news story / By Heidi Walters

No Confidence

160-plus instructors signal their disfavor with HSU president

(May 15, 2008)  As the academic year draws to a close this week and droves of parents flood to town to collect their scholars, some of these visitors, leafing through a copy of Humboldt State University’s newspaper, theLumberjack, or, perhaps, this newspaper, might be troubled by a certain full-page ad.

The ad, which first appeared in last week’s Lumberjack — fittingly, in the Sports section — features a bold headline that leaves one with no doubt that a pitched battle has begun: “A Petition of Past and Present HSU Faculty Affirming No Confidence in President Rollin C. Richmond.”

GALLERY >

Below the heading, in parentheses, lies the taunt: “(addressed to the California State Senate, Assembly, Secretary of Education & Governor, & the CSU Chancellor & Board of Trustees).” It is not, that is to say, addressed to the local institutional establishment, but rather shoots long to land squarely at the state muckety-mucks’ feet.

Followed by that are assorted statements attributed to President Richmond. And then there is a brief statement in explanation of the petition’s existence that begins, “Out of grave concern for the future direction of our university, and for a variety of reasons too numerous to list and too notorious to require further documentation here …”

But it’s what comes after all of that which most astonishes: the signatures of 160 former and current HSU instructors, including some rather prominent ones valued for their expertise in, say, economics (Steve Hackett) or for turning a poetic phrase (Jerry Martien), for just a couple of examples, as well as a number of department heads and more than 40 professors emeritus. And, since the ad first ran, several more have signed on, reports a faculty member. The signers span the range of disciplines.

For perspective: According to latest stats, provided by Paul Mann of HSU public relations, the university employed 518 instructors in 2007: 242 lecturers and 276 tenured/tenure track faculty.

There’s been a long lead-in to this moment, one faculty activist explained to the Journal last week while begging that he not be quoted — he didn’t want to steal the show. He said the whole ball got rolling last September at a meeting of the Academic Senate during which a number of faculty said they wanted a vote of no confidence in Richmond. The Senate demurred, after which a faculty member started a blog in which he polled instructors about their degree of confidence in the president. “The majority of the faculty said they had no confidence,” said our source. The Senate met again, and then sent out its own poll in October. Again, “no confidence” seemed to prevail.

Richmond could not be reached for comment late last week — Mann said it’s best to provide him with 48 to 72 hours advance notice if one wants him to get a comment from or arrange an interview with the President. But Mann had this to say in an e-mail:

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE >SHARE