October 24th, 2023

Academic Senate

Plenary Meeting Minutes

Tuesday 24 October 2023

Hybrid – Seven Hills and Zoom

2:00 PM

 

 

 

OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 - 2:10 PM

The Open Floor Period provides an informal opportunity for campus community members to raise questions or make comments directed to Senators, Senate officers or to university administrators. Please arrive promptly at 2:00 PM. Please limit comments to not more than three minutes per topic. We usually allow 5 minutes total, but extend this time today. Senators may make announcements under Item 3 below.

 

Chair Goldman announced the open floor period at 2:00pm

 

Sen. Linton: announced an upcoming event, “Around the World in Non-Binary Terms: How Gender Diversity is Expressed in Languages other than English.” This will be held Wednesday, October 25, 2023.  

 

Sen. Brewer: announced an upcoming event, “Noche de Estrellas.” This will feature SFSU Assistant Professor Oscar Macias and will be held on Thursday, October 26, 2023.

 

CALL TO ORDER: 2:10 PM

Chair Goldman brought the meeting to order at 2:11pm

 

1. Approval of the Agenda for 24 October 2023

Sen. Hellman brought attention to a typo on the day’s Plenary agenda: an item brought by the Campus Curriculum Committee (CCC) is listed as being in first reading. The agenda should indicate that this item is in second reading.

 

Sen. Wilson moved to accept the correction. Sen. Platas seconded the motion. The motion was carried and the agenda was approved as corrected at 2:12pm.

 

2. Approval of the Minutes for 10 October 2023

Sen. Holschuh moved to approve the minutes. Rob seconded the motion. The minutes for 10 October were approved as read at 2:14pm.

 

3. Announcements from the Floor –

Chair Goldman summarized the procedure for bringing announcements to the floor.

 

Sen. Erickson gave notice that this week sees a strike authorization vote and that an announcement about this was emailed Saturday. The vote closes on Friday.

 

Chair Goldman announced an invitation to vote for University Tenure and Promotion Committee (UTPC) members. This information was sent out to all via email.

 

 

4. Reports
   1. Chair’s Report 

Chair Goldman offered thanks to all for joining today amidst numerous concerning events.

 

 

1. 2. President’s Report

President Mahoney gave notice that she attended CSU Chancellor Mildred García’s first CSU Graduation Initiative Symposium. She also attended a business community event. President Mahoney emphasized the importance of going and communicating SF State’s mission and highlighted academic attainment as part of that mission. She then outlined remarks she made at San Francisco Structures, an event hosted by San Francisco Business Times. More information about those remarks can be found HERE. She then opened for questions.

 

Chair Goldman observed that there were no questions then announced that Provost Sueyoshi would not be joining the day’s meeting.

 

1. 3. Provost’s Report
   4. Standing Committee Reports
      1. Academic Policies Committee

Sen. Chou gave notice that APC has no items to bring to the senate floor.  APC has been working on a handful of projects that include an Academic Program Assessment Policy and the Academic Program Assessment Committee Policy, evaluation of the Academic Calendar, and minor revisions to the course syllabi policies for DPRC process and reporting. Other items include a resolution to Reimagine the Capstone Experience. This is in its final round of revision. They also continue to work on the graduate student grade forgiveness policy. APC received feedback about this from Graduate Council, including Sophie Clavier, Dean of Graduate Studies & Career Development.

 

No questions.

 

1. 1. 2. Campus Curriculum Committee

Sen. D’Alois gave notice that Professor Arezoo Islami has joined the senate as well as CCC. She then indicated that CCC has an item in second reading that will be brought to the floor: a recommendation for a Certificate in Data Science for Psychology. There will be other items brought to future meetings.

 

No questions

 

1. 1. 3. Faculty Affairs Committee

Sen. Holschuh gave notice that FAC has no new items to bring. Sen. Holschuh offered updates about their current projects. The bylaws template has been circulated to department chairs and they continue to receive feedback about revisions to the RTP policy. FAC continues to welcome further comments on these items.

 

No questions.

 

1. 1. 4. Strategic Issues Committee

Sen. Trousdale announced the addition of two new members to SIC: Michael Anderson, Professor and Chair of the Department of Classics, and Marie Drennan, Associate Professor in the Department of Broadcast and Electronic Communication Arts (BECA). Sen. Trousdale gave notice that SIC brings an item to the floor, a Resolution Affirming Academic Senate Input and Oversight in Budget Related Practices and Policies, in first reading.

 

No questions.

 

1. 1. 5. Student Affairs Committee

Sen. Olsher gave notice that SAC has no items to bring to the floor. He then listed projects the committee is presently working on. These include ongoing discussions with the Academic Freedom Committee and Associated Students on policies around anti-doxxing. They are also working on a resolution to reaffirm campus support for multilingual students and students from immigrant families.

 

No questions.

 

 

 

 

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

An informational item is a statement announcing the completion of a process, carried out in accordance with Senate policy, and requiring formal notification of the Senate at its conclusion.

There are no informational items today. We will be using parts of today’s meeting to instruct Senators in processes and procedures.

 

CONSENT ITEMS

A consent item is one deemed by the Chair to be non-controversial, requiring no debate. Any Senator may call the item to the floor, in which case it is considered as new business in first reading. If no Senator calls it to the floor, it is considered approved. It may be read into the record, or we may move directly to the next agenda items.

There are no consent items for today.

 

CONTINUING BUSINESS

Continuing (once called Old) Business involves items returning to the Senate, usually in Second Reading, but occasionally still in First Reading. Items in Second Reading belong to the Senate as a whole rather than to an individual or committee. Comments on Second Reading items should be confined to those for or against or proposing specific amendments. We ordinarily limit each speaker to three minutes. Senators may yield their time to non-Senators if needed. Amendments and the final document are passed or not passed by majority vote.

5. Recommendation from the Campus Curriculum Committee: Certificate in Data Science for Psychology, in first reading.   https://nextbulletin.sfsu.edu/courseleaf/courseleaf.cgi?page=/programadmin/483/index.html&step=showfullrecord

 

Sen. D’Alois brought this item to the senate floor. She remarked on the helpful discussion held about the item during its first reading. She emphasized the importance of this item and reaffirmed her support for its passage.

 

Sen. Collins offered his full endorsement.

 

Chair Goldman moved to bring the item to a vote.

 

The motion was carried and the recommendation approved.

 

Chair Goldman offered congratulations.

 

Sen. D’Alois offered her thanks to all senators who offered comments.

 

 

 

NEW BUSINESS

New Business items are brought by a committee or individual to the Senate in First Reading, during which open discussion and debate may occur. We ordinarily limit each speaker to three minutes. Senators may yield their time to non-Senators if needed. The item is then returned to the Committee for further revision, to be brought back as Continuing Business in Second Reading.

6. Recommendation from the Strategic Issues Committee: Resolution Affirming Academic Senate Input and Oversight in Budget Related Practices and Policies, in first reading.

 

Chair Goldman announced that the item is in first reading. He explained how this process works.

 

Sen. Trousdale brought the item to the floor. He offered to yield his time and invited Sen. Drennan to introduce and explain the item.

 

Sen. Drennan summarized the original resolution that prompted the current item, The Academic Senate Resolution on Affirming Shared Governance and Budget Transparency in Times of Crisis (#RS21-417). This original item, brought during a time of similar budgetary stress and uncertainty, emblematizes the negative impact of resolutions that are accepted without meaningful senate debate. The present item is an effort to bring debate and senate input to the present budgetary issue.

 

 

Chair Goldman opened the floor for comments and questions.

 

Sen. Kim gave notice that this item was discussed during a recent meeting of SIC. He indicated his uncertainty about the present item’s necessity. He then recommended specific edits to the document, including revisions to the second paragraph.

 

The document, Addressing some questions from Fall 2023 UBC Office Hours (Sept. 1, 22), HERE was shared in the meeting chat.

 

Sen. Erickson offered thanks to Sen. Drennan for drafting the resolution. He recommended that the passage reaffirming “input and robust oversight regarding budget matters” (line 41) be revised to include the principle of “equal time,” thus providing space for the vocalization of numerous yet moderated perspectives.  

 

Sen. Collins offered thanks to the committee. He emphasized the importance of budget transparency and observed that modern digitization of administrative records furthers the mission of transparency.

 

Ex Chair Albiniak offered reflections on the period in which #RS21-417 was adopted. He called for greater emphasis on the building of budget and system literacy. He commended UBC for its efforts to increase budget transparency and communication.

 

Discussion was had about the use of specific language in the present resolution. This included questions about the phrase, “robust Senate oversight and meaningful input,” whether this fits in with what UBC currently does, and if it would be instructive to compare this resolution with the original.

 

 

Chair Goldman proposed an 8-minute break.

 

Chair Goldman moved to resume the meeting at 3:27

 

Sen. Linton offered her support on this item as well as her assistance in its revisions. She is happy to work with other sto improve the language.

 

Further conversation was had about this item and some topics from the prior plenary. Regarding the use of the phrase “meaningful input,” it was offered that one approach is to hold regular townhalls (these have proven meaningful in the past). Another idea is to have regular updates on the budget at every plenary meeting. It would also be important to call on the CFA to offer responses during townhalls and/or senate meeting budget updates. It would be good to codify the above in the resolution. As to the prior plenary, disagreement was raised about the manner in which the “Low Degrees Awarded” list was compiled(i.e. without senate input).

 

 

Chair Goldman clarified that SAC is the senate’s way of monitoring and discussing budgets. This committee is composed of staff, faculty, and includes John Kim, AVP of Academic Resources John Kim and Jeff Wilson, Vice President of Administration and Finance . Chair Goldman then reminded senators and guests about John Kim’s Academic Affairs Budget Restructuring Canvas page. He then announced that the SIC item will come back to us in second reading. Questions about this item can be directed to Sen. Trousdale.

 

 

PRESENTATION

7. Jeff Wilson, Vice President, Administration & Finance, and Chief Financial Officer, “SF State Budget Update.”

Sen. Jeff Wilson offered thanks for the invitation to speak. He presented a series of slides outlining the history and state of the 2023-2024 budget, and then some notes about preparation for 2024-2025. He began by offering the annual timeline. This information is presented during UBC. He outlined at what point the state government weighs in on the CSU budget. He gave notice that there was a 5% increase to the base budget in June. The FY 2022-23 Budget contained a deficit of $10 million. He then moved to present the budget that was proposed in August. He then outlined things that have changed since August that were not included in the earlier budget: Fall 2023 tuition and fee revenue falling 21% below funded target (rather than 16.3% below target), additional compensation expenses assuming 5% increase for all employees (salaries + benefits). He explained that SF State was allocated an additional $12.5 million in base budget resources. He offered two budget recommendations. One “best case” scenario where compensation is fully funded by the state and CSU with a deficit of about $16.6 million. A “worst case” scenario where compensation is partially funded by the state and CSU with a deficit of about $24.5 million. It was indicated that this scenario was the likely case. He then displayed a bar graph visually describing the above scenarios. He explained that as tuition has gone down, revenue has gone down. He explained the campus’s expenditures. He offered a summary of outstanding items needing to be resolved. He then provided a list of initial planning assumptions. He then gave notice that UBC holds office hours. He then concluded his presentation and opened the floor questions and comments.

 

Discussion was had about the presentation. Thanks were offered for the information. Questions were raised about the visual communication of the budget data. As to when the planned compensation increases take effect, this will happen quickly. It was observed that since a June presentation of the budget situation was made, there has been talk of a cash infusion to save lecturer jobs. It was clarified that $1.5 million was returned to the budget after that presentation. It was explained that the university has been drawing on its reserves to cover its deficits. The severity of this situation was repeatedly underscored.

 

 

Adjournment: Time definite 4:13 PM

 

Attendance:

 

 

Guests:

 

POST-PLENARY FLOOR PERIOD

This is ordinarily an informal opportunity for senators and guests to meet, exchange information, or follow up on items or questions emerging from the meeting. It will ordinarily run for thirty minutes from the end of formal business, but not beyond 5:00 PM, if people remain online or in the room.