�鶹��Ѱ�����

The Arts and Sciences Council (ASC), 3:30 pm – 5:00 pm, Zoom

Representatives Present: Mithi Mukherjee (HIST), Andrew Cowell (LING), Sebastian Casalaina-Martin (MATH), Juan Herrero-Senes (SPAN), Angelica Lawson (ETHN/CINE), Stephen Mojzsis (GEOL), Mike Zerella (RAPS), Robert Rupert (PHIL), Rebecca Wartell (JWST), David Stock (EBIO), Michela Ardizzoni (FRIT), Cecilia Pang (THDN), Leslie Irvine (SOCY), Julie Lundquist (ATOC), Jennifer Schwartz (HONR), William Taylor (ANTH), Mara Jill Goldman (GEOG), Lorraine M. Bayard de Volo (WGST), Beverly Weber (GSLL), Annje Wiese (HUMN), Zachary Kilpatrick (APPM), Robert Kuchta (BCHM), Matthias Richter (ALC), Carol Shiue (ECON), Anthony Abiragi (PWR), Francoise Duressé (AAH), Tanja Cuk (CHEM), Deborah Whitehead (RLST), Christina Meyers-Denman (SLHS), Colleen Lyons (ENVS), John Keller (APS)

Representatives not present: John Gibert (CLAS), Julie Carr (ENGL), Janet Casagrand (IPHY), Shelley Copley (MCDB), Paul Romatschke (PHYS), Lewis Harvey (PSYC), James White

Also in attendance: Kenneth Hopping (Faculty Affairs Director, A&S)

The meeting is called to order at 3:35 pm.

Chair’s Remarks

The Chair welcomes new members and thanks former chair for help with the transition.

The Chair points out that the ASC currently has no liaisons for the College Ethics Committee and the Appeals Committee on Academic Rules and Policies right now.  We are looking for liaisons to appoint to these committees.

The Chair would like to take this time to highlight a few of the important issues coming up for the ASC.

The provost has sent out an e-mail concerning the importance of the restructuring of faculty governance. The report made for the provost has recommended repeatedly that the Faculty of Arts & Sciences vote on any changes in faculty governance.

The college’s bylaws or rule book should be put into one, centralized place, which it currently does not have.

Individual ASC committees are working on ongoing projects, such as the examination of the college’s role in online education.

ASC administrator informs ASC chair that interim Dean White will not be able to make today’s meeting.

The Chair would like to align the ASC’s practices with its bylaws. The executive committee voted last week to limit the membership of the ASC to what the bylaws state, meaning representatives from outside organizations are no longer attending meetings. The only ex-officio members are the interim dean and the chair of the Boulder Faculty Assembly.

Budget Committee Recommendations

The chair of ASC’s Budget Committee begins speaking. He explains that there are nine members on the budget committee, three from each division. The Budget Committee’s former chair has stayed on the committee. The committee works closely with the dean (he attends all meetings) and the CFO for the college. The committee is an advisory to the dean, meaning they can make recommendations but the dean does not have to accept those recommendations.

The committee has been asked by the interim dean to take a look at different aspects of the budget and see where cuts can be made for the college. These cuts are likely to be semi-permanent or permanent. Enrollment at �鶹��Ѱ�����is down, particularly freshman enrollment. There is a 9% loss in expected income. The Budget Chair points out that usually, the second year of economic problems produce the largest financial issues.

$10 million is the number being used in the college right now for how much needs to be cut. This means we are facing severe, permanent shifts in funding. We are looking at a permanent reduction in the size of the faculty.

The budget document that was previously passed out to the ASC by the chair is not up to date. Those recommendations will not get the college to 5%, which needs to be in addition to the campus wide 5% already taken. Retirements are not as high as they had hoped.

The suggestions are ranked in the order the budget committee thinks they should be taken. If money does later become available, those increases should go back to backfill these losses in the order they occurred.

This document was presented to the executive committee during the summer. The ASC Chair sent it to the interim dean, who has already implemented #4, #1, #2 of the recommendations.

All of these suggestions are cuts to central funding, not to individual departments. They recommend remaining committed to existing contractual obligations.

ASC Budget Committee Chair opens the floor up for discussion.

The representative from CINE and ETHN says that one of the faculty members from their department suggested freezing the new computer program. The Budget Chair explains that this would not do much for the millions they are trying to cut. Also, this program is run by the campus, not the college.

Another member asks for clarity on the startup packages. The Budget Chair explains they suggest cutting only part of this for new faculty going forward, not current faculty.

The same member asks for clarity on the operating budget and what it includes. The Budget Chair explains that this refers to the inviting of speakers and pay for general office expenses.

The APS representative says that one of the faculty members in APS expressed concern over the differentiations between various disciplines, as far as what a start-up package looks like. The faculty member believes there is an issue of competitiveness with other universities (especially in the sciences) and there may not be a “once size fits all” solution to cutting startup packages. The Budget Chair recognizes that the cut would disproportionately affect the sciences. The budget committee is very aware of this but do not have a perfect solution right now.

Another member asks if the hiring freeze will affect diversity hires for the year. The Budget Chair explains that this is not technically a hiring freeze, but a massive hiring slow down. We are still trying to do some diversity hiring. The provost is skimming money off retirements and putting that into a fund for diversity hiring. The funds for this is coming out of the Provost’s office, not Arts & Sciences.

The representative from GEOL says the GEOL department suggests sport coaches taking bigger pay cuts, but then verified that they have already taken a 10% cut. The same department also suggested raising overhead costs. The same member wonders if there are any assets that the college could sell, such as land. The Budget Chair explains that there is no direct control over what the campus does. Selling land would be a chancellor decision & the Board of Regents would have to approve.

The ASC Chair says that some lecturers in PHIL are concerned that if operating budgets are cut, their pay will be cut. PHIL has supplemented some lecturer salaries with operating budget; this could be a significant issue for the college if other departments supplement their lecturer salaries like this. Some faculty in PHIL expressed concern with the priority of the list. If we have to choose between restoring suggestions 4-6 or going back to regular salaries, salary restoring is more important. The Budget Chair explains that this document is based on the assumption that the salaries would be restored.

Another member asks for clarification on the $50 million state cut. Is this across the �鶹��Ѱ�����system or �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder? The Budget Chair believes it is for the �鶹��Ѱ�����System, but is not sure. [The Budget Chair later corrects himself in the chat box. The cut is for �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder]

There is a motion from Leslie Irvine to endorse these budget-cutting recommendations. Stephen Mojzsis seconds the motion. The ASC Chair asks for a show of hands for voting. There are 23 in favor of endorsing the recommendations, and three abstain. The motion is passed.

Faculty Affairs Committee

The ASC Chair moves on to the issue of the Faculty Affairs Committee. There was a vote in December to create the FAC as an ad hoc committee of the ASC for three years, but ASC bylaws state ad hoc committees can be created for either six months or one year. The Chair proposes for someone to move to amend the motion from last December to one year instead of three years. He clarifies that an ad hoc committee can last indefinitely, but needs to be voted on once every year.

There is a motion from Leslie Irvine to amend the motion. The motion is seconded by Juan-Herrero-Senes. There is a unanimous vote in favor of amending the motion.

Faculty Governance and College Restructuring

The ASC Chair explains that last academic year, there was a report made on faculty governance and restructuring of the college. The former ASC Chair served on the committee that created this report for the Provost.

The Chair shares an image from the report of the proposed faculty governance reorganization. The proposed restructure will contain three different components:

1. The Arts & Sciences Faculty Senate (ASFS) would have standing committees on personnel, curriculum, college budget issues
2. The Chairs & Directors Councils would work with the divisional deans on school-specific matters. The report flags one potential problem with this: chairs & directors might be seen as being too close to the deans.
3. ASFS Exec. Committee would consist of chairs from each division and chairs from ASFS. They would act as an advisory to the executive dean, with issues such as planning and agenda setting.

The Chair would like everyone to make it clear to the members of their unit that faculty input is necessary in this restructuring.

The Chair opens the floor for discussion and thoughts.

A member urges all to think about how much power the faculty have in policymaking. In this member’s opinion, there is not much power since their recommendations can be ignored. The committee that worked on this report thought it was important to enhance faculty power, but this does not appear much in the document.

The same member points out that the provost and deans put a lot of stock in what chairs and directors say, and this creates a disconnect between the administration and the rest of faculty. The ASC must be extremely cautious of any changes to governance structure that may dilute the role of the faculty.

The Chair asks if there is any other business to be discussed. No comments. The Chair says he will re-send documents discussed during today’s meeting.

Meeting is adjourned at 4:49 pm.