Oakland University Senate
Thursday, February 11, 1982
Sixth Meeting
128, 129, 130 Oakland Center
MINUTES
Senators Present: Akers, Appleton, Arnold, Boulos, Briggs-Bunting, Brown, Chipman, Christina, Clark, Copenhaver, Coppola, Cowlishaw, Downing, Eberwein, Eliezer, Feeman, Gardiner, Gerulaitis, Gregory, Grossman, Hetenyi, Hildebrand, Horwitz, Ketchum, Kleckner, Lindell, Mallett, Miller, Moeller, Otto, Pino, Russell, Scherer, Schwartz, Sevilla, Stamps, Stanovich, Stokes, Tripp, Wilson, Witt.
Senators Absent: Burdick, Champagne, Dawson, Eklund, Frampton, Ghausi, Heubel, Hightower, Howes, Kurzman, Lambric, Pak, Pine, Rhadigan, Sakai, Shallow, Somerville, Strauss, Swartz.
In the absence of President Champagne, Mr. Kleckner called the meeting to order at 3:13 p.m. He introduced Ms. Clark as a newly-elected Senator, replacing Ms. Bieryla. Upon motion of Mr. Hetenyi, seconded by Mr. Arnold, the Senate approved the minutes of its January 14, 1982, meeting without discussion.
There was no old business before the body and only one item of new business: a motion from the Steering Committee to amend the Constitution of the University Senate (Moved, Mr. Christina; Seconded, Mr. Sevilla).
MOVED that Article IV, section vii. of the Constitution of the Oakland University Senate be amended to read (new language underlined): The presiding officer of the Senate shall be the Provost or, in his absence, a designated representative of the Provost. The Provost shall appoint a secretary of the Senate and a parliamentarian. A copy of the minutes of all Senate meetings shall be made available by the secretary of the Senate to the Board of Trustees at the office of the secretary to the Board.
Mr. Christina commented that this motion came out of intense deliberation on the part of the Steering Committee which had tried hard to accommodate President Champagne's wishes, as declared at the January meeting, without resorting to this amendment process. He noted that the changes proposed in Article IV were small stylistically but perhaps more important in substance. Mr. Grossman inquired whether there were any plans to distribute the entire text of the Constitution so that Senators could place this section in context. Mr. Kleckner thought the document could be circulated if wanted although this section is the only one which refers to the role of the President. Copies of the Constitution were available for inspection.
When the motion elicited little discussion and no controversy, Mr. Horwitz, seconded by Mr. Gregory, offered a procedural motion to waive the second reading in order to clear the agenda for the next meeting. The necessary three-quarters vote of members present was achieved by voice vote, with no objection noted. Mr. Hetenyi then called the question on the main motion, which was approved with unanimous consent. The Senate Elections Committee will arrange the necessary open hearing on this amendment and conduct a mail referendum.
No private resolutions having been introduced for the good of the order, Mr. Kleckner invited Mr. Feeman to give a progress report for the Committee on Academic Mission and Priorities. Mr. Feeman indicated that his committee has adhered to the procedures and schedule proposed in its December progress report. His committee has received approximately sixty reports through the deans and several special reports from the APPC on General Education and Research Institutes Other reports are now being prepared by the Equal Opportunity group and University Service Committee. The CAMP is now concluding an intensive three-week interview schedule with approximately eighty deans, chairs, and group leaders. Next week it begins a process of discussion and evaluation. During the March break he intends to draft the committee's report and discuss recommendations with deans and directors. The final report should reach the President on March 15.
Mr. Feeman observed that CAMP has examined all deans thoroughly and found them fully informed about the programs they guide. He also noted that his committee has learned considerably from interviews with administrators, alumni. Board members, legislators, and community people. An alumni survey brought a representative response from all schools and all periods of University history. His colleagues are trying hard to absorb this wealth of information, and they expect the outcome of their study to be beneficial to everyone.
He reported that the CAMP is now working on a mission statement characterized by a high degree of specificity. Four criteria have been agreed upon: 1) quality; 2) essentiality; 3) environmental match; and 4) affordability. The final report will also include a set of general recommendations relating to the University with suggestions on program linkups, increases and decreases in resource allocations, and possible "storage" of programs in preference to elimination.
Mr. Feeman concluded his report by emphasizing the tremendous demands his committee has placed on its own members and on various other people, especially the deans. He praised all concerned for their complete cooperation in this process and their timely response to all requests for information. Impressed by the substance and tone of his report, the Senate raised no questions beyond Mr. Kleckner's wondering how such numbers of people could make so prodigious an effort if truly involved in teaching, research, and service. He found this process an incredible service to the University. Mr. Hetenyi observed that the persons most involved are digging into their physical, mental, and emotional capital.
Mr. Kleckner concluded the meeting with remarks of general interest. He promised to speak on matters academic at the following week's Convocation and confined himself for the Senate meeting to an attempt at interpreting Budget signals from Lansing. He thought it probable that Governor Milliken s plan to omit payment of the last quarter's budget to institutions of^higher education-in effect borrowing money from the universities and offering to pay us back later-would run into trouble in the legislature despite some support for this scheme from the Big Three universities. The smaller universities (whose enabling legislation forbids borrowing on the market) oppose the Plan, as do many legislators. An executive order for a budget cut looms as a possible alternate, but conjectures vary drastically as to how much would be taken away from how many state agencies. Much depends on the accuracy of the Governor s cheerful economic projections. The Provost urged Senators to stay tuned for further developments in this saga.
When no questions arose, Mr. Kleckner welcomed Mr. Hetenyi's customary motion to adjourn, and the meeting concluded at 3:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate