Description of the following audio piece:
ROBEL: Can I gavel us in without actually gaveling? [laughter] It's great to see you all thanks for being here today. We're back to Indiana summer I guess – that time of year in Indiana where you think you've hit fall but all of a sudden it's almost ninety. So, it’s good to walk into this wonderful air conditioning and this wonderful group so let's begin with, if I may, asking for a motion for the approval of the minutes from our last meeting.
KLOOSTER: So moved.
ROBEL: Thank you, Peter. Second?
GROTH: [comment indistinct]
ROBEL: Thank you, Dennis. All in favor? [chorus of “aye”] Opposed? [silence] Great, thank you so much. Well let's move on to our call act, the memorial resolution to one of our colleagues, William Donald Morton, and for that I turn to Eliza Pavalko.
AGENDA ITEM 2: MEMORIAL RESOLUTION
PAVALKO: Don Martin was a Southern gentleman, by any measure, with a quiet disposition a friendly nature patience and a willingness to help others among his numerous friends, colleagues, and students alike. Don enrolled at Indiana University and completed a Master of Science degree in Parks and Recreation Administration in 1957. He then did a one year in-service training program sponsored by the National Park and Recreation Association in Milwaukee. After a stint as a recreation program supervisor in Michigan, he became director of recreation in Birmingham, Michigan. It was not long before Don became Superintendent of Parks and Recreation in Southfield, Michigan in 1966. Don became an associate professor at Central Michigan University. During his years in Michigan, Don worked and received his doctorate in resource development from Michigan State in 1972. In 1975, he was invited to join the faculty at Indiana University in the Department of Recreation, Park and Leisure Studies in the School of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation.
At Indiana, Don taught courses in recreation planning, finance, and budgeting and park design. His research focused on planning activities and trends in park operations and open space standards. Don authored and coauthored a variety of publications including financial analysis of revenue producing facilities and a ten year look at state parks systems He was co-author of the fourth edition of Recreation and Leisure: The Changing Scene. Don served as assistant chair of the Department Recreation and Park Administration and he was noted for his long tenure as treasurer of the Bloomington Park Foundation. He was a member of the Indiana Park and Recreation Association, the National Recreation and Park Association, and the Academy for Parks and Recreation Administration. One of Don Martin's outstanding graduate students, Dr Phil Rea, said, “teacher, mentor, friend, leader, and colleague. Don Martin does all of that and more. In my years, I’ve not met a finer person … this is how much I value the time spent with this fine gentleman. He improved the life of everyone he touched.” We request this memorial resolution be presented to the members of the Bloomington Faculty Council,preserved in its minutes, and archived. And that after its presentation, copies be sent to his son and daughter.
ROBEL: Thank you so much. Please stand for a moment of silence. [standing in silence] Thank you. Thank you. I turn to our president for the report of the executive committee and the presiding officer.
AGENDA ITEM 3: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE BUSINESS
TANFORD: Thank you. My remarks today are going to focus primarily on communication, communication among us with our constituencies, how one brings things to us, written statements, that sort of thing because we've had a couple of faculty members in the past week who have sent us documents that they think will be helpful to some discussion that we are having, or they contain questions or information. So I want to talk about that just a little bit, and I want to start with just a reminder which we all know that you all represent your units, except for those of you who are at large. And, you know, if important stuff goes on here and it could happen – [laughter] - then we kind of expect you to go back and take that information back to your units and disseminate it somehow. We don't assume that everybody in your unit will read the minutes and read the reports. That's really - we would ask that you go back to your units and circulate, by e-mail or by comment at a faculty meeting, so that your units know what's going on here. I think I want to request that you start that by reminding your colleagues that you are in fact their representative. I, as an empirical experiment, I wandered and picked several of my colleagues in the law school at random, that is the ones who are in their offices, and asked them who the law school's representative was. They either didn't know or they incorrectly thought it was me and no one actually came up with Ken Dau-Schmidt who is actually the elected representative. So this may come as a shock to you but some of you were elected to represent your unit by a vote of three to nothing with thirty one people not voting and it is entirely possible that your colleagues do not know that you are the person that they should talk to if they want to channel information to us - they want us to look into an issue.
We had a perfect example of that we got a very nice, long question, from someone who asked whether we could look into providing some kind of designated parking spaces for faculty who were pregnant. That's not a disability, they're not eligible for handicapped parking, and there are areas of the campus where parking is very hard to come by and it may be difficult for them to walk and I think that's a perfectly good question and that should, you know, your colleagues should feel free to go to - they should know to go to you to give you that information and you can bring it to the executive committee, or pass it on to one of our committees, and we can have a process by which that gets considered.
And kind of my second request in this regard is, as you know or most of you know, one of our major topics of focus this year, and the one that is likely to be the most difficult and have the greatest variety of views, is looking at the status, job security, rights, representation rights, voting rights, of the non-tenure track faculty and ask whether or not there are think steps we should do to improve or change their status to bring them. And that's going to be a long discussion. You can start, for example, knowing that it's going to be a topic this year, by talking to your colleagues, by asking your chair or Dean for fifteen minutes on a faculty meeting agenda to get some input and feedback from the people in your own units and that will greatly help the discussion because we sit here on the executive committee, and even in this group sometimes and I know the administration does, and wonder if the views that are being expressed actually represent anything much more than the individual opinions of us as members and they should be that, but they also should be informed by the views of your colleagues.
Just a note that the discussion about non-tenure track faculty will begin at our next meeting, the first meeting of October, barring a nuclear war with Korea or anything else that might interrupt our schedule. And the purpose of it, to just to give you a long range picture, is it's a preliminary discussion to help us - to help our task force begin to decide where do we start? What are the issues? What should we be focusing on first? What are your views on how we go about doing things like increasing the representation on the B.F.C. and other issues. It's just an open discussion to help us and the NTT task force set the agenda for the discussion of the topic. And I also want to talk just mention briefly about the speaking rights in front of the council, the circulation of information and things like that. We had two letters actually, two letters and then a revision to notes, and then a revision of one of them, that were circulated in advance. Our bylaws provide that on request prior to a meeting, any faculty member may ask to be invited by the executive committee to participate, either in person with speaking privileges or by circulating a document. So, while I think the preference on the part of the Executive Committee - when we sort of get this information coming in - our preference is first to give it to a committee that's working on an issue and let them put it together with other information that they have and decide what is most appropriate to bring to the faculty, but by and large in a case like this, if we get something from a faculty member that looks like it may contribute to a discussion of something on the agenda - that is germane to the agenda - we are likely to approve that it be circulated. And that's what happened this week. The circulation of these documents, whether they be from the Provost or from a faculty member, do not imply the endorsement of the content of them by the executive committee. It's just, you know, this is information that we think - that some faculty member thought was relevant and we are very uncomfortable being in the position of sensors. Of trying to prevent something from being said. So we encourage you and your colleagues to do that. If we get something that's not directly germane to an issue on the agenda, then we'll do then we will refer it to a committee.
And one final thing just to bring your attention. I know the issue of the Benton Murals is floating around. It is on the Executive Committee radar, on our agenda. Parts of that discussion have already been referred to committees and in part we are in consideration of whether there is some issue, some specific issue, some vehicle that would make it appropriate to bring here for some broader discussion. In the meantime there is a presentation by PACE, the Political and Civil Engagement Project, on this Thursday, September 28th, at 5:45 in Woodburn Hall 100, the room that contains the murals. A multi-panel presentation called Art, Public Memory, and Racial Justice: The Case of the Benton Murals, Alex Lichtenstein, Nan Brewer, Devin Brown, Kevin Brown, Eric Sandweiss, Ashley Scurlock, Carl Weinberg, all sorts of good people will talk. So that – I just wanted to alert you that that is going on and with that, I'm done.
AGENDA ITEM 4: PRESIDING OFFICER’S REPORT
ROBEL: Right on time. All right I just have a couple of remarks and I'm going to turn to colleagues to help me with them. We are about to host a visit by our accreditors and there will be many opportunities I think for many of you to meet with the Accreditors, the Higher Learning Commission. They come to visit every ten years, so if you want to see them there are some public meetings. But I thought I'd ask Dennis if he could speak just for a moment to the accreditation visit.
GROTH: Thank you Provost Robel. Yes, next Monday and Tuesday we will be hosting something that's only seen once every ten years like the eclipse. In fact you won't see another one until 2027, perhaps 2028. We will not be distributing glasses; you are allowed to look directly at the accreditation process. [laughter] I will not be held responsible for anything that you see though. [laughter]With all seriousness, first I want to thank everybody. There is more people than I could name that have contributed to this process. Providing evidence, providing feedback on our assurance argument, provide responding to requests from additional information, sometimes with approximately immediate response required and everybody has been fantastic. But I do want to take just a second and identify and recognize my team of Judy Ouimet, Kristin Hobson, and Stephanie Nguyen, who have been working tirelessly - really for about two and a half years - in getting us ready for this two day visit so I thank them immensely. All the good things that happen can be directly applied based upon their work. Anything that bad that happens, I accept all responsibility.
On Monday and Tuesday, the site visit team will be here. These are actually - it's a peer review team, so there are no employees of the Higher Learning Commission coming on Monday and Tuesday. There are only people like us who do this service at other institutions, they have similar responsibilities with all of us. They are faculty, there are Deans, there are administrators that are coming and there are seven people coming. We will be hosting a variety of meetings. Some of them are very specific: they will be meeting with the Deans, for example; with vice presidents; with the president and the provost; with the vice provost; with a variety of specific people on campus but there will be six open meetings on Monday. They're all on Monday; some of them are occurring at the same time. One of them is - there are five criterion to be that are measured in the accreditation reaffirmation process. One is on integrity of the institution and also another one on the mission of the institution. There will be an open meeting on Monday and everyone on campus – students, faculty, and staff - will receive an email giving more details on this. It's also been made publicly available in newspaper and on websites. That meeting at eleven o'clock on Monday morning in the Union. All of these meetings will be in the Union. They're open to people - there will be no presentations made. I've been trying to really be accurate with regards. If people go, they can expect to perhaps have a conversation and add value. There won't be anybody from our institution standing up and saying here's what our mission is. It will be really interaction with the site visit team. There will be a parallel session on teaching and learning also in the Union at eleven o’clock. One part of it is criterion three, which has to do with students and students support and learning from that perspective. In another, criterion four is on teaching and learning and support of faculty, so that is also at eleven. At 1:30 is a criterion five open forum which has to do with resources, budgets, and things like that. Questions may arise from that and then at four o'clock our open, open meetings. There's three parallel - one for faculty, one for students, and one for staff - we are not checking I.D.'s It's not anything but it's expected that the site team would be hearing comments from students or about the student experience in the student session and likewise for faculty so I encourage you to attend.
Keep in mind that they are peers. They're not employees of the Higher Learning Commission. They like all peer review processes will go through a process and provide us a report at some time after the visit is complete. So thank you very much.
ROBEL: I remember when I was Dean at the law school when our creditors came at some point when I was dean, there was a tornado and we were all required to go into our moot court room because … tornado. And the accreditors were in there and we held an impromptu student meeting because we had them all in there and it just seemed like the thing to do. So it was very well attended. [laughter] We can't depend on the luck of a tornado so feel invited to go to any of these meetings on behalf of the campus.
I also, Dennis, before you settle in for the rest of the meeting, I thought it would be helpful for you to describe the grant that you just got. It's related to the H.L.C. in the following sense: the H.L.C. requires that teachers of courses for college credit are credentialed at least one degree level above the students their teaching, with exceptions that are complicated. That has implications for students in high school who are taking college credit classes and Dennis will you describe what the grant is that your office just got? What it will do?
GROTH: Sure. We were notified last week of a grant from the Indiana commission for $869,000 to support this advancement of credentialing for high school teachers that grant those. Its only part—it's part of a larger project with the IU Advance College Oroject to support the credentialing of all of its teachers and to expand its ability to support the state and address this challenge for the entire state. As a result we expect that our big goal, if I could be so bold, is to support every single high school in the state of Indiana with the highest quality dual credit instruction and oversight. It's happening anyways and we're only in about fifteen percent of the high schools in the state and we’re the second largest provider in the state. So I think what we're looking at here is the opportunity to establish IU, and IUB in particular, as the premier provider of this providing the highest quality education programs and addressing the needs really precipitated by the qualification standards with the Higher Learning Commission. The grant will pay for the graduate tuition, the program itself will pay for the graduate tuition beyond the grant. The grant itself is very targeted toward STEM, but we will be entirely supporting all the social science and humanities areas in equivalent fashion.
ROBEL: So you all could very soon have new students in your classes who are working on their master’s degrees in areas that are being taught in the high schools for accredited at our institution and others. So thank you very much, that's about as virtuous as a circle gets.
I have a question submitted ahead of time that goes to issues having to do with the use of lethal and non-lethal force by the IU police department. This is an issue obviously that is of critical interest to everybody. We had an example just this week of how difficult these questions can be. There were four questions submitted ahead of time: What policies are there regarding the use of lethal and nonlethal force? Under what conditions are officers permitted to escalate to using lethal force? Do officers have training and protocols in place that permit deescalation in potentially life threatening circumstances? and Are officers trained in recognizing and handling of individuals with mental health problems?
The answers to all these questions that are answerable by yes or no is yes. I think while I have written out answers from Ben Hunter who is here today, our Superintendent of Public Safety. And he is joined by Lori Flint, the chief of our police department. I think it would be probably more sensible for Ben to give these answers because they're fairly technical and complicated, so with the permission of the Council, Ben if I could invite you to the microphone. Thank you so much.
HUNTER: Thank you, Dr. Robel. Thanks for the invitation. It's a pleasure to be here. On these questions, I'm going to make sure I have them verbatim so I have them here and I sent Dr. Robel the answers. We do have policies on less lethal and lethal force. I'm happy to make those available. I can send him to Catherine and for distribution. Those policies do guide our actions. They've gone through a recent review with my predecessor, interim Superintendent Bob True. There's going to process on that. They've been constantly updated. I'm nine months here. It's best to think of me as the new Jerry Minger, just not as tall. [laughter] So on my arrival, I looked at those policies, I looked at high risk areas that I would be concerned of as I arrived here, and these are areas I'm concerned of. So I worked with John Applegate, Mark Bruin my boss, to develop a de-escalation Commission. The first meeting of that was last month. Our second meeting is next month. Our charge is specific to review the current order, which is a response to resistance to ensure it meets best practices review. I.P.D.’s current training programs use your best practices are utilized in teaching and instructing de-escalation techniques and annual inservice training for our team. And keep in mind this is statewide for nearly three hundred police officers that this commission will be tasked with. Review I.P.D.’s current operational tools to include tools and weapons for dealing and mitigating injury to incidents of resistance. The first commission meeting, we added two additional charges and that's to review data collected on the use of force for the last three years, review current policies on protest response and management.
Again we have what I think is a robust response to resistance policy. We also have also inherited a crisis intervention and mental illness policy. All our officers are C.I.T., Crisis Intervention Team, trained and we do annual in-service on that area. Again, I’ve task the commission to help me look at that training and that comes out of a Police Executive Research Forum report issued in 2015. P.E.R.F. is Washington D.C. based. It's a think tank for law enforcement executives and out of that research it's clear across the country that law enforcement needs to rethink how it handles de-escalation and look at those processes. L.A.'s been successful at it. New York's been successful at it. There are examples across the country that have put those things in place. I think I've answered all the questions. We do the training, we have policies in place, the timing for these questions is absolutely critical for us so I appreciate them.
The last one I didn't recognize. Our officers training recognize in handling, that does come with the training, however I'm not satisfied with our current C.I.T. stance, the training. So separate of the commission, I've commissioned Chief Thomas Remender who's the chief and IU Kokomo for I U.P.D. and Lieutenant James Vastag. They both have master's in counseling, they’ve been practitioners in previous lives so that task them to reach out to faculty and our counseling centers on our campus and develop a new C.I.T. Century Course for Higher Ed. In Higher Ed, we deal with issues that are vastly different from municipal and state agencies, so I want them to retool a crisis intervention team training for higher ed. With me also as you know Chief Flint, who everyone knows, because he knows everyone, which is good, and major Nick Luce who was just recently promoted as our new training director, he replaced Greg Butler. Chief Remender and Lieutenant Vastag will be working closely. As you know our IU Academy, we have graduated over 1,200 recruits that have gone on to other departments including I U.P.D. and so it's important that we on board them correctly and so we're looking at these issues currently. I'm happy to answer any questions from that.
ROBEL: Thank you so much and I was delighted to see that Professor Natalie Hipple from Criminal Justice is helping with data analysis on use of force on the de-escalation commission. So it may well be that the council would like to have to have you back at some later time for a more formal presentation but I'm really grateful that you all were able to come today. Does anyone have a question for the — we've got two?
HUNTER: I can't fix parking tickets just . . . [laughter]
ROBEL: Well, then we’re down to one.
HENSHEL: Would it be possible to circulate the policies because you said that there are policies but you didn't specify?
HUNTER: Yes, absolutely. I’ll send those to Catherine and if there's someone better to send those to, absolutely.
ROBEL: You can send them to my office and we'll make sure that the Council gets them.
ROBEL: I saw another question? Great.
GLAZEWSKI: Are there policies or formal policies around use of force when external security agencies are brought to campus? That may not happen that frequently, but to what extent are policies developed around that use of force in de-escalation and how is that being communicated across multiple agencies?
ROBEL: That’s a great question.
HUNTER: So if it's a joint agency response, they fall under unified command. So for example I'll start with the law enforcement side of it for the O.S.U. game, most recent example. We’re using a multitude of agencies: Bloomington, Indiana State Police, Sheriff's department, they fall under their policies. However we have instituted for the first time a roll call briefing I’ve asked Chief Flint for lack of a better term grab control that a little bit better so we have more formality with it. We've talked to them about clearing, talked to them about report writing, and what our expectations are. That will be happening before every major event that we bring outside law enforcement agencies on. In terms of the private security, we're part of a process of looking at purchasing to do an R.F.P. That's probably a good area, it's not part of our commission, I'm happy to look at it and give suggestions. The security companies that come in across our enterprise, at all seven campuses, are vastly different, however the one main agency is E.S.G. that we closely work with them. They are in the fold, they're under our command for the most part, but it's probably an area I need to work with events on so you know I'll look into that.
ROBEL: Thank you so much. I appreciate, very much, you taking the time to come today.
HUNTER: Thank you.
ROBEL: Alright, are there other questions or comments from the council at this point? Alex?
TANFORD: Just to make clear, the executive committee did receive a number of questions from faculty, all regarding parking, so that rather than do them now. . . There were enough that we put parking on the agenda and those questions will be discussed at that time. We just want to make sure the people who submitted them that they will get asked.
ROBEL: Okay, terrific. Thank you. I haven't seen those. Let's move on then to presentation on campus construction projects, of which they were many, many, many, as you as you have seen and have been and they are all brilliantly managed by the man who's sitting right over there, Vice President for Capital Planning and Facilities, Tom Morrison.
AGENDA ITEM 6: PRESENTATION ON CAMPUS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
MORRISON: Thank you, Provost Robel and Mr. Chairman. My pleasure to be with you today to provide for you an update of campus construction, what we're working on now in terms of major projects, and some things we have in the pipeline and obviously I welcome your questions after we run through some slides. I always travel with pictures. I also want to say Provost Robel, thank you for your comment about air conditioning. We would love it when people appreciate the air conditioning. Doesn’t always work sometimes in every building but I appreciate it here. [laughter] So let me move forward on the presentation. You should all be able to see your screens and we want to always talk about how everything we do on the Bloomington campus in terms of major capital development is guided by a master plan. And if you've never had the opportunity the master plan is online, you can see it on our Web page, and you can see the physical presence of it. There are two great big models of the master plan that exist in two locations. One of them is in Bryan Hall outside the President's office and the other one is at the I.M.U. on the first floor and I would caution you is that when you look at those models recognize that they are fully developed, meaning that it has not only the buildings that exist today but building sites of the future. That's what you see in front of you on this slide. That doesn't mean we will ever build all of those buildings. It doesn't mean that those buildings are coming soon. Back on your parking topic, I often get questions of there's a building on the master plan where I park, when are you taking it away? And please be assured that those are just future building sites and we'll give you lots of advance notice.
The master plan has several priorities and these are the summary ones that we always talk about but we always have to understand that this is a historic campus and we never want to lose sight of that. We're working on some priorities that restore the Jordan River corridor through the campus. We want to define our edges and you see that going on. Very, very important is that we want this to be a walkable campus and what that means in terms of a master plan is on a college campus that we have grown out about as far as we're going to go, meaning now we're going to grow back in. And that it happens through renovation it happens through reinvesting in some of our older buildings and so while you'll see some new construction going on, we've gone as far out as we're going to go and that means we want to keep this a walkable campus as much as possible.
We want to always be prioritizing renovation. We all love new buildings. We love how they look, we love how they serve us, but about right now two-thirds of three-quarters of the money that we spend on major capital at Indiana University is on renovation and rehabilitation of what we have. And that is a responsibility that we have to the state of Indiana, it's a responsibility we have to the students, and so that is always going to be our priority. It is not attractive work. It is not something that people notice lots of except when it impacts your traffic and your walking and you're driving around campus when we've dug up a steam line and it causes you to reroute. Those are always inconvenient, but that's really, chill water lines, that's how we get that air conditioning across the campus and that's why it's important. We obviously want to sustainably manage all of our resources, we talk about that a lot. And so let's move into projects that are under construction right now.
First one that I’ll have you look at is Luddy Hall. Luddy Hall is the news School of Informatics and Engineering and that is on Woodlawn Avenue and so as you see this, you'll look at the upper right hand corner of the slide you always see the box that shows where it is on campus. This building is quickly moving towards completion. It should be done at the end of this semester and then move in will start. And always with a new building it will take a semester or so to move in, shake out although all that knits and gnats, but this building is the first major new building we're building and what will create a new quad up in that area of the campus. You can see some of the construction that's going on now, the insides of the building. I know most of you have not seen what the inside of this building looks like. It is excellent architectural design and we're very excited about that.
Kelley School of Business, the Conrad Prebys Career Services edition. This is the edition just to the north of the Kelly school. This one is also to be completed by the end of this semester. And we believe that beyond the necessary needs of the Kelly school, this one creates a much better back door to the Kelly School than what existed before with the loading dock that was there. Same kind of status if you look in that building right now and you see it being finished and over the next couple of months it will.
Forest Quad renovation, this is over on Third Street, residence hall. We've been going through a plan to renovate all of our residence hall buildings over the last decade and coming into the bicentennial. So Forest is the next one that we've been working on. This one will be fully complete next summer for students. So as you drive by there, you'll see one tower is vacant and being worked on and then that'll flip flop and will do the other tower, but all of this will be done by next summer.
The old Crescent renovation phase two, we have multiple phases to what we call the old Crescent renovation. Not all the buildings that are in this program are part of the formal old Crescent, but Swayne Hall is one that we are renovating now that is in the middle of its project. This is a project that is complex. The building itself was built in four phases over a period of decades. Its renovation has to occur in phases, we're not able to empty out the entire building all at once and gut it and it takes about two and a half years to go through this project. The next big piece of this project will be the removal of the front section of the building, which will be right here and so over the next few months you'll see that come down at some point and a new front put on the building. We think that will be a much more efficient use of that building. We’ll create a new front door for the building, get rid of something that was probably an architectural shortcoming of the institution and . . .
ROBEL: [comment indistinct]
MORRISON: [laughing] And so you'll see that but I can share that phase one of this project is already done if you look at the upper photos, that is just a remarkable sea change in that building and I know that it's been getting very favorable reviews for the faculty who have moved back in. I will share that we know that this is a noisy project, and if you occupy this building or are around this building, it's a sensitive area and that construction can be disruptive, but the end result has been very, very good.
Also in the old Crescent program is the renovation of Ernie Pyle Hall, just to the north of the I.M.U. and this project will be completed by the end of the spring semester. This will create – once the media schools and journalism moved out into this building - this created the opportunity to renovate Ernie Pyle and it will become a new front door for admissions on this campus, as well as career services in the college will be in the second floor of this building.
The Eskanazi Museum of Art is now closed, as you know, and you'll see in the lower right hand photos there that the museum is completely empty. All of the art has been moved out in it is now getting ready for the renovation, which will start any day and you'll see in the upper picture right there the rendering of what will become another new front door to the museum from the arboretum side and that will be a marked change in a very welcome change that what is right now a back door. The construction will be completed by the end of the 2018 calendar year but it will take probably another six to eight months to move all the art back into the museum and so we're looking at a fall of 2019 opening of the museum its fully renovated form.
North of the campus, the Ray Kramer Marching Hundred Hall for the Jacobs School of Music for the marching band. A new facility that's being built on the corner of 17th and Woodlawn and so if you drive by that location you've seen that come out of the ground and that building will be completed by the end of this semester. So we have a number of projects that are completing this fall. Right across the street at Memorial Stadium is the Excellence Academy. This is in the south end zone of the stadium. You'll see very much a new front door to the stadium on the south and you can see the rendering on the upper left photo and then you can see the construction as it exists today and that project will be complete in time for next football season, so it'll open up next summer. It has about nine or ten months to go and this one is not adding seats to the stadium at all this is a building that's being added to the one end of the stadium that will house all of the sports medicine functions, counseling, and food service and nutrition in that complex.
Just to the east is the newly named Wilkinson Hall, which will be the new volleyball and wrestling indoor arena which will be built on the corner of 17th and Fee just to the east of Cook Hall which is the basketball facility. This will be dedicated to volleyball and wrestling. Due to be completed next fall. This is also part of the master plan to bring back on to the athletics district on campus all of their programs. As many of you know, volleyball and wrestling compete out at the old university school gymnasium at 10th and the bypass, and so this will bring all of those student-athletes closer to the campus.
The auxiliary library facility, or what we call ALF Three, and we've had great success in building auxiliary library facility out at the 10th and the bypass, what we call the Technology Park and where we've been able to create a facility where we could, up to this point for the most part, store books that have been unloaded out of libraries on the campus, particularly Wells, and now we're building phase three that will be what we call the ALF of things. There are collections across the campus that need more secure and environmentally sensitive conditions to be stored in. We have many collections that unfortunately exist in closets and less secure areas and so this will allow them to be secured in environmental conditions that are worthy of those collections and so that building has started construction, will be ready by next summer. Small projects but you see these going on. The gateways, this is also part of the master plan to define the campus edges and so you'll see the latest one going in at 7th and Indiana and that project has started and that will be done by the end of the semester. It will take the form of many of the others that you've seen.
This is one that is now complete. Wells Quad renovation, Memorial and Goodbody, taking both of those buildings back to housing. You may not know, but those were original residence halls of the university. Primarily women's dormitories back leading up to World War II. And we've completely renovated both buildings. Gutting the inside and taking them back to housing. So here's a couple of fun photos. The upper left is - you can see the fireplace and a group of students sitting around the fireplace. Look to the right and that's the way it exists today with students living there once again. Furniture is of today the fireplace as of yesterday. When you look at the hallway and the lounge spaces, we've been able to create. We didn't build the dorm rooms back to the sizes that they were in 1940. [laughter] We totally gutted and created some very unique spaces. All of those residence hall rooms are of different sizes and different shapes because they had to conform to an older building it is absolutely a fun place to tour and one I think that students will appreciate. Again you look at some photos. Look at the lower left there, you'll see what an old residence hall room used to look like in 1943 and the upper right hand corner is what it looks like today. That room has only been lived in for a month [laughter] and I'm sure that was one of the cleaner ones that we've been able to take a picture of. You look at the staircase, here again another fun photo looking at 1941, and that same staircase been refinished keeping the fireplace and again credit to the architects who did a great job of maintaining the history of this space but again you see the new spaces, the new restrooms, laundry facilities that certainly didn't exist in that form way back when. And then to the rear of Goodbody Hall, we've made an addition there in adding on a dining hall and so I would encourage of those of you that do like to use the dining halls on the campus that are provided by R.P.S., this is one that is just, in addition to Goodbody, you can see that architectural we were trying to have that blend in and I think that has been successful and that is opening I believe . . . it's open now. I was there last week and had a test meal and it was very good.
And you also notice that we've got a little local sourcing here. On the upper left, you see Nick's will have an outpost there. So you'll appreciate this space and it overlooks what is the new amphitheater location on the campus and there's a little bit of back of house kitchen. That's the cleanest you'll ever see that kitchen as well and that's when it's brand new.
So let's talk about projects and planning very quickly. This is the largest project in the history of Indiana University and the one that is taking the most of our time right now. This is the regional academic health center of the academic health sciences building. This is the new IU Health Bloomington hospital that will be built on the driving range of a golf course. You've probably read lots about it. This in total is a four hundred million dollar project with ninety percent of that being health and the hospital space. That is the design and you'll see how it fits on the space. On the lower left here is the bypass and this construction will start probably right around the first of the year, around January first, and will take roughly about three years to build. Our portion of this, the IU building, the Health Sciences Building is this portion right here, which has the front door of the facility and that will house the academic units of the school of medicine, nursing, social work, and Dave, I’m missing one.
DALEKE: Speech and hearing sciences.
MORRISON: Yes. I had a brain cramp thank you. And credit to David Daleke for his work on representing all the units on the planning of this and we're very excited to get this one out of the ground. Let me walk you through how the site lays out. So if you this was an area looking at the site right here, you can see the Tech campus just to the south. This is the Cyber Infrastructure building right here. This is the major corner. And so this is close up and you can see the parking. Let me also answer a question I get all the time, which is well what will happen to traffic in the area? You can bet that they'll be a traffic light right there as an entry into the into that complex and it will certainly increase traffic in this area, but one of the things that we've been studying with the state of Indiana if you were going to build a hospital facility in this community, you would want to be on the bypass because it's a four lane road. You know if you have ever tried to go to the hospital now, I know many of you have, if you try to navigate 2nd Street at this time of day I guarantee you that will be a slower ride than this will be. This is how the facility divides out. The academic wing is here. Ambulatory, which is basically a clinical space, here and then the hospital emergency room, E.R., in this component to right here as well. And that's a close up view of that. And so that's a couple of architecturals looking close up. We're very excited about the design. It takes much from that area the campus, the C.I.B. building. But it is all limestone and that gives you a little bit of an idea. And then everybody always asks about parking, and so the parking for our building of this will be right here. So our building is here, parking will be right here, and you can see the rest. So that’s the public parking that goes with the hospital.
Let me move on to a Fine Arts new studio building. This is in just north of the railroad tracks, right off of Woodlawn. This portion of the building exists right here. This is the old IU Press Warehouse and Fine Arts occupies this space right now and then we are about to start building this. It will be done at the end of the spring semester for all of the Fine Arts programs that are moving from their locations that are just to the west of the heat plant. Those buildings will be removed coming in the future because of this building, which is what we call the Parking Garage Office Building and this is to give you bearings. This is the new Luddy Hall and then the central heating plant here. M.S.B. 2 is here. Geology is here. Psychology is here. And if there was an area of the campus where we certainly have found the need for more proximate parking was in this location, particularly with the addition of Luddy Hall right there. So we are adding just under 700 spaces in a parking garage at that location. This construction will start next summer and will take a little over a year to build, as you can see. Then the parking garage will be behind this and then Office Building in front of it. I’m just calling it office building because, as the Provost knows, we haven't decided what's moving in there yet. But it is critical for space needs as we transition some other spaces and so it will certainly answer some of the demand for parking that I know you have concerns about.
Golf course renovation, this is a project that is about to start next month and this will take the existing course that is in desperate need of renovation. It was a facility that was designed and built about seventy years ago but certainly not all of the design capability we have today. At that time it was really just rough clearing of the woods there. So this is going to be our ability to repair nature a bit in this location and with a very sustainable and environmentally sensitive design. Our current driving range is here. The hospital complex will obviously go there, and then the rest of the course we will keep. In terms of being the footprint that we will utilize, the Par 3 course will go away and then the holes will get reordered. It will get renovated and so look for that to start. That project will take about a year and a half before reopen again because it's going to take a while for the grass to take.
Metz Carillon, don't get used to this structure. The bells will be removed any time soon and they will be sent off to be renovated and added to this structural will be demolished and then a new carillon will be built within the Arboretum. We're currently working on that design and that will be ready for the board's review hopefully in October. That project will start and then be done August of 2019. I know many of you are wondering about these two projects, Ballantine Hall and Geology. Both of these buildings, again not our finest architectural moments in the history of Indiana University, and I have often wondered why we didn't settle on demolition but there is so much square footage in both of these buildings combined. They are just short of a half a million square feet and so we will be doing complete renovations of both buildings. We're working through now the program for that. I don't want you to get exciting that we can change the architecture of these buildings. We can't. So if you think they're ugly, they will remain ugly. If you like them, though you'll keep liking them. What will happen in them though is we will be doing lots of infrastructure work in these buildings. As you know from Ballantine, there is no central air conditioning in that building. That is one problem we're going to solve. Where we will take out all the window air conditioners, we’ll put in central air conditioning central AC, new infrastructure, new plumbing, fire alarms, get rid of the any asbestos that's still in the building. Just the new windows on that building will give it somewhat of a different look. The same is true with Geology. Going in both of them, built roughly at about the same time and of same design. The one thing I can share is that the interior of those buildings will not change to any great degree because they are solid, solid buildings. Lots of concrete block walls and so where we have offices today, we will have offices tomorrow; where we have classrooms today, we will have classrooms tomorrow but we will make them of today. The form will not change as much as the Provost is obviously still reviewing any changes that we will make to units that occupy those buildings. It is our goal to have all of this completed by 2020 and this is funded by the state of Indiana. Look for work to probably start next summer and we will have to do these in phases, just like Swain. We have no place that we can relocate all of those people at one time so we're working on a move management plan for that. And so with that I am happy to answer any questions.
AGENDA ITEM 7: QUESTIONS/ANSWERS FROM PRESENTATION ON CAMPUS CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
ROBEL: Thank you so much. Lot going on. Rebecca?
SPANG: So as a past president I'm outspoken. As a member of the history department of course think about Ballantine. And when you say that you're working on the program for it, I think with the members of this body want to know is how it had all our faculty involved in determining the program for when certain parts of Ballantine get renovated? Where they go when their offices are being renovated? Do we just get a notice in the mail saying time to go?
MORRISON: No. When I say the words program, it means a little bit different so let me explain all of those for you. Program has to do with the number of spaces that are in the building and what square footages they are and what we hand to the architect and what the scope of the project will be. So I'm sorry for not clarifying that. To your very legitimate question is how do we work through with academic units on all the particulars of move management and that's what the faculty and particular departments know. Who represents the departments in the units, we don't decide, of course, but we have faculty in an academic leadership involved in all those projects. One of the last things you want us to do is fully designed your space. We want input from faculty that this is furniture layouts and all of those things. What comes from designing classrooms, we don't pick the furniture, you know, we want people who are in instructional design to do that. So those processes will play out in terms of what we probably have to do, though, is what we will be working on. These are the buildings where we will move people to. Who goes where? That will be a joint decision, but not going to - let make a joke of this - we're not going to let you bump the people in the Kelley School because you like their new building so can we move over there will. We will find the space to move. The other line I always have is, “We don't create orphans.” We always have a home for somebody to go. We recognize it will be inconvenient. We've had the opportunity at Swain to practice a little bit and some other projects, as well, so I hope I've answered your question.
ROBEL: Right in the corner.
SIEK: Thank you for your presentation. I'm Katie Siek from Informatics. You mentioned that you wanted this to be a walkable campus so I was wondering if you to tell us more about the accessibility and the safety of the campus because in Luddy Hall, there is a four way intersection there but I asked and there's no plans for any type of crosswalk.
MORRISON: Are you asking about on Woodlawn?
SIEK: Any . . . [comment indistinct]
MORRISON: One of the things that we have to pay close attention to is making the campus of pedestrian scale and making it safe but we also have to recognize that we're working with the city of Bloomington as well. We know that where we have done improvements on streetscape, to include more sidewalks and central islands, that has been a help. We also know that frustrates drivers. And so if we have to pick between the safety of students and faculty at the pedestrian level and the frustration of drivers you can guess what we pick. So that's what we have learned and I would call your attention to particularly on Jordan Avenue. We are continuing that project to give notice what we've done from Third Street up to about the bridge and we've put in the traffic islands. We didn't do that just for beautification. It is beautiful. But we did that for safety to give people a landing spot in the middle of the street to get across. 10th Street we know is an issue and again having to work with the city on these things. The city put in that traffic island that is in front of SPEA. We probably believe that needs more attention and in terms of making that landing spot bigger and providing it with the same opportunities that exist on Jordan so that's one that's in our sights. We know the one near Psychology is a problem, in terms of where everybody parks there and crosses there. Your question about Woodlawn. Woodlawn, we have been putting in this summer. That's why Woodlawn was closed, was to deal with the sidewalk scape through there and so those sidewalks are now in place the crosswalks going to the west are not yet, but that's a function of understanding where people cross too. Getting cross walks is generally not a not a problem with the city. And so we'll let that play out a little bit, but the sidewalks are absolutely in place.
SIEK: Just to follow up with accessibility, though. So there's no cut out sometimes in the new sidewalks around Luddy, so I just checking on accessibility.
MORRISON: A good question. I’d be happy to have somebody take a look to make sure. And that is always the goal was to make them accessible. Whether those are in the right place I don't know.
ROBEL: Let’s see. Barb, and then Fritz.
CHERRY: Hi, I’m Barb Cheery. I’m with the Media School and I'm wondering and relationship to the question about how to communicate well the faculty about their space. R.T.V., the building that I'm in, continue to go under some construction. People are moving around and there's some people in the Media School are still on R.T.V. We're sharing space with Art History and almost every week, no matter which department is involved, we keep getting surprised by furniture being taken. Things moving. Furniture that belonged to some faculty members, like they had chairs outside their offices so students would have someplace to sit when they wait for them. It's just taken away and gone. In our lounging area where we have lunch, all of a sudden certain chairs that were there are gone. I mean things are being taken out and the faculty are not told anything and when we check with all the people in the Media School; our own facilities person, he doesn't know. So where's the handoff going between when you're renovating and working on buildings and there continues to be furniture, nothing's done. Who's in charge of that? Where’s the handoff and how can there be better communication because, literally, some of the things that are being taken belonged to certain people or certain departments, and this merger is changing out and we don't know where it goes. So I'm raising that on behalf of a couple of departments in our building and we don't know where to take this. We don’t know.
MORRISON: Obviously it’s news to me and so I'm happy to, at least from our end, to have it investigated to find out if there was anything going on. Because I'm not aware of it. Provost Robel, I'm not sure where as well . . .
CHERRY: Yeah, we're getting surprised almost weekly now. You know, with things disappearing.
MORRISON: There's not a lot of construction going on in that building. There's a little bit in R.T.V. in terms of some studio renovation, but there's not a lot going on otherwise.
CHERRY: But even on the third floor we're no construction is taking place, furniture and things are being taken, change out it's really rather peculiar.
ROBEL: This could be a law enforcement question rather than a facilities question. [laughter] yes but where there's a we were let it go back to my
CHERRY: I just have to mention the last thing is over the weekend some faculty members’ food were being stolen out of the refrigerator there, but that’s a minor thing. But no, . . .
MORRISON: because if I repeated issuing.
CHERRY: There are other things like white boards disappearing, things like that and we don't know what's going on.
ROBEL: I think we were …
MORRISON: Obviously you're getting blank stares here, but we're happy but thank you.
CHERRY: I mean they're coming in our building so I did want to, you know, where to bring it to you.
ROBEL: OK Thank you. Fritz?
MORRISON: Adam is back there feverishly taking notes. [laughter]
BREITHAUPT: Okay. Fritz Breithaupt, College of Arts and Science. First of all thank you, this looks beautiful. I'm impressed. I mean there's a lot of good projects here. Two very brief questions. First one, what's the status of bicycles in your planning? Second question, for the new med school campus there any plans for a tunnel under the bypass, similar to the 7th Street tunnel for pedestrians or bicycles or anyone else?
MORRISON: I’d have to think about that.
ROBEL: We may want to save the bicycle one for our next presentation.
MORRISON: Yes and Adam will be up on - We we've had a bicycle master plan done, completed. We're one of the few institutions in the country that's done that. We're now in process of implementing some of those programs and so I can tell you that is very important to us, because you know from our end, the more students we - or anybody we have on bicycles - the less cars and that certainly helps. So we support it, and I am never disappointed that wherever we put in bicycle racks, they get used. More and more we're putting in new buildings and this is part of our design standard. We're putting in changing rooms for people to be able to bike to work in and then be able to change and we've done that in a few locations recently. So that certainly has the attention. To your comment about tunneling, tunneling in Bloomington is really hard. Literally. We have limestone at about five feet, and so that's why you don't see any underground parking garages here. You generally don't see us go down to build floors sub-grade. It's because of the rock and so when you said under 7th Street I was perplexed because we don't have anything . . .
BREITHAUPT: Yes there's a there is a bicycle path around 7th Street and going under the bypass.
MORRISON: Oh, I know what you're talking about, it’s over on the East side. Yes, yes, yes, yes. I thought you talk about on the campus. This is one which was a natural grade. That was a good one when that was built because of the hill there. But, but no we generally do not go down. We don't go down, I can tell you. It's because, like I said, we have limestone. Every survey we do when we go to build a building ,it's almost to a science, we hit limestone at five or seven feet.
HENSHEL: Thank you very much by the way. Diane Henshel, SPEA. So I'm going to follow up on that question because this is a question that has come up before and with the new medical campus there are great concerns about the number of pedestrians that are going to cross at the bypass. This this came up in the master plan that's being built and there was a request for an overpass. At the time the comment was “no it looks ugly we will not put in an overpass.” Has that possibility been reconsidered because they don't have to look ugly, they can look gorgeous.
MORRISON: Oh, no, they can look gorgeous, no question about that. But it was the concern, I think it was - and I was here at the time and that was expressed by the University. It was a project that was managed by the state of Indiana and you can imagine what the state of Indiana was going to invest in for an overpass and so could you just . . .
HENSHEL: Could you design something pretty? [laughter]
MORRISON: First answer is yes. Second is can’t we afford it. [laughter] That's the hard one. Building a bridge of that length will be very, very expensive.
HENSHEL: But it could save lives.
MORRISON: Well, it’s not the only way to save lives. Let me go more fully in the answer, is that we're having that studied right now. In conjunction with not an overpass, but studied with what needs to happen at that intersection to make it of pedestrian scale for people to be able - it is not uncommon for people, as you've been to major cities, to have to cross four lane roads, but that is that intersection is geared towards the cars. So that is something that we're studying with INDOT right now. So that's what I would say at that location. One of the things that we were concerned about with that installation, to look at the overpass beyond the beauty of it, was how much would people use it. Because, when you're at a level field, if you will, straightest distance between two lines is to go at ground level as opposed to have to walk up the stairs, walk across, walk down the stairs. So there would be people that use it but we were concerned with there would still be people, students, wanting to cross that grade and that's a bigger safety concern.
CALLOWAY-THOMAS: OK over here, Lauren. My hand has been up.
JAFFEE: A question related to the Woodlawn and 10th Street, or I guess, Indiana and 10th Street entryway. Is that going to be on the McCalla School property or Yogi’s. And if the latter, what's the plan for the rest of Yogi’s?
MORRISON: There is not a plan for a gateway at that intersection at all, I can tell you that. We built one at 10th and Woodlawn but Yogi’s is further to the west, as you know. Yeah, so what's the plan for Yogi’s? The IU Foundation did purchase the Yogi’s property. We do not have any plans for that location at the moment. As you probably know, we purchase real estate around the campus for long-term future development at times and that is at the outermost most of our limits. The opportunity to buy it, the owner was willing to sell it to us and so we were able to – the IU Foundation was able to purchase the property. We do not have any plans at this point on we're using it for storage.
ROBEL: Great. And Carolyn has had her hand up and I'll let that be our last question because we really need to stay. . . Oh, I guess Susan has as well. Last two questions.
CALLOWAY-THOMAS: Thank you for presentation. It appears as if Ballantine Hall will not be dramatically changed aesthetically in terms of office space. I have moved six times since I've been here at Indiana University. I'd like for you to guarantee that I will have an exquisite office [laughter] in Ballantine Hall.
MORRISON: Carol, absolutely. And I can guarantee you a view, too.
ROBEL: Let the minutes reflect. [laughter]
CALLOWAY-THOMAS: Thank you.
ROBEL: Susan, you have your question in the time we have left.
SEIZER: I don't know if this gratitude is due to you or to the landscaping perhaps. Dunn Meadow has been wonderfully reconfigured so that it is not only walkable, but it is the rolable and I really appreciate that. There are a couple buildings that you've mentioned that are really - the renovations aren't really wheelchair friendly and Swain East is one of them.
MORRISON: Hopefully that gets addressed in the next round. They're still going with with that renovation, because that is one of our goals is to make the campus more accessible. I think as you know, everything's accessible but it has limits.
SEIZER: Right and the thing about Swain and those “horse lifts,” I call them.
SEIZER: That one I would say seventy-five percent of the time doesn't work so Swain isn’t accessible, at least Swain East. So I just wanted to let you know that, and the Fine Arts building also has a “horse lift.”
SEIZER: So the other buildings, the way they've been renovated where an elevator can manage, is great, but the little elevators that are sort of tinny, they break all the time. They used to require key and they no longer do, which is very welcome but I just wanted to add to the renovation and the accessibility comment.
MORRISON: I agree with you 100 percent and I agree with you on the reliability of that mechanism. It's not unique to Indiana University. It's right, it's not a reliable mechanism throughout but I will talk to you about Swain East.
SEIZER: Okay, thank you.
ROBEL: Thank you, so much, for taking the time today for the wonderful presentation, asking and answering all these questions, and also for just how beautiful everything is. I really appreciate the care that everyone in your organization takes with the look and feel and functionality of the campus. So thank you.
MORRISON: Thank you, Provost Robel. I’ll pass that on. [applause]
AGENDA ITEM 8: PRESENTATION FROM CAMPUS TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
ROBEL: Well, to keep us on time or catch us up just a bit, we turned to Adam Thies and Kurt Zorn, who are the co-chairs of the Campus Transportation Policy and Safety Committee to talk about transportation policy and safety. There we are, yep. Sounds great.
TANFORD: You can just evict Tom from his chair. [laughter]
ROBEL: Or come right over here. Thank you Tom.
ZORN: So Adam and I are co-chairs of the newly merged Committee, which is – I’m trying to remember the name now - the Campus Transportation Policy and Safety Committee and it is the merger of what was the Campus Transportation Safety Committee and the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee. Last year, I was asked - I've been a co-chair of the Campus Safety Committee since 2009 when the Provost at that time, Karen Hansen, in response, you may remember there was a death of a student who was struck on Fee Lane and there would also been a couple of accidents a few years before that resulted in deaths of pedestrians. At that point Provost Hansen put together what was called the Bloomington Campus Traffic Safety Task Force and our charge was to conduct a thorough examination of traffic safety on the campus.
So we were looking at factors that contributed to recent pedestrian accidents and recommending feasible measures to improve traffic safety in general on the campus. At that time Paul Sullivan was the co-chair along with me. Some of the things that have come out of the work of that task force is the formation of a continuing committee the Committee on Campus Traffic Safety but also some of the cross walks that were mentioned a little while ago. Whether you like it or not we're responsible for the cross walk in front of SPEA between SPEA and the Wells library. But before that, the two cross walks on Fee Lane, they were basically our pilot cross walks. You may say, “well geez, why are they that way and why are other ones not that way?” It turns out that it's not as easy to put a little cross walk up in the state of Indiana. I learned this years ago when I was a runner, coming from New York, pedestrians had to right away. In Indiana, it's kind of flipped, that only in certain circumstances does the pedestrian have the right away as a way I understand it. So the reason for the design of the cross walk at the top of the hill in Fee Lane - you’ll notice that there's a little island, but there are also what we call “dragon teeth” in the pavement and this was based on an approved design that had been started up at Purdue, which had been approved by the State and our public safety people here both the city of Bloomington and the campus police agreed with this, that if you set of cross walk up in that way, then you can legally put up a sign that says traffic needs to stop for pedestrians in the cross walk. So basically if a pedestrian enters the cross walk before the vehicles get to those little dragon teeth, the car has to stop; however, if the car is past those dragon teeth before the pedestrian gets in, then legally the pedestrian doesn't have the right away. Okay, so we're working under those circumstances that kind of explains the reason we have the design at 10th Street and the one by the business school on Fee Lane and up the hill on Fee Lane. Psychology, you might notice, doesn't have the island and doesn't have the dragon teeth and that's because we don't have the space to put that design in. So we had to go with the second best solution, which is a cross walk and it's sort of like, “yeah, we just hope people will stop” sort of thing. Similar to the one across from the S.R.S.C. Again that's not a legal cross walk in the true sense of the word, all right.
So what is our committee been doing? We've been working on things like that. We have tried to look at pedestrian, vehicular, and bicycle safety. I must say that the bicycle safety part has been the most daunting, just because there are so many folks that are involved in seemed to be doing things and so forth with regard to that. We've had master plans for bicycles on the campus plus the city has ramped up its efforts, as you know, in terms of bike lanes and so forth. The committee consists of both staff, faculty, students, and also representatives from the city because as Vice President Morrison noted, the streets that go through Bloomington don't belong to the campus, they belong to the city. So anything we want to do, we basically have to work with the city and get their agreement and that. So we have the director of the public works department, the chief of police from the city, and there might be somebody else there for getting at this. But the point is there's a lot of negotiation. The reason our committee works so well, I think, is because we communicate, we sit down, and we tried to find out what the campus is doing with regard to campus traffic safety and also what the city is doing and come to agreements on what can be done. There been some nice things that happened. The Jordan Avenue development on 17th Street at the top of the hill, they leveled that hill because we were concerned about the pedestrian people coming off of the sororities and fraternities on North Fee Lane. Is that what it is?
[comment from indistinct speaker]
ZORN: Oh, right, North Jordan. Those types of things. Then last year we had a retirement. The head of the Transportation Policy Advisory Committee retired and Provost Robel asked me to chair that committee. I had been a member for a few years and during that period of time it became pretty clear that there was a lot of overlap between what the one committee had done and what T.P.A.C. was doing and I mentioned this to Provost Robel that maybe it would make sense to combine that. And what we've done is merge that committee now into the current committee where we will have a specific subcommittee on parking, because that is one thing that is the charge of T.P.A.C. is to come up with, and advise on parking rates to the Provost. So I’m sort of rambling on a little bit. I just want to give you a little bit of context and what Adam and I really want to do is to listen to any concerns you may have that could become agenda items for this newly formed committee.
AGENDA ITEM 9: QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM PRESENTATION FROM CAMPUS TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND SAFETY COMMITTEE
ROBEL: I’m wondering if we could go right into parking, so we might be able to get - I want to be sure there's time for childcare because I think we may have people who have come for childcare so. . .
AGENDA ITEM 10: PRESENTATION ON PARKING OPERATIONS
BAUTERS: I will be quick. Thank you for inviting us.
ROBEL: Okay, great. Julie Bauters, thank you very much.
BAUTERS: Thank you for inviting us to talk about parking operations today and to address any questions or concerns you might have. I'd like to start by introducing Amanda Turnipseed, she is the manager of parking operations and she has the difficult job of managing the much coveted, but limited, asset on campus. She continuously looks for innovative ways to improve the operation and meet the needs of employees students departments and the campus as a whole.
Now, under the new unified system she also works with the other campuses to coordinate policies and procedures. Parking operations is an auxiliary unit. As such they are expected to cover all their expenses, bond payments, and set aside funds for future repair and renovation needs. In fiscal year ‘17 they added utility expenses for the first time. They ended the year with a positive net income and cash balance.
We also do rate comparisons periodically. The last one completed showed we were in the bottom half compared to our peers. So we are one of the least expensive, within our peer comparisons. We solicit feedback about new initiatives through T.P.A.C., which is chaired by Kurt Zorn.
A good example of something that we would take to T.P.A.C. is the comment that was mentioned at the beginning of the meeting about providing expectant mothers with spaces on campus. We can take this to T.P.A.C. for discussion and a recommendation later this fall. We also run any new initiatives through the Enterprise-wide Parking Committee. This is something relatively new, but we're trying to keep all of our policies and procedures consistent across all the campuses and this also allowed us, for the reciprocity on campuses with the parking.
As Tom mentioned we have a new garage slated to open fall 2019 and there are two more garages on the master plan. We have had some recent changes to two of the garages and the 13th and Fee lot after hearing concerns about parking shortages and the Fee Lane garage student hourly parking was eliminated during the day. We also eliminated hourly parking at the Poplars garage. The 13th and Fee lot was converted to employee only. Previously about half of the lot was designated for campus housing parking. This change added about two hundred fifty spaces. Students can still park in the garages and lots after five and on weekends.
Several improvements were made this year to the employee value permit. This is a permit that cost twenty four dollars a year and employees park out at the athletics complex and can take the bus into the core of campus. Previously, the permit was only valid out at the outlet athletics complex even after hours and on the weekends. Now the permit is valid after five and on weekends in other spaces on campus such as the EMP, EMS, and ST. We also eliminated overnight parking in the white lot between the two bus stops to provide more convenient parking added athletics. What we found is some students were storing their cars in the area that was most convenient for those taking the bus into campus, so with no overnight parking that should push those vehicles out and allow closer parking for those that are catching the bus into campus. Plus an additional bus was added to the S-route to address overcrowding and wait times. Since you said at the beginning there are a lot of questions, I think I'll stop there and see what you have.
ROBEL: Thank you so much for being so efficient and I'll start I think up on the diet. Alex and then Eizabeth?
AGENDA ITEM 11: QUESTIONS AND COMMMENTS FROM PRESENTATION ON PARKING OPERATIONS
TANFORD: I've had several questions sent to me as present B.F.C. to ask of you and they all were had the same basic topic, which is that the perceived pretty parking shortage particular in the northeast part of the campus appears to be aggravated by the rapidly growing number of reserved parking spots and those spots generally, if you go like to the little parking lot between the library and S.G.I.S. during the day you'll see that huge number of those places are reserved, and they're always empty the people learn in them. I think there's general concern about where the policy arose that allows the sale of reserved parking spots and what the process would be for reevaluating that policy, particularly in areas of campus where there's parking shortage.
BAUTERS: The reserved parking spaces was an initiative that came out of T.P.A.C. and I can tell you at this time we have 59 individuals that have a reserved parking permit on campus and we do hear the complaint about those spaces being empty. A lot of times the people that want those spaces are people that are traveling to other campuses. They're going across campus to meetings and so with coming and going a lot they need a place to park quickly and get back to the office. We do hear that complaint but there are only 59 reserved spaces for individuals on campus. Some of those others are reserved by departments and so they’re fore departmental use not individual use. But that was a T.P.A.C. initiative and we can we did reevaluated after the first year and we can bring it up again this year.
TANFORD: I think there was enough sentiment on a part of the faculty that this is a request that it be reevaluated both in terms of departmental perking as well. I mean the spaces are just gone and there are faculty members who also need to get to campus in order to teach class. A subject in which, if they don't get there, the major function of the university does not happen and their reports are that they're having a lot of trouble and that we need to rethink the spaces.
ROBEL: T.P.A.C. is the committee that involves faculty representation that evaluates the parking of those kinds of proposals so we can take that back to T.P.A.C. Elizabeth?
HOUSWORTH: I had two questions. One is you said that we were in the lower half of fees for our peer group. I was wondering who you included in the peer group, because we're also very rural compared to many institutions.
BAUTERS: Yes, I can tell you who is in that group. This was done by Walker Consultants and they determined who our peers were. We have Ball State, Indiana State, Miami University of Ohio, Michigan State, Pennsylvania State, University of Illinois, University of Iowa, University of Kentucky, University of Michigan, and University of Nebraska.
HOUSWORTH: Thank you and the other one is maybe less of a question other than but a complaint. I really hate the five dollars bicycle parking fee. So you charge five dollars per bicycle to park on campus but bicycles are a wonderful alternative to have to be using a parking space and I really resent that five dollar fee.
BAUTERS: We have been having discussions about eliminating that fee. For one thing to get more people to register their bikes because that helps us when it comes to thefts or impounding, it's much easier for us if we know who the bike belongs to. So Amanda has been working on that and we are taking that under evaluation right now.
ROBEL: Any other questions?
HENSHEL: This is a follow up on what Elizabeth asked. So not only are we a rural campus with a lot of people driving in from a fairly long distance, but we are also one of the lowest in terms of salary, at least in the Big Ten which included most of the people you compare it against. So if we're in the middle of the pack as a comparative group, we're at the low end or very low and for the salaries, it seems like maybe you should be checking for price of parking compared to salary. And that includes salary of the staff because the staff are especially the ones who live out of town and they really do not have good salaries.
BAUTERS: Yes, and we have talked about how we could bring that into the model. Because like I said, Walker came up with these comparisons but we have talked about how the cost of living is not consistent across all the institutions so we do want to reevaluate that. Currently we're going through a process where we're going through our model and what was presented to the trustees back in 2014 as far as our projections when the decision was made to handle in house and not privatize. So now we're going through and evaluating what our results have been in comparison to that and what changes we may want to make going forward. And I will definitely that one up again.
ROBEL: Any other questions on parking? Yep.
GLAZEWSKI: When parking services started tracking the number of requests that individuals make for dismissing tickets and then kind of reporting that back to individuals, what’s that information being used for? Asking for a friend of course. [laughter]
BAUTERS: I'm not aware of that tracking. I'm not quite sure I'm understanding what you're asking.
GLAZEWSKI: The request for a parking ticket dismissals. The appeals. So they're now being tracked like how many appeals that you're requesting. This is happening to other people, right? I might be the only one requesting the appeals.
TURNIPSEED: So we have always kept an internal track of citations and requests for dismissal that individuals have made over the course of time that I've been with parking since 2007. We've just moved it to an electronic version in the last few years. It's gone through a couple of iterations of being online. We have a receptor for that yearly basis.
So at the beginning of every year, everybody is basically reset to zero account but the purpose of that was for making sure that we don't have an individual who may contact our office and talk to five different people, five different times, with five different tickets and always getting those dismissed. We want to make sure that we're not over dismissing, in some situations, where other individuals may have the same requests that are getting denied on that.
GLAZEWSKI: Is there a maximum? [laughter] Not asking for myself. [laughter]
TURNIPSEED: We don't have a maximum. We have a pretty automatic dismissal of at least a first citation as a courtesy for folks, but we don't have a max number or limit saying “at this level we will no longer dismiss.” It’s on a case by case basis.
ROBEL: Although, I would suggest that you tell your friend if there are multiple parking tickets, there's probably an issue somewhere. [laughter] All right I'd like to get, if it's okay. . . maybe a last two questions because I really want to be sure we get to childcare because we have people in the audience and it was at the end of the agenda.
WITHNELL: Do you do any trend analysis going into the future about the rises in the parking rates. Looking back over the last ten years, going forward if they would continue at that rate in terms of affordability?
BAUTERS: Well, like I said, the goal originally that was brought to the trustees was to get to the peer medium within ten years. So right now we're pretty much set on what our increases need to be going forward to reach that peer medium by fiscal year ‘24.
WITHNELL: How does that impact the affordability?
ROBEL: It might be useful just to recall that when the trustees considered the question of privatizing. Ohio State had privatized - monetized essentially, their parking. They've gone on a monetized, as far as I can tell, most things on campus at this point at Ohio State. And the Provost over there is always talking about how much money he has but I tell him that some future Provost will not like him one hundred years from now. When we did that the trustees took a very firm stand on it and they basically said if we're not monetizing our parking because we believe that we can essential monetize it ourselves, that is we can go to the market rate and use that funding to do the kinds of things that we need to do on the campus - particularly and most immediately with parking - then we have to have the self-discipline to do that. And that's the approach that T.P.A.C. has taken since. Does that answer?
WITHNELL: Well it sounds like you're running it like a business rather than a service.
ROBEL: The goal was to maintain our own control over it, but auxiliaries do very much run like businesses. They are required to do that and that's part of the reason for running an auxiliary in that way is to assure that the money in the academic units is not used to subsidize the services like parking on the campus. So as T.P.A.C. thought through the rate increases over the last several years, it really has been guided by the trustee directive here.
BAUTERS: And I would like to add, we created the value permit to address affordability, which is the one that's twenty four dollars a year. We've also held that E.M.S. lower the standard permit lower and raised the E.M.P., the premium permit, by higher percentages at times.
ROBEL: The other goal that I think the campus T.P.A.C. committee was pursuing was a sustainability goal as well. You know the notion is, let's try to reduce the number of people who are driving to campus and let's provide a fair amount of low cost parking at a place where that is essentially storage parking, out on the athletic campus. Let's make it relatively easy for people to take public transportation in from there. So the trustee mandate really is the trustee mandate. If you're concerned about that, the trustees or the right people to talk to about it. The decision to try to balance sustainability and discourage parking on campus in other kinds of behavioral ways, is really T.P.A.C. and I think you're welcome to take those concerns to T.P.A.C. Let’s see, Ethan you have the last word on this.
MICHAELSON: There's anecdotal evidence of a secondary or black market in employee parking passes and I'm wondering if this issue has been studied and to the extent that it is a problem, what if anything can be done about it?
BAUTERS: This will be helped now that people have to enter their license plate. So now we can search on the actual vehicles, but Amanda has more direct experience with the black market. [laughter]
TURNIPSEED: You know, you make it sound like I’m running this black market. The concept of the black market is in itself hard to study because it's hard to go out and identify where these situations are happening. So one of the things that we have done, that that we did get quite a bit of pushback for but was able to be able to help to identify this taking place. Unfortunately a lot of these permits we found were happening from students who, by virtue of academic appointments are eligible to purchase these employee permits and may or may not have needed them or did not need them for the full length of time that they were purchasing them - and you know they were finding a way that they were able to make some money off of that. So we moved to a model where we were issuing employee permits to that group of eligible students on a semester long basis so that we are better able to identify and control the length and duration of time that the students were having those permits. So that's been one step that we've been - I don't know how successful yet we've been at doing that, but we are not seeing as many of those out in the field and fraudulent as we have in the past.
AGENDA ITEM 12: PRESENTATION ON CAMPUS CHILDCARE COOPERATIVES AND CHILDCARE AVAILABILITY
ROBEL: Well we learn something new every day. Thank you so much and I'm not letting Julie go at this point because we're turning now to child care and the issue first of childcare and then the child care co-ops. If you don't mind I'd like to break those two issues apart for the following reason: childcare is an auxiliary and it is managed through Tim Dunnuck Julie Bauters and ultimately Vice Provost Venkat. The child care co-ops are not part of that auxiliary, they've always been separate and so I'd like to talk maybe first about child care and child care expansion and then turn to the child care co-ops.
VENKAT: Okay. Again it's an auxiliary, which has got three units. One is the Campus Childcare Center. And the other Hoosier Courts and then Campus View. So it's been accredited and gold standard as far as being ably managed and tells me it's about the best thing ever so I believe him. Since it's hard to say much to him. And it's got about 171 spaces right now. It serves about sixteen infants, twenty toddlers, third two-year-olds, and about 100 preschoolers. And it does have somewhere in the neighborhood of about 500 people on the waitlist but as Tim Dunnuck will tell me, everyday the spots opens up. He was able to clear about twelve to fourteen because people have their personal belief that their kids should go. It seems they registered in multiple places and so there is the belief that some expansion will let us know how this waitlist will behave.
In fact the highest demand is for the toddlers, that’s thirty two persons, followed by two year olds that’s about twenty seven persons of the demand is and then finally the infants are twenty six persons. The part of the strategic plan is to expand the campus auxiliary-supported childcare and we have been studying it and we were able to find a creative way to changing a couple of rooms which we used for something else in expanding the child care. So we're able to in January 2018 we will have new classrooms at the Campus Children Center. All this expansion is taking place in C.C.C., our Campus Children's Center. Which will serve in January, ten toddlers and ten two-year-olds. Then in August 2018 then there will be another twenty people added to the additional preschoolers. The reason for the planned expansion of this nature, again according to term because they continue so we want to make sure that there is enough pipeline demand for the preschoolers. And in fact the - once again we have lot of peer comparison and we can see in terms of the cost wise, probably we are in the very low end. In fact, we are in the lowest for toddlers and - which is the other one - and two year olds and then we had a second lowest for the preschoolers and the third lowest for the infant care among all Big Ten several peer groups. That's because I think the campus does support the expansion most of the time.
As far as related to the local community, our costs are higher but at the same time, we had probably the best care again in Bloomington so that goes with that. And also all of our teachers are accredited. They have been with us for a long time and also they had this early childhood training and also the education school provides a lot of support to make it better. So that way the quality is considered superb and then I'll take this opportunity to thank Tim for all his years of great service and caring for these things. Then as far as the co-ops are concerned they don't report to us, but we do provide some sort of support to still guide them in the process and Julie, because of the various things which went on between the state and the I.R.S. and the various legislations, we do provide some support for providing payroll and things like that. In kind support that only started last year because of all the issues raised today. With that, I’ll open for questions.
ROBEL: Great and I should say that we do, actually with child care, we do provide a pretty healthy subsidy as Venkat has suggested for Hoosier Courts, which serves just preschoolers. It's about $1,280 per student. Campus View serves infants and toddlers and it's about $5,500 per student. And then, C.C.C., which is infants through preschool, is about $3,100 per student.
Let me talk a little bit about the co-ops. There are two co-ops that have historically been on the Bloomington campus. They are parent run and they have been around for a very long time. They currently serve about twelve kids. They depend on a model of parent involvement and parent work, so the parents spend a fair amount of time volunteering every week. There's a weekly commitment of - is it ten hours? The co-ops are not within the child care auxiliary, they never happen because they've been essentially a parent-run organization but they have been supported by IU. We've given them a place. We provided increasing amounts of support for the co-ops over the years in terms of indirect support as issues have arisen that come out, primarily, from the increasing regulatory structure that we face around issues that have to do with child care. So a couple of years ago we had we had an inspection at the co-ops by Environmental Health and Safety that led to the General Counsel asking a number of questions. We ended up with the state of Indiana asking some questions. The General Counsel and the state of Indiana agency that works with child care worked together to try to figure out a solution for the co-ops at that point and decided that the best thing to do was to try to get them licensed as, essentially day care homes, is the was the license. We continued to work with the co-ops at that point. There were questions raised by financial management because they didn't, and still don't actually, report through any office on the Bloomington campus.
The thing that finally was the most difficult decision here was to give the co-ops one more year and then withdraw IU from the co-ops. The reason for that has, as I said in my letter, which I think was circulated to all of you, we live in a post Penn State world. Organizations that work with children are just very highly regulated at this point and the parent co-ops are wonderful institutions. The parents have had tremendous experiences with them. They believe deeply in the model of parent run daycare. It's not one that many parents can do. It involves having to be able to volunteer your time during the week, which is difficult for most working people on the campus. And so we kind of were on the horns of a dilemma and you can see in my letter that we went through, all of us involved in our child care and in thinking about what kinds of risks the campus could really take. We went through a very long process to try to determine how best to proceed with the Co-op's. What we finally decided was we've got a lot of demand for child care on the campus and we need to put our resources behind accredited child care for our faculty and staff and students. That's the kind of child care that most people actually need is the ability to you know depend on the provision of care during the week, during the work week. The co-ops are increasingly needing to have a pretty deep infrastructure of support provided by the University in order to ameliorate the financial risks, the environmental risks, and the other regulatory risks that come with having care for children. And at some fundamental level that's at fairly deep odds with the approach of parent run daycare.
So what we have offered to do for the parents who are involved with the co-ops is we've given them priority for the new places that have been created in the childcare programs on the campus. We've given them a year to make alternative arrangements and I have offered, if they would like to set up parent run co-ops outside the campus, to provide access to people who could think about things like whether you want to set it up as a 501(c)(3) or other kinds of arrangements that might happen. I know the parents who are involved in this form of care are deeply committed to it and I know it's a real disappointment to see this coming to the end on the Bloomington campus at the end of the year, but I'm hoping that the long advance warning coupled with the offer to help as the co-ops move off the campus will give enough time for people to really get - and the priority for the new spots - will give people enough time to think about where they want to go next. So with that, I will open it up for questions. Bob?
AGENDA ITEM 13: QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM PRESENTATION ON CAMPUS CHILDCARE COOPERATIVES AND CHILDCARE AVAILABILITY
KRAVCHUK: Hi Lauren. I wondered, then, if it would be possible to capture the essence of the university's decision in this regard as an effort to avoid risk.
ROBEL: I think the effort to avoid risk is a big piece of it and I think it's fair to think of it that way. We also have to think about how we provide the most good for the most families on the campus and as the needs to provide support for the co-ops were increasing. So if you think about a long term path through the co-ops on the campus, the co-ops have thought about could they become accredited. It would be possible but it would take more than a director and the director would also require - any accreditation would go with the directors if the director decided to leave. So you have to start asking as more resources come around these cooperatives, whether that's the best use of the resources of the campus as opposed to trying to provide more through the accredited childcare.
KRAVCHUK: I wonder if I want to question very quickly. I wonder if we might be able to explore - because this is really, it's a young faculty and graduate student recruitment and retention issue. Childcare is really very, very expensive and you know on a stipend or on a junior faculty or on a single parent in particular it's very, very difficult. I wonder if we might be able to explore ways that we might have the University more heavily subsidize certain classes of employees or students in the child care system here. This is something I think my might be really useful be explored.
ROBEL: I’d be happy to look at that. As Venkat noted earlier, we are awfully affordable for our peer group and we do provide a pretty high subsidy for child care on the campus. It's obviously not as inexpensive as when the parents are providing most of the care. On the other hand, we know what the quality is, we know what the facilities are, we know what the financial management is, we know what the training is, and so it really is kind of a trade-off, but sure of course we're happy to explore whether there's a higher subsidy that we could provide. Yeah, let’s see. Fritz and then Alex? Or Susan?
SEIZER: Bobby, I want to thank you for that suggestion because what I was going to say was that I think a lot of graduate students really rely on something affordable and they do have a flexible schedule and they can contribute a couple hours. So it's a real shame to see us losing all of the really affordable - I mean you're saying were comparable but it's still really, really expensive for these lower classes - I mean - lower income families and single parent families. I am a recipient of the benefits of Hoosier Courts for my family and I know that Tim has done a great job with that and his accreditations are wonderful and I really want to support the suggestion just made that the Universities think about subsidizing these lower income families.
ROBEL: I think that's a wonderful suggestion and we will look at that. I don't think it's actually what - I think that the folks who are involved in the co-ops are really devoted to that form of care and I would love to help them figure out how to continue their cooperative on their own. Fritz?
BREITHAUPT: Okay. Thank you. I also follow the same line of reasoning. I am concerned about general fairness here. We heard there is a waiting list, so apparently some people get the benefit of the subsidies while others do not. I mean I know from my own situation because we got turned down by these places because they were full when we got here. So I wonder would it not be a more fair system to establish some general voucher system where the subsidies per child are counted and leaving it up to the parents to go to either accredited places or maybe - I do not understand the logic well that we can also go and people with a voucher system could go to other places. But at least to expand the range to go off campus if there is little space available and take the subsidies then along with them. I mean for a graduate student who signs up, but then get doesn't the spot on the campus could maybe make a dramatic difference I think.
ROBEL: Okay, so we'll take that. We'll put that in the hopper as a suggestion. Adam?
RENEKER: Hey, yeah, so we've been talking a lot about grad students. I am Adam Reneker and I'm the president of the Graduate and Professional Student Government. Childcare has probably been the most common advocacy topic that students have come to me about so far this year. So I’ve spent quite a bit of time looking into the current childcare landscape on campus and how that affects students. You can read the document that Elizabeth sent out earlier about the co-ops and the benefits that it provides to students, both financially and then also just with creating a sense of community for the students on campus that often feel alienated by their peers. With the closing of the co-ops, the only childcare option now, that the campus is financially supporting, is largely inaccessible to students. It can take over a year to get through the wait list. I've heard stories of students who, the minute they found out that they got into grad school at IU, had put themselves on the wait list and then they don't end up getting in until the spring after their first year.
And so because of that students are having to go other ways or to other places and aren’t able to utilize the subsidy. And then just financially, these centers are out of reach for most students. The remaining campus daycare centers are a premium service and it's more expensive than a lot of the other locations in town. So for instance, if I had a toddler, 100% of my stipend as a student academic appointee would have to go to pay for on campus childcare. And so I know that in general childcare is expensive and I value the existence of high-quality childcare options, but it makes me wonder what it signals about our priorities as an institution if we're willing to subsidize childcare for those who can afford the premium service, but we're not doing anything in order to help those with the greatest financial need in this situation.
ROBEL: Thank you. Well, we're we are at the end of our time. Actually a minute past that, and we're happy to continue this conversation or present it to a committee, which is probably the more appropriate you know probably the more appropriate thing to do. And unless there is unanimous consent to stay - or I think our bylaws require that we adjourn at this point. Thank you so much.