University Committee Meeting Minutes
approved March 2, 2015
a. Fair reminded UC about UC-WARF lunch meeting, student budget forum, and joint finance committee briefing in March.
b. Fair called UC’s attention to student resolution from Milwaukee.
c. Fair indicated that chancellor will follow up on UC discussion with Athletic Board chair on possible statements from Athletics personnel on budget and related matters.
a. Suggestion to make explicit call to separate public authority from the budget. Discussion of positives and negatives of decoupling and whether this resolution should address the merits of the public authority itself or be limited to addressing the process. Consensus to leave as is to best make argument that public authority is a major policy change that deserves significant study and public discussion.
b. Discussion of what date, if any, to include at end of resolution.
a. Van Gamert presented the “University Libraries Collections Budget Request” (handout). Consolidation of libraries was raised; Van Gamert would be glad to return to UC to discuss that and/or possible new revenue sources. UW collections budget remains bottom of Big 10. Strategy of this request is annual increase with hedge for inflation. Ample discussion, largely about role of for-profit publishers.
b. K. Broman presented “Open Access Working Group Charge” (handout). UW behind peers in development of open access policies. Working group looking at public access repositories and related issues. Report will ultimately go to Faculty Senate for review and approval. Discussion.
a. Mangelsdorf asked about process for Distinguished Teaching Awards. Smith updated her on process and possible role(s) for provost’s office.
b. UC briefed provost on upcoming meeting with WARF and asked if there might be role for WARF in filling budget gap. Mangelsdorf directed UC to chancellor on this.
c. UC asked provost about budget letters to deans. Mangelsdorf indicated that these are still under review but will be sent out in a matter of days. Discussion of various aspects of budget, including layoffs, consolidations, and messaging.
d. UC asked about impact of budget proposal on searches and recruitments. Mangelsdorf has gotten mixed feedback from schools and colleges, but no clear picture possible until data is complete. Some schools were already conservative in approach to recruitment this year. Some schools have placed holds on searches, but no data on how many, if any, were closed.
e. Extensive discussion of impact of budget uncertainty on class schedules and timetable.
a. Johannes requested permission for a retired committee member to continue on the committee in order to have quorum for upcoming approval of new commanding officer. UC agreed that since retirement date was during this academic year, position is still valid and no need for approval.
b. Johannes requested changes to the committee membership and appointments. Currently whole committee turns over every year and there is ambiguity about the role of the director. This will be addressed in the ongoing Chapter 6 review.