Bullying a female student athlete that dude has some issues.. I would really like to ask him why does he think belittling a youth in public makes things better..

PurpleOut said:

---

I'm getting sick of this.

I've been viewing this as a 50/50 issue since it started becoming public. Obviously there is a huge problem with Gordon and the raise that he was given and "didn't accept." And if more comes to light from these audits that he's messed up with budgets and other things...then by all means, he deserves to go if that is what's best for everyone.

But the constant berating and negativity that comes from our professors towards athletics and overall change is mind boggling. I think it most certainly has a lot to do with faculty and staff that have been here for a long time and not happy that things are being changed or they don't like things that don't go their way. Exactly why we needed SO much changed inside the athletic department.

We've all seen it, ever since I started school in 2002. The professors I had as a majority seemed to just dislike the entire school, aside from those anti-athletic people. For a professor to call out a student athlete like that for no reason is completely uncalled for, and I hope they too get called out for it.

---

I wish I was closer to the situation. My take on it is that the same 20% of professors make a TON of noise about these issues. Balancing a budget with a shrinking pool of students is a challenge.

Nobody will take on the elephant in the room. More and more kids want to stay close to home for school. Other than the large schools (A&M, UT, Tech) have the brand to pull large numbers of kids to a campus 2-1/2 hours from any major city. We (SFA) needs to adjust. Lamar adjusted years ago and built a robust online presence. We have not adjusted. I think Gordon is doing what he can. But with headwinds in his face our alumni need to be more engaged in our mutual interest ,,, seeing SFA grow and prosper. Most of us on this forum support SFA wholesale. We have to 3X, 5X, 10X that support. Axe 'Em Jacks.

PurpleOut said:

---

I've seen so many people on social media that think there haven't been any athletic budget cuts.

Here’s the problem at SFA 👇
It’s not about the 85k raise.
It’s about the fact that budgets were cut in every single department except for athletics.

— cerena ✨ (@cerenahaefs) September 12, 2021

---

Alternative facts? This is so completely untrue. There are fewer people doing more work in the athletic department. The athletic budget has been significantly reduced.

The chair-elect of the Faculty Senate has stated publicly that he is going after athletics next.

SFAJack_76 said:

---

PurpleOut said:

---

I've seen so many people on social media that think there haven't been any athletic budget cuts.

Here’s the problem at SFA 👇
It’s not about the 85k raise.
It’s about the fact that budgets were cut in every single department except for athletics.

— cerena ✨ (@cerenahaefs) September 12, 2021

---

Alternative facts? This is so completely untrue. There are fewer people doing more work in the athletic department. The athletic budget has been significantly reduced.

---

Let's get those numbers then so we can spread them around.

Awesome.

SFAJack_76 said:

---

The chair-elect of the Faculty Senate has stated publicly that he is going after athletics next.

---

Who is the chair?

sfajack05 said:

---

SFAJack_76 said:

---

The chair-elect of the Faculty Senate has stated publicly that he is going after athletics next.

---

Who is the chair?

---

https://www.sfasu.edu/facsenate/roster_bios.asp

SFAJack_76 said:

---

sfajack05 said:

---

SFAJack_76 said:

---

The chair-elect of the Faculty Senate has stated publicly that he is going after athletics next.

---

Who is the chair?

---

https://www.sfasu.edu/facsenate/roster_bios.asp

---

Thanks. I wanted to try to find what he said about athletics.

PurpleOut said:

---

Is the newest budget available online?

---

Here you go:

https://www.sfasu.edu/budget

If you want to compare the past three years.

From The Pine Log

The Board of Regents held a special meeting on Sept. 12 addressing community concerns regarding the Board itself, President Scott Gordon and the University budget.


In a meeting with President Scott Gordon on Sept. 12, the Board of Regents passed an action titled, "Change to Fiscal Year '22 Annual Audit Plan for External Audit Services," to begin addressing concerns raised about the Board of Regents, Gordon and the University's budget.

This change would authorize the chief executive officer "to proceed with obtaining external audit services relating to the financial condition and budget of the University, including an external review of the university statement of net position and agreed upon procedures of key ratios and budget analysis," according to Board of Regents member Robert Flores during the Sunday Zoom meeting.

Board of Regents Chairperson Karen Gantt also introduced a special committee called the "University Financial Council," and appointed Flores as council chair. Immediate members elected by Gantt include the interim finance and administration vice president, the University Budget Council chair, the budget directors and the controller as immediate members. Other members will be determined later.

These decisions were reached in an effort to respond to concerns previously addressed in several meetings with the Faculty Senate, Department Chairs and Staff Council during "The Listening Tour," as Gantt described it.

"Overall, my impressions from 'The Listening Tour' is that the faculty and staff do not feel listened to, or involved or considered in decision making," Gantt said. "They don't feel like they have a voice. They feel and express that the administrative arm, whichever it may be that applies to them, has been dismissive to them."

According to Gantt, the feelings expressed by faculty regarding the Board follow the main themes that the "Board of Regents is perceived to be and is in fact inaccessible and unapproachable."

"We discussed the need to find an effective and appropriate communication channel on substantive issues on University business," Gantt said. "We also discussed that we are all people, and no Board member or anyone else on campus should ever be off-limits for casual conversations and basic human communication, ever."

Feelings were also expressed by faculty and staff addressing Gordon during "The Listening Tour," according to Gantt.

"It was expressed that Dr. Gordon has an inability to take criticism in a healthy way, that his leadership style is "authoritarian" [and] the word "bully" was used frequently," Gantt said. "It was stated that there was a chilling effect on shared governance. It was expressed that [Gordon] takes credit for others' work when it is successful, but has no accountability when an initiative is unsuccessful."

Regarding topics surrounding the budget, faculty indicated that "people do not know how much money is in their budget, they don't have an understanding of why that can't be more clearly presented to them and that if the response is that the budget's complicated, that the buck stops at the Board of Regents on the budget," Gantt said in the Zoom meeting.

"It's the Board of Regents' responsibility to have a full understanding of the budget; and if the Board is voting on the budget, then it shouldn't be described as a complicated document, but one that is conveyed easily across the campus community," Gantt said.

The Board plans "to continue to evaluate the issues that have been raised."

"The Board of Regents is greatly concerned about the information recently discussed, the action taken by the faculty senate and statements made by other constituencies on campus," Gantt said. "We take these concerns seriously."

Also Pine Log Commentary

In the past few weeks, President Scott Gordon and the Board of Regents have become hot topics around campus due to budget issues. After it was revealed that Gordon had accepted, and later returned, an $85,000 raise, the SFA community was enraged. But while the issue is being handled, SFA administration has mainly been attempting to communicate with the faculty of the University. Students deserve the same degree of communication from the SFA administration regarding these ongoing issues.

After the raise was first brought to the community's attention through Facebook, Gordon sent out an email to faculty stating the raise would be returned. Both students and faculty were able to view the Facebook post; however, only one party was sent the email. Students only knew of the raise return if their professors informed them. This is creating a sense of distrust within the SFA community, and many students and parents are angered. Students now feel that not only is their education not valued anymore, but neither are they.

On Sept. 8, the Faculty Senate met with the Board of Regents Chair Karen Gantt. The Faculty Senate discussed the situation and came to a unanimous vote of no confidence for Gordon's presidency. It was only after this vote was made that an email was sent out to students about the situation the following day. The email addressed the vote made by the Faculty Senate but did not directly say what the vote was. It's unfair that students weren't even aware of the meeting, and then weren't even told directly what the vote was. Instead of being told facts, students were made promises.

Even though Gordon returned the money, it was only brought to the attention of the faculty that he did. Students found out thanks to news releases or their professors. Throughout the whole process, students have mainly been left in the dark only receiving emails full of apologies instead of reports.

The Board of Regents and the President need to be more transparent with students, considering that it is their education that lies on the line. Having transparency will provoke less anger and will help students trust SFA administration throughout everything going on.

Any commentary ? Thoughts ? Is the faculty "overplaying" the situation?

I recognized one of my Eng profs from 20 years ago...he does stuff with History, too. I've worked in different departments and stayed in contact with some profs until about 5 yrs ago. Anyway, I've never heard any prof talk publicly or privately about a hostile working environment/retaliation at such a level and across disciplines. To hear that from my old prof was very jarring.

Couple that with the experience a former SFA faculty member shared with me about working with Gordon at a previous institution, I don't think much will change with the relationship. Lots would have to be mended & that would take a very unique leader to accomplish. I have a feeling he won't last long at SFA. But that's my .02....

I have seen similar issues play out at Sam Houston while my dad was a prof and dept chair there (35 years). These issues are difficult to watch play out as an alumni. Sam Houston overcame a lot of issues by hiring Dana Gibson as President. One thing she did that was very successful was funding Athletics, and ok'ing Athlerics paying top dollar for Willie Fritz who turned the Football program around. As you know, the success of the football program has since brought enormous publicity and increases in enrollment which helped every stakeholder related to Sam Houston.
In addition, Sam Houston is in a system and is not going it alone like SFA. That has had many benefits for SH over the years. Significantly more benefits than negatives!!

Do any of you think SFA should join a system? Like TSUS, A&M?

Maybe the Texas State University, which includes Lamar, sam and Sul Ross. But certainly not the A&M or UT systems.

AxeEm99 said:

---

I have seen similar issues play out at Sam Houston while my dad was a prof and dept chair there (35 years). These issues are difficult to watch play out as an alumni. Sam Houston overcame a lot of issues by hiring Dana Gibson as President. One thing she did that was very successful was funding Athletics, and ok'ing Athlerics paying top dollar for Willie Fritz who turned the Football program around. As you know, the success of the football program has since brought enormous publicity and increases in enrollment which helped every stakeholder related to Sam Houston.
In addition, Sam Houston is in a system and is not going it alone like SFA. That has had many benefits for SH over the years. Significantly more benefits than negatives!!

Do any of you think SFA should join a system? Like TSUS, A&M?

---

If we join a system I say Texas Tech System

No one invests in their schools more than the UT system.

But they'd have to be ok with us not being orange or named UT Nacogdoches.

Tech would be my 2nd choice, but they're just so focused on West Texas.

Some new details on the financial issues facing the uni:
https://www.dailysentinel.com/social_media/article_474ca8c1-ac6b-5ced-b27e-9bbb8cd60fad.html

TallTexan said:

---

No one invests in their schools more than the UT system.

But they'd have to be ok with us not being orange or named UT Nacogdoches.

Tech would be my 2nd choice, but they're just so focused on West Texas.

---

I like Tech because it's a smaller system. Texas Tech, Angelo State and Midwestern State. We would be important to them.

And they do have a little bit of pull in the state legislature. Unlike the Texas State system.

But we'd just be so dang far from the mothership and I think that'd cause problems. We're about as close to Lubbock as we are Destin Florida & St Louis Missouri. Being managed by such a far away power just seems the antithesis to our namesake.

That said, let's stay independent until we know how this next fundraising campaign is going atleast.

TallTexan said:

---

And they do have a little bit of pull in the state legislature. Unlike the Texas State system.

But we'd just be so dang far from the mothership and I think that'd cause problems. We're about as close to Lubbock as we are Destin Florida & St Louis Missouri. Being managed by such a far away power just seems the antithesis to our namesake.

---

I agree. Independence is best. Distance from the mothership is a positive, imho.

The saga continues as the Faculty Senate gives "low confidence" vote against BOR. Don't think it's says much more than that they aren't ready to give up.

Article is behind a paywall. Paper comes out tomorrow.
https://www.dailysentinel.com/news/local/article_276bebc1-2640-5406-b42c-f950c64b2da8.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

nacluth said:

---

The saga continues as the Faculty Senate gives "low confidence" vote against BOR. Don't think it's says much more than that they aren't ready to give up.

Article is behind a paywall. Paper comes out tomorrow.
https://www.dailysentinel.com/news/local/article_276bebc1-2640-5406-b42c-f950c64b2da8.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

---

Well, low confidence is better than no confidence, I suppose.

While my dad was a Prof and Department Chair at Sam Houston (35 years) there were several issues similar to this one that occurred there. When the culture at Sam Houston began trying to change, the President and BOR were frequently under fire from all sides. My dad was President of the Faculty Senate and I saw and heard a lot from the 'back seat' during that time.

I believe that the culture at SFA is beginning a huge transformation that a lot of the conservative, 'no change needed, keep it the same' faculty and staff are trying to challenge.

Athletics in my view is leading the change. For years, the SFA football program was neglected. Our administration chose the revolving door of mediocre coaches over Sam Houston's vison of creating a highly successful football program to provide huge amounts of positive local and regional publicity to rapidly build enrollment, unity, and a positive balance sheet. Because of the consistent positive publicity over the last 10 years, Sam Houston has more unity now across the board than I have ever observed.

While Sam Houston has succeeded, doubled their enrollment, and has a nice financial cushion since Willie Fritz' arrival, SFA is still sitting where we were (in enrollment) when I graduated in 1999.

Enrollment and finances at SFA will dramatically increase and improve when we achieve consistent success (beyond the first round) in football, and have consistent positive publicity on the *Local* and *Regional* level like Sam!!

(Yes, I know we beat VCU, Duke, etc. in Basketball. That was awesome, but it achieved National publicity "here today, forgotten tomorrow" We need CONSISTENT positive local and regional publicity to achieve unity across Stephen F Austin including the Faculty, Staff, Students, and BOR!!!)

It will happen. We have the right leadership in place to make it happen!

SFAJack_76 said:

---

nacluth said:

---

The saga continues as the Faculty Senate gives "low confidence" vote against BOR. Don't think it's says much more than that they aren't ready to give up.

Article is behind a paywall. Paper comes out tomorrow.
https://www.dailysentinel.com/news/local/article_276bebc1-2640-5406-b42c-f950c64b2da8.html#tncms-source=article-nav-next

---

Well, low confidence is better than no confidence, I suppose.

---

I've listened and read about much of this. It seems to recur about every 7 - 10 years. What is this about? I'll tell you what I think it is about. Two things: 1) Faculty salaries 2) Enrollment. Both issues are linked together irrefutably.

Like many of you, I have lived in the hyper competitive business world for close to 40 years. I'm not here to say that the faculty are "lazy do nothing" over educated liberals. Politics shouldn't even enter this conversation. In my mind the entire issue is the structural budget deficit, that is largely the result of the decline in enrollment. Recruiting..... I haven't seen any real significant changes (at the faculty level) since Baker Patillo passed, regarding faculty engagement. Does our faculty have any responsibility for recruiting? Do they recruit at all? I don't know the answer, but I do know that the small private universities like Mary Hardin Baylor, Abilene Christian, HBU etc. are recruiting like crazy and the numbers show they are growing.

This faculty senate issue has become a real problem. I would really like to have a faculty senate member have the nuggets to sit down with a couple of Sawmiller's and explain how things will get better if they don't support recruitment and retention efforts. Or tell us the proposed solution. Most of SFA's budget comes from funding sources other than the state of Texas. Increasing private funding is the only answer. Faculty bellowing is diversionary.

It may be time for new leadership. Not because Gordon is doing a bad job or has lied or stolen. Because the well is so poisoned it can't be cleaned. I have a first hand example of a staff member at SFA saying that Gordon deserved to be arrested. Yes, this is not hyperbole. Now, any rational actor knows this shouldn't be even uttered. The man has done nothing close to stealing...... That kind of loud mouth trash has to stop. Hopefully the BOR shows enough nerve to put this thing to rest.

Well, I'm a former, not current, Faculty Senate member. I'm a bit puzzled about my expected role in recruiting and retention. Do people expect me to travel around the state every weekend for SFA and drum up students? Or, maybe after I teach my classes I can make cold calls to high school seniors. Perhaps it's horse-and-buggy thinking, but it seems to me that the best thing I can do to recruit and retain students is to teach my classes to the best of my ability - do my job.

This might be crazy talk, but perhaps one of SFA's problems has been an overemphasis on athletics. Last time I checked, SFA's athletic budget was as big or bigger than its sister schools. Yet SFA's enrollment has stayed stagnant regardless of the performance of its football and basketball teams. And I can't help but point out that even in this time of fiscal constraints, SFA still managed to spend close to thirty million dollars on a practice basketball facility that will help, what, forty people.

On the other hand, most professors haven't had raises in at least two years, and SFA's faculty are already the second lowest paid professors among public universities in the state. This says something about SFA's priorities, which would be fine if SFA was a summer athletic camp, but it's not - it's an institution of learning that supposed to serve all its students.