CAMPUS REENGINEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES

December 07, 2001

MEMBERS PRESENT

MEMBERS ABSENT

AGENDA

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Larry Schlereth brought the meeting to order at 12:15 PM. Schlereth noted that the Campus Holiday Party is today and he would like to adjourn at 3:15 PM. Schlereth asked for a motion to approve the Agenda. Floyd Ross moved and Steve Wilson seconded the motion to approve the Agenda. The Agenda was approved without objection.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES

October 12, 2001, November 19, 2001

Schlereth asked for a motion to approve the minutes of October 12, 2001 and November 19, 2001. Steve Wilson moved and Joe Vederame seconded the motion. Sue Hayes indicated that she was not present at the October 12th, 2001 meeting. The minutes, as amended were passed unanimously with abstentions from those not in attendance at the October 12, 2001 and November 19, 2001 meetings.

VICE-PRESIDENTS REPORT

(Please see the December 07, 2001 Agenda Packet for this document)

Division Goals and Objectives: 2000-2001

Schlereth explained that four objectives have been completed since the last CRC Meeting. Funding for the completion of the Salazar Hall renovation has been identified. The CMS interfund loan will be financed using project management money due to Administration and Finance from the Salazar Hall renovation, TII project, Beaujolais Village project, and parking expansion project. This money will be repaid over a number of years. The Copeland Creek Master Plan is complete. The Police Services Building will be funded through a loan from the Sonoma State Enterprises. As repayment, the University will not charge SSE for certain University services equal to the loan amount.

People Soft Portal: Student Administration Module

Schlereth explained the People Soft portal and the benefits such a system would have for the campus. The main features of the portal allow for convenient information access by the campus community. Schlereth is hoping the CSU will fund the cost of the portal, however maintenance on the portal will cost $300,000. Katie Pierce asked if expenses above the $300,000 for maintenance are likely. Schlereth responded that additional expenses will likely come, however the University is unsure at this time. Sue Hayes asked how far along we were in the process and if it would be prudent to implement such a system if the content were not yet online. She feels a one-year delay in the purchase of the product may be a good option. Rand Link asked if student life announcements would be available on the portal. Sam Scalise believes this feature exists. Lynn McIntyre suggested that the review of other portals could be useful and less expensive. Edna Nakamoto believes the portal will be of great assistance to students and will provide many features and information they currently do not have. Vederame feels students would find the portal extremely useful and convenient. Schlereth noted that in tough budget times this portal would be difficult to fund, however if we are able to receive funding from the Chancellors Office, this tool would be extremely useful for many, especially the students. Lisa Johnson asked if students could do anything to help receive funding for the portal. Schlereth said their presentation during a conference call or a trip with him to Long Beach would be very useful.

Beaujolais Village Update

Schlereth informed Members that working drawings for Beaujolais Village were complete and bids are to be opened on the January 17th. Construction is scheduled to begin on April 1st. Phil McGough asked if McCarthy, a firm we have been pleased with in the past, would be bidding on the contract. Schlereth confirmed that McCarthy had expressed interest.

Information Technology Advisory Committee Update

Schlereth informed Members that the next ITAC meeting would include the following agenda topics: BATS funding and faculty workstations.

Faculty and Staff Housing Committee Update

Hayes updated Members on the status of the Faculty and Staff Housing Committee. The University has received an offer from Brookfield Homes for the Universitys purchase of the 34-acres north of the campus. The offer is too high and the University will be looking for additional parcels in the event that Brookfield and the University cannot come to terms. Schlereth explained the planned University District Specific Plan that was distributed by Brookfield Homes.

CMS: Employee Composition

Many have commented to Schlereth that eliminating the CMS project could solve the impending budget issues. Schlereth feels this may be the case for a second wave campus, however no benefit would accrue to Sonoma as we are already implementing the product. Further, fourteen positions would need to be laid-off and a new student system would still have to be purchased. Andy Merrifield clarified that the fourteen positions would be reassigned, not laid-off.

FINANCIAL AFFAIRS

(Please see the December 7, 2001 Agenda Packet for this document)

Administration and Finance Budget Reduction Plan

Schlereth thanked the Committee for their advice at the last CRC meeting. Based on this advice, Schlereth developed the plan presented in the agenda packet. Schlereth has identified $768,199 in needs for the 2001-2002 fiscal year and has identified $288,199 toward these needs. The difference still needs to be identified. Hearing no objections, Larry will present the plan to the President for approval. Melinda Barnard suggested backfilling some of the positions with internship opportunities. Jim Christmann and Sue Hayes acknowledged the extra work staff and managers would be assuming.

University-Wide Budget Planning

Schlereth presented the parameters developed for dealing with the 2002-2003 University budget. The budget is being developed to deal with a 5-10% budget reduction. Schlereth said reductions on the higher end of the spectrum could result in restricting access. Financial Services is currently working on identifying large pots of money that may exist (reserves, etc.) at the campus to shield from the possibility of the State Controller sweeping the money. Barnard clarified that this money is being shielded from the State not the PBAC. McIntyre indicated that the January budget that was released would likely be optimistic because of the election year. The more accurate budget will come in the May. Rick Luttmann noted out that the University could be teaching 4% more students with 10% less money. He asked that Members speak to anyone who will listen about resolving this matter.

DARWIN HALL RENOVATION

Bruce Walker presented the Darwin Hall Feasibility Study. Based on complaints from users in Darwin Hall, Environmental Health and Safety identified approximately $2,500,000 worth of upgrades needed to the Darwin Hall ventilation system. $7,000,000 worth of deferred maintenance also exists. A renovation to solve these issues would be very disruptive and create spaces that were unusable while the renovations occurred. Based on these facts, it was determined a full renovation of the building should be explored. A complete renovation of Darwin Hall would cost $27,000,000 (not inclusive of relocation and temporary space while renovations are being executed). The Chancellors Office accepted the full renovation cost and placed it high on the Capital projects list because of the health and safety issues involved. This project would be funded if the next bond initiative passes in the general election. Walker thanked Christmann and all involved in the feasibility study.

CAMPUS LIGHTING PROGRAM

Walker presented the findings regarding lighting levels of campus exterior spaces. Walker studied this with Nate Johnson, Chief of Police, along with a lighting consultant. The study concludes our current lights work well in some spaces, but not in others. Criteria examined were: light levels, path of travel, surrounding area glare, and color rendition. Two areas met criteria standards: parking lot F and the Schulz Information Center. The worst areas were: Parking lots H, G, and Zinfandel. Walker is currently studying the cost of fixing the lighting problems. The new plan will minimize light going up into the sky. Rich Marker asked if we are out of compliance with laws as well as standards. Walker stated that we are in compliance with the law, however deviating from standards leaves the University open to liability.

Schlereth wished all Members a good holiday and adjourned the meeting at 3:10pm.

Minutes Prepared by Neil Markley

CRC Minutes 2001-2002
Updated 2008-01-10
AFD.WebContact@Sonoma.edu