Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:09]

>> THIS OPEN MEETING OF THE

>> THIS OPEN MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES IS AUTHORIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH 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, WILL YOU CERTIFY?

>> I CERTIFY THAT THE NOTICE FOR THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ACCORDING TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.054.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: SINCE WE'VE BEEN IN SESSION ALL DAY AND TRAINING, I MIGHT BUMBLE.

[2. Public Hearing on the Proposed Tax Rate]

IF I DO, KEEP ME STRAIGHT.

NOW, WE'RE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH HE TEXAS TAX CODE, THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED TAX RATE FOR THE TAX YEAR 2019-20 IS NOW OPEN.

I HAVE RECEIVED ZERO CARDS FROMM PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK.

IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS?

>>

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I JUST NOW HEARD THAT.

SEEING NO ONE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED, THANK

[3. Consent Agenda]

YOU.

CONSENT AGENDA.

WE HAVE ITEMS 3A1, APPROVAL OF ANNUAL AUDIT PLAN FOR 2019-20.

3B1 AND 2, APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MOVE TO ONE COLLEGE.

B2, APPROVAL OF BROOKHAVEN COLLEGE MISSION AND VISION STATEMENTS.

AND C, SPECIAL REQUEST, ACCEPTANCE OF GIFT OF TRAVEL EXPENSES, ET CETERA. DOES ANYONE BOARD MEMBER WISH TO CONSIDER ANY OF HESE ITEMS INDIVIDUALLY?

>> C. COMPTON: I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM A.

B2 AND C1.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AGENDA ITEM B1 APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING [INDISCERNIBLE] ROLL CALL.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: OKAY.

SO I HAVE A MOTION, CORRECT? TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 3A1, 3B2, C1.

DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> D. ZIMMERMANN: SECOND.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: ANY DISCUSSION? IF THERE IS NO DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY, "AYE." ANY ABSTAIN? ANY, NO VOTES? VERY GOOD.

DID YOU GET THE MOTION AND

[3. B 1) Approval of Resolution Authorizing the Move to One College]

SECONDED? ALL RIGHT.

IF I COULD HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 3B1.

SO WE CAN PUT IT ON THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.

ITEM 3B1.

>> C. COMPTON: I'LL MAKE -- WELL,

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I ASKED FOR A MOTION.

>> D. ZIMMERMANN: SO MOVED.

>> C. COMPTON: I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE'LL GET TO THE DISCUSSION IN JUST A MOMENT.

IT'S BEEN MOVED BY TRUSTEE BRAVO.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN SECONDED BY TRUSTEE RITTER.

DISCUSSION?

>> C. COMPTON: A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT BOTHERED ME ABOUT THIS.

THE URGENCY ALL OF A SUDDEN TO GET THIS DONE.

AND [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I CAN'T HEAR YOU TRUSTEE COMPTON.

>> C. COMPTON: I'M SORRY, I TOOK A LOOK AT [INDISCERNIBLE] AND LISTENED TO THE WHOLE THING.

I DON'T KNOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE IS SUCH URGENCY NOW AND IT POPPED UP ON THE AGENDA WHEN I WAS NOT EXPECTING IT TO COME BACK.

NUMBER TWO, THE RESOLUTION, IT

[00:05:06]

SAID THEY TOOK IT TO [INDISCERNIBLE] AND CERTIFICATES AND SO FORTH.

AND I DON'T SEE THAT THAT'S A GUARANTEE, SINCE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DONE BEFORE.

AS ONE ADDITIONAL AMENITY.

AND EVEN WHEN I LOOKED AT THE POWER POINT PRESENTATION, AND I'M SAYING THIS BASED ON, YOU KNOW, STUDY AND RESEARCH THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY REAL NUMBERS THAT CAN SAY THIS SHOULD BE DONE.

WE CAN TRY TO GET IT DONE.

IT PUTS EVERYBODY UNDER A LOT OF PRESSURE TO MAKE PROGRESS.

BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S [INDISCERNIBLE] IN AND OUT] AND THE THIRD THINK ABOUT THIS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT MY VOTE IS NOT NEEDED TO PASS THIS BECAUSE YOU NEED FOUR VOTES TO GET IT DONE.

[INDISCERNIBLE] AND THAT'S FINE.

I WAS INCLINED TO VOTE FOR IT FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

BECAUSE IT CONTINUES TO COME UP YEAR AFTER YEAR SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD.

MY INCLINATION WAS LET'S TRY ON THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, THEY ARE INTERESTED FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER IN TRYING IT.

MOST OF OF THE INFORMATION IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO MAKE MONEY OR I DON'T HAVE THE CLEAR PICTURE OF HOW YOU ARE PROPOSING TO STRUCTURE IT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE URE [INDISCERNIBLE] THOSE THREE THINGS OUT] MY POSITION.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THANK YOU, TRUSTEE COMPTON.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? YES, TRUSTEE ZIMMERMANN.

>> D. ZIMMERMANN: IN THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD IT SEEMS THERE IS A SET OF QUESTIONS TO SUBMITTING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THOSE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED YET.

THE CHALLENGES TO ONE COLLEGE.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THOSE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

AND THERE IS BENEFITS THEY SAY BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THE BENEFITS WERE PROVEN.

AT THE POINT WE'VE GOT STUDENTS FROM RICHLAND, WITH THE AMOUNT OF COLLEGE HOURS.

IF THEY COME BACK AND WE'RE ONE COLLEGE, DOES THAT COUNT? DO THEY GET TO SAY, YEAH, BECAUSE WE WILL CHANGE THE ENTITY OF RICHLAND TO NO LONGER BE IN RICHLAND.

IT WILL BE WHATEVER WE BECOME UNDER THE ONE ENTITY AS FAR AS LEGACY STUDENTS, AS FAR AS FEDERAL FUNDING, THAT QUESTION WASN'T ANSWERED.

IF WE HAVE SEVEN COLLEGES, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE HAVE ONE, DO WE GET FEDERAL SEVEN TIMES AT THE APPLE OR WE GET ONE CHANCE AT THE APPLE ECAUSE WE'RE ONE COLLEGE? BECAUSE WE DIDN'T FIX OUR [INDISCERNIBLE].

IT SEEMS TO ME WE'RE TURNING EVERYTHING UPSIDE DOWN, INSIDE OUT AND BACKWARDS.

ALL OF A SUDDEN BECAUSE WE DIDN'T -- WE'RE SUPPOSED TO INARE COME UP WITH A COMPUTER SYSTEM THAT WILL ALLOW US TO KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING.

IF WE FIX OUR [INDISCERNIBLE] EXACTLY THE SAME AS IF WE CONTINUE AS WE ARE NOW WITHOUT ALL OF THE MAJOR UPSET AND CONCERNS.

MAYBE WE DON'T NEED SEVEN OF EVERYTHING.

BUT AT THE POINT WE GO TO ONE ACCREDITATION, THAT PUTS ALL OUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET.

THAT SCARES ME BECAUSE WE'RE NOT USED TO DOING CAN THAT.

WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT WHEN SEVEN COLLEGES DO THINGS SEVEN DIFFERENT WAYS, WE DON'T HAVE SOMEONE WHO KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT TO DO THIS TIME TO PUT IN FOR A SINGLE ACCREDITATION.

THERE IS SO MANY QUESTIONS.

THERE WAS TUESDAY'S BEGINNING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MONTH AND

[00:10:03]

THESE QUESTIONS HAVEN'T BEEN ANSWERED TO MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THANK YOU, TRUSTEE ZIMMERMANN.

TRUSTEE RITTER, JUST A MOMENT.

IN TERMS OF URGENCY, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION INTERMITTENTLY FOR SEVERAL YEARS, ACCELERATED FOR THE PAST TWO .

IN FACT, SOME TRUSTEES ASKED WHY DO WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT.

IT'S TIME TO ACT.

WE'VE PRETTY MUCH GOTTEN TO THE POINT WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE IN THE DIFFERENT AREAS.

A BIG ONE BEING THE CONSULTANT GROUP STUDY AND WHAT THAT REVEALED.

TRUSTEE RITTER.

>> P. RITTER: AFTER THE PRESENTATION AND SEEING FROM THE CHANCELLOR ON UNIFIED ACCREDITATION, THE BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES, I CAME OF THAT FEELING THAT WE GOT TO ACT NOW.

I MEAN, THE PROCESS OF SEPARATE ACCREDITATION WHERE COLLEGES HAS BECOME A BARRIER TO STUDENT SUCCESS.

THERE ARE NUMBERS PRESENTED TO US, WHICH WE HAD NO REASON TO QUESTION.

THERE ARE OVER 1300 STUDENTS DENIED DEGREES.

WE WOULD HAVE RECEIVED THEM IF WE HAD UNIFIED ACCREDITATION.

IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE FACT THERE ARE GOING TO BE EFFICIENCIES THROUGH THE UNIFIED ACCREDITATION OVER TIME THAT NEED TO BE WORKED THROUGH IN A THOUGHTFUL AND DELIBERATE WAY, WE BEGAN DOING THAT TODAY IN THE DIALOGUE AS A BOARD.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE RESOURCES TO PULL FROM STUDENTS SUCCESS AND THINGS LIKE PATHWAYS AND SO FORTH IF WE MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION.

THERE IS NO COMPELLING REASON I HAVE HEARD WHY WE SHOULD WAIT ONE MORE MINUTE IN TERMS OF PURSUING UNIFIED ACCREDITATION AS A POLICY OF THIS IS BOARD.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? TRUSTEE COMPTON.

>> C. COMPTON: THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY BECAUSE MS. ZIMMERMANN'S COMMENT THAT WE DO HAVE SEVEN COLLEGES AND SEVEN DIFFERENT IDENTITIES.

AND I DON'T REMEMBER, YOU CAN REMIND ME, OUT] TO THE FACT THAT WE DON'T WANT TO OUT] UNDER EACH COLLEGE NEEDS TO KEEP ITS IDENTITY IN SOME WAY IN TRYING TO [INDISCERNIBLE] DCCCD OR AN INSTITUTION.

IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: CHANCELLOR ASKED ME -- ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM THE TRUSTEES?

>> ONE, AND THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS.

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: I WANT TODAY MENTION ONE UPDATE SINCE WE TALKED ON AUGUST 2ND.

THE DATE ON THIS.

WHEN DR. LONGEN AND I MET WITH THE FOLKS IN ATLANTA, TALKED TO US ABOUT THE NEED TO REALLY DO A PARALLEL TRACK WITH OUR BACCALAUREATES.

AND THIS AT THE SAME TIME.

BY -- AMAZING GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT CAN EASILY GET THIS DONE BY SEPTEMBER 1.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS A PIECE OF INFORMATION THEY CLASSIFIEDED FOR US, I BELIEVE FIVE OR FOUR OF THE COLLEGES, FIVE ARE SUBMITTING REPORTS THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE COMMISSION IN DECEMBER.

AS WE LOOK INTO THAT WE REALIZE THERE IS A BIT OF UNKNOWN REALIZE, WE WOULD NOT KNOW HOW THE COMMISSION WAS REACTING TO THOSE OTHER FIVE OR FOUR THAT ARE COMING IN.

AFTER DECEMBER, WE WILL KNOW AND CAN WRITE AND ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE ISSUES.

IRONICALLY, IF WE DO IT NOW AND GET THE -- CAN ADDRESS THINGS TO BE RESOLVED AT THE DECEMBER MEETING, THEN THAT WOULD DELAY US EVEN FURTHER IN THE PROCESS.

SO WHILE WE'RE GOING TO GET THE PAPERWORK PREPARED, WE'LL SUBMIT IT IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEPTEMBER 1.

SO THAT THE SAC'S FOLKS CAN GIVE US FEEDBACK.

THAT MEANS IT WILL NOT BE HEARD UNTIL JUNE BY SACS AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

THE VISIT WILL OME AFTER THAT FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION IN DECEMBER OF 2020.

[00:15:02]

I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH -- WHILE IT IT DOES NOT ADDRESS A TIMELINE IN THE RESOLUTION, I WANTED TO BE CLEAR WHY WE FELT THE NEED TO PULL BACK BECAUSE WE THINK IT'S A RISK NOT FOR OUR LACK OF ABOUT TO GET IT DONE.

WE COULD GET T DONE.

IT'S SIMPLY THE UNKNOWNS HOW THEY ARE GOING TO REACT TO THE OTHER FIVE REPORTS THAT ARE OUT THERE BECAUSE THEY WILL BE TAKEN UP INDIVIDUALLY.

WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT MOST OF THEM.

BUT A COUPLE OF THINGS WE NEED TO ADDRESS WHEN WE DO THE FINAL SUBMISSION.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: AS TO --

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: WELL, I THINK WE LOSE TWO YEARS IF WE -- I'M MORE WORRIED ABOUT US GETTING AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND LOSING TWO YEARS.

WHEN THEY KICK IT BACK THEY REFUSES TO TAKE ANYTHING ELSE UNTIL OUR ISSUES ARE RESOLVED.

IRONICALLY, EVEN AS WE TRY TO APPROVE, THEY WON'T ACCEPT THAT UNTIL THEY HAVE RESOLVED THE INSTITUTIONS, EVEN IF THEY DON'T EXIST IN THE CURRENT STATE INTO THE FUTURE.

I'M NOT SAYING IT MAKES SENSE.

I'M EXPLAINING THE PROCESS WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH TO DO THIS.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: IT IS A BUREAUCRACY, SAC.

>> WE HAVE THE OPTION OF [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: NO.

>> C. COMPTON: WHAT ARE WE? ARE YOU SAYING -- WELL, LET ME BACK UP.

THE WAY [INDISCERNIBLE] CUTTING IN AND OUT] THE RESOLUTION AND A [INDISCERNIBLE] SAYING AT THIS POINT IT IS OUR INTENT TO MOVE TO --

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: IT IS NOT ANYTHING UNTIL WE [INDISCERNIBLE] SSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS ACTS ON IT.

AT THAT POINT, A COUPLE OF THINGS, ONCE WE START DOWN THE ROAD OF SUBMITTING THIS, WE DO HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE AND PUT N PLACES.

BECAUSE WHEN THEY COME BACK WITH A VISIT, THEY WILL LOOK AT S NOT AS SEVEN COLLEGES, BUT ONE.

WHERE IN THE PAST WE HAD TO PROVE WE'RE SEVEN INDIVIDUAL COLLEGES, IT'S EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.

WE HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE WE'RE ONE.

SO WE WILL HAVE TO START THAT PROCESS DURING THE TIME BEFORE THE COMMISSION ACTUALLY ACTS ON IT.

CAN YOU CLARIFY FOR ME, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHAT THE FIVE LETTERS IN THE RESOLUTION AND THE PROCESS MOVING FORWARD?

>> SURE, WHEN THE COMMISSION ACTS, EVERY INSTITUTION HAS TO [INDISCERNIBLE] 10 YEAR AND F FIVE-YEAR REVISION, I SEE I GUESS SUBMITTAL FOR THAT.

AND IN THE PROCESS, THINGS CAN BE IDENTIFIED AS RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH MEANS THAT A RECOMMENDATION IS UNSATISFACTORY BY SAC.

YOU CAN'T LET A RECOMMENDATION GO WITHOUT BEING RESOLVED AND SACS IF THEY DON'T AGREE WE RESOLVED THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN DECEMBER AND I'M THINKING BASED ON THE DAIS IT'S HIGHLY PROBABLE THEY WON'T, WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL JUNE.

WHICH WOULD MEAN WE HAVE TO DO THE NEXT SUBMISSION SEPTEMBER 1.

WE CAN GO AHEAD AND RESOLVE THAT AND GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY.

IT SAVES US ABOUT SIX MONTHS IN THE PROCESS IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

THE PROBLEM IS, THEY ONLY MEET TWICE A YEAR, WHICH IS NOT CONVENIENT FOR ANYONE.

AND THEY HAVE GOT DEADLINES FOR THE SUBMITTALS THREE MONTHS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.

[INDISCERNIBLE] KNOW WHEN WE SHOW UP TO THE COMMISSION MEETING WHETHER OR NOT THEY AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: YES?

>> MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THERE IS NO TIMELINE FOR THE CHANCELLOR WITH RESPECT TO TO THIS.

IT'S DIRECTION WE MOVE THE DISTRICT FORWARD TO A UNIFIED COALITION PROCESS.

OBVIOUSLY, THAT PROCESS HAPPENS.

AN EXPRESSION OF INTENT BY THE BOARD THAT WE MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION EXPEDITIOUSLY ASPOSSIBLE.

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: WHICH WOULD AUTHORIZE US TO TAKE THE STEPS NECESSARY AS WE SEE PRUDENT AT THIS TIME.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: VERY GOOD.

THERE BEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 3B1.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY, "AYE."

[00:20:04]

OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT REMINDER.

TRUSTEE ZIMMERMANN.

>> D. ZIMMERMANN: NO.

>> P. RITTER: YES.

>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: YES.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: TRUSTEE COMPTON.

>> C. COMPTON: YES.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: VERY GOOD.

ALL RIGHT.

THAT BEING A A HISTORIC MOMENT AGAIN.

THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOU, FOR YOUR VISION, FOR MOVING -- CAN I FINISH MY REMARKS? FOR THE EMPHASIS WE HAVE ON EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING TO IMPROVE OUR MISSION TO TRANSFORM LIVES AND COMMUNITIES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION.

AND THIS WILL HELP US MOVE US FURTHER ALONG IN FULFILL THE MISSION IN REGARD TO IMPROVING STUDENT OUTCOME.

YES.

>> C. COMPTON: IO CUTTING IN AND OUT] WHEN DID YOU EXPECT TO GET SOME CONCRETE DATA?

>> CONCRETE DATA?

>> C. COMPTON: IN TERMS OF INCREASING DEGREES, CERTIFICATES?

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: WHAT WE SHOW IS CAN SHARE THAT.

WE CAN PULL THAT OUT.

BECAUSE SOME OF THIS HAS BEEN HISTORIC.

WE'LL TRY OUR BEST TO REACH OUT TO PEOPLE THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY HERE.

ONCE YOU GET THROUGH AND YOU TRANSFER ON AND DONE THAT, EVEN THOUGH YOU EARNED THE DEGREE, WE BELIEVE ONCE WE GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS, THOSE INDIVIDUALS WOULD BE ELIGIBLE.

HOWEVER, WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO NOTIFY AND CONTACT THEM.

>> C. COMPTON: THIS RESOLUTION IS Z, Z, AND [INDISCERNIBLE] HAPPEN.

IF WE DO THIS, IF THE PUBLIC ASKS, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THEM SOME DATA THAT SAYS THAT THIS IS A GOOD DECISION.

BECAUSE AS I SAID, WE'RE NOT REALLY HAVING ANYTHING THAT SAYS STUFF.

YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF THE RESEARCH THAT YOU ALL HAVE DONE AND THE DISCUSSIONS AND SO FORTFORTH.

BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING CONCRETE THAT JUSTIFIES THIS DECISION AT SOME POINT.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: QUESTION.

ONCE WE GO TO SINGLE ACCREDITATION, AND THIS MIGHT BE BEEN IN TRUSTEE COMPTON'S ANSWER, AND I APOLOGIZE.

ARE WE ABLE TO GO BACK AND DEGREE FROM US BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE REQUIRED NUMBER FROM ONE COLLEGE, IN AND OUT] NOW YOU CAN GET A DEGREE.

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: THE ANSWER IS YES.

WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THE TRANSITIONS, WE'VE SEEN IT WITH UNIVERSITIES AND OTHERS, IT CREATES THE ABILITY.

BECAUSE NOW, EVEN LOOKING BACKWARDS, THE ACCREDITORS SEE THIS S ONE INSTITUTION.

IT'S FRONT AND BACKWARDS.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THE REASON I ASK IS BECAUSE TRUSTEE COMPTON IS ASKING FOR DATA.

I WOULD IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO TAKE US A COUPLE OF CYCLES FTER WE HAVE BEEN AND OUT] AND OPERATING IN THAT FASHION.

I WOULD IMAGINE THOSE STUDENTS THAT WOULD GO THROUGH ND TELL THEM, THEY CAN GET A DEGREE FROM US.

THAT WOULD BE AN EARLY DATA POINT IN TERMS OF THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE.

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: WE CAN NOTIFY CURRENT YEAR STUDENTS IN THAT SITUATION.

I MEAN, I BELIEVE I'M CORRECT.

WE HAVE ABOUT 521 STUDENTS RIGHT NOW ENROLLED TODAY READY TO GRADUATE, EXCEPT THEY CAN'T.

SO WE CAN IDENTIFY THOSE.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: EXCELLENT.

ALL RIGHT.

DO WE NEED AN EXECUTIVE SESSION?

>> CHANCELLOR MAY: NO, I THINK WE'RE OOD.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE'RE ADJOURNED.

>> CHAIR D. FLORES: AND WE DON'T

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.