Minutes For Meeting On February 15, 2012 | Administrative Professional Staff Council | SIU

Date: February 15, 2012

Program:

1. The meeting was called to order at 1:03 p.m. by the Chair, JP Dunn. Visitors and guests were welcomed and introduced.

2. Roll Call

Members Present: Natalie Branca, Steve Buhman, Don Castle, Maureen Doran, Janet Douglas, JP Dunn, Pat Eckert, Jon Geiger, Alfred Jackson, Kathy Jones, Charlotte Sarao, Lori Stettler, Meredith Thomas, Sue Tin, Valerie Brooks Wallin, Gloria Yuncker.

Proxies: Janet Douglas for Tuesday Ashner.

Visitors and Guests: Tracy Bennett, Faye Joyner-Keene, Phyllis Khaaliq, Linda McCabe-Smith.

3. Guest

JP Dunn welcomed L. McCabe-Smith and P. Khaaliq, who discussed the process for search waivers and the responsibilities of a search committee.

4. Minutes

The minutes of the meeting on January 18, 2012, were approved as presented.

5. The agenda was amended to change the item under New Business to FY13 and to add a report on the Search Committee for Dean of the College of Applied Sciences and Arts (6.4d). C. Sarao moved to adopt the agenda as amended; seconded by J. Geiger. Motion carried.

6. Reports

6.1 Chair 
JP Dunn reported on the February 13 constituency heads meeting: i) performance funding will be part of the budget next year. At first glance, it appears the University has lost around $150,000 off its base; ii) there is a bill going forth in the legislature to prevent hiring of annuitants; iii) the director of the Illinois Board of Higher Education (IBHE) will be on campus February 24 to discuss performance funding; iv) the capital budget this year looks promising. Included in the top three is the renovation to the Communications building; v) the spring leadership meeting will be on February 21. There will be discussion on the State of the University address, customer service training and strategic planning. Co- chairs Peggy Stockdale and Tom Britton will discuss that process. Lipman-Hearne will also speak; vi) one of the CIO candidates returned to campus on February 13 for a second look. There are two internal candidates who will be announced soon for the Institutional Research and Services search. The search for the Vice Chancellor for Development should have a pool by March. There is also a search for the director of the Center for Teaching Excellence; vii) some preliminary planning is being done for the use of Woody Hall after the current occupants have vacated; viii) work continues on the Faner and Agriculture buildings, and the Communications building is getting a new roof. There are HVAC and electrical upgrades needed in Neckers; ix) there is a plan to move the books back into the library. The process will take about two years; x) the [Transportation Center] is on schedule and under budget. Also, the request will be submitted for demolition of the triads.

6.2 Board of Trustees 
JP Dunn reported the Board will meet on March 22 in Carbondale.

D. Castle mentioned that he attended the strategic planning retreat last year and has not heard anything on the document since that time. He is interested to hear what has been drafted. JP Dunn responded that it has been fairly quiet publicly. A website had been set up so people could go in and comment on the draft; however, the site was hacked and had to be taken down. K. Jones indicated that copies of the strategic plan will be distributed at the campus leadership meeting taking place next week and will be discussed at round tables. JP Dunn added that volunteers are being asked to host a table to facilitate discussion. L. Stettler stated that at the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory Committee meeting, the Chancellor reported that the strategic planning committee chairs had presented to her on January 23 and outlined [6 areas]. Those will [move forward] during the retreat. D. Castle indicated that he represents the A/P constituency on the committee, and they were actively engaged; since then, it has been quiet.

6.3 Human Resources (HR) 
T. Bennett reported that representatives from T. Rowe Price, administrator for the deferred compensation plan, will be on campus March 5. L. Stettler asked about the Civil Service System audit that took place in January and what will happen next. Will those people who met with the auditors be given any feedback? T. Bennett responded that what normally happens is the HR director receives an interim report. They have an opportunity to provide responses to whatever potential findings or concerns there were, and then HR provides a response in writing. The auditors eventually come back with a final audit decision. From that, HR makes decisions as to whether to implement the changes, if they have that opportunity. In the past, specifically the audit of positions, the recommendation has always been that HR review them for inclusion into civil service; however, it has never been mandated. T. Bennett indicated it could take six to nine months for the final report. On another issue, J. Geiger asked T. Bennett if she has heard anything about health insurance for next year. T. Bennett responded she has not.

6.4 Representatives to University Committees

6.4a Affirmative Action Advisory - Derrick Williams 
D. Williams presented and discussed his report (included as appendix 1 to the minutes).

6.4b Honorary Degrees - Deborah Case 
D. Case submitted her written report (included as appendix 2 to the minutes).

6.4c Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory - Lori Stettler 
L. Stettler reported on the January 23 meeting: i) the Chancellor reported on the administrative review process, looking at all ways to be both effective and efficient. Articles from the American Association of State Colleges and Universities and the National Association of College and University Business Officers were distributed. Both discussed issues that are facing higher education across the nation, and all are very similar to what SIUC is experiencing. The "Business as Usual" article discusses shrinking staff and increasing workloads that all institutions are facing; ii) the Chancellor discussed the advising consultant, who presented a report to the executive staff on the areas that need to be addressed to increase retention from an advisement perspective; iii) a report was given by the state funding performance committee, and Allan Karnes (College of Business) reported on the performance funding model and the meeting that occurred on that issue; iv) there was discussion about the public act and how it supports the goal of the Illinois Public agenda; v) there was discussion on the strategic planning process; vi) Vice Chancellor Kevin Bame reported on the budget facts report, and Carol Henry discussed the capital RAMP budget process; vii) Judy Marshall (Executive Director of Finance) distributed a report on shared business services and discussed specifically the volume of business that has cropped up for travel reimbursements, p-cards, purchase requisitions, etc. She submitted some recommendations on efficiencies in the various areas that report to her.

6.4d Search Cmt, Dean of Applied Sciences and Arts - Faye Joyner-Keene 
F. Joyner-Keene reported: The committee has met several times, noting they had the appropriate amount of information to proceed with the search. Their charge was to review the applications received and come up with candidates for interview. The chair of the committee is John Warwick (Dean, College of Engineering). The committee reviewed 14 applicants to determine eligibility and decided on 4 candidates. Out of those four, one withdrew. The remaining three were forwarded to the Provost. The committee was asked to provide a list of their strengths and weaknesses to go along with the other information, and references were contacted. The committee is now waiting to see whether the Provost approves of what they sent him. K. Jones asked what the time line was between the search deadline and when the three names were submitted. F. Joyner-Keene responded it was about six to eight weeks.

6.5 Standing Committees

6.5a Executive Committee 
L. Stettler reported the committee spent most of the time discussing the proposed changes to the operating paper and the discussion that will take place shortly.

6.5b Committee on Committees 
J. Geiger reported the committee has two searches for which representatives are needed. One is for the director of the Center for Teaching Excellence (due February 17) and the other is for the library dean search (was due on February 3). He indicated that three names were requested for the Center for Teaching Excellence director search, but the committee only has two for approval at this time: Donna Margolis (College of Business) and Keri Young (Career Services). L. Stettler suggested Lisa Peden (Learning Support Services) might be interested in serving. J. Geiger included her for approval, pending her acceptance. The following names were submitted for the library dean search: Aaron Lisec (Library Affairs), Kristine McGuire (SIU Foundation) and Zenetta McDaniel (University Honors). He noted that the Council will be voting on the latter nominations after the fact, as JP Dunn has already passed them on to the Provost. Nominations were approved.

6.5c Constituency Relations - No report.

6.5d Operating Paper 
K. Jones presented for a first reading the proposed changes to the A/P Staff Council Operating Paper (included as an attachment to the agenda) and reviewed the rationale for each change. JP Dunn indicated that one change that was recommended to Section I.A. was to add "department chairs" because removing the line "...tenured or tenure track cross appointment" opens it up for department chairs to run for the Council. P. Eckert pointed out that department chairs are faculty; therefore, they hold voting membership in another constituency, i.e., the Faculty Senate. She believes the new languages covers them. J. Geiger pointed out that a chancellor would also be faculty. Is that person also eligible to vote for Faculty Senate? (yes) If so, then that [title] should be removed as well. He suggested either adding department chairs or removing the entire last sentence of the proposed wording. JP Dunn noted that there are vice chancellors who do not hold tenure Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance and Vice Chancellor for Institutional Advancement. K. Jones explained that part of the intention of the new wording is to draw a clear line between those who are management. D. Castle believes it should be clear what is meant by department chair, if that is going to be added. There should be a defined list of who is meant by "senior administrative officers" if those are the only ones the committee meant to exclude. V. Wallin questioned whether it should say "chairs and directors" since some departments have directors as opposed to chairs. P. Eckert responded that when the committee looked at other institutions and other operating papers, and when they looked at whether someone had voting membership in another constituency, the proposed wording took care of that; otherwise, there was a long list of exemptions. The committee wanted to make it clear that someone who can vote on the Faculty Senate cannot be included. J. Geiger questioned whether the Council would be muddying the waters or clearing them up by either adding or not adding the names. C. Sarao stated that the positions of concern are the vice chancellors who do not have a tenured position, and it is not to say there will not be more of those in the future depending on what happens. So, instead of the last sentence being "senior administrative officers," can it be addressed in such a way that it would specifically target senior administrative officers who do not hold tenure? D. Castle pointed out that if the Council excludes the two vice chancellors who do not hold tenure, then those two positions would not be in any voting unit. He also pointed out that re-defining the constituency would likely require a change in Board of Trustees policy, as it defines membership in the various constituency groups. K. Jones noted that the new proposed wording is taken from Board policy. After further discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to remove the last sentence of the proposed wording under Section I.A.

K. Jones read through the remaining proposed changes, noting that the Carbondale School of Medicine was given the opportunity to voice whether they felt disenfranchised as a result of the dissolution of that sector. There was no objection. Also, K. Jones noted that the proposed wording under I.D., "Except as otherwise specified" will revert back to the old wording as a result of the previously discussed change defining membership (Section I.A.).

K. Jones reported that the Council now needs to decide how to implement or not implement the changes in the Council elections. Originally, what she proposed was to provide notice for the elections and do the referendum to vote on the changes to the operating paper at the same time, assuming the operating paper revisions would be adopted. No one would be elected from Student Affairs since that division no longer exists. However, after giving it more thought, K. Jones indicated she did not feel comfortable with that, so she wanted to present a second option to the Council: distribute the call for nominations showing only two sectors and have people nominate themselves or others based on those two sectors, even though the operating paper has yet to be approved; or, the call for nominations can include all four sectors, and people can run based on the current operating paper. Then, once the operating papers are approved, Council members can be moved to their correct sectors. J. Geiger asked if the proposed new wording would change how many people would be voted into each sector. K. Jones responded that the numbers are pretty close. D. Castle commented that Student Affairs is long gone, and being a former member of that sector, he believes the Council should move forward. He believes the Council would be better for having accomplished the goal of restructuring based on reality.

Concerns were raised as to what would happen, then, if the election was run under the proposed changes and the changes are not approved. D. Castle asked if it was possible to complete voting on the referendum before the elections are completed. K. Jones responded that the committee calculated it out as close as possible. There are notice requirements for both the elections and votes on operating paper amendments that are specified in the operating paper. D. Castle believes the constituency would want the operating paper to be fixed. C. Sarao agreed that it just needs to be done, and the elections be held using the new sectors. S. Buhman moved that the Council hold elections under the proposed revised operating paper; seconded by V. Wallin. Motion carried.

6.5e/f Staff Benefits/Staff Welfare - No report.

7. Old Business - None.

8. New Business

The Proposed A/P Staff Council Budget for FY13 was presented for approval. D. Castle moved to approve the budget; seconded by C. Sarao. Motion carried.

9. Announcements - None.

10. Adjournment

Meeting Adjourned at 2:50 PM.