IFO Board of Directors Meeting

Radisson Roseville                                       

December 1-2, 2005

Present:  Bruce Svingen (substitute for Cindy Killion), Ruth Zietlow, Judy Kilborn, Annette Schoenberger, Derek Webb, Rose Weaver, Andrew Larkin, Gerald Toland, Jayantha Herath, Dave Larkin, Gwen Griffin, Cindy Phillips, Mary Kesler, Cathy Summa, Nancy Black, Steve Bohnenblust, Becky Omdahl, Sonja Meiers, George Seldat, Georgia Holmes

Also Present:  Cindy Finch, Debra Japp, Russ Stanton, Patrice Arseneault (Friday morning only)

Not Present:  Wayne Alexander, Mike Ruth, Cindy Killion

Called to order at 6:40 p.m. with a quorum of 13 Board members.

Additional Agenda Items:

No additional agenda items were added.

Board Minutes from October 27-28, 2005:

The minutes were approved.  Carried

IFO Office Holiday Hours:

As previously mentioned, the IFO St. Paul office holiday hours were determined.  The holidays fall on weekends so an MOA was signed with the staff to determine the dates.   We have agreed upon the dates - the office will be closed on Monday, December 26 through Friday, December 30.  The office will be open and staffed through Friday, December 23 and will reopen on Monday, January 2.  Cindy Finch will be checking into the office once that week as well as making sure the payroll is handled.  Pat Arseneault will be out from December 17 until January 2.  Nancy will be gone from December 25-January 6 on vacation.

IFO/MnSCU Contract Ratification:

Annette Schoenberger wondered about the signing of the contract in terms of duty days pertaining to the grievance time lines.  We have lost some grievances based on timeliness because they were submitted to the FA offices when they were closed.  Annette said responses are sent to their office the first day of the winter break.  Do we have to worry about this during this coming break?  It goes into effect within 30 days unless JSER rejects it.  Cindy Phillips suggested we draw up an LOU.  Nancy and Pat will discuss how to assure that the calendar doesn’t run out on any grievances.

The campus vote results were reviewed as outlined below.  51.4% of our eligible members voted to ratify the contract.

Russ Stanton said this year was the second to the highest year for faculty voter turnout to ratify the IFO MnSCU Agreement.  The IFO was very glad that it was settled so early.  Negotiations are not something that just happens at the time of the expiring contract, it happens all the time.  Rod Henry will attempt to attend the remainder of the IFO Board of Directors meetings.  We need better communication between the IFO Negotiations Team and the IFO Board of Directors. 

On Tuesday the MnSCU Board of Trustees (BOT) is having a public committee meeting to discuss the contract.  Sometimes Board members ask questions about the contract.  We want them to approve the contract so that faculty can receive back-pay and their new rate in their January 20 paycheck.  Russ will also attend the meeting.  Rod also agreed to attend the Board of Trustees HR committee meeting at which time the BOT will vote on ratification of the IFO MnSCU Agreement.

E-Vote Report Out for Accounting Services:

You may recall we put out an e-vote for the new accounting auditing firm.  It is customary to do an audit when you have a change in staff.  George was helpful on interviewing firms; Annette also helped and the staff assisted.  In terms of an update, we have moved ahead with the audit and there is a lot going on.  Nineteen Board members voted yes and two did not respond.  The reason it went out for an e-vote is because of the cost associated with an audit.  The auditors are also making recommendations for us and we are hoping in the long run we will save money based on these recommendations.  The accounting firm is very helpful.  Nancy reminded the FA presidents that their Faculty Association original bank statements are needed as of November 30.  Please send that to the IFO office. 

Minnesota’s 150^th Anniversary and Faculty Opportunities:

Nancy was contacted by Leslie Mercer asking if the IFO if they could identify faculty who would be interested in participating in this commission. Board members were given a copy of the email with the information.  Please bring this back to your campuses and see if there is any interest.  If you want more information, please let Nancy know.

Treasurer’s Report:

Annette Schoenberger gave the report.  The report looks a little different this time.  We have an executive summary on the front page.  Additionally, at the advice of the auditor, the accounting method has changed from cash to an accrual basis.  The accrual accounting method is used when you know you are going to have to pay something in advance (i.e. president’s release time, we don’t pay it until May or June, but instead of waiting until May or June to add it to our financial report, we divide by 12 and add-in that amount every month so we have a better notion of what we’re doing).  We were doing that with some of the expenditures but not all of them.  In this format, the Board members can have a better idea of how the money is being spent.  There is income fluctuation on this statement and that is because we are one month ahead in dues collections because of the timing of the school year.  The auditors recommend we convert to a complete accrual system.  It may necessitate we have a cash accounting report as well.  We will discuss this in the future.  To do a year to date comparison will not be legitimate at this time as the FY05 data was calculated by using the cash method.  At this point it may not be reasonable to translate last year’s numbers.  The expenses we anticipate will be expensed monthly as opposed to the cash basis.  We are open to suggestions.  We are working closely with our CPA who is easy to work with and wants feedback.  Please let Nancy or Annette know if you have questions.  We are trying to be transparent and provide as much information as we can.  Gerald Toland had a question about IFO Board expenses this year compared to last year, there is a $10,000 difference.  Nancy said this issue would be brought back to the accountant for an answer.  George suggested we add back on the account codes as it is difficult to have a discussion when there are so many line items. 

Membership Report:

Cindy Finch is the acting membership services coordinator.  Cindy mentioned to Nancy that faculty who only work in the summer for more than the three credits required, have not been part of the membership dues collection process.  Does any body know why we don’t seek membership from those people other than faculty teaching at Metropolitan?  We need more information on this.  We need to know how many people we are talking about for the last couple of years.  There may be a good reason why we haven’t been doing this.  It could have something to do with the nine month pay schedule.  Let’s find out why we aren’t looking at those people.  Nancy asked Cindy to go back and find out how many people we are talking about, we will ask Rod Henry to see if there is anything contractually prohibiting us from collecting.  George asked if we should check with past presidents to see if they know.  Nancy thanked Cindy for her work. 

Academic Affairs Report:

Debra Japp, IFO Academic Affairs Coordinator, gave the report.  The Graduate Council met on November 4th. Much of the discussion focused on doctoral planning. Each of the SUs described what planning was occurring on their campus. Several programs are on schedule to initiate their programs in August 2007.  There was some discussion about the EdD. Questions were asked about the expectations of joint programs vs. stand-alone programs. The Council discussed the importance of programs being of high quality and what is necessary to create and maintain quality programs. Several Board Policies (1A.1 and 3.17) will have to be changed/amended. Policy 1A.1 will be amended to reflect that the mission of the Minnesota State Universities now includes doctoral education. The proposed language is underlined: “Baccalaureate and graduate programs, delivered principally by state universities, which offer undergraduate and graduate instruction through the master's degree, including specialist certificates, in the liberal arts and sciences and professional education, and may offer applied doctoral degrees as authorized in state law.”

The proposed amendment for Board Policy 3.17 (Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates) Part 2, Subpart I. outlines the minimum qualifications for the degree:

Subpart I. Doctoral Degree. A doctoral degree may be awarded upon completion of a program of study designed to prepare an individual in an applied, professional field. The program shall include at least 72 semester credits in graduate-level courses, including up to 12 credits for a dissertation or capstone project, culminating with the acceptance of a dissertation or equivalent capstone project. No more than 40 percent of the required number of total credits may be credits from graduate courses completed before admission to the program. Credits earned at another Minnesota state university under provisions of an agreement for a collaborative doctoral program are not subject to this limit. At least 75 percent of the required number of total credits for a doctoral program, exclusive of credits for dissertation or capstone project, shall be in courses with registration restricted exclusively to graduate students.

Proposed language for Procedure for 3.17.1 Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates is:

Subpart C. Doctoral Programs. Doctoral programs are limited to the following applied fields: education, business, psychology, physical therapy, audiology, and nursing.

These two items (above) were addressed at the Graduate Council meeting.  Debra thought these need Board attention as they inevitably will come to a meet and confer – what will our response be?  A motion was made to ask the AAC to give us their recommendation on these programs before the January 25 ASAPC (Academic and Student Affairs Policy Council) meeting.  Carried

We need a break down of what this new language means so we know what we are agreeing to.  It is important for the AAC to interpret this for the Board.  Is it 40% of 72 credits?  How many credits are going to be online?  Is there enough time for us to have our position ready before the meeting on January 25?  We will invite Manuel Lopez and Mitch Rubenstein to the next Board of Directors meeting on January 26, 2006.

Then the Graduate Council is meeting on January 27, so this will be a great opportunity to make a fresh impression on them.  It is important that the faculty who were appointed to serve on this committee speak up; please encourage your members.  Remaining FY06 meeting dates are: January 27, and April 14.

An update was given on the Task Force on Graduate Education.  The online survey of SU faculty about graduate education is now closed. Debra met with Mitch Rubenstein, from the Office of the Chancellor, on December 2^nd to discuss the preliminary data and to determine a time line for the task force to complete its charge.

An update was given on the NCAT/CTL Designed for Learning Pilot Program (aka the “Twigg” project).  Initial applications of interest are due December 2^nd. These applications do not include any campus sign-offs.  A committee will review the applications and issue invitations for a mandatory meeting on January 27^th. Final proposals will be due on March 24^t, 2006. Awards will be announced on April 7, 2006. Planning and development will take place from April-July 2006, with implementation scheduled for fall semester 2006. A website has been set up for this program: www.ctl.mnscu.edu/programs/special_Int/dfl.html

The CTL Steering Committee met on November 17. Debra was unable to attend. Cathy Summa attended and provided the following. CTL’s budget is slightly greater than $500,000 for FY06.  This does not include MnSCU staff salaries, but does include salaries of faculty liaisons.  $50,000 is available for small faculty grants

The CTL Faculty Development Survey had a return rate of less than 40%. However, responses provided information for CTL in terms of programming:   Specifically, there was significant positive response to programming focusing on student learning and motivation, and significant negative interest in programming focusing on tenure and promotion issues or development for department chairs, etc.  Additionally, there was strong interest in offering programs in repeated sessions so that more people had opportunities to find time to participate and to offer programming at different locations statewide. There was considerable discussion about CTL taking a proactive approach toward programming to increase awareness of the changing student demographics statewide and about inclusive excellence (as opposed to diversity).

Two items require Board action:

ACTION ITEMS:

1) We learned that an error was made in recording the term of IFO appointee Janet Henquinet.  Her term expires in December 2005 (not in Dec 2006).  Request that the IFO Board either extend her term until May 2006 or appoint a new member to begin in January 2006. 

2) There will be a request from the CTL Steering Committee to revise all appointments to end at the end of spring semester.  Unions will be asked whether they prefer to round terms up or down to nearest or next May for current appointees.

When we got the CTL Steering Committee membership list, the terms are all over the map.  The CTL folks said we should just change the terms but Cathy Summa informed them that they could not do that.  Cathy Summa said Janet would like to continue her appointment to the end of spring 2006.  A motion was extend her appointment until May 2006.  Carried

To clarify other IFO terms, we need to set a term end date.  We will have our volunteer’s terms on the CTL Steering Committee set to end on the month of May (as opposed to July 1) of the year their terms is set to expire.  Carried

Debra Japp resumed her report and stated we should have our replacement volunteers in place by May.  There is an optional July meeting for retiring CTL members and new CTL members, but they are not reimbursing expenses.  They claim that there is no business at this meeting but Cathy said she felt it was important that we participate.

We will have to put this on the agenda for the April Board meeting.  We will have a call for nominees earlier so we can appoint at that April meeting.  Is there one faculty from each campus?  No, but there are equal representatives from the 4-year and 2-year schools who participates in the CTL.  According to Debra, the CTL rarely votes.  Nancy stated that we are looking for ways to better coordinate getting executive summaries from our volunteers who attending these and other MnSCU meetings.  We are trying to connect with our representatives more frequently and encourage their attendance.  CTL coordinates a fall workshop for all the campus CTL directors.

Remaining FY06 CTL meeting dates are: January 26, March 17, and May 4. A meeting is also scheduled for July 12, 2006.

Debra noted additional meetings scheduled for FY06: COPE  (December 2, February 17, April 14); Transfer Steering Committee: January 20, April 28; Academic and Student Policy Council: January 25, Feb. 23, and April 14.

President’s Agenda Announcements:

President Black noted that there were topics the Board members may wish to review before we take them up.  Two are staff pension related; naming the plan administrator and adopting the 401 (k) plan.  The 401 (k) is the staff voluntary pension plan.  We have discovered that we are not up-to-date with filing the 401k Plan that first began in 1999.  Russ was thanked for meeting with TIAA-CREF and getting this going.  The EC went over the Plan Document and has a recommendation to bring to the Board.  Each FA President has a complete document of the adoption agreement for the prototype.  The EC recommends that it be adopted.  If you have any questions, ask your president, who has the document. 

We also need to appoint the plan administrator for the 401 (a), 401 (k), and the employee welfare benefit plan in accordance with the IFO Operating Procedures.  In the past the Office Administrator was the Plan Administrator.  The Executive Committee had a suggested motion for the Board that Nancy read aloud:  “The IFO Board appoints Russ Stanton to act as the Plan Administrator for the IFO Pension Plan (401 (a), the IFO 401 (k) plan, and the IFO Employee Welfare Benefit Plan), and be authorized to, in accordance with the IFO Operating Procedures and the IFO/IFOSA contract, process any necessary forms and documents necessary to comply with federal and state laws. Carried”  The Board approved the motion naming Russ Stanton as the Plan Administrator for the 401 (a), 401 (k), and the Employee Welfare Plan.  Carried

In addition, Linda Baer sent Nancy the concurrent enrollment exceptions report from Linda Baer at MnSCU.  The Board was asked to be prepared to talk about this the following morning.

Meet and Confer Update:

At the last statewide Meet and Confer on November 18, Linda Baer wasn’t there; she was in China on MnSCU business.  The main part of the meet and confer was dealing with the pension RFP.  Thank you, Russ, for handling this matter!

One item needs to be discussed involves the timing of the inauguration of Dr. Ramaley at Winona State University on April 7, 2006.  We have a statewide meet and confer scheduled on April 7, 2006 and MnSCU informed us at the November 18 meet and confer that they would have difficulty meeting with us, as many of their staff would be attending the inauguration in Winona.  Should we have the meet and confer in Winona?  Mary Kesler, Winona Faculty Association President, will ask her state university president if the FA Presidents can be invited to the inauguration.  This may be a good opportunity to talk to members on the Board of Trustees as well. 

Pertaining to the Teacher Center, there is a program and we are not sure where it is coming from, pertaining to licensure for high school science teachers.  Cathy Summa attended the meeting and stated that this is a diverse group of science faculty working to prepare these programs.  They are dealing with graduate level courses.  There was someone from the Chancellor’s office sitting in on the meeting.  The discussion is on developing shared-system-wide courses.  The courses would be developed collaboratively but there was a real problem with ownership.  The problem came into play if MnSCU said they owned the coursework because they are paying faculty for the Teacher Center.  Becky wondered if our COPE people are IFO appointed.  Cindy Finch will check on that.  Debra Japp said there are seven state university faculty who may be IFO members, but in her recollection, they are not appointed by the IFO.  They are appointed by their local campus though.  What are their term limits?  It was speculated that state university faculty representatives serving on the COPE Committee do not see themselves as representing the IFO.  Cathy said there is one person who serves both as the COPE rep and leads this science initiative from Bemidji (John Truedson).

Executive Committee Update:

The November 17-18 minutes were reviewed for information only.  Nancy pointed out that faculty will be receiving a technology survey in mid-January.

Common Start Date:

This morning when Nancy Black attended the union leadership breakfast meeting with the Chancellor, it was clarified that we are not talking about a common calendar but rather a common term start date.  She told them none of the faculty will go along with this until you tell us it is not going to adversely affect our IT operations.  We are taking this to meet and confer.  This issue was brought to our attention during the formation of the Business Practices Alignment Committee, but a memo dated September 14, 2005 from Linda Baer addressed to the state university presidents prompted discussion.  Nancy thanked Bruce Svingen for bringing this memo to our attention.  Our office didn’t receive this memo from MnSCU.  According to Nancy, it seems Larry Oveson, President of MSCF 2-year colleges, is in favor of this.  How many students could possibly be logging into the system at one time?  Is MnSCU taking into account all faculty, staff and students logging in on the first day of classes? 

Additionally, another serious problem is created by a common start date that occurs in August before the Labor Day weekend.  Many of our students are parents of children in K-12 who will have to arrange additional child care since K-12 does not start until after Labor Day. 

On the BOT there are three student representatives and there are no labor representatives.  Russ should ask the Student Association for their position.  What happens when you offer summer classes and your school system isn’t starting until September?  Can you fit in your summer sessions?  Metropolitan State University has a 14 week semester in the summer.  How would they make this work?  We will deal with this at meet and confer.

MnSCU Student Affairs Policies Taskforce:

A call for volunteers was emailed out to the FA presidents on the 11/29.  This is not the Academic and Student Affairs Policy Council.  The charge was reviewed by the Board.  They need two reps from the IFO.  Please forward names to Cindy Finch.  We will find out if or when they are meeting.  Nancy requested that FA Presidents send a one paragraph bio with the name of their campus volunteer.  What is driving the creation of this taskforce?  A motion was made that Black be authorized to appoint the two faculty to this committee.  Carried

Lobby Fund Officer Appointment:

According to the Operating Procedures, the Office Administrator was named on the lobby fund account.  Russ received a call from the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board (CFPDB) this week.  According to the CFPDB, we have 10 days from November 30 to amend our registration.  Russ noticed it was out of date because Darrell Downs was listed as the chair and Wil Harri was listed as the treasurer.  Our current chairs are Paul Harris and John Palmer.  A motion was made to appoint Russ Stanton as the treasurer of the lobby fund account.  Carried

Delegate Assembly:

The Board was given information on Delegate Assembly deadlines for registration and resolutions as well as important meeting times.  The EC reviewed this form.  Cindy Finch put this information together.  Nancy asked the Board to review.  Nancy stated the EC would review their recommendation about compensation for the delegates from the November 17-18, 2005 Executive Committee minutes as follows:

It was moved that we recommend to the IFO Board that we compensate or reimburse no more than the total number of delegates assigned to each campus.  Second was offered.  Motion carried.

Cindy Phillips pointed out that the Operating Procedures call for the Board to designate the time and place of the Delegate Assembly.  The Board designated March 24-25, 2006 at the Roseville Radisson for the Delegate Assembly. Carried

Cindy Finch will forward the forms electronically to each FA President.  The format on the resolutions form was revised to provide greater detail and instruction.  The forms and continuing resolutions will be placed on our website.  It is important to get these out before the winter break. 

A motion was made to approve the EC recommendation as follows:  that the IFO Board compensate or reimburse no more than the total number of delegates assigned to each campus.  Carried

We have invited the Chancellor to be our guest speaker.  He asked us and his staff in writing for some possible topics.  Board members offered the following suggestions:

-         Bringing faculty salaries up to the 80^th percentile of peer institutions.

-         Ask the IFO Negotiation Team for items we felt we could not accomplish during negotiations. 

-         What is the future of funding for public higher education with respect to MnSCU’s piece of the pie allocated from the system office to the campuses?   What is the system doing for us?  Challenge the Chancellor to convince us how the system office is helping us.

-         Intellectual property and the future of faculty as “content providers”.

-         How we ensure funding and quality of the doctoral programs.

-         Vision in terms of how MnSCU can help attract, recruit and retain faculty.

-         How do we recruit, retain and work toward the changing demographics in terms of the student body recognizing diversity issues.

IFO Presidential Nominating Committee:

According to the IFO Operating Procedures, three Board members need to be selected for the Presidential Nominating Committee; for the January 26, 2006 Board meeting two presidential candidates will be brought forward.  Nancy asked for volunteers for the nominating committee:  Ruth nominated Becky Omdahl (Becky accepted), Cathy Summa nominated herself, Gerald Toland volunteered.  The Board determined that these will be our three committee members.

Investment Committee Nominations:

At the last meeting we tabled the vote because we were unsure of the IFO Treasurer’s status.  Annette was elected as Board member.  We have three volunteers:  Mike Young (Mankato), Michael Sher (Metro), and Rajiv Kalra (Moorhead).   A motion was made to appoint Rajiv Kalra and Michael Sher.  Carried

Recessed at 9:25 p.m. Thursday, December 1, 2005.

Reconvened at 8:30 a.m. Friday, December 2, 2005.

Equity and Labor Relations Report:

Pat Arseneault started by reviewing the grievance log.  There is one open grievance from both FY03 and FY04 and thirteen from FY05 and eight from FY06.  Grievances are discussed without revealing any personal information on the grievant(s) but the core issues are addressed.

Nancy stated that Pat and Tiffany have worked very well together keeping grievances current.  Nancy mentioned at the last EC meeting that there seems to be an increase in grievances.  Nancy asked if there is a pattern, letters of expectation were mentioned as one issue.  Pat said in past years there is an ebb and flow.  There are anti-union deans who were recently hired.

She held an Equity Officers training in St. Cloud to train faculty in the 1.B.1 procedure and advise faculty in what they can expect when they accompany a faculty member in an investigation. Where Pat is representing a faculty member in a claim and another faculty member seeks representation there could be a conflict of interest. It is good to have more people trained to provide representation. If other campuses are interested in having equity officers training they should contact Pat.

The Benefits Equity Taskforce met on November 18.  They would like to do some PR work.  They plan to contact the Negotiating Team to discuss their position.  They want to continue to seek expansion of the FMLA benefit.  The BET is seeking to change the retirement selection deadline from one year to a longer period of time, particularly in consideration of Fixed Term appointments.  The BET will take to the GRC their goal of benefits for domestic partners.  The BET will be reviewing all DA resolutions in preparation for making a comprehensive recommendation at the DA. 

The BET reviewed the status of their prior recommendations to the Board, and renewed their commitment to the following proposals to achieve Benefits Equity:

§           Seek making the tuition benefit under Article 27, Section G a transferable benefit, so that a faculty member may designate any person, or a scholarship fund, to be the recipient of the benefit of tuition reimbursement.

§           Seek to expand FMLA benefits in the following order of priority:

a.       Expand entitlement to FMLA to a member of the household.

b.      Extend benefit leave time to a whole semester (versus twelve weeks).

c.       Extend the benefit from being unpaid to paid.

§           Seek a change in the law that a faculty member can change their retirement plan when their appointment status changes from Fixed Term to Probationary, and from Probationary to Tenured.

§           Seek Domestic Partner (health and dental insurance) Benefits.

§           Seek to broaden the definition of an “emergency” to include the need for “urgent care” for out of state insurance coverage.

The BET determined that they would review all DA resolutions with regard to benefits, and attempt to make a comprehensive recommendation with regard to prioritizing, and in some cases deleting or rewording resolutions.

The BET is also looking into the issue of equitable treatment for members on disability leave (in particular, health care coverage).

The BET desires to draw public attention to its proposal to seek the tuition waiver benefit as a transferable benefit, and is working towards this goal. One question the taskforce wanted to find out is how MnSCU currently costs the tuition waiver benefit.

The next meeting of the BET will be on February 10 (February 17 as a back up day). The BET intends to issue a Final Report to the IFO Board on or before March 23, and to Delegate Assembly on March 24.

The Feminist Issues Committee held its fall meeting on November 11, 2005.

The FIC elected Zoa Rockenstein, representative from St. Cloud, as Chair for 2005-06. The committed selected Ria Newhouse, representative from Metropolitan, as an Interim representative to the BET.

The committee intends to renew efforts to publicize the current offer to award a Feminist Issues Grant of up to $3,000 for a proposal for research, a project, or a creative work that contributes to the advancement of women in the IFO and Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU).

§           We are encouraging first time grant writers to apply for the grant using the “first time grant applicant friendly” simple application process:

o       Interested Members should submit a 2 to 3 page proposal, including the project title, statement of purpose describing the goals of the activity, the means for achieving the goal(s) including a project timeline covering the grant period from May 2006 to March 2008, and a description of how the applicant intends to share results. Applicants are also asked to outline your previous experiences and/or efforts on behalf of feminist issues.

o       Members may submit application to the IFO by mail (postmarked by January 23, 2005), email or by fax on January 23, 2006.

o       The successful applicant will be awarded the funds in May 2006 directly payable to the grant recipient faculty member(s) and can be used to pay a stipend or clerical help, or for travel, supplies, or other expenses as outlined by the recipient.

The FIC will meet next in February 2006.

The Salary Review Committee (SRC) will meet December 12 to continue with the FY05 Annual Reviews of new hires and faculty who received a terminal degree between October 1, 2003 and October 1, 2004. 

The GLBTA Issues Committee will hold its winter meeting on December 9, 2005 on the Metropolitan campus.

The Multicultural Issues Committee will hold its winter meeting in February 2006.

Government Relations Report:

Nancy introduced John Palmer, who is the grievance officer at St. Cloud, today he is with us as the co-chair of Government Relations.  Paul Harris is the other co-chair. 

The IFO Governmental Relations Committee met November 3, 2005.   There was discussion on:

• the 2005 legislative session (s)
• outcomes on IFO goals
• legislative vacancies—special elections coming up
• vendor selection for the faculty pension plans
• enrollments
• the process and timetable for the ratification of the IFO contract
• the next legislative session—agenda and March 1^st start date

Hal Kimball, MSUSA President, JJ Jouppi, and two students met with the GRC to discuss MSUSA’s textbook project, tuition buy-down proposals, and tuition discounting proposals.   The students oppose tuition discounting proposals being put forth by MnSCU.   Students would support a buy-down of tuition by the 2006 legislature. 

The GRC discussed legislative goals for the 2006 session, and recommends the following goals to the IFO Board:  

1. Support legislative ratification of the IFO Contract for 2005-07. 

2. Support the MnSCU bonding request (attached). 

3. Oppose the consolidation of the Minneapolis TRA Fund with the state Teachers Retirement Association unless:

• The Minneapolis school district and teachers pay a surcharge to make up for past under funding of the MTRF; and
• The state increases the TRA formula from 1.7% to 2.0% annual service credit.
• In addition, the state should consolidate all teachers’ defined benefit pension plans, including the St. Paul and Duluth plans.

4. Support a supplemental appropriations request that prioritizes:

• Upgrading instructional support systems, including D2L and ISRS;
• Holding the system harmless in terms of extraordinary fuel cost increases;
• A buy-down of student tuition increases; and
• An allocation to individual campuses that would permit them to expand capacity in programs with high student demand.

A motion was made that the Board supports the four legislative goals proposed by the GRC.

Call for division.  Nancy called for a vote on legislative goals 1, 2 and 4.  vote Carried w/o opposition

There was much discussion on goal 3 and how the funds work.  How will this potentially harm our members if this merger takes place?  According to John Palmer, the purpose for this is to be a player with Pogemiller.  If Pogemiller can get the votes to pass this without our involvement we may not play a role.  This is a very important issue to Pogemiller and this was discussed at the last Lobby Days. 

The Minneapolis TRA needs to contribute 15.24% more to keep their retirement fund fully funded.  The school district and teachers are not contributing enough, plus there has been many cut backs in hiring teachers.  Their funds will run out in 4-5 years and at that time their retirement funds will be pro-rated.  Pogemiller is looking at enhancing the formula for rural teachers in an attempt to deal with this shortfall.

Does this issue have a time factor that would require us to deal with this now?  If not, maybe we should have additional discussion.  Russ said there is time for additional discussion as the session doesn’t begin until March 1.  The sooner they deal with this issue, the cheaper the solution will be.  A motion was made to table this issue until the next Board meeting on January 26-27 and request the GRC to come back with an additional report.  Carried

Judy Borgen, MnSCU Budget Director, met with the GRC to discuss MnSCU’s supplemental appropriations request to the 2006 legislature, MnSCU’s new revenue model efforts, and HESO’s Higher Education Funding Reform Implementation Task Force.

Ms. Borgen said MnSCU is looking at five areas for a supplemental budget request:

• Fully fund centers of excellence and funds for a center of excellence in Bioscience
• High priority technology needs
• Extraordinary fuel costs
• A tuition buy-down
• Expanded capacity in programs with high student demand.

No decisions have been made on what will be in the request to the legislature—the MnSCU staff will report back to the MnSCU Board in December.

The Funding Reform Implementation Task Force is looking at recommendations to totally gut the current funding formula for state universities and colleges as it exists in statute.   The statute was seldom followed by the legislature, except if enrollments were going down.   Essentially, it appears the group is recommending no formula in the future—MnSCU and the U of M would just ask the legislature for what they wanted and the legislature would give them what they feel like giving them.

MnSCU’s new revenue model effort seems to be moving in the direction of much higher tuition with tuition discounting for some students to provide access.   This is essentially moving in the direction of the private college model.   Judy said that in order for the tuition discounting to work, MnSCU would take over collecting tuition centrally, and then redistribute tuition to the institutions with greatest need.

The committee met with Allan Johnson, MnSCU Vice Chancellor for Facilities, to discuss MnSCU’s bonding request to the legislature.   Johnson distributed a list of the projects, which totals $279 million.   He also distributed a breakdown of how the $110 million for Higher Education Asset Preservation and Repair (HEAPR) would be spent.  State Universities would receive many millions of dollars under the request (attached).

The committee recommended Lobby Fund contributions of $100 each to 15 legislators who were particularly supportive of higher education last session.  They also recommended setting aside $2500 to attend House Republican Caucus fundraisers, $2500 for attending House DFL fundraisers, and $3500 for attending Senate DFL fundraisers.  The committee recommended setting aside $3000 until next calendar year, when the contributions limits to candidates are raised, so that larger contributions can be made to key supporters of higher education.  The committee discussed higher education funding reform with the IFO Budget Committee.   The Budget Committee will be looking at the issue and will report back to the IFO GRC when they have recommendations.

According to the state, need is determined by the financial status of students; we were told our students are wealthy.  In other words, they are saying the institutions with the neediest students are the CC/TCs.  Your GRC has been engaging in a discussion with the Budget Committee over the last several years in anticipation of what is happening right now.  Our organization needs to be a player in the discussion surrounding this important legislative decision this spring. 

A Board member stated that if there is no money coming into the universities these are moot issues.  Are we putting enough resources into dealing with the issues we are facing?  We probably need to consider prioritizing what we are doing as a body.  In terms of lack of funding for higher education there is really nothing in legislation that deals with this.    The BOT cannot understand why there are different tuition rates among the State Universities.  The way the BOT seems to be heading, mainly the members appointed by Governor Pawlenty, their agenda is to shift the cost of higher education from state appropriations to tuition.  Now what they are proposing is that low income students have their tuition subsidized by other students who are not considered low income.  All of our universities except for SW are on the high end in terms of average family income for students in MnSCU.  This will pit students against fellow students and Russ feels this will have some bad repercussions.  Another issue is the formula for higher education.  This formula hasn’t been followed in years.  In the future we will go to the legislature and ask for what we want and they will decide whether or not to grant the money.  Russ feels this will be a bad way to handle the funds. 

Speaking on behalf of the Budget Committee, Steve Bohnenblust stated that there is a deliberate effort to shift money from the higher cost institutions (state universities) to make up for the lower amount of money the two years are getting.  The allocation model as set up currently, will continue to hurt us.  According to John Palmer, we are going to have to abandon our way of thinking if we are going to be a player, i.e. low tuition high state aid.  What is going to emerge is very clear - high tuition.  The IFO needs to discuss the implications of this reform.  Cindy P. asked Russ to send out an email with just a few paragraphs illustrating the issue to motivate faculty involvement.

Russ stated that just informing members isn’t enough unless you provide them with direction.  We are having the Budget Committee look at this issue so we can have a position paper for the IFO.  It will explain why we took those positions.  Everybody understands that higher education is essential for the future, but that isn’t the issue; the issue is who pays for it and that is where we disagree.  They want students to pay for it and we want the state to pay for it.  The Budget Committee is meeting on January 13, 2006.  It would be difficult to have a complete position paper by then.  George stated it would be good to include a sense of how the faculty feels – we need a faculty buy-in.  George stated there are a lot of people involved in this issue; there are people who have opinions, skills and abilities but maybe they are not completely aware of what is happening; we need to tap into our resources.  This is a huge issue.  In the short term we will put out an Update newsletter next week with information on this matter.  We will take this up at the next Board meeting.

The next meeting GRC meeting set for December 15 and 16, 2005.  The committee will be looking at additional goals for the 2006 session.

Legislative Report:

Russ Stanton gave a report.  Special elections were held for two Minnesota Senate seats on November 24^th.   In Senate District 43 (Minnetonka and Plymouth), Republican Senator David Geaither had resigned to become Governor Pawlenty’s Chief of Staff.   DFL candidate Terri Bonoff won the election with 54% of the vote.   This increased the DFL majority to 36 seats in the Senate, compared to 30 for the Republicans.   The election was a blow to the Republicans because this is historically Republican territory (last election the DFL candidate received on 34% of the vote).  In addition, Republicans typically win about 9 out of 10 special elections.   Evolution versus creationism played an important role in the election debates.

In Senate District 19, Republican Senator Ron Ourada resigned to become a lobbyist in Washington.   The election was won by Republican Amy Koch, with 52% of the vote.  Ourada received 61.7% of the vote in 2002.  This represents a hold for Republicans.

Special elections are coming up for both a Senate and a House seat in District 15 (St. Cloud).   On November 8^th, Republican Senator Dave Klies was elected Mayor of St. Cloud, opening up his Senate seat.   Last summer, DFL State Representative Joe Opatz was appointed Interim President of Central Lakes College, creating a vacancy in his House seat. These will be very fiercely contested seats—particularly the House seat, since Republicans hold the House by only a 68-66 margin (with some progressive Republicans who defect on key votes).  Governor Pawlenty set the special election date as December 27—when most of the students, and probably many of the faculty, will be out of town.  Filings for the seat will close at 5:00 p. m. on Thursday, December 1^st—so we won’t know all who might run until then.   However, the DFL has endorsed Tarryl Clark for the Senate and Larry Haws for the House.   The Republicans have endorsed Dan Ochsner for the Senate and Sue Ek for the House.   Russ will be sending out information on voter registration and absentee ballots to encourage faculty participation in the election.

The November State Budget Forecast came out today.   The state is projected to take in $701 million (2.3%) more in revenue during the FY06-07 biennium than previously forecast.   Don’t start thinking of ways to spend the money yet—it will be used (as directed by law) to buy back most of the past accounting shifts by the state regarding funding for school districts.   The state also announced that when the books were settled for the last biennium (which ended on June 30, 2005) the state had a $355 million surplus.  This money is also directed by law into a tax relief account.  This money could be redirected to other purposes by the legislature next session.

A Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) flowchart developed by MnSCU was handed out.  There is a question on the payout at the end of the calendar year in terms of the HRA and the amounts that are in that account.  Russ contacted MnSCU and the rules are so complex.  Incidentally, MnSCU credited $500 in this last pay period for next years HRA, which created many questions and confusion because the money isn’t available until January 1.  Eventually, it will be for a total of $600 when the new contract goes into effect.   

After reviewing the flowchart, it was discovered that our previous Healthcare Ombudsman may have misinformed the membership.  MnSCU’s explanation differs from what we told our faculty as confirmed by Cathy Summa in looking back at previous Update article. 

Open enrollment came and went and people operated under the assumption that we could accumulate that account to $999 and may have set up their FSA with that money.  Russ and Gary Janikowski, MnSCU HR, talked about gathering up questions and doing a FAQ on our website so there is some standardized way to distribute information. 

Is this something we need to refer to our attorneys, if this is a breech of contract, what are the possibilities of this violating our understanding? What legal action can we take?  We could take this to meet and confer.  Who agreed to this on our side or is it MnSCU telling us this is how it is going to be?  The question did not originally arise and now we are being told this is the process and is not what we communicated to our members.  A motion was made to refer this to our attorneys for a possible breech of contract.  Seldat/Larkin no vote was taken.

We need to empower the EC to move forward if after M&C we are not satisfied.  This flow chart was faxed to us on November 30 after the end of the open enrollment period.  There was confusion among Board members over the information we distributed to our members vs. MnSCU’s interpretation of the account.  The campus HR departments sent out information.  The concern/confusion is the IFOs understanding that we agreed to the method by which our HRAs would be handled and now it appears that the process has changed.  This will become more complicated when we receive the additional $100 upon the ratification of our contract. 

The Board spent considerable time deciphering the root of the miscommunication problem.  The plan document was retrieved from the IFO website.  Gwen Griffin stated that the plan document says that participants with $500 or more in their HRA account as of 12/31 will have their contribution directed to their Health Care Savings Plan.  Cathy Summa indicated that our October Updates newsletter says something different.  It appears that we may have misinformed our members.  Russ made the point that no one is loosing money here.  The money goes into your post retirement account, but that not everyone is eligible or elects for such an account. Board members were concerned that we have a lot of young faculty with heavy medical bills and we touted this as a way for making up for their cash flow loss on insurance premiums. There are different understandings.  As painful as this is, the faster we get the information out, the better chance people have to adjust their finances.  Summa pointed out that in our September Update newsletter we said a special edition of the Update for the FSA and HRA would be sent out but that did not happen. 

Cathy Summa indicated that the immediate remedy is for people to submit a claim this month to bring their current account below the $500 dollar mark.  We thought $1,000 was the cap.  We need to move rapidly.  You have to spend down your flex account if they do not want to have their money rollover to the Health Care Savings Plan.  Russ will ask MnSCU to put this flowchart on their website and we can put a link to it on our website.  Flex dollars don’t pay for long term care, but the HRA does.  In summary, Russ was requested to put an article in the Update for December 10 and send out an email for broadcast distribution on Tuesday, December 6.

Executive Committee Recommendation on the IFO 401 (k):

After reviewing the 401 (k) plan document, the Board was prepared to make a decision.  A motion was made to approve the 401 (k) plan documents. Carried

Becky Omdahl reminded the Board that there was one paragraph where we had questions.  Under the “Highly Compensated Employee” section: could this in any way be discriminatory based on wages?  According to Cindy Phillips, no, did we answer that knowing we are in a situation of having higher compensated employees with different benefits?  Russ stated that this is a form document/plan document was created by TIAA-CREF; we are adopting their prototype.  They told Russ that they do discrimination tests on these documents to make sure the plan doesn’t disproportionately affect the lower paid.  It was determined that there was no issue with this language.

Operating Procedures:

The EC reviewed these non-controversial housekeeping changes and recommended that the Board approve the changes in items 1-3, not 4, and 5-15. 

There was some discussion at previous meetings about the number of signatures for the Lobby Fund check writing.  As recommended by the Executive Committee, we would like to only require one signature on the Lobby Fund.  We do monitor that check book on a regular basis.  We don’t want procedures that hamper our activity.  It should be noted that this issue did not arise from the IRS – any documents that indicate such were incorrect.  This issue came to us from our auditors.

A motion was made to approve items 1-3 and 5-15. Carried

Item 4 is a sensitive issue (faculty association reserves) that we will revisit after our auditors deal with this.

Condo:

The Board authorized the sale of the condo.  Steve Bohnenblust volunteered to contact realtors and handle the sale of the condo.  Steve gave a brief update.   Steve will give a more detailed update at the Executive Committee meeting next week.  We will continue to keep the Board informed.  Thank you, Steve, for taking on this task.

President’s Compensation Taskforce:

Annette Schoenberger, Dave Larkin and Mike Ruth were charged by the Board to deal with the issue of the president’s compensation.  Their recommendation was prepared on a handout given to the Board and was divided into three sections:  salary, housing and personal auto mileage.  This is in response to the IRS ruling.  Currently there is a salary minimum for the president, when we get the 05-07 contract ratified, this number will increase.  A summary of their proposal is outlined below:

SALARY:  At the time an individual begins a two year term as the IFO president their IFO Base salary will be set at the highest of either 135.7 % of their faculty base salary or the IFO minimum.  (While the 135.7 % was arrived at by looking at a faculty schedule of 168 duty days plus 60 additional it does not imply a set number of work days, vacation days etc. but does imply year round work as necessary to do the job.)  After that, any increases the President would have received, even retroactively, in her/his faculty salary shall be added to her/his IFO Base salary.  The IFO minimum is set at $ 90,000 for the 2004-6 term and is to be increased by Board resolution for each two year term to reflect the average increase in faculty salaries during the preceding two years.

HOUSING:  Housing allowance for the president is set each year on July 1 to the average rent for a 2 bedroom apartment in St. Paul plus 20%.  This amount is recalculated each July 1.  This applies only to those presidents who live outside the Metro Area.

PERSONAL AUTO MILAGE:  In addition to actual business mileage, the president will be paid for no more than 40 trips home, per year, at the IRS rate.

A motion was made to approve the recommendation as presented.  Carried

Staff Restructure Taskforce:

This taskforce is composed of Mary Kesler, Nancy Black and Cindy Phillips.  The taskforce gave a report to the EC at their meeting yesterday.  The taskforce is 80% completed in creating a general survey that lists functions asking for feedback on the importance of those functions.  This will remind faculty of what we do at the IFO.  We want to survey the Board, some standing committees, negotiators, and campus treasurers folks who have regular dealings with the IFO.  They we are looking at some short term assistance and we talked about some different strategies.  Some of our members who have expertise and flexibility in their schedule over the next few months may be of assistance to the central IFO office so we aren’t forced to make an immediate decision on restructuring.   Staff will be included in the survey as well.  We are moving along in a balance of keeping going without rushing to make decision with long term impact.   Georgia asked the taskforce if in their analysis they have any indication of those needs.  Cindy answered yes, benefits and resources dedicated to the academic areas.  We know there are needs there and we are trying to identify which are the most important and our energies for dealing with them.

Concurrent Enrollment:

Nancy received an email on Thursday, December 1, 2005 from Linda Baer c/o Shirley Schultz at MnSCU.  The subject was concurrent enrollment exceptions report.  In reviewing the email and its attachments, Nancy reported that this issue concerns the IFO and MSCF has a real problem with it.  Annette Schoenberger recommended that this be taken back to our campus academic affairs committee.  Issues:  there are preclusions not backed by the data.  The conclusion MnSCU is drawing is not warranted by the data.  There were mistakes/misreportings found in the 2004 data.  Maybe we should go to our campuses and ask if this corrective action has taking place.  We were concerned by the criteria for granting enrollment exceptions.  There was a question about students initially registering for PSEO who later changed their minds, what does this do to a classroom environment? The problem is there are high school teachers teaching courses for which college credit is being granted.  The system is trying to eliminate that by saying we have state university mentors.  As we look at the people who were also the mentors, 45 faculty, 25 were unlimited fixed term staff, we also have 11 mentors who are adjunct faculty.  How are mentors being compensated?  When we couple that issue with the teacher center licensure issue, many teachers are teaching outside of their field.  They (high school teachers) have a college course they are teaching but maybe only just took the course themselves prior to teaching it and are unable to teach it in high school but CAN teach it in college.  Are university faculty getting credit for these courses?  How are we soliciting mentors?  Is there any training?  We should get some hard data showing high school students preparation for college courses.  We need to bring this back to the campuses academic affairs then bring to a local meet and confer.  We will discuss this at the January Board meeting.  Someone needs to inform Linda Baer about how poorly this report was written.  Nancy will forward this electronically to the FA Presidents.  We will put on the M&C for January.

There are so many ways that this governor and the administration are trying to get college credits for high school students. That’s not a bad idea but we only get reimbursed half the money, the text books are paid for, CLEP is another issue as we are not able to set the standards, last, we have concurrent enrollment; this is just a bad idea. 

Break for lunch.

Members present:  Nancy Black, Stephen Bohnenblust,  Gwen Griffith, Jayantha Herath, Mary Kessler, Andrew Larkin,  Dave Larkin,  Sonja Meier, Becky Omdahl, Cindy Phillips, Annette Schoenberger, George Seldat, Cathy Summa, Bruce Svingen, Gerald Toland, Rose Weaver, Derek Webb, and Ruth Zietlow. 

Motion:  Redirect the Executive Committee on how to prepare a symposium on higher education funding.  Passed.

Winona is planning to invite Faculty Association Presidents or designees from the different State Universities to attend spring, 2006 commencement. 

Executive Session:

Motion:  Move into Executive Session passed.

The Board moved into Executive Session at 12:38.

Reporting out from IFO Board Executive Session, December 2, 2005:

MOTION:  Move out of Executive Session (1:00 p.m.) 

Seldat/Phillips   Passed.

MOTION:  The Board commends and thanks Nancy for her tremendous work on behalf of the IFO.  Phillips/Meiers   Passed.