shorttop.jpg (1907 bytes)


March 2, 1995
Signal Mountain Room
University Center

ELECTED MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Avery, Tom Bibler, Mary Brabston, Ken Carson, Prem Chopra, Betsy Cook, Neal Coulter, Lloyd Davis, Aniekan Ebiefung, Ahmed Eltom, Howard Finch, John Garrett, Nick Honerkamp, Larry Ingle, Renée Lorraine, David Levine, John Lynch, Jim Macomber, Jim McDonell, Anna Panorska, Loretta Prater, Katherine Rehyansky, Mike Russell, Greg Sedrick, Maria Smith, Jim Stroud, John Tinkler, Margaret Trimpey, Jeannette Vallier, David Wiley, Sally Young

ELECTED MEMBERS ABSENT: Valarie Adams, Martha Butterfield, Robert Duffy, Doug Kingdon, Tom Payne, Ling-Jun Wang

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT: Jane Harbaugh, Charles Renneisen, Grayson Walker

AMONG THE GUESTS PRESENT: Michael Evans, Margaret Kelley, Vince Pellegrino, Nathaniel Pinkard, Charles Scott, Michael Scheffres, Tim Summerlin, Peggy Tucker, Ken Venters, Randy Walker

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 3:22 p.m. by President Tom Bibler.

Approval of Minutes

Dean Charles Renneisen pointed out that $8.1 million, not $1.8 million as reported, had been approved for dormitory construction. The minutes were approved as amended.


After Professor James Macomber brought the problem of Faculty Council representatives Fritz Efaw and Phil Giffin to the attention of Council at the last meeting, the Executive Committee considered the matter of representation. Reapportionment does not occur until Fall 1995. Because of current numbers, however, it appears that Business is still entitled to three representatives and Social Sciences is still entitled to three representatives.

Vacancies must be declared by the Executive Committee. Accordingly, the School of Business was notified that Professors Efaw and Giffin were to retire as representatives. Senior representative from the School of Business, Professor James Macomber, held a meeting to elect new representatives. Professors Mary Brabston from Marketing and Thomas Payne from Accounting and Finance were elected. President Bibler thanked Professors Efaw and Giffin for their service and welcomed Professor Brabston to Council. (Professor Payne was not present at this meeting.)

Report on Patten House/Faculty Club

Because Marsha Yessick of Yessick’s Interiors had already prepared a display for Faculty Council as part of the Patten House report, President Bibler requested a change in order of the agenda.

Professor James Avery explained the reactivation of the Faculty Club concept. Funds were obtained for exterior renovation; now funds must be raised for interior renovation, which should be complete by May 1996 or before. He referred members to the handout (attached to these minutes). The part outlined in black will be reserved from 9 until 5 for faculty use. After 5, it will be available by reservation only. Faculty will be given first choice for receptions.

Interior plans are being made in keeping with the Victorian Italianate style of the home. Yessick’s Interiors is helping in the project. Professor Avery explained that the committee wants the Club to be a place which will be comfortable and relaxing.

Marsha Yessick gave an overview of possible fabrics and wall coverings. The room arrangements make it possible for 24 to dine either casually or formally. Professor Avery said that the house features a fountain, fireplaces, and a catering kitchen for the Marriott. The committee projects that it will take $98,000 to $100,000 to furnish the home nicely. Professor Avery moved that Faculty Council endorse the interior renovation of the Faculty Club as a priority item for the Twenty-First Century Campaign. Mrs. Margaret Kelley, who is in charge of the Faculty and Staff portion of the Twenty-First Century Campaign, said they wanted to offer the Faculty Club as one way for faculty and staff contributions to be used.

President Bibler asked how this could be accomplished. Mrs. Kelley said that there would be a box to check off on the form.

Professor Stroud moved that Faculty Council endorse the interior renovation of the Patten House Faculty Club as a priority item in the Twenty-First Century Campaign. Professor Wiley seconded the motion.

Professor Ingle asked if there was an upper limit. Professor Avery said no; if the money is not available, the committee will not do as much. He believed that we needed to show contributors outside of the University that faculty are supporting their own club.

Professor Renée Lorraine asked if we were endorsing the idea of contributing to the Faculty Club rather than authorizing the amount of money. Professor Avery said that we had already endorsed the club; now we were endorsing the faculty contributing to the campaign.

Professor John Lynch asked how much had already been spent. Mrs. Kelley said that the family has already given over $600,000. The fire code has run up the cost over what they first anticipated. Vice Chancellor for Development Vince Pellegrino noted that the Pattens, Guerrys and Luptons are working with the University to raise the additional money needed. They would be encouraged by this endorsement by the faculty. If we got a good response from the University community, we might be able to have a Challenge Grant and get matching money from the state because it is a multi-use facility. Many family members have given multiple gifts because they like the idea of a Faculty Club being on campus.

The question was raised about how long we had been working on getting a Faculty Club on campus. Associate Provost Jane Harbaugh answered, "Since before my time."

The motion to endorse faculty and staff contributions to the Faculty Club passed by voice vote.

Report from the Curriculum Committee

Professor Ken Venters, Chair, presented two proposals to Council. Professor Nick Honerkamp moved and Professor David Wiley seconded the motion to approve the proposals.

With respect to the new Occupational Therapy Department, Professor Larry Ingle inquired as to how the salaries for the five new faculty and one administrator would be funded.

Professor Randy Walker said that the College of Health and Human Services had received a UC Foundation grant to get the program started. They hope to have more support in soft money from the community. As the program grows with more students, they hope that the state will be able to support them. An outside consultant told them that they needed three to start the program, including a department head who would also teach. Additional faculty would be needed in the third year. Professor Walker has a definite commitment from the community for one position.

Professor Ingle asked what would happen if they did not get the positions. Professor Walker said that the program would have to be of a smaller size; if they received no faculty lines, they could not offer the program at all. Some courses can be taught with existing faculty, but they do not need occupational therapists to teach the occupational therapy courses.

Professor Ingle asked what degrees these faculty members should have. Professor Walker answered that they would have to have at least a masters, but that they hoped to get Ph.D.s. Professor Ingle asked if there is overlapping between anatomy and physiology in biology and physical therapy. Professor Walker explained that students need Biology 208 and 209 and that he had had professor Charles Nelson sign off on the proposal because of the impact on biology. Anatomy will be taught as presently in physical therapy.

Professor Ingle noted on page 10 "a refreshing example of candor." Do they expect the program to be money-making and bring in students who would not otherwise be here? Professor Walker said yes; they tried to use realistic figures. They get a minimum of ten calls per week asking when they are going to start the Occupational Therapy program.

Professor Ken Carson explained that Dr. Richard Metzger’s signature on the form simply means that the Psychology Department supports the idea of the Occupational Therapy program. It will impact sections of psychology statistics classes. His signature does not say he can handle additional students in these classes.

Professor Walker shares psychology’s concern. He has talked with Provost Grayson Walker who understands the concerns of psychology, sociology, and psychology.

Professor John Garrett said he is worried about funding. What would the salaries of these new people be? Professor Randy Walker projected that nine-month faculty would make around $40,000 each. Professor Garrett wondered if these students would be able to generate enough student credit hours to pay the salaries. By his reckoning, only 2.7 lines could be financed; the others would have to come out of the University budget.

Provost Grayson Walker said that he thought Professor Garrett was using a different formula than the administration was. He assured faculty that they would not begin the program if they could not afford it. It is an expensive program which will become self-supportive. Getting it started is the hard part, and Professor Randy Walker has gotten it started by getting UC Foundation and community support.

Professor Jane Harbaugh noted that the ratio for faculty members in upper level professional classes is different; that may be why Professor Garrett’s formula does not seem to be working. Professor Venters noted that the Occupational Therapy program is 91 hours in five semesters. By a student’s junior year, all courses are Occupational Therapy courses.

Professor Mike Russell said he thinks they will find the money to fund the faculty, but he thinks they ought to ask for money for the library. Professor Randy Walker said that many of the journals Occupational Therapy would use are already subscribed to by nursing and physical therapy.

Professor John Lynch said that he too is concerned about the financial end. He does not think that sixty students can support the faculty and staff needed to run such a program. It sounds like a good program, but we already have good programs that are not well funded. He realizes that most of the money goes to salary, but then there’s nothing left for other things. Professor Lynch is afraid that such a program might drain from other programs.

Professor Honerkamp said that he understands members’ concerns, but he thinks it’s Occupational Therapy’s risk, not the University at large. Professor John Garrett disagreed; money comes from the University budget, and if there is a shortfall, then the University has to make choices, such as class size and so forth.

Professor Prem Chopra said that he can see that such a program will bring in students, but some students who go into Occupational Therapy might have gone into other degree programs here if this program was not offered.

Professor Ingle remarked that he is torn; although he thinks that this is a good program and is inclined to vote for it, he would like to see some hard reassurances, not verbal, that we can be everything to everybody. Someone has to say that we cannot do it and maintain the kind of University we want to have. He fears that we are slicing the pie too thin.

Professor Maria Smith says we should not cut our own throats. She wants to add worthwhile programs; perhaps we should be looking at existing programs which have outlived their usefulness. Professor Ingle said he did not see that happening. He thinks those who are losing students mount a new program instead.

Professor James Stroud said that he thinks these decisions involve us all. His department is looking for a faculty member. He has about 150 applicants, about fifteen of them world class, for a low salary. What the job description does not say is that there is not a decent piano on campus. He would like to see a $60,000 piano turn up tomorrow. They will hire a faculty member before they get a new piano.

Professor Mike Russell asked what physical resources the program would need besides salary. Professor Randy Walker said they would need one piece of equipment, a ceramic kiln costing about $500. Most other equipment needs are inexpensive. Siskin will let students use their Occupational Therapy space. In the long term, however, they may need more space.

Professor Jim McDonell is concerned about space because he is in that building and faculty members are already sharing offices. He would like to see support for existing programs before adding new programs.

Professor Nick Honerkamp said he is interested in whether UTC will be better if we vote this program down. He believes It would not be. Professor Margaret Trimpey said that we should separate financial concerns from the new course proposals. Professor Ahmed Eltom said he would like to see how the figures are generated. Professor Lorraine called the question.

The motion passed 26-3-2.

Professor Venters noted that there is only one more Curriculum Committee meeting and that all proposals must be turned in by the 21st of March. The Committee will meet the fourth Thursday in March because the third week is spring break.

Professor McDonell wanted the minutes to reflect that the Occupational Therapy Department is not part of the Physical Therapy Department.

Report on State and Federal Maternity Leave Policies

Ms. Peri Meadows passed out copies of a summary of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. She will discuss taking time off, not being paid for time off. Professor Bibler asked how maternity leave for women would affect tenure. Ms. Meadows said that maternity leave cannot affect what you have earned up to the time you take leave. You do not necessarily accrue benefits while you are on leave.

Professor Renée Lorraine moved that the Tennessee Leave Act be referred to the Handbook Committee for inclusion in the Handbook. Professor David Wiley seconded the motion, which passed unanimously.

Report from the Marriott

Mr. Mike Scheffres of the Marriott explained that they had been on campus for two-and-a-half years. So far they have not made any money, in part because of break periods over the summer and the money they invested in the face-lift of the dining area. They have lost $569,000 since they came on campus.

In September 1993, they brought in managers from all over the United States to help them establish a better system, one which would work better both for the University and the Marriott. They interviewed faculty, students, and administrators. After that they went through a Quality Assessment, and the team gave them a list of things to "fix." Another team of five will come in March to look at facilities, financial performance, and other aspects. They are looking at moving Pizza Hut and Taco Bell outside the serving area to help with lines. They are also looking at making convenience items available for students to cook in their rooms. He believes that they are in a tough labor market and encourages faculty to call him with comments about their services.

Professor Honerkamp asked if the Marriott was having second thoughts about being at UTC. Mr. Scheffres said that their presence will probably be part of the discussions; they need to make a profit. Professor Stroud asked if the Marriott got off-campus clientele. Mr. Scheffres said not much, sometimes on weekends. They have considered offering a delivery service on campus. Already you can call Subway and have your order ready to pick up when you arrive.

Pricing is also an issue. Twice a year they canvas the area; they try not to exceed the local price. Catering is a tough business. They try to keep prices low, although they had to raise the price on a few items in 1994. Across the board, however, it was only 0.6%. They are also trying to come up with "meal deals."

Professor Loretta Prater asked if the Marriott was in similar markets where they were doing well. Mr. Scheffres said that it was difficult to compare; many campuses have residential requirements for food services, but UTC does not.

Report from the Provost

Provost Grayson Walker said that the news from Nashville concerning impoundments was not good, in part because of undercollections in TennCare. The Governor requested a $15 million impoundment from higher education; the UT System’s share is about $7 million; UTC’s share is about $545,000. The administration is trying to make cuts where they will not impact academic programs. Before he left, Mr. John Rudley had proposed a plan for using salaries from open positions as well as about $209,000 from repairs and renovations. They are really sorry to have to do that. They will take about $70,000 from reserves and carryovers from last year. They hope not to have to freeze travel, faculty replacements, or equipment purchases. They may have to come to departments and ask for reductions because they do not want to deplete their reserves entirely.

More bad news appeared in today’s paper: the Fletcher Hall and Maclellan Gymnasium renovation plans have been suspended. That means that work could resume during the summer, if we are lucky. The administration is hopeful that the suspension will be lifted. They believe that the Governor has taken a conservative stand on this. The big question is how much TennCare costs will be. Maclellan Gym is only a $1 million project. The stadium project has also been suspended. The Provost remarked that he shares Professor Stroud’s concern about a grand piano. He hopes it can be purchased next year. If we have money left over, we usually work on a specific problem. For example, last year they addressed the problem of safety in the art department and secured accreditation. He had hoped there would be money this year, but $60,000 for a grand piano would deplete the entire Arts and Sciences equipment budget for the year.

Because of the late hour, the Provost asked to be allowed to speak on the other items at the next meeting.

Old Business

There was no old business.

New Business

There was no new business.


There were no announcements.


The meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Sally Young


top.gif (189 bytes)