OAKLAND UNIVERSITY SENATE
Thursday, 17 September 1992
First Meeting
MINUTES
Members present: Abiko, Andersen, Appleton, Bennett, Braunstein, Chipman, Cowlishaw, Creamer, Dahlgren, Downing, Dunphy, Eberwein, Eckart, Edgerton, Fish, Frankie, Goslin, Grossman, Hansen-Smith, Hough, Horwitz, Hovanesian, Jackson, Kevern, Kheir, Kim, McKay, Mittelstaedt, Moore, Olson, Otto, Packard, Pine, Rush, Stamps, Stano, Urice, Wilczynski, Witt, Wood, Zenas
Members absent: Benson, Burdick, Eisenhower, Gamboa, Gerulaitis, Halsted, Hamilton, Hartzer, Haworth Hoeppner, Hormozi, Mabee, Peterson, Pierson, Porter, Reddy, Schultz, Shepherd, Stevens, Swartz, Yates.
Summary of Actions
1. Minutes of 9 April 1992 (Braunstein; Downing). Approved.
2. Procedural motion to modify order of business (Dahlgren; Hough). Approved.
3. Election to fill a Steering Committee vacancy (Senate Elections Committee). Jerrold Grossman elected.
4 Procedural motion to take from the table item B.I. from the agenda of 9 April 1992 (Hough; Chipman). Approved.
5. Friendly amendment to add a new item to the charge of the Senate Planning Review Committee (Edgerton; Hovanesian). Accepted by sponsors.
6. Amendment to replace item B.1. with a substitute motion that would replace the APPC with two new committees (Hough; Stamps). Approved.
7. Procedural motion to fill vacancies on Senate standing committees (Rush; Kevern). Approved.
8. Special resolution of thanks to Keith Kleckner (Eberwein; multiple seconders). Heartily approved.
President Packard convened the meeting at 3:14 p.m., thereby fulfilling her constitutional responsibility to call the first Senate meeting of the fall semester. She welcomed her fellow-senators, reaffirming her declaration at the 11 September opening assembly that she regards the university as a family and wishes to work in a familial spirit. While she is learning about Oakland's governance structure, she asks the community's cooperation and tolerance; it will take a while to discover which particular functions the Senate and its array of committees carry out and which belong in the purview of other governance groups. Reminding senators that the university is this group's business, she declared that we must work together for the common good if everyone is to feel happy. After these words of welcome, she turned over the floor to Ronald Horwitz, who--as Acting Vice President for Academic Affairs--now chairs the Senate.
Mr. Horwitz began by welcoming new senators, noting that his own name was the only one the secretary had omitted from her chalkboard salute to those replacing familiar participants in these meetings. He then directed attention to the minutes of 9 April 1992, which were approved without discussion (Moved, Mr. Braunstein; seconded, Mr. Downing). In order to afford the Elections Committee time to tally votes and report results of the Steering Committee election before adjournment, Mr. Horwitz then requested a motion to suspend the rules in order to move the first item of new business ahead of old business. Mr. Dahlgren moved that the rules be waived, Mr. Hough seconded his motion, and the Senate concurred. Mr. Brown then took the floor as chair of the Elections Committee to invite nominations for the seat vacated by Ms. Briggs-Bunting, who is on sabbatical for the full academic year. In nominating Mr. Grossman for this post of honor, Mr. McKay spoke eloquently of his colleague's stalwart service to the Senate and its committees. When no further nominations came forward, the group voted to close nominations, and Mr. Grossman was declared elected. With applause both for the Elections Committee, which concluded its work so expeditiously, and for the new Steering Committee member, the Senate then turned to a complicated item of old business.
Mr. Hough, seconded by Mr. Chipman, launched this activity by moving to take from the table motion B.1. from the April 1991 agenda. By approving that motion, the Senate returned to the floor a proposal to establish a University Finance and Budget Committee that the Senate tabled at its last meeting when questions arose both about territorial overlaps between the proposed committee and the Academic Policy and Planning Committee and about President Packard's willingness to incorporate such a committee into her budget process. On the basis of spring/summer cooperative efforts by Steering Committee and APPC representatives and subsequent consultation with the president, the Steering Committee then proposed a substitute motion that would replace the APPC with two new committees, a Senate Budget Review Committee and a Senate Planning Review Committee (Moved, Mr. Hough; seconded, Mr. Stamps). Parliamentarian Appleton ruled that the substitute motion should be treated as an amendment and voted upon before the main motion. Before discussion began on the substitute motion, however, Mr. Edgerton (seconded by Mr. Hovanesian) offered a friendly amendment, promptly accepted by sponsors of the substitute motion, to insert a new third item in the charge to the Senate Planning Review Committee and renumber subsequent items from 4 to 10. Mr. Edgerton pointed out that the additional charge established parallelism in the ways the committee would interact with the President and the Vice President for Academic Affairs while introducing symmetry with the charge to the Budget Review Committee, with which it would be making joint recommendations. The substitute motion, thus modified, read as follows:
MOVED that the Senate dissolve its Academic Policy and Planning Committee, replacing it with a Senate Budget Review Committee and a Senate Planning Review Committee with charges and membership as specified below:
Senate Budget Review Committee
Charge:
1. To work with the president, vice presidents, and Senate Planning Review Committee in the implementation of university plans, goals, objectives, role, and mission;
2. To receive from the president reports on available resources and their allocation to the university divisions and, jointly with the Senate Planning Review Committee, to advise the president regarding priorities for such allocations;
3. To receive from the Vice President for Academic Affairs reports on available resources and their allocation to the university's academic programs and, jointly with the Senate Planning Review Committee, to advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs regarding priorities for such allocations;
4. To report to the Senate on the current university budget and its role in advancing university goals and objectives;
5. To advise the Senate concerning the budgetary implications of relevant changes affecting the organization of the university;
6. To report to the Senate and its committees (as needed, UCUI, the Graduate Council, the General Education Committee) on the university-wide budgetary implications of proposed new academic programs or the discontinuance or major reorganization of existing academic programs as may be proposed; and
7. To meet jointly, as needed, but at least once each semester with the Senate Planning Review Committee
Membership: four faculty (one of whom shall be chair), serving three-year terms; the Director of Budget, the Vice President for Development, Alumni and Community Engagement, and the Director of Research and Academic Development.
Senate Planning Review Committee
Charge:
1. To work with the president, Vice President for Academic Affairs, other vice presidents, the Senate Budget Review Committee, and other duly constituted committees in the review of university plans, goals, objectives, role and mission;
2. To advise the president, jointly with the Senate Budget Review Committee, regarding priorities for university resource allocations;
3. To advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs, jointly with the Senate Budget Review Committee, regarding priorities for academic resource allocations;
4. To make recommendations to the Senate on any changes affecting the academic organization of the university;
5. To advise the Senate on the university-wide implications of relevant changes affecting the organization of the university;
6. To report to the Senate regarding the outcome of organizational changes;
7. To report to the Senate and its committees (as needed, UCUI, the Graduate Council, the General Education Committee) on the university-wide implications of proposed new academic programs or the discontinuance or major reorganization of existing academic programs as may be proposed;
8. To receive reports and recommendations from duly constituted committees and to advise and/or make recommendations to the Senate, as needed;
9. To take on additional duties as directed by the Senate Steering Committee; and
10. To meet jointly, as needed, but at least once each semester with the Senate Budget Review Committee.
Membership: Five faculty (one of whom shall be chair), serving three-year terms; a University Student Congress representative serving for one year; the chairperson of the Graduate Council, the chairperson of UCUI, and an administrative professional appointed by the AP Assembly.
A comment from Mr. Braunstein called attention to different levels of responsibility for the two committees, with the Budget Review Committee charged to work on implementation of university plans and goals and the Planning Review Committee charged to review them. Mr. Chipman urged Senate support for the new committee structure, judging that the model presented in the substitute motion, now amended, provided well for the university's needs. He considered this a unique opportunity for the Senate to step forward to make governance more effective. Mr. Horwitz shrewdly noted that this support came from the "soon-to-be deposed chair of the APPC," prompting Mr. Chipman to exclaim "That's in it, too. You've found me out." Mr. McKay praised both the APPC and the Steering Committee for their diligent work in developing this interactive committee structure designed to help hold the university together based on shared knowledge and mutual involvement. He, too, urged support. Mr. Stamps said he particularly valued Mr. Chipman's opinion in light of his long record of service on university-wide self-study commissions. Having been assured by the parliamentarian that this discussion constituted a second reading of the motion, Mr. Horwitz then called for a vote on the amended substitute motion. This won unanimous approval, thereby obviating need for further action on the main motion. Mr. Horwitz declared the new structure established and thanked the Steering Committee for its valiant service over the summer. Mr. Hough extended similar thanks to the APPC.
On this happy note, the Senate turned its attention to the familiar business of filling committee vacancies. Ms. Rush (seconded by Mr. Kevern) proposed the slate of nominees listed on the agenda. She indicated that Robert Van Til's name should be added as representative to UCUI from the School of Engineering and Computer Science. Without discussion, her colleagues elected the following faculty members to committees and terms as specified: Admissions and Financial Aid Committee Jerry Rose to chair the committee (1992-93) Committee on Human Relations Iris Johnson (1992-95) General Education Committee Anahid Kulwicki, replacing Joyce Eckart (1992-93) Research Committee New Members serving two-year terms (1992-94) K. C. Cheok Kathleen Moore Janice Schimmelman Ronald Tracy New Member serving one-year term (1992-93) Darlene Schott-Baer (replacing Harriet Margolis) Continuing Members serving final year (1991-93) Dean Purcell (chair) John Reddan Gopalan Srinivasan Graduate Council Appointees to Research Committee David Boddy (1991-93) Ravindra Khattree (1992-94) Teaching and Learning Committee Sandra Pelfrey to chair the committee (fall 1992) University Committee on Undergraduate Instruction Kristine Thompson to represent the School of Health Sciences (1992-94) Robert Van Til to represent the School of Engineering and Computer Science (1992-94).
Ms. Eberwein then concluded the formally scheduled business of the day by presenting a special resolution of thanks to the Senate's long-term presiding officer:
Whereas Keith Kleckner is returning to the challenges and satisfactions of professorial life after more than a decade's capable, loyal service as this university's provost; and
Whereas he has served since 1982 as presiding officer of the University Senate, respectfully submitting agenda after agenda for this body's action; and
Whereas he has guided Senate deliberations with characteristic courtesy wisdom, patience, and good humor; and
Whereas he has also provided attentive leadership to the Senate's Steering Committee and assistance to its network of standing committees; and
Whereas he has devoted himself faithfully to advancing the university's teaching and research missions;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the University Senate respectfully submits to him this statement of its gratitude while wishing him happiness as he advances to new endeavors.
So many senators chorused seconding sentiments that Mr. Horwitz declared the resolution seconded "exponentially." An enthusiastic voice vote ratified the group's concurrence with those members who had urged the Steering Committee to prepare such a testimonial of gratitude. Mr. Horwitz praised his predecessor's real dedication to Oakland University and judged this institution very fortunate to have enjoyed his leadership. Having been back in the classroom for a year and a half himself, he assured Mr. Kleckner that nothing but happiness awaits him there.
Having recognized a man who did a prodigious amount for the community's good and welfare, senators refrained from offering any private resolutions to carry on that good work. That left the floor open for information items, with President Packard starting off by explaining changes now under consideration with respect to deputization of campus police. She reported that a problem developed shortly after her arrival in office, when the Oakland County Sheriff's Office notified the university that it would no longer cover liability for our police officers, whom that office deputizes and whom it had previously covered 24 hours a day. The county acted in response to skyrocketing insurance costs, leaving the university to pick up that expense. Although Oakland has managed to arrange new insurance coverage, it provides only partial protection; so a threat remains of a devastating lawsuit sometime in the future. Changes in Michigan law now allow universities to deputize their own campus police officers. If we follow the lead of several sister institutions, we can deputize our police with insurance coverage needed only for time actually spent on the job. Such a change would entail no changes in their working hours or training, and its effects should be imperceptible on campus. The only real novelty is that the law requires the university to elect a citizens' review board to represent our community in reviewing police activities upon registration of a complaint. That board would investigate any charges of improper police behavior and make recommendations to the president but not itself decide cases. The university would provide carefully for the rights both of board members and of the person(s) under investigation. Over the course of this summer, Ms. Otto chaired a committee that included faculty, student, and police members to develop a proposal for such a review board. The president stressed that studies conducted during the summer all focused on deputization of campus police. There is no plan afoot to privatize police service; and, in fact, information gathered from other campuses during the study of deputization makes such action even less likely than before. She had expected the Board of Trustees to decide about deputization at its September meeting, but lack of a quorum necessitated deferring the matter until October. Ms. Packard offered to respond to any questions, mentioning that Ms. Otto and the university's legal counsel were there to provide information, but no inquiries arose.
When Mr. Horwitz asked the president to report on search processes to fill vice presidential vacancies, Ms. Packard announced that Mr. Pine has agreed to chair the committee searching for the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Letters of invitation have gone out to prospective members, carefully chosen to reflect this community. Mr. Pine said that many of those invited had already agreed to serve, and he expected that he would soon have a 14-member group in action. Mr. Stevens chairs the search committee for a new Vice President for Development, Alumni and Community Engagement. That position has been advertised and applications are now arriving. The president said she would welcome suggestions of appropriate persons to serve on the third vice presidential search committee, the one seeking a new leader for our Finance and Administration division. She expected that group to be smaller than the others and mentioned that Mr. Horwitz had denied her the service of any more engineers or nursing faculty. Those persons will be needed for decanal searches in the schools of Nursing and of Engineering and Computer Science. Rumors that the Nursing search would be delayed until a new Academic Affairs vice president takes office are false; all these searches will soon be underway. Mr. Horwitz reported that he has met with current deans of both schools and is gathering names of potential searchers. He hoped both dean searches could be concluded shortly after the new Vice President for Academic Affairs is appointed. Potential deans will want assurance that they can work comfortably with the officer to whom they will report. Mr. Stamps then asked President Packard why the provost's title had been changed. She responded that she is modifying many titles, not that one alone, in the hope of making nomenclature briefer but all-inclusive. She expects vice presidents to work together as a team, each at the head of her or his division. Dropping the familiar word "provost" does not signal a diminished role for the chief Academic Affairs officer; she values the university's academic mission dearly. The title does signify, however, her intent to be both an internal and an external president. Although she has no intention of doing the Vice President for Academic Affairs' job, she continues to regard herself as an academic leader and will not relegate academic concerns to another officer. Her experience as provost at the University of Tennessee, Chattanooga alerted her to the sad fact that a title with so much resonance within the university communicates nothing outside it except in military circles. She hoped that the Vice President for Academic Affairs would be widely recognized as the university's chief academic officer. Mr. Stamps thanked her for that explanation, then inquired whether he should conclude that "everybody's basically a vice president." Ms. Packard affirmed that generalization, but mentioned that the Board had signified its recognition of Mr. DeCarlo's service as Interim President by naming him senior vice president. Her own concept is slightly different than past practice at Oakland in that she hopes vice presidents will be working more on teams.
Mr. Horwitz then filled in the Senate on various matters of interest beginning with some information about a Bookstore Oversight Committee to be chaired by Jack Wilson. The Steering Committee is inviting two faculty members to serve on that body, which will represent the community's interests in the now-privatized store. He then mentioned that fall enrollment figures are not yet final, especially for graduate programs, but already demonstrate a significant turnaround in FTIAC enrollments, which are much larger this year. He promised to circulate detailed information with Senate minutes [October agenda]. He then concluded the meeting on an uplifting note by congratulating Senator Grossman on receipt of the university's Teaching Excellence Award to be presented at the fall commencement. The Research Excellence Award goes this year to Professor Richard Tucker. With business concluded, Mr. Fish called for adjournment at 4:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane D. Eberwein
Secretary to the University Senate