skip to main skip to secondary navigation
Navigation

JPBC Minutes: September 5, 2024

8:30 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams

Attendees

Voting Members
  • Martin Abraham
  • Lorraine Acker
  • Mike Andriatch
  • Jennifer Blood
  • Monica Brasted
  • James Cordeiro
  • Frances Dearing
  • Michael Doyle
  • Tom Hernandez
  • Sara Kelly
  • Stephanie Learn
  • Theresa Martinez
  • Carl O’Connor
  • Kathy Peterson
  • Heather Raczkowski
  • Jamie Spiller
  • Elizabeth Thorpe
Non-Voting Members
  • Julie Caswell
  • Steve Cook
  • Eileen Daniel
  • Keith Davis
  • Crystal Hallenbeck-McPhall
  • Ian Harper:  Co-Chair
  • Mike Harrison
  • Rachael Killion
  • President Macpherson
  • Gary Morog
  • Logan Rath
  • Elliot Weininger:  Co-Chair
  • Melissa Wight
  • Robert Wyant
Guests
  • Mikal Brown
  • Denise Copelton
  • Kandie Gay
  • Jennifer Green
  • Scott Haines
  • Julie Letourneau
  • Dana Laird
  • Jose Maliekal
  • Tammy Jo Manz
  • Tyler Moesle
  • Brittany Narburgh
  • Darson Rhodes
  • Katherine Schaal
  • Rey Sia
  • Bonnie Swoger

Regrets

Voting Members
  • James Onley
  • Skye Paine

The meeting was called to order at 8:31 a.m.

 

Approval of the Minutes

 

Dr. Weininger asked the committee to review the May 9, 2024, meeting minutes. Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the minutes. 13 members voted to approve the minutes. Therefore, the minutes were approved.

Dr. Weininger asked the committee to review the May 2, 2024, meeting minutes. Dr. Peterson motioned to approve the minutes; Dr. Spiller seconded the motion. 16 members voted to approve the minutes. Therefore, the minutes were approved.  

 

Announcements & Welcome New Members

Dr. Weininger announced and welcomed the new members. They are:

Committee Members

  • Jennifer Blood – Associate Director of Finance in the Division of Advancement
  • James Cordeiro – Professor and Chair of the Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance. He is a one semester replacement for the fall semester.
  • Ian Harper – Vice President for Administration and Finance and Co-Chair
  • Logan Rath – Librarian and Senate President-Elect
  • Elizabeth Thorpe – Professor and Chair from the Department of Communications

Technical Advisors

  • Keith Davis – Director for Global Education and Engagement
  • Gary Morog – Director of Facilities Planning and Construction
  • Robert Wyant – Director of Undergraduate Admissions

Review Operating Guidelines

Dr. Weininger reviewed the committee’s operating guidelines with members.

Cabinet Response to JPBC

Members reviewed the Cabinet’s response to the committee.

Review JPBC Charge

Members reviewed the Charge. The following items are new for 2024-25:

  • Organize a session to inform JPBC members about the work of the Brockport Foundation, including information on the endowment and the comprehensive campaign plans; this should occur in one of the regularly scheduled meetings if possible.
  • Examine the long-term stability of programs supported by student fees and make recommendations as appropriate.
  • Examine the efficacy of the scholarship programs and make recommendations as appropriate.
  • Review recommendations of the SSEI task force to support the development of cross-cutting implementation plans, including budget implications.
  • Consider parameters and guidelines for investment funding for 2025-26.

The following questions and answers occurred during the review:

  • The question was raised regarding in the past the working groups have been the voting members and would it be possible to not have all voting members sit on both groups. It was stated that it is believed that not all voting members need to belong to both groups.
  • Clarification was requested that there would not be a working group for the Foundation item. It was stated that the Foundation piece is something that can be handled in the regularly scheduled meetings. The working groups are for the items that require more time and homework than the regular meeting permits. Those items are the fee-based budgets and the investment fund guidelines.

Budget Training Overview

Dr. Hallenbeck-McPhall provided a budget training overview for members. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:

  • Appreciation was extended for the budget training.
  • The question was raised regarding the potential of a comprehensive fee. It was stated that conversations are still ongoing about creating a comprehensive fee. The SUBOA group (SUNY University Business Officers Association) contributed to putting forth a proposal that is favorable to having a comprehensive fee, but it has to go through all the layers of approval at SUNY and the Chancellor. The last update was that there had not been any movement other than discussion.
  • The question was raised regarding zero-based budgeting and what is the status of it. It was stated that we did go through the zero-based budget exercise, and we may revisit it somewhere down the road, but at this point we are going back to incremental budgeting. The exercise was a useful tool in learning about our budgets and it gave departments the opportunity to meet one-on-one with the Budgeting team to look at what was going on. It is believed that efficiencies were made. We are not in a position to fully move to zero-based budgeting as this point.
  • Clarification was requested regarding how State support and tuition revenue sources work. It was stated that the State support before last year was set at about $17.3 million, but then SUNY decided to make some investments in higher education. They gave us transformational dollars and incremental dollars which will hopefully continue indefinitely. This has added to our State support, but none of that was related to our enrollments. There was some calculation that they did to determine how much each campus would receive. It was added that most of the time the State support does not change, and we had $17.2 million for years. For the transformation dollars, they did produce a formula to show how we were getting what we were getting. In some cases, we got more than some of our colleagues and in some cases we got less. It did depend on how well we were doing in recruiting. Sometimes it was recruiting measures like underrepresented students or low-income students. Other times it was due to whether our students were graduating in the right amount of time. Some of it was based upon our research output. So, there was a very complex formula that indicated how we got the funding that we got. It was really about SUNY trying to bolster investments in areas they felt would be most successful. Also added was that with the tuition piece, we have to do an initial projection in May where we work with the IR team, and we project our head counts for the next five years. We only submit one year to SUNY. Then after the census we have to do a reprojection to see where we stand in line with that. They base the tuition piece on what we are telling them we are going to bring in terms of enrollments.
  • Clarification was requested regarding whether it is true that the structural deficit is a projection at the beginning of the year and sometimes over the course of the budget year we achieve unanticipated savings that enable us to draw less on our reserves or add to our reserves. It was stated that that structural deficit piece is only one part of reserves. So that is more looking at the permanent pieces of reserves. There are other inflows to reserves that are temporary such as excess savings in the staff salary pool that flows back to reserves and may at the end of the year bump up our reserve balance. We don’t really know what that is going to look like because it depends on recruitment cycles, what position leave, etc. We do make a modest projection at the beginning of the year and often it is larger at the end of the year. Other things that add to an increased balance are right now SUNY gives back anything in excess of our fringe or pooled offset targets. We also make a projection on this but that can often be larger than what we project. One other fluctuating item could be special sessions. The overflow from that at the end of the year flows to reserves and we make a projection but if we have a great special sessions program and it is higher than we expected, that could also bump up reserves. The structural deficit piece doesn’t change. We have a pretty good handle on that moving throughout the year, but reserves does change because of those temporary inflows.
  • The question was raised regarding what a journal transfer is. It was stated that if a department is hosting a speaker and another department wants to contribute $100 to the speaker. The Budgeting department can journal transfer funds from one department to the other to help fund the speaker. Another example is if a department charges an expense to the wrong account and wanted to change it from another account the funds can be moved from the account the was intended to be charged to the account that was charged.
  • The question was raised regarding whether the past rule of thumb of every additional 100 undergraduate students paying tuition was an increase of about million dollars in our State budget is this still a ballpark number. It was stated that is still true because tuition rates haven’t really changed over the past few years.
  • The question was raised regarding whether there is a different rule of thumb for graduate students. It was stated that the exact calculation is not known at this time, but graduate students do pay more so it would be fewer students to get to the extra million.
  • The question was raised regarding BASC’s contribution to the University’s functions and where does the money factor into the total budget and has there been a decline in the contributions over the years. It was stated that part of the BASC contribution goes towards the University Support accounts. Some of the units have these accounts and it is more for discretionary spending. The other piece of the contribution flows to reserves. When you look at the 5-year model calculation that includes the BASC contribution for the year. To date, BASC has committed to $700,000, which is where we started last year, but based on enrollments by the end of last year they ended up contributing more in the $900,000 range. We will also be having those discussions this year because enrollments are more positive than we originally projected.

Additional Items from the Committee

No items at this time.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:29 a.m.