Governance Council
Friday, March 30, 2015
3:00 PM
UNH 306
Cynthia Fox, Chair
Minutes
PRESENT:
Chesin, Sorrell; Cruz, José; Dutta, Suarav; Fox, Cynthia; Gulatee, Yenisel;
Janiszewski, Caitlin; Kearney, Ann; Kuznetsov, Igor; Malavasic, Jolene; Moore, Chris;
Scheck, Helene; Zemel, Alan
The meeting convened at 3:04 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of March 2, 2015 were approved, with a minor change and 1 abstention.
CHAIR’S REPORT
GOV Chair and Senate Chair Stefl-Mabry met with David Rousseau earlier in the day to discuss
governance involvement in the proposed College of Emergency Preparedness for which Professor
Rousseau has been asked to serve as Interim Dean and for which a Steering Committee and group of
interested faculty had already been formed. Interim Dean Rousseau agreed to forward the membership
rosters to GOV for input and to report to the Senate on the progress of the College beginning with the
meeting of April 27. Chair Fox also gave a brief overview of the Governor’s initiative and progress to
this point and of the administration’s perceived need to have something in place (not a building) by
September.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Senate Elections
Committee on Liaison and Elections Chair Yenisel Gulatee reported that preparation for elections was
complete.
Replacement of Senators
Regarding the issue of a Senate member’s lack of attendance, the individual responded that meetings had
been missed due to personal circumstances. Chair Fox reported the member did not wish to resign and
that going forward would begin to attend meetings again. GOV considered the matter to be resolved.
Bylaw amendment
On March 26, Chair Fox received an email from Senator David McCaffrey that raised concerns about the
fairness of the use on March 24 by President Jones, Senate Chair Stefl-Mabry, and Albany Chapter UUP
President Bret Benjamin of the Voting Faculty listserv to send out a message that endorsed the Bylaws
change. In a subsequent email dated March 27, Senator McCaffrey stated that he had learned that a
colleague who believed that use of the listserv was in violation of university policy had filed a complaint
with the Chief Information Officer. Senator McCaffrey asked that the Governance Council look into the
matter and, if the letter was indeed in violation, consider postponing the Bylaw amendment. To this end,
he asked that Chair Fox share with GOV the email exchanges they had been having on this subject.
Chair Fox asked if any other member of GOV had been contacted about this matter. She noted that
Senator McCaffrey’s messages suggested he was serving as the spokesperson for a group of deeply
concerned faculty, and that the problem was being discussed in a number of venues, but that she did not
have a sense of how many individuals he was actually representing. She reminded GOV that on March
23rd a second notice of the upcoming vote had been sent out that invited voters to contact her or any other
member GOV with questions about the rationale and/or process. GOV members responded that they had
not been contacted
At member requests for background information, Chair Fox recounted discussions regarding the Bylaw
amendment at prior SEC meetings, and summarized how it had been narrowly approved to go for a vote
and that Interim Provost Mulcahy had addressed questions regarding the impetus for proposing the
amendment. The Chair also explained that the CIO had met individually with the authors of the letter
endorsing the amendment and shared the contents of the memo that they had collectively received
following those meetings. The memo did not state that the letter was in violation of university policy, but
did caution care regarding such use in the future.
In a lengthy discussion that lasted almost an hour, GOV considered to what extent the call for a specific
vote represented “political speech” in the context of a matter of internal university policy, the seriousness
of the potential violation of that policy, the benefits of postponing the vote versus the potential
disadvantages, and whether the rights of voters had been compromised. GOV also considered ways in
which this situation can be avoided in the future.
At the end of this discussion, a motion was made and unanimously approved not to postpone the vote.
It was also noted that the joint letter in support of, as well as the initial request by the administration for,
the Bylaw amendment seemed gestures in the interest of demonstrating transparency and working
together.
NEW BUSINESS
New College of Emergency Preparedness, Steering Committee and Working Groups
GOV reviewed the proposed steering committee member list. There was also a spreadsheet listing a
working group interested in assisting. It was noted that representation was light in CAS. There had been a
new Master’s in Global Public Health that could have benefitted from input from critical languages in the
early stages, and perhaps the same was true of this college. It was agreed that all areas of communication
were considered critical elements. Anthropology and Sociology were also suggested, to consider the
cultural aspects. GOV members reviewed potential candidates and agreed to consider and contact others
regarding interest in serving. Chair Fox would contact Dean Rousseau with GOV’s recommendations and
note that names would be forwarded within a couple of days after GOV checked with them.
Renaming of CCI and Formal consultation
Chair Fox explained that at a recent meeting of the UPPC, Senate / SEC Chair Stefl-Mabry had
questioned whether the Dean of CCI’s request to UPPC regarding the renaming of CCI to the College of
Engineering and Applied Sciences constituted formal consultation. Following that meeting, UPPC Chair
David McCaffrey put the issue to an electronic vote with the majority of the members agreeing that it did.
At a subsequent meeting of the SEC, Chair Stefl-Mabry devoted part of her report to a presentation in
which she sought to clarify the definition of formal consultation. This started a conversation about the
events at the UPPC meeting. Following lengthy discussion, it was moved that the issue of whether the
procedure followed thus far in the renaming of CCI constituted formal consultation or not be referred to
GOV.
GOV agreed that Governance, rather than UPPC, is the appropriate Council to be determining the
question of what constitutes formal consultation.
A letter from UPPC Chair McCaffrey and conversation with Senate Chair Stefl-Mabry on the matter were
reviewed. It was agreed that UPPC is the appropriate body for a proposed department name change to go
to. However, it was unclear who was proposing the change since GOV had never been asked to approve
the membership of any committees related to the College of Engineering initiative. It was recalled that
concerns were raised at a recent Senate meeting that Senators often feel that they cannot oppose a bill
after so much work has been done on it, and that their input is requested too late in the process to be
meaningful.
A motion was made that, in determining the interpretation of the formal consultation per the Bylaws and
Charter, it be recommended that the CCI name change proposal go through UAC and GAC for
consideration prior to going to vote on the Senate floor. The motion was rescinded.
A motion was then made and unanimously approved to first review more information on the processes,
for other prior department name changes for the purpose of clarification, and to vote on a
recommendation via e-mail on Wednesday.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Elisa Lopez, Recorder