Present:   Bret Force, Ben Hill, Bill Kyker,  Ellen Lacey, Kay Malmberg, Marie Matsen,  Lynne Phillips, Jane Russell,  Donna Zmolek, Linda Loft, Jane Scheidecker, Sandy Ing-Weise
Absent:   Kaaren OíRourke, Jose Ortal, Jane Russell
Facilitator:   Donna Zmolek
Recorder:   Terry Caron
 

March 6 Minutes
The March 6, BAG meeting notes were approved.

New Member
Ellen Lacey, Instructional manager from Training and Development was introduced.  She will replace Nanci LaVelle.

Board Decisions (Budget and Tuition Increase)
The Board met on March 18 and approved the following:

> $10 per credit tuition increase
> $3 per credit technology fee
> $1 per credit tuition charge in lieu of certain ìhigh-transaction costî  ($1-10) class fees
> Approval of the Reductions and Eliminations of programs and services preliminarily approved at its March 13 meeting and the subsequent Friday meeting.

In order to fund three additional ìbuybackî reductions, the Board requested the college: 

Reduce $100,000 out of  Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance
Reduce $ Bad Debt by $100,000
Reduce Travel & Consultants and Travel by $200,000

BAG discussed the use of the new Technology fee:

• How will equipment be purchased for computer labs?
• Online registration will be the future- no classline registration fee.  The approx. $90,000 in revenues will be lost but there would not be costs for upgrades, maintenance, and telephone line support. 
• TACT is currently discussing a process for the utilization of the Technology fee.
• Equipment replacement would need to go from the more decentralized individual department process to a centralized college replacement equipment process, thereby reducing transaction costs.

• Marie is still receiving figures from the state, which have been reduced ½% more for the biennium. 
• She expects that the college will come close to balancing its budget, but it is without the $5M in carryover that the auditorís have suggested the college needed.  
• Capital improvements wonít be funded until the budget is stabilized.   
• The budget projection spreadsheet will be on the Budget Development web site soon.

During the March 18 Board work session, faculty union representatives gave a presentation of a budget counter proposal.  The Board requested more information and specifics from union leaders regarding why they felt the projections of expenditures and revenues were wrong.  They asked the union leaders to return to the April 10 meeting with those specifics.

Several Bag members were disturbed the Boardís decision to have more discussion of the budget reductions recommendations with the faculty union leaders on April 10.  The process for employeesí input (which explicitly included unions and the management steering committee)  began with BAG in October.  The Budget Criteria Group was formed using shared governance processes and criteria as approved by the Board to consider all input and department recommendations.   A further concern is that the Boardís willingness to hear more counter proposals was viewed as going outside the established process.  (The contract provides for a discussion with the administration.) Several members of BAG strongly feel that the college needs to examine how we do shared governance.  Participation in shared governance is in jeopardy if the Board does not follow its own shared governance criteria and the collegeís process, which fully involved all employees and employee groups.  No other group was granted the courtesy of going beyond the stated deadlines for employee input.

Plusses and Minuses regarding this yearís process:

o The Board is setting a poor example by not recognizing the board approved shared governance criteria and the collegeís set process.

o What is the future of BAGís role if such processes are overlooked?

o What of all the time and effort put into these budget work groups?  Who evaluates the work of these groups?

o Itís not just unions but also other employees giving ìafter processî testimony.

o Canít prevent political actions from happening and it does not make BAGís work less useful.

o This yearís process and responses seemed better than in previous years- more progress made this year than most.

o ET may need to concern themselves with even more work, new cuts and possible contract issues regarding the deadlines should the Board accept any of the faculty unionís final input.

> Terry will schedule a meeting with BAG an ET soon to discuss BAGís recommendations and BAGís future role.

> Terry will email copies of the Budget Policy document.

The next BAG meeting will be April 3, 3-5PM, BUS 205.