FEBRUARY 10, 2004
Present: Chair Daley, Parliamentarian Corbin, Provost Oblinger, Senators Allen, Batra, Beasley, Bernhard, Bitting, Branson, Brownie, Bruck, DeLuca, Estes, Fahmy, Fikry, Griffin, Hooper, Jasper, Kasal, Khosla, Krotee, Matthews, McRae, Middleton, Misra, Peacock, Smith, Stoddard, Tetro, Tyler, Warren
Excused: Secretary Weiner; Past Chair Carter; Senator Headen
Absent: Senators Atkin, Brothers, Hammerberg, Honeycutt, Lucovsky, Rice
Visitors: Benny Benton, Bulletin Editor; Charles Duncan, Senior Staff – Technician; Clare Kristofco, Executive Assistant to the Chancellor; Barbara Barrett, News & Observer; Monica Leach, CHASS; Jo Allen, Interim Vice Provost, Undergraduate Affairs; Judy Peel, Associate Vice Provost; Thomas Younce, Director, Campus Police; David Rainer, Associate Vice Chancellor, Environmental Health & Public Safety
1. Call to Order
Chair Dennis Daley called the tenth meeting of the fiftieth session of the North Carolina State University Faculty Senate to order at 3:00 p.m.
2. Welcome and Announcements
Chair Daley welcomed Senators and Guests.
Chair Daley announced that the President of the University of North Carolina System offered bonuses to experienced Chancellors. Chancellor Fox immediately donated her bonus to the university. The Chancellor at UNC Chapel Hill declined the bonus and one other Chancellor since then has seen the wisdom of donating his or her bonus to the university. Chair Daley congratulated the Chancellor on her actions.
Chair Daley noted that Bruce Mallette has accepted a position as Managing Director of the Statistic Survey in the Computing Sciences Division at the Research Triangle Institute.
Chair Daley announced that two candidates will be elected to run as Chair-elect of the Faculty, at the next Faculty Senate meeting.
Chair Daley announced that nominations are being requested for the Holladay Medal for Excellence.
Chair Daley announced that rave reviews were given to the Emerging Issues Forum.
3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 9, January 13, 2004
The minutes were approved unanimously.
4. Remarks on the Safety Task Force Report
Associate Vice Chancellor David Rainer stated that the task force report was created in December. They had a lot of representation across campus and received a lot of good input, which worked to their benefit and advantage because it gave them an opportunity to hear what people had to say.
Chancellor Fox appointed the Campus Safety Task Force in September. The task force was put together to look at various issues related to safety across campus.
Rainer stated, “One of the most important things that we did was solicit input from constituents across the campus community to hear what people had to say about safety on campus. We also want to provide communication links back to campus. We wanted to have a dialog. We did not want this to be just a conversation that occurred among the committee members. We wanted to provide feedback on allocation of security resources.
Based on the presentation that we made to the Chancellor’s Executive Committee, the Chancellor wanted to make sure that everyone had an opportunity to see what was in the report and to provide feedback and comments. We are here today to solicit feedback and comments from you.
The Composition of the Task Force
We are a diverse campus. We wanted representation from across campus. We had June Brotherton from the Library, Monica Leach’s office, Damien Shay from Centennial Campus, two students on campus, and Dennis Jackson, McKimmon Center, Steve Straus from Political Science and we also had an individual who works with organizations across the United States, helping to build safety and security programs.
We have a lot of resources on campus and we did not want to ignore the resources that we had, so we solicited information and feedback from people across campus. We invited the Director of Transportation to talk to us because Transportation recently did a security survey. Risk Management Association is the professional organization that helps primarily pharmaceutical companies to develop corporate security programs. We wanted to use their expertise to get trend information.
We wanted to look at our campus police statistics very closely. We in campus police believe that we have a safe campus based on crime statistics so we wanted to make sure of how we were presenting statistics, how we were looking at the statistics and we wanted other people’s comments on those statistics. Chief Younce and I made a presentation on the status quo. For those of you who may not be aware of it, there are building construction guidelines that now currently exist. They are available online from the University Architect’s homepage. We are applying these construction guidelines and standards to new facilities that are currently under construction. All architects who are designing facilities for the university are bound by the construction guidelines and I find that a lot of faculty and staff don’t know that the guidelines exist. They are very useful. They talk about compartmentalizing buildings, card access for buildings and other things that significantly enhance our institutional security.
The task force tried to break down its task into four components. One of the things that we found when we started looking at crime statistics particularly across campus was that they were not necessarily being put to good use. We found that out of the 29 assaults against students that occurred last year, 90% of those assaults occurred between students who knew each other and 75% of the assaults occurred when alcohol and drugs were involved. I have talked to Student Affairs and they have placed ads in the Technician to look at that issue. That is just an example of how we tried to compartmentalize our tasks.
I do want to focus on this particular recommendation because I think it is one that presents a lot of challenges across campus because of our open community. When you look at the campus crime statistics we find that the greatest incidents of crime is theft and theft is generally a crime of opportunity. All of our buildings are open. We at campus police do encourage groups that we talk to that if someone is in your building and you do not know them, ask “May I help you? “ or ask for an identification badge. We find very often that people do not carry an ID badge or drivers license, particularly students. We have several classes of people on campus now. Environmental Health people wear an ID badge, Campus Police wear an ID badge, facilities people wear an ID badge, computer support people are supposed to be wearing an ID badge. Everyone at the College of Veterinary Medicine wears an ID badge. The badges are color-coded. Based on these colors the faculty knows what parts of the hospital the students may or may not have access to. The task force felt that it was very important that we at least ask people to carry an ID badge on their person. The other thing that we wanted to do was to establish guidelines through Human Resources and through Student Affairs that adopt guidelines for you to ask somebody for a badge. One thing I am particularly concerned about is profiling. We have a lot of people walking around who do belong in our buildings who might look strange. There is a right way to ask for a badge and there is a wrong way to ask for a badge. There is a right way to stop a person and there is a wrong way to stop a person. One of the things we discussed was, yes we do want people to carry an ID badge with them but we want to develop guidelines about having use that as a tool to benefit us. Please feel free to send me comments/thoughts at email@example.com.”
Senator McRae wants to know what happens if a person does not have an ID badge.
Rainer stated that this is something they have not been able to reconcile yet. It turns out that on a lot of campuses students are required to carry an ID card and there are penalties associated with violation of student conduct code if you are a student and do not carry an ID badge.
One of the things discussed in the task force was whether or not people should be required to wear badges. “I come from a corporate environment where you have to wear your badge. The problem with our campus is that it is a public space. We have visitors all over the place. We have contractors all over the place. I think because it is such a public space, the general consensus among the committee members was it probably was not a vial option to ask people to wear a badge but it was viable to ask people to carry a university issued ID. A lot of the campus facilities have gone to card access. All of the new buildings that are being built with bond money in accordance with the university construction guidelines are card access facilities. The doors automatically will be locked at certain hours beginning in the evening, so to gain access to a lot of the facilities during the evening hours, people will need to have their ID badge which will be their swipe or proximity card.
Another recommendation is the issue of the library, whether or not we should require people to physically present an ID when they enter the library.”
Senator Bruck stated that he has been in a number of institutions where security was a real problem. Everybody had a badge to open every door they were supposed to get in. “For example, I teach three evening courses from 6-10 p.m. and all three of those buildings are locked. Basically for the first fifteen minutes of each class I have a student standing at the door to let the students in. I was told that you are talking about multi-millions of dollars to convert this university in such a way, which simply was not there. Is there any truth behind it?”
Rainer: “Yes, there is truth behind the fact that it will cost millions of dollars to card access all of our doors especially the way the campus is built. What you need to do is to go back to the construction guideline for new buildings. The guideline is very specific in that we try to compartmentalize buildings. For example, the way the new David Clark lab is going to be laid out, there is going to be public space in the building. You will be able to go to the 110 classrooms. You will not be able to get to faculty office space or research labs without going to card access. The new College of Veterinary Medicine building, you will be able to walk in the front door of the building and go to the right. If you go to the left you will need card access for the elevator, you will need card access to get to the faculty office space. The problem we have now is that almost anyone who has a key to the building has a key to the front door. The recommendation is to change the exterior door locks to buildings so that keys that are issued don’t generally unlock or open those doors, but have a card access point on every single major building.”
Senator Bruck wanted to know where students fit in all this.
Rainer responded, “Students probably would not receive card access. However, some colleges have decided in fact, to do that. The College of Veterinary Medicine for the new building is going to have card access for computer facilities.”
Senator Tetro stated that she is curious about the afternoon and evening classes where students will need access but due to safety issues will not be able to have it.
Senator McRae stated that it is not going to do any good to have people carry their ID cards if they are not going to be checked in the evening. Unless something is done so that non-students can be moved off campus and there is a sufficient way to check to make sure who the students are then this really only deals with part of the problem.
Thomas Younce, Chief of Campus Police stated that by doing this we discourage some of those people from coming on campus. By doing things like this you interrupt those thoughts. By using the ID Card every one of us become a deterrent to what is happening on campus.
Rainer stated that there are some departments who are challenging individuals in their buildings if they have no apparent reason for being there.
Scheduling of 110 Classrooms
Rainer stated, “This is not an easy issue but it is one that we think require some dialog. There are some campus buildings that are better than others for scheduling evening classes. Some of our buildings can be compartmentalized; our new buildings definitely can be compartmentalized. We have buildings that are accessible to parking. We have some buildings that are not accessible to parking. Safety and security is not a consideration when we schedule a 110 classroom. We think that it should be considered, but there may be a time where you have an office in a building and a classroom there, it might not be the best place to have that class at night and we may ask people to go to those buildings that we open up at night rather than opening up all campus buildings.”
Senator Warren stated that she was looking at scheduling classes up to 10:50 p.m. and that the Registration Records and Calendar Committee looked at that as part of a way to solve the space crunch. “I was very concerned about this issue, that part of their solution was to say we will schedule these classes in secure rooms. Things are happening outside of the classroom and when you push classes to 10:50 p.m. it feels as though you are looking for trouble. It concerns me greatly.”
Rainer stated that the issue did not come up during their discussion, therefore he cannot respond to it but will make a note to inquire.
Chief Younce stated that they are running a bus service and have walking people designated as escorts only, who work from 6 p.m. until approximately 3 a.m.
Chief Younce noted that they distribute police officers according to when crimes are reported. The majority of crimes reported are during the day.
Rainer stated that if you look at campus maps and the campus master plan the goal is to have a walking campus, but if you look at the maps they don’t show what we like to call core paths. We have asked the university architect’s office to identify core paths, better light those paths, identify them on maps. We can strategically place blue light phones, concentrate our police activity along those paths.
“I have been talking to Charlie Lefler, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities and I plan to talk to his group next week. Facilities people have already engaged in the dialog and are addressing the issues in the report that was specifically related to facilities issues. The issues related to campus police and how we report statistics and training, we are already acting upon them. A lot of the recommendations that the committee has made are already being active acted upon.
If you look at crime statistics, DH Hill Library does have a fair amount of crime. If you look at the numbers of people we trespass from campus, we probably trespass more people from DH Hill than any other place across campus. If you go to the stacks they are isolated. You can go up one set of stairs and come down another. There are elevators that dead end into the building. It always comes up as an issue when we query people about personal safety on campus. One thing we thought would definitely be appropriate is to check ID’s of people who are coming into the library. University affiliated people would show their university ID. Any other person would show driver license or another form of ID.
One of the other things that we thought would be appropriate is to put cameras at the emergency exits. He stated that they trespass more people from the library than any other facility on campus. Rainer wanted to know the Senate’s thoughts.
Senator Middleton stated that he is not sure that this needs to be reinvented. He suggested that they find some good models and try to see what works here.
Senator Fahmy wanted to know if there are statistics on the number of crimes that are committed by those who carry ID’s.
Chief Younce stated that they believe that the majority of crimes that occur in the library are by non-students.
Senator Bruck stated that the library is there for students, faculty, and the public to do research. Unless you have cause to be there you should not be there. It is beyond his comprehension why anyone would reject showing identification or signing in.
Senator Smith wanted to know if other schools in the UNC system have been investigated to see what kind of models they are using.
Chief Younce stated that ECU has a guard in front who does not challenge anyone but he is there to see when people come and go. At certain times identification is required.
Rainer stated that they did not canvas the sixteen campuses. Major campuses do require people to show an ID. He thinks the issue is the one that the Provost raised. There is concern among the library administration that this could be a concern.
Senator Bernhard stated that next week the Library Committee is planning to meet with Provost Oblinger and one of the topics of discussion will be a need for more space in the library. Concurrently we are talking about locking up the buildings around us where students do study at night and then say we need more space when we already do have all this space. Is your committee considering that? There is more to this than safety as we do have to have some place to do our work.
Rainer stated that one of the things that they talked about was opening certain buildings at night and publicizing that and making a concerted effort not to open other buildings.
Chair Daley stated that this is a discussion that the Senate will be pushing further; the use of the classrooms assigning based on other things rather than just the size of the anticipated class and time slot. The safety consideration and the electronic resources needed should be factored in.
Senator McRae stated that one thing that will help in all of the issues that were discussed is to greatly increase the number of people on patrol in the evening, both inside and outside the buildings.
Rainer stated that they have discussed that in Campus Police. They somehow need to increase their visibility because the reality is that they do have a lot of people on patrol at night. “We have an individual who does nothing except walk up and down Hillsborough Street at night. We have an individual who is in the brickyard. If you go to the Campus Police website we post patrol roots on maps. We do have a fair amount of people who are patrolling.”
Senator McRae stated that the point is that the more people that are patrolling inside and outside the building then the less likely that people are going to either loiter or come on campus.
Chief Younce stated that they divide the officers up according to what is happening.
Rainer stated that they talked about surveillance cameras in the report. He feels that it is not an efficient use of resources to have someone sitting in front of surveillance cameras. It is an issue that is under discussion.
Rainer stated, “The message that we always try to convey is that safety is a shared responsibility. Our campus police run a lot more education programs than they used to. They attend new employee orientation. They talk to students and parents at the beginning of the semester. Part of that message is that safety and security is a shared responsibility. One of the interesting things that came out of the participation by the students on the committee was that students feel invisible. They told us that they felt invisible at the meeting.”
Senator Bitting stated that according to the statistics stated as they related to assaults, they suggested that a large percentage of assaults occur amongst roommates, friends, acquaintances, etc. Similarly he has had three break-ins in his building in the last week or two. It has been the general consensus that those were inside jobs since there was no forced entry. “There is that concern.”
Chief Younce stated that they have an area where they had a number of break-ins and they expected them to occur. We do have a system that we can set up and monitor the areas with cameras. They are not live monitors but rather are put on tapes. We also have alarm systems that can be put into an area and when someone enters it comes up on our radio channel.
Senator Tetro suggested that some of the faculty participate in the “Night Walk”.
Rainer stated that one of their recommendations was to better advertise the “Night Walk” among faculty.
5. Issues of Concern
Chair Daley stated an issue of concern from Daniel Ward about establishing a clock on the NCSU webpage to show the proper time for the start and end of classes.
Chair Daley assigned the issue to the Resources and Environment Committee.
Senator Bruck stated, “I can fill out a single spaced page five pages long with “issues of concern” that I have. What I don’t understand is that I say I am concernd about this and immediately it gets appointed to some committee. That committee will then spend the next four months working hard trying to figure out what to do before bringing it back in terms of a resolution. I don’t necessarily want that and I am wondering whether or not I am out of order by bringing up an issue of concern.”
Chair Daley responded that an issue of concern could rise from any faculty member. While we usually send it to a committee, the committee does not have to spend four months looking to have a resolution. They seriously investigate because that one faculty member or student’s issue of concern might be much more general or it might be something we realize isn’t very important.
Senator Bruck stated, “The question that I have is that if this body feels that it is worth discussing, then I would like them to discuss it and say I think a committee should come up with a policy. When I bring up issues of concern, they are not necessarily my issues. I am canvassing the faculty
Real quickly I want to run through some things that all come together in the same way, things that are going on right now.
I have an issue of concern: The President of the UNC System’s political understanding of the state and university system has been called into question. I have five letters to the editor in the News and Observer, another eleven from around the state and of course an editorial from the News and Observer pointing out this problem.
I have an issue of concern: The governor wrote a letter to the Board of Governors yesterday. I have a big issue of concern with what he put in that letter.
I have an issue of concern: Yesterday a book was released titled, Faces Not Numbers, a 125-page book written by the students. You may read it for free. It is on newsobserver.com. It is a PDF file, all 125 pages of it. I perused it during lunch today and I have a response to it. In all due deference to cool hand Luke we got a failure of communication of a magnitude that is beyond belief of what these students and wrote down versus what the reality actually is.
These are all issues of concern. They are all tied together in terms of what really comes down to the budget; how it is being handled and from the very top right down to our students and their perception of the five jobs. We have a student in the College of Management who say they work five jobs to pay their tuition. We have a problem if that is true. The question is why?”
At the University of Illinois, Florida State University, University of Missouri at St. Louis, and University of Chicago there have been mass demonstrations at the administration buildings against pay raises for CEO’s on campus.
Senator Tetro stated that the students do not know what is going on with the budget. They are being very vocal. They would like to be heard. They want someone to pay attention. I say give them an applause because they are actually getting involved and taking time to write something that they care about, sending it to the Board of Governors and asking for someone to listen.
Senator McRae wanted to know if it would be appropriate for the Senate to comment on the raises given to the administrators by President Broad.
Senator Brownie stated that a colleague is concerned about getting her car scratched in the parking lot. She wants to know if something can be done to eliminate this. Chair Daley stated that our parking spaces are in compliance. He suggested that Senator Brownie discuss this concern with transportation when they present at the next meeting.
Senator Peacock stated, “Concerning the bonus situation with the Chancellors, the issue to me is should she have been awarded one in the beginning since a letter of reprimand was put into her file with the resolution of censure last year which basically means that President Broad ignored the issue of concern that we brought up and addressed, which is certainly within her right to do so. However it does not set well with me. I know if I had had a letter of reprimand in my file I doubt I would have gotten a raise. I think this is much more serious and much more basic than the Chancellor’s actions. To follow-up with that I have asked my classes where they think their tuition increases are going. They all think it is going for faculty salaries. This is what they read in the newspaper. I assured them this year that out of our 44 tenured faculty in the department that no one got anything other than the bonus that the rest of the state got. They were shocked at that and wanted to know where the money is going. I am not surprised what I am reading from the students because that is what I am hearing in the classroom. To me, that is a question of perception versus reality. We have a huge problem.”
Senator McRae stated that if you use the figure that the News & Observer had in their article for faculty salaries, which was $5.9M. If you divide that by roughly 1625 faculty you get $5,000 per faculty member. So where is the money going?
Chair Daley stated that assuming it came, we all have a large number of vacant lines that have not been filled. There is need for more sections in a lot of areas just to fill the demand. The assumption was that a lot of that money would be going into existing lines and then meeting the demands for sections over the last few years that we have not been able to meet.
Senator Tetro wanted to know how the faculty could help the student body understand where the money is going so that the students can understand it more clearly.
Senator Bruck stated that he thinks that this is the foundation of this argument that all these papers from all over the country including the Chronicle are saying. I quote from the Chronicle “The biggest threat both to academic freedom and to academic standards is the corperetization of the university.” What it is referring to is not taking corporate money for grants and contracts and stuff. That is immediately what you think it is saying but it is not. What it is saying in reference to in this case, executive salaries, is that there is a market value for a college president. In order for us to be competitive to get a president and a provost and a Vice Chancellor and a department head, we must come up to the market value. I think the students think that we are running a business here. This is what came out in the News & Observer from President Broad, “To be competitive we must give a $20,000 raise to this one and a $30,000 raise to that one.” Presidents are supposed to get paid like corporate CEO’s. They are supposed to be rich. This is not in keeping with my understanding of a public education system and what we are here for. There are now eighteen executive presidents in the United States of public and private universities making more than $500,000 per year.
Senator Bernhard reported on the successful deletion by the Provost's Office of a large number of deceased faculty members from the Official List of Voting Faculty. This was never listed as an official issue of concern but it would be appropriate to recognize the good job the Provost's Office, especially Jevonda Greer & Sandy Connolly, have done in fixing this.
6. Old Business
Second Reading: Resolution to form a Faculty Advisory Committee
Senator Allen stated that the initiative for this resolution was the concern that faculty did not have enough of a voice in the upper administration especially as it relates to the compact planning process because of the communication blockage between department heads to deans to higher levels. The concern also was that the compact planning process probably clearly works best in an expanding budgetary environment, which is hardly what we have at the moment. It is harder put input into a contracting budgetary situation. The question now becomes, “What is not effective? Where do we cut budgets?” It is much tougher in a situation like today to govern and make the correct decisions.
We have tried to constitute a committee that would look at the budget and be informed on many matters and then consider this carefully and advise the Chancellor. The faculty members who agree to serve on this committee will have a major task of importance so they must be committed. I have discussed the committee with both the Chancellor and Provost and we have their support. They have a suggestion that the Provost or the Chancellor should appoint two of the members and that is probably a good idea to balance it. To me it would seem that this is an opportunity for very constructive interaction between administration and the faculty. I think it should be of great help to the Chancellor if she agrees. On the whole this would help NC State.
Senator Allen read the resolution for its second reading.
Several friendly amendments were made.
Senator Bruck called the question.
The resolution was voted on and passed unanimously.
7. Report on the Faculty Assembly
Senator Bernhard stated that the Faculty Assembly meets four days per year. The next meeting is one week from Friday, which will be an interesting meeting because President Broad’s actions with regard to the bonuses for the administrators came after the January 23 meeting.
An attractive thing about these meetings is that we do hear very polished presentations by President Broad and by Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs, Gretchen Bataille, and J. B. Milliken, Jeff Davies, Allen May, and Betsy Brown. These are very well prepared presentations and they do stay and answer questions. The disadvantage is that it is all so brief and infrequent but we really do get to talk.
We meet from 10:30 a.m. until approximately 6 p.m. and much of it is planning sessions with these distinguished people speaking and answering questions. Then we have a group session with committees where issues are debated and resolutions are formed. There is a committee on academic freedom and tenure, budget, faculty development, faculty welfare and benefits, planning and programs, technology and governance. The main disadvantage is that it meets so infrequently. There is a lot of activity by email lately especially since this explosion about the pay increases for the high level administrators.
This year, so far, the good thing that happened at the most recent meeting on January 23, is there were two resolutions passed that were prepared by former chair of the assembly, Professor Dick Veit, Professor of English at UNC Wilmington. The last two resolutions that were passed both dealt with financing. The first resolution’s resolve was: Be it resolved that the faculty assembly communicate to the Board of Governors and the North Carolina Legislature the position that campus based tuition increases should only be used in exceptional cases and the primary responsibility for higher education funding should rest with the state. Then there was a further resolution dealing with faculty and staff salary increases: Be it resolved that the faculty assembly unite with staff employees, the Board of Governors, the office of the president, parents, alumni, and other concerned citizens to urge the Legislature to provide adequate funding for the UNC faculty and staff salary increases during this season without placing this responsibility on current and future students.
We were told that it is in the proposal to the Board of Governors that we would be given 6% salary increase for two or three successive times.
The Technology Committee and the Faculty Development Committee of the Assembly have organized a Teaching and Learning with Technology Conference. This is the third year in a row that they have done this and the immediate one for this year is to be in Charlotte, March 17 and 19 and there are scholarships/financial aid available for that.
Senator Bernhard noted that the Faculty Assembly has a website and that minutes of the meetings and proposed resolutions can be reviewed there.
Senator Bruck commented that for the agenda of the upcoming meeting, it is sort of like the past and future. “I am really concerned about a letter that was sent by the governor to the Board of Governors regarding the idea that there will be no tuition increases. Nowhere in that letter does it mention that the State of North Carolina is responsible for the “additions to the budget that is necessary”. Arguing about what happened a month ago to me is irrelevant. The pay raises are done. The fact that the governor seems to be actually responding to this student document that came down yesterday with a letter saying that he supports the students, there should be no tuition raises of any sort without saying, by the way it is the responsibility of the General Assembly of North Carolina to take care of these problems. It is not there. That is an issue coming up, not one that has been done.”
Senator Bernhard stated that there is a mountain of email and he is sure that there will be more before the meeting. He asked Senator Bruck to forward him his concern.
Chair Daley adjourned the meeting at 5 p.m.