PRESIDENT’S BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Minutes August 24, 2000

MEMBERS PRESENT

STAFF PRESENT

MEMBERS ABSENT:

STAFF ABSENT

GUESTS PRESENT

AGENDA

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Bernie Goldstein brought the meeting to order at 8:09AM. Denis Harris moved and Katharyn Crabbe seconded a motion to approve the proposed agenda. Harris asked that Items for the Good of the Order be added to the Agenda. No objections were made. The agenda was passed unanimously.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

Schlereth asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the July 6, 2000 meeting. Bill Barnier moved and Steve Wilson seconded the motion. Phil McGough indicated the date on the minutes was wrong. Harris objected to the content of the minutes. He feels the Minutes are incomplete because content from the materials presented are not included in the minutes. The minutes were approved with one no vote from Harris. Those not present at the July 6, 2000 meeting abstained.

SUMMARY ANALYSIS: SSU BUDGET

(Please see the August 24, 2000 Agenda packet for this document)

Larry Schlereth presented this item. Schlereth pointed out that a funding shift has occurred causing state appropriations to rise and student fees to decline and a majority of revenue increases have gone to compensation increases. Schlereth noted that ESAS has been placed in Academic Affairs for this presentation. Ahmed Hosseini asked why Academic Affairs only shows 52% of the budget; he thought the number was more like 78%. Schlereth responded that Academic Affairs is not 78% of the budget, but they do receive 78% of new revenue which is based on the marginal cost formula. Further, University-Wide is presented which distorts the numbers.

Phil McGough asked if year-end money would come to the PBAC. Schlereth said year-end money is shown in the presentation, however the money stays within the divisions. This strategy ensures money isn’t "squandered" at the end of the year by divisions who may lose it.

Rick Luttman asked why percentages increased for Administration and Finance and decreased for Academic Affairs between 1999 and 2000. Schlereth responded that this is due to the move of Information Technology and Affirmative Action to Administration and Finance during those years. Hosseini asked why Administration and Finance percentages have increased even after staff reductions in the division. Schlereth said that this has to do with cost of living and salary increases. Further, Administration and Finance did not lose the money it saved because it stays within the division. Gloria Ogg added that mandates from the Chancellor’s Office have also taken some of the money.

McGough asked if division charge backs were included in the presented figures. Schlereth responded that they were not because often the money is restricted and cannot be used elsewhere.

VPBAC ACTIVITY: 2000-2001 ACADEMIC AFFAIRS BUDGET

(Please see the August 24, 2000 Agenda packet for this document)

Schlereth indicated he had created this list, however it is the Provost’s decision to accept or reject the recommendation.

University Reserve Assessment

Crabbe feels there is logic to keeping a reserve. She noted that school districts are legally required to keep a 3% reserve. Fernlund feels this is a good solution, however she is sensitive that some of the growth dollars would not be going to schools to fund additional students

Interfund Loan to the Library

Goldstein indicated this had been approved by the VPBAC

Interfund Loan due Extended Education

Steve Wilson pointed out that some of this payment from Administration and Finance was created through reorganizations.

NSF Matching Grant

Scott Gordon asked if nine sabbaticals would still be allocated due to this proposed reduction in funding. Schlereth indicated the University would still give the nine sabbaticals and the extra $35,000 was typically a cushion for this budget. Saeid Rahimi asked if a reserve would be set up to fund matching grants. Schlereth said this is an Academic Affairs decision. Goldstein indicated that he is working on this. Carlson noted that many grants pay for new equipment which he feels is crucial to the University.

Desktop Replacements

Schlereth noted the dollars involved not only pay for desktop replacements, but also the appropriate support. Gordon asked if the money could be deferred to use for another department in need. Schlereth feels that is a program issue and should be discussed in another committee. Crabbe complimented the Vice Presidents for their effort on these recommendations. She also thanked the Division of Administration and Finance for giving the money to solve some of the problems.

Harris moved that the PBAC recommend to the President approval of the CFO recommendation regarding the University Reserve. Steve Wilson seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Harris moved that the PBAC recommend to the President approval of the CFO recommendation regarding the Desktop Replacements. Steve Wilson seconded the motion. McGough feels this should go to the Information Advisory Committee before we make this recommendation because SSUITE has yet to be approved. Schlereth feels regardless of the SSUITE program, desktop machines still must be replaced. Bill Barnier moved a substitute motion to refer the issue to the Information Technology Advisory Committee and Campus Reengineering Committee for recommendation back to the PBAC. McGough seconded this motion. Schlereth asked the Members to wait on approving any of the items until the whole picture has been presented. Discussion ensued. Harris moved to table all motions before the body. Crabbe seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

ITEMS FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER

Schlereth adjourned the meeting at 10:00am

Minutes prepared by Neil Markley


PBAC minutes 2000-2001
Updated 2008-01-22
afd.webcontact@sonoma.edu