Campus Resources and Planning Committee

March 1, 2010

 

 

 

Present:           Sarah Mattson, LeAnn Dean, Lowell Rasmussen, Mark Privratsky, Zak Forde,

                        Jacquie Johnson, Brook Miller, Sara Haugen, Pete Wyckoff, Sydney Sweep,

                        Madeline Maxeiner, Kathy Julik-Heine, Bart Finzel, Bryan Herrmann

                       

Guests:                        Janet Ericksen, Gwen Rudney, Colleen Miller, Pareena Lawrence, Mike Korth,

                        Sandy Olson-Loy, Cheryl Contant

 

 

Pete reminded the committee that we began the initial budget discussion with Lowell and Colleen last Friday.   Today, they will present the proposed budget “in the Linc model” template.   Jacquie reported that this in preparation for the budget materials we need to send to the Twin Cities budget office before our budget/compact meeting on March 12.   We need to present a credible, balanced budget for FY11 that includes long-term financial modeling.   She hopes to achieve the following goals/outcomes at the meeting today.  1) Agree on or affirm the number of degree seeking students that we want to use to model the budget for FY11.  She believes that number is 1603.  2) Provide projection of our year-end numbers for FY10 and an explanation of what’s in those numbers. 3) Look at how things might look for the next five years. 4) Receive a recommendation or affirmation of the way in which we use the surplus we anticipate we will end up with this fiscal year.   At some point, she would also like to continue the conversation about the status of the carry forwards that belong to the various units and how we might begin to look at those as contributing to central campus reserve.    The committee discussed and walked through the budget-modeling template. 

 

At the meeting’s end, the following motion passed unanimously:

 

The CRPC recommends that anticipated near-term surpluses should be allocated towards campus contingency reserves to the maximum extent allowable pending clarification and negotiation with 1) U of M central administration and 2) the higher learning commission.