EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Present: Bender, Bryant, Humes, Latta, Miller, Prochaska Cue, Scheideler, Siekman, Zorn

Absent: Augilar, Mayo, Whitt

Date: September 1, 1999

Location: 201 Canfield Administration Building

______________________________________________________________________________

1.0 Call to Order (Latta)

Latta called the meeting to order at 3:17 PM.

2.0 Announcements

No announcements were made.

3.0 Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards and Vice Chancellor Omtvedt

3.1 Voluntary Withdrawal from Early Tenure Consideration

Latta reported that Associate Vice Chancellor Jacobson has recommended that the Guidelines for the Evaluation of Faculty: Annual Evaluations, Promotion, and Tenure be updated to make explicit a faculty member's right to withdraw from early consideration of tenure without penalty. Latta pointed out that the current policy does explicitly allow for the withdrawal from early consideration of promotion but not for tenure. She stated that the Academic Rights & Responsibilities Committee has agreed that the change should be made. Latta asked whether the change needs to go to the Senate and the Board of Regents for approval? Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards and Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that they did not think it needed to go to the Board for approval but that they will check out what is the appropriate process. They both agreed that the change should be made. Miller asked what the practice has been in the past? Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that the practice has been to allow withdrawal from early consideration of tenure. Changing the wording of the policy would thus make it reflect current practice.

3.2 Proposed Intellectual Property Policy

Latta asked for an update on discussions with Central Administration about the proposed IP policy distributed to the Executive Committee this summer. She stated that if it is not clear that there will be significant revisions to the document than it should be distributed to the faculty for review in order to get wider input. Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards stated that the document was just discussed at the Council of Academic Officers and that it was agreed that the document will be revised. He stated that the document is currently being revised. He pointed out that the faculty and the university have a joint interest in stimulating and nurturing the production of intellectual property. He stated that they want to have a policy which provides incentives for this. He stated that it is likely that a new draft will be forthcoming and its is one that should be distributed on campus. Latta stated that she will announce this to the faculty and she thanked them for their work on this issue. VC Omtvedt noted that the feedback from the Executive Committee and other faculty on the initial draft circulated this summer had been effective in demonstrating the need for changes in the proposed policy.

4.0 Vice Chancellor Omtvedt

4.1 Update on Vice Chancellor for Extended Education Position

Vice Chancellor Omtvedt reported that he will be meeting with Chancellor Moeser and Senior Vice Chancellor Edwards to discuss leadership for the area of extended education after he steps down from the VC position on October 1. He pointed out that the Administrative Council suggested that someone in an administrative position may be able to take on the role part time, similar to the way he has been handling the position. He pointed out that there is not a lot of funding for extended education. He stated that he is making a request for another allocation from the pro forma funds for this year. Latta asked if these pro forma funds are to support proposals by faculty in developing extended education classes? Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that they are funds to assist in developing programs or courses for extended education. He noted that approximately 30 good proposals were made last year, although they were only able to fund 23 of them. He pointed out that another priority for the use of these funds would be for travel to conferences or meetings which will help faculty or staff to build their skills relative to extended education. Latta asked if the funding is only for courses in an extended education degree program? Vice Chancellor Omtvedt stated that it is for any courses, particularly those in high priority areas of extended education. He noted that President Smith still considers extended education a high priority.

5.0 Chancellor Moeser

5.1 Student Conduct Standards & Behavioral Expectations

Latta asked for clarification on the policy developed in 1996 to deal with student conduct standards and behavioral expectations. She pointed out that one recommendation made by the task force deals with the issue of any student convicted of a violent or serious crime. The recommendation stated that the student convicted of such crimes could not represent the university. She stated that the Chancellor indicated that the student judicial board has broader oversight and that they can sanction a student that has been accused, but yet not convicted. Bender and Zorn pointed out that the Senate passed resolutions stating that a student would be subject to disciplinary proceedings and sanctions under the University Disciplinary Procedures and if convicted, the student would be suspended from participation in any UNL-sponsored intercollegiate event. Chancellor Moeser stated that the Shevin Wiggins case has gone to the Student Judicial Board for due process and that he supports Coach Solich's decision. He pointed out that the Student Judicial Board decision should then stand although the Athletic Department may adhere to an even higher code of standards. He stated that we may want to look at the policy to see if it needs further clarification. He stated that at a recent conference, it was determined that representing a university is a privilege, not a right, and therefore the student can be suspended for misconduct.

5.2 Issues on the Horizon

Chancellor Moeser commended Latta for the admirable response she made to the Board of Regents after the Robert Dickeson presentation. Scheideler asked Chancellor Moeser if he felt that the Board of Regents may be leaning towards establishing a policy that would allow paying the overhead costs of buildings from the donations made to construct these buildings? Chancellor Moeser responded that he thought this may be happening. Zorn pointed out that while he does not want to discourage donations to the university, he felt that it was important that the additional costs of some of these projects needs to be considered. He noted that if reallocation must take place in order to support the maintenance and operation of a building, then it winds up costing the departments in the long run. Bryant stated that the Board of Regents should have a policy to deal with capital construction costs. Chancellor Moeser stated that he believed that the state has an obligation to help support the operation of these donated buildings. He pointed out that by law, the university must set aside 2% of new capital construction funds on a continuing basis to establish a permanent maintenance fund. This fund is held by the state. Latta asked if the next biennium budget process will be more aggressive in seeking these funds from the Legislature. Chancellor Moeser stated that it was too early in the process to be able to determine this. He noted that salaries are still a top priority in the budget.

6.0 Approval of 8/25/99 Minutes

Siekman moved and Prochaska Cue seconded the approval of the minutes as amended.

7.0 Unfinished Business

7.1 Academic Strategic Agenda

The committee reviewed and discussed the revision of the Academic Strategic Agenda. Scheideler suggested that this be made into a two-year master plan. Miller suggested putting a time line on some of the items listed. Humes stated that individual points should be cut out. Latta stated that they want to identify action statements. Miller suggested providing a list of the top priorities. Zorn noted that the organization needs improvement. Bryant suggested giving the Academic Senate a condensed version but maintain a master plan. Latta stated that she will revise the draft.

8.0 New Business

8.1 Resolutions

The committee reviewed a resolution calling for the adherence of existing procedures in dealing with large budget cuts which effect academic programs. Scheideler moved and Prochaska Cue seconded approval of the resolution. Bryant suggested a friendly amendment to slightly change the grammar. Motion approved. The committee then reviewed a resolution on capital construction costs. Siekman moved and Scheideler seconded approval of the resolution as amended. Motion approved.

8.2 Academic Program Committee Representation

Latta pointed out that the President of the Academic Senate can not serve on the Academic Planning Committee due to a conflict in meeting times between the two committees. She noted that in the past, Fred Choobineh, Industrial and Management Systems Engineering, has been the Senate President Designee but that the meeting time conflicts with his teaching assignment this semester. She asked the committee for suggestions on how to resolve this problem. Bryant suggested having the Executive Committee meet at a different time. Zorn pointed out that most members of the committee have arranged their teaching schedules to accommodate the Wednesday afternoon meeting. Griffin will email the committee members to determine if an alternative meeting time can be found for the six days of conflict with the Academic Planning Committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 PM. The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 8^th, 420 University Terrace, Room 203. Respectfully submitted, Miles Bryant, Secretary.