The fifth 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, April 24, 2003, at 2:36 p.m., as a joint meeting of the three bodies. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 134 voting faculty/academic professional members, 24 voting student members, and 4 ex officio members. President Robert H. Bruininks presided.

President Bruininks announced that a Faculty Senate meeting has been added on May 22 to discuss possible budget implications. He also mentioned that an informational statement from the Advisory Committee on Athletics is available at the back of the room.

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/usen/030327sen.html

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

3. TRIBUTE TO DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY

FACULTY/ACADEMIC PROFESSIONALS/STAFF

H. Wesley Balk
Professor
Theatre and Dance
1932 – 2003

Annette Boman
Assistant Professor
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology – Duluth
1966 – 2003

Lorne M. Chanin
Professor
Electrical Engineering
1927 – 2003

Robert Curtis
Professor
Accounting – Duluth
1924 – 2003

Rex Lovrien
Professor
Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and Biophysics
1928 – 2003

Cornelia McCune
Staff
University Counseling and Career Services
1907 – 2002

George G. McCutcheon
Professor
General College
1911 – 2002

Burton Paulu
Professor
CCE Learning Technologies
1910 – 2003

Paul P. Phillips
Assistant Program Director
Physical Plant
1931 – 2003

Robert H. Stumm
Librarian
Law Library
1916 – 2003

William D. Trethewey
Professor
Mineral Resource Research Center
1916 – 2003

STUDENTS

Robert W. Brown
College of Continuing Education

Mahalia J. Houts
General College

Kristin Marx
Carlson School of Management


4. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSES TO SENATE AND ASSEMBLY ACTIONS
Information

FOR INFORMATION:

In the recent election to fill vacancies on the Assembly Steering/Senate Consultative Committee, Professors Jean Bauer and Daniel Feeney were elected to three-year terms (July 1, 2003 through June 30, 2006). The members of the Faculty Consultative Committee for 2003-04 will be:

Jean Bauer, College of Human Ecology
Sue Brorson, University of Minnesota - Crookston
Tom Clayton, College of Liberal Arts
Arthur Erdman, Institute of Technology
Daniel Feeney, College of Veterinary Medicine
Mary Jo Kane, College of Education and Human Development
Candace Kruttschnitt, College of Liberal Arts
Marvin Marshak, Institute of Technology
Judith Martin, College of Liberal Arts
Jeffrey Ratliff-Crain, University of Minnesota - Morris

FOR INFORMATION:

Following the March 27, 2003, University Senate/Twin Cities Campus Assembly meeting, an electronic vote was taken to pass two bylaw amendments. At the end of the three-working-day voting period, 132 votes in favor of and no votes opposed to the amendments were received. Therefore, these amendments have been approved.

On February 18, 1999, in adopting a policy on "Collection and Reporting of Grade Data and Syllabus Requirements," the Senate Committee on Educational Policy was required to provide to the Senate "data on the mean grade point average by designator and course level, on the percentage of As awarded by course level, and overall collegiate grade point averages . . . for grades awarded each Fall Semester." The policy also provides that "data should be reported for all undergraduate students."

COMMENT:

These data will be distributed at the meeting.

Professor Dan Feeney, Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that Professor Bill Tierney, an expert on governance, visited the University last fall. He evaluated the University’s system, and commented that while this system is one of the strongest with respect to faculty and students, there are several groups that are unrepresented even though this structure is a University Senate. The groups he was referring to are non-faculty-like academic professionals and non-bargaining-unit civil service employees.

He then asked senators to review a first draft for revising the Senate structure to be more inclusive. This proposal is being presented to all affected groups this spring for general comments and feedback. Any questions and comments should be directed to Gary Engstrand.

The timeline is that a revised proposal would be presented for discussion to the University Senate at the first meeting fall semester. Any action will not take place until at least December of 2003.

Professor Feeney then said that the Post-Retirement Health Care Savings Plan (PRHCSP) was defeated by the Faculty Senate, but it is not a dead issue. A working group is developing a questionnaire to be administered to affected faculty which will test response to the concept of the plan as well as the cost or accelerated rate.

A Faculty Senate meeting has been scheduled for May 22 in the event that budget issues need to be discussed once the legislature adjourns. At this point there is no way to tell if the legislature will be adjourned by that date, which might lead to a cancellation of the meeting. Until that time, please feel free to address questions to Professors Morrison, Feeney, or Martin.

Lastly, Professor Feeney congratulated the Advisory Committee on Athletics for the statement they made on the riot this year. The Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC) has decided that it will address this problem with the administration since diversions were not effective in preventing this year’s riots.

Professor Dan Feeney, Chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC), said that FCC has nominated Professor Carol Wells as Vice Chair of the University and Faculty Senates. Judy Berning, Chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC), said that the SSCC has nominated Ryan Osero as Vice Chair of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly. A vote was then taken and the two nominations were approved.

MOTION:

To amend the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Statement of Standard Undergraduate Academic Policies and Practices, as follows (new language is underlined, language to be deleted is struck out):

Admissions

...

4. Re-admission: The Twin Cities campus does not have a re-admission policy for students who leave school for an extended period.

Undergraduates are expected to maintain continuous registration. Undergraduates who have not been granted a "leave of absence" (see #12) and who do not register for two consecutive semesters a semester (in day school or University College, but excluding summer session) shall be placed on "Inactive" status. Following one semester of non-registration, a student Students shall be sent information regarding both the meaning of Inactive status and the University's Leave of Absence policy at matriculation. Students on Inactive status will need to contact their college office or the appropriate University College office (for students not wishing to remain active in their current program and not decided about an alternative) for approval to regain Active status before registering for another term. Colleges may condition re-admission on availability of space in a program, and if so, must caution the student that re-admission will be conditioned upon availability of space.

Students in good academic standing at the time they became Inactive should routinely be allowed to return to Active status.

...

12. Leave of Absence (LOA): Some colleges have a leave of absence policy for students who decide to leave school and not register for a period of time and who notify the college of their intent. There is variation in requirements for return and whether a student is to follow old or new program requirements.

Colleges and programs are sometimes proactive in recommending that students take a leave of absence or "stop out," usually for personal reasons. This is a very individualistic practice. In recommending that a student "stop out," leave of absence policies and procedures should be used.

There should be a standard leave of absence form for all Twin Cities colleges; the form should have a place for indicating how long the leave of absence will be.

All colleges shall have a leave of absence policy for students who plan to leave school for more than two a semesters or more. Students who follow the policy and whose leave is approved in accord with college policy need not apply for re-admission when they return. Students in good academic standing shall not ordinarily be denied a single leave of up to one year, or two single-semester leaves, during their undergraduate enrollment. Colleges may condition re-admission on availability of space in a program, and if so, must caution the student that re-admission will be conditioned upon availability of space.

All students shall be informed, when they request a leave, whether they will be held to old or new program requirements upon their return. If the leave of absence is for more than two academic years (i.e., four semesters), the student must follow new program requirements.

...

COMMENT:

The Council of Undergraduate Deans recommended to the Committee on Educational Policy that the leave of absence policy be amended so that any time a student intends not to enroll for a semester he or she should obtain a leave of absence if he or she contemplates returning to the University later. The current policy allows students to leave ("stop out") for one semester and return without consequence the next semester. This change would require a student to obtain a leave of absence if leaving for even one semester.

The Committee agreed with the Council that the change would help students think more carefully about "stopping out" of school. It would also set in place a mechanism by which students will be notified that they need to obtain a leave of absence (if, for example, they have not done so but have not enrolled, they will receive a letter indicating they should seek a leave of absence).

A major reason for the change is to create the expectation that the University expects continuous registration, expects them to enroll for four years, graduate, and leave. By allowing students to "drop in" and "drop out" without talking to a college advisor, the University implicitly encourages students to prolong their undergraduate education.

Students would learn about this policy during orientation, would receive a yearly reminder the University sends via email, and there would be a posting on the web during registration. The Office of the Registrar will work the colleges on the timing of the notification to students that they have been placed on inactive status; that notice would come sometime after the second week of the term. Students who do not register at the end of the assigned queue and have not requested a leave of absence will be sent a reminder that they should register, that help is available, and if they do not register by the start of classes next semesters that they will be placed on inactive status.

Finally, the new policy would simplify the processing of financial aid because the University would have more definite knowledge about students who would and would not need aid.

DISCUSSION:

Professor Martin Sampson, Chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that this motion is part of the University’s efforts to increase the number of undergraduates who finish their degree in four years. The motion states that undergraduates should maintain continuous registration until they graduate and strengthens the mechanisms available for leaves of absences. The current system does not take notice of students until they are absent for two semesters.

Prior to the meeting, an amendment to the motion was received and approved by SCEP. These amendments have been incorporated into the version of the motion available at the back of the room. Professor Sampson then noted an additional amendment to the motion, in the fourth paragraph, third line under leaves of absence. This line should be amended to read, “Students in good academic standing should not ordinarily be denied a single leave up to one year.”

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion as amended was approved.

MOTION:

To approve the 2006-07 Crookston, Morris, and Twin Cities campus calendars.

Crookston 2006-07

Fall Semester 2006 (73 class days)

DISCUSSION:

Professor Martin Sampson, Chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that although there was nothing controversial in these calendars, there was some broad disagreement regarding possible alternatives to the Twin Cities calendar.

Q: The Twin Cities calendar has a difference of 70 days fall semester and 74 days spring semester. Is it possible to lengthen fall semester in years when there are extra days between the end of finals and Christmas Break?

A: This difference in days delayed approval of this calendar last year. This year the University Senate approved a set number of class days each semester, with the set number different between semesters, irrespective of when holidays are.

A senator then questioned whether this disparity in days is right.

Another senator commented that other solutions might be possible, such as having a Monday class meet once on Thursday during the semester to alleviate this disparity.

A senator then stated that while switching class days might help equalize classes per semester, it might be impossible in terms of classroom management.

A senator then said that students support having only 70 days fall semester to guarantee that there is a study day each year before final exams start. This creates a problem in the 2006-07 calendar since there is no study day fall semester.

Another senator said that course content on the final examination might be reduced without a study day between the last day of class and the final exam.

A senator then said that days were lost with the switch to semesters and then again by limiting fall semester to 70 days. He questioned the amount of education possible with fewer class days.

Professor Sampson said that class days per semester at peer institutions were reviewed and the University is not inconsistent with other institutions. He then suggested that the Twin Cities calendar, fall semester be amended to have December 14 be a study day and to have final exams run December 15-21.

A motion was then made and seconded to take two separate votes, one on the Morris and Crookston calendars together and the second on the Twin Cities calendar separately. The motion was approved.

A motion was then made and seconded to approve the Crookston and Morris calendars. The motion was then approved.

With no further discussion, a vote was taken on the Twin Cities calendar as amended and the motion was approved.

MOTION:

To amend the Protocol for Senate Committee Involvement in Central Administrator Searches as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined). Note that section Roman numerals and titles are underlined in the original.

I. Formation of Search Committees

Search committees are typically established to fill major University central administrative positions. The positions to which this section of the protocol is addressed include the following:*

President**
Executive Vice President and Provost
Senior Vice President
Vice President
Associate/Assistant Vice President
Chancellor
Provost
Associate/Assistant Provost
Vice Provost
Associate/Assistant Vice Provost
Dean of the Graduate School
General Counsel
University Librarian
Director of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action
Director, Intercollegiate Athletics (Twin Cities campus)

Members of search committees for these positions, and their chairs, shall be chosen by the appointing authority after consultation with appropriate Senate committees, as follows.

The appointing authority shall ask the Faculty Consultative Committee and Student Senate Consultative Committee, or other appropriate committee (as set out in Section III of this protocol) to submit, by a specified date, names of the faculty and students who should serve on the search committee. The number of individuals nominated should be greater than the number who will serve on the search committee (perhaps twice as large), in order to allow for those who decline to serve and to provide the appointing authority some flexibility in the choices. The appointing authority will select the search committee from among those individuals or will explain to the Senate committee why the search committee membership deviated from the list of individuals nominated. The Faculty and Student Senate Consultative Committees may also identify the names of other individuals (who are not faculty or students) who the appointing authority may wish to consider selecting for search committee membership.

If the Senate committees are unable to provide names to the appointing authority by the date specified, he or she may proceed to appoint the search committee without Senate committee consultation. It is assumed the Senate committee would be given at least two weeks notice of the need for nominees to the search committee.

The Faculty Consultative Committee and the President or other administrator may agree that identification of faculty members for other administrator search committees is appropriate; this protocol should also be followed in such instances. The same is true for the Student Senate Consultative Committee.

II. Committee Responsibility for Search Committees and Interviews

The following Senate*** committees will be given the opportunity to participate in nomination of search committee members and interviews of candidates for the positions noted, in accord with the provisions of Section III of this protocol. Interviews with committees will be scheduled irrespective of the scope of the search (full, limited, or non-competitive appointment); in the case of non-competitive appointments, the committee will be given the opportunity to interview the candidate before [underlining in original text, not an amendment spring, 2003] the position has been offered to the candidate.

Note: The Faculty Consultative Committee may draw on former FCC members to participate in the interviewing process. The Student Senate Consultative Committee may designate student representatives (other than members of the SSCC) to participate in the interview process.

III. Interviewing Protocol, Candidates for Administrative Positions with Senate Committees

It is understood that committee interviews, especially during the summer or when scheduled on short notice, may not involve a majority of committee members or consistent representation for several candidates. It is not the intent of this protocol that the hiring process be slowed or hindered by the possible unavailability of committee members. The committee interviews are scheduled to give committee members the opportunity [underlined in original text, not an amendment spring 2003] to participate in the search process; if they are unavailable or do not attend, the hiring process should nonetheless go forward.

The committee will be supplied, in advance of the interview, copies of the position description and the curriculum vitae of each candidate.

The committee will assemble and discuss, in advance of the arrival of the candidate, how it wishes to conduct the interview.

The candidate will meet with the committee.

The candidate will depart; the committee will then meet in closed session to discuss the candidate(s) and to decide upon its comments or recommendation to the appointing authority.

These comments or recommendation, including any minority or dissenting views, will be submitted as quickly as possible to the appointing authority. The committee's views (with minority or dissenting views) will be submitted as a single document, prepared by the chair or his or her designee, rather than as individual responses to the appointing authority.

The Faculty Consultative Committee and the President or other administrators may determine that faculty participation in interviews with candidates for other positions is desirable; FCC may delegate responsibility for participating in such interviews to other committees of the Senate or the Assembly. FCC may also designate additional committees or individual faculty members to participate in any interviews. The same is true for the Student Senate Consultative Committee.
When more than one committee is appropriately involved in candidate interviews, the committees may schedule a joint session.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

The protocol was adopted by the Senate on February 18, 1993, as part of a consent package, without debate, and approved by the administration on April 26, 1993.

Revised Fall, 1998, to reflect changes in the University's administrative organization and titles of senior officers.

*In the parlance of the categorization of administrative appointees at the time this protocol is written, it covers class numbers 9301-9305, 9314, 9316, 9321-9328, and a few of the individuals in class 9330.

**The selection of the University President is the legal responsibility of the Board of Regents and the search committee for this office is drawn from the members of the Board. This committee has customarily involved the Senate Consultative Committee in the search, either relying on SCC to act as a search advisory committee or asking SCC to appoint such an advisory committee. It is presumed that this practice would continue.

***And, for the Directors of Intercollegiate Athletics (Twin Cities), the (Twin Cities) Assembly Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics. Advisory Committee on Athletics and the Faculty Academic Oversight for Intercollegiate Athletics

COMMENT:

These changes (1) add the coordinate campus chancellors to the list of positions for which the Faculty Consultative Committee should be consulted about nominating search committee members, and (2) clean up a number of title and committee changes that have occurred since the last time the protocol was amended. It also corrects the internal section reference (II, not III) in Section I.

DISCUSSION:

Professor Dan Feeney, Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), said that most of the changes in this policy are housekeeping in relation to the potential split between the Vice President for Research and the Dean of the Graduate School positions. Also added to the policy are the chancellor positions since the intent of the policy is to cover system-level positions and not general collegiate administrators.

Q: Will students be involved in chancellor searches?

A: Yes, students would be involved.

With no further discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

Agenda Items 14. through 22. 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. All items are being presented for the first time.

As an amendment to the Senate Constitution, a motion requires either a two-thirds majority of all voting members of the Senate (160) at one regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Senate (120) 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 (132) at one regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Senate (100) at each of two meetings.

As an amendment to the Senate Bylaws, a motion requires either a majority of all voting members of the Senate (120) 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 (100) at one regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Assembly present and voting at each of two meetings.

As an amendment to the Senate/Assembly Rules, a motion requires a simple majority.

MOTION:

To amend Article III, Section 2 of the University Senate Constitution as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE III. UNIVERSITY SENATE

...

4. Election of University Senate Members

...

c. Deans, vice presidents, chancellors, provosts, the University Librarian, and the General Counsel No individual (whether faculty or academic administrative or professional) holding a University position carrying as any part of its title president, vice president, chancellor, provost, dean, executive director, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff shall be eligible for election to the Senate as members of the faculties under "a" hereof, nor may the University Librarian or anyone who is a dean. Individuals with less than a one-third time appointment as assistant or associate dean shall be eligible for election to the Senate as members of the faculty under "a" hereof. (Article III, Section 4a, shall not be construed to conflict with Article III, Section 1, which provides that the president of the University is a voting member of the Senate. The president is not an elected member of the Senate.)

...

COMMENT:

This and several subsequent motions are intended to align membership rules for the Senate/Assembly and their committees. At present the rules vary somewhat. These amendments basically provide that no central administrator or any dean may serve as a voting member of the Senate/Assembly or their committees. Assistant and associate deans with less than one-third-time appointments may serve as voting members/chairs of committees and as voting members of the Senate.

It is the view of the Consultative Committee that any individual who holds a central administrative position (vice president, provost, etc.) will be dealing with issues that can come before a committee and it is inappropriate that those with administrative responsibility also have voting rights on governance committees. This same logic applies to chancellors. Deans also have administrative authority that differentiates them from faculty, student, P&A, or civil service members of committees. On the other hand, faculty members serving as very part-time assistant or associate deans remain primarily faculty members and are unlikely to be dealing with institutional issues that come before these committees or the Senate, so they should not be barred from committee or Senate service.

MOTION:

To amend Article II, Section 1a of the University Senate Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE II. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

1. Eligibility for Membership

a. Individuals holding academic administrative or professional titles are eligible to serve as voting members of Senate committees even if they are not qualified for membership in the Senate, except that no individual (whether faculty or academic administrative or professional) holding a University position carrying as any part of its title president, vice president, chancellor, provost, dean, executive director, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff shall be eligible for election appointment to the Senate as members of the faculties under "a" hereof a Senate committee, nor may the University Librarian or anyone who is a dean. Individuals with less than a one-third time appointment as assistant or associate dean may serve as voting members of Senate committees. Individuals with academic administrative or professional titles are not eligible to serve on the Senate Judicial Committee or on the Tenure Committee. Individuals with academic administrative or professional titles are only eligible to serve on the Senate Committee on Educational Policy, the Senate Library Committee, Senate Research Committee, and the Senate Committee on Student Academic Integrity if they are also eligible to serve in the Senate.

...

COMMENT:

Refer to the comment for Item 14.

MOTION:

To amend Article II, Section 1a of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE II. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY

1. Eligibility for Membership

a. Individuals holding academic administrative or professional titles are eligible to serve as voting members of Assembly committees even if they are not qualified for membership in the Senate Assembly, except that no individual (whether faculty or academic administrative or professional) holding a University position carrying as any part of its title president, vice president, chancellor, provost, dean, executive director, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff shall be eligible for election appointment to the Senate as members of the faculties under "a" hereof an Assembly committee, nor may the University Librarian or anyone who is a dean except in cases where a decanal position is specifically provided for as part of the membership of a committee. Individuals with less than a one-third time appointment as assistant or associate dean may serve as voting members of Assembly committees. Individuals with academic administrative or professional titles are only eligible to serve on the Assembly Committee on Educational Policy and the Student Behavior Committee if they are also eligible to serve in the Assembly.

...

COMMENT:

Refer to the comment for Item 14.

MOTION:

To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

3. CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES

...

Faculty Consultative Committee

Membership

The faculty of the Twin Cities campus and those faculty members on the Duluth campus eligible to vote in elections for the Senate shall elect eight 8 members, and the faculties of the Crookston and Morris campuses shall each elect one faculty member. Faculty members shall be nominated and elected by procedures established by each campus faculty, subject to the following provisions:

- All members of the Faculty Consultative Committee shall hold regular appointment at the rank of professor, associate professor, or assistant professor. Members of the Deans’ Council are not eligible for election. Individuals holding, in addition to their professorial title, a University position carrying as any part of its title, for any percentage time, president, vice president, chancellor, provost, dean, executive director, librarian, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff may not serve on the committee. Individuals holding, in addition to their professorial title, an administrative appointment as department chair or department head (or its equivalent, such as center director) are eligible to serve on the committee.

...

The ex officio members of the Faculty Consultative Committee are:

--The vice chair of the Faculty Senate shall serve as an ex officio voting member of the Faculty Consultative Committee. (ex officio voting).

--The chairs of the Educational Policy, Faculty Affairs, Finance and Planning, and Research Committees shall be (ex officio nonvoting). members of the committee. If a non-faculty member is appointed as chair of one of these four committees, then the faculty members of that committee shall elect from among themselves a representative to the Faculty Consultative Committee.

--The past chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee for the year following his or her service as chair, irrespective of the term to which that individual was originally elected (ex officio non-voting).

--There shall also be One ex officio, nonvoting member of the committee who shall representative of the faculty on the Duluth campus eligible to vote in Senate elections (ex officio non-voting). This representative shall be elected in accord with procedures established by the eligible Duluth faculty. The ex officio Duluth representative may send an alternate to Faculty Consultative Committee meetings.

--The faculty legislative liaison(s) (ex officio, non-voting).

...

COMMENT:

The Faculty Consultative Committee believes that continuity in discussions of issues would be greatly enhanced if the individuals who serve as chair of FCC continue to serve on the Committee in an ex officio capacity for the year after their service as chair. At present, someone elected to serve as FCC chair in his or her third year of service essentially disappears from governance after his or her term ends; this abrupt termination can (and has) resulted in discontinuities in the ability of the faculty to consult effectively with the administration and Board of Regents on significant issues. It would be helpful if that individual were to remain on the committee for an additional year, able to participate in the discussions, attend meetings, and take on other assignments from the committee as requested. (Several of the Big Ten universities have a chair-elect/chair/past chair arrangement to ensure continuity. This proposal embraces at least the "past chair" element of those arrangements.)

For example, if someone were elected to the committee 2002-2005, and served as chair 2004-05, this bylaw provides that the individual would continue to serve as an ex officio member 2005-06 even though originally only elected to serve 2002-05. This bylaw provision would not come into play if (1) someone were elected to serve as chair during his or her second year on the committee and (2) were not re-elected as chair his or her third year: in this event, the person would already be serving as a member of the committee, although not as chair. (This is not hypothetical; individuals have been elected to serve as chair during their second year on the committee and then served the third year of their term, but not as chair.)

The addition of the faculty legislative liaison merely affirms what is already in the Senate Rules; that individual already serves ex officio non-voting on the committee. This addition, however, does admit of the possibility that there might be more than one faculty legislative liaison (as there are during the current year, when Professors Marshak and Morrison stepped forward and agreed to divide the responsibilities following the death of Professor McEvoy).

The past chair would not be a member of the Senate Consultative Committee.

The Faculty Consultative Committee recommends that the Duluth ex officio representative on the Committee be permitted to send an alternate when his or her responsibilities do not permit attendance at every meeting.

The rule for committees of the Senate and Assembly is that alternates are not permitted, because service is personal, but that rule does not apply uniformly in the case of ex officio representatives. There are a number of instances where ex officio representatives are permitted to send a representative. The Duluth faculty represented on the Faculty Consultative Committee have requested this privilege as well and the Committee recommends it be granted.

MOTION:

To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Rules as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY SENATE

...

3. Terms of Membership, Chairing of Committees, and Removal of Members for Absences

Non-student appointments to committees of the Senate 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. Faculty/academic administrative or professionals with administrative appointments (class titles 9302-9329) of 50 percent or more time are ineligible to serve on Senate committees, except ex officio. who hold a University position carrying as any part of its title president, vice president, chancellor, provost, executive director, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff may not serve as a voting member of a Senate committee, nor may anyone who is a dean, except ex officio. Individuals with less than one-third-time appointments as assistant or associate deans may serve as voting members of Senate committees.

...

COMMENT:

Refer to the comment for Item 14.

MOTION:

To amend Article III, Section 3 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Rules as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE III. RULES FOR COMMITTEES OF THE TWIN CITIES CAMPUS ASSEMBLY

...

3. Terms of Membership, Chairing of Committees, and Removal of Members for Absences

Non-student 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. Faculty/academic administrative or professionals with administrative appointments (class titles 9302-9329) of 50 percent or more time are ineligible to serve on Senate committees, except ex officio. who hold a University position carrying as any part of its title president, vice president, chancellor, provost, executive director, counsel, attorney, or chief of staff may not serve as a voting member of an Assembly committee, nor may anyone who is a dean, except ex officio, except in cases where a decanal position is specifically provided for as part of the membership of a committee. Individuals with less than one-third-time appointments as assistant or associate deans may serve as voting members of Assembly committees.

...

COMMENT:

Refer to the comment for Item 14.

To amend Article III, Section 6a of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

6A. FACULTY ACADEMIC OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE FOR INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS

...

Membership

...

No appointed member of the committee may accept any tickets, team travel, or other benefit or favor from the athletics departments except as specifically authorized by the President and the Faculty Assembly Steering Committee.

...

The Faculty Academic Oversight Committee for Intercollegiate Athletics is an exclusively faculty committee (because it has the responsibility for reviewing transcripts of individual students, something that students and others should not be involved in). Because it is an all-faculty committee, it is the faculty members of the Assembly Steering Committee (that is, the Twin Cities members of the Faculty Consultative Committee) who should vote on whether the committee members will be permitted to accept tickets, etc.

MOTION A:

To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

ARTICLE III. SENATE COMMITTEES

...

3. CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES

...

Senate Consultative Committee

Membership

The Senate Consultative Committee shall be composed of 10 elected members of the faculty, 9 elected students, 1 academic professional, and the vice chair of the University Senate. [The faculty representatives shall serve as the Faculty Consultative Committee; the 8 10 elected student representatives and the chair and vice chair of the Student Senate shall serve as the Student Consultative Committee; the 8 9 elected student representatives, chosen by the Student Senate Consultative Committee, and the vice chair of the Student Senate shall constitute the 9 voting student members of the Senate Consultative Committee.] The academic professional member shall be designated by the Council of Academic Professionals and Administrators.

...

Student Consultative Committee

Membership

The Student Consultative Committee shall be composed of:

- two undergraduate students from the Twin Cities Campus
- chair of the Student Senate (elected by the Student Senate)
- ex officio representation as specified by vote of the Senate

- five students from the Twin Cities campus, 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.

Student members, except for the vice chair, shall be elected in accordance with procedures determined by the respective campuses' student constituencies, subject to the following provisions: Aat the time of their election, students shall be members of the University Senate (except for Crookston).

Student vacancies shall be filled in accordance with procedures determined by the respective campuses for the balance of any unexpired term until the next regular election.

...

COMMENT:

Over the last two years there has been a great deal of discussion about the make-up of the Student Senate Consultative Committee. The general consensus is that SSCC's role is to serve as a place where each campus association is represented and to be an advisory board. This role can best be represented through equal representation. Many have expressed concerned that the Twin Cities' voice, especially undergraduate's, will be lost. While this is a valid concern, the final say for approval of matter comes from the Student Senate, which will continue to have proportional representation.

It is proposed that this change take effect July 1.

MOTION B:

To amend Article III, Section 8 of the Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

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 2 elected undergraduate students, and 2 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:

See comment to the preceding motion.

MOTION A:

To amend Article III, Section 6 of the University Senate Constitution as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

SENATE CONSTITUTION

ARTICLE III. UNIVERSITY SENATE

...

6. University Senate and Student Senate Officers

...

b. The officers of the Student Senate shall be a chair and a vice chair.

The chair and vice chair shall be elected at a special spring semester session of the Student Senate attended only by student senators elected for the following year. The outgoing chair shall preside over the election. Non-senators and outgoing student senators may not be candidates for these positions. The chair and vice chair shall not be from the same campus. In the event that no one is nominated for the vice chair position from a separate campus, the position will be open to all qualified members of the Student Senate. Term of office shall be July 1 to June 30, and the person holding office is eligible for re-election. The duties of the chair are (1) to be the official spokesperson of the Student Senate and the Student Senate Consultative Committee; (2) to set the Student Senate agenda, to be approved by the Student Consultative Committee; (3) to serve on the board of the Student Legislative Coalition, the University's student lobbying organization to serve as chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee; and (4) to serve as the University's representative on the Student Advisory Council; (5) to serve on one central University advisory committee and to delegate student members for other advisory committees.

The duties of the vice chair are (1) to assume the duties of the chair in the event of an absence or incapacity of the chair; (2) to assume responsibilities delegated by the chair; (3) to submit to the Senate Office an annual budget request for the Student Senate and Student Consultative Committee, to be approved by the Student Senate during its fall semester meeting; (4) to organize an annual orientation for members of the Student Senate; (5) to monitor Student Senate attendance and ensure that the Student Senate Handbook is updated and distributed; (6) to serve on a central advisory committee that is not attended by the Student Senate chair if there is more than one such committee active; (7) to serve as the vice chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee.

...

MOTION B:

To amend Article III, Section 3 of the University Senate Bylaws as follows (language to be deleted is struck out; language to be added is underlined).

3. CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEES

...

Student Consultative Committee

Membership

...

The chair of the Student Senate shall also serve as the chair of the Student Consultative Committee. The vice chair of the Student Senate shall also serve as the vice chair of the Student Consultative Committee. Chair and vice Chair elections should be subject to the following provisions:

The chair of the Student Consultative Committee shall be elected by the Student Consultative Committee members from among the campus representatives, not including the Student Senate Chair or the Student Senate Vice Chair. The vice chair of the Student Senate shall also serve as the vice chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee. If the vice chair has already been elected to the Student Senate Consultative Committee as a regular member, he or she must concede his or her prior position to another student, to be chosen as soon as possible by the appropriate student constituency. The chair and vice chair shall serve no more than two consecutive terms. The chair of the Student Senate shall serve as an ex officio, nonvoting member of the Senate Consultative Committee. The vice chair of the Student Senate shall serve as a voting member of the Senate Consultative Committee.

...

Chairs: The chairs of the Faculty Consultative Committee and of the Student Consultative Committee shall be elected by their respective members from among their number for a one-year term of office. Chairs shall be eligible for re-election to that position. The vice chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee shall be elected by the Student Senate in accordance with Article III, Section 6b, of the Senate Constitution. The chair of the Faculty Consultative Committee shall serve as chair of the Senate Consultative Committee.

COMMENT:

By consolidating the Student Senate Chair and the SSCC Chair, the Student Senate will be able to streamline their efforts. First, instead of having two leadership roles, administration, faculty, and students will be able to easily identify the one leadership voice of the Student Senate. Second, the Student Senate Vice Chair will be able to become a more prominent role in the Student Senate. Third, this structure is very similar to Faculty Senate structure, which has proven to be very efficient.

The biggest change in the responsibilities will be the number of meetings the new chair will have to preside over. Furthermore, this change will ensure that the Chair of SSCC is not tied to a student association and will be able to act in the best interest of the Student Senate. If passed, the SSCC will plan to evaluate this leadership decision by December of 2005.

It is proposed that this change take effect July 1.

DISCUSSION:

Judy Berning, Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) Chair, made a motion to remove items 21 and 22 from the motion and to take separate votes on these items. The motion was approved without a vote. The University Senate then discussed items 14 through 20.

Q: Why is the term ‘chief of staff’ included in the list of positions not eligible for service in the University Senate or on its committees?

A: The intent of this language was not to imply departmental officers, but the central administrator with this title as well as chiefs of staff to other high-level administrators.

Q: Would this policy preclude clinical law professors from serving, since they are also called attorneys?

A: The term ‘attorney’ was in reference to persons from the Office of the General Counsel.

Q: What was the rationale behind lowering the percentage of appointment of the associate and assistant dean positions in terms of membership in the University Senate and its committees?

A: The Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC) had a strong feeling that voting faculty members on committees should have less administrative responsibility than 49 percent to avoid conflicts of interest.

Q: How will this policy affect coordinate campus involvement, since there are not deans but center directors?

A: Center directors would be equivalent to department heads on other campuses, and would continue to be eligible. Those positions not eligible for service would be the chancellor and vice chancellor positions.

Professor Feeney said that wording changes would be made to differentiate faculty and non-faculty attorneys and the level of the chief of staff position.

With no further discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved with 127 in favor, 1 opposed, and one abstention.

Item 21 was then considered next by the body.

Judy Berning, SSCC Chair, said that this motion changes the composition of the SSCC. She then noted that the Student Senate approved amended language to the first full paragraph under membership, which reads, “Student members shall be elected and/or appointed in accordance with procedures determined by the respective campuses’ student constituencies, subject to the following provision: at the time of their election, Twin Cities undergraduate students shall be members of the University Senate. A student member will relinquish their seat in the University Senate upon election to the Student Senate Consultative Committee.’

She then noted that the Student Senate approved this motion with 17 in favor and 10 opposed, which shows that there was not complete agreement from that body. A few points made in favor of the motion are that SSCC should represent each campus and not individual students, and that if SSCC is simply a scheduling committee then proportional membership is not needed. However, when the duties and responsibilities for the SSCC were reviewed, it was shown that SSCC can offer opinion on behalf of the Student Senate, which could be accomplished only with proportional membership. Equal membership would also mean that coordinate campus members would outnumber the Twin Cities members on the committee with 6 seats to 4 seats.

A senator then commented that a majority of the Twin Cities senators voted against the proposal at the Student Senate meeting. Coordinate campus members expresses concern that proportional membership equals power resting with the Twin Cities. He feels that this concern is unfounded and that the motion for equal membership does not address the diversity of the Twin Cities. Therefore he urged senators to vote against the proposal.

Another senator said that he was uncomfortable voting for a proposal which only affects the students and on which the students themselves are divided.

Q: If there are 10 members of SSCC and 9 student members on the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), from where do the 9 SCC students come?

A: This is currently an issue for SSCC in that one of the 10 elected members does not vote at SCC meetings.

Another senator spoke in favor of the proposal. He noted that since the Student Senate is a proportional body, it is dominated by the Twin Cities campus. However, on SSCC coordinate campuses only have one voice which limits their ability to place items on the agenda for the Student Senate. It is also hard for one representative per coordinate campus to represent the diversity of these campuses.

A senator then noted that the difference between proportional and equal representation for the Twin Cities campus represents one seat on SSCC.

With no further discussion a vote was taken and the motions as amended were not approved with only 70 in favor and 36 opposed.

Item 22 was then considered next by the body.

Judy Berning, SSCC Chair, said that the vote from the Student Senate meeting earlier was 25 in favor and none opposed. This motion would merge the SSCC and Student Senate Chair positions into one, so that the SSCC structure would be similar to the Faculty Consultative Committee structure currently in place.

One question raised by the Student Senate was in regards to the vice chair position. The bylaw change would have SSCC elect this position, but the position would be open to all student senators.

A senator stated that this motion seems to be inconsistent with item 21 in regards to the vice chair position being included in the total membership of SSCC.

Judy Berning said that any inconsistencies can be reviewed by SSCC in the fall.

With no further discussion a vote was taken and the motions were not approved with only 112 in favor and 2 opposed.

President Bruininks began by addressing the recent riots in Dinkytown and Stadium Village following the men’s hockey victory. While the victory was a great cause for celebration, he was very upset when he heard news about the riots around campus. He noted that some of the rioters were not University students. For those who were students, they will receive fair treatment, but destructive behavior will not be tolerated and these students will no longer have a place at the University.

President Bruininks felt that the statement from the Advisory Committee on Athletics was very articulate and to the point on this issue.

The issue is now what the University does from this point forward. First, alcohol regulations will be reviewed in terms of their enforcement. Second, other policies, not currently in place, will be considered to prevent this behavior from repeating. Some other institutions have adopted anti-riot policies in addition to a student conduct code, and these policies will be reviewed by the University.

While the revised University Student Conduct Code will be acted on by the Regents in June, the administration will present progress on other possible policies to prevent riots to the Regents in May. Guidelines for this type of policy will include out-of-control conditions related to a campus event and involving University students on or near the University campus. The administration will consult with various governance groups before a final version is acted upon.

President Bruininks then said that the riot was damaging to the image of the University, but the public needs to know that this behavior is not representative of the majority of students at the University and will not be tolerated. Most University students respect life and property on and near campus. His intention is to have a serious conversation with the academic leadership and students on campus to find ways to prevent this activity from happening again.

He then turned to the budget situation, noting that not much progress has been made. The Senate’s proposed budget reduction was less than the Governor recommended, but there is little chance that this figure will be approved. The House added $20 million to the University’s budget and that proposal has a better chance of approval. The House funds would provide some relief on tuition and budget reductions, as well as allow modest investments in improving the quality of education for students.

President Bruininks said that the University community will be asked to share this burden. He is proposing no wage increases the first year as well as increases in the employee portion of health benefit expenses. He is planning that compensation increases will be included in the budget for the next fiscal year.

While some funds will be recouped immediately, other reductions will be phased in with a multi-year approach. The University will then need to fight hard for additional funding in the next biennium. If the economy improves within the next six months, the University will also submit a supplemental budget to the legislature next year.

Lastly, President Bruininks noted that the University should celebrate nearing the completion of a very successful private fundraising campaign. The goal seven years ago was to increase the University’s endowment by $1.3 billion. Currently, the University is close to having raised $1.7 billion with two months remaining in the campaign. He commended the generosity of 11,000 faculty and staff who contributed close to $63 million.

Q: What are your thoughts on the concealed gun legislation being proposed?

A: There is a bill in the House and Senate that would people under certain conditions to carry concealed handguns. There is also an amendment that would restrict carrying of these weapons on K-12 and college campuses. The bill, however, would allow a person with a permit to have a gun in the trunk of their car parked in a University lot. At the time this bill might be passed, the University will develop its own policy to ensure safety on campus.

A senator said that they were in Dinkytown while the riot took place and, in their opinion, the police were relatively passive in response to the rioters and that most people involved were simply spectators.

Q: In a bill before the House is a provision that limits state grant funds from 10 to 8 semesters. Since programs take five years to complete and students wanting a double major typically take more than four years, what is the University’s stance in response to this provision?

A: The University has not been in favor of any changes to the state grant program or how the program is funded. To help low and middle-income students, the University will be appropriating its own funds to this area.

A senator then commented that some departments have been impacted negatively because of the recent riots. She also took issue with the 1000 bystanders who did not walk away from what was happening.

President Bruininks then said that this should not be a fun event for the spectators since they enabled the few rioters by providing cover for their actions.

Q: Will staff in central administration be assessed the same three percent cut for health benefits as staff in other parts of the University?

A: There is still much consultation taking place about specifics, but the University cannot pay for the same level of benefits without taking hits in other areas. The goal of any budget plan is to get the University through the this biennium in a creative way so that the University is still in a strong position in two years. Unfortunately, this goal requires a shared sacrifice for health benefit costs that continue to rise each year. If employees do not share in the cost, the University will need to lay off 300-400 employees. Any increased costs will be reviewed so as not to have a greater impact on low-income workers. The University will also work to preserve benefits, coverage, and choices.

A senator commented that there were no riots at Duluth even though the women’s hockey team won the championship for a third year.

Q: This year, in one department, the size of the foreign applicant pool decreased by 60 percent, which will equate to a decrease of 20 percent in next year’s graduate class. While this decrease is possible for a year or two, it will have an impact on the long-term future of graduate research in the department. Is the administration continuing to treat this issue as a priority?

A: This is still a priority for the University, and the issue is being felt most by science and technology areas of campus. The federal administration is acutely aware of SEVIS and visa glitches and are working on these issues. The problem is serious for the University since it needs to have international students on campus. If the United States is seen by international students as difficult to get a visa from, then students will stop applying and trying to attend American institutions. He asked that any departmental stories and examples be sent to him for use in future discussions.

MOTION:

That the Twin Cities Campus Faculty Assembly confirm the reappointment of Mr. Randy Croce, Professor Kathryn Hanna, and Professor Carl Adams for additional three year terms to fill one academic professional vacancy and two faculty vacancies on the Committee on Committees. A simple majority is required for approval.

CARL ADAMS: Professor of Information and Decision Sciences, Carlson School of Management. University Senate member: 1984-87. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Committee on Committees, 1991-92, 2000-03; Consultative, 1994-97 (Chair, 1995-96); Faculty Affairs, 1990-94 (Chair, 1992-94); Finance, 1986-87; Planning, 1985-88 (Chair, 1986-87).

RANDY CROCE: Coordinator, Industrial Relations Center, Carlson School of Management. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Committee on Committees, 2001-03.

KATHRYN HANNA: Associate Professor of General Biology, College of Biological Sciences. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Committee on Committees, 2002-03.

INFORMATION:

The Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws specify that the Nominating Committee may present the name of individuals, eligible for re-election, to the Assembly for confirmation of reappointment without another candidate on the ballot to fill the position.

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

MOTION:

That the Twin Cities Campus Faculty Assembly approve the following slate of nominees to fill three 2002-05 Twin Cities faculty vacancies on the Committee on Committees. A simple majority is required for approval. Once the slate is approved, a ballot will be distributed for voting.

ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTER
ED COMBE: Professor of Oral Sciences, School of Dentistry. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): AHC Faculty Consultative, 2002-05.

CHERYL ZIMMERMAN: Professor of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Judicial, 1996-97.

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SUBIR BANERJEE: Professor of Geology and Geophysics, Institute of Technology. University Senate member: 1984-89, 1991-92. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Committee on Committees, 1991-92, 1993-94.

WILLARD MILLER: Professor of Mathematics, Institute of Technology. University Senate member: 1992-95. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): None.

SOCIAL SCIENCES
V.V. CHARI: Professor of Economics, College of Liberal Arts. University Senate member: 2002-05. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): None.

MEGAN GUNNAR: Professor of Child Development, College of Education and Human Development. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Educational Policy, 1992-96.

INFORMATION:

The Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws specify that the Assembly shall elect by written ballot at its spring semester meeting faculty and academic professional members to fill vacancies on the Assembly Committee on Committees from a slate of candidates provided by the Nominating Committee. Other candidates may be nominated by petition of 12 members of the Assembly. Petitions to nominate candidates not on the slate must be in the hands of the Clerk of the Assembly on the day before the meeting at which the election is to be conducted. The elected Twin Cities faculty/academic professional members of the committee whose term continue at least through 2003-04 are:

Carol Chomsky, Law School
Catherine French, Institute of Technology
Richard Poppele, Medical School
Lynne Schuman, HHH Institute of Public Affairs
Deon Stuthman, College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences
Joel Weinsheimer, College of Liberal Arts

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved. Ballots were then distributed for voting.

Professor Fred Morrison, Faculty Legislative Liaison, said that the President covered most of the legislative business during his report. He did note that since this is the end of the legislative session most of the action will take place in conference committees and then within the House and Senate themselves. He encouraged all members to contact their legislators.

Professor Fred Morrison, Chair of Benefits Advisory Committee (BAC), said that three weeks ago the administration presented a proposal to cut $19 million a year from the University’s health benefit costs in a shift to more employee costs for this service. The average expense per employee would be roughly $1000.

Professor Morrison said this change means that office visits co-pays will double, pharmacy co-pays will increase by 50 percent, and premium costs will increase by $500 to $2500 depending on the type of coverage and the plan choice. While these are harsh increases, they are better than other employers who are cutting jobs or eliminating some types of coverage, such as dental.

BAC is seeking to moderate the impact of these cuts, particularly in light of the probable salary freeze. Employees will be kept advised of any progress being made.

BAC is also looking at another change in the system, four levels of insurance versus the two now offered, individual and family. This system creates a problem for families in which there are two wage earners, only one of which works at the University. The committee is proposing two intermediate tiers be added, employee plus children and employee plus spouse. While these options would reflect modern family structures, the committee would appreciate any comments on this proposal by email.

A senator said that it is important for the University to take a long-term view of this issue to decide between sharing the pain among employees and layoffs. In his experience, cuts made to share the pain are never restored since any new funds do not restore past levels but are used for targeted growth.

Professor Morrison said that view was expressed by the committee and is being shared with central administration.

Another senator asked that increased co-pays be reconsidered since these increases force sick people to pay more.

A senator then noted that employees should be made accountable for the health decisions that they make, but that traditional health plans do not offer this type of accountability.

Q: Do employees have any negotiating power in what changes will be made or will new plans just be added without any consultation?

A: First, no new plans are being added. The tiers being discussed are two pricing levels within each of the existing plans. The top and bottom premium levels would remain about the same, but there would be more intermediate steps added so that the premium is more evenly spread between the tiers.

In terms of input, employees have more influence now that they ever did when the University was with the state. BAC is composed of faculty, academic professionals, civil service employees, and bargaining unit employees, and has been discussing options with the administration on a weekly basis for the last month.

Professor Dan Feeney, Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee, reported on an item of new business from the March University Senate meeting. The Student Conduct Code was referred back to SCC, which decided that the Code will be kept on its discussion list, but no action will be taken within the next few years.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.

Kinley Brauer

On February 12, 2003, Kinley Brauer, former department chair, died of cancer at the age of 67. Friends and colleagues on campus only became aware of his illness in the fall of 2002. Like his death, it came as a surprise; Kinley had seemed to be in excellent health when he retired in December 2001.

After receiving his Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, Kinley arrived at Minnesota in 1965 as the first full-time specialist in American diplomatic history. He promptly set out to transform what had been the most conventional of old-fashioned fields into something more exciting and intellectually challenging. In many respects, Kinley’s approach to U.S. foreign relations fell into the intellectual tradition of the “new” international history long before it became fashionable in the 1990s. His most important piece of scholarship, Cotton versus Conscience: Mass. Whig Politics and Southwestern Expansion, 1843-1848 (1967), embodies this broader vision of the field and won him the McKnight Foundation Humanities Prize in American History for 1965.

With this view of American foreign relations, Kinley became a strong advocate of the international history approach in leadership roles within the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations. He served in various capacities in that professional organization, including as member of Board of Editors for the journal Diplomatic History.

Kinley was an excellent teacher of both undergraduates and graduate students. During the 1960s and 1970s when the cold war was at its height and the Vietnam War was in full swing, his courses on U.S. foreign relations were extremely popular and well attended. He was especially proud of his course on Russian (Soviet)-American Relations and spent much time in the library developing materials for it.

At the graduate level, Kinley was a patient, thoughtful, yet demanding mentor, who motivated his students to work up to their potential. He advised 10 M.A. theses, 11 Ph.D. dissertations, and served as a committee member for over 50 other graduate students. Tom Schoonover, Kinley’s first student to receive a Ph.D. and now a prolific scholar in the field, remembers him as a supportive mentor long after he completed his degree. “He offered comments on papers, articles, book chapters, and even whole manuscripts. When I needed advice or a reader, or just a friend-colleague to talk with, we met at a conference or talked on the phone.” One of his last students, Ken Steuer, won the 2001 Gutenberg-e Dissertation Prize of the American Historical Association.

Kinley was a model of good citizenship and served in a variety of important jobs in the College of Liberal Arts, for example, as director of the Center for Austrian Studies at a very difficult time in its history. For his efforts, the Austrian government awarded him the “Officer’s Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Austria.” Later he left his position as director of the International Relations Program to become chair of the Department of History and served for six years in that demanding job. His greatest accomplishment as chair was to lead the department successfully through a generational sea change spawned by the wave of retirements in the 1990s, a story that was newsworthy enough to hit the front page of the Star Tribune on Saturday, April 3, 1999. As the consummate mediator, Kinley listened patiently both to the “old guard” and the “new guard” in ways that held a potentially fractious department together through the heart of this transition and made it even stronger on the other end.

Kinley retired in 2001 with a huge back log of important, unfinished projects. One was his planned biography of William Henry Seward,” Secretary of State in the Lincoln Administration. Two others, “Russian-American Relations in the Nineteenth Century Reconsidered” and “The Genesis of American Imperialism 1760-1860,”stemmed from his long-standing teaching interest in these areas. Among the many sad consequences of his untimely death is that most of this agenda will not come to fruition.

We will remember Kinley as a warm and supportive colleague who was open and accessible to both faculty and students. Even when he was not chair, he took on some extremely difficult tasks related to personnel issues and handled them with extraordinary professionalism and integrity. He enjoyed good food, good wine, and good conversation. Sometimes at dinner parties Kinley and others would endlessly debate aspects of diplomacy in the Second World War.  He was known as a