A referendum vote of no confidence resolution regarding Sonoma State University President Judy Sakaki’s leadership is on the Academic Senate agenda for Thursday, April 28. 

The resolution requesting a Vote of No Confidence in President Sakaki’s leadership was drafted by a group of faculty from Social Sciences, Arts & Humanities, and Business & Economics and discussed in last week’s Executive Committee meeting with a Time Certain of 3:35 p.m. 

This meeting was described as a public forum and “open to all”, however, reporters from The STAR, the LA times, the Press Democrat and the KCBS SF Radio Station weren’t permitted access to join the “open forum” Zoom call until 54 minutes into the meeting when conversations surrounding the scandal, Title IX issues, the retaliation allegations and discussion about support for transparency had already concluded. 

A vote for turning the meeting into a closed session arose when the resolution was first brought forward according to Arts and Humanities Associate Professor, Talena Sanders who attended the meeting as one of the presenters of the vote of no confidence. The executive committee voted to keep the session open almost immediately. 

Sanders has been a part of the group that’s worked to draft the referendum vote of no confidence. She explained that a vote of no confidence in President Sakaki’s leadership is largely symbolic; it doesn’t carry any actual power with it. The vote is about expressing the faculty position and to strongly suggest, as a full faculty, that President, Sakaki resign. Ultimately, no one has to resign, no matter the outcome of the vote. 

In 2007, 73.4% of faculty voted no confidence in the referendum vote of no confidence for former SSU President, Ruben Arminana. While President Arminana didn’t step down, he quickly implemented changes alongside an issued response. 

“The overall call is that there is a crisis of leadership and it’s not just the Scandal. It’s a continuing crisis of leadership,” Sanders said. “She [Sakaki] does not participate appropriately in faculty governance and delegates roles that were traditionally a part of the President’s work to subordinates.” 

The draft resolution for a vote of no confidence in President Sakaki contains heavy handed statements including describing Sakaki as lacking active leadership, failing to engage with faculty and faculty governance in a substantive way, abrogating responsibility for shared governance and failing to lead Sonoma State. 

Earlier in the week, on Monday April 21, Sakaki issued a campus wide statement. The email opened stating, “It’s springtime, a season that symbolizes new beginnings and transformations.”

Most students were expecting an apology, but rather they received a long letter highlighting Decision Day as well as thoroughly outlining four areas of priorities Sakaki plans to focus on: Title IX, strategic enrollment, budget stability, and new initiatives. 

The email ended, stating, “As we look ahead, you have my promise that I will work every single day for the best interests of our faculty, staff, students, and our larger campus community. It is an honor for me to be your president.”

On April 18, California Senator Bill Dodd issued a statement regarding Sonoma State University President Judy Sakaki’s handling of sexual harassment and retaliation claims made by a former campus provost involving her husband, Patrick McCallum. “The reports are a significant distraction for the university at a critical time, and raise serious questions about her leadership and judgement,” said Sen. Dodd. “It is concerning and deserves close scrutiny by the CSU chancellor and board of trustees as to how the interests of students and employees can be best served going forward.”

Despite the University’s attempts to smooth over this scandal, news surrounding Sakaki and her husband McCallum seems to be continually developing, preventing SSU from escaping negative headlines.