Minutes of the January 9, 2001 Faculty Council/Senate Meetings
Contents Report to the Senate
Report to the Senate ... 1 Richard Bakemeier, Chair of Faculty Council, called the meeting
Update of Rules of the Senate ... 2 to order at 12:20 and gave a brief explanation of the “Faculty
Senate” versus “Faculty Council”: the Faculty Senate, as defined
Report from Administration ... 3 in the Laws of the Regents, is comprised of virtually all faculty on
CCHE and legislative issues ... 3 the four campuses, and meets at least twice a year; Faculty Council
is the elected executive governance body of the Senate, and meets
Supervisor Accountability for PPS ... 3 monthly during the academic year. University President Elizabeth
Hoffman, who is also President of the Faculty Senate, was
Senate Committee Reports ... 4 scheduled to attend the meeting, but was held up at a CCHE
Budget, Personnel, EPUS, P &T,... 4 meeting which ran longer than anticipated. Bakemeier, as Vice
Minority Affairs ... 5
President of the Senate, gave the Address to the Faculty Senate
Council Committee Reports ... 5 and report from Faculty Council, which included a discussion of
Women, GLB ... 5
impending plans to update and modernize the senate rules and the
Campus Reports ... 5
Boulder, Colorado Springs ... 5 Faculty Council bylaws:
Denver, Health Sciences ... 6
Retired Faculty Association ... 6 “Members of the Faculty Council and Faculty Senate members,
I would like to take this opportunity to thank President Hoffman,
Motions as well as members of her System Administration, for their
no motions presented obvious dedication to the principles of shared governance in
conjunction with the faculty of the University of Colorado. The
In attendance in Dravo 299 were: excellent, open communication which exists between the
Sandy Arnesen, UCHSC, Denison Library;
Richard F. Bakemeier, UCHSC, Faculty Council Chair;
committees of the Faculty Council and the president and vice
Richard Blade, UCCS, Faculty representative; presidents is gratifying. There may be differences of opinion and
Michel Dahlin, Assoc. VP Academic Affairs & Research; emphasis in some areas, but these are approached with a sense of
Jeff Dodge, Silver & Gold Record; mutual respect and productive interaction.
Abby Ferber, UCCS, Women’s Committee Chair;
Skip Hamilton, UCB, EPUS Committee;
Laurel S. Harken, UCHSC, Preventive Medicine; "I would also like to thank all the members of the Faculty Council
Judy Igoe, UCHSC, Faculty Assembly Chair; for their active participation in the Council’s work. Much time is
Joe Juhasz, UCD, Faculty representative; devoted by you in ways which may seem unrewarded. It is my
Jan Kraus, UCHSC Pediatrics;
Pamela Laird, UCD History;
goal to see that all of you are recognized by your academic
Mark Malone, UCCS, Faculty Assembly Chair; colleagues and leaders for your contributions.
Mike Martin, AVP Technology & Educ Innovation;
Larry Morse, Retired Faculty Association; "Special credit should be given to the members of the Executive
Rod Muth, UCD Education;
Uriel Nauenberg, UCB, Budget Committee Chair;
Committee of the Faculty Council, including the officers, Peter
Sandi Parker, UCHSC Faculty Assembly; Schneider, Vice Chair, and Tom Zwirlein, Secretary; and the
Mike Preston, UCB, Personnel Committee Chair; chairs of the four faculty assemblies, Judy Igoe, Mark Malone,
Tom Riis, UCB, GLB Committee Chair;
Peter Schneider, and Frank Beer. These latter four devote time not
Martha Jo Sani, UCB Libraries;
Peter Schneider, UCD, Faculty Assembly Chair, Faculty only to the Faculty Council but also much time and energy to the
Council Vice Chair; business of their own campuses through their faculty assemblies.
Laurels Sessler, Faculty Council Office;
Margaret Topf, UCHSC, P&T Committee Chair;
"Finally, much credit should be given to the chairs of the faculty
R L Widmann, UCB, EPUS Committee Chair;
Tom Zwirlein, UCCS, Faculty Council Secretary. governance committees, whose reports you will hear shortly.
January 9, 2001 Faculty Council Page 3 of 7
Much of the detailed work of the shared governance system is who in 1994 was chair of the Faculty Council, played a role in
done by these committee chairs and their committee members, that amended version.
and you have the sincere gratitude of the faculty and
administration. "For complex and not completely apparent reasons, the 1994
draft was not resubmitted for a Faculty Senate vote nor was it
"I have referred repeatedly to the University Faculty Council, adopted by the Board of Regents. Therefore, we are still
whereas you all realize we are in the midst of a meeting of the working under the 1988 Rules of the Faculty Senate, even though
Faculty Senate. The distinction between the two can become the 1994 “Proposed Constitution” more nearly reflects the
confusing. Let me try briefly to give you some historical current structure and functions of current faculty governance.
perspective, which may clarify what I recognize as a
significant need to review and update the documents which "Because of the difficulties arising from this disparity, a working
delegate the authority of faculty governance from the Board of group met last week in this very room, consisting of: Joe Juhasz,
Regents and the Laws of the Regents. representing UC-Denver; John Daily, representing UC-Boulder;
Rex Welshon, (Professor of Philosophy), representing UC-
"The structure and function of the Faculty Senate are spelled Colorado Springs; Richard Bakemeier, representing UC-Health
out in the Rules of the Faculty Senate, which may be found on Sciences Center; Michael Martin, immediate past chair of the
the Web as an appendix of the Faculty Handbook. Those rules Faculty Council, also represented the System Administration.
are dated 1988, and there are major discrepancies between this
1988 version and the current structure and functions of the "The President and the University Counsel have been informed
Senate and the Council. of this process, and the University Counsel’s office is now
reviewing the 1994 draft. It is hoped that an updated version of
"About two weeks ago Laurels Sessler from the Faculty the Rules of the Faculty Senate, using the 1994 draft as a guide,
Council Office and I had the pleasure of a long discussion can be prepared this spring to submit to the faculty for a vote,
about the history of faculty governance with retired professors and, we hope to have the Board of Regents also review and, if
Courtland Peterson and Robley Rhine. Let me trace some of appropriate, approve this document, possibly before the end of
this history: this academic year.”
1967: President Smiley formed a commission to study the Judy Igoe began a discussion of this project by speaking in
governance structure, which then consisted only of the Faculty support of it, and commending Bakemeier for his work while
Senate, whose meetings were sparsely attended. chair of the HSC faculty assembly in updating their bylaws. A
question arose about whether the constitution needs to be
1968: Proposal to form the Faculty Council with Professor approved by the regents, when the Laws of the Regents (LOR)
Peterson as the first Chair. Also in 1968 the Laws of the have given faculty the authority to establish their own
Regents were revised, with the president of the University no governance structure. Bakemeier commented that if the
longer being a member of the Board of Regents. constitution contains concepts to which the regents object, it may
be countermanded down the road. Though the 1992 constitution
1968-69: Faculty assemblies were formed. No major changes was approved by the faculty, it was not implemented as policy or
in the structure of faculty governance during the next 20 years. practice, and was subesequently found to be in conflict with the
LOR, so it was decided that the prudent course of action would
1988: President Gee appointed a faculty-administration be to ask the University Counsel to review it before presenting
commission to study shared governance, seeking to gain more anything to the regents or to the general faculty. Also, it will be
faculty input and to strengthen shared governance on each necessary to consider the 1988 Rules of the Faculty Senate, in
campus in a decentralized fashion. Courtland Peterson, who light of the fact that Faculty Council and its committees have
had recently been elected vice chair of the Faculty Senate, was been functioning under those rules for the past 13 years. It will
named Chair of the commission, which worked intensely also be necessary to track changes which have been made to
during the next three years. faculty governance since the original Rules, and an effort will be
made to go through past Council and Senate minutes to do so.
1992: A “Proposed Constitution of the Faculty of the Committees will be asked to contribute updated descriptions and
University of Colorado” was drafted by the commission, under functions of their respective committees.
Professor Peterson’s leadership, and in the spring of 1992 it
was submitted to the faculty of the University for a vote. The A discussion also arose about why some committees are Senate
required 200 votes were obtained; in fact the draft was committees and some are Council committees, and whether they
approved 369 to 36. could all be known as one or the other. R L Widmann noted that,
in the early 1980's, senate committees could report directly to the
1992-3: Because of concern by the University Counsel’s Board of Regents, but the process and structure was later
office of certain implied shifts of authority from the regents to formalized so that committees first reported to Faculty Council
the faculty, further amendments to the 1992 draft were made. so the two could work more closely together. Response to
An amended “Proposed Constitution” dated March, 1994 was Bakemeier's question about whether there was an advantage to
created. Professor Joe Juhasz of the current Faculty Council, referring to committees as senate committees was mixed:
January 9, 2001 Faculty Council Page 4 of 7
Widmann argued that senate committees represent all faculty, report to the senate, as Council is the executive body empowered
and preferred that all committees become senate committees to make decisions for the senate. A strong argument was made
with the understanding that they report to Faculty Council that P&T should remain a senate committee, to remain at arm's
monthly, and bring items of substance to Council for approval length from the governance structure, but some felt that the other
and vote. Others agreed, preferring the perception that committees could become Council committees. Ongoing
committees represent all faculty and not just a representative progress on this project will be reported at future Council
body, and noting that committee members need not be meetings.
members of Council. A report to Faculty Council is in effect a
Report from Administration
Michel Dahlin, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, priority. The CCHE is considering creative one-time ways of
brought apologies from President Hoffman, who could not get making sure there is enough funding available for ongoing
away from a concurrent CCHE meeting due to an unanticipated capital construction projects; this affects every CU campus.
two-hour discussion of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) review
of the Fitzsimons project. The CCHE had delayed funding of Peter Schneider asked about the bill to separate Metro State
the new education building pending a positive report from ULI. from the state college system, and possible effects on the UCD
The review was very positive, with a few recommendations for campus. Dahlin replied that it is uncertain whether there is
improvements. Dahlin reported that it was very much an uphill support for this bill, and that a thorough examination of bills
battle, but the commission finally voted 6-3 to approve the submitted in this session has uncovered no threat to the role
recommendation to the legislature that the first year funding for and mission of the UCD campus or its relationship to the other
the education building, which has been held in a trust fund, be campuses in the Auraria system. Other "NORED legislation"
appropriated to CU, and that the second year's funding be includes Norma Anderson's bill for charter colleges at School
placed at the top of the continuation projects list. of Mines and possibly UNC; CU will be involved in those
discussions in case we have future interest in this concept.
The CCHE also discussed recommendations for distance Other higher education legislation includes Gayle Berry's
learning. The original recommendations were very restrictive common course numbering bill, and Keith King's bill, also
and controlling, providing only for one platform, one course supposedly about common course numbering, but discussions
taught by a collection of faculty. Through the diligent efforts of have also included ideas about a common core. CU is keeping
many administrators of many institutions, virtually every a close eye on this bill.
"unpalatable" recommendation was changed to an acceptable
alternative. President Hoffman is leading a group to push for getting out-
of-state tuition dollars exempted from TABOR, but there is
Dahlin spoke briefly about legislative issues, particularly about hesitation in the legislature, and legal opinion is being sought
the effects of Amendment 23, which make K-12 funding a on whether this can be done. This may be a multi-year project.
Supervisor Accountability for PPS
Richard Bakemeier opened discussion of a new document called Committee on January 17, and the entire CU plan for PPS will
"University of Colorado System Performance Pay Program be voted on at the January 18 Regents meeting.
Supervisor Accountability Provision”. This document is an
appendix to the University of Colorado plan for the Several faculty members expressed concern about the effects of
performance pay system (PPS) for state classified employees, a 5-day suspension on a higher education institution, where
and outlines a process for tracking supervisor compliance as faculty could be taken out of classrooms, or medical
well as corrective actions for all supervisors (whether staff, practitioners away from their patients. Mike Preston
faculty, officers or professional exempt) of classified staff who commented that he “doesn’t like the idea of somebody else
fail to comply with the state-mandated system. Evaluations outside the system playing cops with the faculty.” Bakemeier
must be completed and reviewed by a second-level reviewer by responded that most of the “cops” are actually within the
April 15 [now April 1], and a mandatory suspension without system: deans and department heads are responsible for seeing
pay of “no less than a week” will be imposed on supervisors that supervisors within their departments and colleges are
who do not complete evaluations. For faculty, disciplinary compliant. Concern was expressed over an apparent conflict
action by the dean will be for "neglect of duty". The statute also between suspension and a tenure system which ensures
requires that performance management activities be reflected in continuing employment. Richard Blade suggested that "to dock
the performance evaluations of any individual who supervises pay is one thing, but to suspend--whether faculty or staff--
classified staff. The accountability requirements will unfortunately, I think the university is going to be penalized
necessitate changes to Regent policy 11.F (faculty more than the individual." It was noted that many of the regular
compensation principles) in light of the fact that compensation faculty are not teaching in June, when a suspension would take
for faculty could change with PPS. The accountability effect, so it will be difficult to suspend them. In response to the
document will be discussed by the Regents’ Strategic Planning
January 9, 2001 Faculty Council Page 5 of 7
sentiment that "the punishment does not seem to fit the crime," consequences. It is the intent of the university and the human
it was pointed out that the failure of a supervisor to complete an resources offices to monitor the situation carefully, and to notify
evaluation results in the employee being inelible for a pay negligent supervisors and their deans, in hopes of preventing
increase come July first, even if performance is exceptional. anyone from reaching the point of corrective action.
The designation of "neglect of duty" can also have other serious
Reports from Senate Committees
Budget Committee Chair R L Widmann reported that the Educational Policy
and University Standards Committee is working hard on
Uriel Nauenberg, Budget Committee Chair, began by thanking intellectual property. At the most recent UCIP (University
Michel Dahlin and Jay Gershen, Vice President for Academic Committee on Intellectual Property) meeting, the term
Affairs and Research, for coordinating efforts with the committee "inventor" was replaced with "innovator". UCIP also
to move forward the motion on salary allocation principles. That began listing the possible financial stakeholders in
motion, which states that allocation of faculty salary funds must intellectual property, and Steve O'Neil, chair of UCIP, will
take into consideration the salary increase to the majority of faculty attend a January EPUS meeting.
to ensure a fair process, is now part of the Regents' faculty
compensation principles. EPUS will also review the Faculty Handbook this spring,
and will work with the Privilege and Tenure Committee on
The Budget Committee will now turn its attention to new ways of the development of a new procedure for termination for
providing funds for faculty salaries, as these funds are unlikely to cause.
come from the state. A committee has been formed, with Richard
Bakemeier and Michel Dahlin as chairs, to examine possibilities, Privilege and Tenure
some of which are controversial and will require thought to ensure
that these funds will be available to all faculty. Chair Margaret Topf reported on the search for the attorney
for P&T: recommendation of a candidate has been sent
The committee will also consider the question of fiscal forward to Charlie Sweet, University Counsel, who will
responsibility and whether motions presented to Faculty Council evaluate for any conflict of interest and negotiate salary.
should undergo a fiscal analysis so that implications to the This candidate has a background in personnel grievances
university budget process are understood before a Council vote on and policy development, and a strong background in civil
the motion. rights, and was retained in the past for a P&T case. A
question arose regarding whether other committees may get
Personnel their own independent lawyer. Peter Schneider responded
that the issue with P&T concerned the fact that the
Mike Preston, Chair of the Personnel Committee, publicly thanked University Counsel office represents the university and its
John Ruhnka for attending the Faculty Council meetings in his administration, and a conflict could be perceived if faculty
place last fall while he was in class, and mentioned several issues governance and university administration had the same
on which the committee will be working this semester: lawyer. Topf added that P&T has always had a small "nest
egg" for legal services, but have noticed the need for a
The committee came to a consensus in favor of the GLB motion on more ongoing relationship with a single attorney.
domester partners benefits and inclusion of "sexual orientation" in
the nondiscriminatory statement, and are considering a motion (not There are five active grievances so far this year, and several
brought forward today) with a broader definition of "domestic people have been referred elsewhere for resolution of their
partner". A letter will be sent to the vice chancellors requesting grievances. In addition, approximately 5 cases were
copies of annual reports to System Administration on progress on resolved on the unit level.
the recommendations of the non-tenure-track faculty report. The
committee supported the Budget Committee's motion on salary As mentioned above, P&T will work with EPUS to revise
principles, passed by Faculty Council last fall. They will be the policy for termination for cause. Topf has done some
looking at medical benefits, and expect to hear shortly about research and compiled a list of five or so different models
progress on retirement investment options. They will also address to examine. An electronic discussion will begin with P&T
the issue of unit merit, taking the position that if unit merit is a part members.
of faculty salaries, then units must be evaluated as systematically
and rigorously as individual faculty. The committee also discussed
the supervisor accountability requirements of the PPS system.
January 9, 2001 Faculty Council Page 6 of 7
will be held in February. They are also planning a survey to
Ken Iwamasa was unable to attend the meeting so Richard address issues of recruitment and retention of faculty of color.
Bakemeier mentioned a few of the current activities of the Respondents will be asked to say why they came to CU, why
Minority Affairs Committee: The committee has been active in they stayed, or, if they are considering leaving, what factors
assisting with the planning of the CU Diversity Summit which influenced that decision.
Council Committee Reports
Women mandated. President Hoffman, upon her arrival at CU,
expressed her own expectations of CU policy: that a standard
Abby Ferber, Chair of the Women's Committee, reminded those behavior be defined which a reasonable person would recognize
present that the deadline for submission of nominations for the as sexual harassment, that a strong educational component
Elizabeth Gee Memorial Lectureship Award is January 22. ensures that people on the campuses know what constitutes
sexual harassment, and that the punishment be swift and severe
Some representatives of the committee have met with the ad hoc and match the crime. The committee has looked at the
committee established by Anne Costain, Associate Vice differences between the two policies, and the records of the
President for Human Relations and Risk Management, to numbers of cases, as well as the issues mentioned above. There
review the sexual harassment policy and its implementation. were 10 cases in 1998, and 34 cases in 1999. "Town meetings"
The Women's Committee is specifically concerned with are planned for the campuses to obtain input from people not on
education and training issues, and requested more detailed the committee.
annual reports to be distributed annually so they can better grasp
the scope of the problem. Also discussed were: the need for a Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues
victim advocate; better ways of dealing with retaliation during
investigation procedures; oversight issues; designation of Tom Riis, Chair of the GLB Committee, stated that the
investigators, reviewing persons and disciplinary authorities; committee was very happy that Faculty Council reaffirmed their
and ombuds services (which do not exist on all campuses), motion on domestic partner benefits and adding "sexual
specifically whether the ombudspeople are different from the orientation" to the non-discrimination statement. The
sexual harassment officers. committee has also discussed this motion and its issues with
President Hoffman, providing her with a history of the votes in
Laurie Harken, HSC, gave a brief history of the policy and the 1990, 1994, 1996, and 1999, and followed up with a letter to
ad hoc committee: her. The sense is that there is no issue with supporting the
A sexual harassment policy was in place until July 1, 1999, but sexual orientation inclusion, but domestic partner benefits is a
as a result of several federal court cases, the university and more complicated issue, especially concerning the definition of
University Counsel became concerned that we were not in "domestic partner" and "parity". The committee will follow up
compliance with these court findings. So the policy was on this issue in the spring semester.
quickly re-written and contained vast improvements, but
concerns remained about reporting of cases and expediency of
their resolutions, so a review of the policy after two years was
Boulder Mark Malone, Chair of the UCCS Faculty Assembly, reported that they are
continuing to work on salary compression issues. Last year, c.$170,000 was
Uriel Nauenberg, reporting for the Boulder allocated to raise people to 91.5% of minimum peer comparison salaries,
Faculty Assembly, said he has already heard from and three scenarios are being examined to determine cost of further
several people applying for faculty positions at improving the percentage. An estimated $100,000 will be needed this year.
CU-Boulder that they have found the new program These funds come from two sources: enrollment growth and a change in
for housing assistance for new faculty "an tuition structure.
extremely positive step in the recruitment The assembly is also working with several proposals to try to alleviate the
process". Also, the BFA is moving ahead to problem of funding summer enrollments so that individual schools do not
develop tuition benefits for the dependents of lose money, as has happened in the past. One proposal provides $100,000 to
faculty members. In the spring semester, they will raise base funding, with another $50,000 to be used for entrepreneurial
look at accounting issues, especially paperwork incentives to bring people to campus who would not ordinarily be there in
required for federal regulations, in an attempt to summer.
decrease the negligence of faculty in that area.
January 9, 2001 Faculty Council Page 7 of 7
Chair Peter Schneider reported that the Denver Faculty Assembly The assembly also unanimously endorsed the
considered two motions at its last meeting: First, endorsement of "Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on Non-
the Faculty Council GLB Committee's two-part motion of last Tenure-Track Faculty" and forwarded to the chancellor's
November to add "sexual orientation" to the university's non- office the recommendation that the UCD administration
discriminatory clause and affirmative action statement and to begin plans for the implementation of that report's
provide domestic partner benefits. The DFA divided the parts into recommendations. They requested periodic reports from
two separate motions, supporting the addition to the non- administration on these plans.
discriminatory clause, but tabling the domestic partner benefits
issue, pending more information on fiscal impacts and eligibility.
Health Sciences Center
Judy Igoe, Chair of the UCHSC Faculty Assembly, spoke of the Igoe also pointed out an article in the most recent Silver &
outcome of the Urban Land Institute (ULI) review. The CCHE Gold Record (Dec.21, 2000) regarding the search for the
requested this review before they would address the newly created postion of Vice Chancellor for Research.
recommendation that the next phase of building on the Fitzsimons There are several internal as well as national candidates for
campus stay at the top of the capital construction list. The ULI the position, which will strengthen the infrastructure for
consists primarily of land developers, so higher education research. The chancellor has responded positively to the
administrators and academics were subsequently recruited to be recommendation that the faculty infrastructre research
part of the review. Six faculty members from HSC were invited committee become a subcommittee of faculty assembly,
as well, representing the four schools and the faculty assembly. with representatives from all four schools.
Faculty assembly leaders were asked if they have taken an official
stance on the Fitzsimons development, but responded that no, they The assembly is also considering the "Recommendations of
have not because support for this project and its planning has the Ad Hoc Committee on Non-Tenure-Track Faculty", with
come at the school level. All of the schools, and all but one of the an eye toward going beyond endorsing the report to making
chairs of the School of Medicine departments have voted in specific recommendations.
support of the project. The outcome of the ULI review was
"exceptionally outstanding", and the review even suggested the Igoe has also spoken to Stuart Schneck, representative to
possibility that planning is not fast enough for the potential of this UBAB, about the unavailability of the CU dental service to
project. Other suggestions were technical in nature and concern CU employees with CIGNA insurance, and hopes for a
approaches which could assist CU and the CCHE in their planning report on that soon.
efforts. Igoe suggested that faculty, and perhaps Faculty Council,
come to the Fitzimons campus for an update and tour of the area.
Retired Faculty Association
Larry Morse, representative from RFA, reported that, although the university-wide RFA meets only twice a year, the executive
committee will meet that week regarding medical benefits for next year. There will be a request for some office space for RFA on
the Boulder campus.
The minutes of the November 30, 2000 meeting were approved. The meetings adjourned at 2:35.
Laurels Sessler, Faculty Council Office
University Faculty Council 26388
Boulder CO 80309-0562