Faculty Senate

Verbatim Transcript

Special Meeting - September 3, 1981

 

The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. The only agenda item was a report by the Chancellor on the Radio Station

 

Giusti: I have to tell you at the very outset one of the things I personally regret, and I know that this has been on some of your minds. It is that I have not been able to consult as widely as I would have liked with the faculty on this issue. It is something that bothers me because I came here two years ago, and I know, as an administrator, no doubt about it, I know that certain things are managerial in nature that a manager, a supervisor, an administrator is sup-posed to handle-that he doesn't have to consult with everybody all the time before he makes a move. But things that involve a general University matter, even though it did not come up from the faculty, I still have made it a practice of reporting back to the faculty, consulting the faculty, and trying to work with the faculty because I'm trying to carry it through to everybody that of this University or any university is that element called the faculty and students' interaction of learning experience. Well, I want to continue to do that. That happens to be my particular style. I like it better that way.  I feel more comfortable in do ing it, and I'd like to get as many people thinking about something before we make a move. I feel we have a better chance of coming out more successfully that way. Well, we didn't have all that consultation this time and I'll give you the background and some of the reasons.

 

First of all, this is the first time I had a chance to get involved with a budget for this University. It is the first year of a biennium. The year that I came was the second year of a biennium.         The budget was fixed. I had nothing to do with the budget.  I merely had to look at whatever I saw, whatever was given to me, and merely move on from there.  This year when we began to build the budget, and we were concerned with taking a wide look at everything of the University and putting. it together and seeing it as a total financial picture, we discovered certain things: that we were possibly in some trouble financially. We did not know what to do about salary increases. We did not know what to expect. We wanted to be sure that we were ready, though, to be prepared for various and different contingencies that might arise. Sometimes there was a notion that if somebody walked in and said "Here's $1 million and I will it or give it to this University for faculty salaries," we could not give it to the faculty--and I'm sure you understand that. We are part of the system. We work within the system and the system dictates what we will give out in salary increases. That's.as simple as it is. It dictates it to this extent. It puts a ceiling on us, but it never puts a floor onus. And that's where we get pinched sometimes.  If we don't stand ready and we don't have the reserves when the system is ready to move, then we're hurt on the reverse side.  If the system said we could give out 9% and we, with the money alotted by the state and the tuition increase, were only prepared to give out 7%, we would be hurting.  On the other hand, if we had the ability to go 10% and the system dictated 9% we would have to go 9%. So, with that we began to build the budget. And in building the budget we noticed in this one area of WIPU-FM that the red flag was up. We were alerted through some channels. in West Lafayette that,in the budget-ing office down there, the red flag had surfaced on the radio station. The reason it had surfaced this year, and not in the previousyears, is because we simply went into an overdraught. A real red overdraught. Why didn't we go into an overdraught situation before? Because at that time certain areas were covering certain operating funds. For example, University Relations holds the salaries of all the people working in the radio station. George Wendt's salary, Georgianne Daniel's salary, for instance, are put into University Relations. Other budgets are carrying various parts of the radio station.    But this year we went into a red overdraught; so we knew right away with the computers, the auditors, and the budget officers of West Lafayette, having a former budget officer as our Vice Chancellor now, we knew that they knew and they were waiting to see what we would do in our budget presentation. The budget was late this year.  It was way late.  And you know what can happen in a legislative session. We did not get a chance to present our budget until June 10.  In the meantime, when we knew what was coming up at the budget-that we knew this radio station would be one target that would be hit-we began to reconstruct the radio station as best we could put it together. We found out for the first time, the Vice Chancellors found out for the first time, under what conditions the radio station really came to IPFW. We saw the correspond-ence, we saw the notes that were there.  It was an eleventh-hour decision. The radio station was licensed and there was a rule set down by both presidents that not one single penny of general funds ever be spent on the radio station. President Hansen loaned $15,000, or permitted us to use $15,000, out of contingency funds as seed money to get this station off the ground.     It was to be repaid one year later. We didn't know any of this really. I didn't know any of this.  And in looking at it, I knew that we were in trouble because I, since the time I have been here, acted in the capacity that when the CETA funds ran out, I went ahead and inked the document which carried Mike Venable and Kitty Degler on now university funds.      At that time I shouldn't have inked the document.  It was my mistake.  But I did ink it and they were carried on University funds.            We were into University funds very heavily to the tune of almost $50,000 of a budget that was on the table listing at about $73,000 to $74,000, not to include some of the things that-were thrown in from various departments, such as equipment, and from LRC.which included the engineer which would bring the cost to about $100,00O.for the radio station.  So we began to sweat a little blood on this. We knew we were going to get caught at the budget hearing. We also know we were not operating according to procedures. So we met in March. We called the Citizens' Advisory Board together and we said, "Ladies and Gentlemen, we've got a problem; we've got a big problem. Here's the problem. We don't have any money to continue the radio station." At that meeting there were about half a dozen members of the Citizens' Advisory Board external to the University, so to speak, and about three faculty members who are on that Board. We explained to them that we have this problem. Where do we go from here? We said, "Alright, how about,devising a plan whereby, when we go to our budget hearing, we can set back over a three-year period, or a four-year period, or a reasonable amount of time, that we can show in good faith that we are going to set back a percentage of the general fund expenditures of this University and, allowing the outside sources to pick up the funding, that the radio station would then be operating as it was supposed to be operating for the past almost three years." That was presented.  We went on our way to do that and they went on their way to plan or to make that plan.  It got down to the time when we had to go before' the presidents and their staff for the budget hearing. We simply went to the budget hearing and when we got there and presented the budget, my one statement, after the pre-liminaries, was "Gentlemen, we have problems. There is one problem with the radio station, and there's problems two, three and four. We know that we are not operating correctly under procedures established for problem one and we want to tell you how we plan to rectify this situation. We have a plan that we can set back each year out of the general funds."  At that particular time there was a little bit of discussion. A little bit of lively discussion here and there.  Some were a little livelier than others, but the essence of it was that maybe we should pull the plug right then and there because we have had those previous years operating under the wrong kind of rules.

 

Well, reason prevailed. We said,"Let us work it out. We can't pull that station off the air. We came here in good faith. We put this up on the table." Of course we knew they knew. "We wanted to share the problem with you. We didn't come just with the problem, we came also wi.th.a solution to the problem-because management isn't just supposed to present problems.  If you're an administrator, you better come up with a solution to the problem. It may not be acceptable, but at least you try your best. There's one thing. I spent two years in the community talking about public relations, talking about essence and the last thing I want to see happen is to see this station

die under my administration.  It breaks down everything that I'm striving for. There are a lot of people out there who like the station and who are interested in the station. I just don't want it. Not to say that it isn't providing a service with good music and the like. So with that we came back. We tried our damndest at the time.  We got the Citizens'Advisory Board together and we said now look, "What is the goal?" They said at that time,"The goal is to save the station." And I added and to save the personnel because I feel we have a moral obligation to the personnel that are there. In fact, look at it, we went out and brought in a man last year from Michigan with a radio background because I believed the radio station at that time was operating correctly. I feel we have a moral responsibility to that person. So the goal was to save the station at that time, so I went looking for $100,000 as

fast and furiously as we could find it. I did go to IIT. I said to IIT,

"Look, we're in a bind.  Can we work out some kind of an agreement here?  I know that you people want to get some kind of media,television, radio, whatever. Can we work out something?" And they took a cold, hard look at it. They came back and said, "No we can't do it. We can't do it financially.

We can't help you.  We're sorry.  We hope you can find a way out."  I went off to another institution. 

 

I think most of you know the institution.  We have agreed, and here is where they say we might not have been open with everybody on this. Well, we went to another source and we went to the source and.we said, "Hey, can you help us out. Here is the problem that we have here, you have extra teeth. Possibly we can work out some kind of an agreement with you." They said, "Hey, we're interested. But don't use our name until we find out whether we can do it. Whether we have the resources, whether its permissible and whether the people

who own us or our governing board will permit it.  We don't want to get the feathers all fluffed up for nothing." So then for about three and a half or four weeks, John Carnaghi and their business people went almost day and night

to try and find out a way.  Inventorying all the equipment, finding out all

the expenditures, how we were operating, everything else to the point where they said, "We think we can do it. We think we can come up with the resources." Now the agreement we were proposing, the agreement was that it had to be the same format that you have now.   It had to play the classical music, it had to be devoted to the cultural arts. It could not be taken in and operating with any of their other facilities. That this would have to remain separate. Well, at that time the Citizens' Advisory Board came back and said, "What's happening?" And we said, "It looks like we might be able to save the sation. We think we've got it made." This group has the money. They have not only the first year of operating, but they have the second year of operating funds through private donations from individuals. The rule changed then. PBNI said at that time, "We have incorporated for the purpose of taking over the radio station." We said, "If you have the resources, fine, but if you don't, it will die." And they said, "Well, we'd rather have it die than to go to anyone else but PBNI."

 

That threw another wrinkle into it. The relations strained a little bit at that point because our goal was to save the station. This became public

knowledge then, not through us, we didn't breathe a word of it. But as soon as it became public knowledge and went on the air, and in the newspapers and on channel 15 without us knowing about it, at that point we got a call from this other body who said, "Sorry, you let it out. We're not going to take it before our governing board now.  It is not going to be something that we want them to put their rubber stamp to. We're backing out of the picture." As soon as they backed out of the picture, we went back to PBNI and said to PBNI, "Look, this station will die unless we get some financial reserves here to

keep this station going. You are the only basket, all of the eggs are in your

basket, and you better run with it. We'll do everything humanly possible to help out in anyway, that is legal, honest and ethical. We'll bend over backwards as long as we meet those three things, and, if we can meet that, anything else goes to keep that station on the air." They took up the challenge. They have gone to work. To the best of my knowledge, this is not a fact, but I have an idea that they have approached, or are somewhere near, the $50,000 mark now in their solicitation and that they are in a position now to meet the FCC requirements, that the license could transfer, and that they could continue to operate. The operation would be the same that you have it now because it would be essentially the same people operating the station. It would carry the same call letters, WIPU-FM, but you would not hear "This is the voice of Indiana University-Purdue University at Fort Wayne," and, ironically as it may sound, until last year, no one ever heard that on the radio either, because when I listened to the radio the first year I could not figure out the fact that we had a radio station and nobody ever mentioned Indiana-Purdue, nobody ever said anything. Then I made it a mandatory rule that they tell the people where it's coming from. So you have only heard that for just about a year.

 

So that's a quickie. An overall view of the background. Where do we stand now? I said that I'm not going to do anything on that radio station until we have a proposal. I had hoped at one time to have a couple of proposals, but they are not going to exist. We're only going to, get one proposal. We're going to get the proposal from PBNI and I am going to take that proposal before our Board of Advisors, simply to (1) inform the Board of everything that has been transpiring and try to keep them updated with some kind of communications, letters, reports and PBNI will make a presentation at that meeting, and then I will ask the advice of the Board of Advisors as to what we should do. If the Board of Advisors should say we recommend that you transfer the license to PBNI, then we will work diligently to transfer that license; we have put together an agreement. The agreement says that (1) as far as the equipment is concerned, that equipment which is considered nonacademic equipment,

or solely radio station equipment, namely the transmitter and the antenna, which is the little thing tacked onto the big tower out there, would remain here at the University because the FCC requires almost a year to actually move the transmitter to a new location. We are remote as it is now because we are broadcasting out of the library. The line would just be extended to wherever. The other thing is that, as far as the facilities goes, you can stay in the present facilities you are now, operating under the same conditions you are operating, provided that (1) after a certain period of time you would have to be like The Communicator, ARA, the bookstore, or the Credit Union that occupy space and pay rent. We would have to comply with that. Otherwise, we would be setting a precedent and then others wouldn't want to pay rent either, and we're required to ask for that rent. As far as the other equipment goes, the transmitter would be leased to them for $1 a year. The other equipment, that would be considered academic equipment--like a turntable or a tape recorder and the like, for instance, the record collection--we cannot sell, we cannot give. If we did, we would have to go through some rules and some regulations--we would have to put it up for bid and so on. We could put it out for loan, not take, but loan. We could loan a turntable for a certain period of time. We could do that, and we offered to do that to help keep the radio station going. PBNI said that (1) they would prefer, if they had the chance, to take it off campus. Fine, because we need the space, we can always use the space, space is critical. That's alright with us if you want to do that. You can take the control facilities off campus, leave the transmitter here and extend your lines. Next year, if you want, you can move the transmitter, too.                          It's up to you. In other words, we're swinging whatever way to keep that station on the air and operating. That is basically where we stand. If the Board of Advisors said, “No, don't go in that direction," then we would go to the Board of Advisors and say, "Ladies and Gentlemen, you know the predicament we’re in; you know the kind of money it takes-we'll pass the paper down this side of the table and up this side. of the table for pledges, because,we have to do something. Otherwise, it'll die out." There's where we are and now, if it's in order, if it's your pleasure, I've gone with an overview, and now whatever questions you might have, I'd like to entertain those.  John can get into some of the financial questions and Ed can address some of the academic. The floor is open.

 

M. Downs: What was the amount the University was spending on the radio station that was in contravention of the agreement with the Presidents?

 

J. Giusti: John, would you help me out a little bit on that? Now I quoted the figure 75% because I didn't want it around in the newspapers and the like.

 

J. Carnaghi: These are as actual as I can make them based on when you are subsidizing you are buying things at times that I think are being bought for University Relations, e.g., a tape recorder, that in fact are for the radio station. So what I have.here is what I know about. I cannot go back to the beginning simply because expenses were shown in other units that never appeared at the radio station, and to go one step further, one of the problems, quite frankly, is that during the transition, me to this campus and Jim Thatcher away from the campus, some of the expenses started being handled differently.  So the radio station showed a tilt; but before that, I suspect they were coming up with a deficit situation, but with a little creative accounting, it.never showed up. So I got here the first of January and in February the red light went on that we were in a difficult situation. What I am showing you is the actual financial statement for the year July 1, 1980

to June 30, 1981. Let me show you what happened. The salary and wages were being charged directly to the radio account called fund 66, which has a self-supporting connotation to it meaning they had some way of setting it up. They charged $22,966. In addition to that, fund 21 (the general fund) there were other salaries being charged that worked full-time at he radio station.    This is part of the subsidy, so we had that being charged directly; then we had charged some $29,800 that for all practical purposes looked like they were part of University Relations. It was not showing up in the radio account. They had supply and expense items of $20,237 and some minor capital purchases for $2500 so that is $75,503 that we know about. The income during this period: we had gifts of $25,081. This is the largest, single year we ever had in gifts. We had sale of merchandise for $284, and some sale of tapes and records amounting to $1217 for,a total income of $26,582. I think if you subtracted this you would see a subsidy of $48,921.  Someone asked me, "What does this represent?" If we had that $48,000 in this budget year we just completed, every general fund budget, supplies and expense, could add an additional 5%. Roughly $10,000 for 1% increase to all S&E budgets. So in this case you're talking roughly 5%. It would be a 1/2 of 1% salary increase for everyone who works on campus.

 

M. Downs: But it couldn't have been used for salary increases.

 

J. Carnaghi: No sir, it could not have been used. But it certainly could have been used for new positions.

 

J. Giusti: On the gifts and donations on that largest year, I think $5,000 of that is represented by a single source, and that is Lincoln.

 

M. Downs: Which of those figures is represented by the shift of CETA to University funds?

 

J. Carnaghi: I don't know. I think it was roughly in the neighborhood of 20,000. Wasn't it Joe?

 

J. Giusti: Yes, I picked up two people and I picked them up at 11-11.  [$11,000]

 

J. Carnaghi: So, over time that 11-11 is now $29. [$29,000]

 

J. Rodriguez: If the University cannot support a public radio station, how is it going to support a tv station? How is the public going to perceive this?

 

J. Giusti: Two things here and I also want Ed to talk to this issue. As far as Channel 23, Channel 23 came to us on this basis: (1) the company that is here in Fort Wayne is Cox out of Atlanta. They own,.really, both Fort Wayne Cable and Citizens. It's one company, the holding company is in Atlanta. They are operating both of those companies here as separate companies. The agreement was cut with the city. And in order to get into this lucrative franchise of companies bidding for it, they had to give up something.   They were requested to give up four channels. They had to give up a channel to government and that's studio 6, I think, in the City-County Building on the 9th floor right near the Mayor's office; a public channel which is in the Community Library, a secondary channel which is down at the Lester Grile Administrative Center, and they had to have one for higher education. Well, it couldn't have gone to St. Francise. They really didn't. want it to go to

Ivy Tech because they are not considered in the same type of league-they are

a two-year institution and this specified it should be a four-year institution--so it really couldn't go to anyone else but us. It's not something that we bought. It's not something we went out and looked for. It was an agreement that was set up. So now that we have Channel 23, it is ours. It is there and it has a potential. Right now it is on.Fort Wayne Cablevision which. goes into 14,000 homes. If the link is made between Citizens and Cable then we will be into 40,000 homes. Okay, you asked, "How can we support television?" Well, I have asked now that we go on sort of a holding pattern with it because I realize that there is great potential with.educational TV. In fact, during the 50's when educational TV really sprung up, Penn State was one of a couple of the pioneers in educational TV. But there are many, many things to be resolved about that. So I have asked Dr. Nicholson if he would put together a blue-ribbon commission, committee, whatever you want to call it, with an outside consultant to come in who has the same kind of things on the vita as to where we are in building an education TV to tell us (1) What would be the ramifications? What are the things we can do? How self-supporting can it be? What could we expect out of the operating or general funds to carry this kind of station? Can we, in going live, what could we do with St. Francis buying into it? What could we do with Ivy Tech buying into it? What could we do with Tri-State? All of these kinds of answers. I'm saying I don't have the answers. I don't know what the answers are.  I don't want to jump until we have this down in black and white, because I don't want to get in the wringer with educational TV as it stands now.  Introduction to Philosophy, which is going on the air right now, yes that one is going on the air right now, but we have no other courses planned. This is coming under Dr. Nicholson now to study. If you want to say anything on that now, Ed, go to it.

 

E. Nicholson: Funny you should ask because he asked that same question for 15 minutes. About the philosophy class. Dr. Butler asked me if he could, indeed, mount a course,on cable through Continuing Education. I said I didn't think so because we hadn't set down any policies, especially with regard to budget. And I would prefer, that if he wanted to do it, he should do it on load as a normal part of his teaching responsibility. He did so. He's doing it in conjunction with a course that he has on campus. LRC reported to me that there are two students who are taking the course through Cablevision. There are about 18 who are taking it in the normal classroom. They began taping and they are going to experience cost of about $500 per taping. And the director of LRC, Ken Balthaser, said I would like to continue that. I am.not asking you for budget, but it is going to be a great experience for us if we get into this business. We have already invested some time and energy into this project. Today, I said yes.                                           Go ahead With the budget that you now have, $500 is fine. We are setting up this policy. Doing precisely what the Chancellor said. And that is to find the answer to a number of academic and financial questions. He said quite distinctly, and several times, he doesn't want another radio station on his hands. And I assure you he is not going to have another one. We're going to have a plan for fiscal soundness. We started negotiations with some people in the community who want to use that radio station. I also know that there are some private negotiations going on between faculty and various cable efforts here. I think that's good. I think we'd like to have a chance at some of your talent too, if we can devise a way to support that talent here.                                                             If we can't, then I would encourage you to use your talent in the community with the present cable broadcasters We're not going to get it done in the next 2 or 3 weeks. My goal is, as I told Ken today, I want answers to most of the questions by mid-semester so by next semester we can respond to faculty and to these outside contractors who are urging us to do things and who are doing things with out competitors--Tri-State, Ivy Tech, and, perhaps, even St. Francis. Can I answer any ques-tions about that?

 

M. Downs: There is no intent that educational television is going to replace the radio station?

 

Nicholson No,as a matter of fact. I fully support the idea that if television could have replaced us, it would have. The technology has been around for many, many years. There were predictions that we would be easily replaced. I think that it's just another tool for us to supplement the classroom.

 

M. Downs: What I asked is that there is not intention that this television station would engage in the same kind of programming, provide the same kind of cultural contribution to the community as the radio station?

 

E. Nicholson: There is a proposal now that's going to be considered. But no decisions will be made until we answer the questions with regard to academic and fiscal policies. One person who has a program on the radio station wants to move to television.

 

J. Giusti: Let me just say. I myself had about 50 questions that I would like to see answers to.          If anyone of you could just sit back and think about the potential of this educational TV' here, I am sure that you can come up with that many questions or more. What does this do with regard to the professor, individual classes? If a professor is going to do one TV class, you know that professor could teach 1,000'' students in the right kind of course. Maybe if that professor did that on a 1-year basis, maybe that course is all that he would have to do for one whole year maybe. Depending on a whole lot of ramifications-what does it do to classrooms? What does it do to textbooks? What does it do to the rights? to the copyrights if we would videotape a PIT production? Can we air it? What are the royalty. rights? There are just so many things right now that :I just want to hold it down until we can get the answers to all of this, and that we know we're on' the right foot and that we're fiscally sound.   By the way, this $75,000 does not include the LRC and the engineer.

 

J. Carnaghi: Nor the space, nor the lights or the heat.

 

J. Violette: I would like to know if you have any plans for that money you save by not supporting the radio station?

 

J. Giusti: What you do is go to the pie chart and take a look at the pie chart and see where it is. How much of it is going into the area of academic instruction? How much of it goes to the physical plant? How much goes to other various areas? We do have to maintain a balance. We have to maintain the physical plant of this institution. We are already in trouble. This is not a new building. We're in trouble in a lot of areas. You know what happened in the University of Massachusetts. They went in and inspected it and had to close the library for some time. It was unsafe.         Four buildings went down; they closed down on them. It's costing them four times the amount

of money now. If you walk up the stairwells in any of the buildings and you look there and wonder why you see all of those streaks on the vinyl, and you say, "How in the dickens is it raining in there, there's nothing on the ceiling, but it's coming down the wall." Well, we learned that that's not water. That is all of the accumulation of floor stripping materials. that have been splashed over and down. Our consultants tell us that the superstructure on the stairs is rusting out. And as that continues we're going to have to replace the stairwells. So what we have to do, we have a maintain a certain. [sic] So what happens.to the $50,000? A hunk of it goes academic. Some of it goes here, it goes into the pie.

 

J. Sunderman: Can you tell us something about how the Bloomington and Lafayette radio stations associated with the University are maintained and is there any hope that we could have any similar arrangements?

 

J. Giusti: I know th.at with regard to West Lafayette, what is it WBAA, they once had an operating budget somewhere in the neighborhood of about $550,000. They are now down to $282,000 and cutting back each year to phase that operation back to a minimum.      Even if you take $282,000 out of a budget of $624 million, something like that.

 

J. Carnaghi: $300 million.

 

J. Giusti: Yes, that's only part of their total. Indiana reports it one way and West Lafayette reports it another way.

 

J. Carnaghi: West Lafayette's general fund is around $200 million and with their research around $100 million.     So they have a budget of about $300 million which $280,000 is general fund monies. They are using general funds for the radio station.

 

J. Giusti: It is not illegal to use general funds for the radio station in the state of Indiana.    It is simply an issue that was set down at the very beginning by the Presidents as a mandate to us saying, "You don't do it.” And if you agree that you not use general funds, then I Arthur Hansen, will ink it and send it to the Trustees." The campus agreed that they would not. use. general funds and that's where we are in the wringer.

 

D. McCants: If PBNI can realistically expect to. generate funds for the station by fund raising campaigning in the community, if other radio.stat ions within and outside Fort Wayne are supported by fund raising in the community, then why are not, Indiana-Purdue, fund raising in the community with the realistic expectation that we can raise the approximately $100,000 that is the current operating budget? Especially since this was the original plan.

 

J. Giusti: Good question. The Bible College operates at 50,000 watts on a budget of $200,000 a year. It draws its funds from as far away as Hawaii from people who are sending in money to a church-related station. They are operating way in the black. There's no doubt about that. They have eleven full-time, professional personnel on their staff. As far as us being a state-supported institution, people are a little less willing to give to us than they are to a private, denominational institution. At least the track record has not been all that good for the money we have tried to collect for that station. Take away Lincoln Life from the best year that we've ever had,, and Lincoln Life has been in there every year for that amount, take that away and we have not had a very successful time at raising funds. The other thing is that we have another serious problem. And as long as the faculty are here, do you want to hear about another serious problem. That has to do with the library. In my opinion, the library is in deep, deep, deep trouble. Back in 1968, through a fund drive, we raised $1,300,000. Over a period of time that money accumulated $264,000. Nobody sought to endow those funds. And those funds are depleted. We now have exactly $112,000 in the pot of which this year, on the 15th of October, we are requesting that the Indiana-Purdue foundation give to the library $42,000. Prior to those years, with the exception of last year when we went light, money is like $77,000, $80,000, and $120,000, we're supplementing the general fund for the library for about $185,000 as the base in the library. We add to that about 6% per year, but we've been supplementing it with the foundation, and when the foundation runs out in two and one-half years, depending on whether we go light or heavy into it, there is no more money for the library. And to me, that is the academic heart and soul of the academy. You can't do without a good library. Right now we've cut back on our periodicals drastically.    We're going up at about 15 or 20% per year for costs in the library. What are we going, to do?  We could sit here for another two years very comfortably and nobody would know the difference until we belly up two years from now. But this is what we discovered in looking over the budgets:  that we're in trouble.    I propose that we go out for a half million dollars endowment. We now have a couple of people in the community doing what we'll call a test, a personal test, we'll call a solicitation on a personal basis from one chief executive to another chief executive saying, if there were to be would you kick in for a three-year pledge of $20,000 or $50,000 or whatever it is,a year, to feel the waters out to see if this thing is realistic or not. Now, if we have to go out for the radio station at the same time as the library, I am personally scared to death for the library. I am. I feel it is a necessity. That we've got to have it for the library and we're going to be in deep trouble if we don't get it for the library. Why we never endowed the funds, I don't know. But the situation is as now. So that's what's making fund raising in the community difficult as hell. Everybody's out. The Philharmonic went out for a goal of $45,000 last year. Had everything going for them. Had $40,000 worth of merchandise that they were giving out. They ended up with $26,000, and they have half the merchandise stored for a future drive.

 

J. Carnaghi: I think one other point is that even with PBNI having access really to people, to resources that we don't, the Chancellor and I spent half of the summer banging on doors of corporations saying this is our problem. We did not get checks from these corporations. They have their own problems. One

of these executives that we went to has come up with a percent that PBNI now has, he did not offer it to us. He gave it to PBNI because it was a family tie. But the fact is, the history of the radio station shows in the gift area, the $25,000 is the best we've been able to do. That either says to me people are not willing to put that money forward, or we've done a poor job, possibly, of fund raising. But I guess what I was goring to measure that with

is "How well is PBNI going to do?" If you take away that gift, they have not

been as successful as we have. They told us they could raise $100,000 in two weeks. And the Chancellor says I'm sorry, I don't believe it. How about six weeks. They said, six weeks, my goodness.           As of last night, they are a long way from their goal. So maybe we've done a bad job, maybe the money isn't

there. Maybe the community doesn't want to put its money behind, maybe it can't. Maybe the resources simply are not there. But the fact is, we weren't successful, and as of yesterday, PBNI has not been as successful as they had

hoped. If you have ideas on how to raise money, I'm sure they would be more than happy, as we would be.

 

J. Giusti: I would like to hear any ideas on the library, as a matter of fact. I’m really worried about that.

 

S. Harroff: Does it seem to be the case that the two Presidents would not be willing to consider reconsidering that agreement that they made given that this seems to be a very important publicity wing of our outreach to this community, and that their two radio stations are operated that way. If we could come up with some kind of saving.

 

J. Giusti: Well you know, the surprising thing was that at the budget hearing

we expected that the greatest amount of on the radio station was going to

come from West Lafayette. At that time, the great amount of on it came from Bloomington. West Lafayette merely echoed and both were in agreement. I've never seen so much agreement in all my life.

 

J. Carnaghi: I think the problem is that when you take West Lafayette's relationship $280,000, to several million, hundreds of millions of dollars, it really, is a very small part of their budget. If you take our entire budget of $18.4 million and look at roughly $100,000 going toward the radio station, they simply are saying, "Chancellor, how can you come in here and say your

supply budgets are inadequate. How can you say your pay lines are inadequate?

You need more faculty?  Yet you can justify $40,000 or $50,000 a year on public relation activity that you admit is not an academic mission of your school." They are saying to us, "Learn from our experience. We're losing a lot of money. How can you afford it?" And being his financial advisor, I have to echo that to him, also.    I don't think the campus can afford $50,000 a year that's not going back into your programs.   I say this because I know next year (we're having breakfasts with the legislators right now), they're saying the chances are close to zero.that the budget will be reopened. The only reason they would reopen the budget in a short session would be if the, governor would be willing to have an increase in taxes.    And he is saying, steadfastly, "No, I won't." This campus will get $87,000 less in state appropriations next year than we had this year.    In addition..to that, if we mount an engineering program, and if we don't mount it next year I understand we start the process over, if we do mount it next year, West Lafayette says you'll have to have a quality program before we'll approve it. To have a quality program they're saying, "We want to see $300,000 up front.  Now that $300,000 is going to come out of existing programs. 

It's going to come out of additional increases to students and how far can you push.      Fifteen percent this year, I don't think we can go 15% again next year. I cannot advise him [the Chancellor], that even if the Presidents said it was alright, that financially it's a good decision.  He can certainly do what he wants. He is the Chancellor.    I'm saying, from what I have heard the priorities are on this campus, I have to say from priorities, we cannot afford to continue a $50,000 subsidy which is going to get, greater because, read the paper today, PBNI says they want to get off campus. They want to

do their thing. If someone should all of a sudden-give us $100,000, who's going to be the volunteer. PBNI has run this station. They have manned it on a daily basis. We've not only got to spend $75,000 to run it, plus what the volunteers ran. So I'm saying right now, you're looking at a bottom line of $50,000. Nobody's sending money to WIPU. We are getting nothing as far as donations. We weren't getting much to begin with, but it's shut off. And now to mount a new program, it's not going to come from outside.  It's goind to have to come from state appropriations, and fiscally I can't recommend it. Certainly the Chancellor has to make that decision.

 

J. Giusti: We have been placed with a minimum of $300,000 to get our

engineering bachelor's program off the ground next year. If we don't mount that program and we're not. offering it by next fall, according to the rules of the commission, we're back to ground zero, and then we, in my opinion, can kiss that program goodbye forever.

 

J. Carnaghi: Let me make one more comment. If Purdue Research Foundation or Indiana University Foundation came to us and said,"We will support that station," you can count on us for $100,000 a year, the radio station, as far as I am concerned, can live.  But I have to have solid support.             If you walk into me with a check for $100,000, I'd have to ask some questions. What are we going to do next year? We've got to have the solid support. We talked to a lawyer in Washington who specializes working with the FCC and told him our story He said I hear it time after time. Radio stations can't run on nickel

and dime donations. You just can't do it. You've got to have big bucks behind it. That's how this station is run. The big bucks have been state appropriatons. When the rules were set up, we were told not to use that. Apparently there was enough enthusiasm and excitement about the radio station, someone decided, "Let's do it anyway."

 

J. Giusti: I had another question to myself.  When I looked at the library, there's been talk about Aquarius Park, there's talk about the radio station. I said, if you look at those, how many of us would say, 315 faculty members, would they be willing to pledge on a three-year basis, $100 a year for the library, and $100 a year to the. radio station. And,that's up front. That isn't covering all the costs. That's just to get off the ground entirely. I'm even saying to myself, "When we mount something here for the library, how much can we generate just for the library?" And that's tough. Believe me it's tough.

 

_________: Is there now any academic use made of the radio station by any of the departments?          Such as, do we have any radio and television students who are training there?

 

J. Giusti: I would have to defer that to Ed [Nicholson] and Dave [McCants].

 

E. Nicholson:  Not to my knowledge. I asked Ken Balthaser and he said he didn't think so Unless it's on occasion. David [McCants] you might know more.

 

D. McCants: Some radio and TV majors do earn academic credit through practicums in radio. They have earned credit with responsibility to WIPU; they have earned credit working in other local radio stations. They are assigned on the basis of qualifications to the job and whether the job is relevant to the academic credit.

 

E. Nicholson: I asked what would be the minimum necessary to run a program if it had an academic mission, and Ken Balthaser tells me that, "If we just use tapes, and did a lot of the taping here, we could probably run it for $25,000." But that would be no other involvement. That means you automate the whole thing and, frankly, I couldn't see that that had any real relevance to an academic mission that I could find on the campus. And I had some discussion with an academic unit that was interested in it; and I pointed out the cost associated with it; and I was willing to argue that that should go into that academic unit if I got assurances that, if they didn't raise the $75,000, that those $75,000 would be available from their S&E account. I think it took about one day for a review, or maybe an hour, I don't know, but at least the next day it didn't appear as a very attractive proposition. I wouldn't want the task of raising $100,000 a year. I wouldn't want the task of raising $50,000 a year in this community for the radio, along with all of the other things that we're asking to be done.

 

M. Downs: I gather you wouldn't want anybody else trying to raise the $50,000 in the community given all the other things we're asking.

 

E. Nicholson: Let me answer that. You can plow the same ground with several people if you can clearly distinguish several causes that strike the same corporation in the same way for the saw organization with its priorities. But you've got to do.it in a coordinated manner. I can't be going to the corporate council and asking for $25,000 for something and then having someone else come in the next day and asking for another $25,000 for something very similar.  And that happens. If you can distinguish that there is particular interest in a radio station through a foundation, or an organization, and let that organization support it, I think you can go out and you can ask for funds for something else; but it is going to take lower priority in that organization. You are going to have to use other fund raising in organizations where the

priority is for those things that you are asking for. I think that explains

the initial success of PBNI.  I think all of you know what I am talking about, and I wouldn't be surprised if they get continuing success, year in and year out from even that organization, unless they can prove the viability of this radio station in this community for some more general support.

 

J. Giusti: You know, as much as I don't want to have this radio station die under this administration, I did go to two chief executive officers, two of the corporations that put in a hunk of money here under PBNI and said to them, "Are you also willing to support this and the library, if we can mount that drive on the library, will you do both?" I think they were sort of caught in a bind here and said, yes, I guess we would have to, but it would be tough. And that's what I am worried about.

 

_______: You said that a couple of the staff were paid for by the public relations department?

 

J. Carnaghi: Yes, the $29,800 was from public relations.

 

_______:  Okay, now what is their total budget?

 

J. Giusti: What we're going to shift out from this year is, well you see in University Relations we paid for the Bulletin out of that in previous years. And the Bulletin runs somewhere in the neighborhood of $30-$31,000 just for the academic Bulletin. And we paid for the previous Admissions recruiting brochures, those kinds of things. When we were doing that and the radio station, I think we're talking about $120,000.      Weren't we John?

 

J. Carnaghi: I don't remember.

 

J. Giusti: I'm not quite sure of that. When you subtract all of the University's publications out of that, which now we're doing, what we're trying to say is that, "Okay, if the academic Bulletin is necessary, that is going in the academic shop. So the money is being put in that shop and we're saying that if the Bulletin is to be a two-year Bulletin, the money won't come back out each year and go in each year. The Admissions material is part of Admissions and has to come out of Admissions. University Relations is going to distill itself down to the point where it becomes only a service function to help all of the organizations, agencies, departments, units and what have you of the University to operate. We’re at the point right now, we're losing the director of University Relations. I am on a hold pattern at the present time. We're not going to mount a search for a director of University Relations. We're not going to go external. We may have some reorganization or some shifting down there, but I think what you will see is that everything we have mounted will continue in just as great an effort, but the budget in University Relations will come way. down in comparison with what it was last year.                      It might have been higher than $120,000, but I'm not sure. It includes all the publications and the radio staff.

 

J. Violette: I have a couple of questions for you. First of all, it sort of looks to me like the library is being taken to task for being the one unit in the University that is responsible for the fact that the radio station isn't going to continue funding.

 

J. Giusti: No it isn't. It is not the library that is being taken to task. I just mentioned that the library is another problem that we have to solve. But the library and the radio station, it is not because of the library that the radio station is in trouble.

 

J. Violette:  I have another question. I wonder if the University, I personally have supported the radio station for the time it has been on the air, it is a fine radio station and I don't like the advertising PBNI is us ing now. It sounds tacky to me and I hate hearing it on that radio station. It seems to me what we need now is some sort of concerted effort that the University get out and make its image shine again, because the PBNI commercials--I understand they need money and they need it desperately--but it makes it sound like the University is destitute and it really doesn't make the University look good at all. I want to know if there is some sort of effort to get out and make the University look good inspite of this?

 

J. Giusti: Yes. It has been noticed by me a great deal. I know what you're talking about. I understand what you're talking about and we're trying to counteract it with some things that we're doing. We are in one heck of a delicate situation right now. We're trying just to keep the lid on it.

That's why I didn't want the press in here today. I didn't want to keep

this thing revved up. I just want to try and keep it as low-key as possible

for the sake of the image of the University. I am hoping that after the (interruption)

 

J. Carnaghi: Can I say a couple of comments on the tacky adds. When I talked to the FCC attorneys, my first inclination was, I don't want to give them access to our air lines. I was concerned about that. And the gentlemen

said to me, "Really, what are you wanting to do? Do you want to see that radio station go? Or do you want to see it die?" I said, "Goodness, if it dies, I have to put up with the Chancellor. We want to see it go." He said, "You've got to give those people access to their listeners, and he said in the last six months they've just changed the rules. You can even let United Fund, anyone who is nonprofit, you can let on. You couldn't until just a few months ago. He said, "I'm sure they know this and, in fact, it wasn't a day later they asked me this question, 'Can we be on the air waves?'” The attorney said, "I think what you have to do is to have a preface, say that it is going to be a public service announcement, back away and let them give their ad that they want to put on."  As long as it conforms with good taste, maybe that is what we're questioning. They said, "You really shouldn't get in and do any censoring of their ad." So we simply have given the preface and the conclusion, and what goes in between is their ad. Yes, we've had some second thoughts, but we have also reminded ourselves that if they don't make it financially, we certainly don't want to be the ones they blame. They've got a professional advertiser that's writing these campaigns. This person is the one that was going to help us out that they had found. So right now, we're simply living with it. I do think, though, that after the 9th of September, after this board meeting, that is the deadline after which they are supposed to have raised-their funds. I think before we go off the air, I think that we are going to have two or three weeks there where we can do our thing and try to come on and put George Wendt back on the air and say things about the

University. Some things that will help restore this image that you're talking about. Right now we've said don't do more than two an hour. That was the attorney's advice, and let them do what they feel is necessary to raise the funds. So we are not impeding their fund-raising efforts.

 

J. Violette: It bothers me in another way to see the WIPU call letters because they could do anything after they leave us. It could reflect badly on us.

 

J. Carnaghi: You see, that's my concern if they stay on the campus. I said to the Chancellor, once we disengage I would just as soon not have it on the campus because we have no. control of it.                         I have a contract with ARA that if

they are providing bad food, we can break the contract. But once you give somebody lease on a piece of property, it would be most difficult to get them off campus. I say if we're going out of the business, let's go out of the business. So I have the same concerns.

 

J. Giusti: We may or may not be able to do anything about that, depending on what the FCC does in the transfer.  We may not be able to.    I don't know.

 

J. Violette: I'm not really all that concerned. I think PBNI will probably keep the programming much the same as it is. But what happens when the leadership of PBNI changes? Or if it changes. That could reflect on the University.

 

J. Carnaghi: If they are still using our call letters. They said they would prefer to keep the call letters, but I'm sure this would be a matter for the FCC and we certainly could interject our own feelings on that.

 

M. Downs: I think that I have much the same concern that Judie does. I think that we would be making a serious mistake if, as a university community, we saw this as anything but a serious setback.  We tried to do something, or at least some people connected with the University, tried to do something and  it has apparently failed, at least as far as the capacity of the University is concerned. I think that there are real questions as to whether their campaign is going to be successful to retain that kind of radio service to this area, and I think that whether we like it or not, the University is going to share some of the blame that is proved for a failure to continue a service that many people hav edecided is valuable.  I noticed that you have invited the speakers of the faculty to attend the meeting of the advisory committee on the 9th when PBNI makes its case.  Art and I, I think, would appreciate receiving from the Senate some sense of the Senate what we ought to say in reference to the radio station. I should remark for the record that I’m distressed that the faculty have been involved in this so lately rather than earlier, since March.  We could have been better prepared for this, we could have been advocates for your decision rather than apparent critics or people who apparently don’t know why the decision was made, if we had been involved earlier.  But I would appreciate very muich your repeated promise to involve us in the future in business of this sosrt, but I’m awfully disappointed that it didn’t happen this time.

 

J. Giusti: I think that, as far as I know, this is probably the only one that we didn’t have as much consultation, and as I said the summer was late, it was June 10th before we knew that we were into the whirlpool as drastically as we were.  The other thing is I think we have three or four faculty members who were aware of it because of the Citizens Advisory Board.

 

M. Downs: I say, let's just take note of it and let's on both sides decide that that kind of thing is not going to happen again. The other thing is,

What should the faculty say to the advisory committee when it meets on the 9th?

 

J. Giusti: In this same conjunction, it is not only that we invite you to  attend the advisory board meeting on the 9th, this has been an open and standing invitation to the speakers of the Senate to attend the advisory board meetings just as we ask the President of the Students’ Government.  So as long as you are considering that, you should know that this would happen every time the advisory board meets.  We would like to have representation of faculty there, too.  Senator Downs has posed a question as to what is the sense of a measage, this would also go to Senator Finco.  I presume both of you will be at that meeting on the 9th. Is there any message that they should carry on behalf of the Faculty Senate?  You understand that the meeting is simply going to give the Advisory Board some of the information that you have received today. Then we are going to turn and say that there is a group, PBNI, which they already know, allow PBNI to make its presentation to the advisory board, and when they make their presentation, they will say to the advisory board, “Here’s where we stand.  This is what we plan to do.  This is the way we plan to operate.  Here is our expertise as far as personnel; and here are the resources that we have now and pledges for the future.  We are requesting that the University work with us in transferring the license.”  You know now, we could stop the transfer and they could challenge and pick it up.  What we’re trying to do is to make the transition easy.  When they leave the room, then the advisory board would discuss the issue and recommend to us a way to go.  They do not come down with any kind of a mandate.  They do not have that kind of power.  They simply recommend.  That would be the format.  If the faculty wishes to say anything. If an advisory board member should request something from the faculty, normally I turn and say, "Do you, the speakers, care to say anything." Sometimes the speakers say no, sometimes they have a comment.

 

S. Hollander: Resolve that the IPFW Senate support the transfer of the license of WIPU-FM to PBNI.

 

J. Giusti: Is there a second to that motion?

 

R. Barrett: Seconded.

 

J. Giusti: Discusson on that motion please?

 

D. Cannon: I have a question on that motion Steve [Hollander]. What if they don't get enough money to operate? Are we still going to be resolved to do this. Let's say PBNI winds up with $30,000?

 

J. Carnaghi: Just a point. The FCC will require that they have three months of operating funds in hand. They do have that. What they are looking forward to is the month of October, which is apparently when public broadcasting networks do their fund raising. They hope at that time to pickup enough to get them through the year. They do have $20,000 towards next year. This is from corporations. So I think there is no question that they will have enough to start. Plus the support that we're pledging behind it in terms of equipment. They will not have enough money to show they will be here two or three years, I'm certain of that.

 

S. Hollander: My own feeling is that the station is such an important community resource that its being on the air for three months is better than it being off the air forever.

 

A. Finco: I agree with your sentiments Steve [Hollander] except, what if someone in the Citizens' Advisory Board would have been willing to support it for us and this resolution kind of changes their minds.

 

R. Barrett: Has not the Citizens' Advisory Board been aware of this since May or June or March? If somebody would have been in that position they would have spoken up long before this resolution.

 

J. Giusti: The Citizens' Advisory Board is one group, the Board of Advisors is another group. I think that you're referring to the Board of Advisors. Citizens' Advisory Board to the radio station and PBNI are synonymous. They

used to be called Citizens' Advisory to the radio station. They incorporated under Public Broadcast Northeastern: Indiana.   You're talking about the Board of Advisors. Are you stipulating a time on the resolution, does the resolution have to come up? Can the resolution wait until the advisors decide which way they're going?

 

R. Barrett: But the resolution is put forth under the conditions we now know. Under those circumstances that the administrators have presented to us the position the best that we can do. And I think that is what Steve's resolution says is that if there has to be a transition, we'll support it.

 

J. Bell: I think maybe what Art is suggesting is that the resolution should be bona fide so that it has that "if" clause in it, if the University and the faculty are unable to support it.

 

D. McCants: Mr. Chairman, I think it is unwise for the Senate to vote on such a resolution without conducting its own investigation into the status of WIPU-FM and the ramifications of it going off the air. We assembled to hear a report from you.     We have heard that report and again, I think it would be unwise for the Senate to create a precedent of taking a position on a resolution of such ramification without conducting its own investigation. I, therefore, will vote against the resolution.

 

S. Hollander: I think we owe it to the speakers, whom we elected, to give them some kind of instructions for what to say, especially since they specifically asked for instructions. And I don't think any independent Senate investigation could be concluded in time to produce new information which might modify the instruction to the speakers.

 

M. Downs: Call for the question.

 

J. Giusti: The question is called.  May we hear the motion again so that we're absolutely sure. Do you have an if in there or don't you.

 

S: Hollander: Resolved that the IPFW Senate support the transfer of the license of WIPU-FM to PBNI.

 

J. Giusti: Clarification of this please. Does that mean that the speakers would present that to the Board of Advisors, or does it mean that they would present it to the Board of Advisors only if appropriate. If the resolution is defeated it means one thing, but if it is passed I don't understand if they will go on record with that prior to any decision in helping to make the decision. Or will that be something to support the decision if it's made?

 

A. Finco: Do we have them make the decision or do we push them toward the

decision? Or do we support the decision?

 

R. Barrett: The question that was posed -by Mike [Downs] was, "If asked for input, what should we say? I think that was the way it was posed. And if asked for input, this is our position at this point.

 

J. Giusti: Is that clarification alright. Alright. Question has been called. All those in favor, the usual sign of aye. Will the ayes please raise their hands? Ayes - 17. Nayes - 10.

 

M. Downs: I move the meeting be adjourned. Seconded. Meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.