University of Minnesota, Morris
October 5, 2006
Members Present: Cassie McMahon, Bryan Herrmann, LeAnn Dean, Sharon VanEps,
Sara Haugen, Maddy Maxeiner, Lowell Rasmussen, Andy Lopez,
Dan Moore, rne Kildegaard, Jonathan Bringewatt, Pete Wyckoff
Pareena Lawrence, Ken Hodgson
Guests: Pam Solvie, Gary Strei, Jacquie Johnson, Sandy Olson-Loy
(In these minutes: continued discuss of budget information and next steps for SPTF)
Gary Strei said he has been thinking about what kind of budget information would be most helpful to the committee. He explained how the budget process currently works with each unit filling out a budget sheet by line items and that the budget is based on our spending history. Pete would like salary and staffing broken down by unit along with operating expense, perhaps going back three, five or ten years. He believes someone should have the entire picture of the budget and if our SE&E hasnÕt changed over the last 10 years, there should be a document somewhere that explains why it hasnÕt. He continues to believe that this committee should get the holistic budget. Arne said heÕs not sure what this committee can do to help SE&E budgets. Andy said all this committee can do is make recommendations. Maddy added that sheÕs not aware that a document exists that says we had to freeze budgets. Lowell suggested starting with an overview of the entire budget and then go down as far down as need be. Jacquie asked the committee to think about what information they want and for what purposes. Specifically, what information does this group need to make such recommendations? Pete responded that historically there has been a lack of coordination and this committee needs to have the information available to them. Andy said there has been a history of incorrect information which creates skepticism. Dan asked how the new Budget Model will affect UMM. Gary said the change will be transparent to us because the new model will have more impact on the Twin Cities. There is no longer an IRS fee; costs are now portioned out by head count. Gary will have some budget information ready for the committee at the October 19 meeting.
Andy asked what the committee should do next with the feedback they have received. Pete suggested dropping some of the verbage and addressing some of the ideas brought to us, i.e., the faculty research component is not clear enough and we need to separate the student research vs. faculty research. Sandy thought the March 31 document had more power and passion and would like to see this document follow the same format. Andy reminded the committee that the Executive Committee will draft a resolution that endorses the strategic plan and will be presented at the October 24 assembly meeting. Pete asked what happens if the assembly votes down. Pareena said the plan still goes forward but it wonÕt carry the same weight than if the campus was behind it. Jacquie said the Executive Committee has spent a considerable amount of time talking about governance questions and the desire for campus by in that would strengthen the plan. There is still a lot of work to be done, like attaching dollars to the plan. She believes we need to help people see this as a living document. Sara shared some student feedback concerns about students being mandated to do something. Arne doesnÕt believe there will be serious steps for the assembly not to endorse the plan and added that if we canÕt sell this document, then we canÕt sell anything. Maddy thought it was important on how this information is framed and to start off on a positive note—this is about us and defining our future.