1999-2000 Campus Resource and Planning Committee (CRPC) minutes. These documents are being compiled into one document for posting to the web to facilitate word-searches on topics of interest/concern to web page customers. Ê University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes September 23, 1999 Members present: Tom Johnson (Chair), Jim Van Alstine, Karen Fischer, Chris Anderson, Gary Hedin, Brett Carlson, Brenda Boever, Norrine Ostrowski, Lowell Rasmussen, Ray Sibul, Maddy Maxeiner, Ken Crandall, Tom McRoberts (by phone). Guests: Sam Schuman, Gary McGrath, Gary Strei. Chair Tom Johnson began the year with introductions. The minutes of the 6/3/99 meeting were discussed, particularly the civility and contention concepts Johnson had mentioned from an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education. The minutes were approved as circulated. Lowell Rasmussen reviewed sudden changes in construction plans. A substantial hole has developed near Gay Hall, causing damage to the dorm's wall. Gay Hall has presented an accessibility problem in the past; this unexpected development presents an unplanned but fortunate opportunity to address that problem. The contractor, who is partly responsible for the problem, will contribute to the entry upgrade. The work will conform to UMM's master plan and will provide handicap accessibility on two levels (there has been none previously). Also, the six year projected capital request plan will need reviewing as it has been revised based on recent data. Johnson requested that Rasmussen circulate material in advance of the meeting when it will be discussed. Concerning construction projects, Rasmussen noted that it is anticipated that the Regional Fitness Center (RFC) will begin operations Oct. 5th with a grand opening on Oct. 16th. Meanwhile, the Science Project designs are being altered to strengthen the third floor. Sam Schuman reviewed our Compact status. The latest draft, an essentially final edition, shows what UMM received from the contract process with central administration, including two new tenure-track positions (as part of the undergraduate initiative) and a commitment to funding for the Native American tuition waiver. Accompanying visual aids included data that suggests UMM's percentage of FYE students per tenured/tenure-track faulty is decreasing, a statistic that will need to be addressed by increasing enrollment. A draft of next year's compact will be presented to the CRPC since multi-constituency endorsement of the document gives it more weight. Schuman also mentioned that the Capital Campaign kick-off will be October 15th. UMM has already raised donations beyond the previously-debated 2.5 million goal. The priorities for the funds will be student scholarships (particularly for upper classmen), faculty and staff support, and instructional facilities. The committee moved on to a consideration of goals for the year. Johnson wondered if the committee agreed that enrollment should be a high priority or had other concerns. Gary McGrath and Sam Schuman encouraged the committee not to duplicate or adopt the responsibilities of the Admissions office such as developing goals or strategies. Ray Sibul asked about the Scholastic Committee's involvement in setting admission standards and Schuman suggested that retention is a better priority for the CRPC than admissions. Jim Van Alstine echoed Johnson's sentiment about prioritizing enrollment, Brenda Boever suggested having the CRPC advised throughout the director search process, and Brett Carlson stressed the connection between residential life and retention. Johnson mentioned that the NCA self-study draft is nearing completion and will address enrollment and retention. A straw vote indicated that the CRPC does find this a significant issue worth focusing on this year. Ken Crandall stressed the need not to waste time duplicating the efforts of the Admissions Office or the NCA steering committee/self-study writer. He encouraged focusing on specifics like the dining hall experience that the CRPC can address. The CRPC will meet again on Thursday, Oct. 7, at 1 pm in the Behmler Conference Room. ----------- University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes October 7, 1999 Members present: Tom Johnson, Chris Anderson, Brett Carlson, Gary Hedin, Ray Sibul, Sara Haugen, Nat Hart, Ken Crandall, Tom McRoberts (by phone). Guests: Jim Olson, Gary McGrath, Gary Strei, Sandy Olson-Loy. After approving the minutes of 9/23/99, the committee discussed the capital request for the 2000-2002 biennium. The request approved by the 98/99 committee has had to be revamped due to restructuring of requests in the Twin Cities. Other requests have moved ahead of UMM's, but Sam Schuman does not recommend battling with other coordinate campuses for better list positioning... it's more important to send a message to the Twin Cities that all coordinate campuses need to be adequately funded. Rasmussen noted that the House, Senate, and Governor's Office all have different party leadership and different perspectives on bonding. If the governor's 400 million bonding cap is observed, the University (which usually receives 15 to 20%) will probably see only 80 million. In the past, the bonding bill has typically been $700 million or even $1.2 billion. Rasmussen has two months to put together requests for 2002, 2004 and 2006. We need to be flexible but not indecisive (too much waffling suggests our requests are trivial). Nat Hart wondered about the smallness of UMM's various entries, asking if combining them would lessen chances for funding. Rasmussen admitted that reprioritizing may be in order, such as moving Social Science renovations ahead of Old Humanities... he will provide the committee with information from a feasibility study as soon as it is completed. Gary McGrath distributed hand-outs ("Concerns," "Applications," "Issues," "Decline Factors," "Operation Problems," "Plans," "Beyond," "Strengths"... copies available from Rebecca Webb upon request) and discussed enrollment after introducing Jim Olson, chair of the Scholastic Committee, which has oversight over admissions standards. In general, the Admissions Office has been reviewing what has been effective and what has been ineffective in recent recruiting. We need to respond effectively to fall inquiries to get applications in by January and a class in place by June. We still compare well to other institutions in class statistics, but we need to start recruiting in the sophomore and junior years to compete with other schools' recruiting initiatives. Ray Sibul suggested that the town of Morris needs to be more attractive to students and provide better off-campus housing. McGrath countered that the town has limited potential for appealing to students and is more of a selling point for their parents. Nat Hart requested more data about costs, expressing concern that "most expensive" not become a buzzword associated with UMM. McGrath added that we have a visibility problem... we need to tout our faculty achievements, enliven the campus if there are going to be tours on Saturdays, and improve our athletic performance for its public relations value. He and Crandall noted UMM's lack of a public relations director, a rare thing for a college campus, particularly one that is trying to improve visibility. Other plans to improve the recruitment process include revisiting our mailing/phoning protocol, pitching any group of high school students that visits the campus, and improving the admissions counselor positions so that they attract our best graduates. Jim Olson mentioned that Scott Hagg has recently addressed the Scholastic Committee on this issue. The committee is confident that Hagg is addressing the problem but Olson stresses that we need to consider how much other schools spend on recruiting. We can't compete "on the cheap." The CRPC will meet again on Thursday, Oct. 21, at 1 pm in the Behmler Conference Room. The agenda will include other goals the CRPC may consider this year. ------------- University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes October 21, 1999 Members present: Tom Johnson, Ken Crandall, Brenda Boever, Lowell Rasmussen, Chris Anderson, Karen Fischer, Brett Carlson, Nat Hart, Norrine Ostrowski, Jim Van Alstine. Guests: Sandy Olson-Loy. Tom Johnson began the meeting by requesting an augmentation to the 10/7/99 minutes describing Gary McGrath's enrollment presentation hand-outs. The minutes will be revised and redistributed; normally, corrections to the minutes would simply be noted in the next meeting's minutes. The minutes were otherwise approved. Lowell Rasmussen discussed the 2000 Capital request. The U will be in an historically less lucrative position if the bonding bill is capped at 400 million; our legislators are prepared to campaign aggressively on UMM's behalf. Jim Van Alstine asked if those in power are aware of how much space will be wasted without the 8.2 million being sought for renovation of the old science building. Rasmussen responded that we are prepared to drive home the message that letting a building sit unusable is not responsible management of state resources. He reviewed the reasons other projects have moved ahead of our request; all are legitimate and essentially insurmountable. Nat Hart wondered about non-funding scenarios and Rasmussen affirmed that the Science and Math personnel are formulating a Plan B should the renovations not occur. Hart clarified that a non-funding scenario should be a graphic admonition of the consequences of failed funding. Brett Carlson urged Rasmussen to stress that UMM's 8.2 million request is designated completely for classroom/teaching space that was planned to help UMM compensate for its lack in this area. Moving on to the 2002 request, Rasmussen explained that Community Services, Social Science, Old Humanities, Education and the MRC all need renovating but our goal is to convince the central administration that our priorities should be Community Service and Social Science, not Community Service and Old Humanities. Rasmussen has two months to finish drafting the 2002, 2004 and 2006 requests. Based on feasibility study results, Social Science will be the next project pursued after the science building renovation. If the science renovation money is denied in 2000, it will remain our top priority and all other projects will remain in line behind it. The legislature is aware that the Science Project will be the only new building requested for UMM for a long time; renovation will be our focus in the meantime. Jim Van Alstine asked about fund-raising/matching requirements. Rasmussen replied that President Yudof is considering requiring a 15% downpayment on new bonding; capital campaign funds could be used for such downpayments. In addition to the 3.6 million required to renovate Social Science, $480,000 would be necessary to create swing space in Community Services (which could be reused during Old Humanities renovations). Brett Carlson asked about the logic of renovating Community Services "twice" (once as swing space and again when its own turn for renovation comes up). Rasmussen replied that there simply isn't any other space on campus available for swinging. Ken Crandall asked about Food Service and Rasmussen responded that it may be used for conference/banquet space and academic support functions (labs, advising, etc). Ray Sibul asked about "secret" spaces like the rafters above Camden and Rasmussen explained that it's not feasible to bring such spaces up to code. Hart asked why renovating Social Science would add classrooms when the floor plans look like office space and Rasmussen responded that the new offices will yield vacated space elsewhere. The committee moved on to subcommittees. Possible areas of focus include enrollment, facilities management, budget/finance, instructional technology, and human resources. Johnson mentioned that the CRPC has never reviewed UMM's operational budget and provided input in the formulation stage. Rasmussen reminded the committee that two hours of effort per week, the typical subcommittee workload, would yield oversight only, not an exhaustive familiarity with a topic. Crandall wondered what areas a human resources subcommittee would explore and Johnson suggested salaries and spousal employment. Sibul added hiring and allocation. Rasmussen encouraged the creation of a facilities subcommittee and explained that its efforts would be needed only through January for capital request purposes. There was further discussion of how subcommittees might operate and which ones would be most useful. Then Carlson made a motion to create subcommittees in the areas of enrollment, facilities/budget, and human resources. Sibul seconded the motion and it passed. Members present indicate their areas of interest and other CRPC members are encouraged to contact Tom Johnson at johnsotl@morris.umn.edu to indicate their service preference. --------- University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes February 14, 2000 Members present: Lowell Rasmussen, Karen Fischer, Tom Johnson, Ken Crandall, Jim Van Alstine, Maddy Maxeiner, Ray Sibul, Nick Kropf, Sara Haugen, Norrine Ostrowski. Guests: Sam Schuman, Sandy Olson-Loy, Gary Strei, Jeff Ratliff-Crain. The committee approved the minutes of 10/21/99 as distributed and then discussed the 2002 capital request to be presented to the Capital Improvements Advisory Council by Lowell Rasmussen on Wednesday, 2/16/00. UMM's 2002 request is based on receipt of Old Science renovation funds this biennium. The CRPC facilities subcommittee met with Rasmussen concerning the request. Social Science renovation remains a top priority because of its impact on classroom instruction. Jerry Zuber's firm has completed preliminary planning. A second story would be added above the "cow palace." Since the entire building cannot be taken off line during construction, the first floor of Community Services would need to adapted as swing space. The subcommittee moved renovation of Food Service from 2004 to 2002 (priority #2). Gary Strei explained that levels would be joined (1 and 2, 3 and 4). The bottom level would be retained by Food Service and the upper level would provide private dining and academic support services office space. Capital request funds would not pay for the part of the renovations tied to Chartwells (a for-profit auxiliary). The third priority on the 2002 request, renovation of Edson Auditorium, includes plans for sharing the expense with substantial private funds. A renovated Edson would provide the campus with a sort of bridge to help meet its auditorium needs until funding can be obtained for HFA Phase III. Rasmussen summarized by saying that the capital request focuses on utilizing current buildings better. Nick Kropf wondered how feasible it is to plan on using part of Social Science while the other part is being renovated. Rasmussen explained how the work would be broken down (first the cow palace addition, then the building proper) and expressed assurance that partial use is reasonable. Jim Van Alstine asked about a "rival" funding project, the art building in the Twin Cities. Are its blue prints completed already? Schuman responded the Twin Cities projects seek funding in one shot, prints and building money at once. The committee approved the 2002, 2004, 2006 and 2008 capital requests as presented. Sam Schuman presented an update on the UMM/UM Compact. This is a "revisit" year, not a document creation year. Schuman noted that we did not receive the funding requested last year for one of our three highlighted areas, scholarships. The committee approved the material dated 12/8/99. Ken Crandall reported on a meeting of the enrollment subcommittee. Its December 8 meeting was spent soliciting information from Sandy Olson-Loy. Applications are up substantially, at UMM and elsewhere, and the quality of students remains high and is even increasing. Work continues with representatives from Noel Levitz, our admissions consultants. Visit days and accreditation standards were discussed and the subcommittee will continue its work on Feb. 15. The Human Resources subcommittee has not met yet. Schuman updated the committee on the capital campaign, which stands at over $4,000,000 in hard pledges. ------------- University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes March 2, 2000 Members present: Tom Johnson, Norrine Ostrowski, Lowell Rasmussen, Sara Haugen, Brenda Boever, Maddy Maxeiner, Ray Sibul. Attempted phone-in by Tom McRoberts. Excused absences include Ken Crandall and Jim Van Alstine. Guests: Sandy Olson-Loy, Gary Strei. The committee approved the minutes of 2/14/00 as distributed and then discussed a proposed change in the structure of Admissions and Financial Aid (AFA). Sandy Olson-Loy explained Steve Okuley's (Noel Levitz consultant) opinion that late February, not fall, is the appropriate time to search for new admissions personnel and that it is difficult to find personnel well-versed in both admissions and financial aid. A review of the organizational charts of the Morris 14 (public and private schools comparable to UMM) revealed that their admissions personnel rank higher in their administrations than ours do at UMM and that many of them report directly to the president or provost. Thus it is proposed that UMM hire an associate vice chancellor for enrollment who would work closely with the vice chancellor for student affairs (VCSA) and report directly to the chancellor. In order to conduct interviews while students are still on campus, recruiting would need to commence on March 6th with an appointment to be announced in May. Gary Strei asked if Scott Hagg and Pam Engebretson are comfortable with the part of the proposal whereby they become directors during 2000-2001 and wondered if they would want assistant directors of their own in the future. Olson-Loy explained that the enrollment position would be difficult to fill if directors of admissions and financial aid weren't in place during the search. Brenda Boever asked about a retention position indicated in the proposal and Olson-Loy explained that it is an area of focus, not a new position to be filled. Boever then asked about the reactions of other groups to the proposal, such as the vice chancellors, the Consultative Committee, the Scholastic Committee, and the CRPC enrollment subcommittee. Olson-Loy explained that people were skeptical initially but became convinced that it is a step UMM needs to take. Tom Johnson wondered about the strength of the opposing viewpoint and Olson-Loy explained that their opposition was addressed by permitting the new position to report directly to the chancellor instead of the VCSA. Financially, UMM would benefit not only from potential increased tuition revenue but from stronger staffing in Admissions and Financial Aid (less shifting and retraining due to turnover), a concern mentioned in the NCA report. The position would be funded by increased tuition revenues. Johnson added that CRPC enrollment subcommittee members Ken Crandall and Jim Van Alstine were also initially skeptical but eventually approved of the proposal. Strei wondered how UMM compares with Morris 14 institutions in its level of AFA funding and Boever added that UMM will need to have good resources to attract strong candidates including office space and support staff. She also confirmed that the director appointments of Hagg and Engebretson would be for the 2000-2001 year only since a new associate vice chancellor would want the flexibility to appoint staff. Maddy Maxeiner wondered what kind of candidates might apply and Olson-Loy speculated admissions or financial aid personnel with an interest in strategy rather than detail. Ray Sibul noted that some UMM community members have suggested the current system is working fine but added that they are not aware that 2000-2001 enrollment is up everywhere, not just at UMM. Sibul moved endorsement of the proposal, which Maxeiner seconded. She commented on the favorable reaction donors have to strengthening enrollment. Lowell Rasmussen noted that the legislature reacts the same way. The committee voted to endorse the proposal. -------------- University of Minnesota, Morris Campus Resources & Planning Committee Minutes March 13, 2000 Members present: Nick Kropf, Nat Hart, Jim Van Alstine, Ken Crandall, Tom Johnson, Norrine Ostrowski, Karen Fischer, Ray Sibul, Brenda Boever, Tom McRoberts, Maddy Maxeiner. Guests: Sam Schuman, Sandy Olson-Loy (excused from the meeting during personnel discussion). The committee began by approving the minutes of the 3/2/00 meeting. Next Sam Schuman discussed eight upcoming open forums (four for students, four for faculty and staff) of a planning nature, an opportunity for him to listen, sustain momentum, and clarify the differences between his interim and permanent chancellor appointments. He will ask what we can do better, what new things we need to do, and what we can stop doing. Discussion should be broad, covering topics from facilities to majors to the LaFave house (which will not become a chancellorial residence). Melody Veenendaal will take notes and Schuman will formulate a response to the material over the summer. Jim Van Alstine wondered about the value of input without corresponding resources. Schuman responded that being able to document our needs facilitates the compact process. The capital campaign is going well and the state is financially sound; this is a good time to address institutional interests. Van Alstine also wondered how the material will fit with current campus plan and Schuman explained that the forum input will be for his own use. Ray Sibul wondered if UMM is currently financially solvent and Schuman reported that we are in the black with no cuts foreseen. Van Alstine asked if Schuman could expect a financial honeymoon period as new chancellor and Schuman indicated he expected only a period of "attentiveness" from the central administration. Thanks to his interim service, though, he is more prepared than a new chancellor would be to make UMM's case. Tom Johnson wondered if the CRPC will have a chance to respond to forum material and Schuman agreed after he's had the summer to review it. At this point, the committee began to discuss personnel issues. Non-members other than Sam Schuman departed and the majority of the discussion was held in confidence. Material that may be mentioned publicly follows. It is vital that the search for an Associate Vice Chancellor for Enrollment be concluded before school ends. The candidates must meet with students. Also, Schuman indicated that he needs his second-in-command (Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs) in place as soon as possible. He hopes a committee can be appointed this spring to draft position material and make plans to begin interviewing next fall. A January 1st start date is desirable if possible. Other searches may wait until fall. The Consultative Committee also encourages examing division of responsibilities.