Monday, April 6, 2015<\/p>\n
Cougar Conference Room<\/p>\n
Members Present: <\/b>President Tony Thompson, Vice President Vicki Jacobi, Jennifer Altenhofel, Megan Andrews, Eric B\u00e9rub\u00e9, Adam Bledsoe, Jill Brown, Joe\u2019ll Chaidez, Bill Devine, Candace Duron, John Eigenauer, Juana Escobedo, Sharyn Eveland, Tori Furman, Shelley Getty, Greg Golling, Lourdes Gonzalez, Gary Graupman, Craig Johnson, Diane Jones, Kelly Kulzer-\u00ad\u2010Reyes, David Layne, Steve Lytle, Mike Mayfield, Janis Mendenhall, Michelle Oja, Ruby Payne, Joseph Polizzotto, Robin Polski, Stacie Rancano, , Joy Reynolds, Kristi Richards, <\/span>Stefanie Walsh, Susan Vaugh, and Karen Ziegler.<\/p>\n The meeting was called to order at 12:15 p.m.<\/p>\n None.<\/p>\n Vicki re-\u00ad\u2010visited the charter proposed for the Curriculum Committee with a few changes.<\/p>\n Greg Golling gave an update on the Engineering Program.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n Tony reported that the presentation of the Emeritus status to Craig, Sonja, and Harold will be done at Graduation.<\/li>\n Bill reported that the Liberal Arts division is recommending that the new faculty position to replace Sonja should be a full-\u00ad\u2010time studio art professor. Sharyn motioned to approve this recommendation. Michelle seconded. Motioned carried with one abstention \u2013 Paul Blake.<\/p>\n Brian Jean brought up AP 3270, the technology use policy. Brian first thanked Vicki and Tony for their retraction of the \u201cprofessionalism\u201d comment made in an email discussion with the senate. Brian then offered two possible options for the senate to consider about this matter. Brian is not questioning Dena\u2019s ability to make this decision on her own without faculty approval. The question is -\u00ad\u2010 why she is not listening to the concerns of the faculty? The faculty have had many discussions on this matter, including wording suggestions, via meetings and email. At this point, the senate can choose to:<\/p>\n Tony then read a letter from Dr. Maloney, dated March 5th<\/span>, stating that the consultation process followed for this matter was consistent with our policies in providing opportunities for discussion and input. This policy was reviewed and discussed at 4 ITC Committee meetings, with the Governance<\/p>\n Council, and with the Academic Senate on January 15th<\/span>. Dr. Maloney consulted with legal counsel regarding questions and wording concerns about the policy on multiple occasions. Our legal counsel did modify some of the language of the policy based on initial discussions with the ITC Committee.<\/p>\n However, our legal counsel advised against any further changes to the policy requested by faculty following the January Academic Senate meeting.<\/p>\n Bill made the point that Internet access is an integral aspect of education and we should be able to use that tool without fear. Bill sees three issues regarding this topic: 1) There does not seem to be any established need or cause to investigate a faculty member; 2) Having access to home computers and technology at home because of their association with college technology is a concern; 3) Having to sign the document.<\/p>\n -\u00ad\u2010Tony mentioned that Dena is willing to take the policy back to the IT Committee and \u201cpull\u201d the signature off of it.<\/p>\n Eric offered that a strict reading of the document is that an employee can be terminated for any transgression without recourse. In the example Eric gave, could an employee who inadvertently caused a computer virus to be transferred to the college computers or network be terminated?<\/p>\n Diane said that the district cannot terminate an employee without cause. Diane ran the document by our union rep and she said that it was pretty standard.<\/p>\n Tony reported that Dena is willing to meet with faculty and staff and have question and answer sessions.<\/p>\n Brian stated that he would like to hear the legal counsel\u2019s reasoning as to why doesn\u2019t the language suggested by the faculty work?<\/p>\n Vicki suggested that Dena invite our legal counsel to come to the campus and answer questions. Greg mentioned that our legal counsel would already have answers to our questions and wondered if they could just write down their responses.<\/p>\n Jennifer offered that this is an employer\/employee contract and there is little we can do about it. The policy has been cleared by several lawyers and is almost identical with other college policies about this issue.<\/p>\n Bill made a motion that we take our issues back to Dena and give her an opportunity to again explain why our suggestions were not appropriate. Robin seconded. Motion carried with Sharyn, Jennifer, and Stacy opposing.<\/p>\n <\/p>\nPublic Commentary<\/h1>\n
Review of March 2, 2015 Senate Minutes<\/h1>\n
\n
\nSenate Rostrum<\/h1>\n<\/li>\n
\nStanding Committee Updates<\/h1>\n<\/li>\n
\nApproval Request: Charter for Curriculum & GE Committee Vicki Jacobi<\/span><\/h1>\n
\n
\nCEED Grant Update<\/h1>\n
\nPresentation of Emeritus Status<\/h1>\n
Item #8 on the agenda was tabled.<\/h1>\n
Full-\u00ad\u2010Time Studio Arts Professor<\/h1>\n
AP 3270 Discussion<\/h1>\n
\n
\n