Live Blogging of the Apr 23 Meet & Confer

5:15PM That is it. No more information today.

5:15PM So, to summarize, nobody is safe, but some people are less unsafe? Chuckles, then yes.

5:14PM More Q&A: but, sorry, I missed most of it. VP Academic commented that Iris Gill is very aware of the limitations of the data. The 75% is being used to determine which programs will get a very, very detailed analysis of budgets. At this point does each of the Deans understand that there are specific programs under 75% and that the Deans are working with the departments and that the deans will notify those departments, but that President continues to examine programs and may ask for addtional information and discussion? Hard question; President is not plannign to go looking for programs to get at but is trying to be conciensous about looking for cases where expensive programs may not have yet been broken out separately. Are chairs being asked to prepare reports, or all members of department? President: presumed chairs would speak with departments, and will not interfere in department governance. IFO: Expectation is that all faculty in departments will be involved. Is lost revenue due to cuts being included in models? Yes, and looking for one-time money to help with some of that. Under contract chairs are coordinators so shouldn't faculty be consulted according to contract? [Followed up by another question] Doesn't "departments" mean all faculty in department not with "department chairs"? President: Intent is fofr departments to respond.

5:01PM IFO is summarizing: President has reviewed budget and formally announced that there will be retrenchments. The President will continue to gather data and wants reports from the under 75% departments to fully understand the situation. Will seek input on academic side primarily from AABAC by reacting to proposed budgets.

5:00PM Can program curricular changes be considered over the summer? Maybe. What is role of AABAC? They will react to President's proposals and act as a sounding board. [Missed another question.] Is out of state tuition being considered? Yes, for international students. [Missed another question, answer was that she is looking for least terrible solution.]

4:53PM Are programs that draw students being given recognition for that? Yes, but need to look at how many students are being attracted. Is impact of the loss of students in a low recovery program on other departments being considered? Yes, but it has been hard to unravel this. Can any of the under 75% programs survive? Most will probably survive, but we do need to come up with $3.43 in cuts. [Missed a question, sorry] Will department budget cuts from this year be restored? Sounds like budgets are being rebuilt from the ground up, and the immediate goal in any event is to get through the immediate crisis. Why 75%? Think of the state appropriation of overhead. 75% means you are supporting 74% of your direct costs, but someone else is subsidizing the other 25% with their tuition revenue. Another thing to consider is whether differential tuition is appropriate.

4:49PM Q&A: Are you safe if you are above 75% cost recovery? No, not necessarily, but less likely to be cut.

4:48PM More Q&A: Can departments challenge data they believe to be incorrect or only propose cuts or more revenue? Numbers for low programs are being scrutinized. Graduate programs? Only those that are sustainable (from their own tuition revenue) will be kept; graduation education for its own sake will not. How much money in personnel cuts? Worst case, hopefully, $3.43M, but don't know. Cost recovery ratio doesn't indicate absolute amount of money saved--a low recovery ratio could still be a small expense and a high ratio might not be lots of money--is this being taken into account? Yes. How are department staff being included? Included in program cost recovery ratio. Are administrative/nonacademic cuts being considered? Yes, but need to know more before deciding. What about proposed department mergers (specifically History and Political Science)? President: good idea, VP Academic: need some clarification from those departments.

4:40PM Q&A: IFO asked if reaching the cost recovery goals means a department is safe. The answer is no, that alone may not do it because cuts will need to be made. IFO asks what is meant by program given that retrenchment happens within seniority rosters. The answer was unclear; basically I think it was that distinct programs (meaning cost centers or package of courses) would be studied, but no answer on how that relates to rosters.

4:35PM IFO expressed desire to extend timeline for departments to reach the tuition cost recovery goals, especially because this benchmark was new to departments to which the President responded that a fiscal emergency requires a fiscal criteria.

4:31PM The President's demeanor was serious, almost shaken at times, but confident. It is clear to me she is working to do the best that can be done and is reluctantly going this route.

4:31PM Looks like no announcement of specific programs today.

4:30PM More dates: June 3-4 meet with AABAC to discuss reports on low tuition recovery programs, from June 24th, July 8th&9th all VPs present plans to UPB, on July 15 present final plan to UPB, July 16 meet bargaining units in the morning, then M&C with IFO in the afternoon.

4:26PM Memo of retrenchment, first some genrealities: Frozen faculty positions are all positions for which funding exists at this time (not sure what that means). Tuition shortfall this year is $800k, total deficit is $8.5M. Salary freeze saves 1.2M and 1.4 in frozen positions but probably drops to 0.7M when critical positions unfrozen. Other savings were listed in detail, see the mid-March budget remarks. Operating budget cuts add up to $o.4-0.5M. This still doesn't fully plug the hole. Some positions being searched: director of housing and one other funded by fees and looking for a marketing director, recruiter, and data manager for enrollment.

4:22PM Some dates: July 16 budget presentation to bargaining unit leaders, followed by July 21, 22 MnSCU Board meeting, then lay off notices sent out after July 27th M&C with IFO if requested.

4:20PM The President seems clearly

4:17PM President thanked faculty for their participation in the process so far and indicated the reports were read and will be included in decision making. Then described some history: The perfect storm: structural shortfall ($4.95M, up by $800k) and economic recession leading to reduction in base (estimated $3.8M I think). Student credit hour generation has decreased steadily over the last 5 years, and decisions made to hold tuition low.

4:12PM President will present formal memorandum of intent to retrench after discussion background.

4:10PM Now the President is up to talk about retrenchment...

4:09PM IFO raised a question about MSUM participation in a program funded by the Lumina Foundation to "tune" programs to standardize outcomes so that employers know exactly what graduates will know. Translation: make programs standard rather than allowing variation (my translation). The Biosciences chair described faculty participation in this project so far after VP Academic explained that the conversation began with a call from MnSCU that some of this grant money was available. IFO strongly objects that this is a violation of contract because when faculty represent faculty it is to go through IFO. VP Academic responded that admin did not forward names, merely let faculty know that MnSCU was soliciting, and that she assumed it had been discussed at statwide Meet&Confer. In response to a question VP Academic indicated all travel has been paid for by Lumina.

4:00PM Now the first job-related issue...IFO mentioned chatter that some deans were recommending adjunct over overload. VP Academic said that is not the admin position, but that she has been advising deans not to make any offers of overload or adjunct until we know for sure what the funding situation is. IFO and Bette agree that when it gets to that point additional consultation will be needed.

3:56PM Information was just shared. No idea what because it was hardcopy, but you can contact IFO if you want to know what.

3:55PM Email discussion is done, nothing will be done until more planning is completed, this was just a first mention.

3:44PM I finally asked my first question, about transitioning email addresses. Not a stunning question, and in retrospect these questions just delay the time it takes to get to the part we are interested in...retrenchment.

3:33PM Looks like it will be a while until we get to the big stuff. Dan Heckaman, CIO, is talking about the feasibility of changing our web address/email to msum.edu. CIO indicated that would be hard, then discussed changing email addresses to first.last name (like matt.craig). Mike McCord asked how much it would cost...the answer is 2.5-3 months full time for 6 people. Ouch. Mike Ruth pointed out that lots of printed material will have to be tossed out.

3:32PM Hockey committee...IFO and the President appointed people.

3:28PM Some good news....summer school will pull in at least $500k profit.

3:21PM On to the Mission Statement, which the MnSCU Board wants Real Soon Now. If I were more interested in the mission statement I'd tell you more. The proposed statement:

Minnesota State University Moorhead is a caring community promising all students the opportunity to discover their passions, the rigor to develop intellectually[,] and the versatility to shape a changing world.

Debate almost erupted over the comma in brackets above, but was truncated by a question about whether ours is really any different than other MnSCU statements.

3:11PM Military withdrawals...the 100 or so people here are too interested. Send military students to Registrar, faculty do have freedom to work out an incomplete if they want to, or may decline to work that out and refer student to Registrar for other options. Not that many people really care right now.

3:09PM And so it begins...starting with military withdrawals and other run-of-the-mill stuff.

3:06PM People are still coming in, nothing happening yet.