2002-03 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 3,
2002
UNIVERSITY SENATE MINUTES: No. 1
TWIN CITIES CAMPUS
ASSEMBLY MINUTES: No. 1
FACULTY SENATE MINUTES: No.
1
STUDENT SENATE MINUTES: No. 1
The first meeting of the University Senate, Twin Cities Campus Assembly,
and Faculty Senate for 2002-03 was convened in 25 Mondale Hall, Minneapolis
campus, on Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 2:15 p.m., as a joint meeting of the
three bodies. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or
signing the roll as present were 128 voting faculty/academic professional
members, 37 voting student members, 3 ex officio members, and 4 nonmembers.
Vice Chair Marti Hope Gonzales presided.
1. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Vice Chair Marti Hope Gonzales asked senators to keep their remarks
brief today because of the State of the University Address scheduled to begin at
2:59 p.m. She also noted that there are only two microphones available in the
outside aisles. If a senator wishes to make a comment, he or she should walk to
the microphone and state their name and unit affiliation before
proceeding.
2. TRIBUTE TO DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY
COMMUNITY
FACULTY/ACADEMIC PROFESSIONALS/STAFF
Theodore
Anderson
Professor
Sociology
1927 – 2002
Ladislav
Cerny
Professor
Civil Engineering
1927 – 2002
Dennis R.
Clayton
Department Director
Graduate School
1946 –
2002
Beulah Compton
Professor
Social Work
1919 –
2002
Edward J. Cowles
Professor
Science and Engineering –
Duluth
1918 – 2002
William A. Diaz
Professor
HHH Institute
of Public Affairs
1945 – 2002
Paul W.
Freed
Professor
School of Music
1927 – 2002
Marguerite
Gardner
Professor
Physical Med & Rehabilitation
1946 –
2002
Paul R. Giel
Director
Men’s Intercollegiate
Athletics
1932 – 2002
Richard Guilfrod
Professor
Social
Work
1909 – 2002
Ben E. Hallaway
Associate Professor
Lab
Medicine and Pathology
1919 – 2002
Laurence R.
Harper
Professor
Mathematics
1929 – 2002
John S. Hoyt,
Jr.
Professor
Independent and Distance Learning
1923 –
2002
Herbert Jonas
Professor
Plant Biology
1915 –
2002
Richard C. Jordan
Professor
Mechanical Engineering
1909
– 2002
Roger J. Larson
Professor
Minnesota Extension Service
East Central
1933 – 2002
Bernice W. Lund
Professor
Science
and Math
1913 – 2002
Jess H. Mottaz
Research
Fellow
Dermatology
1930 – 2002
Mark W.
Olson
Professor
Psychology – Duluth
1955 –
2002
Charles Rausch
Department Director
St. Paul Student
Center
1940 – 2002
Palmer
Rogers
Professor
Microbiology
1927 – 2002
Jay H.
Sautter
Professor
Vet Pathobiology
1912 – 2002
Marilyn
Schneider
Professor
French and Italian Literature
1933 –
2002
Hubert H. Serr
Professor
Dentistry
1914 –
2002
Theodore Stall
Professor
Concerts and Lectures
1908 –
2002
Robert W. Tenbensel
Professor
Epidemiology
1936 –
2002
Alfred Vaughan
Professor and Dean
Physics
1906 –
2002
Stephen S. Wang
Professor
East and South Asian
Languages
1934 – 2002
Richard
Widmer
Professor
Horticultural Sciences
1922 –
2002
STUDENTS
Mutinta Chilala
College of Business and Economics –
Duluth
Brandon Hall
General College
Damien M.
Jacklitch
College of Science and Engineering, Duluth
John H.
Mason
College of Continuing Education
Peter Murray
Carlson School
of Management
3. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSES TO SENATE AND ASSEMBLY
ACTIONS
Information
University Senate
|
Policy on Mid-term Alerts
|
|
Approved by the:
|
University Senate
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Administration June 26, 2002
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Board of Regents – no action required
|
|
2003-04 Crookston Calendar and 2002-03 and 2003-04 Morris
Calendars
|
|
Approved by the:
|
University Senate April 25, 2002
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Administration June 27, 2002
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Board of Regents – no action required
|
Faculty Senate
|
Exit Interviews for Faculty
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Faculty Senate April 25, 2002
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Administration see note*
|
|
Approved by the:
|
Board of Regents – no action required
|
* The Administration strongly supports the spirit of this request and will
direct Vice President Carol Carrier and Vice President/Vice Provost Robert Jones
to work with the subcommittee to determine need and benefit, discuss options and
strategies, and determine cost to benefit ratio for the proposed new Human
Resources program.
4. CLERK OF THE SENATE/ASSEMBLY
REPORT
Nominating Committee Election Results
Information for
the Faculty Senate
FOR INFORMATION:
In the recent election to fill a vacancy
on the Nominating Committee, Professor Richard Skaggs was elected to a
three-year term (July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2005).
CAROL WELLS, CLERK
UNIVERSITY
SENATE/
TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
5. CLERK OF THE SENATE/ASSEMBLY
REPORT
Committee on Committees Election Results
Information
for the Faculty Senate
FOR INFORMATION:
In the recent election to fill a vacancy
on the Committee on Committees, Professor Joel Weinsheimer was elected to a
three-year term (July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2005).
CAROL WELLS, CLERK
UNIVERSITY
SENATE/
TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
6. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
University
Grievance Policy
Information for the University Senate
The Senate Consultative Committee, in its charge, has the authority,
“to act on behalf of the Senate when a decision is required prior to the
next scheduled meeting of the Senate and when a decision is required when it
would not be possible to convene a special meeting of the Senate in a timely
fashion; such actions will be reported to the Senate at its next meeting and the
Senate may then overrule the Consultative Committee.”
Pursuant to that grant of authority, the Senate Consultative Committee
approved changes on behalf of the University Senate to the University Grievance
Policy on May 2, 2002. The policy is being distributed for
information.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
7. SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
Board of
Regents Policy on Honors, Awards, and Recognition
Information for the
University Senate
The Senate Consultative Committee approved changes to the Board of
Regents Policy on Honors, Awards, and Recognition on September 19, 2002. The
policy is being distributed for information.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
8. SENATE COMMITTEE ON FACULTY
AFFAIRS
Statement on Faculty Privacy
Information for the
Faculty Senate
The Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs has been considering faculty
privacy policy and current practice.
A major issue has emerged. The
Committee feels obligated to warn faculty about certain aspects of the privacy
issue. There is a legal gap in privacy protection for faculty.
In the
view of the Committee, the Minnesota Data Practices Act, at
http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/stats/13/, in essence removes many
protections that faculty may believe apply to research data, and possibly
personal communications.
The act permits anyone to request any records
that a faculty member has that are arguably relevant to any public or private
interest. These records may be on paper or electronic, maintained in an office
or home or on an office computer or even on an entirely private home computer.
This includes email, no matter where it is physically or electronically located
or how it was generated. There is no requirement that the information requested
actually be proven important to the public. This is the legal gap.
The
only current protection for research data arises from the “trade
secret” provisions of the act. Unpublished data may be considered a trade
secret. To what extent data in support of published research can still be
considered a trade secret is not clear to the Committee. Even data or
communications (email, for example) that faculty view as private may have to be
disclosed.
Requests for information can be sent anywhere in the
University. Affected faculty, department heads and deans can ask the General
Counsel’s Office for legal advice. This process may involve turning over
all potentially relevant data the General Counsel to see whether or not it is
protected under the provisions of the law. Even the process can be very onerous.
The law can be an effective harassment mechanism.
The law does not seem
to specify what data we must keep. Most faculty are probably repelled by the
thought of secure erasure of data and of data encryption, but these may be
options. Of course, many of us expect never to be the subject of a data
request.
Adopted unanimously May 7, 2002.
RICHARD GOLDSTEIN, 2001-02 CHAIR
SENATE
COMMITTEE ON FACULTY AFFAIRS
9. SENATE COMMITTEE ON FACULTY
AFFAIRS
Resolution to Eliminate the Waiting Period for the Faculty
Retirement Plan
Action by the Faculty Senate
New tenure track assistant professors must be employed for two years
before they can join the Faculty Retirement Plan. The funds that would be
contributed to the retirement plan have been given to their colleges by Central
Administration. Currently, however, the funds in the colleges are used for
“other” purposes. In contrast, P&A staff whose salary
exceeds $55,000 join the Faculty Retirement Plan at time of hire. It also should
be noted that no other Big Ten University has a waiting period for new
faculty.
If new tenure track faculty received their retirement benefits
for the first two years of their employment at the University, an analysis
indicates their retirement income could be as much as 17% higher than under the
present plan.
Because of compounding, the first two years of retirement
contributions play a very significant role in the retirement benefits of a
faculty member. A simple analysis, using reasonably conservative and
historical values for salary increases and growth of retirement funds from
investment gains, shows the importance of these contributions. Thus, providing
the first two years retirement benefits would result in an increase of 13-17% in
a faculty member’s retirement plan after a thirty-year career. Our
retirement program, which many of us boast about as being among the very best in
the nation, is drastically reduced by this loss.
If there is a
need for taking money from individuals’ retirement accounts, then the
colleges would be better served taking money from the last years of a faculty
member’s service, rather than the first two years. Thus, because of
“the power of compounding,” the first two years of retirement
investment provides more in the final retirement balance to an individual than
the last eight to ten years of retirement contributions in a thirty-year career
and the last twelve to thirteen years over a 40-year career.
Not being
able to provide retirement benefits for starting tenure track faculty has
resulted in some programs placing new hires in P&A status, where they can
start their retirement program immediately, and then moving them over to faculty
status after a few years. This procedure, in our view, is not the way to
handle the issue. Rather, since the retirement funds are already available
in the colleges and in many cases in departments, we believe the University
should immediately grant retirement benefits to all starting tenure-track
faculty.
The Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs had asked the
administration to drop this two-year waiting period for new faculty.
Unfortunately this has not, as yet, been approved. SCFA believes the
waiting period puts the University at a disadvantage in recruiting. It
also believes the difference between faculty and P&A appointments in terms
of initiation of retirement plans is unfair and ill-advised.
SCFA
recommends to the Faculty Senate that it ask the administration and the deans to
reconsider their position on this issue. In view of the importance of the first
two years of contributions to the retirement plan, the Committee once again
urges that the waiting period for Faculty Retirement Plan be eliminated for new
tenure-track faculty.
Adopted unanimously May 14,
2002.
JOHN FOSSUM, CHAIR
SENATE COMMITTEE ON FACULTY
AFFAIRS
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion a vote was taken and the
motion was approved.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
CONSENT AGENDA A
Action
by All Bodies
Agenda Items 10. through 12. are considered to be non-controversial or
“housekeeping” in nature and are offered as a “Consent
Agenda” to be taken up as a single item with one vote. Any item will be
taken up separately at the request of a senator. (A simple majority is required
for approval.)
10. MINUTES FOR APRIL 25, 2002
MOTION:
To approve the University Senate, Faculty Senate, and
Twin Cities Campus Assembly minutes, which are available on the Web at the
following URL. A simple majority is required for approval.
http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/u_senate/020425sen.html
CAROL WELLS, CLERK
UNIVERSITY
SENATE/
TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
11. SENATE AND ASSEMBLY OFFICERS
The chairs of the University Senate, Faculty Senate, Student Senate,
and Twin Cities Campus Assembly recommend the following officers for
2002-03:
Clerk – Professor Carol Wells
Parliamentarian
– Professor David McGowan
12. COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES
2002-03 Committees
of the University Senate, Faculty Senate,
and Twin Cities Campus
Assembly
University Senate committee memberships for
2002-03:
DISABILITIES ISSUES – Faculty: William Durfee
(chair), Felicia Hodge, Elizabeth Lightfoot, Virgil Mathiowetz, Ken
Myers, Harold Pickett, Joe Reichle. Academic Professionals: Harvey
Carlson, David Wuolu. Civil Service: 2 to be named. Students:
Christopher Johnstone, 1 to be named. Ex Officio: Bobbi Cordano,
Julie Sweitzer.
EDUCATIONAL POLICY – Faculty/PA: Martin
Sampson (chair), Wilbert Ahern, Dale Branton, Vernon Cardwell, Shawn Curley,
Frank Kulacki, Carol Miller, Marsha Odom, Karen Seashore, Mary Ellen Shaw, Mary
Sue Simmons, Douglas Wangensteen. Students: Scott Ferguson, Gretchen
Haas, 4 to be named. Ex Officio: Victor Bloomfield, Craig Swan, 1
to be named.
EQUITY, ACCESS, AND DIVERSITY – Faculty: Mary
Lay (chair), Stacey Aronson, Eric Burgess, Carol Chomsky, Margaret Moss, Jeffrey
Roberts, Srilata Zaheer, Jacquelyn Zita. Academic Professionals: Beverly
Balos, Shezwae Fleming. Students: Vanessa Bailey, 5 to be named.
Civil Service: Rose Blixt, Don Cavalier. Ex Officio: Sallye
McKee, Julie Sweitzer.
FINANCE AND PLANNING – Faculty:
Charles Speaks (chair), Jean Bauer, Bruce Brorson, Charles Campbell, David
Chapman, Robert Cudeck, Joseph Konstan, Michael Korth, Timothy Nantell, Terry
Roe, Warren Warwick. Academic Professionals: Thomas Klein, Sue Van
Voorhis. Civil Service: Stanley Bonnema, Susan Carlson Weinberg.
Students: Prince Amattoe, Brittny McCarthy-Barnes, Daniel O’Connor,
1 to be named. Ex Officio: Tim Church, Tom Gilson, Gary Jahn, Marvin
Marshak, Richard Pfutzenreuter, Laurie Scheich, Thomas Stinton, Michael
Volna.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES – Academic Professionals:
April Schwartz (chair), Mark Bellcourt, Josephine Crawford, Nancy Herther,
Thomas McRoberts. Faculty: Yosef Cohen, David Demuth, Stephen Downing,
Alan Ek, Douglas Ernie, Haesun Park, 1 to be named. Civil Service: Jeff
Johnson. Students: 3 to be named. Ex Officio: Steve Cawley, Eric
Celeste, Linda Jorn.
LIBRARY – Faculty/PA: William Phillips
(chair), Jennifer Alexander, John H. Anderson, Elaine Challacombe, Isaac Fox,
Lael Gatewood, Jill Gidmark, Leon Satkowski, Roderick Squires, Thomas Scanlan,
Ray Wakefield. Students: 4 to be named. Ex Officio: LeAnn Dean,
Sue Engelmann, Joan Howland, Wendy Lougee, Bill Sozansky, Owen Williams, 1 to be
named.
RESEARCH – Faculty: Gary Balas (chair), Melissa
Anderson, Kathleen Conklin, James Cotter, Sharon Danes, Kris Davidson, Larry
Jacobs, Paul Johnson, Katherine Klink, James Luby, Scott McConnell, Sharon Neet,
James Orf, Virginia Seybold, 1 to be named. Academic Professionals:
Gerry Baldridge, Barbara Van Drasek. Civil Service: Sabine Fritz.
Students: 3 to be named. Ex Officio: Victor Bloomfield, Robin
Dittmann, David Hamilton, Phillip Larsen, Wendy Lougee, Mark Paller, Thomas
Schumacher.
SOCIAL CONCERNS – Faculty: Mark Pedelty (chair),
Jeffrey Crump, Kenneth Heller, Margaret Kuchenreuther, Luis Ramos-Garcia, Ben
Senauer, 1 to be named. Academic Professionals: Judi Linder, Jennifer
Oliphant, Ruth Taylor. Civil Service: Albert Cooper, Sheri Huerd, Susan
Von Bank. Alumni: Roger Beck, Karen Holtmeier, Yvonne Redmond-Brown.
Students: Joel Helfrich, 6 to be named. Ex Officio: Greg Schooler,
Julie Sweitzer, H. Jeanie Taylor.
STUDENT ACADEMIC INTEGRITY -
Faculty/PA: Dorothy Anderson (chair), Mark Bellcourt, Shawn Curley, Robert
Pepin, David Roberts, Daniel Svedarsky, Ava Trent, Carston Wagner. Students:
Elizabeth McCann, 4 to be named. Ex Officio: Betty Hackett, Laura
Coffin Koch.
STUDENT AFFAIRS - Faculty/PA: Cheryl Meyers (chair),
Yasemin Kaygisiz, Amy Lee, Gerald Rinehart Janet Schottel, 1 to be named.
Civil Service: David Lenander. Alumni: Cheryl Jorgensen.
Students: Clarence Peterson, 8 to be named. Ex Officio: Kathryn
Brown.
FOR INFORMATION:
ALL-UNIVERSITY HONORS –
Faculty: Shirley Garner (chair), Vernon Cardwell, Lester Drewes, Sara Evans,
Mary Lou Fellows, Jooinn Lee, V. Rama Murthy, 1 to be named. Academic
Professionals: Stacie Christen, Jean Kucera. Alumni: Jacqueline
Byrd, Archie Givens, Judy Lebedoff, Brian Osberg, H. William Walter.
Students: Aimee Martin, Tom Walsh, 1 to be named. Ex Officio:
Gerald Fischer, Virginia Hansen, Cheryl Jones, Elizabeth
Wroblewski.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES – Faculty: Dina Lopez
(chair), Carl Adams, Jean Bauer, Susan Brorson, Carol Chomsky, Mary Dempsey,
Thomas Fletcher, Catherine French, Kathryn Hanna, Richard Poppele, Deon
Stuthman, Ken Wallace, Joel Weinsheimer. Academic Professionals: Randy
Croce, Lynne Schuman. Students: Matt Dewerff (chair), Judy Berning,
Zeina Dajani, Christina Frazier, 3 to be named.
CONSULTATIVE –
Faculty: Daniel Feeney (chair), Muriel Bebeau, Susan Brorson, Tom
Clayton, Arthur Erdman, Mary Jo Kane, Candace Kruttschnitt, Marvin Marshak,
Judith Martin, Jeff Ratliff-Crain. Academic Professional: Teresa
Wallace. Students: Judy Berning (chair), Nick Cecconi, Yev Garif,
Anthony Heryla, Kelsi Holland, Kari Lindeman, Nathan Saete, Eric Steinhoff, Tom
Walsh. Ex Officio: Yev Garif, Marti Hope Gonzales, Ryan Osero, Martin
Sampson, Charles Speaks, 1 to be named.
Faculty Senate committee
memberships for 2002-03:
FACULTY AFFAIRS – Faculty:
John Fossum (chair), Carole Bland, Terence Collins, A. Saari Csallany,
Richard Goldstein, Darwin Hendel, Cleon Melsa, Dwight Purdy, Wade Savage, Larry
Wallace, Tom Walsh, Carol Wells, Timothy Wiedmann, Aks Zaheer. Academic
Professionals: Jessie Daniels, Kathleen Sellew. Ex Officio: Carol
Carrier, William Garrard, Robert Jones, Theodor Litman, 2 to be named.
Students: 2 to be named.
JUDICIAL – Faculty: George
Sheets (chair), F. Ron Akehurst, David Biesboer, Patrick Brezonik, Edward
Cushing, Amos Deinard, Mary Dempsey, Bruce Downing, Jeanette Gundel, Patrick
Hanna, Cynthia Jara, Diane Katsiaficas, Carol Klee, Sanford Lipsky, Karin
Musier-Forsyth, Ken Myers, Sharon Neet, Phyllis Pirie, James Van Alstine, Robert
Yahnke.
FOR INFORMATION:
FACULTY CONSULTATIVE –
Faculty: Daniel Feeney (chair), Muriel Bebeau, Susan Brorson, Tom
Clayton, Arthur Erdman, Mary Jo Kane, Candace Kruttschnitt, Marvin Marshak,
Judith Martin, Jeff Ratliff-Crain. Ex Officio: Gary Balas, John Fossum,
Marti Hope Gonzales, Marc Jenkins, Mary McEvoy, Martin Sampson, Charles Speaks,
1 to be named.
Twin Cities Campus Assembly committee memberships for
2002-03:
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON ATHLETICS – Faculty/PA:
Eugene Borgida (chair), Linda Brady, Arthur Erdman, Mary Jo Kane, Laura
Coffin Koch, Elaine Tyler May, Gerald Rinehart, Richard Weinberg, 1 to be named.
Civil Service: Duane Nelson. Alumni: Juanita Luis, John Shasky.
Students: Lindsey Hillesheim, 3 to be named. Ex Officio: Carol
Gruber, Frank Kara, Joel Maturi.
EDUCATIONAL POLICY –
Faculty/PA: Martin Sampson (chair), Dale Branton, Vernon Cardwell, Shawn
Curley, Frank Kulacki, Carol Miller, Karen Seashore, Mary Ellen Shaw, Mary Sue
Simmons, Douglas Wangensteen. Students: Scott Ferguson, Gretchen
Haas, 3 to be named. Ex Officio: Victor Bloomfield, Craig Swan, 1
to be named.
FACULTY ACADEMIC OVERSIGHT ON INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS
–
Faculty: Laura Coffin Koch (chair), Eugene Borgida, Linda
Brady, Jo-Ida Hansen, Perry Leo, Susan Mantell, Earl Scott, Cathrine Wambach,
Richard Weinberg. Ex Officio: Carol Grubber, Frank
Kara.
STUDENT BEHAVIOR – Faculty/PA: John S. Anderson
(chair), Jane Carlstrom, Patricia Fillipi, Michael LuBrant, James Luby, Judy
Rayburn, Michael Rodriguez, Bruce Schelske, Carol Shield, Eden Torres.
Students: Zeina Dajani, Ryan Mann, Elizabeth McCann, Daniel
O’Connor, at least 6 to be named. Ex Officio: Betty
Hackett.
FOR INFORMATION:
ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTER
PROVOSTAL FACULTY CONSULTATIVE – Faculty: Marc Jenkins (chair), Denis
Clohisy, Edward Combs, Jean Forster, Lois Heller, Christine Mueller, Michael
Murphy, Ronald Sawchuk. Ex Officio: Tim Church, 1 to be
named.
ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTER STUDENT CONSULTATIVE – Student:
Melissa Highman (chair), Jessica Hammell, Alisa Madson, Matthew Wiisanen, 4
to be named.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES – Faculty: 1 to be
named (chair), Carl Adams, Jean Bauer, Carol Chomsky, Mary Dempsey, Thomas
Fletcher, Catherine French, Kathryn Hanna, Richard Poppele, Deon Stuthman, Joel
Weinsheimer. Academic Professionals: Randy Croce, Lynne Schuman.
Students: 1 to be named (chair), Judy Berning, Zeina Dajani, Christina
Frazier, 1 to be named.
COUNCIL ON LIBERAL EDUCATION – Faculty:
Richard McCormick (chair), Greg Anderson, John S. Anderson, Terence Collins,
Ernest Davenport, John Dickey, Gordon Duke, Joyce Leon, Lary May, Lisa Norling,
George Spangler, Vaughan Voller. Academic Professional: Beverly
Atkinson. Students: 2 to be named.
NOMINATING – Faculty:
1 to be named (chair), Charles Campbell, Patrice Morrow, Jean Quam, Nelson
Rhodus, Richard Skaggs, Carol Wells. Academic Professional: Vicki
Glasgow, 1 to be named.
STEERING – Faculty: Daniel Feeney
(chair), Muriel Bebeau, Tom Clayton, Arthur Erdman, Mary Jo Kane, Candace
Kruttschnitt, Marvin Marshak, Judith Martin. Academic Professional:
Teresa Wallace. Students: Judy Berning (chair), Yev Garif, Anthony
Heryla, Kari Lindeman, Tom Walsh. Ex Officio: Yev Garif, Marti Hope
Gonzales, Ryan Osero, Martin Sampson, Charles Speaks, 1 to be
named.
DIAN LOPEZ, CHAIR
COMMITTEE ON
COMMITTEES
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion a vote was taken and the
motion was approved.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF CONSENT AGENDA A
13. SENATE/FACULTY CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
REPORT
Professor Dan Feeney, Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC),
welcomed senators to the first meeting of the Senate. He then introduced
several people who make these meetings happen: Becky Hippert, Vickie Courtney,
Gary Engstrand, Renee Dempsey, Professor Carol Wells as Clerk of the Senate, and
Professor David McGowan as the Senate Parliamentarian.
Most of the items
on today’s agenda are housekeeping in nature. Two items of considerable
importance are electronic voting and provostal consultative committees.
Returning senators know that sometimes there is a problem with having enough
senators at a meeting to pass amendments to the Constitution and Bylaws. There
is an amendment that will allow electronic voting as a back-up method only if
there are not enough people at a meeting. This amendment is not an intention to
subvert the action of the Senate, but is simply meant to make better use of
senators’ time. The second item is two remove two of the old provostal
committees which are no longer functioning.
Regarding the Faculty
Consultative Committee (FCC), there are several items that it is working on.
One is the stadium. FCC has made a statement including a list of questions and
concerns. FCC has not weighed in for or against the proposal but would like to
know what effect it will have on campus. Several senators wanted to discuss
this item in depth. Because of the time constraint a discussion cannot be held
today, but time has been allotted on October 31 Senate agenda for this
discussion. This discussion will still be timely since the Regents will not be
making a decision until December. A straw poll is being taken electronically
for those people who wanted to weigh in early.
Other issues for FCC are
research secrecy, service unit accountability to the academic mission, the
presidential search, and regularly-scheduled meetings with Twin Cities Campus
deans. Earlier today, FCC met with Vice President David Hamilton regarding
research infrastructure, animal care and use, and human subjects review. A
questionnaire will be sent out on this last issue.
In closing, he asked
senators to contact him with any issues that they felt FCC should be
addressing.
14. PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH REPORT
Professor Sara Evans, a faculty member of the Presidential Search
Advisory Committee, said that she, along with Professors John Sullivan and
Wilbert Ahern, are the faculty members on the committee. She stated that she
cannot share much information since the nature of the process is for everything
to be confidential to generate the best possible pool of candidates.
She
encouraged senators to think about everyone that they know in the country and
nominate that person or ask them to suggest other nominees. The committee needs
to use existing networks to get at the best candidates for the
position.
Professor Evans noted that one concern regarding the process is
that there are only three faculty on the committee, and of these three, two are
historians and two are from the College of Liberal Arts in the Twin Cities.
There are no scientists or faculty from a professional school. To be an
effective faculty voice on this committee, the three committee members have been
meeting with as many faculty leadership groups as possible. This includes
faculty leadership groups at Duluth, Crookston, and Morris, as well as IT, CLA,
CBS, COAFES, AHC, CSOM, and Law in the Twin Cities. For those senators who have
not had an opportunity to meet with the committee members, they are willing to
receive the issues, concerns, and priorities by e-mail or
voicemail.
15. BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT
Update
on Open Enrollment 2003
Professor Fred Morrison, Chair of the Benefits Advisory Committee
(BAC), reminded senators that open enrollment for health benefits is October 16
through November 15 and everyone must re-enroll because dental benefits are
changing. There are also some small changes in the medical benefits, so please
read the information carefully. In particular, there will be a change in the
tiers for some of the care systems in Patient Choice and a change in the
Definity offering.
Additionally, there will be changes in the life
insurance program. The principle change is that the cost for optional insurance
has been reduced between 30-50 percent. For standard life insurance, there will
be reduction in benefits in accordance with the Age Discrimination Act for
people over 65 years of age.
The BAC is currently considering offering a
new benefit on medical evacuation for people who are more than 150 miles from
home and primarily in foreign countries. This benefits has not been finalized.
Bids are currently out and proposals are due in November.
BAC is also
reviewing the successes and problems with the current medial plans. If anyone
has any comments, please send them to the Senate Office for disbursement to the
BAC.
This year the University, instead of the state, will be the insured
party for dental benefits so different choices will be offered. While most of
the plans remain the same, the former state dental plan will have a broader
network, with an increase of 400-500 dentists, and will be provided by Delta
Dental. A non-network plan will also be offered, at an increased premium cost
and a fee for restorative services.
_______________________________________
MOTION B – RULES
CHANGES
Action by All Bodies
Agenda Items 16. through 19. are offered as a one motion to be taken up
as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the
request of a senator. A simple majority is required for approval.
16. UNIVERSITY SENATE RULES
AMENDMENT
Electronic Participation
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 7 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined).
ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE
...
7. Procedures for Committees of the Senate
...
- Committee members may participate and vote in committee meetings
through an electronic connection.
- The chair or a committee
member who voted on the prevailing side, was absent, abstained, or did not vote
may move, by electronic communication, that an action taken by the committee be
reconsidered. The motion to reconsider, including a proposed disposition, must
be made to or by the chair within two business days after the meeting was
adjourned. Committee members must vote, by electronic communication, within two
business days from the time the motion to reconsider was distributed. The
number of votes cast on the motion must meet or exceed the requirement for a
quorum; if that number is achieved, a two-thirds majority of those voting is
needed for approval of the motion to
reconsider.
...
COMMENT:
There have been times
when committee members have voted one way on a particular matter and then, after
overnight thought, decided the outcome was undesirable and wished to reconsider
the item. There has been no legitimate way to reconsider an item immediately
unless a special meeting of a committee is called. This change in the rules,
which is only possible on practical grounds because of the advent of email,
would allow a committee to vote, by two-thirds majority and within four days of
the meeting, to change its mind on an action it took. ("Four days" because a
committee member eligible to make a motion to reconsider would have up to two
days after the meeting to make the motion; the committee would then have two
additional days to vote on the motion.)
Although it is unlikely this
option will be used very often, the fact that it has arisen on occasion suggests
that it might be a helpful device for committees.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
17. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY RULES
AMENDMENT
Electronic Participation
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 7 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined).
ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE
ASSEMBLY
...
7. Procedures for Committees of the Assembly
...
-
Committee members may participate and vote in committee meetings through an
electronic connection.
- The chair or a committee member who voted
on the prevailing side, was absent, abstained, or did not vote may move, by
electronic communication, that an action taken by the committee be reconsidered.
The motion to reconsider, including a proposed disposition, must be made to or
by the chair within two business days after the meeting was adjourned.
Committee members must vote, by electronic communication, within two business
days from the time the motion to reconsider was distributed. The number of
votes cast on the motion must meet or exceed the requirement for a quorum; if
that number is achieved, a two-thirds majority of those voting is needed for
approval of the motion to
reconsider.
...
COMMENT:
See the comment to the
previous motion.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
18. UNIVERSITY SENATE RULES AMENDMENT
Ex
Officio Representation
Action by the University Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 2 of the University Senate Rules as follows
(new language is underlined; language to be deleted is
struck-out).
ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY
SENATE
...
2. Ex Officio Members of Senate
Committees
...
- All-University Honors--Office
of the Executive Vice President and Provost; Office of the Vice President for
Institutional University Relations (three
representatives, including one from Alumni Relations and one from the University
Development Office)
- Disabilities Issues--Office of the
Executive Vice President and Provost (one from the Disability Services
Office and the University ADA coordinator); Office for Campus Life
(one from the Disability Services
Office)
...
- Equity, Access, and
Diversity--Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost (two
representatives, including one from the Office of Equal Opportunity and
Affirmative Action); Office for Campus Life (one from the Office for
Multicultural and Academic Affairs)
- Faculty
Affairs--Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost; representative
of the University of Minnesota Retirees Association; Office of the Vice
President for Human Resources (two representatives, including one from Employee
Benefits); Chair (or his/her designee) of the Academic Health Center Faculty
Affairs Subcommittee; Chair, Tenure Committee
Subcommittee
...
- Information Technologies--Office
of the Executive Vice President and Provost (two representatives, including the
chief information officer); University Librarian (or his or her
designee), Twin Cities Campus; Chair (or his/her designee) of the Library
Committee
...
- Research--Office of the Executive
Vice President and Provost (two representatives, including the Director of
Agricultural Experiment Stations); Office of the Treasurer
Office of Budget and Finance; Office of the Senior Vice President for
Health Sciences; Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School;
University Librarian (his or her designee); Director of Research
Compliance
...
- Social Concerns--Office of the Vice
President for Campus Life; Office of the Treasurer Office of
Budget and Finance (Asset Management); Office of the Executive Vice
President and Provost (Office of Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative
Action)
...
- Tenure—Chair,
Committee on Faculty Affairs, Office of the Executive Vice President and
Provost; Office of the Vice President for Human
Resources
COMMENT:
The Senate Parliamentarian has
ruled that when the ex officio membership of a committee is identified by
individual position (e.g., University Librarian), the individual identified must
serve and cannot appoint a designee. This follows from an earlier ruling by the
Parliamentarian a number of years ago that committee membership is personal and
that proxies or alternates cannot be appointed. The default rule for ex officio
members is that they are subject to the same provisions as other committee
members, unless there is a provision specifying something to the contrary.
Since there is no such provision in Senate governing documents, the University
Librarian must serve on the Information Technologies Committee.
The
Consultative Committee believes that while the University Librarian should serve
personally on the Library Committee (and thus does not recommend changing the
same provision in the designation of ex officio members on the Library
Committee), it does believe that the University Librarian should have the option
of designating someone to represent the office on the Information Technologies
Committee.
The other changes are editorial.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
19. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY RULES
AMENDMENT
Ex Officio Representation
Action by the Twin
Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 2 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Rules as
follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted is
struck-out).
ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE
ASSEMBLY
...
2. Ex Officio members of Assembly
Committees
...
- Advisory Committee on
Athletics--Directors Director of intercollegiate
athletics; Director of Academic Counseling; Director of
Compliance
...
COMMENT:
This is an editorial change
to reflect the structure change in the Department of Intercollegiate
Athletics.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
A senator noted that the ex officio membership
for the Research Committee should be changed to read “Vice President for
Research” and “Director for Compliance” due to administrative
changes. These changes were accepted as friendly amendments.
With no
further discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF MOTION B
_______________________________________
MOTION C – BYLAWS
CHANGES
Action by All Bodies
Agenda Items 20. through 27. are offered as a one motion to be taken up
as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the
request of a senator.
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Senate bylaws, a motion requires either a majority
of all voting members of the Senate (115) at one regular or special meeting, or
a majority of all members of the Senate present and voting at each of two
meetings. As an amendment to the Assembly bylaws, a motion requires either a
majority of all voting members of the Assembly (99) at one regular or special
meeting, or a majority of all members of the Assembly present and voting at each
of two meetings. This is the first meeting at which these motions are being
presented.
20. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Faculty
Consultative Committee
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined; language to be deleted is
struck-out).
ARTICLE III. SENATE
COMMITTEES
3. CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEES
...
Faculty Consultative
Committee
Membership
...
- Each
campus faculty shall submit to the clerk of the campus assembly a slate of twice
as many candidates as are to be elected from its numbers. These candidates
shall be nominated and certified as available according to procedures set forth
by each campus assembly, and shall be announced in the campus assembly docket
for the first regular meeting of the spring semester. The clerk of the campus
assembly shall distribute, by mail, election ballots and slates to all faculty
members eligible to vote for members of the Senate and shall receive all
returns. The election shall be held and completed during a period
commencing February 1 and ending March 10 by April 5. In case
of a tie, the clerk shall choose the successful candidate by
lot.
COMMENT:
Since the election for the Faculty
Consultative Committee (FCC) can not begin until the ballot has been approved,
and since this approval does not take place until the end of February at the
first Faculty Senate meeting of spring semester, the FCC recommends that the
election period be extended in order to be in compliance with the provision in
the Bylaws.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
21. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Faculty
Senate Elections
Action by the University Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article I, Section 2b of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined; language to be deleted is
struck-out).
ARTICLE I. UNIVERSITY SENATE
MEMBERSHIP, ELECTIONS, AND OFFICERS
1. Voting Units
...
2. Faculty/Academic Professional Elections
The elected representatives of the faculties shall be elected in accordance
with the following procedures:
a. Each spring before April 1, the clerk of the University Senate shall
prepare for each faculty/academic professional unit listed in Section 1 of this
Article a list of all persons in that unit who, as of March 1, are entitled to
vote for Senate members, and shall send the appropriate number of copies thereof
to the administrative head of each unit.
b. Between April 1 and April 30, each unit listed in Section 1 of this
Article shall conduct an election for Senate members and alternate members, if
any. Each unit shall establish its own procedures for conducting its elections.
The results of the elections shall be mailed to the clerk of the Senate not
later than May 5.
In establishing election procedures, each unit must adhere to the
following principles and must provide notice of these principles to all
individuals eligible to vote:
--everyone in the unit eligible to serve in the Senate must be provided
the opportunity to nominate individuals in the unit to be candidates for the
Senate (including nominating themselves).
--everyone in the unit eligible to serve in the Senate must be provided
the opportunity to vote in the Senate elections.
--write-in candidates must be permitted, and notice of that option must
appear on any ballot.
--ballots must be distributed to all eligible voters at least three
working days before they are due.
--the ballot must make clear that elections are college-wide, not
department-based.
--the Senate office will provide a ballot template that colleges and
campuses may use.
...
COMMENT:
The Faculty
Consultative Committee has been made aware that on occasion, in some units, not
all eligible individuals in a unit were permitted to participate in the
nomination process for Senate members. It has also been the case that eligible
individuals were not permitted to be on the ballot. As a result of such
incidents, FCC recommends that the Senate approve these minimum standards for
the conduct of elections to the Senate.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
22. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Presidential Appointment of Civil Service
Members
Action by the University Senate
MOTION:
To authorize the Senate Consultative Committee
and Assembly Steering Committee to make all necessary editorial changes to the
Senate and Assembly bylaws concerning the appointment of civil service staff
members to committees.
COMMENT:At present, the Civil
Service Committee nominates to the President individuals to fill slots on Senate
and Assembly committees allocated to civil service staff. The President and the
Civil Service Committee have agreed that the Civil Service Committee should
simply make the appointments, without presidential involvement in the
process.
This motion authorizes the steering committees of the Senate and
the Assembly to make the appropriate editorial changes in the membership
provision for each Senate and Assembly committee that provides for civil service
staff membership.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
23. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Presidential Appointment of Civil Service
Members
Action by the Twin Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To authorize the Senate Consultative Committee and Assembly Steering
Committee to make all necessary editorial changes to the Senate and Assembly
bylaws concerning the appointment of civil service staff members to
committees.
COMMENT:
See the comment to the previous
motion.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
24. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Annual
Reports
Action by the University Senate
MOTION:
To amend the University Senate Bylaws to remove
from the list of committee responsibilities for all committees the
responsibility to write an annual report.
COMMENT:
Rather
than present the very long list of committees with the strike-outs showing that
this item in each committee charge will be deleted, the Consultative Committee
requests approval from the Senate and Assembly to make the changes in the
bylaws.
Annual reports were perhaps useful in a day when committee
minutes were not widely distributed and were not available on the web. Now,
however, when some committee minutes are distributed widely to the University
community, and when all minutes are available on the web, preparing an annual
report is redundant. It is only rarely--if ever--that anyone looks at annual
reports; they languish in committee files in the Senate office. We see no sense
in asking committee chairs or the Senate staff to prepare reports that no one
reads and that are of no use to anyone.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
25. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Annual Reports
Action by the Twin Cities Campus
Assembly
MOTION:
To amend the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
to remove from the list of committee responsibilities for all committees the
responsibility to write an annual report.
COMMENT:
See the
comment to the previous motion.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
26. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Nominating Committee
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 6 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted
is struck-out).
6. NOMINATING COMMITTEE
...
Membership
The Nominating Committee shall consist of seven tenured or tenure-track
faculty and two academic professional staff members. Both the faculty and the
academic professional members shall serve for three-year terms. In case of a
vacancy, the remaining members, by majority vote, shall fill the vacancy by
interim appointment until the next general election.
...
COMMENT:
At present there is no mechanism for replacing a member of the Nominating
Committee who has resigned or is otherwise unable to complete his or her term.
The Consultative Committee recommends that the Nominating Committee have
available the same mechanism available to the Consultative Committee and the
Committee on Committees: election of someone to fill the vacancy until the next
election.
Normally the Committee on Committees will fill any vacancy that occurs on a
Senate or Assembly committee. In the case of committees whose members are
elected rather than appointed, however, it is awkward to try to conduct mid-year
elections to fill a slot for a few months. We believe it more effective and
efficient simply to allow the group to elect someone to fill the position until
the next election (by the Assembly) in the spring.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
27. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Advisory Committee on Athletics
Action by the Twin
Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 5 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted
is struck-out).
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEES
5. INTERCOLLEGIATE
ATHLETICS
...
To carry out these responsibilities delegated to
it by the Board of Regents, the Assembly establishes the following
agencies:
- The Faculty Academic Oversight Committee for Intercollegiate Athletics,
composed of faculty, has responsibility for academic progress and academic
integrity in the athletic programs, and for monitoring eligibility and
compliance issues. (See by-law
4A 5A.)
- The Advisory Committee on Athletics, composed of students, alumni, and
faculty and other employees of the University, advises the President, the
responsible vice presidents, and the athletics departments on other issues,
including the achievement of equity, budget and facilities issues. (See by-law
4B 5B.)
- Faculty Representatives will represent the University in external governing
organizations and will perform other duties assigned in these by-laws. (See
by-law
4C 5C.)
...
5B.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
ATHLETICS
...
Membership
The Advisory Committee
on Athletics shall consist of the following voting members:
(1) a Chair,
who must be a tenured faculty member, who holds no administrative appointment
higher than department chair or head, appointed by the President after
consultation with the Assembly Steering Committee, for a term of three
(3) years one year;
...
The
directors director of intercollegiate athletics, the
director of academic counseling and the director of compliance shall serve as
non-voting ex officio members.
...
COMMENT:
No
chairs are appointed for three-year terms; committee chairs are always for one
year with the possibility of reappointment. It was not intended that the
appointment as chair be for three years; this change brings the term of the
Advisory Committee Chair into line with the terms of all other
chairs.
The other changes are editorial in nature to reflect the
structure change in the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics and the change
in the order of the Bylaws.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion a vote was taken and the
University Senate motions were approved with 146 in favor and none opposed. The
Twin Cities Campus Assembly motions were approved with 121 in favor and none
opposed.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF MOTION C
_______________________________________
MOTION D – CONSTITUTION
CHANGES
Action by All Bodies
Agenda Items 28. through 31. are offered as a one motion to be taken up
as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the
request of a senator.
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Senate Constitution, a motion requires either a
two-thirds majority of all voting members of the Senate (152) at one regular or
special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Senate (115) at each of two
meetings. As an amendment to the Assembly Constitution, a motion requires
either a two-thirds majority of all voting members of the Assembly (131) at one
regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Assembly (99) at
each of two meetings. This is the first meeting at which these motions are
being presented.
28. UNIVERSITY SENATE CONSTITUTION
AMENDMENT
University Senate Officers
Action by the
University Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 6 of the University Senate Constitution as
follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE III. UNIVERSITY SENATE
...
6.
University Senate and Student Senate Officers
a. The president of the
University shall chair the University Senate. A vice chair shall be elected by
the Senate at its last regularly scheduled meeting in the spring semester of the
academic year from among its current members for a term of one
year and shall be eligible for re-election. The president, with the consent of
the Senate, shall appoint a clerk and a parliamentarian of the Senate
(non-members of the Senate), whose duties shall be prescribed in the Senate
Bylaws.
...
COMMENT:
The Consultative Committee does not believe there is any compelling
reason to restrict the choice of Senate or Assembly vice chair from the current
members of the Senate or Assembly. The traditional practice for a number of
years (although not required by any Senate or Assembly rule) is that the faculty
(typically the Faculty Consultative Committee) nominate the vice chair of the
Senate and the students (typically the Student Senate Consultative Committee)
nominate the vice chair of the Assembly. When the vice chair of the University
Senate is a faculty member, that individual has also automatically served as
chair of the Faculty Senate (in the event a student were elected vice chair of
the University Senate, the Faculty Senate would elect from among its members
someone to serve as vice chair). The vice chair of the Senate is a voting
member of the Senate and Faculty Consultative Committees (or, if the vice chair
of the University Senate were a student, the vice chair of the Faculty Senate
would serve as a voting member of the Faculty Consultative Committee).
The Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC), in identifying a nominee to
serve as vice chair of the University and Faculty Senates, considers the balance
of its membership. To restrict the nominations to current members of the Senate
or Assembly restricts the degrees of freedom FCC has to ensure it can adequately
represent the interests of faculty from across the University.
The
Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC), believes this change would provide
an opportunity for one more student to become involved in the University and
Student Senates. With the small number of student senators compared to the
total student population, many student voices and opinions are often left
unheard or unknown. If the student elected was a nonmember, one more student
prospective would be brought forth, allowing the Student Senate to better
represent the student body.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
29. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY CONSTITUTION
AMENDMENT
Twin Cities Campus Assembly Officers
Action by the
Twin Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article II, Section 4 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly
Constitution as follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted is
struck out).
ARTICLE II. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
...
4. Assembly Officers
The president of the University
shall chair the Assembly. A vice chair shall be elected by the Assembly at its
last meeting in the spring semester of the academic year from among its
current members for a term of one year and shall be eligible for
re-election. The president, with the consent of the Assembly, shall appoint a
clerk and a parliamentarian of the Assembly (non-members of the Assembly), whose
duties shall be prescribed in the Assembly Bylaws and
Rules.
...
COMMENT:
See the comment to the previous motion.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
30. UNIVERSITY SENATE CONSTITUTION
AMENDMENT
Electronic Voting
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article VIII and Article IX of the University Senate Constitution
as follows (new language is underlined).
ARTICLE VIII AMENDING PROCEDURE
An amendment to this Constitution shall be approved either by a two-thirds
majority of all voting members of the University Senate at a regular or special
meeting, or by a majority of all voting members of the Senate at each of two
meetings, the second of which shall be the next regular meeting; and provided
the proposed amendment has been distributed, in writing, to the persons and in
the manner provided in Article III, Section 7, for distribution of the Senate
agenda, at least ten days prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the
proposed amendment. An amendment shall be effective following approval by the
University Senate and by the Board of Regents.
If a proposed constitutional amendment has received affirmative
votes of 80% or more of those present and voting at a meeting of the Senate, but
the number of votes cast is insufficient to adopt the amendment (either a
two-thirds majority of all voting members at one meeting or a majority of all
voting members at the second of two meetings), the amendment may be submitted
electronically to all members of the Senate for a second vote. The votes must
be cast no later than three working days from the time of adjournment of the
Senate meeting at which the item was considered. The number of votes required
for electronic approval will be the same as the number required for approval at
the meeting.
ARTICLE IX. BYLAWS
The University Senate may enact or amend its Bylaws either by a majority of
all voting members of the University Senate at a regular or special meeting, or
by a majority of all members of the Senate present and voting at each of two
meetings, the second of which shall be the next regular meeting, provided the
proposed change has been submitted, in writing, to each member of the Senate at
least ten days prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the proposed
change.
If a proposed bylaw amendment has received affirmative votes of 80% or
more of those present and voting at a meeting of the Senate, but the number of
votes cast is insufficient to adopt the amendment (either a majority of all
voting members at one meeting or a majority those present and voting at the
second of two meetings), the amendment may be submitted electronically to all
members of the Senate for a second vote. The votes must be cast no later than
three working days from the time of adjournment of the Senate meeting at which
the item was considered. The number of votes required for electronic approval
will be the same as the number required for approval at the
meeting.
COMMENT:
There have been repeated occasions
over the past several years when constitutional or bylaw amendments have
received unanimous or near-unanimous support from the Senate or Assembly but
which were nonetheless not adopted because the required absolute majority vote
was not obtained simply because there were not enough people present at the
meeting. The Senate Consultative Committee recommends that when an item has
received the support of at least 80% of those present at a meeting (and most of
these items receive 100% support), the Senate office be permitted to submit the
item to senators electronically for a vote of all members. If members of the
Senate or Assembly fulfill their responsibility and respond to the electronic
ballot, most of the proposals could then be adopted promptly and the business of
the Senate and Assembly could proceed unimpeded.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
31. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY CONSTITUTION
AMENDMENT
Electronic Voting
Action by the Twin Cities Campus
Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article VI and Article VII of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly
Constitution as follows (new language is underlined).
ARTICLE VI. AMENDING PROCEDURE
An amendment to this Constitution shall be approved either by a two-thirds
majority of all voting members of the Assembly at a meeting, or by a majority of
all voting members of the Assembly at each of two meetings; and provided the
proposed amendment has been distributed, in writing, to the persons and in the
manner provided in Article II, Section 5, for distribution of the Assembly
agenda, at least ten days prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the
proposed amendment. An amendment shall be effective following approval by the
Assembly and the regents.
If a proposed constitutional amendment has received affirmative votes of
80% or more of those present and voting at a meeting of the Assembly, but the
number of votes cast is insufficient to adopt the amendment (either a two-thirds
majority of all voting members at one meeting or a majority of all voting
members at the second of two meetings), the amendment may be submitted
electronically to all members of the Assembly for a second vote. The votes must
be cast no later than three working days from the time of adjournment of the
Assembly meeting at which the item was considered. The number of votes required
for electronic approval will be the same as the number required for approval at
the meeting.
ARTICLE VII. BYLAWS
The Assembly may enact or amend its Bylaws either by majority of all voting
members of the Assembly at a regular or special meeting, or by a majority of all
members of the Assembly present and voting at each of two meetings, the second
of which shall be the next regular meeting, provided the proposed change has
been submitted, in writing, to each member of the Assembly at least ten days
prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the proposed change.
If a proposed bylaw amendment has received affirmative votes of 80% or
more of those present and voting at a meeting of the Assembly, but the number of
votes cast is insufficient to adopt the amendment (either a majority of all
voting members at one meeting or a majority those present and voting at the
second of two meetings), the amendment may be submitted electronically to all
members of the Assembly for a second vote. The votes must be cast no later than
three working days from the time of adjournment of the Assembly meeting at which
the item was considered. The number of votes required for electronic approval
will be the same as the number required for approval at the
meeting.
COMMENT:
See the comment to the previous
motion.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion, a vote was taken and the
University Senate motions were not approved with only 143 votes in favor and
none opposed. The Twin Cities Campus Assembly motions were not approved with
only 123 votes in favor and none opposed. All motions will be on the next
docket for approval.
NOT APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF MOTION D
_______________________________________
MOTION E – BYLAWS
CHANGES
Action by All Bodies
Agenda Items 32. through 38. are offered as a one motion to be taken up
as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the
request of a senator.
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Senate bylaws, a motion requires either a majority
of all voting members of the Senate (115) at one regular or special meeting, or
a majority of all members of the Senate present and voting at each of two
meetings. As an amendment to the Assembly bylaws, a motion requires either a
majority of all voting members of the Assembly (99) at one regular or special
meeting, or a majority of all members of the Assembly present and voting at each
of two meetings. This is the second meeting at which these motions are being
presented. These motions received 102 affirmative votes at the April 25, 2002,
meeting.
32. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Consultative Committees
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined) by adding a new section (i) and renumbering
existing sections accordingly.
ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES
...
3. CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES
...
Duties and Responsibilities
Executive
...
i. To make editorial changes in Senate policies and documents (including
the constitution, bylaws, and rules) to reflect changes in titles of
administrative offices or officers; the changes will be reported to the Senate
for information.
...
COMMENT:
The Steering Committee/Consultative Committee
recommends that the Assembly/Senate authorize it to make changes in
Assembly/Senate policies and documents (including the bylaws and constitution)
when the ONLY reason for a change is to reflect changes in administrative titles
(individuals or units/organizations) to which there might be reference in Senate
or Assembly documents. This will eliminate the need to bring to the floor of
the Senate or Assembly amendments to bylaws or policies or other documents which
are only necessary because a title has changed. (One example is that the
Academic Staff Advisory Committee has recently changed its name to the Council
of Academic Professionals and Administrators. The Consultative Committee
surmised that the Senate is not particularly interested in acting on pages of
bylaw changes which incorporated this change, which follow later in this
packet.)
If there is any change in the reporting line, or change in
office or administrator name that reflects substantive (or substantial) changes
in responsibility, the Steering Committee/Consultative Committee will bring the
change to the Assembly/Senate.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
33. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Steering Committees
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 8 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined) by adding a new section (h) and
renumbering accordingly.
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
8. STEERING COMMITTEES
...
Assembly Steering Committee
...
Duties and Responsibilities
...
Executive
...
h. To make editorial changes in Assembly policies and documents
(including the constitution, bylaws, and rules) to reflect changes in titles of
administrative offices or officers; the changes will be reported to the Assembly
for information.
...
COMMENT:
This motion for editorial changes for Assembly
policies and documents parallels the previous motion for Senate policies and
documents.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
34. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Rules
for Committees of the University Senate
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article II of the University Senate Bylaws as follows (new
language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE II. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY
SENATE
...
5. Faculty/academic professional
appointments to committees of the Senate normally shall be made for terms of
three years with appointments so adjusted that the terms of approximately one
third of the members expire each year. Academic professionals eligible to vote
may serve on all committees that report to the University Senate except the
Consultative Committee Faculty Consultative Committee and
the Judicial Committee. Student appointments to committees of the Senate
shall be made for terms of one year (see Rules Article III, Section 3, for
student eligibility rules).
...
COMMENT:
With the
recent change in membership provisions for academic professionals on Senate
committees, a proviso was made that the Council of Academic Professionals and
Administrators would have a representative on the Senate Consultative Committee.
This amendment brings this section of the bylaws into alignment with the
amendments passed at the last meeting.
The addition of the Judicial
Committee and Faculty Consultative Committee clarifies what is already provided
in the membership provision for the committees. Inasmuch as the Judicial
Committee hears claims concerning the tenure code, which applies only to
faculty, only faculty members may serve on it. The Faculty Consultative
Committee, as the name indicates, represents the faculty.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
35. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Rules for Committees of the Twin Cities Campus
Assembly
Action by the Twin Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article II of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE II. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE TWIN CITIES CAMPUS
ASSEMBLY
...
5. Faculty/academic professional
appointments to committees of the Assembly shall be made for terms of three
years with appointments so adjusted that the terms of approximately one third of
the members expire each year. Academic professionals eligible to vote may serve
on all committees that report to the Assembly except the Steering
Committee Academic Health Center Faculty Consultative Committee, the
Faculty Academic Oversight Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics, and the
Faculty Steering Committee. Student appointments to committees of the
Assembly shall be made for terms of one year (see Rules Article III, Section 3,
for student eligibility rules).
...
COMMENT:
This amendment clarifies the membership of
certain committees in light of the expanded representation the Assembly granted
to academic professionals.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
36. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Council on Liberal Education
Action by the Twin
Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 3 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
3. COUNCIL ON LIBERAL
EDUCATION
...
Membership
The Council on Liberal
Education shall be composed of faculty and student representatives (both
undergraduate and graduate/professional); members of the academic staff may also
be appointed. Three-quarters of the members of the Council shall be regular
faculty members. ["Regular" as defined in Faculty Tenure]. The faculty
members shall be appointed by the Provost, in consultation with the deans and
with the faculty members of the Assembly Steering Committee, and shall be drawn
from among the colleges and schools of the Twin Cities campus, including the
professional schools. The student members shall be appointed by the Provost in
consultation with the student members of the Assembly Steering Committee.
Academic staff members shall be appointed by the Provost in consultation with
the Academic Staff Advisory Committee Council of Academic
Professionals and Administrators. The chair of the Council shall be
designated by the Provost and shall be a faculty member.
...
COMMENT:
This amendment is an editorial change to reflect
the new title of a committee.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
37. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Nominating Committee
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 6 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
6. NOMINATING
COMMITTEE
...
Membership
...
The Faculty
Steering Committee shall nominate and certify as available twice as many tenured
or tenure-track faculty members as there are faculty seats available seats on
the Nominating Committee. The Academic Staff Advisory
Committee Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators
shall nominate and certify as available twice as many academic professional
staff members as there are academic professional seats available on the
Nominating Committee. The nominations will be presented at the first Assembly
meeting of spring semester. Additional nominations, certified as available,
may be made by: (1) petition of 12 voting members of the faculty (for faculty
members) or 12 voting members of the academic professional staff (for the
academic professional members), provided that the petition is in the hands of
the clerk of the Assembly the day before the Assembly meeting; (2) nomination on
the floor of the Assembly. In the event there are additional nominations, the
Assembly shall by vote reduce the slate to twice the number to be elected, and
shall forward the results to the clerk of the
Assembly.
...
Duties and Responsibilities
a. The
faculty members of the Nominating Committee shall nominate and certify as
available twice as many faculty candidates as are to be elected each year from
the Twin Cities campus and from those faculty from the Duluth campus eligible to
vote in Senate elections to the University Senate Consultative Committee. These
candidates shall be announced in the Twin Cities Campus Assembly docket for the
first meeting of the spring semester. Additional nominations, certified as
available, may be made by: (1) petition of 12 voting members of the faculties,
provided that the petition is in the hands of the clerk of the Assembly the day
before the Assembly meeting; (2) nomination on the floor of the Assembly. The
faculty representatives of the Assembly shall by vote reduce the slate to twice
the number to be elected and shall forward the results to the clerk of the
University Senate. Election procedures shall be in accordance with Article III,
Section 4 3, of the University Senate Bylaws.
...
COMMENT:
This amendment makes two editorial changes; one
to reflect the new title of a committee and the second to change the reference
to a specific section of the University Senate Bylaws.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
38. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS AMENDMENT
Faculty
Affairs Committee
Action by the University Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 7 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined; language to be deleted is struck
out).
ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES
...
7. FACULTY
AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
...
Duties and
Responsibilities
...
g. Interact with the Academic
Staff Advisory Committee (ASAC) Council of Academic Professionals
and Administrators (CAPA) on all items that jointly impact academic staff
and faculty, such as benefits and
retirement.
...
COMMENT:
This amendment is an
editorial change to reflect the new title of a committee.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:With no discussion, a
vote was taken and the motions were approved by a majority vote.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF MOTION E
_______________________________________
MOTION F – BYLAWS
CHANGES
Action by All Bodies
Agenda Items 39. through 41. are offered as a one motion to be taken up
as a single item with one vote. Any item will be taken up separately at the
request of a senator.
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Senate bylaws, a motion requires either a majority
of all voting members of the Senate (115) at one regular or special meeting, or
a majority of all members of the Senate present and voting at each of two
meetings. As an amendment to the Assembly bylaws, a motion requires either a
majority of all voting members of the Assembly (99) at one regular or special
meeting, or a majority of all members of the Assembly present and voting at each
of two meetings. This is the second meeting at which these motions are being
presented. These motions received 108 affirmative votes at the April 25, 2002,
meeting.
39. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Provostal Faculty Consultative Committees
Action
by the Twin Cities Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To delete Article III, Section 7 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
and add a new Section 1 as follows (new language is underlined; language to be
deleted is struck out), renumbering existing sections
accordingly.
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
7. PROVOSTAL FACULTY CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEES
There shall be a Provostal Faculty
Consultative Committee (PFCC) within each of the provostries on the Twin Cities
campus. Each PFCC shall represent the faculty at large of its respective
provostry and not the individual institutes, colleges, schools, or departments
within the
provostry.
Membership
The
Provostal Faculty Consultative Committees shall be composed as follows:
Academic Health Center: 8
faculty members [2 from the Medical School and 1 each from Dentistry, Nursing,
Pharmacy, Public Health, Veterinary Medicine, and the UMD School of
Medicine].
Arts, Sciences, and
Engineering: 6 faculty members [2 each from the College
of Liberal Arts and the Institute of Technology and 1 each from the College of
Biological Sciences and General
College].
Professional Studies:
9 faculty members [1 each from Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences;
Architecture and Landscape Architecture; Education and Human Development; Human
Ecology; Law; Management; University of Minnesota Extension Service; Natural
Resources; and Public Affairs].
Members shall be
nominated in accordance with procedures established for the Faculty Consultative
Committee election and elected by college. Terms of office shall be three years
with terms beginning July 1 and terminating June 30. no member is eligible to
serve more than two consecutive full terms. Elections shall be adjusted so that
the terms of approximately one third of the members shall expire each year.
In case of a faculty vacancy, the remaining members of
the Provostal Faculty Consultative Committee by majority vote shall fill the
vacancy by interim appointment until the next general election. In the event of
changes in collegiate structure, the Faculty Assembly Steering Committee shall
be authorized to redistribute the membership within the appropriate
PFCC.
Each Provostal Faculty Consultative Committee
shall elect its chair from amongst its members for a one-year term of office.
The chair shall be eligible for re-election to that
position.
Duties and
Responsibilities
a. To meet at least monthly to
discuss matters of concern to the faculty.
b. To meet
regularly with the provost and other academic officers to represent the
viewpoints of the faculty.
c. The chair of each
Provostal Faculty Consultative Committee shall meet each semester with the chair
of the respective Provostal Student Consultative Committee to discuss issues of
concern to both faculty and students, and the two committees shall meet jointly
as deemed necessary by the chairs.
d. To meet
periodically with Faculty Senate/Assembly members from the respective provostry
to facilitate communication with the faculty.
e. To meet
with the Faculty Consultative Committee/Twin Cities Campus Faculty Assembly
Steering Committee at least annually.
f. To report to
the Faculty Assembly Steering Committee.
g. To submit an
annual report to the Faculty Assembly Steering Committee.
...
1. ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTER FACULTY CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
The Academic Health Center Faculty Consultative Committee shall
represent the faculty at large in the Academic Health Center and not the
individual institutes, colleges, schools, or departments.
Membership
8 faculty members [2 from the Medical School and 1 each from Dentistry,
Nursing, Pharmacy, Public Health, Veterinary Medicine, and the UMD School of
Medicine].
Members shall be nominated by the Academic Health Center Committee on
Committees following the procedures established for the Faculty Consultative
Committee election and elected by college.
In case of a faculty vacancy, the remaining members of the Academic
Health Center Faculty Consultative Committee by majority vote shall fill the
vacancy by interim appointment from the college in which the vacancy occurred
until the next general election. In the event of changes in collegiate
structure, the Faculty Steering Committee shall be authorized to redistribute
the membership.
The Academic Health Center Faculty Consultative Committee shall elect
its chair from amongst its members for a one-year term of office. The chair
shall be eligible for re-election to that position.
Duties and Responsibilities
- To meet at least monthly to discuss matters of concern to the
faculty.
- To meet regularly with the Senior Vice President for the Health Sciences
and other academic officers to represent the viewpoints of the
faculty.
- To meet periodically with Faculty Senate/Assembly members from the
Academic Health Center to facilitate communication with the
faculty.
COMMENT:
When the Twin Cities campus was divided administratively into three
provostries, the Assembly established three provostal faculty consultative
committees to meet with the provosts. When President Yudof was appointed, he
eliminated the three provostries and replaced them with the Office of the
Executive Vice President and Provost (but retained the "provost" for the
Academic Health Center, renaming the position the Senior Vice President for the
Health Sciences). The two provostal faculty consultative committees proposed
for dissolution have not met since President Yudof was appointed.
This motion (1) disestablishes the two provostal faculty consultative
committees for which there is no longer an administrative officer, and (2)
continues the Academic Health Center Faculty Consultative Committee.
It is the view of the Faculty Steering Committee that if the Executive Vice
President and Provost is going to meet regularly with a consultative committee,
in his or her capacity as Provost of the Twin Cities Campus, it should be the
Faculty Steering Committee (the Twin Cities members of the Faculty Consultative
Committee), not a group that represents a subset of the Twin Cities
campus.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
40. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Nominating Committee
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
MOTION:
To delete Article III, Section 6 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined).
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
6. NOMINATING COMMITTEE
...
Membership
...
The Faculty Steering Committee shall nominate and certify as available
twice as many tenured or tenure-track faculty members as there are faculty seats
available seats on the Nominating Committee. The Academic Staff Advisory
Committee shall nominate and certify as available twice as many academic
professional staff members as there are academic professional seats available on
the Nominating Committee. The nominations will be presented at the first
Assembly meeting of spring semester. Additional nominations, certified as
available, may be made by: (1) petition of 12 voting members of the faculty (for
faculty members) or 12 voting members of the academic professional staff (for
the academic professional members), provided that the petition is in the hands
of the clerk of the Assembly the day before the Assembly meeting; (2) nomination
on the floor of the Assembly. In the event there are additional nominations, the
Assembly shall by vote reduce the slate to twice the number to be elected, and
shall forward the results to the clerk of the Assembly.
In those instances when an incumbent member of the Nominating Committee
is eligible for re-election, the Faculty Steering Committee may present the name
of that individual to the Assembly for confirmation of reappointment without
another candidate on the ballot to fill the position. A proposed confirmation
of reappointment would not preclude additional nominations made according to the
provisions of the preceding paragraph; any such nomination must stipulate
against whom the nominee will run.
...
Duties and Responsibilities
...
b. Both the faculty and academic professional members of the Nominating
Committee shall nominate and certify as available twice as many faculty/academic
professional candidates for the Committee on Committees as are to be elected
each year. These candidates shall be announced in the Assembly docket for the
last meeting of the academic year. Additional nominations, certified as
available, may be made by: (1) petition of 12 voting members of the faculty or
academic professional staff eligible to serve in the Assembly, provided that the
petition is in the hands of the clerk of the Assembly the day before the
Assembly meeting; (2) nomination on the floor of the Assembly. At the last
Assembly meeting of the year, the faculty/academic professional representatives
of the Assembly shall elect by secret ballot members of the Committee on
Committees for three-year terms. No faculty/academic professional member is
eligible to serve more than two consecutive full terms. In the case of a tie,
the chair of the Assembly shall cast the deciding vote.
In those instances when a member of the Committee on Committees is
eligible for re-election, the Nominating Committee may present the name of that
individual to the Assembly for confirmation of reappointment without another
candidate on the ballot to fill the position. A proposed confirmation of
reappointment would not preclude additional nominations made according to the
provisions of the preceding paragraph; any such nomination must stipulate
against whom the nominee will run.
...
d. To report to the Faculty Steering Committee any issues or problems it
encounters which require the attention of the Assembly.
...
COMMENT:
This is a joint recommendation from the Faculty Steering Committee and the
Nominating Committee, made under the provision of (d), above. The Faculty
Steering Committee (the Twin Cities member of the Faculty Consultative
Committee), which nominates candidates for the Nominating Committee (the body
that identifies Twin Cities candidates for FCC and for the Committee on
Committees), determined that two of the incumbent members of the Nominating
Committee were willing to continue their service.
This is the first year that the Nominating Committee has existed and
performed the tasks assigned to it. In order to establish a rotation in
membership terms, two of the seven faculty appointed last year were given
one-year terms. (Three were given two-year terms and three were given
three-year terms.)
The two individuals who were given one-year terms, Professor Charles
Campbell (Institute of Technology) and Professor Carol Wells (Medical School),
have said they were willing to continue to serve. Both individuals have been
conscientious, thoughtful, and contributing members of the Nominating Committee
who bring a campus-wide perspective to their work of identifying candidates.
The Faculty Steering Committee concluded that it would be better to
propose the bylaw amendment above (under the "Membership" paragraphs) rather
than set up an election in which two willing and able colleagues would be forced
to "run" in an election against two other able colleagues. This seemed to the
Steering Committee a pointless exercise. Rather than pit two individuals
against each other, both of whom are willing to serve the University through its
governance system, it seemed more sensible to ask those individuals on the
Nominating Committee if they would agree to reappointment, and ask others to
serve in other capacities.
The same logic applies to the work of the
Nominating Committee in identifying members of the Committee on Committees
(under "Duties and Responsibilities" section (b)): when incumbent members of
the Committee on Committees who have been thoughtful and productive members
agree to serve a second term, it seemed pointless to have to set up an election
where one of our colleagues would lose.
Obviously, in those cases when
someone does not wish to serve another term, or is no longer eligible, there
would be an election by the Assembly. It should also be noted that this option
of reappointment rather than election does NOT include the members of the
Faculty Consultative Committee itself; for those positions there would continue
to be elections irrespective of whether or not an incumbent candidate is willing
to serve a second term.
CAROL WELLS, CHAIR
NOMINATING
COMMITTEE
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
FACULTY STEERING
COMMITTEE
41. UNIVERSITY SENATE BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Committee on Committees
Action by the University
Senate
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 2 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows
(new language is underlined).
ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES
...
2.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES
Of the undergraduate student members, 3 shall
be elected from the Twin Cities campus, and one each from the Crookston, Duluth,
and Morris campuses. The Twin Cities undergraduate members shall be elected by
the Twin Cities undergraduate Student Senate members from among their number.
The graduate/professional student shall be elected by the graduate and
professional Student Senate members from among their number. Crookston, Duluth,
and Morris members shall be elected by their campus assemblies. Elections shall
be held during spring semester. Terms of membership shall be for one year. Any
student committee position that cannot be filled by October 1 will become a
Student Senate at-large position and may be filled by the Student Senate
Consultative Committee on an interim basis until the next general election.
Student vacancies shall be filled in accordance with the preceding procedures
for the balance of any unexpired term until the next general
election.
...
COMMENT:
There is currently no
provision for filling Student Committee on Committees’ vacancies arising
after the initial elections. This amendment corrects the problem.
JUDY BERNING, CHAIR
STUDENT SENATE CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion, a vote was taken and the
motions were approved by a majority vote.
APPROVED
_______________________________________
END OF MOTION F
42. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY BYLAWS
AMENDMENT
Steering Committees
Action by the Twin Cities
Campus Assembly
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Assembly bylaws, a motion requires either a majority
of all voting members of the Assembly (99) at one regular or special meeting, or
a majority of all members of the Assembly present and voting at each of two
meetings. This is the second meeting at which these motions are being
presented. These motions received 28 affirmative votes at the April 25, 2002,
meeting.
MOTION:
To amend Article III, Section 8 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws
as follows (new language is underlined).
ARTICLE III. TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY
COMMITTEES
...
8. STEERING COMMITTEES
...
Assembly Steering
Committee
Membership
The Assembly Steering
Committee shall be composed of 7 (or possibly 8) elected members of the faculty,
1 elected academic professional member, 5 elected undergraduate and
graduate/professional students, and the vice chair of the Assembly. The numbers
of undergraduate and graduate/professional students on the Student Steering
Committee shall be as follows:
In 1998-99, and every other year
thereafter, there shall be three undergraduate students and two
graduate/professional students. In 1999-2000, and every other year thereafter,
there shall be four undergraduate students and one graduate/professional
student.
The faculty representatives shall serve as the Faculty Steering
Committee; the student representatives and the chair of the Student Assembly,
unless the chair is from another campus, shall serve as the Student Steering
Committee.
...
COMMENT:
The recent changes in the membership of various
Senate and Assembly committees adding P&A staff to some of them included an
agreement that there would be one P&A staff member on the Senate
Consultative Committee (but not the Faculty Consultative Committee) and Assembly
Steering Committee (but not the Faculty Steering Committee). The amendment to
include the P&A representative on the Assembly Steering Committee was
inadvertently omitted from the original package of amendments regarding P&A
staff.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
ASSEMBLY STEERING
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion, a vote was taken and the
motion was approved with 110 in favor and none opposed.
APPROVED
43. UNIVERSITY SENATE CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT
Allocation of Functions and Powers
Action by the
University Senate
(2 minutes)
COMMENT:
As an amendment to the Senate Constitution, a motion requires either a
two-thirds majority of all voting members of the Senate (152) at one regular or
special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Senate (115) at each of two
meetings. This is the third meeting at which this motion is being presented.
The motion received 119 votes in favor at the March 28, 2002, meeting and was
withdrawn from the April 25, 2002, meeting.
MOTION:
To
amend the Senate Constitution, Article III (3), as follows (new language is
underlined):
3. Allocation of Functions and
Powers
...
d. In general, functions allocated to the Faculty
Senate shall include but not be limited to accreditation, designation and
granting of University honors, policies concerning faculty appointment and
tenure, and matters within the jurisdiction of the Faculty Affairs and Judicial
Committees. Only those members of the Faculty Senate who hold probationary
or tenured faculty appointments may vote on changes in the "Regulations
Concerning Faculty Tenure," any matters related to tenure, or any matters
related to the Judicial
Committee.
...
COMMENT:
As part of a package of
bylaw revisions establishing positions on some Senate and Assembly committees
for academic professional members, the Faculty Consultative Committee and the
Council on Academic Professionals and Administrators agreed that academic
professional members of the Faculty Senate should not be voting on tenure or
Judicial Committee matters, which are issues of concern exclusively to the
faculty.
DAN FEENEY, CHAIR
FACULTY CONSULTATIVE
COMMITTEE
DISCUSSION:
With no discussion, a vote was taken and the
motion was not approved with only 137 votes in favor. The
motion will be on the next docket for approval.
NOT APPROVED
44. STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY ADDRESS
It is an honor in my 35th year at the University of
Minnesota, to serve as Interim President of this great institution. Succeeding
Mark Yudof is a daunting task, but, from serving as Executive Vice President and
Provost for five years, I can tell you that the vision he and I shared for the
University remains the touchstone for my work here. Mark deserves our thanks,
and I think the University community did a good job of recognizing his many
contributions in the weeks leading up to his and Judy’s
departure.
In fact, President Yudof finished up his work here on a day
that I was out of town, so he used the office I recently moved into. When I
came back, I found notes posted from Mark on my wife’s picture, my
bookshelf and my favorite trophy:
- I am a great lover of the outdoors—that’s part of the reason
I’ve made this state my home for so long—and one of my prize
possessions is a giant walleye I caught. (Soon after I caught the fish, my
oldest son opined that, based upon observations of his father’s fishing
ability, he was absolutely certain the fish had committed suicide.) Anyway, the
fish is stuffed and mounted in a display case. On that case Mark left a note
saying, “No time for fishing!”
- I found another when I went to look for a pencil. This one said: “By
now, you’re obviously in too deep—assign this task to the
Provost!”...which gave me some insight into my life as provost for the
past five years.
For my part, I want to thank the many
interconnected communities here at the University, and particularly our academic
community, for the support they’ve given to me and to my administration.
Susan and I have had to do some adjusting to these new titles and
responsibilities. I’ve been cleared to tell you that she recently
introduced herself as the “interim wife of the
president.”—still sorting out this new title.
While this may
be a time of transition, both in university leadership and in the state budget
climate, I want to assure you that leadership of this great university is fully
committed to maintaining an upward trajectory, to fulfilling the promises
we’ve made to the University community and to the state of Minnesota. We
have an excellent team of senior leaders in place—perhaps the best
leadership team assembled here at the University. And we are governed by a
dedicated group of Regents as well as the wise faculty and staff with us here
today.
In our research, in the caliber of students we are attracting and
in the quality experience they get on our campuses, we cannot afford to slow
down. We are an institution with a century and a half legacy of learning and
innovation. At the same time, we are in an increasingly competitive
environment—for the best faculty and staff, for the best students, for
limited state dollars, for sponsored research funding, and for private gifts.
Truly, to mark time is to lose ground in higher education today.
II.
University successes:
You can see a lot at the University of Minnesota
today that exemplifies our strength and vitality.
For our students,
faculty, staff and alumni, the campus renaissance we have experienced on our
campuses for the past several years is slowly moving from jackhammers to
genomics, from dust and detours to digital technology and design. It is a great
source of pride for me to see the dozens of projects that are either finished or
well underway, including:
- Cutting-edge research and education facilities like Walter Library, the
Molecular and Cellular Biology Building, and the Science Building West Wing at
Morris.
- Great centers for cultural life, like the Weber Music Performance Center at
UMD, UMC’s Kiehle Building expansion, and the Twin Cities’ new Art
Teaching and Research Facility.
- New living and learning spaces for students, including a significant
increase in modern classrooms, Riverbend Commons on the East Bank, and the
Griggs Hall addition in Duluth.
- And the list goes on, with literally dozens of projects that strengthen our
commitment to fields from architecture to plant biology to journalism and the
social sciences.
- To continue this necessary capital renewal, we will ask the Board of Regents
to resubmit to the legislature the important capital projects vetoed by the
Governor this past spring.
Regarding our students, both our
applications and our enrollments continue to rise.
- Across the University, we have a decades high 62,000 students
enrolled—a 4 percent increase over last year.
- Across the University, the average level of educational preparedness of
incoming freshmen is the highest it has ever been.
- And once students, particularly our undergraduates, arrive at University of
Minnesota campuses, their experience continues to improve with:
- New policies regarding minimum course loads and tuition pricing on the Twin
Cities campus that appear to be having the intended effect of increased course
loads, boding well for future graduation rates.
- Online paperless financial aid, which has cut aid acceptance time from 6
weeks to 5 days.
- Undergraduate Research Opportunities programs.
- New first year experience programs, including new honor societies, better
information for parents, special housing programs, broader participation in
orientation and many other opportunities.
- In another area of the student experience, on our Twin Cities campus, we
have a newly united Department of Athletics under the spirited leadership of
Joel Maturi. The department was recently ranked seventh in the nation by Sports
Illustrated for its overall excellence.
- Our graduate and professional programs are experiencing similar successes.
Enrollment of these students is up by 14 percent across the University, and
Graduate and Professional students comprise more than 40 percent of our
graduates here in the Twin Cities.
As Art Rolnick, a
graduate and a senior vice president of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank,
has said, “The University’s product—the gold it
produces—is its well educated students and
its...research.”
[1] And that
research enterprise continues to grow.
- The University’s sponsored research topped half a billion dollars last
year. That’s testimony to the hard work and commitment to
curiosity-driven discovery among our faculty.
- It is also a tribute to the quality and dedication of our faculty and staff
that the University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus was again ranked for the
second consecutive year as one of the top three public research universities in
the nation by a University of Florida study.
The
University’s strength and excellence extends beyond the Twin Cities
campus.
On our Duluth campus, in addition to new buildings, an amazing
enrollment of 9,800 students, and a second consecutive national championship in
the NCAA Women’s Frozen Four, great things are happening:
- Making good on the University’s promise to the state, a new pharmacy
program at Duluth will address the statewide shortage of pharmacists.
- In May, 28 American Indian graduates from a variety of bands and tribes
received Master of Education degrees from UMD, in a cooperative program with
MnSCU’s Fond du Lac College.
Moving south, our
University of Minnesota, Rochester Branch signed a new agreement with MnSCU.
Provost David Carl has been working hard to expand new academic programs in a
variety of fields to address the education and workforce needs of Southeast
Minnesota.
Zooming back up North and West, our Morris campus continues
to win accolades for its unique brand of liberal arts education on a small
public campus. One study ranked UMM number four among all the nation’s
public liberal arts colleges and moved Morris into the third tier of the
“national liberal arts” institutions, making it one of the very few
public institutions in that elite category.
Further north and west, in
Crookston, where many of us were warmly hosted by the community during last
month’s Regents meeting, UMC is marking its tenth year as a baccalaureate
institution. In addition to winning a national award for “Ubiquitous
Computing,” UMC has also had a banner year for development, receiving the
largest gift ever made to the campus and surpassing its Campaign Minnesota Goal
by more than a million dollars!
And Speaking of Campaign Minnesota, our
staff, faculty, volunteers, and donors deserve great accolades for exceeding our
overall campaign goal of $1.3 billion as we begin our last year of this
fundraising effort.
- We’ve raised more than $1.4 billion thus far.
- More than 8,500 faculty and staff have contributed $57 million, illustrating
strong employee commitment.
- Ninety-eight new endowed chairs have been created, as well as more than 500
endowed scholarships and fellowships.
- In the last year, the campaign will focus on student support, our libraries,
and remaining campus and college-specific goals. I am confident we will reach
these goals.
Finally, throughout the 87 counties of Minnesota,
our Extension service has reorganized in order to take better advantage of new
technology and to provide more specialized expertise and clearer connections to
the university’s faculty and research.
This has been a very limited
summary that defines the proud achievements, qualities and extraordinary impacts
of the University of Minnesota. Overall, the state of the University is better
than the Minnesota “pretty good;” it is truly strong and getting
stronger.
III. Context, and the Case for the U
This
year, more than ever, we will have to make the case for the University and for
higher education. To me, it is unacceptable that only 3 percent of Minnesotans
believe that higher education is a priority in addressing the state’s
budget challenges.
In the broadest context, we face a challenge to the
long-held consensus that higher education is a public good.
- The education-income function today is quite striking. A person with a
bachelor’s degree makes almost a million dollars more in lifetime earnings
over a person with a high school education, with more advanced degrees yielding
much higher rates of return.[2]
- That private return, I fear, has begun to overshadow the public good
provided by higher education—particularly by public higher education
institutions like the U.
- We know that funding for public higher education has declined substantially
as a proportion of state budgets and as a percentage of personal income across
the country over the past quarter century, and Minnesota has not been immune to
this trend.
- This has led many public university presidents to comment that, “We
used to be state supported, then we became state assisted, and now we are
state-located.”[3]
In the short-term, as far as the state’s economy goes, I believe this
is the most challenging year we have faced in the past 15 to 20 years.
- Minnesota’s projected deficit, adjusted for inflation, is almost $3
billion. The state has already eliminated hundreds of jobs, and school
districts as well as health and social service agencies are facing similar
difficulties.
- At the U, we’ve already absorbed a permanent, recurring $24 million
cut—that’s four percent—as part of the 2002 legislative
session. We took this cut while safeguarding important academic
investments.
- In 2003, Minnesota will have a new governor and the greatest turnover in
years at the Legislature. We will have to renew the case for the U with many
new faces.
Fortunately, the case for funding the University
remains strong, and there are many benefits that accumulate to the public from
funding research universities like ours.
- As I mentioned, the University currently attracts $527 million in sponsored
research funds or 98 percent of the competitive sponsored funds that go to
higher education in Minnesota. It’s an important leveraging of the
state’s annual investment.
- We have strengthened our commercialization of technology operations to help
ensure that our research innovations, where viable, are taken to market to
provide the greatest good possible.
- We graduate between 10,000 and 11,000 students a year in a broad range of
majors. We estimate that more than half of our graduates remain in state,
contributing to the recruitment and retention of a highly trained workforce in
key fields.
- As a state, we will continue to be a net importer of talent. In that vein,
the University of Minnesota is an integral part of attracting what Carnegie
Mellon Prof. Richard Florida calls the creative class, an increasingly important
group of skilled professionals who are a linchpin of a knowledge-based economy.
[4] To keep the Twin Cities
attractive as one of the top 10 “creative” urban areas, he urges
investment in the University.[5]
- We can make similar cases for the economic impact of our other campuses, not
to mention our six Research and Outreach Centers. The economy of Northeast
Minnesota, for example, relies on UMD for well-educated graduates, for the
applied research into mineral and forest products by the Natural Resources
Research Institute, and for research on environmental changes affecting the
Great Lakes.
- But the case for U funding goes beyond economic growth. We play a vital
role in the cultural life of this state. As just one example, our School of
Music here in Minneapolis is celebrating its 100th anniversary. Just
think of that—one hundred years of teaching students what Longfellow
called “the universal language of mankind.” The University can lay
similar long-term claims to education and creation in all the visual and
performing arts, and to other major contributions to the social well-being of
this state.
But:
- Making the case for the U also extends to the way the state allocates
funding for higher education.
- After three decades in public higher education, I remain skeptical of the
high tuition-high aid model, where the challenge of financing higher education
is supposedly found in “letting the money follow the students.” The
more extreme version of this idea reminds me of what Mencken once said:
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and
wrong.”
- We do have a higher education system—public and private—in this
state that has strengths in many areas. It is evident that we must have
reasonable levels of financial aid for individual students that will help them
finance the educational experience that best suits them.
- It is also important to note that “the money should follow the
student” position applies to support of undergraduates. The strategy does
not address the need to support research or graduate and professional study.
These are critically important issues for the University.
- In my view, we have to maintain the appropriate balance in funding higher
education: we must support individuals (the private good arguments)
and systems (the public good side I’ve outlined previously).
IV. Biennial Proposal—a partnership
- As I’ve mentioned, the current state and national economic context
places special responsibilities upon us this year.
- Even in an era when state funding has waned, it is still important to
recognize that the state is a crucial part of our resource base, providing over
$600 million each year. It represents a third of our overall budget and more
than 40 percent of our instructional budget. It is worthy of our
attention.
- We have a responsibility to the state to present what this University
needs to maintain our current strength and progress, and to build on 151
years of greatness. This is not a time to be shy about the U’s
needs or shrink from the challenges of investment in the U of M.
- On the other hand, we have to maintain a position of credibility
and responsibility in today’s state budget environment. We have to
be cognizant of the state’s economic realities, and show that we are
willing to shoulder our part by strategically and proactively making the best
use of existing state and tuition dollars.
- This month we will bring before the Board of Regents a recommendation about
the broad areas of investment we need—to continue improving the
U’s strength and vitality.
- This will be our lowest biennial proposal in 10 years; it will respect the
state’s economic challenges, and reaffirm our internal commitment to
setting priorities and cost-savings.
- Our approach this year will depart somewhat from past practice. Up front,
we will propose a reasoned, 50-50 partnership with the state when it
comes to financing our increased needs. Our proposal w