|
ACADEMIC
SENATE MINUTES November 30,
2006 |
11:30 A.M.
- 1:00 P.M. ACADEMIC
SENATE CHAMBERS
Members Present: Altar, Alva, Bruschke,
Buck, Dabirian, Drezner, Fidalgo, Fitch, Fromson, Gordon, Guerin,
Hassan, Holland,
Absent: Arnold, Bedell,
Burgtorf, Hewitt, Kirtman, Klassen, Klein, Michalopoulos
I.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Guerin called the
meeting to order at 11:30 a.m.
II.
URGENT
BUSINESS
None.
III.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Guerin requested
a moment of silence in acknowledgement of the passing of colleague, Professor Richard
Wiseman. A memorial service will be held on campus in February and a
scholarship has been established in his honor. Chair Guerin extended
condolences on behalf of the Academic Senate to the Wiseman family and to his
department colleagues.
3.1
In the spirit of budget
transparency, ASD 06-188 Treasurer’s Report – Academic Senate was included on
this agenda for review by the Senate.
Senator Nanjundappa reported that mediation
between CFA and CSU is still in process. He will continue to keep the Senate
informed. The next meeting will be held on December 15, 2006.
IV.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.1
Chair Guerin noted that there was a mistake on the
agenda. The draft of the minutes of 11-16-06 (ASD 06-192) will be sent to
Senators this afternoon for review and approval at next week’s Senate meeting.
V.
TIME CERTAIN
Time
Certain
Subject:
Follow-Up Discussion on Special Investigation Audit Report
Time:
12:15 p.m.
Three resolutions and a
recommended plan of action were submitted to the Senate office in response to the
Special Investigation Audit Report:
M/S/P [Drezner/Fromson] to endorse ASD 06-195
Special Investigation Report 04-01 Dated October 11, 2006: Response and
Recommended Action Plan [Source: Academic Senate Executive Committee]. (Approved
unanimously)
ASD 06-195
Special
Investigation Report 04-01 Dated October 11, 2006
Response and
Recommended Action Plan
Source:
Academic Senate Executive Committee, with unanimous endorsement
Under Urgent Business at the meeting of the Academic
Senate on October 26, 2006, Senator Shapiro announced that the report on the
audit of Business and Financial Affairs (Report 04-91) had been posted to the
At the following Senate meeting on November 2nd, the
full report (including the campus response at President Gordon’s request) was
distributed to members of the Senate. Senate Executive Committee requested
technical assistance from the Department of Accounting, and Professors Betty
Chavis and Vivek Mande attended the Senate meeting and answered questions
pertaining to technical aspects of the audit report. Their assistance in
helping the senators to understand the report and its implications is
gratefully acknowledged.
At the next meeting on November 16th,
President Gordon briefly summarized the timeline of the special investigation
and the campus response under his direction.
He and VP Hagan answered questions from the senators and gallery.
Response of the Academic Senate Executive Committee
1.
Based on the
findings reported in the October 2006 Special Investigation Report, the
Academic Senate Executive Committee concludes that many of the problems
documented in the 1999 California State Auditor’s Report continued for several
years. Both reports reveal instances of
fiscal mismanagement that undermine the university’s reputation and ability to
fulfill its mission. Not only were university resources wasted due to
mismanagement, but the failure to have accurate and timely information
concerning the financial status of the campus led to the inappropriate
accumulation of large carry-forward balances in several divisions and also in
the Lottery Fund. Such funds could have been used to support the mission of the
university in areas which have suffered greatly over the past several years,
such as ongoing and deferred maintenance, the student-faculty ratio, and
faculty and staff hiring/salaries, to name but a few unmet needs that are
clearly evident.
2.
The Academic
Senate Executive Committee supports the campus responses detailed in the
October 2006 Special Investigation Report “to mitigate the recurrence of
similar findings in the future.” Indeed, Academic Senate Executive recognizes
the progress made in making budget and management reports available on the
campus website by Financial Services over the past 12 to 18 months.
3.
Finally, the
Academic Senate Executive Committee recommends continued movement in the
direction of openness and transparency in all aspects of the campus budget,
resource, and planning processes consistent with collegial governance in its
fullest sense.
Recommended
Action Plan
1.
Strengthen Academic Senate Standing Planning, Resource,
and Budget Committee (PRBC)
The PRBC
reviews and recommends on planning, resource, and budget decisions of the
university. As noted in the report, for several years this committee operated
without the information required to complete its charge. To develop the
expertise required to provide well-informed input, Executive Committee
recommends the following changes to UPS 100.000 and 100.001, as appropriate.
a.
Increase the terms
of faculty members on PRBC from two to three years, with approximately
one-third of members selected each year.
b.
Institute election
of Vice Chair who will serve as Chair-Elect the year prior to serving as PRBC
Chair.
c.
Develop an
orientation program for all new members of PRBC (students, staff, faculty,
administrators).
d.
Add an additional
faculty member [non-voting] with expertise in accounting or finance to serve
concurrently when the CBE faculty member is from a department other than these.
e.
Provide staff
assigned to support the work of PRBC.
2.
Review and Implement Existing University Policy
Statements on Review of Administrative Units and Personnel
The
serious problems documented in the Special Investigation Report may have been
detected earlier had existing administrative review procedures been
implemented. Executive Committee recommends that these policies to be reviewed,
revised as necessary (they have not been revised since 1986), and implemented
as soon as possible.
UPS 100.620, Review of Administrative Units
UPS 210.200, Performance Review of Administrative
Personnel
3.
Review and
To begin
to institutionalize planning and budget processes that reflect current best
practices for institutions of our size, Executive Committee shall request that
PRBC review existing university policy statements and recommend revisions that
provide a university policy statement with a monthly timeline delineating the
planning, resource, and budget issues on which PRBC recommends and the
information that will be provided as a basis for such recommendations.
Executive Committee requests that PRBC consider including an annual
presentation by a campus internal auditor on expenditures to PRBC at an
appropriate time.
UPS 100.200, University Budget Process
UPS 100.201, Planning and Budgeting Process
4.
Increase Accessibility of Planning, Resources, and
Budget Information to Campus Community
VP Hagan
has indicated that his goal is to provide information to the campus that is
timely, detailed, accurate, and transparent.
Indeed, several budget and management reports are available on the
campus website. Executive Committee makes the following recommendations:
a.
Add a new bylaw to
invite the President or CFO and internal auditor to provide a report and answer
questions on the fiscal status of the university each semester.
b.
That the CFO seek
advice of PRBC and other constituency groups in the design of standardized
regularly provided reports that are effective in educating the campus community
about the university’s fiscal position.
5.
Support the PRBC to Begin Immediately a University-Wide
Strategic Planning Process
As noted
in the WASC Team Visit Final Report dated March 2000, “Despite
the investment of resources in planning at CSUF over the last decade, the
campus is still without a true strategic plan that integrates fiscal, physical,
and academic matters. Planning is organized instead around a few broad,
enduring themes. There does not seem to be an overall plan for setting priorities
or making strategic investments in particular academic programs over time” (http://www.fullerton.edu/wasc/Final/Chapter2.htm#stand2).
The
first function of the PRBC is to “engage in an ongoing university-wide planning
process and review and recommend with respect to university priorities” (UPS
100.101). Given that the special investigation identified large carry-forward
balances and unallocated lottery funds, it seems essential that such processes
take place to inform recommendations. Furthermore, the 50th
anniversary of the university is a particularly appropriate time for such an
undertaking. Finally, recently expressed concerns about campus growth also
provide impetus for such a process. Thus, Executive Committee requests to work
with President Gordon and PAB to:
a.
Engage an internal
or external consultant to assist the PRBC in carrying out a university-wide planning process that
integrates fiscal, physical, and academic matters.
b.
On the basis of
the planning process, PRBC is requested to develop a plan to address
systematically the priorities identified and circulate the plan widely.
6. Senate Executive Committee revisit in
November 2007 the wisdom of establishing a Senate standing committee on fiscal
oversight.
7. Senate Executive Committee meet with PRBC in
May 2007 to determine if separate budget and planning committees should be
re-established (Budget Advisory Committee and Long-Range Planning and
Priorities Committees were in effect until approximately 1996).
8. Executive Committee and President Gordon
provide an update to the Academic Senate on implementation of these
recommendations as well as the changes delineated in the campus response to the
Special Investigation no later than May 15, 2007.
M/S/P [Bruschke/Shapiro] to endorse ASD 06-196 Response
to Audit Report: Resolution on the Expenditure of Lottery Money [Source:
Senator Bruschke]. Approved as amended:
Senator Shapiro (friendly amendment):
Resolve #2: add “in consultation with
faculty members” after “Department Chairs”
M/S/P [Buck/Fitch] to change 25% of money allotted
to “50%” (Resolve #1)
ASD 06-196
Resolution on the Expenditure of Lottery
Money
Source: Senator Bruschke
WHEREAS;
Lottery money is designated
for instruction, and
WHEREAS; Departments are in the best
position to identify instructional needs and opportunities, and
WHEREAS; The draft proposal for Lottery
Fund Allocation has the PRBC allocate funds similar to the current UPI
process,
and
WHEREAS; The
PRBC application process may be appropriate for UPI amounts (measured in the
$100,000) but not for lottery money amounts (measured in millions of dollars),
and
WHEREAS; The
UPI funds are designed to stimulate innovation, and thus are limited to
one-time expenditures, whereas the lottery funds can be used to support ongoing
efforts, and
WHEREAS; Returns
on instructional expenditures can be maximized if spent with a long-term view,
which is incompatible with a yearly application process
BE
IT THEREFORE RESOLVED;
The
Academic Senate recommends that the PRBC distribute lottery funds as follows:
1.
50% of the lottery money be dispersed as recommended in
the draft proposal for Cal State Fullerton Lottery Fund Allocation,
2.
The balance of the
funds be distributed to departments proportional to FTES load to be spent by
the Department Chairs, in consultation with faculty members, in accordance
with relevant regulations and legal requirements.
It was M/S [Shapiro/Bruschke] to endorse ASD
06-193 Resolution in Response to the Auditor’s Report on Fiscal Abuse at CSU
Fullerton [Source: Senator Shapiro]. The meeting adjourned with discussion of
this resolution on the floor. Discussion will resume at the next meeting of the
Senate, scheduled for next Thursday, December 7, 2006.
VI.
CHAIR’S REPORT
Chair Guerin reported that the Executive Committee
has been working diligently on the Executive Committee Report and Recommended
Action Plan.
In response to Senate suggestions per BL 83-9, she
reported the following actions:
·
PRBC was
asked per BL 98-2 (Functions of PRBC) to develop and implement a
university-wide planning process to identify short- and long-term priorities,
identify the top ten priorities, and report back to the Senate on or by March
1, 2007;
·
Faculty Research Committee was
asked per BL 83-5 (Functions of the Research Committee) to conduct a periodic review of faculty needs in the area of research
and creative activity and to report their findings to the Academic Senate as soon
as possible, but not later than February 15, 2007.
Chair Guerin will be attending the Statewide
Senate Chairs meeting next Thursday, December 7, 2006 in
VII.
STATEWIDE
ACADEMIC SENATE REPORT
None.
VIII.
NEW BUSINESS
8.1
M/S/P [Drezner/Fromson] to approve ASD 06-181 Proposal
for Minor in Entrepreneurship [PRBC] as amended (Approved unanimously) :
M/S/P [Pasternack/Drezner]
to add section 8 (page 6):
“Advisory
note: Students are advised to have a
working knowledge of Excel and to have completed a college-level course in
statistics that covers regression, prior to enrolling in the upper division
courses (300-level and above) for the Entrepreneurship minor.”
8.2
M/S/P [Stang/Dabirian] to approve ASD 06-186 Revised UPS
103.005 World Wide Web Policy as amended:
M/S/P
Pasternack/Dabirian to approve the following amendment:
Page 2, Line 44: Insert “(at least
once per year)” after “regularly”
(Approved with 2 abstentions)
8.3
ASD 06-174 (REVISED) New or Revised Documents Pending
Approval was not discussed due to lack of time.
IX.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 1:06 p.m.