Senate Budget & Finance Committee Multi-Charge Report, September 2004

Rutgers University
Senate Budget and Finance Committee Report
to the
Senate Executive Committee
September 28, 2004

This report summarizes recommendations of our B&F Committee in response to three charges issued to us. We would welcome the Executive Committee’s suggestions if it is felt that we need to prepare resolutions for Senate Consideration.

Senate S-0208: Safety Issues, Classroom/Building Security and Vandalism

Investigate the level of security normally maintained in classroom and office/research buildings, and the current levels of vandalism and other criminal behavior in those buildings. Investigate the use of buildings/classrooms for after-hours study space*, and whether there is an increased cost of maintenance and repair due to unsupervised use. Formulate a policy for locking buildings and classrooms to ensure security. Make recommendations on how to provide students with space on each campus for after-hours study, and the amount of space that seems appropriate.* Explore risk-reduction strategies and mechanisms, and ways to heighten awareness of safety issues. Investigate the potential for a safety week on campus each semester or year. In addition, explore the potential for a website that would include a safety forum for discussion and hazard evaluation. [*The Student Affairs Committee was asked to provide input on the kinds and amounts of after-hours study space that would meet student needs, and on ways to address problems of vandalism. That input was forwarded to the Budget and Finance Committee on January 17, 2003.] Report to Executive Committee by October 2003.

This charge was dealt with extensively by the Senate Budget and Finance Committee during the 2003/2004 academic year. Presentations by Jay Kohl (Director of Public Safety) and Charlie Mury (Security Systems Manager) noted that extensive progress has been made in recent years in upgrading building and campus safety and security. The committee was satisfied that current safety and security measures were systematically improving at Rutgers for the New Brunswick/Piscataway campuses.¹ Our committee did not address Newark and Camden campuses.

¹The B&F Committee addressed this issue at several meetings and the following is extracted from our minutes. Charge S-0208. Head of Public Safety, Jay Kohl, and security systems manager, Charles Mury, attended the Committee meeting and reviewed security policies, procedures, and operations. A discussion of issues ensued and it was noted that the March 20, 2004, meeting of the Senate Budget and Finance Committee will receive a report from Mr. Mury with details on present developments and future goals in the areas of safety and security. The committee expects that this information will assist in responding to Senate Charge 0208 issued to our committee. Particular issues raised at this meeting included:

a. Report by Charles Mury on the STEP Program (Security Technical Enhancement Program).
b. Howard Dess inquired if security cameras were monitored or simply passive picture takers.
c. Newark and Camden may require a separate task force. Mr. Mury said he could assist us in contacting individuals from the other campuses on security issues.
d. Ted Szatrowski identified additional issues related to those working late (middle of the night), actions expected to be taken if an individual is injured, and opportunities to report security events.
e. Jay Kohl, Head of Public Safety, reported to Ted Szatrowski about the competing interests at stake in a university or public environment where there is a need for openness and, at the same time, a need for security. Rutgers had assigned community police officers to each campus who serve as the bridge between their staff (often trained students who undertake 40 hours of instruction) and the greater university community requiring security and safety. Security staff wear full uniforms (with a bright red stripe on trousers) and these individuals: check buildings; monitor public events; and, bring a presence to promulgate crime prevention at the local level.
f. Mr. Kohl noted that Rutgers does publicize criminal events and crime concerns (including patterns of activity) to heighten awareness and to make Rutgers unattractive to criminals.
g. Mr. Kohl reported that they are currently planning a safety/security website.
h. Off-hours study space was discussed and Mr. Kohl highlighted the value of new technology to monitor access/entry and record activities. Intervention is not really feasible but such systems work to prevent incidents and, after incidents are reported, the systems may account for what occurred. Mr. Kohl indicated that technology might, in some circumstances, be used for after-hours study space in lieu of having supervised personnel on hand.
i. Learning Resource Centers were identified as a potentially appropriate after-hours study space.
j. Ted Szatrowski reported that safety/security awareness might be heightened using student newspapers and television. He suggested videotaping safety programs and playing/distributing such tapes.

Ted Szatrowski, William Norville, and Dan O’Connor will meet as a task force with Jay Kohl to discuss: (1) safety week on campus (each semester or year); (2) the website; and, (3) after-hours study space.

At a later B&F meeting the following information was presented. Jay Kohl, Director of Public Safety, covered differences in crime prevention between public and private efforts/incentives. The use of a profit incentive by the private sector allow for an emphasis on continuous observation by such entities as Disney World. Equally important is the perception of safety and security. Rutgers is particularly sensitive to victim’s rights.

Jay Kohl gave a sketch of his background: 21 years with the Detroit Police, going from operational (SWAT team) to legal advisor. He has served as a Police Chief in towns the size of New Brunswick and has been educated at local and national levels as a Fire Chief. A reliance on traditional systems is still prevalent at most universities although several institutions have moved to more modern methods and technologies. Although there are constrained financial resources at Rutgers, several new initiatives are beginning to be planned to obviate the need for personnel to use older, traditional methods to secure buildings. Money realized from salary savings are being planned to fund technologically current initiatives.

An expert helped assess Rutgers’ current and potential systems and a Security Strategy Notebook and a Physical Security Assessment Checklist were prepared. A committee with members including administrators, deans, and students have reviewed these plans.

Charlie Mury (Security Systems Manager) then distributed a ten page PowerPoint presentation on the S.T.E.P. program (Security Technology Enhancement Program). Mr. Mury began at Bell Labs as an electrical engineer and now focuses on technologies related to security systems. [Mr. Mury’s PowerPoint presentation should be appended to these minutes.]

Mr. Kyu-Jung Whang asked if there is a plan to have cameras in all buildings. Mr. Kohl and Mr. Mury responded that is not planned for at this time. Instead, cameras will be placed in defined areas (e.g., parking lots and decks) and in other higher risk areas. he cameras serve as prevention devices and recording technologies. Technology is available for camera information to be transferred to a web site which, potentially, could be viewed by officers in vehicles. Specific parking lots were mentioned as examples of the use of such a link between a camera and a vehicle.

Questions arose about specific aspects of the current plans. It was reported that the new cameras can be set to record so that each DVD could carry 15 to 30 days of surveillance.

Also discussed were how doors on Rutgers’ public buildings could be locked, unlocked, and monitored using new technology. Nonetheless, private housing for students shows that many residences are left unlocked, even after heightened awareness incidents.

William Norville noted procedures in place at RU living centers/dormitories. The open environment of these facilities need to be counterbalanced by attention to security and safety concerns.

We do have recommendations regarding locking of buildings and security cameras.

We are encouraged that University websites are aware of safety issues but feel this can be enhanced by developing video programs to address safety and security. Such video programs can be shown at orientation sessions, staff meetings, and can be available as streaming video on the University website.

It is our conclusion that safety and security are being handled in a responsible and responsive way by the University on the New Brunswick/Piscataway campuses.

Our Committee recommends that:

all living centers and dormitories have automatic locks and security cameras;
the University continue in its development of safety and security awareness through its website;
website development needs to address safety and security for buildings and for those using the bus transportation system;
the website should invite comment from the University community on safety, security, transportation, and building issues and responses to those concerns should also be posted on the website;
a video awareness campaign be prepared for the University Community to emphasize safety and security issues;
designation of safety week be considered to focus attention on safety and security issues; and,
progress reports on safety and security be made on a regular basis to our committee.

Our B&F committee is not sure if we need to make a recommendation on the appropriateness of including off-campus housing contiguous to University property in safety/security awareness campaigns.

Related to Charge S-0208 was the issue of study space. Marianne Gaunt and Howard Dess investigated the issue of late night study space and supplied the Budget & Finance Committee with a one page cover memorandum and a five page report on this topic. This report is a follow-up to a similar report done November 22, 2002 by the Senate Student Affairs Committee responding to Senate Charge S-0208A. Note that information was not gathered for Newark or Camden campuses.

The Gaunt/Dess data summarized the availability of 24 hour study space on the New Brunswick/Piscataway campus and isolated two issues: access to computers and access to study space. The findings indicate that:

provision of 24 hour study space is available on Busch, Livingston, and College Avenue;
the Libraries now provide 24 hour study space during exam times;
even at times where demand for library study space might be expected, there appears to be little use during these hours and probably not enough to justify staffing and related costs;
provision of 24 hour study space brings with it additional safety and security commitments.

Therefore, there is NO recommendation to the Executive Committee to change current 24 hour study spaces available on the New Brunswick/Piscataway campuses.

Senate S-0204: University Master Plan

Evaluate and report to the Senate on the University Master Plan as it develops. Status report to the Senate Executive Committee by October 2003.

The B&F Committee failed to issue a timely report on the University Master Plan. Kyu-Jung Whang (Vice President for Facilities and Capital Planning) reported that the Master Plan had been adopted formally by the Board of Governors for all campuses at its December 2003 meeting. The entire plan, over 130 pages, is available on the Rutgers website at: http://facilities.rutgers.edu. The plan indicates priorities for new buildings and related initiatives. Vice President Whang noted that such plans are usually viable for about five to seven years. He also noted that these are plans and that they need to adjust to changing circumstances and situations.

There is no recommendation by the B&F Committee regarding the University Master Plan.

S-0202: Evaluation of Parking and Transportation Services

Examine and make recommendations regarding coordination between bus and train schedules, class-period schedules, parking (especially for commuters) policies, and other campus functions. Incorporate input from Student Affairs Committee regarding discussions held with Parking and Transportation Services. Report to Executive Committee by December 2003.

The B&F Committee recommends that:

major bus stops include online kiosks equipped with video monitors showing the movement of buses on their routes with an indication of when buses will arrive at that station² ;
video monitors at pertinent, major stops also display connecting train information;
all bus stops include bus and train schedules;
web site be developed to invite comments on parking and transportation issues;
New Brunswick and Edison train stations include information on how to get to Rutgers campuses; and,
New Brunswick and Edison train stations include maps of Rutgers campuses.

²Currently “Where Is My Bus” is available on the Rutgers website providing real time bus location information using a GPS navigation system. We are recommending that this information be available at the bus stop itself.