people   committees   meetings   resources    home
    officers       standing       senate       archives  
    members       special       executive       bylaws  
          proclamations       sites  

Faculty Senate Budget Committee Meeting
Tuesday August 13, 2002, 9:30am
Andy Holt 5th floor conference room

MINUTES prepared by Lou Gross

Members Present: Davies, Davis, Dewey, Greenberg, Gross (Chair), Lyons,
Mulkey, Reed, Reidy, Scheurer
Non-members present: Combs, Crabtree

Members Absent: Hedrick, Nugent

I. CALL TO ORDER, 9:30am

II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. This meeting had as it's main objectives
providing an opportunity to meet with Provost Crabtree to discuss
objectives for the year, no formal agenda was approved.

III. Reports.

1. After introductions of all committee members were made, Gross presented
a summary of possible activities for the Committee for the year and
Lyons presented a summary of activities over the past year. A discussion
was held regarding the possible topics for dicsussion with the Provost,
who was scheduled to arrive at the meeting after this initial
discussion. Concurrence was reached that items to be discussed with
the Provost would include:
a. The budget process for this year - how might the Committee best
provide input to the process and what changes are anticipated
in the process relative to last year.
b. The possible representation of the Committee on the Executive Planning
and Budget Committee for UTK.
c. Faculty salaries and allocation of any merit raises. In particular,
whether alternatives to a percentage allocation to each unit based upon
the salary base would be possible.
d. Reallocation. Are there additional plans for this over the current year
and if so, what is the policy regarding prioritization and how should
the Committee provide input to this.
e. Staff salaries and privatization. In particular, what if anything is
being comtemplated regarding a living wage for UT employees.

2. After Provost Crabtree arrived and the above points were brought
up as possible discussion topics, as a basis for discussion Sylvia Davis
provided budget information on two sheets. One provided a summary of
State allocations for 2002-2003 for each unit within the UT System,
summarizing how the 2002-2003 budget arose from the previous budget and
salary and operating fund increases. The second sheet provided a
breakdown of UTK new State revenue for FY2002-2003 and additional
fixed costs associated with these, indicating approximately $3M in
new revenue that is available after the new fixed costs.

3. A broad ranging discussion was then held with Provost Crabtree and
a brief summary of some of the points follows:
a. The budget presentation process this year will differ from last year,
though details are still to be determined. This could include having all
presentations held on 2 full days, rather than split over many partial
days. There would then follow an open session for comments and the hope
is that all this would be completed by th end of March.
b. While no commitment was made regarding having the Senate
Budget Chair on the Executive Budget and Planning Committee, Provost
Crabtree indicated that he would pursue this.
c. There was regret expressed about the differential salary increases
for faculty and staff last year, and the hope was expressed that funds
could be found to do 5-6% raises thais year rather than the 2% included
in the State budget. Fairness is the key issue for all raises, with
performance, equity and merit listed as guiding principles. If there
are new funds available, it is not yet clear whether these would be
allocated to new faculty or additional contingent faculty on 3 year
term appointments (a move to this has been made this year from 1
semester appointments). Some consideration will be given to the
possibility of bonuses for faculty and staff. The case was made that
in response to the salary study conducted by the Budget Committee the
past three years, salary pools should not be distributed to units as a
percentage of base. Instead, consideration shall be given to units
that are out of line with their regional and nation peers.
d. The reorganization of the two new colleges is expected to provide
about $500,000 in savings eventually, in 2-3 years, from reduction in
administrative costs. No major new reorganizations are planned for
this year, except the possibility of a Chancellor position and
associated modifications of responsibilities.
e. Regarding non-exempt employees, discussions would be held with
representatives to factor in their desires as related to flat
percentage raises for all or some other scheme.

4. Some additional points raised in the discussions were:
a. Graduate students may prefer establishment of a covered health
insurance plan rather than increased stipends. The hope is to start
such a plan in the spring, and this may possibly lower the cost of
undergrad participation in the plan due to economies of scale.
b. A number of enhancements are planned that would require about
$2.5M to carry out including: restoring part of the Science Alliance
awards, covering inflation costs for the library, including benefits
for non-tenure track faculty, adding a diversity hire in Music,
enhancing the Honors program and some programs in Engineering.
c. Some start-up set aside will be needed at the campus level to
make it possible for positions to open in some departments.
d. Some of the wireless upgrades are currently on hold, saving
about $2.7M, but there is about $5M to be spent this year to patch
up the legacy student management system. It was decided that no
package could be purchased to do this that was affordable.
e. A sabbatical program is still being planned, in which
applications would be needed by November 15 and faculty would be
notified by Dec. 15 about funding. Due to pent-up demand, it will
take several years for the program to handle the majority of
f. The strategic planning process begun last year is currently
stalled. It will be worked on later this year.
g. A public relations firm has been hired to help UT tell positive
h. Students should not be viewed as customers, rather they are
co-creators in the educational process.
i. There is a lack of a service orientation on campus and a
bureaucracy that has inhibited activities. This must change.




The following dates were chosen as meetings for this semester:
August 26
September 23
October 14
November 11
December 2
with all meetings at 3:30 in the Senate Conference Room (University Center
room 203)







back to top


If you have any questions concerning the UT Faculty Senate, or would like more information, send an email to

To offer suggestions or comments about this web site, please email the webmaster.