President Warner called the February 16 Faculty Senate meeting to order in the Farish Hall Kiva at 12:15 p.m.  

MEMBERS PRESENT:  [39]                                                       
BUS:      W. Chin, S. Kadipasaoglu, R. Keller
CLASS:   V. Brady, B. Byrnes, S. Craig, W. Herendeen, N. Houston, T. Karner, J. Kotarba, D. Mazella,
 J. Middents, D. Papell, F. Schiff, G. Trail
EDU:    M. Connell, J. Freiberg, S. McNeil, A. Warner
ENGR: T. Helwig, G. Paskusz, J. Richardson, D. Zimmerman
HRM:    K. Titz
LAW:    S. Huber, R. Schuwerk              
LIB:      D. Camille, S. Ferimer, M. Thomson
NSM:    T. Albright, P. Copeland, J. Eichberg, G. Johnson, E. Leiss, D. Wells
OPT:     R. Manny         
PHA:    C. Pedemonte
TECH:  K. Greenwood                                                                           
GSSW:  H. Karger   

MEMBERS ABSENT:  [13]                                                                                                                    
ARCH:  D. Kacmar        
BUS:    J. Berkowitz                 
CLASS:  K. Brown, R. Lence (w/Notice), J. Rushing (w/Notice), G. San Miguel                                
ENGR: O. Ghazzaly     
LAW:    M. Duncan (w/Notice)                
NSM:    D. Blecher, D. Graur (w/Notice), A. Ignatiev (w/Notice), T. Lee(w/Notice)                
OPT:     S. Quintero

VISITORS:  
Jay Gogue (UHS Chancellor and UH President), Jerry Strickland (Interim UHS Senior Vice Chancellor and UH Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs/ Provost), 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), Ed Hugetz (UHS Assistant Vice Chancellor and UH Assistant Vice President for Planning & University Outreach), Craig Ness (Executive Director, Academic Budgets & Operations, SVP-AA), John Powell (Executive Speechwriter), Adriana Barillas-Batarse (Reporter, Daily Cougar)

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:  The January 26, 2005 minutes were approved.  NOTE:  Natalie Houston was present at this meeting.  The official print and Web minutes have been corrected to reflect this.

Report from and Discussion with the Faculty Senate President:  Allen Warner
            Pres. Warner said about 500 students, alumni, faculty, and staff participated in the February 8 UH System Day in Austin.  People were formed into teams and every legislator was visited by three different teams.  It was a busy day. Pres. Warner said he would like to acknowledge Dr. Gogue’s participation.  President Gogue was in Austin to address the legislature, but he drove back late the night before so that he could be at UH to charge the group and then he rode the bus back to Austin.  That was very much appreciated.  Dr. Warner said he was on a team with one other faculty member and three students.  He explained that when the team entered an office, the students would tell the legislator that universities needed to maintain the right to set their own tuition because the increases last time were necessary to make up for the cuts that came out of the last legislative session.  That is a powerful message that cannot be delivered by faculty.  It was a very good session.
            Pres. Warner said the Senate Executive Committee and he have been very much involved with the search for the UHS Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs/UH Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost of this campus.  There are five candidates. Two have come to campus; one is here now and two more will be coming in the next two days.  All faculty should take the opportunity to attend the open sessions.  Pres. Warner said he has contacted the Faculty Senates of each of candidates’ institutions to get their perception of these candidates.  That feedback is being shared with the Executive Committee, which also has an hour with each of these candidates.  The Executive Committee has decided to hold all of the individual evaluations until all candidates have visited the campus.  In addition to submitting individual evaluations, the Executive Committee will be meeting on February 21 to compare notes and see if there is a composite set of recommendations that can be forwarded to the search committee for their consideration.  The Faculty Senate Website currently has a list of the names of the candidates with the opening meeting times/places for each, and there is a hot link to an evaluation form that can be used for the candidates.  Pres. Warner encouraged all faculty to do attend the open sessions and provide feedback to the search committee since this is a position that will affect everyone.  The search committee will be recommending three candidates to Dr. Gogue.
            Pres. Warner offered Kudos to Mamie Moy, Chemistry Professor and Director of the UH Center for Science and Mathematics Applied Resources (SMART), who was recently awarded the Helen M. Free Award for Public Outreach by the American Chemical Society.   Dr. Moy was recognized for a lifetime achievement in outreach to students and teachers.
            Pres. Warner said he is searching for other ways to get announcements out.  He does not want to take senators’ time reading announcements.  It is important that when senators together that they do good things and consider important issues.
            Sen. Eichberg said all comments on candidates should be submitted to the Provost Search Committee by 5:00 p.m. on February 21.  Senators and other faculty are certainly welcome to make undirected calls about the candidates elsewhere and that any feedback should be brought to the attention of the search committee.
            Pres. Warner said he would urge every senator to do their own due diligence on each of the finalists and to get that information to the search committee.  The deadline is 5:00 p.m. on February 21.  The last candidate will be on campus on Friday, February 18.

Report from and Discussion with the UH System Chancellor and UH President:  Jay Gogue
            Dr. Gogue reported on UH Day in Austin.  Dr. Gogue said Pres. Warner neglected to tell you part of the story.  True, about 500 people met at UH so there were 7-9 busloads of people who went to Austin.  Dr. Gogue said he rode in the lead bus with the Senate President.  They had a good time and a busy day, followed by a reception.  As he had to testify the next morning at 7:00 a.m., Dr. Gogue remained in Austin while the rest of the leadership rode in the lead bus.  They were almost to San Antonio before they realized that they had gone the wrong way.  Rather than cut through on I-10, they came back to Austin and then on to Houston. 
            Dr. Gogue said he had three different opportunities to give formal testimony last week.  One was on Monday before the Senate Higher Education Committee, chaired by Senator Royce West from Dallas. There were several hours of testimony with a lot of questions about tuition, especially about the impact of tuition deregulation.  What is the university doing?  What kind of plans does the university have for the next year?  These were very straight forward questions.  On Wednesday morning there was a hearing session with the House Appropriation Committee from 7:00 – 9:00 a.m. for UH and the UHS.  Dr. Gogue said he has worked with legislatures in a number of states, but starting at 7:00 a.m. is very unusual.  Again the questions were what one would expect.  What are the university’s priorities?  What is UH trying to do?  Dr. Gogue talked about the University’s basic priorities: (a) to try to get some restoration of the 5% budget cut.  (b) restore the debt service on the bonds.  This hits schools or institutions differently.  At UH it does have not a huge impact, but at UHCL seventy cents out of every dollar that they raised with tuition increases went to the tuition revenue bond debt service.  As State law required them to set aside 20% for scholarships, the 10% that was left didn’t give them a lot of flexibility. (c) the HEAF monies.  The Higher Education Assistance Fund is extremely important.  The priority was to get the $175 million in HEAF reauthorized, then hopefully adjusted for inflation. (d) to see that Tier 1 is fully funded with $42 million in the pool.  UH’s share would be around $12 or $13 million for the biennium.  (e) continue to allow the authority for deregulated tuition. 
            Dr. Gogue said he gave formal testimony at a House Appropriation hearing on Wednesday morning and a Senate Finance Committee hearing on Thursday morning.  At this point of the session, it appears the House doesn’t seem to be particularly interested in the restoration of the 5% budget cut.  There is probably more support on the Senate side to look at how institutions will come up with 5%.   
            It looks like both the House and the Senate are supportive of restoring the debt service for revenue bonds.  For 35 years Texas did it one way, but changed it two years due to the financial picture.  That may be changed back.      
            HEAF monies attract positive comments both from the House and the Senate, which is good at this stage of the process.  There are some opportunities to increase these funds.
            There are two competing proposals for research funding:  (1) the research development fund, formerly the Tier 1 fund, has $42 or $43 million.  UH’s draw has been the largest of the schools with access to that fund.  Neither UT nor Texas A&M have access to that pool of money.  (2) the Governor’s proposal or the Emerging Technology Fund which proposes to allocate $300 million of which 50% would go to new research centers ($150 million); $75 million would go toward the recruitment of various outstanding faculty to become to be a part of the research centers; and $75 million would be used for matches.  That is a wonderful proposal.  All A&M schools and all UT institutions would be to apply for that money so that is different.  The second factor is how will they measure success because the Governor’s plan calls for the creation jobs and other demonstrable things in a very accountable way or the university has to pay the money back.    
            Dr. Hugetz said there is concern about what might happen with the Texas Grant Program which has been very supportive to this campus.  There is talk about cutting it by 40%.  That would really impact UH students.  Dr. Gogue said that is a good point.  These financial aid packages for the neediest students are pretty substantial.  To qualify the family income must be less than $30,000 per year.  There are competing proposals.  One is to move that pool of funds to just community colleges with four-year schools dealing with the Be-on-time money where a student, who graduates from high school, goes to one a four-year institution, maintains a B average and graduates in four years, has all loans forgiven.  Senator Ellis was the sponsor or creator of the Texas Grant Programs.  Senator Ellis is obviously very concerned as UH will be if Texas Grants is cut by 40%.
            Dr. Gogue said that two weeks ago some members of the Board of Regents, Grover Campbell, Art Vailas and he spent a full day in Washington.  The purpose was to meet with both Texas senators, which the group did, and to meet with the local federal delegation.  The group presented twelve different initiatives that came out of the University process to identify areas of federal interest.  The group would sit down with each member to talk about the various priorities of the University.  The group always talks about the reorganization of higher education and the impact on their appropriations.  It was a good session.  Dr. Gogue said his goal is not so much the specifics of which areas in federal funds are earmarked for UH, but that UH needs to grow those numbers.  The baseline for federal earmarks in the past five or six years has been about $2 million a year.  Last year UH received about $6.3 million.  The current year, UH should get around $10 million or $12 million in terms of direct federal funding.  Air quality is likely to be the largest part of that funding.  It’s easy to understand why that would be a high priority in Houston with air related issues.  There is a lot of effort to try to do a better job of monitoring and to determine point source pollution sites.  The Regents were very active in Austin as well as in Washington.  Eight of the nine Regents went to Austin for UHS Day.  The group did have a chance to visit with the Governor, Lt. Governor and Speaker of the House.
            Sen. Keller asked Dr. Gogue to comment about the capital campaign.  Dr. Gogue said there is a search for the Vice President for University Advancement who will direct the campaign. About a year ago a firm was hired to look at the institution’s internal readiness to handle a major campaign.  The study has been completed.  The University is carrying out their recommendations to prepare internally for a campaign.  In the second phase, the consultants will go out into the community and talk with people about a UH capital campaign.  They will ask potential donors if they will be receptive or supportive.  The plan is to get 200 samples from the community.  These are focused interviews where they sit with the person for about an hour and ask questions about the priorities UH has identified and see what the level of interest is, then they come back to UH and they say the campaign should five years, seven years or whatever length.  They will give a dollar figure that they believe UH can raise.  Then the quiet phase of the campaign begins.  There is no public announcement until the University has raised 40% to 50% of the total.  At this stage the internal assessment is done, but the VP needs to be in place.  No goal has been established yet, but in a public meeting the consultant was asked what size campaign UH might have and he commented that UH should be somewhere between $600-$750 million.
            Sen. Wells asked if there is serious consideration in the legislature to do away with the 10% rule (automatic admission for high school students who graduate in the top 10% of their class)?  Dr. Gogue said he was asked what impact does the rule have on the university and his little cheat sheet said no impact on UH.  He added that he didn’t know if there is a serious move or not.  Dr. Gogue said he understands it comes up in every session.
            Sen. Schuwerk asked if the President worried about the legislature giving UH less money once the capital campaign gets going and appears to be successful.  Dr. Gogue said in today’s world universities are actually measured, looked at and expected to bring in those dollars.  It seems that in Texas if an institution can become wealthy, there is a strong interest in helping it stay wealthy.
            Sen. Copeland said he had just come from a presentation by a faculty candidate in his department and he was wondering who is the constituency of the faculty member, in addition to the university?  Dr. Gogue said the number one constituency is obviously the individuals in that department, then the disciplinary field.  He added that if a department hired certain people who have an interest in health science, then the department would want to  involve the people in the Texas Medical Center because it might create a constituency that could support new labs, new facilities, and new equipment.  Dr. Gogue said when he thinks about constituencies for a president,
which could apply to newly hired faculty, he thinks about (in a university) faculty, staff, students, the parents of students, and the Board of Regents.  On the external side there are the donors and alumni, who may or may not give money.  Then there are a host of special interest groups: Athletics, Moores Opera House, people who hire UH graduates and research sponsors.  There are elected officials, accreditation bodies, etc.
            Sen. Huber asked for more information about the press release announcing an arrangement with the medical center.  Dr. Gogue said UH signed what is called an affiliation agreement which is good for 30-years with the Methodist Hospital (TMH).   The positive part for UH includes:  (1) TMH is very desirous to recruit exceptional scholars nationally and internationally.  These scholars want to have an academic home as well as medical facilities.  There is potential to hire an exceptional scientist there who can link with the chemistry, biology, computer science or mathematics departments.  (2) They will be opening within the TMC a 200,000 or 400,000 square foot of research space.  UH has an opportunity to be a key player in the use of that space.  There will be opportunities for many different disciplines, even those that don’t appear related to medical needs, to be engaged in the overall process and research.  (3) From a very programmatic point of view, the most important part of this partnership with TMH, in addition to the opportunity for clinical research and the possibility of generating NIH grants, is that this is probably the greatest chance to get UH to the status of Tier 1.  In terms of UH’s research funding, a little over 50% of all federal funding is in NIH money.  The nature of medicine has changed dramatically from new discoveries being made by the physicians bedside to the basic scientist taking the problems that the physicians find and doing the research that makes a difference in the way health care is done.    

Report from and Discussion with the UH System Interim Senior Vice Chancellor and University of Houston Interim Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs/Provost:  Jerald Strickland
            Dr. Strickland reported on: (1) Search VC/VP for University Advancement. Dr. Strickland said the committee has finished its telephone interviews with eight candidates.  It selected four to invite to campus within a week to two weeks.  The Senate Executive Committee will be invited to participate in those campus interviews.  Keep in mind that this is a system-wide position so there will be folks from different campuses involved.  (2) Strategic Initiatives.  Dr. Strickland said the Texas Medical Center Initiative is the first and most important step UH will take in many years.  UH and the System may have 100 projects at the TMC but it didn’t have a foot there.  Having a presence there is what the faculty and the Board of Regents wanted to do. In the strategic planning process, that is one of the things that UH wanted to make sure happened in the near future.  There are other things the Board wants UH to do and, of course, those initiatives are being working on, too.  There is an initiative in energy that is coming to focus.  UH has been organizing folks with a common interest in the energy environment.  There was a meeting about a week ago in the Bauer College that involved folks from the community and from the industry.  The group discussed how it might participate in the Governor’s New Development Fund.  It also discussed establishing an institute in this area in which UH participates.  (3) UH has 70 faculty searches on-going.  Last fall UH had 904 tenured or tenure-track faculty.  A little process was made.  UH didn’t lose as many people last year but it is still searching.  (4) Budget Hearings for the colleges will begin in March and later for the divisions.  The Faculty Senate has asked for a representative to be at the table and there will be one.  The hearings will have the Provost staff, VPs, a Senate representative, and the deans, who will be presenting their requests and justifications.  This is the first time the Senate has been included and he is looking forward to these hearings.  (5) The Designated Tuition Review Committee will be like the one formed last year to look at all the requests for designated tuition and considered the possible funding scenarios.  Last year with less money coming from the state, the increase in designated tuition was very important.  It was the only way faculty or staff got any raises.  This year the Senate has four representatives on the committee. Committee members are engaged and are interested.  Students are present as full voting members plus 2 or 3 administrators to facilitate and some staff who keep up with the data and information.  Pres. Warner sits on every committee with Dr. Strickland and, if he is not there, Sen. Craig is there.
            Sen. Craig said how is the new Science and Engineering building going to be finished?  Dr. Strickland said the original plan was to construct a bigger building than UH was able to fill at first.  Additions would be made over time and through fund raising.  The two deans (ENGR & NSM), a committee, Development and the last administration thought that was a good plan.  Fund raising has not been as quick as expected.  The building is going to be finished. It will have air conditioning and horizontals and verticals.  Additional funds are needed to fill out more spaces.  This year there is about $6 million in Excellence Funds that will be utilized to fill out portions of the building.   Dr. Elaine Charlson, who was in the audience, interjected that horizontals will be worked on first, followed by offices, hallways and other projects.  Dr. Strickland said he recently met with the deans and they know what the issue is.  Development is working with them. 
            Sen. Copeland asked how much money will it take to fill this building out?  Dr. Strickland said $15 million would make a big difference.  That is a challenge, not an impossible task.
            Sen. Craig asked is the building going to be open this September?  Dr. Charlson said it is on schedule to be completed next summer; the start of the fall semester (2006).  The Academic Service Center is set to open in January.
            Sen. Freiberg said FS-CoUG met with Dr. Rudley yesterday and he shared with the commission that the academic cost per credit hour per dollar between UT, Texas A&M and UH.  Sen. Freiberg said he was impressed by the fact that UH is 2-3 times lower than A&M and about 6 times lower than UT.  Dr. Hugetz said that information refers to the cost of the system.  Dr. Hugetz said the UH number is smaller is because the System operation was merged into the main campus.  The cost per student at UH is approximately $62 whereas UT costs $350 and A&M costs around $300.  Dr. Strickland said most systems don’t operate the way UHS does.  By collapsing the system and campus together, there were savings. 
            Sen. Copeland said he is on his department’s faculty search committee.  One candidate’s vita was very impressive so he called her advisor to get more information.  Sen. Copeland was told that she had already accepted a job offer.  She had two job offers to consider before UH was ready to invite her to campus.  UH lost a great opportunity to hire this woman because they were able to do all things necessary to make a job offer in February whereas UH couldn’t interview her until March.  Something needs to be done to make this process better.  Dr. Strickland said that process starts at the department level.  It doesn’t take the Provost’s Office very long to get its part of that done.  It could be done it in a day.  It has been done in a day.  It’s been done in a couple of hours so that UH doesn’t miss the opportunity to make the offer.  Sen. Copeland said his department didn’t know about this opportunity because the ad didn’t get out until January.  Dr. Strickland said he will talk to the deans and department chairs about this process.
            Sen. Craig asked were health insurance problems for new hires solved?  Dr. Strickland said he has encouraged the deans to add to their offer letter component dollars and cents to cover the cost of insurance for first 90-days.  Dr. Strickland said there are three or four options to handle coverage which is in the offer letter.
            Dr. Gogue said in reference to Sen. Copeland’s comment about hiring, universities are seeing everything pushed up to the point where if offers aren’t out by the first of February, institutions miss the first group.  It was apparent last year in the Provost search where some good candidates dropped out because UH was trying to make a decision in April.  It is almost a necessity to have vacant positions cleaned up by Christmas to be able to highly competitive.

BUDGET & FACILITIES COMMITTEE, CHAIR – Mary Beth Thomson
            The first Budget & Facilities Committee meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, February 23, at 10:00 a.m. in the Faculty Senate Conference room.

COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES, CHAIR -  Jerome Freiberg
            The Committee on Committees had an organizational meeting, elected a chair (Jerome Freiberg) and set a meeting date of February 25, at 10:00 a.m. to review committee recommendation for the next academic year.

EDUCATIONAL POLICIES & STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, CHAIR – Dan Wells
            The Educational Policies and Student Affairs Committee has a meeting scheduled for Friday, February 25, at 11:30 a.m. in room 220 Ezekiel Cullen, the President’s Board room.  

FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, CHAIR – Katy Greenwood
            The Faculty Affairs Committee has a meeting scheduled for Friday, February 25, at 12:00 Noon in the Faculty Senate Conference room.

Extension of Probationary Period for Emergency Purposes - DRAFT (2/7/05)
[Approved by the Faculty Affairs Committee with a majority e-vote of  8 For, 2 Preferred Further Discussion]

A faculty member has the right to request an extension of the probationary period because of family emergencies or other serious personal circumstances.  Circumstances that may justify an extension include, but are not limited to, serious illness and injury, responsibility for the primary care of an infant or small child, responsibility for the primary care of a close relative who is disabled, elderly or seriously ill or other serious disruptions or unexpected reasons beyond the faculty member’s control.  Such requests may be granted by the Provost under the following general guidelines: all such requests must be in writing, must be forwarded through the department chair and the dean to the Provost, and must be submitted within a reasonable amount of time after the emergency or other personal circumstances arise, and normally will not be considered after March 1 of the academic year prior to the tenure review period.  In the event that an extension is granted prior to a mandatory probationary review, the probationary period will normally be extended for one year.

From 2004 Faculty Handbook:  Extension of Probationary Period for Emergency Purposes

Family emergencies or other serious personal circumstances may on occasion justify a request for an extension of the probationary period not exceeding one academic year during the probationary period.  Such requests may be granted by the Provost under the following general guidelines:  all such requests must be in writing, must have the signed written recommendation of the department chair and the dean, after which they must be forwarded to the Provost, and must be submitted within a reasonable amount of time after the emergency or other serious personal circumstances arise, and shall not be considered after March 1 of the year prior to the tenure review period.  In the event that an extension is granted prior to a mandatory probationary review, that review will be delayed for one year.

            Sen. Greenwood said the FAC has not met as a committee, but used electronic voting to approve the proposed revision of the tenure clock statement in the Faculty Handbook.  The document before the Senate today was drafted by the Provost based on previous discussions with the FAC.  The revision doesn’t change the wording very much, but it gives the faculty member the right to propose an extension and have it go to the Provost. 
            Pres. Warner said this revision was a spin-off of the Primary Caregiver Leave proposal from last spring and is meant to clarify stopping the tenure clock.  There was a proposal from the Provost last fall that was considered by the FAC in November with the Committee offering a counter proposal to the Provost.  This version incorporates most, if not all, of the elements of that counter proposal. 
            Sen. Papell moved to table the resolution until it can be discussed at a full meeting of the FAC rather than by an e-mail.  When the FAC discussed this statement in November, it wanted to include some very specific language that is in the Texas A&M policy.  Other Committee members and he believed that the earlier version provided more protection for women who are pregnant and who have children and want to extend the tenure clock.  That language is not in this proposal so the proposal needs to come back to the committee.
            Sen. Huber asked if the Senator would be willing to hold that motion until people who care to say something about the proposal have a chance to speak?  Sen. Papell withdrew the motion.
            Pres. Warner said the full motion is on the table; the revised language is on the table for discussion.
            Sen. Greenwood said the FAC did electronic voting and with a majority e-vote of 8 For while 2 Preferred Further Discussion.
            Sen. Huber said the Senate should never draft from the floor, but in looking at the document, there are a couple of changes worth discussing.  Right is a word that jumps out at him; as in “I have a right to ask the President to double my salary.”  Right suggests a promise and the rest of the document doesn’t suggest anything like that.  Right isn’t the word needed in this document.  The second suggestion is that the old version says the probationary period will be delayed for one year and this draft says it will normally be extended for one year.  Compare the two sentences and one might say that the extension could be less than one year.  It could also mean one year and no more.  The policy should be specific on that point.  And finally, this policy needs an attitude toward rules.  For example, set a rule that students may take a maximum course load of 16 hours per semester.  To take 17 hours, the student just fills out a piece of paper and UH will waive the rule.  To take 18 hours, the student has to have really good reasons to have the request considered, but for a request to take 19 hours, the answer is no, no matter what.  The policy needs to be clear that if this is a bona fide request, it would be granted.  The policy needs to suggest an attitude.
            Sen. Schuwerk said one change that he noticed was the role played by department chairs. It looks like under the old version the department chair was the gatekeeper; whereas it looks like now it really passes through the department chair to the Provost.  The department chair might be against it but it will still go to the Provost.  Sen. Schuwerk said he wanted to confirm that change.  Sen. Middents responded that it was very deliberate change.
            Sen. Craig asked if there was a reason for the timing of presenting the proposal now.  Pres. Warner said he asked Sen. Greenwood about the possibility of submitting an e-mail vote because UH has people who need this policy change now.  Pres. Warner said he has been getting requests and questions for months about where the Senate is on this policy.  The Senate got a memo on August 3, 2004 from Dr. Gogue saying that this part of the Primary Caregiver Leave was something that UH owned and that the Senate ought to get on it and get it done.  It is now February 2005 -- six months later -- and the Senate is thinking about delaying it longer.  There are people who may be in need but are afraid to do anything until the policy is clarified.
            Sen. Papell said the wording in the A&M policy was presumptive right for a woman to have a child and extend the tenure clock.
            Sen. McNeil added that the policy applies not only to women, but men who stay home with a child.
            Sen. Papell said he didn’t remember and didn’t have the exact language but the Senate should not vote without discussing that language.
            Pres. Warner said he would check with the former FAC chair, Sen. Karger, but he remembers that the last meeting of the FAC in 2004 dealt with this proposal and sent it back to the Provost who did change that language.  There was some question about the language.  The issue of presumptive right was discussed but one of the Senate’s legal minds pointed out that the notion of presumptive right overawes everything else.   Pres. Warner said he remembers that the FAC took the word, right, out before the proposal was sent back to the Provost.  That has been re-inserted by the Provost which with his counter proposal.  Sen. Karger agreed, saying he believed it was Sen. Huber who pointed out the problem with the phrase presumptive right. 
            Sen. Copeland said he didn’t see the revision was a problem.  As far as he could tell the Provost has the option to deny a request whether it is called a right or a request.  The Provost can say no.
            Sen. Keller said it seems like most of the impact would be on the fourth or fifth year of the tenure clock.  Some colleges might have an important review in the third year or at two and half years.  It is not unknown for someone to be given a termination after the third year.  Would this policy have an impact at all on what colleges can do before that ultimate year?  Pres. Warner said the A&M policy says the faculty member has a right to stop the tenure clock.
            Sen. Keller asked what if a faculty member makes a request at the end of the second year, before the third year begins?  Pres. Warner said there are institutions in this country with a policy that doesn’t differentiate between the years.  They just say the faculty member has the right to stop the tenure clock. It doesn’t say why and it’s not a request.
            Sen. Leiss said he didn’t think there is any reason to say that stopping the tenure clock after the second year is different from stopping it after the fourth year. The person loses a year.  When that happens is not the Senate’s business.
            Sen. Byrnes said he would prefer to take the policy back to the FAC and discuss it further, especially with the additional information.  The responsibility for the primary care of an infant or small child may imply a pregnancy which might allow a person to make plans, but to refuse to consider a leave request after March 1 is a little absurd.  Lot of things could happen to an individual for which they may need some extended leave and which may occur after the March 1 deadline.  Sen. Byrnes urged the Senate to send the policy back to FAC for further review.
            Sen. Huber said this body isn’t ready to vote on this document.  One answer might be to have a rule that says provided a faculty member makes a request by March 1 the person is entitled to it.  After that date, a different standard might be applied.  He suggested giving the Provost a sense of the meeting that this draft is fine; go with it because of the clarification that chairs and the deans don’t have a veto and requests go to the Provost.  It is going to take a couple more months to get this settled.
            Sen. Schuwerk said he wanted to focus on the exigent circumstances.  If there really are exigent circumstances and a need to act in the very near future, that changes the question.  Is the policy ideal as drafted?  Is it better than the one UH has now?  If UH needs a policy right away, then should the Senate vote today or vote by e-mail in a very short time?  On the other hand if there is time, then the Senate should refer the policy back to the FAC with all the suggestion that have been made.
            Sen. Leiss agreed, saying is the Senate trying to write a policy that is applicable to all possibilities or is it  trying to come up with something that can be done right now but can be changed later?  Certainly the Provost seems to be sympathetic to the problem so the urgency shouldn’t be that great.  He added that he didn’t like the wording of “unexpected reasons beyond the faculty member’s control.”  Pregnancy is something where there is some control, so he would prefer that language be changed.
            Sen. Karger said, having being part of the long arduous process of coming up with this statement, he felt that any policy is going to have unintended consequences.  There are going to be unforeseen contingencies.  If there are cracks where people slip through, there is no reason why the Senate can’t revisit the policy and refine it.  No policy is an absolute, final statement. 
            Sen. Eichberg moved that if this document goes back to the FAC, the Senate ask the Provost to extend the deadline this year from March 1 to June 1 to give this body enough time to finish this process.   Sen. Leiss seconded the motion.
            Sen. Huber said that is a bad idea; never tell the administration to postpone decisions. Administrators are supposed to make decisions and the Senate should change the policy when it is ready to do it right.
            Sen. Johnson said he didn’t see that an amendment was necessary because the policy states that a request normally would not be considered, so it could be considered at anytime.
            The Senate voted by a majority not to request the deadline extension, defeating the amendment.
            Sen. Freiberg asked if the Senate had a fixed time for the Handbook changes?  Pres. Warner said the answer is no, but he understands that it is an element under discussion by the FS-CoUG.
            Sen. Freiberg said the reason he asked is it might be useful if the Senate called this an interim policy since there are so many changes that need to occur.  Passing it as interim policy would allow the committee to continue its work.
            Pres. Warner asked if Sen. Freiberg was proposing an amendment.  Sen. Freiberg so moved.  Sen. Kotarba provided the second.
            Sen. Leiss said he didn’t see any point in coming up with an interim policy if the Senate doesn’t feel that the revised statement is good enough for a permanent policy.  UH has an existent policy. 
            Pres. Warner said that, just as a reminder, the problem with the existing policy is substantial antidotal evidence of rubber rulers, lack of consistent enforcement and substantial gate keeping done by department chairs, or in some cases, deans or others.  There is also substantial underground information that if a faculty member requests any extension on probated time, it can affect the disposition of a promotion and tenure vote when the individual comes up for a final decision.
            Sen. Leiss said he didn’t see anything in the language as it is written that would preclude anybody from requesting that the request go up further, even if a department chair from refuses to grant the leave.
            Sen. Schuwerk said currently they have to have a signed recommendation of the department.
            Sen. Leiss said the Provost should instruct the Deans and Chairs by chain of command that they have to write a written recommendation.  There is nothing in this policy that could not be done now.
            Pres. Warner said the motion on the floor and seconded is to amend the proposal policy by signifying it as interim.  Is there further discussion on that proposal?  The motion to amend the policy by adding the term “interim” passed by a majority vote. (19 For; 14 Against). 
            Sen. Papell moved to table the interim policy and send it back to the FAC for further discussion.  The FAC will report back to the Senate when it is done.
            The Senate voted against the motion to table by a majority (7 For; 25 Against).  
            Sen. Middents said the assumption by the committee was that UH has a receptive administration and as the FAC couldn’t possibly address every possible exigency, it didn’t try. 
            Sen. Schuwerk asked was it or was it not the intention of the committee that this was a one-time request?
            Sen. Pedemonte said it was his idea that this was a one-time request.
            Sen. Middents said there was a right to do it one time, but there were also questions about what happens with circumstances not under one’s control.
            Sen. Keller said he would like to resubmit this to the FAC.
            Pres. Warner said on the floor is a motion to accept an interim policy, recommend to the Provost that the administration follow this interim policy for the time being and ask the FAC to work on it and come back with a provision for a permanent policy.  He added that one reason this policy is important has to do with a report released less than a week ago from the NCE (National Council on Education?) suggesting that tenure be re-looked at in terms of a 10-year time span not seven. 
            Sen. Keller suggested the senators vote this motion down so it goes back to the committee.
            Sen. Eichberg said he opposed voting this motion down because then UH does not have an interim policy.  It will have the old policy until a new policy is brought forward.  In the meantime March 1 will come and go and people who are affected will not have the benefit of the more liberal regulations of the interim policy.
            Sen. Freiberg called the question.
            Pres. Warner said the question is whether or not to adopt this proposal as a new policy on an interim basis with recommending to the Provost to follow this for the time being while the FAC continues refining the document.  The motion passed by majority vote (voice).  

SCHOLARSHIP & COMMUNITY COMMITTEE, CHAIR - Joseph Kotarba
            An organizational meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 16, from 10:00 – 11:00 a.m. in the Faculty Senate Conference room.

Discussion and Vote on Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics (CoIA) Document:  Joseph Kotarba
            Sen. Kotarba said the steering committee of the CoIA has decided to extend the deadline to April 1 for Faculty Senates to vote on the Academic Integrity proposal.  The proposal has been extended in order to collect editorial suggestions, respond to questions and to clean the document up and construct a new and hopefully more meaningful executive summary.  Sen. Kotarba said he would have a new version of the proposal on-line at least a week before the March Senate meeting along with a new executive summary in which he will try to highlight some of the more important points.

 New Business:
            As an information item, Sen. Leiss said that he is serving on the Food Service Advisory Committee.  This is a fairly important year because there is an RFP (Request for Proposals) out for the food service contract on the entire campus for a period of 5-10 years.  Anybody who has major issues, comments, etc., should send them to Dr. Leiss (coscel@cs.uh.edu).  At this point the Committee has received three proposals from three major companies.  The group is also in the process of conducting site visits.

            Pres. Warner said the Faculty Senate Retreat will be March 4, from 8:30 a.m. - 2:30 p.m. 

 
The meeting adjourned at 1:55 p.m.