SUBJECT

DESCRIPTION

DATE

A motion was made by Tom Read, seconded by Joe St. Hilaire,

“that University Planning Council will work with the Senate in the upcoming year to determine the composition, charge, and reportage of a standing committee to monitor building and classroom design that ensures a faculty perspective from inception through completion of the original design,”

which the members passed unanimously.

Members plan to maintain email contact over the summer until Fall Quarter when the mechanisms can be put in place for a standing committee.  Jim Stewart, Senate President, or his designee, and Rick Osen, acting as Interim Chair, will keep abreast of events and email committee members and participants over the summer.

MOTION to Approve Peer List

St. Hilaire made a motion, and Tom Read seconded, “that we recommend that the list be adopted as amended with the deletion of California State Polytechnic University at Pomona.”  The members passed the motion unanimously.

Peer institutions approved by University Planning Council – meeting of 10/13/04

1.           Appalachian State University (NC)

2.           California Polytechnic State University – San Luis Obispo (CA)

3.           California State University – Chico (CA)

4.           College of Charleston (SC)

5.           Eastern Illonois University (IL)

6.           Humboldt State University (CA)

7.           James Madison University (VA)

8.           Millersville University of Pennsylvania (PA)

9.           Murray State University

10.         Rowan University (NJ)

11.         Salisbury University (MD)

12.         Sonoma State University (CA)

13.         SUNY College at Geneseo (NY)

14.         The College of New Jersey (NJ)

15.         Towson University (MD)

16.         Truman State University (MO)

17.         University of Colorado – Colorado Springs (CO)

18.         University of North Carolina – Charlotte (NC)

19.         University of North Carolina – Wilmington (NC)

20.         University of Northern Iowa (IA)

21.         University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire (WI)

22.         University of Wisconsin – La Crosse (WI)

23.         University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point (WI)

24.         Washburn University of Topeka (KS)

25.         Winthrop University (SC)

General University Classroom – Design Criteria

Members reviewed a UPC-approved 1993 table of General University Classroom Design Criteria that is to be referenced by Facilities Management during the course of building design.  The criteria cover three areas:  “Building Considerations”, “Classroom Design Considerations”, and “Room Equipment Considerations”.  Members asked to clarify the purpose of this document and how it has been applied. 

Election of Chair – Revision to Faculty Handbook

Council members returned to a motion passed in Spring 2004:

“Osen brought a motion to the committee for a change in the Faculty Handbook, which was seconded by Maryann Reynolds, and passed unanimously as follows:  ‘Each Winter Quarter the members of the committee will elect a chair for the following academic year.’ This will be forwarded to the Faculty Senate.” (UPC minutes of 5/19/2004).   A document accompanying the motion gave the following rationale:

“Rationale:  In the section of the Faculty Handbook which explains membership of the University Planning Council [Appendix B, section BL7.5, page 72], there is a sentence:  “The members of the committee will elect a chair each spring after the appointment of the new members to the committee.”  This points to electing a chair at the last meeting, or thereabouts, of the academic year.  Since the chair is to receive 0.33 FTEF release time, it has long been recognized that the timing of the election is impractical.  By March of each year courses and teaching commitments have been made for the next academic year.  Thus, UPC has recognized that it must realistically elect a chair for the following year during Winter Quarter.  This has been the practice for several years, nominating and unofficially electing a chair by straw vote at that time, then holding the official election at the end of Spring Quarter.  A change to the Faculty Handbook can legitimize present practice.  It could be as simple as substituting the quoted sentence above with the following:  “Each Winter Quarter the members of the committee will elect a chair for the following academic year.”

Councillors agreed that the handbook language should move forward to the Senate for its two required votes, and then to the Board of Trustees. 

Classroom Design Review Process

Chair Osen welcomed guests: Larry Gilbert, Director, ATUS; Gil Aiken, Architect/Project Manager, Facilities Management; Ed Simpson, Architect/Planning Manager, Facilities Management; Jim Korski, Manager, Space Administration.  Council members reviewed with the guests the floor plans for the new Academic Instructional Center.

Recommendation

In order to follow up on the meeting’s profitable discussions, councilors requested hearing back from the guests after questions that were raised are discussed with the consultants and engineers.  Councilors expressed appreciation to the guests for their time and effort.

2006-2007 Contingency Plan  – Val Berry, Guest

As part of UPC’s review of the Contingency Plan, Councilors welcomed Val Berry, Director of Human Resources, to address the concerns of Councilors regarding the priority of layoffs and other wording within the plan.   

o        Action 1 in the plan mentions “involuntary terminations of limited-term appointment faculty, administrative exempt and classified staff…”  Berry emphasized that layoff is not a good way to deal with mid-biennium budget concerns.  There are a lot of issues and time delays related to layoffs [e.g., classified staff layoffs require 30 days notice, and even then are subject to grievance and other policies], and savings cannot be immediate. 

o        An appropriations shortfall does not necessarily rise to the standard of financial exigency.  Thus, we need to be careful before implementing layoffs which could severely affect operational units.

o        Layoffs can produce mass bumping among classified staff, thus upsetting many units across campus.  Additional litigation may run up costs.

o        Berry proposed that the plan might incorporate some sort of broad philosophical statement about institutional priorities, and a broader view of how we wish to treat our personnel.  It was mentioned that parsing out budget-cutting to division heads may be more effective in implementing budget cuts as opposed to layoffs.

o        Berry suggested several alternatives such as releasing probationary employees before probationary faculty, eliminating temporary hires, freezing travel, instituting a hiring freeze, minimizing preventive maintenance, and even considering furloughs as less permanent processes than layoffs.  Berry added that a winter closing [e.g., between holidays] might provide significant savings.