Minutes

Members present: Andrews, Benson, Braunstein, Brieger, Buffard-O’Shea, Carter, Chapman, Coppin, Didier, Early, Eberly, Eberwein, Esposito, Fink, Gardner, Grossman, Hildebrand, Kleckner, Liboff, Long, Mayer, McNair, D. Moore, K. Moore, Moran, Mosby, Nakao, Pfeiffer, Riley Rozek, Rusek, Russell, Schochetman, Schwartz, Sen, Sharma, Sieloff, Speer, Stamps, Sudol, Wood; guests: Johnson, Schaefer

Members absent: Alber, Blanks, Boddy, Dow, Downing, Estes, Haskell, Marks, Mitchell, Olson, Otto, Polis

Summary of actions:

1. Approval of the April 15, 1999 Minutes (Andrews, Sieloff) Approved.
2. Information items
3. Election of Senate Steering Committee
4. Appointments to Senate Standing Committees (Grossman, Moran) Approved.

The first meeting of the 1999-2001 Senate was called to order by Mr. Esposito who welcomed the Senators and asked their forbearance as he dealt with the unfamiliar task of chairing the University Senate.  As the first item of business he called for the approval of the April 15, 1999 minutes.   Mr. Andrews so moved, Ms. Sieloff seconded and the minutes were approved as distributed.  Mr. Esposito then announced the appointments of Mr. Andrews as parliamentarian and Ms. Hildebrand as secretary.

Having been advised that Steering Committee elections may be time consuming, Mr. Esposito announced that we would proceed to the election in order to use our time wisely and would postpone consideration of the information items until after the election.   He turned the meeting over to Mr. Mayer, chair of the Senate Elections Committee, who opened the floor for nominations.  Six nominees were proposed, all were eligible to serve and, as silence fell and no further nominations were forthcoming, Mr. Andrews moved to close the nominations.  Mr. Rozek provided the second, the Senate approved, and the election was declared completed.  The 1999-2001 Steering Committee will be composed of the nominees: Mr. Andrews, Mr. Braunstein, Ms. Moore, Mr. Riley, Mr. Schwartz and Ms. Sieloff.

The following information items were presented:

1. Golf Course update--Mr. Esposito reported that the issues regarding the research areas and the golf cart pathways have been resolved to the satisfaction of all the parties involved. Speaking to the financial benefits of the course, Ms. Schaefer reminded the group that the goal of creating a second golf course was to convert at least 100 life members of the President’s Club who had stopped giving to ongoing contributors.  She reported that this tactic has been successful and that, in fact, 236 members have made a commitment for future donations.  Mr. Liboff raised concerns about how the monies generated by the golf course would eventually flow into the university coffers and, in particular, wanted assurances that some of the money would be targeted for academic units.  Ms. Schaefer responded that many members of the President’s Club designate their contributions  for academic programs and that only 5% of the money goes into the undesignated category.  She added that the unrestricted donations go into the Foundation’s accounts and are used primarily to support scholarships and to provide matching grant monies.

2. Amended Senate Constitution--The amended Senate Constitution was discussed at the June 30, 1999 Board meeting with both the President and Provost recommending its approval.  The Board tabled the motion.  Since then, the Provost has been involved in ongoing discussions with the Board and is attempting to influence them to approve it.  The proposal will be on the October Board meeting agenda and the Provost expressed his hope that they will approve it at that meeting.

3. MBA Lebanon Program--Mr. Gardner reported that they are engaged in legal discussions concerning the program, that it is a new model for Lebanon and that a number of issues still need to be worked out.  However, he hopes that they will be able to begin the program in January 2000.  He described it as an 18 month program, combining distance learning and seminars, with the last portion of the class being held in the states.

5. OU Hiring Procedures--Mr. Esposito reported that, although a committee was supposed to be formed to deal with the issues raised last year, none has been formed.   Mr. Andrews advised that since the Steering Committee was charged with the responsibility to identify appropriate parties to discuss the issues and come to a resolution, the result of which is to be brought to the Senate, that this should be referred to the incoming Steering Committee.

6. Master Plan--Ms. Schaefer stated that the Board of Trustees approved updating the Master Plan and that a Task Force of approximately 20 members representing all constituencies on campus is being formed to deal with this project. The process is expected to take one and a half to two years and will involve consideration of the Strategic Plan as well the physical structure of the campus. The Task Force will be co-chaired by Mr. Esposito and Ms. Schaefer and she assured the Senate that they would be kept informed of the Task Force’s work.

Mr. Esposito added that he is planning on forming an Enrollment Planning Committee that will play a role in providing information for the Master Planning process. The Committee will consider the size of the institution, the balance between graduate and undergraduate student populations, the size of component programs, the College and the Schools, and will propose a 10 year enrollment plan. The enrollment plan will have embedded in it an academic plan which will have an impact on the physical facilities. He stated that the plan, which he hopes will be ready in draft form by January, would be reviewed by appropriate Senate Committees and by the Senate itself. In response to Ms. Eberwein’s query about Senate Committee involvement in the master plan and enrollment plan process, Mr. Esposito noted that the several Senate committees have representatives on the Master Planning Task Force and the same would be true of the Council.

7. Multi-Purpose Complex-- The guidelines that were approved by the Senate last year after a broad campus wide discussion were used by the consultants in the discussion with the Palace about a performing arts center, reported Ms. Schaefer. The financial return and the ties with the academic mission of the university were important issues.   As it turned out, there just wasn’t a good fit with what the palace was proposing.  Given that performing arts centers don’t make money and given the financial constraints, it just didn’t make sense.  The university is continuing to look at the prospect of a Conference Center/Hotel complex,  particularly since there is a market for high end conference centers.  As for the ice arena, the market study hasn’t been done yet, but Ms. Schaefer opined that it will be challenging to find a way to make it work.  Mr. Andrews asked where the Conference Center/Hotel might be located and Ms. Schaefer responded that the locations mentioned included the corner of Adams and Walton, the corner of Squirrel and Butler or somewhere along Squirrel Road, with the Adams/Walton site being preferred.  Mr. Esposito suggested that the proximity to the golf course might be an advantage. Ms. Didier asked if the university would have access to the conference center facilities for continuing education and professional programs and Ms. Schaefer replied, definitely yes, that the plans included academic conferences, executive education, continuing education programs, with discount rates for academic use.

8. Enrollment Update-- Mr. Johnson informed the group that enrollments are looking good this year, as one might be able to tell from the full conditions of many of the parking lots. Although transfer students and graduate enrollment is flat or slightly up, the incoming freshmen FTIACs are up 15%. We have 1800 freshmen this fall and OU has the distinction of having the 3d highest number of valedictorians among the state universities. The scholarship students, those with a 3.9 average, number 120 this year compared to 61 last year. He also noted a 46% increase in freshmen with 3.8 GPA’s or better and reported that the Honors College has the largest enrollment ever. The emphasis on improving the quality of students that come to OU is working, he stated.

9. Capital Campaign--Mr. Esposito announced that OU is readying itself for a capital campaign, adding that the Creating the Future Task Forces were a preliminary step in the process. The private part of the campaign, that period when donors are identified and approached, will begin in the spring of 2000. The public part of the campaign, which won’t be announced until 50% of the goal is raised, is expected to be announced in about two years. The actual timing will depend on the response of donors, the amount to be raised and how long it takes to get to the 50% mark. Mr. Esposito reported that the President is reconvening the Task Forces and asking them to respond to the draft document Oakland University Campaign for Distinction in the 21st Century. So far, three of the Task Forces have met and labeled the document awful, a generic piece of pap, not something that distinguishes OU from any other university. So, Mr. Esposito stated, the theme is up for revision. He noted that large donors usually don’t give based on a theme but rather to support an area of interest to them. He also predicted that the type of campaign theme that the faculty would like won’t be the sort of thing outside donors like.

10. Pouring Rights Agreement--Noting that there has been a fair amount of publicity regarding this, the Provost updated the Senate on the Pouring Rights Agreement the University has signed with Pepsi for the exclusive sale of Pepsi products on campus. This agreement will bring additional revenue to the university.  In reply to Mr. Grossman’s query about the amount of  consultation, Mr. Esposito pointed out that the Senate has the right to be consulted in matters of academic importance and to initiate proposals on general welfare. He felt that the pouring rights agreement was not a matter of academic importance but added that thought it would have been useful to have had more discussions with the students.

11. Other--Mr. Russell asked about the status of the Senate proposal to add a faculty liaison with the Board of Trustees. Mr. Esposito responded that the President has the recommendation and that it has not been forwarded to the Board. He added that he hopes there will be resolution of this issue in the near future as well as that of the amended Senate Constitution.

New Business

With no old business on the agenda, Mr. Esposito called the Senate’s attention to the one item of new business and recognized Mr. Grossman. Mr. Grossman moved that the names presented in the agenda be appointed to Senate committees for the terms specified and added the name of Kathy Galloway as the Health Sciences representative on UCUI for a three year term. Mr. Moran seconded the motion which the Senate quickly approved.

Good and Welfare

Opening up the floor for good and welfare items, Mr. Esposito recognized Ms. Eberwein who wondered why students and faculty are being so poorly served by the university bookstore this semester. As a matter of academic concern, she asked what steps are being taken to ensure that this doesn’t happen again.  Mr. Esposito responded that according to the contract, the bookstore is supposed to be up and running and it isn’t.  He assumes that this is an one-time aberration that will not recur.

There being no further items for discussion, Mr. Andrews moved that the meeting be adjourned, a chorus of seconds were heard and the meeting was adjourned around 4 p.m.

Submitted by
Linda L. Hildebrand
Secretary to the University Senate

10/13/99