main | roster | committees | current session | minutes | documents | links | site index

Manoa Faculty Senate Draft Minutes of Mar 15, 2006

March 15, 2006
Law School Classrom #2

Senators present:
Aune, Baker, Bangert, Baroni, Bingham, Bley-Vroman, Bridges, Comcowich, Cox, Diamond, Donegan, Duffy, Fassiotto, Fryer, Fujimoto, Garcia, Grandy, Haig, Hudson, Kent, Lampe, L. Lee, Liebert, Lorenzo, Magaard, Manshardt, Mark, Minatodani, Paull, Port, Raleigh, Ramos, Ramsey, Richardson, Russo, Rutter, Sansone, Scanlon, Shiramizu, Skouge, Staff, Tiles, Valliant, Ward, Weems, Weinstein, Wieczorek, Yates, Yue

Senators absent:
Allsopp, Buenconsejo-Lum, Coimbra, DeMattos, Ericson, Efird, Greene, Halagao, Hawkins, Hemphill, Herring, Kamakawiwoole, Kennedy, Kipnis, M.T. Lee, Lopes, Nitz, Rieder, Roberts Marlow, Sanders, Sipes, Stimson, Yu

Senators excused:
Chang, Decarlo, Duffy, Fritzinger, Inazu, Kazman, Satsuma, Yuen

Chair Bley-Vroman called the meeting to order at 3:08 pm.

1.Approval of February 15, 2006 minutes

The minutes were approved with minor corrections. Please email additional corrections to mstaff@hawaii.edu

2.Chairs report

Devolution Initiative:

Bley-Vroman reminded senators that at the last meeting a resolution was passed calling for a study of the system functions by May 20, and requesting that no candidates be interviewed for any Vice-President positions until the positions are justified. The next day, President McClain announced a devolution initiative, asking for reports from his vice-presidents. The following week Bley-Vroman urged him to make public the memo where he asked that vice-presidents detail what percentage of their work was Manoa focused versus work at the system level, and copies were given to the chancellors. Thus, the Senate's efforts seem to have spurred some action on devolution, though it is too early to gauge success. Experience indicates that if you ask administators what they can give up, you may not get much. Bley-Vroman noted he would be surprised if system executives report that their offices should be smaller. Given this reality, continuing pressure should be brought to bear on the matter.

Permanent presidency appointment without a search

The Regents met and accepted the committee's recommendation to appoint McClain without a search. At the BOR meeting, Bley-Vroman expressed discomfort this happened without an opportunity to comment. Bley-Vroman also asked regents to consider keeping the President's salary in line, with heads of state higher education systems, and not with major university president salaries. Bley-Vroman mentioned that the big house near campus should be occupied by the head of the nearby campus, not the head of the system, and asked that College Hill not be a part of McClain's contract. This matter has not been raised on the senate floor but has been discussed by the SEC. The BOR appeared to be sympathetic, yet College Hill is a part of the deal in the president's contract.

Search committee for Chancellor

The search has been delayed because of the regent's focus on the system presidency. But now, we have a committee, and membership will be made public this week. Bley-Vroman is chair, and appointed faculty include Barry Raleigh, Elizabeth Tam, Ruth Dawson, Ric Trimillos, Denise Antolini, Tom Ramsey. There are three deans: Raleigh, Kudritzki, Dubonowski. Kame`eleihiwa will represent Kuuli`i Council. Committee will meet soon and begin to contact possible search firms.

Public Policy Center/Certificate

The proposal to form a public policy center in Social Sciences and a related proposal for a graduate certificate in pub policy were stalled when the Senate postponed acting due to some comments on the proposal. The committee is still working on these matters and expects to have a clearer report and proposals next month.

Discussion: Garcia (SOEST) asked if it is possible to poll senators before making statements on behalf of the senate. Bley-Vroman responded that the Chair should not represent a view unless he was asked to do it. That's why Bley-Vroman said he couldn't have an opinion on the appointment of McClain?the senate had not considered the matter. With respect to College Hill, he admitted to going out on a limb. We know what's on BOR agenda usually, but in this case it was last minute notice. The BOR actions at this meeting were unusual.

Garcia commented that most faculty check email more than once a day and could often offer comments if asked. Bley-Vroman felt that generally the senate should meet.

Bangert (CBA) mentioned it would be easy to set up a yahoo group with polling and balloting features. Bley-Vroman noted it was worth exploring.

Wieczorek (CTAHR) commented that senate committees have been making decisions by email. Senate by-laws don't currently permit this for the senate as a whole.

Bley-Vroman felt it would require some thought..wearing his parliamentarian hat, he wondered if it would be possible to have a group this size work properly by email since the chair would not be able to check if there was quorum and there would be possible disagreements on when to stop debate.

3.Senate Executive Committee

a. Resolution to move the system administration off the Manoa campus

Jim Tiles presented the resolution, which is presented as a means of applying further pressure toward devolution. The resolution asks the system to move offices away from Manoa. Although the original drafts included more reasons, some were removed.

Colleagues from around the system have been surprised to learn that Manoa administration is quite slim. They did not realize this because of the system presence; the system has stayed close to Manoa, with the effect of blurring the issue.

Other reasons: there is a space shortage at Manoa. If system moved downtown, it would be easier to interact with legislators, businesses, donors.

JT read the resolution:

Resolution on Moving the Hawaii University System offices

Whereas, The present location of the University of Hawai'i System executive offices on the Manoa campus causes colleagues on other campuses to regard the actions of the System as the actions of the University of Hawai'i at Manoa; and

Whereas, The present location of the University of Hawai'i System is an obstacle to the clear separation of function and of lines of authority that is needed for the effective administration of both the University of Hawai'i System and the University of Hawai'i at Manoa; be it therefore

Resolved, That the executive offices of the University of Hawai'i System shall be moved to a location that is separate from any campus of the University System.

Discussion:

Bridges (NS) asked if we want ITS, a very large office, moved out of system?

Tiles stated we need an ITS for Manoa. This resolution won't determine what would get moved, but there may be a resolution regarding ITS in the future.

Raleigh (SOEST) asked if we should add that we want the administrative offices moved? We can't move everything system.

Garcia: commented that we shouldn't be concerned about what the other campuses think.. if we have a strong chancellor that would be more important?

Tiles noted that it does matter what others feel and say since resentment of Manoa is strong. It should help if responsibilities were separated.

Bangert stated that he knows McClain well and interacts with him a great deal. McClain supports moving off campus. His problem is how to pay for it. If collective intelligence can help with this, it's the right thing to do. As a dean he believed in decentralization. He needs more than pressure, he needs ideas, support. It would be best to move the symbolic offices quickly, and other offices like ORS later.

Lampe (NS) added that the resolution gives the sense of the senate, not a blueprint.

Someone asked if other senates are passing similar resolutions?

Tiles noted he and Bley-Vroman could take it to ACCFS next Friday and ask them to support it.

Sansone (SOEST) said he liked the suggestion to put "administrative" in the resolution. To him, it is good that ORS is just down the street. But since Varsity building is empty, wouldn't that be a good place to move?

Bridges noted that MFS should consider that the legislature might move system offices to Hilo.

There were several comments about a possible downtown location. Such a location might symbolize removal of what we're about. There is something special about a university campus.

Tiles note that we are not asking to move Manoa administration away from campus. We only want to move the system administration, the office administering 10 campuses of different types. There are two layers of administration at Manoa, only one of which is proper to have here, with the result that the President sometimes appears to be interfering in what the Chancellor is doing.

Garcia asked, given the needs within the system, what message are we giving to people of Hawaii to ask that resources be used in this way?

Tiles reminded all that we have significant needs on this campus. The resolution though is not really about space but about lines of authority.

Grandy (SS) asked would we be willing to go with this if legislature says fine, but costs come from Manoa?

Ramsey (NS): Manoa now bears some of the system costs. For example, guards for the President come from the Manoa budget. We pay system office electricity, phones. Manoa already subsidizes some aspects of the system.

Weems (CTAHR) suggested that if the concern is not to have our chancellor bullied, the bullier should be removed.

Ramsey noted that the higher education system includes programs such as auto mechanics, vocational rather than university education programs. We need the system to be seen more neutrally-hosting higher education in its many forms. If system offices stays on the Manoa campus, confusion will reign.

Lampe suggested we think about a place such as the UC system, with its offices in Oakland, not at the Berkeley campus. It works quite well - and was moved to this neutral location to make it work better.

Raleigh moved to add "executive" to the resolved (to move the executive offices).

By voice vote, the motion passed unanimously with one abstention.

The question was called and the motion passed.
In favor: 32,
Opposed: 5
Absentions: 3

b. Resolution on a system UARC at Manoa

This resolution was presented by Martha Staff. Since President McClain has proposed keeping the UARC alive as a system entity, the SEC has been asking how a system UARC will impact progress toward devolution, Manoa autonomy, and faculty governance. She noted that it seemed UARC task orders would be carried out on the Manoa campus, by Manoa faculty, yet the Chancellor, Senate and other campus governance entities would play no role in management and oversight. She mentioned it was problematic if we could have a UH President who could override a thoughtful campus decision, and that such an organization would not have the authority and autonomy that WASC suggests is proper. Staff noted that although we can appreciate the President was acting in good faith to find a compromise, that the process left the matter too unclear. She stated there has never been any evidence that faculty or labs from other campuses would be involved, and it made no sense to have a UARC run by the system in this case.

Garcia noted there had been an independent investigation by UHARI and the Senate should refer to this discussion.

Bley-Vroman noted the resolution was not intended to raise substantive issues.

Paull (CTAHR) said that ORS is a system office. Using the same logic, ORS should be changed to campus level.

Lampe commented that ORS is a separate issue but there were many who thought ORS should be moved to Manoa.

Raleigh stated that, unfortunately whether you mean it or not, this looks like a slap at the president. For possibly good reasons, the President agreed with Manoa, but for his own reasons he also proposed an alternative UARC. In this form, the resolution looks like we are annoyed we lost that battle.

Wieczorak wanted to know what are you asking for? Who would administer it?

Tiles said we are asking that the UARC not take place. The resolution was originally titled "a back door UARC." The Senate voted that UARC should be administered nowhere.

Ramsey commented that some might be happy with a UARC if it was an off-campus, private entity and that in the early days that was indeed the concept. If we could we should go back to that concept. He noted he supports this resolution simply because its clear the UARC is embedded at Manoa, and it shouldn't be as a system unit.

Manshardt (CTAHR) asked if it would it be better to redraft a different resolution?

Bley-Vroman stated it would be possible to postpone a month or indefinitely, or to refer to a committee.

Bangert commented he would like to see more in the resolution. He noted that Martha and Jim don't seem to have the same attitude. Martha says it's about process. Jim says he doesn't want UARC at all.

Tiles said that he agreed with Ramsey's comments.

Lampe noted that he agrees with the current resolution in front of us.

A non-senator commented that the host culture was very clear about the acceptability of UARC?it is not acceptable at UHM or elsewhere.

Kent (SS) said he's against any UARC. If we go with the President's plan, it's the worst of all possible worlds. Manoa would have no oversight which makes it worse than what was proposed before. Faculty should also be concerned about the potential of military penetration here.

Keever (non-senator) pointed out that if the senate passes the resolution it will alert McClain that we don't want UARC on this campus.

Raleigh noted that the President has negotiated a 3-year moratorium on classified research. This might change what faculty want.

Lampe proposed that this resolution be postponed since the arguments are about the UARC not the resolution.

Yates (JABSOM) suggested tabling the resolution, since it seems to be a way of rubbing the president's nose in it.

Tiles argued against postponing indefinitely and said he would like it considered next month. Soon, this issue will come up with BOR. We need to keep the resolution warm, and he would prefer that this be addressed today, since it is in sympathy with our previous decision.

Yue (LLL) seconded Tile's comments. The discussion will go on anyway. The larger question is still on the table.

Ramos (CRC) suggested not postponing. The resolution is clear this is about the devolution. This is an example of what we're trying to prevent with respect to Manoa-system confusion.

Vote on postponing indefinitely:
20 in favor,
18 opposed,
1 abstention.

Bley-Vroman commented that if someone wants to bring this up again they must follow the senate's process.

4.New business

a.Senate website information

Manshardt asked if the resolutions were available on line before the meeting?

Bley-Vroman noted that the usual practice is to post senate agenda and materials by the end of the week preceding the meeting. In this case, one of the resolutions was copied twice, with different titles, but this was a mistake. Ideally, the agenda for each senate meeting is set 9 or 10 days before the meeting and items are posted a few days later.

b.Retiree matters

Riggs (retiree) noted that the resolution on retiree participation, passed unanimously at the last meeting doesn't appear yet on the website. Names for retiree committee representation were submitted to the Chair. Bley-Vroman confirmed he'd received the list of names, and it will be acted on by SEC next Monday. He promised to check on posting the retiree resolution.

c. More on UARC

Bley-Vroman commented that the UARC dilemma has been difficult, personally and institutionally. He's grateful for the civility, at least superficially, that Senate has had. The Senate made a decision. The chancellor said something very close to what we said, emphatically rejecting the UARC, but left open the possibility of having a UARC type research off campus. As it stands, the President's proposal is unclear, but it had two distinctly different aspects: a 3-year moratorium on classified research and a proposal that it be administratively housed at system level.

A speaker (?) asked if we were now going to do nothing more. We voted against UARC but now we seem to be choosing to lay low.

Forman (non-senator) had suggested during Congress that we need a faculty review. It could be done in the first 3 years of the UARC.

Bley-Vroman inquired if this was a suggestion that we should ask to what extent do researchers have the right to accept funding from anywhere. Should a review cover classified or proprietary research?

Wieczorek noted that we just voted to postpone the last resolution indefinitely?can we now say we don't like the system doing a UARC?

Tiles commented that if the Manoa faculty and facilities are involved, this goes against where we are going with devolution.

Bley-Vroman said the UARC revealed a cultural divide in the Senate. We formerly had many bickering factions, but the split is more serious here.

Kent: The anti-UARC side will be going to court, will pull out all stops on this matter

A speaker (?) noted there are real splits but that's ok. Our role in the Pacific basin is very important. We need to ask what role besides a military one, can we play? What is the role of the university? Our brochures use cultural symbolism on every page. What does this mean? We talk about nuts and bolts and not enough about the bigger issues.

Bley-Vroman adjourned the meeting at 4:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted
Martha Staff
Secretary, Manoa Faculty Senate


main | roster | committees | current session | minutes | documents | links | site index

University of Hawaii | UH Manoa | UH Links | UHPA | Board of Regents