Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting
Emporia State University
19 November 2002

Present: D. Allen, S. Backhus, L. Bland, S. Brinkman, J. Calhoun, R. Catlett, R. Chamberlin, J. Costello, R. DeVito, M. Harrell, L. Hobson, E. Hogan, J. Johnson, R. Keith, A. Landis, C. Longacre, D. Miller, M. Mingenback, T. Mitchell, A. Montalvo, D. Moore, F. Mullins, S. Neill, F. Pavri, D. Perry, D. Saunders, R. Smith, W. Smith, J. Starr, Z. Swanson, and K. Theohary
Absent: None
Liaison: None
Substitution: M. Dow (for J. Agada), and J. Hirsh (for J. Schwenn)
Visitors: None

  1. Call to Order: President Keith called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. in the Messenger Room of the Memorial Union.

  2. Announcement of Attendance: Roll call sheet was distributed with substitutions noted.

  3. Approval of Minutes: Minutes of the 5 November 2002 meeting were approved as posted.

  4. Announcements and Comments:

    1. Associated Student Government President Kristin Theohary
      At its Thursday meeting ASG will be voting on a resolution involving the Student Code of Standards (SCS) and making line item decisions and adjustments. On Wednesday at 8:30 P.M. in the MU Ballroom, ASG will be hosting an open forum to discuss the SCS.

    2. Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Jim Hirsh No report was given.

    3. President of the Faculty Ron Keith
      Keith stated the BoR met last week. The Regents are looking at new organizational structures to deal with coordination issues as well as governance issues. Keith reported that COFSP presented to the Regents the need to continue to have a voice on issues related to governance and coordination. COFSP met with SAC and supported a similar statement made by the students. Regents decided to create a taskforce to look into the development of Performance Agreements with the Regents' universities. As part of past Kansas' legislation, if a Regents' university meets it performance agreement, it would receive additional funding in the amount of two percent of its budget. Regent Docking proposed a taskforce that would have two faculty representatives, one from the community colleges and one from the Regents' universities. COFSP also reported that at the next meeting it would distributed a proposal to COPS and the Regents that would create Regents-based recognition of faculty to boost faculty morale. The proposal involves the creation of two awards per institution, one for a junior faculty member and one for a senior faculty member. Guidelines and the selection of candidates would be determined locally. Regent Wempe, the chair of BoR, asked how the Regents could foster morale among the faculty? Keith stated the Regents value our work and us.
      Two Fridays ago the Strategic Planning Committee met. Keith shared with the committee a list of bulleted points about the impact budget cuts have had on faculty and things they value. Keith mentioned three reoccurring themes: cuts in travel affects faculty and what we do with students in many ways; there is a lack of resources, such as handouts, review sheets, and laboratory materials, that faculty think are important for students in a quality program; and faculty use their own money to purchase materials for classroom and professional use. Keith may decide to send the thematic summary to the faculty.
      The Tuition and Budget Committee met last Friday. It was stated that the Governor might make an additional allotment (cut) this year. Sebelius said that she would be concerning herself with the 2004 budget. The 2004 budget plans for a 5% cut from the current budget. The President shared her understanding of retrenchment. To her, retrenchment involves layoffs and not furloughs and other budget strategies. She wants to maintain flexibility in handling budget issues. Layoffs are in terms of retrenchment, and she does not want us to pursue furloughs as part of retrenchment.

  5. Committee Reports

    1. Academic Affairs (Swanson)
      Swanson stated he has parsed out the selection of the teaching awards to three committees and has assigned the pages of the revised Policy and Procedures Manual (PPM) for review. The committee continues to work on the Intensive English program and has drafted a bill. Swanson shared the bill with FSEC and will take comments back to the committee. AA looked at its bill before the Senate, and later in the meeting, Swanson will move to postpone it for consideration. AA also looked at how the SCS fits with the PPM and how a proposed resolution will fit into the scheme. What has been proposed may be inadequate and need further consideration.

    2. Faculty Affairs (Catlett)
      Catlett informed the Senate that FA looked at FSB 02002 in terms of the comments made at the last meeting. Catlett assigned pages form the revised PPM to committee members. The committee will continue to look at the Chronic Low Performance Policy.

    3. Committee on Campus Governance (Mullins)
      Mullins stated that COCG has reviewed two committees, the Athletic Advisory Board and the Classified Assembly Committee. COCG will recommend the continuance of these two committees.
      The committee has finally decided a recommendation on the commitment of a person elected as the second vice president. The length of the commitment will remain the same, but there will be no duties/expectations of the second vice president. The individual may choose to attend meetings, but there is no expectation that he or she will participate in Senate activities.
      Keith asked Mullins if the pages of the revised PPM that COCG was responsible for reviewing had been assigned to committee members. Mullins stated that they had been distributed.

  6. Old Business:

    1. FSB 02001 - STATEMENT OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES IN THE SYLLABI (Academic Affairs)
      Swanson moved that FSB 02001 be postponed until the next meeting. W. Smith seconded the motion. After little discussion, the motion passed. Keith stated that it would be placed on the agenda for the December 3rd meeting.

    2. FSB 02002 - RETRENCHMENT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES (Faculty Affairs)
      Keith referred the item to Catlett. Catlett said he would proceed, and asked senators to ask questions or provided input if that was appropriate. Keith stated that if senators had something to report, that would be appropriate. One member of the Senate stated that his department was not in favor of furloughs. One individual stated that there were to many ways to withdraw resources from faculty. Another department had questions about providing bonuses to faculty to retire. They questioned if it was wise to offer experienced faculty incentives to retire. Also, they were concerned what kind of impact furloughs would have on retirements. Another department was concerned about the lack of language that would indicate the steps to be taken to implement the changes. In addition, the language does not protect faculty. That is, faculty could take a pay cut and people could still be dismissed. One senator shared that a member in her department felt that if there were a need for retrenchment, he or she would like to have a voice. Keith stated that faculty have a voice in the current Retrenchment Policy in terms of the University Retrenchment Committee.
      Catlett was asked if other universities have retrenchment policies. He stated that most follow the AAUP guidelines or something very close. The committees created the notion of including furloughs and the language is probably unique to ESU.
      In response to the above comments, Catlett stated the committee looked at salary cuts vs. termination. The committee was trying to make a policy that would be useful in the future, as well as today. The committee debated many issues related to this bill. The bill puts a lot of trust in the administration. However, a referendum also needs to come as a resolution from the Faculty Senate. Faculty could take a cut and terminations could occur. A Senator stated that they thought the furloughs were in lieu of terminations. Catlett stated that we want to keep in mind that financial difficulties could last for several years in which one year may be different from the next. In one year faculty may choose to have pay cuts, and in the second year faculty may not want furloughs and layoffs must occur. A president and the Faculty Senate, through a resolution, can have a faculty referendum in which if 60% of the voting faculty agree, furlough could be an option to deal with financials difficulties. Catlett stated that he was proud of the committee's effort and what they had accomplished. An AA committee member stated that fundamentally the committee looked at, "Instead of 6 being gone because we do not have the money, is there a way to share the pie differently?" The committee wanted to look at ways to get through a year without cutting people. The committee's thought was that this would come before retrenchment. Firms are having similar difficulties and all in an organization are taking cuts. Catlett shared the furlough policy for classified staff. He pointed out that it discusses financial exigency and program discontinuance. As for the early/phase retirement incentives, the committee thought it was a good idea to consider them. At a cost possibly less than $1,000, the University could encourage people to retire who were already considering doing so. This would allow the University to retain people who want to be here.
      Keith asked, "What do we do with the bill?" A senator stated that there seems to be a lack of communication or miscommunication between the committee and the administration. It was stated that the VPAA asked the committee to look at the Retrenchment Policy, and he was at the FSEC meetings when this was discussed. The administration has been in the loop. Keith stated that the President may not have been well apprised. She wants to be involved. Keith mentioned that at the Tuition and Budget Committee it just came up as part of the discussion; it was not targeted for discussion. A senator asked Keith if the President was reluctant to consider it or if she was intrigued by it. Keith stated that what the President does know is that it does not fit into her notion of retrenchment. She is open to talk about the issues related to this. Keith stated that maybe he or he and Catlett could meet with the President to discuss these issues. We do know that she is not in favor of furloughs being part of the Retrenchment Policy. Keith stated that her interests are in maintaining flexibility and this is what the committee was trying to do. A senator stated that he believes that the bill could go back to committee and come back to the Senate floor in several parts. After further discussion, Harrell moved that the bill go back to the committee for further discussion and consideration. W. Smith seconded the motion. Landis called for a point of order. Keith stated that in the past first vice presidents of the faculty have moved motions on the Senate floor, and it was allowed. After minimal discussion, Swanson called the question. The motion passed.

  7. New Business: None

  8. For the Good of the Senate


  9. Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 4:53 pm.

Submitted by:

Marvin Harrell
First Vice President of the Faculty

Last updated on 28 January 2003.
Provide comments about the format to Dwight Moore at mooredwi@emporia.edu.
Return to the Minutes of the Faculty Senate.