Manoa Faculty Senate Committee on
Administration and Budget Meeting Minutes
May 11, 2009, 12 noon, Hawaii Hall 208

Present:  Ross Christensen (chair), Shirley Daniel, Bob McHenry, David Duffy, David Chin, Matt McGranaghan, Judith Inazu, Dave Sanders, CN Lee and Mary Tiles UHM Faculty Senate liaison

Excused:  Denise Antolini, Tricia Wright

Invited:  Vice Chancellor Cutshaw

The meeting was called to order at 12:05 p.m. 

Minutes of the April 20 meeting were approved as corrected.

VC Cutshaw provided an update of the budget workgroup and the results of the legislature.  Total cuts are $30 million, and there is an expectation that $14 million from the stimulus package will be available to mitigate this.  However, the use of stimulus funds are the prerogative of the Governor.  There is also an issue of using the stimulus funds this fiscal year with so little time left before June 30.  It is unclear how the State will cover the current year budget shortfall.    

There has been some discussion by the governor and UHPA about furloughs.  However, there is nothing settled, and it is unknown whether there will be a contract in place or offer on the table before year end. 

VC Cutshaw pointed out that, unlike the budget cuts of the 1990s which were smaller and incremental cuts over a number of years, the proposed cuts this time are large and all in one year.  It is not clear how we can adjust so quickly. 

Chancellor Hinshaw will be sending out a memo to the campus about the prioritization process.  There were programs on the investment side and on the diminish side that seemed clear candidates for adjustments in priorities.  But there are lots of programs in the middle, highlighting the need for additional meaningful prioritization.  It is not anticipated that anything significant on this matter will occur over the summer.  The committee discussed the strengths and weaknesses of the prioritization process and how it might be improved going forward.  More consistency across programs and analyses will be needed. 

The committee discussed the reorganization process with VC Cutshaw.  She noted that the reorganization process was revised a few years ago so that administrators could approve reorganizations that occur up to 2 levels below their authority.  After these policy changes, UHM tried to put together a flowchart and checklist to guide the process.  However, given the issues with the A&S and the PBRC reorganization, there needs to be a better way to get something done.  All agree that the goal is to get a process that works. 

The committee discussed what types of reorganizations that the faculty senate would like consultation on.  She cited examples of reorganizations within facilities management as one that might not be of concern to the faculty.  However, the committee indicated that the quality of facilities services has a significant impact on faculty, so it should not assume that consultation would not be needed in these types of cases.  VC Cutshaw noted that she is concerned that consultation be not only full but also timely.  The committee discussed the use of technology and websites similar to those used by federal agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Park Service to get public input and comment on proposed rules and policy changes.  The committee discussed various steps in the process, lengths of time for open comment periods, and levels of consultation and approval, responsibilities and documentation of communications.  The committee recommended that the appropriate Dean/Director or administrator initiating the reorganization should be responsible for communicating with the affected faculty and units, and that this communication should be documented in the system developed.  VC Cutshaw will work to get a website and related process set up to standardize the announcement, comments, and communication of the consultation process for reorganizations and will come back to the committee and the SEC in a few weeks to review it. 

The committee discussed structures for input into the budget process.  Chair Christensen suggested that a permanent budget committee, with similar composition as the current ad hoc budget work group would be desirable.  If the committee were permanent and more focused on planning, then more transparency and communication could occur.  VC Cutshaw concurred that such a larger group would be helpful going forward.  The committee noted that the chairs of appropriate faculty senate committees, such as CAB, CAPP and Research, would be good participants in the permanent budget group.  The committee asked VC Cutshaw to propose the composition and the charge of the committee and bring it to CAB at the next meeting. 

The next CAB meeting will be June 8.  Chair Christensen will schedule a room. 

Chair Christensen gave a summary of the Advance that he and the SEC and other committee chairs attended with the UHM administration.  The topics discussed included the need to review the various ad hoc committees, the update of the strategic plan, and the reorganization process.

The meeting adjourned at 2:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Shirley J. Daniel