Transcript Senate Meeting
October 2, 2012
Bill Sauser, chair: I’d like to call the meeting to order please. I’d like to remind everyone, please, to sign in in the back and get your clickers because we will be using them today. If you haven’t used them before they are pretty easy, the on-off is at the bottom. You press that and a little blue light comes on that says power, then when you vote you should get information that your vote has been counted, if it doesn’t blink then just push your vote again. It will only count it once, you can press it as many times as you wish.
I’d like to welcome you to the October 2, 2012 meeting of the Auburn University Senate, I’m Bill Sauser, the chair of the Senate. A short review of the rules of the Senate; First is senators and all substitutes for senators, please sign the roll, get your clicker. Second, if you’d like to speak about an issue then go to the microphone located on either aisle, and when I recognized you state your name and indicate whether or not you’re a senator and if so, what unit you represent. Finally the rules of the Senate do require that senators and substitute senators have the opportunity to speak first, then after all comments by Senators on any issue, our guests are welcome to speak when recognized.
We have 87 members of the senate, so a quorum requires 44. So first use of the clicker, if you are here and a senator press A, (senator or substituting for a senator). Okay, great, a quorum is present so we will proceed with the meeting.
Our first item on the agenda will be to approve the minutes from the September 11, 2012 meeting. Those minutes have been posted on the Senate’s Web site, you’ve all had a chance to read them or read the transcript if you desire. Do I hear a motion on the minutes? Anyone move approval? We have a motion and a second, all in favor please say aye.
Bill Sauser, chair: Opposed nay. (none) The motion carries. Thank you, thanks for doing those minutes Robin.
Our first order on the agenda is comments from our President. Dr. Gogue. [2:40]
Dr. Gogue, president: Thank you Bill. I just have 3 things that I wanted to share with you. At our last meeting I mentioned to you there was an election coming up on a Constitutional Amendment or a change in the Constitution. It was the movement of money from the Trust Fund, not the Educational Trust Fund, but moving money from the Trust Fund into the General Fund agencies. It did pass. To be very candid with you, those of you in higher education, it’s good that it passed because we would have probably had proration already to announce to you had it not passed. I don’t know if it’s a good thing long term for this State but you’re basically borrowing money out of a savings account to pay off current needs. So anyway that did pass and I wanted to make sure you knew that.
Second thing is the Board of Trustees meeting did occur since we last met. All items from the academic side were approved. The major item that was approved was the budget for the current fiscal year. I call your attention to two items, one within that budget was a permanent salary increase and I know Dr. Large provided the go ahead to Deans a day or two after the Board meeting in September, so you should have received letter by now, if you have not you will receive them very soon on terms of permanent raise increases. The second element that was also in the budget is a 2% funded centrally, one–time money that would be available as salary increases in December, as I recall. My understanding is basically the same guidelines will go out, they are merit based increases; schools, colleges, departments are able to use additional funds over and above the institutional funds to support additional raises.
Final thing I wanted to mention to you is we have two members of our Board of Trustees who’s term really expired last legislative session. That is Sam Ginn’s and John Blackwell’s term expired. The way our Constitution is written they are allowed to serve up to one full year until their replacement is found. Both of their terms actually expire in that one-year grace period, if you will, in February. The governor in the next day or so will call those committees together, there will be 2 members of the Board of Trustees. It will be chairman Harbert and Mr. Raine will be the two, the Alumni Association will also name 2 and the governor will chair that committee. They will make the announcement probably this week and begin that process of receiving candidates or receiving applications.
Those are the 3 things I wanted to mention. I appreciate you being here today, are there any questions for me? [5:39]
Eduardus Duin, senator, chemistry: A couple of weeks ago in the AU Daily, all the paychecks are going to paid to the end of the month, so in effect I had some questions about that. I understand in particular to Christmas paycheck coming a little bit earlier, personally I like that a lot in my household, maybe you could reconsider that particular paycheck option.
Dr. Gogue, President: Don, do you understand the question? Let me ask Don Large to respond.
Don Large, Executive Vice President: I think the concern was as the president said last time we would be paying that one-time at the end of the month?
Eduardus Duin, senator, chemistry: The AU Daily said the paycheck would come at the end of the month.
Don Large, Executive Vice President: The one-time, it will be paid…I don’t know if we have and exact date, Karla is it Dec. 7? That’s what I thought. So it’s very much like we did last year. We will be getting the information in the next month from the schools and colleges of their proposed increases, the one-time allocation. Then we will process it and it will be in their bank deposit on Dec. 7.
The regular paycheck would come on December 31.
Dr. Gogue, President: Don, what’s the question we couldn’t hear?
Don Large, Executive Vice President: The one-time will be paid December 7. When people leave for the holidays, I guess around December 19, but you get your check for the month deposited on December 31, just like you would at any other end of the month. I think the question is: Could that be deposited on December 19 or something like that?
That wasn’t what we intended to do. [8:06]
Karla McCormick, executive director of payroll and employee benefits: We did make an announcement that going forward any pay day that occurs on what would otherwise be a holiday or before we leave for the holiday, such as the checks that we would typically get before we leave for the Christmas holidays, are actually going forward going to be paid on the true pay date. So we will get paychecks on November 30 and then get paychecks again, if you are a monthly employee, on December 31. Semi-monthly employees will get paid as usual on the 15th, and instead of getting two on the 15th, you will get one on the 15th and the next on the 31st.
The reason that we did that was to avoid having to estimate within those paychecks, when we run those checks before the time has actually been worked, we have to estimate how much time people are going to work then after that pay period has run, we have to go back and compare actual worked time with what’s actually been paid. And then we have to recover that. That’s a long process. We had talked with some of the monthly employees, we talked with some of the semi-monthly employees who were comfortable with the fact that we would change it to the 31st, and admit to a lot of us especially if you are a monthly employee would not have to go 6 weeks from Dec. 15, when ever you get that check until January 31 to get another check. Not sure that everybody is completely happy about it but that was the logic, and I do think there are a lot of employees who do understand that logic and are comfortable with it.
Dr. Gogue, president: Thank you Karla. Are there other questions?
Bill Sauser, chair: Karla, the A&P Handbook and Staff Handbook state that the pay would come on the day before a holiday that payday falls, are you going to make sure that the policy books are changed?
Karla McCormick, executive director of payroll and employee benefits: We are
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you. [10:19]
Next order of business, Dr. Boosinger has a number of things to share with us, but he wants to make that presentation next week on October 9 when he is scheduled to present to the General Facutly, and graciously asked that we differ today. So we’ll do that. And I’ll make my brief report at this time. [10:57]
I like to begin these reports always by acknowledging my fellow elected officers. Ann Beth could not be with us today but, here’s Larry Crowley, and Robin Jaffe, Judy Sheppard, and our appointed parliamentarian, thank you for serving us yet again, Constance Hendricks, and Laura Kloberg works as our administrative assistant. If you have any business to bring up to the Senate, just let any one of us know or of course you could always contact your unit’s senator as well.
I wanted to comment on grassroots shared governance. We all are aware that there are lots and lots of departmental, and school, and college, and university, and senate committees. Are we not? How many of you serve on at least one committee? Aha I thought I’d see just about every hand go up in the room. There are hundreds of faculty members who are involved in what I call grassroots shared governance throughout the university. It is very important service work and I’m pleased to see that it is recognized as such. There are a lot of important decisions that get made every month by these committees and bodies and all of us then have the opportunity to be involved in making decisions about the university that affect our academic program.
Your elected officers as I pointed out earlier each serve on a number of committees and represent you well. I could ask each one of them to talk about what they’ve done this month, but instead I just thought I’d run through my own calendar. I’m not going to share with you everything that was on the calendar but here just a couple of observations that I had about some of the meetings that I attended, just this month.
Good gracious, those 4 all on the same day and in fact on September 6 we started early in the morning with a cabinet meeting. The focus of that particular meeting which is held prior to every Board of Trustees meeting is to make sure that all the t’s are crossed and the i’s are dotted and everything is just right on the agenda and materials that are sent out to the Board, so they will have all the proper materials and proper information when they are called upon to vote. There were a few tweeks made, a few changes made, but by and large the agenda was in great shape and it was sent out and as you just heard from the president, every item was passed by the Board, so that’s good news.
Later that day I went to a luncheon. This was a really fine event. This was a luncheon that was hosted by Dean Bill Batchelor as a sounding board. His idea was let’s call together on a regular basis all of the Senators and all of the committee members of those who are working on Senate Committees, let’s get the group together and discuss issues and have a sounding board. I was invited to come, I really enjoyed that and commend Dean Batchelor for doing that and suggest maybe our other Deans look at that opportunity as well.
Later that day the Provost’s Counsel met. This group meets twice a month, two of the meetings are deans only so they can have a face-to-face discussion with their direct supervisor. The other two meetings every month are open to the deans and other direct reports of the Provost. Information is shared, ideas are talked about, we get deans perspectives; I was pleased to be invited there.
Finally at the end of that day the Senate Executive Committee met, this is your elected officers plus the Provost. And we do get to meet with the Provost twice a month. Actually there’s another meeting that meets on the alternative, so we meet every week, which is a pleasure Tim, thank you. Good discussions about what’s going on within the university and plans for the future.
On the 10th the Senate Executive Committee met with Dr. Gogue, Dr. Boosinger, and Dr. Large. We get to do this every month. It’s again a great opportunity to share information, be sounding boards for one another, talk about what’s going on in the university. If there are any issues that have been brought to our attention we can bring them up with these university officers and get their perspective as well. If there’s action that needs to come before the Senate we talk about that an make some recommendations at that time. I wanted to let you know that’s going on.
Also on the 10th the president held his administrative meeting. The president does this every Monday. It’s a large group of campus administrators, people who gather together for a short meeting, 30–45 minutes, never longer than 60 minutes, just to share what’s going on on campus, and there is a lot going on. It’s kind of a briefing meeting for everybody to be on the same page about what’s happening on campus.
The Provost’s open forum was held on the 11th, who was there if you were at the Provost’s open forum? These are really good. We know the Provost has been holding open forums on a number of different issues. This particular one was focused on the Central Classroom Facility, great meeting some exciting things were discussed, lot of faculty there, good input. On the 11th also the Senate met and all of you were here for that meeting so you know what happened.
On the 13th the Steering Committee got together. [16:49] The Senate’s Steering Committee is the group who puts the agenda together. So this is the group that actually votes on what goes on the agenda and what does not. Also we meet twice a month, we look at the agenda and we also preview all of the presentations that are brought to you so we can get an idea of what is going to be discussed and to make some suggestions as to what you might be particularly be interested in.
The Finance Committee of the Board of Trustees met on the 20th. Folks this was probably the best Board of Trustees interaction I’ve ever had in my 35 years on the Auburn University campus. I think everyone who was there was really impressed. What went on the Board of Trustees asked very good strategic level questions, as they should, they showed due diligence, they asked tough questions; our administrators, our president, executive vice president, and others were well prepared to answer those questions, good information shared. [17:56] And if that’s the way our Board of Trustees is going to operate from now forward, we are going to be very pleased with that. That was a great meeting and I want to point that out to everyone.
I am also a member of an administrative review team. This is something new that the Provost’s Office and the University Senate is kind of jointly conducting, we started doing these last year, the idea is that every administrative office, or deans, vice presidents, etc. are reviewed on a periodic basis. You may recall a 3–5 year basis, and the purpose is to do a 360 degree review, that is those above, those below, and those who are colleagues, and those that are affected by each administrator have some input so that we can know how she or he is handling the duties of the job. [18:52] So my purpose in being there was of course to make sure that we do have a fair and comprehensive 360-degree meeting. I was delighted with the way that meeting began, the chair was very responsible to see that everyone was involved and I think those are going to be very good for our university for the future.
Oh, a couple of more meetings before the month ended on the 26th the Academic Affairs Committee met. Oh my goodness, what a tough job they have these are lengthy meetings and they meet regularly and as it was described to me by Dr. Relihan, this is a group that deals with the ‘nitty-gritty’ issues of advising and interpreting university policy and so forth and every time they meet they have a lot of issues to deal with. One thing I was really excited about was the fact that we now have a tiger advisor program. It is now operational. This is an additional opportunity for students to be advised, they can go to the Library and some of our retired advisors, which are now on staff, to give them a general advise, not to take the place of their college or school advisors, but rather as it was put to me, “tell the students what they should have learned during Camp War Eagle,” so it’s a good service and I’m delighted to see it’s there.
We had a couple of lengthy Master Planning meetings the next day. The Master Plan Update Committee is a very broad based committee and it’s intentionally so to see to it that we get voices from around campus. The Master Planning Update is done every 5 years and that’s underway. The whole purpose is to hear from lots of different voices across campus. So we had a good discussion. I learned not only about the high quality of our own planners here in the university, but also the value added by Sasaki Associates, they’re doing a really good job folks and I was delighted to see it.
That afternoon we also had a planning related committee, this is the Executive Facilities Committee I am delighted to represent you on that committee. This is a group that is making tough decisions. Every square inch of our campus has several people looking at it saying, “boy I could use that,” and tough decision have to be made and priorities have to be set. This is a group advisory to the President, and then the President to the Board about how land is to be used on the campus. So this is a pretty hard working committee.
Made for an exciting month and I did want to share with you, multiply the kind of work that I did by about 100 and you get some idea of the grassroots campus governance that’s being done. Shared governance that’s being done on this campus, and I think it’s pretty exciting.
A couple of reminders before I close, first I suggest that all the senators read or at least scan the AU Daily, Auburn Digest. Do it daily. The idea is it’s the diary of our campus, it tells us what’s going on each day. I’m always amazed when I look at that because I can see that our faculty are having input not only all across campus, but throughout the world. It’s a really good thing to look at, so just take a moment or two to scan it. That’s about all it takes if there’s one item or two that’s of interest to you, you can read that in more detail.
As I mentioned on October 9 we’re going to have a General Faculty meeting. This traditionally is our State of the University Meeting, and that’s what we are going to hold. It will be in this room at 3:30 on the 9th. Dr. Gogue, and Dr. Boosinger, and Dr. Large, and Mr. King are going to make brief reports to us, presentation, show us what’s going on in their areas of work. Then also we’ll be here to respond to questions, so I encourage all of you to come and also bring your faculty colleagues. Let’s have a good turn out for this meeting because these officers have a lot to share with us. [23:17]
The final thing, the Campus United Way Campaign is underway and Dr. John Mason is honorary chair and I’m going to ask John to make a comment or two about the campaign as we close. John?
Dr. John Mason: Very briefly, a little bit of a community service announcement is basically what I am going to do. During the months of October and November it’s very traditional around the United States that United Way Campaigns are in force and this year I was asked to participate as an honorary chair trying to demonstrate my advocacy and support and thereby the university’s advocacy and support. Primarily this is an opportunity for the university to demonstrate to our neighboring community that indeed we all benefit, both our neighbors in Lee County as well as the university population that if you have the interest and you have an affinity for trying to help in a neighborly fashion throughout Lee County I simply want to encourage you to read the information and participate. Our Human Resource group does an excellent method by which we can participate through our monthly payroll deductions, but more importantly there are 5 critical areas that I think are important for a family like Auburn University to participate. Recognizing that the United Way Campaign does have community wide impact, you’d be surprised when I attended the first briefing I just simply did not have a comprehensive idea of the broad nature of the types of people that they serve. I would bet in this room, yourself or your neighbors might either be volunteering or participating in all the works in particular the good works. This is one of the things that is the right thing to do.
Another piece of information and I’ll close on it; from an educational aspect if you do plan to participate you can also designate to which area your contribution might be assigned. So it has great flexibility, it’s a way of Auburn University engaging with the community, and allows the community to show our reflections that we really do care. Thank you very much for your time, hopefully you will join all of us in that goodwill campaign. I appreciate it, thank you.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you so much John. Are there any questions for me in my role as chair?
Alright, next come our items of business. Some of you got a chuckle last time when I asked someone else to address one of the items of business, I want to remind everyone that as chair I am not allowed to either advocate either for or against any of the business that comes before the Senate. I to be a neutral moderator and that’s what I’m going to do. So if there are issues and questions that come up of course, we’ll hear those from the floor and from those that present the motions.
Our next item of business is a nomination. We are nominating a Senate Committee member. All members of the Senate committees need to be endorsed by the Senate, so I am going to call on Robin Jaffe to make that motion.
Robin Jaffe, secretary: Thank you Bill. This is a nomination for the University Writing Committee, Roy Knight to fill a position that was vacated. This comes from Rules.
Bill Sauser, chair: This comes from the Rules committee so it needs no second. Any comments? Ready to vote? All in favor press A, opposed press B. A= 56, B=0. And that motion carries. Thank you Robin.
Our next item of action is a resolution that was brought before you last time for discussion, we are now brining it for action. This is an Administrator Hiring Resolution, it’s being brought to you by Larry Crowley on behalf of the Steering Committee. Larry? [28:19]
Larry Crowley, chair-elect: I move on behalf of the Steering Committee to amend the Administrator Hiring Resolution which was previously adopted Oct. 2, 2007 as shown here, and which was also provided as a link to the current agenda. As shown in the motion, it contains two amended sections, first the preamble would be modified to indicate that the very present concern for the Senate at the time this resolution was originally passed, which is now better referred to as practices of the past; second the administrator hiring guidelines section 4 will substitute should for shall. In terms of limiting duration of the service to 12 months for an interim and also strike the trailing phrase for the section.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you, we have a motion on the floor that comes from a Senate Committee. Is there any discussion of the motion? [29:14]
Vicki Van Saten, senator, pathobiology: College of Veterinary Medicine and I mention that for a reason. I understand and support the rational behind this resolution it’s intended to prevent and interim administrator to sliding into permanent positions without an appropriate search and to insure faculty input in administrator hiring, but I think the resolution goes further than necessary by requiring sitting interims to resign in order to apply for this permanent position. I want to point out some unintended consequences of that requirement one of which we are experiencing at the College of Veterinary Medicine right now.
Our former Dean Dr. Boosinger has become the Provost so we are conducting a search for a new dean and our interim dean has resigned in order to be a candidate. So having two interim deans in such a short period of time is extremely disruptive and it’s also taking a lot of faculty time when we already have a capable interim dean. So they are really having to scramble quickly to find a replacement.
Another unintended consequence that I see will likely be difficulty in finding qualified people to serve as interims because those most qualified might be interested in applying for the permanent position and if they have the best interest of their unit in mind and they realize that having an interim, and that interim resigning and having another interim and how disruptive that is they might want to avoid that and decline a request to serve as interim.
There are other provisions in this resolution that allow it to fulfill its purposes, preventing the interim administrators moving into permanent positions without a search and assuring the faculty input of administrator hiring, so it makes stepping down as the interim to apply for the permanent position redundant. The resolution does require searches, both for the interim and for the permanent position both with faculty participation. So I find that requirement for resignations for sitting interims unnecessary and I’d like to propose that the resolution be amended, by removing the sentence that “it is preferable that sitting interims resign prior to seeking the permanent position.” Thank you.
Bill Sauser, chair: Is there a second to that amendment? Hearing a second the amendment is now open for discussion.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: A point of order. Is the motion that he called for that didn’t have a second to amend this resolution or adopt it?
Bill Sauser, chair: The motion is to adopt this particular resolution [32:12] It was adopted by the Senate some years ago and has laid dormant, so it’s coming back with amendments. So what we have before you is a motion to adopt, it required no second because it came to you from the executive committee.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: Okay, I thought I heard a motion to amend from Larry.
Larry Crowley, chair-elect: You are exactly right, I was bringing an amended motion.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: Are we amending the amendment then?
Larry Crowley, chair-elect: I guess that would be right.
Bill Sauser, chair: Michael what we have on the floor right now is an amendment to strike the words “especially if they have served more than 12 months in the interim position.” Am I correct, no, I’m sorry, please restate.
Vicki Van Saten, senator, pathobiology: I’d like to propose that the resolution be amended, by removing the sentence that “it is preferable that sitting interims resign prior to seeking the permanent position.”
Bill Sauser, chair: Would you maybe draw a line through that so we can see that. That’s what’s before us right now. It’s been moved and seconded. So that’s what’s being discussed at this point.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: So we are going to vote on an amendment to the amendment?
Bill Sauser, chair: That is correct.
Thank you, I’ll call on our distinguished past president (chair).
Bob Locy, senator, biological sciences: When I stood, I stood to thank the Senate leadership and the Provost for, based on our discussion at the last Senate meeting, reinstating some of the initial wording that made all administrators above the level of department chair, come under this resolution. However, I still wish to thank those people for that, but I also want to speak to this amendment. The sentence which we are proposing to strike does not require anything, as the amender mentioned in her comments, is says that it is preferable that you do that. As such I believe the language that’s here, provides an important function which is to ask people when we are conducting searches for interims to think about whether they want to become the permanent or not. If there is only one person around to serve as an interim who has to be in the interim position in order to not be in the interim position when the serve, the wording of the thing also allows for the opportunity to have that person continue in the position and still be able to go through the search process. I fail to see that this is creating any undo hardship on anyone and a little forethought in the formation of the search committee in the original list of applicants for an interim position would eliminate the necessity of having several deans in relatively short period of time. So I believe that it accomplishes the task of not having a sitting interim discouraging additional applicants for the full-time permanent position applying for the position. And if you follow the resolution and relatively quickly get an interim committee appointed, conduct your search for the regular position, I don’t see that it creates undo hardship for anyone, and also ample opportunity to work outside of these guidelines with permission in order to be able to produce a positive result for everyone.
So I believe the wording that’s placed here is completely appropriate and I would therefore urge voting against the amendment of the resolution.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you. Yes sir.
David King, senator, geography and geology: I came up to the microphone to basically say what Bob was saying, and Bob said it much more eloquently than I probably would have, but I do also oppose this and it just says that it’s preferable. Probably in the instance that was cited about the Vet School, it probably isn’t preferable, but just as a general guideline it’s good to have that in there so that if exceptions have to be made then they are, but I think I would support having the general view that a sitting interim shouldn’t seek the permanent position unless there is some special circumstances. And the example given here probably is one of those cases, it just says that it is preferable it doesn’t say you shall or you must or you will.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you. Are there any other comments on the amendment? Would you like to speak to the amendment as he comes forward Larry?
Larry Crowley, chair-elect: I understand your concern at the Vet School and we had a conversation when we called the search firm and asked them specifically this question with the Vet School and we were informed by him that it would chill the candidate pool a little bit, but we do have this section 6 that we could adjust and make deviations from what the standard policy is. So when unusual situations like this happen, item number 6 would come into play as well. We’ve had instances like that over the last couple of years.
Rust Wright, senator, fisheries: I’m getting confused here, because there are two amendments and the first amendment was what was brought to us originally, and then there was an amendment to the amendment.
Bill Sauser, chair: I can clarify that Rusty. [38:41] What was brought to you originally, what is called a main motion is marked up there with blue. There was an amendment made to the main motion and was seconded, that has been drawn up in black. So what we are considering right now is only that one amendment.
Rust Wright, senator, fisheries: So what are we voting on?
Bill Sauser, chair: We are going to vote on whether or not, those words (in black) should be struck from the main motion.
Rust Wright, senator, fisheries: Then we will vote on the second part?
Bill Sauser, chair: That’s correct, following discussion we will.
Rust Wright, senator, fisheries: Okay.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you. Are there other comments or questions? Are you ready to vote? I hear that you are, so if you are in favor of the amendment press A, if you oppose the amendment press B. A=15, B=44. The amendment is defeated.
Now we are back to discussion on the main motion. Are there comments on the main motion? Yes, sir.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: Seeing that we can amend an amendment let me propose an amendment to this amendment. [40:04] You guys have a copy?
Bill Sauser, chair: We do Michael, Michael was very kind to send us his suggestions beforehand. So we are going to find that and if we can’t find that I do have a copy of it right here. Ah, technical difficulties.
Mike Stern, senator, economics: I put in red what the minor edits are. Let me draw attention to item 6 first. In item 6 it uses and example of deviation, the election of a department chair. I think this is somewhat due to maybe what the situation was 5 years ago and maybe that was less common or some units didn’t practice it, but in my college it’s common place and very common place throughout the country so, I prefer that election of a department chair be viewed as standard as opposed to a deviation. An election of a chair doesn’t require notification that something is unusual. I don’t view chair election as a deviation and so since this does apply to a level a department chair that’s why I eliminated that sentence there in 6 using as an example. So then I altered number 1 to say the “open administrative positions shall be filled by faculty election or (like in the case of a chair) and then it continues on as you had it, or by conducting your search and so on and so forth.
Then in item 4 because we use shall other places like in 3 and so forth, I prefer using shall for the policy as that is the policy. Since we have a deviation clause in 6, if you need to deviate it for some reason just like the other shall clauses that come before it, it gives instructions for how to do so. So since we have a deviation clause, I don’t think we need to further weaken the idea that interim positions are supposed to be short term. So I prefer the original language which was “shall.”
Those are my only two edits just to make the election of chair viewed as standard as opposed to deviation and to use shall for the short term nature of interim positions, since we already have a deviation clause.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you we have an amendment is there a second? Hearing a second, that amendment is now open for discussion. Prior to discussion I would like to ask a clarification of the maker of the amendment. Is your change on item 1, does that also apply to all positions at or above the level of department head or chair, which would include dean and provost?
Mike Stern, senator, economics: It uses or, so I suppose if the university wanted to elect a dean or something it could but that’s up to the person in charge of search, right?
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you, I think that clarifies my question. Is there discussion on this proposed amendment? I should ask Dr. Crowley first since he proposed the resolution, so Dr. Crowley do you have a comment?
Larry Crowley, chair-elect: The department chair which you are getting this changed for which was offered as a deviation and you are opening it up for potentially more administrators being elected, I would not be in favor of that. If you could be more specific on the faculty election for chairs only. The way I see it the chair position is really a committee of the whole and it’s the dean that does the appointment[44:49] rather than the faculty making the election.
The shall rather than should, I would accept that as a friendly amendment.
Bill Sauser, chair: Dr. Crowley polled the committee beforehand and the seconder also accepts shall as a friendly amendment, so that need not be voted on. Yes sir. [45:17]
Bob Locy, senator, biological sciences: Certainly have no problem with the shall, however as I read what the amendment would do, it places us in a position where there is ambiguity concerning the election of any of the offices not just the department chair. And I think striking the sentence that’s being stuck down at the bottom actually removes clarification that indicates that what the concern was isn’t really a concern because it says such deviations, perhaps if you want to put, “from this policy” may include but are not limited to… the deviations are from the policy it’s not to say that it’s not normal practice to elect you departmental chair and it places everything in the open plain light of day by saying you are perfectly welcome to make and exception in this rule. [46:22]In fact in the original resolution in 2007 that particular sentence resulted from comments from the floor of the Senate at that time based on the fact individuals or department chairs were elected from the existing sitting faculty didn’t feel they needed to have a search committee, and so to accommodate that we inserted that sentence. Perhaps it’s poorly worded and doesn’t accomplish or doesn’t address the concerns the amender has mentioned, but on the other hand, I think it’s fairly clear and don’t see the need for putting faculty election up there where it seems to apply to every office because I don’t think it would be very easy to have a faculty election for Vice President for Research, or Provost, or other things and this would seem to say that that’s possible as I read it as amended.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you, a brief response. [47:31]
Mike Stern, senator, economics: Yes, I’m not sure I follow, but the sentence that is deleted there clearly indicates that since it says, “as opposed to the hiring of a department head” suggests that the hiring of a department head by search is standard where as election of a chair is somehow deviant. I think that’s relatively clear from that sentence as written and it’s an interesting example that is chosen. I think the university has been wise to move away from this head hiring, so to speak, and moving into more direct faculty governance by electing a chair, I think that serves the institution much better.
And nothing in 1 as I have written it mandates in any way the election of any particular position because it has the word “or” so I’m not sure why it would cause anyone to have an election for a dean or anything else. The person in charge of filling a position that makes a decision, decides on the parameters of that search and because it says “or,” if your unit doesn’t want to have an election then a search can be run. So I don’t see the constraint.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you, are there other comments on the amendment? Comments on the amendment in red are in order now. Seeing none let us then call for a vote, if you favor the amendment; by the way we have accepted “shall” as a friendly amendment so we are not including that. Any votes on the red amendment? If you favor the amendment press A; if you do not favor the amendment press B. A=19 B=38. That amendment is defeated.
Now back up for discussion is the main motion. Are there comments or questions on the main motion? Seeing now we shall proceed to vote. If you favor the main motion press A; and if you oppose the main motion press B. A=36 B=15. If you’re not certain your vote has been counted feel free to press it again it will only record a vote once. That motion carries. Thank you. [50:29]
That is the last of the action items, there are no action pending items so we will proceed to our information items. First item of information comes to us from Kimberly Braxton-Lloyd from Pharmacy Health Services. Kimberly is going to talk to us about a very exciting program, the Healthy Tigers Program. You may have noticed a few staff members from Healthy Tigers out in the hall. She may explain that as well.
Kimberly Braxton-Lloyd, assistant dean of Pharmacy Health Services: Good afternoon, I’m Kimberly Braxton-Lloyd, assistant dean of Pharmacy Health Services from the School of Pharmacy. As you may know we participate in the Healthy Tigers Initiative that we provide on campus. I’d also like to recognize that Karla McCormick, the Executive Director of Payroll and Employee Benefits is with us today, and this is a benefit that is provided for Auburn University employee population through her office.
When I met with the planning committee for today Senate meeting they recommended that we bring a demonstration with us an have a Healthy Tigers Screening opportunity for the Senators so that you’d have a first hand opportunity to participate and to share information with people from your unit.
I last presented this to you in May of 2010 when we first passed the Healthy Tigers Initiative proposal for campus and today I just want to give you an update on where we are and where we are going with this.
The Healthy Tigers Program is an optional employee benefit that’s offered to active employees and dependants who subscribe to our health insurance plan. It’s an opportunity for an employee to earn a $25 per month discount on the their health insurance premiums. The rules have changed a bit as we implemented the Healthy Tigers Program that if the employee participates and the adult spouse on the plan, if you have a family plan, participate in the biometric screening program that we offer then they are able to save $300 per year which is a significant savings on health insurance. [52:54]
We do view this as an expanded employee benefit and opportunity to engage our employee population and an opportunity for you to save on out-of-pocket costs. You might ask, why did we implement this program? We had several different purposes for the initiative, but the main thing that we want to do is increase a health and wellness culture on this campus and increase the engagement of our employees in making healthy decisions and participating in healthy behaviors, exercise and taking care of health problems. As you know because Karla McCormick presented a few weeks ago about our health benefit, we are self-insured. And that means that the university uses dollars that are collected from us through our premiums on our paychecks and also from our units who provide part of our premiums for our health insurance plan, that we are using those monies to pay all of the bills for all of our medical costs and pharmacy costs for our university. There have been studies that have shown that if you increase employee engagement in taking an active participation in health and wellness behaviors that you can decrease the overall health care expenditure for self-insured populations such as ours. This is the reason that Auburn University moved in this direction to provide an incentive for participation in the Healthy Tigers Program.
The goal is that we, if you look at our expenditures we spend 80% of our cost on the 20% of our employee population that have diagnosed disease states and that have health care problems. So our goal is to help the 80% who have not developed diseased states yet recognize when they are at risk and take early intervention to take control of their disease states in order to decrease the expense for the university. Which is decreasing expense for each of you if you enroll in our benefits plan. [55:00]
Now we wanted to offer this benefit to increase employee interest, health related quality of life, it has an opportunity if employees do engage to decrease our health care cost but also improve the health care quality of life of our employee population, increase productivity, decrease absenteeism and generally benefit the employee population. We first did the Healthy Tigers initiative in 2008 and it was in a different format and more of a format of a health fair where we just offered an opportunity for our employees to come out and participate. A one-time opportunity that was offered one-time during the year to get a biometric screening conducted. We only had 16% of the employees participate in that initiative and after it we did not see the continued engagement from our employee population. They didn’t visit the Healthy Tigers Web site, we weren’t seeing hits, we weren’t seeing visits, we weren’t hearing Healthy Tigers talked about, and it wasn’t perpetuated after the event. That’s when we regrouped, the Health and Wellness Committee considered this, upper administration, payroll and employee benefits, everyone got together and tried to decide what was the best path to take to really truly engage our employees in a health and wellness initiative, and that’s when we introduced the new format of Healthy Tigers in 2010. [56:24]
The goal is to continue to provide a strong incentive for employees to have their health and wellness information collected and the Steering Committee asked me to describe what happens during a Healthy Tigers visit, it’s an optional health screening. We take a blood sample from a finger stick and they said that a lot of employees said that we do a vein-puncture and it’s more invasive than it is, but it’s a finger stick blood draw and we fill a capillary tube with blood and on that we analyze total cholesterol, HGL cholesterol and blood glucose, and we also take a blood pressure measurement. There is also an optional weight analysis that can be performed. We decided to make that optional, but probably 80–90% of our employees who participate in Healthy Tigers decide to go ahead and have this performed. We do a weight, calculate a body mass index, we check a weight circumference and we also have an instrument that can tell you your percent body fat. So it’s useful information to know and like I say many of our employees go ahead and request that information during the screening.
It helps our employees to know when they are at risk of developing disease states and to take action to prevent the developing disease states if they are at risk and overall it has opportunity to decrease our overall expenditures.
This is a flow diagram that shows you the flow through the Healthy Tigers program. We provide Healthy Tigers screenings through the School of Pharmacy using our pharmacy students our post-doctoral residence and our pharmacy faculty and employees to provide screenings all over campus and throughout the state of Alabama. We provide these screenings between January and November and we will not be providing screenings through the School of Pharmacy in December of this year, but you still have an opportunity to submit your form from your physician until December 19 at noon. [58:32]
If an employee has a risk factor with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or glucose then the employee will receive a free referral to their physician. And if the employee does not have a relationship with a physician we actually have a relationship with the AU Medical Clinic where they hold a certain number of office visits for Healthy Tiger referrals. So if the employee does not have a medical home, sometimes it can be difficult to get into the door with a physicians practice, but we help facilitate this by providing those slots to get a patient in to see a doctor. After the patient receives a follow-up with the physician then they automatically receive the $25 per month reduction in the health care cost.
If there are no risk factors that are identified then they automatically get the $25 per month reduction in their health insurance premiums. The referrals occur when the blood pressure is high, not just a little bit over the goal, these are numbers that indicate there is a trend toward disease; a problem with their disease state, but if for instance their systolic blood pressure is greater than 160 or the diastolic blood pressure is greater than 100, then they receive a referral to a physician; if the cholesterol is greater than 250 or if the blood glucose is greater than 200, just in case somebody asks you about those values for referral.
One thing that did change in 2011 is that if you are on the family plan, both you and the adult dependant on the plan, the spouse has to be screened in order to receive the $25 per month reduction in premiums. So you might get questions from your faculty members and your employees within your units about that, that both have to be screened. We have worked with the payroll and employee benefits system and we’ve updated where you can check you status in Banner. You can go in and see if you are eligible or have completed the requirement for the discount for this year and whether your spouse has or not. So it is very easy for you to check.
The other services that are provided through Healthy Tigers is since pharmacy students, residents, and faculty are involved in the screening process, we do make recommendations to employees and dependants on preventative health care such as vitamins and minerals that might decrease the risk of certain disease states. Immunizations that would be required including flu shot, nema vacs, tdap, and other vaccines that might be indicated based on the employees age and health risk. We have a smoking cessation program that we can provide for employees and also weight-loss advise. We also have a Web site and I think a lot of our employees might not be aware of how much information is being put on the Healthy Tigers Web site, so please encourage the utilization of the Web site. There’s information, presentations from experts across campus on different topics, there’s newsletters available and monthly tips, they are interdisciplinary and items are submitted from people across campus that have expertise in many areas; this includes nursing, kinesiology, nutrition, we also try to promote services available from other disciplines that our employees might not be aware of such as the tiger fit program, speech and hearing clinics, and other services that are offered by clinicians locally.
We have also collaborated with the Health and Wellness Committee and we’ve offered different initiatives such as the Walk-at-Work days, there’s one coming up very soon so watch the AU Daily for that. We have worked with the Health and Wellness Committee and Payroll and Employee Benefits to repaint the paws on campus and to launch the Follow the Paws program so our employees can engage in exercise throughout the day. We submitted a concessions grant and have a pedometer program, you can check out a pedometer to use to gauge your daily activity and count your steps and shoot for that goal of 10,000 steps per day.
In your handout there’s some frequently asked questions that you can use as a reference for the individuals in your department, but we do receive questions on whether you have to come to the Pharmacy School to get your screening or not or whether you can go to your regular physician, or if you already have an established visit with your physician could the physician complete or verify your information. There is a form you can print off of the Healthy Tigers Web site, and it’s a form that can be completed by your physician and submitted and through Banner there is verification that we have received it. Sometime you send a form in and you don’t know if was actually received or not and you will get verfication (on Banner). It cant’ be old data, it has to be lab results from 2012 for it to count for this year for your 2013 discount. [1:04:00]
Healthy Tigers begins again every January and runs through November on campus, and provider forms through December 19 at 12 noon.
If any of you have employees that work off site the School of Pharmacy does, once a month, go through the state of Alabama and provide screenings at locations that are requested by our employees. We do have minimum number of 20, you have to have at least 20 employees that travel to that common site in order for us to travel to that location, but we will go throughout the state if there are ACES employees or Research Station employees that desire screenings and want to have it done.
The discount if effective for one year, but the screenings have to be repeated every year and even if you had it done at the end of the year or the beginning (some people get confused about the academic school year versus the calendar year) This benefit follows the benefit plan of January through December.
Another question that we get is do you have to achieve certain goals in order to get the discount? Do you have to get your blood pressure down to goal or your blood sugar down to a certain value in order to get the $25 per month discount? And the answer is no. If you do have a high value you just have to see your physician and follow-up in order to receive the discount.
In 2010 it really was a fantastic response because if you look across the nation, participation in biometric screening programs that are offered by employee groups is around 30%. We had a late start because didn’t improve it and start conducting screenings until May and we conducted May through November and we had 74% of our employee population participate that year. [1:05:57]
In 2011 we expanded the benefit to include adult members of the family, the spouses, that if you had a family plan, that expanded the number of people to complete the screening in order to receive the discount. Our numbers dropped slightly, we did more screenings, but it was only 69% of the population that was eligible for the screenings. That is still an outstanding response.
We are currently conducting the 2012 screenings and we are seeing an increased response and increased participation this year. I anticipate that we are going to meet or exceed what we’ve seen for the last 2 years. One problem that we do have is that some employees think that their screening have to be one year from when they did it last year and since we started in May of 2010 it has kind of clumped everybody between May and November and then we have a rush at the end to try to get the Healthy Tiger screenings conducted. So the earlier in the year that you do it the better. We are trying to implement systems to encourage employees to move the date that they conduct their screening to earlier in the year so we avoid that rush at the end. Right now we are sending out reminders of the month of your birthday, so in your birth month. If you can share that we are trying to make sure to accommodate everyone so please come in as soon as possible.
The results of the Healthy Tigers Program has been very good, we have identified around 18% every year receive referrals for high blood cholesterol levels, dislipideamia, so 18% of our employees had high cholesterol and did not realize they had it. Around 8% have hypertension that was undiagnosed and about 5% have diabetes that was never caught and never know or treated. We are still evaluating and conducting analysis on the economic impact this is going to have for the university and on the Web site if you go to the Healthy Tigers Web site there is actually employees that have had personal experiences with Healthy Tigers where is has been life saving experiences for them and they’ve conducted testimonials. There was on employee who did not have a medical home and realized after he went to see his doctor and had some lab work done that he had cancer, it was kidney cancer and he was able to have surgery and it was completely resolved and he’s cancer free. He’s shared his story on the Healthy Tigers Web site as a testimonial. We’ve also caught hypertensive emergency in a patient that was having a heart attack and was able to intervene immediately on that patient as well. So there are some stories from Healthy Tigers that you really cannot quantify as far as savings, but it’s had a very positive impact on our employee population. I am thankful that these employees have been willing to share their experiences with us.
These are some resources for you if you want more information about the Healthy Tigers these are some Web sites that you can visit.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you so much Kimberly. Are there questions for Kimberly? A great program, we thank you for what you are doing and bringing to our attention.
The next information item comes from our Traffic and Parking Committee. They are here at our invitation. [1:09:24] Yes sir? I’m sorry I did not see you at the microphone, please come forward.
Sanjeev Baskiyar, senator, computer science and software engineering: I just wanted to point out that I think this is an excellent program, however I think what you write on your Web site is that it is a $300 benefit, but I think for the faculty it’s a $205 benefit because they are paid 9-months as opposed to 12, maybe I am wrong about it.
Karla McCormick, executive director of payroll and employee benefits: (not at a microphone) basically stated that the 9-month faculty benefit is still $300 per year it is just calculated differently to fit with the 9-month pay.
Kimberly Braxton-Lloyd: Karla McCormick said that we would check on that but we were basing it on a 12-month employee and $25 per month, and I guess it depends on how the health insurance premiums are deducted for a 9-month employee.
David King, senator, geology and geography: My question is and I don’t mean this to be a criticism but how is the data managed that you collect on all of these employees, the privacy issues and under which circumstances would you release data about an individual to say a company or a family member or something like that?
Kimberly Braxton-Lloyd: Every service that we provide through the Pharmacy Health Services Division both in the Pharmacy and in the Clinic and through the Healthy Tigers Program we follow all HIPPA guidelines on the secrecy and the privacy of the information. The information that is sent for instance on payroll and employee benefits is on whether the employee met the criteria for the deduction or not, clinical data are never exchanged between the two areas. So all HIPPA guidelines are upheld for all of these programs and none of the clinical information leave the firewalls of the clinical space, just like if you went to the AU Medical Clinic to see a physician or get a prescription filled, that is on a different data base and is protected and every clinician within both practice sites are very aware of the importance of HIPPA and the privacy of a patient’s data.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you Kimberly and I want to thank the two senators who had questions and I apologize again for not being able to see you, must be the cataract in my eye, I apologize.
Thank you. Auburn University like every campus in the nation has traffic and parking issues. We’ve invited some representatives from our Traffic and Parking Committee to come here today. They didn’t come to listen to every individual’s private parking gripe, so if you have those they will listen to them but this is probably not the forum, you are welcome to address them later. I did send them 3 questions that I asked them to address and that’s what they are coming forward with today. The 4 individuals are Cathy Love, who chairs the committee, Jeffrey Dumar, Don Andrae, and Richard Gaither.
Cathy Love, chair of Traffic and Parking Committee: I have a Powerpoint for you. [1:13:27] The 3 questions we were asked to answer for you today on parking policies and regulations, how they are made, who makes them, and how you can have input into the process.
Parking at Auburn is decentralized, we don’t have one department that handles all transportation related functions here on campus. We actually have 3, we have the Traffic and Parking Committee there on the left. This committee makes the rules and regulations for the efficient and equitable use of the existing parking resources. Up at the top we have Parking Services. Don Andrea is here from Parking Services, they implement and enforce the rules and regulations made by the Committee. In the lower right we have the Campus Planning Department, Jeffrey represents Campus Planning, they develop plans for future land use including the locations and sizes of future parking facilities.
I’m going to talk about the work of the committee. We are a standing university committee we report directly to the President through Don Large, the executive Vice President. We are advisory only, there’s our charge and in the red-brown color, we are expected to make recommendations regarding the parking lot zoning, zoning enforcement procedures, cost in procedures for registration, procedures in regulations for traffic and movement during athletic events, pavement marking, signage, signalization, site lighting, handicapped parking/access, pedestrian malls, shuttle-bus systems, and bicycles/skateboards, etc.
Typical activities of the Committee, zoning, rules and regulations, requests for exceptions and special considerations, we perform an annual parking occupancy study, we meet 4–5 times a year, and we keep minutes and make an annual report. I set the agenda and it’s typically based on unfinished business from previous meetings, topics raised by the committee members themselves, and topics addressed to me personally.
Here are the members of this year’s committee. There are 8 continuing ex-officio members, you have 3 faculty serving a 3-year rotation, 2 A&P on 2-year rotation, two staff on 2-year rotation, one graduate student, 4 undergraduate students one of which must live on campus, and an alternate student. Your representatives this year are, Jennifer Adams, Ben Choe, and Jeffrey LaMondia.
I was asked to differentiate Traffic and Parking from the Appeals committee, they are totally separate. There are 3 Appeals Committees, again appointed by the President and advisory to the President. They are not affiliated with the Parking and Traffic Committee nor are they affiliated with Parking Services. And I believe they have 3, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday just because of the work load of those committees.
Contact information, there’s my phone and my e-mail address and here are the e-mails of your 3 faculty representatives. I will turn it over to Don now to talk about the work of the Parking Services Department.
Don Andrae, manager Parking Services: Cathy says that I kind of the top of the chain there, certainly the one most prevalent in everyone’s mind when they think about parking. As you can see from our presentation we are only enforcing the rules that are set forth by the Traffic and Parking Committee and also do not decide on where we can put parking spaces or where we put parking garages.
Our mission statement is to “Facilitate safe and convenient access to Auburn University while encouraging alternative modes of transportation.” And so far we’ve done a good job of that this year which a lot of you certainly have seen some of the impacts.
Our responsibilities are implementing and enforcing the parking rules and regulations set forth by the Traffic and Parking committee, we compile and distribute those Rules through various ways, like with students we gave them a map and this year it had a QR code that had all the rules and regulations that they could scan and read them easily. In the past we handed out a 40-page document, which nobody read, so now with the QR code they read it. We are responsible for the sale of parking permits and we’ve improved that this year and are putting a lot more online, where you can register a lot better online.
We do collect the parking fines and as it says there we do not do moving violations. I know there has been a lot of discussion about us doing the moving violations this year but we have to do that through the Auburn University Department of Public Safety as well as the City of Auburn Police and have to coordinate with them. They actually have to stop the vehicle coming on campus and then we can issue the ticket.
We do have a discretion to deal with emergencies, special events (football games), services and other delivery issues where something is coming on campus for a special event, we do that. Certainly we are responsible for the Signs and Pavement Markings from the standpoint that we put in work orders handled by Facilities Management to make those changes and it’s also based on the approval from the Traffic and Parking Committee for rezoning things.
Parking at Auburn University is broken down in two areas, there’s faculty and staff, which is a broad zone system, which we all know, everybody either gets an A or gets a B. A permits of course are for those people who are considered exempt or for a staff member who has 10 or more years of service and they are entitled to park in any area zoned A, B, or C. A staff member with less than 10 years of service receive a B zone and are entitled to park in a B or C. Students, we do an assigned lot system with all student now and in the past it was only with the resident students that we did assigned lots. So basically an assigned lot is saying that you have proximate parking close to where your residence halls would be for residence students and you pay an additional price for that, and it goes through a random drawing and those not selected through the random drawing get into the overflow. They also have the choice to enter the overflow to begin with which some of them do. We issued that same system this year for commuter students. We allow them into a random drawing, we did the lots through the Traffic and Parking Committee and much discussion in there working along with Student Government, we took the 3 lots on Donahue and labeled them as “Proximate Lots” and turned them into what we call PC Parking. We had a random drawing for that. We had 5,000 students enter into that drawing and only 1,300 received permits initially we are now up to 1,900 which I’ll show you in a second. The ones who did not wish to be in Proximate Parking went ahead and got into the overflow, of course the other 3,700 who did not get the PC got into the overflow.
Here’s some sales from last year and this year. You can see the As and Bs they are down, but then again you have to remember that’s the full year for the As and Bs last year and that’s only for the first part of this fall semester. It will probably be about the same amount when we get to the end of the year.
The difference you can see is the C permits, last year we sold 11,000 C zone permits, it’s kind of miss-leading because we only have 3,000 parking spaces, so this year we sold 5,000 C zones but in addition to that we sold 1,800 PC permits. We’ve sold 7,100 C zone permits this year. What I’ve done on the right side here is I took the A plus the B zone permits which totals to 4,000 and we took the available spaces of 3,604, so based on the 2012 permit sales that was 1.28 permits per space and this year based on the sales is 1.12 permits per space.
The other significant difference we’ve had this year is that we made it mandatory for students and faculty and staff to register bicycles. It helps us determine lots of things such as what our bicycle usage is and also do we have enough bicycle racks on the campus. Last year we only had 429 bicycles registered, this year so far it’s over 2,600. It’s already changed since this time, it’s gone up another 100. That tells us based on the number of racks we had that we didn’t have enough racks for the bicycles and we’ll need to look at additional racks. Plus the key thing it tells us is that we need to work on our bicycle safety. That number of bicycles; we’ve seen a lot of issues with bicycles with students and everybody else they are disregarding all rules. So we will be working on that.
The impact of change to assigned lots, Key thing here’s what we tried to do through the Traffic and Parking committee when we did this was to reduce the congestion on Donahue. And it has significantly reduced the congestion on Donahue. We also wanted to keep the students from idling and circling the lots looking for vacant parking spaces, that again has been accomplished. In fact this year what we are receiving is complaints about the empty spaces as opposed to not being able to find a space. And we are resolving that as we go along because as I said we have added another 500 to the PC option and probably another 250 before the end of the year.
The other thing that’s done is carpooling. I went out to the PC lots the first 2 weeks and to my surprise cars were coming in with 2, 3, 4 people in a car. When I stopped and asked people I found out that of course the students live in the same apartment complexes and when one got the PC the others said I’m riding with you. So that has worked wonders and reduced the number of cars on our campus, which of course was our mission. Provide alternate modes of transportation, carpooling is one of them. In addition to carpooling we also instituted a car pooling program called Zimride, which allows students to go online through online access in facebook, faculty and staff is available to this too, and what it does is match you up with someone who lives close to you and you can ride to work or class with them. The other thing this has done, which is a good thing, is that it increased the ridership on Tiger Transit, we are seeing a lot more riders on Tiger Transit. And like I said we are receiving less complaints about not finding a space and they are late for class because now the ones that have gotten a PC certainly love it and can come 5 minutes before class, park, and get to class in plenty of time.
The impact of course for commuting students, what we did change was faculty…when we first started this our concern was students were going to be paying $160 per year for one of these permits and what we wanted to do was basically guarantee a spot if they are going to pay that much. That was one of the things that the SGA insisted on if we are going to charge students that much money we had to guarantee them a spot, so that became then a discussion in the Traffic and Parking Committee if we are going to to guarantee them a spot then As and Bs cannot park down in the PC, so we had to institute that policy. But before we did that the committee as well as my office went and analyzed those lots and looked before we made the change to PC, we checked to see how many As and Bs were parking in the Cs in each one of those lots. And we found there were some of them so what we did was before we even changed them from a C to PC the committee through our recommendation went ahead and rezoned 80 additional spaces to As ad Bs. After we changed it to PC we did not enforce a policy about saying if you park in a PC you’ll get a ticket the first time or tow you. What we did was an analysis of the empty spaces and we still found As and Bs parking in the PCs, we went back to the committee and made a recommendation that we change 99 additional to be As and Bs., since we had the empty spaces in the PC lots let’s go ahead and take advantage of it.
The other thing of course [1:26:39] right now there is some lack of As and Bs parking, but the other thing was in the Lowder lot bricking was supposed to be finished before fall started and it didn’t make it, so when it does there will be an additional 40 A spaces in there.
This is my contact information. I welcome any suggestions, I have an open line and listen to all complaints, but unfortunately a lot of times I cannot resolve them. I have to refer you to the Traffic and Parking Committee or to the Campus Planning. And in saying Campus Planning I will turn it over to Jeffrey. [1:27:16]
Jeffrey Dumars, project manager: I am Jeffrey Dumars and I am in the office of Campus Planning and Space Management. Our office is under the AVP for Facilities, Dan King and the director of Campus Planning, Tom Tillman are managing the update of the master plan. Fundamentally the Master Plan we look to inventory all space on campus, both interior and exterior, and compare that to a projected need for space both interior and exterior, then compare the two, look for deficiencies and surpluses of space and then plan for what we need to fulfill our mission in the future on our campus.
The Master Plan Update as we’re moving forward there’s a bit of governance, structure established for the update and two key committees have been established. The Master Plan Update Committee is the key constituency base committee that is really broad based as mentioned earlier in this meeting where it is representative of all constituents on campus, there’s faculty representation, student, alumni, leadership as well. That committee we’re taking all issues of the Master Plan including parking and trying to get a recommendation out of that committee that’s consensus based. That recommendation goes to the Facilities Management Master Planning team including the consultant Sasaki Associates, which is the Master Plan consultant, and there is also a landscape team that’s just being brought on board. In addition, there are Provost Open Forums throughout the fall, which anyone on campus and the community at large can participate in discussions on many issues including parking.
Then after we gather that input, recommendations will move forward to the Executive Facilities Committee, that’s senior leadership and faculty and student representation that make s a motion to make recommendations to the President to the Board of Trustees to ultimately approve the master plan update.
Last fall, I don’t know if anyone remembers a survey on the priorities that went out for the Master Plan Update, anyone participate in that survey? Just a few. There was a list of 11 or 12 issues were sent out on the Web and asked anyone on campus to rank those priorities, maybe not rank but select the most important issues to each person on campus and it was divided by constituency so we had you fill out the survey with your e-mail and so we could divide it into responses from faculty, student, staff, and the like. This graph here shows the number of responses per issue on the left and campus transportation and parking was the third highest response by faculty, it was the second with students. We used that information and that list to develop the planning elements which we’re really seeing as moving forward to be the chapters of sections that are most important for this round of the Master Plan Update. And those planning elements were approved by the Board of Trustees. The major issues is we’re terming more whole istically mobility, but incorporated in that will be parking.
I just want to go back and show you how faculty are represented on the Master Plan Update Committee and also the Executive Facilities Committee. there’s a standing Master Plan Committee that master plan issues go to and it was expanded with ad hoc representation including the University Senate representative, Dr. Sauser, and four standing faculty members from the Master Plan Committee represented. On the Executive Facilities Committee, the University Senate leadership is represented by Dr. Sauser.
We really spent the summer looking at academic interior space and doing the projection for that and Dan King will be here next week presenting the options for the site location for the new CCF Building. In addition there’s going to be an open forum on October 17 focused just on parking and mobility. I encourage you and any other faculty to participate. There are also other open forums on other key issues, check the Web site, there’s r 5 or 6 over the fall open to anyone on campus, we want as much participation as we can get.
Also we are kicking off a Web site and when we have an open forum our intent is to put them material presented on the Web and offer that as a vehicle for comments as well. As I said Dan King will be here next week and the open invitation we will come and present to the full senate at any time and would love to share more information. I encourage all faculty to work through your representatives to influence the outcomes on these different committees and the representation that you have. Feel free to contact our office at anytime with any issue as far as the Master Plan.
Now we would love to take any questions or comments.
Bill Sauser, chair: Folks we’ve had a good presentation. Again please don’t come forward with individual concerns or ideas, get those through your contact people, but we do want to entertain some general questions of campus wide importance.
Dale Coleman, senator, animal sciences: I represent a department and a college where there is a lot of daily flow on and off campus to outside units, to the fisheries unit to the livestock unit and so on, and on Fridays of game days there is a forced migration of students into other parking lots where normally our faculty are trying to come back. So who controls that forced migration of student cars out of parking areas that vans are going to need into parking areas that faculty still need? On Friday before a game day. [1:34:33]
Cannot hear, no one was by the microphone. [1:35:32]
Don Andrae: The email that was sent to students about moving their vehicles for home football games was not specific as to the day and time that they could start moving their vehicles. That has since been corrected and all future emails relating to moving into other parking lots will specify that this cannot be done until after 4:00 pm on Friday. We also monitor the faculty/staff lots very closely on Friday to make sure that the vehicles have the proper permits. That should help faculty and staff.
As we all know the tailgaters start moving in at that time and we also want to be sure that our students are provided with a place to park their vehicles before all the spaces are taken by tailgaters.
Dale Coleman, senator, animal sciences: But I appreciate your efforts, I know you deal with a lot of headaches that I would not want to have to deal with, so thank you.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you and I’ll recognize you for a question.
Bob Locy, senator, biological sciences: The first thing I’d like to tell which ever or all three of you people is that I’ve worked on college campuses for over 40 years now and the environment that we have on Auburn’s campus relative to the regulation of parking compared to other places that I’ve worked is really very nice and outstanding. You folks do a very difficult job and you do it well enough that we all have at least a non-hostile feeling toward you which hasn’t always been the case on all the campuses I’ve worked on, so I want to commend you for that. But kind of relative to what Dale said, I think there is a real issue in terms of looking at service vehicles and campus vehicles in general and the parking and moving of those around campus, and I think we haven’t done that as well as we’ve done issues like managing student parking, faculty parking and other issues, so I’d urge you to…let’s figure out how to not have UPS trucks parking behind my car when I need to get it out of my parking lot, or coming out of the front of my building and having the FED EX truck parked if front of the doorway to my building so I cannot even get out of it. Sometimes it’s campus workers parked in completely inappropriate spots. If we need to provide space for them to park let’s see if we can’t figure out a better way to do it than we’ve been doing it. Thank you. [1:37:28]
Someone: That’s actually one of the…
Cannot hear, no one was by the microphone. [1:38]
That’s actually one of the main items on the agenda for the Traffic and Parking Committee this coming year. There is a lot of confusion as to what a “service” vehicle is and we will be clarifying that in our rules and regulations as well as indicating where and when service and state vehicles may park. It may require the rezoning of spaces to add additional service vehicle spots at certain locations.
David King, senator, geology and geography: I know it’s late and I’ll be brief. There were just 2 things, one Bob touched on which is service vehicle parking spaces. I walk back and forth across campus and I see many, many unoccupied service vehicle spaces and the service vehicles are parked on the grass, parked on unmarked concrete surfaces, they park wherever they want to or need to and so I would just ask the committee to free up all unnecessary service vehicle parking spaces and let those of us who actually work in the campus core to have more places to park.
The other thing was something that I’ve been concerned about for a long time and have been trying to get attention drawn to, and today I emailed Cathy Love so perhaps we can sort of dialogue, I just wanted to mention that it’s my experience that there is a serious problem on the campus with vehicles moving in the same direction as pedestrians on what are either sidewalks or for all practical reasons are sidewalks, formally streets that have been closed; this includes golf carts, dump trucks, various other vehicles, bicycles, skateboards. It is one thing when you are crossing a street perpendicular and you see those things moving and you know the dangers, but when they are coming from behind you, blind-side, come at you and turn suddenly, it’s state law and city ordinance that bicycles and golf carts are not driven on sidewalks. I just want to bring that to the attention of who might ever be able to help resolve the problem. [1:39:58]
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you and we’ll entertain one more question. And, yes, you have the floor.
Fern Healy, assistant professor of marketing: I have 2 questions. First of all I work in Lowder and there is a lot of construction going on and also the B zone slots that were located when you enter War Eagle Way, those were all taken away, so parking is a big problem and now we are told the we cannot park in the PC lot, we were told that very late, and I’m wondering what is now the policy, either official or unofficial about faculty A and B cars going into the PC? [1:40:40]
Cannot hear, no one was by the microphone. [1:42:12]
The decision to not allow the faculty/staff to park in the PC spaces was made by the Traffic and Parking Committee. The students felt that it was necessary as they were paying a higher price for the PC permit and were guaranteed a parking space. The only way that this could be assured was to not allow A and B zone permits to park down into the PC zone spaces. We analyzed the parking lots before the C-zone spaces were changed to PC-zone to see how many A and B permit holders were parking in the C-zone spaces. The Traffic and Parking Committee approved the rezoning of 66 C-zone spaces to A and B zone spaces towards the end of spring semester. After the first week of the Fall Semester, another analysis was conducted and an additional 99 PC spaces were rezoned to A and B. We are continually analyzing the situation. We will be changing the parallel parking on Donahue in the Coliseum Lot to A zone spaces as the construction on Biggio and Coliseum Drive will be eliminating the A-zone spaces there. In addition, an area in the Coliseum lot will become motorcycle parking as the motorcycle parking on Biggio will also be lost during this construction.
Cathy Love: …create the PC zone. There was a lot of discussion about whether or not that would disenfranchise or in some way harm the ability of faculty members to find parking. I brought the minutes from that meeting just to show you some of the discussion and what proposal actually was and how it was amended in the committee. It was always understood that we would continuously review the supply and demand of A and B permit holders and that we would adjust the number of PC as necessary in order to get you enough of A and B.
Fern Lin-Healy: You increased the number of PCs, but only the students were allowed to go for them, right? Are there any plans or any availability for faculty to be able to enter into that lottery or to have some other way that a faculty member could be guaranteed even if it’s one which they share with another faculty member, such as I teach Monday, Wednesday, Friday, I’ll take this, you teach Tuesday Thursday, you take this. [1:43:35]
Cannot hear, no one was by the microphone.
Cathy Love: …You are correct that the park-down privilege is not applicable to the PC zone which is a part of the students’ “assigned-lot system”. These are managed lots in which the ratio of permits to spaces is closely controlled. There was a lot of Committee discussion about whether or not the loss of the park-down privilege would disenfranchise or in some other way harm the ability of faculty and staff (still on the “broad zone system”) to find parking. I brought the minutes from that Committee meeting just to show you some of the discussion, what the proposal actually was, and how it was amended in the Committee. It was always understood that we would continuously review the supply and demand for A and B permit holders and that we would adjust the number of B spaces in the big PC lots in order to meet the needs of faculty and staff.
Fern Lin-Healy: But when you increase the PC, still faculty are not eligible for that. [1:44:15]
Don Andrae: No they are not. Proximate Parking, we’ll have to discuss that.
Fern Lin-Healy: But just to be entered into the same lots, there’s no way for a faculty member right now to get guaranteed parking where some students at least have a chance.
Cathy Love: Right now under the “broad zone” system faculty doesn’t have guaranteed parking. What we try to do is just to adjust the supply of those spaces in order to meet your demand. That’s what we are attempting to do now, if you have a problem in the Lowder area, let me know exactly when and where you’ve been unable to find parking and we’ll rezone some more.
Fern Lin-Healy: I’m unable on Wednesday morning at 8:30 a.m.
Don Andrae: I’ll add to that, almost a space per permit for faculty staff, it may not be in the Lowder lot but there is a space
Fern Healy: Not even in the lot across the street so… okay, thank you.
Bill Sauser, chair: Thank you very much folks, it’s been a good dialogue. We know who our representatives are and we know who to talk to and we’ve got their contact information, so I thank you very much.
I do want to ask if there is any unfinished business to come before the Senate? Hearing none, is there any new business to come before the Senate? Hearing none, I declare the meeting adjourned. [1:45:33]