The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair and Presiding Officer Jory Hancock at 3:07 p.m. in the College of Law, Room 139.

Present: Senators Aleamoni, Benson, Bickel, Caldwell, G. Davis, DeYoung, Eribes, Graff, Hancock, Hartman, Hogle, Houtkooper, Howell, Hurt, Impey, Kidd, Kosta, Larson, Likins, Merkle, Mishra, Mitchell, O’Brien, Parsons, Pitt, Quinn, Rimsza, Schooley, Silverman, Smith, Songer, Spece, Szilagyi, Tal, Taren, Warburton, Weinand, Witte, Zwolinski. Thomas Volgy served as Parliamentarian.

Absent: Senators Armstrong, Auxier, Becker, Dahlgran, D. Davis, T. Davis, Grant, Gruener, Ivey, Jenkins, Joens, Kurzer, Marchalonis, Medine, Pepper, Perches, Regan, Richardson, Romer, Sheridan, Walsh, Warnock, Zilm.

2. OPEN SESSION

Senator William Bickel – Senator Bickel asked the Senate to consider whether or not the current CAFT investigatory hearing for Dr. Marguerite Kay is in violation of institutional ethics and Dr. Kay’s due process rights.

3A. ASUA President Benjamin Graff

President Graff reported that ASUA conducted its first on-line primary elections last week. The voter turnout increased almost twice over last year’s primary. On-line General Elections will be held next week and ASUA hopes for a voter turnout of 5000+ students. An ASUA student sub-committee is participating in each of the candidates for Vice President for Undergraduate Education (VP-UGE) interviews.

3B. GPSC President Jason Auxier

3D. Secretary of the Faculty Wanda Howell

No report.

3E. Chair of the Faculty Jerrold Hogle (attachments)

Chair Hogle announced that the Faculty Center will be conducting a second election according to the Constitution and Bylaws and that a special one-year term for the position of Vice Chair of the Faculty will be on the ballot since Vice Chair Hancock has resigned effective April 30, 2001, in order to run for Chair of the Faculty. Also on the ballot will be two positions on the Committee on Committees, and ten At-Large Senate seats. Following today’s Senate meeting, there may be Constitution and Bylaws amendments on the ballot as well. Petitions are available from the Faculty Center and are due Friday, March 9. Referring to materials distributed on Senators’ desks, Chair Hogle reviewed the system-wide Whistleblower Protection Policy that was passed by ABOR last Friday. Because the whistleblower committee crafted the policy to be parallel with the state policy, ABOR agreed that at such time as more or different rights are granted to state employees, this policy could be reopened and amended. They also agreed that the policy can continue to be amended, as early as the next meeting. At the April ABOR meeting, the whistleblower committee will propose an amendment to change J, 2, c to read more specifically, "The complainant alleges that the prior disclosure was a contributing factor in the adverse personnel action." The committee will continue to accept suggestions for further amendments. On a related matter before the legislature, House Bill 2617 suggests that all of the provisions of other state policies must apply to University policies. This is a violation of the State Constitution, which establishes a separation of powers between the Department of Administration State employees and all employees under the Arizona Board of Regents. The Arizona Faculties Council (AFC) unanimously opposes this bill specifically because of a passage that creates an inequitable system of promotion and tenure for which the General Faculty would not be eligible. Chair Hogle reviewed the status of several bills currently before the legislature involving universities. He urged faculty to read and consider the complicated HB 2041 on the Computer Information Transaction Act. Senate Boll 1415, the Graduate Assistant Workload Program, is still the University’s top priority decision package. HB 2628 is the JLBC’s budget recommendation of a 5% merit increase for all qualifying State employees in January 2002 and 2003. The same group of house members is also proposing a Classification Salary Adjustment fund of $1M in 2002 and $2M in 2003 for university employees. Although Governor Hull has stated that she hopes the state employees’ pay package will not be affected, her office has just lowered its revenue estimates. Turning to local issues, Chair Hogle commented that the University’s budget process is truly progressing along shared governance guidelines. The Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee’s (SPBAC) Near-Term Budget Guidelines have gone forward to the Cabinet. The President, Provost, and Cabinet have agreed that every decision the Cabinet discusses will be tied to one of these guidelines and that a conversation between SPBAC and the Cabinet will occur before any final decisions are made. Chair Hogle awarded a plaque to Senator Tom Davis in absentia for his extraordinary service for the faculty and the University. Dr. Davis has resigned his seat in the Senate due to his greatly expanded duties as Director of the Program for Research Integrity Education.

Provost Davis announced that the UA Library has won the 2001 Excellence in Academic Libraries Award sponsored by the Association of College and Research Libraries and Blackwell Book Services, which recognizes exemplary programs, services, and resources for furthering the educational missions of institutions. Following the call to the audience at last Friday’s ABOR meeting, he presented information to the Board about workload, stipend and tuition waivers for Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTA’s). Although the presentation was neither a response to a motion nor a decision item before the Board, it was an opportunity to emphasize the fundamental role of graduate students, GTA’s, and Research Assistants (RA’s) at Research I universities and to compare and contrast their net compensation with our peer institutions. The UA GTA compensation currently falls at 54% of a group of 24 similar institutions. About two-thirds of this group waives GTA’s tuition, and several more provide a partial waiver. A complete waiver of in-state tuition for TA’s would place the UA at the 88% of our AAUP peer institutions. During the call to the audience, GPSC President Auxier recommended to the Board that waiving in-state tuition and reducing graduate stipends by a similar amount would actually better benefit graduate students because tuition is expected to rise more steeply than stipends. ABOR approved two capital projects, the Architecture expansion at $7M and the Chemistry building/expansion at $45M. Five candidates for Vice President of Health Sciences will be visiting the campus in March and April and the search committee expects the process to be completed by early May. The final five candidates for the VP-UGE include Jerry Hogle and Randy Richardson of UA, Susan Steele, U of Connecticut, formerly of UA, George Bridges, U of Kentucky and Philip Kraemer, U of Washington. The AIC Dean’s search committee is chaired by Holly Smith and includes faculty members from both AIC and main campus, as well as student and staff members. This search may have to be suspended during summer break. The search for the Dean of the College of Public Health has been expanded to a national search but it is still expected to be complete by May. A Center for Creative Photography (CCP) Steering Committee chaired by Vice-Provost Libbie Ervin has been established to develop a vision and conduct a search for the next director of CCP.

3G. President Peter Likins

President Likins announced that ABOR approved the university system’s budget for the Proposition 301 money, exactly as it was presented. The Board also approved the system’s concept for the Arizona Regents’ University. This is a significant commitment that could total allocations of $50M/year. President Likins expressed discouragement with declining revenue projections and noted the irony of the situation now occurring with the universities enjoying the positive reinforcement of a supportive state legislature and governor. He invited the Senate to attend a panel discussion about the labor dispute that occurred at the Kukdong factory in Puebla Mexico, which makes UA apparel for Nike. The panel will include representatives from the Fair Labor Association, the International Labor Fund, the Worker Rights Consortium, Nike, Verité, and Students Against Sweatshops. President Likins hopes that this effort has the potential to bring all these forces to bear to improve working conditions at a single factory in Mexico and that it may ultimately affect working conditions worldwide.

The minutes of January 22 and February 5, 2001 were approved as distributed.

CONSENT AGENDA ITEM: UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH COURSE, FORWARDED FROM THE INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)

The consent agenda item detailed at the end of these minutes was approved. [Motion 2000/01-24]

SPBAC chair Andy Polk explained how extensively the committee has disseminated the Strategic Plan to each of the colleges as well as SAC, APOC, the Alumni Association, the Foundation, the Health Sciences Center, and the Offices of Business Affairs and Advancement. Feedback has focused on five areas: 1) creating a more supportive culture within the University, 2) determining how to use the strategic plan effectively and appropriately at sub-unit levels, 3) giving greater attention to embracing ethic, cultural, physical and intellectual diversity, 4) recognizing alumni as an important resource, 5) reframing the Plan to be more inspiring, 6) relating President Likins’ personal mission statement to the Plan, and 7) giving more attention to the student voice. After the three-part plan is revised and completed around May 1, it will contain the statement of aspirations, a 3-7 year prioritized implementation plan guided by the NCA Re-accreditation Review recommendations, and a link between the implementation plan and the budget decision making process. Senator Tal suggested adding a glossary to the plan to define such terms as "learning-centered, service learning, and learning community."

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION (THIRD READING) ON REVISED GRIEVANCE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY (attachment)

Senator Mitchell referred Senators to the 2-19-01 draft of the Revised Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty which was forwarded by the APPC as a seconded motion [Motion 2000/01-25] for the Senate’s approval. He explained that after the committee approved this draft, he received a number of good suggestions for changes from CAFT. Since the APPC has not been able to reconvene to consider these changes before today’s Senate meeting, Senator Mitchell will present those suggestions at the appropriate places in today’s presentation. Senator Witte moved [Motion 2000/01-26] to change the word "decide" to "advise" in Section I, R, "Grievance Principles." Motion was seconded and passed. APOC Representative Jull reiterated his objection of January 22, 2001 to the University’s failure to initiate a grievance policy for appointed personnel separate from faculty grievance procedures, because Section II, B, 3, a, changes the jurisdiction of the Committee on Conciliation and CAFT from what is written in UHAP and directly affects appointed personnel who lack voting rights to approve the new policy. Senator Hogle explained that the General Faculty will have a chance to vote on the policy and that this doesn’t exclude appointed personnel from bringing cases to CAFT or Conciliation. L. Wood of the University Attorney’s Office (UAO) confirmed this interpretation. Senator Likins noted that Section II, B, 3, a, is missing the word "be," in the final sentence, between "may" and "presented." Senator Hogle moved [Motion 2000/01-27] to amend the second sentence in Section II, C, 1, c, to change the word "determine" to "advise." Motion was seconded and passed. Senator Silverman moved [Motion 2000/01-28] to strike the third sentence of Section II, C, 1, c, which reads, "In the event of a disagreement between the chairs of CAFT, Conciliation, and UCEC, a majority vote among these three committee chairs will decide the issue." Motion was seconded and passed. Senator Mitchell noted that the Committee on Conciliation does not conduct hearings; therefore, he moved [Motion 2000/01-29] to change the word "hear" to "handle" in the second sentence in Section II, C, 1, c. Motion was seconded and passed. In Section II, C, 3, b, Senator Hogle moved [Motion 2000/01-30] to change "decide" to "advise," and "hear" to "handle," to remain consistent and Senator Silverman clarified that this means corresponding changes in all similar and related passages within the document. Motion was seconded and passed. Senators Witte and Spece objected to the conflict of interest implicit in Section II, C, 2, m, 5, i, that says if the UAO has not been previously involved in a case, it may provide procedural advice to the grievance committee. L. Wood explained that the UAO is far more informed about UA’s internal rules and procedures than any outside attorneys and doesn’t perceive any ethical conflict of interest in advising the grievance committee because the UAO represents the entire University. Senator Spece moved [Motion 2000/01-31] to add a grievance principle "S" to Section I, to read, "The Arizona Board of Regents Policy Manual ("ABOR-PM") and University Handbook on Appointed Personnel ("UHAP"), like most documents relevant to faculty governance, are properly interpreted according to the meaning a reasonable person to whom they are directed would ascribe to them. Therefore, attorneys generally have no special expertise in interpreting such documents. Moreover, attorneys generally have less knowledge than faculty concerning appropriate resolution of disputed academic matters, faculty governance, normative issues, and faculty discipline. Therefore, faculty should feel free to exercise independent judgment in interpreting governing documents and deciding procedural and evidentiary disputes unless duly appointed university counsel gives a specific opinion, based on obviously controlling legal materials, that the faculty interpretation is contrary to law. Moreover, given that, in many matters, university counsel or their appointees might have a conflict of interest in the sense of feeling that it is in the best interests of the University to exercise greater control over faculty than the latter find appropriate in light of traditional customs, practices, and professional guidelines, faculty should be encouraged to consult friends or faculty with legal training to give them independent advice on matters as to which they do not feel persuaded by University counsel or their appointees." Motion was seconded. Senators’ discussion included the following points: 1) The APPC consulted the UAO in developing this grievance policy according to the Senate-approved Guidelines for Policy Development by Faculty Committees. 2) Although faculty may consult UAO, it is free to disregard UAO’s advice. 3) This paragraph is very helpful and supportive in making grievants aware that other options exist. 4) What is the intent of this section? 5) The last sentence is far from neutral, is pejorative, and is inappropriate in this document. 6) The amendment appears to be more of a philosophy statement than a policy. 7) It is not possible to legislate ethics or philosophy. 8) If the faculty member agrees the UAO’s advice is neutral, then there is no conflict of interest. 8) One guiding principle should be an avoidance of ex parté communications. Senator Warburton called for the question. Motion failed, 9 in favor, 22 opposed, 2 abstentions. Senator Spece moved [Motion 2000/01-32] to add another grievance principle "S" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member should be fined, suspended, or dismissed unless there is clear and convincing evidence as to any disputed factual issues." Motion was seconded. Senator Spece said many universities’ grievance policies contain this provision. Since "preponderance of evidence" means someone could be terminated based on 51% of the evidence, faculty, who are given tenure and academic freedom to encourage freedom of speech and academic integrity, need to be insulated with this provision of "clear and convincing" proof in situations where a fine, suspension or dismissal could be imposed. Motion passed. Senator Spece moved [Motion 2000/01-33] to add another grievance principle "T" to Section I, to read, "The provost and president should follow committee findings and recommendations unless compelling reasons, specifically articulated, dictate otherwise." Motion was seconded. He explained that this provision is recommended by AAUP and many other prestigious institutions. Senators’ discussion points included the following: 1) This is an unnecessary principle because it is already true and because the policy shouldn’t presume to tell the president and provost what they already know. 2) Why are the president and provost, who are imbued with reason, judgment, and conscience, included in the grievance process if they are always going to follow a committee’s recommendations? 3) If it’s true, why not include it? If it is not true, then the provision is needed. 4) Under the principles of shared governance, the president is obligated to explain his decisions except in circumstances when he is constrained by law, such as in the Regents’ policy which precludes discussing personnel issues or if CAFT recommends an action to the president that he lacks authority to grant. Motion failed. Senator Spece moved [Motion 2000/01-34] to add another grievance principle "T" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member of administrator should be involved in the determination of a dispute in which he or she is a party because of direct involvement in the contested matter." Motion was seconded and passed. Senator Spece moved [Motion 2000/01-35] to add another grievance principle "U" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member shall forfeit the right to grieve a matter unless he or she is aware that s/he has been harmed, has a right to grieve the matter, and is specifically apprised of any time limits regarding contesting the matter." Motion was seconded. Senator Likins inquired whether this provision applies to someone who realizes s/he’s been harmed even ten years later. Senator Spece confirmed that it does, citing recent HIV cases now before the courts. Motion passed. Senator Mitchell began to suggest an amendment to Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, as requested by CAFT, relating to the UAO providing procedural advice to the grievance committee. Senator Hogle offered a point of information that if the Senate could pass the revised policy today, followed by the amendments to Constitution and Bylaws, those amendments could then go onto the ballot of the General Faculty’s second election. Since the Constitution and Bylaws can be amended at any time, the CAFT committee’s suggestions could then be taken up by APPC next fall. Senator Witte opposed Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, because the passage places UAO back into the loop. She moved [Motion 2000/01-36] to delete Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, which reads, "If neither party is advised or represented by counsel, and the University Attorney has not been involved in the case on behalf of either party, then a University Attorney may provide procedural advice to the grievance committee." and to delete a portion of the sentence in Section II, C, 3, m, 5, ii, which reads, "if the University Attorney is precluded from providing advice to the committee." Motion was seconded. Senators’ discussion included the following points: 1) This motion adds unnecessary expense in many cases. 2) The motion would not preclude the University Attorney’s advice as part of legal consultation. Motion failed, 7 in favor, 21 opposed, and 3 abstentions. Senator Likins suggested and Senator Hogle moved [Motion 2000/01-37] to amend Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, by adding the phrase "upon request" to the end of the sentence, to indicate that the discretion lies with the faculty, not the UAO. Motion was seconded and passed. Senator Mitchell offered language taken from the ABOR Policy Manual Section 6-201 L, 4, 1 (9), to substitute for Section II, C, 3, m, 5, iii, to read "Legal advice is limited to questions of procedure and admissibility of evidence. The legal advisor may assist in the conduct of the hearing, but shall not vote." The APPC has not yet reached a majority vote on this passage. Senator Hogle raised a point of information that if APPC has not approved this passage, then it is not a seconded motion, and should therefore be held over for the next round of amendments. Senator Hogle called for the question on Motion 2000/01-25 for the entire document as amended today. Motion passed, with 1 opposed and 1 abstention.

DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON FACULTY CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS REVISIONS (attachment)

Senator Howell referred to the document distributed on Senators’ desks today containing a background information cover page and the four proposed changes to the Constitution and Bylaws which come as a seconded motion [Motion 2000/01-39a-d] from the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Changes. The first recommendation is to strike from the Constitution Article V, Section 9, b, some of the current language relating to grievance procedures that will now be located in the Bylaws, and to add a paragraph "3" which creates the Grievance Clearinghouse Committee. Senator Hogle reminded the Senate that the first sentence of this passage should read "The Grievance Clearinghouse Committee shall advise," not "decide," in order to be consistent with the Senate’s earlier action today of approving the Revised Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty. The third recommendation is to replace Article IV Section 9, Procedures, a-m of the Bylaws with the Revised Grievance Policies and Procedures as amended and approved by the Faculty Senate today. He suggested voting on Recommendations 1 and 3 as a bloc. Motions 2000/01-39-a and 2000/01-39-c passed. The second recommendation, which also comes as a seconded motion from CAFT, is to amend Article IV, Section 9, a-b of the Bylaws, proposing a new selection process for CAFT membership and reads:

"The Committee on Committees will prepare a list of names containing not fewer than two times the number to be elected. After consultation with the Chair of the Faculty and the President, the committee will reduce the list to a slate of twice the number to be elected, giving due consideration to diversity. For each person listed, a brief description of relevant academic experience, qualifications and background will be provided. This information will also appear on the ballot submitted to the General Faculty along with the names and colleges of continuing members. If the outcome of an election cannot be determined because of a tie vote, a runoff election shall take place.

The Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure shall elect its chair from among those of its regular members who have served at least one year. In the event that the committee is of the opinion that the case load is so great that undue delay will be experienced in the hearing and disposition of all cases before it, the committee may direct that temporary members be installed to hear specific cases. Temporary members shall be selected by the presiding officer of the committee by whatever means he or she deems appropriate from a pool of names provided by the Committee on Committees. Such a pool shall contain not less than twice the number of names as there are temporary members to be selected. The Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure shall select one of its regular members to serve as panel presiding officer in each case. In all cases the tenure of temporary members of the committee shall be limited to the hearing and disposition of the specific case which occasioned their selection.

3. If an elected member of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure resigns or becomes ineligible for membership, this member will be replaced for the remainder of the term of the departing member with the candidate who received the next highest number of votes in the same election, with ties broken by the Chair of the Faculty. If there is no eligible candidate, the Chair of the Faculty will fill the vacancy by appointing a member of the General Faculty who is otherwise eligible for membership on the committee."

DISCUSSION (FIRST READING) OF THE POLICY ON SCHOLARLY AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY (attachment)

Noting the lateness of the hour, Senator Hogle suggested that this item be deferred but that everyone read it and make suggestions to Dr. Hurt, chair of the Research Policy Committee via his e-mail at cdh@u.arizona.edu.

RECESS

The Senate meeting recessed at 5:03 p.m. to go into Executive Session.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:22 p.m.

Wanda H. Howell, Secretary

Appendix*

Open session statement by Senator William Bickel

Committee on Elections "Schedule of Election Activities 2000-2001"

Executive Summary: Approval of Board Policy 6-914, "Protection of Employees from Reprisal for Whistleblowing: (Second Reading)

HB 2617, an amendment to Arizona Revised Statures Section 38-533 Exemptions relating to whistleblowing

Executive Summary: Status of Bills involving universities reviewed in the state legislature in January

"Labor Dispute in Kukdong" invitation to panel discussion

"Draft: The University of Arizona Main Campus Strategic Plan 2001"

Consent Agenda from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve two undergraduate Directed Research courses

Draft 2-19-01 "Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty"

Senator Spece’s suggested amendments S-W to the Grievance Principles portion of the "Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty"

"Background, March 5, 2001," "Proposed Changes to the Constitution, March 5, 2001," and "Proposed Changes to the Bylaws, March 5, 2001"

Draft 21 February 2001 "Scholarly and Scientific Integrity Policy"

*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.

2000/01-24 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve request to create two house-numbered courses numbered 392 and 492, titled Directed Research, 1-6U, repeatable for a total of 12U, courses will carry the regular grade type (A, B, C, D, E). Motion passed.

2000/01-25 A motion to approve Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty. Motion passed.

2000/01-26 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: In Section I, R, "Grievance Principles," change the word "decide" to "advise." Motion passed.

2000/01-27 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: In the second sentence in Section II, C, 1, c, change the word "determine" to "advise." Motion passed.

2000/01-28 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Strike the third sentence of Section II, C, 1, c, which reads, "In the event of a disagreement between the chairs of CAFT, Conciliation, and UCEC, a majority vote among these three committee chairs will decide the issue." Motion passed

2000/01-29 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: In the second sentence of Section II, C, 1, c, change the word "hear" to "handle" Motion passed.

2000/01-30 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: In Section II, C, 3, b, change "decide" to "advise," and "hear" to "handle," to remain consistent. Motion passed.

2000/01-31 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Add a grievance principle "S" to Section I, to read, "The Arizona Board of Regents Policy Manual ("ABOR-PM") and University Handbook on Appointed Personnel ("UHAP"), like most documents relevant to faculty governance, are properly interpreted according to the meaning a reasonable person to whom they are directed would ascribe to them. Therefore, attorneys generally have no special expertise in interpreting such documents. Moreover, attorneys generally have less knowledge than faculty concerning appropriate resolution of disputed academic matters, faculty governance, normative issues, and faculty discipline. Therefore, faculty should feel free to exercise independent judgment in interpreting governing documents and deciding procedural and evidentiary disputes unless duly appointed university counsel gives a specific opinion, based on obviously controlling legal materials, that the faculty interpretation is contrary to law. Moreover, given that, in many matters, university counsel or their appointees might have a conflict of interest in the sense of feeling that it is in the best interests of the University to exercise greater control over faculty than the latter find appropriate in light of traditional customs, practices, and professional guidelines, faculty should be encouraged to consult friends or faculty with legal training to give them independent advice on matters as to which they do not feel persuaded by University counsel or their appointees." Motion defeated.

2000/01-32 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Add a grievance principle "S" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member should be fined, suspended, or dismissed unless there is clear and convincing evidence as to any disputed factual issues." Motion passed.

2000/01-33 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Add a grievance principle "T" to Section I, to read, "The provost and president should follow committee findings and recommendations unless compelling reasons, specifically articulated, dictate otherwise." Motion defeated.

2000/01-34 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Add a grievance principle "T" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member or administrator should be involved in the determination of a dispute in which he or she is a party because of direct involvement in the contested matter." Motion passed.

2000/01-35 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Add a grievance principle "U" to Section I, to read, "No faculty member shall forfeit the right to grieve a matter unless he or she is aware that s/he has been harmed, has a right to grieve the matter, and is specifically apprised of any time limits regarding contesting the matter." Motion passed.

2000/01-36 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Delete Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, which reads, "If neither party is advised or represented by counsel, and the University Attorney has not been involved in the case on behalf of either party, then a University Attorney may provide procedural advice to the grievance committee." and delete a portion of the sentence in Section II, C, 3, m, 5, ii, which reads, "if the University Attorney is precluded from providing advice to the committee." Motion defeated.

2000/01-37 A motion to amend Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as follows: Amend Section II, C, 3, m, 5, i, by adding the phrase "upon request" to the end of the sentence. Motion passed.

2000/01-38 A motion to approve Draft 2-19-01 of the Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty as amended today. Motion passed.

2000/01-39a A seconded motion from the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Changes to strike from the Constitution Article V, Section 9, b, i-vi, a-b, some of the current language relating to grievance procedures that will now be located in the Bylaws, and to add a paragraph "3" which creates the Grievance Clearinghouse Committee and including changing one word within that passage, "decide" to "advise," in order to be consistent with the Senate’s earlier action today of approving the Revised Grievance Policies and Procedures for Faculty. Motion passed.

2000/01-39b A seconded motion from the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Changes and from CAFT to amend Article IV, Section 9, a-b of the Bylaws, proposing a new selection process for CAFT membership to read: "The Committee on Committees will prepare a list of names containing not less fewer than two times the number to be elected. After consultation with the Chair of the Faculty and the President, the committee will reduce the list to a slate of twice the number to be elected, giving due consideration to diversity. For each person listed, a brief description of relevant academic experience, qualifications and background will be provided. This information will also appear on the ballot submitted to the General Faculty along with the names and colleges of continuing members. If the outcome of an election cannot be determined because of a tie vote, a runoff election shall take place.

The Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure shall elect its chair from among those of its regular members who have served at least one year. In the event that the committee is of the opinion that the case load is so great that undue delay will be experienced in the hearing and disposition of all cases before it, the committee may direct that temporary members be installed to hear specific cases. Temporary members shall be selected by the presiding officer of the committee by whatever means he or she deems appropriate from a pool of names provided by the Committee on Committees. Such a pool shall contain not less than twice the number of names as there are temporary members to be selected. The Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure shall select one of its regular members to serve as panel presiding officer in each case. In all cases the tenure of temporary members of the committee shall be limited to the hearing and disposition of the specific case which occasioned their selection.

3. If an elected member of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure resigns or becomes ineligible for membership, this member will be replaced for the remainder of the term of the departing member with the candidate who received the next highest number of votes in the same election, with ties broken by the Chair of the Faculty. If there is no eligible candidate, the Chair of the Faculty will fill the vacancy by appointing a member of the General Faculty who is otherwise eligible for membership on the committee."

Motion passed.

2000/01-39c A seconded motion from the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Changes to replace Article IV Section 9, Procedures, a-m of the Bylaws with the Revised Grievance Policies and Procedures as amended and approved by the Faculty Senate today. Motion passed.

2000/01-39d A seconded motion from the Committee on UHAP, Constitution, and Bylaws Changes to renumber the entire Constitution and Bylaws using formal outline form. Motion passed.