FACULTY SENATE MEETING
November 6, 2007
Present: Chair Martin, Secretary Kellner, Past Chair Allen, Parliamentarian Corbin; Provost Nielsen; Senators Ambaras, Anson, Bernhard, Dawes, Domingue, Evans, Fauntleroy, Fleisher, Genzer, Havner, Hergeth, Heitmann, Hudson, Levy, Lindsay, Moore, Murty, Overton, Poling, Raymond, Shamey, Walker, Williams
Excused: Senators Lindbo, Robarge, Schweitzer, Scotford
Absent: Senators Akroyd, Hanley-Bowdoin, Muddiman, Ozturk, Ristaino, Wessels
Visitors: P. J. Teal, Secretary of the University; Marcia Gumpertz, Assistant Vice Provost for Faculty and Staff Diversity; Thomas Conway, Dean, DUAP; David Hunt, News Services; Bobby Mills, Student Body President; William Kinsella, Associate Professor, Communications; Amber Joyner, SG-Senate Academics Committee; D. Marquis McCullough, SG-Senator, College of Education; Laurie Texton, Academic Personnel Coordinator-HR; Beth Buck, Employee (EPA) Relations Consultant; Jack Colby, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Facilities Operations; Bill Winner, Professor, Coordinator ES/NR Program
1. Call to Order
Chair James D. Martin called the sixth meeting of the fifty-fourth session of the North Carolina State University Faculty Senate to order at 3:00 p.m.
2. Remarks from the Chair
We are trying to learn something about our Energy Council, what all is going on with respect to the year of energy, what that is going to mean for us in terms of programs that are already started and those that may be started. We will look to see what kind of input faculty and the Faculty Senate in particular may be able to play in some of that.
This afternoon I would like to focus on thinking about perception and reality as we think about issues of energy sustainability. Concern for energy and sustainability right now is like grandma and apple pie. It’s the word of the day, “of course we care about energy and of course we care about sustainability,” but unfortunately when it comes to dealing with the reality of energy and efficiency whether its energy efficiency, whether its reducing our carbon footprint, alternative energy, carbon dioxide emissions, you name it, many different problems and in fact, many seeming solutions to the problems may or may not have the implications that they are described to have. So, what is perception? What is reality? Dealing with these things is actually a very serious and difficult matter. Of course it requires investments, a lot of politics, and a lot of hard work. There are lots of arguments made but how do we evaluate which of those arguments we should care about. What are things that we do that would really make an impact? What are those things that are grandma and apple pie that will just make us feel good? What are the issues of reality? What are the perceptions? Well, of course, I think in the way of object lessons and it reminds me of the age-old coke or diet coke issue; both, after all are refreshing, both, after all are soft drinks and both after all are the real thing. As a chemist we don’t just look at the outside of the real thing. There is a difference between coke and diet coke, it’s 39 grams of sugar per can. In the event that you ever have a question to the effect of the diet coke versus the regular coke the perception and the reality are two different things; energy and apple pie. It’s the real thing but what exactly is the real thing?
A professor of chemistry and energy at MIT recently came to PAM’s alumni college event and the event focused on energy this year. He has done a lot of working thinking about energy and this is material formed from his talk and out of his proceedings of the National Academy but it helps us think about some data. It gives us reality from which to think. We looked at the global energy inventory and first of all we are looking at the primary energy per capita versus the C02 emission per capital and he scaled it with respect to a variety of countries and also what we see here are the lines for coal, oil, and gas. Coal, of course, is the worse energy source because you get the most carbon dioxide emitted per unit of energy. Natural gas is the best energy source if you are looking at fossil fuels with respect to C02 per unit of energy. In his work he very clearly shows the direct correlation between the GDP and energy consumed.
He also looks at how that energy is produced and he starts with looking at where we are today in aspects of his targeting. If we keep a fixed carbon balance, how are we going to make up for the additional energy that is going to be needed? With conservative assumptions we are going to need somewhere around 30 terawatts of energy by 2050 and currently worldwide we are generating about 13 or 14 terawatts of energy, and so we are going to need somewhere for the rest of this energy to come from.
The facts are a little problematic sometimes when we look at what is going to be needed to make up this differential and this is a differential needed only by 2050. He calculates that if you assume that all biomass were simply CH20 and you could convert all of that to energy, and you took all of your cultivable land and grew material as biomass for energy you would be able to generate an additional 7 to 10 terawatts of energy.
If we built a new nuclear power plant, one every two days we would gain a whopping eight terawatts of power. We have haven’t built a new nuclear power plant since some time in the late 1970s. What he notes is that with the current efficiency of photo able tags, if we simply put photo able tags over the landmass that we currently have paved as roadways in this country we would generate enough power to power this country . How is that kind of thing going to happen? It’s going to happen with research, it’s going to happen with leadership, so clearly we need leadership in energy efficiency. Energy efficiency is going to help us move this way just a little bit. It is going to moderate how far these folks have to go in their GDP and what impact it is going to have on the globe. We might ask, how do universities fit into this picture? In the UNC Tomorrow video we were told that the university system is the largest consumer of power in the state of North Carolina. That is something that is probably never going to change because we are one of the largest organizations in the state of North Carolina and so there is going to be a major consumption. What should we do about that? What can we do about that? Clearly we are going to need new supplies of energy. What can and should we do about that? I think you are going to need things like basic research. You are going to need courage to implement any of those technologies that are going to be engineered. The university really is poised with a portfolio able to tackle a lot of these issues and that, I believe why we declare things like the year of energy. Clearly these energy issues are not something that we are going to be able to solve in our one year of energy, but what happens in this year can lay the foundation for what needs to be a sustained effort in leadership, both in policy and investment and priorities for the future.
Well, to address some of this the Chancellor has named an Energy Council. This Energy Council is made up of students, faculty, and staff and industry representatives, and their job is to begin the process of planning for this year of energy. I believe that process is just getting under way, so having them talk with us early is a good idea to gain a different aspect of faculty input than they get just from the faculty that happen to be on the committee. Clearly this council will be concentrating on building partnerships and momentum, but also they state on how to build our academic resources to create scholarships and academic programs focused around energy and environment. Today we are going to have leadership representatives from the Energy Council to brief us on these issues and hopefully have a lot of discussion so that we as NC State can and do pursue bold and creative initiatives with respects to energy and sustainability.
There will be two training events for the Dale Sayers Memorial CPR Challenges on Friday, November 16 and Saturday, November 17. There are three sessions scheduled each day.
The NCSU and UNC-Chapel Hill Executive Committees will have dinner tomorrow night at 6:30 p.m. at the Carolina Inn.
The Executive Committee recommended forming a small strategic plan working group look at some of the data and to work at developing somewhat of a strategic plan. The group may meet on Thursday afternoons alternate to the weeks that we hold the Faculty Senate. Anyone who is interested in participating in that process should contact Chair Martin.
Academic Tenure Policy
Senior Vice Provost Perry brought this issue to our attention at the last meeting. There is a minor change being made to the academic tenure policy. It is an edit to Section 6.5.2. and this change codifies what we have been doing in practice and that is: final approval to a non-reappointment with respect to our tenure policy stops at the Provost and not at the Dean. It stops at the Dean for affirmative actions and it stops at the Provost for negative actions. That is how we have been acting for the last two cycles. It does not stop at the Chancellor because the Chancellor then becomes a level for appeal if necessary.
We received 592 total votes for the bylaw revisions. Three of those came by direct email. There were 545 in favor and 45 against the revisions. The bylaws have been successfully revised for the first time since 1996.
Senator Ambaras: How long was the stated polling period for that vote and how long was the voting period actually extended to achieve that result?
Senator Martin responded that the polling period was extended until October 29th. When the Executive Committee met we did not have our quorum need at that time. The votes that we had at that time were 91% in favor and 9% opposed. It was unanimously agreed by the Executive Committee to send out another announcement.
Senator Ambaras: So if I recall correctly the original vote notification was on October 11th.
After seventeen days of voting we did not achieve a voting quorum therefore we had to extend the vote, is that correct?
Senator Martin: We didn’t give seventeen days in the initial offering. Initially we suggested that it all be done in a week. Then we extended that so if it is the eleventh until the twenty ninth that’s your seventeen days or whatever. Getting people to vote, as you know from the issue in CHASS, is a challenge.
Senator Ambaras: I would respond that getting people to vote on an issue in which they were concerned in CHASS was not a challenge.
3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 5, October 23, 2007
The motion passed to approve the minutes.
Senator Williams stated that the University Graduate Student Association put forth a resolution proposing that a commemoration be made of the site of the old Riddick Stadium. William Johnstone, the graduate student that spearheaded this initiative met with the committee and made a fairly compelling case. They would like the Faculty Senate to adopt a statement of support for this project and to appoint a representative to an ad hoc committee that they plan to organize, which would consist of representatives from the Staff Senate and Faculty Senate to try to plan what this commemoration should be and how to go about doing it.
Senator Williams presented a statement of support to the Faculty Senate for approval.
A motion was made and seconded to suspend the rules to pass the resolution on the first reading.
Senator Williams moved that the two-paragraph resolution of support for the UGSA proposal to design a commemorative of Riddick Field be adopted.
The motion was seconded and passed unanimously.
5. Remarks from Provost Nielsen
Provost Nielsen commented on his trip to Japan.
He spent some time at Nogoya University where NC State is part of a group called Academic Consortium 21. NC State is the only North American member of that group and we will be hosting the Biennial International Forum here next summer, July 27-30, 2008.
Chancellor Oblinger will serve as President of the AC 21 for the next two years.
We spent most of the time in Korea talking several universities and organizations about the possibilities for joint research educational and other activities in Korea and there are very strong possibilities and more will be coming out I think as the Korean National Government passes their budget in December. There should be some very good news in that budget about the possibilities for support of work that NC State is interested in. We will be establishing some study abroad programs in Korea and then the possibility of some academic programs. We did sign the memorandum of understanding in agreement with Seoul National University to create a dual doctoral degree program in genomics, which allows students to be accepted into the doctoral degree program in genomics at both Seoul National University and NC State University and they are responsible for satisfying the requirements of both. Students would have an adviser in Korea and an adviser in the United States and their advisory committee would develop a joint research project for them that would satisfy faculty on both sides and at the end of this process they would receive a degree from Seoul National University and one from NC State University. It was interesting that the signing of that agreement for this dual degree program made the National Press in Korea.
I’m here more today just to say this area of energy and environment, which we have chosen as a focus area, has gotten a lot of support across the university and the Energy Council is overseeing it.
I was on a conference call with the General Administration talking about teacher recruitment plans and what we are planning to do in the next several years and some resources that they have available to provide to the university. The resources that they will provide out of the new budget will allow us to hire a recruiter to specifically look at recruiting teachers. Our share is $52,788 per year for three years.
6. Year of Energy and the NCSU Energy Council
Chris Gould – Associate Dean, PAMS, Energy Initiative Coordinator
The Energy Council is chaired by Provost Nielsen and Vice Chancellor John Gilligan. The membership was drawn from recommendations from each o f the colleges for us to nominate a person to serve and it was supplemented by some additional people who had particular areas of expertise on campus and that also included some people from outside the university.
The charge is to advise the Chancellor and the Executive Officers on energy research, education, outreach and economic development.
After the first meeting of the Energy Council, which was a month or so, ago, we split up into five subcommittees which were Research , chaired by me, Education , chaired by Bill Winner, and Campus Activities, chaired by Jack Colby. The students have been very active in this area, Bobby Mills is chairing that group. Steve Callen is chairing an outreach group and then we certainly are very concerned about partnerships and public relations so all of these things come into play on this very critical issue.
The Research Triangle Energy Consortium is one of the outcomes of the research deliberations. This was to take advantage of the brand name of the Research Triangle in a context of going off the major programs or gifts. We are aware that BP gave $250M to Berkeley, Phillips, and $50M here to Georgia Tech. Certainly people thought about why did this happen and its clear these groups were very well organized out of the box, and we thought what a compelling group – one that could stand up against any institutions in North America, even on the planet -- would be the three Research Triangle Universities plus the Research Triangle Institute. So the Research Triangle Consortium is formed, an MOU has been signed to partner on energy research and this symposium is the first event. Everyone is welcome to sign up and come. I think it’s a pretty interesting program, broadly based. The first day is more technical (energy and transportation) and the second day is energy and the environment and energy and society structured around experts, and then you have a panel of people from the various campuses to discuss what is going on. We are looking for forty or fifty faculty and students from NC State to make up our contingent. Please take a look at it and sign up if you can make it. If you are a faculty member the keyword is “member” and if you are a student the magic key word is “student.” The cost is $20 per day for faculty and $10 a day for students.
Coming back to the deliberations of the Energy Council, we are split up into these subcommittees and I will mention briefly what we are deliberating on. In the Research group we have talked about everything -- from something, which cost zero dollars to something, which cost $100M, so we are not at this point constrained by resources.
Should you have a building that is a focus and if so what should be in that building? Should we have faculty who are really cluster hired in energy issues as opposed to the standard procedure (do your own thing and that will come together). How should we support students to get them involved in what I believe is the technological and societal challenge of the twenty first century.
We debated extensively on how do you build an interdisciplinary program out of this, because this is an extraordinarily interdisciplinary research area. It’s not just a technological fix. We must involve the social, political, economic parts of our campus in thinking about the energy problem, as Chair Martin pointed out very clearly at the beginning.
In terms of buildings we have thought of research buildings, which are primarily lab buildings, and also other buildings, which would just be an opportunity to bring faculty from all of the colleges together to be in one place where you can talk. We thought about that building being a showcase building for new technologies that we may develop.
Faculty Cluster Hires
The Provost has provided positions within the compact plan. The Chancellor talks about thirty positions in energy and the environment, how should they be done?
We are happy to say that we are off and running on that. There were undergraduate student energy research support fellowships given out and those projects are under way now. We need to have continued funding there. We need funding for the summer. We need to have outside donors who feel like they can contribute to that.
These areas all spell out into thinking about education. They all spell out into thinking about how the students are thinking about energy, so in that sense it is very integrated.
Bill Winner- Professor of Forestry and Environment Resources – Energy Council Academic Programs
It is very interesting to hear the Energy Council described. The apple pie image is that we all have a slice in this issue of energy and the environment and it is not that pie that sits in the Energy Council’s lap. It’s the pie that is part of all of us. In thinking about that, I’m going to begin with a simple message and that is the academic planning team of the energy council has four or five people working hard on it. We meet on a regular basis. We talk on a regular basis and we email constantly, bouncing ideas around, but I like to think of those people that I’m working with as really being representatives of the university at large, and in that sense I would like to think of each of you and each of the faculty members that I talk about as being representatives not only of your own programs and your own interest, but of the university community at large, so I would like to appoint you all as members of the academic planning team. You can enjoy your piece of pie by helping us come up with the ideas that are necessary to prepare our students and in so doing to prepare ourselves for how it is society will be thinking, talking, working to address the needs related to energy environment. It’s not the responsibility solely of the academic planning team to come up with the magic solutions for what we will be doing. It’s a community responsibility and we are all a part of it so I welcome you as you shoulder your share of that burden.
Please contact me anytime when you have ideas or when your colleagues give you ideas in conversation wherever it may be that will help the university come forward with the curriculum and with the courses and with the other activities we need to be doing in conjunction with the year of energy.
We have come up with some short-term ideas that we can implement pretty quickly. We have come up with some longer term ideas, or mid term concepts for actions that can be started in a period of a year or eighteen months, and we have some longer term ideas as well. With more, as you are thinking about how you can communicate with us and contribute to both those kinds of time frames.
What are we thinking of in the short term? In the short term we are thinking about things like fellowships for student projects. We are thinking about seminar series. We are thinking about workshops with specific themes related to energy and the environment. We are thinking about those thirty faculty members who might be recruited to NC State in a cluster related to a theme of energy in the environment, whether as the seminar series or a part of the seminar series, so that we see as an academic community how they fit into the bigger picture and at the same time communicate with our university at large.
What are we thinking about in the mid term? We are thinking about things like awarding energy professor fellowship where the university might designate one professor on campus to be the energy professor fellow. This might provide a small amount of release time to free this person up to do research, to write, to communicate. A travel budget so that they can travel where they might need to travel, and to have this be a rotating fellowship on an annual basis, to designate an energy professorship for someone on campus as a fellowship.
We are thinking about the idea of awarding or recruiting annually an energy professor, someone from off campus who would come with that kind of a designation and over the course of five or six years we would have five or six people designated as energy professors who would have special responsibilities to the campus as a whole as well as to the academic unit to which they were recruited.
We are thinking about implementing an energy prize or prizes that could be awarded to existing faculty members here on the campus for innovative teaching, research, outreach and engagement for their efforts related to energy as well as the prospects of bringing in a speaker who would receive an NC State energy prize for their work perhaps at a global scale. Those are examples of some mid term kind of projects that we have in mind.
In the long term we are thinking about these thirty new hires. If each one teaches one course, that is thirty new courses related to energy and the environment that we would have on this campus. That provides a lot of academic horse power that is desperately needed on the campus, and thinking about how those thirty new courses could be contributing toward new curriculum, new degrees, new concentrations, new minors, new certificates, and to that end our group has conducted an inventory of existing courses related to energy. In that survey of existing courses we have something like one hundred fifty-five courses that are including the word energy in the title or in the abstract. Then, there wass a second part of the search where we have contacted the people in all the colleges to try to get their suggestions, and to see if we missed any courses that are related to energy and the environment. We added those to the list, so this is a self-selected list of anything that counts, approximately 155 courses. We have arranged them into different categories.
One category is energy theory, thermal dynamics and those types of courses. Another category is energy production, how do we produce energy. We have lots of courses in these areas. The third category identified for sorting is energy distribution and storage. How do we distribute energy in grids? How do we store it in batteries? How do we store it in other mechanism? We don’t have a lot of courses in this area. We have quite a few courses about how to use energy. We have a lot in how we use electricity. We have a lot in how we use combustion engines. We offer quite a few courses on how we use energy.
We don’t have very many courses in this area.
We also have 65 or 70 courses in which energy is included as an integral theme of the course. Courses like ecology have energy involved. Courses in Agriculture include the concepts of energy. Courses in Social Sciences -- many of them do have the ability to include energy as a part of that course. There might be courses on environmental ethics, courses in environmental policy. Those kinds of courses will include energy as an integral theme but don’t focus on energy per se. So we have about 155 courses that we know of that include energy. We don’t know how often they are offered. We don’t know how heavily they are enrolled. We have not included seminar courses, special topics courses, thesis credits in this search. We are just trying to get a picture and what this picture is telling us is that we are lacking interdisciplinary courses at the one and two hundred level that are open to freshmen and sophomores that will help satisfy requirements for general education or GEP requirements that are team taught, and so our group is, in the long term, thinking about what we need, the tools to develop the academic curriculum and the academic programming that is going to provide interdisciplinary courses to all students at all levels, and open the doors to thinking about the complex issues associated with energy and the environment, questions that we all know are coming down the road.
You are all a part of helping us get where we need to be with academic programming and I invite you to give me any and all of your ideas.
Jack Colby, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Facilities Operations
Among the many hats that I wear, I have often been involved with the Energy Management Office here on campus, having responsibilities for the utilities group. We are the people that sign the $30M in checks that we write to the utilities companies for what it takes to run this campus. I also have the pleasure of being responsible for the Office of Waste Reduction and Recycling and all of our other efforts that we have in order to create an environmentally responsible campus here at NC State. Very often over the years I have felt very alone with that. Richard Bernhard and I were out recycling and doing things when it didn’t seem to have so much popularity. So, despite the financial impact on us for the cost of energy and sustainability, it is now good to have more people interested and involved in what is happening.
I was very pleased to be appointed to the council to represent the campus interest. There is this notion that we ought to live and demonstrate on campus what we teach and what we do research on and I think we should take that very seriously and make it a part of the culture at NC State to be able to live and learn and demonstrate all the types of technologies that our students are going to be needing. With this we created the campus subcommittee, which was a group that we pulled together from faculty members, from the council, and then also members from the Office of Energy Management, from the Campus Environmental Sustainability Team, and from our Office of Waste Production and Recycling. We did brainstorming to generate a long list of potential activities that we could look at for the campus for the year of energy with an emphasis on things that would raise the awareness of the campus, both among staff, faculty, students, in order to have a feeling of involvement in the year of energy. We have the good fortune of being able to look at items that have high visibility and we can take advantage of that. These things do not require the significant investment that some of the longer term issues involve.
Let me give you an idea of what we are intending to recommend to the Chairs of the Council and hopefully we will receive a positive response from them. Our top five issues are:
- We should adopt an energy policy at NC State describing what we feel important in terms of the energy field and how this campus ought to demonstrate responsible energy use. We think that could also include a commitment in terms of carbon neutrality that would set the stage and guide our campus actions not only in decisions that we make on energy but how we use energy, how we build our buildings and such, that would help guide us along the way.
- Enhance our million dollar challenge which is an effort that we have been pushing for several years now -- and talking with all the student and staff groups about -- which says that if every one of us as a member of this campus can save fifteen cents a day by just turning off lights and turning off unused equipment we could save a million dollars per year. Along with that is an energy pledge that brings it down to a personal level knowing that things are changing and that what we did in the past in terms of personal things on energy use and energy waste are not going to be the types of situations that we face in campus lives, and in our personal lives from here on out.
- We ought to be building and renovating facilities that are sustainabe, that recognize life cycle cost and recognize the total cost of ownership of the building. We now have the ability to create more sustainability structures, set guidelines and the like, to be able to do that and to get recognition of that through lead ratings that would guide us in that process. We also have some recent legislation, Bill 668, that was passed by the legislature this year and requires that we do substantial energy modeling and energy conservation activities for new construction. With these overriding types of guidance I think it’s time for us to put together a standard that NC State can use to guide its new construction and renovation and achieve sustainable growth.
- To refocus our Earth Day celebration on the year of energy and possibly move this from a day of activity to a week long activity of celebrating energy issues providing symposiums, lectures, and the likes of that, and culminating in a day of activities on Earth Day, April 22 when we can announce many of these other items and the commitment of the institution and use that as a real kickoff time to make some significant progress.
- To enter into an energy star partnership with EPA which would guide us in terms of not only high visibility on a national level and a commitment to energy conservation, but would also put in place standards for green purchasing that would make sure that our appliances and the energy devices that we buy meet the highest energy efficiency standards and over the long term make significant increases.
The other things that we looked at were renewable energy goals, a revolving fund to fund energy conservation projects, guest lectures throughout the year on energy topics, capital projects demonstrating renewable energy applications, fleet issues, etc. We think we have covered a wide range of opportunities and we feel like we have a very strong list that we will be forwarding through the campus.
I am very pleased in terms of water conservation that the numbers that we starting to see right now show what we can do as a campus community when we are called upon to be responsible. NC State, over a period of April to September, has reduced its water consumption by 29% over last year. Starting with the baseline of 2001 we had already achieved a 30% reduction so this is substantial and we are very proud of how the university has pitched in to do it.
We can do the same thing with energy. We are already, despite the growth of the campus, on a downward curve in terms of our unit expenditure of energy. We can’t sustain that if we don’t get the campus community together and everybody working in the same direction.
Bobby Mills, Student Body President
This Saturday the students are going to announce a water conservation competition between NC State and UNC-Chapel Hill that is going to run until our February game against them in basketball. The Chancellor and I signed a commitment to do that against Chancellor Moeser and their Student Body President.
Mills pointed out the students’ website that shows the usage of energy in several dorms. He stated not only does it change from residence hall to residence hall this website will also show different elements such as the carbon dioxide produced. This idea was created to run from now until the end of the semester and hopefully with this project, if it goes well, we think it will expand to the entire campus residence life. Currently every dorm or every council has a green coordinator and hopefully they will add on this aspect. This is definitely a big project that students are really behind.
All the RAs have tips to use and the prize for the winning dorm is guaranteed tickets to ACC basketball games.
Mills pointed out another website that the students created where students worked on sustainability for a student fee. It was a $10 student fee and they were unable to move forward with the fee because GA decided that no new student fees were going to be allowed. After a student vote 54% of the students voted in favor of it, which shows that there is large support of the student body.
Some of the projects that the students are trying to look into as well are LED lighting in the parking decks and also the brickyard. The cost for the parking deck would be about ten thousand dollars and the brickyard would be about forty thousand dollars. A student fee like this would generate about a quarter million dollars that so it could help pay for those projects and expedite the process.
We are trying to figure out another ways to get students involved. Students have made videos to show ways that is not only for sustainability, but we can make videos to show how to conserve water on campus. If they had some type of project like that I think the incentive would be free textbooks for next semester, which would be a great incentive for students.
There is also a new student organization that Dr. Winner is adviser of and also Green. Personally I have had twenty students to contact me in the last few weeks wanting to know what NC State is doing.
Questions and Comments
Past Chair Allen : How much emphasis in hiring are you going to place on people’s response to global warming?
Winner responded that it’s not fully known yet how that will happen.
Senator Ambaras: I appreciate your attention to the non-science side of the equation, your willingness to create interest and the reference to policy and environmental ethics and things like that. In relation to that general issue and also the issue of thirty positions I think it would be worth emphasizing that energy is also a cultural issue, it is an issue of human history, it’s an issue of communication and this is something that if one would look for people in CHASS but also outside on the job market one could find people working in anthropology who are attuned to the interface between human culture, or the history of science and technology, or the history of the middle east, and so on, So I would encourage you to look at us and I would be willing to work with you, as I think all of the CHASS senators will.
Winner stated that he thinks this academic issue of energy and the environment touches every faculty member on the campus. I have no list of those who qualify or those who do not qualify. It is art, it is human behavior, it is religion, it is all of them as well as the natural sciences and the social sciences so this whole university as a community is recognizing the complexity of environment and energy issues. It’s not that the problem has become more complex over the years, it’s that our appreciation of understanding the networks of issues that are tied together has greatly increased and as a result there is really no person who doesn’t have a role to play.
Provost Nielsen commented that of these thirty faculty positions, fifteen are positions that have been allocated through the compact planning process, to be filled over the next three years and the other half will go to our positions that we will be refilling. It’s energy and environment for those thirty positions and not just energy.
In terms of putting together interdisciplinary programs, calling on everyone across the university is the right way to do it.
Senator Moore stated that he attended the UNC Tomorrow Initiative on Friday where President Bowles make a statement that whenever we built new buildings this year and reached budget problems the first thing that it struck out was the green features. Could someone reconcile why we are striking the green features in all these buildings.
Colby stated that if you look at the building construction world we often do things backwards from what the real world does. We go to the legislature and request money. We then start the design process and we find that the funding is 30% under funded to build what we expect. Unless you are able to put money in the pot, you build to the dollars. From the time you start the design to the time you actually occupy the building, you’ve lost square footage. So with this, we find tremendous cost pressure on the buildings and obviously the academic programs have requirements and so every project ends up under tremendous stress at the end, and we don’t have any guidance, so there are no general rules within the state construction process. In our processes to be able to try to represent our programs best, we often make short term -- more square footage -- at the expense of the lifecycle cost. It’s good in the short term, none of us ourselves have to write the check for the bill. We do that through the state and through budgeting that really is not linked to real life and cost of ownership. So now with passage of Bill 668 we are going to be forced to be responsible. The design team has to design to a 30% reduction from the actual standards for new construction and 20% for renovations. The first year of operation, we have to go back and look at the performance of the building, and if it does not meet the model then there has to be action that require that.
One of the reasons we want this energy commitment policy at this institution is so that when we face these issues it’s more difficult to make that last decision of ignoring long-term lifecycle cost. So if we do that as an institution, collectively we say this is what we are about, this is important to us, we want sustainable buildings then it will happen.
Chair Martin: Do you foresee any possibility of changing that framework so that we would design, then get the money, then actually build what was designed for?
Colby stated that it is idea to go into the budget request process with what we call advance planning. There needs to be latitude within the program and process because things change over time that may alter what the building is all about. Hopefully we would look at this and will be able to make incremental changes over time.
There needs to be flexibility in the design construction process. Over a course of time we want all the building we do build to be built at a much higher level.
Provost Nielsen stated that part of it is budgeting commitment. If we make a commitment to the fact that as we budget a building we are going to say 3% of the total cost of the building is going to be there to pay for sustainability investments and we don’t allow that to be in the discretionary space. We can make this happen if we have the courage to do it.
Colby stated within the facilities division their goal is to deliver a facility that is of value and enhances your programs. Getting a better understanding with our building committees, educating them about the process is something that we need to do a better job of.
Senator Barclay Poling: I am curious as to how the system built 2.9 billion dollars worth of buildings and, in President Bowles’ words last Friday, not a single one was great. It seems to me that, yes, we have this new building, but that our goal now at NC State is to prevent this from happening in the future?
Chair Martin stated that this was Bond I, and there have been green buildings built during that time period, but not out of bond money. They were out of differential appropriations.
Winner stated that it is important to think about the new buildings that coming down the pipe, but in addition you have a lot of existing buildings and one of the measure to discuss that is how to prioritize the retrofitting of existing buildings. This society as a whole has a lot of housing, office buildings, and anything we can learn from our experience here about how to retrofit existing buildings can help the public at large and other businesses understand that they can also retrofit buildings.
Senator Overton: I just want to see if you can say more about the kinds of things you were thinking about such as new curricula, concentrations, minors, and certificates and what I would like to hear about are the ones that will be interdisciplinary.
Winner stated that there is nothing definitive, but there is certainly a growing interest among the students and among the faculty. Many faculty members with whom I have spoken and also some of the administration, are interested in the idea of creating interdisciplinary academic programs in which a group of faculty that were interested in a program area could develop courses and curriculum for which they would become ultimately responsible. The framework for belting that kind of approach to interdisciplinary education doesn’t exist here at NC State. There is some example of degrees that operate that way. When we look at other universities we see that they are able to operate with the framework that is much more open to the concept of interdisciplinary program operated by faculty members who have their FTE in existing academic departments, but who create the kind of educational program that networks the university in new and novel ways that we are not doing right now. So as we move these discussions along with energy and environment, they provide a great example of that kind of an area that would benefit from an interdisciplinary academic program approach and there is discussion now about how to implement that, but nothing solid yet.
Chair Martin: What are the kinds of things that other universities do to make it happen?
Gould stated that Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon are two.
Winner stated that we are looking at administrative approaches where faculty members would apply to become members of a faculty for environment and energy and upon being admitted to that faculty would be engaged in teaching courses and developing a curriculum for a degree that might yield a bachelor’s degree in energy and environment, or it might yield a certificate or concentration in energy and environment, and it would be a group of faculty members, opposed to those from all academic units that simply wanted to participate.
Chair Martin: Would these faculty be given their FTE assignments through that, or would it depend on the graces and will of the department heads and deans or does the faculty member if accepted into the program automatically get some dispensation from the gods that say, you now may cross over.
Winner stated that the academic program would have a budget and can use that budget to buy teaching and that teaching might come from existing departments or some might come from off campus, maybe even from Chapel Hill or Duke. That budget typically comes from off the top. In other cases the independent academic programs might actually have teaching FTEs which means that they can use these FTEs, although they are used to recruit new faculty members to the campus and there is no promotion and tenure within this interdisciplinary program, they have appointment FTEs where there is teaching responsibility assigned for the FTE and people rotate in and out from different academic units depending on the teaching loads they have at various points in their career or various times in their semester. There are a number of ways where the teaching can be arranged for faculty members who teach in these interdisciplinary programs. It is extremely important to have this administrative structure worked out in great detail. It is extremely important that the issues of promotion and tenure be worked out and it is extremely important that there be some incentives provided for those who participate so that they can do so without penalty or harm to their careers. To that end there is an interdisciplinary/departmental task force that Provost Nielsen has appointed that is preparing a report. We have been meeting since last spring and will soon come up with some guidelines as to how NC State can approach an organizational structure for interdisciplinary academic programs and to base that approach on a look at a number of universities, our peer institutions that have similar programs.
Senator Bernhard stated that years ago he was appointed to CEST (Campus Environmental Sustainability Team) by then Chancellor Fox. We went to many meetings at Biltmore Hall when Provost Nielsen was Dean of Natural Resources and was the Chair of CEST and had conversation similar to the ones that we are having today. One thing, even then, was done well was that the students in the dorms got involved in recycling, and this competition at Chapel Hill is wonderful and it is actually in the spirit of things that were being done quite a number of years ago. I think we have been doing a pretty good job of educating the students on protecting the environment, but fairly quickly they leave and then we have a new batch and we have to continue educating people.
Even now in my department you find huge amounts of recycling items in garbage and particularly in the ordinary garbage. There is a large component of people here who are not getting the message, and there are people like myself who have been here for thirty years and they are not into this. Somehow we need to get the people who are enduringly here for decades to get the same spirit that the students are getting in competition with Chapel Hill. It hasn’t happened yet and it can happen.
Secretary Kellner: The idea that we have eliminate all the green features from these buildings is very likely because state funds don’t have written into them that these things are required for buildings built with state funds. Can you persuade some legislators down there to get involved in the year of energy and environment and to become interested in these questions so that some time in the future people might be proposing to put some of these requirements into contracts and bond issues that would force individuals to make these wise decisions when they are building buildings.
Colby stated that the current legislation and the things that we already have on the books give us the tools to do what we needed. It comes back to individual decision-making and adherence to what we value. There is always a way to work around the system. On the flip side I didn’t mean to give you the impression that our buildings have no sustainable features, because we do have standards and we push those and we incorporate those, regardless of what happens. We do have more energy efficient building than we were building years ago, but we don’t go the extra mile and we don’t incorporate these things. We don’t celebrate them and that is piece that is missing. My feeling is that although the bill that was passed had its teeth removed in terms of really forcing everyone into adherence, here it comes back to again, as self discipline, so that if we had within our construction processes and within our building committees a commitment to this we can make it happen. If nobody sees the value in that and they are more interested in the short term square footage and the future be damned then we will never get to where we need to be, because it is all in the state of mind. We would like to bring the community along and support, so that it’s not the other guy that is building the sustainable building, but everyone is doing that.
Chair Martin thanked the group and stated that the challenge he gives to the Senate is, we are good at putting together places where we get information and sit around and talk about it. Where is the commitment? When our buildings go up are we willing to sacrifice those square feet for something to be done. We also talk a lot about Faculty Governance but faculty governance means more than just sitting around talking about it. I don’t know what the answer to that is, maybe we should try to put together a policy -- like department policy -- that sort of has some of these fundamental chords. I don’t know what the answer is but I challenge each of us, as senators, to think about it and potentially next semester we maybe need to revisit some of these topics that we received information about this semester, moving toward some specifics. Let’s think about it and seriously consider coming back next semester, revisiting several of these issues, working with the Energy Council Interdisciplinary Task Force team.
7. Issues of Concern
Senator Ambaras : I would like to speak briefly about the procedure by which the vote on the Academic Policy Committee’s report on the GEP proposal was conducted in our last meeting.
The overall majority of the Senators present voted in favor of the Academic Policy Committee’s report and I in no way shape or form wish to revisit the issue of the report itself. I believe that for those of us who are concerned about GER revision it is incumbent on us now to continue to follow that process, its implementation, and to assure that our concerns are met. I would like to call attention to the voting procedure. If you will recall this vote was held by secret ballot. The Faculty Senate bylaws, Article 3, Section 7 indicate that voting in the Faculty Senate shall be by voice vote or by vote of division. A vote of division is when there is lack of clarity about the majority. There is nowhere in the bylaws any provision for voting by written ballot/secret ballot on matters other than the election of the officers of the Senate itself.
Article 3, Section 9 indicates that parliamentary procedures should follow Robert’s Rules of Order. When looking at Robert’s Rules of Order on voting, one finds that a vote by ballot, a written secret vote is by definition conducted to ensure secrecy of the vote and in order to conduct such a vote a motion must be made, seconded, and the majority of the voters must approve of that procedure before it can be conducted. So one can conclude that regardless of the content of the vote itself, regardless of the Senate’s determination regarding the content of the Academic Policy Committee Report the vote was valid neither in accordance with the bylaws nor in accordance with Robert’s Rules of Orders. This leaves the vote open to contestation. It also calls into question whether or not the Senate votes and behaves in accordance with its own bylaws, and this is the question of institutional integrity I feel that we must address. I am also concerned that we had a secret vote on a matter that which was essentially a vote on a committee report. It is my understanding that the ethos of this body is not to conduct secret votes on matters such as committee reports or on any matters. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that the resolution to censure Mary Anne Fox was committed by an open voice vote also, so I’m afraid that we are setting a certain precedent here that on any matter in which the Chair sees fit, the chair can decide to conduct a secret ballot. I think this is contrary to both the bylaws of the institution, to the spirit of this institution, and my simple fix for this matter is that we have a voice vote on the academic policy committee report. I think it would be fairly clear what the decision would be. Should parliamentary procedure require that the question be reopened for this, I commit to not speaking. I commit to calling the question myself should that be, but I feel that its imperative for us as a body to hold to our own institutional laws and to be responsible to our constituents, to represent the faculty in a matter that is in conformity with the principles of representative governance that we embrace.
Chair Martin stated that he has consulted with the Parliamentarian on this issue. The reason that I conducted the vote as I did and announced well before we conducted the vote as to what the procedures was going to be is because I had discussion with a number of people who requested that the vote be made by written ballots and Robert’s Rules of Order does not say the purpose is for secrecy but the wording rather stated in one part of Robert’s Rules that if there is reason to believe that a person would not be able to vote their true sentiments then written ballot may be requested.
Senator Ambaras stated that Robert’s Rules of Order, page 38 Chapter 45, states, a vote by ballot can be ordered by majority vote, which may be desirable in any case where it is belief that members may thereby be more likely to vote their true sentiments. In other words, that vote requires a majority vote of the Senators present in order to be conducted and that was not taken. The Chair by announcing his intention to hold a secret ballot does not follow Robert’s Rules of Order.
Parliamentarian Corbin stated that he thinks this issue should be taken up as an issue of concern so that it can be written and understood by all of the senators.
Senator Moore wanted to know if there could be a revote.
Senator Hudson noted that only two members of the Academic Policy Committee were present and a CHASS senator is also missing.
Chair Martin stated that the issue is the process by which votes were taken and I can assure you that there was no mal-intent in conducting the ballot as we did and I checked with the Parliamentarian ahead of time and he agreed that it was a legitimate means of conducting business, so let’s look at it in more detail and address in that sense rather than ignoring it and just taking another vote.
Senator Ambaras stated, I believe that where you based your decision is on the notion of adoption motion or action without a motion by unanimous general consent and in this case, this refers to cases where there seems to be no opposition in routine business or questions of little importance. In such cases, time can be saved by not having formal votes. Now if one wants to define the vote on the GER revisions as a matter of routine business in which there is little or no opposition, then perhaps that interpretation might hold. However I would suspect strongly that that kind of vote does not qualify.
Chair Martin: That vote was taken. It’s the vote on the way to vote that you are objecting to and the one thing that is clear in Robert’s Rules of Order is that anyone may object to any rule at anytime. If there is objection then we address it. What Robert’s Rules of Order does not deal with is objection after the meeting adjourns.
Senator Ambaras: Robert’s Rules of Order does not permit the Chair to bypass Robert’s Rules of Order.
Chair Martin: The Chair did not bypass Robert’s Rules of Order because the Chair contacted the Parliamentarian. If there is an issue here, let’s look at it and address it for future action. Do note please that Robert’s Rule of Order does allow for the objection at any time and there was no objection. Were there objection raised, then we would absolutely have needed to take the vote on the rule of operation, and that would have required one fifth of the senators agreeing to hold the vote.
A motion passed to adjourn the meeting at 5 p.m.