Governance Council
Monday, February 13, 2012
10:30 AM
UNH 300
Andi Lyons, Chair
Minutes
Present:
Raysa Capellan, Liang Chu, Cynthia Fox, Donald Keenan, Danielle Leonard, Andi
Lyons, John Schmidt, Joette Stefl-Mabry, Daniel White
Guests:
Susan Phillips
The meeting convened at 10:31 am.
CHAIR’S REPORT
Chair Lyons referred to the charges made to GOV as a result of the passage of Senate Resolution 111203R. The resolution charges GOV to provide a report to the full Senate by March 15. Chair Fessler spoke
with Provost Phillips after the resolution passed and provided the Provost with a timeline that GOV
followed last year. The Provost will attend today’s meeting to answer any questions.
Senator White commented that the issue of what constitutes formal consultation has been debated at
length. There seems to have been a divergence from past practice where it concerns the deactivation of
languages, theatre and the project renaissance in October 2010. Typically, a senate committee like
GAC/UAC/UPPC would comment on a major change to the academic curriculum prior to the change
occurring. In terms of event timing, Chair Lyons shared that she attended the CAS Council of Chairs
meeting and Dean Wulfert discussed budget reductions and asked for feedback prior to making a decision.
Chair Lyons said she was not sure that an elected governance body is on the same level with any dean in
terms of being informed. Prior to all of this, the Provost held a series of meetings on the Going Forward
Plan over a two year period, and it appeared then that reductions were possible for several departments.
She added that GOV had been consulted and made recommendations for the membership of BAG4, and
that the recommendation that UPPC in its entirety be part of BAG4 was accepted. This addition
constituted formal consultation with elected governance, and the Chair of UPPC, Jim Fossett, was charged
with reporting on progress at each Senate meeting. Chair Lyons stated that she believed those reports are
on file as part of Senate records.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 6, 2011
The minutes from December 6, were approved.
NEW BUSINESS:
Charge to Governance from Senate Resolution 1112-03R: Resolution to Investigate Violations of
Governance Procedures in Matter of 2010 Program Deactivations
Chair Lyons welcomed Provost Phillips to the discussion. She asked the Provost what, from her
perspective, the reasons might be for needing to revisit the issue and why people feel proper consultation
did not happen. Provost Phillips reminded those who were on GOV last year there was an investigation
into the consultation process, and it was part the package that the Senate forwarded to President Philip in
November. The Provost said she also had a sense there has not been a full understanding of the meaning
of program deactivation, which does not mean courses have been discontinued. She said some faculty in
LLC were also concerned about letters they received from her over the summer. A discussion ensued after
the Provost’s comments.
Senator White explained that he perceived the problem as a divergence in the process used, as opposed to
what had occurred the previous semester. He added this was the reason SUNY Senate made a statement to
use caution about consultation and avoid gray areas about what constitutes formal consultation.
Senator Fox spoke as a faculty member affected by the deactivations, and said she also believed the
discussion has resurfaced because the process did not follow normal procedure. She said there is also a
sense that the process for selecting these programs has not been made clear. Senator Fox said no mention
was made of graduate programs that underwent a very thorough review in the previous year. The French
Department did well in that review and no reference was made to that. There seems to be no particular
academic justification made for the deactivations and the issues continue to fester. As the budget situation
appears to have improved, the campus is building. There is no sense of consultation occurring and people
do not feel that their concerns are being taken seriously.
Chair Lyons pointed out that having new people involved with the Senate this year could be a
complicating factor in the current discussions, since they were not involved in discussions last year or are
not in the areas affected. She said they would not be getting the full background from the past three years
leading up to the deactivations, if they were not involved at the time.
Senator Fox viewed the memo of March 24, 2011 from the President stating his decision to retain minors
as a possible interpretation of a response, although the memo wasn’t very revealing about what it meant to
look elsewhere for savings. Senator White added that the focus needs to remain on curriculum. There
were strong statements made at the Senate meeting about how faculty feel and the impact on the academic
component. Senator White read the President’s memo of March 24 asking the Provost to retain minors,
and said this would go into the report due on March 15. Chair Lyons stated a belief that this was a formal
written response to the Senate’s reactions in November, even though it may not have been the desired one.
Senator Fox referred to the point made by Senator Wills at the Senate meeting in which the Bylaws say a
response should be as detailed as possible, and the President’s memo did not provide any academic
justification about his decisions. She said it has not been made clear to people affected how the decision
was arrived at or its academic basis.
Provost Phillips responded to concerns about the task and hoped the outcome would be to develop a better
process going forward. She provided information on the new budget scenario and reviewed some
background from the previous three-and-a-half years. The first response to budget cuts came mostly in the
form of attrition, which did not give the campus the full effect of that impact. As the number of cuts
increased to six in total, the impact became greater. The outlook has changed with the provisions of the
NYSUNY 2020 legislation. There will be an increase in undergraduate tuition of $300 per year and a
student access fee of $75. Out-of-state tuition will increase 10% and in-state graduate student tuition will
increase 6%. Our proposal has not been accepted yet and the campus is unable to move forward with the
increases. The legislation has some stipulations over the five-year period, which includes initiatives for
increasing student enrollment and generating additional external research funding. The initiative will
require increased services on all levels to support additional students, and investments in accounting and
procurement to support external research funding.
This past fall a pilot program was launched on how to create a proposal for hiring new faculty if the
legislation is approved. The Provost received 20 different proposals from across campus from every
school and college. They were reviewed by a group of faculty and some were funded under the
assumption that NYSUNY 2020 will be approved. The Provost indicated that a couple of the proposals
have been put forward to see how they would support the two goals. She said all of the comments
concerning funding of faculty are predicated on the goals being supported. She added though there would
not be a means to recoup the money lost in the earlier budget cuts. Secretary Leonard asked the Provost if
the affected areas had the same opportunities for submitting proposals, and the Provost said they did.
Consideration will also be given to the non-faculty side in the context of the needs of different units. The
legislation would provide for approximately 187 faculty to be hired and an nonspecific number of staff and
research personnel. Provost Phillips indicated that new hires do not necessarily have to be the grantgetters, but could provide support to an existing faculty member who attracts grant dollars. Chair Lyons
said it may be useful to have the Provost address the full Senate at its next meeting on this issue.
Chair Lyons asked the Provost to address the divergence in the process between voluntary and involuntary
program deactivations and explain the difference. Provost Phillips said it seems that the usual way is to
have the process come through a department; but, it is not the only way, especially during a budget crisis
when the process can take on a different meaning.
Chair Lyons thanked the Provost for addressing GOV. The Chair then asked Senator White to lead the
resolution investigation, and he accepted.
OLD BUSINESS:
Administrative Assessment Committee Update
The Charter Amendment to establish a council on administrative review and evaluations was presented at
the Senate last Monday. At that time, Senate Chair Fessler read a memo from President Philip in which he
stated his reasons for not supporting the amendment. Senator Stefl-Mabry said she and members of the
assessment committee were looking forward to meeting with the President. She has asked Chairs Fessler
and Lyons to attend as well. Senator Stefl-Mabry believed part of the issue may be that the President has
not seen the accompanying guidelines. The President’s memo indicates that faculty do not have authority
to undertake evaluation of administrative staff, and she hopes the meeting is a time for the President to
articulate his concerns. Stony Brook has been doing evaluations for a long time and believes it has been
very helpful in identifying problem areas.
Secretary Leonard had concerns about today being the deadline to distribute the amendment to the Senate
based on the requirements of the Charter. This would mean the amendment would be deferred to the April
or May meetings. Chair Lyons said she anticipated some revisions, at least, would be part of the outcome
from meeting with President Philip. Going forward by sending the amendment today may create a feeling
of hostility and she thought it would show a good faith effort to wait until after the meeting.
Chair Lyons said University Counsel apparently had concerns with use of the word evaluation when the
amendment was discussed. She suggested perhaps using the word assessment since the administration is
looking at evaluation from a legal perspective. Senator Stefl-Mabry said she would change evaluation to
assessment in the document.
Senator Fox referred to comments made by Senator Lanford at the Senate meeting, at which time he
pointed out that a precedent had been set for this type of activity, and she asked how far we would want to
pursue the issue. Senator Keenan said that perhaps the new president would be more receptive to the idea
and thought the amendment should move forward. Chair Lyons said we could make a point from an
historical context, but wants to avoid being in an adversarial position with the President. GOV will
continue the discussion at its next meeting.
Committee on Council Nominations (CCN) Timeline and Process for Identifying Senate Participants
Secretary Leonard outlined the steps that needed to take place in terms of elections. She will be in contact
with deans of the schools and colleges to ensure their process is moving forward in terms of electing their
senators. The next step is contacting people about their term limits and whether they wish to run again.
Then a slate of candidates will need to be developed based on those responses. Secretary Leonard
informed GOV that elections will need to be held for at-large seats, a UAS seats, and a SUNY Senator.
GOV first publishes a preliminary slate of candidates and then solicits nominations. Secretary Leonard
said she would send an email to GOV members outlining exactly what is required. She also said she
would like GOV to have at least one more meeting before March 5, which is the deadline to publish the
preliminary slate. March 19 is the deadline to publish the final slate for at-large seats. These are the
agreed upon deadlines discussed by GOV.
Spring meeting schedule
GOV members discussed its next meeting times and agreed that Monday is the best time slot. GOV will
meet again on February 27 and March 19.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned a 12:21 pm.
Respectfully submitted by
Gail Cameron, Recorder