MOTION (Moved by Tullis, seconded by Scholle)

"The System Governance Council moves to adopt the agenda for the November 14, 1995 meeting. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

3. Approve October 17, 1995 minutes Attachment 3.

MOTION (Moved byTullis, seconded by Dursi-Johnson)

"The System Governance Council moves to approve the minutes for the October 17, 1995 meeting. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

4. Retirement benefits

Pat Ivey stated that all the governance groups need to review and comment on the proposed changes to the PERS and TRS retirement plan. These changes are being proposed by the state division of retirement and benefits.

Ivey stated that it is important that everyone review their current plan and know exactly how all the rules of the plan work. She stated that one change that is already in effect, is that if you are retired you must apply for Medicare at age 65. At that time, Medicare becomes the insured primary provider, and Aetna becomes the secondary.

Ivey also noted that a new RIP Bill is also currently in legislation for 1996.

MOTION: (Moved by Dursi-Johnson, seconded by Scholle)

"The University of Alaska System Governance Council members will be the responsible governance group for retrieving information from Statewide Human Resources and the State of Alaska Division of Retirement pertaining to any and all changes to the current PERS and TRS retirement plans. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

5.1 Future of the System Governance Council 5.1

Don Lynch stated that the UAF Faculty Senate voted at their last meeting to adopt all of the following proposed constitutional changes to the Council.

Rita Dursi-Johnson stated that the UAS Faculty Senate had discussed the changes briefly and felt that reducing the amount of meetings per year was a good idea and also felt comfortable with all the constitutional changes as proposed. She stated that they felt that meetings could be called for the Council on an Òas needÓ basis. Meaning, that if an issue came forward that needed to have full support from faculty, staff and students, a meeting would be called by the System Governance Council chairperson. She also noted that there are also other methods of disseminating information to various groups without having to hold an actual meeting.

Donna Chantry stated that in her discussions with the administration and Board of Regents about the System Governance Council, it has been strongly supported and should continue to function as it is currently structured.

MOTION: (Moved by Scholle, seconded by Dupee) PASSED unanimously

"The System Governance Council members will vote separately on each proposed constitutional change to the Council structure. This will constitute a first reading. The second reading, with the new adopted changes will be reviewed at the next meeting. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Pat Ivey explained that the intent of this proposal was to eliminate formal membership. The effect would be eight members from the Staff Alliance, nine members from the Alliance of Faculty Senates and fourteen from the Coalition of Student Leaders. Barb Tullis stated that if the membership of the Council is so informal, members will not participate ever. Dursi-Johnson stated that her group had the opposite opinion, that if you had such a large membership, the possibility of getting at least two people from each campus would be much greater.

Marie Scholle stated that at the previous meeting there was a lot of discussion about changing the structure of the council. She stated that she feels that it is very important to keep the council together. She stated that she feels there is a real benefit to having a group comprised of faculty, staff and students, and that it is governanceÕs only forum to share ideas between the various entities.

MOTION: (Moved by Scholle) PASSED unanimously

"The System Governance Council membership will remain as it is currently structured. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Scholle stated that with this system, the group would never have continuity. She stated that she would prefer that the council have one chairperson, elected annually, that leads the group. She stated that with one chair, people will know who to contact month after month, and that person will have a real knowledge of everything that is happening within the council. Dursi-Johnson stated that she also feels that only one chair should be elected per year.

Don Lynch stated that adopting the proposal for a rotating chair could possibly benefit the council since one person would not always be responsible for calling the meetings and this could mean more of a chance for quorum.

MOTION: (Moved by Barbara Tullis, seconded by Scholle) PASSED unanimously

"The System Governance Council moves to keep one chair per annual year as it is currently structured. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Scholle stated that she feels it is important that the chairperson be kept in command of calling all meetings and it is important to keep one person in control.

Lynch stated that the reason for this new language is so that a chair from another governance group could call a meeting when they had an item they wished to discuss with all the other groups. It was noted that this is still possible by contacting the Council chair to request a meeting. Lynch stated that this leaves too much power in the hands of the chair. That if the chair does not see the importance of the issue, it would not get to the Council for discussion. It was stated that according to the constitution, the Council members would have the power to vote for the meeting, and only a one-third in favor vote would be needed.

MOTION: (Moved by Scholle, seconded by Tullis) PASSED

"The constitution remains as written and any meetings called for the System Governance Council shall be called only by the Council chair. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Ivey stated that because of program assessment, a poll was conducted on governance, and this was a direct recommendation from that. The Alliance of Faculty Senates felt very strongly that the System Governance Council should not be perceived by the legislation as the umbrella group for all of governance and that it should only be seen as a mechanism for getting all the governance groups together. The Staff Alliance and Coalition of Student Leaders also agreed with this.

Lynch stated that without this new wording, the System Governance Council could be perceived as just another layer above the other governance groups. He felt that this could be dangerous, and that the Council should not be in a position to take ÒactionÓ, other than a coordinating or informational body.

Scholle stated that the Council would not vote against the groups that it represents, she stated the group has been formed to support the other groups and to add an extra layer of support to make them stronger.

MOTION: (Moved by Dursi-Johnson, seconded by Lynch), PASSED

"The Council shall take no legislative action on system issues other than endorsement of the actions of the other system governance groups or to coordinate actions between them unless specifically directed by the president of the Board of Regents, the president of the university, or the Council co-chairs. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Scholle also stated that reducing the amount of meetings per year could be detrimental to the council since issues that are in need of review are always coming up.

MOTION: PASSED, with one negative vote

"The System Governance Council will reduce the number of minimum meetings from six (6) per year, to four (4) per year. Each meeting must specify either audio or video conference. The System Governance Council will have no on-site meetings. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

It was noted that it appeared that the sole purpose of proposing to disband the System Governance Council was to divide the money between the remaining groups, and this did not seem like a fair justification to do so. It was felt that the group would only be as strong as the people want it to be.

Scholle stated that the Council is supposed to meet for emergency meetings and disseminate information to help the other groups along. She stated that it would take proper funding to accomplish these things.

Lynch stated that the Alliance of Faculty Senates was very much in favor of this motion. He stated that the emergency meetings could be funded by the presidentÕs office if more funding was needed. He stated that the Alliance of Faculty Senates, Staff Alliance and Coalition of Student Leaders needs the funding more the Council does to make them more effective.

Dursi-Johnson stated that in creating the budget for the Council, on-site meetings had been included and the Council would not be funding any on-site meetings, that they would only be having audio and video conferences.

It was recommended that the members wait until the end of this fiscal year before making any changes to see exactly how much funding it would take to run the Council.

MOTION: (Moved by Dursi-Johnson, seconded by Lynch), MOTION FAILED with three "yes" votes and five "no" votes.

"The System Governance Council moves to reduce their budget from $6,200 to $3,000. The remaining $3,200 will be disbursed equally between the Alliance of Faculty Senates, the Staff Alliance and the Coalition of Student Leaders. This action is effective November 14, 1995."

Bukowski stated that this will be an item for future discussion and that any comments regarding goals should be sent to the System Governance Office.

This was an informational item only and any comments on the tracking system should be sent to the System Governance Office.

Bukowski stated that a new draft was sent out on November 10, 1995 and incorporates some of the recommendations from the various groups. The primary change is that the Board of Regents will not be voting on this issue until their February 1996 meeting, which is a change from December 1995. Ivey noted that any comments may be sent directly to the Statewide Office of Human Resources.

5.5 Other action items

This item was not discussed.

6. Information items

6.1 Board of Regents December meeting

This item was not discussed.

6.2 Other information items

No local governance reports were given.

The next meeting is scheduled for December 12, 1995.

There were no other items of concern.

There were no additional comments.