COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PLANNING AND BUDGET
Stanton Glantz, Ph.D. Chair
Special Meeting of June 7, 2001
PRESENT: Chair S. Glantz, Vice Chair C.A. Hunt, D. Bikle, J. Norbeck, A. Kahn, L. Zegans, R. Price
ABSENT: J. Showstack, N. Agabian
GUEST: W. Gold, Chair, Clinical Affairs Committee
This special meeting of the Academic Budget & Planning Committee was called to order by Chair Glantz on June 7, 2001 at about 1:00 p.m. in Room N319Y. A quorum was present.
Discussion of Faculty Moving to Mission Bay and Impact on Campus Programs/Scientific Enterprise
Chair Glantz tabled this issue for later discussion as N. Agabian had asked for this agenda item but was unable to make the meeting.
Discussion of Deans’ Position on APB Restructure Proposal (as stated in May 2001 letter from Deans to Chancellor)
Chair Glantz reported on the most recent Executive Budget Committee meeting. Chair Glantz and Senate Chair L. Pitts had understood that this EBC meeting was intended to be the forum in which the Deans’ concerns regarding APB’s restructure proposal would be discussed. However, the Deans’ sent a joint letter to the Chancellor expressing their position on the proposal prior to the EBC meeting. Neither APB nor the Senate was copied on the letter, thus Chair Glantz and Chair Pitts received the letter for the first time at the EBC meeting. It was decided that discussion of the APB proposal would be tabled until a later EBC meeting, allowing APB and the Senate time to work on responding to the issues raised by the Deans in their letter.
Senate Chair Pitts is soliciting responses from the four Faculty Councils and has asked APB to provide a response as well.
Chair Glantz noted that the Deans expressed support for the long-range planning portion of the proposal, but that they do not support Senate review of their budgets.
The Committee discussed the Deans’ letter and how to respond. The Committee wants the response letter to, among other things, reassure that APB does not intend to inject delay into the budget process and to note that APB believes in and seeks Faculty Council involvement in the review. The Committee also wants to note that there are Clinical/Adjunct Faculty representatives on the APB Committee and that APB will seek that voice. In addition, the Committee decided the letter should acknowledge the Committee’s understanding that this is a change and suggest that there be a 1-2 year pilot with re-assessment by the Chancellor at the end of the pilot. Chair Glantz will work with G. Gende to draft a response letter to be sent to Senate Chair Pitts in the next 2-3 days for Committee review.
Discussions of the Graduate Council Proposal Re: Appointment and Mentoring of Postdocs
The Committee discussed this proposal and determined that it endorses the principles as outlined above, but there needs to be careful analysis of the budgetary implications before such a proposal moves forward.
- School of Nursing Proposal to Increase Students: The School of Nursing has recently been asked by UC Administration to recommend ways to increase the number of nursing students as a means of addressing the nursing shortages. The proposed recommendations are still in draft form and the Committee will review and discuss this issue further when more information is available, likely at the next monthly APB meeting.
- Clinical Affairs Committee Interface with APB on Medical Center Budget: CAC has proposed taking primary responsibility for review of the Medical Center budget. CAC Chair W. Gold reported that M. Laret, Medical Center CEO, has offered to bring CAC up to speed through tutorials on the Medical Center budget process. M. Laret’s biggest concerns are making sure that Senate involvement will not affect the established budget timeline and that it is clear on which issues the Senate will focus. The Committee determined to discuss this issue further at the next APB meeting.
The meeting adjourned at about 2:30 p.m.
Sr. Senate Analyst