Governance Council
Monday, October 29, 2012
1:00PM
UNH 306
Christine Wagner, Chair
Minutes
Present:
Liang Chu, Anthony DeBlasi, Yenisel Gulatee, Reed Hoyt, Ann Kearney, John Schmidt,
Christine Wagner, Benjamin Weaver, Daniel White
The meeting convened at 1:03 pm.
CHAIR’S REPORT
Update: Resolution 5 Committee:
Chair Wagner reported that Henryk Baran had been appointed to the committee as the representative from LLC.
The committee met last Monday and elected Susanna Fessler as chair. The committee also began drafting a
report to address the charge of Resolution 1112-05R that was passed in the Senate this past February. They will
meet again to work on finalizing the report.
Update: Smoking Task Force:
Chair Wagner provided copies of the original Senate Bill (0809-16) introduced by ULC and approved by the
Senate in April of 2009. The Bill calls for the implementation of a smoke-free campus and asks the President to
assemble a task force to discuss the feasibility of such implementation. She provided a copy of the President
Phillip’s memo of April 2012 designating representatives which should be on the task force and a list of
stakeholders identified by ULC for GOV to consider. This will be discussed further under New Business.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes of October 1. The minutes were approved with 2
abstentions.
NEW BUSINESS
Bylaws Amendment, Article II Section 7.7.1 and Section 3.4.3:
Chair Wagner began the discussion with Section 7.7.1 of the Bylaws which currently states:
7.7.1 any Senator shall have the right to place items on the agenda by submitting
such items to the Chair of the Executive Committee at least ten days before the
scheduled meeting.
The section doesn’t state whether agenda items should be submitted before the scheduled SEC or Senate
meeting but has been interpreted to mean ten days before the Senate meetings. Additionally, resolutions have
been coming to the Senate improperly formatted or as non-actionable items. New clarifying language has been
proposed for the section to read as follows:
“any Senator shall have the right to submit agenda items to the Chair of the
Executive Committee in accordance with Senate Charter Section VII.5. Items
must be submitted at least one week before the scheduled meeting of the Senate
Executive Committee.”
Chair Wagner said the idea behind the change is to allow the SEC to facilitate proper legislative format and to
determine whether such agenda items need to be reviewed by a Senate Council first. It would not prevent an
item from going to the Senate but would make sure they are actionable items and can be implemented. The
SEC can recommend for or against an agenda item but the Charter provides a clause that the SEC cannot
prevent an item from being placed on the Senate agenda. The change would not prevent anyone from
introducing a resolution from the floor and placing it on the agenda with the proper two-thirds vote. Chair
Wagner suggests that perhaps the change could be presented and voted on at the spring faculty meeting
A lengthy discussion ensued concerning some type of provision for a mechanism that would prevent the SEC
from stalling on an item and to force an item out of a council or committee. Senator DeBlasi recommended a
clause stating after 60 days of going to a council, the item would be forwarded to the Senate. Chair Wagner
suggested that a time limit might be expressed in terms of the senate meetings as opposed to calendar days.
Additionally, it was suggested that an item that is submitted to the SEC should be forwarded to the Senate after
two Senate meetings. Daniel White inquired why a change was being proposed at this time. Chair Wagner
responded that it would prevent items from going directly to the Senate without first going through the SEC or a
council. Mr. White expressed concern about a possible agenda item being kept from the Senate because it was
not actionable. He said items of discussion also need to go to the Senate. Chair Wagner said the notion is to
make Senate debate more effective and efficient. Senator DeBlasi said an advantage of initial review is that it
would make faculty aware of the types of items that are actionable such as bills and resolutions. On the other
hand, another layer of review creates a form of passive censorship and there needs to be a balance between the
two. Chair Wagner suggested the process of an agenda item going to the Senate after two Senate meetings so
that the SEC could not stall and prevent an item from being placed on the agenda. Chair Wagner reminded
everyone that a senator could always bring the item to the Senate floor directly. GOV agreed that would
provide balance without suppressing any items. Chair Wagner will draft language for the amendment.
The language of Section 3.4.3 is currently stated as follows.
3.4.3 The Secretary shall prepare and distribute the agenda at least one week before Senate
meetings, in consultation with the Senate executive committee. The agenda must contain
all items submitted by any Council or any Senator at least 10 days before the meeting. The
Secretary shall maintain a public record of attendance of all Senators and shall give notice,
at least ten days before the next Senate meeting, to any Senator whose seat could be
declared vacant after an additional absence, as specified in section 8. The Secretary shall
oversee preparation and distribution of the minutes and of a summary of recent and
upcoming business.
The proposed change in the second sentence that would keep the language internally consistent:
The agenda must contain all items submitted by any Council or any Senator in accordance with
Faculty Bylaws Article II, Section 7.7.1.
GOV agreed this revision should be included.
Approval of Replacements on Smoking Task Force:
Chair Wagner provided a copy of President Philip’s memo from April 2012 which asked GOV to consider
representatives from specific stakeholder groups. She informed GOV that some of the recommendations
originally made by ULC are unable to continue. Replacements have been identified and GOV needs to approve
those replacements as well as the entire group. A motion was made to approve and was seconded. The
members were approved by GOV.
The campus presidents of UUP and PEF were asked to serve but are unable to do so. PEF president, Sue Kent
declined to participate. UUP president, James Collins, indicated he did not agree with the premise to make the
campus smoke free. Chair Wagner asked GOV if they should be invited again, and if they decline, ask for
substitutes. Chair Wagner suggested that if they decline to appoint substitutes, the positions would be left open.
Chair Wagner suggested that GOV formally approve this procedure regarding union representation on the Task
Force for the record. A motion was made and seconded to approve this procedure, and approved unanimously
by a vote.
Charter and IRCUAP:
The issue of whether or not Section XI on IRCUAP belongs in the Charter arose during GOV’s discussion of
the Senate Handbook earlier this month. The IRCUAP amendment was passed by the Senate in May of 2009
but President Philip did not approve it and cited his reasons in a memo dated August 27, 2009. In that memo,
he also said he would not approve the clarifying amendment on graduate courses. The IRCUAP amendment
was inserted in the Charter with the preface that it’s independent of University governance, with the Provost’s
Office having responsibility for securing members. Chair Wagner asked GOV to consider whether or not the
amendments belong in the Charter and if not, should they be removed.
GOV debated the issue. Senator DeBlasi said it seemed clear that the IRCUAP amendment should be removed
since it compels action of an administrative office. He added that this is something the Senate normally cannot
do and falls beyond what is Senate internal business. Senator Hoyt provided a suggestion of having the
amendment revised since it is a breach of faculty responsibility. Chair Wagner added that it was separate from
faculty governance. John Schmidt said he didn’t believe it belonged in the Charter since the president would
approve those things that are advisory to him by the Senate. Senator DeBlasi didn’t believe IRCUAP
guaranteed an independent faculty voice since it allows the provost to select the committee. Chair Wagner
stated that since GOV’s task is deciding whether or not it belongs in the Charter, they would need to take a vote
and asked for motion to be voted on. Daniel White said more clarification was needed about what the president
does or doesn’t sign. Chair Wagner said it was something GOV would have to deal with at a later date but it
comes from the policies of the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees policies are clear about the Bylaws
but not the Charter. In response to Mr. White’s request for additional history, she said past minutes may
provide guidance about whether or not it the amendment should be in the Charter. The information needs to
remain on the Senate’s Legislation page as having been passed by the Senate but it could misinform senators or
mislead future senators.
A suggestion was made to keep the amendments in the Charter with a paragraph to explain their status. A
discussion ensued concerning the role of the Charter and Chair Wagner requested a motion to put forward.
Senator DeBlasi made a motion that since IRCUAP was not signed by the president and compels action by an
administrative office, it is the opinion of the Governance Council that the amendment is not operational at this
time. The motion was seconded and approved by vote with one opposition.
Senate Secretary Gulatee asked why the amendment was added to the Charter. Chair Wagner read the text of
the Chair’s Report from April 12, 2010:
Charter Amendments. The discussion confirmed differences in perspectives regarding the
graduate course and IRCUAP amendments. President Philip is not willing to approve them,
but he is aware of governance’s reading of BOT Policies that stipulations in the bylaws or
charter that do NOT involve consultation with the President do not require the President’s
approval. He has no objections that the relevant amendments approved by the senate be
included in the charter, as long as it is understood that the President did NOT approve
them. A resolution of the different interpretations of BOT policies will be deferred until the
issue comes to the forefront with a specific proposal requiring application of either one of
the amendments.
Chair Wagner said she would look through past minutes to further understand the situation and
GOV could discuss this further at a later date.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Senate Handbook review and revision
CAIR update
Due to time constraints, discussion of these items will be deferred to the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:32 pm
Respectfully submitted by
Gail Cameron, Recorder