3:00-5:00 pm, Wednesday, September 24, 2008 (GSLIS 126)
Paula Kaufman, chair, with quorum present
1. Provost Linda Katehi, introduced by Paula Kaufman (3 rd agenda item)
The Provost thanked the Faculty for being invited. This is an opportunity for discussion as we move forward on the campus's strategic plan.
The Provost went over the planning process she initiated with the Council of Deans (COD) since coming to the University three years ago. Discussions have evolved during the summer retreats:
2006: Team getting to know each other; importance of strategic plan and process
2007: Talked about values initiatives and how they connect to specific units.
2008: How to accomplish the goals of the plan-importance of bringing the plan to completion.
The campus faces external and internal financial challenges, especially given today's economic environment. This drives us to rethink what we do on this campus. Despite our best efforts, we cannot guarantee that we will be successful in raising public funds. The state economy combined with rising tuitions require us to justify why the University should receive extra funds; it's difficult to explain to the public that we want them to make additional financial sacrifices.
We must ask whether we have done the best we can to lower costs? Our rate of spending is greater than the growth of our revenues; to move forward, we need to improve our own organization, making it higher quality, more effective and capable of addressing challenges. A number of the ideas generated at the retreats will do this.
The Provost indicated that she appreciated the Library's resolve in asking difficult planning questions and seeking solutions. Faculty, staff and student support are needed to make this work.
Questions & Answers
Q1 (John Wagstaff, Music & Performing Arts):
With the current financial climate, financial responsibility does not get us very far. Excellent advocacy at the State level is important; what mechanisms do we have in place?
A1 (Linda Katehi) :
Disagrees; thinks that financial responsibility will indeed be scrutinized and regulated. We have a responsibility to people in the State. Deficit = lack of respect/responsibility.
The question she would have asked is: What kind of sacrifice are we prepared to make? Rethinking involves looking not just at duplication within units but at cross-campus functions such as information technology, student services, etc., in order to use resources more effectively/efficiently and improve our service.
Q2 (Bill Mischo, Grainger Engineering):
The State portion of University funding has dropped to ~30%, resulting in a dependency on outside funding. What can we do to increase this, especially in light of graduate students' primarily grant-supported status?
A2 (Linda Katehi):
We are forced to become more like the private sector by raising funds through alumni, and providing services etc. using new technologies. We need to consider what the right size is for our institution. We currently have a high cost per student; high quality space is expensive, as are utilities, staffing and the start-up costs of investing in new technologies.
Q3 (Alvan Bregman, Rare Book & Manuscript):
What about the cost of sports programs? Are they separate? Do we benefit financially from donors who give to athletics?
A3 (Linda Katehi):
Sports programs are totally and honestly self-supporting (donors & users). They contribute money to other operations.
Q4 (Chatham Ewing, Rare Book & Manuscript):
What kind of re-engineering/re-envisioning will take place, and how will Faculty take part in that process?
A4 (Linda Katehi):
It's important to stay with the process: it could take 10 years or more to achieve a re-engineering by function. (A similar process at IBM took 25 years.) Reorganization should benefit units.
Q5 (Muhammad al-Faruque, Asian):
What are our financial priorities, and what is the prioritization process?
A5 (Linda Katehi):
There exists broad disparity between units, in terms of technology and scholarship. Priorities are not always financially-driven: example of $1000 LAS faculty support fund implemented this year. Money is the tool, not the goal.
2. Energy Conservation Initiative (Terry Ruprecht, Director of Energy Conservation) (4 rd agenda item)
O verview of campus energy situation:
Our energy use has increased threefold in the last 5 years, resulting in a $90 million campus deficit (due to rising fuel prices and increased electrical consumption.) Adding space and technology, we have "grown our way to energy consumption". UIUC is 3 rd in the Big Ten in electricity consumption.
UIUC's carbon footprint is primarily (96.4%) based upon building use (coal based). A 1% reduction would save ~$500K and 5200 tons of carbon emissions. A 20% reduction would meet Kyoto protocols. We have no history of energy conservation. Because energy was accounted for at the system-level, units never saw a bill, however a 20% reduction in energy is a doable goal.
The "dirty dozen" consists of the 12 buildings that are responsible for 30% of energy use on campus. The Main Library ranks 15 in the list of buildings' energy use.
What have we done to date?
KCPA example: $188,000 up front cost resulted in $380,000 annual savings (6 month payback), and is no longer one of the "dirty dozen".
Areas in need of attention:
What can we do now?
3. Approval of Faculty Meeting minutes of July 23, 2008 (1 st agenda item)
Approved, no changes (Gail Hueting moved, Muhammad al Faruque second, no opposition).
4. Introduction of New Faculty Members (2 nd agenda item)
Chatham Ewing-Curator of Special Collections, Rare Book and Manuscript Library.
Jason Quackenbush-Advancement (responsible for the annual gift programs and Library Friends.
5. Committee Reports: Executive Committee (Bill Mischo, Vice Chair)
See the EC website for agendas and minutes, and new membership. Highlights of recent meetings include:
Q1 (Al Kagan, Africana)
Will email messages be sent out when posting to EC web?
A1 (Bill Mischo)
6. Zero Time Appointment for Patricia Miller, Executive Director of the Illinois Heritage Association (Bill Mischo)
This agendum was carried over from the last Faculty Meeting. A 0% appointment to Library Faculty, proposed by Beth Sandore and endorsed by EC. The motion to approve the zero-time appointment of Patricia Miller to the Library Faculty was carried.
7. ByLaws Committee (Al Kagan and Mary Mallory)
This item was carried over from the last Faculty Meeting. See the July 2008 minutes for details.
Al Kagan introduced the motion to amend Article 6, section 1C by addition of 3 additional clauses (see Appendix I, below). "Advice of the faculty" should mean holding a vote, according to Senate Statutes. A "Yes" vote would establish a formal voice in library reorganization as it affects divisions.
Lynn Wiley (Acquisitions): We already operate under UIUC Senate rules, so why need to be specific? Have other units changed bylaws to be this specific?
Mary Mallory (Government Documents): The proposed amendments reinforce the Senate rules.
Chatham Ewing (RBML): What does "changes in structure" mean? When would approval be required?
Al Kagan: Clear case would be changes at the unit level, for example, either to dissolve a unit.
Mary Mallory: Another example would be to merge two divisions. She urged the Faculty to support the motion, using the example of proposed changes to Government Documents under the NSM that could have a great impact on the research and service of faculty. EC decisions should be reinforced by vote of faculty, to ensure better communication with those involved.
It having been determined that a quorum was present, the motion "to put the amendments proposed by the ByLaws Committee to a vote of the Faculty" was voted on and was CARRIED by majority.
8. Report of the University Librarian (Paula Kaufman)
Paula Kaufman announced that the Mortensen Center will be receiving a Macarthur grant of $200K for work in Nigeria.
Four shared initiatives in which PTK is involved:
Q1: Barb Henigman, Law
Are these monographic or serial?
A1: Paula Kaufman
Any media, any format
Q2: Caroline Szylowicz
How will our last copies be identified?
A2: Paula Kaufman
We don't weed out last copies, though guidelines will be needed to ensure these are kept.
9. Old business
10. New business
OSHER Lifelong Learning Center: "Loving Frank" (Frank Lloyd Wright), with a lecture, book study group and bus tour, October 27.
The Rare Book & Manuscript Library has mounted on exhibit entitled "Multiple Merwins: Poet, Translator and Environmental Activist" in connection with the visit of W.S. Merwin to campus on October 28. On that day there will be a reception for the poet at 1:00 pm in RBML.
UIUC College of Education will hold its Youth Literature Festival on campus October 2-4, 2008.
A motion to adjourn was passed at 5pm
APPENDIX I: ByLaws Committee presentation and motion
The Bylaws Committee is proposing the following changes to the University Library Bylaws. The purpose is to encourage shared governance by bringing the bylaws into conformance with the principle behind the UIUC Senate rules change of February 20, 2006, "Change to Senate Standing Rule 13 to Require Faculty Votes for changes to Academic Units." UIUC Senate Rule 13 states in part:
"B. In any proposal for the formation or change in academic organization (such as, termination, separation, transfer, merger, change in status, or renaming) of an academic unit, as provided in the University Statutes, Article VIII, the advice of the faculty at each level (e.g., department, school, college, as applicable) shall be taken and recorded by vote of the faculty. Voting shall be as provided in the bylaws of each unit."
Proposed amendment to Article VI, Section 1 (new language is indicated by Italic font):
ARTICLE VI. STRUCTURE | Section 1. COMPOSITION AND GOVERNANCE
C. Changes in the structure of the organization shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Article IV, Section 4 and Article VIII, Section 2 of the Statutes. Changes in the structure or composition of the divisions shall be made only with the advice of the Faculty as taken and recorded by Faculty vote.
C.1. Changes within a single division are subject to an advisory vote of the Faculty within that division.
C.2. Changes that affect two or three divisions are subject to an advisory vote of the Faculty of each of the divisions affected.
C.3. Changes in four or more divisions are subject to an advisory vote of all of the Faculty of the Library.
This revised proposal was discussed at the July 23rd faculty meeting but we lacked a quorum and could not take any action concerning a ballot. Questions can be addressed to members of the Bylaws Committee: Al Kagan (chair), Mary Mallory, and Bill Maher.
Amendments to the Library Bylaws may be voted by electronic or mail ballot or at a subsequent special meeting of the Library Faculty. Bylaws amendments require a two-thirds majority of those voting at a meeting or by electronic or mail ballot.