|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveMarch 4, 1991
Minutes University Council Meeting March 4, 1991 Dr. James D. McComas called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. Present:J. McComas, R. Smoot, M. Ridenour, E.F. Carlisle, J. Hillison, T. Goodale, P. Gherman, L. Harris, G. Hooper, R. Heterick, H. Doswald, R. Sorensen, J. Johnson (for J. Nichols), D. Robertshaw (for J. Buffer), J. Marchman (for G.W. Clough), S.J. Ritchey, L. Moore, A.J. Davis, L. Rees, D. Hewitt, E. Holford (for R. Small), F. Thye, L. Eng (for S. Batie), L. Geyer, N. Eiss, D. Kingston, J. Crittenden, N. Marriott, A. Snoke, L. Barroso, D. Adams, J. Budd, Kevin Mottley (for W. Kuster), P. Radcliffe, M. Byrne, C. Vargo, Kevin Konopka (for P. Larkin) Guests: Bill Burleson, Spectrum; Pat Hyer, Provost's Office; Cornel N. Morton, Office of EO/AA; Absent: C. Forbes, P. Eyre, R.A. Heller, C. Steger 1. ADOPTION OF AGENDA A motion was made and seconded to approve the agenda as distributed. The motion PASSED. 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 4, 1991 The University Council minutes of the meeting of February 4, 1991 were approved with the correction of a typographical error. 3. SECOND READING, COMMISSION ON UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES RESOLUTION 1990-91C, CONCERNING ACADEMIC ELIGIBILITY. Dr. McComas called on Dr. Carlisle who moved adoption of the resolution, then asked Dr. Marchman to respond to questions. Dr. Kingston inquired about the projected impact of the resolution on summer school enrollments. Dr. Marchman responded that CUS had considered this question and determined that there would be very little change in enrollment numbers, as most students would continue to remedy their situations at the earliest opportu- nity. He reiterated that this resolution was developed to officially legit- imize a practice that has been in effect for some time -- namely, allowing students to use the spring OR fall sessions to raise the QCA to the required level. The resolution was PASSED. 4. SECOND READING, UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION RESOLUTION 1990-91A, SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY. Dr. Hyer recounted the history of the policy, stating that it was initially developed in 1989 to strengthen the university's stand against sexual harassment and to simplify procedures for investigating complaints. The proposed draft of the policy incorporates suggested revisions from the Faculty Senate, the Commission on Faculty Affairs, the College of Education Faculty Association, and Dr. Barry Crittenden. Major revisions include 1) clarification of the section on consensual relationships, 2) the decision to eliminate any written records at the "informal consultation" stage, and 3) the establishment of a panel review process -- if requested by the accused -- once a decision is rendered by the Director of EO/AA. Ms. Barroso, representing the Classified Staff Affairs Committee, endorsed adoption of the policy and urged that it be widely publicized at all levels of the university. The resolution was PASSED. 5. IN SUCCESSIVE MOTIONS, COUNCIL APPROVED THE MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS. a. Commission on Extension, January 8, 1991. Dr. Kingston requested an update on the status of the Hotel Roanoke. Dr. Smoot reported that proposals for the development of the hotel and adjoining convention center were submitted several weeks ago. Those proposals are now under review by a committee comprised of Roanoke area business people who will report its recommendations shortly. Mr. Ridenour added that the General Assembly recently passed legislation that authorizes a commission responsible for the financing and building of the conference center as a joint project between the City of Roanoke and Virginia Tech. Mr. Ridenour noted that while the legislation prohibits using university funds to renovate the hotel, it is struc- tured so that revenue generated through future conferences held at the site will be used to repay development and operation costs. He added, however, that a feasibility study will be conducted to document the anticipated volume of business before any renovation is undertaken. b. Commission on Faculty Affairs, January 18, 1991. c. Commission on Graduate Studies, December 5, 1990 and January 16, 1991. Dr. Kingston asked if item 4 -- the definition of a "family" -- from the December 5, 1990 minutes had been determined. Dr. Hooper responded that the CGS was still receiving input on this issue as it relates to graduate student housing, and thus it remains unresolved. Dr. Hooper then made reference to item 7 in the minutes of January 16, 1991, regarding discussion of the "I" grade resolution. Dr. Hooper reported that the commission is addressing two corollary issues: 1) the need to finalize those grades within the academic term following the incompletion, and 2) whether those "I" grades should count as an "F" for calculating QCA during that term? With regard to the latter issue, he informed Council that the CGS advocates that an "I" grade not be counted as an "F," as that action could jeopardize graduate assistantships. Dr. Hooper added that because other constituencies are involved in this debate (CUS and the Faculty Senate), the CGS has decided to withhold action. He asked that these minutes be approved, excepting this item. d. Commission on Research, December 12, 1990. e. Commission on Undergraduate Studies, January 14 and 28, 1991. Dr. Carlisle noted item 5 in the January 14, 1991 minutes, the estab- lishment of a program of individualized study for students graduating "in honors." 6. FOR INFORMATION a. Commission on Research, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH CENTERS. Dr. Hooper reported that this document reflects a formal effort to record the policies and procedures involved in the establishment and review of interdisciplinary research centers. b. Minutes of the Building Committee, January 22, 1991. Mr. Ridenour reported that these minutes recount discussion of issues associated with the capital outlay submission to Richmond on March 1st. He also explained that the university intends to bring the capital and budget planning process together in the future. Thus, the Building Committee would function as the group that would review the overall master building plan of the university, while the budgeting and planning committee would involve itself with related appropriations issues. Dr. Snoke inquired if these two proposed committees would report to an advisory committee or commission? Mr. Ridenour responded that although they would work in concert, the two committees would probably both report directly to Council. c. Minutes of the Computer Committee, January 9, 1991. d. Minutes of the University Committee on Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action, December 11, 1990 and January 8, 1991. e. Minutes of the University Communications Resources Committee, November 28, 1990. Dr. Heterick was asked if there was going to be an access charge for faculty and students to use the campus communications network from off-campus locations. He replied that while there has long been an intent to levy a fee for such services, there has yet to be developed a technologically reasonable means for doing so. Dr. Heterick added that the committee is still attempting to develop a a viable way to measure and charge for these services. f. Minutes of the University Library Committee, January 9, 1990. 7. ANNOUNCEMENTS o Dr. McComas asked Dr. Smoot to update Council on the status of the proposed parking deck for the lot adjacent to Squires Student Center. Dr. Smoot described plans for the jointly funded project by the Town of Blacksburg and the university that would result in approximately 500 parking spaces for faculty/staff, student, and public use. He antic- ipates that the projected cost of the structure and the town's share of those costs will be determined by the spring. o Dr. McComas recognized Jim Budd as outgoing president of the Student Government Association, in addition to the other student leaders retir- ing at the end of this year. He then introduced Melissa Byrne as the president-elect of the SGA, and Kevin Mottley, the new SGA vice- president. o Dr. McComas credited the work of Mr. David Bousquet, Director of Admis- sions, and his staff for their efforts to increase the number of under- graduate applications, particularly in light of the fact that many other Virginia and national institutions are experiencing declines in applications. He also informed Council that there are over 300 Merit Scholarship semifinalists across all university programs. 8. QUESTION/ANSWER SESSION Dr. Kingston requested an update on issues related to the budget. Dr. McComas responded by describing the status of capital projects. He stated that the House of Delegates and the Senate proposed two different bills related to capital funding, but because they could not reconcile the different funding requests, both bills failed. Dr. McComas reiterated the results of a public poll that showed sufficient support for a bond issue to support capital projects. Accordingly, the university must utilize this support to ensure that the next legislative session results in the passage of a bond for capital projects. Dr. McComas then informed Council that the General Assembly did approve a $7.3 million tuition increase for instructional programs (not for research or extension). Mr. Ridenour then provided some specific information about other legislation. He noted, for example, that 1) Virginia Tech received authorization to increase the bond limits on Squires Student Center, 2) the new coal-fired facility will be funded through a debt-financing package, 3) the Equine Center in Northern Virginia will receive a total of $350,00 to support teaching and research, 4) UVa and Virginia Tech will each receive $12,500 to review and plan graduate programs in Northern Virginia, and 5) six additional positions were approved for the Extension Division. Mr. Ridenour then stated that the General Assembly stipulated that out-of-state students must pay 94.4% of their instructional costs (they currently pay 88%). Additionally, the General Assembly also recognized that more students will need financial aid by authorizing $475,000 in support for that purpose. Dr. McComas then provided information related to a possible fourth round of budget cuts of up to 6.5%. Mr. Ridenour prefaced this discussion by stating that the $200 million reserve fund would be used prior to the imposition of another round of reductions. Dr. McComas then stated that provisions for a state employee furlough were removed, although he noted that individual agencies could still impose a mandatory furlough to meet deficits, especially if that action resulted in fewer layoffs. Mr. Ridenour asked Council to remember that the Research and Extension divisions were at greater risk for further reductions, as the $7.3 million raised through tuition increases would not be available to these two areas. Ms. Vargo, representing the Graduate Student Assembly, commented that graduate school admissions are on the decline at this university, princi- pally as a result of increased tuition and reduced stipend levels. Dr. McComas recognized her concerns and indicated that many individuals and constituencies are also troubled by these issues. Dr. Kingston, for example, reported the results of an informal survey in the chemistry department which revealed that Virginia Tech is "dead last" in financial support when tuition is subtracted from stipends. Dr. McComas concluded that this university would continue to work to reverse this adverse funding trend for graduate education. The meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Larry A. Harris Executive Assistant to the President LAH:lg
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/ucm/1991/March+4++1991.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:49 EDT