present shall be required for submission to the University Faculty for consideration.  Voting by the University Faculty as described in Article III shall be by ballot.  Approval by a two-thirds majority of the ballots returned shall be required for passage and submission the University President for review and approval.  Following review and approval by the President, each amendment shall be submitted to the Board of Trustees for review.” 

The proposed amendments to the Faculty Senate’s Constitution have no effect until the process outlined in the 2011 Constitution is followed.  The Faculty Senate has untilFebruary 26, 2014, which is 21 days from the date of this memorandum, to follow the process above to make amendments as prescribed in the Faculty Senate’s 2011 Constitution. The Faculty Senate will not be recognized as a University committee if it does not comply with its 2011 Constitution by February 26, 2014.  Should the Faculty Senate decline to take the appropriate action by the requested date, the University encourages the faculty-at-large to make a determination as to how it wishes to participate in the governance of the University.

Again, the work of the Faculty Senate is of great value to the University since it is a mechanism that should promote inclusiveness and shared governance. In this vein, the Faculty Senate must comply with the mandates dictated by its Constitution, which permits all eligible faculty to vote on significant amendments to the Faculty Senate Constitution.  We look forward to the timely resolution of this issue, so that we can continue to move forward with the great work of this institution.  The administration is confident that by working together, we can overcome these hurdles.

cc:     CSU Deans

Wayne Watson, Ph.D.
Chicago State University
9501 S. King Drive
Cook Administration / #313
Chicago, IL  60628


  1. So Watson can't answer questions about his violation of university and state hiring policies, but he can meddle in the Faculty Senate's affairs over a technicality in its constitution. What a lion of courage and integrity he is. More a weasel. Has the little man thought through what happens to Senate committees?

    One of the more depressing aspects of this sorry show is the banality of Watson's impotent attempts to silence his critics.

    1. But look how courageous he was to actually put his name on the memorandum. This is quite a contrast to his usual practice of cowering behind a phalanx of politicians, ministers and attorneys.

  2. Can someone please a bit of context for all those not at CSU in 2011?

    1. OK. In 2010 Watson ordered apparently pointless reorganizations of two colleges, Education and Arts and Sciences. Because he promised more changes to come and because the various departments were in chaos, the senate attempted to rectify the situation by suspending the rules and changing the representation from by department to by discipline. This was done in September 2011. For more than two years, this configuration existed without a peep from the administration and suddenly in September-October 2013 they decided to pursue a strategy of attempting to discredit the senate by asserting that it had not followed its own constitution. This is where the issue stands at this point.

  3. Surely, Watson is in violation of university and state hiring policies and reward system for friends which has caused a significant lost of state (taxpayers) funds. Since these decisions were intentional one would think his actions were criminal and he should be prosecuted. Why not take that action?

    1. Government agencies that are supposed to monitor these kind of violations have turned a blind eye over the past few years. Try taking this to the CSU ethics officer on campus--another FOW (friend of Wayne) and see how far it will go. The government agencies are complicit and entrenched in political influence --IBHE, HLC interpret their roles in a narrow way and see some of our issues as "internal matters." Gov Quinn lets Emil Jones call the shots down here and so Watson has a board of trustees that are all politically connected and will not do anything against him (you saw what happened last year to the Board of Trustees when they exercised their supposed right to rule over the president). There may be external agencies or even federal agencies, but the state of ILL is corrupt and compromised. The point here is to keep shining a light on the corruption and its resulting inept leadership. In 10 years when someone finally realizes what a cesspool this is they can't say the faculty of CSU did not care and had tried to work against the corruption.