Rejected bill to be revised

The faculty trustees bill 131 was rejected 5-4 yesterday by the Indiana Senate Education Committee. The bill would allow one faculty member to secure a non-voting position on the Indiana University Board of Trustees. \nThis type of legislation has been passed in the Indiana House of Representatives several times, but failed to make it through the Indiana Senate, according to the American Association of University Professors Bloomington Web site.\nRep. Mark Kruzan (D-Bloomington), co-author of the bill, is not surprised by the outcome, considering the great lengths that Indiana universities went to, including IU, to see the bill fail.\n"The universities put on a full court press in opposition to the bill," Kruzan said.\nKruzan drafted the faculty trustees bill after he was contacted by IU faculty and staff interested in getting representation on the board. \n"It's been more than a decade and the universities have progressed one inch in that decade," Kruzan said.\nKruzan is not ready to give up the fight yet for the bill. He plans revising a current Senate bill related to higher education by amending the language concerning faculty trustee information to include ideas contained within the rejected bill. \n"We could probably get the language passed out of the house over the University objections but then we run into the same problem that they experienced in the Senate today," Kruzan said. "That doesn't mean that we should not try."\nAfter a new bill is revised, it will go in front of the Indiana House of Representatives. If it passes, it will then go to the Senate to be voted on again. Kruzan said a revised bill could be ready within three weeks.\nNon-supporters of this type of legislation feel having a faculty member on the Board of Trustees would create a conflict of interest. \nPresident of the Bloomington Faculty Council Bob Eno feels the conflict of interest doesn't hurt the integrity of the board.\n"There is a conflict of interest," Eno said. "Conflicts of interest are inevitable, but they are not necessarily harmful."\nEno, professor in the Eastern Asian Studies Department, said these conflicts of interest are also accounted for by not allowing the faculty member to vote while serving on the board. Eno said the board can only gain by adding a faculty member.\n"I think the board would benefit from having faculty members because faculty bring a perspective that boards are going to need to rely on," Eno said.\nEno said faculty perspective is essential because the faculty are responsible for enacting any decisions the board makes into the classroom. Eno said the board needs an "expert member" to help in the decision-making process.\n"It's imperative that boards be fully informed in the faculty perspective," Eno said.\nEno stressed his statements do not in any way reflect the stance of the BFC. Eno, former president of the American Association of University Professors, discussed the AAUP's push for this bill to pass. Eno said the reasons behind the AAUP advocating the bill do not include any negative accusations on how the Board of Trustees is currently performing.\n"Their stance on this is on the principle," Eno said. "We have very close relations with the board of trustees."\nBecause of this close relationship, Eno said he feels "that it is a very good time to begin a relationship," starting with legislation similar to the faculty trustee bill. \nKruzan is also concerned that by not allowing faculty members to serve on the board, a voice is being lost. Kruzan said students have representation on the board with the one student member, but the faculty does not have any representation.\n"Without the faculty there at the table where decisions are being made about education, it's a more limited view," Kruzan said. "Their input is lost when they are not able to participate."\nBut non-supporters are still concerned that by allowing faculty members on the Board of Trustees, special interests will be supported over the general well-being of the institution.\nPresident Myles Brand was unavailable for comment at press time Wednesday, but Vice President of Public Affairs Bill Stephan said Brand discussed the University's position on the bill last week. \n"The success of the American higher education system, the envy of the world, is due in no small part to lay governing boards," Stephan said. "A lay board which represents the broad public interest, and not narrow constituencies, helps ensure that the University will remain fully engaged in public affairs, supported by the public, and effectively contributing to the welfare of society."\nStephan said if the bill becomes law, IU will be sure to change to coincide with the current legislation.\n"If there are any changes in the law, obviously Indiana University will comply fully with the spirit and intent of the law as it applies to the membership of the Board of Trustees," Stephan said. \nKruzan said universities need to be more open to the idea of change, especially on the idea of giving their own employees a voice.\n"The University should understand that this is not a threatening proposal," Kruzan said. "They should stop fearing the unknown. The open-minded approach should be what the University is all about"