Faculty Senate: legal update, budget, parkingThe Faculty Senate met June 5 and was called to order by Adrian Reuben, M.D. The next meeting will be held at 7:45 a.m. Tuesday, July 10, in the Administration/Library Building, room 107.Update on legal counsel Reuben provided statistics on the faculty response to solicitations in support of establishing a legal counsel to review contractual documents for the Faculty Senate. As of June 4:
Committee assignments
Sutusky announced that there is an on-going search for chief financial officer. In the interim, Ed Troublefield, a recent retiree with many years’ experience in academic institutions in South Carolina, is working in this capacity. Sutusky introduced Troublefield to the senate. Susie Edwards, budget director, reviewed the internal university budget process and decisions which have been made at the state level to date in regard to the FY02 budget. She noted that cost of living increases of 1.25-2 percent for classified and unclassified state employees have been included in both S.C. Senate and House bills. Budget reduction projections vary in each body: the S.C. House projects a 10 percent reduction for higher education (2 percent for MUSC) and the S.C. Senate projects a 6 percent reduction for MUSC. Some of the shortfall would be made up with performance funding, but those are non-recurring funds. The conference committee to resolve differences in the bills is now in session and should finish by June 7. If their deliberations are not complete, they will come back in late June to continue. Gov. Hodges can then sign the bill, veto it, or use a line-item veto. Any delay beyond June 7 portends late delivery of the budget. In response to a question, Edwards said that MUSC receives $106 million in state appropriations, which are distributed disproportionately among the colleges and departments. Sutusky noted that whatever the publicized cuts are, they will in actuality translate into more, because of fixed costs like utilities and contracts which we must pay at 100 percent. He also stated that FY03 will be a difficult budget year. Copies of the published MUSC budget, which includes final figures for FY99 and FY00 and projections for FY01 and FY02 can be obtained from the budget office by calling Edwards at 792-2853. This compilation includes MUSC and its affiliates: MUHA, AHEC, UMA, and Charleston Memorial. Edwards reviewed MUSC’s internal budget process. Budget packages are distributed in the fall. Three analysts are available in the budget office to assist units with budget preparation. From January through March, budgets are presented to either the vice president for finance, the provost, or Sabra Slaughter, Ph.D., the president’s chief of staff. Updates are presented to the president and President’s Council in May, to the Finance Committee of the Board of Trustees in June, with final presentation to the full board in August. Departmental budgets were reduced by 0.5 percent in May of this year. For FY02, a 10 percent reduction is being assumed. Expenditures for FY02 are projected based on the plans presented from departments for a 10 percent cut. As senators review the budget figures distributed at the meeting, they may send questions to Sutusky (sutuskyj@musc.edu). Crouch responded to a question about how a 10 percent cut will affect departments. She noted that she has met with all academic units and about half are well-positioned for this. They have already determined what should go or be revised and begun working towards that. The other half have serious problems. Certain accreditation ratios, such as faculty/student ratios must be retained. She also advised that researchers should be sure that salaries are being reclaimed from grants whenever possible. Clinical departments must maximize revenues and efficiencies. Sutusky noted that the administrative side has been working through re-organizations and efficiencies also. Crouch feels that across-the-board cuts are unwise and will be discussing a change management approach with the president. Researchers expressed the need for more timely notification of how grant funds can be spent if the initial expenditure ideas included in their grants are disallowed later by federal guidelines. Parking: John Runyon
Parking fee increases are required because of the projected need, over the next 10 to 15 years, for 6,000 additional parking spaces. The campus master plan calls for patient/visitor parking to be in the interior of the campus and staff parking to be on the perimeter. A new garage at the Charleston High School site is still under discussion, but is being designed. This will start as a dual-purpose facility with 500-1,200 spaces, serving both staff and patients. The total debt service and operating costs of this garage are projected to be $1.8 million per year. Since state regulations require that parking must generate revenues to cover all costs, including employees, operations, maintenance, etc., fees must go up to cover the costs of the new garage. Currently, staff/student parking operates at a $400,000 deficit each year, while patient/visitor parking runs at a $2 million profit. In response to a question about validated parking, Runyon said that the Medical University Hospital Authority pays for that. A number of parking-related issues that need discussion or resolution were raised by the senators. Among these:
Furlough of state employees Sutusky said no formal guidelines or directives have come from the state regarding a furlough. He noted that a furlough would be very difficult to impose on a campus like this which provides critical services 24 hours a day every day. The S.C. Governor’s Office might announce something after June 7. In the meantime, the MUSC Office of Human Resources has drafted a policy in case a furlough is announced. Sutusky noted that if a furlough is imposed, there will be no exceptions. Faculty contracts are currently being signed. There are many different contracts in use throughout the university. They range from short and general to lengthy and detailed. If any faculty see a contract with difficult or complex wording, they are asked to bring it to the attention of the Faculty Senate. If wording can be added to protect the faculty, that should be done. For example, Philip Privitera, Ph.D., worked with Thomas Higerd, Ph.D., to revise the wording on one contract which stated that the “period of performance” may differ from the “term of appointment.” While there was good reason to make this statement (to accommodate faculty who actually work less than 12 months), this negates work done on the term of appointment document which was recently approved by the Board of Trustees and will be incorporated in the Faculty Handbook. All new faculty hires will sign a statement recognizing that the MUSC
Faculty Handbook is their contract with the university.
Nominations will take place the first week of school, about Aug. 15, and elections will be held one week later. A request was made by one senator to invite a representative of the Institutional Review Board to the senate to address the increasingly difficult research environment. Reuben announced the availability of a PDF version of the MUSC Faculty Handbook on the senate website and encouraged faculty to review significant parts and send questions/issues to him and the Governance Committee. Senators present
Clinical Sciences: Narenda Banik, Timothy Carter, Dennis Cope, Leonard Egede, Leonie Gordon, Maria Lopes-Virella, Mark Lyles, Subbi Mathur, Terry O’Brien, Adrian Reuben Dental Medicine: Peter Kobes, Luis Leite, Jon Rampton Health Professions: Janice Hundley, Gail Pashek Library Science & Informatics: Jennie Ariail, Nancy McKeehan, Peggy Schachte Nursing: Tara Hulsey, Sally Stroud Pharmacy: Kurt Lorenz, Kit Simpson, Donald Wiest
|