Budget Advisory Committee

SANTA ROSA JUNIOR COLLEGE

BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Tuesday, August 24, 1999

Senate Chambers, 3 p.m.

The meeting was called to order by John Roberts, Chair.

Members present: Barbara Croteau (Co-Chair), Christopher Crystal, Rosemary Darden, Paul Finn, Micca Gray, M. Lee, Ricardo Navarrette, Ron Schuelke, Ed Sikes, Sandi Tassano.

Members absent: Ed Buckley, Doug Garrison, Curt Groninga, Ben Partee, LuAnn Poulsen, Deborah Sweitzer.

Staff to the Committee: K. Bradbury, R. Kyle, Lamont Royer.

Guests: Robert F. Agrella, Tim Bosma.

1. Approval of May 20, 1999 Minutes

It was M/S/C to approve the minutes of the May 20, 1999 meeting.

From a conceptual standpoint Dr. Roberts explained the proposed final budget doesn't vary greatly from the June tentative budget. Some numbers changed because of the changes passed by the State legislature. Opportunities and challenges that lie ahead for the budget year were reviewed. The "Draft" budget document was distributed and discussed. Page 3 lists all the funds that the college manages. The major assumptions in terms of revenues and expenditures are shown on page 4. Most of these budget assumptions, especially on the revenue side, are familiar to the ongoing committee members. The first main assumption is that no funds are incorporated that rely on growth, a departure from past practices, but the reality is that enrollment has been flat. The last enrollment numbers are about 1.5% ahead of last fall. If it holds and at the end of this AY there is some growth, there will be revenue associated with it and the plan is to begin reducing reliance on summer school FTES. The choice will be the college's whether to transfer the FTES, buy back those transfers with the growth revenue, or use the revenue for other purposes.

One surprise in terms of the calculation of the district growth CAP is a change in the rate of high school graduates, which exceeded 7% this year for an overall rate of 4.26% combined with the other factors in the calculation. A disappointment was in the COLA rate of 1.41%, which essentially put us in a status quo budget situation. There is very little discretionary base money in this budget.

On the revenue side a disappointment was the second year funding for Partnership for Excellence, less than one-half of what was expected. Another change is in the area of one-time ongoing block grant funding, meager in terms of prior years. In response to a question regarding the stability of the lottery fund, it is in the range of $110-$115 per year FTES with the biggest variable in the number of large jack-pots paid out. It is not an absolutely reliable source. Student Representative Christopher Crystal asked what a block grant is, and Dr. Roberts explained it is an appropriation of one-time dollars. In the past three years it has been revenue that was a part of the Prop. 98 revenue stream accumulated in the prior year and appropriated because revenues were higher than budgeted and anticipated. It was allocated to the California Community Colleges on an annual basis, and has been referred to as "catch up" funding. What happened is that it has run out.

There is no provision for funding any negotiated salary increase at this time. Funding has not been identified and is simply not a part of this budget. The situation is much the same as last year. Sandi Tassano asked whether the college is going to have to pay into PERS this year, and Dr. Roberts indicated it would not. The same processes for Partnership for Excellence proposals will be followed as last year. Dr. Agrella reviewed 1999-00 items already allocated though this mechanism. He mentioned allocations to CATE at $36,400 in permanent staffing; Coddingtown conversion of STNC's to permanent- $12,500; MESA funding- $35,000; One-time increased student access- $50,000; $40,000 for computer acquisition to new faculty hires and last year's absent sabbatical recipients; upgrade student computer labs- $367,000 at all locations; a small allocation in the amount of $6,125 for Administrative Services to establish an Institutional Research office; and the final item- $55,000 for non instructional purposes that will require demonstration of extraordinary need. Of the $2.7 million ongoing P4E appropriation from the State, $1.5 million is committed at this point. Responding to Ricardo Navarrette's question, Dr. Roberts explained the COLA was not attached to this funding source during a very studied approach by the State.

In general terms it was a disappointing year for the Community Colleges in that the state received unprecedented property tax revenues. Governor Davis has a bias about K-12 and is skeptical about funding P4E. This was a conscious opportunity for the Governor to choose between what most people would consider a qualitative program (P4E) or quantitative to fund more growth. In a growth-based system like California, growth is rewarded. The budget is not a loss, it just hasn't grown.

Dr. Roberts noted that it is very likely that the next few tentative Budget Advisory Committee meetings will not be held until there is more word on budget development from the State.

Meeting adjourned 4 p.m.