1. Updates from the Chair

2. Funding for Administrative Computing Systems Discussion - Bob Loessberg-Zahl

Absent: Jerry Hallee, Phyllis Leavitt, Celeste Rose.

Staff to the Council: Gilda Garcia, Paula King, Debbie Lauriano.

1. Updates from the Chair
   1. IT 5-Year Administrative Unit Review
      Handout: IT 5-Year Administrative Unit Review Schedule

      The handout has information on the charge to the committee, areas of focus for discussion, review process and schedule, schedule of consultations with IT customers and constituent groups, and how to provide feedback. The Administrative Unit Review is seeking input on suggestions for improvement to include in its final report to Dr. Grey. The AdC3 Constituent Group meeting was cancelled due to the confict with Bryan Miller's memorial service. The Council will provide input at the regularly scheduled AdC3 meeting on Monday, December 7. You are welcome to invite others. Faculty, students, technical users have been invited to other constituent group meetings to provide input. The goal is to connect with as many interested people as possible.

   2. IT Policy Board Meeting - October 26
      The IT Policy Board is composed of Provost & EVC Grey, the Chair of Committee on Academic Policy & Budget Review, Wes Wallender, (Alan Jackman for Winter Quarter), the Chair of the Academic Computing Coordinating Council, Harry Matthews, and the Chair of the Administrative Computing Coordinating Council, Alan Laub. Jerry Hallee is representing the role of the Associate Vice Chancellor - Information Technology. Paula King serves as staff to the committee.

      The topic of the meeting was the IT leadership position. There is consensus that the position should be classified at the Vice Chancellor or Vice Provost level, some combination of options one and two. The final decision has not been made yet. Jerry Hallee is drafting the position description. The position will be advertised nationally. Dean Laub asked Council members to think of people they would nominate for the position.

      The other item discussed at the meeting was Stuart Lynn's visit on Nov. 5. Council members were asked what items they'd like discussed. One suggestion was about systemwide site licensing. See http://slc.ucdavis.edu/ for more information about current UCD and UC systemwide software agreements.

      The purpose of Stuart's visits to the campuses is to catch up on what is going on and to learn what UCOP can do better to help the campus meet their goals.

      Another question was asked about what other UC's are doing as the National Science Foundation, over the next year, will require that all proposals be submitted electronically. This will affect all UC campuses. Some are in probably in a better position to do this than others. Is there a systemwide approach?

      If you have additional suggestions, send email to Dean Laub or Paula King.

   3. IT Leadership Position
      See Item A above.

      It is anticipated that interviews will be conducted sometime in the spring.

2. Funding for Administrative Computing Systems Discussion - Bob Loessberg-Zahl
   Handout: Possible Budget Principles for Administrative Computing

   Bob Loessberg-Zahl reviewed the handout. The principles regarding cost sharing for administrative computing systems projects were discussed. Bob drafted the handout from the CAUSE article "Crisis in Information Technology Support: Has Our Current Model Reached Its Limit?" from Bob's own experience in budgeting, and the way the Capital Budget Process is run on campus. The description is really very simple and straightforward. The tricky part of this is implementation.

   Startup costs should include the costs departments will incur. Planning to replace desktop computers every three years is a matter of priority. A&ES does it over five years. Office of Administration has determined that you spend the same amount of money patching things up if you have a five-year strategy rather than a three-year strategy. Vet Med also has a plan for replacing computers. Student Affairs has consolidated staff support for computers and is working to update all their units' equipment.

   Discussion about some of the issues of reallocating resources. Bob described for members of the Council the funding method developed for Network 21 which has two aspects: backbone costs and local costs. Reminder, there may be times that for any given project, general established principles come into conflict with what may need to be implemented for a particular situation. Accountability in the process is important as well as oversight and direction. Budgets for administrative systems projects also need to be done in sufficient detail.

   Action: Schedule Vet Med, Office of Administration, Student Affairs, and College of College of Ag & Env Sci to share what they have done to plan for equipment replacement at a future meeting. The handout will be incorporated into the Administrative Computing Policy & Procedure document, which will be discussed with this group in the near future.

Action: Gilda to find the best time to schedule a two-hour meeting on that day to have the AUR Constituent Group meeting and the regular meeting. The meeting will be scheduled at the time that works best for most of the Council members, either 2 to 4, 2:30 to 4:30, or 3 to 5.

The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.