Academic Senate Minutes November 04, 2003

Chair MacConnie called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. on Tuesday, November 04, 2003, in Nelson Hall East, Room 102 (Goodwin Forum).

Members Present: Butler, Cheyne, Coffey, Dalsant, Derden, Dixon, Dunk, Fulgham, Green, Klein, Kornreich, MacConnie, Meiggs, Mortazavi, Moyer, Mullery, Newsom, Oliver, O'Rourke- Andrews, Paselk, Paynton, Richmond, Schwab, Shellhase, Snyder, Sonntag, Thobaben, Varkey, Vrem, Wieand

Members Absent: Fonseca, Knox, Marshall, Sanford, Yarnall

Proxies: Platin for Kiesling

Guests: S. Carlson, College of Natural Resources & Sciences; R. Fritzsche, Faculty Personnel Services; S. Higgins, College of Professional Studies; J. Howard, College of Natural Resources & Sciences; C. Mueller, Library; L. Phillips, Office of the Registrar

1. Approval of Minutes

It was moved and seconded (Fulgham/Platin) to approve the submitted minutes for the October 21, 2003, senate meeting. Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED WITH ONE ABSTENTION.

2. Announcements and Communications

Chair MacConnie announced that President Richmond has accepted the budget resolution, and he is in receipt of the MSW proposal and is awaiting the resource review from the Provost's Council.

Contained in today's agenda packet is a copy of the report Keeping the Promise. All senators were encouraged to read it.

3. Committee and State Senate Reports

Office of the President - President Richmond reported that the vice presidents have been asked to begin their planning process for the 2004-05 budget. There is no new information on the status of the budget; the Chancellor's Office has suggested that campuses should plan for an additional budget reduction. No particulars are known yet.

President Richmond has been in contact with Mr. Steve Weiner, one of the authors of the report Keeping the Promise. Mr. Weiner would like to visit campus and meet with members of the campus community and local business people. A meeting will be scheduled some time in January or February.

Nina Fendel, the CFA regional representative, and President Richmond met this morning and discussed ways to make the Humboldt campus community more family friendly. A task force will be formed to consider several issues. Members of the task force will be announced; comments and suggestions may be given to any of the members.

Statewide Senate - A search is underway for the position of Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Gary Hammerstrom's position. This is an important position and anyone knowing of possible candidates (particularly provosts or vice provosts) should encourage them to apply. Senator Snyder is a member of this search committee.

The expanded executive committee is concerned about the negative press releases from the Chancellor's Office regarding the appointment of Susan Meisenhelder to the Board of Trustees. This will be an issue at the next statewide meeting. At the minimum, a letter will come from the expanded executive committee expressing such concern to the Chancellor. There is an unstated agreement that no one lobbies for or against a nominee to the Board of Trustees, and it is very disturbing that the Chancellor has decided to speak out on this particular appointee.

Associated Students - A resolution in support of the transgender day of remembrance, which will take place November 20 and will commemorate the lives lost because of prejudice and hatred toward transgender people, has been approved. An official memorandum in support of the optical scanning of course evaluations and grade reports has been submitted.

Administrative Affairs - A bid in the amount of $23.4 million was accepted for the BSS building. The successful bidder was Danco-Swinerton, and the plans will be discussed at the President's Council Friday. Construction of the building is scheduled to begin this summer and will take approximately 30 months to complete.

Educational Policies Committee - The Committee has one resolution on the agenda and is discussing online student evaluations and the course repeat policy.

CFA - Bargaining has been canceled because of the fires in southern California. Susan Meisenhelder, who was the CFA statewide president for the last two terms, was nominated by Governor Davis to sit on the Board of Trustees. Several press releases indicating that this nomination will be blocked by the Chancellor's Office have been released. Senators may contact Senator Meiggs for additional information. [This is a time when CFA and the University ought to be working together in the best interest of the students. The Chancellor was not notified of this appointment in a courteous way. The appointment was made two weeks prior to an email being sent to one of the Chancellor's staff members announcing this appointment and suggesting that perhaps other kinds of lobbying had occurred in the Chancellor's Office. The CSU and CFA need to discuss ways of improving the university as a whole.]

General Faculty President - Luke George, Department of Wildlife Management, has been elected to the HSU Foundation Board of Directors.

UCC - The focus group on nonmajor requirements for the strategic plan will meet Wednesday, October 5. All are invited.

Senate Finance Committee - The budget committee meets regularly and is close to completing a budget policy, which will be distributed for recommendation.

Student Affairs Committee - The Committee has met with Kathy Munoz, the FAR representative, and a resolution will be brought to the senate soon.

OAA - The Provost's Council will be considering three resource reviews associated with program reviews at tomorrow's meeting. The Council also will be considering the MSW resource review, and if the review is favorable, the recommendation will be forwarded to the President. Friday, November 14, is the first of a series of coffee and scones meeting with small groups of department chairs.

Faculty Affairs Committee - The Committee has developed a singular proposal including time lines, levels of review and the type of file needed for submission. It also has developed a series of options for the RTP review process. Two open forums are scheduled; one for Tuesday, November 11, and one for Friday, November 14, both forums will be held from 2-4 p.m., location to be announced. The Committee also has planned a meeting with the Provost, the deans and directors for Friday, November 21, 2-4 p.m. in NRS 203. Documents for a first reading should be to the Senate by the end of fall term.

Chair MacConnie encouraged everyone to attend the forums.

Other Announcements - Chair MacConnie announced that the second statement from Robert Cherny, Chair of the Statewide Senate, will be forwarded to all senators.

5. Resolution on Program Reinstatement (#09-03/04-EP)

It was moved and seconded (Varkey/Green) to place the resolution on the floor.

WHEREAS, Currently there is not a procedure for the reinstatement of suspended programs; and

WHEREAS, Occasions arise in which it is appropriate to reinstate suspended programs; therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt recommend the adoption of the attached Cal Poly Humboldt Policy for Reinstatement of Suspended Programs.

Senator Varkey provided background on the resolution stating that Humboldt does have a policy for suspension programs, but there is no policy for reinstatement. It is logical to have a reinstatement procedure.

It was accepted as a friendly amendment that Joint Council be changed to Provost's Council in the policy.

It was accepted as a friendly amendment to clarify that the policy only refers to degree programs so the word degree should be added to the title.

If this policy is to mirror the suspension process and a review goes to the Graduate Council, then it is forwarded to the UCC.

It was accepted as a friendly amendment to add the word member to the first sentence of the third paragraph so that it reads, "If the initiating individual is other than the chair or faculty member of a department, . . . "

At the department level, could the program be approved entirely by the department chair and not by the faculty of the department?

It was agreed to postpone definitely to the next senate meeting the discussion of this resolution.

4. TIME CERTAIN 4:30 P.M. Nomination for Outstanding Professor of the Year Award

The senate moved to executive session.

Ann Diver-Stamnes, Chair of the Faculty Awards Committee, read the Committee's letter of nomination. The Senate returned to formal session.

It was moved and seconded (Cheyne/Thobaben) to approve the nomination submitted by the Faculty Affairs Committee.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

It was moved and seconded (Fulgham/Snyder) to make this an emergency item for immediate transmittal to the President. Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED.

6. TIME CERTAIN 4:45 P.M. Physical Capacity Enrollment Ceiling Discussion

Bob Schulz, Director of Physical Services, used a PowerPoint presentation to update the senators on the status of the Master Plan (MP) at Cal Poly Humboldt. Senators were encouraged to visit the web page (there is a link on Humboldt's home page), which contains an accounting of activities to date, including comments from the public forums.

The enrollment ceiling of the university is the primary topic today. The architects will not be able to complete their task without such information, and it is a significant issue that needs to be addressed.

Comments to date reveal patterns of consistency regarding items such as parking is a problem, the roadways are a problem, entry ways need to be addressed, open space and landscape concerns and campus aesthetics. Within these consistent comments of items to be addressed are inconsistent solutions; for example, consolidate parking structure and build no parking structures; create uniform aesthetics and strive for architectural diversity; build down, not up and build up, not out; and remove small parking lots and develop more parking areas, especially near Forbes Complex. Other relevant topics include sustainability, safety and accessibility, new/revised facilities, and maintenance and operations.

Initial recommendations from the MP Committee include the following: establish Humboldt as an environmental leader, enhance the natural environment, improve the natural water features, acquire campus apartments and the annex, close 17th Street, redesign the Art Quad, and relocate Plant Operations.

Mr. Gary Krietsch explained enrollment ceilings and capacities and referred to the book The College Year Reports, which may be downloaded from the Web and includes information on all campuses in the CSU. Definitions included Headcount - a total count of the student body; and FTES (Full-time Equivalent Student) - a unit of measure equal to 15 semester or quarter units per term which is reached by dividing the total semester or quarter hours by 15. The Master Plan for higher education is a three-tiered system designed in 1960 to provide students with access to affordable, high-quality education. The top one-third of high school graduates are eligible to attend the CSU. Capacity Space is categorized as lecture, seminar or teaching laboratory space; it does not include conference rooms or teaching or lecture service. It is based on the hours per week that a room is scheduled and station occupancy. Space utilization standards were approved by CPEC (the California Postsecondary Education Commission) and indicate that lecture rooms are to be scheduled for 53 hours per week between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. with an occupancy rate of 66 percent; lower division laboratories are to be scheduled for 27.5 hours per week with an occupancy rate of 85 percent; and upper division and graduate laboratories are to be scheduled for 22 hours per week with an 80 percent occupancy rate.

Conversion of student stations to FTE capacity is achieved by multiplying the scheduled hours by the occupancy rate and dividing that number by 15 for lecture courses and by 45 for laboratory courses. For example, to convert the lecture student stations to FTE capacity, multiply 53 by 66 percent occupancy and divide by 15 which equals 2.33 FTES per student station. Lecture spaces at Humboldt total 2413 student stations equalling 5622 FTES; lower division laboratories total 618 student stations equalling 321 FTES, and upper division and graduate laboratories total 1351 student stations equalling 527 FTES. Humboldt's total permanent capacity equals 6470 FTES. The temporary spaces are not included in this calculation.

College year (CY) enrollment is equal to the total enrollment for the year starting with the summer term. College year minus the summer term (ST) equals the academic year (AY); thus, CT - ST = AY. Academic Year becomes the foundation of the Master Plan ceiling, and enrollment is based on the academic year. AY minus Other Earned (OE) enrollment, such as courses that do no drive space, equals the on site academic year FTES. For 2003-04, the forecast would be: 7450 (CY) minus 375 (ST) equals 7075 AY FTES minus 1082 (OE) equals 6043 AY on site.

Annual Enrollment Target is not the same as enrollment Master Plan ceiling. Enrollment targets are negotiated each year with the Chancellor's Office for the express purpose of determining budget and enrollment for the next college year. Master Plan enrollment ceiling is a long range capital planning tool established by the university and used to develop a logical and sensible plan to develop the physical facilities to meet the academic need. This probably will take ten to twenty years or more.

According to Bob Schulz, Humboldt has been a small campus in the CSU for a long time. Currently and for decades we have hovered near the 2.25 percent mark of the total population of the CSU. If our enrollment ceiling were to stay the same in 2012, we will shrink to 1.75 percent of the total CSU enrollment population. If Humboldt's enrollment ceiling were raised to 10,000, we would still represent less than the current 2.25 percentage. At 12,000, we would be just a bit higher than our current enrollment percentage. Two points to remember about the 12,000 enrollment figure are: (1) we would not reach this enrollment ceiling until 2030+ at which time the system would be at its maximum possible capacity and there will be thousands of students not yet enrolled; and (2) there is a good chance that we will hit the CSU maximum capacity figure of 457,000 about 2014 or 2015, which will create a new set of problems.

Possible scenarios showing the impact of physical changes to the campus were presented, including logical placement of buildings, logical automobile circulation versus pedestrian circulation; parking areas, etc. There may be some older buildings that need to be replaced with more efficient, larger capacity buildings without changing the footprint. Such conversations on accommodating potential growth have not begun yet. One item that needs to be addressed is identifying an appropriate campus entrance.

The likely impact of a MP ceiling increase at a rate of approximately 2 percent per year in the next three to seven years will affect certain projects in the following way. Some spaces, such as the library (which includes interdisciplinary computer labs according to state space standards), physical education and the corporation yard, allow for long-term enrollment needs rather than immediate needs. For example, if Humboldt's enrollment is raised to 10,000, then the library will have 52,000+ assignable square foot shortfall space and that becomes a project that can be pursued immediately. The only way the relocation of our corporation yard could be justified is if Humboldt goes to 10,000 or 12,000 FTES. Such a relocation would allow for the current corporation yard space to become a main entrance to campus. No building on campus will be relocated, replaced or reconfigured if there is no capacity component to it.

According to the North Coast Journal Humboldt students bring approximately $7,000 in import revenue per student to the community, and each student spends approximately $11,000 on other items. The total economic impact to Humboldt County then is approximately $45,000 per year from each student. At 8000 FTE, the local impact to the community would be $409.5 million each year; 10,000 FTE would yield $513 million to the community each year and 12,000 FTE would yield $612 million each year.

The Strategic Planning Committee will be giving President Richmond a recommendation on enrollment ceiling. This information will be needed for the MP Committee to continue its work. The MP Committee also will be discussing ratios of housing, parking, etc. and consolidating all commentary received thus far. The architects will consider all information and return in late January with a series of design scenarios. The scenarios will include an overview of current departmental allocations and will offer ideas for possible change; they will not be using the current percentages on how Humboldt uses its space.

Discussion comments included:

Given that Humboldt has seen no real growth for many years, and given that the Chancellor's Office probably would want Humboldt to show a steady growth over several years before Humboldt would be considered for any buildout projects, it seems realistic to believe that it will be many years before Humboldt will receive the approval for such buildout projects. [The 2006-07 capital program is under consideration now; such buildout activities probably would not occur until the 2007-08 fiscal year. Humboldt has seen no growth for the last 20+ years because the president during that time believed that Humboldt should maintain that enrollment and remain a small campus. If a change can be shown over the next three years, Humboldt will be taken seriously. If we show no change in our behavior, then we will not be taken seriously.]

The City of Arcata has two voting members as part of the MP process; they participate in the MP Committee meetings; they have seen all the information available on the process. [Representatives from the City of Eureka and the County of Humboldt also participate in the process.]

The classroom space is based on occupancy from 8 a.m to 10 p.m. Monday through Friday, and the occupancy rate is averaged over the entire time.

Summer term can be a handicap because the academic year is used for the definition of the capacity of a campus. On the other hand, if an adequate number of summer term students is not enrolled, the campus is punished on its capacity justifications. It translates into inadequately using the facilities on campus.

Every campus, regardless of size, is allowed to request one major capital outlay project each year.

Saying that each dollar generated locally by each student will circulate 2.5 times in the economic community may be an underestimation; this figure will vary dramatically depending on how export driven the local economy is. Since Humboldt is one of the only export industries in the area, the multiplier will be larger.

Perhaps it would be best to avoid terms such as stagnant growth; if something is healthy it does not mean it is stagnating. The primary consideration is at what point does Humboldt become too large to have the desired interactions with students, to attract to Humboldt the people we want to have here, and to provide the quality of education for which Humboldt is noted. [The important thing to remember is that we are talking about incremental levels of change. Such changes will not be seen by many of us on campus now, but will be seen by our grandchildren.]

Appreciation was expressed to Bob Schulz for his presentation.

It was moved and seconded (Derden/Fulgham) to adjourn the meeting.

Meeting adjourned 5:45 p.m.