CCSU Faculty Senate
Minutes—April 21, 2003
VAC 105 3:00 PM
Abadiano, Altieri, Austad, Benfield, Best, Blitz, Brann, Braverman, Carter-Lowery, Casella, Conway, Crundwell, Duquette, Fried, Gallagher, Gilmore, Halloran, Hedlund, Hensley, Kleinert, Knox, Kurkjian, Leake, Marlor, Martin, Martin-Troy, Mezvinsky, O’Connell, Osterreich, Rajaravivarma, Resitarits, Saginelli, Sarisley, Seider, Sevitch, Terry, Terezakis, Thornton, Williams, Wolff.
Ex Officio Members: Provost Bartelt, Snr V.P Demos, Deans Whitford, Lemma, Root.
Carol Jones (Rep. Of Arts and Sci Dean)
Guests: CJ Jones (Athletic Dir), Sal Cintorino (Ahletics), R Bachoo (Admin)
President Best opened the meeting at 3.05
Motion to approve Minutes of 03/17/03
(i) President Best indicated that the first Faculty Senate sponsored lecture series was to be given by Professor Norton Mezvinsky and entitled:
“Are Islamic, Jewish and Christian fundamentalisms obstacles to peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict?”
and would be at 2.00p.m. April 29 2003 in Founders Hall at 2.00p.m.
In recognition of Professor Mezvinsky’s recent appointment as CSU Professor, senate members gave him a sustained ovation.
(ii) President Best also announced the Interfaith Passover Seder for 6 p.m. April 22 in the constitution room. RSVP’s are requested if attending
b. AAUP Report. Sen. Austad
(i) Balloting has now closed for the ratification vote on the tentative agreement on wage concessions. Results will be sent by e-mail as soon as ballots are counted.
(ii) Dr Walsh was due to attend today’s meeting but owing to his fathers illness he could not attend. He will however attend our next meeting if requested.
(iii) The local AAUP/CSU election is now in process. Ballots are out and all are encouraged to vote.
Sen. Crundwell: What is the usual number of ballots received?
Sen. Austad: Usually in the one hundred range...unfortunately not a lot
Sen. Halkin: If a member does not care whether his/her vote is anonymous and will identify themselves then voting numbers may increase as at present voting procedures to effect anonymity make the process cumbersome.
Sen. Braverman handed out the senate –only ballots.
Nominations for all committees were sought from the floor. There being none:
Motion: to close nominations Leake/Halkin
Senators voted; results at next Faculty senate meeting.
- Senate Committee Reports
a. Dr Pudlinski presented the curriculum Committee report
Motion to accept Curriculum Committee Report Wolff/Blitz
b. Academic Standards Committee. Matt Warshauer
These items were deferred for a full package presentation at May meeting
c. UBPC Sen. Blitz
Senator Blitz focused on the recent solicitation of opinions from all university staff and faculty for cuts/reductions/savings. They fall into three categories:
1. Cuts Number of administrators (no names forthcoming)
Reduction of services, especially duplicative services
Air Conditioning over weekends
2. What must be Saved Faculty lines
Recruit high achievers (through marketing)
Strengthen Honors class
3. Additions... Increase fees for outside user groups
Savings on technology
Number of parking tickets (no increase in $ penalty)
A full report (excluding names of those submitting) will be attached to the next agenda.
Sen. Braverman: Where does the recently announced additional shortfall of $ 875,000 factor in?
Snr. VP Demos: This must be found from the current year.
- Unfinished Business
There was none.
- New Business
Sen. Sevitch presented his motion introduced at the last meeting. As introduction and explanation he noted:
· All departments have experienced reductions
· In the 1993 catalogue there were 26 members in the Athletic department
In the 2003 catalogue there were 67 members of the Athletic department...a 153% increase in ten years
· The handout (attached) suggests that there will be no savings by going to Division 2 and this is not believable.
· Athletics should not be a sacred cow, all have to share in the cuts
· There are only two types of Division 1 athletic programs in the US. Those that make money (e.g. Sen. Sevitch noted that his Alma Mater The University of Indiana was one) and those that do not (e.g. CCSU); this subsidy amounts to over $ 2 million.
· The Basketball team have and can “afford” their own councilor
· Why must Central even have a football team, particularly when they have rarely had a winning season and now there is a competing team and stadium for 67,000 people 10 miles to the east?
· If we have made draconian cuts to academics why not athletics?
Whereas the CCSU budget has been cut significantly, and
Whereas the state's economy is deteriorating, and
Whereas Connecticut is a small state that can only support one public, Division I sports program,
Be it resolved, that the Faculty Senate recommends that CCSU's Athletics Program be downgraded from Division I to Division II, as is the case at our sister institution, SSCU.
Made by: Sevitch/Halloran
Discussion on the motion:
Sen. Blitz: This is bad policy making. Despite the evidence Sen. Sevitch presents, Connecticut can support more than one Division 1 School. As presented it is not collegial to coaches who have not been consulted nor does it reflect student views, one of which was expressed in the student newspaper completely disagreeing with this motion.
An example of proper process was the online CSU resolution that went to the UPB, the Board of Trustees, and a motion was passed on the basis of the facts, passed to the technology committee of Senate, back to the Faculty Senate for a resolution, which the President signed. In this case we have not heard from the University Athletic Board, the UPBC, students, or coaches. As such it is policy by individual fiat.
Sen. Austad: Reiterated all that Sen. Blitz said and as Union President noted it was her duty to hear or ensure coaches are heard from. Moreover Draconian cuts in Athletics will not solve the university’s budget problems. Finally she questioned the source and veracity of much of Sen. Sevitch’s data.
Sen. Gilmore: Wanted to know what Athletics have already cut?
Sen. Fried: Noted outstanding questions of only visible cuts? Are the cuts appropriate? When have cuts been made? Were the cuts fair? Valid? Relevant? All these questions are unanswered in her mind.
Sen. Carter: Indicated just last year three programs were discontinued. Indeed the issue amongst schools is how to get into division one (given the NCAA moratorium on new entries). Finally he referred members to the sheet he had distributed.
Sen. Oostereich: noted she had sat on such a decision making body in the past and that after a year of deliberation on an issue that recommended no change...change occurred three weeks later. In essence the decision is not ours.
Sen. Halloran: noted that with a budget of $ 3.1 million the athletic department % of the total University budget is closer to 2.5%
Sen. Halkin: Is there indeed a cost savings going from Division 1 to division 2? Are uniforms still not required?
Sen. Sevitch: The three sports cut last year were cut for other reasons (gender equity etc). However it still does not answer the question: Do we need a football team?
Sen. Martin-Troy: noted for the record the sports cut were men’s & women’s tennis and men’s swimming.
There were no votes in support of the motion
There were 4 abstentions
Motion to adjourn
The Senate adjourned at 3.45 p.m