skip to main skip to secondary navigation
Navigation

JPBC Minutes: March 27, 2025

8:00 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams

Attendees

Voting Members

Martin Abraham
Lorraine Acker
Mike Andriatch
Qudus Bawa-allah
Jennifer Blood
Frances Dearing
Michael Doyle
Tom Hernandez
Sara Kelly
Stephanie Learn
Theresa Martinez
James Onley
Skye Paine
Kathy Peterson
Heather Raczkowski
Jaime Spiller
Elizabeth Thorpe

Non-Voting Members

Julie Caswell
Keith Davis 
Crystal Hallenbeck-McPhall
Mike Harrison
Rachael Killion
Gary Morog
Elliot Weininger: Co-Chair
Melissa Wight
Robert Wyant

Guests


Mike Baird
Ashley Breth
Nathan Bull
Denise Copelton
Nicholas Colucci
Brian Dickinson
Johnna Frosini
Scott Haines
Erick Hart
Seth Johnston
Richard Klancer
Dana Laird
Julie Letourneau
Teresa Major
Jose Maliekal
Emily Marchese
Paul Montanaro
Brittany Narburgh
Karen Parker
Karen Podsiadly
Krystal Reagan
Darson Rhodes
William Ruiz
John Sapienza
Megan Sarkis
Darlene Schmitt
Christopher Smith
Bonnie Swoger
Susan Wielgosz


Regrets

Voting Members

Monica Brasted
Carl O’Connor
Frances Dearing
Elizabeth Thorpe

Non-Voting Members

Ian Harper: Co-Chair
President Macpherson
Logan Rath

The meeting was called to order at 8:01 a.m.

 

Approval of the Minutes

 

Dr. Weininger asked the committee to review the February 20, 2025, meeting minutes. Dr. Spiller motioned to approve the minutes; Ms. Learn seconded the motion. Ten members voted to approve the minutes. Therefore, the minutes were approved.

Announcements 

Dr. Weininger announced the following:

  • The JPBC nomination period has closed. Dr. Weininger and Mr. Harper will review the nominations and consult with Senate Leadership in the next week or so. The new members will be selected by our next meeting. Due to the change in the structure of Academic Affairs, our committee will be expanding a little bit, and we will be welcoming several new members in the fall. 

Fee-Based Budget Presentations

A Gift to the Fund for Brockport (Alumni) - presented by Jenny Blood, Associate Director of Finance 
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding how long this fee has been assessed at SUNY Brockport. It was stated that the fee has been around since before Mr. Andriatch started in Advancement 25 years ago.
  • The question was raised regarding if the student feedback regarding this fee is in the form of surprise or upset. It was stated that there is very little feedback in the Student Forum. If someone does reach out regarding the fee, we do point them to the Student Accounts site where it shows how to opt out of the fee. We do explain that it is an optional fee that they can opt out of it and once they do then they do not have to do it again.
  • The question was raised regarding if this fee is included in the amount of the total cost of attendance to students. It was stated that only the mandatory fees are quoted in their aid package for cost of attendance, and this is not a mandatory fee.
  • The question was raised regarding if other SUNY schools have this fee. It was stated that other schools do have this fee. I know in our case, the opt out process is very simple, and you will not be charged the gift for the rest of your time here. At some of the other schools, you have to opt out every semester.
  • The question was raised regarding Graduway and the rumor that it is going away. It was stated that at this point we have eliminated Graduway because our contract ended. We were not finding that it was being as useful of a tool, so we wanted to better allocate that money to other things for students like the scholarships.
  • The question was raised regarding the SURP funding and the jump from last year to this year from $27, 000 and $40,000. It was stated that the reason for the increase is because each year we try to get donors to support that. So that is what we are paying out of our unrestricted dollars. If we can get donors to support SURP funds that eliminates the amount that we have to pay from our unrestricted and allows us to put more towards scholarships. We typically budget around $45,000 but last year we had more donors that contributed to it.
  • The question was raised regarding if SURP will continue at its current level going forward. It was stated that is the plan and we have raised the SURP awards to $4,000 for each student.
  • The question was raised regarding SURP participation rates or how many students are funded each year. It was stated around 27 to 30 students each year. Some are funded through these funds and some through our general unrestricted funds. It was added that we have 36 students lined up for this coming summer. Not all of them are funded through the Foundation.
  • Clarification was requested regarding if the amount of students lined up for the summer is an increase from previous years. It was stated that it is an increase, and we are making an effort to expand the SURP program.

Career Services - presented by Stephanie Learn, Associate Director of Career Services
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • Concern was stated that the fee is important for supporting essential programming, but there is a risk of students perceiving that the fee is a burden or upset that their fee is being used to fund stipends of other students. Students may feel they are subsidizing other students. In a way fees are always subsidizing other programming that students are accessing. In theory you could say it is subsidizing programming that is available to everyone then that helps to neutralize it. If there were matching funds from the University for the stipend, it may help neutralize any student upset. It was stated that it is a good idea and Provost Abraham and Emily Marchese could discuss it. It could help with the marketing of it. It was added that these conversations are already occurring. The idea is to use these funds to pilot the funding in the hopes we can find the additional funding to eventually be able to match the funding. We will advertise that it is open to everyone. We know every graduate student will not benefit from it. Mike Harrison and his team have been asked to develop robust evaluation criteria and transparent criteria so there is greater understanding about how the funding is being allocated. In addition, it was added that this funding idea will need to be reviewed by SUNY for approval because it falls a little bit outside the scope of the fee policy.

Athletics - presented by Erick Hart, Director of Athletics
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding if there has been a change in the number of students that attend athletic events. It was stated that with the change to the Empire 8 Conference we struggle with being the home team crowd at home events because it is sometimes like two home teams. If we play Nazareth, St. John Fisher or Geneseo, we get a larger crowd because it is a local team. We also do a good job at marketing games, and we do fun things during half time. We are getting large crowds which is harder for us because we have to plan differently. We hosted the Empire 8 Basketball Playoffs, and we had four to five games in a row that were packed every time. Playing in the new conference has helped us because we are playing local teams. In the past when we were playing SUNY Plattsburgh or SUNY Potsdam, we did not get that visitor crowd that we do now.
  • The question was raised regarding in terms of our fee being in the middle of the SUNY comparison for the cost of the fee, are we also in the middle with the requested fee increase? It was stated that with the comparison it is not apples to apples. Some schools have additional State support and others do not have that much State support. Seems like everyone is asking for a fee increase between $10-$25.
  • The question was raised regarding if the students that participate in athletics have an enhanced athletic fee. It was stated that we have not seen an enhanced athletic fee. The Empire 8 schools do not have it nor do the other SUNY schools.
  • The question was raised regarding how the capital project for Tuttle North and Tuttle South impacts the fee. It was stated that the construction projects are State funded, so it does not impact the athletic fee at all. It was added that it was part of the presentation because it was one of the upcoming projects, but it is not directly connected to the fee.
  • The question was raised regarding the figure of between 15 to 20% of our freshmen each year are members of a varsity team and is this consistent across the SUNY comprehensives? It was stated that there is a mix of different numbers because schools are different sizes. We have a large program with 24 varsity teams. We have some teams with large rosters like football, baseball, and men’s lacrosse. I think we are one of the larger programs in SUNY. In terms of the figure of 15-20%, that is where we have been for the past few years. With our nice athletic facilities, we are able to have large rosters.

Campus Recreation - presented by Scott Haines, Director of Campus Recreation
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

 

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The statement was made that Mr. Haines has managed and stewarded a great facility and kept us aware of the financial constraints.
  • Appreciation was extended for the SERC as it is a great facility for our students. It was stated that the individuals in Facilities are the best and they take care of the facility. When people come in, they cannot believe the building is finishing up its thirteenth year. That has a lot to do with the people that clean our facility on a daily basis and the people that repair equipment. They do a fantastic job.
  • The question was raised regarding the statistic that 88% of undergraduates use campus recreation facilities at some point and is there a sharp difference between residential and non-residential usage rates? It was stated that we could pull the information from the software and provide it at a later time. In general, it is a little higher for those that live on campus but there are still people that live in the area who are so close to everything, so they come over. The part that I focus on more is to generate more female usage. I want to know that our facility is friendly to our female students. With the way we laid out our facility, we take that into consideration so that people have a place where they feel safe and comfortable because it can be intimidating.

Technology - presented by Steve Cook, Chief Information Officer
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

 

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding what is the ideal reserve amount and can we maintain that? It was stated that we should always try to maintain between $300,000 and $500,000 in reserves because of things that can happen. For example, some of our reserve funds will probably be used up this summer for all the things that are happening with the power outages. Across campus we are going to have switches and other items die. We are being as proactive as possible, but they only have so much life span going up and down. What we are doing is we want to make sure that we have a certain number of backups on campus so we can replace them quickly. We intentionally budget lower than the number of students enrolled. One of the reasons we had a big jump in reserves from last year to this year is because we only budgeted for 5,500 students and we had 7,000. Our philosophy of this department is to always budget lower than the number of students coming in so that we can build up our reserves. All of the money that we have spent on hardening our network and streamlining things on campus in terms of things that you do not see every day but impacts how well it works on campus, has been paid for out of reserves since I have started here.
  • The question was raised regarding that the budget for information security is doubled for next year and what necessitates that and what are the challenges? It was stated that part of it has to do with our geopolitical situation that we are in across the world. Everyone has probably seen a phishing email and they are getting more creative, and AI has made it easier for them to fake people out as well. What we are trying to do is create a corset of tools that we will be using to help protect the campus. We could spend more money on people or spend more money on tools. We are trying to find the fine balance in between. Essentially, we are trying to find the most efficient way that we can monitor our systems. The product we are looking at will help us if something happens at 2am when no one is awake. We are looking for a 24/7 model which is better than what we have now. Not that we do not have a 24/7 Service Desk, but we need to have individuals watching our systems 24 hours a day now and that is much more different than it used to be even a couple of years ago.
  • The question was raised regarding if the software needed for student employees like Adobe comes out of this fee. It was stated that pretty much any tool that is being used on campus is being paid for by the fee unless it is something specialized for research. In the Art department, students can pay for the Adobe suite at a discounted rate when it comes to their education.

Student Health Services - presented by Darlene Schmitt, Associate Director of the Counseling Center, Karen Parker, Associate Director of the Student Health Center and Ashley Breth, Assistant Director of Wellbeing
(Presentation is available in Teams)

 

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

 

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The statement was made to commend the Hazen staff on the phenomenal job they are doing with the resources they have.
  • The concern was stated regarding the need for additional counselors with the amount of anxiety and depression in our students. At one point there were seven counselors and now there are four with one opening.
  • The suggestion was made for administration to think about hiring someone to submit to insurance. We know that most students under 26 years old are on their parent’s insurance, why don’t we hire somebody to recoup some of those costs as this would help the deficit? It was added that it would allow the center to broaden their services.
  • The question was raised regarding the governing principles with insurance and the student health fee and what is recoupable and what is not. It was stated that when the students visit the center, we do make a copy of their insurance card and keep it on file. We provide services to students that we are able to, like in-house testing. If the providers in their assessment want supplemental data like blood work, we contract with Quest Diagnostics. Bloodwork, biopsies, and cultures are sent out and that is the only way insurance is utilized. The other thing that is helpful is if we send out a prescription to Wegmans or Walmart, it helps the provider determine which prescription to send as that could change the amount the student has to pay for their copay.
  • The question was raised if services that are being provided could be reimbursed by insurance if we had the infrastructure to do so. It was stated that yes and it would be medical billing. If a nurse practitioner that works outside of the Health Center sees an individual, the insurance gets billed for the interaction with the patient and that is not happening in Hazen for any counselor, nurse practitioner or physician that sees a student. It was added that if a student did not have insurance, they would not be charged. In addition, our students are a population that needs Long Acting Reversable Contraception (LARC), and these are services that we cannot provide right now. If we had the medical billing, we would not have to refer students out for the different options that they are interested in.
  • The question was raised regarding if there would be any HIPAA implications in terms of compliance scope with billing insurance. It was stated that it is believed that there would not be any. The students sign informed consents. They are very aware of how the providers interact with insurance and each other.
  • The question was raised regarding Medicat and if there are any other electronic medical record systems that are cheaper and do you see Medicat increasing their fees? It was stated that there are other options but with being an integrated center, our options are more limited. Before we got Medicat, we did put it out to bid and that was the best option. We are talking to SUNY to see if we can get a contract so we can decrease our costs. It was added that one of the reasons the electronic medical record systems are so expensive is because of the security involved and keeping the data somewhere else. The other thing is that Medicat is a standard system across higher education and most of our local schools use Medicat as well. It is tough one to let go off because it is a very good product for what it does, and it has a good workflow.
  • The question was raised of whether, in addition to the increased need for mental health services, there are also increased needs relating to physical health that we have to anticipate for our campus health system, or alternatively, if we’re just seeing a seasonal spike with the flu, COVID, etc.? It was stated that everything is connected so if you have emotional stress it is going to make anything physical more exacerbated. Our providers will tell you they are seeing more complex cases. Another thing is there is a growing number of international students that we see. There are 200 currently on campus. They utilize the services at Hazen, and they are not necessarily more complicated, they can just be a little bit more time consuming. For them, in many cases, we are their only option because they do not have transportation. Directly to your question, we will see complexity and the numbers continue to raise challenging our capacity. It was added that there is the trio going around; flu, covid and the norovirus and then if you get a provider getting sick then Ms. Parker needs to step in to assist with seeing students. The same is true for mental health issues, we are see more complex cases. More students are coming to college now that 20 years ago wouldn’t have because of improved mental health care and earlier detection. They are coming with psychotic disorders or bipolar disorders and with stress it gets exacerbated. In addition, with the Director of Hazen search each candidate met with students and one of the things that all of the student groups brought up was extended hours. Many years ago, Hazen did have evening years and that is something that we have had to let go of because of staffing. This is something that is a real need and we need more staff to be able to do extended hours.
  • The concern was stated regarding that Hazen is operating at a deficit and with the fee increase there will still be a deficit that would entail the institution with covering the gap.
  • The question was raised regarding if there have been any discussions with Hazen staff regarding the balances involved with the institutional risks with increasing student fees and counterbalancing that with the essential services that Hazen is providing with the already extended college budget and if this is the correct amount for the increase. It was stated that there is a number of things that go into thinking about the services we provide to students. When you look at the mental health portion of Hazen, one of the things that we talk about a lot is that the Counseling Center cannot meet the needs of all 2,600 students that live on campus. Even if we had two more counselors, that is not going to help meet the needs. So, we have been taking a broader approach with looking at how we support students on campus overall. So, our partnership with the Counseling Education department has been helpful and we have discussed how to better market those services. Unfortunately, it is not a one fix model. Part of it is looking at the scope of it. We have hired a new director that will be coming in and she will have ideas looking at the scope of work on the health center side versus the number of students that we have coming in. One of the things we have also tried to do is our partnerships in the community. Right now, with our Health Center model we are not able to do everything so it is very important that we look at ways in which we can get student services. For example, often times the Health Center refers student to the off-campus clinics that are in the Brockport area. One of the things that we have been talking about is transportation and how the student gets to point a to point b. There are a lot of moving pieces. We have been talking about ways in which to reduce the deficit but as the Hazen staff mentioned, just the scope of wellness and health issues we are seeing for students is going to exacerbate as well as the cost to address those needs. It is often time a balancing act. We would love more staff in both the health prevention and counseling areas. We look at that on an annual basis and a case-by-case basis based on the overall need and scope. I worked in partnership with the Budgeting office every year. These fee budgets are very limited, and I am happy that JPBC is going to be looking at the fee-based budgets and how we can support those growing deficits. I think the study and recommendations that the taskforce puts together are going to be critically helpful to not only the impact of Hazen but all of the services that are fee-based. I try to take a strategic approach to all of the problems and challenges that exist in the fee-based budgets. We look at them on an annual basis and we make strategic decisions. For example, we really utilize the incremental funding to bolster some of the things that the Counseling Center is doing. We try to use our supplemental funding to help manage some of the issues. As it was mentioned, HR did the salary study because we were not able to get quality people to stay and a big part of that was we weren’t competitive. There were nurse practitioners and registered nurses making more money out in Monroe County and we were not meeting that gap. So, we were able to close that gap with the study. Those are some of the things we were looking at strategically and we will continue to do so.

    Parking and Transportation - presented by Johnna Frosini, Director of Parking and Transportation Services

    Transportation

     

    The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

     

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding the Transportation Taskforce report and if there were any recommendations which would impact the services and what next year’s potential budget needs might be for that. It was stated that the biggest gap for our students is transportation to internships, medical appointments and just getting off of campus to enjoy what the city of Rochester has to offer. While we have an on-demand service from RTS, we know that it is not reliable and not convenient. So, part of our recommendation is do we partner with them, what would that look like and what would that cost or do we expand our Eagle Run to service our students and bring them more opportunities to get to the transportation hub whether that’s in the city or the transfer station that is in Gates. Another thing that we looked at was bringing back car sharing. With car sharing we use two different service providers, Hertz and Zipcar. It was a pretty good program and popular with those students who have a driver’s license. Students can become annual members and pay a small fee and then on a daily, hourly or weekend basis can borrow a car. We are examining bringing this back; however, it is run a little differently now. Their car sharing programs are guaranteed revenue generating. That is a little bit different for our Procurement team and SUNY Counsel to review and approve because it is an investment.
  • The question was raised regarding the projected deficit and what are the thoughts on long-term sustainability? It is stated that this has been a struggle for years knowing that we were going to be faced with this. We are trying to understand the prioritization of what the student needs and what the student wants, and I think that is part of why President Macpherson charged this taskforce to do a deep dive into that. I do not know where we are going to land, but I think it is important to prioritize their needs versus their wants. I tried to have a conversation with Enclave to get some subsidies, and we have internally tried to do some things to get us out of where we are, but I think we need a little bit more support.

Parking

The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred during the presentation:

 

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding whether the SUNY comprehensives will be asking for fee increases for parking. It was stated that the SUNY schools are managed differently. There are some that are self-supporting like us and there are others that are not. So those that are not, rely on university funds to cover the costs of doing repairs and maintenance. Those that are similar to us are trying to get creative. Stonybrook, for example, is working with the unions and is introducing a parking fee to the unions. They are two years into the negotiations. Albany is another example, while they were self-supporting up until next fiscal year because the university realized they cannot cover the costs to maintain the facilities. So that is now taken out of their purview of responsibilities. So, we are all struggling.

 

  • Appreciation was extended for the presentation.
  • It was stated that staff from the Center for Global Education and Engagement should commended for their hard work in exceeding the international enrollment targets
  • The question was raised regarding the possible partnership between Global Education and Engagement and Athletics to recruit athletes from Canada. There has been a change in the NCAA policy in particular with hockey where they are going to allow major/junior hockey players to come down to and play in the United States and they have never been allowed to do this before. There are about fifty major/junior teams that these players at the age of 16 committed to play major/junior hockey are now eligible to come down and play in the United States. There are other teams that could benefit from this as well. If we do not support this program in particular and Athletics can not complete this recruitment due to budget restrictions, is there a way for the institution to assist the coaches with these recruitment efforts? We struggle getting students from NYC because it is six hours away, but we have a million people an hour and a half away and they would still be considered international students. It was stated that we are recruiting in Canada. An advisor will be going there this semester, and this is in collaboration with GCC, and it is utilizing some of the transformation funds. This is the second semester in a row that we have done this collaboration. It was stated that Global Education and Engagement does work with Coach Dickinson and Erick Hart but are happy to explore other opportunities to do so. It was added that we could do more in terms of recruiting athletes and conversations have occurred around how we connect our athletes to our international recruitment efforts. To some extent it depends on the team and the country of interest. There are many teams that could be highlighted all over the world. It is just a matter of putting the coaches in place that are interested in recruiting internationally and connecting them with Mr. Davis and his team so that they can work together. This is an area of interest and is under discussion. This is an area you will probably see grow in the next couple of years. 

Additional Items from the Committee

  • The question was raised regarding what the total amount of the fee request increase is for the year. It was stated that it is $64 for the year. It was added that we need to be mindful of the increase amount because students are cost conscious. In addition, we need to recognize the essential services that need to be supported.
  • The request was made for the deliberations of the committee to have a summary of the dollar amount and percentage increase for each of the different fees and total dollar fee increase percentage. It was stated that the Budget team has that prepared and it will go to the fee committee next Friday and it will come this committee with their recommendations for endorsement at our next meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:36 a.m.