Faculty Senate

Minutes - November 1, 2021 - 3:05pm - Online through WebEx

CCSU FACULTY SENATE MEETING

Present: Acharya, K.; Al-Masoud, N.; Amaya, L.; Atkinson, S.; Bigelow, L.; Bishop, J.; Blitz, D.; Boscarino, N.; Bray, A.; Broulik, W.; Crundwell, G.; Donohue, P.; Drew, S.; Dumpson, N.; Duquette, M.; Elfant, A.; Emeagwali, G.; Farrish, K.; Foster, P.; French, J.; Gamache, J.; Garbovskiy, Y.; Gardner, P.; Gichiru, W.; Givens, E.; Gonzalez, K.; Gu, S.; Halkin, S.; Hedlund, J.; Jackson, M.; Jarmoszko, T.; Karas, R.; Kean, K.; Kirby, D.; Langevin, K.; Larsen, K.; Lewis, M.; Martin, A.; Matthews, S.; Matzke, B.; McCarthy, M.; Morano, P.; Nicholson, B.; Ofray, J.; Orange, M.; Paolino, J.; Penniman, C.; Roark, E.; Robinson, G.; Salgado, E.; Savatorova, V.; Schenck, S.; Scott, T.; Shen, X.; Sikorski, J.; Small. I.; Smith, J.; Smith, R.; Sohn, Y.M.; Spear, E.; Sugg, K.; Sylvester, C.; Thai, N.; Vargas, C.; Villanti, S.; Wang, W.; Washko, L.; Whittemore, L.. Zadi, S.; Zhao, S.

Ex-Officio:Burkholder, T.; Farhat, J.; Kostelis, K.; Mulrooney, J.; Robinson, C.; Wolff, R.; Toro, Z.

 

Parliamentarian: Dimmick, C.

President of the Senate: Latour, F.

Guests: Fallon, M.; Leonidas, E.; Merenstein, B.; Miller, S.; Moore, N.; Moreland, D.; Pope, C.; Suski-Lenczewski, A.; Tully, J.

1. Minutes

• Minutes of October 18, 2021

The minutes of the meeting of October 18, 2021 were accepted.

2. Announcements:

a. AAUP President (T. Burkholder)

• AAUP is in the process of planning a celebration of faculty and students for November 15, which is the day President Cheng will visit campus. It is to celebrate the accomplishments and achievements of our students. There will be a food truck, a tent with information, and some speakers. More information to come.
• The Holiday Chapter Meeting will be on November 29 from 3:30 – 5:30 p.m. Owing to the conflict with the Senate, the date or time will need to be changed.
• After several weeks of informal discussions with the Board of Regents (BOR), we will resume formal negotiations with the BOR this Thursday, November 4. The informal sessions have cleared the path to focus the negotiations on those items that remain unresolved. There will be a somewhat large winnowing of issues that will not get resolved during these negotiations.
  • D. Blitz asked if there was a schedule for President Cheng’s visit. President Toro indicated there will be at least three open forums: AAUP, professional staff, and students. Those are the same types of meetings that President Cheng has been hosting at each one of his community college campus visits. Times have not yet been confirmed.

b. SUOAF-AFSCME President (L. Bigelow)

• The next Chapter meeting will be held on November 11, 2021 at noon, on Teams.

c. SGA (N. Elsinger)

• No updates.

d. FAC to the Board of Regents (D. Blitz)

• D. Blitz presented and discussed the report disseminated with the agenda, including an exhibit showing the new formula for how the State funding is allocated across the System Office and universities. He noted that he asked that the System Office’s allocation be limited to a certain percentage; that request was denied. Rescissions will be proportional to the block grant to the university. D. Blitz asked for a breakdown of how the new formula will actually impact the universities. The table he discussed is a comparison of how it would have been allocated under the old formula and how it will be allocated under the current model. Under the new model, CCSU’s funding will be decreased by $1.3 million. The budget includes additional operating funding to cover a portion of fringe benefits, but there is no indication of whether this funding is one-time or recurring.
• The matter of the vaccine mandate was also raised by the FAC at the BOR meeting since it was not on the agenda. Four issues were raised and need to be taken into account and the Board resolution needs to be amended. He would like to see the elimination of personal and religious exceptions, unless it is required by the canon of the religion. Non-compliance (testing and reporting) is too high and the penalties are too low. Booster shots should be required or recommended, and there should be an educational campaign promoting the efficacy of the vaccine.
• D. Blitz also raised and reviewed the four components of role of the Faculty at the BOR and four elements supporting the need for respect for faculty from the Board, some of which is statutorily based.
• This Friday, there will be a joint meeting of the FAC and the BOR. This is statutorily required, yet this will be the first such meeting in over two years. There are two items on the agenda: a discussion of the accelerated completion plan for remedial math and English and a discussion on improving transfer opportunities for students.

e. President of the Senate (F. Latour)

• F. Latour received a message from the SCSU Senate President: according to their FIRC representative, there will be a task force assembled in spring 2022 regarding alignment of a 30 credit general education requirement to make sure the CSU’s are competitive and to make sure that the first 30 credits taken can be easily transferred to any university in the system. F. Latour does not see value in the task force. It disregards that when the TAP was created, the articulation of general education between the community colleges and the CSUs was done collaboratively with the faculty at each of the Universities and approved by their senates. This feels like the Board is trying to bypass input from Senate and also the Curriculum Committee in order to interject its own agenda. Fred stated this is another attempt by the Board to gain more control over the curriculum and sought comments and feedback from the Senate.
  • T. Burkholder: their modus operandi has been to recruit faculty from a campus, put them on a committee, and call this shared governance, which it is not.
  • G. Crundwell asked T. Burkholder if a grievance could be filed because the Senate is the faculty voice and they are seeking faculty input outside the Senate? He posited that any time people at the BOR try to get faculty on a committee should be grieved right away. T. Burkholder indicated it depends on how they go about it. D. Blitz noted that the Transfer Articulation Council was disbanded two years ago in favor of Students First. Now we are back to the same question: is there respect for the faculty’s control of the curriculum? F. Latour asked whether we should reach out the Board and explain the contractual language that relates to how they should go about seeking faculty input. D. Blitz suggested that F. Latour work in tandem with the other Senate Presidents to send a message back to the BOR. A couple of options include: (1) an ad hoc committee of the Senate to present something at the last meeting as a way to reach out to the Board and (2) Fred meet with other Senate presidents and they work on a common resolution. Fred favors doing something on our own and then presenting it to the other Senates to see if they want to endorse it. Fred then sought volunteers for the ad hoc committee. T. Burkholder, H. Hughes, and N. Al-Masoud volunteered to serve on the ad hoc committee.
• MOTION: The Senate approves the creation of the ad hoc committee.
  • The motion passed.

3. Committee Reports (reports marked with an asterisk are informational reports intended for consent agenda only; if you would like a report to be discussed, please inform the President and Secretary by Monday, noon)  

a. Curriculum Committee (N. Moore)

• Ned Moore, Chair of the committee, reviewed the Curriculum Committee report presented with the agenda.
• MOTION: To approve the report of the Curriculum Committee. The motion passed.

4. New Business

a. Departmental Name Change Proposal

• Department of Geography to Department of Geography, Sustainability and Tourism
• C. Pope from the Geography Department requested this item be postponed until the next meeting. F. Latour agreed, but asked for her to first describe the proposal so that people are aware of what has been proposed. She agreed and did so. C. Pope indicated that anyone with questions could direct them to the Department Chair, Professor Charles Button. G. Crundwell asked if this is a controversial proposal; otherwise he doesn’t understand why this is being tabled. C. Pope indicated they would like to be collegial and collaborative in this process and because of that, they would like all departments to be aware of the proposal so that they can contact the department with questions or concerns. F. Latour asked if there were any objections to postponing the item until the next meeting, or whatever meeting they wished to put it forth. Hearing no objections, the item was presented to the Senate for information and it will be put on a future Senate agenda.

b. Informational Presentation on Retirement Changes (A. Suski-Lenczewski)

• F. Latour introduced Chief Human Resource Officer Anna Suski-Lenczewski to give a presentation on upcoming changes to the SERS retirement plan.
• Anna Suski-Lenczewski recapped the changes:
• Effective date was clarified. The last date to retire in order to avoid the changes is July 1, 2021.
• Key changes:
  • Retiree Health Insurance: Effective 8/1/22 or later: your contribution changes from 1.5-3% of the total cost the state pays. After 8/1/22, that contribution goes up to 5%. However, if you are covered by Medicare, this will not effect you.
  • The State of Connecticut reimburses Medicare-eligible members who enroll in Parts A and B, you are currently reimbursed for the monthly cost. That is not scheduled to change after 7/1/22, but there is an additional charge for certain higher wage earners (IRMAA) – that is based on your AGI. If you file jointly or individually, it still applies. Currently, if you retire by 7/1/22, whatever that amount is that Medicare charges for that supplemental amount is reimbursed to you by the State. After 7/1/22, the IRMAA amount drops to 50% reimbursement only. This applies to people in ALT and SERS.
  • The other big change for SERS is related to the COLA. Currently, you are guaranteed a minimum of 2% COLA. Currently, after you receive 9 pension checks, you are eligible for a COLA increase. If you were to retire January 1, 2022 and 9 pension checks later, in the Fall, you are eligible for your first COLA increase in January 2023. Increases come in January or July, depending on your retirement date. If you retire after 7/1/22, your first COLA comes 30 months later, and there is no guaranteed COLA floor. It could be less than 2% or even 0.
• Please see the Upcoming Events of the Human Resources website and go to the page dedicated to 2022 resources. Direct link: http://osc.ct.gov/2022-retirement/
• Reminder: If you are planning to retire, please contact Human Resources ASAP. They already have an unprecedented number of retirements in process and years of service has to be verified by the Comptroller’s office and it takes time for that to be verified.

5. Adjournment

• The meeting adjourned at 4:35pm.