After several weeks of internal unrest, the UC Academic Senate
is set to hold a special meeting on Monday to decide whether to
remove its top official.
The Academic Senate, which represents and sets policy for the
15,000 University of California faculty members at all 10 campuses,
gave Senate Chair Clifford Brunk a vote of no confidence last
month, which prompted senate members to schedule Monday’s
meeting in order to determine if any actions will be taken to
facilitate Brunk’s removal.
If the senate does vote to oust Brunk, it will be the first time
a senate chair has been removed from office.
The action comes amid allegations that Brunk, a UCLA biology
professor, has allowed his personal views to interfere with his
senate duties. In so doing, some senate officials say, Brunk has
misrepresented the faculty’s views on important issues to the
UC Board of Regents and other executive bodies.
On the advice of his attorney, Brunk declined to comment on the
proceedings, but he issued a statement in which he asserts that the
complexity of the issues he has dealt with as senate chair makes it
impossible to please all of the faculty members he represents.
“Representing the UC faculty fairly and accurately to the
administration, … to the Regents and to the public is a very
difficult task. I take this responsibility very seriously and I
believe I have performed this job very well,” he said in the
statement.
After concerns began to surface surrounding Brunk’s
treatment of senate staff members, the Academic Council, the
senate’s executive wing, on Feb. 22 issued a vote of no
confidence in Brunk’s leadership ability.
Reports in several major newspapers, including the San Francisco
Chronicle, suggest that one of the primary reasons for the vote was
the senate’s disapproval of Brunk’s handling of the
recent UC executive compensation investigations.
In an e-mail written Tuesday by UC Berkeley Academic Senate
Chair Alice Agogino and distributed to members of Berkeley’s
Academic Senate, Agogino said the compensation issue alone would
not be enough to lead her to vote out the senate chair and that the
actions taken by the senate involve “broad based
concerns” about Brunk’s leadership.
Academic Senate Vice Chair John Oakley, who would replace Brunk
if he is removed, said since the situation involves
“confidential personnel matters,” he would not comment
specifically on the proceedings. But Oakley said the senate is
taking appropriate steps to deal with the problem.
“It’s a delicate matter,” Oakley said.
“There appears to be a rather messy problem, and rather than
cover it up, the senate is doing its best to deal with
it.”
In a series of telephone calls placed Wednesday and Thursday, 24
members of the Academic Senate did not return calls or declined to
comment specifically on Monday’s vote, but several alluded to
the problem being larger than it appears on the surface.
“This would not be going on if there weren’t very
serious problems and this has been investigated very thoroughly by
the Academic Senate,” said Stan Glantz, a UC San Francisco
professor and member of the Academic Council.
Brunk’s term as chair is set to expire on Aug. 31.