Remarks to the Oregon State Board of Higher Education

20 December 2002

Capital Center, Beaverton, OR

President Lussier, Chancellor Jarvis, Directors and Guests:

Good morning. In my brief remarks today, I'd like to quickly summarize the December IFS meeting and speak to you about some faculty concerns.

Our December meeting was hosted by OHSU. In their welcoming remarks, Drs. Kohler and Hallick presented some distressing statistics on employment needs in nursing, indicating that a doubling of nursing enrollment in all programs in the state is needed immediately to meet the needs of 2010. Both also reviewed aspects of the planned tram and riverside development to make "the hill" more accessible and to allow for needed expansion of facilities.

The remainder of the Friday meeting was devoted to a wide-ranging discussion of strategic planning and The Deal with Director Barnett and Chancellor Jarvis. Representative Jackie Dingfelder of northeast Portland joined the meeting for a time as well, offering her perspectives on governor-elect Kulongoski and the upcoming legislative session. Senators asked me to pass on their thanks and appreciation for the amount of time both Director Barnett and Chancellor Jarvis devoted to this session; it was certainly worthwhile for us and we hope they found it time will spent as well.

During our Saturday morning meeting, when senators summarize their impressions of the Friday conversations, it quickly became apparent that we didn't have a clear understanding from Chancellor Jarvis of the system's strategy for the upcoming legislative session. The faculty of the system want to be a part of the effort to promote the OUS with the legislature, but to avoid diluting the message, we need to be, as the saying goes, "on the same page" as the system and the Board. To that end, about a half dozen of us had a very productive meeting with Grattan Kerans and Lisa Zavala yesterday. I think we will be much more effective in our promotion of The Deal and the needs of higher ed. as a result.

While on the subject of advocacy, I applaud the goal of developing a plan for each Board member. Faculty will be in legislators' offices during and before the legislative session. We look forward to seeing Board members in Salem as well. You, in many ways, have more credence with legislators than we because they don't see you as having an ax to grind; faculty are often seen as campaigning for their own well-being rather than supporting the broader goals of giving Oregonians a top-notch post-secondary education system and fueling state economic growth. Please, visit Salem early and often and use your prestige to carry the message for public higher ed.

The PERS situation and its effects on the OUS surfaced as additional important issues for faculty. I note that understanding the financial impacts of increased PERS and PEBB contributions on cell values is mentioned as essential in connecting the RAM to The Deal. Faculty, however, feel the PERS predicament has ramifications that go beyond the financial. Faculty nearing retirement are faced with making important decisions without all needed information and making these decisions hurriedly. Many have chosen to leave the OUS rather than risk substantially reduced benefits, leaving big holes in their departments. In one department at OSU, 4 faculty members hastily decided to retire effective next week because of information they gleaned from several sources which they construed to mean they might take significant benefit cuts if they waited. I believe other departments at OSU had equivalent large retirements. Two members of one department at OIT made similar decisions. While some of these faculty members will return on adjunct appointments, the character of the affected departments has been rapidly altered in unexpected ways. Departmental experience, sagacity and governance have likely been diminished; winter and spring class offerings must be amended in some cases; certainly faculty morale among those remaining who will pick up extra courses has been affected. In institutions where hiring freezes are in place, such sudden, unexpected retirements are causing a difficulty. Students, too, will feel these effects in reduced offerings, larger classes and less instructor contact; time to graduation, and therefore costs, may increase. If the Board and the system have developed a strategy to address these non-financial impacts of the PERS dilemma, faculty are not aware of it. It is imperative that the system and the Board articulate a message to legislators and others involved in resolving PERS' difficulties that the system is feeling the effects in non-financial ways and that faculty retirement benefits, which have long been touted as making up for depressed salaries, must be protected. Further, the system must plan for the likelihood of increased retirements if resolution means reduced benefits.

As this is my last opportunity to address you, let me say thanks for helping to make my term as IFS president a pleasant one. I've enjoyed meeting and talking with each of you; I've learned a great deal. I particularly appreciate your including faculty in the selection process for our new chancellor, and, through me, in the strategic planning process. I will continue to represent OIT on IFS so I'm sure my path will cross some of yours but I won't have the privilege of talking with all of you regularly. It is with some regret that I turn the helm of IFS over to my capable colleague, Bill Danley from Southern.

Thanks, too, for your support and stewardship of our public system of higher education. Your commitment and dedication are truly outstanding and critical to Oregon.

Thank you and happy holidays.