FS MINUTES January 28, 2004

President Jacobson called the meeting to order in the Farish Hall Kiva at 12:15 p.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT: [42]
ARCH:     D. Kacmar
BUS:        W. Chin, S. Khumawala, M. Parks, D. Rude
CLASS:    V. Brady, K. Brown, B. Byrnes, S. Craig, P. Gingiss, W. Herendeen, A. Jacobson, J. Kotarba,
                 B. Lange, D. Papell, J. Rushing, G. San Miguel, F. Schiff, G. Trail, R. Weldon
EDU:        M. Connell, S. McNeil, A. Warner, C. White
ENGR:     O. Ghazzaly, T. Helwig, S. Kleis, G. Paskusz
LIB:        S. Ferimer, M. Thomson
NSM:     G. Auchmuty, D. Blecher, P. Copeland, J. Eichberg, G. Etgen, A. Ignatiev, E. Leiss, D. Wells
OPT:        R. Manny
TECH:   C. Goodson, K. Greenwood
GSSW:    H. Karger

MEMBERS ABSENT: [10]
CLASS: J. Middents, R. Murray
ENGR:    T. Cleveland, D. Zimmerman (w/e)
HRM:     K. Titz
LAW:     S. Huber, P. Linzer
NSM:     K. Kadish
OPT:      R. Manny, S. Quintero
PHA:   C. Pedemonte

VISITORS:
Jerry Strickland (Interim UHS Senior Vice Chancellor and UH Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs/ Provost), John Rudley (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Administration & Finance), Charles Shomper (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Information Technology), Dona Hamilton (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Legal Affairs and General Counsel), Elwyn Lee (UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Student Affairs), Elaine Charlson (UHS Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and UH Associate Vice President for Academic and Faculty Affairs), Marco Mariotto (Dean of Graduate & Professional Studies), David Irvin (UHS Associate Vice Chancellor and UH Associate Vice President for Plant Operations), David Bell (UHS Assistant Vice Chancellor and UH Assistant Vice President for Academic and Faculty Affairs), Ed Hugetz (UHS Assistant Vice Chancellor and UH Assistant Vice President for Planning & University Outreach), Ed Apodaca (Associate Vice President Enrollment Management and Admissions), James Anderson (Executive Associate to UHS Chancellor and UH President), William Fitzgibbon (Interim Dean, Technology), Judy Myers (former Senator and Professor/Librarian), Theresa Monaco (Professor of CUIN), John Powell (Executive Speechwriter), Juanita Jackson (Assistant to VP for Student Affairs)

Pres. Jacobson announced that Elaine Charlson and Brian McKinney are planning a major renovation of the Kiva; she noted that Senate has been very fortunate to have the use of the Kiva over the years. [Editor’s note: Kiva renovation is scheduled to begin in the summer of 2004.]

Pres. Jacobson urged everyone to attend the open meeting with the Provost candidate at 4:00 p.m. She said the more people communicate their ideas about the campus, the more informed the decision of the search committee will be.

Senators interested in viewing any of the sessions of the 11th Scholarship and Community Conference may borrow the video tapes or DVDs of “Bringing Science to Life: A Conversation with Oliver Sacks”. Call the Senate Office to make arrangements.

Senators, who have not done so already, should complete their Senate Committee Preference form and turn it in with their schedules to the Senate staff.

February 27 is the deadline to nominate staff for a Staff Excellence Award. Forms are available on-line through the Human Resources Website at: www.uh.edu/admin/hr/. A link to the nomination form may also be found on the Senate homepage. Nominations should be sent to Chair, Staff Awards Selection Committee c/o Human Resources Department room 347, McElhinney, Mail Code: 5009.

Kudos to Terrie Sultan - the Chuck Close exhibit that was organized by Blaffer Gallery is opening at the Met and received a great review in the New York Times on January 26^th.

Kudos to Dave Maggard for bringing in the Cougars’ participation in the Hawaii Bowl under budget and for getting out on the field to calm things down after the game.

The Faculty Senate is also saying farewell today to Judy Myers. Her name first appears in the Faculty Senate minutes of September 1980 as the replacement for J. Meador, the lone senator from the Library. In the 24 years since, Judy Myers has made her presence felt, not just in the Senate but throughout the University of Houston. She was first elected to the Committee on Committees (COC) in 1982 and was elected again in 1984. She chaired the COC in 1990 and was elected to serve on the Committee on Committees in 1992, annually from 1995 through 2001, 2003 and she will be serving on it this year as well. In 1983 Judy was elected Vice Chair of the Senate. In 1985 she served as Chair of the Student Life Committee. She chaired the Budget Committee in 1991, 1993 and 1997. She has been elected as Member-at-large to the Executive Committee three times: 1994, 2000, and 2001. She served as President of the Senate in 1989 and as Chair of the University Planning and Policy Council in 1994. The Faculty Senate will remain standing, but it is a little shaky today as one of its pillars leaves.

Of course there are some parting gifts: a Librarian Action Figure – complete with librarian trading cards. And so she will remember the Senate a bit more fondly, it presents her with this silver bowl. The inscription reads: In appreciation of exemplary service to the University of Houston and its Faculty Senate. Judy Myers, Senator, 1980 – 2004, President, 1989.

Mrs. Myers said first all, I want to tell all of you how much I have enjoyed working with and for the Faculty Senate. It gave me a chance to be a part of a larger university, to be part of things going on in the University that I wouldn’t have otherwise known about outside the Library. I can’t tell you how wonderful a University I think this place is. I went to school at LSU, which is another fine university of a different type. But the University of Houston is the one that can be the model university for this century because we are in the right place. We are in a wonderful, diverse city where there is a huge need for higher education and it is going to have to be delivered in different ways. We are well enough funded -- we don’t believe that most days -- but not too well funded. You can have too much money, just look at some other places around here. And we still think we are a new institution. That was true when I came and somehow we have kept that feeling. So I can’t tell you what a wonderful place this is.

I want to leave you with four images: First, a horseshoe nail. Second, think of the most fabulous Venn diagram you can imagine. Not just the little over-lapping circles in your textbook with the shading, but one with little blobs, not just circles, all over and many, many colors. Some of them change colors throughout the single blob. And some of them are almost completely off by themselves or maybe a whole group is interconnected a little bit with some other area, with maybe the most tenuous little connection back to the main body. To me that represents the faculty of the University. Everyone is doing their own thing, and also has a connection with other scholars so that we can bounce things off each other. The third image is a bullet point and the fourth is the Voyager Plaque.

The horseshoe nail to me is the details. It is the paperwork. It is the rough sidewalks that somebody reported but that didn’t get fixed and the sidewalks that are always under water. The faculty, student and staff see the missing nails. We need to keep reporting the problems. We need to keep banging on the nails, like the assistant professors labs that we heard so much about this past year. Hammering is the only way we are going to get attention to these problems. It is hard, but we have got to keep doing it.

The Venn Diagram represents the faculty. One thing I hear in meetings with administrators is “you can’t get the faculty to agree on anything.” What I have always said is, if you get a bunch of faculty together and they agree, throw them out and get another batch. What you want from faculty is this wonderful scope of ideas, the extensions of knowledge that bristle out all over the place.

The bullet point -- there are lots of kinds of communication -- written communication, verbal communication, stories, poems, music, parables, memos and bullet points. Memos are like parables in that they are intended to make a point, but the resemblance ends there.

Faculty should be aware that administrators are people who got to be where they are because they understand memos and bullet points. Some faculty are good at this form of communication, too, Alex, Al... But for most of us bullet points are like a foreign language; they have no room for exploration. On the other side, administrators think they understand faculty because they think they used to be faculty. I am not too sure about that. I had a serious discussion one time with a person who is in this room today about whether a particular administrator was a space alien. This administrator had told us that he got up every morning, put on a suit and went to breakfast with a different group of people, every day. My colleague and I decided that this administrator was simply so different from us that he was not one of us. We thought he was a very nice space alien, but once we recognized how different he was we understood why it was so hard to communicate with him. The problem is not that administrators are not listening. It’s that they are not getting it, and vice versa on our side of the conversation. We and administrators have different roles to play in the University, and usually when we try to converse one of us is speaking a foreign language. We need to keep trying to communicate; we will have a stronger university if we can. But we need to realize the nature of the divide.

Now the fourth image. Think of the Voyager Plaque. Image that spacecraft touching down on some planet in another solar system. The plaque gives them a picture of our solar system, a bunch of bullet points, and the sound of a whale. I wonder which part of that the interplanetary recipients will understand? Will they “get” the bullet points, or when they get here, will they want to talk to the whales?

We are involved in a grand collaborative endeavor. We sometimes say that the faculty has no influence, that we don’t make the decisions. But we do the work, and as far as the influence, I believe the communication is the influence. Sometimes we just have to speak a foreign language to get through. So let’s keep after those horseshoe nails, because they matter, eve if those are the foreign language to administrators. Let’s keep being our wonderful Venn diagram, speaking in songs and sagas and learning enough about bullet points to communicate. And as for me – what’s this? (picks up horse shoe, then looks around the room) I don’t see him in here. I’ll have to go find him.

Pres. Jacobson said at the last meeting she promised to bring to the Senate a proposal for a committee. This is the committee that the Faculty Senate voted on when it approved the Climate Survey Report. This is basically a committee on shared governance plus. The plus refers to the discussion the Senate has had this past this Fall about how the faculty could be involved in moving the University forward. The Senate articulated some principles, strategies and goals necessary for the flourishing of that synergy that exists between faculty and the University’s stature; not necessarily its reputation, but its genuine stature. The Faculty Senate Commission on University Governance (FS-CoUG) is charged with increasing the impact of faculty expertise, values and energy on the University’s advancement. This is a means to look at ways in which UH could implement the principles, strategies and goals to get back in balance that wonderful synergy between faculty and the University’s stature.
Pres. Jacobson said the idea for this committee has been discussed for four or five months. She said she has decided not to seek to chair the Faculty Senate Commission on Faculty Governance. She admitted worrying that it would be hard to let it go of the group, but it was easier once she figured out a way to involve the Faculty Senate. That is, FS-CoUG will begin its work with a series of proposals to be gathered together by the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees. As the Commission gets organized, the COC will be working to gather ideas on things that might be implemented. For example, one of the provost candidates mentioned that her university had examined faculty governance university governance issues and one of their proposals that was implemented is that every initiative is open. When deans draw up their budgets, there is a general notice and proposals are invited for new initiatives from the members of the college. And there is an elected body that reviews these proposals. The Commission needs to investigate best practices of other universities, especially places where the synergy is more in synch. Pres. Jacobson then invited senators to send ideas to the COC and to help do background research for the Commission. Pres. Jacobson, who will assume the Chair of the COC, will ask that group to devote much of this semester to this task.

Pres. Jacobson said she has discussed FS-CoUG with Dr. Gogue and he is in favor of it. They have talked about the fact that FS-CoUG will need a budget. She invited comments on this, too.

On looking at the report on the Climate Survey, Pres. Jacobson said she realized that the Senate had voted for more than a committee on shared governance. The formation of FS-CoUG has only been delayed because then Pres. Eichberg sought to involve both the faculty and the administration. It was hard to get administrators involved until Dr. Gogue arrived at UH.

Pres. Jacobson said FS-CoUG would look at faculty participation in shared governance, too. She added that she spoken to the council chairs and they will join in to look at how shared governance in general at the university.

Sen. Lange asked if the President has given approval for the four administrators to participate on the committee. Pres. Jacobson said Dr. Gogue has gone over this and he has approved it.

Sen. Warner asked, “Has this document, in this form, been reviewed by the Executive Committee?” Pres. Jacobson said, “No, it hasn’t. There have been two additions. Sen. Warner asked, “So this is pending review?” Pres. Jacobson said, “Yes, it have to go back to the (Executive) Committee.”

Sen. Leiss asked is this a commission of the Faculty Senate? Pres. Jacobson said yes. Sen. Leiss asked so it will report to the Faculty Senate? Pres. Jacobson said that is down at the bottom. Sen. Leiss asked it has a two year timeline? Pres. Jacobson said yes, but it has to ask for continuation at the end of the first year. Sen. Leiss said he is concerned about duplicating the functions of the Faculty Senate and greatly concerned about diluting the power of the Faculty Senate. Now that the Senate has finally gotten back to where it has some input, he would really hate to see it squandered. Pres. Jacobson said that is why the Commission has to have ideas from the Faculty Senate that it wants to implement. These will be faculty proposals that the Commission will be asked to implement. Sen. Leiss said if the Commission is a creature of the Faculty Senate, then the Commission can do certain things, but anything that is policy will have to come back to the Faculty Senate as a recommendation from the Commission. The recommendation will have to be discussed in the Faculty Senate and the Faculty Senate will approve or reject it. Pres. Jacobson said the report will come to the Senate to receive final approval and before it issues its recommendations, pending its approval by the Executive Committee.

Sen. Eichberg said the Executive Committee fully intends for the Commission to be an arm of the Faculty Senate. Any kind of conclusion will have to come to Faculty Senate for discussion. Pres. Jacobson said the first report is due to come before the Senate on January 1, 2005 along with a request to continue if necessary. Pres. Jacobson said one of the things she hopes that FS-COUG will do is spend some time setting up the Executive Committee as a subcommittee to look at some of the issues involved in the functioning of the Faculty Senate.

The Budget and Facilities Committee would like to thank the University administrators who visited with the committee and its Chair during 2003. The committee discussed a variety of issues including the scope and philosophy of the Office of Advancement, the plans for implementing the new Cougar1 card and its effects on faculty, the distribution of Indirect Cost funds, and the policies and practices of Plant Operations.

Specific ideas discussed worth highlighting include plans to consider holding back some funds for emergency and other unplanned repair of laboratories so as to keep funded and other promising research on the right track and a plans to consider highlighting the purchasing of equipment for Assistant Professors so that our colleagues with tenure clocks ticking will not be hindered by unnecessary delays in setting up their research programs.

The Budget and Facilities Committee naturally works closely with the Vice President for Administration and Finance and the BFC wishes to thank Dr. Rudley for his help and his interest in faculty input into how UH can become a better place to teach and learn.

In its meetings during 2003, the Committee on Committees (COC) fulfilled its regular function of nominating faculty members for upcoming vacancies on the approximately 30 University standing committees. Candidates for nearly 70 positions were recruited. The pool of available nominees for the most part comprises the full-time tenured/tenure-track faculty who responded to the preference survey for committee service. The percentage of responses is distressingly low and the COC should consider other means to involve a larger number of faculty in this aspect of University governance.

The COC continued to meet with representatives of standing committees, as well as Vice Presidents, to exchange views concerning issues faced by committees under their charge and committee performance and communication might be improved. Separate meetings were held with: John Rudley, Vice President for Administration and Finance, and Elwyn Lee, Vice President for Student Affairs, and included discussion that focused on how each Vice President should communicate more effectively with committees reporting to him or her and should also request a committee annual report that would be available to key groups on campus, including the Faculty Senate.

A meeting was held with Robert Broward, Director of Transportation and Parking, to discuss the activities of the Transportation and Parking Committee as well as the Faculty/Staff Traffic Court.

Dr. Robert Herrington, Director of Human Resources, and Mr. Lane Renfro provided an update on the deliberations of the UH Fringe Benefits Committee. Items covered included recent changes in payment and regulations relating to health and retirement benefits. Concern was expressed as to how conversant faculty and staff, especially faculty new to the campus, are with the implications of the additional regulations. Dr. Herrington and Mr. Renfro expressed willingness to address these issues at a future Faculty Senate meeting.

The COC met with Mr. Abel Garza, Executive Director of Affirmative Action, to review activities of the Sexual Harassment Board and the Title IX Grievance Committee. The merits of appointing a faculty advocate or ombudsperson were also discussed. The Committee agreed to seek further opinions on this matter and plans to invite individuals from Rice University who have expertise in this area to a meeting early in 2004.

Finally, the COC carried out its annual duty of approving nominations for officers, Executive Committee members-at-large and COC members for 2004.

The Chair would like to thank the members of the 2003 COC, who were Wynne Chin, Jerry Freiberg, Steve Huber, Joe Kotarba, Judy Myers and Carlos Pedemonte, for their sincere interest and hard work during the year.

Sen. Eichberg encouraged all senators to try to get as many of their colleagues as possible to respond to the standing committee preference survey. If more people would respond there would be a bigger pool from which to draw faculty representatives to these committees. There is a tremendous amount of talent at UH. The COC will continue to meet with representatives of University standing committees. This has proved to be a very useful activity. The COC had some very productive discussions with Drs. Rudley and Lee concerning the role of the Vice President in terms of the committees over which they have administrative authority. It would be very nice if the COC could follow up these discussions with some plans for clearer lines of communication between these administrators with the committees. For example, they should be encouraged to issue annual report which should be distributed to the Faculty Senate and others.

The Educational Policies and Student Affairs Committee has gathered information about the following issues related to educational policies and student affairs:

Course Evaluations: The committee met with Patrick Daniel, the Director of Learning and Assessment. Mr. Daniel spoke about the history of course evaluations at UH and gave the committee an overview of the course evaluation process. Mr. Daniel brought copies of the different course evaluations used across campus and highlighted the types of questions and responses. Mr. Daniel noted that revising the format and questions on course evaluations rests with the individual colleges, and that he is available to provide assistance in the revision process.

The Measurement and Evaluation Center (MEC), a part of Learning and Assessment Services, provides many types of evaluation services to UH and the community through institutional tests, exam scoring, focus groups, and survey research. There is no charge for consultation, developing electronic grade books, or scoring course exams for UH Departments and a nominal fee for other services. Contact Patrick Daniel at pdaniel@uh.edu.; Learning and Assessment Services, Student Services Center at 713/743-5434, http://www.las.uh.edu/.

Academic Honesty and the Task Force Recommendations: The recommendations of the Academic Honesty Policy Task Force were approved in July and are reflected in the Student Handbook for Fall 2003 (see pages 9-13 of the Student Handbook 2003-2004). The Committee has recommended developing a one-page handout for faculty about the policy and distributing information about the policy throughout the Colleges. Brian McKinney is working on this handout with members of the Academic Honesty Policy Task Force. The Academic Honesty Policy can be found at: http://www.uh.edu/dos/hdbk/acad/achonpol.htm1.

Textbooks with Non-Returnable Workbooks: The committee worked with Dr. John Rudley to review questions regarding textbook adoptions with non-returnable workbooks. This issue hopefully will continue in the coming EPSAC Committee.

Members of the committee during 2003: David Blecher, Valentini Brady, Brian Byrnes, Michael Connell, Steven Craig, Katy Greenwood, Garth Jowett, Howard Karger, Stanley Kleis, Peter Linzer, Jonathan Middents, Dale Rude, Roberta Weldon, Cameron White.

The following Agenda Items were addressed by the Committee on Faculty Affairs during 2003. Accomplishments and actions taken are also noted.

The President of the Faculty Senate, Dr. Anne Jacobson, charged the Legislative and Community Relations Committee to change both its name and its purpose. The new name, the Scholarship and Community Committee reflects the dual purpose of this committee in transition. The working definition of the committee is:

The Scholarship and Community Committee is charged with the responsibility to serve as liaison
between the UH Faculty Senate and both the internal university community and the various external
—local and regional--communities we serve. The Committee will assist faculty in three areas:
promoting scholarly activities; conducting scholarly activities; and communicating scholarly activities.

The role of the Faculty Senate in the ongoing examination of “excellence” in research and
scholarship.

On March 21^st, the chair of the committee addressed the College of Technology’s Friday Colloquium. An open and spirited discussion revealed the importance of understanding the variety of ways faculty engage in scholarly activity, beyond any narrow definition of research.

On April 2, 2003, the committee met with Dr. Arthur Vailas, UH System Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Research and Intellectual Property Management. The SCC invited Dr. Vailas to meet with it informally to discuss ways this new committee can assist scholarly activity among faculty. Dr. Vailas was accompanied by Dr. Scott Perry, the incoming chair of the Research Council, and Ms. Rosemary Grimmet, Executive Director of Research Services. Dr. Vailas spoke of the importance of coordinating the committee’s activities with those of the Research Council. The committee agreed to pursue collaboration with the Research Council.

In an effort to collaborate with other university groups to develop a workable meaning for “excellence,” the committee will conduct two immediate activities this year. First, the committee will, through its chair, meet with Dean Marco Mariotto on January 28, 2004 to discuss the progress of the Excellence Report his office is developing. Second, the committee will provide an observer to the Research Council’s subcommittee on Excellence beginning February 2004.

Communications both within the university and between the University and its various external
communities

There are two reasons why this is becoming increasingly the major focus of the committee. First, other groups within the University are also examining the issue of excellence in research and scholarship. Second, there is currently no other faculty group advising and contributing to the important work of the Division of University Advancement.

The committee’s first task was to assist with the Scholarship and Community Conference on October 1, 2003. Specific tasks included soliciting posters and managing the poster display (with the assistance of Ms. Vy Dao, Sociology graduate student). This effort turned out to be a visible and useful method of disseminating information on the exciting research in neuroscience taking place at the University, largely in collaboration with researchers at other universities and the Texas Medial Center.

The committee met with Wendy Adair, Associate VP for University Relations, and Mike Cinelli, Executive Director of University Communications, on October 15, 2003. Topics for discussion included:

The University of Houston is about to go into its fifth year of its five-year positioning campaign, aimed at key influencers in the community. The prime audiences are key executives, community leaders, human resources professionals, alumni, faculty, staff and students, with an emphasis on the Houston market, where UH’s reputation is still soft. The campaign was designed to move the position of UH from that of a commodity based on accessibility and low cost to one of quality based on outstanding programs and educational opportunities.

The University of Houston is a member of ResearchChannel, a consortium of research universities, research-granting government agencies and corporate research divisions dedicated to broadening the access to and appreciation of individual and collective activities, ideas, and opportunities in basic and applied research. Additional information about ResearchChannel is available on the Web at www.researchchannel.org. Questions concerning this feature of the university's external communications program should be directed to Michael Cinelli, executive director of University Communication, at mcinelli@uh.edu.

Each morning the latest news and information is available to the campus community on the UH Today Website -- www.uh.edu/uhtoday. Along with the print version of each story, video interviews with faculty, students and staff provide a glimpse of the person and issues that are at the heart of the story. Suggestions for future stories can be made by sending an e-mail note to Francine Parker, director of Internal Communications, at fparker@uh.edu.

On November 12, 2003, the committee met with Ms. Joanna Wolfe, Executive Director of Major Gifts for the university. The committee established that the University is woefully low in the size and number of endowments, and has relatively few endowed chairs. The process of developing major gifts, however, takes many years to nurture.

The committee hopes to improve faculty input to University policy on development and communication through the following agreements made at a meeting on December 9, 2004 between the committee chair and Ms. Ileana Trevino, Vice Chancellor for University Advancement:

The committee will invite the following guests to future meetings: representatives from the Texas Medical Center, the Houston Chronicle, the Greater Houston Partnership, the Office for Research and Intellectual Property Management; the M.D. Anderson Library; and KUHF.

Pres. Jacobson said there was an ad hoc committee comprised of: David Blecher, Joseph Kotarba, Jerry Paskusz, Carlos Pedemonte, Roberta Weldon and Dan Wells that was charged with articulating the characteristics wanted in a Provost. Pres. Jacobson pointed out the handout (available in the Senate office) to the senators had both the “Provost Criteria” document and the “Principles and Goals” because that memo contained a reference to what is called now “Achieving Excellence: Principles and Strategies.” The latter contains very specific measures with goals that are incomplete. It includes the suggestions that came from last Faculty Senate meeting. There are blanks as senators will be asked for more suggestions. There will be an e-mail to ask for more suggestions. This document may be a topic for discussion at the upcoming retreat. The retreat will be February 27.

Sen. Wells asked who is coordinating this? Is she going to put everything together or is the Executive Committee going to get together again. Pres. Jacobson said this is now a decision for the Executive Committee where it should be placed and to decide how it should be done.

Regarding the provost search, Pres. Jacobson said there is a very strong slate of candidates. She urged Senators to attend all the open meetings with the candidates and to encourage their colleagues to attend. Pres. Jacobson said the Search Committee Chair did a wonderfully gentle job in guiding the group and the committee really pulled together. It had very, very considerable agreement. All the finalists who will be brought to campus got very, very high votes.

Sen. Trail said he didn’t know how many people heard the Provost Candidate at the open meeting yesterday but Lawrence Curry asked her a question that had to do with how she felt about faculty electing their deans and chairs. She said she didn’t think that elections demonstrated much and she wouldn’t consider it. It was my understanding that the CLASS has gone without Bylaws now for three years over this specific issue. It’s alleged that this issue is at logger-heads with someone in the Provost’s office. Sen. Trail said he asked a follow-up question of whether she would apply this to the election of chairs and she said yes. He added that he just left the room after that because this is an unacceptable candidate. Pres. Jacobson said this candidate has got to be the most shared governance person in the whole wide world. Her university is faculty-run partly because of her. Sen. Trail said apparently departments don’t name their own chairs at that university, so he was glad that Dr. Curry asked this question quite specifically.

Sen. Ignatiev said chairs in general are appointed once there is a sense generated of who is mutually acceptable. Sen. Trail said he understands that chairs and deans serve at the pleasure of higher officials but in general the way a department expresses its will should be followed. That is not the impression he got, but he did not follow it up with a question about who would be consulted in this process.

Pres. Jacobson said she would follow this question up. The candidate had an excellent interview. She is one of the people who got principles, strategies and goals going at her university.

Sen. White said he was at that university in 2000 for a whole year. She was the Dean of the College of Education when he was there. During that time the college had two new chairs come up and it was completely faculty driven the entire time. He added that he didn’t know what has happened since she has become the vice chancellor.

Pres. Jacobson said her track record, everything indicates that she is faculty friendly. She said people were complaining that she wasn’t telling them what she wanted them to do.

Sen. Warner commented that, having been through a lot of interviews and UH will have at least five candidates to interact with over the next couple of weeks, he recommended that people wait to fill out their evaluations on each candidate until they had a chance to look at all of them. He said it is not a process of an absolute zero. People need to be looking at comparisons among people, and then make a judgment on that basis.

Pres. Jacobson said if an issue like this arises it is nearly incumbent on the person who raises it to get in contact with university and find out what is happening. UH needs more accurate information.

Sen. Leiss said there may be a very different culture in a different university. He said he did not see her because he teaches at the time the open meeting was held. Knowing what he knows about a number of other foreign universities, it may well be that that is the culture there but that it is not necessarily a reflection on the person’s predilections. It is conceivable that she was very much attune to that, but is changing under the current system. It’s a possibility. It is important to get some definitive answer to what went on because clearly this is a crucial issue and certainly wouldn’t be beneficial to this campus.

Pres. Jacobson said she thinks if there is any concern, it really should be the opposite of that expressed; namely, one might worry that she would come in and let the faculty completely take over.

Sen. Gingiss said as he looks at this document (the Achieving Excellence: Principles and Goals), it’s across the board spend more money. He said he sees nothing in here that reflects priorities, let alone difficult choices.

Pres. Jacobson said there is more money coming in because of an increase in tuition and the deans are drawing up their budgets. The Executive Committee took to Dr. Gogue the idea that faculty might have input and he was surprised that faculty hadn’t already had input. He asked her to say to Dr. Strickland that deans should be consulting with the elected faculty representatives of the Faculty Senate.

As I thought about this last year, it became clear once again that it not really possible to get much accomplished by oneself as Faculty Senate president. So I was extremely fortunate to have had two particularly able – really, excellent - immediate predecessors – Jerry Freiberg and Joe Eichberg – who were quiet revolutionaries to whom we are in fact all indebted. At a time when many people felt the university was on the wrong track, Jerry started asking the questions and Joe worked to make a constructive job of the answers that the survey revealed. It was a very difficult situation in which Jerry and Joe were particularly viewed negatively; as one administrator made clear, he felt it was like Pearl Harbor – we bombed first and then sued for peace. But in fact many people, including Joe and Jerry, were very surprised at the results. Some others of us were unfortunately aware of a pervasive unhappiness, but were very surprised at the effects.

I don’t mean to simplify the situation in citing Jerry and Joe. It was a time when the faculty senate as a whole stood up for what the faculty believed. And everyone in the executive committee – and a number of people not in it – worked along side Jerry and Joe. But we need to be grateful to them at least in part for the period.

In any case, with Joe’s work on Shared Governance, I was able to start to look at what constructively we might do. At the same time, we were in a state of great transition and I was hearing a very great deal about people’s views about the university. For this and many other reasons, it seemed right to try to put together what the faculty felt could be important steps to move the university ahead. This is now “Achieving Excellence: Principles and Strategies.” It was only near the end of the process that I realized we were doing something in some ways more profound (or so I think). We were capturing very, very significant elements of a very important synergy – those ways in which faculty excellence and the university’s stature can nourish one another.

Joe Kotarba said to me recently that he thought the faculty at UH are better than the university. This is a sign that that synergy is greatly disturbed or even non-existent.

A number of people have said that the principles and strategies were just very obvious, and others have said that we haven’t done anything like this before. It was, nonetheless, a time to say what to the faculty is obvious: this is the kind of thing we can do to make the university greater. And now we have an administration that wants to listen and facilitate our doing it. We need now to remove obstacles that prevent us from doing that job. FS-COUG, we can hope, will help clear our path.

There are other things to be done and many other constituencies to be heard from but, at the heart of the matter, is the fact that it is faculty expertise, energy and values that are really are at the core of a university. There are many complex things to be said about the complexity that a university is, but this is a simple and fundament truth that is immensely important.

In closing: Many thanks are owed to many individuals not mentioned who worked on the projects described. For a last time, I welcome Jay Gogue to a university he is really now part of, and say that we do indeed recognize his commitment to the faculty. Jerry Strickland, thank goodness you agreed to be interim provost and convey the message of shared governance in your present job as you did in your past one as a dean. I also thank the members of the executive committee, particularly those who are leaving: Dave Shattuck, Katy Greenwood, Joe Eichberg, and Peter Copeland. Of course, thanks to many others: John Rudley, an unfailingly efficient help in our efforts. Thanks to Dave Maggard – he has been where we need to go (I am thinking of Berkeley, not the riot following the bowl game) and he is trying to help us. As always, Mary Brantley and Brenda Jones deserve special thanks.

PASSING OF THE GAVEL

Pres. Jacobson passed the gavel to Sen. Auchmuty and welcomed him as President. Pres. Auchmuty said it is with great pleasure that I present this memento to Anne Jaap Jacobson to commemorate her year as President of the University of Houston Faculty Senate. This has been a very eventful year in so many respects and this will just be a token that may remind her of one of the lesser duties of a Faculty Senate President; namely chairing the meetings of the Faculty Senate and its Executive Committee.

You have heard her summary of the highlights of her activities during the past year. All I can add is my compliments on the tremendous energy and effort she devoted to such a wide range of activities. Her defining project was undoubtedly the Scholarship and Community Conference, “Bringing Science to Life.” She also has been deeply involved in the searches for the new President/Chancellor and the current search for a Provost. We are all wondering, some with some trepidation, what she intends to try to reform, or radically change, next.

I believe we all owe Anne gratitude for her continual reminders about the importance of diversity, of inclusion, of shared governance, and the importance of the encouragement and stimulation of research activities. She has focused her professional philosophical talents on a surprising array of university activities and processes. We are all in her debt for her analysis of, and discussions about academic topics, especially roles and goals at UH and the importance of multidisciplinary research groups. This resulted in some long meetings, which always remained interesting.

We all respect your commitment to many different and important causes so, on behalf of the UH Faculty Senate, I present you with this plaque. We all look forward to your continued involvement in University activities.

The agenda for this meeting is very full, so I will keep this speech brief and will perhaps say more about individual issues when they arise during the year.

First I'm very pleased to introduce the committee chairs for 2004. I've been told that just about the only real action a Faculty Senate president can do without a vote, a committee meeting, or getting someone else's approval, is the appointment of committee chairs. So I'm very pleased that the following senators have agreed to chair the respective committees. Each has been around UH for quite a while, and collectively they will bring tremendous experience, expertise and institutional memory to the table.

The chair of the Budget and Facilities Committee is Saleha Khumawala from the Bauer College of Business. The chair of the Educational Policies and Student Affairs Committee is Dan Wells from the College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics. The chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee is Howard Karger from the Graduate School of Social Work. The chair of the Scholarship and Community Committee is Joe Kotarba from CLASS. The chair of the Committee on Committees is the immediate past president, Anne Jacobson, from CLASS.

I greatly appreciate the willingness of each of these faculty members to devote their time and energy to being a committee chair. I'm sure that they'll be strong advocates for faculty interests and concerns, and will provide excellent guidance and advice during the coming year. I hope that at the end of the year they'll feel that it has been time well spent - even if the only tangible reward will be the sandwiches and soft-drinks at our luncheon meetings.

This year, I expect the Faculty Senate will continue building on the developments of the last few years; especially in continuing to address the concerns that were so strongly evident from the results of the survey of the upper administration performed some years ago. I believe that there are great opportunities for developing an excellent working relationship with the new administration and I look forward to collaborating with Dr. Gogue and his team in working for the benefit of all our students, staff and faculty.

The main task is to join the administration to implementing better procedures and processes throughout the UH system. This includes helping ensure that the people appointed to senior administrative positions here at UH have attitudes and values that encourage academic and educational priorities, and include faculty and staff participation. We would like to see discussion, collegiality and inclusion replace some of the uninformed, and often unusual, decision making witnessed in the recent past.

First I would like the Faculty Senate to look at issues concerning faculty governance in colleges. Every college is supposed to be governed by college by-laws that have been approved by the Provost. After 3 years, CLASS still does not have approved by-laws. Some other colleges have by-laws that are out-dated or have not been followed for many years. I would like the faculty affairs committee to look into this situation and recommend that each faculty senator review the situation concerning their own college. Are their colleagues satisfied with the current situation and what specific improvements would they like to see happen?

Faculty participation in college decision making and planning, varies widely across colleges on this campus. Communication and relations between deans and their faculty also differ markedly between different colleges. It seems that the time has come to review and compare the way our colleges are organized and how they involve their own faculty in their activities. I hope that the Faculty affairs committee can review these issues and identify some commonalities across the university. In particular, I hope that they can identify some best practices and improve various procedures and processes. Especially questions centering on the hiring of new faculty. I hope that this can be discussed at the Spring Faculty Senate Retreat which will be on Friday, February 27th.

Another priority is to work with various groups to develop faculty advisory boards for various offices in the UH administration. Currently the committee on committees helps fill positions on a number of advisory boards around campus. Three committees that currently appear to work well are the Library advisory committee, the Athletics Advisory Committee and the Intellectual Property (IP) Committee. This is reflected in a variety of ways, including the fact that usually many more faculty would like to serve on these committees than there are positions available. There could be considerable benefit to all of us if a number of other areas of the administration had regular faculty input and counsel. A list would include such offices as those of the General Counsel, University Advancement, Governmental Relations, Media Relations, Human Resources, Purchasing, Facilities Planning and possibly others.

Other suggestions and advice are welcome. Many of these offices were historically part of the UH system and have had a tradition of being isolated from the academic side of the university - to our mutual disadvantage. Some of these advisory committees should include representation from the other campuses of the UH system. I hope the Faculty Senate can work with the administrative heads of these offices to establish appropriate advisory committees. I've been very encouraged by the support that this proposal has received from Dr Gogue. If this happens, we will then need to have faculty volunteers willing to serve on these committees. My hope is that many more faculty than at present will return the committee selection forms and offer their expertise and time to help the university in their areas of interest and knowledge. This should help make this a much better institution for all of us with a minimal amount of extra effort.

Dr. Gogue has recently initiated the development of a strategic plan for the UH system. We have invited Ed Hugetz to talk to us at the next meeting about the issues involved and I hope that the Faculty Senate will be able to provide some useful comments and suggestions.

Earlier in this meeting, we discussed FS-Coug. This commission was authorized by the Faculty Senate some time ago. At its next meeting the Faculty Senate Executive Committee will go forward in light of today's discussion. It would be most useful if the commission would identify issues, and suggest remedies expeditiously; preferably by the end of the year.

I believe that the UH Faculty Senate has evolved over the years into an effective voice for faculty representation. If you have issues that you would like to have more information about, or would like to have discussed please raise them with the appropriate committee chair or any member of the Executive Committee. You may also send email to FSenate@uh.edu and we will try to forward it to an appropriate person. If you wish to send it to me, I can be reached at FSPres@uh.edu. The President-elect and Secretary will soon also have their own separate email tags. Sara McNeil and Joe Eichberg are also planning to develop an electronic faculty newsletter, which I trust will be of use in discussing faculty issues and concerns.

I'm greatly looking forward to this year and hope it will be productive and that I'll have many accomplishments to talk about in a year's time. There appears to be an excellent opportunity to change the recent UH atmosphere and culture for the better. I encourage everyone to attend the receptions for the provost candidates and to contact search committee members with your comments and opinions.

When I came here 22 years ago, I remember being surprised by a Physics department faculty member telling me that about 10 years earlier, he had been the first UH faculty member to receive an NSF grant. The university was clearly still very young as a research university. Shortly after I arrived, Homer Walker, Garry Etgen and some other members of our department submitted a group proposal to the NSF requesting a Vax 11/780 computer for our research. This was funded, together with similar proposals from the physics and chemistry departments. The new computers were networked and then the NSF arranged for us to be connected to the ARPAnet and to NSFnet. So, in 1984, UH was connected to what evolved into the Internet and we chose the suffix "uh.edu" for our email addresses. This claim was staked before most people in the world had even heard of computer networks. We were there before the University of Hawaii or the University of Hartford or any other possible claimants for UH.

I hope that UH can continue to be ahead of the curve in many ways. This year we have the opportunity to help redefine the faculty structures that will accommodate the changes that have happened over the last 10 years and our plans for the next decade. I hope that the Faculty Senate will enjoy the discussions, make good proposals and that everyone will benefit from the results.

PRESENTATION ON PARKING GARAGES: Dr. John Rudley, UHS Vice Chancellor and UH Vice President for Administration & Finance

Dr. Rudley thanked the Senate for allowing him to speak. He also thanked the members of the Executive Committee in helping him through his first year at UH. Most of the ideas that they laid on my table were practical ideas and he appreciated all of them.

      After a year of studying the parking situation, Dr. Rudley said he is finding out what one of the solutions will be. He went to the students and they said UH needs a parking garage. UH hired a consultant to provide some idea of parameters involved in building a garage and Dave Irvin will share the results of their study. Dr. Rudley said he did incorporate a couple of things into the consultants’ evaluation: (1) There could not be a substantial increase in rates for people who are not parking in the parking garage. Most campuses pass the cost along to everyone. UH doesn’t want to do that. (2) Look at including retail space. One way to accomplish reducing the cost is to build a parking garage with retail shops on the first floor. The retail outlets can provide income to offset the cost of the parking garage. Dr. Rudley reminded the senators that parking is an auxiliary operation so its funding cannot be offset by the academic budget. The plan is to borrow enough money to build the garage with the revenue from the parking garage going to pay the debt service on the parking garage and the maintenance. Dr. Rudley added that no parking garage on any college campus, of which is aware, pays for itself as a stand alone facility. The new retail space concept is what a lot of universities employ now. He looked at the University of Pennsylvania. They just built a parking garage and they put in a grocery store as one of the retail operations. To everyone’s surprise the grocery store grosses $18 million a year. The University of Pennsylvania is located in Philadelphia and they worked with the local community in locating the parking garage. (3) Work with the local community. UH is looking at the concept of parking on Scott Street with local redevelopment organizations.
      [Editor's note: The Parking Study may be found on-line in PDF or Powerpoint presentations.]
      Mr. Irvin said this proposal has been shared with various groups across campus including the Parking and Transportation Committee. UH hired the Walker consulting group. Walker has done a lot of parking studies and a lot of parking garage plans for universities all over the country. A lot of different options and parking needs were considered. A parking garage was not immediately considered because it can be a very expensive proposition.   The consultants’ figures indicated that currently UH needs about 1,300 additional spaces. In looking at other options, there really weren’t any that made a significant impact on the University to provide the number of spaces to solve the shortage problem. The conclusion was probably the obvious one, but it is good practice to go through the exercise to determine that no other option exists at this point. To make a significant dent in the parking deficit, UH has to look at a parking garage.

As Dr. Rudley indicated, the only question is how to fund it. Without retail, UH would be looking at increasing parking rates by 35%-40% for everyone. Knowing retail space would be the best option, the question became what does UH need in terms of additional services, shops, restaurants, etc., so that the University has not only a structure that can help pay for itself, but adds to the overall experience and the overall life of the campus? The recommendation made by the consultants, after some in depth conversations and modifications, was build a parking structure of 1,700 spaces; about 570,000 gross square feet with about 48,000 square feet of retail. The construction cost is estimated to be about $28.6 million. It was recommended because of the need that the project begin very quickly to be on line by Fall of 2005.

The other thing considered was possible locations for a parking garage. There have been a number of suggestions over the years. Some suggestions came from discussions with the Transportation and Parking Committee, which has faculty representatives; some came from University master plans. Because of the need to fold in retail and the need for the parking garage to serve a number of functions in addition to proximity to classes, (i.e., have some weekend use, special events use and community use), the recommendation is that the first parking garage be built at Scott and Holman. That is relatively close to campus and has a couple of advantages.

From the retail standpoint it makes a lot of sense because the retail area on Scott. Also, there will be a rail line going down Scott, which enhances UH’s ability to rent that space. It also provides a community development impetus and helps UH’s community outreach and work with the Scott Street Coalition. It also adds another 1,700 spaces, diverting some of the traffic from Cullen. UH is going to dramatically increase the shuttle bus service.

The impact on the parking rates will be around a 2% increase just to maintain what UH currently has. Because of the additional revenue from retail what this proposal would mean is instead of a 2% per year increase the parking rate you would be looking at a 4% increase in parking cost. For instance on the faculty and staff gated lots by Fall 2005 will cost an additional $9.00 per year. For ungated faculty and staff lots it will cost about $4.00 more per year.

Mr. Irvin said the proposal is on-line through the plant operations website. He encouraged senators to ask their colleagues to look at the site and give input.

Sen. McNeil asked who would ultimately make the decision? Mr. Irvin said, as with any decision that involves capital expenditure, it will be made by the Board of Regents. Any major construction project usually goes to the Facilities Planning Committee which has faculty, staff and student representatives. The FPC makes a recommendation to Dr. Gogue who would then make a recommendation to the BOR.

Sen. Ignatiev asked if the location in Lot 15D West is a recommendation or the approved final position. Mr. Irvin said at this point it is a recommendation only. Sen. Ignatiev recommended the second choice, Lot 15D East.

Sen. Wells said the parking garage will have a premium rate. He asked if any studies had been done to see if anybody is willing to pay more to park further out on Scott and Holman? Mr. Irvin said they have not done a study on this campus; they have looked at other campuses.

Sen. Craig said the proposal is asking people to pay double and take a shuttle bus to work; no one is going to do that. Dr. Rudley said only 350 of the spaces in the garage would be available for faculty. Dr. Rudley said 1,000 will be student parking spots with the other 500 visitor space. The question is whether or not 350 faculty and staff will be willing to park in the garage. Dr. Rudley said right now UH has a deficit in parking of about 2,200 spaces. There are at least six possible locations for parking garages. The campus needs more than one parking garage. Hopefully, this will be the first of at least two or three UH will build. The idea is to go slowly with this. Another recommendation is to build a garage by the Recreation Center. None of the options are being ignored.

Sen. Schiff asked what proportion of the revenue from the retail will go to paying off the debt? Dr. Rudley said 100% goes to the amortizing the debt. Dr. Rudley said he will take the proposal to the Board of Regents. His job is to make sure UH can finance things that make sense. Dr. Rudley said in his analysis, unless he misses the revenue targets, is the expense targets will be about $350,000 short every year on just matching revenue for the operational expenses but the overall parking budget will pick up the slack. UH will be able to supplement the parking garage from overall parking revenue.

Sen. Lange said she would like to see the University exercise some clout with the Mayor’s office and Metro for more public transit and to work on a long term solution. She added that she is happy rail is coming. Dr. Rudley said on that point when UH met with the Scott Street Corridor Coalition, he made sure Metro representatives, traffic and city planners were also at the table along with the local community leaders.

Sen. Copeland asked what is the plan for funding construction? Dr. Rudley said UH will borrow the money, $28.2 million. There will be about $1.5 million debt service. Revenue should be about $2 million per year but there will be a maintenance cost of about $400,000. Dr. Rudley said he will still have to supplement the garage with about $350,000 per year.

Sen. Leiss asked wasn’t there a federal mandate to reduce pollution about five or six years ago? What happened to that? He added that has always been his impression that a parking garage requires far more expenditures for security because it provides more ways for people to hide and in general is a more dangerous than a flat surface parking lot. Would UH have to spend significantly more in order to have close-circuit TV, call box, etc., and it would also take the police longer to get there. Dr. Rudley said in this case it won’t. UH is putting a police presence or a police station in the parking garage just for those reasons. Dr. Rudley said there will be other measures taken including lighting and security cameras.

Sen. McNeil said she wanted to lend her support for putting the first garage on the perimeter of the campus. A garage in the middle of campus will cause traffic jams. UH has a beautiful campus.

Sen. McNeil said faculty won’t get those spaces. Students who are early birds will park closer to campus.

Dr. Rudley said there is always a business decision to everything that is done. There is no way to know if people are going to use the retail operations.

Sen. Wells said if a garage is the same price, it’s a great idea, but if the plan is to charge more to park further away, it is not going to work.

Dr. Rudley said UH checked the parking rates at Texas A&M University, UT and other campuses that are in the state who have a similar concept of what this University is trying to do. The proposed rate is very competitive.

Sen. Craig said it is very difficult to get students to take the shuttle busses. UH has economy lots but the students don’t use them. He said he is worried that the students won’t pay for a parking garage.

Dr. Rudley said the students have indicated that they expect to hang out in some of these retail operations. They expect to be able to go to Starbucks and buy clothing at the GAP. They have made six or seven recommendations. They don’t have any place to go and buy groceries. They don’t want to go down to the HEB on OST.

Sen. Craig said all the retail stuff sounds great, but he doubted that students would be willing to do that, take a shuttle bus to class and pay a bigger rate to park there.

Pres. Auchmuty said parking has always been something that concerns the Senate. Dr. Rudley has agreed to come back to the next meeting to continue this discussion. Meantime people can look at the data and talk about it with colleagues.

Agenda Item # 1	What is the appropriate timing for a follow-up study of the previous Manny report on salary compression, as salary compression continues to be an issue?
Action:	Committee members determined that 2003 was not appropriate due to change in administration and unfavorable budget projections. This issue should be addressed again perhaps in 2004
Agenda Item # 2	As requested by Senate President Anne Jacobson, how can the Faculty Affairs Committee foster faculty governance in each College?
Action:	Notified Senate President Anne Jacobson that committee members were available to assist with effort -- waited for her direction and guidance.
Agenda Item # 3	How can the Faculty Handbook and future policies foster and strengthen the role tenured faculty at the University of Houston?
Action:	Committee members reviewed and concurred with wording of Faculty Handbook regarding cap on hiring non-tenured faculty;
Action:	Committee members reviewed and support wording of the Principles of Faculty Governance.
Agenda Item # 4	How can adequate time be assured in each College for review of tenure and promotion documents?
Action:	Determined that time tables and procedures varied greatly in each College; some Colleges begin the process of review in the Spring, others in the Summer and others in the Fall. Each College must plan sufficiently to adhere to necessary time tables and time constraints by the University.
Agenda Item #5	How can the Faculty Affairs Committee assist in the review of the Department of Human Resources at the University of Houston, as requested by the Associate Vice President for Academic and Faculty Affairs, Elaine M. Charlson?
Action:	Committee members identified the need to clarify the scope and purpose of the University of Houston Human Resources along with the need for comparative data from other major research universities regarding comprehensiveness of human resources, including leave policies, level of benefits available, and nature of advocacy for faculty needs. This statement was communicated to the Associate Vice President for Academic and Faculty Affairs, Dr. Charlson
Agenda Item # 6	How can University Senate members give more input into the Senate representative on the Provost Search Committee regarding the criteria for a permanent provost? Committee members identified the need for more individual and collective input to President Anne Jacobson regarding the qualifications and experience needed for the permanent provost.
Action:	Concerns were communicated to Senate President Anne Jacobson and requests were made to put this item on the November, 2003 Senate agenda in a more structured way.
Action:	A special meeting was held December 2003 by Anne Jacobson with individual Faculty Senate representatives regarding criteria for selecting a permanent provost.
Agenda Item # 7	How can faculty monitor and recommend a system or process for assuring that faculty have sufficient materials, including software site licenses for teaching and sufficient laboratory equipment including repairs for research?
Action:	A subcommittee was formed to study and report on this issue. Dale Rude is the committee member heading this action item. Recommendation that this item be continued during the 2004 year when new committee members are named.
Agenda Item # 8	The committee identified an ongoing priority issue of "the diminishing value of a total compensation package -- including salary, health insurance, retirement savings options, parking, low-cost gym facilities, etc." for faculty at the University of Houston. The committee also identified the need to examine policies in place regarding faculty leave -- sick, maternity, bereavement, family -- in terms of clarity and comprehensiveness.
Action:	A subcommittee of Steven Craig, Michael Connell and Roberta Weldon are gathering data and exploring possible future alternatives regarding health insurance. This issue should continue as a priority during 2004 when new committee members are named.
Action:	A subcommittee of Brian Byrnes, David Blecher and Valentini Brady began the process of gathering data regarding various leave policies at other public Universities. This work hould continue during 2004 when new committee members are named.