8:30 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams
Attendees
Voting Members
- Martin Abraham
- Sondra Aman
- Mike Andriatch
- Austin Busch
- Frances Dearing
- Kristin Hartway
- Tom Hernandez
- Teagan Hughston
- Meghan Irving
- Yin Liu
- Jose Maliekal
- Jason Morris
- Carl O’Connor
- Kathy Peterson
- Heather Raczkowski
- Janet Roy
- Mark Stacy
- Elliot Weininger
- Katy Wilson
Non-Voting Members
- Julie Caswell
- Steve Cook
- Eileen Daniel
- Crystal Hallenbeck
- Mike Harrison
- Cathy Houston-Wilson
- Sara Kelly
- Rachael Killion
- Darson Rhodes: Co-Chair
- Jim Wall: Co-Chair
- Melissa Wight
Guests
- Mike Baird
- Keith Baker
- Jennifer Blood
- Monica Brasted
- Laurie Boyd
- Nathan Bull
- Ryan Dipaola
- Marsha Ducey
- Jennifer Green
- Frank Mancini
- Theresa Martinez
- Brad Menear
- Tyler Moesle
- Stasia Molyneux
- Pamela O’Keefe
- James Onley
- Sandra Persons
- John Sapienza
- Katherine Schaal
- Brad Schreiber
- Rey Sia
- Jessica Smith
- Bonnie Swoger
- Sarah Unger
- Susan Wielgosz
- Aaron Wilkinson
- Robert Wyant
- Kathy Zunner
Regrets
Voting Members
- Michael Doyle
- Thomas Hager
Non-Voting Members
- President Macpherson
The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m.
Approval of the Minutes
Dr. Rhodes asked the committee to review the minutes from the March 9, 2023, meeting.
Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the minutes; Ms. Roy seconded the motion. 16 members voted to approve the minutes. Therefore, the minutes were approved.
Announcements
Dr. Rhodes made the following announcements:
- A modified version of the Instructional Technology & Classroom Renovation Committee presentation was added yesterday due to some revised numbers.
- Members were reminded about the upcoming Diversity Conference and Scholar’s Day.
Vote to Endorse Campus Based Fee Review Committee Recommendations
2023-24 Broad-based Fees
The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the review of the recommendations:
- It was stated that Brockport is above the median for the cost of fees compared to other institutions. It was asked that members keep in mind the students are cost sensitive and this could impact our recruitment goals.
- The concern was stated regarding the lack of student knowledge around the fees and that the campus should find ways to increase communication about the fees by either the Stylus or integrating them into APS courses. It was stated that in previous years there has been low attendance at the BSG Student Fee Forum, but this year the room was full. This is a sign that they are more involved and asked questions to obtain more information. It was also stated that information should be provided to parents.
- Dr. Weininger motioned to vote on the broad-based fees individually; Dr. Morris seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 9 | 5 | 0 |
Campus Recreation (Student Recreation Fee)
Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee increase; Ms. Roy seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | 1 | 0 |
Brockport ITS (Technology Fee)
Dr. Weininger motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee to remain the same;
Mr. O’Connor seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | 0 | 0 |
Hazen Center for Integrated Care (Student Health Fee)
- The question was raised regarding the long-term planning to eliminate the deficit for Hazen. It was stated that the Ms. Kuleszo is reviewing services to determine what can be eliminated to reduce costs and is being very cost conscious with expenses. Also, she is researching opportunities to have interns. It was added that Hazen used to stock some prescription medicine and they are no longer doing that. In addition, they are reviewing staffing costs and updating positions from 11-months to 10-months as individuals are retiring.
- Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee increase;
Dr. Weininger seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | 0 | 0 |
Intercollegiate Athletics (Athletic Fee)
- The question was raised regarding the long-term planning to eliminate the deficit for Athletics. It was stated that the funding model for Athletics needs to be changed or programs will have to be eliminated and that will impact enrollment. The costs of buses and food continues to increase. Athletics retains over 90% of students.
- It was stated that we should be reviewing how other SUNY schools fund Athletics. Especially SUNY Cortland as they are our major competitor. Athletics is a driving factor for recruitment and retention.
- The concern was stated that it is in our strategic enrollment planning to be the most affordable SUNY school and students are cost sensitive. In addition, we need to be careful raising fees every year.
- It was stated that SUNY did not approve fee increases for a few years. It was added the last time Athletics increased the fee was 2021-22. The fee went from $390 to $485.
- It was stated that we need to find balance to provide an exceptional experience for students while still controlling costs. There are repercussions for not raising fees. The long-term planning is part of the SEM plan and how we can make this a priority. For the immediate future, these fees are important for the departments to be able to operate and to be successful in being competitive and recruiting.
- It was clarified that there was an agreement by the campus to remove Athletics’ debt a few years ago. The agreement was that annually an estimated $500,000 would be transferred from Reserves to Athletics for fringe benefit relief.
- The question was raised regarding what the balance would be without the fee increase. It was stated that the balance would decrease by an estimated $100,000.
- Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee increase; Dr. Morris seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | 1 | 0 |
Transportation Services (Transportation Fee)
Ms. Aman motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee increase; Ms. Roy seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | 0 | 1 |
Career Services (Career Services Fee)
Dr. Weininger motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee to remain the same;
Ms. Dearing seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 16 | 0 | 0 |
A Gift to the Fund for Brockport (Alumni Fee)
Dr. Weininger motioned to approve the recommendation for the fee to remain the same;
Ms. Roy seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | 0 | 0 |
2023-24 Course Fees
Dr. Hallenbeck provided an update on the course fee requests. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the review of the recommendations:
- The question was raised regarding how predictable SUNY is at approving course fee requests. It was stated that SUNY is unpredictable. The past two years, they have been scrutinizing fees and have been asking questions and for data to support the request. We have to supply a cost breakdown when we submit to SUNY.
- The suggestion was made that if the fees are approved, that communication should be provided to students regarding the changes. It was stated that the course fees will be updated in the course catalog. It was added that for accreditation purposes, the fees have to be listed on the program’s website in addition to the course catalog.
- The question was raised regarding if a potential student can find the amount of fees they would be paying if they enrolled in a particular major. It was stated that all of the fees for Nursing are listed on the website. The fees are also discussed at the Open Houses.
- Clarification was requested regarding the $185 course fee for Nursing and that historically students have individually paid for the fee, but it is being requested to be covered by the department through a fee. Currently, students are paying the Kaplan fee through the Bookstore. There are issues with this, because if a student does not pay by the deadline, they lose their access until they pay. Having this be a course fee will eliminate this issue and students requested that the fee become a course fee.
- Appreciation was extended to the committee for all of their work.
- Dr. Weininger motioned to endorse the recommendation for the listed course fees to increase; Ms. Aman seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | 0 | 0 |
Instructional Technology & Classroom Renovation Committee Update
Mr. Baker provided an update from the Instructional Technology & Classroom Renovation Committee. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- The question was raised regarding if there is any data on if students prefer the tablet-armchairs or desk and chairs. It was stated that the committee did not have the opportunity to survey students due to a tight timeline.
- It was stated that when furniture was updated in residential halls about six to seven years ago, three different options were made available to students to try for 48 hours and vote on what they preferred. In addition, Facilities was consulted on which furniture they would be able to clean, repair and maintain.
- The concern was stated that for planning and test purposes, the faculty preference should outweigh the students. In addition, it was suggested that each classroom could be updated with a variety of chairs so that it is not a “one size fits all” and therefore faculty have classroom options for their preference. It was stated that the committee was hesitant to present a recommendation of “mixed” rooms because there could be many different combinations.
- The concern was stated that faculty preference should not be looked upon as a minority as that preference may be truly needed for the functions of the class. It was stated that it was difficult to obtain specific faculty preference as it would cause issues with anonymity. It was suggested to obtain specific needs from Department Chairs and Deans as this information could be gathered during staff meetings and would ensure anonymity.
- The question was raised if the other furnishings in the classroom were considered for the update. Like whiteboards, instructor station, etc. It was stated that the committee did review the other furnishing and window treatments, paint and flooring are included in the renovation costs.
- It was stated that ADA furniture needs should trump all other renovations and what ever amount is needed to spend on these upgrades should be spent from the allocated funds.
- The concern was stated that the renovation needs of Hartwell are not that dire and 20% or $100,000 of this funding should go back into the Reserves. It was stated the classrooms that were chosen were done so due to the amount of utilization. In addition, it was stated that the subcommittee is not the decisionmaker, it is only making recommendations for JPBC to approve or not approve. It was clarified that the subcommittee is a subcommittee for JPBC and the role of JPBC is to determine if members endorse the report to move forward to Cabinet for review.
- The question was raised if one of the chair options is more ADA accessible and if the committee looked at this particular aspect. I was stated that the committee did not examine this because most of the furniture being sold by the suppliers do meet ADA requirements. The top of the armchairs doesn’t have an arm rest on the other side and individuals can easily get in and out. Specific needs do need to be based on the individual’s needs. This is why the committee allocated $125,000 to better meet these needs.
- Appreciation was extended to the committee for all of their work.
Vote to Endorse Instructional Technology & Classroom Renovation Committee Recommendations
Ms. Aman motioned to endorse the report as written; Ms. Dearing seconded the motion. The following are the voting results from the present voting members:
| Endorse | Not Endorse | Abstain |
|---|---|---|
| 17 | 0 | 0 |
Strategic Enrollment Management Update
Dr. Kelly provided an update regarding the Strategic Enrollment Management plan. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- The question was raised regarding if the enrollment target numbers in the presentation are the same numbers that were included in the most recent 5-year financial model. It was stated that Cabinet met with the Strategic Enrollment Management team and developed the enrollment targets. Therefore, the numbers that were in the 5-year financial model are consistent with the numbers that were just presented.
- Clarification was requested that these enrollment targets would help the campus to eliminate the structural deficit over the next four to five years. It was stated that was correct.
- The question was raised regarding what the next steps would be after receiving feedback by the April 1, 2023, deadline. It was stated that the steering committee meets bi-weekly. Over the course of April, they will be reviewing the feedback and finding ways to incorporate it to the next draft. The draft will then be brought forward to Cabinet and then work on implementation.
- The question was raised if presentations will be made after the new draft is formed so individuals can see how the feedback has been incorporated. It was stated that the timeframe for the next set of presentations is still being determined.
Additional Items from the Committee
The following items were discussed:
- Members were encouraged to wear their Brockport apparel tomorrow for Green and Gold Friday.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:11 a.m.
DR/JW/mw