Eastern Oregon University

Tech-Fee Committee Meeting

February 14, 2008

Members Present:  Brian Sather, Charles Martin, Frederick Pratter, Callie Nelson, Tom Herrmann, Marian Mustoe, Linda Fratzke

Resource Members Present:   Paul Rowan, Karen Clay, Anna Maria Dill, Helen Moore

Guest:  Provost Jaeger

Minutes from last meeting - approved as submitted.

Charles Martin has been appointed as the vice-chair.

Paul Rowan noted that Jon Norris and he toured the ISB to gather information regarding the Technology for MTE Students proposal.  Based on that information Jon Norris has suggested several changes to the proposal that would reduce the costs by approximately $15,000.00 while providing the same opportunities as the original proposal.   The total cost of the revised proposal would be approximately $20,000.00. 

Provost Jaeger shared some of his vision of the future of the Tech Fee Committee.  He said that, because of the BART plan and our positive enrollment numbers, it appears we will be able to maintain a financial equilibrium.  However, he stressed that it is a tenuous equilibrium.   Provost Jaeger argued that over the years, EOU “has not taken care of business” regarding technology.  He said that the past level of support for technology is not sufficient to help us maintain the current equilibrium.  He assured the committee that EOU is now committed to “take care of business” by making sure that technology is a priority.  However, Provost Jaeger stressed that we cannot just support technology; we need to make sure that whatever technology we support is strategically appropriate. 

A new technology task force is being formed to develop technology strategy and it will work with the Tech Fee Committee to insure that EOU supports technology that adheres to our strategic goals.  Provost Jaeger and Paul Rowan are working together to determine the make-up of the task force and determine how it will coordinate with the Tech Fee committee.   Provost Jaeger assured the committee that he would like to continue the “student-hands-on” legacy and bottom-up approach of the Tech Fee Committee, but stressed that we must work within the technology strategic plan.

There was discussion between committee members and Provost Jaeger.  Highlights of the discussion include:

• Brian Sather asked for clarification regarding the make-up of the task force.  For instance, would the Tech Fee Committee be a sub-committee of the task force? Provost Jaeger said he would like to integrate the task force with the Tech Fee Committee, but a decision had not been made regarding exactly how to do it.  He did ask the committee to consider the logistics of merging the task force and the Tech Fee Committee.
• Frederick Pratter said that the Tech Fee process has always been responsive rather than pro-active and he argued that this has been both a positive and negative aspect of the committee.    He also noted that the new task force/Tech Fee committee will probably save the campus money through efficiency and lack of duplication.
• Paul Rowan stressed that technology on campus is not sustainable at current funding levels.   He indicated that, for several years, tech fee money has essentially been EOU’s only source of discretionary funds related to IT.  He also noted that the direction of the Tech Fee Committee will have to be revised as it merges with the new task force to work within the technology strategic plan for the campus.  Paul asked us to remember the importance of technological research and development.  He argued that a portion of the campus technology budget should be set aside for R & D to help keep us from falling further behind technologically.
• Anna Maria Dill noted that Tech Fee funds cannot be carried forward from one fiscal year to another.  This puts the committee in the position every year of having to “spend it or lose it”.  This is rarely a fiscally responsible situation.  Provost Jaeger assured the committee that there were ways of carrying budget money to the next fiscal year and said he would investigate the best way of doing it.  He was also optimistic that this could be accomplished without charging the Tech Fee account an administrative fee. 
• Brian Sather asked Provost Jaeger to share his thoughts about the Computer-based Teaching Facility proposal put forward by Jon Norris.   Provost Jaeger agreed that the facility is an appropriate investment for Tech Fee and even though Inlow Hall 013 may not be an ideal location, it would be an acceptable temporary location.  He asked the committee to remember other sources for technology funding such as the E-Tech grant and OHSU.  Dr. Jaeger suggested that the committee talk to Carol Ledbetter regarding contributing to the cost of this proposal in particular because the Nursing program hopes to use the facility. 

Provost Jaeger commended the committee for the good work.  He said that the committee has done a great job in difficult times.   But he urged committee members to keep in mind that there are more difficult times to come.

Next meeting 7:00am on Thursday February 28, 2008.