Senator Lai expressed a concern with the resolution shifting responsibility to CPE, and asked, "What is the endgame?"

Senator Hannemann noted that the last presidential search in 2017 included only one faculty member on the search committee. Perhaps we also need a resolution calling for at least two faculty representatives on this year's search committee.

LeChrista Finn asked what this resolution is trying to accomplish.

Senator Grimes responded that it was to encourage CPE to see changes in procedures and composition of the board and leaves exactly what those measures would be up to CPE and the governor.

Dr. Finn asked how the text of the resolution came about, and Senator Collum responded that he had drafted the text at the request of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and submitted it to the Professional Concerns Committee for consideration.

A student asked if the student voice would be heard in this process, and Senator Lai responded that search committees should always have student representation.

Peter Smith expressed a concern that the resolution text as submitted did not mention the current administration and its role in KSU’s financial crisis. He noted that the recent dismissal of the former Staff Regent has already resulted in a lawsuit against the university that will probably require a very large financial settlement. He suggested that perhaps a senator could propose a friendly amendment to add “and the current administration” after “Board of Regents” in the fourth paragraph. Senator Hannemann made a motion to include that friendly amendment.

The amendment was put to a vote of the senators and was accepted by a vote of 15 for, two against and two absentions. So the resolution text was amended.

LeChrista Finn expressed a concern that no one has addressed compromised procedures among faculty colleagues in a recent election.

Senator Stratton noted that he had spoken with Dr. Finn about this concern and the Professional Concerns Committee would be looking at it.

A student inquired to whom “the current administration” referred. Peter Smith responded that this referred to Acting President Stamps and that pending lawsuits have placed the university in serious financial liability.

Senator Ballard-Kang asked if the resolution would be put to a vote of the Senate or the entire faculty. Senator Collum replied that the current motion would be an action voted only by the Faculty Senate in its role of representing the full faculty.

Dr. Finn asked if there could be some process for feedback from the full faculty.

President Clay agreed that this could be possible.

Senator Novelo said that one way for all faculty to have input is to follow the publicly posted minutes of the Senate and its committees and contact their representatives with their concerns.

We all have a role to play in improving communication. One of my constituents has expressed to me a concern about the lack of communication from the upper administration. This environment does not foster communication and trust.

Senator Hannemann said the Senate had hoped for feedback from this meeting. Perhaps action should be postponed to get more feedback from constituents.

Senator Grimes said that Dr. Finn raised vaolid concerns. We should get views from as many faculty members as possible, and perhaps also get feedback about a possible second resolution to address the issue of a presidential search committee.

A student expressed the concern that the interests of students be considered in these discussions.