January 26, 1999

Chair Sohmer called the session to order at 6:45 p.m. in Room 1800 of the Graduate School and University Center. Present were Senators from the following campuses: Baruch: Hill, McCall, Otte and Pollard. BMCC: Friedman and Vozick. Bronx CC: Beligne, Cummins, Fuld and Alternate Skinner. Brooklyn: Bell, Hager, Haggerty, Jacobson, London, Shapiro and Tobey. CCNY: Grossman and Pearson. CSI: Cooper, Foleno and Levine. CUNY Law: James. GSUC: King. Hostos CC: Vasillov. Hunter: Hampton, Kurzman and Sherrill. John Jay: Kaplowitz. Kingsborough CC: Galvin, Goodkin, O’Malley and Richter. LaGuardia CC: Beaky, Gallagher and Reitano. Lehman: Bullaro, Feinerman and Nathanson. Medgar Evers: Bennett, Harris-Hastick and Alternate Sigler. NYC Tech.: Cermele, Donoghue, Norton, Walter and Alternate Hounion. Queens: Cairns, Savage and Alternate Hemmes. Queensborough CC: Barbanel, Dahbany-Miraglia, Gellman, Greenbaum and Alternate Specht. York: Cooper, Doss and Odenyo. Professors Rodway, Frisz and Connorton were excused. Governance Leaders present: Davidson (LaGuardia), Day (Brooklyn), Kaplowitz (John Jay), Kurzman (Hunter), Levine (CSI), O’Malley (Kingsborough CC), Perlstein (BMCC), and Specht (Queensborough CC). Executive Director Phipps and Administrative Assistant Pasela were also present.

I. Approval of the Agenda: A report from the Budget Advisory Committee was added as item IV.E. Added under New Business was Resolution on the Board of Trustees' Resolution on Writing Across the Curriculum.  The agenda was then adopted as amended.

II. Approval of the Minutes of November 24, 1998: The Minutes were approved as distributed.

III. Invited Guest - Hon. Kathleen Pesile, CUNY Trustee: [recorded in Reports & Deliberations]

IV. Reports: [recorded in Reports & Deliberations]

a. Chair (oral and written).

b. Interim Chancellor Christoph Kimmich (oral).

c. Faculty Members of Board of Trustees Committees (written).

d. Chair of UFS Status of Faculty (written).

e. Chair of Budget Advisory Committee (oral and written)

V. Resolutions

a. On Curriculum – Passed unanimously by voice vote.

b. On Admissions Standards and Policies – Passed unanimously by voice vote.

c. Appreciation for Outgoing Vice Chancellor Richard Rothbard – Passed unanimously by voice vote.

VI. New Business:  Resolution on the Board of Trustees' Resolution on Writing Across the Curriculum - The resolution, which called on the Trustees to "lobby public officials and legislative bodies aggressively to provide the necessary additional funding to ensure the proper implementation of Writing Across the Curriculum," was passed unanimously by voice vote.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Wm. Phipps, Executive Director

************

III. Invited Guest – Hon. Kathleen Pesile, CUNY Trustee [in real time, this segment followed the Chancellor’s appearance]

Chair Sohmer: In keeping with an old tradition starting in 1969, we have invited over the course of years the new Trustees to come and become real as Trustees to the faculty and the faculty to the Trustees. Tonight we have the newest, probably the youngest, Trustee on the Board, Kathleen Pesile. She was appointed by Governor Pataki in June 1998 to replace Susan Moore Mouner, whose term has expired. A Financial Planner/Investment Advisor, educator, and CUNY alumna, Ms. Pesile has a diverse background in international banking, higher education, and is the principal of her own financial services firm, -- Pesile Financial Group – since 1995. She was a former financial consultant and Chairperson of the American Bankers Association from 1993 - 1994, where she developed workshops and seminars for bankers. Ms. Pesile was Vice President for Global Markets, and Mergers and Acquisitions at J. P. Morgan & Co. from 1986 to 1993, where she served as the Bank's first corporate financial services information officer, and as Chairperson of an international committee within the banking/securities industry established to create standard practices in the dissemination of global real-time financial data. Ms. Pesile served as Vice President of Finance and Administration at Capital Cities/ABC from 1981 to 1986, where she also was part of a three member team that developed, financed, and managed the company-sponsored nationwide substance abuse program and she created a nationwide university recruiting program to hire and train financial analysts. Since 1978, she has been an adjunct lecturer in finance and international business at The College of Staten Island, and was a founding faculty member of its Weekend Division. For the past four years she has been an adjunct MBA thesis advisor/examiner at the Stonier Graduate School of Banking at the University of Delaware. In 1977, Ms. Pesile started her teaching career as the first woman instructor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Jersey City State College, where she developed financial management courses for law enforcement students, and a founding member of the Peter Rodino Institute. Ms. Pesile attended what was then Staten Island Community College where she earned her A.A.S. degree summa cum laude, and Baruch College where she earned her B.B.A. and M.P.A. degrees magna cum laude. Ms. Pesile was a doctoral candidate in international affairs at New York University, where she was the recipient of the National Security Scholarship from the National Security Council. She has been a member of the Board of Directors of The College of Staten Island Foundation and the CSI Alumni Association.

We are fortunate in having her here on a Tuesday evening because she normally teaches on Tuesdays and Thursdays. This is just before it becomes impossible for her to visit.

Hon. Kathleen Pesile, CUNY Trustee: Thank you all very much. I’ve met some of you in my visits to the campuses. I came on board in July and have visited 15 campuses since then. My aim primarily is to meet with faculty on a regular basis, get to understand some of the intricacies, and the uniqueness of each of your campuses in dealing with the students, the alumni association, continuing education programs. I’ve taken this role very seriously. On last night’s vote, I can only say that I’m here irrespective of whether I voted for or against the Resolution. It would have carried without my vote anyway. It was a reaffirmation of the original May vote.

What I’d like to do is just open this up to question and answer, and just have this very casual, so I can get a chance to meet with you, to talk to you not as an adversary, which I do not want to be, but as a colleague and get to understand each of you. I’d like to open it up to that.

Professor Crain (Psychology, City College – "I appreciate that you went around, and I know you met with administrators, some faculty, and students. I know students who met with you and were charmed by you, talked to you, and felt that you were open-minded. I was on a school board for nine years, the Teaneck, New Jersey, Board of Education. If I had not been to a public hearing on an issue of critical importance in the history of the University, I would have abstained. I would have felt it my obligation to have abstained, having missed the hearings as you did in May, and having missed the public hearing in January. I do not believe that it’s true that it would have happened regardless. Because these things have ripple effects. Had you abstained, it would have put more pressure on others. It was simply not true that your vote was irrelevant. I was deeply resentful of your vote. This vote is one of the most destructive votes in the history of American education and to the denial of opportunities to people of color. It is very hard for me to talk right now, but it’s mostly outrage that I feel and I think so many people here feel. We are in a nightmare; we cannot believe what happened. What you are doing to these kids and these people, trying to get an education." / Trustee Pesile – Open admissions is not ending. As we stated, the process has changed. Access will still be there for students. That is part of my statement that I left with the Chair of the Trustees yesterday (attached to these minutes). / Professor Crain – "Access where, to the community colleges? There are six community colleges, and they are overcrowded right now. There is a committee that is looking into privatizing remediation at those colleges as we speak. Almost every college in the nation offers remediation. Why take it away from our students who are largely students of color, who are so poor, who can barely afford an education, and who never had the example of having an education in front of them, and struggling with jobs. Why leave it at the State University, leave it at Harvard, leave it at Columbia, leave it at all these other places, and take it away from our students. I just think --there is no word for it; I can’t understand it. It just seems to me purely cruel." / Trustee Pesile – That was not my intent, to be cruel. / Professor Crain – "I understand."

Professor Greenbaum (History, Queensborough Community College) – "I just wonder if the Board has thought through a few questions as part of the implications of what they have done. What do they plan to do about the viability of those schools where large numbers of freshmen will no longer be able to enter? And secondly, if they anticipate these students will now go to community colleges, where are they going to find the space? Since they are separately funded, how is the funding for these students going to go to the community colleges?" / Trustee Pesile – I’m not going to answer that this evening. I’m honest -- what you see is what you get. I’m here introducing myself as a Trustee, and I expressed that this morning [to Prof. Sohmer]. I am here in the greeting role. If you choose not to speak with me, I would be offended.

Professor Grossman (Elementary Education City College) - "What concerns me is that people do not understand who our students are. It amazes me. They say, "well, remediation, the high schools should be doing it." A majority of our students do not necessarily come from the City high schools. I think 50% of City College students, are born in other countries. Often I’m called on to evaluate the college degrees of students from countries outside the college. I specialize in transfer evaluation. Our students are not the typical model, mother, father, 2.5 children, dog and cat, of the typical family. Our students are typically older, often single parents, working. Whenever somebody says something about the graduation rate I go through the roof. I don’t know when I’ve met a student who did it in four years. That is not the way it works. I urge you to remind the other Trustees, many of whom just seem to be from totally another planet. I can’t tell you how many students I’ve encountered who have to drop out a semester for illness, unplanned pregnancy, or other kinds of things. But they come back. I think one thing that keeps me going whenever I get discouraged about the insults that get heaped on us, is my admiration for my students. I am in awe of the students and that is what gives me joy during work every day. Please don’t let the other Trustees forget what we are all about." / Trustee Pesile – I’m delighted to hear that from you, thank you.

Professor Hager (Music, Brooklyn College) – "I think in what Bill Crain said, you heard some of the passion that is fairly typical of CUNY faculty and what we are all about. We’re really kind of stunned to think that the students, who we are proud of, and who faculty devote incredible energy to, are tossed off as somehow not worth the investment. If CUNY has standards here and we have students who come in at this level for whatever reason, we could either lower our standards, or bring them up to where they can succeed. That is what remediation does. Many students complete remediation within one semester. Somehow none of that is getting recognized. These students, they get into an environment where they have a supportive and committed faculty, and they blossom. You are not going to find that kind of commitment at a Kaplan school. How does it save money? If they are going to get vouchers, why not invest in the faculty that have done such an incredible job over these decades in taking these kids who come from the public schools, who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, who come to this country as new immigrants, and give them that American dream? Why take away that investment that has repaid itself so many times? I think that we are all at our wits’ end as to what to do. We care about this institution and the City and we see CUNY as a vital part of it, and yet we are being cut off at the knees. I guess I don’t expect an answer. I just want to reaffirm the feeling that Bill expressed that I think many of us just don’t know what to do." / Trustee Pesile – I do appreciate your comments.

Professor Gallagher (English, LaGuardia Community College) – "From your response to Fred Greenbaum before, you may not want to answer this question, but I would ask that you take it back to the Board of Trustees. A little background. I’m not sure if you are aware of this. We are facing an absolutely horrendous budget situation at the community colleges. The Mayor has refused to add extra funding to pay for the mandated raises in the new contract that his representatives signed off on. This year we can somewhat wiggle out of the position because we have $150 per student increase in State aid. It was suppose to go for new programs and various other funds that have been set up previously, but we can draw money off that. The budget shortfall issue is not small -- it’s about $4.5 million spread among six campuses. Next year it might be as high as $25 million and the same in subsequent years. The Board of Trustees has just voted in a plan to take approximately half of the students who now go to four year colleges and move them to community colleges. Where is the money going to come from? What plans does the Board have? Unless they have plans, simply saying that open admissions has been preserved is fraudulent." / Trustee Pesile – Thank you for your comments.

Professor Reitano (Social Science, LaGuardia Community College – "I was just wondering, how do you envision the role of the community colleges in CUNY, now and in the future in light of the Resolution that has been passed?" / Trustee Pesile – I have no comment on that yet. / Professor Reitano – "What about their present role? How do you perceive the community colleges? Are you a graduate of Staten Island Community College?" / Trustee Pesile – Yes, I am. / Professor Reitano – "How do you perceive the role of the community colleges within the University?" / Trustee Pesile – If you look at the former SICC before the hybrid joining from Richmond College and the formation of CSI, SICC was basically a two-year program. You went for your Associates Degree. If you then selected to go on for a Bachelor’s Degree, you had to leave Staten Island one way or another. That was basically the opportunity for most first generation students moving into upper higher education. The way I see it here in Staten Island in particular, teaching there for so many years, is that is the opportunity for most of the students to determine what avenue, what career path, they want. They then either go to Brooklyn or to Baruch; that’s the majority of the students. We now have an influx of students from Kingsborough as transfer students because of the baccalaureate program at CSI. What will happen as a result of this resolution, I don’t know at this point for CSI’s lower level and the balance of the community colleges. / Professor Reitano – "You’ve been to the other community colleges?" / Trustee Pesile – I’ve been to just about every community college, yes. / Professor Reitano – "You wouldn’t want to generalize about their roles?" / Trustee Pesile – When I visited it was in July. There was no indication that there was going to be another vote. / Professor Reitano – "But their roles in the University as academic institutions." / Trustee Pesile – Most of them, especially Bronx Community, Borough of Manhattan Community, they are basically taking a number of students from around the five boroughs, including New Jersey, as the first introduction to higher education. Most of the employers in downtown Manhattan will subsidize their programs. Then the students decide whether they want to move on or not. / Professor Reitano – "I hope you will allow me to send you some materials from the community college caucus." / Trustee Pesile – I would appreciate that very much.

Professor McCall (English, Baruch College) – "I don’t want to be impolite, and I’m not being dramatic, but when I left that Board meeting last night, and to this very moment, I have the image in my mind of George Wallace standing in a schoolhouse door telling those students that they could not come in. I think that what happened last night is comparable to that. What you have done is say to these students, we don’t want you anymore in these colleges. The people in this room have devoted their professional lives to working with these students that you are telling them they can no longer have." / Trustee Pesile – I certainly have devoted my professional career to doing that. / Professor McCall - "You have heard all of the reasons why we feel we can be effective and that the students are successful and why we should continue allowing them to come to the senior colleges. We haven’t heard the reason why you chose to vote the way that you did. I think that you owe that to us." / Trustee Pesile – I gave my statement to the Board yesterday, and the statement is available. / Professor McCall – "Can’t you tell it to us. We aren’t necessarily going to have access to that statement." / It’s public information.

Professor Kaplowitz (English, John Jay College) – "The Faculty Senate at John Jay appreciated your visit with us last semester very much. I appreciate working with you on the Fiscal Affairs Committee of the Board. I’d like to ask you whether you’re willing to comment now, and if not to bring this back to the Board and to the Mayor. What is your opinion about the inappropriateness of using tax levy money dedicated to a public institution, to finance private institutions as the Mayor suggested in his State of the City address. It is so inappropriate to have public tax levy money to be used for programs at NYU, Fordham, and St. John’s as he named, rather than to be used at the colleges that that money is dedicated to." / Trustee Pesile – Karen, I will take that back. I have never met the Mayor. I’m still waiting for an appointment to meet him.

Professor Vozick (Science, Borough of Manhattan Community College) – "I’d also like to thank you for being here at least. I am a part-time faculty member at BMCC, representing the part-time faculty members." / Trustee Pesile – Was I correct in what I said about the students, that there are a whole host of employers who are very cooperative and subsidize most of their tuition? / Professor Vozick – "That’s absurdly distant from reality. With great respect, the statement is not close to reality. I’ve been around CUNY for over 20 years; there is a steeping process, getting used to the ins and outs of institutions. You’ve been around it some yourself. There is a story about CUNY that’s moving in higher-class circles in the City usually. I must speak the truth, usually white-dominated circles, that is quite different from the reality of CUNY. Part of your job is to understand both realities. Let me go back to two things I wanted to say. We are both part-time faculty members; we have something in common. First, I want to bring it as politely as I can, but as sharply as I can to your attention, that the great number of students to one degree or another, both at York and BMCC, and through the student organizations that I’m in contact with, feel that there is a pattern of disrespect abroad in the City toward CUNY students. It is exemplified by the Mayor’s speeches, but also current in the imagined attitudes of corporate leadership, or whatever, that CUNY students aren’t any good. This is my oversimplification. It is a feeling of disrespect. I’ve spoken to the Interim Chancellor about it, and I’m now going to speak to you about it. There is not one in leadership roles who seem to take as their responsibility to speak up for the students. To say, wait a second, when a student who is a mother and working at a job decides to go to college, to take on all that extra work and effort, hopefully for their own benefit, it also benefits the City. We should be cheering them on. This is a pattern that has been established through this current Board. Nobody seems to be reversing it. I’m curious as to when this is going to show in enrollment numbers, because people will be scared away. That’s my first point." / Trustee Pesile – One of the first things I spoke with Chancellor Christoph Kimmich about when I first came on in July, was that I was sick and tired of all the bad press about CUNY. CUNY is family, in particular CUNY students. I want to develop initiatives with the corporations to have a closer relation to develop programs that will give our students better scholarships as well as internship programs in front office positions, not back office. Also to develop greater internship programs. I am now in the process with Vice Chancellor Hershenson of developing a breakfast for major corporations to meet with me to develop that. / Professor Vozick – "I think that’s positive. I’m referring to something on a deeper level of open speech on behalf of students, but I will leave it there just for your consideration." / Trustee Pesile – I think another approach I had mentioned to Vice Chancellor Hershenson was to develop better public relations -- where we can have students involved in media publications and TV commercials, enlightening the public of who we are, and that we are not Tutor University. / Professor Vozick – "I want to go to my second point. The part-time faculty have become, because of a series of fiscal maneuverings on the part of Governors, going back two Governors, a larger part of the CUNY faculty. Until now they are like the sleeping giant, the invisible but huge presence. Of course full-time faculty, being only human, fear what’s going to happen when they wake up. I don’t think it’s a real danger. The net bottom line is that the part-time faculty are largely ignored and dealt with in almost in a chattel manner. They teach entry level courses, remedial courses, and heavy teaching loads. That is not an appropriate thing. No one is taking the role of meeting with part-timers. I don’t know if you’ve met with part-timers in any specific way." / Trustee Pesile – I have at some of the campuses. / Professor Vozick – "I commend to your consideration some significant way of developing an interface between part-timers and the leadership of the University which is currently a null."

Professor Levine (Engineering Science & Physics) – "I have an advantage not shared by my colleagues here of having met you before you became Trustee. My image of you is of someone who is in fact a dedicated adjunct instructor at the college, who indeed did do an excellent job with our students. This is why I was even more shocked. When Chancellor Kimmich stated what happened Monday night he focused on what he called, ‘making a statement.’ We are waiting for you to make a statement." / Trustee Pesile – My statement is basically, I made my decision out of my conscience, the courage of my conviction. I had no political input as some people may have thought. But after visiting the campuses and after meeting with students and faculty, having an inside flavor of CUNY, I felt there were four reasons that I had to make a decision as a Trustee, as an educator, as a business woman, and as a tax payer. Based on those four roles I developed and formulated my reasons. I find that it is very essential, that students have a different role. The City of New York is the driving force or the engine that drives the economy of the entire State. Yet our students don’t act as the fuel for that engine. They are not given the types of jobs in corporate America as anyone coming from a private institution. I take that from experience. I have hired people from my positions at Capital Cities/ABC as well as JP Morgan. You do not find anyone at JP Morgan in front office. When I visited the Baruch campus two months ago, I went to the placement office and I said, "how many graduates have been placed at JP Morgan," and they gave me the figures. I said, "that’s not front office." That’s one of the roles I want to change. Another issue in my statement of why I made my decision was the very fact that I felt students have to take personal responsibility. You don’t decide in your senior year in high school that you are going to go to college, you start to prepare for it. I have that problem in my own family. I have no children. But my cousin came to me and said, what are we going to do with our son, he doesn’t go to class -- this is in high school in Staten Island. He is always cutting, and I don’t know what to do with him. He has an opportunity. If he is not going to be mature enough he can go into the army, but other than that he’s going to have to figure out what he’s going to do with his life. He went to the College of Staten Island but he was afraid he would be barred under the freshman skills test. He said, "Look, I passed." I said, "And this is just the beginning; this is an eye opener. You have to do well, and you have to figure out what you want to do. College is serious and the investment you get out of it is what you are going to have the rest of your life. If you are going to play games and waste your parent’s money, then don’t even bother going." I told him quite frankly, and I’m saying it here tonight. Even if he chose not to go to college and he wanted to get a federal, state, or municipal job, he’d have to take a test, pre-employment, pre-screening test. He probably would have to go to the bookstore to buy the book to study. He would have to do it on his own time. That is one of the reasons I said they have to be serious about what they want to do.

Professor Pollard (Library, Baruch College) – "Thank you for being here. From Baruch College I just wanted to add to some of the stories that you’ve just talked about. That doesn’t give the full picture of what’s happening, why our students are not really hired sometimes. I know personally several students who have told me that they are discriminated against on Wall Street because of their color." / Trustee Pesile – And their name and gender. / Professor Pollard – "Fine, but you didn’t say that. I’m putting all of that in there." / Trustee Pesile – But CUNY is what is holding them back. / Professor Pollard – "One particular student transferred from the honors program at Buffalo to Baruch. She graduated summa cum laude, a very smart student. When she went down to Wall Street, she faced discrimination -- not because of her education, but because of the color of her skin. I just want to put that on record. People are not telling the whole story here. That’s number one. Number two, you talked about students not measuring up in the high schools. What about those high schools that do not offer the academic programs, and there are those programs. There are high schools in this City now that do not offer math and the academic preparation. That is not remediation when they come into college. They have never been given the opportunity to take this. It is the same as learning a language for the first time. It would be the same thing. Why are we now as taxpayers willing to bring somebody from abroad, ESL, and give them the opportunity for remediation, but we don’t give the opportunity to the people here, to our own. I think that’s very unfair and it has everything to do with white supremacy. I’m sorry, it does. That is my own personal feeling. The last point I want to make here is that you talked about not knowing the results the Resolution is going to bring. Has there been a discussion at the Board of what they did?" / Trustee Pesile – Yes, but I haven’t been there.

Professor Gallagher (English, LaGuardia Community College) – "I suggest, if you are really serious about wanting to help change the attitude of some of the major CUNY bashers in the City, you might want to start with some of your colleagues on the Board of Trustees." / Trustee Pesile – I’m just beginning to get to know them. / Professor Gallagher – Let me suggest an opening gambit. The constant emphasis on the two-year and four-year graduation rates is absurd. A vast majority of our students, more than 99%, do not take enough courses to graduate in either two or four years. If you can change the mind of some people on the Board of Trustees, if you can make them look at reasonable graduation rates, four years for the two year schools, five years, eight years for four year colleges, then you will have accomplished something with the major CUNY bashers that you want to go into battle against.

Professor O’Malley (English, Kingsborough Community College) – "I’m not saying we can’t do better, but I believe in 1996 Standard and Poor did an article saying that CUNY produces more corporate executives than any other university in the United States. I think it’s important that we remember that." / Trustee Pesile – They are now the corporate executives in senior management positions primarily of graduation years prior to 1980, 1985. / Professor O’Malley – "That’s interesting. I’d like to see the data on that. Do you have that?" / Trustee Pesile – Not available. I’d like to see our students move into more of those positions that are current. Those who have graduated in the past five years. / Professor O’Malley – "Do we know if that was before?" / [Unidentified Speaker] – It’s post open admissions. It takes time for anybody to get there. They would be in the trade for ten to 20 years. / Trustee Pesile – It is this group of individuals who now present the greatest amount of influence for us to cultivate and ask them to take our students. / Professor O’Malley – The other thing, I just wanted to repeat what Brian Gallagher said. At Kingsborough Community College, if you look for classroom space between 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m., you won’t find any. My English Department has 30 full-time faculty and 90 to 100 adjuncts. I don’t know where we are going to put extra students, particularly if we don’t have more faculty lines. We don’t have any space anyway. You should bring that back.

Professor Davidson (Governance Leader, LaGuardia Community College) – "It took me personally almost nine years to get my undergraduate degree. I was supporting my parents and younger siblings. I can relate to what the problems are of our students at City University of New York, much more so than many of the appointees to the Board of Trustees. You and maybe a couple of others who were products of City University, but most of them are not. Our distinguished Mayor of course is not; our distinguished Governor of course is not. They cannot relate to the problems our students have. We believe in the mission of City University; we believe in open admissions. I have two children. When I had to advise them where to go to school to get the best possible education for their futures, I recommended that they come to City University. I am the proud parent of two graduates of City University, one of Queens College and one of City College. Some of you had my son at City College, and some of you had my daughter at Queens College. They did a pretty good job. Therefore, I see the University in a different light than the members of the Board of Trustees, the Mayor, and the Governor. I hope that you will carry that back when you do get to meet with the Mayor and you do get to meet with the Governor. LaGuardia Community College has students from 136 different countries. I’ll take you around on a tour -- people of all colors, national origins, everything. They all achieve. They may not do it in two years, in four years, or six years. They have to do what I did; they have to support their families. Please try to be an agent of change for our students and our colleagues with your colleagues on the Board of Trustees. Please try." / Trustee Pesile – There is an attempt being made as we move along.

Professor Bell (Educational Services, Brooklyn College) – "I am President of the Council of SEEK Directors and I am a member of the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate. I wasn’t going to speak tonight. In fact, I told my husband that I wasn’t going to say anything. This is too close an issue to me. When you gave the example of your nephew I really had to rise and talk. It seems to me that there is a misunderstanding that our students who are in remediation are those who screwed up in high school, that they didn’t try, that they cut classes, that they were the middle class screw-ups. I have a brother who is one of those. He had every opportunity in the world and all of the money my parents could muster to send him to college, and he didn’t do it. That’s another question. But the SEEK students I teach, whose family maximum income is $14,000 for a family of three, going on up to $19,000 for a family of ten. They are not the screw-ups; they are the winners. They are the kids who were recommended by their high school counselors for being the best and the brightest in those schools. They work the hardest. They are the first ones in their families to have finished high school. They were cheated. The first six weeks of every semester, one of the things we have to teach them is to show them what they weren’t taught in those high schools. They are furious that they have not read the books, written the essays, learned the academic discourse. They want to learn, and they work so hard. When Governor Pataki several years ago went to eliminate SEEK, one of the things I did was bring up a whole bunch of our Ph.D. graduates onto the floor of the Assembly and Ed Sullivan introduced them. The whole Assembly was amazed. To think that our kids aren’t the best and the brightest. I hold the FIPSE grant that makes our program in remediation a model for the nation. We now have seven schools on line, including Geneseo and Buffalo to replicate our remedial program that is supposedly not working. In one semester this year our statistics show that 82% of our kids who entered remediation this summer passed by the end of the first semester." / Trustee Pesile – Can you share those documents with me? / Professor Bell – "Absolutely. Our program works. The government has given us a second FIPSE grant. Remediation works. My father- in- law, people have heard me say this, was the subject of a book a number of years ago called, "Our Children Are Dying." It was about a principal in Harlem who was fighting the system. He is now 87 years old and he is still sitting in his wheelchair, fighting the system, fighting through my husband and myself. It seems to me that we’ve experienced in the past six months the saddest days, just like the stuff in the 1960’s when people were being denied opportunity. Only it has moved up from the elementary schools to the colleges. I really hope you will look at our successes. Last May before you were on the Board, those of us who have these successful projects testified and showed that our programs worked. I was the sole faculty member on that Badillo Committee on Remediation. We presented lots of data. I hope you will even after the vote go back and look so that you really see what we’ve done and what the faculty have done who have spent their careers doing this.

Professor Haggerty (Art, Brooklyn College) – "In the past I have taught at Bowdoin College in Maine, where I taught the children of the elite. Also the University of California at Santa Barbara, where I taught a lot of adept surfers. Some very fine students, too. You seem as if you have a good heart, although unable to express all of your feelings in this public venue. As a person who has worked with the students we work with, I think we represent the American dream. As I speculate about the end of open enrollment and the end of remediation, I don’t think we can call it merely restructuring. Frankly, because that’s like calling genocide cleansing; it is sort of a euphemism. When I speculate about the end of these programs I think about a new version of Pandora’s box in which hope is absent. If hope is absent, what’s left? Despair, crime, prison? I believe you will speak on behalf of these causes based on the things you’ve heard. I hope you will persuade others who did not have your courage to come here and listen to people who think obviously quite differently from some of them."

Professor King (History, Graduate Center) – "I have not spoken to this body before. I promised my husband that I would not speak tonight, like Martha. I welcome you and I hope you will be an agent of change -- a different kind of change possibly than you’ve been hearing about tonight. I’m a historian. I teach students who know nothing about history. They know very little about literature, and they can barely write. They are very eager to learn, and they are very interested when they are introduced to matters of substance. I think they are not very different from the students at St. John’s or at Fordham. I hope you will be an instrument of change in reintroducing to the system of higher education standards in the liberal arts, and ask students to rise to their very high potential and exceed their backgrounds as I did mine. Both my parents were exceedingly poor. I made it all the way through higher education onto professional degrees from poverty backgrounds. I think unless we raise our standards and unless we challenge our students to study at the very highest levels and the very most difficult subjects they will not succeed, so I encourage you to that task."

Trustee Pesile – One of the things that I’d like to say before I leave, is that I’ve been very fortunate to travel to 45 countries around the world in my previous employment. It amazes me how education is so far different in other countries and how important we value it here. I just want to say that we have become a technological age, and it is incumbent upon me I believe, and the Board, to ensure that we get the type of technology we need to put in front of the students as well as the faculty. If we don’t have that we are really going to fall far behind. I really think that is a key at this point, to push forward for the budget and for technology as well. I thank you for having me here this evening. I’m sorry I could not meet with you originally, but I am glad I did come here this evening.

IV. Reports

First I’d like to thank all those who have expressed their concern and good wishes about my recent by-pass surgery, which went well. I spent one week in the hospital, and I’ve been steadily getting stronger since then. Since I returned to business on January 4^th, there have been two significant meetings of the Board. One was the public hearing on the 19^th, with upward of 100 testifiers, all of whom were informative, cogent, and interesting. Among the witnesses were a former dean of the faculty of Columbia College, and the current Dean of Iona – neither CUNY people -- and a former budget director at CUNY, now an educational consultant. All of them testified about the ubiquitous availability of remedial courses. There were facts, statistics, and passion. Unfortunately not the entire collection of Trustees heard or read the testimony, including at least three who ultimately voted to reinstate the May 26^th Resolution.

Last night the Trustees met at LaGuardia in the auditorium with approximately 100 spectators and a very large contingent of CUNYCOPS and police. There was an attempt to introduce a substitute resolution using reading as the major marker with mathematics as an adjunct by Trustees Everett, Morning, Murphy, and Ruiz. If one reads body language at all the anti-student cabal of the Board was not listening (one had learned by yesterday morning that several of the Trustees had been informed of the possible substitute, but called their puppetmasters who told them that the Mayor and the Governor would have none of it). Through a noisy meeting in which few heard or listened, they reiterated the vote of May 26^th with the Board of Regents review looming. As Jim Murphy said, this battle was lost, but the war continues. We have stated before that the Board of Trustees should consist of independent Trustees. The law says that they should be, and they seem to be unaware of the fact that it is an immoral act. They listen to the Mayor and ask the Mayor and the Governor, and unfortunately that’s what happened last night. Why it happened, why the Mayor and the Governor really think destroying CUNY is a very important act, I’m not sure. It certainly is partially racism, and maybe a whole bunch of other things.

The Chancellor talked to you about SUNY, and there is an interesting fact about the SUNY budget. The Trustees asked for a $7.2 million increase, which is trivial and not keeping up with the cost of living. After the Governor spoke with them, the $7.2 million became $2.7 million. There is a theory about dyslexia in the Governor’s Office. That’s the Chair’s Report.

At its meeting yesterday afternoon, the Board of Trustees adopted a slightly revised version of the resolution on remediation. There will be different perspectives on the outcome, as there should be. But I think we are all agreed that the majority of the Board wanted to make a statement. A statement consistent with its sense of the University and its future. That said, we must all understand that, at this point, yesterday’s Board resolution is University policy. It supersedes the resolution that was adopted last May.

There are three points I should like to make. First, no one knows whether this resolution will move forward or whether it will be enjoined by some kind of legal action. The two suits that were filed in the aftermath of the May resolution are quite specifically attached to that resolution and, with a replacement resolution in place, are moot.

Second, the resolution has left us with some unfinished business. We heard a number of times at Board meetings, hearings, and again yesterday -- that SEEK and ESL are excluded from the resolution. I have seen nothing in writing that confirms that claim or shows what it actually means. It is said no action is necessary on SEEK because the legislation establishing SEEK takes care of the issue. That’s not our reading of the legislation. The legislation sets out various possibilities, various options, for how SEEK students might benefit from their special status. It does not describe a situation that might be considered the equivalent of an exemption from the resolution.

Another piece of unfinished business, another question, is how does the resolution define an ESL student. We have been told that, for this purpose, an ESL student is anyone who has spent at least a semester in high school, grades 9 through 12, abroad. That is, as you will know, at variance with the standard definition of ESL students generally applied in higher education. But it is a definition. The question is raised, somewhat facetiously, what about a student who spends junior year abroad. Or spends a semester in Montreal. Does that change his status to ESL? Will we now see a great exodus of junior high school students to study abroad so as to benefit from this status? In any event, there are a number of unresolved issues in this connection. And finally, what about the skills tests themselves? I think all of you here know that for years now we have been unhappy about the tests and the varied purpose to which they’ve been put. Here we seem to be giving them yet another purpose.

How can we clarify and define some of these issues so that, as this process moves forward, we provide some guidance to the campuses. The resolution requires the campuses to submit implementation plans by mid-May. That’s what the Trustees have asked for; they expect to see and review these plans. Here the Chancellery needs to be involved in providing guidelines, setting out the kind of leeway or flexibility campuses will have as they think about implementation. We are working on that.

The third item, one you are familiar with, concerns the role of the Regents. I think all of you know that we have some reservations about making this particular issue a master plan amendment, as has been discussed. I must tell you that the Regents have been less than clear about what actually falls under the rubric of amendment, as promulgated in their policy revisions in 1995. However, no one disagrees with the Regents’ requirement that the University periodically submit an updated master plan. Such an update reports on significant changes at the University, new policies, projected enrollments, fiscal issues, and the like. The next update is due next year. The document is studied and reviewed by the Regents. They can either approve or disapprove it. It is then forwarded to the Governor, who can either accept or turn it down.

Let us not think for a minute that the Regents are necessarily the last stop. The history here is instructive. In 1992, as required, the University submitted a master plan update. The Regents did what they’re mandated to do. They studied and reviewed, they may even have had open hearings, and then they forwarded their assessment to the Governor. He filed it. Thus: what he has is an unaccepted 1992 University master plan. Life goes on; the world didn’t stop turning. What’s instructive is that the Governor, the previous Governor, not this one, simply ignored the Regents and what they had done. We now have a different Governor, and a different Board of Regents, but to ignore the history here is to be blind to possibilities. Those are the three major items: the legal issue, the unfinished business issue, and the Regents issue.

Again, just to reiterate what I said some time ago. The report is going to be drafted by Schmidt and Benjamin but will have to be approved by the Task Force. So it is not necessarily straight from the pen of the Schmidt-Benjamin team to City Hall. The route is first through the Task Force. Feeding into it, but separate, will be reports that they have commissioned from the consultants, first from the RAND Corporation, focusing heavily on remediation and testing, and from Price Waterhouse Coopers, focusing strongly on budget, expenditures, and allocation models we have adopted over the years. Those two reports, we will get separately, but will feed into that final report as well, will be used by the Task Force in the final report.

That is where we are on that issue. I can’t tell you anything more, because I don’t know a great deal more than that. I try to keep in regular touch with Benno Schmidt so that, to the extent possible, I can avoid surprises. Obviously he’s not telling me everything, and I wouldn’t expect him to. But sometimes it’s possible to read between the lines and to see where he is heading.

Also on my list is a brief update on the Budget. Tomorrow the Governor will release his Executive Budget, and we will know whether our Budget Request will have found favor. We have been in Albany fairly regularly. I went up there twice earlier this month, once in connection with the Governor’s State of the State speech. Everyone up there has been enormously tight-lipped about the budget. The party line seems to be that overall they want to keep increases below the rate of inflation. It depends who you talk to, but it is obviously not a great number. One of the things we expect to happen, however, is that they will make good their commitment on the five-year capital plan. Also, we hope, on collective bargaining. How much they will go beyond that remains to be seen. They have been very complimentary about our budget request. They have said, after years and years, we finally get a sense of where the University wants to go over the long haul, rather than just over the next twelve months. That is, to them, a plus given what they are used to. I can tell you, they sent very strong signals to our sister institution upstate, to take a lesson out of the CUNY book, which must be a first. Clearly they were asked quite pointedly to look at what they might learn from us. Occasionally a compliment like that is nice.

Let me caution about two things. One is, even if this year does not bring us all that we have asked for, we have made very clear in our conversation with the State that this is a multi-year plan. If everything cannot be done in the first year, then we would expect things to be worked out in the second and third year. They have not demurred. This is not an issue where they have said, "we don’t want to talk about this." In fact we have talked quite productively about the issue. The other thing that I would tell you from my experience, both in my previous life and now, is that there is bound to be some kind of surprise hidden in the budget request. This is the first year of Pataki’s second term as Governor. The first term he produced tuition for us. Clearly, if he wants to do that again, the first year is always a good time to do it. The "T" word has never come up. But I just want to caution that something like that might be sprung on us. It is traditional budget strategy to have some twist, some surprise. Whether it is with financial aid, whether it is the "T" word, whether it’s something else. We could be wrong, and they may have turned over a new leaf, but this has been standard in all these years.

When I attended the State of the State speech, I was surprised in some ways, given the discussions we had with the Governor’s office earlier, that he never uttered the words higher education. He spent most of his time focusing on pre-college education. You have seen over the weekend, that he has a particular thrust, which is going to occupy the limelight for a while. That means the limelight has shifted away from us for awhile, which is not all together uncomfortable. Clearly there is more here than meets the eye -- the Governor taking on the schools. I’m sure as this evolves we’ll hear more about it.

Much of what the Governor was saying was almost peripheral to our concerns. That of course is unlike the State of the City speech. I don’t know how this came across on radio or television. But sitting there was for me a different experience from a year ago. Last year we got a very passionate, tub thumping attack. This year we got forty minutes of praise for Chancellor Crew. As we climbed up the mountain, we sort of slid down the other side and got to CUNY. There was not a single moment of applause when he spoke of CUNY. It fell far short of the prepared remarks that we got a copy of afterwards, with a number of things he did not mention orally. In his prepared remarks, he mentioned proposing a core curriculum, and a flunk out policy, altogether a set of seven items. He talked about three. One is the voucher system which nobody quite understands. Second is the flagship concept, and third is closing institutions that don’t measure up. We haven’t heard anything more from him; it didn’t resonate with the audience. You remember last year, we had immediately a barrage to implement some of the things he said. That has not happened. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t going to be some interest among the Trustees and others when the issue comes up in the next month. We should be aware that some of these things are coming up. But at the moment, I’m struck, and this is a personal impression, by the fact that we didn’t get the treatment that we got last year. Last year it resounded from the walls and it was broken by applause repeatedly. Neither of those occurred this time. Though it may just be a different strategy.

The other State of the City speech, the one by Council Speaker Valone, was very favorable to us. He is a true friend. He had invited some of the beneficiaries of his policy to reduce tuition for students with a "B" or better in high school who apply and get into CUNY. He had set aside money for that -- $7 million in the budget. There were some 4,400 students who qualified and therefore got a tuition remission thanks to Speaker Valone. We had arranged for a dozen recipients to be there. They looked eager, intelligent, cheerful, well-dressed, wonderful representatives. He asked them to stand up, the audience stood up, and it was just a beautiful moment for all of us. That was one of the high points of these presentations -- which I must say not necessarily an unmixed blessing.

Finally, two small pieces. You may have heard that we had a significant resignation in the Chancellery, when Vice Chancellor Rothbard, who has been in charge of Budget, Finance, and Information Services, decided to leave. It was extraordinarily fortunate for me to find as a replacement, the present Vice President for Finance and Business at Queens College, Sherry Brabham. She has experience at the Central Office and also at the campuses. It is one of my tenets that anyone who works at the Central Office should have both. She comes very well qualified. She will assume the position on the first of February. The Board approved it yesterday.

There are two things that I am doing in the interim as we move from one incumbent to the next. For years, the Office of Internal Audit, which is an office that we have tried to keep as objective and neutral as possible, has reported to the Vice Chancellor. I’m taking the occasion now to have it report to the Chancellor. I think that it is an office that ought to be independent of any Vice Chancellor since it covers university-wide issues and is our guarantee to the outside world we must make sure that what we do in fact is proper and appropriate. The other thing that I’m doing is asking the head of Information Services, Dean Ribaudo, to report to me as a special assistant to the Chancellor for technology. I’m very much interested in moving forward on some of the very exciting things that are happening in educational and instructional technology. Some of the things that are happening on the campuses. We should do what we can do centrally to move this forward, to resolve some of the questions that have come up about distance learning, distributive learning as it is now being called.

You are all aware of course that President Leon Goldstein died unexpectedly earlier this month. It is a significant loss. He was someone very committed to Kingsborough, but also to the University as a whole. I think that the loss of this particular friend and counselor for the University is very sad. I have asked his Provost, Dr. Zibrin, to serve. I recommended that to the Board yesterday and the Board approved that appointment as Interim President at Kingsborough. Those are the immediate changes in personnel. We have had a resignation in the mean time from President Schmeller of Queensborough Community College. At this point, as of August 31^st when his resignation takes effect, there will be only three permanent community college presidents left. Unless there is a change in the meantime, that is not good. Out of the six community colleges, not to have more than three as permanent people leaves us weak as a community college group, especially when we have to contend with our SUNY counterparts. So those are the issues that I want to bring to the table. I’m delighted to be here, and I’m interested in hearing your questions. What’s on your mind?

Professor Levine (Engineering Science & Physics, College of Staten Island) – "Have we had a common answer to the question, who is paying for the Schmidt Commission?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – The short answer is no. The longer answer is that there have been several fundraising activities. They have been held in strategic places downtown where likely donors have been given a briefing about the Schmidt Commission, what its charge was, and what it intended to do. But that’s the best we can do at the moment. We are not paying for it.

Professor O’Malley (English, Kingsborough Community College) – "How can you start implementing the January Resolution if it hasn’t yet gone through the change in the Master Plan and gone to the Regents? Isn’t there a problem?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – Maybe implementation is the wrong word. The Board of Regents has made very clear that they would like to see implementation plans. They want to see more than the Resolution. They want to see what we do with it. The presidents at the campuses have been asked to prepare such plans for review by the Board of Trustees in May. That would be the next step. / Professor O’Malley – "And that would go to the Regents?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – That would then be liable for Regents review, yes.

Professor Young (English, Borough of Manhattan Community College) – "You mentioned ESL students and SEEK students in the four year colleges as possibly being exempt from some of the requirements. I think there are four senior colleges where there are two-year programs. It is not clear to me whether the Board intends for everybody in every college, regardless of whether they are enrolled in a two or four year program, to have to be held to the same standard of passing all of the remediation before they get there. Is there going to be an exemption do you think, for the two year degree program enrollees?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – The Resolution talks about baccalaureate programs. So that institutions with both would be held to the terms of the Resolution for their baccalaureate students, but not for their associate degree students. / Professor Young – "Which would mean that more people would try to get into those schools via the route of the two year programs in order not to have to meet those requirements. I know there are four-year schools where the majority of students are in the two-year programs. Is there any thought or concern about using that as a loop hole?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – I don’t know whether loophole is the right word. The Trustees have made clear, certainly to their satisfaction, that access to the University via the associate degree programs whether they are in community colleges or in the hybrid colleges, remains open. So open admissions defined in those terms is clearly not being challenged.

Professor Friedman (Developmental Skills, Borough of Manhattan Community College) – "As you know, the issue of remediation was a major topic of discussion at the last two hearings. Some of us heard rumors that when questioned on the day of one of those hearings, about the issue of remediation at the four year colleges, the answer was, "that’s not an issue because that’s already been resolved by the Board." Given the Resolution that was passed last night. Is it your sense that the Schmidt report is going to deal with the issue of remediation at the four year colleges as well as the community colleges?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – I think that the Schmidt Commission is aware of what I said earlier. There is a lot of unfinished business. Clearly this was evident at the Board meeting last evening. Some of the meaning of SEEK, ESL, and the kinds of things we talked about earlier, is yet to be defined. I don’t think any of us is in doubt that we need to do some more work to say what exactly that means. So the Schmidt Commission is very clear about the reach of that Resolution. Certainly that has been fairly implicit in some of the conversations I had with Dr. Schmidt. The focus is really not so much on community colleges, but on what they like to call choice. They didn’t use the word voucher. But clearly they are interested in offering options to students other than CUNY. It doesn’t mean no to CUNY; it means alternatives that students might want to pick for whatever reasons, convenience, costs, and so forth. They did not explain to me how this would be financed. They did not explain to me how students would be given that choice after they take our tests, or what institutions would take our tests to define remediation. You can already see where the complications arise. They haven’t at least in my presence defined what that might mean, but they keep referring to the question of choice for students. Whether the question becomes a question of excluding or including senior colleges, I do not know. I think that is less on their screen than the question of providing greater flexibility for student choice.

Professor Cooper (English, York College) – "In describing the final process, at the final stage the Regents must submit their proposals to the Governor, who can accept or reject them. I assume that means that he has that power over positive recommendations of the Regents. What about a negative recommendation? / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – They will have to present something to him. Whether it is a negative or positive report is immaterial. He can accept or reject either. / Professor Cooper – "If they omit that Resolution and submit a report without it, and he rejects the report, that does not then automatically mean that he is restoring what the Board has done?" / Interim Chancellor Kimmich – Here we are really crossing into speculation and new territory. But it is certainly in his power to send back a report that is negative and say, no I’m not accepting that, reconsider it.

e. Chair of Budget Advisory Committee – Professor Alfred Levine, the chair, presented the findings of a study he had done on administration costs at the colleges (his overheads are attached to these minutes).