October 30, 2008

Present: Gabrielle Triefenbach-Kramer; Ming Wang; Michael Gawronski; Cynthia
Richichi; Alex Jakubowski; David Kohn; Christine Work; Tom Stack; Sandra Wardell;
Max Schaefer; Judy Osburn

Excused: Paul Basinski; Edward Lugo

Item #1: Minutes were reviewed-vote on approval tabled until the next meeting

Item #2: Time line: i. October 30th, ia. open forum on Wednesday was not well attended,
but more people did attend the second day. Dan Bloomer removed the initiative on
multi-media support.
Ib. Discuss initiatives to be brought forward

ii. Nov 6th: iia. create master list; iib.members rank initiatives using rubric criteria; iic
review spreadsheet on initiatives.

iii. Nov. 13th: iiia. members ranking of initiatives are presented; iiib.ranking of initiatives
entered into spreadsheet

iv. Nov. 20th: iva. narratives for initiatives are due

v. Nov. 21st: va. ranked initiatives posted to PIP


Item #3: Initiatives to be ranked: Max Schaefer discussed the newly proposed security
system, for which money is supposedly available. Gabrielle discussed how the soft ware
in admissions will link information throughout the campus for anyone who needs access
to the information to serve the needs of the students.
Sandy Wardell spoke to the issue of investigating nationally funded grants for Security
upgrades, and Nursing simulation equipment/labs. Max voiced a concern that at the
present time, there is no cultural affairs coordination. Max suggested that a viable plan
needs to be developed to replace the former cultural affairs committee, and then ensure
that Newburgh campus receives an appropriate portion of cultural affairs funds. Christine
Work spoke to the issue of possibly getting cultural events other than performance
activities until physical performance activity space is developed in Newburgh. Ming
Wang suggested that we not replace any usable furniture at this time, unless it is
unsafe/unusable. Several members supported Ming's suggestion. Tom spoke to the issue
of funding initiatives which could generate funds: clerk to do collection billing; grant
writers, etc. Several members spoke of needing increased security on campus-Cynthia
also mentioned the need for supportive equipment for the security department.
Gabrielle asked if the restored faculty position request has funding; Cynthia explained
that if someone leaves or retires, the funding could be kept, or could be used for a
pressing current need if the position is open for a period of time. Cynthia also reminded
the members that the "vacancy" factor is considered as part of the budget.
   The committee members discussed the difficulty in reviewing the PIP initiative
document. Christine Work suggested that we develop the role of the committee to be
more focused on information and analysis rather than just the ranking of the initiatives.

     Discussion ensued on the difficulty of understanding the justification section on the
PIP system. Christine suggested changing the format of the system, and having ongoing
initiative planning to provide continuous updates of the whole context within which the
initiatives are being planned. Cynthia asked for clarification from Christine: Christine
explained that she is suggesting that the person developing the initiative make contact
with others to investigate if there are other sources of funding, if the initiative comes
under several funding sources, etc. Christine stated that Jim Dutcher is amenable to
making changes to the PIP system to make the online system structure more
understandable to users of the system. Ming Wang suggested that the committee rank
without regard to funding sources. Several members discussed the fact that under the
current system, it is difficult to understand the ranking of initiatives such as faculty,
versus upgrades to facilities, technology, etc.

Respectfully submitted,


Beverley Marchesani