Governance Council
Friday, March 30, 2015
3:00 PM
UNH 306
Cynthia Fox, Chair
Minutes
PRESENT: Chesin, Sorrell; Cruz, José; Dutta, Suarav; Fox, Cynthia;
Gulatee, Yenisel;
Janiszewski, Caitlin; Kearney, Ann; Kuznetsov, Igor; Malavasic,
Jolene; Moore, Chris;
Scheck, Helene; Zemel, Alan
The meeting convened at 3:04 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of March 2, 2015 were approved, with a minor change and 1
abstention.
CHAIR’S REPORT
GOV Chair and Senate Chair Stefl-Mabry met with David Rousseau earlier in the
day to discuss governance involvement in the proposed College of Emergency
Preparedness for which Professor Rousseau has been asked to serve as Interim
Dean and for which a Steering Committee and group of interested faculty had
already been formed. Interim Dean Rousseau agreed to forward the membership
rosters to GOV for input and to report to the Senate on the progress of the College
beginning with the meeting of April 27. Chair Fox also gave a brief overview of the
Governor’s initiative and progress to this point and of the administration’s
perceived need to have something in place (not a building) by September.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Senate Elections
Committee on Liaison and Elections Chair Yenisel Gulatee reported that
preparation for elections was complete.
Replacement of Senators
Regarding the issue of a Senate member’s lack of attendance, the individual
responded that meetings had been missed due to personal circumstances. Chair
Fox reported the member did not wish to resign and that going forward would
begin to attend meetings again. GOV considered the matter to be resolved.
Bylaw amendment
On March 26, Chair Fox received an email from Senator David McCaffrey that
raised concerns about the fairness of the use on March 24 by President Jones,
Senate Chair Stefl-Mabry, and Albany Chapter UUP President Bret Benjamin of the
Voting Faculty listserv to send out a message that endorsed the Bylaws change. In
a subsequent email dated March 27, Senator McCaffrey stated that he had learned
that a colleague who believed that use of the listserv was in violation of university
policy had filed a complaint with the Chief Information Officer. Senator McCaffrey
asked that the Governance Council look into the matter and, if the letter was
indeed in violation, consider postponing the Bylaw amendment. To this end, he
asked that Chair Fox share with GOV the email exchanges they had been having on
this subject.
Chair Fox asked if any other member of GOV had been contacted about this
matter. She noted that Senator McCaffrey’s messages suggested he was serving as
the spokesperson for a group of deeply concerned faculty, and that the problem
was being discussed in a number of venues, but that she did not have a sense of
how many individuals he was actually representing. She reminded GOV that on
March 23" a second notice of the upcoming vote had been sent out that invited
voters to contact her or any other member GOV with questions about the rationale
and/or process. GOV members responded that they had not been contacted
At member requests for background information, Chair Fox recounted discussions
regarding the Bylaw amendment at prior SEC meetings, and summarized how it
had been narrowly approved to go for a vote and that Interim Provost Mulcahy had
addressed questions regarding the impetus for proposing the amendment. The
Chair also explained that the CIO had met individually with the authors of the
letter endorsing the amendment and shared the contents of the memo that they
had collectively received following those meetings. The memo did not state that
the letter was in violation of university policy, but did caution care regarding such
use in the future.
In a lengthy discussion that lasted almost an hour, GOV considered to what extent
the call for a specific vote represented “political speech” in the context of a matter
of internal university policy, the seriousness of the potential violation of that
policy, the benefits of postponing the vote versus the potential disadvantages, and
whether the rights of voters had been compromised. GOV also considered ways in
which this situation can be avoided in the future.
At the end of this discussion, a motion was made and unanimously approved not to
postpone the vote.
It was also noted that the joint letter in support of, as well as the initial request by
the administration for, the Bylaw amendment seemed gestures in the interest of
demonstrating transparency and working together.
NEW BUSINESS
New College of Emergency Preparedness, Steering Committee and Working
Groups
GOV reviewed the proposed steering committee member list. There was also a
spreadsheet listing a working group interested in assisting. It was noted that
representation was light in CAS. There had been a new Master’s in Global Public
Health that could have benefitted from input from critical languages in the early
stages, and perhaps the same was true of this college. It was agreed that all areas
of communication were considered critical elements. Anthropology and Sociology
were also suggested, to consider the cultural aspects. GOV members reviewed
potential candidates and agreed to consider and contact others regarding interest
in serving. Chair Fox would contact Dean Rousseau with GOV’s recommendations
and note that names would be forwarded within a couple of days after GOV
checked with them.
Renaming of CCI and Formal consultation
Chair Fox explained that at a recent meeting of the UPPC, Senate / SEC Chair
Stefl-Mabry had questioned whether the Dean of CCI’s request to UPPC regarding
the renaming of CCI to the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences
constituted formal consultation. Following that meeting, UPPC Chair David
McCaffrey put the issue to an electronic vote with the majority of the members
agreeing that it did.
At a subsequent meeting of the SEC, Chair Stefl-Mabry devoted part of her report
to a presentation in which she sought to clarify the definition of formal
consultation. This started a conversation about the events at the UPPC meeting.
Following lengthy discussion, it was moved that the issue of whether the
procedure followed thus far in the renaming of CCI constituted formal consultation
or not be referred to GOV.
GOV agreed that Governance, rather than UPPC, is the appropriate Council to be
determining the question of what constitutes formal consultation.
A letter from UPPC Chair McCaffrey and conversation with Senate Chair Stefl-
Mabry on the matter were reviewed. It was agreed that UPPC is the appropriate
body for a proposed department name change to go to. However, it was unclear
who was proposing the change since GOV had never been asked to approve the
membership of any committees related to the College of Engineering initiative. It
was recalled that concerns were raised at a recent Senate meeting that Senators
often feel that they cannot oppose a bill after so much work has been done on it,
and that their input is requested too late in the process to be meaningful.
A motion was made that, in determining the interpretation of the formal
consultation per the Bylaws and Charter, it be recommended that the CCI name
change proposal go through UAC and GAC for consideration prior to going to vote
on the Senate floor. The motion was rescinded.
A motion was then made and unanimously approved to first review more
information on the processes, for other prior department name changes for the
purpose of clarification, and to vote on a recommendation via e-mail on
Wednesday.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:02 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Elisa Lopez, Recorder
