From: Susan Rakowitz [srakowitz@fairfield.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:54 AM
To: Richard DeWitt
Cc: Crawford, David; Dennin, Joseph; Preli, Rona; Tromley, Cheryl
Subject: Re: Academic Council motion
Rick,

The FSC supports the proposal to add the FSC chair to the Budget Committee. Increasing faculty representation on the Budget Committee enhances faculty/administrative collaboration in general, and does so in a way that is advantageous both to our committee and to the Budget Committee. The Budget Committee takes no votes, so persuasive arguments are paramount. Having more faculty making such arguments means the faculty perspective is more likely to be heard. The benefits to the FSC of having one of those voices be a member of our committee are even clearer. The Budget Committee discusses the parameters of changes in compensation. It's advantageous for the FSC to have a voice in those discussions as early as possible. Furthermore, the administrators who meet with the FSC are deeply involved in those compensation discussions in the Budget Committee. If the FSC does not have a representative in the room for those meetings, we are at an informational disadvantage when we meet with the administration. In light of these arguments, we support extending Budget Committee membership to the FSC chair. Allowing the chair to pass that additional time commitment of 2-3 hours per month to a designee from the committee seems reasonable, and is, in fact, precisely the way the President made the invitation this year.

We are not concerned by the objections raised below. The two committee limit applies to standing Handbook committees and "special committees". The Budget Committee is neither. With regard to the additional time commitment this change would place upon the chair, service is part of our jobs as faculty members. As with scholarship, there is no clear definition of precisely how much service is appropriate. As with scholarship, then, faculty members typically do more service in some years and less in others. Chairing the FSC, with or without a concomitant seat on the Budget Committee, makes for a heavier than average year of service, but not necessarily heavier than, for example, chairing Rank and Tenure or publishing a book. It doesn't make sense to pull out of one of these examples for course release. What seems much more important is that we have merit guidelines that ensure that all schools and departments value service, and do so to comparable degrees.

Susan Rakowitz, Chair, FSC



From: Richard DeWitt <rdewitt@mail.fairfield.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:21:20 -0400
To: "'Rakowitz, Susan'" <SRakowitz@fairfield.edu>, <pbayers@mail.fairfield.edu>, <pcaster@mail.fairfield.edu>, "'Deak, Edward'" <deak@mail.fairfield.edu>, "'Scheraga, Carl'" <CScheraga@fairfield.edu>
Cc: "'Preli, Rona'" <RPreli@fairfield.edu>
Subject: Academic Council motion



Memo

To:       Salary Committee Chair, Educational Planning Committee Chair, and faculty                  representatives to the Budget Committee

From:  Rick DeWitt, AC Executive Secretary

Date:   10/19/09

Re:      Academic Council motion concerning FSC, EPC, and Budget Committees

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
 
 
At its 10/5/09 meeting, the Academic Council passed a motion requesting the Salary Committee, Educational Planning Committee, and Budget Committee consider and report back to the Council on a recommendation involving these committees.
 
Below we have included the text of the motion along with the relevant section of the minutes from the AC meeting. We have also included items AC members communicated to us concerning the recommendation, the section of the AC Subcommittee on Governance Report relevant to the motion, and correspondence between the President and AC Executive Committee involving this recommendation. The entire report from the AC Subcommittee on Governance and the complete minutes of the relevant AC minutes can be found on the Faculty Secretary’s website.

In addition, the AC has long had an item concerning the Budget Committee on its list of Pending Items. The AC Executive Committee is researching this item and will take this opportunity of renewed interest in the faculty representation on the Budget Committee to get this item back to the AC for resolution. We will be in touch again if there is more AC business for your committee to consider.

We would ask that you consider this request and report back to us at your earliest convenience, including any relevant documentation (for example, minutes of meetings at which this is discussed).
 
As always, thanks to everyone for your work on these important committees.
 

 
 
 


Motion and excerpt of minutes from AC meeting of 10/5/09


MOTION [DeWitt/Tucker]:  That the Academic Council pass on recommendations numbers 3, 6, and 7 to the relevant committees to consider and report back to the Academic Council.

Prof. Rakowitz noted that regarding number 3, the Public Lectures and Events Committee informally provided her with feedback; they did find in favor already and found very productive. On the other two, number 6 we are asking for the subcommittee. For number 7 it’s fuzzy whether they are a committee; she’s not sure what to make of that.

Prof. Mulvey stated that procedurally we should send this to the Public Lectures and Events Committee and get something formal from them that they think it’s a good idea and why. For number 6 again, procedurally it is better for us to get the Student Life Committee to weigh in on the recommendation. For number 7, the Budget Committee is not a Handbook committee and we elect three representatives (point of information). We should send it to these committees for information and recommendation.

The vote was held by ballot.

MOTION PASSED: 9 in favor, 8 opposed.


 
 
Items AC members communicated to the AC Executive Committee regarding the proposal to add the Chairs of the FSC and EPC to the Budget Committee. Some of these were communicated after the 10/5/09 AC meeting, and so do not appear in those minutes.

 
1.         The FSC and EPC are labor intensive committees, with the Chairs of those committees having an especially heavy workload. If the Chairs of those committees are expected to serve on another time consuming and labor intensive committee (such as the Budget Committee), perhaps a course release is appropriate for the FSC and EPC committee chairs.

2.         The Faculty Handbook, I.C.a.5., places limits on the number of committees on which a faculty member can serve. So placing the Chairs of the FSC and EPC on the Budget Committee may have the unintended consequence of forcing that chair to resign from another committee. (There is some question as to how to interpret this limitation. According to Journal of Record policy, such questions of interpretation are settled by the AC with administrative approval, so it may be that the AC will need to consider this interpretation issue.)

3.         An alternative suggestion: Have the EPC and FSC elect and recommend to the President a committee member (not necessarily the Chair) to serve on the Budget Committee for that year, with the President deciding whether to appoint the individual recommended.  

4.         
There is the short-term issue as well as a long-term issue.  In the short term, the President has already indicated that he intends to appoint the FSC Chair and the EPC chair to the 2009-2010 Budget Committee. If the committee chairs do take on this duty, the committees may want to consider holding a new election for chair since the individuals agreeing to stand for election to chair did so without understanding all they would be required to do. The long-term issue of whether the FSC Chair and the EPC chair should be added to the Budget Committee is what the Academic Council is asking your committee to consider and report on.
 

 

Section from AC Subcommittee Report with recommendation 7, regarding expanding faculty membership on the Budget Committee]


7. EXPANDING FACULTY REPRESENTATION ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE

The subcommittee recommends that the Academic Council pass a motion that requests the University President to add the chairpersons of the Salary Committee and the Educational Planning Committee to the membership of the University Budget Committee.

Rationale: Over ten years ago, the university administration agreed to allow elected faculty representatives to sit in on the university’s Budget Committee. (This committee was then called the “Finance Committee”, but the name was changed to avoid confusion with the Board’s Finance Committee, which has a very different role.) Faculty have since been electing such representatives, and three faculty have been participating in the work alongside the vice presidents, the executive vice president, and representatives from the student body and staff.
 
This recommendation would improve shared governance by 1) increasing faculty participation in conversations regarding the allocation of key campus resources, and 2) placing elected chairpersons of standing faculty committees that conduct business often related to the allocation of resources in conversation with the broader context of resource needs on campus. This broadening of faculty participation in substantive conversations regarding fiscal resources would contribute significantly to the budgetary process.
 
 
 
 
Email of 10/6/09 from President von Arx to AC Executive Committee


From: von Arx, Jeffrey, S.J. [President@fairfield.edu
]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 4:21 PM
To: Preli, Rona; Dewitt, Richard
Subject: University Budget Committee
 
 
Rona and Rick –
 
I understand that the Academic Council passed a motion to seek the views of the committees impacted by various recommendations made by the Academic Council Subcommittee on Governance. Recommendation #7 from the Subcommittee reads as follows:
 
The subcommittee recommends that the Academic Council pass a motion that requests the University President to add the chairpersons of the Salary Committee and the Educational Planning Committee to the membership of the University Budget Committee.
 
 
As the person to whom this motion is directed, I thought I would voice my opinion. I think that this recommendation responds to concerns expressed by the faculty about inclusiveness and transparency in our budget processes and I support it.  As the University Budget Committee is formed in the coming weeks, I plan to invite these two additional faculty.  If the Academic Council passes a motion in support of this change, it would be much appreciated.
 
JvA, SJ


 
 
Email of 10/7/09 from AC Executive Committee to President von Arx


From: Richard DeWitt [rdewitt@mail.fairfield.edu
]
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 11:02 AM
To: 'von Arx, Jeffrey, S.J.'
Cc: 'Preli, Rona'; 'Dewitt, Richard'
Subject: RE: University Budget Committee
 
 
Jeff,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and recommendations with Rona and me concerning the proposed motion to include the chairs of the Educational Planning Committee and the Salary Committee on the Budget Committee. We think there is broad support for including additional representatives on the University Budget Committee and are pleased to move forward with this proposal.
 
The Budget Committee is an administrative committee and, of course, we respect your authority to appoint whomever you want to that committee. The Council, as you know, is asking the relevant Handbook committees to consider the proposal before the AC weighs in with a recommendation to you.
 
Basically, we think the Council will want to consider all the consequences (intended and unintended) before taking action. One concern, not expressed until after the meeting, is that the Handbook has a limit on the number of committees on which a faculty member may serve. (And, the Journal of Record has a subsequent interpretation of this Handbook language). So the proposal may have the unintended consequence of requiring the chairs to resign from one of their other committees. Also, both the FSC and the EPC are incredibly time-consuming committees. Asking those chairs to sit on another committee that meets very, very frequently is asking for a major commitment that, perhaps, these individuals did not expect when they agreed to chair their respective committees this year. Perhaps the AC might recommend some course reduction for the chairs in exchange for a major new time commitment.
 
In any event, we do expect the AC to work on this quickly and have their recommendation to you this fall. Again, we think there is broad support for additional representatives on the Budget Committee, and we look forward to working with you in moving this forward.
 
Regards,
Rick
 
 
Rick DeWitt
Executive Secretary
Academic Council