FACULTY SENATE MEETING
March 22, 2011
Present: Chair Overton, Chair-elect Kellner, Secretary Hergeth: Senators Aspnes, Bernhard, Bourham, Edmisten, Funkhouser, Hammerberg, Hatcher, Havner, Headen, Khosla, Kidd, Kiwanuka-Tondo, Krim, Kotek, Levy, Miller-Cochran, Moore, Paur, Robinson, Sawyers, Tonelli, Williams
Excused: Senators Argyropoulos, Auerbach, Mitchell, Sztajn
Absent: Senators Carver, Croom, Rucker, Townsend, Tu, Washington
Guests: P. J. Teal, Secretary of the University; Kevin Howell, Assistant to the Chancellor, External Affairs; Steven Keto, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Finance & Resource Management; Randy Woodson, Chancellor; Ethan Harrelson, Student Government; Charles Leffler, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Business
1. Call to Order
Chair Overton called the eleventh meeting of the fifty seventh session to order at 3 p.m.
2. Welcome and Announcement
Chair Overton handed out information on mediation training and she stated that the Faculty Senate will provide fees for some of the registrations. Those that are interested in attending the training will need to fill out the registration and send it to Marc Okner, Director of SAAO. There are approximately 20 seats available.
Chair Overton thanked those who worked hard to get nominations for the elections. She congratulated Engineering, CHASS, and PAMS for getting more nominations than seats available.
The colleges that do not have nominations cannot participate in the electronic elections process. They will instead have to pursue the elections in their colleges.
The Strategic realignment have started some discussions and the two senators from Natural Resources are attending a meeting that has been called to start talking about the sciences in their college.
Chair Overton announced that a number of faculty attended meetings during spring break to discuss the Strategic Plan in order to develop a response from the Faculty Senate. She plans to complete a response from the faculty by March 25th.
Chair Overton stated that the time line for individual feedback is the same; the comment period closes on March 25th. The Writing Team will meet next Monday to begin integrating the comments and moving the document from a draft to a final copy to get it to the April 22, 2011 Board of Trustees meeting.
3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 10, February 22, 2011
Secretary Helmut asked for approval of the minutes. The minutes were approved as submitted.
4. Revised Patent and Tangible Research Policy – Billy Houghtelling
Billy Houghtelling presented an informational PowerPoint on the revised patent and tangible research policy (POL 10.00.1).
Dr. Terri Lomax convened a revision committee last fall to look at the university policy. The committee was comprised of faculty from the colleges that received the most inventions on campus.
The six objectives of that review committee were:Faculty was asking for clarification of the patent policy on consulting agreements;
- They wanted to make sure our policy was consistent with BOG patent and Copyright Policies;
- Redefine the role of the IPC ;
- Include tangible research property;
- Clarify student rights; and
- Merge the Royalty Sharing Regulation with Patent Policy.
- Improved definition of SUBTANTIAL USE OF UNIVERSITY RESOURCES (Article 2.7)
- Include TANGIBLE RESEARCH MATERIAL (Article 2.8)
- Clarified language related to:
- University-administered funds (Article 4.2)
- Scope of employment (Article 4.3)
- Student ownership rights (Article 5.1)
- Opportunity for specific student entrepreneurship/design programs to be exempted from University IP ownership provisions (Article 5.3)
- Consulting Policy Articulated (Article 6)
- Invention Disclosure Administration (Article 7)
- OTT assumes full responsibility for review, evaluation of commercial potential of disclosures, and decisions related to continued management and IP protection
- Disclosures no longer required to be routed through unit and college administration for approval (eDisclosure System to be implemented in 2011)
- Direction provided to sponsoring units for revenue distribution to promote innovation and entrepreneurship (Article 8.1)
- IPC to function as appeal body for inventors and serve as an advisory body on all matters related to administration of NC State’s IP portfolio (Article 9.2)
The presentation is available online at
5. Federal Update-2011-2012
Matt Peterson, Director of Federal Research Affairs, stated that politics will continue to constrain public policy.
Peterson reported that sustaining previous growth rates for research and financial aid are going to be tough in this environment. There is still not an appropriations end game for the current fiscal year. He stated that by now he would have submitted legislative priorities to the members of our North Carolina delegation and the deadline would be at us or past us. The Preparations Committee has not even started dealing with the budget year that starts on October 1st.
Peterson thinks there is going to be downward pressure on research funding. He said, that does not mean we might be able to keep the funding levels for some of these agencies that we have grown over the last few years, but if you are going to cut the discretionary spending by one hundred billion dollars on a 400 billion dollar baseline, there is no way federal research dollars are going to be unaffected.
What’s the Loss in the Appropriation Cycle: NC State lost about 13.5M in earmark funding. Many of those projects were solely at our campus, several were multi-campus partnerships. It is possible that a small amount of that money will end up as competitive money but the vast majority of that 13.5M will not be coming to our campus in the Fall.
Peterson reported that the coming year will not include earmarks. Prior to FY 2011 earmarks were down about 50%, and universities get a lot earmarks when you look at the federal budget.
Peterson stated that there is a little bit of cognitive dissonance in the House. How members of Congress feel about earmarks is a state of mental conflict. Earmarks have become a symbol of spending in Washington.
Peterson reported that the other big challenge for us is financial aid. The House proposed $5 billion dollars in cuts from Pell grants and if you look at the changes that Congress made in Pell three years ago, they grew the program at a very fast rate by doing a number of things that added people and added dollars to each person’s grant, and now it is become harder and harder to sustain that rate of increase over the next few years. So the House will cut almost $900M in the coming year maximum programs if that was to stay in the final negotiations. So in order to fully fund Pell when they sit down to the table in the next week or two, they are going to come up with an additional five billion dollars of either deficit spending or other programs to cut to fully fund the program for next year.6. Second Reading- Resolution Supporting a Resolution of the UNC Faculty Assembly on Academic Freedom
A motion was made and seconded to approve the resolution. The resolution passed without dissent. Elections – Secretary of the Faculty
The nominations for Secretary of the Faculty were Senators Mike Levy and Roby Sawyers. The Senators voted and the election ended in a tie, eleven all.
A motion was made and seconded to allow Senators with an excused absence from today’s meeting to vote for the Secretary position.
The motion passed to seek the votes of the excused absent senators.
7. Issues of Concern
Senator Havner brought a concern about changes in premium for group term insurance for retirees.
Chair Overton assigned the issue of concern to the Personnel Policy Committee.
A motion passed to adjourn the meeting at 4:35 p.m.