COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING AND BUDGET
Stanton Glantz, Ph.D. Chair
Meeting of April 19, 2001
PRESENT: Vice Chair C.A. Hunt, J. Showstack, D. Bikle, J. Norbeck, A. Kahn
ABSENT: Chair S. Glantz, D. Bainton, S. Barclay, L. Zegans, N. Agabian, R. Price
The meeting of the Academic Budget & Planning Committee was called to order by Vice Chair Hunt on April 19, 2001 at about 2:30 p.m. in Room S318. A quorum was present.
The March 20 and 29, 2001 minutes were tabled for approval until the next APB meeting.
Vice Chair Hunt, also Chair of the APB Task Force examining the Tobacco Center proposal, presented a report on the Tobacco Center Proposal. Vice Chair Hunt put together the following ad hoc committee to serve as the task force under APB looking at the proposal: Maria Pallavacini, Bill Holzemer, Sharmila Majumdar, Christoph Schreiner and Susan Hall. Vice Chair Hunt had several telephone discussions with the task force members which resulted in the reported presented today. He noted that comments from the task force on the proposal seemed to fall into three categories: the Center itself, the space, and the procedure for Senate review of this Center.
The Committee discussed the report and the proposal itself. The Committee was generally supportive of the Tobacco Center but had concerns regarding the placement of the Center in the library and whether the space was sufficient to support Center operations, eighteen post-doctoral fellows and potential visiting scholars. Ultimately, the Committee decided that they would defer to the architect’s recommendations regarding the amount and design of space in the library. Regarding placement in the library, Vice Chair Hunt reported that the American Legacy Foundation made this placement a condition of the endowment. Vice Chair Hunt also reported that all fellows are to be located in the Library in order to avoid having fellows at several different locations. All agreed that the Senate should have been part of the review process at an earlier stage but that the proposed Director of the Center, Stan Glantz, had done what he could under administrative direction to ensure that appropriate process occurred.
There was a motion to endorse Vice Chair Hunt’s report with some changes. The report will add the following language from a related report by Karen Butter, Librarian:
- There are, however, special considerations in locating this function in campus 'common' space used heavily by the entire UCSF faculty/students and the community. The selected library location itself may place restrictions on the size and design of the space. The design must respect and not restrict existing functions and uses of the building. Additionally, the design should retain the architectural integrity of the building preserving as much of the existing window site line as possible. Students and faculty place high value on study/reading areas and, to the extent possible, functions displaced in this area must be relocated to other comparable portions of the building. We understand that the architect has weighed these considerations in making his recommendations.
The report must also reference the Committee’s belief that the Center should be accessible to all of the UCSF community and that the academic programs should be accessible by all UCSF graduate students. With these changes, the Committee voted unanimously in favor of the motion.
Vice Chair Hunt will attend a question and answer session on April 24, 2001 where Stan Glantz, Lisa Bero and Karen Butter will be available to answer the questions of the various Senate committees reviewing this proposal. Vice Chair Hunt will report any significant new information to the Committee and discuss whether the report need be edited any further. Absent significant new information and after final committee review to ensure any appropriate changes are made, the report will be sent to Senate Chair Larry Pitts.
The meeting adjourned at about 4:00 p.m.
Sr. Senate Analyst