Skip to Content

Sept 29, 1999 Minutes

Senators Present: Bible, Conroy, Early, Gillis, Gordon, Hays, Irvin,
McKinney, McGee, Peeler, Renick, Skerpan-Wheeler,
Stimmel, and Stone.

Absent: None

Liaisons Present: None

Guests: Mike Moore, Home Again
Don Hazlewood, Mathematics



The meeting was called to order by Chair Hays at 4:05 p.m.


The senate discussed the draft list of proposed topics to be covered on
the faculty survey. Some modification and expansion of the list occurred.


The senate engaged in a thorough discussion of the draft language for
Paragraph 12 of PPS 7.10. A few modifications were suggested. There
was unanimous agreement that the language be tidied up as discussed, and
presented to the deans at the next joint Senate/CAD meeting.


Senators McGee and Renick met with Dr. Carolyn Conn Assistant Vice
President for Financial Services and Susan Warren of the Travel Office.
The meeting provided a frank exchange of ideas, with both sides eager to
explore ways in which the travel application/reimbursement process could
be made more satisfactory for all involved parties. Susan Warren shared
a long list of the common reasons why reimbursement requests are bounced
back to faculty and staff. Most of these revolved around the lack of proper
documentation required by state law, and the travel office has to
enforce those regulations. One of the fundamental problems appears to
be that the faculty are uneducated about many of the specific provisions
in those regulations. Either faculty, or designated individuals in
departments, need more education in the travel reimbursement process.
There is a brochure that explains basic state travel rules and what
documentation is needed for reimbursement to which faculty could refer
for easy access to answers to common questions. However, many faculty
seem to not be aware of the pamphlet or have not read it.

There do not appear to be _SWT_ policies/procedures impeding the travel
reimbursement process.

Not all senators were mollified; some continued to insist that travel office
rules seem to be capriciously applied. The senate awaits supporting

Renick, McGee, Conn and Warren will next work on a survey to better
identify specific problems that SWT employees have in the travel
reimbursement process and then see if they can propose specific
solutions that address those issues.


Motion to eliminate the Academic Policy Oversight Committee and the
Tenure, Promotion, and Compensation Committee, and to transfer their
functions to the Academic Governance Committee. Bible/Irvin 13-0.

Motion to eliminate the University Club Committee, and to transfer its
functions to the Facilities and Environment Committee. Bible/Irvin 13-0.

These changes will become effective September 1, 2000. They will largely
occur via the expiration of the terms of members currently serving on the
affected committees.


Money dominated the discussion of items suggested for the next PAAG meeting

1. How are various budgeted monies allocated to various of the SWT enterprises?

2. Aquarena finances. How much has Aquarena really cost us over the years?
How much more is it going to cost us? Is it worth it? Why not turn it
over to TPWD and be done with it?

3. When do departments get more travel money? I.e., when do they get more
m&o money so that they _can_ have more travel money?

4. SWT enrollment is at a record level. When will departmental budgets
increase to reflect our growth in enrollment?

5. What is the status of the Art/Technology/Physics building(s)?


1. (Hays) Mimi Tangum has complained that the Office of Sponsored Projects will
incur significant printing costs because of the electronic submission
of grant requests. She estimates a printing budget of $1,400 which she
proposes to deduct from grant monies.

Early suggested printing the damn things in the JCK Computer Center,
thus shifting the paper costs to Computing Services.

Conroy suggested that procedures be changed so that the forms can be
filled out online. But that the forms continue to be submitted in
hardcopy form so that the printing cost issue does not arise.

2. (Bible) PPS 8.08 (Grievance Process) needs attention. Bible, Stone,
Gillis, and John McGee will do so and report.

3. (Bible) Can the existence of the University Council be justified?

4. (Early) The 22 September 1999 minutes were approved after being
mercilessly hacked into docile submission.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.

mercilessly submitted