University Libraries Logo University Archives of Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes Archive

September 17, 1993

 

  Faculty Senate Cabinet

  Minutes

  September 17, 1993

  Accepted by the Faculty Senate:  DRAFT

 

  Present:  David Beagle, David de Wolf, Timothy Gregoire, Mike Lambur, Mike

  O'Brien, Peter Shires, Larry Shumsky, Bob Sumichrast

 

  1. Some progress has been made on remaining committee, commission,

  and board assignments.  Bob Dyck from the College of Architecture and

  Urban Studies has been nominated for an opening on the Faculty

  Review Committee.  David de Wolf will appoint someone to the

  Committee on Committees and to the Board of Virginia Tech Services

  with the consent of the Cabinet.

 

  2. Mike Lambur agreed to report to the senate from his position on

  board of VTIP.

 

  3. Future Senate meeting program ideas were discussed.  David de Wolf

  reviewed the plans for the October 19, 1993 meeting.  Nick Rush and Jim

  Shuler, candidates for the delegate seat left vacant by the  retirement

  of Joan Mumford, will address the Senate.  Each will speak for

  approximately ten minutes.  Then the floor will be open for questions.

  In addition, Judge Danny Bird, President of the Alumni Association will

  be invited to address the Senate concerning the current political

  climate in Virginia as it relates to higher education. Danny will also

  be asked to provide insight into activities taken or planned by alumni

  concerning this issue.  While there was also interest in discussing the

  Faculty Rewards Project at the October meeting, it will not be part of

  the program.  However, David deWolf will distribute the report on the

  project to all Senators prior to the meeting.

 

  There was general agreement that the college deans should be asked to

  address the Senate in November.  The deans will be asked to discuss

  implications of the Faculty Rewards Project. Senators will have had

  ample time to prepare questions and comments about this project before

  the meeting.  If the deans cannot attend this meeting, then Len Peters

  will be asked to come.

 

  4. Members of the Cabinet expressed positive feelings about the way the

  September Senate meeting was conducted.  There was general

  agreement that it was of an appropriate length.

 

  5. Actions and ideas of the Faculty Response Committee were discussed at

  some length. Articles written by some faculty members were reported to

  have appeared in newspapers around Virginia.  An article written by Sam

  Riley was published in the Richmond paper and parts of it appeared in

  the Roanoke Times and World News.  An article written by David de Wolf

  also appeared in the Roanoke and possibly other Virginia papers over

  the weekend.

 

  Peter Shires suggested that we may have already responded sufficiently

  to the negative series of articles which recently appeared in major

  Virginia papers. Cabinet members discussed various ways by which faculty

  could improve the standing of higher education in Virginia without

  prolonging the effects of the negative articles.  David de Wolf reminded

  the Cabinet of efforts underway by President McComas and the alumni

  association and he suggested that efforts should continue to be

  coordinated. David provided some details on efforts by the University

  administration and Alumni Association to provide both the public and the

  legislatures of the role of higher education.

 

  6. A possible forum between Mary Sue Terry and George Allen sponsored by

  Virginia Tech or a group of institutes of higher education was discussed.

  There was general agreement that the positions of the candidates on

  higher education were not fully known and there was interest in

  determining these positions. Alternatives to a forum were also discussed

  including holding a debate, asking for written position papers which

  address higher education, and working with a newspaper to receive this

  information.  David de Wolf said the University administration had

  similar ideas and pledged to first work with the administration on this

  matter.  He will follow up on other ideas discussed after determining

  how they fit into actions already under way.

 

  7. Faculty Senate representation has been requested on four projects by

  the Office of the Vice President of Business Affairs, R. Smoot. David

  de Wolf will ask J. Ficenec to represent the Senate in the Pre-planning

  Study for the Rector Field House.  M. O'Brien volunteered to serve on

  the pre-planning study for a residence hall and for the University

  Services Building, and M. Lambur agreed to serve on the Recreational

  Facilities planning study.

 

  8. There was considerable discussion of the possibility of forming a

  political action committee for higher education in Virginia. However,

  there did not seem to be a clear understanding of what this would

  entail.  A consensus was reached that a more clear proposal was

  required before any significant action should be taken.  David de Wolf

  will ask Leon Geyer to prepare a proposal.

 

  9. Various problems with the current Senate Constitution were

  discussed.  One general complaint is that the constitution contains too

  much specific information.  While no one spoke against the prospect of

  re-writing the constitution, there seemed to be no champion for

  undertaking the project at this time.

 

  The next Cabinet meeting is scheduled for noon on Monday,

  November 1, 1993.

 

 

  Respectfully submitted,

 

  Robert T. Sumichrast

  Secretary, Faculty Senate

 

Current Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive

Return to Virginia Tech Governance Minutes Archive


VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives


Send questions or comments to:

Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001

URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/fcb/1993/September+17++1993.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:38 EDT