University Senate looks inward

On Friday, when the University Senate—a body infamous for inaction—met for its second plenary meeting for the semester in Jerome Greene Hall, it mainly wanted to talk about itself.

The policy-making powers and confidentiality of the Senate were key issues of the afternoon, along with the annual report on the physical development projects of the University and the H1N1 vaccination.

Normally University President Lee Bollinger would begin the meeting. But he “was away on business … I believe in Paris,” according to Sharyn O’Halloran, chair of the senate executive committee, who presided in Bollinger’s place. (Bollinger is scheduled to meet with alumni in Hong Kong this week, according to the University calendar.)

“I propose a resolution to have his [Bollinger’s] salary donated to the University at large,” O’Halloran quipped in Bollinger’s absence, while adding that she “hopes he understands the power of the Senate.”

After reiterating Bollinger’s comments from the September meeting about the endowment, O’Halloran turned the discussion toward the power of the Senate, a slightly contentious topic since Bollinger’s comments in the last meeting about the advisory and non-policy making role of the Senate.

She mentioned statutes 23 to 25 laid down in the Senate’s By-Laws, Statutes, and Rules. Statute 23 states that the Senate is a “policy-making body” which “may consider” all issues “of University-wide concern, ... affecting more than one faculty or school,” or which involve agreements with affiliated institutions. In statute 25, it adds that “Unless Trustee concurrence is required, acts of the University Senate under Sections 22 and 23 shall become final on passage.”

Then, Monica Quaintance, CC ‘10 and chair of the Structure and Operations Committee, discussed the new guidelines for confidentiality in the Senate. While the plenary meetings are not confidential, she said the committee meetings are. The new policy would remove a few unpracticed policies from the laws, while adding in a policy which makes the minutes from the committee meetings confidential for a period of 50 years.

Biology professor Robert Pollack, a faculty senator, supported this idea. He said that if the Senate would like to increase its power in the University, “We should be able to see confidential information and we should be allowed to make our documents confidential, if the central administration is serious about asking us about policies and not simply being told.”

“For us to be consulted we must all as senators be serious about keeping confidence,” Pollack added.

Rajat Roy, SEAS ‘10 and a student senator, sang a different tune. He said that the senators are “hurting” themselves with this policy. He asked the Senate how far it is “departing from its universal mission” with this policy since it was created “as a body of transparency.”

Then, biology professor Ron Prywes, the chair of the Physical Development Committee, presented his committee’s annual report on the University’s projects, including the Northwest Corner Building and the Mind, Brain and Behavior Building in Manhattanville.

Prywes raised the concern of funding for these projects. The University is supposed to hire roughly 10 new faculty for the Northwest Corner Building and about 30 to 40 for the Mind, Brain and Behavior Building. Prywes said he is concerned that Columbia might not have the funding for these new hirings. Additionally, he wondered if, when some of the faculty are relocated to these new buildings, the University will pay new faculty to fill in the gaps in the old buildings.

Samuel Silverstein, John C. Dalton Professor of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics and senator from the Columbia University Medical Center, also raised concerns about relocation of faculty. He said that about 50 health sciences faculty members are supposed to be moved, two of whom are Nobelists. He said he believes that “no university can relocate people of that magnitude without an enormous intellectual and social impact on its functions.”

After Prywes responded that this is a “great opportunity for the medical school to be better,” Lisa Hogarty—the senior vice president and chief operating officer of the medical center—added that it is a “big initiative” for them but they are “fully engaged.” Silverstein and Hogarty briefly argued about whether it is a “problem” or an “opportunity” for the medical center.

Then, Samuel Seward, the Assistant Vice President and Medical Director of Health Services, gave an update on the H1N1 illness and vaccination.

According to Seward, there have been “influenza symptoms among all areas of the University, but the severity of illness is mild.” Despite the “major strain” of the disease being “active” right now, “people are getting well within 3 to 5 days,” he said.

Regarding the vaccine, he said that some people have already received the vaccine but “what has been released so far is limited” and the University doesn’t have a “clear date” when it will be available. But, when Columbia does receive it, the University will first give it to “ those with increased risk” such as undergraduates and pregnant women, he said.

Tags: News, Amber Tunnell, Endowment, Lee Bollinger, Sharyn O'Halloran, University Senate