Bernie Goldstein brought the meeting to order at 8:07AM. Dennis Harris moved and Gloria Ogg seconded a motion to approve the proposed agenda. Joe Latulippe asked that only the IRA fee be covered in the "CMS Expenditures in Student Fee-Based Programs" topic. Larry Schlereth feels it more appropriate to cover the topic in the whole instead piecemeal. Latulippe conceded. The agenda was passed unanimously.
Goldstein asked for a motion to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2000 meeting. Harris moved and Rand Link seconded the motion. The minutes were approved with no "no" votes. Those not present at the February 24, 2000 meeting abstained.
(Please see the March 30, 2000 Agenda packet for this document)
Schlereth presented this item and noted it was placed on the Agenda at the request
of students. Schlereth indicated the issue to be whether student fee-based
programs should be assessed for CMS. Latulippe feels it is inappropriate that
students pay every time each student fee-based program is assessed a CMS charge.
Further, it brings a hardship to the budgets of these programs, IRA in particular,
every time an additional charge is assessed. Latulippe is concerned about the
health of IRA programs as additional charges accrue to the fund. Andy Merrifield
finds Latulippe’s argument compelling because the IRA fund is slightly
different than the other student fee-based programs that are more enterprise
related. Ogg asked if the IRA programs were not charged the fee would Athletics,
the Star, or the Children’s School be charged somewhere else? Schlereth
indicated the Star and Athletics would not. Schlereth also noted that if the
CMS assessment were not charged to IRA, the assessment would be distributed
based on the marginal cost formula. Ogg stated that these programs are labor
intensive and do need CMS supported management services. She added that some
of the IRA programs are entrepreneurial. For instance, the Star receives ad
revenue, the Children School charges fees, and Athletics receives ticket and
concession revenue. Scott Gordon feels that it is not without precedent that
a fund does not get assessed fees. He noted private gifts are not taxed. Schlereth
noted that if the fee is not the problem, there is a way to tax the revenue
generating programs only. Merrifield suggested a referendum to change the formula
in which the money is allocated could be a consideration of the students. Latulippe
feels students in 1994 would not have passed the IRA fee if they knew how much
control they would lose. Link suggested the students look at a model similar
to Chico State where the fee is raised annually based on the CPI or a similar
model. Markley agrees and noted that when costs rise either expenses must be
cut or revenue increased. Pat Seda asked if coaches could be gradually moved
back onto the general fund, freeing IRA money. Goldstein said this is a possibility,
however, the effects on Academic Affairs would have to be analyzed. Harris
feels this is an FAC issue and they should deal with it. Merrifield feels it
is appropriate to deal with this because the FAC asked the PBAC to review the
issue. Merrifield moved the PBAC suggest to the FAC the IRA assessment of CMS
charges be borne by revenue producing IRA programs. A second was obtained from
Bill Barnier. Barnier called the question. A vote to call the question passed
with one no vote (Gordon). A vote was taken and the motion passed with ten
yes votes and three no votes. Barnier moved that the IRA fund be exempted from
CMS assessments. A second was obtained from Gordon. Harris indicated he did
not want Academic Affairs to be hit with IRA’s assessment and does not
like the principle of giving exemptions. Merrifield stated he did not want
Academic Affairs incurring the charge; however he is supportive of this exemption
and feels this assessment is wrong. Kathryn Crabbe is not supportive of the
exemption and feels an escalation of the fee would be prudent. She does not
want to see Academic Affairs hit with the IRA assessment fee when a majority
of the IRA program resides in Student Affairs. A vote was taken and the motion
failed with eight no votes, four yes votes, and one abstention. Barnier asked
to be recorded as not voting in favor of the motion.
(Please see the March 30, 2000 Agenda packet for this document)
Schlereth presented this topic and suggested these are items he feels are going
to be the university-wide priorities for this budget cycle. Merrifield indicated
he would be asking the Executive Board of the Academic Senate for approval
of a survey to gauge faculty opinion on budget matters. He is hopeful to have
this complete by the end of the semester. Crabbe likes the idea of a survey
and feels the Associated Students should consider one as well. Schlereth feels
the notion of a survey is a good one, but many areas of campus are still determining
priorities and trying to bring them to life. Schlereth reminded the Committee
that they should not be setting priorities, but rather finding ways to fund
them. Schlereth noted some priorities are not listed because the Trustees have
expressed interest in funding them. If these fall off the Trustees’ list,
they will be added to our list. Barnier asked that "operating expense" be
added to the list. Phyllis Fernlund agreed. Letitia Coate agreed that there
are many needs but asked if anyone had ideas how to fund these needs. Barnier
noted salary savings have been, and could continue to be, used to help fund
needed items. Crabbe asked what Development could help with. Jim Meyer feels
Development is already stretched to the limit and will need extra staff to
accommodate more work. Assuming he has staff to assist, faculty/staff development,
technology, and the University Center are all possibilities. Gordon feels faculty/staff
development and housing are critical to the campus, especially in fields where
competition is fierce. Gordon added, when the President is supportive of a
program it tends to be more successful. Ogg feels reengineering should always
be considered when attempting to find money. Schlereth noted the President
would need to be advised of specific strategies to fund the priority list.
Goldstein adjourned the meeting at 10:00am.
Minutes prepared by Neil Markley
PBAC minutes 1999-2000
Updated 2007-12-14
afd.webcontact@sonoma.edu