Meeting, November 9
DRAFT
|
Members
Present: |
B. Allan,
L. Ametsbichler, C. Anderson, T. Atkins, L. Barnes, D. Beck, R. Bendick Kier, N. Bradley-Browning, F.
Cardozo-Palaez, K. Canty, B. Cochran, J. Crepeau, M.
DeGrandpre, P. Dietrich, A. Delaney, B. Douma L. Frey, J. Eglin, J. Gannon,
F. Glass J. Glendening, B. Halpap, L. Hayes, K. Hill, S. Justman, M. Kupilik, B.
Larson, G. Larson, C. Lawrence, C. Loisel, J. Lopach, J. Luckowski, S.
McCann, D. McCrea, J. McNulty, V. Micheletto, M. Monsos, N. Nickerson, M.
Pershouse, L. Putnam, B. Reider, Y. Reimer, T. Seekins, L. Sheng, D. Shively,
G. Smith, F. Snyder, J. Sommers-Flanagan, A. Sondag, R. Stubblefield, A. Szalda-Petree, H. Thompson, N. Tuleja,
E. Uchimoto, N. Uhlenbruck, A. Ware |
|
Ex-Officio
Present: |
President
Dennison, Vice President Duringer, Associate Provosts Staub and
Walker-Andrews, Registrar Micus, ASUM President Helling |
|
Members Absent: |
C. Hand,
S. Gordon, C. Nichols, R. Skelton, P.
Silverman, S. Stiff, D. Stolle, M. Tonon, W.
Freimund, D. Potts, F. Rosenzweig, D. Swibold, K. Unger |
Chair
Ametsbichler called the meeting to order at
Registrar Micus called roll.
Communications:
President Dennison
The administration has been planning for the
Governor’s Tuition Cap. The College
Affordability Program is designed to avoid tuition increases for resident
students. Therefore, nonresident tuition
is decoupled from resident tuition. The
Program is based on an agreement of present-law adjustments – the delivery of
current services to the same number of students with the same number of
employees, recognizing that there are inflationary increases that have to be
met. Agreement was reached on
inflationary items such as energy, benefits, health care, and etc. This involved a lot of discussions between
the Budget Office and the University System Financial Officers. Included in the calculation (for planning
purposes only) is a 3% salary increase.
One unsettled issue is the fund maintained to provide payouts for employees’
leave balances. The proposal is that the
state will maintain a separate fund so that if the campuses exceed their fund
level, a request can be made that at least half of the expense be paid out of
the states fund.
The expenditure total was calculated for the same number of students as last
year. Then the student enrollment of
each campus was evaluated to determine the percentage of resident students. The present-law adjustment expenditures are
then multiplied by the percentage of resident students to determine the total
funding to be provided by the state.
The
The calculation will be the operating budget going
into the legislative session. The long-
range building requests are separate.
There was initially some discussion about having a bonding program and
what it would include. Most recently,
the discussion has moved away from bonding toward using some of the ending fund
balance to pay the building requests directly.
This will also be determined in the legislative session.
It is yet to be determined whether any of the
one-time-only funding requests will be provided. These are still being looked at and there is
still the possibility that some of these requests might be approved once the
legislative session begins.
Senator Frey asked whether the one-time-only requests
would be available in the future.
President Dennison responded that the appropriation is for this biennium.
This model is a significant change in the way funding
is figured in
In the past there was a lump sum that was provided for higher education and
this was allocated among the campuses based on the Cost of Education
Model. Now, there is a computation of
what is required to maintain the current level of service. Missing from the model is recognition that
enrollment growth will occur. Also
missing is the recognition of the need for funding to develop new programs.
This is what the one-time-only money can do now.
Senator Kupilik asked whether the model funds the
state pay plan at 80%.
According to the President, the gross average of the
MUS system is 80% but on this campus, it would be 79% in accordance with the
percentage of resident students. Also,
in the faculty pay plan is 80% salaries and 20% merits and promotions, but that
has yet to be determined.
How the agency budgets fit within the calculation has yet to be addressed. The agencies are entities like the Extension
Services,
Vice President for Administration
and Finance, Robert Duringer
The
depleted contingency fund should not impact faculty. The administration is adept at managing this
type of situation and should be able to move funds to minimize the risk. This
will be a bit of a challenge for Administration and Finance, but it is hoped
that there will be no manifestation on the campus.
Senator Thompson asked whether the higher minimum wage will have any impact on
students credit load.
Vice President Duringer responded that the difference in the wages might give
students a little more money, but it most likely will go towards discretionary
spending.
Senator Lopach asked whether the contingency fund covered all the unanticipated
expenses or whether expenses still need to be paid.
Vice
President Duringer clarified that the contingency fund paid most of the
unanticipated expenses. It is gone, but
unless there is a complete surprise with spring enrollment, which is
statistically unlikely, Administration and Finance will be able to move money
around to cover the remaining expenses.
Associate Provost, James Staub
In accordance with
Academic Policy 101.2, Associate Provost Staub submitted the Nontenurable Academic Faculty Report. The tenure-track faculty total is up by 5 and
nontenurable faculty is up by 12 compared to last
year. Any questions regarding the report
should be directed to him.
ASUM
President Andrea Helling provided an update of ASUM
activities. The students made 7,000
phone calls to remind students to vote and distributed voter guides to students
in the dorms and family housing. ASUM
will be hiring a lobbyist and intern to work in support of the tuition cap. A
resolution was unanimously passed to encourage the University to join the
Workers Rights Consortium, which is an organization that monitors factories
around the world to assure they are in compliance with fair labor standards and
human rights compliance. ASUM will be considering the stadium expansion and
associated $17.50 athletics fee increase at the next meeting Tuesday
evening.
Chair’s Report
Article
Amendment
Chair Ametsbichler
announced that the Article Amendment updating titles of Pharmacy and Forestry
was approved with 112 affirmative votes of the faculty at large and President
Dennison.
As promised,
Senator Lopach asked whether there was a relationship between the Board of
Regent’s general education requirement and the institutions’. How much flexibility is there? How much does the university have to adhere
to the MUS core?
Senator Hill responded that there really is no relationship. There is no intent by the Board of Regents to
require changes to the campuses’ general education programs. Each institution is encouraged to keep its
unique program. The MUS Core will only
apply to students wishing to transfer within the system. So it is really a lot of work for only a few
students. The Indian Education for All component was included because it is
important to the Regents, but the funding is still unknown.
Senator
Lopach asked whether a student who took 24 credits of the core, for example, at
one of the technical colleges transferred to
Senator
Hill explained that students who take the MUS core will have fulfilled all
lower division general education requirements at any MUS institution for which
they transfer. However, students are
only eligible to use the MUS core if they have taken 20 credits or more of the
core. Students transferring with fewer
than 20 core credits would have their courses assessed for meeting UM’s general education program. Students would still have to take university
requirements and program requirements, such as the upper-division writing
assessment and writing requirement in the major.
The faculty and administrators on the Council are very much protecting the
individual programs. Individual courses
have not yet been reviewed.
Senator
Luckowski asked about the Council’s sense of the Indian Education for All
requirement, whether it was in addition to the core. What is the intent?
Senator
Hill indicated that this is a work in progress. The Regents are clear that this
is a feature of K-12, and there is a desire to do something in higher
education, but there isn’t any money. It
could be a value-added experience or be integrated into courses. The Council didn’t address this issue because
of the funding. The Board of Regents is
very much in favor of Indian Education for All, but how to deliver it is still
a discussion for the future.
It was
pointed out that there was a document on the Board of Regents agenda, An Academic Plan for Indian Education for
All for the
Senator
Beck has been attending the Board of Regents Indian Education for All Committee
meetings in
Senator Frey commented that the MUS core appears to threaten the campuses
general education programs.
Senate Hill
responded that the number of students using the core is very small.
Senator Frey conjectured that if it becomes an issue, individual departments
can set up major requirements to ensure their students are getting the desired
foundation.
SBPC
The
Strategic Budget and Planning notes were made available to inform Senators of the
budget status. VP Duringer spoke to some
of these issues.
Service Award
Chair Ametsbichler reminded the Senate that nominees were needed for the
service award.
BOR
Meeting
The Board
of Regents meeting is on campus next week.
There was a link to the agenda.
Faculty are welcome to attend when an item of interest is scheduled.
Curriculum
Special Request
Associate Provost Walker-Andrews asked that the Level 1 degree title changes
for the
Committee Reports:
Senator Szalda- Petree presented the
curriculum list for approval.
Senator Frey asked whether there was any discussion on Journalism’s increase of
credits in the major.
Senator Szalda-Petree responded that the program went from 30 to 35 credits and
this is in line with credits required in other programs.
The graduate curriculum items were presented and approved by unanimous
consent.
Associate
Provost Walker-Andrews informed the Senate that the termination of the MS in
Physical Therapy was approved several years ago, but apparently did not make it
to the Board of Regents to update the degree inventory.
Unfinished Business:
The
election procedures bylaw amendment was approved.
New Business:
Associate Provost
Good and Welfare:
Senator
Frey asked about the status of the general education issue.
Senator Szalda-Petree responded that
Senator Lopach asked if the draft was sent to department chairs.
Senator Szalda-Petree answered that the model has not been distributed to
departments. Members on the committee
have shared information with their departments and comments have been returned. A compromise needs to be decided prior to the
draft going to departments so that productive revisions may occur.
Senator
Luckowski asked Registrar Micus about the rumored elimination of paper
schedules.
Registrar Micus explained that he is working on a preliminary approval to
eliminate some of the printed schedules, primarily because the schedule is
out-of-date the moment it is printed.
There is a possibility of an online schedule that is more interactive
and up-to-date. Likewise, the
Registrar’s Office can provide more accurate information for advising
activities.
The meeting
was adjourned at 4:11pm.