Called to order 3:20pm by Mike Gavin
I. Agenda was approved.
It was noted that an amendment was made via email by Michael Gavin with regard to the withdrawal date
as Friday the 19th
II. Minutes were approved.
The first version was changed by Mark Hubley. Mark added that the Grievance Committee was in place,
and may need to meet soon to review a dismissal instance/hearing that occurred toward the end of spring
semester.
III. Introductions by all present
IV. Reports
 Vice President: A meeting is scheduled with Swazette for catching up, resuming the Salary and
Benefits Committee, and to review the Benefits Proposal that was submitted last spring.

President’s Leadership Team: As yet no meeting has occurred. The Academic Council (formerly
Academic Team) will meet next Thursday.

CWF: the first meeting is Tuesday with details and agenda posted to the portal. The election of CoChairs and the Executive Committee will occur. Also, HR will deliver an update on seven different
policies and where the college stands. These include: Short Term Disability, Same Sex benefits,
Alternate Work Schedules, Health Care Reform, Total Compensation Statement, Confidentiality
Agreements and the Advance Notice of Retirement Incentive program. Kent 262 at 2pm.
 The CWF newsletter is now out once a semester. In response to a question from Eldon, the CWF
is reorganized with new bylaws and all slots are filled. Meetings are monthly. There are
committees which no longer exist. The four that do exist are: College Life and Culture,
Community Involvement and Outreach, Institutional Affectiveness (includes budget, assessment
and planning) and Technology Planning.

Chair’s Council: met two weeks ago. Nothing outstanding is occurring at the moment, Mark Hubley
will follow up at the next meeting on the 13th and report to the Senate after that.

Teaching and Learning Center: there are fifteen paid registrations available for Adjunct Faculty at
the MCAP conference; six have been reserved so far. Alan Mikelson has asked Chairs to disseminate
the information to any Adjuncts that may not be in L-AdjFac.

Elections Committee: Michael Gavin contacted Chairs asking for individuals to serve in open
positions. Needed at present are Adjunct Faculty from STEM, Student Development Services and
Learning Resources.
 Darlene Antezana: positions are Adjunct Faculty Liaison from VPAA, Adjunct Faculty
Representative of VPAA, Adjunct Faculty Representative of the WDCE.
 The election committee has several positions rotating off this Fall. It was recommended that those
willing to continue be reaffirmed. The areas needed on the committee are:
1. Health Sciences, Learning Foundations, Adjuncts.
2. Faculty Salary & Benefits (may come from the Faculty Organization) and Grievance
(tenured). An election may be required for the two positions above. It was
recommended that the election be via email.
3. Iva Toler will serve on General Education and Curriculum for HGNPE, Barry Barube
will be the faculty rep for HNPE.
4. Michael Gavin asked that Chairs attempt to get faculty in areas where an alternate
position was not filled.
5. Janet Carlson will be retiring in December. The Alternate will move into her position,
and another Alternate found for the spring ballot.

FO Bylaws will need to appear on agenda in future.
V. New Business
 Update on 10 month contract: in summer Dr. Dukes and Dr. Dunnington assembled a task force to
define the ‘10 month contract.’ Mark Hubley, Michael Gavin, John Rosicky, Roseann Bend, Cheryl
Dover, Melinda Kramer and Mara Doss are on the committee. This group was tasked with addressing
three issues and two questions:
 The Questions: 1) What is a 10 month contract?, 2) What are the expectations of faculty on a 10
month contract?
 Three Issues: 1) not a lot of governance in summer occurs since faculty are not here, 2) major
committees on campus don’t meet during several time frames: between final grades and
graduation, over summer, prior to spring semester. 3) Those weeks were noted as ones where
there could be professional development for faculty on campus.
 The committee is most concerned with not having our schedules change much, and faculty are
concerned with having every day practices not change, with the realization that there is a concern
that if we don’t help define the 10 month contract, the administration will define it for us. Points
made during the discussion:
 Mark Hubley noted two issues. 1)The faculty contracts set dates, but some faculty are
not carrying out non-teaching responsibilities during the contract times. This is
especially true of January and just before Commencement ceremonies. This is causing
tension between faculty and the administration, and 2) faculty often request professional
development opportunities, but want additional compensation for the training. If the
faculty can come to an agreement about carrying out responsibilities and participating in
professional development during the stated contract times, this may solve the tension.
 Michael Gavin: other community college policies have been investigated. Some respond
that this is an odd time for professional development, other use the days to work on
syllabi and registration. Different colleges use the time differently.
 Clyde Ebenreck: Perhaps faculty who are needed during these times can be offered a 12
month contract? Mark Hubley replied that this is one idea on the table for discussion.
This may be tied to some faculty, and/or tied to certain positions. It was noted that a 12
month contract does include 36 hours of teaching instead of the 30 hours required in a 10
month contract.
 Year round meetings would require cooperation from the Space Utilization committee
and administration.
 Eldon Baldwin: there is also an issue of language. A 10 month is historic. Everyone always knew
what it meant. Current administrators are not familiar with the history, because they’ve never
been in that position. Perhaps the name of the contract should be modified: 12 month means
37.5hour week and earning annual leave. These people assume that you just remove 2 months
from this. We have to clearly define a teaching contract differently and name it differently. 30
credit hour contracts, 36 credit hour contracts, etc. If they want a 12 month for a chair, switch
them and give them annual leave. Committee needs to examine the language.
 There was a general consensus that language is a good point, the definition of the contract
should be spelled out to include other duties. Dates are sensitive issue and hard to get
around dates being important. May be no need to change the dates. The 10month
significance is the 20 pay cycle. Most of us are on the 26 pays anyway; but college
handles it differently. College banks the month on 20 pays, then just allocates it to…
they are banking/holding it. Our persective, was there much discussion of perspective of
new hires? Mark, just beginning the discussion. There may be a point to governenace,
but it’s not really known if it necessitates a change in the contracts.
 Mark Hubley, perhaps if faculty can promise that we will be here when it’s expected and
not question the money… that might mean second week of January we need to meet as a
department. To solve the issue, it may be a matter of finding the biggest issue, and
addressing that. The week between grades and graduation is a perfect time to address
these things. Not showing up to graduation is a big issue; also the decorum of people at


graduation. There are things we can do to look more professional and address her
concerns, because some of them are valid.
Michael Gavin: A meeting of the committee is coming up, and he might have better idea
of what is going on then. This is a work in progress.
Clyde Ebenreck asked if meetings are open. They are not. Michael Gaving stated that
this is mainly to get work done, and he is open about the information discussed.
However, many in the Senate were concerned at the closed nature of the meetings,
especially since the college’s communication structure was an issue for Middle States.

Tenure for Faculty becoming administrators. A couple of faculty have brought this up. Faculty
who get tenure, then move on to administrative positions are being asked to relinquish the tenure.
There was a general consensus that tenured earned should be kept. The following issues were
discussed.
 There is no policy now anywhere that anyone is aware of. The most recent three have signed
away the tenure. This is being brought forward after the fact. Historically it was the other way
around as well with a Dean getting tenure in their contract. This seems to be recent.
 The assumption is that administration may not want to devote the funds to replacing a faculty
position, then having the tenured faculty wish to return to that filled position.
 The policy is prohibitive to faculty who may wish to serve the college in an administrative
capacity.
 There was concern that this is not written in the faculty handbook, and it is not known if it is stated
in the newly signed contract.
 Tenure is awarded by the Board. So, how can the Administration cancel it? Would this be a legal
issue?
 Michael Gavin asked how the Senate would like to move forward with the issue? It was decided
that the Senate President send a letter to President Dukes stating that it has come to the attention of
the Senate that a new administrative procedure has been adopted. As this clearly impacts the
faculty , the Senate believes that shared governance demands this be discussed and not just put
into practice. The letter should ask how this is a valid procedure. Alan Mikelson suggested that
Michael Gavin started with a phone call to HR before moving forward with the letter. A motion
was put on the floor for the Faculty Senate President to send a letter on our behalf, seconded and
unanimously passed.

Uniform policy for off campus testing centers . The question was posed if a uniform testing center
policy be used for online students taking exams by proctor. After discussion, it was agreed to online
faculty currently create exam proctor and testing center guidelines on a case by case basis. The does
not seem to be a problem at present. The consensus was to leave it up to the instructor.

Other new business ~ after discussion of the items below, Michael Gavin asked if those who broached
the topics could write a paragraph about their concerns and send them via email. Once collected,
Michael will compose a letter of concern to Dave Mosby.
 Dangerous crossings:
 Charlie IET discussed his concern with the exit road near the CAT building and faculty
lot. The burm there causes very limited visibility at night, and people crossing the road
could be hit by cars. After discussion was that noted that accidents have occurred here in
the past. Charlie asked that we make note as a senate body to address the issue with
Dave Mosby. Laura Ellsworth stated that the CWF committee would probably be
College Life and Culture. Michael Gavin agreed to following up the issue by crafting a
letter stating the Senate’s concerns to Dave Mosby.
 Eldon Baldwin noted the backup of cars making a left turn at the 3way stop near the
entrance at construction. There is poor visibility, and this should not be a primary
entrance.
 Handicapped parking availability and building access.
 There seem to be an insufficient number of handicapped spots, or those that exist are not
in spaces access by the individuals who need them. This issue has come up before, and
some think the college has enough. Alan Mikelson stated that if this is the case, perhaps



some of the current spots be moved to more useful areas.
Perhaps the Campus police could request identification for those using the handicapped
places (this is allowed by state law).
Queen Anne needs modernizations. The greater community uses the building, and it is
not easily accessed by handicapped individuals. This update should be a priority.
Library:
 The reserve policy was presented, and all faculty were asked to consider putting texts on reserve
for students.
 Bestbookbuys is a price comparison website recommended for students.
 Faculty can bring in students to learn how to do library research on new databases. A face-to-face
workshop can be signed up for online, or via email.
For the next meeting, Michael Gavin asked that any agenda items that need to be added be sent via email.
Once issue he would like to address with Lark Dobson in the meantime will be making the application
procedures for newly hired faculty to be more conducive to those on hiring committees.
Meeting adjourned.