[00:00:07]
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WELCOME TO OUR WORK SESSION.
WE HOPE IT WILL BE BRIEF SO WE
[1. Certification of Notice Posted for the Meeting]
CAN GO INTO OUR COMMITTEE MEETINGS.THIS OPEN MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, 551.001 THROUGH 551.146.
VERIFICATION OF NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR.
PER TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.1282, THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST OVER THE INTERNET IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, 551.128.
CHANCELLOR, CAN YOU CERTIFY S TO THE POSTING OF THE NOTICE? I CERTIFY THAT THE NOTICE FOR
[A. Governance Committee Charter]
THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ACCORDING TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.054.>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THANK YOU.
THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE CHARTER.
I ASK IT BE PUT IN A WORK SESSION BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT HAPPENED IN OPEN BOARD EETING.
SO WE ARE SURE THAT THE QUESTIONS ARE ASKED AND ANSWERED WITHOUT HAVING TO HURRY THAT IT HAPPEN.
>> IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA FOR FIRST READING.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
YOU RECEIVED THIS ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF AGO.
ANY DISCUSSION? ANY QUESTIONS OF ROB?
THREE OF US WILL GET TOGETHER AND TALK ABOUT THE OTHER FOUR OF US? [CHUCKLING]
>> ONLY WITH RESPECT TO TO GOVERNS.
IT CONTEMPLATES THREE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WILL HELP GUIDE AND ESTABLISH THE PROCESS IN SOME INSTANCES, GOVERNANCE MATTERS BUT THE ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN AS A FULL BOARD, IT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDING BODY AS ALL OF THE COMMITTEES ARE.
THIS WOULD BE PARTICULAR TO GOVERNANCE.
IN DEVELOPLING THIS AS A CHARTER AND IT WAS DEVELOPING WITH A VIEW TOWARDS THE COMMITTEEERIZE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CHARTER BY POLICY.
IF THE BOARD USES THIS CHARTER OR SOMETHING LIKE IT TO BE THE CHARTER FOR THE COMMITTEE, WE WOULD NEED TO BRING AN AMENDMENT THAT CREATES THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IN THE POLICIES BBA LOCAL, WHICH IS WHERE THE OTHER COMMITTEES ARE SET FORTH.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: I'M CONCERNED ABOUT EVALUATING AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, MOFINITORING AN ELECTD OFFICIAL.
RESPECT TO GOVERNANCE POLICIES, MAYBE GOVERNANCE POLICIES BUT WE'RE DEALING WITH ELECTED OFFICIALS.
>> WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT EVALUATION, IT SAYS ESTABLISH AND REVIEW PROCESS, CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING EFEVALUATING EFFECTIF THE BOARD.
THE FULL BOARD WOULD TAKE THE PROCESS.
IT WOULDN'T BE A COMMITTEE OF THREE EVALUATING THE OTHER FOUR.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: IF I MIGHT THAT'S A REQUIREMENT THE BOARD HAVE A SELF-EVALUATION PROCESS.
THIS WOULD GET US IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: THIS GOES WITH A SINGULAR ACCREDITATION?
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: WE JUST NEVER HAD A BEFORE?
>> WE HAVE BEEN IN VIOLATION, YES.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE ALSO IN LOCAL POLICY IT TATES WE'LL CONDUCT AN ANNUAL EVALUATION.
SINCE THERE IS NO TIMELINE, NOTHING IS AROUND THAT POLICY WHICH TYPICALLY DOES NOT HAPPEN.
SO THIS IS BASICALLY PUTTING IN A CHARTER TO CORRESPOND WITH POLICY ISSUES, SOME ACCREDITATION ISSUES, TO MAKE SURE THAT FROM THIS POINT FORWARD IF THIS IS APPROVED, THOSE THINGS HAPPEN.
>> IT'S REALLY AN EFFORT TO TRY TO COMMITTEE, TO CREATE A COMMITTEE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE DISCRETE FUNCTIONS OR DEVELOP PROCESSES FOR DOING THAT IKE WITH THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, TO DEAL WITH MATTERS WITHIN THE PROVINCE BUT RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD THE ACTIONS.
>> AS A DRAFT, IT'S NOT A FIRST READING, ALL INPUT AND SUGGESTIONS, CHANGES, ANY TYPE OF ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS, ARE CERTAINLY WELCOME.
>> ONE THING THAT STRUCK ME WAS WHETHER WE WOULD WANT TO INCLUDE SOMETHING IS IN THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE DEALING WITH OPEN MEETING AND RECORDS REQUIREMENTS AND PROCESS BY WHICH THE BOARD WILL OPERATE TO ASSURE WE'RE IN
[00:05:03]
COMPLIANCE.CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS LIKE THE TYPES OF DOCUMENTS WE RECEIVED.
BOTH OPEN AND CLOSED SESSIONS AND SO WE'RE -- AND ALSO, TRAIN THE NEW BOARD MEMBERS WITH RESPECT TO TO THAT AREA.
THOSE ARE GERMANE AND IMPORTANT TO OUR FUNCTION AS A BOARD AND GOVERRANCE.
>> I THINK THAT COULD BE WITHIN THE AMBET OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT RELATES TO THE OVERALL DISTRICT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, THE REQUIREMENT, ET CETERA?
>> I SUSPECT IT IS SOMEWHERE ELSE IN POLICY.
>> WE COULDN'T CHANGE BY OLICY OR COMMITTEE CHARTER, THIS DISTRICT COULDN'T CHANGE.
BUT COULD CERTAINLY HAVE THIS COMMITTEE LOOK AT THE PROCESSES AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THE BOARD DEALS WITH THOSE ISSUES AND OR THE DISTRICTS S IT RELATES TODAY GOVERNANCE OVERALL.
>> DEALING WITH NEW BOARD MEMBERS AND POSSIBLY PART OF THAT EDUCATION AS WELL AS PROCEDURES AND AGENDIZE THAT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE SHOULD GET TO THAT POINT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS? , COMMENTS, INPUT? SO ARE WE OKAY WITH ROB ADDING A PART SPEAKING TO COMPLIANCE WITH OPEN EETINGS? I THEN PUTTING ON FIRST READING AT THE JUNE BOARD MEETING OR DO WE WANT DO LOOK AT IT AGAIN? THE JUNE BOARD MEETING?
>> I THINK TH THERE IS ENOUGH TE IF YOU HAVE OTHER IDEAS --
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: JUNE IS JUST THE FIRST READING.
>> JUST FOR POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
WHAT I WILL BRING TO THE BOARD FOR FIRST READING IN JUNE WILL BE AN AMENDMENTS TO THE BOARD POLICY, BBA LOCAL, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE COMMITTEES OF HE BOARD, AND IDENTIFY THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.
AND THE FINANCE AND WORKFORCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: IF YOU COULD PUT WE'LL CONDUCT AN ANNUAL EVALUATION OF THE BOARD.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I ALSO LANGUAGE IN SACKS, REGARDING THAT SO THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT THIS MOVING HIS DIRECTION.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: NUMBER SIX, TO ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE CRITERIA.
SO SOMEBODY DOESN'T SPEAK UP, THEY ARE NOT PERFORMING? EXPECTATIONS FOR TRUSTEES IN AREAS OF ATTENDANCE, PREPAREDNESS?
IT REQUIRES WE HAVE A POLICY FOR REMOVAL OF BOARD MEMBERS.
SO THAT'S A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT.
>> THIS ENVISIONS AND I APPRECIATE THE QUESTION, EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING. IN FACT, THAT'S ESTABLISHED BY STATE LAW AND WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
THERE IS A STATE LAW PROVISION TO THE GOVERNING BODY.
THIS CONTEMPLATES, THE LANGUAGE MAYBE LESS ARTFUL.
AND WHAT IT REALLY CONTEMPLATES IS THOSE EXISTS POLICIES TO THE EXTENT THEY NEED REVISED, UPDATED OR CHANGE, ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, THE COMMITTEE READY RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD A CHANGE IN POLICY THAT MIND ADDRESS THAT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: BASICALLY --
CAN I FINISH WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY?
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I DIDN'T KNOW YOU WEREN'T FINISHED.
>> C. COMPTON: WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY ON NUMBER SINCE SIX.
I THINK YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL ON ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE CRITERIA AND EXPECTATIONS BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO SOMEONE BEING ELECTED, IT'S UP TO THE CITIZENS IN THAT PARTICULAR DISTRICT TO DECIDE THE CRITERIA THEY WANT FOR THEIR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS WITH THAT OR TAKE IT OVERBOARD.
YOU KNOW, EVEN AS IT PERTAINS TO
[00:10:02]
NOT ONLY CRITERIA BUT EXPECTAEXPECTATIONS BECAUSE IT'P TO US TO DECIDE FOR CITIZENS WHO THEY ARE REPRESENTING.>> PERHAPS THE LANGUAGE IN SIX NEEDS TO BE REVISED.
I AGREE THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS OUTSIDE THE ABILITY OF THE BOARD TO DO.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WELL, A ANDO BASICALLY IN TERMS OF SIX, WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS IF THERE IS A CHANGE IN EITHER STATE LAW OR SAX'S ACCREDITATION IN THESE ISSUES THAT TRIGGERS THE GOVERNS COMMITTEE TO GO OVER TO THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE, ET CETERA, AND DO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO LOCALLY TO RESPOND TO STATE LAW TO MAKE SURE WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE.
THE ACCREDITATION AND THE STATE LAW.
>> YEAH, I THINK THAT IS VALUABLE AND I THINK I CAN SAY THAT IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
TO THE EXTENT THERE MAY BE CHANGES, EITHER THE ACCREDITATION OR STATE LAW WITH WITHRESPECT TO TO THESE ISSUES.
THE GOVERNANCE WILL BE THE COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD REFERRED FOR CONSIDERATION AND COMING BACK TO THE FULL BOARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION.
I'M REMINDED OR TOLD THAT THE CHARTER IS ACTUALLY ON FOR FIRST READING THIS MONTH.
IT CAN EITHER BE TABLED TODAY OR SINCE IT IS FIRST READING, IF YOU WANT, I HAVE TAKEN IN YOUR COMMENTS AND CONSIDER THE OTHERS AND BRING BACK FOR FINAL READING IN JUNE AND GET OUT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WHAT IS THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD? KEEP IT ON FOR FIRST READING OR TABLE IT?
>> I'M PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: FIRST READING? WE HAVE THE INPUT WH WHERE WE'RE GOING TO MAKE CHANGES.
>> C. COMPTON: KEEP IT ON FIRST READING AND THEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT JUNE WI WITH ANY INPUT OR CHANGES.
>> C. COMPTON: IF YOU TABLE IT NOW, THE FIRST READING WILL ALREADY INCLUDE ANY SUGGESTIONS OR CHANGES THAT YOU SUBMIT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: SO TODAY'S FIRST READING, THE CHANGES ARE GOING TO BE MADE.
SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CONSENSUS IS.
DISCUSSION IS HAD ABOUT CHANGES, WHICH YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE, COME BACK IN JUNE FOR FINAL READING.
AND THAT IS WHERE THE BOARD WOULD APPROVE OR NOT?
>> THAT THAT WOULD BE THE PROCEF IT'S NOT TABLED.
I'LL MAKE THE CHANGES AS QUICKLY AS I RECEIVE HEM.
THESE CHANGES I CAN TURN AROUND SHORTLY.
SO YOU WILL A RED-LINE VERSION.
NOT AT THE BOARD MEETING TODAY BUT AS QUICKLY THEREAFTER AS I CAN.
IF YOU GET TO FINAL READING IN JUNE BUT CHANGES HAVEN'T BEEN MADE TO YOUR SATISFACTION, YOU CAN TABLE IT AT THAT POINT AS WELL.
>> I SEE THIS PROCESS IN A SORT OF ACCREDITATION POLICY BEHIND THE ACCREDITATION AS DRIVING A JOINT ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HOW WE GOVERN AS A BOARD OF TRUSTEES.
I THINK THAT'S A REALLY GOOD THING.
AREN'T THERE EXTERNAL, THIRD-PARTY ORGANIZES THAT CAN TAKE A DETAMPED LOOK AT A BOARD AND HOW IT WORKS -- DETACHED.
NOT NECESSARILY TODAY BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE VALUABLE IN HAVING SOMEBODY OTHER THAN OURSELVES, AT LEAST GET A BASELINE AS HOW WE DO AS A BOARD AND COMPARE TO OTHER SIMILAR TYPES OF BOARDS THAT ARE OPERATING IN THE STATE SO WE LEARN SOMETHING FROM THEM AND GET BETTER AS A RESULT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: TIMELY INPUT.
THAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE JUNE BOARD MEETING.
THE SESSION WE'RE HAVING WITH THE CONSULTANTS.
SPECIFICALLY ON THOSE MATTERS.
POLICY AUDIT AND BEST PRACTICES.
THE CONSENSUS IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CHANGES MADE.
>> I'LL MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND WELCOME ANY OTHER INPUT.
>> THE TIME TABLE IS TO [INDISCERNIBLE] COMPLETION.
>> I DIDN'T BRING THE SAX REQUIREMENT BUT T REQUIRES AN ANNUAL EVALUATION.
I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANYMORE SPECIFICITY IN THE REGULATION AS I RECALL.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: BUT WE COULD ADD A TIME TABLE.
MUCH LIKE E DO WHERE OTHER THINGS, WE COULD ESTABLISH A DATE BY WHICH IT'S GOING TO START AND WHICH IT SHOULD END.
[00:15:01]
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: ANYONE HAVE A SUGGESTION FOR TIMELINE? IT'S BETTER NOT TO LEAVE IT OPEN-ENDED.
THE WAY IT IS NOW, IT'S OPEN-ENDED? MAYBE OOK AT TO BEGIN THE PROCESS JUNE 1, I DON'T KNOW.
>> IF THERE IS NO PUSHBACK, WE MIGHT TIME IT WITH THE CHANCELLOR'S EVALUATION, IT'S A EVALUATION OF US.
ALL THOSE THINGS, IT'S NOT A TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS.
THE WAY AND NVISION, IT'S VERY BASIC POINTS AND ISSUES, AND SAX, WE COULD PROBABLY MOVE THROUGH THAT.
>> ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT TIMELINE?
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: YOU ARE RIGHT.
WE'LL RECEIVE THOUGHT FROM ROB WHEN HE INCORPORATED THE CHANGES.
AND AT THE JUNE BOARD MEETING WE EITHER APPROVE OR OT.
WE HAVE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, CHANCELLOR, IS THERE A NEED?
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: NOT AT THIS TIME.
WE'LL REVISIT THAT WITH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.