8:30 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams
- Sondra Aman
- Mike Andriatch
- Justine Briggs
- James Cordeiro
- Frances Dearing
- Linda Delene
- Hailey Gardner
- Kandie Gay
- Daniel Goebel
- Tom Hernandez
- Cathy Houston-Wilson
- Jose Maliekal
- Dave Mihalyov
- Janet Roy
- James Spiller
- Mark Stacy
- Elliot Weininger
- Crystal Hallenbeck
- Jason Morris
- Darson Rhodes: Co-Chair
- Jim Wall: Co-Chair
- Melissa Wight
- Lorraine Acker
- Monica Brasted
- Denine Carr
- Thomas Chew
- Lynda Cochran
- Steve Cook
- Laura Coriddi
- Bob Cushman
- Eileen Daniel
- Peter Dowe
- Deborah Ferris
- Jennifer Green
- Dan Greer
- Kim Haines
- Scott Haines
- Mike Harrison
- Erick Hart
- Anna Hintz
- Mehruz Kamal
- Sara Kelly
- Pamela Kenward
- Rachael Killion
- Dana Laird
- Karen Logsdon
- Sandy Mosher
- Carl O’Connor
- Karen Podsiadly
- Heather Raczkowski
- Craig Ross
- Rey Sia
- Taneika Thompson
- Cheryl Van Lare
- Dana Weiss
- Susan Wielgosz
- Kimberley Willis
- Robert Wyant
- Kristin Hartway
- Katy Wilson
- President Macpherson
- Karen Riotto
The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m.
Dr. Rhodes made the following announcements:
- The meeting minutes from the November 18, 2021 meeting are not available yet. They will be shared at our next meeting.
- On Friday, December 10, 2021 there will be a Recruitment Showcase panel. This will be an open discussion regarding the recruiting and marketing efforts at Brockport. Members were encouraged to attend the event.
- Due to the possibility of time limitations, the update on enrollment and staffing may be presented at our next meeting.
Academic Strategic Plan (ASP) and Goal Group 1 Question & Answer Session
The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- The request was made to have the ASP presentation shared publicly. It was agreed that the presentation would be attached to the Provost’s weekly report.
- The question was raised regarding obtaining more information on the six student ambassadors for the Intercultural Center and what that opportunity is for students. It was stated that the plan is to employ six students, the center currently does not have that. The six students would assist with carrying out the work involved with the Intercultural Center, but the opportunity includes training and growing the students as ambassadors.
DIFR and Residential Life/Learning Communities Update – presented by Carl O’Connor, Assistant Director for Housing and Craig Ross, Cross Divisional Budget and Facility Officer
Mr. O’Connor and Dr. Ross presented the DIFR and Residential Life/Learning Communities update. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- The question was raised if the financial projections include any cost savings from space management of the dorms. It was stated that the cost savings are not included in the projections. The space management of the dorms is a strategy that is being reviewed, but it is difficult to say right now if it is an option until we know the numbers for fall. If it were to be done, then there would be salary savings achieved.
- The question was raised regarding if the reduced single rate produced more students to be interested in singles or was it the same from the previous year. It was stated that it netted about 100 more students that were interested in singles.
- The question was raised regarding if the reduced single rate will continue. It was stated that the rate is currently being reviewed to determine if it will stay the same or increase.
- The question was raised regarding what the definition of a false start is. It was stated that a false start is a student who starts classes and leaves the College within the first week.
- The question was raised regarding if interest was still being accumulated during the exemption time of the bond payment. It was stated that interest was still being accumulated.
- The question was raised regarding the budget being based on 1850 students and whether this is sustainable and achievable. It was stated that pre-COVID the average of residential students was between 2500-2600. It was stated that it is believed that 1850 is a safe number. There will be marketing of the singles. There is communication being developed geared towards local students on the benefits of on-campus housing. There are more scholarships that will be potentially available. It was added that there would have to be a reduction in expenses to maintain that budget. The reduction in the capital plan should also help.
- The question was raised regarding if the projections include evaluating the increased demand for on-line learning and how it may impact the demand for residence space. It was stated that there is a committee called the DIFR Strategic Team that focuses on five-to-ten-year planning. There are many key players from across campus that are on this committee that include Dana Weiss, Robert Wyant and Sara Kelly to name a few.
- The question was raised regarding the marketing of on-campus housing to graduate students especially when the demand of online courses is so high at the graduate level and how we can compete with off-campus housing. It was stated that the initial marketing for graduate students was geared towards the programs that require an in-person component. The off-campus housing is relatively cheap, but we try to come from the angle of the convenience of on-campus housing and the benefit of having all expenses on one bill. We are currently conducting a market study to see where we are in comparison to the off-campus housing.
- The suggestion was made to consider if there are residential units that could be marketed for a nightly rate for the programs that are mostly online but need to meet in-person for the weekend or a week.
The question was raised regarding which programming in the residential halls is the most popular and is there any programming in higher education that is associated with retaining and attracting students. It was stated that as an example, there is intentional programming that is done for the nursing cohorts that helps develop their connection to each other but also to assist those students who do not get accepted into the Nursing program and what other majors that they can complete at Brockport to give us a better chance of retaining those students.
Discussion & Vote on Budget Prioritization Requests
Goal Group 1
Members reviewed the budget request from Goal Group 1 that involved establishing an operating budget of $47,000 plus $10,000 in College Support funding for the Intercultural Center. The following question and answer occurred:
- Clarification was requested regarding if this request was to establish an ongoing budget and wouldn’t involve an annual budget prioritization request. It was stated that the request is for an ongoing budget.
Dr. Spiller motioned to vote to endorse the budget request, Ms. Roy seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
- Endorse – 14
- Not Endorse – 0
- Abstain – 0
Goal Group 2
No requests presented at this time.
Goal Group 3
Mr. Wall updated members regarding the changes to the budget requests:
- The Tree Campus USA project is being put on hold until the Facilities and Landscaping Master Plans are complete. In addition, with all the capital planning projects that are happening across campus there are trees being planted and funded by SUCF. With the North Campus Project, we are tripling the number of trees that will be on campus in that area.
- The request for the Budget position has been removed because we believe with filling the vacancy in the Budget Office, we have enough resources in place to continue the work with zero based budgeting.
- The request for developing and establishing Emergency Preparedness has been reduced from $120,000 to $60,000 because it is has decided that it will be phased in over a couple of years.
Members reviewed the updated budget requests from Goal Group 3. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- Clarification was requested if the $60,000 for Emergency Preparedness included the hardware for the fire and CO2 monitors and training for the systems. It was stated that the hardware was funded by SUCF. About $30,000 will go towards maintenance and monitoring of the fire and CO2 monitors. The rest is for ongoing training programs withing campus but mostly in the Facilities department.
- The question was raised regarding if we do not currently have a sufficient budget to cover the cost of training. It was stated we do not.
- The question was raised regarding if the budget for the training is to cover personnel hours or to purchase online modules for training. It was stated that some funding is for professional instruction and other training is online. So, it is a mix of both.
- The question was raised that it is understood that this training is important for health and safety, but is it required for accreditations and certifications. It was stated that it is.
- Clarification was requested on the items that were originally presented as to be determined and if the committee would be voting on them. It was stated that all items that were listed as to be determined were removed and until they can be fully defined, the committee will not vote on them.
- It was clarified that the seed mix for the Meadow Project is a one-time cost.
- The question was raised regarding how much the campus will save from not moving the area where the meadow will be. It was stated that the estimate is close to $5,000 a year.
- Clarification was requested regarding what the $3,000 for the Earth Day activities would be used for. It was stated that there is a subcommittee on sustainability and every year they look at the Earth Day activities. In the past few years, the campus has had hardly any funding to support the activities. This is to establish some funding to allow the campus to complete some Earth Day Activities. It was requested that the subcommittee connect with Dr. Spiller so he can help coordinate with broader campus teaching and learning experiences.
- The question was raised regarding where the meadow will be and if the area where the frisbee golf course would be impacted. It was stated that it will be located across from X lot and the golf course will not be touched. Also, Kevin Rice has worked with Erick Hart and they will be keeping a running path through there for the cross-country team.
Dr. Spiller motioned to vote to endorse the budget requests, Ms. Dearing seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
- Endorse – 14
- Not Endorse – 0
- Abstain – 0
Goal Group 4
Members reviewed the budget request from Goal Group 4 that involved requesting $65,000 for a Training Manager position in Human Resources. Members will not be voting on the Employee Success Center as the specific amount is unknown. The following questions and answers occurred:
- The request was made to explain what the position is, if it has existed in the past, and why it is deemed a necessary expense at this time. It was stated that we did have a Training Manager up until 9-10 years ago. When that individual left, the College did not replace the position. Since the beginning of the current Strategic Plan, employee development has been a major issue that has been discussed. BizLibrary offers wonderful training videos but we are missing out on opportunities of having in-person team training and professional opportunities on campus and that is why this position keeps coming up every year. It was added it would be a dedicated resource to develop programs especially the new supervisor trainings that many individuals have requested.
- The question was raised if this position would require the skills and be tasked with working with the Grants Office on researching federal and state funding that can be used for trainings. It was stated that this requirement could be added to the job description and requirements because it makes sense that the individual would have the expertise to help secure any potential funds.
- The question was raised regarding if this position has presented to JPBC in the past and if so, how is the situation different now than when it wasn’t approved. It was stated that JPBC has recommended in previous years that this position be filled, but Cabinet has determined that it was not a priority because of the available funding. It is brought forward each year by Goal Group 4 because the group feels it is a priority.
- The question was raised regarding if in the future and there is an Employee Success Center, this position would be a keystone figure in the center. It was stated that would be the expectation. A Training Manager would be vital in ensuring the success of the center.
Ms. Aman motioned to vote to endorse the budget request, Dr. Houston-Wilson seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
- Endorse – 13
- Not Endorse – 2
- Abstain – 0
BASC Budget Update – presented by Dana Weiss, Executive Director of BASC, Anna Hintz, Assistant Executive Director of BASC, and Deborah Ferris, Accounting & Finance Director of BASC
Ms. Weiss, Ms. Hintz and Ms. Ferris presented an update on the BASC budget. The following question and answer occurred:
- The question was raised regarding comparing the total cost of goods over the past few years and how we are at almost at the same number as 2019-20 but with fewer students and meal plans. It was stated that last year there was a decrease because food was mostly takeout and now, we have more places open on campus and students are dining in. In terms of this year’s number with less students being the same as it was in 2019-20, it is due to inflation.
- Due to time constraints, members were instructed to email any questions to Dr. Rhodes, and they will be sent to the BASC team to be answered.
Retention Update – presented by Sara Kelly, Assistant Vice President for Enrollment Management and Taneika Thompson, Interim Director of Institutional Effectiveness
Dr. Kelly and Ms. Thompson presented an update on retention. Due to time constraints, it was requested that Dr. Kelly and Ms. Thompson attend a future meeting to further discuss the information presented. It was agreed that schedules would be reviewed to determine if they could attend the committee’s next meeting.
Other Items from the Committee
- None at this time
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m.