Minutes of April 28, 2003 Meeting

	The April 28 meeting convened at 2:01 p.m. in room 817 Cathedral 
of Learning.

	UPBC members present were:  Tammeka Banks, Frank Cassell, James 
Cassing, Jerome Cochran, Richard Colwell, N. John Cooper, Liz Culliton, 
David DeJong, Christine Dollaghan, Gerald Holder, Arthur Levine, James 
Maher, Maureen McClure, Barbara Mowery, Mary Ann Peterson, Arthur 
Ramicone, Michael Stuckart, Evelyn Talbott, Philip Wion, and Thomas Wolf.  
Also present were: Jeffrey Liebmann, William Madden, and Robert Pack.
	UPBC members not present were: Attilio Favorini, Christopher Happ, 
and Stephen Wisniewski.

Approval of the Minutes and Report of the Chair

	The minutes of the February 10, February 19, and March 20, 2003 
meetings were approved.  Maher discussed the general issues surrounding 
the FY 2004 planning and budgeting process.  He distributed a draft annual 
report to the Chancellor for review and comment by the Committee members.

Discussion of FY 2004 Planning and Budgeting Parameters

	Ramicone discussed the time line of the planning and budgeting 
parameters process and background information on the FY 2004 parameters.  
He then distributed the report of the Parameters Subcommittee, including 
the following major recommendations.

-- a tuition increase of 9.5% for in-state students and 7.5% for 
out-of-state students;
-- the assumption that the Commonwealth appropriation will decrease 5%; 	
-- a projected 10% increase in grants and contracts revenue;
-- no change in gifts, endowment, and investment revenues;
-- a 3% increase in salary expenditures;
-- no increase in supplies and services expenditures;
-- increases in utilities expenditures, including increased load 
factors on existing facilities, rate increases for sewage and water, and 
new facility usage;
-- a $3 million increase in academic program initiatives;
-- a $500,000 increase in library acquisitions;
-- a $1 million increase to the Deans' share of the Research 
Development Fund; and
-- an increase in financial aid equivalent to the tuition increase.

Ramicone explained that the current draft parameters still result in a 
$1.2 million deficit, but that by the time they are presented to the Board 
for approval, adjustments would take place to present a balanced budget.  
Cassing moved that the Committee approve the FY 2004 planning and 
budgeting parameters as presented by the Parameters Subcommittee.  
Dunbar-Jacob seconded.
	Wion expressed concern that, given the 2.4% inflation increase in 
the past year, the 3% increase in salaries would not permit the University 
to give a full increase for maintenance of real salary for satisfactory 
performance and also provide adequate funds for merit, market, and equity.  
He suggested that doing so would require at least a 3.9% increase.  Wion 
moved to amend the parameters, changing the recommended 3.0% salary 
increase to 3.3% by moving $1 million from the academic initiatives 
expenditure line and using those funds for market adjustments.  Cassing 
seconded.  Discussion ensued including  the efforts made to keep medical 
insurance costs to employees down (significant portion of the past year's 
inflation increase), which represents a pre-tax savings.  Maher stated 
that few public universities are currently investing as heavily in 
salaries as the University.  Cochran expressed concern over the reduction 
of flexibility available to supervisors to address salary concerns.  Wion 
withdrew the motion to amend the recommendation of the Parameters 
Subcommittee.  The Committee voted unanimously to approve the FY 2004 
planning and budgeting parameters as submitted by the Parameters 
Subcommittee.
	The Committee discussed a recommended distribution of the proposed 
salary increase.  Cassell moved that the Committee recommend a 
distribution of 1.5% for maintenance of real salary, 1.0% for 
merit/market/equity, and 0.5% for centrally-administered market funds.  
Cochran seconded.  Holder indicated that this distribution was approved by 
the Parameters Subcommittee in its final meeting.  Wion moved to modify 
the recommended distribution to 2.0% for maintenance of real salary and 
1.0% for unit merit/market/equity with no centrally-administered market 
funds with the understanding that some of the academic initiatives money 
could be used for this purpose.  Cassing seconded.  Cassing stated that 
neglecting cost of living increases is not a sound long-term policy and 
that maintaining real salaries is important to avoid erosion of salaries 
as well as to promote employee morale.  Maher stated that adequately 
funded merit increases also contribute to promoting  morale.  Levine 
agreed, stating that it is intellectually and psychologically attractive 
to lean toward merit increases.  The Committee voted 6 to 11 against the 
amendment.  With no further discussion, the Committee voted 11 to 5 
approving the original motion (with one abstention).

	The meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.