|
 |
Minutes for
A meeting of the University Senate was held at 4:15 p.m. on Wednesday, November 10, 2004, in Maxwell Auditorium.
Present were: Chancellor Cantor; Senators: Alcoff, Anderson, Behm, Bennett, Biklen(D.), Biklen (S.), Brown (H.), Burak, Cavanagh, Cleary, Cohan, Crowston, de Berly, Dekaney, Diaz, Donovan, Druger, Easton, Elin, Fiese, Flusche, Gensemer,Getachew, Gilman, Harding, Hartmann, Himes, Hogan, Horwitz, Jeneault,Jensen,Karpoff,Kasowitz-Scheer, Kelly (R.), Kenn, Kornfilt, LeGay, LaGraff, Legaspi, Letterman (M.), Letterman (R.), MacDonald, Mager, Maroney, Martin, Masrouri, McKay, Meyer, Mitchell, Mosher, Murphy, O'Rourke, Pellow, Potter, Poulin, Robertson, Russell, Saleh, Sanford, Sardino, Sauer, Schell, Scherzinger, Schiff, Sellars, Sherman, Smith (D.), Smith (E.), Sokoloff, Tankersley, Trento, Tussing, Urtz, Van Gulick, Vitharana, Wallwork, Ware (B.), Ware (E.), Webber, Wells, Wilbur, Wolf, Yao.
Presiding Officer: Chancellor Nancy Cantor
The Chancellor called the meeting to order, and proposed that the minutes of the October 13th meeting be approved as distributed. They were approved. She then called Prof. Doug Biklen to present the report of the Agenda Committee. Prof. Biklen told the body that he wished to follow up on the issue of institutional data, saying that the Vice Chancellor had created a committee to do an audit of what data were currently kept, and that Prof. John Mercer would be heading it. He said that the committee's findings would be forwarded to the Agenda Committee, for referral to the appropriate committee. He further reported that the Chancellor's office would be making money available to the Committee for Diversity to finance their study. Biklen then told the body that Item VII, report from the Committee on Administrative Operations had been withdrawn from consideration by the Chancellor, and would be revised and submitted at a future meeting. He concluded his report with the comment that the motion by the Committee on Academic Affairs would be voted on at the December meeting.
The Chancellor called Prof. Michael Olivette to present the report of the Committee on Curricula, which included a motion to approve the course changes in the Schools of Architecture, Management and Public Communications and the College of Visual and Performing Arts contained in the report. The motion carried.
The Chancellor then called on Ms. Linda Straub, who presented a report from the Committee on Services to the Faculty and Staff. Ms. Straub drew the body's attention to the redefinition of retiree benefits on page 1, and the report of the Health Care Advisory Committee on page 2.
The Chancellor called Prof. Michael Wasylenko, who reported for the ad hoc Committee on Athletics. Wasylenko said that the task force had the dual charge of examining the benefits of SU's Division I-A athletics program and understanding the budget of the athletic department, and then to communicate their findings to the University Senate.
Benefits
Prof. Wasylenko said that the task force had determined that SU's athletic program may benefit various constituencies of the University community and the extended community, and they had undertaken to interview and seek statements on benefits from Admissions, current students, alumni, the central New York region, Institutional Advancement, the Senate Committee on Athletic Policy, and the Athletic Policy Board. He said that in discussion with the Vice President for Enrollment Management, the committee learned that:
- athletics ranked last in a list of 36 factors students used to choose colleges, according to a study conducted for SU by Clark, Martire and Bartolomeo, Inc.;
- visibility gained through appearances in the Final Four in basketball and
bowl games in football had resulted in some gains in applications, but the
profile of the entering class did not change as a result, and the increase in
applications was not sustained for more than a year.
Wasylenko said that the Vice President concluded from this that athletics programs
had a neutral impact on attraction of undergraduates to SU. He said the Vice President cautioned that sudden changes in a university's profile, such as changing the athletic profile or sudden changes in major areas of a university, generally added to the uncertainty in establishment of a stable number of students in the entering class.
Budget
Prof. Wasylenko said that the athletics budget was more complex than they expected, with some revenue sources distributed from the conference and sharing arrangements dependent in some instances on how much revenue an individual college
or university contributed to the shared revenue pool. He said that some preliminary figures were available, e.g., football at SU in the 2004-5 budget year would earn revenues above its expenditures, and that this did not account for revenue from programs sold, food and beverages purchased, novelty sales, or parking revenues. He contrasted that to the high quality Division 1-AA football programs such as Colgate, Bucknell and the ivy league schools which would typically have financial losses from football in the $3.0 to $4.0 million
After Prof. Wasylenko's report, a senator rose to comment that he felt the work of the ad hoc committee was useful, because the events of a year and a half ago, i.e., the invitation for SU to join the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), and its subsequent withdrawal, was one of the most damaging things ever to happen to SU, that the missed opportunity had grave financial implications, and that he raised the issue now because he felt it was the obligation of the Senate to understand what had happened. In conclusion, he exhorted the Athletic Director and the SU administration to explore it aggressively if any such opportunity ever arose in future.
The Chancellor called Prof. Jerry Mager, who presented the report of the Budget committee, highlighting mention of the fall budget revision, explanation of the shortfall (p. 4), a list of topics the committee will be looking into (p. 2) to address the shortfall. He said that the committee was currently learning about a proposed new budgeting model, Responsibility Center Management (RCM), that would tentatively go into effect with the fiscal-07 budget.
In the discussion, questions raised and comments made included:
- Where would the $1.1 million have gone? [Mager said that it probably would
have gone to compensation.]
- Is there any plan to discuss RCM in the Senate? [Mager responded that the
Vice Chancellor had set up two working groups to study how RCM might look
at SU; this group would make a report to the Budget Committee; Prof. Biklen
said that the Agenda Committee had discussed it briefly.];
- the Dean of the Graduate School cautioned senators to be aware that the decline in graduate student enrollment mentioned in the report did not occur in all schools, that the matter was complicated, and that the shortfall was not solely due to international student enrollments.
The Chancellor called Prof. Louise Phelps who presented the report of the Academic Affairs committee. She said that the motion to endorse the merger of departments in the College of Engineering and Computer Sciences (ECS) to create a new Department of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering was not controversial, and that a liaison arrangement with ECS had been established to deal with ongoing developments. The Chancellor reminded the body that the vote on the motion would be taken in December.
The Chancellor then reported to the Senate the status of ROTC and SU's efforts in regard to the Solomon Amendment, which denies colleges and universities federal funding if the universities inhibit military recruiter or ROTC programs access to their campuses. She said that the legal situation remained unchanged, that the official policy of the current administration was "Don't ask, don't tell", and that Congress had recently passed a bill that broadened the Solomon Amendment by requiring colleges to grant military recruiters access that was "equal in quality and scope" to that given to other potential employers. Cantor said the bill was sent to President Bush on October 9, 2004 for his signature. She said that the Senate Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered (LGBT) Concerns had been very active in studying the issue, that a subcommittee was looking at the broader issues, and that she had asked her cabinet to provide resource persons for the LGBT committee, listing as examples: Associate Vice President for Human Resources Neil Strodel, Dean of Hendricks Chapel Tom Wolfe, Bond, Schoeneck & King attorney P. Zecchio, LGBT Resource Center Director Adrea Jaenig, Vice President for Undergraduate Studies Ronald Cavanagh, and University Registrar Maureen Breed.
In the discussion, a senator asked where SU stood as an institution in relation to the issue. The Chancellor said that SU was identified as an institution connected with the Solomon Amendment. A non-senator asked to speak, and the Chancellor recognized him. He told the body that the Solomon amendment only addressed part of the issue, but that SU went above and beyond in allowing recruiters from the Department of Defense access to campus, and that this issue needed to be addressed. He said that SU's actions supported in an inappropriate way the activities of the Department of Defense. He suggested that the LGBT committee or the Senate address the issue, and that SU take a stand. The Chancellor thanked him, and suggested that he bring his concerns to the LGBT committee.
Under new business, a senator rose to express his delight with the intellectual quality of the events of the Chancellor's inauguration day, and the body applauded.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Teresa Gilman
University Senate Recorder
|
