ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING

MINUTES

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

SEVEN HILLS CONFERENCE CENTER

NOB HILL ROOM

2:00 – 5:00 p.m.

 

 

OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 - 2:10 p.m.

The Open Floor Period provides an informal opportunity for faculty members to raise questions or make comments directed to Senate officers or to university administrators.  Please arrive promptly at 2:00 p.m.

 

CALL TO ORDER: 2:10 p.m.

With a quorum being present, the meeting was called to order.

AGENDA ITEM #1 — Approval of agenda for October 7, 2014 plenary session

The Item was discussed. The Agenda was Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #2 — Minutes of September 23, 2014 plenary session

The Item was discussed. The Minutes for September 23, 2014 were Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #3— Chair’s Report

The Item was discussed. The Academic Senate heard a report from Chair Getz. Central in the report were the following:

 

  • The Academic Senate will collaborate on the “Make your mark event” on October 21, 2014.
  • Senators are required to attend as if attending a regular plenary.
  • Senator feedback is welcomed.
  • The introduction of new senator ASI Senator Turner.
  • Student Mark Madden of Metro Academy and biology major was murdered in East Palo Alto. A moment of silence was had.

 

AGENDA ITEM #4 — Report from Vice President Ron Cortez, Administration and Finance, on the University Budget

The Item was discussed. The Academic Senate heard a report from Vice President Ron Cortez, Administration and Finance, on the University Budget. Copies of the Power Point presentation were made available to senators. The following comments and concerns were raised:

 

  • What kinds of strategies are being used to get more money per student?
  • Are there two to three points that are salient to the faculty?
  • Our funding model causes disparities and limits our ability to hire tenured faculty and maintain our buildings.
  • To what extent is our funding based on FTE? How are the different funding models by campus different?
  • How do the funds get allocated into the different categories? Why isn’t UCORP self-support? Is there any monitoring of the funds that come in and go out?
  • Is it possible to have a historical overview of increases and decreases in the budget?
  • It is important to recognize that the CSU has gone from state support to state assist. What are we planning to do to address the needs of our aging infrastructure?
  • Where are the tracks of land that are of interest to the university for development?
  • How does the structural deficit affect the operating budget for Academic Affairs?
  • Is it possible to follow the models followed by other CSU campuses?
  • To what extent is the new bookstore making money? Are we getting more from development than what we are paying in salaries for development staff?
  • What is being done to ensure that finances are being monitored? 

 

AGENDA ITEM #5 — Update from President Les Wong on San Francisco State University’s potential role in the Shipyard/Hunters Point development

The Item was discussed. The Academic Senate heard an update from President Les Wong on San Francisco State University’s potential role in the Shipyard/Hunters Point development. The following points were central in the update:

 

  • No help will be obtained from the state.
  • Public-private partnerships must be examined for the science building and the Bayview-Hunters Point.
  • Educational services will be central in the redevelopment of Bayview-Hunters Point.
  • The Lennar Urban Group approached the President.
  • SF State University will be the first official business tenant in the Bayview-Hunters Point.
  • University values will be at the center the acquisition and receiving of funds for the development.

 

 The following comments and concerns were raised:

 

  • To what extent has healthy construction been examined?
  • Have there been any negotiations regarding the terms?
  • It is important to convey the issue of affordability.
  • Has there been any discussion of potential gentrification that may occur as a result of this development?
  • How might faculty propose ideas for – and participate in - this new project?
  • To what extent is the new bookstore making money? Are we getting more from development than what we are paying in salaries for development staff? What is being done to ensure that finances are being monitored? 

 

AGENDA ITEM #6 — Resolution on Student Success Fees, from the Executive Committee (first reading) The Item was discussed. Senators Steier motioned that the move Item to Second Reading. The vote was called. The motion carried. Senator Hanley moved that the following amendment be made: Strike the second “Whereas” clause. The vote was called. The motion carried. Senator Hanley moved that the Second Resolved clause be stricken. The motion was discussed. The vote was called. The motion was failed. The vote was called to Approve the Item as Amended. The motion carried.

 

 

 

 

AGENDA ITEM #7 — Resolution honoring Dr. Asa Grant Hilliard III and reaffirming the long-standing friendship between SF State and the William V.S. Tubman High School in Monrovia, Liberia, from the Executive Committee (Consent Item)

The Item was discussed. The Item was unanimously Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #8 — Proposed revision to the Emerita/Emeritus Status Policy, from FAC (first reading)

The Item was discussed. Senator Steier motioned to move the Item to Second Reading. The vote was called. The motion carried. The vote was called to Approve the Item. The motion carried. The following concerns and questions were raised: In Lines 11-12, Does this means that we will honor our lecturer faculty?

 

AGENDA ITEM #9 — Election: Senate Representatives to Board of Appeals and Review, Bookstore Advisory Committee, Baccalaureate Requirements Committee, and University Budget Committee

The Item was discussed. Elections were held. The following resulted:

  1. Senators Steier and Crabtree were elected by Acclamation to the Board of Appeals and Review.
  2. Bookstore Advisory Committee:
    1. Senator Hammer nominated Senator Hanley.
    2. Senator Hanley was elected by Acclamation.
  3. Baccalaureate Requirements Committee (BRC):
    1. Senator Steier self-nominated.
    2. Senator Collins nominated Senator Carleton.
    3. A Ballot Vote was called.
    4. Senator Carleton was elected.  
  4. University Budget Committee (UBC):
    1. Senator Clavier nominated Senator Howard.
    2. Senator Mendolla nominated Senator Hill.
    3. Senator Hanley nominated Senator Teresa Doan.
    4. Senator Doan nominated Senator Pope.
    5. Senator Stowers nominated Senator Yee-Melichar.
    6. A Ballot Vote was called.
    7. The following senators were elected:
      1. Senator Howard
      2. Senator Pope
      3. Senator Yee-Melichar
    8. A run-off election was called between Senators Hill and Doan.
    9. The following senator was elected:
      1. Senator Doan (#4)
      2. Senator Hill (#5)

 

AGENDA ITEM #10 — Adjournment—no later than 5:00p.m.

The Academic Senate adjourned at 4:15p.m.