ABIGAIL JACOBSON
News Editor
To the surprise of some students and faculty, there was a prompted vote of no confidence in Fredonia President Stephen Kolison and Interim Provost Dr. Judith Horowitz at the Senate meeting on April 4.
The vote was brought up by Dr. Ted Lee, a biology professor at SUNY Fredonia.
A document titled “Petition for Resolution of No Confidence to be included on April 7, 2025…” included reasonings behind the call for a no confidence vote.
A no confidence vote, according to Collins Dictionary, means “a vote in which members of a group are asked to indicate that they do not support the person or group in power.”
Some of the rationale behind the call include areas such as “Whereas the President and the Interim Provost do not always appear to act in the best interest of this campus,” “Whereas the President and the Interim Provost have not responded to faculty input” and “Whereas the President and the Interim Provost never provided financial data to support program cuts or retrenchments which could be a breach of the UUP negotiated labor agreement.”
With this Google Doc presented at the Senate meeting, it arose many questions and curiosity from the Senate. Some members were puzzled as to why the interim provost was included on this no confidence vote, based on the fact that she had just recently taken the position after the previous provost, David Starrett, stepped down.
Lee’s response mentioned concerns about Horowitz’s leadership in other roles, and stated that if the former provost Starrett were still in office, him, President Kolison and Horowitz would all be included in this vote.
Others wondered what would happen after a potential vote of no confidence.
Senator Ziya Arnavut mentioned the resignation of previous President Virginia Schaefer Horvath and summarized his discussion, according to the University Senate draft minutes from April 2025, by including that “this Senate pushed her out with a vote of no confidence. Are we any better off than we were back when she resigned? [Lee]’s not in favor of a no confidence in this president. He wants us to make the effort to find solutions.”
During that meeting, Helen Ihasz, a guest at the Senate Meeting, mentioned that she and her husband were the people who had written a letter that ended up in the Dunkirk Observer. Summarized in the draft minutes, they mentioned that “to all of you who are worried about the process, worried about protecting something, worried about losing something, [my] message is that if we don’t act now, we won’t get another chance.
“People have not been treated right, our finances are dying. There’s too much good going on here to let these people ruin what you’ve been building here for decades,” Ihasz argued. “Don’t be afraid to act. You need to get together as a faculty. The School of Music has been decimated; the only thing holding it together is the faculty.”
Others mentioned that this resolution of a no confidence vote is rushed and is not ready yet.
Revisions for this resolution are now in the hands of the Senate, as it was not brought up to a vote.
SOURCES:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/vote-of-no-confidence#google_vignette
Petition for Resignation of No Confidence to be included on April 7, 2025 Senate Agenda.pdf