Dr. Edythe Abdullah, Mr. Luther Coggin, Ms. Toni Crawford, Mr. Wilfredo Gonzalez, Mr. Hugh Greene, Ms. Ann Hicks, Ms. Wanyonyi Kendrick, Dr. William Klostermeyer, Ms. Joy Korman, Ms. Joan Newton, Dr. Bruce Taylor, Ms. Rachael Tutwiler, Mr. Kevin Twomey
Chair Taylor called the meeting to order. A quorum of trustees was present and the meeting was ready to proceed with business.
Chair Taylor recognized Ms. Rachael Tutwiler for her service on the Board and stated she had been an outstanding student representative and trustee and that it had been an honor to serve with her.
Trustee Tutwiler stated that, on behalf of the student body, she wanted to express gratitude to the Board for their efforts. She introduced Mr. John Barnes as her successor.
President Delaney provided an update on the budget, stating that PECO dollars were less than originally anticipated. He discussed current PECO projects, indicating that at this time plans remained unchanged.
President Delaney noted that the University was anticipating an additional 8 to 9 percent budget cut and all vice presidents were working diligently to adjust their budgets. A report would be provided at the upcoming Finance and Audit Committee meeting.
Trustees asked for particulars on how budget cuts would affect campus security. The administration stated that the Board of Governors’ had recently published a study, and based on this study, UNF’s efforts toward campus security were deemed adequate. Any additional costs could be covered internally.
President Delaney discussed the Senate higher education reform bill and subsequent implications for the State University System. He provided information on the current status of the bill.
Trustees discussed the impending budget cuts and the Legislature’s view toward higher education. President Delaney reported that the tone was somber with a realization that education was a priority.
Chair Taylor addressed those in attendance and offered opportunity for open comments. Mr. Stan Gustetic was recognized and provided an opportunity to address the Board.
Mr. Gustetic discussed concerns about the utilization of campus parking, specifically addressing evening classes for graduate students. His concerns were poorly lit and unsecured parking areas which presented security risks. He asked the Board to recognize graduate students’ financial contribution to the University and to consider allowing evening students to park in the core of campus.
Chair Taylor offered appreciation to Mr. Gustetic for his comments and asked Vice President Gonzalez to respond to his concerns. Vice President Gonzalez responded that the University was addressing concerns about safety, including poor or absent lighting.
Chair Taylor asked the administration to provide an update to Mr. Gustetic’s concerns. The administration agreed to provide a report at an upcoming meeting.
Chair Taylor stated that the consent agenda contained seven items – four action items from the Finance and Audit Committee, unanimously approved, and two action items from the Educational Policy Committee, unanimously approved.
Trustees asked if a study had been done on the impact of the Child Development and Research Center, in terms of diversity. Chair Taylor asked Vice President Gonzalez to speak about this issue.
Vice President Gonzalez yielded to Mr. Everett Malcolm, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs. Mr. Malcolm stated that the University had completed a market analysis of surrounding areas with like centers.
The data revealed that the Center was priced at the middle of the range. Administration noted that there were programs available for people at the lower economic level, including the Universal Voluntary Pre-K program.
Chair Taylor asked for a MOTION to approve the consent agenda as presented. The MOTION was made by Trustee Twomey and seconded by Trustee Abdullah. The MOTION was carried.
Chair Taylor asked Trustee Twomey to present this item.
Trustee Twomey asked Vice President Shuman to present the audits.
Vice President Shuman discussed the findings and recommendations from the operational audit and stated that the overall audit was good.
Vice President Shuman discussed the financial audit, reporting that all financial statements were presented fairly with no significant deficiencies noted. She stated that the Florida Bright Futures Scholarship Program Audit and the Federal Awards Audit were also clean audits. Vice President Shuman noted that net assets had increased for the University.
This item was for information only. No further action was required.
Vice President Shuman reported that the University was able to meet the first round of budget reductions by using reserve accounts. She stated that plans to accommodate impending reductions would be presented at the upcoming Finance and Audit Committee meeting.
Vice President Shuman discussed the status of investments, stating that the University’s transition out of State funds would create a healthier environment. She noted that, as a result of the pull-out of State funds, the University had begun negotiations with three different firms and had invested with two of the firms – Sawgrass and Evergreen. She added that both had provided good returns.
Trustees sought clarification on how the anticipated reduction in enrollment would affect the debt servicing for student housing and the Student Union building. Vice President Shuman stated that the University did not anticipate any issues regarding the repayment of debt for either of these projects.
This item was for information only. No other action was required.
Vice President Shuman presented a brief report on the capital projects and noted that the AOL building and the Auchter building were officially property of the University. Both acquisitions had received new signage and would be known as UNF Hall and Alumni Hall, respectively.
Vice President Shuman recapped the Board’s authorization to approve change orders and directed trustees to the meeting materials, noting that a report was provided.
Chair Taylor asked Trustee Hicks to present this item.
Trustee Hicks asked Provost Workman to speak about these reports.
Provost Workman stated that this was an exciting initiative formulated by the Undergraduate Studies Council and the General Education Council. He indicated that a number of campuses around the country had adopted a similar program in which incoming freshmen would be required to read a specified text. This text would be incorporated into discussion and instruction across campus, including freshmen composition and social science classes. He noted that the program would also be the focus of a number of campus wide reading groups and used similarly by members of the community.
Provost Workman stated that the goal of the program was to create a sense of community and to advance common intellectual purpose. He clarified that the text was chosen after consideration of many possible works.
Provost Workman stated that this program represented an attempt to preempt a nationally imposed standard of measurements for higher education in this country. He said that this program was a collaborative effort between the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC). Provost Workman noted that UNF was a member of AASCU.
Provost Workman clarified the mission of the program which was to provide consistent, comparable, transparent information for higher education stakeholders; to aid students and families in college choices; and to demonstrate greater institutional accountability for student learning and development. He provided a list of components for the program and focused on: student experiences and perceptions, and student learning outcomes. He mentioned that these components would provide the University with a set of important gages.
Provost Workman concluded this discussion by noting that this program would provide value to the University’s commitment, not only to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) but also to the institution’s various constituencies.
Trustees asked if there were duplicative efforts for this program and SACS preparations. Provost Workman stated that the VSA program did not duplicate but complemented efforts and would help institutionalize a spirit of assessment and accountability.
Chair Taylor asked Provost Workman to speak about this item. Provost Workman stated that the inception of the revised vision, mission, values and goals statements were in response to a request from the Board.
Provost Workman spoke about the process involved, stating that a group of faculty members were assembled to meet with Dr. Terry MacTaggart, a consultant hired by the University to guide the institution to the next level. He mentioned that this initial group of faculty members became the nucleus of the task force but was augmented to make sure there was equal representation from faculty across the five colleges.
Provost Workman stated that Dr. MacTaggart was strongly of the opinion that the University was already an institution of high quality with the potential to become a better institution. He noted that Dr. MacTaggart pointed out that the University could do a better job of articulating its purpose and trajectory. Provost Workman stated that Dr. MacTaggart’s observations had become the charge of the task force.
Provost Workman provided details of the task force, including that it was appropriately led out of Academic Affairs and that it was cognizant to represent the trajectory of the entire institution. He mentioned that the task force had met regularly throughout the year.
Provost Workman discussed the text of the statements and pointed out that the task force sought to create their own wording to offer to the University community. He noted that the task force solicited a great deal of input from the University community with responses numbering in the 100’s, from all constituencies. Provost Workman stated that every response was considered and used to shape and refine the statement.
Provost Workman spoke about the vision statement and acknowledged an observation made by trustees. He stated that the administration felt it was important to embrace the fact that the University was a regionally comprehensive institution. And, in the process, the University would transcend its local boundaries and become an institution of national quality, nationally renowned.
Provost Workman spoke about donors and the Board of Governors, noting that their perception of the University might infuse the curriculum. He allowed that the statement should not be regarded as a limitation but as a strength, with a basis to become an institution of national renown.
Provost Workman addressed the University’s need to clearly specify – through the vision, mission, values and goals statement – actions that would enable the institution to advance toward the completion of its goals. He spoke specifically about refining the values statement, noting that this statement was formulated by the President’s staff and then vetted widely by the campus community. Provost Workman stated that he believed the values statement provided a sound basis for individual character development and also provided a strong basis for defining institutional purpose.
Provost Workman noted that the revised vision and mission statements were being presented to the Board with a request for approval of the text as it was written.
Trustees complimented the endeavor and showed admiration for the rich and precise language in the document. Trustees then discussed the vision statement, particularly the language specifying the North Florida region. Concerns were addressed regarding the possibility that the language might inhibit the growth and maturation of the institution. Trustees asked the University to be mindful that, as the institution grows and matures, the language might be revised to reflect a broader service area.
Trustees spoke about the clarification of language responding to the regional workforce, addressing economic development and the development of the community. Provost Workman responded that the language speaking to the service of the region was intended to address these matters. He noted that, by serving the region, the University understood its responsibility to provide intellectual capital and intellectual richness to the community, including civic engagement and community-based learning.
President Delaney spoke about Provost Workman’s cogent explanation of the statements, echoing the need for the statements to be relevant and collaborative. President Delaney clarified that the statements would be living and changeable. References were made that the Board also served the region and advanced its intellectual and cultural needs. Provost Workman noted that where the University was situated was not arbitrary to its identity but allowed for the locality to infuse the University in many ways and, likewise, for the University to be an effective steward of the region.
Trustees asked for clarification on how the language was chosen to define the University. Provost Workman responded that the fundamental aspects of the institution were quickly recognized as the privileged relationship between students and faculty. He acknowledged that this relationship was not one of mentor to mentee but interdependence, with faculty sharing a passion for discovery and engaging in a mutual process with students. Provost Workman noted that the question became one of how to distill the language.
Chair Taylor stated that the process was extremely valuable and allowed the University to know itself. He noted that the intent of the process and the statements was for the clarity of identity of where the institution was and where it was headed. He suggested that the Board should approve the revised vision and mission statements as submitted with a request that the administration review the statements at some regular interval to ensure congruence as the institution moved forward. The administration responded that the vision, mission, values and goals statements would be continually revisited.
Chair Taylor presented the revised vision and mission statements for approval, whereupon a MOTION was duly made by Trustee Gonzalez, seconded by Trustee Abdullah and unanimously adopted. This item was approved as presented.
With no further discussion, Chair Taylor adjourned the meeting.
Copyright © 2016 University of North Florida1 UNF Drive | Jacksonville, FL 32224 | Phone: (904) 620-1000