February_24,

WSU FACULTY SENATE MEETING

February 24, 2003

Senators Present: Danning Bloom, Matt Bosworth, David Bratt, Marianna Byman, Mark Engen, Pat Ferden, Kelly Herold, Matthew Hyle, Colette Hyman, Joe Jackson, Mary Kesler, Cindy Killion, Daniel Lintin, Peter Miene, Bill Ng, Troy Paino, Susanne Smith, Bruce Svingen (Rochester), Kerry Williams,

Senators Absent: Sara Barbor, Darrell Downs, Yogesh Grover, Christa Matter, Christine Pilon-Kacir (Rochester), Jo Stejskal (sabbatical leave), Cathy Summa, Alex Yard (sabbatical leave).

Others Present: Nancy Peterson, Carrie Fried.

I. Call to Order

David Bratt called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.

II. Approval of Minutes of February 10th, 2003 Senate Meeting

Corrections:

NB-F: Heading should be ‘MN Transfer’ not ‘Man Transfer’.

M. Kesler/B. Svingen moved to approve minutes of Feb. 10th as corrected/written.

Motion Carried.

III. Agenda Additions/Revisions and Approval:

NB-A: 3:45

C. Killion/S. Smith moved to approve agenda items.

Motion Carried.

IV. President’s Report

D. Bratt sent fruit baskets to a faculty member and a faculty spouse who are hospitalized.

He has gotten three new committees started and attended meetings of two others.

Cathy Summa, Mary Kesler, and David Bratt have attended two meetings of the All-University Budget Task Force.

Along with a number of other faculty, D. Bratt attended the Chamber of Commerce’s Eggs and Issues Breakfast last Saturday.

He also attended Sen. Steve Murphy’s town meeting in Red Wing.

Additional notes:

D. Bratt will be attending the state IFO executives meeting this Thursday. Faculty with publications are encouraged to give some copies to him to take to this meeting for MnSCU display.

V. Review of Meet and Confer Notes February 17^th, 2003.

Additional Notes/Clarifications:

D. Bratt’s additional notes on Technology Funding:

Funded by ‘the budget’ (i.e., tuition + state appropriation):

E-Learning Center staffing (largely made up of already existing lines)

Laptops for faculty and staff (two-year contracts) - about $440,000 per year

Some lab expenses

Funded by student fees:

Laptop Fee: student laptop leases, services, and some staff

Residence Hall: wiring in residence halls

Technology Fee: classroom technology and wiring: some labs

Increased staffing levels

Meet and Confer Notes received by Senate.

VI. Committee Reports

COM-A. A2C2

No report.

Com-B. Graduate Council

No report.

Com-C. Government Relations

M. Kesler/T. Paino/B. Svingen reported the following:

1. Russ Stanton and Speaker Sviggum testified for the IFO contract bill, including several legislators speaking (vigorously) against the Governor’s budget proposal.

2. IFO lobby days were last week. Several faculty visited several legislators and Governor’s staff. Topics included: Budget, tuition increases, lack of HESO funding for public school students, House/Governor against tax increases of any kind, while some Senators spoke in favor of tax increase of some sort.

3. GR voted to ask Russ Stanton to explore a study of a Grants/Voucher plan given in the form of grant dollars per student (i.e. money is given to HESO and students apply for it). This is a total change from the usual method of state funding. One advantage is that this new plan could provide a cohesive lobbying effort from all public and private schools to receive more funding from the legislative. Though a clear disadvantage is that private schools could an even greater portion of the HESO money. This is only at exploratory stage. IFO has not weighed in on this issue yet.

4. A student forum on budget is tomorrow (Tuesday).

5. Faculty are reminded to write thank-you letters to key legislators.

C. Hyman/S. Smith moved to inform the state IFO that the Student Grant/Voucher funding concept be kept only at the exploratory phase and be studied with restraint, and to ask Russ Stanton to address the issue of the IFO union, including advantages and disadvantages.

Discussion:

1. This is a competitive model and would decentralized away from a MnSCU central office, and could give more money to local campuses. However, this could disband IFO unity statewide.

2. A concern is the blurring of the line between public and private schools. This could be especially disadvantageous in terms of Capital Bonding dollars, in which the private schools can easily out-compete public schools.

3. Expensive programs at public schools could be at risk with this new budget model.

4. The risk of possible disbanding of the IFO union is extremely dangerous.

Substitute motion:

C. Killion/M. Kesler moved to direct the Board of Directors to oppose the flow of public money toward the private schools and to oppose having Russ Stanton explore the Grant/Voucher concept.

P. Miene/K. Williams moved to postpone further discussions on this issue until more information can be gathered for the next meeting.

Motion Carried.

Com-D. Personnel Policies and Grievance

No report.

Com-E. Committee on Committees

No report.

Com-F. Action Committee (State IFO)

Troy Paino was appointed as the chair of the Action Committee.

Faculty Senate approved the appointment.

Toby Dogwiler would like to be on the Action Committee.

B. Svingen/C. Killion moved to refer to Committee on Committees the nomination of Toby Dogwiler for the Action Committee.

Motion Carried.

VII. Old Business

OB-A. Budget

An FY04 Budget Scenario (2/18/2003, 12^th Draft) was included in the information package distributed at the Senate meeting. The Scenario is based on Governor’s Budget recommendation:

If all unfunded ($4.94M, a 10.08% reduction) is covered only by tuition, the tuition increase would be 19.88%; if covered only by cuts in staff, about 82 people will be laid off, which would translate to 659 classes.

Ironically, the MnSCU office is NOT taking the same % cut. Shouldn’t the Chancellor’s office provide leadership when it comes to taking cuts?! The Chancellor’s office has about the same number of staff members as the number of employees at WSU.

2. Legislators might not micro-manage like the Governor; i.e. Governor is recommending a cap of 15% on tuition increase.

3. TC’s and CC’s appear to be in a better funding situation than the SU’s.

The administration forwarded a gigantic package on Revised Regulation 3-7 and stated that any questions should be directed to Grants Director Peterson.

The package contained documents that were unanimously approved by the IRB. The documents contained revisions that were made in accord with the federal Office for Human Research protections Guidance on Written IRB Procedures issued July 11, 2002.

1. Besides updates, several protocols have been revised to make it easier to fill out.

3. Department representation on IRB will be checked relative to a 3-year time frame on departmental grants activity.

M. Hyle/S. Smith moved to postpone until the Faculty Senate receive the Regulation 3-7 (perhaps the 12 pages can be sent to Senators via e-mail before the next Senate meeting).