Pitt motion to dismiss suit against UPJ denied.

A federal judge has denied Pitt's motion to dismiss a sex and race discrimination lawsuit against the Johnstown campus (UPJ) and its president.

U.S. District Judge D. Brooks Smith ruled that UPJ's affirmative action program and its affirmative action director, Clea Hollis, "were adversely affected by decisions sanctioned by" campus president Albert Etheridge.

Attorneys for the two sides are scheduled to meet May 24 to agree on a schedule for future action in the case.

Hollis sued UPJ and Etheridge last July, claiming she was harassed, demoted, isolated and excluded from campus events to keep her from doing her job.

According to the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh, Etheridge publicly gave "lip service" to affirmative action but told Hollis "on numerous occasions that he did not believe in affirmative action and that he would do everything possible to avoid implementing its principles," contrary to Pitt policy.

Etheridge said Pitt attorneys have advised him not to comment on the lawsuit. University spokesperson Ken Service said Pitt's administration believes Hollis has been treated fairly and that neither UPJ nor its administrators has discriminated against her.

Hollis's lawyers likewise have advised her not to comment. One of her attorneys, Robert A. Cohen of Pittsburgh, said only that, "We're pleased with Judge Smith's decision."

– Bruce Steele, via University Times

Last week, state Sen. John Wozniak, D- Johnstown, Delta Chi, convinced the Senate appropriations committee to delay the University's state funding request for next year until Pitt addresses the Johnstown campus's chronic budget problems.

This morning, Wozniak is scheduled to meet here with Chancellor Mark Nordenberg to continue discussions they began earlier this month about UPJ.

Both men called their earlier talks "constructive." Both said they are confident about working out a compromise to ease UPJ's budget crunch and end the delay in legislative consideration of Pitt's request for a $164.5 million state appropriation for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

"I have always found Sen. Wozniak to be a reasonable person who cares deeply about the Johnstown campus," Nordenberg said. "When we last met, we had very constructive conversations focusing on the means by which lingering issues could be fairly and expeditiously resolved. I would expect us to continue on that path."

Wozniak, a UPJ alumnus, said: "For the last 49 years, the main campus has been saying to the Johnstown campus: 'I hear ya. I understand your problems.' But it never came to anything."

In recent years, he said, the campus has been forced to take $1 million annually from its auxiliary budget to cover salaries and classroom expenses. "You should never cross that line" between the auxiliary budget and educational and general expenses, Wozniak said.

On the positive side, Pitt recently agreed to pay $600,000 in debt service on UPJ construction and to wire Johnstown residence halls for Internet access, Wozniak noted.

"It's a two-way street," he said. "Pitt needs to help eliminate UPJ's indebtedness, and UPJ has to do its part by reviewing its curriculum and doing the long-range planning that Pitt's other campuses have been doing."

Unlike Pittsburgh campus schools and the University's three other regional campuses, UPJ has not yet submitted to the Provost's office a long-range plan setting goals and priorities based on existing funding. Nor has UPJ thoroughly reviewed its curriculum since 1972.

But UPJ began making up for lost time this month. A 13-member strategic planning steering committee held its first meeting April 21.

The committee has been assigned to design a planning process for the campus, identify priorities, and propose actions and tactics.

UPJ President Albert Etheridge, who chairs the steering committee, wrote to Johnstown faculty last week: "Developing a new plan for our college is an exciting opportunity. Your ideas and thoughts concerning this important process are always welcome."

"It looks like a pretty good committee," said Johnstown English professor David F. Ward, who helped organize the Committee to Save UPJ last fall. The group has been pleading UPJ's case for more funds to state lawmakers and through the news media.

"By fall, we [Johnstown faculty] hope to have a solid outline of a plan and a good idea of where we want to go, academically and financially," said Ward, who is not a member of the steering committee.

Provost James Maher, asked whether UPJ can expect an increase in University funds, said: "It's premature to say there's going to be more money when the plans haven't been either formulated or reviewed.

"What is true," Maher added, "is that when we decided to wire the residence halls here [on the Pittsburgh campus] for the Internet, we simultaneously asked each of the regional campuses to review their needs for Internet access. Some of them wanted to put their share of the money into public labs. Johnstown took some time to decide what it wanted, but recently — and by 'recently,' I mean within the last couple of weeks — Johnstown brought us a plan stating that they would like to wire their residence halls. That project should go forward rather quickly."

Delaying consideration of a university's funding bill is a common tactic for state legislators, said Ann Dykstra, Pitt director of Commonwealth Relations.

Last year, for example, Sen. William Slocum, R-Warren, temporarily put Pitt's appropriation on hold to protest the fact that two Pitt law professors helped an environmental group block the sale of timber in the Allegheny National Forest. The forest is in Slocum's district.

Currently, Temple University's budget request is on hold while lawmakers study last year's merger between Temple and the Pennsylvania College of Podiatric Medicine. The latter used to get a separate funding allocation from the state.

"At this point in the [budget-making] process, it's not that big of a deal that our funding bill is on hold, especially considering the positive discussions going on between the chancellor and Sen. Wozniak," Dykstra said.

The state House and Senate are aiming to agree on a proposed budget for Gov. Ridge's consideration by the week of May 10, Dykstra said.

House and Senate leaders, together with governor's office staff, are negotiating a compromise between the House's $18.9 billion budget bill and the Senate's $18.6 billion proposal, which is closer to what Ridge proposed in February.

All three proposals recommend increasing Pitt's state funding by almost $4 million to $162.2 million next year.

The University has requested $164.5 million plus one-time appropriations of $2.5 million for advanced research and $1.5 million for programs to prepare Pitt students for the 21st century economy.

Nordenberg and Dykstra said Pitt will continue to lobby for more than the 2.5 percent increase proposed by the House, Senate and Gov. Ridge.

"The process of crafting a final budget is still underway, and it will be a couple of weeks before we'll know better how that is unfolding," the chancellor said. "Obviously, we hope for more than the governor recommended."

–Bruce Steele, via University Times

Faculty at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown (UPJ) this week are launching a letter-writing campaign to Gov. Ridge, asking him to help the campus obtain a larger share of Pitt funds.

"We're asking faculty, staff, students, students' parents and community leaders to write to the governor," said UPJ English professor David F. Ward. "We're not asking him to hold up approving Pitt's appropriation, but we want the state to at least consider insisting on equitable funding for all students in the Pitt system."

Ward is a member of the Committee to Save UPJ, which accuses the central Pitt administration of treating the Johnstown campus as a "cash cow."

While UPJ's 3,000 students represent 10 percent of Pitt's total enrollment, including graduate students, the campus gets just 2.5 percent ($3.3 million) of the University's state subsidy, committee members say, citing the Pitt Revenue and Cost Attribution Study.

University administrators maintain that UPJ actually will receive nearly $5.2 million in support from the central administration this year. They also note that the University does not fund academic units based on headcount or student credit hours taught, but through a system that recognizes the broad range (and varying costs) of Pitt's missions, including undergraduate and graduate education, research, service and general administration.

Ward estimated that 50 of UPJ's 147 faculty members belong to the Committee to Save UPJ, "but we haven't actively recruited members, and we don't keep a list," he said; 34 faculty members signed a letter to Chancellor Mark Nordenberg last October, requesting more funds for the campus.

When no additional money was forthcoming, the committee began pleading UPJ's case to the state General Assembly and through the news media.

"We have no stick to beat Pitt with, whereas, they have massive clubs to hit us with," Ward said. "Our only hope is to enlist public support."

Members of the House and Senate appropriations committees questioned Nordenberg about UPJ funding during hearings in February, but the lawmakers did not pursue the issue beyond a few general questions. See March 4 University Times.

During what he hoped would be a conciliatory visit to Johnstown on March 16 and 17, Provost James Maher promised not to cut the campus's faculty, allowing UPJ to replace retirees with junior faculty and keep any salary savings. Maher also offered to help UPJ take better advantage of Pittsburgh campus libraries, computing and other central resources, thereby freeing up money for Johnstown programs. But he called on UPJ to review its curriculum and develop a long-range plan. See March 18 University Times.

The campus has not thoroughly reviewed its curriculum since 1972, according to Maher. And, unlike other Pitt units, UPJ has not yet submitted a long-range plan to the Provost's office, setting goals and priorities based on existing funding, he said.

Johnstown campus President Albert L. Etheridge said he would distribute an outline of planning activities to campus personnel late this week, as a first step in developing what he said will be "a creative and bold" UPJ plan.

At last week's Senate Council meeting on the Pittsburgh campus, Sheldon Clare said he had received 15 comments from fellow UPJ faculty members following Maher's visit. They called the provost's statements at a March 17 UPJ Senate meeting "demoralizing," "threatening" and even "insulting," Clare said.

"There is this constant feeling that Pitt doesn't give a damn about Johnstown," the UPJ professor said, adding: "This is a 30-year problem that's got to be resolved somehow."

Clare complained that Maher spoke at the UPJ Senate meeting only from 3:10 p.m. to 4 p.m., fielding just three questions from the audience.

The meeting began at 3 p.m., and UPJ's wrestling coach spent the first 10 minutes reporting on the team's NCAA Division II championship. Maher then spoke for 25 minutes before taking questions. UPJ Senate members had been warned that the provost would leave at 4 p.m. to return to Pittsburgh for a meeting.

Maher was visibly taken aback by UPJ professors' comments as relayed by Clare. He said his first goal in visiting UPJ had been to heal wounds. Maybe some people didn't want to hear his message about tight budgets and responsible planning "and so they felt it was insulting," Maher said.

Chancellor Nordenberg defended the provost.

"We have been moving through challenging times for every unit of the University," Nordenberg told Senate Council. "As Jim's writings and reportings on this subject have suggested, the campus at Johnstown actually has received comparatively favorable treatment from the central administration during the period of time [since the mid-1990s] that we have been making those decisions.

"There is a history of misunderstandings" between UPJ and the central administration, the chancellor said. "There are canyons that need to be crossed. But we have taken the responsibility to build bridges seriously. To some extent, that is reflected by the trip that the provost made to the [Johnstown] campus and the schedule he maintained while he was there."

In less than 24 hours, Maher met with the UPJ advisory board and the board's executive committee, with students and faculty, and with the editorial board of the Johnstown Tribune-Democrat, which has covered the UPJ funding controversy extensively.

Nordenberg told Senate Council: "The one point I really want to make — one that's probably unnecessary to make with this group — is that, in my extensive meetings with the provost, I have never found him to be anything but polite, respectful and attentive to the needs of those within the University community who express them, even when they are not always expressed in the most civil of ways."

Based on their public statements, UPJ faculty and Pitt administrators at least agree that communication between the two sides traditionally has been poor.

"When do you begin listening to the natives?" Johnstown anthropology professor Bruce Williams asked Maher during last month's UPJ Senate meeting. "If the natives have lived somewhere for 1,000 years, maybe they know more about the place than you do.

"I'd personally say that everyone here knows we're not funded correctly," Williams said. "Every single person who works here absolutely knows it in every way….You say we don't understand some things in Oakland. Well, the problem is, we think you don't understand some things here. You're far away. Somehow we can't get it across to you."

In reply, the provost told the more than 100 people at the UPJ Senate meeting: "There are a couple of thousand other University employees in other parts of the state who are as convinced as everyone in this room that their budgets should be bigger. If this University were richer, I'd be delighted to raise everybody's budget. I'm trying to find a way to distribute scarce resources in the most effective possible way. I'm reaching out to you and asking you to analyze your opportunities and help me to do the best we can do together."

Some Johnstown faculty bristle at the argument that Pitt could not substantially hike UPJ's funding without taking money away from Pittsburgh campus programs.

"It is not up to us to tell the Oakland administrators how to allocate their fair share of the resources in Oakland. We're talking about Johnstown getting its fair share," said Johnstown physics professor Allan Walstad, Kappa Delta Rho, a leading member of the Committee to Save UPJ.

"If the Oakland administrators have built programs in Pittsburgh with money that properly belonged elsewhere, the blame for any consequences rests entirely with them," Walstad said. "They should have set priorities and developed a workable plan for their campus. Milking the regionals is no substitute for making tough choices in Oakland."

– Bruce Steele, via University Times