FACULTY SENATE MINUTES NO

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES NO. 9

February 8, 2005

1.� CALL TO ORDER: The 9th meeting of the Faculty Senate for 2004-2005 was called to order at 1:15 PM on February 8, 2005 in the Park Center Hall of Fame Room by Chair Ram Chaturvedi. ��

SENATORS AND MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Chaturvedi, J. Rayle, P. Buckenmeyer,

D. Driscoll, P. Walsh, D. Berger, M. King, K. Alwes, J. Cottone, K. Rombach, B. Griffen,

K. Pristash, D. Ritchie, A. Young, D. Vegas, M. K. Boland, D. Walker, E. Bitterbaum,

R. Franco, W. Shaut, B. Kissel, J. Governali, G. Clarke, J. Cottone, D. Kreh

SENATORS AND MEMBERS ABSENT: C. DeGouff, L. Anderson (sabbatical), J. Hokanson, J. Peluso, D. Canaski, A. Henderson-Harr, T. Phillips, P. Schroeder, E. Davis-Russell

GUESTS PRESENT: G. Levine, J. Mosser, P. Koryzno, R. Olsson, M. Prus, Y. Murname, R. Grantham

I.� APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

The Minutes from January 25 will be approved at the next meeting on February 22.

II. SENATE ACTIONS:

There was a vote to amend the agenda to move the Fast Track Presentation Skills proposal to New Business (Approved)

There was a vote to approve the nominations for the Student Affairs Committee (SEE Area Senators reports} (Approved)

III. CHAIR�S REPORT:

The Chair opened his report by announcing that the agenda would be amended, due to that the Fast Track issue concerning Presentation Skills, which would be moved to New Business and be discussed and voted on at the meeting in two weeks, on February 22.� J. Cottone explained that this came as a result of several e-mails from concerned faculty that this topic required more attention.� The Chair reported that the Steering Committee had met before the meeting and agreed on the change. Cottone made the motion and it was approved.

D. Vegas asked if there was a quorum present and Parliamentarian D. Kreh reported that it required 13 in attendance and there was a quorum because 17 voting members were present.�

The Chair then reported that the Steering Committee met on February 1 and discussed two memos, one from the Educational Policy Committee and the other Presentation Skills Committee which would be introduced at the meeting and discussed and voted on at the next meeting.�

Regarding formation of administrative search committees, Ms. Barry has prepared a white paper which has received feedback from the faculty and is being revised. It will be reported on at the Senate at a later date.� Chaturvedi repeated, as he has in the past, the importance of filling these search committees in a timely manner in order to attract better candidates. The campus has lost good candidates in the past due to the delay in the process.

Chaturvedi then distributed data from SUNY Central as to how SUNY compares to other public and/or private institutions.� He said we are doing well, and in some cases, better than others.

He ended by reporting a reminder that it is Black History month and there are several events being held on that topic with announcement coming from the President�s Office.� Joel Shatsky would be giving a talk that night entitled, �Nuns and Guns� at 7 pm in the Corey Union Exhibition Lounge.�

Chaturvedi introduced the two student Senator Dan Walker (and Mary Kate Boland.)�

IV. VICE CHAIR�S REPORT:

J. Rayle announced that he attended the SUNY Plenary in Albany and handed out a summary of the events.� One of those things, he reported, involved designations looking at SUNY assessment and Mission Review II. He reported he was involved in the latter committee which discussed that topic.

He stated that on Saturday a resolution was passed supporting Chancellor King.

Rayle told the Senate that he was unable to answer questions regarding these issues but that SUNY Senator T. Phillips could and would probably be reporting to them in future meetings.

He then reported on the Restructuring Committee which has met and had discussions concerning allocating reps from various areas on campus.� He asked the campus think about renaming the Faculty Senate, calling it the College Senate or All College Senate.

He asked that the body refer to him as his Joseph (Rayle) in the future.

V.� SECRETARY�S REPORT:

No report.

VI. TREASURER�S REPORT:

No report.

VII.� PRESIDENT�S REPORT:

President Bitterbaum announced an article in the UUP newsletter Voices honoring Bill Griffen. He encouraged everyone who hasn�t read it to do so.� He said, �It�s a great article. I just wanted to let the record show that.�� K. Alwes commented that �it was very well deserved.�

Bitterbaum then reported about graduation rates and indicated he will be sending out an e-mail to the community. He said, �I think you will be surprised how good our data is.� It is all relevant, of course, but puts us way ahead of the other SUNY�s and national public universities. For us at the six year mark, our graduation rate is 57% and that puts us in the top five of all senior institutions.�� He announced the rankings were: Geneseo, Binghamton, Albany, Fredonia with SUNY Cortland being fifth.�

Mission Review III is going into the second round, he said.� Most of the documents were sent to Albany to gather input and he thanked G. Levine who did the formal draft which, he reported, was very well done. It will come back on April 7 where representatives will be here on campus working with faculty and administration.

He said they would also like UUP and faculty interested in what is happening in Albany this week to visit with Barbara Lifton and Senator Seward, as well as an assistant.� He finished by saying, �We are pleased to have them and other vice presidents talking about these and some other topics.�

President Bitterbaum stated, in behalf of the Provost, that faculty were asked for feedback regarding by J. Barry�s white paper on administrative search committees and found it very impressive. Barry plans to revise it before bringing it back to the Faculty Senate.

Bitterbaum reported that his office is working on a SUNY Cortland Council for Undergraduate Research. He said, �We will do something at the graduate level but we already have a very active graduate program.� He mentioned activities such as Scholars�s Day which involves undergraduates working with peers.� Bitterbaum spoke of Mike Toglia in Psychology and other faculty that have been invited and there will be a Faculty Staff newsletter to highlight the current research and work that they are doing in both graduate and undergraduate work.

The President announced that the American Democracy Project has a web site: www.cortland.edu/civicengagement.� There will be a banquet at the end of the year. He also mentioned a video Paul Vanderveur made.

He announced an initiative involving Davis-Russell and others called the Cultural Requirement Committee which will be bringing speakers. He said, �We hope to have talks in the future to put some significant dollars there.��

President Bitterbaum mentioned that his office has been working internationally and came up with a central college to develop civic engagement programs. Davis-Russell went to the conference, he stated, and was very interested. There will be faculty stipends with three service courses being developed. They would like additional faculty to join and help and Bitterbaum encouraged faculty and departments to contact him.

QUESTIONS FOR THE PRESIDENT:

D. Berger said he and his colleagues are concerned about key personnel in computing who have retired or are on leave.� He said, referring to these support personnel as those �...who have always been extremely supportive and cooperative.�� He stated that it is more difficult in Psych 101, for example, involving mastery quizzes and learning material that the faculty have had to delay implementation of that because the computing area is currently understaffed.�� He further stated, �I wanted to mention I hope that we would make every effort to provide some temporary solutions to hire some other people, make some arrangements, so that we can continue to have computing support on this campus.�

Bitterbaum affirmed Berger�s concern and said he had discussed it with the Provost. He announced that the problem exists that there is a lot of competition for qualified computer programmers, especially with hospitals and businesses.� He stressed the successes they have had in the past hiring former students from different disciplines, such as math and science. He mentioned several names of people who have been disabled, retired or left the campus.� He mentioned that they are working with P. Warnken, who is looking for qualified personnel in a very competitive job market situation.

Berger asked if they could not hire individuals or even students temporarily until more permanent measures could be successfully undertaken?

Bitterbaum stressed that where they find talent they utilize them. He mentioned an art student whom they hired to wire the new math lab last year.� They would like to hire him but he wants to continue his career as an artist. He ended by saying, �We will see what happens.�

VIII. VICE PRESIDENT�S REPORT:

Franco reported the initiative regarding financing student rec centers which continues and a reference to a �glimmer of hope� regarding financing the venture.� He mentioned a conference call two weeks that prior Thursday for 1-1/2 hours where his office discovered that the bonding process does require involving members of assembly and senate.� He said that there are such members who are opposed to binding buildings paid for by student fees.� He said �I think we are invigorated in our enthusiasm, as certain individuals looking at student life, to try to move this forward and hopefully change the minds of folks that are opposed to the construction and financing of these rec centers by student fees.

Vice President Franco said that the cabinet residence hall budget for next year was approved. He said the next step will be to take that budget to the Student Government Association for their review and endorsement.

His last item of business addressed the financial cut in the EOP Program. He said, �We are concerned about the state budget, as it had been presented in general terms before, but I am concerned about the 50% proposed cut on EOP funding which focuses entirely on eliminating all special financial aid for EOP students.� So we will be working hard to convince our legislators that reducing financial aid in this way would damage the program and decrease the number of students we are able to attract to Cortland through EOP.�

W. Shaut gave an update on the current budget, saying, �We have been notified by SUNY that we will receive 9.7 million dollars in funding.�� He mentioned the history that evolved from 2 years ago when the tuition increase went into affect. He pointed out, �They took money from some campuses and funneled it into some other campuses. We received just over $900,000 at that BAP. We lost 2.7 million. We are not told that another 9.7 million is coming back into SUNY.� We will receive another $400,000 to $500,000 some time before end of the fiscal year. Based on lack of knowledge on next years� budget there is an 85 million revenue offset supposed to be supported by tuition increase reduction in state funding.� There�s no plan to totally restore that 85 million that is being reduced, so until we have a better handle on what is happening in the next fiscal year, with increased contracted salary increases and utility costs, we are going to hold this $400,000 to $500,000 to alleviate any shortfalls in next years� budget.�

On the Capital Plan, Vice President Shaut reported that we are ready to begin the Brockway project. He stated 29.million was approved for the projects which that money supports. However, he informed the Senate, the first bids were 10-15% higher than �we originally projected� caused by cost of construction materials and operating costs. He explained that due to construction going on overseas this has presented an opportunity for contractors and suppliers to increase prices.� He further stated,� �If we continue to find ourselves a few million dollars short as we get to the end of our projects� the projected 3 million has been updated to 3.1 and then 3.4.

Someone asked if we are still doing the roofs to which he responded in the affirmative.

Another unknown individual asked about the transferring of funds from one campus to another.

Shaut responded that a few years ago, when the BAP formula was taken off of the table with the tuition increase, that increase, although charged to all students, doesn�t go to all campuses. Some campuses, he explained, were hurt by this since the tuition increase didn�t increase revenue. He stated, �We didn�t receive 2.7 million in additional support, it was transferred to other campuses. All campuses were held harmless with education in state support. Nobody had a smaller budget than the year before. There was no formula involved, they just took all revenue and state support and moved it to campuses so they were all held harmless the year before.� If we had received the tuition increase, we would have received 2.7 million dollars of additional funding.� They have since made a change in this process,� he explained, �We have gotten over $900,000 back and now there�s another 9.7 million that�s been put back on the table and we should get between $400,000 and $500,000 additional funding for this year.�

Bitterbaum explained that some schools always received a large share from the state and they previously didn�t have to rely on tuition increases because the state provided for them. He used Cornell as a good example of how this inequity evolved by saying, �When they decided to raise tuition, we got over $950,000 back, but Cornell didn�t have that mechanism, so they had to take it from the 13 comprehensives and give it to those who didn�t have money. Cornell got 50 million, or pretty close to that share. Then all of the presidents shouted �this is bloody murder� so the Chancellor went back to the legislature and said this is not fair to the13 comprehensives. So we were able to get additional dollars for other institutions.�� He mentioned how this inequity occurred and how they are attempting to rectify it.

Someone asked if tuition is raised for the coming year, whether its $500, $200 or $100, if the same sort of inequitable distribution will happen again, saying, �Will those colleges which have more students, and therefore, would gain more money would not essentially benefit from that portion?

D. Ritchie said, �I would anticipate that we would be well funded so if we generated $500 from 6,000 students, we would lose that equal amount of state support, and other campuses heavily funded by state support, we would lose that. In the end we would all be treated equal.�

Vice President Mosser shared news from Institutional Advancement, the addition of Richard Martin, in the Publications and Electronic Media Group, who reports to Tracy Rammacher.� He said, �We are looking forward to having Richard oriented and to our website.� He also stated that Tracy Rammacher and her staff we working with Mark Yacavone in developing a new view book for campus and they are exploring the possibility of a cd view book, as well.

In March alumnus Charles Young from the class of �86 is coming to service as Executive in Residence. He stated that Mr. Young is VP for Marketing and Communications for Tyco International in Princeton, NJ and will be visiting with the Communication Department, as well as meeting with students, faculty and administration on campus.

Mosser reported that at the end of the calendar year our new Manager of Plan Giving, Peter Vanderwart, secured a $100,000 gift to establish new scholarships, saying, �...And so we are very excited about this and beginning to see a lot of good results from field staff and visiting alumni at the college.�

He announced Institutional Advancement is also launching the Annual Fund solicitations which are designated appeals for the library and art gallery and Raquette Lake as a way to gather support to strengthen those programs.

Mosser stated that President Bitterbaum and Mike Katz representing the Leadership Giving Group made a trip to San Francisco to visit alumni of the college and will be fund raising visiting alumni in Florida in early March.�

X. STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS:

Long Range Planning Committee - No report.

Educational Policy Committee - J. Governali presented the recommendation from his committee regarding the summer session configuration proposal from the Director of Summer Session Advisory Council. He said they have worked on reviewing the policy with the Directors of Bursar and Financial Aid. Governali reported that there are a number of issues that had to be dealt with in terms of summer session.� As a result EPC spent most of the Fall developing a proposal configuration working back through the campus community and presenting their proposal to reconfigure the summer session which will result in discussion and vote in two weeks.

Student Affairs Committee - P. Buckenmeyer announced the nominations for his committee: Social Behavioral Sciences, 2003-2005, Ibipo Johnston-Anumonwo; Fine Arts/Humanities 2004-2006, Mark DiCiccio; Math/Science, 2004-2006, Cristina Bacuta; Marriah Gerty, Student.

These nominations were approved {SEE Senate Actions} He announced that they will begin preparations to discuss applications for Faculty Senate Student Scholarships Award. The application deadline is March 4.

Faculty Affairs Committee - G. Clark reported that his committee will meet the upcoming Thursday. He announced that they now have a chair and are still in process of securing the English and Physics Department personnel policies.

College Research Committee - D. Ritchie made the report for C. McRoberts.� The College Research Committee will meet next week. The Faculty Research Program will meet to consider applications with a March 4 deadline. Research and Travel grants for non-tenured faculty and staff and the Outstanding Achievement in Residence Award have a March 4 deadline. An e-mail went out last week from Amy Henderson-Harr that for the Summer Research Fellowships for 2006 the deadline will be next Fall 2005. He also wanted to remind people that for the Office of Sponsored Programs the UUP New York state IPA grants applications are due February 21. There will be an upcoming deadline for the UUP New York State Special Projects Awards and he encouraged faculty to take any opportunity they can.

The Presentation Skills Requirement Amendment proposed by Presentation Skills Committee was presented, of which Thomas Mwanika, who is on sabbatical, was listed as chair, with member Regina Grantham there to present it. Another chair has yet to be determined. The members of the committee, besides herself and Mwanika are: Marley Barduhn, Donna Margine and David Hollenback, she announced.

She explained that the proposal is referred to as an �amendment,� which is to define that they are referring to 3 credit courses. She added that her committee wanted a change in the wording on part 3, page 1.� She said they wanted to indicate that it, as the presentation skills requirement, would be a course that has the minimum of 3 credits for core connotations to be designated as a presentation skills course.� Basically, she said, it is a GE course. She said, �To my knowledge� most GE courses are 3 credits.� She reported that the second proposal is to indicate that her committee, referring to section 3, that the course is taught in both the traditional classroom and online, but she said that the traditional classroom mode may be submitted for as the presentation skills designee. She said a lot of people think it should be any course, but, she reported, that is what it says, referring to the mandate.

Alwes commented on the propriety of proposal number one in the amendment which she feels is absolutely necessary. She said, on proposal number two, �I am concerned...have any professors actually submitted an asynchronous class as presentation skills?�

Grantham responded by saying, �We haven�t had anybody submit one yet but I understand there is discussion.�

Berger asked for clarification on the amendment saying it could be stated as so because a GE course has 3 credits.

Grantham stated that the main comment would be consistent with all requirements upon graduation and that is the major issue, to be consistent with SUNY GE.

M. King asked if there is anything in the SUNY proposal that would require it to be a 3 credit course or if that is another option?

Grantham responded by saying, �That is a good question. To my knowledge I don�t see anything there but I will check it out.�

D. Berger said, �There�s a course in our department that is not a GE course, our Senior Seminar in Psychology.� Right now it has presentation. Can that not be considered to satisfy this requirement because it is not a GE course?�

Grantham said, �It�s not a GE course but once it becomes presentation skills it is a GE course. It�s a presentation skills course.�

Berger responded, �Not everybody.�

Grantham said that she has been hearing people saying that it�s a presentation course before it has been presented with material that was appropriate to this course.� She said she taught it that way in the Fall. When they did the assessment of the presentation skills, she said, they wanted to know the patterns of presentations and also different types of research. They gave examples of students to determine patterns of presentations to demonstrate so �People who think they can

just teach it without indicating different types of presentations, when it comes to being assessed, you may want to change your mind a little bit. A lot of people thought I can do it the way I am doing it now but you have to include different types of presentations.�

K. Rombach asked, �Does this mean that some courses could be both writing intensive and just presentation requirement, too?�

Grantham replied, �If you submit a course that meets both of those requirements I don�t see a reason why, it just has to meet the requirement of presentation skills.�

D. Berger asked, �Is the purpose of the presentation course to learn how to give a presentation in the discipline of your major...or does it have to be anything like the GE presentation, particular to the academic area?�

Grantham responded that maybe assessment came from SUNY Central. She said, referring to her students, that she didn�t know of any students who are prepared, and that her students were not prepared.

M. Prus stated that, �I think it�s important to understand the history of the presentation skills requirement as the assessment of the SUNY requirement. We were required to submit a plan to the General Education Assessment Review Committee three years ago that describes how we would assess each of the ten knowledge areas, and the student knowledge basis in the areas. There are 12 categories in SUNY General Education Requirements over the coming 3 years and we have taken two of those three rounds of assessment. When that plan was first submitted the GEAR group returned to campus and said they had a number of issues, the primary one that we did not have a way of assessing and didn�t have a way of delivering presentation of skills... The presentation requirement, as far as the basic communication requirement has, I think, specific learning outcomes associated with it, 2 of them referring to writing, written communication, two referring specially to oral presentation.� And those two are to develop proficiency in all presentation skills to show proficiency in the evaluation of other oral presentations. And so those are the two learning outcomes that we are required to assess. The instrument that Regina refers to was developed locally by the Presentation Skills Committee, and in an effort to show that our students have those two abilities, or have met those two learning objectives. That�s an instrument that was distributed at the end of our semester when...skills courses selected did not come from system administration or from the GEAR group, but as entirely a local instrument.�

J. Cottone made a point of clarification that presentation skills, under this kind of position, that any proposals less than 3 credits have been returned to departments. He pointed out that there are little changes as far as requirements.

R. Grantham said he was correct and that another point of clarification is that it is not a presentation skills course until approved by the Presentation Skills Committee and the Provost.

Bitterbaum expressed his understanding that oral communication was a different kind of demonstration and has to be incorporated in these presentation skills courses.� He stated that this is the responsibility of the Deans and Department Chairs.

D. Berger asked, �I just want to repeat the difference between learning about presentation, how it is done as a communications course, and learning to give presentation in your discipline.� And I am not sure which would be more valuable for psychology or chemistry majors. And I don�t know that I would agree that Language Arts students need to learn, what in essence, seems to be subject matter in communications?�

Bitterbaum responded to Berger that he would not argue the point. He said that when he first arrived at SUNY, that the point Berger argued was what system administration was opposed to.� He said the interpretation at the system level was that it could be very important but it has to be broader than that and that is why they rejected it on our campus early on.� He said, �It would be very helpful to come back in two weeks and share with us what is the interpretation, as we understand it, as a system dictating to our campus.� They require most of us to teach things for which we have absolutely no background.�

Alwes said that what Berger and King were referring to were writing intensive, which, she indicated, is being proposed as well. She said that certainly students can say they don�t need writing, or they don�t have a need for geography, but it�s all part of your discipline. She said, �You as a human being should come out of a four year liberal arts school knowing how to read and write and think about other disciplines� and she supports presentations skills because of that.

Bitterbaum said, �We need to do something as a community to help our colleagues to do that. If that�s my understanding from SUNY System as to what they expect.�

King said, as a Psychology major, he would be a total failure in teaching how to write a poem, which is just a different kind of writing, he pointed out. He said, as a parallel, oral presentation is exactly the same.

Bitterbaum said �I just want to know what was the original intent at the SUNY system GE level because I think that would guide us what we have to do as a community. My understanding is the widest would not be discipline specific, it would be broader than that.� We have a responsibility to each other.� The President asked Prus if it wasn�t 1-1/2 years since the discussion began?

Prus answered, �I think it was not necessary to go beyond the individual discipline. The reason the GEAR group objected was that we had not even demonstrated to them that we had not had the speaking within the discipline. When we submitted a revised proposal we did model it after the GE at SUNY Fredonia in which there is delivery and assessment of speaking intensive courses, which was approved by meeting the SUNY GE requirement for oral communications and basic communications, (and) was precisely delivered and after it was issued as a senior seminar type course within the discipline.�

D. Berger asked, �I would like to know if the question is based on that statement you made the assessment procedure you developed was discipline specific?�

M. Prus answered that there was no specific as proposed within. He said, �What we proposed doing was establishing a speaking intensive presentation skills requirement at SUNY Cortland in which students were showed proficiency in oral presentation and assessment....we planned in the final year of our three year cycle. But we did not propose a different instrument be used. What happened was that the proposal was sent to the Faculty Senate and approved on March of �04. The President approved it and then the Presentation Skills Committee skills was created and they were the ones responsible for determining which ones meet presentation skills and secondly how presentation skills would be assessed.�

W. Griffen said that, in the interest of liberal arts, and speaking to D. Berger�s point, he thought it� is in the sense that one may not have the skills proposal and that if the language is inimical to Astro Physics then writing intensive either comes out or doesn�t come out as we evaluate it.� He said the problem was with the language which may be too exclusive so that when our graduates go out they can�t speak the potentials or dangers of a discipline.

J. Governali said, �I think it would be helpful in the discussion to see the SUNY document regarding this requirement and also evaluation sheet that Regina was talking about.�

D. Berger asked how the committee was formed and Grantham said it was appointed. Chaturvedi speculated that it was probably appointed by the Provost.

VI.� AREA SENATORS REPORTS:

B. Griffen reported, as chair of the ROTC committee, that his committee met last Wednesday and selected co-chairs, Gretchen Douglas, from the Library, and himself. The next meeting would be the following day, he said.�� He said they will be discussing their charge, in general, with a general airing of views, and that the action taken on the part of various members to gather information on other SUNY colleges in regards to this topic. He said that specific military statements will be put in the record, particularly on sexuality and gender issues.

XVII. SUNY SENATOR: No report.

XVIII. STUDENT SENATOR REPORTS:

D. Vegas introduced Mary Kate Boland, SGA Vice President, and Dan Walker. She announced that SGA recently hired out to have their web page updated.� They are working on constitution and other things that will be coming up for the next couple of years. The Meal Plan is being worked on with ASC �doing a great job.� She said they are meeting weekly and have a proposal for an entirely new meal plan. SGA is going to be proposing it on campus and will be presenting� it in early March.� Some concerns from off campus involve the concern that Hallnet will not fix the students� hardware. Vegas discussed the issue of the fee and what is going to happen. She asked if Dr. Shaut wanted to comment further.

Bitterbaum responded that his understanding is that off campus students don�t pay the same fee as on campus. The Campus is secured in firewalls to protect computers from viruses which destroy computers off campus.� He said, �We don�t want them connecting to the system unless there is another way we might do that.� There are discussions right now, Bitterbaum announced, as our system can be penetrated by outside viruses which we can�t protect.

Vegas reported that the Student Senate met last week and is discussing the parking problem. They have been working with Mayor and University Police in getting the parking lines painted. And also went to City Hall and talked to the Mayor.� She said, �If you can get five extra cars on Neubig the students would benefit.� Vegas said another program SGA is working on is a ride board where information can be posted and students can exchange rides. She asked everyone to help publicize the program and encouraged faculty to participate.

M. King asked about the computer problem. He said, �What happens when these students bring their laptops on campus and connect to our system? Are they corrupting our machines?�

Bitterbaum responded, �Paula (Warnken) is working on it.�

King replied, �We are defenseless against that.�

Bitterbaum answered, �I assume we are, but I don�t think that is the case.�

D. Vegas said, �I spoke with D. Sidebottom and he said they can�t devote time to it right now.�

Bitterbaum likened it to a squirrel running in a chamber just trying to keep up. The President� also announced an initiative to reopen the discussions with the cemetery board about trying to get a piece of property for parking. He said they happened to talk to the President of the Cemetery Board, and although the offer was previously taken off the table, they are now willing to start the discussion again.

Alwes asked what property he was referring to, to which Bitterbaum responded �The one on Neubig.� He said 119 spaces could be designated there. The President reported that they have to charge because the college would have to pay the cemetery.

Bitterbaum also mentioned the possibility of a parking garage which would cost millions of dollars because of all of the concrete.

Vegas indicated that SGA wants to talk to Vice President Parvisi to have her estimate how much it would cost to build parking garage and how many spots it might create. She said, �If we bond it through a private company and we raise a very significant cost by raising the parking permit we could use that money to pay back the bond. She ended by saying the students are using a lot of energy focusing on those issues.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:30 PM

Respectively Submitted,

Barbara Kissel

Recording Secretary

The following reports are appended to the Minutes in the order reported and submitted by Senators and other members.

(1) Educational Policy Committee Proposal for a Reconfiguration of the Summer Session Schedule (Spring 2005) submitted by J. Governali

(2) University Faculty Senate Plenary Meeting January 28-29 System Administration Report submitted by J. Rayle

(3) Inquiry on SUNY data regarding graduation rates comparison of public and private universities submitted by R. Chaturvedi.

(4) Presentation Skills Requirement submitted by R. Grantham.

http://www.cortland.edu/senate/minutes/m9.html

�