EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING
Present: Bryant, DiMagno, Logan-Peters, Miller, Sawyer, Siekman, Spann, Whitt, Wolf
Absent: Fuller, King, Prochaska-Cue, Scheideler
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2002
Location: 420 University Terrace, Academic Senate Office
1.0 Call to Order
Miller called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
2.0 Announcements
2.1 Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee
Miller announced that the Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee would be meeting on Friday, February 15th to begin discussions on the faculty salary increases for next year.
3.0 Stan Campbell, Director of Campus Recreation, and Peter Maslowski, Professor of History and
Member of the Campus Recreation Advisory Council
Miller welcomed the guests and stated that the committee would like to hear about the long range plans of Campus Recreation and the impacts these plans will have on parking. Campbell displayed drawings of the campus master plan. He noted that the Antelope Valley Project (AVP) will make significant changes to the campus. He stated that the campus softball field and other campus recreation fields will be eliminated by the AVP. He pointed out that the current recreation fields and tennis courts directly south of Vine Street will eventually be moved further south into student and faculty/staff parking immediately north of R Street. He noted the concern that everyone has regarding the increases to parking fees. He stated that these increases could mean that some faculty and staff will discontinue using the recreation center because it is an additional cost that they will not be able to afford. He reported that another place where campus recreation fields will be created is in the parking area by the Reunionbuilding. He stated that eventually the Reunion building will be destroyed and additional fields will be placed there. He noted that the tennis courts by the Harper Schramm Smith dorms need to be replaced. He stated that campus recreation had hoped to unite with the Athletics department to build an indoor tennis court in this location but the cost of this facility is hard to justify. Campbell noted that the Housing department might use the spot to build additional housing. He pointed out that demand for campus recreation fields is high during the 3-4 months that they are used.
Campbell stated that the recreation fields currently located on East Campus will remain in place and an additional field will be created once the old Biochemistry building is torn down. He noted that the School for Natural Resource Sciences building will be constructed on an existing parking lot on East Campus.
Miller asked what the short range plans are for Campus Recreation. Campbell stated that 80 acres were recently acquired northwest of the municipal airport. He stated that they hope to put an outdoor education center there. He noted that it is where the ropes course is now located. He stated that they hope to eventually build a lodge at the location which can be used as a retreat. He pointed out that if funds are available, they would like to replace the tennis courts at Harper Schramm Smith. Campbell reported that Campus Recreation is currently working on plans to build a park with softball and baseball fields at 32nd and Leighton Streets. He noted that they hope to have the fields on line by 2003.
Miller asked what the usage is for the campus recreation center. Campbell reported that it is heavily used and that they are almost at capacity use. He pointed out that alumni have complained that they would like to use the facility but this is not possible due to the heavy usage. He stated that they hope to extend the hours of the facility next year. Miller asked how the Antelope Valley Project will influence campus recreation. Campbell stated that the project will create a number of hiker/biker trails which they hope will all come to campus. Logan-Peters asked why the recreation fields will be in the center of campus rather than on the outskirts. Campbell stated that the campus master plan was designed to reduce vehicles on campus, thereby eliminating potential interaction between vehicles and people. He pointed out that the students prefer the recreation fields to be closer to the campus recreation center.
Miller noted that the new fields cannot be created until the parking situation is resolved. Campbell stated that the solution to the problem is to stack parking but the high cost makes this difficult. He stated that it would be very helpful to have someone subsidize the cost of building a parking garage, other than faculty and staff. He noted that students are not allowed to park their cars on campus at the University of Iowa. He pointed out that infrastructure fees are just starting to be tacked on to the cost of new buildings to help replace lost parking and other campus services. He noted that 1400-1500 parking stalls will be lost with the Antelope Valley Project. He stated that students are anxious to have a second parking garage built. Miller asked if there was the possibility of turning the parking garage out to a private enterprise. Campbell reported that Jim Main, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Business & Finance, is working on it.
4.0 Approval of 2/0/02 Minutes
DiMagno moved and Wolf seconded approval of the minutes as amended. Motion approved.
5.0 Unfinished Business
5.1 Faculty Compensation Advisory Committee Meeting
Miller noted that the FCAC would be meeting on Friday morning to discuss faculty salary increases for next year. He asked the committee for feedback regarding the increases. The committee discussed that it would be helpful to know specifically what additional budget cuts are being prevented by the proposed reduction in salary increase. DiMagno stated that if the increases were not going to be 6.3% as indicated last year, at a minimum the departments should control most of the 4.8% salary increase recommended by the Chancellor. Bryant stated that an additional argument for the departments to retain all of the 4.8% is the number of faculty lines that have been lost, which then creates more work for the remaining faculty members, and that most of the outstanding faculty received high raises last year. Siekman noted that health insurance and parking were both going to be increasing again and that the minimum standard increase should be higher in order to cover the cost of living increase. Wolf noted that a problem with the raises last year was that people receiving adequate evaluations received the same increase as people who received an outstanding evaluation. Sawyer stated that people receiving an unsatisfactory evaluation should receive less of an increase. The committee agreed that the guidelines used in determining last years salary increase should not be used. They pointed out that the guidelines created confusion and inequities last year.
5.2 Quality Indicators
Whitt asked that the issue of quality indicators be placed on the agenda again for further discussion. He stated that the College of Arts & Sciences is planning on using the indicators to evaluate departments and individuals. The committee agreed to discuss this issue with SVCAA Edwards.
5.3 Treatment of Retired and Soon to Be Retired Faculty
Wolf asked that the issue of how professors are treated upon retirement or when they are close to retirement needs to be discussed. The committee agreed to put this on the agenda for an upcoming meeting.
6.0 New Business
6.1 Nominations for Executive Committee and Committee on Committees
Bryant suggested that the committee should think about the election of new officers and new members. The committee agreed that an email message should be sent to Senators to see if any of them have an interest in being nominated to serve on the Committee on Committees.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:02 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be held on Wednesday, February 20th at 3:00 p.m. in 201 Canfield Administration Building. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and James King, Secretary.
