Report of the Faculty Senate Budget Committee
Appendix 2

September 2003

The Faculty Senate Budget Committee met on August 28, 2003 with Rob Benford, Paula Davis, Randy Hughes, Jane Swanson, Andrew Wood, and Kay Zivkovich in attendance.

The committee examined additional information collected by committee members. Rob Benford presented the summaries of the Fiscal Year 2004 Operating Budget Request (see http://www.vpfinance.siu.edu/finserv/pb.asp). He noted that this document shows that the request for SIUC (without SOM) was smaller on a percentage basis (6.7%) than the other divisions: President’s Office (11.9%), School of Medicine (14.4%), and SIUE (7.9%).

Note: Since the meeting, the Fiscal Year 2005 Operating Budget Request has appeared in the RAMP document as an action item on the September Board of Trustees agenda (see http://www.siu.edu/bot/). The request is similar with the following percentage increases: President’s Office (13.8%), SIUC (7.3%), SIUC-SOM (16.0%), and SIUE (8.8%).

Paula Davis reported on a meeting with Lawrence Schilling, Director of Institutional Research, and distributed a description of Cost Study assignment categories used at SIUC. She reported Mr. Schilling’s conjecture that other institutions may be assigning costs in a different way. The IBHE is examining this possibility.

After reviewing additional budget information obtained from the Budget Office web site, the committee agreed that only budget information for state money, which is what is available on the web site, is not sufficient to understand the budget. The committee agreed to request additional information once the 2004 budget became available.

The committee discussed the Budget and Planning Task Force Final Report. Jane Swanson noted that it was difficult to discuss specific recommendations, especially from a budget viewpoint, since there were no numbers associated with the recommendations. The committee agreed that it is important to gain support among constituency groups before engaging in significant restructuring of the university. Information and deliberation about the specifics of the proposals must precede faculty acceptance of changes. The committee agreed on two recommendations:

1. There should be an ongoing group for budgeting and planning with faculty (and other constituency) participation. In addition to making recommendations, the group should monitor the progress and evaluate the results of the resulting actions.

2. Before implementing a recommendation, the details of cost savings and the effects on the academic mission should be presented for evaluation and action by the Faculty Senate (and other constituency groups).

The next meeting of the Faculty Senate Budget Committee was scheduled for 1-2 PM, Thursday, September 25, 2003 (location to be announced).

Respectfully submitted,
Randy Hughes, Chair

Return to September 9, 2003, Minutes