Meet and Confer Notes
November 4, 2004
Faculty Association: Annette Schoenberger, Theresia Fisher, Judy Kilborn,
Tony Akubue, Steve Hornstein, Bill Langen, Tracy Ore, P. N. Subbanarasimha,
JoAnn Gasparino, Fred Hill, Donna West, Notetaker
Administration: Michael Spitzer, Diana Burlison, Nathan Church, Lin Holder, Roland Specht-Jarvis, Kristi Tornquist, Rex Veeder, Anne Zemek De Dominguez
Meet and Confer Notes of September 23, 2004 - Accepted
Meet and Confer Notes of October 7, 2004 - Accepted
1. Proposed Policy for On-Line Courses (Admin) (11/20)
FA: In follow up to the subject of the Proposed Policy for On-line Courses, you were waiting for our names; and I can give those to you today – they are: John Theis, Bill Branson, and Mohammad Mahroof-Tahir.
2. Partnership Agreements (FA) (2/26)
FA: We asked how those are formed and what the process is by which they occur?
Admin: With other entities. I think you requested something in writing.
FA: Yes, what the policy is.
Admin: I don’t have this yet – let’s leave this topic on the agenda.
3. Internal Audit (FA) (4/22)
FA: We have a copy of the letter from John Asmusson, and I think what he is saying is to do those four things I told you to do the first time. Is this your understanding?
Admin: Close enough.
FA: Does everyone have a copy? It was sent to President Saigo. So, can we take this topic off of the agenda?
Admin: Yes.
FA: There was another issue in the audit about those things we didn’t understand -- how we can be more expensive than Mankato. I understand this will take care of budget matters. We have other questions regarding our instruction being more expensive, and how can this be? Originally, that was part of the issue to find a way to understand.
Admin: There are two factors. Mankato uses more graduate assistants to provide instruction; and second, during the years in question, we had more students in upper division courses as a percentage of our enrollment than Mankato had, and this instruction is more expensive. Those are the two primary reasons.
FA: Last spring, I thought we were going to come up with a list of questions regarding those same things Steve brought up and thought we had an agreement to have John Asmusson help us. I remember a meeting with Diana Burlison and President Saigo regarding the instruction issue….
(A caucus was held)
FA: John Asmusson promised to write us a second letter, however, we haven’t received it; therefore, we need to leave this topic on the agenda.
4. Search Committees for Administrative Positions (Admin) (9/9)
Admin: I don’t know if this topic needs to stay on the agenda. We appreciate the Executive Committee approving the ad for the three positions we gave you the job descriptions for. The Affirmative Action Office has completed their review of the document.
FA: I have our names for the search committees. Do you want me to write them out?
Admin: You can give them to me in writing.
Admin: We also have a position that is being co-funded by advancement and the College of Business for a fundraising position, and we need to have a search committee. We would like for representatives to be selected in the College of Business since this is where the position will be housed.
FA: How about giving us a job description.
Admin: It’s a MSUAASF position ranged C or D. It’s a fundraising officer position, much like other positions we’ve had in the foundation with the focus on raising money from alumni and groups with interest in the College of Business.
FA: Similar to the position of Internship Director?
Admin: That’s faculty.
Admin: This is a fundraiser position, and they’re all in MSUAASF.
Admin: This is in an effort to experiment and measure the success (for fundraising) and follow up with similar positions in other colleges.
FA: Do you want us to say right now…..?
Admin: We need a process by which we get people on search committees. Do you want the College of Business to select themselves?
FA: It seems to me MSUAASF folks would put people on the search committee.
Admin: MSUAASF will have a full number of members.
Admin: They can’t have less than any other bargaining unit. There will be at least five people from MSUAASF as dictated by their contract. We’re saying we want people in each department from the College of Business; so we’re asking you what you might like to do so we can get on with this.
FA: It seems we just put out a call and run the procedure the same way we normally do -- request representatives from each department.
FA: I’d be comfortable taking this to the Executive Committee to find out what they want to do.
Admin: If this were a search for a Dean, wouldn’t you have an election within the college?
FA: Yes, but this isn’t a Dean’s level (position); so, I’ll go back and see if I can get a recommendation.
Admin: Again, the longer the process takes, the longer we have to wait.
FA: Yes, I know -- if you had told me on Monday….
Admin: Yes, I understand; however, I didn’t’ know this on Monday.
FA: I just can’t speak for the group.
FA: Are we finished with this?
Admin/FA: Yes.
FA: What about the position descriptions?
FA: I have the one for Records and Registration and the Dean for Marketing and Communications, and I have Sponsored Programs. I don’t have the one for Lead Investigator.
Admin: As soon as they’re ready, we’ll send them.
Admin: Diana and I talked about this. There is a possibility to review the Administrative VP position, and we’ll get this to President Saigo by the 15th; so we’ll have this soon after.
FA: So, I’ll send these names to you via e-mail on Monday morning.
5. Diversity Education Task Force Proposal (FA) (9/9)
FA: I think we were waiting for responses.
Admin: There are very interesting things in that proposal, but there are some overlapping activities, and there are concerns having to do with a number of different entities on campus; and we want to know if we could have a committee in order to get together and meet.
(Students from Support the Court gave a presentation at this point in Meet and Confer.)
Admin: We were going to ask – we have a CODE committee, a CODAS Committee, and a Diversity Education Task Force -- what is the relationship among all of these committees, and how do we coordinate various opportunities so they’re mutually supportive and coordinate activities so we have coherent activities that are intelligent and make sense. This will be more efficient than having multiple entities doing the same thing at the same time.
FA: We have representatives from the committees -- maybe we would need two people from each committee to try to sort this out.
FA: What you might do is invite the chairs from each committee to come and talk with you and tell them what you see the problems are. Do we know who the chairs are?
Admin: For those three, but this one – the Diversity Education Task Force Proposal -- doesn’t have one indicated.
FA: This came from CODAS.
Admin: I’m just trying to make the point.
FA: Got it! (laughter)
FA: It would be CARE, CODE, CODAS – just three people and yourself.
Admin: OK.
FA: CARE has already elected liaisons who would be on this task force.
Admin: OK.
FA: You’re supportive of this?
Admin: Of the conception, but would like to organize.
FA: Does this topic stay on the agenda?
FA: It stays on.
6. Article 22/25 process and explanations. (Both) (9/9)
FA: I want to take this in a different direction today since I’m still working with the state IFO on other issues. At the last Senate meeting, someone pointed out that while the contract allows you to withdraw from the entire process at any point, it is silent regarding the promotion process. Someone pointed out that you could withdraw from the process at any point. Therefore, what we’d like is if we could agree that a person can withdraw at any time and what they can do to officially withdraw. If I decide I don’t want to go for early tenure (or promotion), how do I do this?
Admin: It’s very simple. You just request the packet be returned – it depends where it is at the time. I would think it would go to the Dean if it’s elsewhere. The request should be in writing.
FA: There is a deadline on the procedure.
Admin: It would still be withdrawn even if it goes to the Dean.
FA: I think the request is that this be put in a statement on a web page where we have that information -- if you decide you want to withdraw from this process….. since that way, there would be no confusion.
FA: I think you spoke to it already. I was going to say if for political reasons, nobody listens to faculty who say they want to withdraw and they come to you and say nobody is listening, what would you do?
Admin: I would give the person back their packet and say OK.
FA: To clarify, early tenure is what we’re talking about?
FA: Any tenure process.
FA: So it’s as if you went up for tenure but were turned down. It’s silent for promotions; but the people who know about the contract say it allows for this as well.
Admin: I think you just request this directly, and it’s done. The difference between tenure and promotion is there’s a request you be reviewed at a specific time or you get one year’s time, and there’s no request you submit for promotion -- it’s a voluntary act on the part of the faculty.
FA: But, with regard to the request to withdraw, there should be someplace for it to go – that’s the real issue.
Admin: If people feel they ought to address the President -- to be absolutely safe – they should go that route.
Admin: We should check -- you need to let your Dean know, and the clerical people should notify certain people. We should find out what happens, transparently. Somebody just needs to do some research.
FA: I hear most of us are in agreement – it just got goofed up last year, and we had someone say they don’t know what happened; and we just wanted to clean it up.
FA: I don’t think this is the entire issue. I was involved in the issue last year as FA President. We’re talking about the process of withdrawal. Withdrawal from the process is fine, but what happened was committee members were recommending a person up for tenure withdrawal; and it gave us a situation where they didn’t withdraw freely. We’re getting this procedure for withdrawal, but we have another issue. You’re right, we haven’t talked in Senate, and I’ll bring this up in Senate; but I don’t want the assumption here to be we just want a procedure.
FA: If we can just start with the procedure, we can work on the other.
FA: I like what Provost Spitzer said if for political reasons somebody is crying “I don’t want to seek tenure early; I don’t want to seek promotion early” and nobody wants to listen, they can come to him and say “I’ve written this and no one is paying attention,” and he will stop this immediately. Another thing I heard the FA President say is we can have a statement in a conspicuous place – explaining what the policy is all about -- or what the administration wants done in situations like this.
Admin: The problem FA Past President Fisher was addressing (even if not in Senate) would not be impacted by this policy.
FA: That’s a hard one to get at.
Admin: There are different versions of this story, as well, and I don’t know if we can get into this.
FA: Yes, but I know mine is right! (laughter!)
Admin: I’ve heard six different versions (laughter!)
FA: What about a new case?
FA: Go to Annette!
7. NCA Committees (Admin) (9/9)
FA: I like it we’re not caucusing, and we can have a free discussion. Let me review all of the names for the record:
Steering Committee: Kathleen Steffens
Mission and Integrity: Roger Rudolph
Preparing for the Future: Gordon Schrank
General Education: Matt Julius.
So that is the grand total.
FA: We’re continuing to convince people to join.
Admin: I think we’ve had some conversations at Pre Meet regarding the agenda and other occasions in trying to find ways to assure faculty their part in these committees is appreciated and is recognized and should be recognized by the Deans. Service on these committees is of great significance and importance and value to the university, and we need to recognize this service is meaningful when faculty invest their time. There should be some kind of recognition for this, and we’ll continue to find ways to make this recognition available.
FA: Michael, do you remember when you came into Senate last year and said a similar thing, and then we had various committees that took on a lot of work in a short time, like the Task Force on Restructuring, and then we had a meeting with President Saigo, you, Annette, Judy, and myself to look at this issue. I think we’re at a point where we need some resources – to allocate for this. Of course, we recognize the NCA Committees are very important, but so is the UCC and General Education Committee…..Some are just workhorses that turn out work in just unbelievable fashion.
Admin: Especially the UCC clearly has a mountain of work, and we recognize that.
FA: We’re really wandering into #2 of New Business. I’ve done a lot of thinking about some tangible suggestions like giving promotion (not in the sense of a raise promotion) in the form of publications and awards -- people mentioned parties like Sponsored Programs gave. I do think part of it is a time issue. When you look at the schedule, we used to have times for doing this work; i.e., putting together Strategic Planning for next year, and we can’t find spots on the schedule. A piece might be to build this time into the schedule when this work can occur so it’s possible.
Admin: When I look around the table, I’m not sure there are many people who served on the semester conversion committees. That is when we looked at the schedule. In fact, we did talk about keeping some portion of the schedule open except for labs and things of that nature. I argued for Tuesday and Thursday across the noon hour to take those two class hours on a routine basis. I lost, and the recommendation was not to do that, and people were really nervous for departments to put together course loads; and, yes, it is a popular time. We’d be very open for the FA to come to us with another recommendation.
Admin: I’ve been on two campuses with hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 12:00 until 2:00 PM when meetings took place, and it worked very well.
Admin: I don’t think we’d have an objection, and you ought to discuss what it would mean in order for the department to meet the needs of the students. With regard to committee meetings, Michael and I have talked about this since the first time we had a meeting behind closed doors; and he’s been very supportive to find ways to have additional support for major committee assignments, and I think we need to find concrete ways to do this. Michael has said he wishes we could do this. We have to find some ways, and it’s probably a cooperative way in order to still meet the needs of the university. It might be to elect people a year ahead to schedule reassigned time.
FA: I think compounding the situation is also the fact we have to have a two-hour block every day for office hours. You have to advise students, but I don’t think anything is impossible. It’s a matter of looking into it seriously and coming up with something agreeable to everybody involved. I think it’s a good thing, and I’m happy to hear the Provost has always been receptive to such suggestions.
FA: Speaking from my own experience, I think it would be a really good idea to push Tuesdays and Thursdays…..
FA: I’m so grateful Steve has broken the code of silence here (laughter!). Really, do any of us have the slightest shade of doubt why the schedule is the way it is? It’s so folks can arrange their schedule for Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays and not Tuesdays or Thursdays; or, in some cases, Tuesdays and Thursdays and not Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. If you ask them over and over again, they tell you very bluntly they couldn’t take one or two or three days off; so, thanks, Steve.
FA: Provost Spitzer has offered a few times to talk with the Deans, and I wonder if maybe we should ask them to generate ideas and ways they might be more responsive and concrete in ways of rewarding faculty in doing service.
Admin: We will discuss that.
FA: I wanted to offer another voice for why somebody would want a Monday, Wednesday, and Friday or a Tuesday/Thursday (schedule). I’ve always had a Monday through Thursday schedule because I’ve got 40 percent of the advisees in my department. I like to have my teaching concentrated on those days, so I can do my advising – there is a reason; and I just want to put that out there that they may actually need this and not just want days off.
FA: There’s a department who has a different take on this. Their sense is around a kind of class they do focusing on dealing with attitudes and changing perceptions, and it is hard to do in a 50-minute block. For them, it might be a class that meets two times a week – a longer block – making it possible for them to have a discussion. We’ve talked about other ways to bend the schedule around perhaps other times a week to have those longer class sessions so they don’t pile up on Tuesday and Thursday.
FA: I’d like to bring this back to how do we reward people for this service? Colleges have magazines they publish, we have a party, the university publishes a big magazine; and when they feature a faculty member, they feature their research. Where is the party for people who are going to work crazy on this North Central Accreditation? The university wouldn’t be here if we didn’t do the North Central Accreditation. That’s symptomatic if people don’t feel rewarded.
Admin: You can say if they serve on NCA committees, there will be a party!
FA: There is the issue -- yes, you can say you respect them; but the outside evidence that it’s occurring is not there. For Strategic Planning, we want a party!
Admin: I yield to Tony…..
FA: I do not believe in hand picking some committees to throw a party for if it’s for the purpose of having people gravitate to these committees. Whatever committee people volunteer to be on should be rewarded by the administration taking it seriously and recognizing a person was/is a member of a committee -- for the administration to acknowledge this is a reason for promoting this person and giving a party and sending the person a certificate. I’m not in support of saying this committee is more important than another, since together they make this place work.
FA: I just want to add it seems to me at a time when we’re starting to get students to engage with committees, doing work with the committee, highlighting faculty engagement in this work would be appropriate.
Admin: It sounds like we want to professionalize the accreditation process and would best be done to bill through reassigned time. I would think about those essential appointments that cannot be done and completed otherwise. In order to professionalize it, you need to pay for it; and then you can turn and say “Are you done”? “We’re ready to receive it.” It wouldn’t be healthy for a person to overburden themselves to deliver -- you need to have a professional environment to do so. Michael, I’m spending your money!
Admin: We’ll, it hasn’t come out of my pocket!
FA: Let the minutes reflect you’ll buy the pizza!
FA: Roland, was this a motion? I’ll second it!
Admin: Again, I just have to say having been the self-study coordinator last time, I think there was excellent support from faculty for the NCA process – there were lots of committees and involvement and it showed in the accreditation visit, and we walked away gleaming. In the prior accreditation, there had not been that kind of involvement – a very small group had done the self study, and we walked away with ten concerns and two focus visits. I can’t stress enough how important it is for faculty and students to participate, and I don’t know how else to reward them – with certificates and parties, reassigned time when appropriate. I think you have the right to hold us accountable, and we’re ready and we’ll find the ways.
Admin: Let me comment -- two other campuses are engaged in preparing for the NCA Accreditation. In one case, at Mankato, there is one committee; and I think they’ll run into the issue just described. In another situation, one person did the whole study. I’ve been through three accreditations; and as Lin said, it is absolutely true -- one thing considered in the process is how broadly participation has taken place at that campus and how informed people are about the process and various issues raised in the self study. If we don’t have that, we’ll run into trouble. We really do need this participation. If we don’t get accredited, we’re no longer permitted to provide Federal Financial Aid, and the institution would close. We’re very far away from being in this situation, but it’s important to us as an institution to have a positive outcome from the accreditation, and we need significant faculty participation in the process, and we’ll figure out ways to acknowledge individual faculty members’ contributions to whatever extent we can. With regard to the issue of promoting faculty solely based on their participation in committees, there is a difference of criteria in the contract where faculty are expected to participate in five different areas. The balance is variable, but we do want to see they’re engaged in a variety of activities. They may need to be doing something in each area, and this is the issue that came in one or two cases last year.
FA: I am very grateful you recognize a faculty member may be so absorbed in one criteria that another may take a lower priority. Different faculty have noted in their particular academic unit, the interpretation is not obvious -- there is a demand for equal excellence in all five criteria regardless of the intensity in one criterion over a given year.
Admin: In the PDP/PDR process, isn’t there an opportunity for a faculty member to give their balances in these criteria?
FA: Yes, that’s how the contract is intended to work.
FA: I think we understand how important accreditation is – this is not the issue. I think faculty worked very hard on it. We have a lot of committees without a lot of people, and being told how important accreditation is and the administration will find a way to reward faculty doesn’t solve the problem. There is one case where a faculty member with scholarship and significant committee work didn’t go all through the promotion process, and I think that had repercussions. Our argument is not for promotion to be based solely on committee work; we’re just saying committee work is not valued. We have whole colleges who don’t participate. We don’t think faculty are not being promoted, because they are. We have some departments saying committee work doesn’t matter, and we have a bottleneck because there are some faculty who keep working and working, and they’re burnt out. We need to find a way to jump start the process…….
FA: When referring to the Provost saying solely committee participation, I’m wondering where this reference came from, because I didn’t hear anyone say this. We’re talking about things being weighted equally. I know this afternoon while I was looking for more committees to join, the FA President said I don’t want you to join another committee since I want you to be able to sleep! Are we saying we want you to recognize the fact these committees keep the university going and you cannot diminish any of the committees; and you should show to the campus community, especially to faculty, you value committee participation and there should be a way to articulate a notice to faculty members?
Admin I agree with that.
FA: I think there is a larger issue. There are many adjuncts and advisees. Last year, we increased class sizes. It’s a larger issue, and it cannot be blamed on the administration. To push MnSCU, we need support. The money dried up at the other end, and faculty take it out in hide. There is only so much they can take. It’s not just whether we value committee work, it is the issue whether faculty have enough time in their lives to do it.
8. Process used to decide which department a faculty member is rostered in. (FA) (9/9)
FA: This item will come up again. There seem to be more joint appointments.
Admin: We started drafting a statement, and I don’t have a finished version – it’s in our senate.
9. Opening Convocation and Commencement. (FA) (9/9)
FA: Frankie Condon is supposed to get you a name for an LR&TS rep and an FA rep, and we’ll get those names to you.
10. Restoration of Funds to Student Services. (Admin) (9/23)
Admin: As a result of Diana’s hard work on the budget, we have one-time and ongoing permanent funding, and I received support of all of the other VPs in saying the permanent money would go to the restoration to Student Services.
Admin: It has not happened yet. We’re bound by Meet and Confer and other bargaining units and processes, and we’re going to do that. We’re talking to the employees involved now, since it impacts them; and we’ll restore the cuts to Student Services.
FA: Do the folks know this – you’re talking to them?
Admin: Yes. In the last two days, I’ve spoken to Counsel 5, MSUAASF and have had discussions to begin with the affected employees. Counsel 6 will have an MOA. We could have a case of people who took a cut getting bumped out of the position they had for 30 years, and we have to get an agreement in place and signed; and perhaps a person may prefer their present employment situation. But, we’re going to restore the cuts.
FA: Thank you!
Admin: Can this topic come off of the agenda?
FA: Yes.
11. We request a list of all joint faculty/non-faculty appointments with percentages and supervisory duties. (FA) (10/7)
Admin: The only person we’re aware of is in the College of Fine Arts and Humanities – the former chair of the English Department with 49 percent as their administration appointment and 51 percent as their faculty appointment until the end of this calendar year. After that time, she’ll be in student management until the end of the academic year on June 30.
FA: Since there is 2 percent more for their faculty appointment than their student manager role, we have a faculty person signing Articles 22 for the Dean?
Admin: Yes. I can initial them if it makes life easier.
FA: Her signature is a problem. Please white out her signature.
Admin: OK.
FA: Her signature on those is very problematic.
Admin: 49 percent is supervisory ……
Admin: I’m talking about Article 22, not Article 24. Where is the difference?
FA: I think she’s fulfilling an administrative responsibility, and we have a split there – where faculty weighs in on the Article. I think we went through this in the COE. What happened, ultimately, is the individual was moved to full-time management; although, they did have some teaching responsibility, and that kept it clean.
Admin: That’s what we’ll plan to do.
FA: Thank you. It will make her life easier too.
FA: What I find is troubling is when you say the “only one you know of.” Is our personnel system so bad we cannot ask it?
Admin: It changes frequently.
FA: This topic may be taken off of the agenda.
The agenda was moved to New Business - #5
New Businesss
5. Summer School (Admin) (11/4)
Admin: Let me give you the printout and worksheet of Summer Session ‘04 and the projection for ‘05. Let me say, briefly, these are the same formats you’ve seen previously. The top sheet, essentially, shows the analysis of summer 2004. Of the state universities within MnSCU, all but two were down -- we were up and Southwest was up for the summer. Income is the number of credits multiplied by tuition. The figure on the far right is essentially income divided by costs. If we spent $1, we have a $1.55 return on that dollar that moves into the general budget for the university; and the expectation of this money is to subsidize the university. The increase in enrollment was 1 percent over the summer before. The numbers for income divided by cost are higher and is a function of faculty salaries remaining constant where tuition increases 15 percent, and thus produces income. These are the highest income cost figures the Summer Session has ever generated. The second is a recommendation for how to increase Summer Session college allocation by 3 percent over this past summer so the amount available to colleges for instructional purposes will be increased 3 percent. I do estimate tuition income and expenses. The amount out there is $2,110,152 to colleges. When we have a demand for additional sections, we can do so; and we’re not in a position where we have to say “go away.” The Special Projects request has gone out for $60,000 and will be reviewed, and a recommendation will be made to the Provost. The Faculty Fringe is a derivative of salary. The Summer Session portion is my salary, clerical salary, materials, and a variety of other things; and the bottom line is expenses and income.
On the last sheet, of greatest interest is the final column that is the amount allocated to the colleges for Summer Session ‘05. The Deans have a draft of this awaiting Meet and Confer, and I told them I’d respond to them afterwards. For the five colleges, the initial allocation for Summer Session ‘05 adds up to $2,110,152.00, a 3 percent increase over $2,048,000.00. Taking into consideration is an increase in enrollment and in faculty salaries and such. Any questions? I’m not trying to skip over columns; but, quite frankly, I can spend an hour going over this information.
FA: I’m concerned about the low enrollment figure for my college.
Admin: The money allocated to the college is for instruction – it is allocated to the Dean, and the Dean working with the departments allocates the money.
FA: OK.
Admin: The contention is these dollars are for instruction and are in the hands of the Deans; and if the money is diverted to meet the needs of the college but not to instruction, those are low enrollment classes.
FA: Could we get a list of what those were?
Admin: I have that, and I believe I can give it to you -- $70,000.
FA: For what kind of stuff?
Admin: One was due to a data system being generated in the college – again, I did this almost a month ago.
FA: If you would get us a list – we’re curious…..
Admin: For college-related functions but non-instructional is what these are.
FA: But, you can get us that list?
Admin: I’d be happy to.
FA: I have a question -- what that does is limit the ability to provide courses we can offer, so I’m baffled by that number.
FA: Who makes the decision that the money is going to be used for non-instruction vs. instruction?
Admin: Primarily, the Dean does in consultation with the Provost. The decisions are based on college activities.
FA: Is this a university-wide issue or a college issue? Faculty need transparency.
FA: What is “Other” on the first page (of the 2004 Summer report).
Admin: “Other” is for non-college prefix classes.
FA: Where’s Continuing Studies?
Admin: They have a 12-month budget and budget through the summer and do work semi in concert with summer sessions.
FA: They’re not part of this budget?
Admin: No. They do offer some continuing studies work in the summer but not in this analysis.
FA: Are we closing classes on Fridays?
Admin: No.
FA: Will the offices remain open and will the library remain open? Will we have air conditioning?
Admin: Yes! (laughter!)
Admin: The Summer Session scheduling will not change from previous years. The majority of our classes are Monday through Thursday; and there are some on Fridays, and those will continue.
FA: There was a lot of pressure not to schedule classes on Fridays – that pressure is off. I think that’s the point we want to make.
The agenda was returned to Unfinished Business - #12
12. Extra Money in the budget. Senate motion: That faculty senate ask the President for a detailed accounting of the unspent money, the exact amount of money and why it was not spent before we can begin discussion on how it will be spent.(FA) (10/7)
Admin: I passed out this one-page handout. The term Programmatic Funds Allocation Process is a procedure to deal with the plan involving a series of steps that entails requests from various units on campus to submit proposals for how some of this money can be spent and the basic premise on determining -- meeting basic needs and investing in the goals of Strategic Planning. They will go to various units on campus, to the Presidents’ Office, to the VPs, Deans, and Directors. The proposals that come back will have a narrative of how the proposal will satisfy the criteria, what is involved, what the cost is, and we’ll collect and prioritize and share this plan across campus to get feedback and responses from various bargaining units and Student Government. Once completed, we’ll publish the results and allocate funds and spend money, and we’ll solicit feedback on this proposed course of action.
FA: Today?
Admin: One of my thoughts, initially, is we’d restore supplies and equipment money to various units based on an amount existing several years ago when there were serious and significant cuts; but in conversation with the Deans and the Academic Affairs Council, some colleges made reductions and some made cuts in personnel. Therefore, what I want to do instead is meet with the Academic Affairs Council and the Deans (tomorrow) and have them present a list of supplies and equipment needs for colleges, and we’ll then prioritize them; and a significant portion of what they’re requesting will be funded right away.
FA: All of this money minus the money for the restoration of those cuts in Student Life and Development is one-time money.
FA: So you’re saying to start this process, for example, the Strategic Planning Committee has decided they need some funding to actually implement the Balanced Score Card; so the committee would come up with a proposal and associated cost and they would send the proposal to you by November 15?
Admin: No, December 17.
FA: What is November 15?
Admin: A letter will come out from the President to various units identifying the process with forms for soliciting requests.
FA: OK.
FA: Listening to this, I feel happiness when I hear something like financial exuberance -- it feels like we’re out of the woods. Is that what it is?
Admin: Yes -- at least temporarily.
FA: I’m not going to be threatened with pink slips!
FA: There has been some sacrifice from academic programs. In some disciplines, faculty say they can’t apply for grants and have the equipment and supplies. This is not necessarily a model that can replace the one that had been used. Don’t view this as a big surplus – we have to restore some first.
FA: That was exactly my point. By what we’re discussing, I have the feeling we’re not out of the woods yet. The sentiment is here of financial exuberance, and I’ll be cautious about that.
Admin: Yes.
Admin: If you give me a few minutes, we’ll take care of that exuberance!
My focus is on fiscal year ‘05. I promised this by the 1st of November, and it’s the 4th of November. My assumed variables are few because there are not many to assume – much is fact. Our enrollment is 14,100. The current numbers say 14,087 (live for 13!). We projected utilities, and you can see we modified the projection to reflect a 20 percent increase in natural gas, a 15 percent oil increase, and a 3 percent refuse increase; water, sewer, electricity remain flat; and we’ll maintain a reserve at 5 percent and don’t know what legal settlements are going forward. I went in, and the allocation directed to instruction is the same. As you can see under tuition, I adjusted for the 125 enrollment we won’t make. One piece is what we’ve collected from the prior year’s tuition – we’re working on this. We’ll have a little more in ‘05 we can recognize. We haven’t had a good pattern since we cleaned up so many accounts receivable from last year. As of the end of October, we’re projecting $117,250,943 in revenue.
The next pages focus on the last three columns. I went in and reevaluated salaries for fiscal year ’05. We anticipated a 5 percent increase, and it wasn’t. What is here are the real numbers (the majority are here). I pulled these from the accounting system. All of the contract adjustments are in, and then there are spring commitments we’ve added from the contract adjustments, from adjuncts in the spring, moving for a number of things; and I sat down with the Provost and Mike Mundis to get as realistic as we possibly can at this time. I did this at the same time with classified (added the Entrepreneurial Center). I talked with Dennis about the graduate assistants and what he needs for a tuition waiver and broke those two numbers out. I went in and looked at what we projected for contract travel for IFO. I broke that up between IFO, MSUAASF and Excluded. Other commitments -- faculty research, faculty short-term and faculty long-term I adjusted. Because we put in the new phone system, I adjusted this to reflect the real number. The big number, toward the bottom, of $1,055,313 is the utility adjustment. The Washington School was in there, and I took it out. I included the bill for liability insurance – we’ve added buildings, the stadium is bigger, the Rec center, we have all of Lawrence. I backed out loan system management since MnSCU covers this. I looked at the prior year’s adjustment, and this better reflects that number. Taken out on the expense side (salaries and all supplies) was $4.9 million. Ignore the expense budget. With revenue of $117 million and expenses of $110 million means we should have $6.8million dollars, and that the budget is anticipating higher revenue than expenses on the books for fiscal year ’05. I’ve changed this so you can better see by the memo on the bottom of the page. I list the carry forward from fiscal year ‘04, etc., that brings this fiscal year ’04 money now into fiscal year ’05. This is the one-time money -- $4.7.million. There’s probably a million more because we have contracts in place. The only thing outstanding is insurance for fiscal year ‘04 for 725 faculty at $600 each; so this number of $4.7 will go up by $950,000 and that’s because we got all contract settlements in as of Tuesday afternoon at 3 PM. So that’s were we’re at. I will get sheets corrected and back to you folks. We’ll go through Meet and Confers back to the students. I wanted to get on Student Government’s agenda tonight, but these young folks have been putting time into other things, and they’re worn out.
FA: All of the contract settlements are in – including salary equity adjustments?
Admin: Everything.
FA: Equity adjustments will be in the next paycheck.
Admin: I went out and literally checked and made sure.
FA: I know faculty roll over their professional travel funds -- is that rollover included in the $4.7million?
Admin: No. The number, referenced under the Memo section, reads a carry forward of $16.8 million, and the line below reads ($1.4 million).
Admin: In response to the earlier question raised, a portion of this money that is recurring money will be used to fund additional positions.
Admin: We heard from Diane, this is based on 14,100 students. We know the demographics are such we cannot assume in two years’ time these students will come without us making additional efforts. Faculty and administration need to be aware that now is the time to put emphasis on advising and the First Year Experience program that will attract these students -- every 100 students that are not here reduces the surplus.
Admin: This is one reason why we’ve put emphasis on retention.
FA: Thank you, Diana.
Admin: I’ve got a “to do” list, and I want you to be aware of my goals. November 15 is when I anticipate the updated report we did for ‘04 will be out on the Web incorporating the budget changes. I’ll make other changes so it reads better. November 15 is when I anticipate projections for ‘06 and ‘07 (three scenarios). MnSCU came out with their request to the legislature, so I can start projecting. I have to get my job description done.
On November 30, I will be working on the All Funds Report you requested, and I hope to have the draft. I’m running into some difficulty, so it might be a softer deadline; but I’m working at it. When we look at revenue but look at other funds -- residential life and board plans, room plans, there is a lot of difference in the revenue. The decision is whether to put it all out there and nobody catch onto it or compress it -- what is the right way (i.e., room, meals). We’re working through this by holding discussions.
I’m working on the status report you folks asked about. I’m doing a first run and hope to have this done for the Budget Committee to look at. If it works, then status reports will be on January 15, April 15, and from then on it continues for May, June, July, and August until the fiscal year is over.
I’ll rework the budget documents -- you saw I pulled out carry forwards, revenue, and expenses for one year. There are some other things I’m working with the Budget Committee on, and I still have a goal for a university budget book (don’t ask me how it will look!).
FA: Didn’t we talk about getting some help for Diana?
Admin: Yes. That will be one of the proposals for the budget, since it’s a permanent change.
Admin: I’m sensitive to your requests and am working on all of them. The All Funds report is interesting.
FA: The $1.4 million, if I am correct in understanding, is the difference between what we negotiate and what you estimate it would cost.
Admin: Yes.
FA: We told you upfront we estimated 5 percent.
Admin: I’ll update these spreadsheets, and we’ll get them to Annette.
FA: We’re going to stop now. Our next Meet and Confer was scheduled for November 18; however, we’re not able to hold it then; therefore our next Meet and Confer will be held on December 16.