EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Alexander,
Alloway, Beck, Fech,
Flowers, Hoffman, Moeller, Peterson, Rapkin, Scholz, Shea, Stock
Absent: Bolin
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Location: Academic Senate Office, 420 University
Terrace
Note: These
are not verbatim minutes. They are a
summary of the discussions at the Executive Committee meeting as corrected by
those participating.
______________________________________________________________________
1.0 Call to Order
Beck called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.
2.0 Vice Chancellor Owens
2.1 Update
on Budget Cuts in IANR
VC Owens stated that he does not have any new information to provide since the Chancellor made his announcement about the budget cuts. VC Owens stated that IANR will probably cash flow many open positions for awhile and will use money from those lines to help deal with the budget cuts. He noted that some small permanent cuts might be made here and there but nothing major. Beck stated that this seems like the appropriate way to handle the budget since the cuts could be temporary. VC Owens agreed.
VC Owens stated that he will have
to do some major cash flowing for the new Vet program. He pointed out that the next two to four
years will be particularly difficult to deal with. He noted that once all the current
Beck reported that she spoke with
the Iowa State Senate President who is also a Veterinary Medicine
professor. Beck noted that the professor
had some questions and some concerns.
One of the concerns is with the size of the classes and the other is
what would happen in the future, for example, if
VC Owens stated that each of the
Universities will have a member on the other’s Veterinary program’s curriculum
committee. He noted that the Associate
Deans of each program will manage the teaching portion of the program and there
is agreement that the teaching courses between the two campuses will match
up. He stated that in the interim, if
VC Owens noted that the Board of Regents felt that the joint program should be pursued and two of the Regents who are medical doctors are familiar with 2+2 programs.
2.2 Tenure Consideration for
Extension Educators
Beck noted that the VC has experience in working at an institution that had tenure for their extension educators and the Committee wanted to get his opinion on such a system. She stated that she recently saw a table which showed that land grant institutions are about split even on how many offer tenure or a rolling contract and those that don’t.
She noted that she is appointing a task force to look into the issue and to develop a proposal for providing a rolling contract similar to that being proposed for the Professor of Practice category for teaching faculty.
VC Owens stated that at
Beck stated that the task force will be small and will include an extension educator and an extension specialist as well. She noted the Professor Hoffman of the Executive Committee will serve as chair of the task force.
Beck stated that she does not think
that the system here works as well. She
pointed out that the extension educators can be terminated on 90 days notice
which she does not think is humane. She
pointed out that there are times people in the public may disagree with the
information being provided by the extension educator and these people may put
pressure on the
Beck stated that she will keep the Vice Chancellor informed of the progress of the task force.
2.3 Administrator
Evaluation Resolution
Beck stated that a faculty member
in IANR asked the Executive Committee address the issue of having a uniform
policy on the process used to evaluate administrators. VC Owens stated that the IANR Deans Council recently
adopted a method similar to the one being used in the
Beck noted that SVCAA Couture indicated in a previous meeting that the same process is being used by Academic Affairs. Beck stated that as a result it does not seem like a resolution is needed. The Committee agreed to drop the resolution.
2.4
See section 2.1 above.
2.5 Issues on the Horizon
VC Owens stated that the suggestion to conduct one academic program review for all four of the extension centers was discussed by the Extension Advisory Committee. He stated that the consensus of the EAC was that having individual reviews was appropriate because of the unique geographical needs of each district. He noted that he agrees with the EAC. Beck pointed out that the Academic Planning Committee will need to know about the report made by the EAC.
VC Owens stated that he is close to making an offer to one of the candidates for the head of Entomology. He noted that two finalists were brought back for further interviews and each had very good reputations and were good candidates. He stated that he hopes to make an offer by the end of the week.
VC Owens reported that the search
is continuing for a new director of the
Moeller asked why the pool of candidates for many positions is so small. VC Owens stated that he is unsure but this is happening at other universities as well. He noted that Biological Systems Engineering has been rated as one of the top ten programs in the nation for a long time but there was a small pool of candidates for the head of that unit. He stated that the tide of small pools may be linked to the fiscal climate that state universities are currently facing. He noted that people do not want to deal with possible budget cuts and it is difficult to make an administrative job attractive with these cuts.
Peterson pointed out that many people that are highly qualified for being chairs/heads are happy where they are at and do not want to make a move. He stated that a job has to be attractive in order to entice these people to come here. VC Owens noted that it is frustrating because in the past they were able to promise an incoming chair/head that they could hire people to build the kind of department that they would like and the recent budget situation has made that difficult or impossible.
Hoffman stated that he spoke with someone serving on a search committee for a Vice Chancellor position and this person stated that they had a small pool of candidates even when a headhunter was used. VC Owens stated that he has considered using a headhunter.
VC Owens stated that he is hoping
that the
3.0 Dan Carpenter, Director, Parking and
Transit Services
3.1 Parking
on Campus During Athletic Events
Moeller stated that even though she has a reserved parking permit she is unable to use her designated lot for parking in the evening when a volleyball game is going on. She stated that it is not right for someone who has to pay $912 a year for a reserved permit to not be able to use it at night when they are going back to their office to work.
Carpenter stated that he became aware of the problem and has since told the special events coordinator that lot 17B cannot be used for special events. He noted that lot 17C will still be used.
Carpenter reported that people were particularly rude to the attendants at the lots for special events this year. He stated that he has informed the donor groups that if this kind of abuse continues the donor group would not be using the parking lot.
Carpenter noted that the original intent of the reserve lots was to keep them reserved during the main part of the day and open the area for night classes.
Carpenter stated that he spoke with Professor Forsythe after the Daily Nebraskan article about the parking problem during special events. Carpenter noted that people coming from outside the campus area oftentimes are unsure where they are going and frequently park in the wrong area. He stated that he informed Professor Forsythe that lot 17D was available for reserved parking permit holders to use in the evening during special events.
Moeller stated that she recently had a grant to bring in a guest speaker and attendance for the event would be primarily public school teachers. She stated that she had to pay $8 ($4 per day) for 78 people to park on campus even though one of the days was a Saturday. She noted that many of these people were potential graduate students and she does not feel that it is right to have to pay for parking for a recruitment effort.
Carpenter stated that the cost of permits started to really increase when the garages where built. He pointed out that the burden of funding Parking and Transportation Services fell on the fee users. He noted that UNOPA and UAAD have raised the same issue.
Carpenter reported that parking and transit services is completely an auxiliary unit. He stated that out of the $7.5 million which the unit has to spend, $3 million must go to paying for the garages. The other money goes to funding the operation of the offices and the transportation system. Any remaining funds go to maintenance. He stated that any money left over from fees and special events helps the budget but the unit is in a situation where they need any additional funds they can get. He pointed out that the transportation system is expensive to operate and even though fees were added for students using the transit system, the transit system rarely pays for itself.
Beck asked if it is typical at other universities for parking to be self supporting. Carpenter stated that it is typical. He noted that parking started out under the University Police but several years ago it split and is now under Business and Finance. He pointed out that the Nebraska State Legislature feels that permit users should pay for parking and therefore funding is not appropriated for parking at the University.
Carpenter stated that building on campus in years past would take away parking lots without compensating for the lost lots. He stated that this is now beginning to change but this is an internal policy that has been set because permit holders can no longer bear the cost of replacing the lost parking lots. He noted that Facilities has been operating under the policy that if a parking lot is lost due to construction the cost of the project must include costs to recover the lost parking.
Carpenter stated that the campus master plans shows parking being moved to the perimeters but the users of parking want to park close to campus. Beck pointed out that the plan does not match what the users want thus creating a difficult situation.
Beck asked about the possibility of having a sliding fee scale because the cost of parking is a big issue for the staff. Carpenter stated that a sliding fee scale would create higher fees for those who are at the higher end of the pay scale. He stated that only campuses that are unionized seem to be able to accomplish getting a sliding fee scale. He noted that he has looked at several models but has not seen one that would work here. Beck stated that she realizes that not all faculty members would be in favor of a sliding fee scale but many faculty members are concerned for the hardship the parking costs put on staff. Moeller stated that the cost creates a climate issue for the staff and it would be helpful if the staff could get some kind of break. Shea noted that the third shift was eliminated for custodial workers and they were forced to work during the day. Not only did they get a reduction in pay for this change but they had to pay higher parking costs to park on campus during the day. He stated that it is not right to take this out on people who are at the lowest end of the pay scale. Carpenter stated that he is open to any suggestions on how the rates can be reduced.
Hoffman asked if other universities have student parking on campus. Carpenter stated that some do and some don’t. He noted that 60% of the garage parking goes to the Housing department for students. He noted that students only pay about $7 less a month for parking than faculty and staff.
Beck asked how the rates are decided. Carpenter stated that the Parking Advisory Committee has helped to define the costs and open forums have been held on campus to discuss the issue with faculty, staff, and students. He noted that the cost of permits for garages was raised because they became their own permit type. He stated that the amount that is needed to pay debts has been a factor in determining costs. He noted that reserved permit prices increased first but it reached its peak and the number of reserved permits sold decreased because of the high cost. He stated that the cost of the other permits increased in order to raise the necessary revenue.
Peterson asked how much revenue is
raised from special events parking.
Carpenter stated that special events parking raises 6 – 7% of the
budget. Peterson suggested that parking
for special events be raised because most people will be willing to pay for
parking in order to attend the special event.
Carpenter stated that he does not have a problem in doing that. He noted that donor parking for athletic
special events is $10 per space. He
pointed out that the Athletics Departments gets $5 of that payment.
Moeller asked if freshmen can have
cars on campus. She noted that at the
Carpenter stated that he is working on creating a user agreement for students to sign when they get a parking permit. He noted that the user agreement will state that the student accepts the responsibility of adhering to parking policies on campus.
Hoffman asked if parking off campus
has been looked at. He stated that it
might be cheaper for students and faculty to park at a remote location and come
in on one of the transit buses.
Carpenter stated that this was looked into. He noted that the closest remote parking lot
was two miles further north and most commuters come from the south. He stated that the geographic location makes
it too difficult to have remote lots. He
noted that the perimeter lots out by the
Alexander stated that there is a number
of university vehicles parked in the lots by the Walter Scott Engineering
building. He pointed out that these
spaces should not be used for storing vehicles.
He stated that if a convenient ride is provided for people who need
these vehicles they should be placed in a remote lot. Carpenter noted that these are vehicles
probably being used by Telecommunications or the
Moeller asked if the Executive Committee could get a breakdown of the revenue and expenses for Parking and Transit Services and how the costs are formulated. She pointed out that this information would be helpful to get to people.
Hoffman asked about purchasing the
commercial space under the
Alloway asked about enforcement. He noted that at Anderson Hall the lot may be full but many people parking there at night do not have a university hang tag. He asked who enforces the lot after dark. Carpenter stated that university lots require permits 24 hours a day/7 days a week. He stated that after hours parking is enforced by the campus police but tickets will only be written if there is a problem such as parking in a handicap parking stall. He reported that a pilot test is going to be done with the lot being closed after 11:00 at night. He stated that the entrance to the lot will be chained. He noted that the faculty will be consulted with to see if this works for them. He pointed out that the lot is being used as an after hours party spot when the bars close and there is often a lot of broken glass in the lot. He stated that Dean Norton will be contacting him to let him know how well chaining the lot works.
Alloway asked what the cost is for a gate with a swipe card. Carpenter stated that it costs approximately $7000 for a gate and then there is the software needed to manage it. Alloway asked if the NCard can be used. Carpenter stated that presently it could not. Beck suggested that the hang tag could be used as a swipe card. Carpenter stated that another issue with the gates is that they are often broken.
3.2 Possible Merger of
Parking Advisory and Parking Appeals Committee
Beck noted that parking appeals are now done on line and that the number of people who show up to appeal tickets in person is very low. She asked if the Appeals Committee still meets to discuss the on-line appeals. She wondered whether the Parking Advisory Committee and the Appeals Committee can be merged. Carpenter stated that he has some issues about combining the two committees. He noted that the Parking Advisory Committee still have a lot of work to do and is a recommendation committee. He stated that the review of appeals should be done by people not employed by Parking and Transit Services since they are the ones that write the ticket. He stated that there needs to be a due process for people to appeal tickets.
Beck stated that the Executive Committee is just reviewing committees to see if the number of them can be reduced. She noted that there are three faculty members, three UNOPA, and three UAAD members on the Parking Appeals Committee. Carpenter suggested that the number of representatives from each group might be able to be reduced. Peterson suggested that Beck should discuss this with UNOPA and UAAD first to see how they feel about it.
Alexander asked if tickets still need to be written during the holiday break. Carpenter stated that if tickets are not given during this and other times when the university is closed people will start thinking they can park on campus. He noted that regulations need to be kept otherwise it can get confusing about when it is okay to park on campus.
Alexander asked if administrators use departmental funds to pay for specialized parking spaces. Carpenter says they cannot. He pointed out that Parking and Transit Services do not accept any grant funding or departmental funding to purchase permits for individuals. He noted that the Chancellor actually pays more each month for his parking space next to the administration building.
The Committee thanked Carpenter for meeting with them and stated that the information he provided was very helpful.
4.0 Announcements
4.1 Meeting
with the Chancellor
Beck reported that she and Moeller
will be meeting with the Chancellor on February 28th to discuss the
proposed revisions to the Reduction in Force Procedures. She stated that she will be sending the
Chancellor a printed copy of the document along with copies of the articles on
the
4.2 Meeting with Executive
Associate Dean Weissinger
Beck reported that the Executive Committee will be meeting with Weissinger on March 29th to discuss the proposed revisions to the graduate remission programs.
5.0 Approval of 2/15/06 Minutes
Alexander moved and Flowers seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
6.0 Unfinished Business
6.1 Update
on Child Care
Beck reported that she met with Professor Buck who has been a faculty representative on the committee working on child care. Beck stated that there appears to be some frustration with the process of getting the child care facility up and running.
Moeller stated that the search for a management company to oversee the operations of the child care facility has been narrowed down to two companies.
Beck stated that it was suggested that the Executive Committee meet with Vice Chancellor Jackson to discuss what is going on with the process. Beck noted that there is real concern that it will be exceptionally costly to send your child there, particularly since the vendor will be given a building that should offset some of the costs.
Peterson asked whether renovations have begun on the building yet. Moeller stated that the building needs major renovations and these won’t begin until at the fall at the very earliest. She noted that the Chancellor met with the Chancellor’s Commission on the Status of Women and said that private funding is being sought for the renovation project.
The Committee agreed to schedule a meeting with Vice Chancellor Jackson.
6.2 Resolution on Evaluation
of Administrators
See section 2.3 above.
6.3 Review of Committee
Structure
Beck stated that she spoke with Professor Hitchcock, chair of the Honorary Degrees Committee. She reported that he said that the size of the committee was good and the committee only meets twice a year but the length of the meeting can vary depending on the number of nominations that are submitted. She stated that he had no problems with making the committee a subcommittee of the Commencement and Honors Convocation Committee.
7.0 New Business
7.1 Ad Hoc Committee on
Maternity Leave for Graduate Students
Beck reported that Executive Associate Dean Weissinger is putting together a small committee to look into this issue. She asked if anyone is interested in being on the committee otherwise she will send an email message to the Senators to see if anyone from the Senate is interested. Hoffman volunteered to serve.
Beck stated that one of the main issues is how the graduate student will get paid while on leave. Hoffman pointed out that most universities will not pay a graduate student while on leave. The policy would just stop the clock in their master’s or doctoral program.
7.2 Medical
Reimbursement Account
Alloway reported that a faculty member complained to him about the additional documentation that is now being required this year for people to get reimbursement from their account. He noted that this is people’s money that they have set aside in an account and they have to now justify why they want the money. The Committee agreed to invite Greg Clayton, Director of Benefits and Risk Management, to meet with the Committee.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, March 1st at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Pat Shea, Secretary.