Approved Minutes For Meeting On March 16, 2011

Main Content

Date: March 16, 2011

Program:

1. The meeting was called to order by the Chair, JP Dunn. Visitors and guests were welcomed and introduced.

2. Roll Call

Members Present: Tuesday Ashner, Natalie Branca, Steve Buhman, Janet Douglas, JP Dunn, Pat Eckert, Layla Murphy, Mike Reiman, Amy Rose, Charlotte Sarao, Rod Sievers, Lori Stettler, Gloria Yuncker.

Members Absent: Alfred Jackson, Meredith Thomas.

Proxies: JP Dunn for Jon Geiger; Charlotte Sarao for Sarah Olson; Sue Tin for Gloria Yuncker.

Visitors and Guests: Joel Fritzler, Tom Furby, Pat Latch.

3. Minutes

The minutes of the meeting on February 16, 2011, were approved as presented.

4. Adoption of Meeting Agenda: L Stettler moved to adopt the agenda as presented; seconded by C. Sarao. Motion carried.

5. Reports

5.1 Chair 
JP Dunn reported on the constituency heads meeting: i) tuition increases for next year were discussed. There are 3, 6, and 9% scenarios under consideration, although President Poshard indicated he would ask for at least 7-8%. A first reading on the proposal will be on April 14, and it will be ratified at the Board meeting on May 12; ii) the Governor's proposed budget calls for a state funding level of $220 million, the same amount the University received from the state more than a decade ago. The campus is still owed $120 million for FY11. In February, $11 million in MAP funds were received, but that is a separate pot of money from what the campus is currently owed; iii) there are three candidates and three alternates for the College of Liberal Arts dean; five finalists for the dean of Engineering; and six candidates for provost. Mike Ruiz (University Communications) was selected as the A/P Staff Council representative to that screening committee. The committee will be asked to rank the candidates and not eliminate any. The Chancellor mentioned holding open forums to include all the candidates since they are well known on campus; iv) the last unpaid closure day was this week (April 15). ACSES did not accept either contract offer (three year or one year), so the administration implemented the one year. The same will happen to the Non Tenure Track Faculty Association if they do not agree to a contract by March 25; v) the dean of the College of Education and Human Services will be retiring July 1, so there will be a search for that position; vi) a fall break is scheduled for October 8-11. The break at Thanksgiving will be shortened to three days; vii) there may be another round of discussion about early retirement, but it is likely off the table because of the cost and the fear of over-correcting; viii) the campus is working with Lipman-Hearne on marketing. One suggested comment was to take the "C" out of SIUC because of the misperception that the University is a branch campus.

5.2 Board of Trustees 
JP Dunn reported the next Board meeting is on April 14 in Springfield.

5.3 Human Resources (HR) - None.

5.4 Representatives to University Committees

5.4a Search Cmt, Dean of Engineering - To be rescheduled.

5.4b Traffic Appeals Board - Tom Furby 
T. Furby presented and reviewed his report (included appendix 1 to the minutes). He noted that the Board does not make policy, but is more of a judicial board.

5.4c Traffic and Parking - Joel Fritzler 
J. Fritzler presented and reviewed his report (included as appendix 2 to the minutes). Council members raised some concerns regarding the loss of parking spaces once the garage is demolished and the new Student Services building is completed. P. Eckert asked if only the number of spots being lost will be made up. She believes there will be an influx of people going to the Student Services building who have previously parked elsewhere. This happened when the Student Health Center staff were relocated. She questioned whether the committee planned for this possibility. T. Furby responded that he sits on the committee by virtue of chairing the Traffic Appeals Board; he believes there will be an addition of 81 spots, which will bring the parking spaces up to the same amount that were in the parking structure. S. Buhman pointed out that most of the new parking behind the Student Services building will be reserved for people coming in. JP Dunn noted that some additional parking will be added after completion of all the buildings. T. Ashner added that when the new Alumni Center is built some years down the road, there will be approximately 90 Institutional Advancement employees moving to that side of campus. T. Furby responded that the plan for now is to replace the garage parking. C. Sarao believes a shift will occur whereby people who work in Faner will begin parking by Woody Hall, and those in Woody Hall will begin parking near Faner. S. Buhman expressed concern about those people attending events at the Student Center having to walk from the Arena parking lot because there will no longer be parking near the Student Center. P. Eckert commented that the Student Services building was not originally supposed to go where the parking garage is now. Things keep shifting, and she is not sure what is being considered. JP Dunn pointed out that the garage is at the end of its useful life, and attempting to repair it would be more costly.T. Ashner mentioned that when she served on the committee, they wanted to add a fourth tier for the purchase of decals. The higher salaried employees would make up a little more of the income that parking needed because the department is cost recovery. It was difficult to get the committee to consider this change. J. Fritzler responded that one of the arguments [against the recommendation] was that many staff in that higher tier already have gold stickers; therefore, there are that many more employees not buying stickers. There was also discussion as to whether retirees [with less than 20 years of service] should automatically receive a gold sticker, as opposed to someone who has put in 20 years. There was discussion as to whether that person should pay a lump sum for the [difference in years] and get a gold sticker or just continue to buy a blue sticker like everyone else. T. Ashner believes the committee already approved that recommendation. They went to all the constituency groups and received approval that they did not want retirees to get a gold sticker, but only those with 20 years of service. He should raise that issue at the next meeting.

5.4d Graduate Council Representative - Bill Stevens 
B. Stevens submitted the following written report: The only items the Graduate Council has considered that might be of interest to the Council are proposed revisions to the University's Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics. If [the Council] does not have those documents, he can provide them. They appear to be stalled since 2009. JP Dunn noted that the Council looked at these documents a few months ago. C. Sarao took issue with the statement that the "only things that would be of interest to the Council...." She argued that committee representatives should report whether they believe there is something of interest or not. Committee representatives are suppose to report on their committee's activities, period. JP Dunn agreed that B. Stevens should have reported regardless of whether he believed it was of interest or not. P. Eckert indicated that the Council should make it clear to anyone who is appointed as a Council representative that her/his role is not to determine what s/he thinks is of interest, but to report on the meetings. R. Sievers asked if B. Stevens is supposed to report quarterly, even though the Graduate Council meets [8-9 times] a year. JP Dunn responded that he would like to discuss the overall issue of how often committee representatives report, as he believes there are some representatives the Council should hear from more frequently and possibly at each meeting (e.g. the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory Committee). Representatives do not always have to attend Council meetings, but they can send a written report that can be read into the minutes. JP Dunn charged the Committee on Committees and the Executive Committee with reviewing this issue.

5.5 Standing Committees

5.5a Executive Committee 
T. Ashner reported the Expanded Executive Committee met and reviewed the minutes and finalized the agenda. Other than discussing those issues on which he has already reported, the committee discussed JP Dunn's presentation to the Computing Advisory Committee. JP Dunn reported that one of the activities occurring somewhat parallel with the distance education changes being made is the submission of an RFP (Request for Proposal) for a new learning management system (currently, the University is running Blackboard). The committee proposing the changes requested that they look into the possibility of switching to a difference system. JP Dunn indicated that the Computing Advisory Committee invited him to appear before them, so he went to one of their meetings and explained the process of writing the RFP. He explained that the RFP includes 26 pages of requirements. There are seven members who will review the RFPs, and that is expected to be completed by the end of this month. Vendors will be invited to campus the first two weeks in April, and a decision will be made by the end of the academic year. T. Ashner asked why the University was not staying with the current Blackboard system. JP Dunn responded that it is at the end of its life and is no longer being supported by the vendor.

5.5b Ad Hoc Elections - No report.

5.5c Committee on Committees - No report.

5.5d Constituency Relations 
S. Buhman reported the committee will meet to discuss a date for the spring reception. T. Ashner asked if the committee participated in the selection of the A/P outstanding service award recipient. S. Buhman indicated they did participate. T. Ashner noted that generally, all nominees for the awards are recognized at the spring reception.5.5e Operating Paper 
JP Dunn reported that the committee will need to address representation in the Council's Operating Paper, as well as the composition of the A/P Judicial Review Board. Previously, when changes were made to the A/P Grievance Procedure, they were sent to the JRB for review. R. Sievers indicated the issue of representation will be held over for action by the next Council.

5.5f Staff Benefits - No report.

5.5g Staff Welfare - No report.

6. Old Business

JP Dunn reported that the Ad Hoc Elections Committee recently sent out the request for nominations to run for the Council. There were six nominations from Academic Affairs, with two positions available; four nominations from General, with one position available; and one nomination from the division formerly known as Student Affairs, with one position open. The results of these elections will be ratified at the April 20 meeting.

7. New Business - None.

8. Announcements - None.

9. Adjournment