EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Bryant,
King, Logan-Peters, Miller, Peterson, Siekman, Spann,
Whitt,
Wolf,
Wunder
Absent: DiMagno,
Fuller, Sawyer
Date:
Location: 420 University
Terrace, Academic Senate Office
1.0 Call to Order (Miller)
Miller called the meeting to
order at
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Summer
Meeting Schedule
Miller distributed copies of the
summer Executive Committee schedule. He
noted that the meetings will begin at
2.2 Board of Regents Meeting
Miller reported that
President-Elect Wunder will be attending the July
Board of Regents meeting in Valentine, NE.
3.0 Approval of
Spann moved and Peterson seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
4.0 Review of Tuesday’s Election and What It
Means to UNL
Miller noted that the primary
elections indicate that incumbent Regent Wilson has good support. Wolf stated that the Executive Committee
should encourage faculty members to vote in the November elections. Siekman pointed out
that overall the incumbent legislators did well in the primaries. Bryant suggested that the Senate might
consider holding a forum early in the fall semester for the candidates running
for election. He stated that the
Executive Committee should consider meeting with the
5.0 Report of Miller and Wunder
on Meeting with President Smith
Wunder reported that he and President Miller recently met with President Smith. He stated that discussion focused primarily on the budget and the potential for future cuts. He noted that Governor Johanns is considering holding another special session in the fall to deal with the state’s budget problems. Wunder pointed out that 60% of the state expenditures cannot be cut, which means that other state agencies, including the university, will have to absorb most of the cuts. He stated that there is concern that the university will get a large budget cut since we did not receive a big cut in the spring. Wunder stated that if the petition to rollback taxes succeeds, it will mean that there will be an additional $100 million shortfall for the state.
Wunder reported that the Governor has stated that there will be a 3% ceiling on increased budgets for the next biennium. He stated that President Smith reported that fixed costs for the university will increase by 3%. As a result, President Smith does not foresee a salary increase next year. Wunder stated that President Smith told the Chancellors to keep their budget cutting committees active because they might have to meet over the summer.
Wunder stated that President Smith is leaving the campus budget cuts up to the individual Chancellors; however, President Smith did discuss that there were too many courses, departments, and colleges at the university. King asked if there was any mention about the number of administrators. Wunder stated that this was not discussed. He pointed out that some administrative offices have grown in size over the years while the number of faculty and students has declined. He pointed out that the Senate should keep an eye on any growth in administration. Wunder stated that President Smith noted that Central Administration has the lowest budget in its peer group.
Wunder
reported that President Smith anticipates that additional budget cuts to the
university will cause significant damage.
Siekman asked if
Miller reported that health care costs will possibly increase by 15% this coming year. He stated that the report of the blue ribbon panel on health care will be made sometime in the next few weeks.
Wolf asked what would be the impacts of additional budget cuts for UNL. Wunder stated that if the tax rollback passes, it could put the campus into financial exigency. He stated that should this happen, cuts could be made to any program. He stated that the best case scenario, if the tax rollback passes, would be for the university to receive a 17% cut. Wolf speculated whether the petition drive had substantial support. Wunder stated some backers of the tax rollback petition had hoped to put it on the primary ballot but the process had taken longer than they expected.
King asked who would be able to declare financial exigency. Wunder stated that Chancellor Perlman would make that decision. He pointed out that this is a step that most campuses do not want to take. Miller stated that if financial exigency should occur, it will be important for the Executive Committee and Academic Senate to play a strong leadership role.
Spann noted that retiring faculty members could be a source of funding. He stated that these faculty positions could possibly be filled by non-tenured lines. Wunder pointed out that many people are postponing retirement due to the situation of the stock market. He noted that his department has lost faculty due to retirements, yet has not been permitted to replace them. Spann stated that it should be pointed out how the number of faculty members is decreasing while there appears to be an increase in administrators. Wunder suggested that the committee meet with the Academic Planning Committee to see if they have the same perception. Bryant stated that the administration should be encouraged to review how money is being spent at the administrative level. Wunder pointed out that if Chancellor Perlman sticks to his criteria on the budget, the next step will be for him to look at possible cuts to administration.
Wunder stated that President Smith was pleased with the lobbying efforts by the alumni on behalf of the university. He stated that President Smith felt heartened by the year because grants are up, retention rates of students are up, admissions of new students are up, and the budget cuts were not as severe as they could have been.
The committee discussed whether efforts should be made to review the growth of administration over the past 10 years in comparison with the growth of faculty and students.
6.0 Discussion of Commencement, Honors
Convocations, and Other End of Year Events
Honors Convocations:
Peterson stated that some students who should have received honors were not recognized because their college did not have any ceremonies. Bryant noted that the mandate for colleges to host their own honors convocation ceremony was unfunded. He stated that he went to both of the ceremonies and found the Friday ceremony to be disappointing. He noted that very few people attended it. He stated that the Honors Convocations Committee has the right idea but the wrong plan for the ceremonies.
Spann stated that he attended the
Bryant suggested that the Chancellor be notified that the ceremony held on Friday should be conducted within the colleges. Miller stated that he would follow up with Chancellor Perlman and the Honors Convocations Committee. Spann urged that caution should be taken to avoid having a proliferation of ceremonies which would make it difficult for students and parents to attend.
Hooding and Commencement Discussion:
Wunder reported that the hooding ceremony was nicely attended and well done. He pointed out that if faculty want to receive the support of the people of the state, it is important for them to attend the commencement ceremonies. He stated that departments need to send more representatives to commencement. Miller stated that attending commencement ceremonies should be encouraged. Peterson noted that faculty members who attend the commencement ceremony on behalf of their department never receive any recognition or thanks. He stated that this is something that should be valued. Miller stated that the executive committee should be represented at commencement. He noted that he will push the issue this fall. He suggested that a breakfast meeting could be held to give recognition to those faculty members who attend the ceremony.
7.0 Graduate Faculty Status in CBA
Bryant reported that faculty
members have notified him of their concerns regarding CBA’s
effort to dictate Graduate Faculty Status.
He pointed out that it is the
Bryant reported that CBA was also trying to change the assignments of faculty not actively involved in research by giving them additional courses to teach. He pointed out that doing this without the mutual consent of the faculty member is a violation of Board of Regents Bylaw 4.3.
Bryant stated that an additional concern is how faculty members will be judged as being research active or inactive. He stated that it was reported to him that the decision will be based on a list of journals determined by the department as acceptable. He noted that there is concern that publications in journals not listed will not be considered as active research. Wolf pointed out that Chancellor Perlman stated that the quality indicators would not be used for this purpose.
Wunder pointed out that a faculty member who is not active in research should receive an evaluation that indicates this lack of work. He pointed out if this lack of research continues it should invoke a post tenure review. He questioned whether the evaluation process is working properly.
Wunder
stated that he did not believe there was a process that examines graduate
faculty status after it has been awarded.
Miller questioned how someone could be disenfranchised from the
Logan-Peters stated that the proposed requirement of faculty members achieving promotion to full professor within seven years seems unrealistic. Bryant pointed out that this requirement could be grounds for grievances. He noted that there can be various reasons why some faculty members are not fully promoted within seven years of becoming an associate professor. Whitt stated that these actions by CBA go beyond the concerns of the graduate status: they are unjust actions. Bryant pointed out that the post tenure review process provides a vehicle for dealing with faculty members who are not conducting active research.
Miller stated that he would contact Associate Dean Karels to let him know the concerns of the committee.
8.0 Unfinished Business
8.1 Update
on Quality Indicators
Bryant stated that he is concerned that the administration is sending mixed messages to faculty regarding the quality indicators and their use. He reported that Chancellor Perlman indicated in Executive Committee meetings that the indicators were to be used to measure the quality of the institution, not individual faculty members. However, in a recent email message to a faculty member, Chancellor Perlman claims that he never made any comments that the indicators could not be used for evaluations. Logan-Peters pointed out that the committee has been told all along that the indicators were not going to be used to evaluate faculty members. The committee agreed to contact the Chancellor concerning his statements on the quality indicators and ask him for clarification. Wolf stated that faculty members are commenting that the list of journals is a violation of academic freedom. The committee agreed that the Chancellor needs to be contacted and asked for clarification of his statements on the quality indicators.
8.2 Update
on Pepsi Fund
Miller reported that he spoke with VC Jackson regarding the Pepsi Fund. He conveyed the message to VC Jackson that the faculty members feel they do not have any access to these funds. Miller reported that the Pepsi endowment fund did not do well last year and as a consequence there was no money to support any new proposals. He noted that only previous commitments received funding for this year. Bryant stated that part of the problem is that faculty feel they have little involvement in the decision making process for the use of these funds. Wolf stated that some accountability and oversight of these funds is needed.
8.3 Parking
and the Recommendations of the Parking Advisory
Committee
Miller reported that the recommendation to charge $20 a month for bus passes for those faculty/staff/students who do not purchase a parking permit is just a proposal at this time. He stated that VC Jackson would like to receive feedback from people regarding this proposal. Wolf asked what the rationale is for charging the fee. Miller stated that the funds collected from the bus passes would be used to help offset the costs for the bus shuttle service. Logan-Peters pointed out that the bus shuttles were put in place to help control the number of cars on campus. She stated that charging this fee will probably bring more cars to campus.
Miller reported that funding for
the 14th and
Wolf suggested that the committee meet with members of ASUN to discuss the proposal for the bus passes. Miller stated that VC Jackson would like to speak to the Senate regarding parking at the September meeting.
Wunder noted that this coming academic year should be the last year of the parking fee increases to cover the cost of the 17th & R streets parking garage. If so, there may be a slight decrease in fees next year.
The meeting was adjourned at