2006-2007 FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

Thursday, February 22, 2007
Foothill Suite, University Union
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.

MEETING AGENDA

OPEN FORUM

INFORMATION ITEM

Background: Effective Fall 2007 there are several registration changes in the works. Items already approved are: 1) Earlier registration beginning in late April for continuing students; 2) Post payment of registration fees; 3) graduating seniors registering for up to 21 units; and 4) Transfer students registering at Orientation as freshman do now.

Another proposal is to change the class level order in which students register.

Currently, continuing freshman register right after seniors, before juniors and sophomores. Students enroll in the following priority order:

1. Disabled students
2. Students in retention programs or other special categories [1]
3. Graduating seniors [2]
4. Freshmen attending orientation (fall semester only)
5. Seniors [3]
6. Freshmen [3]
7. Classified graduate and Credential graduate students
8. Juniors [3]
9. Sophomores [3]
10. Second bachelor degree and Unclassified graduate students

The proposal is to have all continuing students register in descending class level order which means continuing freshman register after sophomores. 

1. Disabled students
2. Students in retention programs or other special categories [1]
3. Graduating seniors [2]
4. Seniors [3]
5. Classified graduate and Credential graduate students
6. Juniors [3]
7. Sophomores [3]
8. Freshmen [3]
9. Second bachelor degree and Unclassified graduate students

NOTES.

[1] The retention programs or other special categories are as follows:

• Student government officers and FastTrack program enrollees
• Debate team and President's scholars
• Athletic Training Education
• MESA Engineering Program
• Intercollegiate Athletics
• Marching band
• Alliance for minority participation
• Cheerleaders
• Blended liberal arts program

[2] Graduating seniors must have submitted a graduation application by the deadline. Priority is granted only once. Second bachelor's degree candidates move to the graduating seniors slot during the semester in which they file to receive graduating priority.

[3] Within each class level, students are scheduled according to total units completed, beginning with those students with the highest number of units completed being scheduled first.

The retention programs or other special categories are as follows:

Student government officers	220
Debate team	12
Athletic Training Education	12
MESA Engineering Program	260 +/-
Intercollegiate Athletics	350 to 450
Marching band	70 to 90
Alliance for minority participation	20 to 30
Cheerleaders	15 to 20
Blended liberal arts program	100 +/-
Honors Program (2006-07)	60
Residence Hall RA's	25 +/-
	1144 to 1279
% of Students Registering	Just under 5%

CONSENT ACTION

Student Fee Advisory Committee
Anne Bradley, LIB, 2008

ASI Elections Complaint Committee
Jordan Halgas, 2008

ASI Appellate Council
John La Rocco, 2008

Village Advisory Group
Carolyn Gibbs, Department of Design, A&L
Karen Hansen, Civil Engineering-Construction Management, E&CS
Michael Schmandt, Geography, NS&M

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the following program change proposals:

• Department of Philosophy - Philosophy Major Honors Program

• Department of Design - Interior Design

• Department of Art - Art Studio (Art Education)

• Department of Computer Science - Certificate Program in Managing Information on the World Wide Web (CSC 8)

• Department of Computer Science - Certificate Program in Managing Information on the World Wide Web (CSC 22)

Details of the change proposals can be found at Attachment A.

REGULAR AGENDA

CONTINUED DISCUSSION: SECTION 6.06 OF UNIVERSITY ARTP POLICY - (3:15-4:00)
(This is the third in a series of discussions)

On November 30, 2006, the Senate heard a presentation by David Wagner, Vice President, Human Resources, on the major changes embodied in FS 05-69 (2005-2006 Faculty Senate). A summary of this presentation can be found at Attachment B. The Senate previously discussed the matter on November 2, 2006.

The following background information is provided:

On September 28, 2006 - The Faculty Senate approved the following motion:

FS 06-125/Ex.

AFFIRMATION OF FACULTY REFERENDA ON FS 05-69/EX. - UARTP DOCUMENT - AMEND SECTION 6.06.D

The Executive Committee recommends the following motion:

The Faculty Senate affirms the results of the ballot measure calling for the rescission of FS 05-69, Ex., and requests that the President rescind the changes specified in FS 05-69, Ex., and commits itself to a series of discussions on the underlying substantive issues in the Fall 2006 semester. The Executive Committee will provide to the Senate a schedule of these discussions.

Carried.

Note: pertinent background materials can be found in the agenda of September 28, 2006.

Section 6.06.D.1 of the University ARTP Policy states ". . . to assure itself that it (the department) is providing equality of treatment and equal employment opportunity to all applicants . . . "

FS 05-69 amended Section 6.06.D of the UARTP Policy. The amendments' main themes have been summarized as follows (with the relevant sections of the Policy annotated):

Major changes:

Who can serve as Affirmative Action/Equal Employment Opportunity Representative (AA/EEOR):

1. AA/EEOR may be probationary faculty (if dept allows probationary faculty to serve on hiring committees) (D.1.A.)
2. AA/EEOR is voting member of hiring committee (D.1.A.)
3. Dept chair cannot be the AA/EEOR (D.1.E.)

Duties:

1. Elaboration of duties (D.2. D – F)
2. Review of national availability data to develop recruitment plan (D.2.D.iii.)
3. Written affirmation of no inappropriate action (D.2.G.)
4. Applicant flow data assessed to recommend strategies for future searches (D.2.H.)

Training:

1. Training for all faculty in the search process (D.3.A.)
2. Without training cannot participate in search (D.3.B.)
3. Bifurcated training (D.3.A.)
4. Training required every 3 years (D.3.C.)

Amendments:

1. Amendments were not drafted by the UARTP Committee

The following timeline of events is provided:

2005-2006 FACULTY SENATE ACTIONS

• November 17, 2005 – first reading
• December 8, 2005 – second reading. Second reading was tabled until February 2, 2006
• February 2, 2006 – FS 05-69/Ex. approved by the Senate.
• March 2, 2006 – FS 06-80/Flr. - MOTION TO SUBMIT FS 05-69/EX. (UARTP DOCUMENT - AMEND SECTION 6.06.D) TO A REFERENDUM OF THE FACULTY defeated by the Senate.

 REFERENDA 

• March 7, 2006 – notice of intent to seek signatures of faculty to take FS 05-69/Ex. (to rescind FS 05-69/Ex.) to referenda filed with the Faculty Senate.
• April 3, 2006 – the sufficient number of signatures to take FS 05-69/Ex. to referenda received by the Faculty Senate.
• April 24-May 5, 2006 – balloting occurs. The referenda was approved 86 (yes = rescind) to 61 (no = do not rescind).
• May 9, 2006 – the Faculty Senate transmits the voting results to President Gonzalez for his information and action.

 PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS 

• February 28, 2006 – President approves provisions of FS 05-69/Ex.
• August 31, 2006 – President requests clarification from the Senate.

 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS 

• September 19, 2006 – Faculty Senate’s Executive Committee, in response to President Gonzalez’s memo of August 31, 2006, places FS 06-125/Ex. on the September 28, 2006 Faculty Senate agenda, a resolution affirming the results of the faculty referenda on FS 05-69/Ex., and requesting rescission.
• September 19, 2006 - Faculty Senate’s Executive Committee, in response to President Gonzalez’s memo of August 31, 2006, agrees to place a resolution on a Fall 2006 Senate agenda to re-consider the provisions of FS 05-69/Ex., thus starting a campus dialogue on the issue, as called for in the Spring 2006 initiative.

NEXT STEPS

• introduction of a motion containing the language of FS 05-69 verbatim
• introduction of another motion or set of motions that amends Section 6.06.D of the UARTP Policy
• other?

FIRST READING

WHEREAS	The Faculty Senate of Sacramento State endorses the resolution approved by the Academic Senate of the California State University “Importance of Settling the Contract Between the CSU and CFA"; and
WHEREAS	the faculty of CSU Sacramento has primary responsibility for the academic policy, curriculum and academic standards of the campus; and the Faculty Senate has a responsibility to advocate policies which will improve the educational quality of campus programs; and
WHEREAS	the quality of academic programs and long-term health of the institution depends on the recruitment of highly qualified teacher/scholars to CSU campuses, their retention and continuing professional support, and this recruitment and retention requires remunerating them commensurate with their training, professional status and national norms, and treating them with the respect due co-governors of the institution; and
WHEREAS	since July, 2002, faculty have been granted only a 3.5% General Salary Increase while the California Consumer Price Index has risen 15.8%, as the Chancellors Office has effectively subjected the faculty carrying the heaviest teaching loads in the country to a pay cut which reduces their salaries 18% below those of comparable campuses nationally (as determined by CPEC, the California Post Secondary Education Commission); and
WHEREAS	California Faculty Association (CFA), the legal collective bargaining representative for CSU faculty, has negotiated in good faith with the CSU Chancellors Office for 20 months, while the Chancellors Office has refused to consider proposals to raise faculty salaries to parity with the rising cost-of-living, provide for Service Salary Increases and remedy salary inversion for junior faculty; and
WHEREAS	CFA and Chancellors Office have now reached the final statutory stage of bargaining known as fact-finding, without progress in the previous stage of mediation; and
WHEREAS	CFA must prepare for the possibility that after the fact-finder’s report Chancellor Reed may take the extreme step of attempting to impose terms and conditions of employment, which would violate the spirit of shared governance and produce turmoil and demoralization on the twenty-three campuses of the CSU; therefore, be it
RESOLVED	that the Faculty Senate of Sacramento State affirms its support for the CFA’s bargaining objectives; urges Chancellor Reed to return to the bargaining table and adequately address matters of faculty compensation, workload and professional growth and development, and calls on faculty to help insure the conditions of a healthy, vibrant university and realize the University’s commitment to principles of shared governance; and be it further
RESOLVED	that this resolution be distributed to the Sacramento State President, Provost and other administrators, all CSU Academic Senates, the CSUS chapter and other chapters of the CFA, the CSU Chancellor and Trustees, and local media.

INFORMATION

1. Faculty Senate's home page:  www.csus.edu/acse, or, from the CSUS home page, click on Faculty and Staff, then Faculty Senate.
2. For new Senators:  "TOP TEN THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW AS A FACULTY SENATOR".
3. Meeting procedures

4. Schedule of Faculty Senate meetings:

March 1, 2007 - Senate meets March 8, 2007 - tentative March 15, 2007 - tentative March 20, 2007 - "Access to Excellence" meeting, Ballroom III, 1:00-4:00 March 22, 2007 - tentative March 29, 2007 - no Senate meeting: spring recess April 5, 2007 - 1st organizational meeting of the 2007-08 Senate, 3:00-3:30; 2006-07 Senate meets, 3:30-5:00 April 12, 2007- tentative

April 19, 2007 - 2nd organizational meeting of the 2007-08 Senate, 3:00-3:30; 2006-07 Senate meets, 3:30-5:00 April 24, 2007 - Outstanding Teaching, University and Community Service, and Lifetime Achievement Award for Community Service reception April 26, 2007 - tentative May 3, 2007 - tentative May 10, 2007 - tentative