Faculty Senate MinutesFebruary 16, 2017 – 3:10 pmChattanooga Rooms, University Center

Members in Attendance: Ainsworth, A. Jerald; Anderson, Dee Dee; Angle, Steven; Asllani, Beni; Bell, Mike; Bonnal, Michael; Brown, Richard; Cooley, Morgan; Crawford, Beth; Davidson, Susan; Dumas, Joe; Etheredge, Jessica; Halstead, Diane; Hand, Kelli; Hargrave, Katie; Harvey, Jamie; Hill, Linda; Laing, Craig; Lee, John; Liedtka, Theresa; Mauldin, Marcus; McAllister, Deborah; Oglesby, Burch; Potts, Gretchen; Rausch, David; Sisworahardjo, Nurhidajat; Sompayrac, Joanie; Tanis, Craig; Trussel, John;

Members Absent: Beech, Jennifer; Boyd, Jennifer; Cairns, Virginia; Churnet, Habte; Green, Margaret; Gunasekera, Sumith; Hamblen, Josh; Hunter, Rik; Iles, Gale; Liang, Yu; McGhee, Felicia; Nichols, Roger; Ray, Steve; Shaheen, Aaron; Winters, Kathy; Zibluk, Jack

Guests in Attendance: Marisa Colston, Tyler Forrest, Michelle Prince, Carol Oglesby, Joanne Romagni, David Seidel, Gavin Townsend

1. Call to Order

2. Approval of minutes from 1/19/2017 meeting

motion for approval: McAllister 1st, Cooley 2nd

discussion - none

motion approved – unanimous voice vote

3. President’s Report

Meeting with FARC

Sompayrac – I met with Parthasarati Dileepan and David Sachsman of FARC.

We had a 90 minutes meeting. We talked about the proposed changes and why

I think they are necessary. There is some sentiment that if it is not broke don’t

fix it. There was also some sentiment that FARC has some competing duties

that sometimes conflict with each other and maybe some of the duties should

be separated. What we have agreed to do is to continue to look at the issues.

They have sent a memo expressing their discontent with many of the proposed

changes and we are going to continue to work on a draft that is more

amenable.

UFC Resolution (posted on the Faculty Senate Webpage)

Sompayrac – I serve on this council with Dr. Halstead and Dr. Davidson with

other members of Faculty Councils from around the UT System. The UFC has

been talking about the implementation of the EPPR. The other UT Senates

have passed resolutions asking for some transparency of data on aggregate

performance reviews, cumulative performance reviews and EPPR as is it

implemented. Not anything that would violate confidentiality just overall data

starting with the 2014-2015 year as a baseline. We are the last campus to

consider this resolution. The resolution before you is comparable to the

resolutions passed on the other UT campuses.

motion for approval: Halstead 1st, Dumas 2nd

discussion - none

motion approved – unanimous voice vote

4. Administrative Reports – none

5. Committee Reports

Classroom Technology

Adsit – When the committee went through its charge we found that we were

supposed to be advisory to several technology committees that no longer exist.

We revised the charge (posted on the Faculty Senate Webpage) to make it more

generic and added the Dean of the Library to the committee as ex officio because

of all the technology in the Library

discussion - none

motion approved – unanimous voice vote

Handbook Committee

Crawford – Committee is waiting on several chapters from legal and system.

When we get a chapter back we will circulate it and do an electronic vote to keep

the process moving.

Curriculum Committee

Simmons – Committee brings all 12 proposals forward for voting.

Discussion: none

Vote: For 22, Against 0, Abstain 0 - motion approved

Oglesby – The 2/3/17 to 2/10/17 electronic vote on the 17 Curriculum Proposals

was: For 20, Against 0, Abstain 0 - motion approved

Budget & Economic Status Committee

Townsend – The Budget and Economic Status Committee is bringing a proposal

(posted on the Faculty Senate Webpage) before you which was born from

committee discussions over the past year or so. The typical pool for faculty salary

enhancement is usually in the range of 1 to 3% which is about $1 to $1.5 million

dollars.

Sometimes the State Legislature requires the money to be distributed as a Cost of

Living Adjustment (COLA). Sometimes the UT Board of Trustees demands that

the University pay particular attention to merit and equity compensation.

Sometimes the Deans have particular ideas on how the money should be used.

Over the past 15 years, the one major area which has not been addressed very

often is salary compression. This is particularly a problem for senior faculty

members. There are examples in several departments where Full Professors are

earning close to the same or even less than Associate Professors. The

administration is aware of the problem. It seems to be a universal problem in

American Universities. It has been addressed on occasion. There is salary

comparison data showing how our salaries compare to our peer institutions by

discipline. The University has made some efforts to raise the average salaries to

100% of our peer institutions. What has not happened is a regular rotating method

to address the three major methods of enhancing faculty salaries. This proposal

encourages the administration to use a rotating plan to address compensation

enhancements.

Discussion:

Halstead – There are some concerns from some of the College of Business

Faculty that the salary comparison data is not from AACSB accredited programs.

There is a wide disparity in salaries between accredited programs and non-

accredited programs. What data set will be used to determine market?

Townsend – This proposal does not specify any formula or what data set will be

used. It sets up a rotating plan and asks administration to work with B&ES

Committee to come up with a reasonable formula to address those concerns.

There have been some efforts in the past to try to make it as fair as possible.

Sompayrac – My perception today is that if we approve this proposal. It is a

recommendation to the administration. It is up to the administration to accept it

and say we are going to do this. If they choose to do it, I would hope that they get

faculty input from the various colleges. Richard Brown acknowledged that would

be done.

Townsend – That is all correct

Halstead – I hope the upper administration will work with the Deans and

Department Heads and the Faculty in each college to appropriately agree upon the

comparison schools’ data set.

Asllani – My only concern is that when this is implemented it may not be fair for

a given faculty member. Maybe in the year merit is given, a faculty member did

not receive merit that year. Have you considered 1/3 going to each area every

year?

Townsend – There is a statement in the next to last paragraph stating that no less

than 50% of the available funds be directed to one of the three rotating

compensation objectives. So for example, if 60% of the pool is used for

compression that leaves 40% to address other areas such as merit. Some years

there may be more money to address one area or another but over time (3,6,9

years) it should even out. The result being a more equitable correct allocation of

the funds. Using 50% instead of a larger percentage gives the administration some

flexibility in distributing the money.

Vote: For 19, Against 0, Abstain 3 - motion approved

6. New Business

Holt Building Resolution (posted on the Faculty Senate Webpage) – Dr. Tim

Gaudin

Gaudin – What we asking the Faculty Senate to do is recommend to the

administration to correct what we feel is an important oversite in the infrastructure

needs of the campus. The specific events are detailed in the resolution. In

summary, in 2012 funding was approved for a new Life Sciences Building.

However, at the end of the state approval process the Legislature pulled the

funding. The Life Sciences Building is still on the campus Master Plan but has

failed to make it back up the list to the top priority for the campus. When the Holt

Hall Renovation is complete, Biology will inherit some new space. It will

accommodate our current faculty (this does not include Geology) but it will not

accommodate any future growth. It remains a 40 year old building the is

deteriorating. We are asking the Life Sciences Building be moved back to the top

of the priority list for the UTC Campus as it was in 2012.

motion for approval: McAllister 1st, Halstead 2nd

discussion:

Halstead – How many faculty members are in the Department?

Gaudin – I would have to look it up but it is in the low 30s. We have a 1000

majors and we service another 1000 students. Close to 1/3 of the student body

comes through our department and uses our labs.

Halstead – It looks like 10 to 12 Faculty signed the letter. Why did the other

faculty not sign the letter?

Gaudin – We did not bring it to a faculty meeting and in general we have not

recommended that non-tenured faculty sign these types of things. Also, the

Departmental Office is still in Holt but the departmental faculty are spread over 6

buildings. I do not think you would find anyone in the department who is opposed

to this.

Halstead – What does our administration have to say about this?

Sompayrac – I presented this to the administration at the executive meeting and

they said it deserved to be heard.

Angle – The decision and what was done was before I came. I am a Chemist and

have been involved in building Biology and Chemistry labs before so I understand

the space issues. Holt Hall is being renovated. The Deans Office has moved out

and English is moving out. We are putting together a list of what Biology had

prior to the renovations and what will they have after it is done. I thought we were

adding 15 new hoods as part of new lab space. I do not know the specifics about

class room labs, stations and numbers. That project is funded and ongoing now.

The building we do have in the que is a Health Sciences building. Part of what we

have planned for that building is wet labs for the Department of Biology. It will

be adjacent to the Collins Street Anex. I have been on some campuses where the

teaching labs and research labs were in different spaces. If we do build the Health

Sciences Building, it will be done jointly with the UT School of Medicine. It will

house some clinical faculty including Dentistry. There are 140 or so 3rd and 4th

year medical students and over 100 full-time Faculty. They would love to work

with our faculty on research and grants. They are interested in broader issues. The

nutrition program is really attractive. The last thing we are trying to do is tie the

hands of the Biology Department so they are not successful.

David Aborn – A lot of the focus has dealt with space. But it is also about the

quality of the space and the quality of the instruction. When the work is done, it is

still a going to be a 40 year old building. It will still have much of the same

equipment. To produce students who are competitive we need a more up to date

state of the art facility. The Health Science Building could provide some of that

but there are a lot of Biology majors who are not going into the health sciences. I

think we need to look at this in a broader perspective.

Gaudin – With all due respect to the Chancellor, we view this as a Holt Hall

repair and not a Holt Hall renovation. The HVAC and wiring are being brought to

code so people can work in the building. A lot of the discussion focused on

Erlanger and the Health Sciences Building. Space is precious and academic

buildings are incredibly rare and the thought that we would give some of it to

Erlanger is not something that I or my colleagues find very attractive.

Spreading us out makes us less cohesive as a department. As things currently

stand we would be in 3 different building minimally. We feel the current plans are

inadequate.

Angle – It takes a long time to move through the que. It took ETSU 17 years to

get through the que for their performing arts facility. Can UT Health Sciences and

UT Chattanooga partnering together help us in the que? The UT Physicians are

located at Erlanger. So Erlanger is involved. However, we are not giving Erlanger

any money. We are not transferring anything to them. How do we jump the que

and get to the head of the line? Does it fit for Biology? I don’t know. Is it a pain

to be located in different buildings? Yes, it is. I have been at two institutions that

have to dealt with this exact issue because you cannot please everyone at the same

time. If we can make a case and get the funding for the Health Science Building,

then we should discuss how it might work for Biology. We are not trying to stand

on Biology and not see you be successful. Because we could not move walls in

Holt Hall was frustrating for everyone. We do want functional space. We want it

to work.

Sompayrac – Is there a down side to passing this resolution today?

Angle – If you do not approve this this resolution, we are going to engage Biology

and try to come up with a good solution. If you do pass this resolution, we are

going to engage Biology and try to come up with a good solution.

I cannot promise we will readjust our campus que based on the vote today.

Politics will play a role in the que and where we think we can be successful in

getting money. We will try to raise money to fund all the other projects.

A request was made for a paper ballot.

Vote: For 17, Against 1, Abstain 4 - motion approved

The Faculty Senate recognizes that passage of this resolution, while

demonstrating support for faculty colleagues in Biology, Environment Science

and Geology, serves to make a recommendation for increased advocacy by the

administration and not a mandate.

Parking Changes – Michelle Prince

The PowerPoint Slide Presentation is available on the Faculty Senate Webpage.

Tyler Forrest - Chancellor Angle and Dr. Brown have made fixing parking a

priority. I told them that fixing parking is probably impossible. However, I think

we can greatly improve it.

The process included a survey, six focus groups and a capacity utilization study.

From that, we have developed a three year plan to try to improve parking. Year 1

is complete – During year 1 we adjusted the number of reserve decals to relieve

capacity on general lots. We also changed the enforcement grace period for

reserve lots. We ticketed beginning the first day of classes. We added roughly 400

new spaces which helped up with overall capacity and completed critical

maintenance on 16 lots.

David Seidel – Parking changes to come include vehicle immobilization using

boots. There will be a soft roll out this summer. Full implantation will begin in the

Fall of 2017. Boots have several advantages including that towing is much more

expensive than boots and that towing is done by a third party. We want to stop the

practice of students racking up $800 dollars in tickets and then not being able to

register because of holds. How will I know my vehicle is booted? Several signs

are placed on the vehicle. I have applied hundreds of boots to vehicles and they

will not harm the vehicle.

Sompayrac- Based on current trends how many boots do you think we will need?

Seidel – I would guess that we will need 10 boots. Boots are very effective. Once

students see the first boot word will get around quickly via social media.

Forrest – We will start with the most habitual offenders and work our way down

the list.

Harvey – How much does a boot cost?

Seidel – To get a boot off your car there is a $20 fee and you have to pay off your

vehicle balance. One more benefit of boots over towing is that your vehicle may

be towed to an unknown location. If you vehicle is booted, the student still has

access to everything in the vehicle such as medicine, books and computers.

We have one more new policy which starts in the Fall. It is a dual registration for

disability permits. There is a problem of people using disability permits that do

not belong to them.

Sompayrac – If I am a visitor with a disability tag and do not know about the

regulations, am I going to get a ticket?

Seidel – You will not get a ticket initially. Part of the implementation of this

policy is to determine who are visitors and who is just pretending to be a visitor.

If the same car is parking in a spot every Tuesday and Thursday we know they are

probably not a visitor.

Potts – The parking garage is designated for visitor parking. How will disability

parking be handled in the parking garage?

Seidel – There are no disability spaces in the parking garage but it will be handled

the same way. People with a disability tag will not be charged.

Forrest – gave and update on the food options that will be offered in West

Campus Housing.

National Tobacco-Free Campus Initiative– Carol Oglesby

A Link to the Healthy Initiative Website is available on the Faculty Senate

Webpage

Carol Oglesby – I represent a large group of people who help our students stay

healthy. The Healthy Living Initiative was started approximately 4 months ago.

We have a committee working to bring opportunities to Faculty, Staff and

Students to help them stay healthy. The committee is composed of representatives

from Student Development, Campus Recreation, Student Health Services, The

School of Nursing and Health and Human Performance. We are using our local

resources but we are also using some national resources. We have joined the

American College of Sports Medicine’s Exercise is Medicine Program. In this

program, Faculty, Staff and Students can go to Student Health Services and get an

exercise referral to the ARC for free personal training sessions. Healthy Campus

2020 is a program backed by the American College Health Association which

provides resources to help offer programs that foster healthy environments and

behaviors on college campuses. We are also working with Governor Haslam’s

Healthier Tennessee Initiative to serve as a pilot program in establishing a

Healthier Tennessee Campus Category within the initiative. Marisa Colston and

the Department of Health and Human Performance have taken a lead role in this

effort. The Healthier Tennessee and Healthy Campus 2020 programs both

emphasize smoke free environments. The Tobacco Free Campus Initiative is a

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services program to provide resources to

college campuses to help them become smoke and tobacco free. We are using

their resources to help us address tobacco issues on our campus. We have done

some initial surveys for Faculty and Students examining feelings toward tobacco

on campus. We will have a larger student survey coming out later this semester.

We are aware of the State of Tennessee Laws that make establishing a tobacco

free campus difficult. However, we may still be able to help our campus

environment. We are going to offer help to those who wish to stop smoking

including pharmaceuticals. We are going to do this through Student Health

Services and free smoking cessation programs offered in Hamilton County. The

committee has sent a letter of Chancellor Angle asking for support of the tobacco

free initiative. Please watch for announcements and visit the website to find out

about of various program offerings. We will be offering programs in nutrition,

activity, mental health and many other areas to help promote a healthier campus.

Angle – The tobacco free initiative will be really hard for some people and we

need to recognize that it is very difficult to stop smoking. We can offer a lot of

resources but for a few people this will be really difficult. Some of the students

have asked me, why don’t we enforce the rules that we have. We need to look at

how we do this and get everyone involved, faculty, staff and students.

We will be calling for nominations for faculty to run for President-Elect

7. Unfinished Business – none

8. Faculty Concerns -

Sompayrac – Tennessee Legislature is considering a bill (HB739) which they are

calling the Freedom of Speech Bill. The UFC talked about this bill. Sections 2c5

and 2c6 are of particular interest. The concern is that the bill sounds like the

Legislature does not want anything happening in a classroom that will offend any

student. Maybe that is not the intent but that could be the result. There are classes

where on occasion you have to move the students out of their comfort zone. I will

send this out to everyone so that we can discuss it.

9. Announcements -

Joanne Romagni encouraged participation in Research Dialogues

10. Adjournment

Motion for adjournment: Halstead 1st, Potts 2nd