EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Present: Alexander,
Beck,
Absent: Alloway, Bolin, Rapkin
Date: Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Location: 201 Canfield Administration Building
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
Moeller called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m.
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Early Retirement Program
Moeller stated that she has heard that the early retirement program is no longer in place at the University but one-on-one negotiations can still take place. Chancellor Perlman stated that a circuit court has determined that early retirement programs are not constitutional. As a result, General Counsel Wood recommended that the University terminate the program. Chancellor Perlman pointed out that the termination of the program does not prohibit individual negotiations from taking place although cost factors need to be carefully considered if a negotiation occurs. He noted that the cost of health insurance is the major issue.
2.2 Update on Chemistry
Professor Investigation
Chancellor Perlman stated that he has received the police report investigation. He noted that he will be meeting with Professor Belot. Chancellor Perlman stated that he needs to review the report again before deciding what action he will take. He noted that regardless of his decision the proper procedures will be followed.
2.3 Issues on the Horizon
Moeller stated that she has heard that there is a possibility we might be facing a $5 million budget cut. Chancellor Perlman stated that we have about a $5 million budget cut with the assigned minus figures in the budget. He noted that if prices hold consistent, the utility bill for UNL could end up in the red by $5 million. He pointed out that the legislature gave some appropriations last year to cover the utility costs and he hopes that it could happen again. He reported that the campus has just been informed that the utility company that provides half of the campus’ electricity is raising rates. He stated that we are not in great financial shape but no budget cuts are being planned.
Moeller reported that she
understands that Dean Hoffman has resigned.
Chancellor Perlman stated that this is correct and that it was a
voluntary decision by Dean Hoffman. Ledder
noted that Dean Hoffman is resigning as Dean but will stay on as a professor in
the
Chancellor Perlman stated that one
of the big issues that the campus is working on is the general education
revisions. Moeller reported that during
the Senate meeting last week the Senators met in small groups to discuss the
institutional objectives. She stated
that there have been 507 responses to the Senate survey. She noted that the idea is to get faculty
optimally involved in the process of revising the general education
program. She pointed out that getting
the colleges to approve the revisions may be challenging. She stated that she did some research and
found out that there is a statute going back to the turn of the century where
colleges are the body that makes the decision on the curriculum. She pointed out the
3.0 Deb Thomas, Assistant
Vice President for Administration, and Ron Withem, Associate Vice President for University Affairs
Thomas stated that they wanted to speak to the Executive Committee about the impact of state limit spending on the University. She noted that the ballot initiative seeks to limit state spending increases to the combined rate of inflation plus population growth.
Thomas noted that grassroots advocacy is extremely important because there will be 22 new senators in the state legislature. She pointed out that Withem has traversed all over the state meeting these legislators but external grassroots advocacy needs to occur as well. She stated that there is a new computer service which will allow Withem to get information on supporters of the university and the legislators they may know. She pointed out that personal contact with state legislators is very helpful. She stated that if there is a particular senator that is against the university, her office would like to quickly be able to communicate with people who can then communicate with the senator. She gave cards to the Executive Committee asking if people in the Senate would sign up with the program. She noted that to become a University Ambassador all you need to do is to go to http://www.ciclt.com/ungr and click on the “Join University Ambassadors Now!” link and then complete the form and submit the information.
Withem stated that the rules from the General Counsel’s office concerning university employees speaking about the “Stop OverSpending Nebraska” ballot initiative state that taxpayer resources cannot be used to support or oppose the ballot initiative but factual information about the impacts the bill will have on the University can be communicated. He pointed out that employees can talk about factual information during work hours but cannot suggest to anyone whether they should support or oppose the initiative. He stated that employees can say whatever they want on their own time.
Withem reported that the measure is
being funded with $1 million but only $2,000 of this is from
Withem noted that the appeal of the
initiative is based on its simplicity; the government is spending too much
money. If the initiative should be
placed in the constitution it would limit growth in the state. He noted that
Withem stated that an analysis assumption indicates that if total state spending only grew 3% per year from 1997-2007 as allowed under the lid, appropriations to higher education, state agencies, and aid to local governments would have been significantly reduced and all of these entities would have had to take proportionate reductions. He pointed out that during the recent budget cutting years the university took a 10% reduction which was far more than other state agencies which only received a 2% reduction. He noted that if the lid was effective for the past 10 years tuition rates would have increased to approximately $8,500 per year to help offset the loss.
Withem reported that if the lid was
in effect for the past 10 years the loss to the university’s state appropriated
budget would be more than $134 million.
This is equal to the amount needed to operate city campus or the
combined appropriations made to the
Withem stated that if a 3% spending lid would go into effect now it would eventually end state appropriations to the university and force the university to become a private institution. He pointed out that under this scenario, tuition could increase greatly.
Ledder pointed out that the
analysis assumes that the enrollment rate would not change but more than likely
enrollments would drop significantly having an even greater negative impact on
the university. Flowers noted that lack
of support for programs will result is a loss of faculty members as they leave
to go to institutions that have greater support. This would further erode the number of
students enrolled. Withem stated that
Thomas pointed out that it is not
factually clear whether or not tuition could be used to offset the loss of
funds with this initiative. Moeller
asked if information on the impact on the
Beck asked if Withem and Thomas have a sense of how people feel about the initiative in the state. Withem stated that many organizations are coming out against it including the Chamber of Commerce, Nebraska Farmers Union, and AARP of Nebraska to name a few. He noted that there are two websites concerning the initiative: http://www.notinnebraska.com opposes the initiative and http://www.sosnebraska.com supports the measure.
Thomas stated that the initiative is called Amendment 423.
4.0 Announcements
No announcements were made.
5.0 Approval of 9/13/06 Minutes
Beck moved and Flowers seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
6.0 Unfinished Business
6.1 Institutional Objectives
Survey Responses
Moeller reported that there have been over 500 responses to the survey to date. She reported that she summarized the feedback that was made by the groups from the Senate meeting. She noted that some concerns with the institutional objectives are: special problems with large classes, pragmatic issues related to large classes, and concern that this will end up being another form of faculty evaluation that is not very accurate. Implementation points raised are: how will students demonstrate that they achieved these objectives, will faculty know how to assess these objectives, more concern about implementation, outcomes are what we should discuss and implement, and how to meet these objectives. One suggested change is to replace the word exercise in the third objective.
6.2 Commencement Committee
Moeller reported that she is receiving a number of email messages from members of the Commencement, Honors Convocations, and Honorary Degrees Committee about the proposed merger of the committees. She noted the Professor Berger, who is a member of two of the committees, pointed out that the faculty members need to make decisions concerning the requirements for receiving honors. He noted that faculty members would be outnumbered on the proposed combined committee. Beck pointed out that only faculty members will be voting members of the combined committee when issues of policy or decisions about honors criteria or honorary degrees come up; the first two happen rarely, which is one reason for combining the committees.
Moeller stated that most committee members are not interested in taking on additional work. She noted that the committee members are talking about what the advantages and disadvantages will be if the committees are combined. She stated that she wants to hear what the committees decide and then she will report back to the Executive Committee and the Senate.
7.0 New Business
7.1 Conflict with Membership
of Academic Rights & Responsibilities Committee
Moeller stated that there is a conflict with the membership of the Academic Rights & Responsibilities Committee. She noted that there are members on the committee that are from the same college and the syllabus requires that each of the five members be from different colleges. She pointed out that this has occasionally occurred in the past.
Beck stated that the reason for having the members from different colleges is due to voting and minimizing the possibility for conflicts of interest when cases come up. She noted that a member of the committee may have to recuse themselves from voting if a case comes before them from someone within their college.
The Committee agreed that an
election will need to occur to replace a member of the committee.
7.2 Faculty Salary Increases
The meeting was adjourned at 4:59 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Rick Alloway, Secretary.