Budget Planning Council
M I N U T E S
March 2, 2007
Present: William
Decatur, Greg Shepherd, Gail Houlette, Phyllis Bernt, Aimee Howlee, Morgan
Allen, Wendy Merb-Brown, Rich Carpinelli, John Day,
David Thomas, Joe McLaughlin, Morgan Vis, Dominic Barbato, and Darrell
Winefordner,
Absent: Gary
Neiman, Dennis Irwin, and Kathy Krendl
Guests: April
Henderson, Steve Flaherty
Goal: Budget reduction targets for Planning Units
- Units
will do a reduction target exercise; target will be set higher than needed
1. Restatement of Budget Position
(Three percent
tuition increase Scenario Summary handout)
a. Preliminary Enrollment
- Information
is still changing and incomplete
- See
line 1—same information shared with the Board of Trustees
- Line 2
& 3 indicates refinement of $11,000 difference
- Mike
Williford and Kathy Krendl are refining numbers regarding enrollment and
retention, etc.
- Better
information is needed for graduate numbers even though they do not pay
fees – Darrell has created “assumptions”
b. SII Adjustment
- SII is
down by $1.7 M; potential to move up or down by $1.5 M
c. Utility/POM (Plant
Operations Maintenance)
- POM
figures previously did not include water and sewage resulting in an
additional $1M
- Projections
for utilities next year show a decrease in cost (due to using less gas and
more steam), with costs remaining relatively flat for the future
2. Establishing targets for Contingency Budget
Reallocations ($9.8M target)
a. Review of
exemptions
i. Library
Acquisitions
ii. Fee Waivers
iii. Graduate
Stipends
iv. Scholarships
v. Central Pools
and Reserves
vi. Technology
Fees
vii. Debt Service
viii. Faculty
Salaries?
- Faculty
compensation cost equal $1.2M each year for five years
- Undergraduate recruitment and retention - $1M – delete
‘Marketing’ text
- Faculty
promotions $150,000 in addition to compensation raises
- Graduate
investment - $1M
- Minimum
wage $500,000 which only funds half of the increase
- Need
to evaluate some figures…i.e. undergraduate retention and graduate
investments
- Proposals
from Planning Units will be revisited
- Should
IT be pulled and held harmless regarding cuts?
- Suggestion
to ‘sweeten’ Gateway Scholarship
initiative suggestion
b. Establishing a
target(s)
i. Athens General Program
ii. General Fee
- Faculty
pay exempted example is not exempted at the unit level
- Differential
target for academic (2.15%) and support (4.9%) units
- Summary
page – exemptions listed generate $191M of the $312M needed (handout)
- Summary
of reserves; Research and Administer Central Pool (handout)
- Differential
cuts discussion
c. Establishing
guidelines for Planning Units
3. Cost Saving and Revenue Enhancement
Priorities
- Scenarios
are drafts and need refining
- $9.8M
beginning figure will come out of the general fund budget not Student
Affairs
- General
fee budget should be treated the same as academic
- Debt service
discussion and exemption status
- Differential
between academic and support
2a. Review of
Exemptions (part of target worksheet)
Need to examine “non-strategic” initiatives; examine at the
college level items such as productivity, quality, programs and centrality;
assessment needed regarding fee waivers and graduate stipends
- Arguments
need to be presented from units regarding justifying cuts and
discussion needs to occur across
units in keeping with a strategic plan perhaps for 5 years
- Framework
not in place currently for such an endeavor
- Program
elimination strategy needed as well as administrative offerings
- Reason
for optimistic $8M middle point target versus $9.8 to $11 M
- $6M
to break even – extra $2M for a strategic pool scenario suggested; no because we do not have the tax
amount under RCB
- Reminder
to consider SIS costs
Send list of ideas
brainstormed at previous meeting to be considered before the next meeting in
order to reach a consensus (See Feb 1 minutes for listing)
The next meeting is Friday,
March 9 from 9:30-12:00 in Baker University Center Room 239
Handouts for
today’s meeting