|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveApril 20, 1993
The following minutes were officially approved on September 21, 1993 FACULTY SENATE Minutes 20 April 1993 32 Pamplin Hall I. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by President Leon Geyer. Visitors were welcomed: John Ashby (Spectrum), Stephen Baehr (Foreign Languages), Peter Karp (University Architect), Peggy Rasnick (Staff Senate Liaison), Ted Settle (Continuing Education). II. The agenda was adopted with the following changes: Ted Settle was added to the program for purposes of discussing the Hotel Roanoke project; two items - the Senate bylaws and the Faculty Review Committee - were added under new business. III. Roll call Senators present: Barbeau, Beagle, Brown, Bunce, Carrig, deWolf, Eng, Falkinham, Fern, Ficenec, Foy, Geyer, Graham, Hardell, Haugh, Howard, Jones, Lambur, Martin, McDaniels, Miller, Norstedt, O'Brien, Olin, Pierce, Shumsky, Snoke, Sumichrast, Tideman, Vinson, Williams. New senators: Bambach, Bandinelli, Burger, Creamer, Dyck, Greenberg, Gregoire, Richardson, Riley, Rohani, Sanzone, Shires, Tze. Senators absent: Armstrong, Clowes, Fuller, Hasselman, Holtzman, Hult, Landgraf, Mullins, Murray, Parsons, Rakes, Scigaj, Sherman, Simmons, Wang, Weaver, Webb, Wright. New senators absent: Anderson, Benson, Cramer, Giles, McDaniel, McKenna, Pinder. IV. Announcements President Geyer expressed his thanks to all senators who are going off the Senate this year, as well as to the Senate officers and Senate Cabinet members, praising them for their good work. He also thanked the entire Senate for its participation in university governance, for interesting times and good moments, and even for some of his sleepless nights. He believes the Senate has moved forward this year, and he anticipates further progress under President deWolf. V. Program A. Peter Karp (University Architect) Karp discussed the status of current architectural projects on the campus. 1. Bond issue projects: The Engineering-Architecture facility has been split into two projects. Both are in the schematic design stage; the bid will be next spring. The Biotechnology project has been moved to campus to connect to Engel Hall; the bid will be in October. The Library Storage Facility will go out for bid in the fall. The chiller expansion is out for bid at present; the new airport terminal (paid for by federal and state funds) will be bid in the fall. 2. Preplanning studies (for which the state has given permission): Chemistry/Physics expansion and Burruss Hall/Architecture annex. In this plan, the rear of Burruss would become classroom space. These studies are paid for by the university; the outlay cannot be recovered from the projects. 3. State permission to complete planning: Performing Arts complex. The schematic designs are complete and the package is now up for review by the university administration and the Development Office. The money for this project is not coming from the General Fund. Discussion In response to questions about specific projects, Karp indicated that although preplanning indicates a state priority, nothing has been approved for the Architecture Annex. This will not be brought before the legislature until January, and no money can be assigned until approval is given. The time-line for the project depends on the source of funding. Regarding the Upper Quad, the university plan calls for converting all the buildings into academic offices (the conversion of Major Williams was part of the bond issue and is progressing). The dorms will be replaced one- for-one - one new bed for every bed lost in conversion. His office is waiting to hear if the state will agree to the Newman Library infill. The Engineering- Architecture facility could be completed by the summer of 1996 if all goes well. The Biotechnology facility will be placed at right angles to Engel Hall in such a way as to use the slope for best benefit. All new and converted buildings will be air-conditioned. Karp explained the progression of work handled by his office. His basic staff is quite small, but during projects extra people are assigned. Preplanning projects are done by outside consultants hired under state guidelines. The selection committees include representatives from the Budget Office, the Physical Plant, the building user group, Staff Senate, students, etc. They have been fortunate in attracting fine architectural firms. In response to a observation that many unfortunate aspects of campus buildings could have been avoided by more user input, Karp said he is quite concerned with this matter. As a project progresses, the committee is readjusted to drop or merge administrative representation and to expand departmental representation. Faculty can apply for consultantships, but, because of state financial restrictions, faculty expertise is ordinarily used for small parts of a larger project. Senator deWolf observed that the priority given to the Performing Arts complex is still a concern of the College of Engineering, but that Minnis Ridenour will address the college on that matter in the near future. B. Ted Settle (Director, Continuing Education) Settle's main interest in the Hotel Roanoke project is with the conference center. He has given presentations on the plan throughout the campus and is concerned to get the faculty involved with the project. Although the center will be funded and built by the City of Roanoke, its administrative committee will include three representatives from the city and three from the university. He showed plans for the proposed development and indicated that the main exhibit hall will be the largest conference space between Charlotte and Washington, D.C. Tech's main interest, however, is in the seminar areas, breakout areas, and auditorium - areas on which the design teams from the university are concentrating. Discussion In responding to questions about the programming and facilities available in the conference center, Settle indicated that the programming will be driven from Blacksburg. Planning for the "high tech" area of the center includes meeting all computing and AV requirements (Tom Head is involved in this aspect of the project). Settle does not know if such features as continuous translation will be available. He thinks the facility can handle about 1700 people. Settle estimates the initial impact on the Donaldson- Brown Center to be a one-third reduction in programs. The Blacksburg facility, however, is attractive for smaller groups who want the campus setting and the convenience of faculty at hand. In the long run, he does not see the two facilities as being competitive. About fifty faculty were invited to serve on the design team. The Academic Council (representing the colleges) has had input as well. Additionally, he has made presentations on the project to several commissions and committees and other campus groups. The conference center is a continuing education project; there are no current plans to move the Roanoke Graduate Center into the facility. Tech will share in the profits of the conference center. As to the Hotel Roanoke, Tech has $4 million in the project and will get all its money back should Doubletree's plans for the hotel result in failure. VI. Approval of minutes Faculty Senate minutes for 8 April 1993 were approved. VII. Council, commission, committee reports - no discussion VIII. New business A. Blueprint Committee report (Senator McDaniels) After the report was moved for discussion, Senator McDaniels pointed out that the document at hand is shorter and more to the point than the earlier draft. He asked that the Senate look at the report as a campaign document for next year. Review and revision will take place in the summer of 1993, there will be a proactive campaign on major issues during the next academic year, and the action plan will be implemented. Senator Riley, a member of the committee, also spoke to the report. Considerable discussion followed. It was pointed out that the administration is also looking into this matter. There was general agreement of the necessity to educate our own faculty and students to the seriousness of the problems confronting higher education in the commonwealth. In order to gain support, we need to concentrate on making improvements in the university and on publicizing the improvements; we need to show that we understand priorities need to be adjusted to meet the future. Our own faculty needs to be educated to the importance of research. If we can't reach our colleagues, we will have difficulty reaching our students, the general public, and the legislature. The committee has discussed ways of reaching some of these groups. Although there are no plans to get involved with lobbyists, the committee will take into consideration the possiblity of targeting SCHEV, the General Assembly, etc., as part of the campaign. The Faculty Senate of Virginia has discussed the matter. Riley pointed out that the thrust of the report is not to wave a big stick but to gather the facts and present them. A motion to accept the document passed without dissent. B. Resolution on faculty salaries The resolution originated with Stephen Baehr of Foreign Languages. At the request of the Senate, the original resolution was passed to the Senate officers, who rewrote in into the present form as printed in the agenda. It should be noted that "percent" should read "percentile." Discussion was allowed before a motion on the resolution. Several senators considered the resolution to be inappropriate at the present time; the administration is well aware of the salary problem and is trying to address it. The Blueprint Committee, which was also asked to consider the resolution, reported that they did not believe it to be in order. Because no motion was forthcoming, the resolution did not reach the floor. C. Senate elections Election results are as follows: University Council Gene Brown David deWolf William Greenberg Commission on Faculty Affairs Don Creamer Golde Holtzman Sam Riley Robert Sumichrast Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies Jim Burger Robert Olin Commission on Public Service and Extension Ralph Badinelli Commission on Research Hsiung Tze Commission on Student Affairs Robert Graham Jim McKenna Commission on Undergraduate Studies Richard Bambach Alan McDaniel Commission on University Support Paul Metz (University Libraries) David Russell (Senate alternate) Building Committee Michael O'Brien Kamal Rojaini Employment Benefits Committee Felix Pierce Charles Pinder EO/AA Robert Graham Dick Russell Ellen Braatan Jerry Williams Honorifics Committee Alumni Award Janet Sawyers Luke Mo University Distinguished Professor Ali Nayfeh Frank Quinn Intellectual Property Committee Richard Krutchkoff Linda Anderson Victoria Kok Sandra Birch David Kingston Michael Furey Michael Hyer Dick Ebel Parking/Transportation Advisory Committee George Sanzone John Broderick Scholarship and Financial Aid Committee Linda Richardson Don Creamer Student Budget Board Alan McDaniel Robert Graham Communications Resources Committee David Beagle Kamal Rojiani Computer Committee Peter Shires David Roper Senate committees Faculty Senate Cabinet Agriculture & Life Sciences Jim McKenna Architecture & Urban Studies Michael O'Brien Arts & Sciences Larry Shumsky Business Robert Sumichrast Education Don Creamer Engineering David deWolf Extension Faculty Mike Lambur Forestry Timothy Gregoire Human Resources Bill Barbeau University Libraries Marilyn Norstedt Veterinary Medicine Peter Shires Committee on Committees Jim McKenna Charles Pinder Credentials and Elections Committee James Burger Linda Anderson Don Mullins J. A. Hardell David Beagle Mike Lambur Robert Martin Don Creamer University Forum on a Liberal Education Richard Bambach Faculty Senate of Virginia Carl McDaniel John Hillison Committee on Reconciliation (It was moved to suspend the Senate rules in order to expand the committee to 10) Joe Falkinham Marilyn Norstedt Jeanne Howard T. N. Tideman Bonham Richardson Felix Pierce D. Faculty Review Committee procedures (document distributed) President Geyer emphasized that this document, which governs the operations of the FRC, is a Senate document and is not part of the Faculty Handbook. Discussion of the procedures was postponed until the fall semester. E. Senate Bylaws (distributed) Suggested revisions have been indicated in the handout. President Geyer reminded the Senate that the constitution also needs revision to match the present university governance structure. Much of what is in the constitution should be in the bylaws. IX. There being no other business, and the elections being complete, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 PM. Respectfully submitted, Marilyn L. Norstedt Secretary
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, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/fsm/1993/April+20++1993.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:41 EDT