Meeting Minutes
February 12, 2002
Meeting convened at 1:03 p.m. by Bruce DeVantier, President.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Paul Angelis (for Geoffrey S. Nathan), Michael Batterman (for Anna Brzyski), Richard Coulson, Bruce
A. DeVantier, James E. Duggan, Karen Having (for Linda M. Grace), Robert H. Helfert, Paul H. Henry, H. Randy
Hughes, Laura K. Kidd, Manohar R. Kulkarni, Mary E. Lamb, Lenore Langsdorf, Stephen M. Milner, Nancy
Mundschenk, Laura Murphy (for Lisabeth A. Dilalla), Geoffrey S. Nathan, Donna M. Post, Karen K. Prichard, Richard A.
Rivers, Janet L. Rogers, Michael F. Shanahan, Pamela A. Smoot, Robert L. Spellman, Jane L. Swanson, Russ Trimble (ex
officio), Susan E. Tulis, Lori Vermeulen, John S. Washburn, David J. White, Frederick Williams, Margaret Winters (ex
officio), Walter Wendler (ex officio), Alan Woolf.
Members absent without proxy: Kimberly A. Espy.
Visitors and Guests: Alexa Aguilar (Daily Egyptian), David Carlson (Library Affairs), Mike Loizzo (WSIU-FM).
MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting on December 11, 2001, were approved as presented.
REPORTS
1. B. DeVantier reported: a) the Senate was asked to submit names for the search for permanent associate
provost. The Committee on Committees will submit names as requested; however when this issue was discussed in
Executive Council, it was pointed out the sentiment of the Senate has always been to fill the higher positions before filling
the subordinate ones; b) a joint meeting of the Senate Executive Council and the Graduate Council Executive Committee will
be held on February 13 to make a reasoned response to the controversy surrounding the budget, specifically the President's
announcement of off-cycle raises for some of his staff. It is hoped a joint statement will be prepared and presented at the
Board of Trustees meeting on February 14; c) the search for a Faculty/Staff Ombudsman is complete. However, there are
procedural matters that need to be resolved at the President's level before an official announcement can be made; d) he
attended a meeting of the Norwood Committee, which was empaneled to try to improve the level of cooperation between the
Carbondale and Edwardsville campuses. One of the charges given to the Senate presidents of both campuses was to try to
develop a set of suggestions concerning the potential for profitable collaboration. Anyone with profitable suggestions can
contact him; e) there has been some controversy about prayer at graduation. It is his understanding that a committee has
been formed to try and resolve this matter.
2. Chancellor Wendler reported: a) he had intended to have a group together to discuss the issue of invocation at
graduation; however, the Board of Trustees wants to discuss the matter. It may be a directive will result that will eliminate
the need for a meeting; b) there was a $1.5 million shortfall in tuition last year because enrollment was down by 900
students. The Governor called back $25 million from higher education, of which SIUC's share was $1.5 million. The
campus is now at $2 million total in budget reductions. The Governor then asked for help from higher education with health
care costs that totaled $47 million. SIUC's share of that total is $3.7 million, putting the University $6.7 million in the hole.
The process of implementing cuts has already begun. He noted summer school has not been canceled, and promised that no
student will be prevented from graduating. There will be budgetary reductions in every area of the campus; b) the searches
for vice chancellor for research and dean of the School of Medicine are progressing.
3. Interim Provost Winters reported: a) the associate vice chancellor position could not be filled at the time she
stepped out to become interim provost because she had not resigned the position. Under any other circumstances, it would
have been filled at once because it is a key position. Although the position reports officially to the provost, it works very
closely with the chancellor as well. Therefore, it should not be an interim any longer than it has to be; b) letters should be
going out on tenure and promotion in the next few weeks. Interim Provost Winters noted this would be her last Senate
meeting, as she will be leaving the University after 25 years. She wished everyone well.
QUESTION AND ANSWER
1. D. Post asked if the Chancellor could intervene with what she sees as a major safety issue on campus. She
believes there should be a series of articles in the Daily Egyptian explaining to students, faculty, and staff about the
crosswalks, the signs, and what they mean. Chancellor Wendler indicated he has been talking with Vice Chancellor Poshard
about this issue and is attempting to find a way to alleviate the problem.
2. R. Hughes asked Interim Provost Winters whether the search for a permanent associate vice chancellor will be
completed and the position filled before she leaves. Interim Provost Winters responded that she is still putting the committee
together, but it is possible the position will be filled in the next three weeks. She does not want to put out a position
description until the committee is formed. However, she will be asking for someone with administrative experience at the
level of chair or above. The search will be internal.
3. L. Langsdorf asked Chancellor Wendler if a more detailed description of the budget could be given that shows
where the cuts are being made. There have been discussions on campus about where the money is going, including in the
President's office. Because of the recent concern, people are asking how much money the President gets to run his office
and where it comes from. Chancellor Wendler indicated that one portion comes from tax revenue and another comes from
the Governor. L. Langsdorf indicated the figures she has seen only say what comes into the campus in the way of state
appropriations. She realizes the cuts are being made everywhere, but there are no statistics as to which cuts are going
where for the entire budget. Chancellor Wendler responded it is possible to get those statistics. As a matter of fact, his goal
is to have the budget online in its fullness for anyone to view. He indicated he has nothing to hide and is eager to make it
available so people can see that [the administration] is not squirreling away money and somehow profiting from not
spending.
4. R. Coulson asked if there is a procedure in place to find a replacement for Interim Provost Winters while the
search continues for a permanent provost. Chancellor Wendler responded he discussed with the Dean's Council earlier
about how to proceed since it is a fairly short-term appointment. He would like to have a committee consisting of the
provost's staff and deans to advise him on interim candidates for the position. He will work on an announcement to send to
the campus community that would allow people to be nominated for the position. It would have an experience requirement
of having served at least at the level of department chair or higher. Chancellor Wendler indicated he is willing to take some
input on the process. His plan is to consult with B. DeVantier, the Faculty Association, and other groups along the way.
5. J. Duggan asked Chancellor Wendler if he would proceed with empaneling a committee to examine the issue of
prayer at graduation if a directive from the Board of Trustees does not occur. Chancellor Wendler responded he would most
likely, although he is unsure a committee would be able to tell him much more than he already knows. There is a very
strong sense in both directions about what is right. However, he is awaiting word from the Board about what should be
done.
6. N. Mundschenk commented that students begin registering for summer on March 1. Chancellor Wendler
indicated he would not know [about the cuts] until February 20. The fact is that he does not know at this time which of the
$7 million in cuts are recurring and which are one-time. N. Mundschenk indicated she raised the issue because students
should either be able to start registering or advisors should be instructed not to register them. R. Hughes asked how the
administration expected to save money by canceling summer classes. He understands there are costs attributed to instruction
that apply as an average over the year, but do they apply to making the kinds of decisions about the marginal things such as
utilization of facilities, etc. Chancellor Wendler indicated the University would not save money, and it could be argued that
money would be burned up by not offering classes in the summer. The lights are still on, the buildings are still cooled, etc.
The fact is that the savings would be in the form of faculty salaries.
On behalf of the Faculty Senate, B. DeVantier thanked Interim Provost Winters for all of her years of service to the
University, especially during its more difficult times. Her frank discussions have been much appreciated.
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
R. Hughes reported: 1) there was discussion about the order of hire for the associate provost position, as well as
the short turnaround in which to come up with names for a search committee; 2) there was discussion on the need to find a
replacement for the chair of the Budget Committee. This is something the Budget Committee needs to handle. It was
considered as to whether there needed to be a replacement for the committee itself. D. Post noted that at the last Senate
meeting, B. DeVantier asked anyone who was interested in chairing the Budget Committee to contact her. She indicated she
has not heard from anyone, and probably the Budget Committee should elect its own chair. R. Hughes suggested the Budget
Committee meet after the Senate meeting to do so.
ELECTIONS COMMITTEE - R. Hughes, Chair
R. Hughes reported the spring elections are underway. Every year a reapportionment is done to determine how
many representatives are needed per college (see Attachment A to the Agenda). The question of how the recent changes in
the Faculty Senate's Operating Paper may affect reapportionment will be addressed by the Governance Committee.
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES - D. Post, Chair
D. Post presented for approval the nominations of Marcia Anderson (Workforce Education and Development) and
Lenore Langsdorf (Speech Communication) to the Search Committee for Associate Vice Chancellor for Administration. She
also presented for approval the nominations of Cheryl Anderson (School of Law) and Steven Kraft (Agribusiness
Economics) to the Search Committee for Associate Provost.
Nominations approved on a voice vote.
BUDGET COMMITTEE -
M. Lamb distributed copies of her report on the Tuition Reallocation Committee (see appendix to these minutes).
FACULTY STATUS AND WELFARE - J. Duggan, Chair
J. Duggan reported he was selected to replace L. Grace as chair of the committee. The committee met to discuss a
number of issues, including: a) there is no college or University-wide policy on subvention. The committee may conduct a
survey and come up with a resolution; b) clinical faculty appointments; c) tenure rights policies; d) the proposed revisions to
the Clean Air Act Policy, which will be voted on at the committee's next meeting; e) a question as to why University
benefits pay for Viagra but not birth control. He will raise this issue at the next University Joint Benefits Committee
meeting.
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE - A. Woolf, Chair
A. Woolf reported the committee will look into the issue of Senate reapportionment.
UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE - D. White, Chair
D. White reported the committee still has a number of issues pending, two or three of which he hopes to bring forth
as resolutions in March.
NEW BUSINESS
K. Prichard stated she would like to discuss how members of the Senate would feel about a joint resolution with the
Graduate Council addressing the president's announcement of raises for his staff. R. Coulson expressed concern that the
headline in the paper emphasized the fact that President Walker compensated his staff with mid-year raises rather than the
fact that he saved his office a quarter of a million dollars. He did not believe there was anything unreasonable about putting
additional duties on existing staff and then compensating them with raises. It is certainly nothing new. A. Karnes stated the
point is that the rationale used by the President's office is faulty. There are fewer faculty members, and the remaining ones
have taken on additional duties without compensation. L. Langsdorf agreed, stating her department is down four faculty
members, and the work is being divided up. They are not being paid on par with other faculty in peer institutions. [The
University] did not have to spend money on a survey to show that faculty are underpaid; the IBHE has already done that.
Yet, faculty are not being given any extra pay to take on the extra assignments.
D. White asked if the positions in the President's office have been eliminated. R. Coulson indicated they have been
eliminated. B. DeVantier stated one of the key points of the Executive Council meeting was not so much the actual money
involved but the off-cycle raises. The concerns raised were: 1) it was done at a time when other people on campus are
scrambling to try and deal with the budget shortfalls; 2) it is galling to some faculty and administrators to see that there can
be mid-year raises; 3) it is unclear whether these people will then be eligible for further raises in the normal cycle; and 4)
why the raises could not have been postponed for the normal cycle. A. Woolf stated a key issue is the public's perception.
Most faculty recognize that the President's office has its own budget separate from the campus, and he is indeed the person
in control of that budget. However, because of the symbolism of giving mid-year increases when the campus is scrambling
to cover a shortfall, the problem of public perception has to be addressed. He also noted the concern that the President's
office spent $19,000 for a consultant when any person on his staff could have spent an hour on the Internet to come up with
the [comparative salary data]. K. Prichard believed, all other things aside, it seems a very thoughtless move on the part of
the president. B. DeVantier did not believe it to be thoughtless because the president was very careful in the constituency
heads meeting last week to explain the thought and logic behind his actions.
L. Langsdorf pointed out the president's budget is not a gift from heaven directly to him. Each campus is taxed to
support that office. It is not a separate budget. The $19,000 the president spent to find out if some of his staff were
underpaid could have been used for faculty salaries, staffing summer session, the library, etc. A. Woolf agreed, but noted it
should largely be viewed as separate because it does not affect the day-to-day operations of the campus; though it is true that
if the money were not sitting there, it would be sitting somewhere else. D. Post stated the faculty can support the logic of a
raise for any person who works on campus. She believed the raises are certainly needed, but there is no defense for his
timing. Once again, the public perception is that the President's office is associated with SIUC and it is all one budget. So,
it is very difficult to defend the logic of the timing of the raises when people believe the budget cuts may cause summer
school and intersession classes to be canceled.
R. Spellman believed that if it is not thoughtless, it is faulty thought because one of the responsibilities of the
president is to present the public face of SIU. The public face is the president giving raises at a time of financial stringency
when thought is given to layoffs, cutting summer classes, etc. R. Spellman noted the campus pays a lot of money for public
relations advice for administrators. Either the president did not get good advice, he did not seek it, or it was ignored. As a
result, he failed in one of his responsibilities, which is to present a good public face. R. Coulson stated he understands what
is being said. What bothers him is that if the president had just quietly started the routine process of refilling those
positions, no one would have said anything. It is unfortunate there is a possible bad spin what he has done. The fact
remains that the president came up with a quarter of a million dollars that was not there before, and he did not have to cut
positions. R. Rivers stated the president's decision makes sense if it is looked at in isolation. He saved money, and his staff
are deserving because they are doing more work. However, by looking at past campus policies, there is no tradition of
giving mid-year raises for additional duties. He noted that civil service employees have been asked to do more over the last
three or four years by fiat from the president's office and upper levels of the campus in order to handle p-card transactions,
AIS and other activities. No one offers them a mid-year raise or tells them their job description has changed. It is just,
"This is your new job, do it." The same goes for the faculty.
M. Lamb referred to her budget report which stated that academic affairs will not only be hit for 70% of the tuition
shortfall ($1 million) but also 70% of the legislative take-back ($1 million to be paid by colleges). The plan is to give to
academic affairs a debt of $6 million out of a $9 million total for the campus. In addition, academic affairs will be paying
for the office of vice chancellor for research (VCR). M. Lamb believes this is an unreasonable percentage and almost
insures irreparable damage to academic programs of every college. Interim Provost Winters expressed appreciation for M.
Lamb's comments about the tax on academic affairs. She clarified that the reason academic affairs was visited with 70% of
the tuition shortfall is because it has 70% of the budget. She noted 70% is the only number that has been cited yet because
the administration is still struggling with numbers and how to divide them for the rest of the take-back. She stated the
reason the VCR is being funded out of academic affairs is that it is coming out of academic affairs. This new vice
chancellor area will have a separate budget. Several of the budget lines that were for the Graduate School will be separated
out from academic affairs, as well as some responsibilities that rightly fall under research. As a result, academic affairs will
no longer have 70% of the budget. Referring back to her original comments, M. Lamb indicated Chancellor Wendler told
the Faculty Association leadership that he was going to be giving 70% of the budget for these items to academic affairs
because it would take too much time to sort out different ways of redistributing the University's budget.
After further discussion, R. Spellman made the following motion (seconded by K. Prichard):
That it is the sense of this body that the off-cycle raises to the President's staff are inappropriate
given the financial condition of the University, which can be expressed in the Executive Council's
meeting with the Graduate Council Executive Committee.
A. Woolf moved to waive the five-day rule to consider the motion; seconded by M. Shanahan.
Motion to waive the five-day rule carried on a voice vote.
L. Langsdorf believed the motion was mild in terms of the previous adjectives used, noting that "appropriate"
seems to be the mildest thing that could be civilly stated. K. Prichard requested a show of hands vote.
Motion carried on a 28-0-2 show of hands vote.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 2:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Frederick Williams, Secretary
FW:rm
Faculty Senate Homepage
Meeting Schedule |
Meeting Agenda |
Meeting Minutes |
Membership |
Committees |
Operating Paper
![]()
