A quorum being present, the regular monthly meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order by Presiding Officer Jeffrey L. Warburton on February 8, 1999, at 3:04 PM in Room 146 of the College of Law.

Present: Senators Aleamoni, Armstrong, Atwater, Caldwell, Christiano, Cohen, Coker, D. Davis, Dvorak, Dyl, Erlings, Ervin, Garcia, Gerken, Gruener, Heckler, Heinrich, Hogle, Larson, Levin, Levy, Likins, Love, Marchalonis, Maré, Meaker, Medine, Merkle, Mishra, Nolan, O’Brien, Parsons, Pepper, Pitt, Schooley, Silverman, Spece, Swindle, Szilagyi, Taylor, Troy, Voyatzis, Warburton, Weinand, Witte, and Zwolinski. Robert Sankey served as Parliamentarian.

Absent: Senators Dahlgran, T. Davis, Dryden, Howell, Hurt, Impey, Jenkins, Joens, Johnson, Laetsch, Miller, Mitchell, Pope, Sypherd, and Wilson-Sanders.

2. OPEN SESSION

Dr. William Bickel - concerns regarding the Marguerite Kay case. (Attachment)

Senator Silverman - thanked Dr. Bickel for his comments.

Senator Taylor’s announcements: (1) The UA Graduate and Professional Student Research Conference will be held on February 20 from 8:15 AM to 5:30 PM in Modern Languages 350. (2) Senator Love is coordinating an ASUA-sponsored student scholarship program; 10 scholarships of $1,000 each will be awarded. Please refer outstanding students to Senator Love’s committee for details. (3) Los Angeles attorney Johnnie Cochran will be speaking February 12 at 6:00 PM in the Arizona Ballroom. (4) The Day of Action mall rally, held on February 3 to express student concerns regarding proposed legislative budget cuts for the state universities, was successful. Faculty who wish to show support for the students’ position are encouraged to complete pre-addressed postcards available from ASUA; these will be transported to the State Capitol. (5) The Arizona Students’ Association (ASA) is planning a rally in the courtyard of the State Capitol at noon on February 16, during the House budget hearings. (6) ASA’s 12th Annual Leadership Conference and Legislative Luncheon is scheduled for February 23 in Phoenix. This will be an opportunity for students to attend leadership workshops and to meet with legislators; transportation will be provided, and lunch is free. Interested students should apply now to the UA’s ASA office.

No report.

3C. Secretary of the Faculty Susan Heckler

No report.

Highlights: (1) A federal budget amendment passed last year allows external groups to enter university laboratories to review primary research prior to publication. Vice President for Research Richard Powell has been lobbying personally in Washington, D.C., for the repeal of this legislation, since issues of academic freedom are involved. Any faculty experiencing such intrusions into their laboratories are urged to call Vice President Powell’s office immediately. (2) The annual meeting of the General Faculty is scheduled for Tuesday, March 2, from 10:00 to 11:30 AM in the Center for Creative Photography Auditorium. This year’s meeting will feature a conversation with President Likins. All faculty are encouraged to attend whatever portion of the meeting their schedules will allow. (3) Referring to the "talking points" paper distributed on Senators’ desks, Chair Hogle reviewed what he has done as an individual about his concerns regarding proposed legislative budget cuts: He wrote to his legislators and the Governor, expressing support for the Governor’s budget proposal, using the talking points outlined in the handout. Faculty wishing to contact their legislators can obtain addresses from the Faculty Center, or by visiting the legislative website: www.azleg.state.us. (4) Some faculty originally set to attend the UA Wildcat Pride Legislative Evening in Phoenix on February 17 have had to cancel due to scheduling conflicts; anyone interested in participating in place of these people should contact Chair Hogle. (5) The proposed legislative budget cuts for universities have elicited an outpouring of support from the community. Chair Hogle indicated that we owe a debt of gratitude to those UA people who have coordinated efforts to counter this proposal and muster support for the UA: the Senior Faculty Associate to the President, who drafted a paper on the effect of the universities on the state’s economy; personnel in the Tucson and Phoenix State Relations offices, who are coordinating the legislative evening and other events associated with the budget hearings; the Alumni Association, which is rallying alumni around the state; the new Vice President for Advancement, who has assembled a team to mount a cohesive effort to enhance the UA’s image in the broader community; and especially to President Likins, who has taken a strong public stand in support of the UA.

No report, since Provost Sypherd was unable to attend.

President Likins focused on external relations issues. Highlights: We should consider the unreasonable budget proposal from the legislature a gift—an opportunity to enlist the long-term support of various constituencies and to create a body of advocates for higher education. The Vice President for Advancement and her team will have a significant role in this area. In the past, we have tended to be quietly defensive when faced with budget cuts and other adverse actions; now is the time for us to go on the offensive. The Arizona Board of Regents, which was fully consulted in advance, concurs with this approach. The debate over the budget proposals has brought the issue to the forefront and has garnered support for the universities from various new quarters. Part of our energy needs to be directed at raising private funds; in this regard, the Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee (SPBAC) has provided extensive advice regarding the upcoming Capital Campaign, and faculty also will be asked for their ideas and their help.

Chair Hogle announced that Presiding Officer Warburton will represent the Faculty Senate at the budget hearings scheduled for 1:30 PM on February 16 and 17. President Likins noted that representatives from the universities will be there to testify regarding the budget on those two days.

Senator Silverman said he agrees with the President about taking the offensive in the budget battles. He asked President Likins what type of reaction he has received specifically to the UA from legislators. President Likins responded that Southern Arizona legislators have been positive toward the UA, varying only in the intensity of their support. Even legislators who have been harsh in the past have recently written in support of the UA, he said. In meetings that the President and the Associate Vice President for State Relations have had with the legislative leadership, no personal hostility toward higher education has been evidenced. However, some legislators have expressed opposition to a public role in advanced higher education, supporting the idea of less government, of funding programs such as Students First K-12 through budget cuts rather than issuing bonds, and of making the universities participate in those budget cuts. These legislators seem unusually dedicated to their ideology and are drawing their conclusions from ideology rather than from an analysis of the situation, President Likins said.

Chair Hogle began by noting that the last fundraising campaign, Century II, had been conducted by the Foundation without much connection to the campus. This time there will be a concerted effort to involve the entire campus, including faculty, in the process. To that end, both Chair Hogle and Dr. Joaquin Ruiz, SPBAC chair, were named to the primary campaign planning committee and participated in the planning retreat. Noting that today’s presentation would focus on faculty involvement in the campaign, Dr. Hogle introduced Mr. Richard Imwalle, President of the University of Arizona Foundation, and Mr. Rick Frisch, coordinator of the campaign.

Mr. Imwalle provided background: Approximately a year ago he and President Likins decided that it was the right time to launch a major fundraising campaign that involves not only collecting donations, but also unifying the campus community regarding goals and vision. Mr. Imwalle established a senior campaign planning committee consisting of development officers, faculty representatives, a student representative, and administrators. The committee has focused on the areas of finance (budget and reporting), research regarding prospective donors, cultivation strategies, communication, and organizational structure. Soon the committee will present its written report to President Likins, and the President will follow that with a message to the campus community inviting participation in priority-setting. After retreats to discuss the campaign with internal constituencies and then with external constituencies, the formal announcement of the campaign will probably be made in January 2000.

Mr. Frisch commented that fundraising is a relationship process and then elaborated the goals of the UA’s upcoming campaign: to raise a lot of money (at least $500 million), in the spirit of campus collaboration, in such a way that the potential exists for continued giving after the campaign officially ends. Other comments: We need to (1) acquire more funds from current donors, (2) research who has the potential to contribute, and (3) create opportunities for people to connect with the UA in ways beyond sports. Although no good models exist for faculty involvement in fundraising (out of seven schools that planning team members visited to review fundraising programs, only one made an effort to involve faculty), there are several ways it is hoped that UA faculty will participate: (1) join volunteer leadership teams to support the campaign; (2) assist in identifying corporate relationship opportunities; (3) promote stewardship by communicating with donors about the mutual benefits derived from their relationship with the UA; and (4) help identify a list of priorities for the campaign.

Chair Hogle commented that it is hoped that faculty in departments and other interdisciplinary programs will meet in response to President Likins’ forthcoming letter to discuss possible priorities for fundraising. Ideas resulting from those discussions will go forward to the college councils, then to SPBAC, and finally to the President and the Foundation. In the meantime, administrative groups, staff, and student organizations will also be meeting to develop lists of priorities. If the schedule progresses as hoped, specific decisions regarding priorities can be made by May 1999.

In response to a Senator’s question whether space needs can be included in priorities, Mr. Imwalle said that, in general, the campus community is being encouraged to think more globally, beyond individual units or single grant proposals to such things as endowment and interdisciplinary initiatives. However, President Likins added, in certain areas, such as the College of Humanities, faculty housing is a critical need and therefore belongs on a list of priorities.

Other Senators’ comments: (1) In the past it has not always been clear where money donated to the Foundation goes. It is important to have faculty involvement in the Foundation, through membership on the Board of Directors, not just on fundraising campaign committees. (2) Campus community members should donate to the upcoming campaign to show support for the effort. (3) The legislature should be encouraged to provide more gifts in kind or matching funds for such partnerships as endowed chairs. (4) The faculty should have a role in implementing ideas after the funds are raised. In the past, sometimes plans have not materialized.

President Likins’ other comments: (1) The upcoming campaign should not be referred to as a capital campaign, since we also will be accepting and counting other types of giving, such as gifts in kind. Our efforts should be thought of as long-term fundraising strategies. (2) Even though the official campaign announcement will not be made until January 2000, we will say that the campaign started on July 1, 1997, so that we can count recent major gifts. (3) From all the proposals and lists of priorities, some will be selected, identified as University priorities, and mentioned in campaign literature. However, all other proposals will be included in a catalog of potential gift-giving opportunities. (4) We will raise as much or more money than we target; however, we must realize that some needs will remain unmet. (4) Fundraising campaigns can either build community or fragment it. In order to forestall the latter possibility, it is critical that lines of communication be kept open, and that feedback be offered throughout the process.

Presiding Officer Warburton asked Senators to contact Chair Hogle or the Foundation with ideas, questions, or comments regarding the campaign.

Senator Silverman, chair of the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Revisions (Revisions Committee), explained that the Revisions Committee is proposing three amendments to the General Faculty Bylaws, which are being brought to the Senate as seconded motions [Motion 1998/99-28, Motion 1998/99-29, and Motion 1998/99-30]. The wording of these amendments is provided in the motions listed at the end of these minutes. Senator Silverman summarized the suggested changes as follows:

Amendment #1 - Article IV, Section 1(a)(Iii) - A housekeeping matter, to list the number of signatures required on a nominating petition for the Committee on Committees. (Last fall the General Faculty approved having the Committee on Committees be directly elected by the General Faculty.)

Amendment #2 - Article IV, Section 6 - A request from the chair of the University Committee on Ethics and Commitment to increase the size of the permanent committee to 12 members, in order to more effectively handle the increased caseload.

Amendment #3 - Article V, Section 4(e) - A request from the Student Affairs Policy Committee (SAPC) to include the Code of Academic Integrity in their committee’s charge. (Senator D. Davis, SAPC chair, noted that this change would be a formal recognition of what the committee is already doing.)

Motions 1998/99-28, 1998/99-29, and 1998/99-30, as detailed at the end of these minutes, were all passed unanimously. The amendments will now be placed on the spring election ballot for a General Faculty vote. Senator Silverman also noted that the Revisions Committee is currently reviewing other portions of the General Faculty Constitution and Bylaws—including grievance procedures, standing committees, and Senate membership—and may be presenting other proposed amendments either later this spring or in the fall.

7. CONTINUED DISCUSSION ON PROPOSED WHISTLE-BLOWER POLICY (Attachments)

(Due to the complex nature of the following discussion and the many points presented therein, readers who are interested in more detail are encouraged to review the audiotapes of the Senate meeting, which are available at the Faculty Center.)

Senator Atwater reported that the Academic Personnel Policy Committee (APPC) had met once since the last Senate discussion of the proposed whistle-blower policy and had received some input regarding the document, including extensive written suggestions from Senator Spece. The APPC also plans to meet with the Staff Advisory Council, the Appointed Personnel Organization Council, and other groups to get input. Using overhead transparencies, she discussed: (1) applicability of the whistle-blower policy—it will apply to all faculty, academic professionals, administrators, classified staff, and student employees, and it should provide even-handed treatment of the whistle-blower and the alleged wrongdoer; (2) definitions of "personnel action" contained in Arizona Revised Statute §38-531, compared to definitions of "adverse personnel action" contained in the UA’s proposed whistle-blower policy; and (3) steps in the whistle-blower process, comparing the chronology of events under the state whistle-blower law to that of the proposed UA whistle-blower policy.

Comments/questions from Senators: (1) Rather than list specific "adverse personnel actions," it would be better to use a general term like "personnel action with a negative effect" in the policy. (2) Another option would be to provide a list of specific examples of adverse personnel actions, but to preface the list with a statement that an adverse personnel action "can include but is not limited to" the examples given. (3) The list of adverse personnel actions seems to have some retroactive consequences. (4) What does the independent hearing officer determine—whether the adverse personnel action occurred, whether the adverse personnel action was appropriate, or whether the adverse personnel action was the result of a whistle-blower’s disclosure? (5) An adverse personnel action can also be inaction, such as failure to promote or to grant tenure. (6) What happens if the whistle-blower’s allegations are shown to be false? Is there any penalty?

Senator Atwater asked for additional input soon, so that it can be considered before the next Senate discussion. It was agreed that copies of the three transparencies used today would be enclosed in the packets for the Senate meeting on March 1.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:03 PM.

Susan E. Heckler, Secretary

Dr. William Bickel’s statement regarding the Marguerite Kay case.

Arizona’s Universities and The 2000-2001 Budget ("Talking Points").

Memorandum dated January 27, 1999, to Senators from Committee on UHAP, Constitution and Bylaws Revisions regarding proposed Bylaws Amendments.

Copies of three overhead transparencies used during whistle-blower discussion (Applicability, Definitions - Adverse Personnel Action, Whistle-blower Policy)

*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.