WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

INSTITUTIONAL BOARD OF ADVISORS MEETING

FEBRUARY 1, 2006

 

ATTENDING: President Bayless, Chairman Robinson, Mr. Weser, Mr. Segsworth, Mr. Cooper, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Miller, Mr. Roberts, Dr. David, Ms. Smith:  Tech Representatives: Dr. Janeksela, Mr. Fauver, Dr. Brown, Ms. Kerby, Ms. Graham, Mr. Prince, Mr. Darling, Dr. Hurst, Dr. Harris, Dr. Sathyamoorthy Mr. Neese

 

1. Minutes of the November 30, 2005 and January 11, 2006 meeting were approved with minor corrections.
2. The IBOA adjourned to executive session briefly to discuss a personnel matter and then returned to regular session.
3. Ms. Kerby gave a financial report noting that deficits are continuing and that end of year reserves are estimated to be approximately $1,000,000 in unrestricted accounts.  She indicated that expenses are approximately the same as last year.
4. Ms. Graham reported that the office of Recruitment and Admissions is aggressively seeking students and that despite the uncertainty about Tech’s future and the impending legislative action recruiters are optimistic that recruiting is being only minimally effected.  She noted that more students are bringing their parents to visit due to the potential for moving engineering.  She stated that in spite of this there are not many serious complaints.  She also indicated the students are applying earlier this year and that fact will impact enrollment later in the year.  She felt that recruitment is looking positive but not spectacular at this time.  Ms. Graham also shared a number of new recruiting materials being used this spring and distributed examples of those.
5. Mr. Darling supplemented his written report on facilities by pointing out the completion of the roof on the Engineering Lab Building and gave a quick overview of projects that are now in progress across the campus.
6. Dr. Hurst gave a brief overview of his written report on grant activity on the campus and indicated that by moving grant management to the WVU Research Corporation Tech should save approximately $200,000 per year in management costs and added efficiencies.
7. Deans Brown and Sathyamoorthy pointed out highlights of their written reports on the College of Business, Humanities and Sciences and the LCN College of Engineering respectively.
8. The Board had a lengthy discussion of the merits of moving the LCN College of Engineering to South Charleston as proposed by the Governor.  Issues raised included:
   1. Need for adequate funding and aggressive lobbying for same
   2. Impact on the Tech Foundation
   3. Merits of asking legislature to return Tech to independent status
   4. Need to work with the City of Montgomery for local improvements
   5. The merits of moving to South Charleston and the effect on engineering
   6. The challenges that would be faced in South Charleston including housing and feeding students, student life outside the classroom, meeting core curriculum needs, etc.
   7. The need for positive public relations
   8. Improvement to fund raising activities
   9. Alternatives to fully moving engineering
9. After a healthy and vigorous discussion the Board indicated it would closely monitor the Legislative session and each member would relate their sense of Tech’s needs to the legislators they felt best able to communicate with.
10. The meeting adjourned.