Minutes

Minutes of the University Senate Meeting Wednesday December 2, 2009

Present:  T. Bars, A. Berenstein, J. Bonine, C. Bybee, K. Dellabough, L. Forrest, H. Gangadharbatla, P. Gilkey, N. Gower, M. Henney, A. Hilts, J. Hurwit, K. Jensen, C. Jones, D. Kennett, H. Khalsa Kaur, R. Kyr, K. Lenn, H. Lin, C. McNelly, L. Middlebrook, S. Midkiff, D. Olson, N. C. Phillips, M. Price, N. Proudfoot, L. Reichardt, L. Sugiyama, T. K. Thompson, N. Tublitz, S. Verscheure, M. Williams

Excused: A. Laskaya, J. Piger

Absent: G. Baitinger, C. Bengtson, S. Chakraborty, E, Chan, T. Dishion, C. Ellis, A. Emami, M.A. Hyatt, M. Jaeger, T. Minner, P. Southwell, Z. Stark-Macmillan, T. Toadvine, L. Van Dreel, P. Walker, P. Warner

CALL TO ORDER

University Senate President Peter Gilkey called the regular meeting of the University Senate to order at 3:05 p.m. in room 220 HEDCO Building.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

Minutes of the November 11, 2009 senate meeting were approved as distributed.

STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY

Remarks from University President Richard Lariviere.  The president began his remarks by reminding everyone that the university is reaching the end point of the annual charitable giving drive and he emphasized the importance of donations with so many people in need during these difficult financial times.  He commented next regarding the fiscal situation of the state and the university, reaffirming that this past year has been very bad financially for the state and that next year may be even worse.  The president reported that the state contributes a mere 8% to the universityÕs general fund; consequently, the anticipated 20% budget cuts yet to come will have less impact on our campus than if we had been funded at a higher percentage (like many of the other state supported institutions across the country).  The president went on to say that in order to meet the funding challenges, we need to change the manner in which we receive funding from the state.  Currently, the annual appropriation process is designed so that whatever the fiscal shortfall, the state first meets legislated mandates for other state agencies, then makes up the shortfall from the higher education budget.  We must address the fact that there are no mandates for higher education.  For the current biennium, the state appropriated $650 million dollars for state agencies, and higher education will only receive $128 million of that amount; however, there may be more budget cuts in February 2010 depending on whether proposed tax increase Measures 66 and 67 pass in the special election.  In general, the budget for this biennium looks rather grim.

The president went on to express the frustration of not knowing what the universityÕs budget was until well into the fall term of classes.  He suggested several changes that are needed: one is to regularize the stateÕs funding of higher education, that is, to change the manner in which we receive funding from the state so that what we receive is predictable.  Another is to change the governance of the university in relation to the state; for example, the president would like to see a board of regents or a board of governors governing the UO specifically, with sole responsibility for ensuring the institution is making policies and directing its mission based on what optimally affects the institution.  He noted there are a number of models that could be explored in this regard.  President Lariviere said that it is important for the university to have accountability with the state, so he would like the faculty to devise a set of metrics to determine whether the university is doing its job or not.  And third, the president suggested that we should examine ways to re-cast our relationship with the state – some suggestions are provided in former President FrohnmayerÕs recent report to the chancellor (see http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/DF-18Nov09.pdf ).

During a question period, President Lariviere amplified several points.  He noted that the UO already has many accountability measures – but he would like the faculty to advise him on the types of meaningful metrics that can explain and articulate to the public what we do at the UO.  Regarding the governance of the university, the president said an ideal set up would be the UO having its own board that understands its role, one that says the president is in charge of running the university and managing the accountability metrics.  He commented further that the Frohnmayer document only speaks of the three big research institutions (UO, OSU, and PSU), and we need all seven OUS institutions agreeing that some kind of changes must be made.  The president that what is clear is that we have to go into discussions with the state as a group of seven universities and with a common agenda to change the way we see things, that is, to work collectively on this issue.  President Lariviere recognized that a considerable amount of consultation between faculty, staff, and students is required on all of these issues so that the outcome is meaningful to all people involved.  He plans to consult with the faculty in the near future and has asked Senate President Gilkey to suggest faculty members for a joint task force to begin this process.  Lastly, regarding the relationship between the faculty and the administration, the president said that the faculty and the administration must work together.  He went on to say that the faculty determines the quality of the institution, and he would like to see the facultyÕs focus and judgment be on such matters. 

Remarks from Vice President for Student Affairs Robin Holmes.  Vice President Holmes opened her remarks explaining that a general goal of Student Affairs is to enhance the overall quality of the student experience at the university, which is done through strategic partnering that provides learning opportunities, programming, and services supporting the academic mission of the UO.  She noted that Student Affairs seeks to create purposeful environments that will enhance the studentsÕ experience both in and out of the classroom.  The vice president said that students attending the UO are better prepared academically than in previous years and they have higher expectations.  In the current year, there are record numbers of out-of-state and international students, and the ethnic and racial diversity of the student body continues to increase as well.  Student Affairs works to ensure that students are prepared academically, emotionally, and physically to take their place in the UOÕs community of scholars, and to benefit from the academic opportunities provided by the faculty.  She commented that Student Affairs is taking a holistic approach to educating the entire student, by moving from a purely service-oriented approach in student services to a student learning paradigm that better aligns with the academic mission and academic plan of the university.

The vice president provided a visual presentation that outlined goals that Student Affairs would like to achieve by 2020 (see http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/Holmes02Dec09.pdf).  Included in the presentation were four cornerstones: (1) community, the notion that students can be part of something at the UO; (2) capacity, which includes a plan to build and renovate facilities that are reflective of a preeminent residential university; (3) quality, that is, support for the metrics that support institutional quality, such as the positive reputation of our students demonstrated by acquiring the best jobs and being admitted to the most prestigious graduate schools; and (4) capitalizing on what makes the UO so special, the physical environment, people, hands-on learning, student engagement, student activism, and preparing future leaders and global citizens.

Vice President Holmes commented briefly on progress made in the strategic housing plan, which will lead to replacing all the older residence halls between by 2027.  An East campus residence hall that is nearly ready to break ground for construction will be the largest residence hall with over 170,000 square feet, providing 450 more beds with traditional rooms and semi-suites that will be attractive to freshman and sophomores.  It will be built with ÒgreenÓ efficiencies and will have specific academic functions within the building, such as honors programs and language immersion, and a resident scholar apartment so that the faculty member that has the responsibility for the curriculum that he/she is leading can be on site with the students.  In addition, the building would have a learning commons, including a librarian office and a librarian on staff, study rooms, computer labs, and classrooms.  The vice president concluded her remarks by noting that the building will have the same architect as the new Living Learning Center in order to capture the same efficiencies built into that residence.  Also, honors and language immersion programs are planned for the new building; as future needs change, the academic focus of the building may change as well. 

REPORTS

Move to paperless UO Catalog.  Mr. Colin Miller, director of Design and Editing Services, updated the senators regarding progress on having the UO Catalog and Law School Catalog go paperless (see SenateCatalogHistory.pdf and SenateCatalogTimeline Going paperless.pdf).  A paperless catalog is supported by the major consumers of the catalog as well as the president and provost.  The conversion from paper has begun and will proceed in 2010.  Mr. Miller explained that the entire catalog currently is on-line at the UO as it is with all the AAU schools.  Printed copies are available for $25, and soon the on-line catalog will be formatted to have a ÒprintÓ feature that individuals can use if desired (currently, a PDF version is available).  During a question period Mr. Miller clarified that student advising units agreed that a paperless catalog was the right direction for the catalog.  Also, the catalog will follow the same schedule for updates that is in place now and will have previous versions of the catalogue preserved for access in future years for reference. 

Fall 2009 Preliminary Curriculum Report. With Committee on Courses Chairman Paul Engelking unavailable to present the Preliminary Curriculum Report, UO Registrar Sue Eveland moved to have the report accepted with a couple noted corrections: (1) eliminate the Multicultural title under the Other Curriculum Matters section, and (2) ART Drawing II has been approved.  The report was approved as amended (see http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/FinCurrRptF09.html for the corrected, final version of the fall 2009 report).

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE FLOOR

Senate President Gilkey noted that the next meeting of the Faculty Governance Committee was scheduled for Thursday, December 4^th from 9:30 to noon in the Lewis Lounge (see Report for more information).  Also, President Gilkey drew attention to a November 18, 2009 report from Dave Frohnmayer to George Pernsteiner (alluded to earlier by President Lariviere) regarding a document titled The Coming Crisis in College Completion: OregonÕs Challenge and a Proposal for First Steps, and encouraged the senators to peruse the report if they had not already done so (see The Coming Crisis in College Completion: Oregon's Challenge and a Proposal for First Steps).

Notice of Motion – US09/10-11 regarding the Riverfront Research Park.  Senator Zachary Stark-MacMillan, ASUO, gave notice of a motion that would declare senate opposition to the renewal of the conditional use permit extension for the planned development of the first 4.3-acre increment of the Riverfront Research Park North of the railroad tracks (on the South bank of the Willamette River).  The opposition would allow for a student and faculty inclusive permit review process and an updated evaluation of the UO owned Willamette Riverfront property (see US09/10-11). 

Motion US09/10-6 – concerning nominations for the Senate Vice Presidency.  Action on this motion was postponed until the January 13, 2010 senate meeting (see US09/10-6).

Motion US09/10-7 – concerning increasing access to public records.  Action on this motion was postponed until the February 10, 2010 senate meeting (see US09/10-7).

Town Hall meeting regarding unionization.  President Gilkey announced that he is working with the FAC, at their request, and with the OA Council to set up a Town Hall meeting on the topic of unionization.  (Date for the meeting has been changed from January 15^th to Friday, January 29^th from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in 150 Columbia. 

NEW BUSINESS

Motion US09/10-9 – concerning the appointment of members to a joint administration/senate committee on state accountability metrics related to a possible new governance model with the state.  President Gilkey asked Senate Vice President Nathan Tublitz to preside over the meeting for this and the next motion so that he could put the motion on the floor for discussion and speak to it.  President Gilkey moved the following:

The UO Senate directs the UO Senate President to recommend faculty members to the UO President for appointment to a joint administration/faculty committee concerning state accountability metrics that may be part of a new governance structure/relationship to the State of Oregon. The UO Senate President shall consult widely and shall contact the UO Senate, the Faculty Advisory Council, the Senate Budget Committee, and the Senate Nominating Committee in this regard.

University of Oregon leaders are currently engaged in conversations with the chancellor, OUS presidents, and elected leaders regarding fundamental changes in how OUS institutions are funded and governed by the state. This conversation will continue to occur over the next few months and will include a dialogue with our campus community and state policy leaders. The internal conversation will focus on how the UO can continue to fulfill its critical public mission and remain accountable to the state under a more autonomous structure. The campus conversation will help reinforce the idea that under any model, the University of Oregon remains focused on meeting the needs of Oregonians.

Discussion on the motion centered on concerns as to whether the joint committee should be appointed by the university president or the senate president.  Senator John Bonine, law, expressed concerns about erosion of faculty responsibility if President Lariviere appointed the committee instead of Senate President Gilkey.  He moved to amend the first sentence to change the word ÒrecommendÓ to ÒappointÓ and to remove the words Òto the UO President for appointmentÓ.  There was general consensus around this wording change as senators wanted to avoid setting a precedent for how such committees are appointed.  Mr. Dave Hubin, presidentÕs office, pointed out that the president has appointed standing committees in past years; however he saw no difficulty in the proposed amended wording.  The amendment was put to a vote and passed by voice vote.  The first sentence now read: 

The UO Senate directs the UO Senate President to appoint faculty members to a joint administration/faculty committee concerning state accountability metrics that may be part of a new governance structure/relationship to the State of Oregon.

The main motion, as amended, was again back on the floor for discussion.  Mr. Nick Gower, ASUO, asked why the committee was limited to faculty members and had no students.  He proposed amending the first sentence further to read Òfaculty members and other members of the university communityÓ, which after a brief discussion was simplified to strike the word ÒfacultyÓ read Òmembers of the university communityÓ.  Mr. Hubin expressed his belief that the original wording of Òfaculty membersÓ reflected the presidentÕs belief that accountability metrics were primarily a faculty issue; however Mr. Hubin indicated that he would convey the desirability of student input to the president.  With little further discussion, Senator GowerÕs amendment was put to a vote and passed.  The first sentence now reads:

The UO Senate directs the UO Senate President to appoint members of the university community to a joint administration/faculty committee concerning state accountability metrics that may be part of a new governance structure/relationship to the State of Oregon.

Senator Leah Middlebrook, comparative literature, expressed concern that a senior faculty member from the humanities be included on the committee, and proposed simplifying the second sentence to end with the word ÒwidelyÓ and to delete the rest of the sentence.  This amendment also met with approval and passed.  With no other amendments forthcoming, motion US09/10-9, as amended, was put to a hand vote and passed (24 in favor, 4 opposed, and 3 abstentions).  

The final version of motion US09/10-9, as amended reads:

The UO Senate directs the UO Senate President to appoint members of the University Community to a joint administration/faculty committee concerning state accountability metrics that may be part of a new governance structure/relationship to the State of Oregon. The UO Senate President shall consult widely.

University of Oregon leaders are currently engaged in conversations with the chancellor, OUS presidents, and elected leaders regarding fundamental changes in how OUS institutions are funded and governed by the state. This conversation will continue to occur over the next few months and will include a dialogue with our campus community and state policy leaders. The internal conversation will focus on how the UO can continue to fulfill its critical public mission and remain accountable to the state under a more autonomous structure. The campus conversation will help reinforce the idea that under any model, the University of Oregon remains focused on meeting the needs of Oregonians.

Motion US09/10-10 – to authorize the Senate President to appoint a Senate Advisory Group to implement US08/09-8 concerning fiscal transparency.  Senate President Gilkey indicated that Vice President for Finance and Administration Frances Dyke requested having an advisory group to help with the implementation of senate legislation US08/09-8 passed last May, which deals with creating an on-line, publicly accessible budget reporting system.  The system will allow users to track current and retroactive individual university expenditures as is currently available at Oregon State University.  (See OSU budget reporting website at https://bfpsystems,oregonstate.edu/webreporting/).  The administration has made good progress, but a working advisory group will help to remove any ÒbugsÓ in our on-line system.  The proposed motion reads:

The UO Senate passed a motion (US08/9-8) stating The University Senate respectfully requests the University of Oregon Administration to establish a publicly accessible, on-line budget reporting system at the University of Oregon by 15 November 2009 that will allow users to track current and retroactive individual university expenditures as is currently done at our sister institution Oregon State University on their budget reporting website ( https://bfpsystems.oregonstate.edu/webreporting/ ). "

At the 11 November 2008 UO Senate meeting, Frances Dyke reported"The tool you will be able to access starting next Monday is the initial roll out of a financial reporting tool for compliance with the university Senate motion on financial transparency. In the course of discussions related to development the work group has identified impediments to our ability to provide transactional level detail in a publicly available financial reporting tool. There are issues of both security and legally binding confidentiality that must be balanced against the desire for full transparency. As mentioned at the October Senate meeting I am now asking the Senate President to appoint an advisory group to help analyze these problems and find solutions that can be legally and operationally implemented. In making this request I also recommend that the Senate President consider creating this advisory group by drawing on membership of the Senate Budget Committee and other members of the Senate or university community who have a particular interest or expertise in financial management reporting."

The Senate President is directed to consult widely and to appoint the advisory group recommended above.

Vice President Tublitz spoke briefly to provide background information on the motion saying that OSU has a very good on-line system that allows users to view budgeting information directly.  He agreed that the administration has made a good first step to implement a similar system for the UO.  Ms. Carla McNelly, multicultural academic success, suggested that classified and administrative staff members that work with the Banner system and budgeting would make very good members for the committee.  With no other discussion forthcoming, the question was called.  Motion US09/10-10 to appoint a working group for implementation of US08/09-8 was passed by voice vote.  Senate President Gilkey asked Vice President Tublitz to chair the committee. 

Other Business.  Senator Bonine referred to a posted email he sent to the senators concerning General Counsel Melinda GrierÕs recent statement about the facultyÕs role in shared governance at the UO (see Email on shared governance).  He was concerned that Ms. GrierÕs statement was a very narrow view of the facultyÕs role in shared governance.  His basic message was that the General Counsel Grier cited several statutes giving power to the president but did not cite the statement about the Òpresident and the professorsÓ having the Òimmediate governanceÓ of the university.  He opined that the statutory authority of the faculty has long been recognized at the University of Oregon, and that the statutory faculty authority is not limited to curriculum and student discipline.  In disagreeing with Counselor GrierÕs statement, Senator Bonine argued that one should not accept words that come from a lawyer simply because they come from a lawyer – they can be challenged. (General Counsel GrierÕs statement can be viewed at http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/Grier-10Nov-PublicMeetingspdf.)

ADJOURNMENT

With no other business at hand, the meeting was adjourned at 4:51 p.m.

Gwen Steigelman

Secretary of the Faculty

Minutes of the University Senate November 11, 2009

Present:  G. Baitinger, T. Bars, A. Berenstein, J. Bonine, E, Chan, K. Dellabough, A. Emami, L. Forrest, H. Gangadharbatla, P. Gilkey, J. Hurwit, A. Hilts, M.A. Hyatt, M. Jaeger, K. Jensen, C. Jones, D. Kennett, H. Khalsa, A. Laskaya, K. Lenn, H. Lin, C. McNelly, L. Middlebrook, S. Midkiff, T. Minner, D. Olson, N.C. Phillips, M. Price, P. Southwell, Z. Stark-Macmillan, T. K. Thompson, L. Van Dreel, S. Verscheure, P. Warner, M. Williams

Excused: C. Ellis, J. Hurwit, J. Piger, N. Tublitz

Absent: C. Bengtson, C. Bybee, S. Chakraborty, T. Dishion, N. Glower, M. Henney, R. Kyr, N. Proudfoot, L. Reichardt, L. Sugiyama, T. Toadvine, P. Walker

CALL TO ORDER

University Senate President, Peter Gilkey called the regular meeting of the University Senate to order at 3:05 p.m. in room 220 HEDCO Building. 

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

Minutes of the October 14, 2009 senate meeting were approved as distributed. 

REPORTS

Senate Nominating Committee.  Committee chair Anne Laskaya, English, reported that the committee nominated Lise Nelson, geography, to fill a vacancy on the Graduate Council due to an unforeseen resignation; the senate confirmed Ms. Nelson's appointment. 

Climate Action Planning.  Professor Art Farley, computer and information science, began the report by explaining that former UO President David Frohnmayer, along with the other OUS institutions and 650 colleges and university presidents across the country, signed the American Colleges and Universities Presidents Climate Commitment.  The commitment sets a goal of achieving a 10% emissions reduction by 2020 and zero net greenhouse gas emissions on all campuses by 2050.  For our campus, the first step is to develop a Climate Action Plan.  The plan will be a living document that will be modified and updated as technologies and understanding of the problems and issues advance over time.  A first draft has been completed and the Environmental Issues Committee would like feedback and input on the draft document from faculty and the university community (see http://sustainability.uoregon.edu/content/introduction).  The Environmental Issues Committee has spent much of its time over the last 2 years putting together an emission responsibilities chart (see http://sustainability.uoregon.edu/content/emission-profile).  The chart is an important part of the Climate Action Plan which states the various classifications of greenhouse emissions that occur as part of university activity.  There are a number of opportunities to capture renewable resources, but the campus must have the will to do it.  Reductions can occur, but the cost is estimated at $25.8 million, with a simple payback of 18 years; $65 million is needed for renewable energy projects.  The university has a long-term investment horizon to spread costs of reducing emissions.  The question is, of the various options the university has, which will it take responsibility for dealing with, and which will it not. 

Mr. Steve Mital, director of the Office of Sustainability, provided a PowerPoint presentation of some highlights of the Climate Action Plan (see http://sustainability.uoregon).  The draft plan consists primarily of strategies to begin dealing with emission reduction, hence the request for faculty input on ways to achieve reductions.  Mr. Mital said that the United States produces the highest per capita carbon emissions in the world.  And although people often associate a reduction in one's carbon emissions with a reduction in lifestyle, this is not necessarily true.  He said the US has an abundant amount of renewable resources to capture; for example, concentrated solar power (CSP) is mostly in the southwest, there is a lot of wind energy potential in the Willamette Valley as well as the Columbia River Gorge and in other parts of the country, and geothermal energy is also available.  Such resources could be widely distributed across the US.  Mr. Mital said that higher education is becoming active in emissions reduction because it is training future leaders – this current generation of students will bear the brunt of solving carbon emission problems already created.

Turning to some illustrations relevant to the UO, Mr. Mital said that utility combustion (the emissions that come from the power plant) comprise about 47% of the UO's total.  The purchase of electricity from EWEB is 13%.  Emissions related to university air travel is 31% (athletics was not included in this total).  Only 50% of faculty and staff travel to campus each day by car and 11% of students do; the rest get to campus by riding bikes, taking the bus, walking, and car-pooling.  This improvement in commuting behavior is an example of ways in which we are changing behaviors to reduce our commuting emissions and have made a dent in the rising amount of the UO's total emissions.

Lastly, Mr. Mital indicated that student-faculty interaction is a large part of the Climate Action Plan.  One example of how the university could move forward is to set up its own carbon offset business in the business school.  He suggested that the carbon market is going to be one of the largest markets in the future.  Mr. Mital said that the UO strategy is flexible right now and there are very broad planning strokes ready for faculty input now because the plan is due to President Lariviere in early January.   

During a discussion period, Senator Kassia Dellabough, AAA, mentioned the redesign of Lawrence Hall, which integrated design issues into academic programs, as a positive step toward having greener buildings.  Mr. Frank Stahl, emeritus biology, suggested that more people take advantage of existing Media Services technology for video conferences (instead of traveling to the conference).  He has participated in such conferencing and it worked very well.  Finally, Mr. Mital responded to a question about campus goals by saying that the UO is in the process of defining realistic goals for the campus and seeing what types of resources are available on our campus.

Faculty Athletic Representative (FAR) Report.  Professor Jim O'Fallon, NCAA Faculty Athletic Representative for the UO, began his remarks by noting the passing of former UO president Myles Brand, who was President of the NCAA.  Mr. O'Fallon commented that Mr. Brand, through a task force, had instituted a number of positive changes to improve the academic side of the student-athlete experience.  In particular, he pushed hard on academic eligibility of student athletes to assuring that athletes were taking courses that provided progress towards graduation in a reasonable time frame.  A combination of strengthening of the individual eligibility requirements and some mechanisms to move teams toward making judgments about how they can promote academic success of their student athletes have changed the atmosphere relating to academic success of student athletes on campus.  Student athletes operate under a set of regulations designed so that as they enter the final year of their eligibility they will have 80% of their designated degree program completed.  The UO has very good graduation rates to show this academic improvement.

Mr. O'Fallon continued his report, explaining that the Academic Progress Rate (APR) metric used by the NCAA is a three digit figure (925) based on a number of distinct measuring points for each athlete then applied team by team: if the team has a 925 score, the expectation is for a 50% graduation rate at the end of the students' last (5^th) year of eligibility.  If a team fails to make at least the 925 score, the team can be subjected to loss of scholarships, and penalties related to the team's ability to participate in NCAA championships.  The UO has no team below 925, nor is it subject to any penalties.  The football team is lowest with a 935 score (this is last year's score – this year's score is in the process of being computed).  Mr. O'Fallon explained that the football team has the lowest score in part because the football players finish their eligibility at the end of the first term of a 3 term senior or 5^th year.  A number of the players have serious professional opportunities in the sport, and they tend to get ready for the National Football League try-out camps right after the finish of football season in fall term.

Other examples of UO team scores are women's basketball at 988, women's golf at 1000, softball at 986, men's basketball at 975, and men's and women's cross country at 974.  These scores are among the best in the country.  Student athletes at the UO have a graduation rate of 71% compared with the general campus graduation rate of 62%.  Mr. O'Fallon concluded his remarks by highlighting some notable accomplishments of current athletes, such as Nicole Blood, and Galen Rupp, who are NCAA Academic All Americans in track and field, and Nick Reed, a first team Academic All American in football.  Both Rupp and Reed also have been awarded NCAA post-graduate scholarships.

Report on implementation of resolutions for a smoke free campus, and transparency of university financial transactions.  Senate President Gilkey noted that a report from Vice President for Finance and Administration Frances Dyke addressing the senate resolutions from last year concerning progress toward implementation of a smoke free campus, and transparency of university financial transactions, had been posted previously on the senate web page for senators review (see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/Dyke6Nov09.html).  He indicated that Vice President Dyke was available for any questions. 

Senator Deb Olson, education, asked why the list of concerns regarding going to a smoke free campus were not being addressed by a task force.  Vice President Dyke replied that the first piece of implementation is the fundamental education of the campus.  The vice president said that both the Student Health Center and the Office of Human Resources are charged with providing educational programs on a variety of life- and health-related issues.  There have been conversations among Vice President for Student Affairs Robin Holmes, Director of the Student Health Center Mike Eyster, and Director of Human Resources Linda King to create an inventory of things that we are already doing, and to investigate best practices in the area of going to a smoke free campus.  When this process is done, Vice President Dyke said she would be ready to take a look at the question of implementation.  She noted that progress in this area was not a lack of will, but rather a question of balancing priorities in a very busy environment. 

On another topic, Senator Terrie Minner, academic advising, asked if Vice President Dyke would provide a written report for the December Senate meeting regarding the status of the Officers of Administration (OA) employment policy initiatives.  She also questioned whether the administration has decided on holiday closure and whether there is there any conversation on developing a standard process for holiday closures.  The vice president replied that she and Human Resources Director Linda King were planning to attend the January senate meeting to discuss the work that has been done on the OA policy initiative.  She said they would be happy to move it up to the December depending on the senate's schedule.  Also, she added that some records and materials are available and linked through the HR website (see http://hr.uoregon.edu/oa-employment), and that Ms. King is willing to take questions if senators wished to email them her.  Regarding holiday closures, there has been a preliminary discussion in the president's Executive Leadership Team meetings.  She said that the expectation is to have a closure policy similar to last year, with some improvements on communication and for having the vice presidents decide the closure protocols for their areas. 

Faculty Governance Committee.  Former Senate President Paul van Donkelaar, human physiology, chairs the Faculty Governance Committee (FGC) and provided an update on its recent meetings (see http://www.uoregon.edu/~assembly/dirSF/dirExtra/facgovcom10-14-09.pdf and also see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/intgovcomm-report-11-11-09.pdf).  The committee has proposed a timeline for its activities: for fall 2009, there are several options to review for governance reform, the website is nearly ready for comments and input on these options, and the committee intends to hold a town hall meeting for further feedback on the several governance documents and also receive initial input from President Lariviere; for winter 2010, compile input/feedback and revise alternatives, solicit additional input/feedback from UO community via the website, hold a statutory faculty meeting to select one of the alternatives, revise, refine and add detail to the selected alternative; hold a statutory faculty meeting and vote on the proposals, revise and refine the selected version; in spring 2010, present the new governance enabling legislation to President Lariviere for his consideration, and make adjustments to the faculty election process as necessary based on the new governance document (may need to delay spring elections if implementation is late in Spring term).

The FGC has identified a number of goals and priorities that are the focus of internal governance revisions.  General goals are to have: (1)a mechanism for statutory faculty to meet, (2) a mechanism for statutory faculty to oversee whatever elected body or bodies carry out day-to-day governance functions, (3) broad-based representation of the UO community, (4) the ability to respond to matters that arise with reasonable speed, (5) procedures that define how the president can respond to matters coming from an elected body (e.g., recommendations vs. directives), and (6) possible consolidation of various types of committees (e.g., elected vs. appointed; committees established by elected body or bodies vs. committees established by central administration).

Current ongoing priorities of the FGC include: (1) curricular matters and the impact of budgetary decisions on the curriculum, (2) other issues related to budget, (3) student conduct and discipline, (4) student life issues, (5) personnel policies, (6) admissions policies, (7) issues related to space, (8) issues related to parking, (9) issues related to faculty insurance liability, and (10) issues related to faculty grievances.

Mr. van Donkelaar encouraged senators to visit the Faculty Governance Committee website that provides the information that is being used in the committee's deliberations as well as a schedule of meetings, which are open meetings (http://www.uoregon.edu/~assembly/dirSF/FGC.html).  Anyone who wishes to contribute to the discussion is welcome.  During a brief question and answer period, Senator John Bonine, law, asked who is looking into the legal analyses of the various proposed governance alternatives.  Mr. van Donkelaar responded that a member of the law faculty is serving on the committee.

Notices of motions.  President Gilkey reported that h has received several notices of motion.   Motion US09/10-7 concerning increasing access to public records, sponsored by Bill Harbaugh, economics, has been transmitted to the Senate Rules Committee for action.  Motion US09/10-8 concerning promotion and tenure results, sponsored by Frank Stahl, emeritus biology, has been withdrawn and proposed to Senior Vice Provost Russ Tomlin instead.  Motion US09/10-9 concerns appointment of a joint administration and senate committee dealing with state accountability metrics that may be part of a possible new governance model and relationship with the State of Oregon, and is sponsored by Peter Gilkey, mathematics.  Motion US09/10-10 to create an advisory group concerning the implementation of legislation US08/09-8 passed last May regarding transparency of university financial transactions, is sponsored by Peter Gilkey at the request of Vice President for Finance and Administration Frances Dyke, who feels it would be useful to have an advisory group on this matter.

Other reports received.  President Gilkey reported that he received the annual report from General Counsel Melinda Grier regarding the university's policies and procedures in response to the USA Patriot Act, CAPPS II, and other similar legislation (pursuant to US02/03-4); the report indicated that no subpoenas from the federal government under the Patriot Act have been received by the UO in the past year (see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/PatriotActSubpoenas2009.PDF). 

President Gilkey also commented that he had received a note of clarification provided by Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Russ Tomlin regarding practices that have been followed to organize the interaction between the Faculty Personnel Committee and the provost and his staff (see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/Tomlin10Nov09.pdf). 

The president next drew attention to the OUS enrollment data and fall 2009 enrollment fact sheet which indicates significant enrollment increases (5.8%) across the Oregon University System with increases at both the undergraduate (6.7%) and graduate (3.9%) levels.  To a question from Senator Chris Phillips, mathematics, regarding the Cascade campus, it was clarified that the campus in Bend is an OUS campus; the UO offers courses there under the administration of Oregon State University.  (See http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/2009EnrollmentRelease_FINAL.pdf and also see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/Fall09_EnrollmentFactSheet_FINAL.pdf)  

Lastly, President Gilkey indicated that he has received information provided by General Counsel Grier concerning the extent to which the Oregon Public Meetings Laws is applicable to the University Senate (see http://www.uoregon.edu/~uosenate/dirsen090/Grier-10Nov-PublicMeetings.pdf).  Senator Bonine took issue with Ms. Grier's opinion saying that it failed to cite a relevant Oregon Administrative Rule and had a narrow interpretation of the Òimmediate governmentÓ phrase of the Charter statement, which he felt was a much broader term.  In essence, Senator Bonine was concerned that because Ms. Grier reports to University President Lariviere, there was a possible conflict of interest in providing an objective legal opinion for the University Senate on this issue.  He indicated that he would send a more detailed email of his concerns to President Gilkey for posting on the senate website.  In addition, Senator Bonine gave notice that he intends to sponsor a motion that the University Senate appoint its own legal counsel.  President Gilkey requested that Senator Bonine send the text of his motion to him as soon as possible so that the Rules Committee can review it, and because the December senate meeting is scheduled a week earlier so as to not conflict with the fall term final exams schedule.

NEW BUSINESS

Motion US09/10-3 –to establish a Senate Ad Hoc Committee on public (open) access to scholarly publication.  President Gilkey asked Senate Rules Chair Tracy Bars to temporarily preside over the senate for this motion so that he could step down to introduce and speak to the motion (Senate Vice President Nathan Tublitz was unable to attend the meeting, and thus was not available to preside).  President Gilkey moved adoption of Motion US09/10-3 which reads:

The UO Senate directs the UO Senate President to create a Senate Ad Hoc Committee.  The members of the Committee will be appointed by the UO Senate President in consultation with the Senate Nominating Committee, with the FAC, with the Provost, and with the UO Library.

The University of Oregon has a longstanding commitment to making its research widely available, both to the scholarly community and to the general public.  Technology is now enabling faculty, universities, and disciplines to adopt new ways to provide enhanced visibility and access to research, usually through digital repositories that are freely accessible.  The terms "public access" or "open access" are used to describe these methods that help to remove financial and permission barriers to scholarship and readership.  The Committee will

• Investigate policies facilitating such public access at other AAU Universities.
• Consult widely within the UO community.
• Take into consideration UO Policy statements, OUS Internal Management Directives, and other relevant documents.
• Draft a University Policy Statement that, if endorsed by the UO Senate and promulgated by the President, would enable the University to:
• support wider access to UO faculty research.
• enhance the visibility of UO faculty research.

Mr. Gilkey expressed his belief that open access to scholarly publication is a very important issue, thus he would like to address it by forming an ad hoc senate committee to write a policy on the issue for senate approval and then send it to President Lariviere.  Mr. Gilkey indicated that if the motion passes, he will consult with groups as stated in the motion to appoint the committee that he would chair.  Senator Bonine asked if the policy investigation would include print journals and any restrictions on them, and Mr. Gilkey responded that it would.  Since there were no other questions, Ms. Bars brought the question to a vote.  Motion US09/10-3 passed unanimously.  With the voting on the motion completed, President Gilkey thanked Ms. Bars for her assistance and resumed the chair.

Motion US09/10-4 concerning eligibility for the Senate Vice Presidency.  Speaking on behalf of the Senate Rules Committee, which sponsored the motion, Ms. Bars moved to:

Revise the final sentence of section 5.2 of the Enabling Legislation to read: ``The vice president shall be elected from among the officers-of-instruction who are currently serving senators and will become president at the end of the following year by confirmation of the senate.Ó

Senator Chris Phillips, mathematics, began the discussion by wondering if there were problems with the current legislation that prompted the change.  Ms. Bars indicated that the Rules Committee crafted this motion and the next two motions to be considered in response to the confusion and uncertainty that occurred during the senate's organizational meeting last May when the vice president is elected.  Senator Mary Ann Hyatt, law, questioned why librarians were not included among those eligible to serve as vice president because they hold academic rank (note: librarians are contracted as officers of administration, not officers of instruction). Ms. Bars responded that the proposed motion simply reverts to the original enabling legislation regarding vice president eligibility, that is, an officer of instruction who is a current member of the senate.  The motion does not address the issue of whether officers of administration should be eligible for the senate vice presidency.  Senator Chris Jones, AAA, asked if the proposed change allows for more people to be eligible.  Ms. Bars indicated that the candidate pool would be smaller, limited to those in the senate rather than including people who had previously served in the senate in the preceding five years, which is the current legislation.  Mr. Frank Stahl, emeritus biology spoke in opposition to the motion, saying that having a larger pool of candidates was preferable, and he also questioned why a change was necessary. 

Senator Bonine said that he wanted to think further about the motion, to let it percolate longer, and that he did not want to vote on it at this time.  There were some additional comments regarding the nature of the candidate pool, and Ms. Bars indicated the intent of the motion was to remove the Óex-officioÓ nature of the candidate pool.  Senator Bonine then moved to table the motion.  President Gilkey called for a hand vote which resulted in 21 in favor of the motion to table, none opposed, and 5 abstentions. Motion US09/10-4 regarding eligibility for the senate vice presidency was tabled. 

US 09/10-5 concerning the election of the Senate Vice President.  Once again Ms. Bars, speaking for the Senate Rules Committee, introduced motion US09/10-5 which reads as follows:

Solely for the purposes of the election of the Vice President of the Senate and the affirmation of the President, the voting body shall consist of all incoming senators for the following academic year.  This will allow newly elected senators a chance to vote on the person who will be the President during their term.

Before beginning a discussion of the motion, President Gilkey explained that the senate by-laws are rather unclear regarding who actually votes for the senate vice president: the senators in office during the May organizational meeting, or the senators who will serve during the academic year that begins fall term.  He noted that there was some confusion last May about who votes for the vice president. 

There were senators supporting both sides of the proposed motion.  Senator Priscilla Southwell, political science, was in favor of the motion saying that elected governance bodies typically elected their presiding officers from within their own ranks.  On the other hand, Senator Huaxin Lin, mathematics, opposed the motion saying that the serving senators know more about the candidates' experience from working with them during the academic year.  The discussion continued and seemed to be moving in favor of the newly elected senators electing their officers when Senator Zachary Stark-Macmillan, ASUO, moved to amend the motion to read as follows:

Voting for the vice president shall occur at the first meeting of the senate fall term.

Discussion of the amendment focused on the ramifications of moving the voting to fall term, and whether there were duties that the vice president must attend to over the summer months.  Mr. Dave Hubin, president's office, noted that the senate vice president is chair of the Committee on Committees, but the committee does not meet over the summer.  Senator Phillips spoke against the amendment, saying that it would be useful to have a vice president in place over the summer for other issues that arise.  Senator Southwell, who supported the original motion, spoke in favor of waiting until fall term to elect the vice president.  There was a motion to call the question, which passed.  President Gilkey then put the amendment to a vote.  US09/10-5, as amended to read that voting for the vice president shall occur at the first senate meeting of the fall term, passed. 

Motion US09/10-6 concerning nominations for Senate Vice President.  Due to the lateness of the hour, President Gilkey indicated that discussion on this motion will be held over until the December senate meeting.

As a final item, Senator Bonine requested that for future discussions on motions, the Rules Committee provide background information and include strike-outs of any pending changes for the motions that change previous legislation. 

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

Gwen Steigelman

Secretary of the Faculty

Minutes of the University Senate Meeting October 14, 2009

Present:  T. Bars, J. Bonine, C. Bybee, S. Chakraborty, E, Chan, K. Dellabough, A. Emami, L. Forrest, H. Gangadharbatla, P. Gilkey, M. Henney, A. Hilts, J. Hurwit, M.A. Hyatt, M. Jaeger, K. Jensen, C. Jones, D. Kennett, H. Khalsa, R. Kyr, A. Laskaya, K. Lenn, H. Lin, C. McNelly, S. Midkiff, T. Minner, D. Olson, N. C. Phillips, M. Price, L. Reichardt, Z. Stark-Macmillan, L. Sugiyama, T. K. Thompson, T. Toadvine, N. Tublitz, L. Van Dreel, S. Verscheure, M. Williams

Excused: A. Berenstein, C. Ellis, S. Libeskind, L. Middlebrook, J. Piger, P. Southwell

Absent: C. Bengtson, N. Gower, S. Plummer, N. Proudfoot, P. Walker, P. Warner

CALL TO ORDER

University Senate President Peter Gilkey called the first regular meeting of the University Senate to order at 3:05 p.m. in room 220 of the HEDCO building.  President Gilkey welcomed everyone.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

After several minor errors of a clerical nature were noted, the minutes from the last regular senate meeting of May 13, 2009 were approved as amended.  Minutes from the May 27, 2009 and May 28, 2008 senate organizational meetings were approved as well. 

STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY

Remarks from University President Richard Lariviere.  President Lariviere thanked Senate President Gilkey for the opportunity to address the senate for the first time as the new university president, saying that it was both an honor and a privilege.  He has been working to familiarize himself with the university campus, university committees, and the university in the context of the entire state; in doing so, he said he continues to be humbled by the depth and quality of the UOÕs faculty and programs.  The president noted that more budget and faculty hiring details will be provided later in the meeting, but everyone should be aware that we are in the midst of the worst economic environment of our working lifetime.  He explained that the stateÕs portion of our budget accounts for only 9½ % of our operating budget (and about 8% without the federal governmentÕs stimulus money).  But because we have adapted to getting by on next-to-nothing from the state, we are in a better economic position than our peer comparator institutions who are accustomed to receiving much higher percentages of their budgets from their states and whose budgets are cut drastically.  As an example, President Lariviere reported that the University of California at Berkeley typically hires about 100 new professors each year – this year they hired 10.  On the other hand, we will be able to continue with our usual hiring pattern, which means that we have had an especially good year hiring new highly qualified faculty for this year.  Nevertheless, with so little state support, we will need to find new funding solutions and budget models to keep moving forward to fulfill our mission.

The president reported he has been meeting with deans, department heads, and faculty members his first few months on campus.  He spent much of the summer traveling around the state meeting with editorial boards, civic leaders, legislators, community college leaders, and other leaders, talking with them about the role of the university and about their situations within the state.  He commented that there is an enthusiasm for some kind of new educational model in higher education, but with no certainty as to what it is.  The president stated that the current climate provides and opportunity to find those solutions for higher education and achieve a new relationship with the State.  He affirmed that the UO is not willing to set out on a path of mediocrity, and that the university needs to find ways to avoid mediocrity. 

During a question and answer period, Senator Chris Jones, AAA, asked the president what conditions besides the economic conditions make him optimistic that he would be able to accomplish things that others who preceded him could not.  President Lariviere responded that it must be a collective effort that has to be supported by the faculty.  Second, ideas proposed will need to be supported by the social and political entities of the state – the business community, the labor unions, and so forth.  He continued that these factions will have to understand why what we propose is beneficial for them; if the university aligns all these factions in the proper way, this will be a very different moment for legislators in terms of their attitudes in solving this problem.  He added that he thinks this is the right moment.  Next, Senator John Bonine, law, asked the president to comment about his view of faculty governance and the role and relationship of governance with the administration.  The president answered that he believes in the collective harnessing of ideas toward solutions, and did not profess to have all the ideas, answers, or solutions.  He said that he had some ideas about how to attract the ideas and solutions, and added that he much prefers, and finds it challenging, to get the issue in front of people and see what they have to say about the matter.  He added that his sense is that this is the appropriate time to reevaluate the structure of governance and its support.

Remarks from ASUO President Emma Kallaway.  Ms. Kallaway reported on a number of activities underway in the student government, which is in charge of funding for many student activities and projects.  The recent Street Fair raised $3,000 and work is underway on a winter fund raiser.  Another project includes ÒWeaving New Beginnings,Ó a cultural event staged strategically to talk about safety.  The ASUO will also choose which issues to tackle for the year, such as the multicultural requirement, having a local farmers market, and a ÒgreenÓ campus infrastructure. 

Ms. Kallaway also noted that classes are very full and students are saying that class size is larger than what they expected.  She indicated that the ASUO will continue to advocate for Oregon Opportunity Grant money, which is nearly depleted at this time, in order to ensure that students have access to educational funding.  Lastly, Ms. Kallaway said that students and representatives from Facilities walked through campus last evening along with Dean of Students Paul Shang to identify the areas around campus where lighting is not satisfactory.  Changing from the yellow light to a white light will spread light further at ground level which will make a difference in campus safety for students.  The university will also be adding Òduck feetÓ on some pavement to provide better path guidance and visibility.  Ms. Kallaway concluded her remarks saying that student government hopes to work well with the University Senate in a professional relationship this year.

Update from Vice President for Finance and Administration Frances Dyke.  Vice President Dyke began her remarks saying the unofficial enrollment numbers were strong at the end of the second week of classes, showing an increase in both headcounts and credit hours.  Compared to last year at this time, student headcounts have increased 4.3% (22,347 student this fall compared with 21,435 last fall) and credit hours have increased 4.5% (310,865 compared to 297,212).  Official numbers will be available at the end of fourth week and at the end of the term.  Vice President Dyke reported that the university finally has its budget numbers for FY10 and that Provost Bean has posted a message to this effect in the provost office web page (see October 7 update at http://provost.uoregon.edu/).  She noted that a 2.5% general fund budget reduction will be implemented immediately, retroactive to July 1, which was anticipated and discussed with deans last spring.  No other take-backs are planned at this time.  The State appropriation amount is $16 million less than the FY 2009 beginning state appropriation.  The expected tuition increase revenues will yield about $37 million.  However, obligations against the tuition increase revenues are backfill against the reduction in state appropriation ($16 million) increases in student scholarships and fee remissions to help maintain accessibility ($4 million), backfill for loss of funds from the UO Foundation and other income ($7 million) and the requirement replenish reserves to state-mandated levels ($2 million).  Thus the net amount available is about $8 million. 

The Vice President went on to say that base budget additional requirements are estimated at $14 million.  These include funding for enrollment increases and an increase in fixed obligations, such as annualized amounts of November 2008 salary and OPE increases for classified staff, officers of administration and officers of instruction/research, and increases in utilities.  These are covered by the net available from tuition increases mentioned previously ($8 million) and the 2.5% general reductions assessed to units ($6 million).  Next significant financial discussions will take place regarding the January referendum to appeal tax measures passed in June by the Oregon Legislature to balance the budget.  These tax increases included a tax increase on high income individuals and an increase in the corporate minimum tax.  If the tax referendum passes, the estimated funding loss to the Oregon University System is at $40 million for the biennium.  The UOÕs share could be a loss of an additional $3 million of state appropriation per year, or $6 million for the biennium; it could also be a greater reduction.

Moving to another topic, Vice President Dyke reminded senators to check the web for H1N1 influenza updates (see http://emc.uoregon.edu/).  Currently the Student Health Center is seeing a surge in student visits and increased absences for illness from staff.  There is a small amount of H1N1 vaccine available CDC listed for priority groups, and more expected to be sent.  Seasonal flu vaccine supplies also are depleted, so UO staff and faculty are advised to seek vaccinations through another provider.

On the construction front, the vice president reported that the new (HEDCO) Education building opened at beginning of summer term and the Jaqua Learning Center for Student Athletes expects to open in January 2010.  Space in Esslinger now occupied by student athlete services will be reassigned by the Campus Space Committee.  Discussions regarding scheduling for the first floor auditorium and classroom space in the Jaqua Learning Center are underway.  The new basketball arena is progressing on time and on budget. The arena will be open for the start of the 2011 PAC‐10 basketball season.  To date, $111.6 million in arena construction contracts have been awarded with 83% going directly to Oregon companies.  There are 200 trade workers on the site daily and there will be 450 workers there at peak activity.  The parking garage is progressing on time and on budget as well.  One hundred percent of the contracts for the underground structure have been awarded to Oregon companies.

Ms. Dyke next reported updates on several other construction projects.  The chiller replacement project and electrical distribution project are now completed, which represent phase one of the new power plant construction.  The State Board of Higher Education has approved, and the university is requesting an increased expenditure authority (to $75 million) for the East Campus Residence Hall.  The resident hall project was approved by the legislature in 2007 so that the university could initiate planning; construction is expected to begin in June 2010.  Finally, the university ended up with $3 million in state stimulus funds for projects that were Òshovel readyÓ in May 2009.  These dollars have been spent on projects that included improving roofing, sidewalks, and other similar improvements. Requirements for these funds were that contracts go to minority, women or small business enterprises in the private sector.

The vice president noted that Information Services (IS) is working to comply with the Senate motion US08/09-8 regarding transparency of university financial transactions.  She indicated that it appears IS will complete the on-line budget tracking project by the November 15th deadline.  The plan is to present a reporting tool that balances the need for transparency with security and legally binding confidentiality concerns.  Once the reporting tool is available, the vice president will work with senior senate leadership to identify a task force to work through any problems or challenges that are identified.  

Lastly, the Department of Public Safety (DPS) is implementing a community oriented policing and problem solving model (COPPS).  The model requires strong partnership with the campus community and the city.  Vice President Dyke said that the Targeted Crimes Unit was inaugurated during spring 2009.  The unit delivers community outreach and awareness programming, manages investigations, and uses information to develop effective prevention and response strategies.  The Safe Campus Initiative was launched during the summer, which includes restructuring the relationship with the Eugene Police Department with a dedicated officer integrated with the DPS team.

During a brief discussion period, Senator John Bonine, law, requested that future numerical financial presentation be accompanied with visual information to make it easier to follow the presentation.  The vice president responded that she would provide the information to eh webmaster for posting (see http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/FDYKE-14Oct09.pdf).  Senate Vice President Nathan Tublitz asked about the progress on the on-line budget transparency project, to which Vice President Dyke reiterated her earlier comments that Information Services is on track to have financial posted by mid November.  There have been some difficulties with the software, but the intention is to work through those with the senior senate leadership. 

Update from Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Russ Tomlin.  Vice provost Tomlin expressed his appreciation to Senate President Gilkey for the inclusion of Academic Affairs in the first senate meeting of the year.  He commented that it affords the chance to participate in what many people are optimistic will be a year of improved transparency, collaboration, and shared commitment to the health of the university and its component missions and communities. 

Mr. Tomlin reported on several matters of interest and projects that are underway for the current year.  Regarding new faculty appointments, the UO was able to appoint 47 new tenure-related faculty members.  It was an exceptional year, with great success in hiring from exceptionally deep pools of superior faculty candidates.  Of the new appointments at least 14, or 30%, are individuals who self-identified as members of under-represented groups; 16, or 34%, are women.  The vice provost added that he expects this hiring year to be similarly exceptional.  With respect to faculty promotion and tenure, Mr. Tomlin provided a summary of the promotion and tenure process for tenure-related faculty.  This past year, there were a total of 55 promotion and tenure cases considered, 29 cases of promotion to associate professor with tenure, 20 cases of promotion to professor, and 6 cases for tenure only.  Fifty-two of the 55 cases resulted in promotion or tenure or both, which is consistent with patterns of success in prior years.  The vice provost also noted that the process was completed by May 1^st -- six weeks earlier than required, thus reducing anxiety for those under consideration. 

Vice Provost Tomlin next mentioned several projects underway.  The University of Oregon Academic Extension project is focused on the transformation of the current Summer Session and Continuing Education programs into an expanded vehicle to deliver UO academic expertise to a broader set of audiences.  The goal is to empower faculty to create academic programming attractive to new populations that returns significant resources back to the program creators and their academic departments.  The university grosses about $12 million per year through Summer Session and Continuing Education; the expectation is to double this revenue flow over the next three to five years.  Restructuring of Summer Session is currently underway.  The previous financial model will be replaced by one that drives most of the resources into the schools and colleges and their component departments.  There will also be an enhancement of academic quality through more robust oversight by the schools and colleges.  The larger Academic Extension project is expected to roll out January 1, 2010.  Some new opportunities will be initiated at that time and academic affairs will work with faculty, department heads, and deans to explore new opportunities in distance education, in domestic markets, and in international markets.  One example of an innovative direction is an E-textbook project, led by Dev Sinha, mathematics, which aims to reduce costs to students while being self-sustaining for the long term.  The vice provost noted that a faculty advisory board for academic affairs will be established this term; Mr. Tomlin will consult with the Senate President on this effort over the next few weeks.

Vice Provost Tomlin next explained that Academic Affairs is engaged in an extensive codification project to improve the quality of information available to faculty and staff about policies, procedures, and practices that affect academic appointments, opportunities, and success.  He commented that university policies, procedures, and practices are often out-of-date, or inconsistent, vague, and difficult to pin down, which is frustrating to many users seeking information.  The codification is aimed at increasing consistency across the schools and colleges, updating and revisiting formal policy or practice where policy and practice are in conflict, and providing more transparent information to support faculty and staff in various efforts.  Mr. Tomlin highlighted a few examples currently underway.  In response to a requirement in our current accreditation process, the ProvostÕs Office, is close to opening a UO Policy Library which will include an indexed inventory of all policies that govern the university.  Associate Vice Provost Ken Doxsee is working on web-based assessment infrastructure to meet current accreditation requirements.  And lastly, Academic Affairs will soon provide an updated website aimed at creating more accessible and transparent information on faculty matters, including: an updated and electronic promotion and tenure guide, and an intranet for faculty that will include more elaborate suggestions or coaching than is customarily done on a public site.   Some matters for the intranet would include post-tenure review, emeritus status for faculty, courtesy appointments, implementation of remaining NTTF matters (evaluation & promotion), and Conflict of Commitment, to name a few.   

During a discussion period, Senator Nick Price, mathematics, asked about policies for adjunct faculty.  The vice provost replied that the main project this year is the development of an evaluation and promotion process for NTTF that parallels what is done for promotion in tenure-related appointments.  There are department level guide lines for promotion of tenured related positions that are consistent with needs and expectations relevant to the peculiarities of the department.  Faculty members are reviewed at the college and school level and, in turn, are reviewed centrally for cross unit consistency.  Academic Affairs will be rolling out a process, based in part on units that have already done good work with NTTF in regards to evaluation and promotion, and make that process available to deans that do not have a good policy in place.  We will work to develop with deans to develop appropriate strategies.  Mr. Tomlin noted that consistency of practice across units is a challenging issue.  He also said that there are a few people that have been at the UO for considerable time that may need to be grandfathered into the system.   Senator Kassia Dellabough, AAA, asked if the policy will address the single-term adjunct faculty who are not NTTF.  Mr. Tomlin answered that right now the policy is aimed at NTTF and that every adjunct can tell whether he/she is a career NTTF, and covered by the promotion policy, by looking in the upper right hand corner of their contract. 

Senator John Bonine, law, asked whether the on-line policy library will be dated, and raised some privacy issues with the type of information that would be included on the proposed Academic Affairs intranet.  The vice provost answered that the policy library is web-based and will be dated.  As for the types of information found on the intranet, Mr. Tomlin was sympathetic to the privacy issue raised and explained that what he is wrestling with is how to deliver information that is useful to people without making a public statement or case out of every proposition that supports our faculty.  He said that there will be nothing in the intranet that a freedom of information request will not reveal.

REPORTS

Senate Nominating Committee.  Committee Chairwoman Anne Laskaya, English, presented names of persons nominated for positions on the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate and the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee.  Each was approved for appointment as follows: Erin Moore, AAA, to serve a term on the IFS expiring June 2011; Ron Severson, LCB, to fill a vacancy on the IAC-with term to expire June 2010; James Isenberg, mathematics, to serve as a Senate Representative to the IAC with term expiring June 2011; and Grace Golden, human physiology, to serve as a Senate Representative to the IAC with term expiring June 2010. 

UO Chapter of the AAUP.  AAUP UO chapter president Carl Bybee, journalism and communication, spoke about academic freedom in an era of budget cutbacks.  He began his remarks making three points: (1) academic freedom at the UO campus and across the country is under siege, but it is not due to this Òbudget crisis;Ó (2) academic freedom and the business side of a university are not two separate concerns – they are deeply interconnected concerns; and (3) academic freedom requires a strong, independent, informed, voice of higher education professionals capable of exerting significant, visible influence on university governance.

Speaking to the first point, Senator Bybee said that the current budget does pose significant threats to academic freedom and to the ability of the UO to carry out its public mission to the citizens of Oregon and to the nation.  To survive, he said the UO will need to continue to raise tuition and find ever increasing sources of outside financial support.  He suggested that there are major transformations taking place today in terms of how we understand economics, the value of public institutions, and the ideas themselves of what freedom and a free society mean.  On the second point, Senator Bybee said that looking at the number of tenure-related faculty on our campus over the past 15 years, the faculty has increased by 6% while overall enrollment has increased more than 20%, which is a matter of concern.  He continued that the AAUP, in recognizing the dramatic rise of adjuncts and instructors on campuses, incorporated specific steps of moving adjuncts, fixed appointment faculty and part-timers to more secure, stable economic footing into its ÒRecommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and TenureÓ.   The numbers of who teaches and with what protections raise questions about the health of academic freedom on our campus that need to be addressed. 

Senator Bybee continued by raising a number of questions that well may impact academic freedom on campus: when the academic freedom of a member of the professional higher education community is challenged, does the university need to provide the economic support for the faculty member to engage that challenge?  When there are calls for budget cutbacks, where and how they will fall and take place, are these matters of academic freedom?  When the legislature allocates resources to the university, is tracking the flow and distribution of these resources matters of academic freedom?  When fund-raising priorities are set, are these matters of academic freedom?  Last, Senator Bybee said that the idea of shared governance does not work without substantial resources for faculty and other higher education professionals to act, to have timely access to crucial materials they deem relevant to their work, and to see the outcome of their work in determining crucial university decisions.

Senator Bybee concluded his remarks by inviting faculty members to contact him any time they feel their academic freedom in being challenged.  He said that the AAUP can provide advice and assistance regardless of whether the person is an AAUP member, an adjunct, or a full professor.  To have a public university serving a public mission in a democratic society, he opined that there can be no budget cuts to academic freedom or to the institutional resources and culture that support academic freedom.  (See http://pages.uoregon.edu/uosenate/dirsen090/BYBEE-14OCT09.pdf.)

Senate Budget Committee.  Mr. Tim Duy, economics, reported on work of the Senate Budget Committee (SBC) saying the last year the SBC spent a lot of times deciding on what the budget would look like as far as the revenue side from the state.  He noted that Vice President Dyke had already provided base details earlier in the meeting, and he added that there is some risk to the stability of that budget going forward, one of which is the $700 million in tax revenue that might not materialize if ballot measures to overturn new taxes are passed.  Mr. Duy explained that the governorÕs office believes the revenue forecast have been overly optimistic, and that actual revenue received may not be able to support the state budget, and in turn, the universityÕs expected level of state support.  Mr. Duy agreed that the rebound from the current recession may not come back as strongly or as quickly as originally thought, which paints a less than rosy picture of the budget situation.  He added that the biggest near term challenge for the state of Oregon is that it has not added nearly enough (net) jobs to pull itself clear of the recession, and has not added many in nearly a decade

Faculty Governance Committee.  Last year senate president Paul van Donkelaar, human physiology, chairs the committee which is looking into restructuring faculty governance.  The charge of the committee is to use the Department of Justice opinion from November 2008 to guide revisions of the internal governance structure of the university.  He said there are a number of issues around that general concept of faculty governance that the committee will be working on.  Mr. van Donkelaar encouraged senators to visit the Faculty Governance Committee website that gives the information that we are using in our deliberations as well as our scheduled meetings, which are open meetings (see http://pages.uoregon.edu/assembly/dirSF/FGC.html).  He added that anyone who wished to contribute to the discussion was welcome.  He also noted that a Statutory Faculty Meeting was scheduled for November 18^th during which potentially one or more motions would be discussed and voted upon related to these issues.  Mr. van Donkelaar said there are a number of potential motions that will be actively considered at this point in time, and that the committee will discuss these motions and provide information about them to the UO community.

During a brief question period, Mr. Frank Stahl, emeritus biology, asked if we are bound to have a statutory faculty meeting on November 18^th if the committee was not ready to present any motions.  Mr. van Donkelaar said the date had been set last May by President Frohnmayer, but that he would contact President Lariviere about the whether the November meeting could be changed.  (Note; the November 18^th Statutory Faculty Meeting has been canceled and will be held at a time to be announced in the future.)  Senator Carla McNelly, multicultural academic success, asked why there were no students, classified staff, or officers of administration on the Faculty Governance Committee to which Mr. van Donkelaar replied that his understanding was that the committee is comprised of statutory faculty members who will be the faculty voting on the revising the governance system.  However, he indicated that the committee was open to communication from the broad community and invited that communication.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATONS FROM THE FLOOR

Climate Action Plan draft ready for review.  Art Farley, chair of the Environmental Issues Committee and Steve Mital, director of the Office of Sustainability, spoke briefly about the first draft of the Climate Action Plan (see http://sustainability.uoregon.edu/files/uploads/Climate_Action_Plan_1_1.pdf).  Mr. Farley explained that in signing the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment, the UO has embarked on a journey toward climate neutrality, a long-term goal for a large institution.  He said that although the university already has progressed further down toward this goal than most other universities in the country, our new commitment cannot be simply another "green" effort that involves certain environmental interests.  Rather, he suggested that the commitment must span all the disciplines and departments -- everyone on the campus has a role to play.

In preparing the draft Climate Action Plan (CAP), information was gathered from several units, and outside consultants were hired to assist with data collection and modeling to estimate the emissions profile of our entire campus.  The CAP represents the best information currently available regarding how much the university is emitting and where opportunities exist for emission reductions.  He continued that although the CAP provides a good sense of what climate neutrality will require at UO from an operational perspective, it does not yet include details regarding faculty, staff, and student engagement.  Consequently, Mr. Farley asked senators and colleagues for their input on the draft plan to ensure that it reflects broad institutional goals.  A final version will be readied in early January 2010 which will be published on the ACUPCC website along with climate action plans from 650 other institutions of higher education.

Mr. Farley stated that the CAP is intended as a living document, changing and adapting to different circumstances as the university moves forward.  The process through which potential projects and strategies are solicited and evaluated is important; thus, he asked faculty and students to identify areas where curriculum and research tie in, staff to recommend operational initiatives, and everyone to suggest outreach programs for the campus and surrounding community.  Due to the rapidly arriving publication date, Mr. Farley implored everyone to give the CAP review process special attention and thought, submit feedback to him by November 30, 2009.  Mr. Farley concluded his announcement by saying that there are many questions left to be answered in this undertaking, but that it is in the best interest of this institution and of future generations that the UO Climate Action Plan be as inclusive and effective as possible.  The input solicited will help lay the groundwork for a long-range strategic plan for the UO and will help determine what type of university we are and create the type of university that we want to be. 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Motion US09/10-1 – to create a Senate committee on faculty governance.  MotionUS09/10-1 was tabled at the May 27^th organizational meeting of the senate for consideration at this first senate meeting of the academic year.  The motion reads:

Moved,

 That the Senate forms a committee to prepare a draft university governance document for discussion at the announced meeting of the Statutory Faculty on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 at 15:30. The Senate President is directed to contact the so-called ÒDead PresidentsÓ [former Senate President, excluding the current (2009-2010) President] and to contact the members of the UO Senate and to invite the individuals contacted to serve on said committee.

Senator Tracy Bars spoke in opposition to the motion saying that the membership was too limiting and offered the following amendment: ÒThe Senate President shall be named chair of the committee and shall have the authority to invite additional members from outside the Senate body to serve on the committeeÓ.  The amendment was seconded.  After a brief discussion clarifying the relationship of the proposed committee (to be appointed by the senate president) with the statutory Faculty Governance Committee appointed by President Lariviere with membership advised by the Faculty Advisory Council, and some other supports speaking in favor of broadening the committee membership, the motion was put to a hand vote and was passed. 

The main motion, as amended was now on the floor for discussion.  Mr. Frank Stahl, emeritus biology, provided some historical context for the motion.  He said that last spring, retiring President Frohnmayer intended to create a committee to construct a faculty governance document.  Mr. Stahl continued that it seemed inappropriate to him to have a retiring president to take on that activity, and that it would be more appropriate for the incoming president or for the faculty to engage in that activity.  Further, Mr. Stahl explained, he was concerned that any committee so constructed might represent the philosophy of the outgoing administration, which he did not want to see happen.  As a consequence, he brought the motion to the Senate to ensure that faculty viewpoints on governance were properly presented to the statutory faculty when it met to decide on a governance document.  Since that time, incoming President Lariviere undertook steps to create a Faculty Governance Committee via the FAC.  With this explanation, Mr. Stahl suggested that the motion be tabled.  Senator John Bonine, law, moved to table the motion.  The motion to table US09/10-1, as amended, was put to a vote and passed.

NEW BUSINESS

Motion US09/10-2 – regarding voting privileges for the University Senate Vice President.  The following motion was brought to the floor:

Resolved,

If the Vice President of the UO Senate is not a serving UO Senator, he shall serve ex-officio on the Senate with full voting authority and the membership of the Senate will be temporarily increased by one senator for the period in question concerning questions of quorum. 

With little discussion or dissent, Motion US09/10-2 was put to a vote and passed.

Notice of Motion US09/10-3 to create a Senate Ad-Hoc Committee on Public Access.  Senate President Gilkey announced he has received notion of a motion to create a committee to address issues of public assess for scholarly publications which will be discussed in more detail at the November 11^th meeting. 

ADJOURNMENT

With no further business at hand, the meeting was adjourned at 5:00. 

Gwen Steigelman

Secretary