Vickie Ropp, Patricia Haggerty, Keith Paton, Angi Caster, Ruth Windhover, Barbara Hunter, Eric Baer, Phil Sell, Michael Allen, and Lea Ann Pratt

None

The meeting was called to order, by the chair, Phil Sell, at 3:15 p.m.

2. Action Items:

A revised copy of the Faculty Senate Constitution as of the March meeting and a copy of comments from the Business Division were distributed to the Senate members. Michael Allen had copies of the Business Division comments distributed to share the opinions from the faculty that he represents.

Phil Sell noted that he had a proxy from Moira Fulton and that he would be voting that proxy in the meeting.

Phil stated that we would continue to discuss the proposed constitution, one article at a time. Then after this is finished, there would be a vote on the constitution as a whole.

At the March meeting, Article I and II were discussed and agreed upon. We will begin at Article III.

Keith Paton expressed concerns from his division. He noted that they wanted to see the changes that were made from the existing constitution and the proposed. He also stated that they were not pleased with Phil’s response. He voiced their concerns and that they wanted to see the differences between the new and old constitution.

Phil stated that something will be written to note the changes if the proposed constitution goes to a full faculty vote.

There was discussion as to changing the wording in Article IIIB to include nontenured faculty. Eric Baer made a motion to change Article IIIB to say "at least one of which is tenured." Ruth Windhover seconded the motion.

Discussion: Phil commented that we have heard comments for why they shouldn’t be, so he asked for reasons why nontenured faculty should be on the Senate.

Angi directed the attention to the Business Division comments as being reasons for why we should have them. Phil noted that these were opinions, not reasons for having probationers. Eric noted that it would be more inconclusionary, rather than exclusionary. It would be more representative of the entire faculty.

Ruth stated that shared governance is on all of our contracts. By implication this is one of the tenure criteria. This is a primary way that shared governance is exercised. It excludes the probation from the full range of exercising shared governance. Phil noted that they could join other committees.

Angi commented that new faculty members often bring a wind of change when they are hired. This almost smacks of "Let’s make you fit the college and our ideas, until you have the same opinions. Then they can be included." She noted that she was on the senate all three years of her tenure process. Angi commented that the newness of the voice and the enthusiasm that they came in with may not be there at the end of the tenure process.

Michael Allen commented that he hasn’t spoken to any faculty member in his division who would be in favor of limiting membership to tenured only. He noted that his biggest concern is that we create this elitist group of people and that it gives an unequal feeling to those who do not have tenure. Michael questioned whether current committee membership wasn’t already top heavy with probationers. He specifically referenced the current selection committees being more probationers than tenured faculty members, excluding division chairs and administrators. Barbara stated that all nontenured faculty in the Math department are on a hiring committee. Phil noted that this isn’t so in his division.

Discussion followed on the wording that should be included in Article IIIA and IIIB.

Keith questioned the benefit of excluding probationary faculty. Phil commented that this would force divisions to send tenured faculty instead of sending who will come.

Phil read the motion to change Article IIIB to read "Each instructional division shall elect two faculty members of the division, at least one of which shall be tenured. The amendment to the motion is to include a change to Article IIIA to read tenured and/or probationary faculty members. The motion and amendment were made by Eric Baer and seconded by Ruth Windhover.

Discussion followed as to the wording of the membership. Eric withdrew the amendment and Ruth agreed to the withdrawing. Ruth stated that we could do an eligibility statement such as the following groups are eligible for Senate membership tenured faculty members, probationary faculty members, and certain administrators.

Ruth made an amendment to the motion so that the first sentence of Article IIIA read "Those eligible for Senate membership are tenured faculty members, probationary faculty members, and certain administrators." Angi seconded the motion. Phil asked the question of approval of the amendment to replace the first sentence in Article IIIA. Motion passed. (1 vote opposed)

The original motion to include "at least one of which shall be tenured" was voted on. Motion passed. (1 vote opposed)

As to Article IIIC, Phil stated that there had been a request by administration to change this, to be consistent with contract language to include "or his designee" after Vice President for Academic Affairs. Eric so moved and Angi seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Article IIID discussion included comments as to the reasoning for limiting it to tenured faculty only. Phil noted that the one of the main criticism that the Senate has is that it lacks continuity. By limiting it to tenured faculty, it would likely reduce the amount of turnover in officers. The faculty approved this clause on the previous try at revising the constitution. Vickie Ropp made a motion to approve as stated. Keith seconded. Motion passed (3 opposed)

Angi asked for Phil to clarify the change in terms and officers. Phil described the changes as all officers are elected for two year terms, the chair elect does not automatically become chair. The intent was to get continuity amongst officers and senates. That is essentially the only change from the previous constitutions. One difference that is spread over the previous article and this one is that divisions elect two representatives no matter what their size is. The actual result of this is that all divisions have the same representation. This will be simpler and less time intensive in trying to keep track of division sizes to insure correct representation. Eric moved to accept Article IV as written. Angi seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Phil read the article and noted the chair will serve as the representative to FACTC which we are doing this year. It was also noted that FACTC should be written out and then the acronym should follow. Michael moved to approve as amended. Eric seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Phil stated that nothing changed in this article from the current constitution. Ruth noted an editorial comment to add a comma after agenda in VIC. Eric made a motion to approve as amended. Ruth seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Phil noted that added to Executive Committee is the faculty forum statement. A change was also made to the PR&R committee. It states that faculty senate will be the pool from which that committee is created, excluding chair, chair elect, and secretary. The other items in this article were unchanged. There was discussion as to whether the duties of the PR&R committee overlap with HCEA. Phil noted that the intent was to exclude faculty and administration disputes. An editorial change to this article is to spell out PR&R and put in the acronym after title; to take out the commas in VII A; to insert a comma after secretary in VII D. Angi made a motion to accept Article VII. Michael seconded. Motion passed.

Phil stated that there is nothing different or new from the existing constitution in Article VIII. Ruth noted that a comma should be added after stipends in VIII C. Vickie made a motion to approve. Ruth seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Angi Caster made a motion to approve the entire constitution as revised moved. Michael Allen seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.

The Faculty Senate meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

Lea Ann Pratt, Faculty Senate Secretary

4/10/99