BOR Work Session on Thursday, 20 May

The BOR will hold a work session on Thursday 20 May at 9:00 a.m. in the Heritage Room.

The agenda is as follows:

1. Budget Update from President Andrews
2. 2010-11 Tuition Rates
3. Faculty Senate Constitution
4. STAMATS Enrollment Marketing Study

Obviously the first item is the most important for all of us. We now know that the Legislature will begin its special session on 24 May (after the primaries, as predicted by just about everyone) with a draft of a compromise budget put together by the Governor's office. We also know some details of that budget (see story here: http://www.moreheadstate.edu/news/release.aspx?id=55230), so it is a matter of learning how the administration is planning to respond.

At graduation, I did have a chance to talk with Rocky Adkins and Walter Blevins about how a government shutdown would affect MSU students and employees. After talking with them, and after reading the news this week, I feel somewhat more optimistic than I did before, but we'll all be relieved when this waiting game is over.

I am also curious how the Faculty Senate Constitution will be received by the administration. As far as I know, it has not been accepted or rejected by President Andrews. There may be a couple of sticking points, but the main one seems to be whether the Faculty Senate has the right to institute formative reviews of the President since the BOR bylaws state that the Board has the "exclusive right" to evaluate the President.

And the final item is tremendously important to us all as well. STAMATES is the firm that we have paid (rather handsomely) to help us determine how to improve our enrollment marketing. Headcount enrollment has been very flat in recent years, and credit hour production is going down. Increased enrollment may not solve all of our problems, but declining enrollment numbers will most certainly keep us from achieving some of our most important goals.

Look for my report on the work session next week.

Ron

Brief Report from 11 March Meeting

At Faculty Senate on Thursday, I promised to deliver my report on the blog, since our meeting was entirely taken up with discussion of the Constitution.

Obviously you can read the press release on the meeting here: http://www.moreheadstate.edu/news/index.aspx?id=53982

I will only make a couple of additional comments.

First, I am delighted in our new Board leadership. John Merchant and John O'Cull will do an excellent job in their respective roles as Board Chair and Vice Chair. Both are very experienced Board members and have my highest respect. I look forward to working with them both.

I also want to thank Elizabeth Mesa-Gaido for doing an excellent job with her sabbatical report. She articulated very clearly and enthusiastically why support for research and scholarly productions is so very important for the institution, our programs, and our students--as well as for our own professional development. She did a great job.

I am happy to report that the University was able to support a limited number of sabbaticals for next year (3 to be exact). I challenged the administration to try to find ways of funding sabbaticals on a firmer footing as we move out of these difficult fiscal times. Basically, there is no money in the budget for sabbaticals at present. Departments and colleges find creative ways of funding sabbaticals with existing resources.

Last, but not least, the Regents gave the President the authority to negotiate the purchase of the current Rowan County Library. Please note that the current Master Plan includes a Classroom to Community Project with a price tag of around 6 million dollars. Purchasing the Library building will come in WAY below that figure and thus should save the University several million dollars over the current plan. It should also be noted that the purchase will be funded with Little Foundation money and matching money from Bucks for Brains. All in all, it sounds like a win/win situation for the University and the community if all goes well.

Have a great spring break.

Ron

BOR Quarterly Meeting on Thursday, 11 March

For some reason, the agenda for the 11 March Quarterly Meeting of the BOR is not on the web just yet. I have seen a draft agenda, and here are some highlights (beyond the 2nd Quarter Financial Report, Personnel Actions, and other routine business):

A. Election of Board Officers
B. Approval of Tenure with Promotions
C. Approval of Sabbatical Leaves
D. Sabbatical Report from Elizabeth Mesa-Gaido (Art)
E. Approval of Purchase of Property and Exception to Master Plan

The last item may be the only controversial item on the agenda, and I would venture to say it is only controversial because of the difficult fiscal situation we are in throughout the state. Basically, the University is interested in pursuing the purchase of the current Rowan County Public Library for use as the location of the Kentucky Center for Traditional Music. The building could be used for other sorts of community outreach programs as well. Before the University can move forward on a purchase, the Regents must approve the exception to the Master Plan (acquiring this property is not on the plan).

From everything I've heard to date, this purchase makes sense for the University if the price is reasonable. If you get a chance, let me know what you think.

As always, you're welcome to attend BOR meetings. I'm sure the Regents would enjoy getting a chance to meet some faculty.

Ron

KTRS Changes

If you haven't read about the proposed changes to KTRS contributions, you may want to take a look at the following story: http://www.moreheadstate.edu/news/index.aspx?id=53716

At the BOR work session on 18 February, we were told that it was likely that individual members would be required to contribute an extra 1% (more or less) phased in over the next couple of years. The increased contribution was to go entirely toward the medical insurance fund for retired workers. Now, of course, we are hearing that the proposed increase will be 3%, phased in over six years. While the change in contributions will help shore up the funding of KTRS, the increased contribution is not likely to be popular with current members, especially since the changes will only affect the medical insurance of retired members.

What you may not realize is that the participating universities will also have to come up with a 3% increase (again, phased in over six years) as part of their contribution. This change will have the basic effect of a budget cut for MSU and the other institutions that utilize KTRS, and I don't have to explain how challenging it will be to pay for this increase under the current circumstances.

We'll have to see what happens with House Bill 540, but I am relatively sure that some sort of increase will indeed be enacted--for us as individuals, and for the University as a whole.

This issue is not an issue the Regents or the administration can solve, but I would be glad to hear your opinions.

Ron

Best Information on the UA-Huntsville Situation

You can find information about the UA-Huntsville shootings all over the web, but the Chronicle of Higher Education website has some of the best information available. Access it here: http://chronicle.com/section/Home/5.

As you might expect, there are some lively debates among Chronicle readers on the subject of tenure and workplace violence.

Breaking News: Raises at WKU

According to the student newspaper at Western Kentucky University, administrators are planning for a modest raise for faculty for next year. The plan would turn the 1.5% bonus faculty got in 2009 into a raise to their base pay this July. Read the story here: http://www.wkuherald.com/2010/02/09/faculty-staff-to-get-raises/

Your natural question might be "If WKU can do it in these tough economic times, why can't MSU do it?" I'll be asking this question repeatedly myself, and I'll be watching to see what the other Kentucky universities do. I am not terribly hopeful that we'll get any raises for 2010-11, but we need to keep a faculty salary enhancement plan on the front burner.

If you haven't read the post on HB 374 below, please take a look at it and tell me what you think.

Ron

House Bill 374 and Faculty Regent Elections?

According to MSU's web page: "House Bill 374, sponsored by Rep. Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, would allow faculty members at the rank of instructor to vote in elections for faculty seats on the governing boards of the six comprehensive universities and also would make them eligible to hold such seats. Current law restricts voting and election rights to faculty at the rank of assistant professor and higher."

I am curious what you think of this proposal.

As the current Faculty Regent, I am probably not entirely objective about such a proposal. But I do have an opinion. There is probably some justification for having Instructors vote for the Faculty Regent. Currently at our institution, non-tenure-eligible faculty (which includes both full-time Instructors and part-time Adjunct Instructors) represent nearly 45% of the total faculty, and they generate close to 30% of the total credit hours of the institution. In the interests of fairness, it seems to me that full-time Instructors should have some say in who represents them on the Board of Regents.

I am much less in favor of allowing full-time Instructors to serve on the Board of Regents. Many of these folks are very capable and very professional, but I strongly believe that our Faculty Regent should be tenured and should be a full professor (the latter is currently not a requirement, btw). It seems like a recipe for disaster to elect a Faculty Regent who could conceivably be fired at a moment's notice and who doesn't have full academic freedom.

But I am willing to be convinced otherwise, so let me know if you have a different opinion on this matter.

Ron