Council of Illinois University Senates Minutes
Faculty Staff Commons Conference Room
Bone Student Center
Illinois State University
September 23, 2002
Lane Crothers, Chairperson of the Illinois State University Academic Senate, called the meeting to order.
Senate Chairpersons/Representatives Present: Lane Crothers, Illinois State University; Phil Beverly, Chicago State University; Anne Zahlan and Doug Brandt, Eastern Illinois University; Suzanne Willis, Northern Illinois University; Donna Post, Southern Illinois University-Carbondale; William Jones, University of Illinois-Chicago; Patricia Langley, University of Illinois-Springfield; Robert Fossum, University of Illinois-Urbana/Champaign; Winthrop Phippen, Western Illinois University. Provost Al Bowman of Illinois State University also joined the discussion for part of the meeting.
Absent: Senate Chairpersons/Representatives from Governors State University, Northeastern Illinois University, Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville.
Passage of Resolution
Regarding Public Monies for Private Institutions
During the last year, several of the Senates passed a resolution regarding public monies to private institutions and made efforts to promulgate it statewide. Illinois State University’s Academic Senate voted in support of the resolution and attempted to place it in the Chicago Tribune. However, that request was denied. Northern Illinois University’s Senate and University Council passed the resolution with a minor change. The Senate also sent an opinion-editorial statement to the student newspaper and the local print media. The Senate and Faculty Union at Eastern Illinois University passed a resolution on the topic composed by a subcommittee of the Senate. SIU-C’s Senate passed the resolution. Dr. Post stated that the resolution most likely went through the usual distribution protocol—to the administration and then to Springfield. The Senates at University of Illinois-Springfield and Chicago State also passed the resolution. Some Council members were unsure of the status of the resolution within their universities and will follow up.
The Council talked about where the support for more state money to public institutions would lie--support from faculty or support from the public. Senator Crothers suggested that the public universities could actually build a coalition with the less wealthy private institutions on the capital money. Dr. Langley expressed concerns about a coalition with private universities in that it might confuse the message. Council members discussed how the distribution of IMAP monies to private institutions was a disadvantage to the students from low-income households. Dr. Crothers said that IMAP money was not really for an eligible student’s choice, but was for a student’s choice from a middle-income family.
Dr. Langley proposed a comprehensive statistical analysis of the relevant issues; council members
agreed to compile data for this analysis. The data would include:
1. Percentage of financial support by the State to public and private universities and to community colleges:
· Distribution of IMAP monies
· Distribution of capital monies
2. Cumulative effect of budget cuts on public universities:
· Tuition increases
· Increased debt loads for students
· Hiring freezes
· Loss of tenure lines
· Increased faculty course loads
· Decreased availability of classes
Council members will make this information available to the faculties, administrations, students, parents, alumni and the public at large, the goal being to educate people on the issues so that they might understand why they should care.
Provost Al Bowman of Illinois State University joined the meeting in progress and welcomed Council members to ISU. He thanked the Council for its work and stressed the need for faculty input in administrative decision-making. The group discussed ways in which it could convey the faculty perspective to state legislators. Dr. Bowman reported that ISU brings area legislators to campus events quite regularly and that there were opportunities for causal conversations. He also suggested educating students about fiscal realities in higher education, perhaps having the conversation at the beginning of a class. Those students could talk to their parents, who could then talk to legislators.
Dr. Crothers noted that the trustees on the university boards were another conduit to state legislators. Some members stressed the problem of access to trustees as well as the lack of higher education backgrounds of the trustees who serve on the boards. The council suggested lobbying for better appointments to the boards with the installation of the new governor by submitting criteria to the governor for board members, such as being knowledgeable of higher education, and suggesting that there be a certain percentage of alumni on the boards. Dr. Langley suggested also having a representative from CIUS meet with the candidates’ higher education personnel. She noted that this was an opportune time to establish a relationship with the new administration and for CIUS to assert itself as the one of the bodies that could provide the public university’s perspective on higher education issues.
Other suggestions for lobbying included placing advertisements, paid for by CIUS, in major newspapers in Illinois to educate the public on these issues. Dr. Crothers noted that an excellent way of getting an item on the legislative agenda was through the placement of full-page ads in the Chicago Tribune. The council also considered getting their message out through NPRs.
Council members once again took up the discussion of placing a faculty member on a public university’s Board of Trustees. Dr. Zahlan stated that a faculty member on a board should be an elected faculty representative rather than an appointed one. Dr. Crothers reported that the President of ISU would not support a faculty member on the Board because it was his position that it was his job to convey the faculty’s perspective to the trustees.
Members discussed various strategies for installing a faculty member on a board. One such strategy would be through a public referendum; another would be to attempt to place a faculty member on the board of an institution at which that faculty member was not employed. Dr. Langley noted that it would problematic for a faculty member to serve on a board of the same institution at which the individual was employed, specifically because of salary determination decisions; however, a faculty member from another institution would not pose an obstacle. She stated that she had submitted a proposal for a faculty member on the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, but that they had not proceeded very far in reaching a conclusion.
Dr. Crothers interjected that it was an appropriate first step to make such proposals to the boards, but the much broader step was to seek a change in state legislation permitting faculty members to serve on BOTs. Dr. Fossum noted that BOTs may permit representatives to sit at the table without a change in legislation. U of I’s board members allow the university legal counsel, comptroller, vice presidents and chancellors to participate in their meetings. Dr. Langley stated that the resolution drafted at U of I was to have a faculty voice at the table, including during executive sessions, even if it were non-voting representation. Dr. Post agreed to compile the resolutions from each Senate Chairperson who had made a proposal concerning this issue and forward a new draft proposal to Council members, which will also include assigning a board member to attend Senate meetings. Chairpersons will submit the resolution for approval to the Senates and perhaps get it publicized, which could generate some public pressure.
Senator Crothers asked if other public universities in the state had faced the problem of having newly hired international faculty be ineligible for benefits. He stated that, as it was explained to Illinois State University, Central Management Systems (CMS) had reinterpreted an IRS guideline that called for an employee to meet the substantial presence test to be eligible for SURS and health insurance. ISU had to reallocate monies in order to provide insurance for these international employees. All other Senate chairpersons reported that the issue had not arisen, to their knowledge, at any of the other public universities.
Council members discussed the additional costs instituted by CMS to universities for employee health insurance. For many years, these costs were subsidized by CMS, but CMS decided to retroactively recoup those costs. Dr. Langley stated that if universities were going to pick up health care contributions, perhaps they should pick them up entirely and have better health care plans. Dr. Crothers noted that the IBHE is initiating a study of self-insurance.
Dr. Langley noted that no other state institutions had been asked to make similar contributions toward health insurance costs. She suggested developing a comprehensive impact statement about what is happening to public universities in the State of Illinois based upon legislative decisions. The Council suggested linking the increased costs for employee health insurance that public universities were required to pay in FY02, which may be perpetual, to the loss of faculty lines, decrease in the number of classes offered and increase in time to degree. Dr. Langley offered that any statement should include the percentage of state monies to private institutions. The statement could reflect how monies to public institutions have decreased and how scholarships might increase and tuition stabilize if the state monies distributed to private higher education institutions were given to public universities. A comprehensive picture would also include the requirement of funding the State University Retirement System, the contribution to which will be $75 million.
Dr. Crothers stated that it would require the collection of the ground level data on their campuses. He asked that each council member send him the specific data that he or she would like to have collected; he would then compile a list and distribute it to the council. He reported that he could get the statewide information from IBHE staff in terms of the amount of state monies to private institutions Members also suggested obtaining comparison data from the surrounding states. Dr. Crothers stated that he should be able to obtain that information as well.
Council members agreed that they should pursue a breakdown of the increased contributions caused by the deficit, of which public universities were attributed a share of $45 million for health care costs. The members stated that that they would like to know the share attributed to other institutions. Dr. Crothers reported that even the IBHE, to his knowledge, was not provided with this data. However, perhaps the public university representatives on the IBHE Faculty Advisory Council could be given the task of getting the breakdown. Dr. Crothers stated that he could also ask Dr. Lesnik to pursue it.
Data to be collected:
· Data showing the breakdown of the increased contributions caused by the deficits—Why was the share of $45 million attributed to public universities for health care costs?
· Number of faculty lines lost.
· Number of classes lost.
· Increase in time to degree.
· Percentage of monies to private institutions.
· Increase in scholarships if state monies were given to public universities instead of private institutions.
· Funding required for SURS.
· Comparison data from surrounding states.
Non-Tenure Track
Faculty Issues
All campuses reported that they were struggling with a variety of NTT faculty issues. Dr. Crothers asked if there were movements on other campuses, as at ISU, by non-tenure track (NTT) faculty toward unionization. The faculty at UIS are unionized. Dr. Langley stated that NTT faculty should have release notification rights and that faculty should support longer contractual arrangements. Dr. Post reported that some NTT faculty at SIU-C were moved to “clinical instructors” with continuing term positions and a year’s notice for release dates. She added that we should support term faculty temporarily covering a problem and that administration should move these individuals along because they should be in permanent positions. Dr. Fossum stated that they were grappling with the decision of creating multi-year contracts and changing the statute to include dismissal with cause.
Dr. Crothers noted that public universities were the only higher education institutions that did not have formal representation within the IBHE. Council members were supportive of Dr. Crothers submitting a proposal for structural representation on the IBHE to the Executive Director of the IBHE, Daniel LaVista, and Chairperson, Steve Lesnik. Council members will also ask their university presidents if they would support this. Dr. Crothers urged members to also attempt to institutionalize patterns of participation with university administrations in higher education decision-making processes, including participation in the IBHE Big Picture meetings.
Council members discussed how they might obtain funds for public relations. Dr. Crothers stated that one obvious source of funds was the university Foundation accounts. He added that lobbying with these funds could not be done in the name of any university, but could be done in the name of the Council of Illinois University Senates. The alumni associations, McArthur Foundation, campus garage sales and used book sales were suggested as avenues to raise funds. Dr. Post challenged each council member to raise $1000 and a target date of March 1, 2003 was set. The money raised would be used for several Tribune ads and to pay the expenses for lobbying efforts in Springfield.
Ms. James reported that CIUS had developed no bylaws, only a constitution. Dr. Jones pointed out that if the council raised money to lobby for items on its agenda, it would become a legal entity and, as such, would require bylaws. Dr. Langley concluded that the council was a non-profit organization; however, it was not a 501C3 organization, which is a type of organization that cannot lobby.
Eastern Illinois University suggested the possibility of their hosting the CIUS meeting in the spring. Illinois State University had been chosen as the meeting place for council meetings because it is,
comparatively, centrally located. Changing locations would extend the distance to the meeting for some Senate Chairpersons and shorten the distance for others. Council members agreed to have the next meeting at Eastern Illinois and move the meetings to other universities as requested and agreed upon.
1. Faculty members on Boards of Trustees Resolution.
2. Comprehensive statement on the impact of state monies to private institutions and the impact of budget cuts.
3. Comprehensive statement on the impact of increased health care contributions, which would also contain the percentages of funding provided to private institutions, comparison data from surrounding states and funding requirements for SURS.
4. Structural representation through CIUS within the IBHE.
5. Funding for CIUS.
6. Administrative support for the Council of Illinois University Senates (i.e., supportive of future lobbying, funding for CIUS)
7. Description of the various Senates and indicators of support for Senate Chairpersons
(List forwarded to Senate Chairpersons):
· Number of Senators
· Number of Students
· Number of Faculty
· Secretarial Support
· Release Time
· Financial Support - Reimbursement for travel, stipend for service as Chairperson
· Office Space
· Web Site Development
Adjournment