Faculty trustee approved

The Indiana House of Representatives passed House Bill 351, which increases the number of members of the IU Board of Trustees permitted to reside in Monroe County and adds a tenth, non-voting faculty representative to university governing boards around the state. \nIn order to become law, the bill must now go to a conference committee where the House and Senate must compromise on the final draft. There it faces groups sharply divided over several issues. Some are concerned over how a faculty trustee would change the make-up and mission of its governing boards. Others question the need of having faculty input to help trustee boards navigate the changing face of higher education. \nHouse Majority Leader Mark Kruzan, D-Bloomington, said the faculty trustee amendment to the bill faces a long road to become law.\n"Many legislators are influenced by lobbyists for universities," Kruzan said. "Faculty are only represented by a handful of legislators so it's an uphill fight." \nThe bill arose out of a lack of communication between faculty and administration at other universities, circumstances which trustee Stephan Backer said don't exist at IU.\n"Our faculty council president comes to all of our meetings and attends our executive sessions on 99 percent of what we do," Backer said. \nInitially introduced by Sen. Vi Simpson, D-Ellettsville, the bill only expanded the number of IU trustees able to reside in Monroe County from two to three. This would eliminate the problem the Board faced when trustee Fred Eichhorn moved from Lake County to Monroe County last year, making him the third trustee living in the county. The University obtained a legal opinion on the issue it will not release to the public. Because of that decision, Kruzan said he opposes the amendment.\n"They are not acting as a liberal arts institution should if they're refusing to release an opinion," he said. "It seems that the opinion would say this legislation isn't necessary. Right now three members of the board are from Monroe County; the law says two and if the University has a legal opinion that says that's OK. If it's OK by way of legal opinion, I haven't had it explained to me why the bill is needed." \nIU spokesman Bill Stephan said that opinion simply said that Eichhorn was considered a resident of the county where he lived at the time he was appointed to the board, which is different from the issue addressed in the bill, which expands the number of trustees allowed to live in one county under normal circumstances. \nAn amendment putting a faculty member on the board of trustees was added to the bill last week. Similar initiatives have died in the past. \nHaving faculty input on decisions would make the Board's decision-making process more effective, said Bob Eno, president of the Bloomington Faculty Council and a professor of Eastern Languages and Cultures.\nEno said the administration told the faculty that the University would take no official position for or against the bill. Don Weaver, director of government relations, did express the University's concerns about the bill when it was still in the committee stage.\n"This bill has been introduced on and off in various forms and we always had concerns," Weaver said. "One major concern is that the board of trustees were set up statutorally to represent the legislature and citizens of the state, not to represent employee groups."\nThat a faculty representative of the board that makes decisions on issues such as salaries would represent a conflict of interest is another concern University representatives have expressed to legislators. Stephan said IU president Myles Brand met with the Bloomington Faculty Council and said he thought any conflict of interest on the part of a faculty member could be managed.\nKruzan said making the faculty trustee a non-voting member of the board resolves the issue.\n"I would hope trustees are already doing everything they can to better compensate the faculty and staff so that the faculty have no greater incentive than anyone else," he said. \nKruzan said he is disappointed by the lack of support universities have shown for the faculty trustee amendment.\n"It never ceases to amaze me the narrow-mindedness sometimes displayed by what are supposed to be liberal arts universities," he said. "It's a shame that universities don\'t trust their own faculty enough to let them be at the table when important decisions are being made."\nBacker stressed that adding a faculty trustee represents a more far-reaching issue to university governing boards charged with interacting with legislators, faculty, staff and citizens.\n"The issue isn't 'do you want a faculty member on the board' as much as that we really have to define what the board is to do, and how it is to interact with all these groups," Backer said. "If we include faculty on the board, what does that do to your ability to act as an impartial arbiter between these groups"