Despite the tone of anger expressed by Faculty Senate members over the bureaucratic means of the Chancellor’s Office and Board of Regents, there was no official vote taken on members’ confidence in the BOR.

Senate member Rodolphe J. De Seife said he wanted to bring forth the resolution that the senate design a letter of concern over the Chancellor’s Office, despite the delay senate discussion would cause.

De Seife said he had no pride of authorship, and much of his resolution had been taken from a similar one designed at Southern Illinois University to explore the successfulness of its Chancellor’s Office.

The Chancellor’s Office started off as a coordinating office years ago. It has mushroomed into an office that needs a chancellor, seven vice chancellors, deputy vice-chancellors, assistants to the deputy vice-chancellors and two lawyers, whereas before it needed only two people, he said.

“If we need a Chancellor’s Office then so be it, but we have to reorganize the machinery behind it,” De Seife said.

De Seife said faculty members should be on BOR evaluation committees on a formal basis. Telling universities they don’t have enough people who know about management is lunacy, he said.

“There are more faculty members that know more about management rather than paper shuffling, which is what these people do,” he said.

Senate member Bob Suchner said he didn’t think the resolution stated what De Seife had said.

“The resolution calls for a meaningful evaluation which I think the Chancellor’s Office will interpret as what they’re doing already,” he said.

Member Arra Garab called for a “meaty expository” stating what the senate really meant.

J. Carroll Moody, president of the faculty senate, was given the authority to construct an ad hoc committee to construct a resolution to be brought forward at the next faculty senate meeting.