October 2024

Faculty Assembly

October 2024

 

UCCS Faculty Representative Assembly Meeting

Friday October 11, 2024

 

 

Attendance:  Joel Tonyan (President), David Havlick (President Elect), Monica Yoo (Past President), Kylie Rogalla (Secretary), Lynn Vidler, Kathy Kaodis, Laura Austin-Eurich, Melissa Benton, Dylan Harris, Susan Taylor, Cathy Simmons, Les Tekamp, Douglas Risser, Sara Hagehorn, Todd Endres, Assma Sawani, Robert Mitchell, Henriikka Weir, Markus Moeder-Chandler, Margaret Harris, Marina Eckler, Aaron Corcoran, Michelle Dorne, Gabriel Martinez Mercier, Catherine Simmons, Rosely Conz, Matthew Beckwith, Douglas Risser, Colin Mahoney, Suman Lakkakula, Zhe Li, Evan Taparata, David Weiss, Jian Ma, DAvid Moon, Birgitta de Pree, Gordon Stringer, Jennifer Zhon, Janet Giddings, Mark Ferguson, Solveig Olsen, David Anderson

 

Call to Order / Approval of Minutes

Motion to approve September 13 Minutes

            Moved by: David Havlick

            Seconded by: Monica Yoo

            Motion passes 

 

Reports of Visitors:

Angela Bender & Andrew Archuleta, Human Resources

  • PowerPoint Presentation
  • Hello everyone. We wanted to come in and give an update about compensation with you all. 
  • Merit Pay: Coming it at a flat rate, we are now able to discuss a 2% merit pool for regular and research faculty making $85,000 or less. The 2% will be given to the Deans to decide how to distribute those merit increases. 
    • Question: Will Dean’s be able to make a decision to give it out to everyone, include those making more than $85,000?
      • No, the Dean can only give merit to those making $85,000 or below. 
    • Question: How is compression being addressed?
      • So give out merit like this does cause more compression. We are looking at compression as a whole. We are hoping to have money to be able to address compression in the coming years.
    • Question: When will the Dean’s get the money?
      • This merit increase is effective January 1st. Doesn’t apply until January 1st. So they have the money but not being used yet.
    • Question: How does the merit increase going to the Deans affect staff?
      • So staff processes are different. It is based on their annual reviews and will be distributed based on what they received during those reviews. The increase will go only to those making $85,000 or less and it includes administration. 

  • Compensation Task Force Feedback

    • We have looked at staff and we are starting to look at faculty. We are really here to get feedback from faculty. What are your issues? What do you want us to look into? We want to get your feedback so that we can bring it back to the Provost and leadership to consider how we will be moving forward. 
    • We have identified these issues from the task force that we will be considering solutions to them. (For more detail, refer to the PowerPoint document)
      • Variation Across Colleges
      • Rank & Responsibilities
      • Concerns About Salary Ranges and Minimums
      • Standardization of Definitions – Defining teaching, research, & Service
      • Living Wage Considerations
      • Service Definition & Compensation
      • Compensation Differences Among Faculty Types
      • Living Wage & Empowerment
    • This is what we have learned. What do you want us to do from here? Should we get some kind of structure put into place? Do we want procedures created or policies? 
    • Comment: What is shared is just a summary of what was said. These aren’t equally represented in the bullet points. These were conversations that came up with the focus groups.  
    • It would be good for you all to discuss and let us know what you would like for us to do. So that will set a direction for us. 
      • Question: Is “workload” teaching only? 
        • The point of this feedback was that IRC felt that they completed the same amount of work or more than TT and felt that compensation was unfair.
        • Don’t want this to turn into IRC vs TT. This conversation was coming from how do we want to focus on what is bringing in money to the campus and we best support those positions.
      • Question: Do you foresee a salary increase for FY26?
        • I think that it is early to be able say if we will have any money. If we get an increases to merit next year, we will likely need to cut money from somewhere else. 
        • Just to be clear, this task force is not about what we will pay people but to make sure that we have the structures to help determine pay for each area.  
      • Comment: Each area is just so different and it is difficult to put anything into place that would work for everyone. It varies by each college, by TT & IRC, and we have to keep in mind the compression issues. It is very complicated. 
    • Please go back and discuss this with your areas and we will have another conversation about this at your next meeting. 

     

Kathy Kaoudis, Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance

  • We are waiting for the gov budget to come out on Nov. 1. That will have the gov priorities.  The forecast has shown that the state as a whole will have a budget gap which means that there will not be much new money. Last year we got a lot of funds. We are not expecting that again. We are also not expecting to be cut. This means that for FY26, unless our enrollment goes up, we will have a year where we will need to make budget cuts again. Our costs are going up more than our revenue. Our system office and other institutions work closely together with the joint budget committee to craft a plan that will allow the state to balance their budget but also have a collaborative approach to what that funding will look like. 
  • Last month – we had a successful strategy summit on September 9th about what we believe our priorities are and what distinguishes us from other universities. Held 3 financial strategy sessions. Each VC, each Dean, and Auxiliaries presented. These were recorded and we are working to get them edit them down and get the key points out from them along with the slides. All of the info that we have gathered will be used in a retreat with ELT and Deans and at the UBAC retreat. Those retreats will create a rubric on how we evaluate those one-time funding items and what we need to continue, what we change the scope of, and what we need to stop doing. 
  • Sustainability: We have a number of events in the next month. Working with Polly at the Farm with her focus being on creating sustainability events. This goes back to what the Farm was originally planned to be.
  • Auxiliary Strategic Plan – That draft plan is available online and you can give feedback. Will be finalizing in two weeks so that it can start the process of being reviewed by the Regents. 
    • Question: Can we send out communication about the Master Plan so everyone knows? 
      • We can do that. There have been some open forums that have been done but we can make this known to everyone.

Jennifer Sobanet, Chancellor - Presented by Interim Provost Lynn Vidler

  • Thank you to everyone for the financial strategy sessions. Will be making those recordings available through UBAC Teams. 
  • Gratitude to FA Executive Committee & Staff Council Executive Committee on giving feedback about what is valuable on campus. 
  • Retreat in November with ELT and January for the UBAC retreat to discuss how do we go about setting criteria for decision making on one-time funding. 
  • Thank you to everyone for the conversation about adding faculty back into the graduation process. There has been a discussion about having faculty sit on the stage instead of on the floor in front of the stage. SGA also provided feedback on how the students felt about it. The feedback was that the faculty liked to be on the floor to see the students when they get off the stage. So we will have a few more rows on stage for faculty to sit there and we will also have the seating on the floor as well. The seating on the stage will likely be on a first come, first serve basis. 
  • Regent’s meeting in November will be at UCCS and we will have a key note speaker and open discussions before the start of the Regent’s meeting. 
    • Question: With commencement – seems like there could be a better access for those with disabilities to get off stage. There is a ramp going up to get on the stage but then they go down the stairs to get off. 
      • Students do not have to use the stairs but I’m not sure how well that is communicated. I will give this to Danielle to discuss and look into. 

Lynn Vidler, Interim Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs 

  • We are really excited that Jacqueline Rearick has now started as the Executive Director of the Office of Sponsored Programs. She is very excited to be here and we are excited to have that office fully staffed again. Thank you everyone for your patience as we got her in place. 
  • Policy – making slow progress on moving some policies forward. Next week we will be looking at differentiated workload and SOMETHING ELSE. The grievance is on pause until we get a meeting scheduled with legal. That will come up next week or the week after. 
  • State wide conversation of the option for a reduced credit bachelor’s degree. This would not be a BA or BS, it would be something else. It would be 90 credits. Right now there is some question about weather that is legal under Colorado statute. These conversations are happening so think about how might that look in your area.
  • Compensation Task Force – Did want to point out that one of the bullet point is defining the definition of teaching, research, and service. These are very different across disciplines and wan t you to keep it in mind
    • Question: Where would they cut the credits for this reduced bachelor’s?
      • That would be up to the faculty to determine. I don’t think there is just one way for it to be done. As others think through this perhaps in other states, we will start to see how other institutions are doing it. It remains to be seen to what extent employers are for it. 
    • Question: Who is pushing for reduced credits?
      • I don’t know. I can make some guesses. There are some states, like CO, that have a goal to get a certain % of residents to have secondary education. (CHECK ON LANGUAGE) 
      • I will keep you in the loop. It is such a massive switch which is why I wanted to bring it up now. It would just be an option, but we would not get rid of the standard 120 credits. It would not be called BA or BS. 
    • Comment: If they are going to cut funding, wouldn’t it be better to fund our current programs. Also if we offer a 90 credit option, that will essentially replace the 120 credit hour option. 
      • That is why I wanted to bring this up and let everyone know ahead of time. 

Reports of Officers:

Report of the President – Joel Tonyan

  • FA Constitution Task Force: 
    • We have had 5 people that have volunteered to join the task force for the constitution. Norah Mazel will chair that committee. If you are interested in joining that task force, you have until the 14th to let me know that you are interested. 
    • The committee will take most of the Fall semester to review and see what changes we might want to adjust. 
  • We have a Vacancy: LAS Arts and Humanities. We have had some nominations. Will be sending out a vote for that.
  • Graduation Layout: I really appreciated the response. Majority want to sit in front of the stage and having the opportunity to engage with their students. We talked about a third path. We are going to give options for first come first serve for faculty to sit on the stage. Everyone else will be able to sit on the floor. Can look into the accessibility of getting on and off the stage. This registration will go out next week. 
  • Looking for more opportunities to reach out and get feedback from faculty more frequently. 

 

Report of the President-Elect – David Havlick

  • If you have any topics that you would like to be brought up for the November Regents meeting, please do let us know.

 

Report of the Past-President – Monica Yoo

  • Nothing New to Report

 

Committee Reports

Representative Reports

  • Assma Sawani, College of Business—testing center concerns, accommodations, make-up exams

    • A number brought up concerns about testing center not being able to accommodate make-up exams. Is this going to continue moving forward? Worried about how to arrange the make-up times. Will this ever go back to the testing center? 
    • It is a concern with lecturers that need to oversee make-up exams who do not have time. 
    • Can we have a different testing center? Is there somewhere that these can be housed?
    • Can the Excel Centers help with this? Can students help? Can undergrads proctor other undergrads? 
    • Need an actual physical location and proctors. 
    • Joel Tonayn: Can bring forward to Lynn that this is still something that needs to be address and done to help out our faculty. 

 

Unfinished Business

No unfinished business

 

New Business

  1. Guest #1: Bill Lueck—Hotel/Conference Center
  • PowerPoint Presentation
  • Raising awareness of this proposed project. Campus Master Plan has a proposed conference center included based on feedback from faculty and staff. The UCCS Development Corporation supports the strengthening instructional, research and service programs throughout the University. It has been going for about 7 years and consists of leadership and COS leaders. 
  • The conference center will not be owned by us. We will just give the ground lease for the hotel. 
  • Considering if we will do an RFI or a more concrete RFP. Will have to go back to the Regents before moving forward with either option. We have presented this to the Regents before but this would be for official approval. 
  • Market Research was done through a class run by Dr. Van Scotter to determine demand, market factors, campus synergies, and industry best practices. 
  • This plan will move the softball field next to the baseball field and the hotel would be built just behind the Ent Center. 
  • This must be revenue positive for UCCS or it won’t happen. We have high support in the community for this now. 
    • Question: Were the faculty asked about demand for this?
      • We reached out to FA and Staff Council. 
      • We are open to ideas
    • Question: What is the difference between ground lease vs ownership? 
      • At Boulder, the are opening a conference center. The University bought into it. We do not plan to do that. We can take a valuable asset and turn it into a reliable revenue. 
    • Question: What is the timeline?
      • Winter 25/26 would be the groundbreaking.
    • Question: Have we considered what else we might want to do with that land in the next 100 years? 
      • Now is the time to discuss how we want to use this land. It can be tangibly beneficial to the Ent center and Campus. We need to have the support of faculty and staff to be able to move forward with this. We don’t have the revenue stream figured out completely as of yet but that some of the revenue could be used to help the Ent Center. Programmatically, the two facilities would be connected. Conference that needs more space can use Ent. 
    • Question: Are hotels being maxed out?
      • Yes. There are many new hotels being built in CoS to meet demand. This would include 70% full. 
    • Question: The ground lease deal, is that similar to the Ent bank on Nevada? 
      • Yes I believe that they do. 
    • Question: We talked about merit for faculty. Do we believe that Ent Center should be funded over maintaining faculty? 
      • We can certainly talk about this more and discuss more if we move forward.  
    • Question: What implications would this have for the Austin Bluffs Open Space?
      • We have not done an environmental study. We will figure this out during an RFP process. 
    • Comment: Ent has been used for Copyright Conference. Could the Conference center steal some revenue from the Ent center?
      • It would be based on the schedule that we would use with the conference center so that we avoid this issue. This was brought up in the research that was done. 
    • Comment: Can see the cost of bringing in candidates to have discounted rates at the hotel on campus. 
    • Comment: Concerned about who will own this hotel and if they will charge high rates.
      • Recommended a discount structure. It seems that it will be necessary for us to be able to do that. Will look closely at who we partner with and how that will look for UCCS. 
    • Comment: We have put candidates downtown which actually has made a huge difference. It seems valuable to put them there. 
    • Question: If all we are doing is leasing land, how can it not be a revenue positive? What could go wrong?
      • Hypothetically – If we give discounts based on different factors. We will need to make sure that the lease is done in a way that makes sure that it is a revenue positive.
  • Question: What will this do with our University Events? If events isn’t making money, then this would likely make big issues. 
    • Generally, it was determined that it would be positive. Events doesn’t have a big enough space for outside events and this would give another option for larger events. 

  • Will look into sending out another survey for Faculty opinions

     

  • Guest #2: Laurel Bidwell & Jennifer Poe - RPT Criteria Review Committee
    • FPECR Committee Bylaws
    • Question: What will you do to encourage IRC involvement?
      • Emily Skop will be moving off the committee this year. We are going to be looking for an IRC faculty member to take that place. It will go through the same process
    • Question: There is no male representation, should there be?
      • We did have male representation on the committee but he did have to step down. We based out bylaws based on the FA bylaws and there were no gender specifications in the FA bylaws.
    • Question: How was committee formed?
      • Last year, there was a call from FA for volunteers to create the committee. That is how the original group was formed. 
      • Once we are established, we will go through FA like all other committees. 
    • Question: Is there going to be any restrictions on joining this committee if you are on an RPT committees? 
      • Writing that down. Is the thought that there would be a conflict of interest? What would that be? This committee is just providing recommendations to departments that request it. We will discuss as a committee if there is a conflict of interest. 
    • Question: When talking about term lengths and roles, is there a requirement to rotate off after your time is up? How can they continue to sit on the committee if they must rotate off?
      • What we would do, it would go through FA so that there is a call for those who want to join the committee. The person that rotates off can put their name forward again. 
    • Question: Did this start out as a task force and then moved to a FA committee? Should we have an election to get others on the committee? 
      • This was established as a call from FA last year.
    • Question: As a review of annual merit and RPT criteria, it seems that there should be equal representation of IRC. Should TT be reviewing IRC criteria? Does it make more sense to have two committees? One for TT and one for IRC? 
      • We would love to do this but I'm not sure that would be able to work to fill both committees with our limited number of faculty that are able to join. These recommendations that come from the committee are not going to be requirements, it would just be an rubric that is used as a guideline. Asks questions for the departments that request it. 
      • This is the way that it came to us and we would love to hear from IRC on what they would like to see. 
      • We are not setting criteria, we are providing a way for departments to reach out to us and this committee will ask questions to help align with suggestions made in the White Paper.
    • Joel will set up a meeting with this committee and the FA Executive Committee. Might want to reach out to the IRC Committee to see what their thoughts on this committee make-up. 

Motion to Adjourn

Les Tekamp motioned to end the meeting; David Moon seconded; passed.  

Next meeting: Friday, November 8th, 2024, 12:00-2:00 pm in Hyflex Format; Dwire 103 or MS Teams