******************************************************************
Page 6419 Minutes of Senate Meeting 255 1 May 1996
THE SENATE OF MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Minutes of Meeting No. 255
1 May 1996
Synopsis: The Senate
(1) Approved Proposal 18-96, Basic Benefits Package, stating the
philosophy that all employees, retirees, and their families should
have health benefits, financial security at retirement, and life
insurance.
(2) Heard that the Administration has approved the M.S. in
Environmental Policy and the Ph.D. in Mathematical Sciences.
(3) Heard that two new degree programs are proposed: M.S. in
Environmental Engineering; B.S. in Applied Ecology and
Environmental Science.
(4) Agreed that we need an Ad Hoc Committee, composed of faculty,
staff, and administrators, to develop a retrenchment/separation
policy.
(5) Learned that Senate Officer nominations include for President -
Ted Bornhorst and John Williams; for Vice President - Jim Lutzke
and Ted Soldan; for Secretary - Janice Glime.
(6) Heard a presentation by John Sellars (Senior Vice President for
Advancement and University Relations) on the Capital Campaign.
(7) Heard a report from the Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Policies
and Procedures Regarding Tenure-track Appointments, presented by
Christa Walck, and requested a proposal on the recommendations.
(8) Defeated Proposal 19-96, Parking Task Force Recommendation.
(9) Amended Proposal 23-96, Policy on Faculty Availability, with
"should" amended to "will" be available.
_______________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Bornhorst called the Senate Meeting 255 to order at 5:30
p.m. on Wednesday, 1 May 1996, in Room B37 of the Electrical Energy
Resources Center.
Secretary Glime called roll. Absent were at-large senators Robert
Filer and Laurie Whitt, and representatives from Chemical Engineering,
Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, IT, and Academic
Services/Engineering. Liaisons in attendance were Steve Hellmann (USG),
and Geoff Roelant (USG).
2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Guests included Fred Dobney (Provost), Debbie Lassila (Provost's
Office), Marcia Goodrich (Tech Topics), Freydoon Arbabi (Civil &
Environmental Engineering), John Sellars (Sr. Vice President for
Advancement and University Relations) and Ellen Horsch (Human
Resources).
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
President Bornhorst announced that Agenda item 8-C, Graduate
Student Tuition Task Force report by Provost Dobney, has been removed
from the agenda. Senator Leifer asked that item 9-A, on Proposal 19-96,
be moved after item 9-D. There were no objections to moving 9-A, so it
was moved.
Vichich MOVED and Arici seconded the motion to approve the agenda
as adjusted. The motion to approve PASSED on voice vote with no
dissent. [Appendix A. NOTE: only official Senate and Library archival
copies of the minutes will contain a full complement of appendices.]
. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MEETING 253
Senator Beck asked that the paragraph on page 6340, beginning
"Senator Beck," be changed to eliminate the words "a paper mechanism
for." Senator Vichich requested that the second sentence of the
paragraph on page 6341 be changed. Senator Vichich stated that he was
familiar with the All Campus card and views a potential problem with the
parking card. Blumhardt responded that John Ahola spoke with Tech
Express people about the card and when we said we would pay for whatever
it takes to do it the response was that it could be done. Senator
Heyman asked that the title of item 8-B on page 6342 be changed from
"Budge" to "Budget."
Heyman MOVED and Mroz seconded the motion to approve the minutes
as corrected. The motion PASSED on voice vote with no dissent.
5. OPEN MOTION TO APPROVE PROPOSAL 18-96: BASIC BENEFITS PACKAGE
[Appendix B]
Senator Brokaw asked for the rationale for including life
insurance. Arbabi (Chair, Fringe Benefits Committee) replied that for
some it was impossible to get life insurance when they retire. Senator
Bradley stated that the proposal doesn't say who will pay for the
insurance. Bradley MOVED and Vichich seconded the motion to add the
word "eligible" to items I and III of the proposal, to read "all
eligible employees and their families" in item I and "for all eligible
employees" in item III. The motion to amend PASSED on voice vote with
no dissent. President Bornhorst ruled this was an editorial change.
There were no objections. Keen asked that it be clarified for the
record that the word "eligible" modifies both employees and retirees;
President Bornhorst agreed. There was no further discussion. The
amended Proposal 18-96 on the Basic Benefits Package PASSED on voice
vote with no dissent.
6. NEW BUSINESS
Proposal 29-96, Sabbatical Leave Recommendations, was introduced
so that it could be voted on at the next meeting. [Appendix C]
7. REPORT FROM SENATE PRESIDENT
President Bornhorst reported that Proposal 13-96, Associate in
Applied Science Degree in Chemical Engineering Technology, was sent to
the Administration on 16 April 1996. A memo regarding concurrence with
Amendments to Proposal 7-94, Scheduling of Evening Examinations, was
sent to the Administration on 16 April 1996. [Appendices D and E]
President Tompkins has approved Proposal 10-96, M.S. in
Environmental Policy, and Proposal 32-95, Ph. D.
******************************************************************
Page 6420 Minutes of Senate Meeting 255 1 May 1996
in Mathematical Sciences. [Appendices F and G]
Two proposals for new degrees have been received and referred to
the Curricular Policy Committee: Proposal 27-96, M.S. in Environmental
Engineering; Proposal 28-96, B. S. in Applied Ecology and Environmental
Science. [Appendices H and I]
Bornhorst sent a memo to Senators and Alternates from Designated
Non-Academic Units extending their term for an additional year as agreed
upon by the Senate. [Appendix J]
Bornhorst sent recommendations from the Graduate Student Tuition
Task Force and from the TIAA/CREF Task Forces to the appropriate Senate
standing committees. [Appendices K and L]
The Ad Hoc Senate Constitution Committee has met twice regarding
the revision of the Constitution. They have concluded that substantial
changes are needed to make the Constitution consistent with the addition
of professional staff.
The Senate Officers met on 30 April and discussed various topics.
In particular, they are concerned about the duplication of effort that
occurs when task forces produce recommendations that are referred to
Senate Committees. The Officers agreed to prepare a proposal for
consideration by the full Senate. We now have standing Committees which
can have subcommittees. The Bylaws also provide for ad hoc committees
created by the full Senate. The Officers recommend that all ad hoc
committees forward proposals/recommendations directly to the full
Senate. When a task force is supported by the Senate, it should be
called an ad hoc committee; if it is not supported, then the task force
results should go to a standing committee. Ad hoc committees can
include any person in the University community, allowing for flexible
membership, but membership must be approved by the Senate.
At its last meeting, the Senate discussed the formation of an Ad
Hoc Committee on Separation. The discussion ended with a question as
to whether or not there should be a combined faculty, professional
staff, and administrative committee. The construction of this committee
must be decided.
Senator Beck asked if this would be mostly a retrenchment
committee; Bornhorst affirmed this. Senator Heyman asked what groups
it would affect; what about staff, when many are "at will." He asked
if we are weighing different issues. Bornhorst replied that we may need
to segment the committee after it looks at the issues. Heyman stated
that if whole departments go, it will affect faculty, union, and
non-union staff. Vice President Walck stated that she agrees with
Heyman; Bornhorst asked if there should be administrative
representatives. Walck affirmed that; Senator Mroz agreed and Carstens
added that it should be any group that is affected. Mroz asked if we
can make policy for the union; Bornhorst responded that we cannot.
Senator Bradley stated that unions might be able to supply good input.
Bornhorst asked if there were any objections to having a combined
committee; there were none, so the committee will represent staff
interests as well as faculty and administration. This committee will
be assembled in September.
Bornhorst announced that he would not be in town for the next Board
of Control meeting; Vice President Walck will present the Senate report
to the Board.
President Bornhorst reported on the nominations for Senate offices:
for President - Ted Bornhorst and John Williams; for Vice President -
Jim Lutzke and Ted Soldan; for Secretary - Janice Glime. Senator Leifer
asked if nominations are still open; Bornhorst responded that they are
open until we vote; an earlier date was set for receipt of constituent
nominations.
8. COMMITTEE BUSINESS/REPORTS
A. Advancement Planning - John Sellars [Appendix M]
Senior Vice President for Advancement and University Relations,
John Sellars, presented his plans to launch the Capital Campaign. He
provided a pert chart outlining 2.5 years to prepare to launch the
campaign. To support this campaign, there is a search for a Director
of Donor Research, a Director of Development, and a Director of
Corporate Relations (to replace Mike Wirt).
They will seek outside counsel for a feasibility study for the
campaign. Tasks include identification of potential major donors,
determining how much can be expected in donations, preparing a history
of the donors (giving levels, types of things supported, etc),
developing an individual strategy for every potential major donor, and
conveying why it is important to support MTU. They will identify the
top 100-500 donors. To achieve a goal of $100 million, $40 million must
be obtained in a 10-month period. There needs to be focus groups to
build momentum. As the campaign progresses, we need to re-assess and
redefine the goal based on the progress being made toward the goal. The
actual campaign will be launched in October of 1998.
Finally, Sellars presented a critical path analysis to help
identify key issues.
Senator Pegg asked what is meant by "determine support base."
Sellars responded that this refers to both who the people are [likely
donors] and the dollars to be expected. Senator Diebel asked how strong
we are compared to other schools. Sellars responded that we are strong
in corporate relations and foundations, but we need significant
improvement in major gifts.
Senator Bradley asked what the number of initial donors is; Sellars
responded 100. If a donor is very wealthy, they will spend lots of time
studying the donor first before seeking the donation. Bradley asked
what size of list will this 100 be derived from; Sellars responded that
they have a list of 1800.
Senator Flynn stated that last time there was a major campaign,
gifts of land were counted among the dollar donations. Sellars
responded that since that time standards for accounting have been
developed and we will go strictly by these standards. Dobney commented
******************************************************************
Page 6421 Minutes of Senate Meeting 255 1 May 1996
that we had been given stocks in 1987 or 88; if we had kept them they
would be worth millions now, but we sold them immediately. Sellars
stated that investment advisors and donors help to advise them when to
sell and what to keep.
Senator Sweany pointed out that some parts are missing on the
critical path analysis and asked how it can work. Sellars responded
that these unknowns will need to be filled in.
Senator Leifer stated that the University community is sensitive
to hiring more administrators and wanted to know if any schools follow
the model "if you're good, we'll give you X%." Sellars stated that a
person in fundraising is expected to raise 20X his/her salary. Some
schools have tried offering a bonus, but universities say that doesn't
work well - it causes the use of "smoke and mirrors." There is now an
ethical standard by case that says a commission or percentage is not
appropriate for somebody who is a development officer or advancement
officer. That is now an ethical statement within the profession.
B. Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Policies and Procedures Regarding
Tenure-track Appointments - Christa Walck [Appendix N]
Vice President Walck reported that there are three categories of
policy: legal requirements of affirmative action; Board of Control
policy that authorizes the President to add salaried positions;
preparation of university hiring procedures by the Affirmative Action
Office and Provost.
Hiring procedures require a search committee, a national search,
and that the position support the planned development of the department.
The President is not bound by the University procedures, but
he/she is bound by U. S. law.
The committee recommends 1) that the University policy should be
followed in ALL tenure-track hiring; 2) the description for new hires
should be amended to add "and for all initial tenure-track academic
appointments;" 3) in exceptional cases when it is necessary to violate
policy, the position created should be temporary; 4) a policy on spousal
hiring should be created.
Walck closed by citing the recent case at Akron University, where
the President was forced to resign because the Attorney General's Office
investigated her role in 8 cases of hires without a national search and
her pressuring of a dean to hire an administrative spouse. The Faculty
Senate requested the investigation.
President Bornhorst reported that there is currently a spousal
hiring situation that concerns the Department of Forestry and Wood
Products. He asked if Senator Mroz from Forestry would like to comment;
Mroz declined to comment until after the department meets with the
Provost on Friday. Walck made it clear that her committee is not
investigating a specific case, only the current operating policies.
Senator Sweany asked if the policy would restrict the hiring of
spouses and Walck responded it would not. Sweany stated that there are
two issues: 1) putting one's own spouse on payroll; 2) hiring spouses
as part of a hire.
Senator Diebel asked if minority recruiting is covered by these
considerations; Walck stated that there is a question of what is
provided or permitted by law and the university policy; if the hire is
to fill a program need, there need to be clear guidelines.
Senator Leifer stated that somewhere there ought to be enforcement;
if the policy is not followed, what is the consequence? Bornhorst
reminded him that it was the Senate at Akron that asked for the
investigation leading to the resignation of the president. Walck stated
that our President is using the power given to him by the Board of
Control. Dobney added that the hires are monitored by the Affirmative
Action Office and checked by the Provost's Office; if there is an
exception there must be a good reason.
Senator Beck stated that we should make the recommendation into a
proposal. Bornhorst asked Walck if the Committee could make the
proposal; Walck responded they could and asked if the Senate can act on
it next week. Senator Heyman stated that it would not meet the 10- day
requirement.
Senator Mroz stated that we need a proposal on spousal hires. Top
quality people are often married to top quality people. The people who
have been here for a while will be left out, but we need to do this for
new people.
Senator Flynn stated that the interpretation of affirmative action
is up for grabs; it has not been resolved in the courts. Senator Chavis
stated that this implies that the individual applying for the job is in
question when often he/she is not. Flynn responded that we have to open
any position so that anyone can apply.
Bornhorst stated that the sense of the discussion is that we need
a proposal based on the recommendations and that we should direct the
spousal hire to a Senate Committee. Walck stated that the spousal hire
should follow University guidelines.
9. OLD BUSINESS
B. Proposal 20-96, Recommendation on Campus Activities Benefit
[Appendix O]
Bradley MOVED and Arici seconded the motion to approve Proposal
20-96. Keen MOVED and Walck seconded the motion to amend the proposal
by deleting the words "2/3 of," making it read, "Provide credit
equivalent to SDC yearly membership in the faculty and staff debit
cards...." Arbabi (Chair of the Fringe Benefits Committee) stated that
faculty and staff need a feeling of community membership. Senator
Bradley added that the reason for the 2/3 is that the committee felt
that a full membership might overload the SDC, whereas 2/3 might
actually make money for them. Mroz pointed out that there is a yearly
transfer of auxiliary funds to the general budget. Provost Dobney
stated that probably about $70,000 would be lost (that amount currently
received from employees). Mroz questioned the impact of this proposal
on the wellness program. Dobney responded
******************************************************************
Page 6422 Minutes of Senate Meeting 255 1 May 1996
that only 75 of the 175 wellness program members actually qualify
for the reduction based on their participation. Keen reminded the
Senate that in 1980 or 81 the faculty had full access to Sherman Gym.
When the facilities moved to the SDC, the faculty lost these privileges
without anything being said.
The amendment to strike the 2/3 PASSED on voice vote with several
dissenting votes. Bornhorst ruled that the change was more than
editorial; there was no objection, so the ruling stood.
C. Proposal 21-96, Recommendation on Educational Benefit [Appendix P]
Vichich MOVED and Arici seconded the motion to approve Proposal
21-96. Keen stated that the faculty handbook allows two courses.
Arbabi stated that the Committee wanted to use specific numbers, but was
unsure what was in the current handbook because it was not available.
Provost Dobney and Debbie Lassila responded that the policy is two
courses. Arbabi stated that the Senate could amend the proposal.
Heyman moved to amend the proposal to read: Modify the current benefit
of 2 courses for the faculty/staff as follows: 2 courses may be taken
at MTU by the faculty/staff members each quarter, with the following
schedule. From these 2 courses, 1 or both could be used by the eligible
faculty/staff member only. The other 1 course may be used by a member
of the faculty/staff's family. There was no second to the motion to
amend.
Brokaw MOVED and Mroz seconded the motion to send Proposal 21-96
back to the Committee. Dobney pointed out that we will need a fiscal
analysis before the Board of Control would be willing to approve it.
Horsch (Human Resources) stated that we need to identify what "family"
means. Senator Fynewever asked how the proposal would affect children
who are enrolled here for a degree. The motion to send it back to
committee PASSED on voice vote with no dissent.
D. Proposal 22-96, Recommendation on Child Care Benefit [Appendix Q]
Sweany MOVED and Arici seconded the motion to approve Proposal
22-96. Senator Heyman stated that we have all gotten a questionnaire,
which he urges us to complete and return, and we need to understand the
need for child care among the campus community. We need to know what
it will cost to provide this care. Heyman MOVED and Walck seconded the
motion to TABLE the motion to approve Proposal 22-96. The motion to
table PASSED with no dissent. [A motion to table must be brought from
the table at the next meeting by a Senator or the motion, as presently
stated, is dead, according to Robert's Rules of Order.]
A. Proposal 19-96: Parking Task Force Recommendation [See minutes,
page 6348, for a copy of this proposal.]
Mroz MOVED and Ouillette seconded the motion to approve Proposal
19-96. Provost Dobney stated that the general response from faculty has
been, "who do you think you're kidding?" He continued that there is no
question that the $130 parking add on to salary would come from money
that would otherwise be used for raises. If it is possible to give
raises, we would have to spend that money on parking allowances.
McLean (Staff Council) stated that the Staff Council recommended
that the issue should be re-evaluated; there should be no fees until the
issue is more closely investigated.
Senator Beck stated that his first thought is "what's the cause,"
not "throw money at it." The ratio of students with cars is much higher
than in the past. There were more students in the dorm before than now;
60 rooms in Wadsworth Hall are empty. If these were filled, at 2
students per room, this would free up 120 parking spaces. We should try
to get more students to stay in the dorms.
Senator Lutzke stated that faculty and staff don't have problems,
the students do. They want to park close to where they have class.
Senator Carstens pointed out that the problem for faculty and staff is
that they will lose a lot when the new building is constructed. Senator
Sandberg stated that you don't have to charge $130 to solve the problem.
Dobney pointed out that the majority of students in the residence halls
have cars; the dorms have 400-500 students below their design capacity.
Carstens reminded the Senate that when most of us went to school,
freshmen and sophomores were not allowed to have cars on campus; could
we solve the problem with such a restriction? Hellmann (USG) responded
that upper classmen mostly live off campus; about half the sophomores
are in the dorms; and freshmen are required to live in the dorms.
However, students need to get home (mostly downstate). Senator Arici
commented that students might be safer if we did not allow freshmen to
have cars.
Senator Sloan stated that our number one priority is to get more
students; such restrictions on such a remote campus would not encourage
more students to come here. Senator Keen stated that he has a
hypothesis, that the enrollment in recent years is negatively correlated
with the number of cars; this implies that if we reduce the number of
cars, we should have more students.
Secretary Glime pointed out that we have lost the public
transportation (bus) that could carry students home, necessitating cars;
depending on someone else to drive a student home increases the number
of students who leave early for holidays because their ride is leaving.
Hellmann stated that he can drive home for $10 and no bus can compete
with that price.
Senator Heyman stated that we need to separate student and faculty
issues. Instead of pooling parking into one fund by charging $130 for
parking, pay the first 200 faculty and staff $200 to park at the SDC.
This would cost $40,000 and save $169,000 that a parking allowance of
$130 would cost.
Blumhardt (Facilities Management) responded to the faculty/staff
parking issue by stating that faculty/staff bump the grad students and
the grad students bump the undergrads when parking for faculty and staff
becomes
******************************************************************
Page 6423 Minutes of Senate Meeting 255 1 May 1996
scarce. Parking is over booked by 20-25%.
President Bornhorst commented that we should deal with the city to
keep the sidewalks clean between the SDC and the main campus in the
winter to make walking safer. Blumhardt responded that the city can do
better. He added that these recommendations came from the task force
as a strategic plan to allay problems in 1998 and beyond. The task
force agreed that the lots are full now. There must be a workable plan
in place in anticipation of the targeted enrollment for 2003: 500 more
undergraduates, 500 more graduates, 50 more faculty, and 50 more staff.
Heyman said that we need to consider the needs of the students; the
faculty and staff don't need to be tied into that plan.
Carstens asked what was done on other campuses. Blumhardt
responded that restrictions don't seem to make any difference in cities
because there is lots of public transportation. At MTU, the freshmen
are not a problem because their parking is above Garnet Street.
Students now want flexibility so they can go to Taco Bell or other
off-campus places.
Senator Vichich stated that Blumhardt gave us a $130 incentive to
car pool or walk, but for people who work on shifts or live in Mohawk,
these are not options. Mroz stated that if we auction the spots, we
could raise more money, and he then asked how many schools charge
students and employees. Blumhardt responded that 10-12 schools in
Michigan charge. No state dollars are used for parking; all are run as
auxiliary enterprises or with fees or general fund money. Senator
Bradley commented that the proposal recommends a charge but does not say
what will be done with the money. Bornhorst read from Blumhardt's
report that Adrian College charges residents $25 and commuters $10; MSU
charges $30-90; U of M charges students $195. Some schools charge only
students, others charge only employees. Among our benchmark schools,
the same diversity exists, with the highest fees at Carnegie Mellon,
ranging $300 to $1000 for students, faculty, and staff.
Mroz commented that other schools have less cost because they have
less snow maintenance. Blumhardt agreed, stating that we have 7 grounds
personnel. He added that the money would be used for buses, improved
roads, and maintenance.
Senator Leifer asked where the deck would be put. Blumhardt
responded that the first would be across from the Memorial Union and a
second one to be built later would probably be between the MUB and the
Administration Building. The city bus system is stressed to the
maximum, so we need a backup bus. There is also a night on-demand bus.
Bradley MOVED and Keen seconded the motion to call for the
question. The motion to call the question PASSED on voice vote with no
dissent. The motion to approve Proposal 19-96 FAILED on voice vote with
some assenting votes.
E. Proposal 23-96, Policy on Faculty Availability [See minutes, page
6382, for a copy of this proposal.]
Keen MOVED and Heyman seconded the motion to approve Proposal
23-96. Geoff Roelant introduced himself as the new USG representative.
He stated that the USG would like the proposal to be amended to change
the word "should" to "will" in the first sentence, to read, "As part of
good instructional policy, faculty will be available to all students."
Brokaw MOVED and Mroz seconded the motion to amend the proposal
by changing "should" to "will" as stated.
Keen responded that there were students on the committee and they
did not bring up this issue. The committee had chosen the word "should"
because they did not know how they could enforce the mandatory
statement. Therefore, they relied on "should." The idea is that if the
faculty member is not available, that person should carry a large weight
of guilt.
Hellmann stated that only the first "will" would change; they chose
to leave the method up to the faculty. He stated that Jennifer Klein
had brought this concern to the committee.
Senator Carstens stated that the request was reasonable;
departments should be able to enforce it.
There was no more discussion; Bornhorst stated that the suggested
voting units were academic-degree-granting departments. Senator
Fynewever suggested that it should be all course-offering units; Walck
MOVED and Mroz seconded the motion to change the voting units to all
course-offering units. The motion to change the units passed on voice
vote with dissent. The motion, as amended, PASSED on show-of-hands
vote, 15:6.
President Bornhorst announced that the USG has requested that the
University stop using the social security number on identification cards
and other places. This recommendation will come to the next meeting as
a proposal.
Bradley MOVED and Mroz seconded the motion to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 7:32 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by Janice M. Glime
Secretary of the Senate
.