The President stated that given the university budget possibilities based on the Governor’s recently released budget, he wanted to update the Board prior to the April subcommittee meeting. 

J. Bry discussed the revisions in the FY24 Budget Summary and proposals related to the Higher Education Surtax spending. He reminded the board that prior to the Governor’s released budget the university was projecting an $8 million dollar deficit at the last meeting. He also indicated that it is expected that increases in costs related to utilities and central services will continue. Under the Governor’s proposal there are several areas of money proposed that will offset items contributing to the university deficit. He discussed fringe benefits and the goal of putting employees on state maintenance.  He talked about performance funding, collective bargaining and funding stemming from the Fair Share taxes. In addition, the Governor’s budget continues to provide for performance funding. Collective Bargaining is proposed to be funded for all three years. This will be the portion that sits on state maintenance. A large portion of resources are directed at financial aid, the mass grant plus program. He discussed the breakdown of the Governor’s fair share proposal. It is estimated that the university could receive $2.5 million. Assuming no changes to the Governor’s proposal, the university estimates a $2.9 million shortfall as opposed to the $8 million previously presented.

E. Gregoire asked with the tuition price lock was there an assumption for a fee increase built into past and future models? J. Bry responded no, it doesn’t include fee increases although we are considering proposing a 2.5% fee increase on university and technology fees.

There was a brief discussion on a hiring freeze, and enrollment assumptions. 

The document was presented for informational purposes. 

J. Bry presented the 2023 Internal Control Plan and asked the Board to consider adopting the plan. He indicated that due to COVID, there were some internal processes that needed to be changed. There are no real significant changes.  A few minor changes have been made stemming from the state comptroller's guide and recommendations from the recent state audit. He noted that there are individual control plans for high-risk departments. 

D. Phillips said it is really important to do this at the Board level, and this is a box to be checked. We need to do this on a regular basis. J. Bry indicated this should be done every five years. K. Spinelli echoed the sentiments and stated that it is a great document. 

Y. Malcom stated that basically we are required to do it on an annual basis, we do it yearly and high-risk departments have to answer questions directly from the Comptroller’s Office. If there are changes, our policies are updated. 

This was discussed previously.