Image
File
MAD HATTER SUPPLEMENT PAGE 2A
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.
Edited Text
MAD HATTER SUPPLEMENT PAGE 2A
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.
ALL DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERSONNEL
BILL DAY, CHAIRMAN, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
REPORT - MEETING WITH MINISTRY OF EDUCATION OFFICIALS REGARDING FURNISHINGS
AND EQUIPMENT BUDGET - DOUGLAS COLLEGE PERMANENT CAMPUS
‘Bill Day, B11] Morfey, Bob Lisson, Mabel Endacott, Terry Leonard
and Sooz Klinkhamer met with Dr. J. F. Newberry, Executive Director of
Management Services - Post Secondary, and members of his staff. Hector
McIntyre, in charge of Capital Facilities, and our primary liaison person
for the construction of the campus, was also in attendance.
Members of the Douglas College team agreed that the meeting
was very successful, in that we were given a very fair and considerate
hearing, a sympathetic response, and clear direction. Some outstanding
features:
(a) The general budget totals have been accepted by Dr. Newberry
for inclusion in next year's budget estimates - subject,
naturally, to detailed approval over the next few months.
(b) The earlier we have our final lists prepared, in the pattern
desired by the Ministry (see memorandum from Barbara Bessey
in this issue), the better. Ideally, the Ministry would
like to have these lists in by early to mid-September.
(c) The Ministry officials wish to see the building furnished
and equipped to our actual student and staff requirements
as of the Fall, 1982, rather than fully equipping the
building to 1988 standards.
(d) Concerns were voiced regarding science capital items, but
there was general acceptance of a philosophy that our science
laboratories should be equipped to first-class lower-division
standards, using SFU and UBC as the bench marks.
(e) Under no circumstances would the total Furnishings & Equipment
budget be allowed to go over the 15% guideline.
To the degree that our budget is below the 15% guideline, it will
tend to gain credibility in the eyes of the Ministry and the Treasury Board
(hich is exercising extraordinary control over ail expenditures these days.)
(f) The general principle seems to have been accepted that the
equipping of the Dental Hygiene laboratory is exclusive of the
general formula funding for the building as a whole - as the
Dental Hygiene Program is really the first of a series of new
technologies and programs that will be added to the College
as time goes on.
Our general impression was that our colleagues in the Ministry were
very favorably impressed by the care and thought that has gone into our project
to date.
The members of the Project Development Committee would like to
congratulate and thank all those members of the faculty and staff who have
worked so hard to date on this aspect of the overall project.