April 10, 2008 Provost/Vice Chancellor Employee Forum meeting
Attendees: Provost Bernadette Gray-Little; Vice Chancellor Dick Mann; Associate Vice Chancellor Carolyn Elfland; Associate Vice Chancellor Carolyn Elfland; Forum Chair Ernie Patterson; Forum Vice Chair David Brannigan; Forum Treasurer Jane Majors; Forum Secretary Brenda Denzler; Forum Delegates Wallace Ambrose, Alan Moran, Jackie Overton; University Employees Sandra Hoddle, Victoria Mullen.
Ernie Patterson noted questions about why the Bible Church park and ride lot on Sage Road was being closed. He asked if anyone knew the reasoning behind this process. Carolyn Elfland said that in a nutshell the University cannot afford to maintain the lot. She said that the University had spent years looking for a lot in the 15-501 corridor before getting the Bible Church to agree to host a park and ride lot. She said that this was never a permanent agreement but rather was to be renewed from year to year. The Chapel Hill Town Council required the University to obtain a modification of its special use permit in the face of much neighborhood opposition. The Bible Church lot was always going to be only an interim solution.
Elfland said that the University was excited to have this lot available but had found that only 50 cars were parking there during the time it had conducted lot counts. The route costs the University $340,000 to provide adequate but not great transit service. The University thought that more people would switch to the Bible Church lot from the Friday Center. Friday Center buses run every five minutes or so during peak times.
Elfland said that UNC Public Safety had looked at the issue and worked with the Town of Chapel Hill on the budget for Chapel Hill Transit. She said that parking permit increases on campus were nearly insupportable. She noted that the University cannot afford to support Chapel Hill Transit budget increases of 9-10% every year. Chapel Hill Transit has constructed a new transit center that costs a fortune to maintain, with 60% of all costs allocated to the University.
The Town Council had required Chapel Hill Transit to build bus pulloffs at the Bible Church lot. Originally, the cost for these pulloffs was set at $15,000. However, workers discovered major electrical and water feeds at the sites that would drive up costs to $300,000 to build the pulloffs. Elfland said that neighborhood protests against the Bible Church lot have also continued.
Dick Mann said that the Town Council had received a petition against the Bible Church lot at its meeting last week. Neighbors took photographs depicting things that they did not like about the lot to the Town Council meeting. These neighbors asked the Town Council to revoke the permit for the park and ride lot. As the University sought to balance its transit budget in light of all of these obstacles, it decided to discontinue the Bible Church lot and the BCX express bus route. Instead, the University would devote its funds to the routes with the largest number of riders.
Elfland noted that the University is bound by contract with the Town to pay the entire cost for express bus routes. The University and the Town share the cost for routes that run through neighborhoods. She noted the perception among some Chapel Hill residents that the park and ride lots serve people who do not live or pay taxes in Chapel Hill. These people feel the Town should not contribute to park and ride bus routes. She granted that more people ride the BCX express route than those counted in the studies. Mann noted that the petitioners were ready to mount a major objection to the lot. Elfland did not have a copy of the petition but noted the clearly reasonable amount of opposition amongst Bible Church neighbors.
Victoria Mullen noted that many people in the neighboring condominium complexes walk over to use the BCX express bus. She said that she was upset because she had given up her $700/year parking sticker to do the right thing and take the bus into campus. She was willing to deal with the bus being late as she thought it was generally a good service. She also noted that the BCX service was popular for people coming to campus from Durham, Roxboro and Northern Orange county. She had had a poor experience with the Eubanks and Friday Center lots. She noted that many people who signed a different petition in favor of the BCX route are members of the University’s Commuter Alternative Program (CAP) as well as members of the neighborhoods near the lot. She had encouraged people parking there to enroll in the CAP program.
Elfland said that the University would do well to control the people parking in park and ride lots. She said that there is nowhere in the 15-501 corridor available for such a lot as the University had sought space for a lot for years. Mullen asked if there were any possibility of reducing routes or spaces to preserve the BCX route in some form. She asked if opposition to the route was insurmountable.
Elfland said that the Bible Church itself did not oppose the route. Instead, the University had notified the Town and the Church that it would not continue funding the BCX route. The University had not held a hearing with neighbors. Elfland thought the University would need to go through the special use permit process all over again to restore the lot’s permit.
Elfland noted that if one cannot keep bus service at a certain level at a particular stop, people will refuse to rely on the service and use it regularly. She said that there is truly a tipping point, given that if service is any less frequent than 20-30 minutes between buses, people would not accept that schedule. She said that if the University had unlimited resources to support the BCX route, it would do so.
Mann said that the University is probably not going to reopen the Bible Church park and ride lot as it has made a commitment to withdraw. He granted that the University faces a broad set of park and ride lot problems. He noted that Chapel Hill Transit had asked the University for more money for new buses. Mullen asked if the University had thought to ask people to help pay to support the route. She thought that riders would be willing to pay a nominal fee.
Elfland said that as far as paying for park and ride, the University had created a problem for itself in how it obtained land for these lots. She said that the University had combined with the Town to obtain federal funding for the park and ride lots, making the lot cost next to nothing. Unfortunately, the University does not have any control over who parks in the lot and cannot charge people to park in the lot. She noted that the Friday Center lot’s lease will expire in 2009, which will move it out from under this regulation. She said that there could be some nominal charge to park in park and ride lots in the future.
Patterson suggested exploring a deal with the University Mall to provide park and ride lot spaces. He thought the Mall might agree to this deal since riders would possibly generate revenue for surrounding stores. Elfland said that University had spoken with the Mall and found it as not interested. Denzler suggested University Mall. Elfland said that she had explored all these options but the only place it had found was the Bible Church lot, which would not be legal without a special use permit. Patterson suggested the parking lot on Elliot Road across the street from the Credit Union.
Mullen asked if the majority of the costs for the Bible Church lot are given to the Bible Church. Elfland said that these costs go to Chapel Hill Transit. The University pays market rate for the spaces in the lot, perhaps $100,000 a year overall. She noted that the Town was asking the University to contribute to Chapel Hill Transit routes running to Town high schools and middle schools. She said that anyone could establish a route to determine ridership. If ridership is high enough, the University would have to support the route. Patterson said that riders could possibly share in the costs, perhaps at a charge of $10/month. Elfland noted the high costs of parking permit prices on campus.
Sandra Hoddle thanked the University for trying to establish the BCX route. She said that it had been a brilliant success. She asked why residents do not object to the D route that runs through the same neighborhood. She also noted that the Commuter Alternative Program cycle generally starts in August, but the BCX route stops in May. She said that this represents a hardship to make alternative arrangements before the next cycle of CAP permit plans. Elfland said that she did not realize that they would stop the BCX route in May. She said that she would see what the University could do about contributing until the end of the permit year, adding that funds are very tight now. Hoddle said that there was a concern that the entire episode would give the CAP process a bad flavor.
Alan Morand said that Facilities Services and Administrative Office Building employees are already tight for space, with many driving in from Alamance County using the Eubanks lot. He asked if the University was thinking about building a park and ride lot further out into Orange County. He estimated that 75% of Facilities Services employees in his shop come from Alamance County. Elfland agreed that the Alamance contingent was growing markedly and said that the University was researching possibilities near Highway 40 and 86 and Highway 85 and 86.
Patterson asked about the possibility of bus service from Pittsboro. Mullen asked about similar service from Durham. Elfland said that the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) franchise for the region does not serve Pittsboro. She said that Chapel Hill Transit and Pittsboro were discussing a route given that the Briar Chapel housing complex will soon open. She also said that TTA does run from Durham to Chapel Hill.
Patterson said that Board of Trustees chair Roger Perry had expressed an interest in enhancing the Pittsboro route. Elfland hoped that the Triangle would fully develop a regional transit authority, with dedicated routes from 15-501 and Meadowmont in the next ten to twenty-five years. She said that this represented a top priority in the University’s regional planning.
Hoddle asked if BCX riders should take their case to the Town Council. Elfland said that the University partners with the Town to address transit needs. She noted that no one has money to add to routes to meet increased demand. Patterson said that CAP riders should know that their level of service will change unless they go to the Town.
Patterson noted the current gas price crisis, as crude oil had risen to $112/bbl and gas was nearing $3.50/gallon. Some observers think that gas will reach $5/gallon by this time next year. David Brannigan said that the University needs to frame this as a crisis. He said that the Chancellor had reiterated his message to increase flexible scheduling but nothing was happening on the ground. This is a crisis for employees earning $120/week for grade 53. He recalled that someone had raised the possibility of four ten-hour shifts with Kirk Pelland, the Director of Grounds Services. Pelland had said in a meeting that it was the supervisors’ responsibility. Brannigan asked then if supervisors have the autonomy to work out their schedules with their crews. Brannigan said that Pelland then changed his tack, as nothing in reality happens in Grounds without Pelland’s approval. Brannigan asked Pelland if he has the autonomy to decide if he can work out operational needs. Pelland said that he does not have the autonomy.
Brannigan said that he did not believe Pelland and said that he thought he would have to bring the issue to Pelland or Mike Freeman. He asked Elfland if Pelland has the authority to work with crew people to help them or not.
Elfland said that she knew less about Grounds than she did about other Facilities Services departments. She did say that Facilities Services shops are interdependent and many jobs involve coordinating different shops working on the same job at the same time. She said that from the point of view of getting the work done, Facilities could not allow each shop to make its own decision. Instead, supervisors are encouraged to talk and work out their schedules within the broader picture of Facilities. One shop should not just announce its schedule leaving other shops high and dry.
However, Elfland thought that Grounds might be different. She thought these questions should be discussed within a larger group before each individual area would make its determination about scheduling.
Patterson said that the University should work to find ways to reduce the cost of commuting for employees. Elfland asked how the University could accomplish these goals on a crew leader basis anyway. She said that Grounds has responsibilities that it could not ignore for three straight days, and said that all of Grounds must work through the week together. She asked about trash that is not attended to for three straight days, even if Grounds staggers its crew work.
Denzler said that other shops in Facilities Services make the four ten-hour schedule work by providing fifty hours of coverage while never paying a dime for overtime. Brannigan said that everything that Pelland says is a misrepresentation. He said that no one is advocating that Grounds be completely vacant on Friday or Monday. Instead, a crew of four in rotation would work together to allow one of its workers who had obtained by Thursday afternoon forty hours of work would have the opportunity to work a shorter week. Brannigan said that Pelland had misrepresented the issue and so had undercut a realistic opportunity to find out how Grounds might manage the question. Pelland had objected, just like with the issue with Grounds workers wearing shorts. He thought there had been deliberate obstructionism and thought that the question had not been discussed in a realistic, constructive manner.
Bernadette Gray-Little asked if there had ever been a plan to take forward the question for discussion. Moran recalled that in his shop there had been a question as to creating a petition to go to a four day, ten-hour schedule. He went to his supervisor to ask if he could circulate the petition with his approval. His supervisor, upon hearing of the petition, had immediately called a vote in the shop on the question. He thought that this response typified an environment which has undercut the willingness of employees to come up with innovative ideas and, in turn, morale.
Mann said that flexible scheduling is not the only and best way to solve the gas price problem. He said that carpooling is another option. He observed that a four day, ten hour schedule had wiped out the ability of nurses in hospitals to carpool. He also said that if employees have ideas, they should work to get them up the chain of command. The administration can advise departments on policy but cannot always be certain that ideas are carried out in different departments. Elfland said that she was not opposed to having a group work on these questions, but said that each group cannot come up with its own approach. Brannigan said that he wanted to get around the roadblock created by Pelland and have a meaningful dialogue about what can be done.
Denzler said that Facilities Services was not alone in this question. She said the Forum had heard from employees in other units seeking flexible scheduling and the option to telecommute. That employee had heard that because a receptionist cannot telecommute, that employee also cannot do so even though his job involves no public face time. Mann said that this is an issue of equity. If a department allows some employees to use this option and others not to use it, the situation can create real anger about differing privileges. Denzler said that was a legitimate viewpoint but she thought that the nature of the different jobs should allow for the telecommuting option. Denzler agreed the flexible scheduling and telecommuting is not the answer to gas prices. She had experienced difficulties organizing a carpool from her neighborhood.
Moran suggested that the director level of each department create a committee to canvas employees for new ideas. Elfland noted that there are already vanpools that the University does subsidize. Majors said that these serve often only a small amount of people, given the difficulties of forming them.
Elfland said that there are many, many variables facing the University when addressing mass transit. Employees live all over the map. There are some who have to come in early, while others must leave early. Some go directly home because they have no afterschool care, while others have no interest in a four day, ten-hour schedule because they cannot afford the additional day care costs. Others riding vanpools could not adjust their rides to fit a four day, ten-hour schedule. She noted the 29-28 split vote in Moran’s shop on the question as evidence of the deep divide among employees. She thought that these scheduling questions must be addressed by work unit but must also have input from employees.
Majors said that managers must be willing to have these discussions. Brannigan said that he did not personally care about the question but he said that it upsets other people in Facilities Services. He said that Pelland does not have to pay for gas and noted that other employees resent the roadblock to discussions. Elfland said that she would talk about the question with Freeman, stating that the issue was not limited to just Grounds.
Mann said that the University has no policy against flexible scheduling. He said that some jobs require interaction with the public and others require more writing and research. In any event, the work unit must demonstrate that the work is being done. Denzler observed that there is no policy against telecommuting but no pro-active policy in favor of it.
Patterson seconded Moran’s suggestion that every department on campus work to identify people desiring to carpool or vanpool. Elfland pointed out that the University already has this service, and Patterson thought that many at the University do not know about it. Denzler said that she had used the service but had found it did not work. Elfland thought that this would be a good item for the University Gazette or the InTouch to discuss, noting the availability of University vanpool matching services and subsidies.
Mullen asked if this was indeed the death knell for the VCAP lot. Denzler noted that the Forum had conducted an employee survey on flexible scheduling and use of alternative transit modes. She hoped to do a full write-up on these findings soon. Gray-Little said that there is a different situation now than perhaps the one that the survey addressed then. Denzler said that the survey was not definitive and granted that better research is needed. Elfland encouraged those assembled to come up with additional programs to place on the University’s transit to-do list.
Patterson asked if there was time to talk about the Time Information Management system. Denzler said that implementation of the TIM system had been a tad on the rigid side. She asked if the system would feed into the cost of commuting discussion. Mann said that he would ask Vice Chancellors and Deans to keep an open mind on the flexible scheduling question, saying that they should be receptive to ideas. Patterson said that the Forum would ask people to talk and submit ideas to deal with gas prices as well as health care concerns.
Respectfully submitted,
Matt Banks, Recording Secretary