Senate Minutes

March 6, 2006

I.  Approval of Tentative Agenda

            At 3:34 p.m. the University Senate President, Brent Lindquist, called the meeting to order.  The Agenda for the meeting was changed:   VII (Discussion on Open Meeting Procedures) to come before VI (discussion on Proposal for Senate Meeting Quorum.  Approved.

II.  Approval of Minutes

             Minutes from February 6, 2006 were approved.

III.  President’s Report – (See attached report)

            Southampton College close to signing the purchase agreement.  Delay in legal proceedings has meant that we will not meet anticipated F'06 start-up schedule. Instead the plan is to have some events at Southampton this summer; and a few courses in MSRC will begin in the Fall, including freshmen courses to service the community local to the Southampton campus.  We anticipate approximately 300 students for F'06.  A curriculum committee has been organized to work out the details of the offerings to be included at the Southampton campus—The plan is not to be ready to go by Fall of 2007.

            Gyrodyne is moving slowly.  We are waiting for the Judge to decide on the property price.  Groundbreaking should happen in Spring ’06.

            Housing for Southampton and Stony Brook:  There are 250 acres of County land that the county is considering for affordable housing. Stony Brook has entered into discussion with the county to manage some of that property for affordable housing for new faculty.  The Stony Brook Foundation would build at lower rates for this type of housing.

Norman Goodman:  Curriculum Committee for Southampton:  What connection is there with the Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee?   

President:   this committee is a brainstorming committee.

IV.  Provost’s Report:  See attached report.

V.  Proposal for Journalism Program - (see attached Journalism at SB; Implementation Plan): 

            The program has been reviewed by Capra, the Undergraduate Council, the Graduate Council and the A&S Curriculum Committee (A&S will provide governance structure for the journalism program in the near future).  All committees are in favor of the Journalism program, with suggestions that have been communicated to the Provost's office 

Howie Schneider briefly recapitulated the points of the program. Thanked all of the committees and persons working on proposal.  Step 1 is to establish the Undergraduate Program and Step 2 the Graduate Program.  The goal is to turn out thoughtful, independent-minded journalists.  Want to set the bar high for the writing portion. 

Extended discussion on why it is desired to have the Journalism program as a separate school was settled by the Provost's office which noted that all professionally accredited programs on campus exists in separate school units (Nursing, the Engineering programs, Business). Separate school structure is important in maintaining accreditation status, program visibility, competitiveness, etc. Malcolm Bowman from MSRC echoed this by noting that the MSRC is able to compete nationally as a program because of its separate center status.

Motion to accept Implementation of Journalism Program:  The motion passed with 3 abstentions and no dissenting votes.

Senate President Announcements:
Brent Lindquist:  The nomination period for senate position nominations will be extended by one week. 

            Commercial tutoring on Campus:  Undergraduate Council feels that the commercial tutoring on campus be allowed to continue. It recommends that a task force be set up to discuss this in more detail (operating guidelines, oversight; the role of faculty in this oversight process). 

VI.  Discussion on Open Meeting Procedures for Senate Meetings: 

Brent Lindquist: 

            At some point, Senate meetings may come under the Open Meetings law (OML) and we should be prepared.  Stony Brook Counsel has advised that the OML would probably apply to the Senate monthly meeting and not the Senate Standing committees.  Meetings have to be scheduled well in advance and the agenda cannot be changed.  The Senate Executive Committee proposes that the Senate move towards adopting operational aspects of the OML. In particular, recording of votes by individual senators.

            When there is a vote, a sheet will be passed around to record whether the individual Senator is for, against or abstains from the vote. 

The Senate Executive Committee also recommends defining a realistic quorum value to govern votes on senate resolutions.

VII. Resolution on a Senate Quorum.  The Senate Executive Committee recommends that the by-laws be amended to change the definition of a quorum for senate meetings from that specified by Robert's Rules of Order number, and instead be fixed at 25% of filled senator positions.  Senate attendance sheets for the last 9 monthly meetings show attendance records between 32 and 46 senators, which represents roughly 35% of filled senator positions. The Senate Executive Committee is thus comfortable recommending that a quorum be fixed at 25%.

Motion to add the proposed definition of Quorum to the Senate By-Laws passed with 1 abstention.

No old business. 
No new business.

Meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,
W. Brent Lindquist
President-University Senate

and
Laurie Theobalt
Secretary
University Senate