UNIVERSITY POLICY AND PLANNING COUNCIL
2017-18 CHAIR –JAMES COLLINS
August 30, 2017
MEETING MINUTES
Present: J. Boyle, S.Chittur, J.Collins, M.Leventhal, L. McNutt, C. Parker, K.Reinhold, J. Van
Voorst, D. Wharram
Guests: Jon Bartow, Graduate Education
Kathie Winchester, Undergraduate Education
Celine LaValley, Undergraduate Education
Approval of the Minutes from May 11, 2017
Correction of date from May 10th to May 11th.
Minutes of the May 11th meeting were unanimously approved.
Vice President for Finance and Administration Report
Vice President Van Voorst updated the committee on two major items; facilities and budgetary
operating updates. On the facilities side of the house, many upgrades and improvements have been
made over this past summer, some of the updates include 4 classroom renovations including technology
improvements, the campus center renovations have been completed and new venues have opened.
Now that the semester has begun we have extended hours over in the campus center along with
breakout areas, all of which have been getting a lot of use. Building 25(old health services building) has
now re-opened and is housing Africana Studies and Economics as they are being renovated on the
podium. We are in the process of re-locating individuals from the old business building to other
buildings on campus so that the old business building can be renovated. The goal is to work our way
around the podium. Over the past few years the campus has invested in creating designs and ensuring
we have the designs ready for when capital funds become available. The designs are relatively cheap to
produce and by having this proactive approach we saved about a year of time probably in the
renovation of Building 25. A number of other designs are in process including the lecture centers,
computer science, and last phase of the campus center. Our number one request has been for the
Schulyer building, a proposal out of the governor’s office has been released and it is intended to release
funds to the construction fund for all of SUNY, whatever projects come in from all of SUNY will be looked
at and the best will be funded, this is how we got building 25, so we are going back there and pushing
Schulyer, Schulyer will be a $50-60 million dollar project which is for all the renovation money. We also
have some other good projects that we are pushing. We will continue this year with the subcommittee
for facilities again. Now on the operating side of the house; we have the following funds, state,
foundation, Research Foundation, UAS, and Empire (Housing Corporation), all these exist on campus to
support the University at Albany. There was some concern that in legislature in regards to what was
going on in each of these and whether or not more oversight is needed. This never made it out of
committee but it is something to have on our radar. If we were unable to do business in all these
different funding streams we would have difficulty completing business in the manner we are currently.
The question is raised are they interested in transparency or oversight? Vice President Van Voorst
cannot speak on this but does say that they were interested in a lot of the transactional detail, not
questioning why the organization existence, it was all about the transactional details. This question
though is at the heart of what I think they are trying to get at. Chair Jim Collins asks now if our budget is
balanced from the tuition dollars received and the expenses we will incur on campus. Vice President Van
Voorst responds, enrollment levels are still a challenge, we are meeting our undergraduate numbers but
graduate still continues to be an issue. Engineering did come in higher than their target which is helping
offset some of the shortfall. Vice President Van Voorst does not have the final numbers but Provost
Wheeler or Sandra Starke of Enrollment Management would be better able to answer the question of
final enrollment numbers. From a fiscal view we are short in our projections, except for transfers where
we have exceeded our projection. For the next meeting we will ask enrollment questions to the Provost.
For the 17-18 budget plan the projection for tuition revenue is $3.7 million, we will be short of that
unless the graduate program has an uptake. This 17-18 budget plan was decided about a year ago, and
incremental funding of $4 million was distributed, some of this was one-time and some permanent
based commitments. The Compact Proposals can be found on MyUAlbany, we are tracking what
proposals were funded, where the funds went, and where in the process individual compacts are. To the
extent that we have revenue shortfall we will have to cover that shortfall with one-time funds and work
on a plan for how we will move forward in future years. We have taken a pause in the Compact Budget
for 18-19 so no budget commitments have been made yet. There is a potential revenue stream of $200
per student should this incremental pass it would result in around $2.3 million of additional revenue.
One of the biggest issues we are watching is negotiated salary increases, PEF has settled, CSEA has
ratified, and UUP is still negotiated. PBA is now two years in arrears, and the GSEU will negotiate next
year. The impact should all of these contractual salary increases take effect will be roughly a $2.8 million
dollar commitment. The contracts also have a retroactive piece which would hit in this 17-18 year and
doubles up the impact, resulting roughly in a $5.3 million commitment. Excelsior Scholarships have been
a big undertaking and all the impacted parties are working wonderfully at implementing this plan that is
being developed as it is implemented. All the rules were not settled when the initial applications were
due and a lot of applications were submitted. The higher education corporation then received the
applications and authorized us on further review. Our number was about a $1.4 that will go into student
accounts from the aid. All other aid will be counted prior to Excelsior being counted so items like PEL,
and TAP. Then we have the private organizations, for example Kiwanis Club that provides funds to the
student for living expenses such a books. These funds under the current guidelines count as other aid.
Sub Committee Facilities Report
Facilities subcommittee chair Sridar Chittur recommends for the facilities committee the plan will be to
create the agenda here in UPPC so the conversation at the meetings can be more focused. Some
discussion points for the next facilities meeting would be, library space being re-worked, concerns of
series of space re-allocations and who is notified and when. Chair, Jim Collins will work with the Facilities
sub committee chair, Sridar Chittur to develop a plan for digging through the requests and working
through them. As word gets out that UPPC has this committee there may be more requests coming this
way for us to look into. On either the September or October meeting we will have on our UPPC agenda
to discuss how UPPC sees the committee functioning as a conversation about priorities. Mitch Leventhal
recommends asking to have someone from the Construction Fund coming to speak to the committee to
offer a background on how they operate. Dawn Wharram has appointed a graduate student as well to
committee.
Sub Committee Resource Analysis and Planning Report
Resource and Planning committee chair Mitch Leventhal reports that the committee has not met since
our last meeting, but our next meeting and the remaining meetings for the year are scheduled. The
meetings have deliberately been scheduled about a week prior to UPPC so that we can coordinate our
work. The first meeting will be a high level overview of the fiscal status, then Vice President Van Voorst
will have some topical items to discuss.
Chair’s Report
Jim Collins reports that the central responsibility for UPPC is overseeing policies and plans for academic
research initiatives, the council will be informed of strategic and budgetary goals, be consulted on the
size of the student body, make recommendations for changes in the academic calendar and next
meeting we will have Karen Chico Hurst present. Council has a broad remit and we need to be aware of
that, Jim will circulate the part of the charter that UPPC is responsible for. The next housekeeping item is
regarding votes, during the votes it is standard for all guests and non-members of the council to not be
in the room. Also, if you are part of the council and your department is affected you leave the room as
well. Administrative assessment, and the committee has been working for the senate to have
representation in administrative assessment, last year Jim worked with others to appoint three
members to the Assessment Advisory Council, will review the assessment plans and protocols. We have
appointed, Professor Stelf-Mabry, Professor Crestner, and Professor Ng. Going forward we will have
someone from senate, UPPC, and the advisory committee. The strategic planning process has met twice
with the incoming President and two regularly scheduled meetings with the Provost and Chief of Staff.
The incoming President liked the general design of the strategic plan but it has not been approved so it
sounds like we will be working with some variance of what was created. Our next meeting is September
20th from 12:30-2:30pm.
Revised Campus Impact Form
Over the summer some individuals from UPPC worked on the campus impact form to clarify the routing
and the resources that may need to be consulted. Celine LaValley was brought in to help us create an
editable form. Some concerns that have been had regarding the form is that people may opt out or not
realize the impact on budget, space, and ITS, we want the departments to need to reach out those
organizations on campus and have the potential impacted unit check yes or no to the impact. The
suggestion of adding a section at the beginning for other faculty implications, check yes or no is
suggested. Jon Bartow asks the question of what do we want the proposing faculty to tell you? You
want to be consulted on the impact and be informed, but you also do not want to impose too heavily on
your colleagues’. This form is only a part of the whole proposal, it is not designed to stand on its own.
The campus impact form needs to be included as an attachment to the proposal. On the last page of the
form the steps and process the proposal should take is now added to the bottom of the form. The
completed forms and proposals go to undergraduate programs or graduate programs and then come to
UAC or GAC as well as here in UPPC. It is suggested that we add who in those offices the proposals are
going too. By having the proposals go in this order the proposal is being vetted before it comes to UPPC
so they are getting a proposal that is free of some of the errors that can sometimes be in the original
proposal. Jim Collins asks for permission to work with what has been brought up this meeting so we can
hopefully next meeting bring a final version.
Routing of Proposals
Another major discussion point was adding some sort of routing of proposal’s and timelines/ deadlines
for submitting the proposal and having them implemented. It is hard to have a hard deadline on this
process as the dates are flexible based on the type of program. The academic organization change group
has been created to ensure the various groups that will be effected are made aware and are taking the
appropriate actions. Best times and deadlines really depend on what the unit it trying to complete.
Rather than having a deadline, it is suggested that the proposing unit meet with Undergrad or Graduate
programs to work with them and help set the expectations. Contact these respective offices at the
earliest possible timeline in your planning process and they can help set the proposing units
expectations on the timeline.
Meeting adjourned at 3:25pm.
