REPORT NUMBER 254 OF THE ACADEMIC BOARD
JANUARY 30, 2025
To the Governing Council,
University of Toronto,
Your Board reports that it held a meeting on January 30, 2025 at 3:10 p.m. with the following members present:
PRESENT: Douglas McDougall (Chair), Donald Ainslie (Vice Chair), Trevor Young (Vice President and Provost), Scott Mabury (Vice President, Operations & Real Estate Partnerships), Nicholas Rule (Vice-Provost, Academic Programs), Leah Cowen (Vice-President, Research and Innovation), Ramona Alaggia, Larry Alford, Catherine Amara, Joshua Barker, Sheila Batacharya, Jordan Bear*, Zoraida Beekhoo*, Susan Bondy, Daniel Bowyer, Laurent Bozec, Gabriella Brasileiro Santos, Christian Caron, Shai Cohen, Robert Cooper, Ryan Cortez*, Paul Downes, Liam Dravid*, Monique Flaccavento, Ankita Goyat, Jason Harlow*, Zachary Hawes*, Alex Hernandez, Walid Houry, Sarosh Jamal*, Ehab James, Charles Jia*, Shone Joos*, Rita Kandel, Audrey Karlinsky, Tys Klumpenhouwer, Lisa Kramer*, Robert Kyle, Jeff Lennon, Joanne McNamara*, Libbie Mills*, Irene Morra, Javed Mostafa*, Eha Naylor, John Oesch*, Jesse Pasternak, Maya Povhe*, Anuradha Prakki, Matt Ratto, Karen Reid*, Lisa Robinson, Rosa Saverino, Suresh Sivanandam, Naomi Steenhof, Adam Stinchcombe, Sali Tagliamonte, Laura Tam, Kevin Temple, Sergio Tenenbaum*, Morgaine van Beers, Charmaine Williams, Suzanne Wood, Melanie Woodin, Joseph Wong
*participated remotely via Zoom
REGRETS: Tala Alsaid Suliman, Robert Austin, Kayra Balikci, Glen Bandiera, Bensiyon Benhabib, Heather Boon, Adalsteinn Brown, Jutta Brunee, Pier Bryden, Catherine Chandler-Crichlow*, Albert Cheng, Carol Chin, Dinesh Christendat, Susan Christofferson, Lorne Costello, Tarun Dewan, Lisa Dolovich, Markus Dubber, Jessica Eylon, Annabelle Dravid, Joseph Flessa, Robert Gazzale, Alexandra Gillespie, William Gough, Kelly Hannah-Moffat, Linda Johnston, Charlie Keil, Gretchen Kerr, Elaine Khoo, Jeannie Kim, Marcus Law, Robert Levit, Yee Fun Lo, Dave Lehto, Amy Mann, Ryan McClelland, James Orbinski, David Palmer, Karin Ruhlandt, Rob Simon, Laura Simone, Markus Stock, Robyn Stremler, Edwin Thomas, William Verreault, Erica Walker, Christopher Yip
SECRETARIAT: Miranda Edwards (Acting Secretary to the Academic Board), Timothy Harlick (Assistant Secretary to the Governing Council)
IN ATTENDANCE: Meg Connell, Emma del Junco, Susan McCahan, Kendra Naidoo, Ron Saporta, Lachmi Singh
Pursuant to section 38 of By-Law Number 2,
consideration of item 10 took place in camera.
OPEN SESSION
-
Chair’s Remarks
The Chair, Professor Douglas McDougall, began by welcoming members back from the winter break. He reminded members that governance elections were currently underway and that there were eighteen seats open on Academic Board. He noted that the nomination period had now closed and that voting would take place from February 4 to 14, 2025. He called on members to raise awareness within their constituencies about the elections and the importance of university governance. -
Report of the Vice President and Provost
Professor Trevor Young had no report to make but invited members to ask questions.
A member requested an update on the new graduate funding program that had been announced by the University in November 2024. Professor Young said that the program had been implemented as expected and that the University had received positive feedback. He noted that the budget coming forward to Academic Board in the next cycle would reflect these funding changes.
A member inquired as to any steps being taken or considered by the University to address the potential U.S. government tariffs and asked what effect they might have on University projects. Professor Young responded that he did not foresee having to cancel or delay any University projects due to potential U.S. tariffs. He noted that the University had strong short-term reserves and flexibility in its budget model. There were no immediate short-term financial concerns for the University. He noted that, despite the challenges of the current political climate, there might be positive advantages for the University such as an opportunity to attract students and faculty from the U.S. to Canada.
A member asked what fraction of the University’s research funding derived from U.S. sources. The Provost invited Professor Leah Cowen, Vice-President of Research and Innovation to respond. Professor Cowen informed the Board that approximately 5% of total research funding originated from U.S. sources; however, some faculty members may have projects where a significant portion of their research funding came from the U.S., depending on their field. Professor Cowen acknowledged there had been indications that the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) may or may not freeze research funding; however, she emphasized that communications had provided mixed messaging thus far and so the exact state of funding remained unclear. -
Revisions to the Temerty Faculty of Medicine’s Procedures Manual for the Policy for Clinical Faculty (2021 Edition)
Dr. Lisa Robinson, Dean of the Temerty Faculty of Medicine and Vice-Provost for Relations with Health Care Institutions introduced the revised procedures Manual which governed clinical faculty appointments, renewals, terminations, grievances, and complaints. The Manual had last been revised in 2021 and, since that time, the Clinical Faculty Grievance Review Committee had been activated for the first time. Following the committee’s activation, and acting on the advice of the Office of Appeals, Discipline, and Faculty Grievance, there was an evident need for clearer language and procedures.
Dean Robinson highlighted some of the major revisions. First, the probation and continuing appointment review section was amended to include language allowing for parental and other forms of personal leaves. Second, changes were made to the structure and processes of grievance bodies, including conflict of interest procedures, in order to align with the University’s best practices. Notably, going forward, the Chair of the Clinical Faculty Grievance Review Committee would always be an external and legally trained person appointed by the President.
The Dean concluded by informing the Board that her office planned to seek advice on revising article four of the Policy for Clinical Faculty, which required that certain procedural changes must be reported to the Academic Board for information. The Dean’s office wished to revise the policy to allow approved revisions to become effective immediately upon approval by the Clinical Relations Committee, while ensuring timely reporting to Academic Board.
In response to a member’s question, the Dean explained that the Temerty Faculty of Medicine’s grievance processes are separate from those of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). In the event that both entities were to investigate the same grievance, the Faculty would engage in discussions with Counsel to determine if the Faculty should hold its own proceedings in abeyance. The Provost added that clinical faculty faced the unique position of being subject to college, university, and hospital grievance policies. He told the Board that the CPSO was considered the highest and final investigative level and that universities and hospitals typically waited for the outcomes of those investigations before proceeding with their own.
Some members told the Dean that they had found the revised manual’s language and concepts to be unclear. Members raised concerns about particular sections including maternity and paternity leave policies, the potential impact of professionalism complaints on faculty promotions, and the Canadian Appointment of Review (CAR) process. Several members agreed that the policy required further revisions to improve clarity and further mitigate institutional risks before being finalized. A member emphasized that unclear language could lead to serious misunderstandings and legal issues and gave the example of lawsuits where the meaning of a comma placement can determine the award of damages. T
The Dean and Kendra Naidoo, from the Office of University Counsel confirmed that the revised Manual had been reviewed by Counsel and with input from the Office of Clinical and Faculty Affairs. The Dean further explained to the Board that the Clinical Relations Committee (CRC) had ultimate approval authority for the manual and policy. She noted that CRC met once a year so there would be future opportunities to consider the issues that Board members had raised. The Provost confirmed that the Board’s feedback was welcome and would be taken into consideration in future reviews. - Faculty of Information’s Academic Plan 2025-2029
The Chair welcomed Professor Javed Mostafa, Dean of the Faculty of Information, to respond to members’ questions about the Academic Plan. A member asked for clarification on whether the Faculty’s iSchool Institute had been previously dismantled or if it was being re-launched with a new focus. The Dean responded that the Institute’s activities had been wound down and that, since his tenure as Dean, he had worked to re-launch it as a faculty program. He also mentioned that the faculty was working closing with the continuing education division on this project. - Debt Financing for Deferred Maintenance Program
Professor Scott Mabury Vice-President, Operations and Real Estate Partnerships, introduced the item by explaining that the University had a significant backlog of deferred maintenance building projects that could not be funded under the current model. The proposal before the Board was to allocate $250 million of institutional debt to deferred maintenance over the next two to three years. Professor Mabury described the state of disrepair and outdated infrastructure on the University’s campuses that were in dire need of upgrades. He noted that provincial funding for deferred maintenance had been declining for several years and that, despite its advocacy efforts, the University did not expect this to change in the short-term. The University currently received $11 million annually for deferred maintenance while having approximately $1.2 billion worth of deferred maintenance needs, which was growing annually. Maintenance and upgrades of the University’s buildings would improve the spaces used for teaching, research, and student amenities, thereby promoting and enhancing the University’s academic mission.
Mr. Ron Saporta, Chief Operating Officer, Property Services & Sustainability, delivered a presentation with further details. He outlined the type of the work that the new financing would be used towards, including facilities upgrades, heating/cooling and electrical systems, and space re-designs. Mr. Saporta noted that this proposal was timely for the following reasons:-
An opportunity to leverage the university’s tripe-A credit rating
- Buildings were reaching the end of their lifecycle at a critical mass (about 50% of the University was built either in the post-war period or in the early 2000s and both categories are currently reaching the ends of their maintenance lifecycles)
- Construction costs inflation continued to grow, meaning it was more cost-effective to finance deferred maintenance now than in the future
-
The presentation also outlined key benefits of the proposal:
- Allow the University to undertake projects at a larger scale which is more cost-effective
- Create improved spaces to support the University’s academic mission
- Upgrade to more energy-efficient building systems which supports the University’s climate positive plan and could save the University $1-2 million in costs annually
In response to a member’s question, Mr. Saporta informed the Board that the debt allocation would not impact other projects already underway.
In response to a question regarding government advocacy, Professor Mabury confirmed that the University would continue its advocacy efforts for increased provincial funds. Professor Mabury’s office had determined that there was a higher risk from inaction than in waiting for increased government funding. Professor Mabury also noted the University’s Advancement team would continue to seek out donors who might be interested in supporting this large-scale deferred maintenance project, noting that the opportunity to help upgrade labs and other research facilities would be appealing to many individuals. In response to another question, Professor Mabury discussed the opportunities of private-public partnerships and noted that the University had such partnerships in place for residence spaces. A member asked if the proposed financing was sufficient to clear the deferred maintenance backlog to which Professor Mabury responded that it would not be sufficient to cover all needs but the proposal would allow significant progress to be made.
On motion duly moved, seconded, and carried
YOUR BOARD RECOMMENDED
THAT the scope of the Deferred Maintenance Program be approved in principle; and,
THAT the program be approved in principle to be funded through: Debt Financing and the deferred maintenance budget.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Board proceeded with the Consent Agenda.
On a motion duly moved, seconded, and carried
YOUR BOARD APPROVED
THAT the consent agenda be adopted and that Item 6, the Report of the Previous Meeting, be approved.
- Report of the Previous Meeting: Report Number 253 – November 14, 2024
Report Number 253 from the Board’s meeting of November 14, 2024 was approved. -
Business Arising from the Report of the Previous Meeting
There was no business arising from the report of the previous meeting. -
Items for Information
Members received the following items for information:
END OF CONSENT AGENDA
-
Date of the Next Meeting: March 6, 2025, 3:10 - 5:10 p.m.
The Chair confirmed that the next meeting of the Board would be held on March 6, 2025 at 3:10 p.m. -
Other Business
No items of other business were raised
THE BOARD MOVED IN CAMERA.
IN CAMERA SESSION
-
Debt Financing for Deferred Maintenance Program
The Board returned to Open Session.
The meeting adjourned at 4:12 p.m.
February 5, 2025