Minutes of the
Faculty Assembly
Of the
University of North Carolina
120th Session
20 April 2002
Chapel Hill, N.C.
I.
First Plenary Session
1.
Chair Veit welcomed members and called the meeting to order at 10:33 a.m. with
39 members present.
2.
The roll was passed around for members to sign and the following indicated they
were present: Hugh Hindman (ASU); Bob
Morrison, Henry Ferrell, David Pravica, Ralph Scott (ECU); Ali Khan, Barbara
Solaro (ECSU); Enid Beverley Jones, Genniver Bell (FSU); Beryl C. McEwen,
Aurelia Mazyck (NCA&T); George Conklin, Jerry Schooler (NCCU); Norman
Coates (NCSA); Frederick T.Corbin, Harriette Griffin, Richard H. Bernhard,
Stephen Lilley, Paul Williams (NCSU); Donald Lisnerski, Duane H. Davis (UNCA);
Philip A. Bromberg, Barbara B. Moran, Joseph S. Ferrell, A. Fleming Bell, II
(UNCCH); Jeff Passe, Dick Toenjes, Yogi Kakad (UNCC); James Evans, William Link
(UNCG); Jose D’Arruda, Bonnie Kelley (UNCP); Richard Veit, Stephen McNamee, Dan
Noland (UNCW); David Claxton, Mary Adams (WCU); Jill Harp, Francine Madrey
(WSSU).
3.
The minutes of the February 2002 meeting were approved as submitted with the
addition of Delegates Noland and Morrison to the slate of officers as
candidates for chair of the Program and Planning Committee.
4.
Report by Chair Richard Veit
Chair
Veit reported on the meeting at 8 a.m. this morning between the President’s
Cabinet and the Executive Committee of the Assembly. He handed out a report by
the President on the Status of Resolutions of the Assembly. The Assembly
discussed a proposed revision to the Code of the University of North Carolina
to allow faculty to serve on the Board of Governors and Boards of Trustees. He
noted that the President did not seem enthusiastic about this issue. The Chair
noted that we would need to make a substantial case for this issue if we wished
to have the statutes and the Code changed. The Chair noted that he would
continue to make a case for Assembly representation.
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell asked if a recently retired faculty member could serve on the
Board of Governors? He suggest further that we not use ex-officios as members.
Chair
Veit asked for a show of hands regarding institutions that had annual
evaluations of Chancellors. UNCC, UNC-W and ECU reported that they had annual
evaluations.
Delegate
Henry Ferrell noted that bubble sheet were viewed as not ok as evaluation
instruments for administrators, but that they were ok for faculty.
Chair
Veit urged the Office of the President to work toward annual evaluations of
administrators on each campus.
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell noted that there had been a problem with negative evaluations on
reappointments of senior staff at Chapel Hill. It was noted that this is due to
the anonymous nature of the evaluation documents.
Chair
Veit reported the he has asked the President about plans to move the UNC System
toward the Florida model. The President noted that Florida was in point of fact
looking at the North Carolina model of higher education.
Chair
Veit reported on the status of re-imbursement of faculty members for
hospitalization out-of-state. If the hospital is beyond the thirty-mile limit
faculty should be ok. (If under the limit they may need to travel to a North
Carolina facility). If the out-of-state hospital does not pay the out-of-state
hospital DRG (Diagnostic Related Group) amount billed, the faculty member has
sixty days from the date of receipt of the benefit form to appeal the lack of
payment. Most faculty are not aware of this limit. When the faculty member
appeals the claim, the State Health Plan contractor will negotiate the
difference in the DRG with the out-of-state provider. In state the State Health
Plan negotiates the DRGs in advance with approved in-state hospital providers.
Chair
Veit asked for campuses to hold Faculty Assembly Delegate elections and to
inform him promptly of the delegates elected. He noted that he had not yet
received notification from a number of campuses. He requested co-operation on
this important issue. Later in day a handout prepared by Ron Penny was given to
delegates on this issue.
Chair
Veit next reported on the Faculty Dispute Resolution Report. He noted that
following points relative to the report: Local campuses would be required to
develop “a viable mediation system”; a larger role would be assigned to
mediation; local campus grievance committees would be assigned mediation roles;
faculty would be encouraged to try mediation first; during the period of
mediate the appeal clock would stop; Chancellors were encouraged to develop a
dialog with local appellate committees; appeals to the President and the Board
of Governors would be limited in section 607 appeals; a database would be
maintained of local campus appeals.
Delegate
Lisnerski asked if appellate committee conversations with Chancellors would
jeopardize the appeal process.
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell noted that UNC lawyers were on the committee that wrote the
report.
Delegate
Scott noted that at ECU faculty advisors were not allowed to attend hearings to
advise faculty members during grievances.
Delegate
Solaro asked if there would be a database to keep up with information on the
kinds of appeals. Chair Veit noted that there would be.
Delegate
Hindman noted that he thought we did a good job of solving the unimportant
issues in disputes and a less successful job on the more important issues. He
noted that staff attorneys would be made available to hearing committees at the
Office of the President. He noted that there would be a change in some types of
appeals to the Office of President and the Board of Governors. He stated that
MPIs (Material Procedural Irregularities) were still an issue. The question is
was there an improper standard or an improper application of the standard.
Charles
Waldrop noted that changing the Code went beyond the charge of the Task Force
on Dispute Resolution.
Chair
Veit noted that the 16 campuses had selected an outstanding teacher- Steve
McNamey at UNC-W.
4.
Report by Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Gretchen Bataille
She
noted that it was important to do an annual evaluation of what we have done
during the past year and what we can do next year. Vice President Bataille next
listed what she thought were significant accomplishments of this year:
a.
She noted that
we have finished an important long-range plan that is important to strategic
development of system wide internationalization.
b.
Faculty has
been supported through: $1.6 million for e- learning; $1 million for Gnomic grants;
support for the bio grid and computational modeling; and leadership institutes
for chairs, deans and above.
c.
A change in the
semester length on local campuses.
d.
Introduction of
the Academic Common Market.
e.
Twenty-one
reports were made during the year to the General Assembly on new program
planning. The Health Care Work Force report was under way and the Distance
Learning report had been finished.
Vice
President Bataille noted that we had good communication this year and that this
had encouraged dialog between the Faculty Assembly and the Office of the
President. We need to continue to think about budget issues. We need focus on
how we can have “access with quality.” She noted that the General Assembly is
aware of classroom quality issues. She quoted President Broad’s statement with
regard to the current budget situation that “this too shall pass.” Vice
President Bataille appealed to the Faculty Assembly that we should all pitch in
to see that both entitlements and quality instruction are continued. With
regard to internationalization she noted that there was some concern post 9-11
with security for foreign students. She noted that there was also increases
concern with security on local campuses for labs, people and computers. She
remarked that program planning during the current budget created a need for
more campus collaboration. She stated that Academic Affairs supported consortia
in German, French, and Gerontology. Vice President Bataille noted that her
office was looking at the upcoming biennial budget. Even though times are
currently dismal with regard to the budget we need to be prepared for new
initiatives that are found through our strategic initiatives. She urged the
Faculty Assembly to work with their Research Vice Chancellors on how they can
to help with the development of new initiatives. She noted that delegates would
receive a document later in the date entitled “Management Flexibility to
Appoint and Fix Compensation: A Summary”.
She noted that changes in this document were the result of Faculty
Assembly input. Vice President Bataille concluded with the hope that we can
continue collaboration between her office and faculty on local campus. She
again thanked the Assembly for the work that we do.
Chair
Veit noted that Management Flexibility was not the same as governance. He also
noted that in response to the budget crises he would like to see us hold the
line on faculty workload.
Vice
President Bataille noted that she agreed with him on this issue.
Delegate
D’Arruda noted that Jasper Memory had worked on collaboration a few years and
that we still had a need for something like this.
Vice
President Bataille noted that Russ Lee was working on this now. What her office
needs to do is to supply some value added in the collaboration.
Delegate
Passe asked if any thought had been given to leadership training for Faculty
Senate Chairs.
Vice
President Bataille noted that no thought had been given to this issue because
of the administrative nature of the workshops. She noted that this was
something the Faculty Assembly might want to look at.
Betsy
Brown noted that she might be able to put a small group together to look at how
the Faculty Assembly might address this issue.
Delegate
Morrison noted that ECU was considering cutting one of their programs without
any faculty consultation. He noted his concern with the fate of smaller program
in the system given the current budget crises.
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell noted the budget cuts would affect faculty cuts. It is
difficulty to speak of one without the other. He noted that meetings were
difficult between the administration and faculty because of the current North
Carolina open meeting law. He asked if the General Administration could re-negotiate
the agreement with the NC Press Association regarding the open meeting law? He
noted that we should plan for program reduction. He suggested that delegates
review local campus financial exigency plans.
5.
Report by Vice President for Finance and CFO Jeff Davies and Vice President for
Public Affairs and University Advancement J.B. Milliken.
Vice
President Milliken stated that we need to take advantage of our resources to
get our message out to the people of North Carolina. We need to talk with the
legislature at every opportunity. If we have any feedback for him please
contact him at: mailto:milliken@ga.unc.edu.
He noted that we would have budget cuts this year along with about 45 other
states. He stated that redistricting would first on the mind of the
legislature. He noted that this was the worst recession in ten years and that
describing it as “mild” does not cover the full picture. He noted that North
Carolina had special difficulties because of: a $1.5 billion tax cut; $1
billion spent for flood relief; and tax refunds of $1.4 billion. He stated that
textiles, tobacco and banking were heavily affected in the current slowdown.
Milliken noted that the recession would probably have an 18-month lag effect
following an upturn in the economy. He again noted that there would be a budget
cut, the question is how much and for how many years. He noted that there was a
difference between economic predictions by economists and actual economic
performance. A 4% growth had been projected, while in fact the economy shrunk
by 3% for a net difference from projections of –7%. Next year projections were
for 4.7% growth, the most optimistic current projections are for 0-.9% growth.
The actual economic reality may be every lower. He feels that we need at least
a 4.9% cut to make the books balance. There will be a $1 billion budget revenue
shortfall according to current estimates. He noted that both enrollment and
entitlements would go up.
Vice
President Davies stated that it was important to remember past cuts in current
budgets: $48 million in reversions, $64 million in one time cuts and $51.5
million in lost R& R funds. The Governor has requested all state agencies
(except for education) to be prepared for cuts in 7-11% range. Community
Colleges are looking at 4-10% range. The University system did not report in at
the same time as these current cuts. The University has submitted a scenario
that would impact instruction. He noted that when cuts go into the 4% range it
impacts instruction. We started with cuts in the 1% to 4% range. In reality 4%
cuts will not be enough. The budget submitted to the General Assembly is the
starting pointing for reduction. General Assembly target is $694 million out of
the education budget. A 4% reduction would $72.5 million dollars. Currently
looking at $140 million in cuts, additional cuts of 4% would result in $280
million in proposed cuts.
Vice
President Milliken noted that it would be a high priority to minimize cuts and
that he would seek full funding for enrollment increases. He plans on playing
defense on keeping management flexibility and F & A costs (overhead)
recovery. He also noted that plans for the bonds would stay on track and thereby
help the North Carolina Economy.
Chair
Veit asked how useful it was to have local publicity on campuses?
Vice
President Milliken noted that we need to have a strategy in place on this. No
one knows the impact of what local publicity would be. Right now we “need to
keep our powder dry” on this issue.
Delegate
Lisnerski asked if the 4% would result in a $70 million take back?
Delegate
Noland noted that $280 million would be an 8-16% cut.
Delegate
Bell asked if this would be permanent cuts?
Vice
President Milliken stated, “yes.”
Delegate
Henry Ferrell asked if thought had been given to making an alliance with the
community colleges on the budget issues?
Vice
President Milliken stated that this would be a “great idea.”
Delegate
Harp ask that we look at other states that are coming out of the recession
quickly.
Vice
President Milliken noted that how North Carolina structures economic change
would affect us. He stated that Michel Porter of Harvard had been hired as a
consultant to help us out with strategies.
Delegate
Ferrell asked how could we work out financial exigency due to time constraints
on paper? He noted that there was currently a hiring freeze at UNC-CH.
Vice
President Milliken stated that he would be surprised if financial exigency was
declared. He hopes we will not have to reach this point.
Vice
President Davies noted that just because position were vacant they were not
eliminated.
Delegate
Davis asked why is it taken for granted that these will be permanent cuts?
Vice
President Davies noted that he agreed, but that is not the track that is being
taken.
Vice
President Milliken noted that sometimes there is a delay in the economy coming
on line that affects this.
6.
Additional nominations for officers and committee chairs for 2002-2003 were
requested by the Chair. Chair Veit made changes to the ballot that was
submitted by the Nominations Committee by adding Delegates Morrison and Noland
to the Planning and Programs Chairs and Delegate Pravica to the Academic Affairs
Committee.
7.
New business: Motion 2002-Apr-#12 was referred to the Budget Committee.
8.
The morning session adjourned for lunch at 12:12 p.m.
II.
Delegates had lunch 12:12 p.m. until 12:50 p.m.
III.
Standing Committee Meetings were held form 1:00 p.m. until 2:43 p.m.
IV.
Second Plenary Session
Chair
Veit called the Second Plenary Session to order at 2:43 p.m. with 35 members
present.
The
roll was passed around for members to sign and the following indicated they
were present at the afternoon session:
Hugh Hindman (ASU); Bob Morrison, Henry Ferrell, David Pravica, Ralph
Scott (ECU); Ali Khan, Barbara Solaro (ECSU); Beryl C. McEwen, Aurelia Mazyck
(NCA&T); George Conklin, Jerry Schooler (NCCU); Frederick T.Corbin,
Harriette Griffin, Richard H. Bernhard, Stephen Lilley, Paul Williams (NCSU);
Donald Lisnerski, Duane H. Davis (UNCA); Philip A. Bromberg, Barbara B. Moran,
Joseph S. Ferrell, A. Fleming Bell, II (UNCCH); Jeff Passe, Dick Toenjes, Yogi
Kakad (UNCC); James Evans, William Link (UNCG); Jose D’Arruda, Bonnie Kelley
(UNCP); Richard Veit, Stephen McNamee, Dan Noland (UNCW); David Claxton, Mary
Adams (WCU); Jill Harp, Francine Madrey (WSSU).
1.
Report by President Broad.
a. She met with the Officers
and Committee Chairs this morning. She noted had she learned some things of
concern to the faculty at this meeting.
b. She appreciates the support and
co-sponsorship of the UNC-TLT Conference just held in Greensboro. This was a
very successful conference.
c. We are having a 20% per year increase in
“D.E.” enrollment
d. We are bracing for cuts in our budget. Things
will be more grim in 2002-2003.
e. It has been along time since
we have faced circumstances like what we fact next year.
f. Increases in entitlements
will total some $1.5 million dollars.
g. Soon we will know the current tax receipts
from the April 15 tax filings.
h. Governor Easley has requested campus to
campus cuts 1% by 1%.
i. She is working with Governor
Easley, who is very interested in protecting education funds.
j. At the 4% reduction level
some 200+ faculty positions will have to be eliminated.
k. None of these cuts will be from the ranks of
permanent faculty.
l. There are no quick and easy
answers. She will not be surprised if this is long summer of budget
negotiations.
m. She will do her best to protect university
resources.
n. With regard to enrollment growth, we will
have to argue for expansion funds from the General Assembly.
o. There is talk about moving enrollment growth
funds to the continuing budget for Community Colleges and the University of
North Carolina.
p. Enrollment growth has been at the 8% rate for
in-state students and 12% for out-of-state students. Out-of-state enrollment
will pay for about one-half of enrollment funding.
q. Good news is that research and support of
sponsored programs has resulted in some $768 million in extra-mural funding.
This is an increase of some $100 million.
r. UNC ranks 3rd in
sponsored research and private funding. We hare behind the University of
California and the University of Texas.
s. She noted the resolution
(motion 2002-April-#12) urging the General Assembly to fund enrollment
increases.
Delegate
Hindman asked if the President would comment on financial exigency.
President
Broad noted that it was hard for her to imagine this happening.
Delegate
Noland asked if cuts will be more than 4% and what guidelines have been given
to local campuses?
President
Broad stated that none have been given. Each Chancellor works with Deans to
determine cuts. She believes cuts will be more than 4%. She was told by some,
that cuts might be as much as 13%.
Delegate
Noland followed up by asking if these would vertical cuts?
President
Broad responded again that she would rely on local campuses to make
decisions. Possibilities would be
increases in class size and/or reductions in class offerings. This will be a
very painful time, but we will grow out of the situation in the long run.
Delegate
Lisnerski asked if these cuts were permanent?
President
Broad responded “yes.”
Delegate
Bell asked, “Do we need to argue to the legislature that these cuts should not
be permanent?”
President
Broad responded “absolutely!”
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell urged the Chancellors to involve faculty in the cut process.
President
Broad noted that she agrees and that she is committed to faculty consultation.
Delegate
Joseph Ferrell noted that there were too many reporters on the UNC-CH campus.
Delegate
Pravica asked about Low Productivity programs especially the Interim Vice
Chancellor Thompson Math committee report.
Vice
President Bataille responded that we are looking at ways to use technology to
enable use to share course offerings across campuses.
Delegate
Passe noted that he was disappointed that a non-voting member was not possible
for Faculty on the Board of Governors. He asked President Broad if she was in
favor on a non-voting faculty member on the Board?
President
Broad noted that she had worked where faculty was on the Board and where the
faculty was not on the Board. She noted she was not personally persuaded that
this representation is important. The larger question is the faculty voice
heard?
2.
Chair Veit then turned the podium over to Delegate Jill Harp to present the
Nomination Committee report of candidates for Faculty Assembly Officers and
Committee Chairs for the 2002-2003 academic year.
Elections
were held. The following Officers and Delegates were elected:
Chair:
Richard Veit
Vice
Chair: George H. Conklin
Secretary:
Ralph Scott
Chairs
of Committees:
Academic
Freedom and Tenure: Mary Adams
Benefits
and Welfare: Donald D.Lisnerski
Budget:
Duane H. Davis
Faculty
Development: Bonnie Kelley
Governance:
Jeff Passe
Technology:
Jose D’Arruda
Planning
and Programs: Dan Noland
3.
Standing Committee Reports
a. Academic Freedom and Tenure
– Paul Williams
He introduced Motion 2002 –Apr-#13 (to endorse
report of Committee on Non-Tenure-Track Faculty). Delegate Toenjes noted that
he was gratified that Betsy Brown wanted Faculty Assembly support on this
issue. Motion was amended to change
last phrase “UNC Board of Governors” to “Campuses in cooperation with the
Office of the President.” Motion passed on voice vote. Next he introduced
Motion 2002-Apr-#14 (Establish principles for RPT process in the UNC system). A
number of editorial amendments to this motion were proposed. Delegate Henry
Ferrell suggested that Permanently Tenured be used in the place of RPT faculty
in section 2. He noted that this was the phrase used in the Code. Discussion
was held on this point. Delegate Morrison suggested for “clarity” that Section
3 (“Clarity”) be deleted up to the phrase “There should exist clear…” Delegate
Joseph Ferrell suggested that “earn” be changed to “achieve”. Delegate Williams
suggested that Section 5 be changed to read “faculty vote to” to the phrase
“recommendation of the voting faculty.” Delegate Bell suggested “RPT” be
inserted in line one of the motion. Hindman suggested that section 2 be broken
into three sections 1. “Mentoring programs…” 2. “An Assessment of their
progress toward tenure” and 3. “Formal statements of mutual…”. Delegate Joseph
Ferrell made the motion the delete section 5. The Ferrell motion failed. The
main motion passed on a voice vote with the editorial amendments.
b. Budget – Barbara Moran
Delegate Moran reported on last year’s motion number
seven. She noted that President Broad had responded that Chancellors will have
local budget information available on the campuses in local libraries. She
asked that delegates check on this fact. She wants to be sure that faculty are
involved in the budget process. She sees three different stages in effects on
local campuses: Faculty involved in the budget process, a faculty process in
place, but not working, and no process in place. She presented the UNC Faculty
Resolution as Motion 2002-Apr-#12 which passed on a voice vote.
c. Faculty Development – Beryl McEwen
The committee met with Frank Prochaska and spent most of its time identifying incentives for encouraging teaching and learning with technology in the UNC system. The committee noted that the recently held TLT conference was a success and hoped that the conference will be scheduled for next year, and will become an annual event.
d. Benefits and Welfare – Don Lisnerski
Reported that his committee met with Ron Penny and
Kitty McCollum. Delegates had a handout on out-of-state Health Plan benefits at
their places. His committee plans to look into out of country benefits and a UNC Supplemental out of country policy. It
was noted that this policy would only cover faculty on official business. He
asked what could be done about faculty retention on campuses with regard to
benefits packages? He noted that the Task Force on Illness and Disability had
had its first meeting.
e. Governance – Henry Ferrell
With regard to faculty layoffs he read
from Section 605a of the Code which deals with financial exigency. He is
concerned over the move toward greater autonomy for local campuses. He is
concerned that local trustees will attempt to micro-manage the campuses. He
noted that the Executive Committee had agreed to meet prior to each Faculty
Assembly at an agreed upon site. He felt that is was an improvement over the
teleconferences of the past. He introduced motion 2002-Apr-#15 relative to
chairs of standing committees appearing before the UNC Board of Governors Study
Commission. Chair Veit spoke against this motion due to prior involvement of
the Assembly in this issue. The motion passed on a voice vote. Next he
introduced motion 2002-Apr-#16 relative to President Broad’s support of faculty
participation in meetings of the Boards of Trustees and their committees. The
motion passed on a voice vote. Henry then noted his long service on the Faculty
Assembly and stated that this would be the last meeting he would be attending.
f. Planning and Programs –
Steve Lilley
His committee spent some time in self-analysis. They
have decided to continue as a committee. They plan to look at program review
and how they are assembled.
g. Technology – Jose D’Arruda
The Technology Committee met with Frank Prochaska
and Robyn Render. The Committee conducted a very successful conference at
Greensboro. 62% of the attendees were faculty members. He asked for the support
of the Faculty Assembly of the TLT Collaborative Conference next year. He
presented a list of System-wide software contracts that can be consulted at: http://northcarolina.edu/ir/procurement/contracts/cfm
Next he presented a Motion 2002-Apr-#17 to Thank the
TLT Collaborative and Frank Prochaska for their support of the Conference. The
motion passed on a voice vote. The committee presented new ideas for the
conference next year: Poster sessions and combining the conference with another
conference to reduce costs.
4. New Business
a. Chair Veit expressed
appreciation to the Chairs of the Faculty Assembly Committees.
b. Mary Smith presented a motion relative to the
service of David Claxton. Motion 2002-Apr-#18: Whereas David Claxton has
faithfully served the Assembly for six years, including currently acting as
Vice Chair, we resolve to honor him for distinguished service.
c. James Evans presented a motion relative to
the service of Keith Howell. Motion 2002-Apr-#19: Whereas Keith Howell has
served six years as a delegate from UNCG to the Faculty Assembly; Whereas, he
has provided leadership and energy as an exemplary representative of the
interests of the university; Whereas, he chaired the Faculty Assembly with
distinction for two years; Whereas, he has been a prominent and articulate
voice for the interests of UNC faculty generally; Whereas, he has also served
as the faculty’s model as a connoisseur of food and wine; Whereas, his second
term as a delegate from UNCG is now coming to and end; Now, therefore, be it
resolved that the Faculty Assembly recognize and thank our colleague, Keith
Howell, for his dedication and leadership on behalf of all faculty of the
University of North Carolina.
d. Bob Morrison presented a motion relative to
the service of Henry Ferrell. Motion 2002-Apr-#20: Whereas Henry Ferrell served
on the Assembly that drew up the constitution and bylaws during 1972-73 and
regularized the work of the Assembly through established committees and meeting
times. On December 2, 1972 the organizational meeting was held in Chapel Hill
and President William Friday invited the Faculty Assembly “to play an active
role in the processes of the University.” During the 1972-73 academic year the
assembly met on five occasions at which time the Faculty Assembly
representatives of ECU William Grossnickle, James McDaniel, Robert Woodside,
and Henry Ferrell were in attendance or represented by their alternates. These
meetings engendered spirited debate on academic freedom, due process and the
role of the faculty in shared governance within the University of North
Carolina. Whereas Henry Ferrell served as the second chair of the Faculty
Assembly from 1974-1976, and continued his leadership as a major force in the
founding and growth of the Faculty Assembly. Whereas Henry Ferrell has served
on the Faculty Assembly from 1972-1978 and from 1996-2002, and provided a
second six year term of service to the faculty of the University of North
Carolina System as a leader and parliamentarian of the Assembly. Be it resolved
that the President of the University of North Carolina and the delegates of the
University of North Carolina Faculty Assembly express their profound
appreciation for his service to the State.
e. Delegate Bell thanked Chair
Veit for his work during the past year.
Chair
Veit declared the meeting adjourned at 4:54 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted by
Ralph
Lee Scott
Secretary