• Home
  • University Senate-11/05/15

University Senate-11/05/15

University Senate
November 5, 2015 - 3:30pm
Green Hall-Room 203

This meeting may be electronically recorded

I.         Announcements

II.        Approval of minutes from October 8, 2015

III.       Standing Reports

        A.  University Senate President Mike Williams

        B.  Student Senate President Zach George

        C.  Staff Senate President Chris Wallace

IV.         KBOR Weapons Policy Draft 

V.          Proposed Amendment to USRR 6.8.3 (Annotations)
             (SenEx has recommended to deny.)

VI.         Proposed Amendment to USRR 6.9.1 (Parking Appeals)

VII.        Proposed Amendment to University Senate Code Art X, Sec. 2 (ACEC Faculty

VIII.       Proposed Amendment to University Senate Code Art. X Sec 2. (AP&P’s ex officio member)

IX.         Proposed Amendment to University Senate Code Art. X Sec 2. (Libraries Committee Provost Appointments)

X.          Proposed Amendment to University Senate Code Art XI Sec. 2 (Parking Commission Provost Appointments)

XI.         Proposed Amendment to University Senate Code Art XI Sec. 4 (Judicial Board Provost Appointments)

XII.       Old Business

XIII.       New Busines


KBOR Draft Weapons Policy




November 5, 2015 – 3:30 p.m. – 203 Green Hall

Approved December 3, 2015

MEMBERS PRESENT:  Faculty Mike Williams, Mary Banwart, Philip Baringer, Ron Barrett-Gonzalez, Jim Carothers, Jay Childers, Kelly Chong, Jonathan Clark, Michael Davidson, Chris Elles, Christopher Fischer, Lisa Friis, Andrea Greenhoot, Joe Harrington, Kissan Joseph, Pamela Keller, Paul Laird, Jason Matejkowski, Amalia Monroe-Gulick, Steve Padget, Meagan Patterson, Angela Rathmel, Geraldo Sousa, Bill Staples, Belinda Sturm, Susan Williams, Students Zach George, Harrison Baker, Shegufta Huma, Brent Lee, Chance Maginness, Brittany Oleniacz, Logan Sutton, Howard Trey Wolf, Mady Womack, Taylor Zabel, Staff Chris Wallace, Terri Chambers, Keah Cunningham, Michelle Ginavan-Hayes, Emily Lee, Margaret Mahoney, Liz Phillips, Peggy Robinson,

ABSENTFaculty Tom Beisecker (Excused), Charles Epp (excused), Pam Fine, Lynn Hancock, Majid Hannoum, Weishi Liu, Jonathan Mayhew (excused), Mario Medina, Bozenna Pasik-Duncan (excused), Roberta Freund Schwartz, Dean Stetler, Barbara Timmerman (excused), Lisa Wolf-Wendel (excused), Students Keonya Jackson, Elizabeth Johnson (excused), Sophia Templin (excused),  Staff Charlotte Goodman (excused), Kristine Latta (excused), Susan Shaw (excused), Tanya Spacek

ALSO PRESENT: Maureen Altman and Kathy Reed, University Governance; Amy Smith, Policy Office; Chancellor Gray-Little; Provost Vitter; Sara Trower, General Counsel; Sara Shepherd, LJ World

President Mike Williams called the meeting to order and announced that the meeting is recorded.

MINUTES for October 8, 2015 were approved with the following corrections: Sarah Elliott attended the  meeting; in the third line of the Faculty Senate President’s report, “effect” should read “effective”; in the of eighth line from the bottom of the third paragraph in the KUAAP report, United Arab “Republic” should read United Arab “Emirates”.  Jim Carothers suggested specifying that the shooting the University Senate President referenced in his report was the Umpqua Community College shooting in Oregon.


University Senate President

Ola Faucher, Director of Human Resources will attend the next meeting to update the committee on the Tobacco Free KU initiative.  Williams shared information he received from her, saying that Student Senate has been working with HR and that there will be another open forum.  July 2017 is the projected date that the initiative will go into effect. 

Williams congratulated Provost Vitter on his new position as Chancellor of the University of Mississippi, and Sara Rosen as new Interim Provost.

He introduced Michael Davidson (Music) as Sandra Gray’s temporary replacement for this semester and thanked him for accepting the position.

Faculty Senate President

Tom Beisecker was excused from the meeting so there was no report.

Student Senate President

Zach George reported that the Student Weapons Survey was sent out yesterday and will be going on for the next three weeks.  Jesse Pringle, Student Body President has been working on the survey with the KBOR Student Advisory Committee who hopes to discover how students feel about weapons on campus. A bill was passed to create a $4.90 fee to fund the new Burge Union.  The building will include offices for legal advice, the Emily Taylor Center for Women and Gender Equity, and a reflection room.  Student Senate will hold a forum on the Tobacco Free initiative in November to get student input to help decide if they will support the initiative.  The Student Senate Online Course Evaluation Proposal will be presented to FacEx next week.  A bill was also passed to amend the Student Senate Rules and Regulations to contain gender neutral language and last night a bill mandating that all Student Senate legislation will have gender neutral language was passed and has been forwarded to the Student Body president for approval.   

Staff Senate President

Chris Wallace reported that the Staff Senate website is up and running.  They also now have a Facebook page.  He informed the Senate that the Jeanette Johnson Professional Development Fund is getting ready to accept applications.

Vote on PROPOSED AMENDMENTS to the university senate code and usrr

Mike Williams explained the amendments below which the committee needed to vote on. 

He requested that the proposed amendment to delete USRR and and change to be tabled indefinitely since, after further discussion with the Governance Office staff, it was found to be an unnecessary amendment which SenEx subsequently denied.  Jonathan Clark felt that a policy to record the annotations should be instituted.  Williams explained that Kathy Reed has provided a solution in creating a templated format to record from the meeting minutes any notations which would help future chairs understand how certain provisions had been interpreted rather than trying to annotate the entire process which wasn’t the intent of the rule.

USRR Article VI, Section 8

Rationale: The Governance Office found that after the Judicial Board procedures were reformed the suggested annotated version was never created.  This has caused confusion and inconvenience for those seeking the annotations.  It was suggested that this section be removed. 

USRR Article VI. Procedures for Conflict Resolution

Section 8. Other Powers and Responsibilities of Judicial Board Chair

6.8.3 Annotation Interpretations of University Senate Code and Rules and Regulations Compilation. The Judicial Board Chair shall compile an annotated version of the University Senate Code, the University Senate Rules and Regulations, and other provisions applicable in disputes arising under these procedures. The annotated version of applicable provisions shall include brief statements of all Judicial Board decisions interpreting a provision. These statements shall identify the provision in question, the interpretive issue, the resolution of the issue by the hearing or appeal panel in question, and the date of the decision, but should not include information about the parties or details of the matter in dispute. Availability. A copy of the annotated version of the University Senate Code and the University Senate Rules and Regulations shall be maintained in the office of the Judicial Board and provided to the Office of the University General Counsel, as well as any unit or specialized tribunal that requests a copy. The annotation(s) respecting any provision shall be available upon request to any interested person. When the application of a provision that has been subject to a prior interpretation is at issue in any matter pending before the Judicial Board, the Judicial Board Chair shall provide copies of the pertinent annotation(s) to the parties and the members of the panel who will be deciding the case. Members of a unit level hearing panel or specialized tribunal may inquire of the Judicial Board Chair whether prior interpretations of relevant provisions exist, and the Judicial Board Chair shall provide copies of the annotation(s) reflecting any such interpretation. Effect.

Motion to indefinitely table the proposed amendments to USRR, and Maginness/Barrett.  Passed.

Williams explained that the amendment was the result of a recommendation from the Chief Justice of the Court of Parking Appeals. 

USRR Article VI, Section 9

Rationale: After meeting with Nicholas Birdsong, Court of Parking Appeals, the following USRR change was recommended (Fall2014.)  This will make Article VI, Section 9 consistent with amendment 11 of the University of Kansas Court of Parking Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure:

“Any amendments to these Rules shall be made at the discretion of the Chief Justice with the advice and consent of the Officers. Pursuant to University Senate Rules and Regulations 6.9.1, amendments to the Court’s procedures shall take effect 30 days after submission of the proposed amendments to the chairperson of the Judicial Board, unless returned by the chairperson for correction or modification. Subsequent to any modification under this section, the Chief Justice shall be responsible for ensuring that these Rules are promptly updated in the KU Policy Library.”

USRR Article VI. Procedures for Conflict Resolution

Section 9. Procedures of the Court of Parking Appeals

USRR 6.9.1 …Copies of the procedures shall be supplied to the offices of University Governance, Provost, General Counsel, and Dean of the Law School, and to others upon request. The Chief Justice shall be responsible for promptly placing the procedures in the KU Policy Library.

Motion to approve amendment to USRR Article VI, Section 9. Baker/Sousa.  Passed

University Senate Code Amendments:

Article X, Section 2 (ACEC)

Rationale: Previous FacEx members felt that because ACEC reports to SenEx (which includes faculty) requiring a Faculty Senate member on the committee was redundant and that choosing the fifth faculty member from the faculty at large would offer a larger pool of candidates to choose from. 

Article X. Standing Committees of the University Senate

Section 2. Membership

The Committee on Academic Computing and Electronic Communication shall be composed of four ten voting members: five faculty members, one of whom shall be from the Libraries, serving staggered three-year terms,; one faculty member of the Faculty Senate appointed for a one-year term, three representatives from the staff members serving staggered three-year terms,; and two students, an one undergraduate and a one graduate student each serving a one‑year terms, appointed by the student body president…

Motion to approve amendment to University Code Article X, Section 2 (ACEC).  Sousa/Baker.  Passed

Williams explained that this amendment was a result of a misunderstanding.  When the Director of Student Academic Service who was an elected member of the committee left the University his replacement expected to be a voting member of the AP&P but hadn’t been elected.  In sorting out the situation the committee realized the importance of having a representative from academic success and recommended the addition of the ex officio member.  Barrett-Gonzalez asked if ex officio status should be extended to other members since it seems myopically centered on the College.  Williams said he would take the suggestion to SenEx.   

Article X, Section 2 (AP&P)

Rationale: The FY-15  AP&P committee recommended that the Director of Student  Academic Services of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences be added as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the AP&P committee.

Article X. Standing Committees of the University Senate

Section 2. Membership

The Committee on Academic Policies and Procedures shall be composed of seven faculty serving staggered three-year terms, three representatives from the staff serving staggered three-year terms, and three students serving one-year terms. A representative of the Undergraduate Advising Executive Committee (UAEC), appointed by that group, and the University Registrar, and the Director of Student Academic Services in the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, shall serve as ex-officio, non-voting members.

Motion to approve amendment to Article X, Section 2 (AP&P) Barrett/Baker.  Passed with 1 “no” vote.

Williams explained that these revisions would appear to negate the influence of the Provost but are a clearer definition of how the process has been working, and still provides for the authority of the administration by the Provost’s endorsement or lack thereof.  Jonathan Clark said he was puzzled by the wording which doesn’t say the Provost can veto.   Williams’ assumption is that if the Provost had a problem with the appointment he/she would inform the appointing body and the problem would be worked out.  Carothers noted that the rationale states that the appointments would be made by the individual bodies but that the Provost would still review the appointments.  Provost Vitter agreed with Williams’ assumption.  Williams said that the amendment may be revisited.

Article X, Section 2 (Libraries), Article XI, Section 2 (Parking Commissions), and Article XI, Section 4 (Judicial Board)

Rationale for the following three amendments: The practice has been that each body contacts and appoints their own members.  The names of the staff and students (and faculty for parking) are then given to the provost.  The provost sends letters of service to both the appointee coping his/her supervisor. 

Article X. Standing Committees of the University Senate

Section 2. Membership

The University Committee on Libraries shall be composed of…In addition, there shall be four student members serving one-year terms and two staff members appointed by the Provost  their respective governance bodies and serving staggered three year terms.  These appointments are endorsed by the Provost via a letter of service to the appointee and his/her supervisor

Motion to approve amendment to Article X, Section 2 (Library Committee).  Passed

Article XI University Commissions, Boards, and Other Committees

Section 2. The Parking Commission

Voting members. The Provost shall appoint the voting members from lists of persons recommended by the groups named: Three members of the student body including a member of the University Transit Commission and a representative of AbleHawks recommended appointed by the Student Senate Executive Committee; three members of the faculty, one of whom may be an emeritus faculty member, recommended appointed by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee; four staff recommended appointed by the Staff Senate. These appointments are endorsed by the Provost via a letter of service to the appointee and his/her supervisor.

Motion to approve amendment to Article XI, Section 2 (Parking Commission) Baker/Huma.  Passed

Article XI University Commissions, Boards, and Other Committees

Section 4. Judicial Board

The Judicial Board shall be composed of:

III.    three members of the unclassified professional staff (as defined in Part II. E of the Handbook for Faculty and Other Unclassified Staff), appointed by the Provost, for three‑year overlapping terms. appointed by their respective governance bodies, for three year staggered terms.  These appointments are endorsed by the Provost via a letter of service to the appointee and his/her supervisor.

IV.   two members of the university support staff, appointed by the Provost, for three-year overlapping terms. their respective governance bodies, for three year staggered terms.  These appointments are endorsed by the Provost via a letter of service. 

V.     three administrators, at least one of whom shall have faculty status, appointed by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee Provost for three-year overlapping terms. For purposes of this provision, administrators are those persons assigned half time or less to teaching duties

Motion to approve amendment to Article XI, Section 4.  Baker/Zabel.  Passed.



Mike Williams told the committee that KBOR’s work on amending the document occurred earlier than the December date he had expected.  He said that he had spoken with others on campus about the weapons policy, including General Counsel, the Provost and Vice Provost, Tim Caboni, Vice Chancellor of Public Affairs, and KU’s liaison with Topeka, Kelly Reynolds, Public Affairs Director of State Relations.  He told the Senate that he hopes to make sure KU remains a vibrant learning community.  His intention is that as much information is collected from as many people as possible so that the entire campus is represented.  To this end, Williams plans to go to faculty meetings, student meetings and other meetings on campus.

Williams told Senate that he will collect comments to bring to the KBOR meeting in Wichita on November 18 and then opened the floor to discussion. 

Many expressed that allowing concealed carry on campus is a very bad law which will disrupt the climate of learning and threaten lives.  Zach George informed the committee that he has heard from some students who support the law as protection in the case of a school shooting, an occurrence which Harrison Baker said some students have told him is a question of “when” not “if”. 

Concerns and possible plans/actions were discussed.

  • Response to Topeka: Paul Laird suggested the need for a resolution telling Topeka to change the law.  Harrison Baker agreed that all bodies should draft resolutions.  In response to Chance Maginness’ question whether a resolution would be a pragmatic step the Chancellor said adding more voices of the University community is worthwhile but she didn’t know if it would make a difference.  She believes KBOR and the state legislature know what the University administration thinks but hearing other voices could be of value.  Williams felt KBOR’s COFSP (Council of Faculty Senate Presidents) will express a unified voice from all campuses that will have more weight than one body.  In response to Chance Maginness’ questions of what KU is doing now with the legislature and if there has been a lobbying effort, the Provost suggested the possibility of pursuing a continuation of the exemption and added that the student and faculty/staff weapons surveys could help.  The Chancellor said neither KBOR nor the University have organized a lobbying effort.  The current focus is on what we now need to do on campus.  
  • The state’s responsibility for campus safety:  Geraldo Sousa suggested the state should provide funding for metal detectors; Belinda Strum felt that the state should provide for campus safety, noting training videos are not enough.
  • Training: Megan Patterson asked if it would be possible to require a course in gun training.  Sara Trower said that KU is restrained by the law that states that concealed carry is authorized without the requirement of any kind of class or certification.  Williams said he has been talking to Sharon Graham, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Continuing Education Administration, and Ed H. Pavey, Director Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center, about training concerning topics such as how to access a threat and how to respond to a threat.
  • Possible loopholes: Sousa asked for clarification of a potential loophole that, while building halls are not exempt from concealed carry, classrooms may be.  Sara Trower said that the law doesn’t allow exemptions for discrete portions of buildings only whole buildings.  He also suggested an argument might be made against the danger of having gun storage in classrooms.  Sousa also pointed out that even if there were enough money for metal detectors and guards the traffic jam created by going through security points could be an argument against guns on campus.
  • Possible building exemptions: Ron Barrett-Gonzalez mentioned the disproportionate threat of violence, citing that some buildings are more dangerous (for example those containing hazardous material), and suggested KU make this known to KBOR and the state legislature, as well as looking into obtaining exemptions for those buildings.  Williams said that the Ad Hoc Weapons Committee is looking at exemptions for chemical labs and essentially non-KU entities such as research areas and child care facilities (possibly by installing key codes).  Barrett-Gonzales also suggested getting the fire marshal involved to comment on the danger of a gun going off in a large venture like the field house, for example a public stampede..
  • Impact outside KU:  Brittany Oleniacz said that in her work with the Natural History Museum she has heard from parents who don’t want their children on a campus with guns.  Margaret Mahoney noted that weapons on campus could impact outside speakers coming to KU, especially those at places like the Dole Institute where there are people with polarizing opinions; she questioned how it would impact something like security for a speaker like Bill Clinton.  Belinda Sturm suggested KU listen to international voices and how concealed carry might impact their coming to KU.   Emily Lee asked if we have information from other states where guns are allowed on campus.  Williams said the Universities of Florida is looking at the issue now and reactions of the University of Texas have been in the news.  He added that the Ad Hoc Weapons Committee is looking at responses of other states and asked senate members to email him if they have any information on this.  It was also suggested that perhaps if athletic directors indicated that guns on campus would affect enrollment of athletes, it might help.  The Chancellor said that Texas exempts athletic venues and added that while the Big 12 is concerned, they can’t overturn state law.    

Concerning the weapons surveys the Chancellor expressed that anything that increases participation would be invaluable.  Lisa Friis from the Ad Hoc Weapons Committee encouraged people to bring the committee their comments and opinions, assuring that no one will be judged; they want ideas from all sides. 

In conclusion Williams thanked the Senate for their comments.  He gave the University Governance email (govern@ku.edu.) and implored Senate members to send any additional comments and to encourage their colleagues to express their opinions on this critical issue.  He will put updates on the University Governance site.  http://governance.ku.edu/



Jonathan Clark raised a point of order expressing that according to USRR, FSRR, and Roberts Rules of Order, no individual can cancel a Senate meeting, and added that since he had some points to make about the weapons conversation that concerned faculty specifically, he would like the faculty to stay for a discussion and the University Governance staff stay to stay to record the proceedings.  Williams answered that cancellation of Faculty Senate was announced at FacEx and no objection was expressed so there would be no Faculty Senate meeting afterwards and the staff did not need to remain.

Old Business


New Business


No further business. 

The meeting adjourned at 4:54

Respectfully submitted,

Maureen Altman



One of 34 U.S. public institutions in the prestigious Association of American Universities
44 nationally ranked graduate programs.
—U.S. News & World Report
Top 50 nationwide for size of library collection.
23rd nationwide for service to veterans —"Best for Vets," Military Times
KU Today
Governance Meetings