Chair’s
Report for
Senate update
1.
Important
links to agendas, minutes, Chair's Reports and other sites of interest are
available
on the Senate web site: http://www.uwec.edu/Usenate.
Senate Chair’s Report will be available on this site by
2.
During
debates, Senators may speak only twice to any motion or amendment. Each
speaking term is limited to 10 minutes. The Chair will add names of those
wishing to speak to a speaker's list upon recognition.
Faculty Reps Meeting –
next meeting, teleconference April 30th
Board of Regents – April
1st & 2nd
1.
After
hearing another TABOR-type proposal from Rep. Underhein,
the Regents discussed long and hard the implications of not responding to the
current TABOR discussions in the legislature.
While the Board stressed the desire to keep the dialogue open as
proposals move forward through the legislature, it wanted to communicate its grave
concerns about the current proposals. All regents voted for the following
resolution except for Regent Gottschalk who dissented for lack of a specific
proposal and Regent Gracz who was absent.
2.
Regent
Resolution of
WHEREAS, the University of Wisconsin System
shares in the commitment to control spending in the State of Wisconsin and has,
in fact, contributed by reducing its GPR spending in this biennium; and
WHEREAS, the University of Wisconsin Board of
Regents believes that the development of state funding limits is a process that
requires ongoing communication, and board members, the president, chancellors
and UW staff have been discussing such proposals with legislators; and
WHEREAS, all such proposals so far advanced have
involved a constitutional amendment to limit state spending which, as we have
seen experienced in other states, would limit the state’s ability to invest in
education which is critical to state economic growth;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT
The UW Board of Regents expresses its grave
concern about proposals that have so far been advanced to its members, and the
board expresses further grave concerns with regard to proposals that might
exempt the University of Wisconsin System but would negatively impact other
components of public education and spending which would, in turn, negatively
impact the University of Wisconsin System.
3.
Also
on April 2nd, the Board of Regents passed a Resolution concerning a Parity Pay
Plan Request (see original resolution for leading Whereas statements)
Upon the recommendation
of the UW System President, and pursuant to s. 230.12(3)(e)
Wis. Stats., the Board of Regents
directs the UW System President to notify the Governor and the Legislature that
the UW System seeks to obtain a 2003-05 compensation and benefits adjustments
plan for faculty, academic staff, non-represented graduate assistants, and
university senior executives that is in substantial parity with other state
employee groups. The Board directs the UW System President to transmit to the
Director of the Office of State Employment Relations, a request that the
Director recommend to the Joint Committee on Employment Relations a university
unclassified pay plan modification to obtain a general salary increase (1.35%)
for faculty, academic staff, and university senior executives that is
equivalent to the 1% plus $0.10 per hour general wage adjustment approved for
other state employees in 2004-05, that allows full-time faculty and academic
staff to receive a lump sum payment of $250 and non-represented graduate
assistants to receive a $125 lump sum payment, that allows academic staff
salary ranges to be increased by up to 1.35% and that increases university
senior executive salary group ranges 1 and 2 to competitive levels, and that
allows faculty, academic staff, non-represented graduate assistants and
university senior executives to contribute to state group health insurance at
the same premium levels charged to other state employees.
Further, the Board of
Regents requests the State of
Further, the Board of
Regents amends Regent Policy 96-2 to provide full-time faculty, academic staff
and limited appointees with 3 and ˝ days of paid leave each fiscal year and one
additional day of paid leave each fiscal year in recognition of Veteran’s Day
as non-cumulative personal holidays to be scheduled and taken as determined by
the institution and to provide less than full-time unclassified staff a
prorated share of all personal holidays based on the percent of appointment.
Legislative Update
(portions from Update prepared by UW System)
1.
The
next scheduled session of the Legislature is April 27-29, a limited business
floor period. Senator Majority Leader Mary Panzer (R-West Bend) has indicated
that the session will include at least one negotiated contract with state
employees, possibly some appointments and bills prepared by the Revisor of Statutes.
2.
Gov.
Jim Doyle signed AB-869
this week. The measure exempts certain
veterans from UW non-resident tuition.
3.
Bills
awaiting Governor’s signature: AB-207. Bans smoking in and around
4.
A
brief summary of Legislative action on bills affecting the UW System will be
available within the next two weeks. In
addition to April 27-29, the Legislature will be back for a May 11-13 veto
session. An extraordinary session may be
added to either of these calendars, or later in the
spring, to address AJR-55 (TABOR) and other issues.
Rationale for ruling the
vote invalid for
the Amendment (40-AS-03-a1)
to the motion entitled Election of Academic Staff Representative
by
“At
meetings of the University Senate, a quorum shall consist of a majority of the
members eligible to vote.” – Faculty and Academic Staff Handbook, Chapter 3,
University Senate Bylaws
A
quorum of voting members of the University Senate was present at the beginning
of the March 30th meeting and the meeting was called to order.
During the meeting a motion to be voted on only by academic staff was
presented. During debate, an amendment to this motion was also presented. A
vote was taken on the amendment. The amendment was defeated 6 – 7. However,
during the debate of the amendment, the Senate Chair reviewed the roster and
noted that a quorum of academic staff did not exist. The secretary for the
Senate was notified of this fact. Fourteen academic staff were
present out of 28 members. Fifteen were needed for a quorum.
Robert’s
Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 10th edition, page 336-338 states:
In the absence of a quorum, any business
transacted (except for the procedural actions noted in the next paragraph) is
null and void. … The only action that can legally be taken in the absence of a
quorum is to fix the time to [sic] which to adjourn, adjourn, recess, or take
measures to obtain a quorum. ...
When the chair has called a meeting to order
after finding that a quorum is present, the continued presence of a quorum is
presumed unless the chair or a member notices that a quorum is no longer
present. If the chair notices the absence
of a quorum, it is his duty to declare the fact, at least before taking any
vote or stating the question on any new motion – which he can no longer do
except in connection with the permissible proceedings related to the absence of
a quorum, as explained above. Any member noticing the apparent absence of a
quorum can make a point of order to that effect at any time so long as he does
not interrupt a person who is speaking. Debate on a question already pending
can be allowed to continue at length after a quorum is no longer present,
however, until a member raises the point. Because of the difficulty likely
to be encountered in determining exactly how long the meeting has been without
a quorum in such cases, a point of order relating to the absence of a quorum is
generally not permitted to affect prior action; but upon clear and convincing
proof, such a point of order can be given effect retrospectively by a ruling of
the presiding officer, subject to appeal.
The
Chair allowed debate on the amendment to continue after noticing the lack of a quorum
(see underlined sentence above). Remembering the phrase “until a member raises
the point”, the Chair allowed the vote to be taken since no member had yet
questioned the existence of a quorum. Unfortunately, the Chair failed to
remember that it was also the Chair’s responsibility to announce the lack of a
quorum when discovered (see italics above).
Had
the Chair not taken the time to discover a quorum did not exist, the vote on
the amendment would stand because “a point of order relating to the absence of
a quorum is generally not permitted to affect prior action”. However since it
is a fact that the chair did note the lack of a quorum, as evidenced by
notifying the secretary of the Senate, the transaction must be ruled “null and
void”.
Therefore,
the debate on the amendment will continue at the next meeting.