Prior to the meeting, members received a presentation from Rod Arthur, CEO UQ College, Ipswich Campus
I asked about the impact of the flood on UQ Sport's budget, given UQ contributes around $11M a year to UQ Sport. The EDO responded that the Finance Committee awaited a revised budget from UQSport that takes account of losses attributable to the flood and insurance claims.
In 1990, Senate resolved that, unless otherwise determined by Senate, the net revenue from paid parking would be used to develop parking provisions within new buildings and to upgrade existing carparks. Since then, Senate has allowed expenditure on cycling infrasrtructure as well.
Management put up a resolution that the 1990 resolution be recscinded in order for revenue from paid parking to be regarded as part of general revenue from now on.
I said that I was not opposed to the motion, but was interested in what had prompted it. I noted that the common reason for parking fee rises until the last couple of years had been cost of the infrastrcture (eg, new parking stations). In the last year or two, the reason for rises has been to keep up with rises in public transport fares, so that public transport becomes a financially viable alternative to parking.
The EDO responded that the last loan, for the Confier Knoll carpark, would be paid off by the middle of 2011 and there then would be an excess of income over expenditure. About 20% of the fee income goes on parking staff salaries and the remaining 80% has been paying off loans or providing improvements such as sealing dirt carparks and improving cycling infrastructure (eg, more racks and showers). Once the Conifer Knoll loan is paid off, ~$3M p.a. willl be available after salaries are paid, said Maurie McNarn.
I expressed the concern that, in the future when a new parking structure is proposed, that staff and students will be hit for a fee increase on the basis that it is needed to service a new loan. I was advised that any such building proposal would now be part of the regular buidling program (Asset Management Plan) which is funded separately. The ~$3M of parking fee income would go into general revenue for distribution via the Budget Contribution Model like most other revenue that funds the University's operations.
Having made my point about not justifying future fee increases on cost grounds without first taking account of 'profit' generated from 2011 onwards, I supported the motion.
Usual reports from sub-committees; explanation of School-Based Performance Framework; Progress reports from Faculties, Institutes and Support Areas against their 2010 operational plans; Annual Report 2010; Centenary wrap-up report.
