|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveJanuary 19, 1993
The following minutes were officially approved on Jan. 19, 1993. FACULTY SENATE Minutes 19 January 1993 32 Pamplin Hall I. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by President Leon Geyer. Visitors were introduced: John Ashby (Spectrum), David Bousquet (Director of Admissions), W. David Conn (Environmental Design Planning), Tom Goodale (Vice-President for Student Affairs), Elizabeth Guertin (Academic Advising), Sigrid Gustafson (Psychology), Guy Hammond (Religion), Jean Hammond (Academic Advising), Sheryl Morgan (Massey University, New Zealand), Peggy Rasnick (Staff Senate Liaison), George E. "Buddy" Russell (Vice-President for Alumni Relations), Joseph Sgro (Psychology), Ellie Sturgis (Psychology), Terry Wildman (Curriculum and Instruction). II. The agenda was adopted with one addition: the election of a representative to Virginia Tech Services. III. Roll call Senators present: Armstrong, Barbeau, Beagle, Brown, Bunce, Carrig, deWolf, Eng, Feret, Fern, Ficenec, Fuller, Geyer, Hardell, Hasselman, Haugh, Heath-Camp (for Clowes), Holtzman, Howard, Hult, Jones, Landgraf, Martin, McDaniels, Miller, Mullins, Murray, Norstedt, Olin, Pierce, Scigaj, Sherman, Shumsky, Snoke, Sumichrast, Vinson, Weaver, Williams, Wright. Senators absent: Falkinham, Foy, Graham, Lambur, O'Brien, Parsons, Rakes, Simmons, Tideman, Wang, Webb. IV. Program: Students - Past, Present, and Future (Buddy Russell, Tom Goodale) A. Russell described the Alumni Association as an organization that serves students and faculty, as well as Tech graduates. He believes the alumni are always a part of the university, in that they contribute to and take part in many university programs and endeavors. Tech alums in the state legislature, for example, are very supportive of the school; 80 have signed on to one of the Tech budget amendments in this session. Russell gave a slide presentation on the activities of the Alumni Association, including the association's work with University Development and University Relations; student recruitment activities; fund- raising; special events, such as Homecoming, Founders' Day, and reunions; and opportunities for faculty participation through speaking to alumni groups. He believes that the greatest needs at present are increased operating funds for the university, more clout with the legislature, and more alumni participation in fulfilling Tech's mission. B. Tom Goodale outlined the areas for which his office has responsibility: the Counseling Center, Student Health Service, Food Service, Military Affairs, Housing, Student Centers, Campus Recreation, and the Dean of Students Office. The Tech student body, most of which live in an area of five square miles, is about 75% Virginian; there is representation from all other states except Idaho. There are representatives from 101 foreign countries, and 5.5% of our students are Afro-Americans. By gender, 58% of Tech students are male, 42% female. Goodale accepts the idea of various student communities: purposeful, open, just, disciplined, caring, celebrative. He and his colleagues work on the assumptions that (1) the academic mission is the most important part of the university; (2) each student is unique, with personal worth and dignity; and, (3) bigotry cannot be tolerated. But, as in any society, the students reflect a wide range of assumptions and beliefs; the problems of racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia are on the campus as well as in the rest of the world. He views his task as helping to provide an environment where diversity can be embraced. Goodale believes that Tech's colleges are much more involved with the students than is the case at other universities; the faculty here care about their students. Although the students are criticized for being too passive, their primary memories of Tech are to individual faculty members who have helped them. A major problem, however, is substance abuse, which is being addressed, partially through private funding. Goodale also spoke of the changes in students, who will face greater choice of schools but a very competitive job market. Students are more competitive academically. They are learning to cope with stress, to meet university demands, to understand the quest for quality and excellence. They are also learning to cope with death - there were 15 student deaths last year. Tech's students, as viewed by a recent study, were found to be socially liberal, politically conservative, relatively affluent, relatively sophisticated, academically capable, inclined to prefer quantitative subjects, and less work oriented than peers at other schools. For many, Tech was not their first choice. Nonetheless, Goodale finds this to be a challenging campus, with excellent faculty, administrative, and staff support and students with a generally positive attitude toward education. C. In the question period, Russell was asked about the problem with motel accommodations in Blacksburg and why more events couldn't be scheduled when accommodations are available. Russell responded that the main problems occurred during the football season; local motels are not at all full now, which is why there are not more motels in Blacksburg. The uncertain weather is a reason for not scheduling more events during the winter months. In response to a question on student community service and volunteerism, Goodale noted that student efforts in these areas have doubled in recent years; about 42% of the students now participate in some public service project. V. Approval of minutes A. Senate minutes for 8 December 1992 were approved. Senator Hasselman asked that a statement on tax- sheltered annuities, taken from the Tax Guide for College Teachers, be appended to the minutes of the present meeting (see Appendix A). B. Senate Cabinet minutes for 2 December 1992 were accepted. Senator Snoke asked if better data could be obtained concerning the four-year graduation rate. VI. Council, Commission, and Committee reports A. Commission on Faculty Affairs (Senator Shumsky) CFA faces a governance problem regarding committees that report to the commission. It is not totally clear how much "control" a commission has over the committees. Shumsky also noted that the CFA minutes are becoming more detailed because of the importance of some issues, such as the proposed Future Professors Program, which he outlined briefly. B. Computing Committee (Senator Snoke) Snoke reported on the planned demise of support for certain mainframe activities and on the expertise available for computer users. Mike Williams from the Computer Center is scheduled to address the Senate on some of these issues. VII. New business A. Faculty representative to the Distinguished Speakers Series (to replace Bunce). Senators Eng and Bunce nominated, Senator Bunce elected. B. Faculty representative to the Commission on Faculty Affairs (to replace Murray, to fill in for Pierce this semester). Senator Fuller will replace Senator Murray; Senator Sherman will substitute for Senator Pierce. C. Faculty representative to Virginia Tech Services (to replace Eng). Senator Sumichrast was elected. D. President's reports 1. President Geyer reported on the Governor's budget, which contains a 2% raise for faculty, effective December 1993, but has no recommended changes for research or extension. There is a statewide effort to raise salaries more than 2%, which has been entered as an amendment. The Virginia Tech amendments include support for the Equine Center, the restoration of funding for Extension, and funding for industrial and business extension efforts. 2. President Geyer met with Gordon Davies in December and discussed the SCHEV report. Davies was upset with the presidents' response to the report; Geyer's impression was that SCHEV is a bit out of touch with what's happening on the university campuses. In response to a question, Geyer said that Davies believes he was complying with a legislative mandate when SCHEV prepared the report, that Davies considers he and SCHEV represent higher education. 3. Other activities President Geyer met with President McComas, and the Senate officers met with the Provost and Minnis Ridenour. Points of discussion were the SCHEV report, benefits, and the status of the New Virginians. The officers also met with Delegate Joan Munford prior to the beginning of the legislative session and discussed the higher education issues that will face the legislature. E. Senate Resolution 1993-1 President Geyer outlined the situation that gave rise to the resolution, which supports the statement of the Council of Presidents and the resolution of the Faculty Senate of Virginia. After brief discussion, the resolution passed unanimously. (Resolution 1993-1 is attached to these minutes as Appendix B.) Lengthy discussion followed, centering on a plan of action to follow up on the resolution. While it was generally agreed that such behind-the-scene efforts as working through the Faculty Senate of Virginia should continue, there was a need for our faculty to make public statements, both individually and collectively. Geyer emphasized the need for more newspaper articles, for participation in the alumni speakers' bureau, and for doing a better job with our students. The consensus of the group was that President Geyer should hold a press conference this week to announce the passage of Resolution 1993-1 and call for a mass meeting of all faculty to be held as soon as possible. VIII. There being no further business, the Senate adjourned at 9:43 PM. Respectfully submitted, Marilyn L. Norstedt Secretary - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPENDIX A Contribution Limits for Tax-Sheltered Annuities (from the Tax Guide for College Teachers) There are 3 basic limitations on how much can be contributed to a tax-sheltered annuity, the elective deferral limitation, the annual limitation, and the overall limitation. The elective deferral limitation requires that the total voluntary contributions made by an individual to tax-sheltered annuities under a reduction in salary agreement cannot exceed $9,500 per year. The $9,500 limit is reduced by deductible contributions made to a SEP [cf. Section 3] or by amounts deferred under a 401(k) deferred compensation plan [cf. Section 5]. The $9,500 limit will be raised to as much as $12,000 for individuals who have worked for their current employer for at least 15 years, provided their previous contributions to tax- sheltered annuities with their current employer averaged less that $5,000 per year. Precisely, for such long-term employees, the $9,500 limit is raised by the lesser of (i) $3,000, or (ii) the excess of $5,000 multiplied by the number of years of service with the current employer over the total voluntary contributions made in prior years to tax-sheltered annuities with that employer. The extra amounts provided by this rule cannot total more than $15,000 over a lifetime. Thus, if a person voluntarily contributed $12,500 under this rule for each of 5 years, his lifetime maximum of $15,000 would be used up. His voluntary contributions for future years could then not exceed $9,500 per year. Submitted by Senator Hasselman 19 January 1993 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPENDIX B FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION 1993-1 BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Senate of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University strongly endorses the "Statement of the Council of Presidents in Response to the SCHEV Staff Draft Report" and the resolution of the Faculty Senate of the University of Virginia passed on 16 December 1992. The Resolution follows: RESOLUTION of the FACULTY SENATE of the UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA 16 December 1992 The Executive Council of the Faculty Senate strongly endorses the "Statement of the Council of Presidents in Response to the SCHEV Staff Draft Report." The presidents have emphasized that the recognized quality of higher education in the Commonwealth cannot be maintained with reduced support combined with the projected increase in FTE enrollment of 3,500 per year in the 1994 biennium. The citizens of the Commonwealth demonstrated on November third their commitment to education and to the welfare of their children. The faculty of the University of Virginia is acutely aware of the financial difficulties facing the nation and the Commonwealth. We have shared in salary reductions, increased our efforts to maintain academic standards, and seen the status of the University diminished. We especially appreciate the support and foresight of the voters. We understand that the State Council has tried to make the best of reduced revenues with the prospect of increased enrollments. The State Council negotiated with representatives of the Commonwealth's colleges and universities and significantly improved the initial draft of 24/Nov/;'92. We welcome many of the suggestions and applaud the Council's exploration of new approaches in their draft of 11/Dec/92 (for release 12/Jan/93). However the State Council must explain to the General Assembly the value of their universities and colleges and what is really required to prepare the next generation for the twenty-first century. We can meet this challenge if we work together -- students, staff, and faculty throughout the Commonwealth in cooperation with the State Council. It is time for reconciliation and for a bolder vision. Passed by the Faculty Senate of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 19 January 1993
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/January+19++1993.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:42 EDT