ECUS 2009-2010 Parking Lots [DRAFT]
Last updated:

Committee Parking Lot [SUBJECT TO REVIEW OF ECUS]
This parking lot is a holding area for ideas that might be revisited at a future meeting of the Executive Committee.  Listing these items in this parking lot is an attempt to keep them on the radar and this list will be periodically reviewed by the Executive Committee.  The date in parentheses indicates the most recent meeting date at which the item was discussed.

  1. Further discussion among ECUS and Standing Committee Chairs on a Standardized Review of Policy [09-30-09]
               Talking points may include but not be limited to: the possible creation of a process to initiate policy review, observation that each standing committee has the authority to proactively review existing policy within its scope, observation that a on-line policy index is in development.

  2. Discussion of standing vs. steering function of the Executive Committee and Access to the University Senate for business items. [10-07-09]

  3. Discussion of the glossary of operational definitions [policy, procedure, concern, resolution, information item, etc] with an emphasis on the types of functions and actions of the University Senate such as policy/curricular, informational item, expressing a concern, recommendation, advisory function. [10-07-09]

  4. Discussion on the advisory function of the University Senate in the context of a review of university-wide committees to determine whether or not such committees might be redundant or the charge of such committees might be appropriately handled by the University Senate or its committees. [10-07-09]  This item was discussed at the 12 Apr 2010 ECUS meeting and received disposition.  At the 04-21-2010 ECUS meeting, this was removed from the parking lot.

  5. Discussion of the broadening of the scope of the University Senate from policy making to include the academic responsibilities (curriculum, faculty welfare including rights, responsibilities, tenure, promotion, retention, recruitment, etc.) of faculty articulated in Section 3.2.4 of BoR policy and the AAUP Redbook. [11-04-09] DRAFT -this parking lot item was drafted by Craig Turner and is unofficial until endorsed by ECUS.  This item was endorsed for inclusion on the parking lot by ECUS at its 04-21-2010 meeting.

  6. Develop a process for documenting the second visit of a committed motion to the senate within the motion database.  [11-16-09]  DRAFT - this parking lot item was drafted by Craig Turner and is unofficial until endorsed by ECUS.  This item was endorsed for inclusion on the parking lot by ECUS at its 04-21-2010 meeting.

  7. Consider adopting a practice to invite incoming University Senators to attend a University Senate meeting prior to the start of their terms of service. [11-16-09]  DRAFT - this parking lot item was drafted by Craig Turner and is unofficial until endorsed by ECUS. At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended this item be removed from this parking lot and placed as a recommendation to the 2010-2011 ECUS in the 2009-2010 annual report.

 

Updates Parking Lot [UPDATES WE MIGHT HEAR AT A MEETING SOME DAY]

  1. An update on Communication on Curricular Matters from Provost Jordan at some point following the 10/02/09 CAPC meeting.  [09-30-09]  At the 04-21-2010 ECUS meeting, this was removed from the parking lot.
  2. An update on the Academic Affairs Handbook Revision Process from Provost Jordan   [09-30-09]  At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended this item be removed from this parking lot and placed as a recommendation to the 2010-2011 ECUS in the 2009-2010 annual report.

 

Bylaws Parking Lot [Content Matters]
The items on this list are issues that have been identified to be considered for proposed bylaws revisions.  Prior to making the determination of whether or not to propose a revision to the bylaws, these items are subject to further discussion at one or more future meetings of the Executive Committee.  Such conversations might be informed by consultation with other members of the university community such as members of the University Senate and/or University Senate committees.

1.    II.Section4.A. (content)

           Presiding Officer Elect - Review eligibility criteria to ensure it is articulated in a desirable way.

           Question: Should a candidate for this position be required to have at least two more years in their three year term of service?

           Broader Question: Is it desirable to decouple US Officers from committee slate and select US Officers PRIOR to considering committee slate?

                 If so, how might it be implemented?   At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended this item be removed from this parking lot given that it would be discussed at the University Senate meeting on 11-Aug -2010 as part of the 2010 Governance Retreat.

         

 

2.    II.Section2.A.1 (content)

            Corps of Instruction List - Definition of Faculty for Apportionment and Election Purposes

            Question: Are there alternative ways to define faculty preferable to BoR Corps of Instruction List (Full-time with rank)

 

3.    I.Section1.D.  (content)

            Veto -- Presidential Actions on University Senate Motions [this section is a quote from the Institutional Statutes]

               Question: Must the University President act on EVERY action of the University Senate?

                    i.e. Slate of Nominees from SubCommittee on Nominations

                    i.e. Resolutions (Is it desirable to require a formal approve or veto by University President?)

                Might consider offering the University President a third option [beyond veto and approve] such as "Receive as Information Item" or "Acknowledge"

 

4.    II.Section 4.  Officers of the University Senate (content)  [11-04-09 meeting; for wider vetting at Nov SCC/ECUS and US meetings]  

            DRAFT -this parking lot item was drafted by Craig Turner and is unofficial until endorsed by ECUS

            Question: Should a President Pro Tempore or a Vice President position be a replacement for the current Presiding Officer Elect position?

            Question: Should the incoming University Senate select (elect) its Presiding Officer (still require elected faculty senator as eligibility)?

            Question: Should there be some form of campaigning (statement on desire to serve (in writing and/or at an organizational meeting)) for officer candidacy?

            Question: Should the timeline for selection/election of elected faculty senators be compressed to permit time for US officer selection process?

            Question: Should University Senate officer selection occur prior to the organizational meeting at which the slate of committees is considered?

            Question: How might officers be selected?  On-line vote? Another organizational meeting with vote after campaigning? other process?

            Question: How might inclusion and accessibility for service on the University Senate (particularly as leaders) be promoted?

At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended this item be removed from this parking lot given that it would be discussed at the University Senate meeting on 11-Aug -2010 as part of the 2010 Governance Retreat.

 

5.    VI: Bylaws Revision Process (content)  [11-04-09 meeting]  

               Suggestion to amend bylaws revision process to make only "substantive" changes endure the two meeting rule

                     with a separate compressed process for "editorial" (minor wording) changes (possibly consent agenda item if such survive review)                

At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended this item be removed from this parking lot given that it was motion 0910.EC.002.B.

Bylaws Parking Lot [Editorial Matters] 
The items on this list are more editorial (less substantive) matters that may result in proposed bylaws revisions.  Prior to becoming a proposed bylaws revision, the issue is subject to consideration at one or more future meetings of the Executive Committee.

At its 04-21-2010 meeting, ECUS members recommended these items be removed from this parking lot given that they were included in motion 0910.EC.001.B.

1.    All Sections:  (editorial)

           Consider adding subtitles to sections as has been the practice in recent revisions to the bylaws

 

2.    IV.Section3.A. (editorial)

          Replace "chair" with "officer" [a remnant of collapsing of two organizational meetings to one with all officers elected at once]

 

3.    V.Section1.A. (editorial)

            Minimum Size of ECUS is seven members (not eight as presently stated) -- Univ Pres, Provost, Three Officers, Two more [for five academic units]

 

4.     V.Section2.C.1 (editorial)

            APC Composition: Given that in 2008-09 the conversation of adding a voting student member to the APC, the editorial adjustment was not made here

                Consider changing "VPAA" to "Chief Academic Officer", "which" to "whom", and "that" to "who"

 

5     II.Section1.A.4. (editorial)

               Student Members on University Senate

                  Consider changing "student member" to "selected student senator" and "students to serve as university senators" to "selected student senators"

 

6.    II.Section1.A.1 (editorial)

              University Senate Composition

                  Consider changing the first two occurrences of  "that are" to "who are" the third occurrence of  "that are" to "identified as" and "from the" to "who are"