Capri Sims Milestone Season
‘No Kings’ in Ellensburg
Cosplay Club wins at Sakura-Con
Page 4
Page 5
Page 8
Vol. 133 NO. 4
April 9, 2026
WOHLPART’S LETTER
“BRIDGED A GAP” BUT “FACULTY NEED MORE” VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE CONTROVERSY CONTINUED
Brandon Mattesich
T
Editor-In-Chief
he group of faculty petitioners who originated the vote of no confidence against President Jim Wohlpart told The Observer that Wohlpart’s April 2 email, taking “full responsibility” for the change in his leadership style and the “misstep” that led to the vote of no confidence, “bridged a gap” but that concrete action is still needed. This new statement from the petitioners was emailed to The Observer in response to a request for comment on the president’s April 2 email. “The message from President Wohlpart on Thursday, April 2, 2026, provided some measure of healing,” the faculty petitioners stated in their response. “The tone of recognition and acknowledgement of missteps bridged a gap and drew us closer to a shared understanding of what has transpired. But faculty need more.” “In the words of one faculty member, ‘It’s a very good letter. But ‘caring and engaged’ is as ‘caring and engaged’ does. Words alone do not build trust, and unless and until they are backed up by solid actions, they are meaningless,’” the response continued. The faculty petitioners went on in the response to list their “needs” for next steps, including a complete re-negotiation of CWU’s shared governance document and a “seat at the table when considering budgetary realities.” Most of all, the response stated, they “need our shared governance partners to
recognize the appropriate role of faculty in securing a world where student success is possible.” “Securing that better future for students in 2026 means redirecting our collective care, support, and trust to the work that faculty and students are doing in and out of the classroom,” the response continued. “Trust is critical in this. We have heard a lot about how faculty mistrust President Wohlpart. But demanding trust without reciprocating it is asking for blind loyalty. Where is the trust extended to the faculty? And what does it mean to trust faculty?” According to the petitioners, faculty have “not seen a lot of trust extended to faculty.” In their response, they went on to assert that the Senate is “not trusted to represent faculty voice and so there have been efforts to diminish it and supplant it with the voices of other faculty bodies and the AUC (Adaptive University Council).” “President Wohlpart does not trust that faculty evaluations can provide insightful perspectives to help him improve his work, and so he attempted to silence those evaluations by rewriting Faculty Code,” the petitioners stated. “Faculty are not trusted to participate on search committees, and so searches are failed or positions are hired through direct appointment.” The petitioners elaborated in their response that one form of trust they “need” to be shown is in trusting the Faculty Senate to represent the voice of the faculty. “We need our elected representatives in the Faculty Senate to be recognized as
the voice of faculty,” the response stated. “While ADCO (Academic Department Chairs Organization) and UFC (United Faculty of Central) are important partners for consulting on their respective issues, the Senate is the only deliberative, representative body for determining the faculty’s perspective with regard to academics and all matters related to academics.” The faculty petitioners closed their response by stating that trusting faculty means “recognizing that faculty perspectives are critical for informing decisions that impact the future of our university and thus the futures of students.” “We know when our students are going hungry or struggling with rent or panicked about finding that first job. We know when global news stories come home to roost in the lives of students—whether it is about immigration enforcement, military operations, or economic crises,” the response stated. “We have witnessed students dealing with these problems for generations—even long after they have graduated from CWU. So why aren’t faculty trusted? Until this trust is extended to faculty, and until there are commitments and actions associated with the recognition of President Wohlpart’s missteps, we will continue our movement.”