UM Home
SACUA Home

Senate Assembly Resolutions

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 111813-1
BENEFITS RESOLUTION
View full resolution text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 092313-1
Attracting and retaining the best faculty and staff, essential to maintaining the University of Michigan's reputation and status as a top public university, requires that the University remain competitive in salary and benefits. In its review and modification of faculty and staff benefits, the University has, in recent years, tended to examine components of total benefits in isolation 3 and often under conditions of secrecy. In the interests of comprehensiveness and greater transparency, Senate Assembly urges that the University and the relevant HR committees consider benefit packages in their entirety and involve faculty in a more open and meaningful process.
Vote on the Active Motion:
The Action was approved by unanimous vote with no abstentions of record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 041513-1
The University of Michigan is a great public institution. It is imperative that the University continue to work strenuously to create a learning community that reflects its aspirations to be a leader for public education in our increasingly diverse twenty-first century society. Therefore, it is resolved that we request the administration to:
1) seek to determine the cause(s) of the now decades-long lack of progress in improving campus diversity;
2) redirect University resources and strengthen leadership where necessary to achieve this goal of a more diverse and inclusive campus, supplementing any existing institutionalized programs with new creative approaches;
3) broaden the scope of efforts to include modern definitions of diversity (not only race, color, and national origin, but also age, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, disability, religion, veteran status, and economic class);
and
4) support initiatives such as the UM Alumni Association Leadership, Excellence, Achievement, Diversity (LEAD) scholarship program for out-of-state under-represented minority students, including, to the extent possible, making such programs a high priority in the next University capital campaign, within the limits defined by the state and federal Constitutions.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- 27
Number disapproving- 9
Number abstaining- 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 031813-1
Multiple members moved and seconded a motion to approve the proposed reapportionment as follows:
School/CollegeSeats
LSA15
Medicine15
Engineering6
UM-Dearborn5 (formerly 4)
UM-Flint3
Architecture & Urban Planning2
Art & Design2
Business2
Dentistry2
Education2
School of Information2 (formerly 3)
Kinesiology2
Law2
Music, Theatre & Dance2
Natural Resources & Environment2
Nursing2
Pharmacy2
Public Health2
Public Policy2
Social Work2
Vote on the active motion:
Approving- All
Disapproving- None
Abstentions of Record- None
The Senate Secretary declared that the motion had been approved by unanimous consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 111912-1
Resolved
Whereas the Senate Assembly and Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs constitute the official representative bodies of the Faculty Senate, and
Whereas the Senate is authorized by the Regents Bylaws to consider any subject pertaining to the interests of the University, and to make recommendations to the Board of Regents in regard thereto, and
Whereas the selection and appointment of executive officers of the University is of critical importance to the functioning and progress of the University,
We urge that search committees for executive officers and, particularly, the search committee for the University's next president, include representatives of the Faculty Senate chosen from a list of names selected by SACUA and approved by Senate Assembly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 021312-1
Professor Kearfott moved that the Senate Assembly strongly supports President-Emeritus Duderstadt's vision of the University of Michigan's bicentennial celebration, in particular that a broadly defined academic core dominate (Rothman seconded).
The Action was approved by a show of hands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 021312-2
We, the Senate Assembly of the faculty at the University of Michigan, support the creation of an environment at the University of Michigan where all students, staff, and faculty members feel comfortable to take a stance (either for or against) GSRA Unionization.
In particular, we oppose intimidation or retaliation against individuals supporting or opposing GSRA unionization. In doing so we respond positively to calls from union activists that individual faculty members endorse this principle. In short, we affirm the commitment of University faculty to uphold federal and state law in this and all other matters. We also call on all parties to put forward only claims that can be documented with reasonable evidence in order that a dignified exchange of ideas be encouraged.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 36
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 021312-3
Chair Barald introduced an action item calling on the University to carefully consider the recommendations of Senate Assembly resolution 012312-1 on reporting criminal activity. She noted that hospital security, NCRC security, and housing security do not report to DPS. There was no discussion.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 40
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 012312-1
The Senate Assembly voted without dissent to ratify the resolution regarding peaceful protest that had been introduced at the December 2011 Assembly meeting in absence of a quorum. Assembly members had been polled electronically and strongly endorsed it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 012312-2
The Senate Assembly voted without dissent to ratify the resolution regarding reporting crime that had been introduced at the December 2011 Assembly meeting in absence of a quorum. Assembly members had been polled electronically and strongly endorsed it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 012312-3
Professor Armitage moved to collate a list of all Senate Assembly members who have been asked to maintain secrecy in policy advisory committees and forward it to office of provost (multiple seconds). The motion was modified through friendly amendment to collate a list of committees rather than Assembly members.
The action was approved without dissent by show of hands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 012312-4
Professor Hirshorn placed on the floor the Resolution on Open Governance offered by the Budget Study Committee. After brief discussion suggesting that the resolution might offer guidance to faculty on advisory committees who are faced with gag orders, the Action was adopted. Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 24
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 122311-1
RIGHT OF STUDENTS AND FACULTY TO PROTEST PEACEFULLY ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES
Revised and Approved electronically by Senate Assembly. View full resolution text.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 54
Number disapproving- 1
Number abstaining- 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 122311-2
REPORTING CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ON CAMPUS
Revised and Approved electronically by Senate Assembly. View full resolution text.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 55
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 112411-1
HEALTH INCENTIVES TASK FORCE REPORT
Chair Barald called attention to distributed item 3. She asked for Senate Assembly approval of the revised report.
Approval was expressed by unanimous vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 112411-2
STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES APPEAL BOARD
Professor Kearfott moved (Rothman seconded) that Senate Assembly approves the appointment of the Chair of the Civil Liberties Board as ex officio member of the Student Affairs Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities Appeal Board.
The action was approved by unanimous vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 112411-3
Chair Barald proposed for action of the Assembly:
Resolved- Senate Assembly hereby 1) affirms the already existing one-year term limitation of the SACUA Chair, and now extends it to the SACUA Vice Chair and 2) affirms the already existing three-year term limits of SACUA and Senate Assembly members, and now extends that to the Senate Secretary.
Discussion-
Secretary Lehman said that he saw merit in the proposal based on recent changes that have extended financial compensation to SACUA members. He pointed out that historical limitation of the SACUA chair's term is linked to the fact that the incumbent receives 50% of their salary directly from the provost's office. Within the last few years, compensation has been extended first to the vice-chair and then to regular SACUA members. Last year compensation started to be extended from the office of the provost to the Secretary, and it amounts to $5000 per year. Lehman said that over time, the source might be regarded as a reliable stream of revenue and that Assembly members might reasonably start to question where their officers owe their allegiance, particularly when SACUA devotes substantial parts of its meeting in executive session shielded from scrutiny. Nonetheless, he pointed out that there were jurisdictional issues with the motion because the Assembly cannot mandate changes in the Senate Rules, nor can it dictate to individual units. Chair Barald stated that the motion was advisory in nature. SACUA members Goldman, Kearfott, Koopmann and Rothman expressed support for the motion.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 31
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION 112411-4
Chair Barald proposed for action of the Assembly:
Resolved- To expand the range of faculty engagement in central faculty governance and to more fully represent faculty opinions on such matters, Senate Assembly hereby adopts the concept of electronic voting for the action items of the University Senate and the Senate Assembly.
Discussion-
Secretary Lehman said that support for electronic voting would be asked as part of the Administration Evaluation question set this year, and that his sense was that a plebiscite on the issue would garner strong support. He added that the more problematic issues involve the process of governance, rather than the technical issue of voting per se. For example, in the debate last year about extending the tenure probationary period, the action item that prevailed was offered from the Senate floor by Professor Larsen. The action items formally proposed by SACUA in advance of the meeting were defeated. Lehman said that the key issue in electronic voting is determining a democratic and transparent process whereby issues offered for vote are vetted and amended consistent with rules. He added that there were secondary, technical issues, as well, such as whether the electronic votes should be anonymous, or identifiable.
SACUA members Goldman, Kearfott, Koopmann and Rothman expressed support for the motion. Professor Borer asked for increased specificity to define who votes on the substance of the issue proposed for electronic voting, and who is eligible to vote. Several members suggested that the motion could be better phrased. Professor Moore expressed concern that the advent of electronic voting would inadvertently lead to reduced participation in Assembly meetings. Professor Goldman proposed that anonymity should be the default condition of electronic voting. She said that she believed that if faculty had been able to vote electronically about tenure probation, the Regents would not have adopted the administration's proposal. Professor Koopmann responded that he did not think such a vote of the faculty would have influenced the course of events at all. He suggested that the Assembly needs to be very careful about setting the rules and conditions for electronic voting, but that he favored the idea. Professor Shriver said that he was a little concerned that people might vote in haste without proper deliberation. He suggested that any items offered for electronic vote also be accompanied by commentaries from various members about the deeper issues and their implications.
Amended Action Item
The Senate Assembly hereby adopts the concept of electronic voting for selected action items of the University Senate as approved on a case by case basis by the Senate Assembly. All such votes shall be cast anonymously.
Vote on the Active Motion as Amended-
Number approving- 34
Number disapproving- 0
Number abstaining- 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE ASSEMBLY ACTION SA102411-1
HB 4770 and 4771 seek to prohibit any government entity in the State, including universities and city governments, from providing public employee domestic partner benefits (medical or other fringe). We support the current practice of the University of Michigan of offering benefits to those who meet the criteria of Other Qualifying Adult. This practice is fair and offers equitable benefits for those performing the same jobs.
Recognizing the integrity in self governance of the University of Michigan, we support current policy that provides these benefits at the University of Michigan. To do otherwise would significantly hamper the University of Michigan in its efforts to recruit and to retain the best faculty and staff. In addition, the health of the University Community, including the dependent children of qualified adults, would be put in jeopardy.
Vote on the Active Motion
Number approving- 47
Number disapproving- one
Abstentions of record- none
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY SA102411-2
Professor Giordani moved (Kearfott seconded) that the Assembly accepts the report as amended (see Appendix) and instructs SACUA to develop an effective implementation plan after considering the discussion at the current meeting.
Vote on the Active Motion
Number approving- 44
Number opposing- 4
Abstentions of record-none
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042511-1
The Budget Study Committee and the Committee on the Economic Status of the Faculty introduced the following action item:

1. WHEREAS, the Budget Study Committee and the Committee on the Economic Status of the faculty have repeatedly requested that the University administration release to them total annual compensation data (W-2 date) for all members of the university community, itemized by individual but not linked to names, in order to permit the committees to conduct analyses sanctioned by the Senate Assembly in the areas of faculty compensation, health benefits, and retirement benefits, and
2. WHEREAS the information is necessary for developing advice to executive officers and the Board of Regents about the functioning of the university, and
3. WHEREAS, the administration has repeatedly and persistently refused to comply with these legitimate requests, and
4. WHEREAS the Senate Assembly is authorized to request information from any member of the university staff,
5. THEREFORE, the Senate Assembly, acting in its authority under Regental Bylaw Sec. 4.04, asks the University President and the Provost to release the compensation data specified in paragraph 1 to the respective committees within two months of this action.

Chair Rothman asked Vice-Chair Poe to preside temporarily so that he could speak from the floor. He said that release of salary information could paint an unfair picture about faculty compensation because it would include compensation from other than General Fund sources that were not tied directly to teaching effort. He added that the compensation figures might invite criticism from members of the general public who are not so well compensated. Professor Barald pointed out that she and others received large portions of their salaries from sponsored projects rather than from General Fund sources. Professor Peters said that the Assembly committees were unable to conduct meaningful analyses about cuts in retiree and health benefits without adequate data across the entire university staff population.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- 19
Number disapproving- 14
Abstentions of record- 1
Chair Rothman questioned whether a quorum existed, and made a quorum call. Thirty-six members of the Assembly voted their presence, and the presence of a quorum was established.
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042511-2
Assembly members Lehman and Smith introduced the following Action Item:

RESOLUTION ON SACUA COMPENSATION POLICY
WHEREAS, the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA) serves as an instrument for effecting the actions of the Senate and the Assembly;
WHEREAS, the SACUA Chair and Vice Chair as well as the Secretary of the Senate are officers of the Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the members of SACUA are members of the Senate Assembly;
THEREFORE, the Senate Assembly ratifies and approves the recent practice of providing discretionary funds from central administration sources to the Vice Chair, Secretary, and SACUA members in consideration for their service commitments to central faculty governance.

Chair Rothman explained that for the previous two years, the vice-chair has received additional annual funding of $5,000 and regular members of SACUA have been offered $3,000. Professor Smith asked what funds had been given to the interim secretary last year. The chair replied that it was $5,000.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- 27
Number disapproving- 2
Abstentions of record- 7
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 012411-1
Resolved, that at the University of Michigan only tenure track faculty as a body are eligible to make final decisions of the faculty in matters involving tenure including, but not limited to, the tenure process as described in Regents Bylaw 5.09 and its procedures, as well as individual decisions to grant tenure.
For: 56
Abstention of record: 1
Against: 0
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 012411-2
Resolved, that the January 23, 2006 Action of the Senate Assembly (No.012306-1) expressing significant reservations about any changes to the existing Regents Bylaws governing tenure is hereby re-affirmed.
For: 54
Abstention of record: 1
Against: 1
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 111511-1
Approval of Committee Charge Template.
Professor Frost moved approval. Seconded.
The Action Item was approved unanimously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102510-1
Professor Lehman moved that the Senate assembly express their appreciation to the candidates for their contributions. Seconded.
The Action Item was approved unanimously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 092010-1
Professor Poe moved the Approval of Committee Member Replacements. The motion was adopted unanimously.
At 4:05, Chair Rothman proposed the Creation of an Advisory Task Force on Faculty Involvement in Health Plan Incentives with the Possible Charge:

1) To identify principles to guide the University's use of incentives in the management of health costs, and 2) to develop examples and possible options for the implementation of these incentives.

The Chair asked that nominees be sent to Tom Schneider. Concern was raised about the lack of openness of the Human Resource committee set up to assess initiative for healthy behavior. Professor Poe moved to form the task force.
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 092010-2
Professor Lehman moved for the assembly to reserve to itself the right to issue its report in early 2011 and that, prior to the release of that report, it calls upon the administrative committee to release all material used in its deliberations to the task force. Further, it calls upon the administration to make no decisions until the deliberations of the task force have been concluded.
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 092010-3
Professor Lehman moved the continuous enrollment action from the May meeting (051710-1).
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 051710-1
Based on the discussion regarding the proposed committee to study all aspects of continuous enrollment formulated by the Senate, John Carson proposed the following resolution:

We resolve that the Dean of the Rackham Graduate School be requested to provide all nonconfidential information collected from the university's various schools, departments, and programs evaluating and responding to Rackham's continuous enrollment proposal. We also request a summary of Rackham's own deliberations over the continuous enrollment proposal.

Vote on the Active Motion-
Number Approving - 30
Number Disapproving - 0
Abstentions - 0
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042610-1
Chair Thouless called attention to distributed item 3. He pointed out that SACUA negotiated several amendments to the proposed policy with the office of the provost, and that item 3 includes those amendments. He said that SACUA endorses the present policy proposal and transmits it to the Assembly with recommendation for approval. Professor Abdoo expressed dissatisfaction with the insufficient information and discussion provided by SACUA about the recent revisions to the document. She pointed out that there was no easy way to see what changes had been made, and that there has been no opportunity for discussion of these changes within her unit. Her concern was echoed by other members of the Assembly. Professor Frost suggested that in the future the SACUA leadership should provide Assembly members with a marked-up document that shows additions, deletions, and amendments. Other members pointed out that SACUA had been insufficiently forthcoming and engaging with the Assembly this year that had been customary.
Vote on the Active Motion (approval of proposed policy item 3):
Number approving- 33
Number disapproving- none
The chair did not call for abstentions of record.
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042610-2
Professors Hirshorn and Prygoski introduced the following resolution:

Whereas the University administration has constituted several university-wide committees charged with health benefits and retirement benefits issues, and whereas the deliberations of these committees are often secret or poorly communicated to the University community, and
Whereas the members of these committees are selected by the administration rather than by peers, and may fail to represent the diverse interests of the several groups that constitute the University employees, and
Whereas a University thrives on open communications and works best when contributions and ideas from all segments of the University community are welcomed,
Therefore the Senate Assembly urges (1) that appointments to these committees be made upon the recommendations of the respective segments of the University community, and (2) that these committees function in an open style that promotes dialogue and communication, and encourages outside inputs.
Discusssion
Professors Poe and Frost asked the proposers to define “respective segments.” Professor Brown asked whether it includes retirees, for example. Professor Stark said that the resolution was not a detailed policy statement, but rather that it was a statement of principle.
Professor Mansfield asked whether the resolution would have any teeth. Professor Abdoo asked whether the committee meetings were subject to the Open Meetings Act. Chair Thouless replied that the meetings were not subject to the Act. A member of the Assembly declared that openness is a fundamental issue, and that salaries are being reduced each year by benefits take-backs conducted without transparent deliberation. Professor Giordani suggested that the resolution be amended to reduce its inflammatory language, but acknowledged that there are too many committees operating in secrecy.
Several members of the Assembly declared that the Assembly ought to communicate its strong objection to secrecy, and asked for the rationale for such secrecy. Professor Rothman stated that he was appointed by the provost to a committee charged with changing retiree benefits, but that he could not discuss the deliberations of the committee because he was sworn to secrecy. He said that the rationale offered for the secrecy was that preliminary proposals under consideration might engender strong opposition. He added that he supported the resolution, nonetheless.
Professor Goldman suggested that the resolution be amended to say that a draft form of any proposed policy should be shared openly and remain open for public comment for a prescribed period. Professor Frost moved that the Active Motion be postponed until May (Smith seconded), but the motion to postpone failed.
Vote on the Active Motion
Number Approving- 30
Number Disapproving- 4
The chair did not call for abstentions of record.
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 012510-1
RESOLVED, that Senate Assembly, on behalf of the University of Michigan Faculty Senate, adopts the distributed statement on academic freedom.
The action was passed by unanimous vote, with no objections and 4 abstentions of record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102609-1
Senate Assembly approves a change in the charge to the Senate Assembly Committee for a Multicultural University. The new charge is:
“to communicate regularly with and provide input from a faculty perspective to the Senate Assembly and SACUA.”
The action received unanimous approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102609-2
Senate Assembly deliberated an action item proposed by SACUA regarding quorum count approves the action approved by SACUA:

If a member of the Assembly is absent from 3 consecutive Assembly meetings without requesting an alternate, the seat shall be declared vacant and shall not count against quorum.

Discussion of the main motion
Professor Smith suggested that the motion could have the effect of disenfranchising a unit because of the actions of individuals. Professor Abdoo said that a unit may not know that their representatives are absent from meetings. A motion from the floor, properly seconded, proposed removing the phrase “shall be declared vacant and.”
Vote on the amended motion:
Number approving- 35
Number disapproving- 2
The active motion became: If a member of the Assembly is absent from 3 consecutive Assembly meetings without requesting an alternate, the seat shall not count against quorum.
Vote on the active motion:
Number approving- 47
Number disapproving- 1
Number abstaining- 1
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 031609-1
Chair Potter reported that Regental action changing Kinesiology from a Division to a School has consequences for Senate Assembly apportionment. As a Division, Kinesiology was entitled to one seat on the Assembly but as a School it is entitled to two seats. Because the size of the Assembly is presently limited to 73 seats, a re-apportionment would be required and most likely either LSA or Medicine would lose a seat.
Dr. Fraser moved that the Assembly asks the Board of Regents to increase the size of the Senate Assembly to 74 seats (multiple seconds).
The action was declared unanimous on the basis of a voice vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY SA012609-1
Amend the Rules to read:
“Eligibility for membership on SACUA shall be limited to voting members of the University Senate who are currently or were previously members (including alternates) of the Senate Assembly or its standing committees.”
Vote on the Active Motion
Number approving- unanimous approval, with no abstentions of record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY SA012609-2
Chair Potter asked vice chair Thouless to chair the discussion. Chair Thouless declared the motion introduced by Professor Rothman at the December meeting to be the Active Motion.
Professor Eagle proposed a friendly amendment to the language of Rothman's motion, and the amendment was accepted. The Active Motion then was:
A student-athlete shall be in good academic standing as determined by the academic authorities who determine the meaning of such phrases for all students of the institution. The academic authorities who make these determinations are located in the academic advising units of the schools and colleges where the students are enrolled; these academic advising units will make recommendations about a student athlete's eligibility to the provost.
Adjustments in the timing of recommendations should be made to meet NCAA requirements. In order to accommodate the timing requirements of determining eligibility each semester, the academic advising units should set timelines for approving academic plans and recommending certification of eligibility by the Provost by he first day of classes each semester.
Discussion of the Active Motion-
A member of the Assembly asked for clarification of the role of the Academic Performance Committee (APC). Professor Potter explained that the APC spends most of its time looking into the academic experiences of student athletes, and that eligibility issues take up a relatively small fraction of its time.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number Approving- 29
Number Opposing- 1
Number Abstaining- 1
The Action Item was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY SA012609-3
Professor Riles moved (multiple seconds):
Whereas members of the Academic Performance Committee (APC) are offered reimbursement for bowl game attendance and travel expenses, including game tickets, airfare, hotel accommodations, and meal per diem, and
Whereas the University Audits Office has found this reimbursement to pose an apparent conflict of interest for APC members in carrying out their advisory responsibilities on academic performance,
The Senate Assembly urges the President to end the practice of reimbursing APC members for any expenses associated with attending bowl games.
Derivative Motion-
Professor Eagle moved to postpone further deliberation on the Active Motion until September 2009.
Vote on the Motion to Postpone Further Debate:
The Derivative Motion was disapproved by majority vote. The Active Motion reverted to the primary motion introduced by Professor Riles.
Discussion of the Active Motion-
Professor Abdoo asked about the source of money for the perks. Professor Riles said that he understands that the money is generated by athletic revenues. Professor Poe asked about the full range of conflicts of interest that Professor Riles was concerned about. Professor Riles said that the athletes, and the football athletes in particular, are responsible for the $90M in revenue that pay the coaches and staff of the Athletics Department as well as the APC perks. Professor Smith said that he attended two Bowl games while chair of SACUA and that there was a lot of functions involved, including meeting with alumni, prospective students, and representing the faculty of the university.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- 19
Number disapproving- 11
Abstentions were not called for or recorded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 120808-1
The revised Standard Practice Guide 201.89 Sexual Harassment was introduced. There were no comments.
Motion to accept the revised SPG section as written was given and seconded.
The Action was approved by unanimous vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 120808-2
The Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics Bylaws written November 2008 were introduced.
There were no comments.
Motion to accept the bylaws as written was given and seconded.
The Action was approved by unanimous vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 120808-3
Motion to revise Article 1, Section 1, Paragraph 3 of the Rules of the University Senate, The Senate Assembly, and the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs to read, “Librarians of any rank who have full-time appointments as regular staff members shall be designated as members of the University Senate.”
Motion to accept the revision as written was given and seconded.
The Action was approved by unanimous vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042108-1
The Senate Assembly accepts the report of the Committee for a Multicultural University and endorses its recommendations.
Vote on the Active Motion:
The motion was approved by unanimous vote with one abstention of record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042108-2
The Senate Assembly endorses Action 040908-2 of AAAC:
NCAA Division I student-athletes whose mandatory practice or competition commitments to University sponsored activities limit their opportunities to participate fully in the complete range of classes because of scheduling conflicts should be accorded the highest level of priority registration for terms when conflicts arise. Eligibility for such priority registration should be overseen by the Academic Performance Committee (APC) of the Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics in consultation with the Office of the Registrar. The purpose of this priority registration is to enable access by student-athletes to classes they need to complete their degrees in a timely fashion.
Moreover, the AAAC shall oversee an annual evaluation in consultation with the APC and the Office of the Registrar to ascertain the implementation and effects of this policy.
Discussion of the Active Motion
Professor Ketefian expressed concern that practice and competition schedules conflict with the academic needs of athletes, and stated that they are students first. Professor Koopmann replied that competition schedules are determined by the NCAA and the Big-10, not the U-M. He expressed support for the Motion. Professor Frost pointed out that many students must work to pay their tuition, and that perhaps they deserve special consideration, as well. Professor Lehman replied that the AAAC had specifically asked the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) to consider the issue because it wanted the students themselves to evaluate its fairness. In fact, it was the MSA that proposed that priority registration be restricted to Division I athletes. Professor Eagle commented that this Action would be a precedent that could be used by other groups who self-identify and subsequently petition for accommodation.
Vote on the Active Motion:
The action was approved unanimously with 4 abstentions of record.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042108-3
STATEMENT ON ADMINISTRATION CONSULTATION WITH FACULTY
SACUA member Fraser introduced the following resolution:
The Senate Assembly and the Provost have recently approved Principles of Faculty Involvement in Institutional and Academic Unit Governance at the University of Michigan, 2d ed. We believe this document is a substantial improvement over its predecessor, and hope that it will provide a framework for faculty participation in university governance and for further discussion of the respective roles of faculty and administration. We thank the Provost for her patient and constructive role in bringing this project to completion. The product is a result of many months of diligent negotiation, with give and take on both sides, and is the first principles document that includes and describes the role of central faculty governance at the University of Michigan.
One issue eludes a fully satisfactory solution. SACUA wanted more explicit assurance that the administration would be proactive in communicating and consulting with faculty governance (SACUA and Senate Assembly) about significant issues that are of interest to the faculty but were not of an academic nature. The response of the administration was largely twofold. First, in an institution the size of the University of Michigan, some issues cannot be revealed prematurely without endangering negotiations. Second, with the complexity and variety of issues involved, the administration cannot commit itself to knowing which issues the faculty will find of interest. We recognize these considerations, and believe that they can be accommodated in a provision that nevertheless assures that administrators will ordinarily feel obliged to consult on significant matters with representatives chosen by the faculty.
The administration has invited us to question it on any issue that draws our interest. We accept that responsibility. We encourage the administration to be transparent and consultative in its dealing with faculty governance. We hand on to our successors the challenge that when the principles document is next reviewed, language detailing a more explicit and proactive assurance and consultation should be negotiated and approved.
Discussion
Professor Riles spoke in support of the resolution, stating that he would support an even stronger statement, but that the existing language was acceptable to him. Professor Ketefian pointed out that the academic business conducted by the faculty is essential to the mission of the university, and that SACUA must be alert to developments and bring them before the committee structure of the Assembly. She said that the administration has a responsibility to inform, facilitate, and support the essential mission performed by the faculty.
Professor Poe moved that the Senate Assembly endorses the resolution as offered (multiple seconds).
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- 36
Number disapproving- 1
Number abstaining- 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 042108-4
Professor Poe moved that the Senate Assembly thanks Chair Smith for his service as faculty chair and commends him for the progress made during the past two years (multiple seconds).
The action was approved by acclamation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 031708-1
Chair Smith introduced a proposed Action Item placed before the Assembly by SACUA. Chair Smith introduced the document, Principles of Faculty Involvement in Institutional and Academic Unit Governance at the University of Michigan, 2d ed, to be considered for approval.
The document is an update to the earlier draft reviewed by Senate Assembly during the fall. Revision to the document was suggested by Senate Assembly membership, as concerns about faculty notification and consultation for matters of institutional significance, as opposed to academic issues exclusively. SACUA worked with the Provost and other administrators during the past months to develop a statement of clarification on the issue. Chair Smith read the text of the addition, which is found on page 5, paragraph 7:
“Issues that might be of significant concern to faculty may occasionally arise from outside the realm of the traditional faculty interests, as outlined in paragraph 6. As appropriate, and when circumstance permit, administrators will make a good faith effort to inform and seek the input of faculty representatives, with the understanding that what constitutes a significant concern is a matter in which reasonable minds may differ.”
Discussion of Active Motion-
Professor Friedman spoke about the development of this revision to the document. He said that the most important limitations to the text are the weakness of commitment to “inform and seek the input” of faculty, and the fact that the term “faculty representatives” is not clearly defined. Although the final product is disappointing, he encouraged Senate Assembly approval, as it is a strong document overall.
Professor Eagle suggested that the document be approved with the new paragraph 7 omitted, as the language is so qualified that it is meaningless. He recommended that further discussion and negotiation be attempted before approval of a relatively meaningless statement.
Professor Friedman said that he doubted that further negotiation would yield a better result. And, he said, although the language is very weak, it does represent an important move forward on the part of the administration about its responsibility to consult with faculty on significant non-academic issues. He agreed that the result is disappointing.
Professor Thouless said that it is important that at least some statement reflecting the need for consultation with faculty is an important step. He also noted that this issue is addressed in Regents' Bylaws.
Professor Frier reported that SACUA considered rejection of the entire document about this issue. He noted that the stadium renovation is not what is central to the issue; instead, it is about the commitment on the part of the administration to consider and value the voice of faculty.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 27
Number disapproving- 2
Abstentions of record- 2
The motion was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 031708-2
Professor Friedman moved that the Senate Assembly charge SACUA with drafting a resolution expressing disappointment about the nature of the added item 7, to be considered by Senate Assembly for the April meeting.
Discussion of Active Motion-
Professor Fraser said that negotiations have been very thorough, and the administration is already aware of faculty disappointment about the product of the past months' negotiations.
Professor Friedman argued that although the administration recognizes the dissatisfaction of a few SACUA members, it might be useful for the administration to realize that Senate Assembly is disappointed, if that is the case.
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number Approving- 19
Number Disapproving- 6
Abstentions of record- 2
The motion was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 121707-1
Chair Smith read a resolution submitted by SACMU:
Whereas, the President has indicated that 100 new faculty will be hired at the assistant professor level, the SACMU recommends that diversity be an integral component in the recruitment, hiring and retention processes.
Professor Primus expressed concern that owing to its origin from SACMU, the resolution might be construed to indicate that race be used hiring decisions, in contradiction to the Michigan Constitution. Professor Eagle responded that it was not possible to assess the motivations of the proposing committee, and that the resolution speaks for itself.
Vote on the Active Motion
Number approving- 28
Number disapproving- 4
Number abstaining- 2
The motion was approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 121707-2
Professor Freidman moved (Koopmann seconded):
The Assembly rescinds Action 121707-1 and replaces it with:
Whereas, the President has indicated that 100 new faculty will be hired at the assistant professor level, the Senate Assembly recommends that, consistent with governing law, diversity be an integral component in the recruitment, hiring and retention processes.
Vote on the Active Motion
Number approving- 23
Number disapproving- 8
Number abstaining- 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102207-1
Professor Potter introduced a proposed Action Item placed before the Assembly by SACUA:
COIA Proposal on Reforms in Intercollegiate Athletics
Whereas the Senate Assembly of the University of Michigan finds that the proposals of the Coalition on Intercollegiate Athletics are generally in accord with the values of the University of Michigan, it hereby endorses the goals of these proposals.
Discussion of the Active Motion-
A member of the Assembly expressed reservations about a provision in the COIA proposals that he said might adversely affect educational opportunity for African-American student athletes. Professor Potter replied that there was no intention to create adverse effects.
Professor Ketefian asked how much faculty oversight there was at the UM campus about academic performance of student athletes. Professor Potter described the operation of the Academic Performance Committee of the Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics. He said that the APC operates with votes cast exclusively by faculty.
A member of the Assembly expressed concern that there was no mechanism for enforcement of the proposals. Professor Potter acknowledged that it was a weakness, but that Division I athletics were extremely complex and subject to external pressures.
Vote on the Active Motion:
Number approving- all but one
Number disapproving- one
Number abstaining- none
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102207-2
Professor MacAdam introduced a proposed Action Item placed before the Assembly by SACUA.
Resolution on Copyright Policy
Recognizing how important it is that the University of Michigan maintain a copyright policy that serves the best interests of both the University and its faculty authors, Senate Assembly endorses in principle the “Addendum to Publication Agreements for CIC Authors” and the University Library's additional efforts on behalf of University authors' rights in the Library's negotiations with publishers. At he same time, Senate Assembly further recommends that the University's current copyright policy be reviewed and rewritten in order to clarify and strengthen the ownership rights of faculty in the instructional and scholarly works that they create. To that end the Senate Assembly endorses the establishment of a joint faculty and administration committee to draft a new policy.
Discussion of Active Motion-
Professor Ketefian asked what support will be available to faculty as they negotiate with large publishing firm. Professor MacAdam said that there were people in the Intellectual Properties office and the Office of General Counsel who can be consulted. GC Bernard explained that the OGC could not represent individual faculty in their own negotiations. He said he wishes the faculty could have the same legal services that students enjoy.
Professor Riles asked whether a list could be constructed by the OGC of publishers whose practices already conform to the ideal. GC Bernard replied that Riles' suggestion was a good one.
Vote on the Active Motion-
The Action won unanimous approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 102207-3
Professor Riles moved that the Senate Assembly urges the President and Board of Regents to reconsider the Stadium Renovation project in light of arguments presented by Professor Goldstein and the serious concerns raised by more than 600 faculty and staff through their petition (two seconds).
Vote on the Active Motion-
Number approving- 18
Number disapproving- 7
Abstentions of record- 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION OF SENATE ASSEMBLY 092407-1
Chair Smith invited a motion to approve the slate of candidates nominated for membership on Senate Assembly committees.
The Action won unanimous approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View Earlier Resolutions