California Faculty Association - LA Chapter

Laurence K. Gould, Jr., Chair
Dee Dee Myers, Vice Chair
Trustees of the California State University

A Response to the Board of Trustees Evaluation of Chancellor Charles B. 
Reed

Dear Mr. Gould and Ms. Myers:

Please convey to members of the Board of Trustees the faculty's deep 
disappointment with your recent evaluation of Chancellor Reed. The 
unqualified praise for the Chancellor expressed in your letter has 
generated a sense of betrayal among faculty who took the evaluation 
process quite seriously and addressed their concerns to you. Faculty 
members are dismayed that your letter ignored their input, attributed 
faculty achievements to actions of the Chancellor, and obscured the 
reality of Mr. Reed's relations with CSU faculty.

Chancellor Reed's evaluation ignores stacks of letters and strings of 
email messages written in response to your calls for faculty input and 
copied to CFA. It is inconceivable that a careful reading of these 
thoughtful, thorough reviews could leave a Board dedicated to the future 
of the CSU unaffected. It is certainly inconceivable that such detailed 
and extensive solicited assessment of performance would be ignored in any 
legitimate faculty review.

It is especially disturbing to see Chancellor Reed given sole credit for 
projects conceptualized, initiated, and implemented by the faculty. Our 
analysis and objections led to the termination of CETI, teacher 
preparation has long been one of the CSU's highest priorities, and 
partnerships with K-12 education reflect faculty commitment not 
administrative zeal. The Chancellor oversaw the addition of tens of 
thousands of students without committing resources to hire sufficient 
tenure-track faculty to teach them. As a result, working conditions for 
all faculty have deteriorated. Similarly, the Chancellor committed the 
University to year-round operations without adequate funding, leaving 
faculty to sort out many of the details. It is telling that while the 
system's budget has increased, the percentage of the budget devoted to 
instruction has steadily decreased.

At the end of your letter, you provide a list of the Board's goals for 
Mr. Reed to pursue over the next three years. Faculty - the intellectual 
center of the University - rank last! Asking Chancellor Reed to "enhance 
communications and consultation with faculty" lacks the specificity 
expected in even the most cursory of reviews. Requiring that he "plan 
effectively for anticipated faculty hirings" is similarly vague and akin 
to asking one to begin repairs on the dam after flooding has begun. A 
wise Chancellor would plan for faculty first. A concerned Board would 
acknowledge the faculty input in preparing such an evaluation.

It saddens us to send this letter, but we have felt it necessary to 
communicate with you as honestly as the faculty who participated in the 
review process did. It is our belief that such communication is essential 
for the trustees, administrators, and faculty to have a relationship that 
is good for the CSU.

Sincerely,

Susan Meisenhelder, President

Lillian Taiz, Vice President

Patricia Evridge Hill, Secretary

James H. May, Treasurer

Mark O. Sekelick, Associate Vice President, North

G. Nanjundappa, Associate Vice President, South

Elizabeth Hoffman, Associate Vice President, Lecturers