[1. Certification of Notice Posted for the Meeting]
[00:00:15]
>> 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.
[2. Discussion on BCG (LOCAL) Board Internal Organization - Board Evaluation]
CHANCELLOR.>> I CERTIFY THAT THE NOTICE FOR THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ACCORDING TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE 551.054.
WOULD YOU ADDRESS THAT, PLEASE.
I LISTENED TO THE COMMENTS AND THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD THAT WE HAD AT THE LAST GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING IN SEPTEMBER.
AND ATTEMPTED TO CRAFT SOME LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE TIMELINE FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE EVALUATION ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
IT IS A REQUIREMENT OF SACSCOC ACCREDITATION AND BOARD POLICY THIS BOARD DO A SELF-EVALUATION ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
WHAT THIS AMENDMENT PURPORTS TO DO IS HAVE THE SELF-EVALUATION BE CONDUCTED DURING SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER OF EVERY CALENDAR YEAR WITH A VIEW TOWARDS COMPLETION NO LATER THAN OCTOBE.
THE THOUGHT THERE WAS A REFLECTION OF WHAT THE DISCUSSION WAS.
IF THAT CAN BE DONE IN THE FALL BASED UPON A RECOMMENDATION FOR A PROCESS TO BE FOLLOWED, THE COMPLETION MAY INFORM SOME OF THE DISCUSSION T THAT WILL BE HD IN THE SPRING WHEN THE CHANCELLOR'S ANNUAL EVALUATION IS DONE.
I WOULD BE OPEN TO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT BCG LOCAL.
THAT WAS AN EFFORT TO CRAFT LANGUAGE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT I HEARD AT THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: THAT MEANS WE CAN DO IT THREE OR FOUR TIMES A YEAR?
IT'S REQUIRED ONE TIME A YEAR.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: THE POINT WE REMOVE AT LEAST, THAT TAKES THE QUESTION OUT OF IT IF WE TAKE IT ANNUALLY.
>> YES, THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT.
CERTAINLY, HAVING THE -- THAT IS EXISTING LANGUAGE IN BLACK.
WE COULD CHANGE IT TO SAY, ANNUALLY.
THE BOARD SHALL CONDUCT A SELF-EVALUATION AND BOARD MEMBER PERFORMANCE WHICH WOULD BE FINE.
THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW.
AT LEAST ANNUALLY WOULD MEAN THIS BOARD COULD ENGAGE IN MULTIPLE SELF-EVALUATIONS IF IT WISHED TO.
>> DESCRIBE AT LEAST TO BE CAPITALIZED NNUALLY.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WHY NOT THREE, FOUR, FIVE TIMES A YEAR.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: IT SOUNDS LIKE FUN.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: I HAVE A COMMENT.
I KNOW THE AGENDA REVIEW I ASKED YOU TO PUT A DEFINITE DATE.
BUT IT IS SAY THE SUMMARY MAYBE PRESENTED NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 31ST.
IF WE DO THE SELF-EVALUATION IN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, IT'S NOT GOING TO GIVE TIME THAT BY OCTOBER 31ST, THE SUMMARY IS PRESENTED.
SO I WOULD SUGGEST WE STRIKE THAT LANGUAGE AS LONG AS WE HAVE SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, I WOULD IMAGINE NOVEMBER OR NO LATER THAN THE DECEMBER, THE SUMMARY WOULD BE PRESENT TODAY THE BOARD.
WITH THAT, OF COURSE, THIS IS NOT ON THE BOARD AGENDA, NOR IS THE NEXT ONE.
THIS IS THE TIME TO DO THAT SCRIVENER WORK.
YOU DON'T WANT TO, IN FACT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT PUT LANGUAGE THAT IS SO ABSOLUTE, I'LL TAKE OUT --
[00:05:01]
DEADLINE?>> D. ZIMMERMANN: IIF WE MISS OR OWN DEADLINE, THAT'S ADDUCESY.
THE BOARD SELF-EVALUATION SHALL CONSIDER SUCH ITEMS AS ROLE RECOGNITION RELATIONSHIP ARE OTHERS.
I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHERS.
>> THAT IS IN BOARD POLICY CURRENTLY AND HAS BEEN SINCE THE LAST TIME THIS BOARD POLICY WAS AMENDED IN 2016.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S BEEN IN THERE.
I DIDN'T ADDRESS IT IN THE DRAFT.
IF THE COMMITTEE WANTED ME TO LOOK AT THAT, WE COULD.
I THINK RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHERS, REFERS NOT ONLY TO THE RELATIONSHIP IN AND AMONG BOARD MEMBERS IN TERMS OF OLLEGIALITY AND OTHERS AND THE CHANCELLOR AND OTHERS AS WELL.
>> THESE ARE NOT PRESCRIPTIVE BUT MORE OF EXAMPLES HERE.
AND POTENTIALLY WE'RE RECOMMENDING WE NOT PUT A SPECIFIC INSTRUMENT AND POLICY WHAT RATHER THAN THE BOARD CAN DECIDE YOU IKE IT, KEEP IT.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: I HAD A QUESTION.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: IT'S JUST SUCH AS, INSTEAD OF, SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THAT.
IT GIVES EXAMPLES OF WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THE EVALUATION WILL CONSIDER.
AND WERE THOSE IN TERMS OF THE INSTRUMENT WE COMPLETED, WERE THOSE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHERS?
>> THIS IS DEALING WITH THE BOARD, NOT INDIVIDUALS ON THE BOARD, I THINK.
IT'S MORE OF A -- THE SELF-EVALUATION OF THE BOARD AS A WHOLE.
INDEED, THIS BOARD IN ITS OFFICIAL CAPACITY DOES HAVE -- IT HOLDS A PARTICULAR POSITION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND WITHIN OTHERS WITH WHOM IT INTERACTS, IT'S NOT TARGETING ANYBODY PARTICULARLY EITHER.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: IT TALKS ABOUT PERFORMANCE OF BOARD MEETINGS, SELF IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES.
IT SEEMED A LITTLE BIT NEBULOUS.
>> I THINK THAT'S THE BOARD AS A WHOLE.
TALKING ABOUT HOW DOES A BOARD FUNCTION? YOU'VE HAD A FACILITATED WORK SESSION WITH ACCT ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO.
THOSE THINGS I THINK ARE INSTRUCTIVE OF THE TYPE OF THINGS YOU WOULD EVALUATE YOURSELVES ON.
>> REFERENCING THE CHANCELLOR'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW.
I WAS THINKING AFTER HAVING FILLED OUT THE BOARD SELF-EVALUATION FORM HOW DIFFERENT OUR OWN SELF-EVALUATION IS FROM THE CHANCELLOR.
OUR SELF-EVALUATION IS ALMOST ENTIRELY PROCESS AND PROCEDURE AND RELATIONAL, IF YOU WILL IN TERMS OF OURSELVES, CHANCELLOR AND EACH OTHER.
AND THE CHANCELLOR PERFORMANCE REVIEW, THE WAY IT'S INVOLVED, I THINK IT'S OUTSTANDING.
IT'S REALLY, THE ANNUAL STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE DISTRICT.
WHAT AM I GOING TO BE AND BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR.
IT SEEMS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THOSE TWO OPPOSITE PARADIGMS OF PERFORMANCE REVIEWS, TOTALLY PROCESS ORIENTED, ADVANCING SOMEONE-- THERE IS A CONVERSATION THE BOARD MIGHT WANT TO HAVE AN AN ANNUAL BASIS.
WHAT IS IT ABOUT OUR PROCESS WE WANT TO SPECIFICALLY IMPROVE? AND FOR EXAMPLE, I THINK THIS AND BY THE WAY THE CHANCELLOR'S SECRETARY OF THE BOARD, THE PRIMARY STAFF TO THE BOARD, HE'S THE ONE PERSON WE HIRE.
EXAMPLES OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS IN THAT SPACE WOULD BE THINGS LIKE CHARTER AND LAUNCHER GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT KIND OF HAPPENED.
BUT YOU KNOW, WE KNOW WE NEED TO DEVELOP A STRONG NWEB PROGRAM IN THE CONTEXT OF THE $1 MILLION BOND.
LAST MEETING WE DISCUSSED THE NOTION OF WE WANT TO CREATE FINANCIAL PARAMETERS AND STANDARDS AROUND OUR UTILIZATION OF THE RAINY DAY FUND.
I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE TO REFLECT ON ON AN ANNUAL REBASIS.
WE'RE GOING TO NEED THE CHANCELLOR AND STAFF REPORT TO DO THESE THINGS.
THERE ARE THINGS, I THINK THERE IS A CONVERSATION WE NEED TO HAVE BETWEEN THE TWO MODALITIES OF PERFORMANCE REVIEWS AT THE BOARD LEVEL THAT WILL HELP US
[00:10:01]
BE BETTER.I DON'T KNOW GOOD IT MAKES SENSE.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: A THOUGHT THERE.
WE DO SOMETHING ELSE THAT IS NOT REFERENCED IN THE FALL WHEN WE DO THE OARD'S PLANNING.
WE GET INTO MANY OF THE ISSUES AS PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
I THINK REALISTICALLY, BOTH ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO US.
ON THE ONE HAND HOW THE BOARD CHOOSES TO EVALUATE ITSELF IS UP TO THE BOARD.
FOR GUIDANCE WE NEED THAT STRATEGIC VISION OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PRIORITIZE GOING FORWARD. THE TWO OBVIOUSLY MUST BE SOMEHOW RELATED.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, BOTH ARE IMPORTANT.
ONE IS I WOULD SAY YOU ARE RIGHT.
I THINK ONE IS MORE PROCESS AND ONE IS MORE DIRECTIONAL.
>> P. RITTER: I'M NOT SUGGESTING THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE A SEPARATE PLAN BUT THERE IS ELEMENTS IN OUR ROLE IN SPECIFIC THINGS WE WANT TO SPIKE OUT AND CHECK THE BOX AN ON ANNUAL BASIS AND HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE FOR ENSURING THE PROGRAM OR FINANCIAL STANDARDS OR GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE WHERE WE SEE A GAP AND A NEED FOR THAT.
AND WE'RE REACTIVE AND WE DO REACT APPROPRIATELY I THINK.
BEING MORE INTENTIONAL AND FORWARD LOOKING.
>> AS THE CONVENING OF THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE IS A GOOD PLACE TO HAVE THOSE KIND OF CONVERSATIONS.
NOT SO MUCH AT THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW.
I THINK COMPILING IDEAS AND INITIATIVES DURING THE MEETINGS OR THE TIME THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETS, THE EVALUATION IS MORE HOW DID WE DO ON THOSE? SO AS PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN AS THE BEGINNING AND THE PERFORMANCE THE END, MAYBE THROUGH THE COURSE OF THERE MEETINGS WE HAVE SURVEY, WHAT THINGS DO YOU THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT MORE? THE IDEAS YOU MENTIONED TO PUT THAT AS PART OF OUR ONGOING CONVERSATION THROUGH THE COMMITTEE MEETING AS OPPOSED TO PART OF THE PERFORMANCE.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE CAN DO THAT AS PART OF OUR PLANNING? THAT WE HAVE ANNUALLY OR TWICE A YEAR SOMETIMES TO JUST CARVE OUT TIME FOR OUR THINGS WE WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE IN THE EVALUATION, IS THAT ALL RIGHT?
>> P. RITTER: ONE OF THE TEAMS THE MANAGEMENT TEAM CHOSE TO DO WAS THEY HAD AN A LIST.
A LIST OF 10 TO 12 PRIORITIES FOR THE TEAM S A WHOLE.
AND THERE WERE THINGS THAT WERE LOOKED AT EVERY MEETING.
MAYBE NOT ANYTHING -- EVERYTHING ON THE LIST WAS DISCUSSED EVERY MEETING.
BUT EVERYTHING WAS TO THE POINT IT CAME OFF THE LIST.
KIND OF A PARLAY LIST MIGHT BE A WAY TO GET AT THE SPACE.
I THINK IT'S AN EVOLVING FORCE.
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: I THINK THERE IS A NEED TO HAVE A SEPARATE CONVERSATION ABOUT THOSE THINGS.
AND HAVING A LIST OF GROUP OF IDEAS.
OR EVERYBODY PUTS SOMETHING TOGETHER.
WE GOT FOUR PEOPLE INTERESTED IN THIS PARTICULAR THING.
YOU WERE MENTIONING OTHER IDEAS AS WELL.
>> P. RITTER: IN THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: I THINK SO.
>> I WOULD TAG ON AND SUBMIT THAT THE LANGUAGE IN EXISTING POLICY THAT HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED IN ADDITION TO WHAT I PROPOSED WOULD ALLOW THAT DISCUSSION TO
[3. Discussion on BCA (LOCAL) Board Internal Organization - Board Officers and Officials]
OCCUR ON AN ANNUAL BASE.IT TALKS ABOUT THE BOARD CONDUCTING A SELF-EVALUATION AND BOARD AND BOARD MEMBER PERFORMANCE.
IT COULD BE MORE OPPOSITIONAL OR PROCEDUREERALLY OR PROCESS FOCUSED OR HOW ARE WE MEETING THE MISSIONS AND OBJECTIVES.
THE NEXT SENTENCE I ADDED TALKS ABOUT THE BOARD GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE SELECTING THE TOOLS AND METHODS RECOMMENDED.
YOU MIGHT DECIDE TO DO AN A LIST AND T THAT WILL BE THE BOARD SELF-EVALUATION AND CHECK OFF ITEMS. I THINK IT'S ALL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS.
>> THIS IS THE OTHER POLICY THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT LAST MONTH'S GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING.
SPECIFICALLY, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF CHANGES.
ONE WAS A CHANGE MADE BY TRUST BRAVO THAT TALKED ABOUT CHANGING THE TERM CHAIRMAN TO CHAIRPERSON.
THE OTHER TO ESTABLISH A ERM LIMIT ON THE CHAIR ROLE AND THE WAY I HAVE CRAFTED THIS IS BASED UPON THE DISCUSSION I HEARD.
WAS THAT A PERSON ELECTED TO THE OFFICE OF CHAIR COULD SERVE TWO CONSECUTIVE TERMS, FOUR YEARS.
AFTER WHICH TIME THEY WOULD BE INELIGIBLE TO SERVE WITHOUT STEPPING AWAY FROM THE ROLE.
I PUT LANGUAGE IN THAT SAID, IF NOBODY ELSE WOULD SERVE AS CHAIR
[00:15:03]
AND THE ONLY WILLING PERSON COULD BE THE PERSON WHO WOULD BE DISQUALIFIED, THAT PERSON COULD SERVE.THE OTHER ADDITION, IS I RECITED EXISTING STATE LAW.
I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO SET THE CONTEXT FOR TERMS OF OFFICERS THAT OFFICERERIZE OFFIE ELECTED THE FIRST REGULAR MEETING FOLLOWING ELECTIONS IN EVEN NUMBERED YEARS.
AND THEN THEY SERVE FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM.
WHICH IS WHAT THE STATE LAW REQUIRES.
WE CAN'T CHANGE WHEN THAT ELECTION OCCURS.
IT OCCURS IN THE EDUCATION CODE IN THAT FORMAT.
I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> P. RITTER: IS THE TERM CHAIRMAN USED IN OTHER REGULATIONS AND SHOULD WE AMEND THIS TO BE A GLOBAL CHANGE ON ALL OUR POLICIES TO REFLECT THAT?
I THINK THERE ARE ENOUGH OF POLICIES THAT ARE OLD ENOUGH THEY ARE REFLECTIVE OF LANGUAGE THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN VOGUE AT THAT TIME.
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: A RECOMMENDATION WE DO A GLOBAL --
>> I DON'T THINK IT REQUIRES ACTION OF THE BOARD.
IT'S MORE OF A SCRIVENER CHANGE.
WE NEED TO GO THROUGH AND DO A SEARCH AND SAY WHERE THE TERM CHAIRMAN APPEARS, IT NEEDS TO
[Items 4 & 5]
BE CHAIRPERSON OR CHAIR AND CHAIR IS CCEPTABLE.I DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL REQUIRE US TO HAVE THOSE POLICIES APPROVED AS AMENDMENTS.
I WOULD NOT WANT TO DO THAT, NOR TO MY OFFICE.
AND WE'LL HAVE THOSE CHANGES MADE. BECAUSE IT'S THE -- EXACTLY.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE TOPICS THAT SURFACED DURING OUR SESSION WITH PAM FISHER, YOU ALL KIND OF WANTED THOSE REWORKED.
STAFF LOOKED AT THAT AND REWORKED THEM UNDER THREE BROAD CATEGORIES.
IF YOU ARE OKAY WITH THE WAY THEY HAVE BEEN CATEGORIZED UNDER THOSE THREE, AND THEN ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT?
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: ONLY ONE QUESTION I HAD.
I DID FIND-- I FOUND SOMETHING I'M NOT SURE IS EVEN A WORD.
IT'S THE LAST LINE, FIRST WORD IN THE LAST LINE.
>> I HATE TO KNOW THE FACT, IT IS.
IT'S WHETHER OR NOT A DUTY IS IN FACT COULD BE DELEGATED BY SOMEBODY TO SOMEBODY ELSE.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: ISN'T THAT DELEGATABLE?
>> IT MAY BE ONE OF THOSE WORDS YOU SEE IT USED IN TWO WORDS.
BUT ERTAINLY, I HAVE MADE UP WORDS BEFORE.
THIS WOULDN'T BE THE LAST TIME.
>> SOMEONE WHO KNOWS ENGLISH BETTER THAN GENERAL COUNSEL.
BUT THAT IS WHAT IT REFERS TO.
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: DO YOU THINK WITHIN THESE THREE VARIABLES WE CAN HAVE ENOUGH LEEWAY TO INCLUDE WHAT PHIL WAS BRING ACTION IN TERMS OF SETTING OF ITEMS OF DISCUSSION.
WITHIN THE REVIEW OF CURRENT POLICIES COMING UP WITH AN A LIST, IF YOU WILL, FITS WITHIN THIS PARAMETER? ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT?
>> I THINK IF WE LISTED IT, IT WOULD BE TOO LONG.
THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A SUMMARY.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THE ONLY THING ON THAT, TRUSTEE JAMESON AND RITTER, IS WHEN WE WOULD GET TO HAT.
WHAT IS THE INTENTION OR THE THINKING OF WHEN WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THESE THREE CATEGORIES AND THEN THE ITEMS -- THE TOPICS THAT FALL UNDER.
>> THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION OF THE POTENTIAL TRAINING SESSIONS YOU WANTED TO SCHEDULE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.
THESE COULD BE SPREAD OUT ON A QUARTERLY BASIS.
AND BASED ON THE SUBJECT MATTER, EITHER BRING IN EITHER IDENTIFY CERTAIN POLICIES THAT FALL UNDER THAT SUBJECT MATTER AS WELL AS BRINGING CERTAIN SPEAKERS UNDER THAT SUBJECT MATTER.
IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT THE COMMITTEE'S INTENTIONS ARE.
[00:20:01]
IT WOULD BE DONE ON A QUARTERLY BASIS.>> THAT IS POTENTIAL THINGS --
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE'LL DUS THAT IN A MOMENT.
RIGHT NOW UNDER THIS, THE QUESTION IS THERE ARE SEVERAL TOPICS UNDER EACH CATEGORY.
SO WHEN DO WE BEGIN TO DISCUSS THEM? I KNOW PHIL WANT TO DISCUSS OUR HR PRACTICE.
APPROVING MPLOYMENT CONTRACTS.
AND DO WE NEED AS A BOARD TO CONTINUE TO DO HAT? FOR US TO ARRIVE AT A DECISION, WHEN DO WE SCHEDULE A DISCUSSION? MY THINKING WAS THE NEXT PLANNING MEETING IN NOVEMBER.
>> P. RITTER: IS TEAMS THE TWO SESSIONS WE'VE HAD WITH ACCT FOLKS I THOUGHT IT WAS OUTSTANDING.
AND I NOT THAT THEY REALLY HELPED US AS A BOARD ADDRESS TOPICS 1 AND 2 IN THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE TOPICS .
IN FACT, YOU COULD ALMOST SAY WE DO THAT TWICE A YEAR.
IT SEEMS, THE WAY THIS IS ME, IT SEEMS WE HAVE MORE OF A OPPORTUNITY, AND PERHAPS AN A LIST AROUND THE REVIEW OF CURRENT POLICY TYPE OF THING.
WHAT ARE THE LIST OF POLICIES WE NEED TO GET AT.
SOME COULD BE THINGS IDENTIFIED OR PERHAPS CONSIDERED IN OTHER COMMITTEES.
POTENTIALLY, I MEAN, YOU NOW, JOHN ROBERTSON WOULD BE THE EST GUY ON THE STAFF TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ON FINANCIAL PARAMETERS ON THE USE OF RAINY DAY FUNDS.
WE KNOW THAT ISSUE IS ON THE LIST AND WE KNOW WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE DEALT WITH.
MADAM CHAIR, I OFFER IF WE EEP DOING WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH ACCT, WE'RE GOOD.
AND WE SHOULD PRIORITIZE THE PRECIOUS TIME WE HAVE.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THEN THE QUESTION COMES UP, THE ONE IN THE SHEET THAT WAS PASSED AROUND, THESE ARE TOPICS THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TO HAVE ON, NOT NECESSARILY A MONTHLY BASIS, BUT ON A MONTHLY IN TERMS OF WHEN THEY ARE SPREAD OUT.
BUT AGAIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR, THE ISSUE YOU HAVE AS TO EMPLOYEE CONTRACT AT THE NOVEMBER PLANNING WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION ON THAT?
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: WHICH WOULD BE POLICY.
>> P. RITTER: YES, FOR NEXT MONTH.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE MAKE SURE WE SCRATCH THAT OFF THE LIST.
WE HAD THE DISCUSSION TO OME TO A DECISION, ET CETERA. I NOTICED THE EVALUATION ON THE ACCT CONSULTANTS ON SPECIFIC TOPICS HAVE RECEIVED GOOD, SOLID EVALUATIONS.
SO I WANTED TO ASK YOU WHAT ARE SOME ADDITIONAL TOPICS THAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO GET TRAINING ON OR ADDITIONAL KIND OF DEEP DIVE ON SO THAT THEN WE CAN SCHEDULE THAT.
THESE ARE SOME SUGGESTED TOPICS.
FOR EXAMPLE, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IN TERMS OF OUR POLICY ON ETHICS THAT WE'RE DOING WELL.
HOW IS THE POLICY BENCHMARKED IN BEST PRACTICES OUT THERE.
AND THEN, WE ARE IN THE STATE OF TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE IN REGARDS TO GOING TO SINGLE ACCREDITATION, IN REGARDS TO WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH FACULTY LOAD, THE BOOK, WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH BOOKS FOR STUDENT, ET CETERA. SO MAYBE HAVE SOME GUIDELINES, BEST PRACTICES WHEN AN INSTITUTION IS UNDERGOING TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE.
SO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE KIND OF ON TRACK WITH WHAT WE AS A BOARD SHOULD BE LOOKING AT AND SHOULD BE MONITORING AND WE'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR THAT.
SO IS THAT A TOPIC THAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A PRESENTATION ON?
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: WE HAVE A RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS HERE.
>> P. RITTER: ONE OF THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES FROM TRANSFORMATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO IS YOU KNOW, ARE WE PREPARED TO MANAGE THE COMPLIANCE OF THAT TRANSFORMATION? JUST CONTACTS, GRANT'S ADMINISTRATION, YOU KNOW, ALL THE STUDENT AID REQUIREMENTS, THE VETERANS REQUIREMENTS, THE LIST GOES -- YOU HAVE ITERALLY DOZENS OF PEOPLE AND THAT'S THEIR JOB EVERY SINGLE DAY.
[00:25:02]
DISCUSSION AND HELPING US UNDERSTAND AS A BOARD, WE'LL LET YOU LOOK UNDER THE HOOD HOW COMPLICATED IT IS SO WE UNDERSTAND BETTER AND -->> CHAIR D. FLORES: WHO IS MITIGATING RISK IN TERMS OF FINANCIAL AID OR --
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: PROBA.
>> A PART OF IS T IN THE PROCESS OF ENGAGING OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL THAT ARE EXPER SAID IN EACH AREA.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: RISK MANAGEMENT IS AN ADDITIONAL TOPIC? IT'S BEEN TWO YEARS SINCE THE PRESIDENT SAID -- PRESENTED INDIVIDUALLY.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT FITS IN WITH THE SINGLE ACCREDITATION WE'RE GOING THROUGH.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY HELPFUL TO GET A SNAPSHOT OF WHERE THEY ARE AT.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TOO.
THIS WOULD BE PROBABLY ONCE WE'RE INTO THE SPRING WE SEE HOW THINGS ARE GOING AND HAVE A CONVERSATION.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THTHAT WOULD BE IN MARCH WITH OUR PROJECTION NOW.
APRIL, ANY SPECIFIC TOPIC THAT'S NOT ON HERE THAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO DO A DEEP DIVE INTO?
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SECURITY.
COMPUTER SECURITY BECAUSE AT THIS POINT, JUST TALKING ABOUT ITNE CALLS AT MY HOUSE.
WITH MY HUSBAND'S SECURITY CLEARANCE, OPM AS HACKED.
AND AT THIS POINT, WE NOW HAVE COME TO THE POINT THAT ALL OF THE FREEBY SECURITY STUFF IS OFF.
HE'S AT HOME AT HIS VERY MOMENT REDOING EVERY SINGLE PASSWORD WE'VE EVER HAD BECAUSE OPM HAS THAT INFORMATION.
>> CLOSED SESSION TO DO THIS LIKE WE HANDLED IN THE PAST.
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: THAT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS AS AN ORGANIZATION, ALL IT TAKES IS ONE LITTLE CREASE OF LIGHT AND THEY COME IN THE DOOR.
AND IF THEY ARE LOOKING FOR CITIES, THE CITIES THEY HAVE HACKED AREN'T AS BIG AS WE ARE.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: CYBERSECURI.
ANYTHING ELSE FOR APRIL THAT ANYBODY HAS AN INTEREST IN?
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE HAD A POSITION AS A BOARD ON DIFFERENT LEGISLATIVE BILLS THAT ARE BEFORE THE CONGRESS WHERE WE CAN BE ADVOCATES FOR HATEVER IT AFTERS US.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME TYPE OF TRAINING ON LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY IN TERMS OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE TABLE THAT OUR REPRESENTATIVES ARE VOTING ON.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THAT IS AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL? I THINK AT THE STATE EVEL, WE DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB.
>> FRANKLY, IT MOVES SO SLOWLY.
>> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: BUT AS A BOARD WE WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT HOUSE BILL BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE OPPORTUNITIES COMING UP.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: IN APRIL, IT WOULD ADD TO THE NATIONAL ADVOCACY AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: LET'S BE FLEXIBLE BECAUSE WE CAN'T CONTROL THE CALENDAR OF THOSE.
AND THERE IS A COUPLE OF THINGS GOING ON AT THE SENATE RIGHT NOW REGARDING THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT.
WE'RE CERTAIN THE BILL IS GOING TO BE FILED IN THE HOUSE RELATIVE TO SHORT-TERM HEALTH AND THINGS.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: YOU WOULD CHOOSE THE DATE?
IT'S REALLY HARD AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL TO COMMIT UPFRONT TO A BILL BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE CHANGES AND THINGS WE LIKED WE MAY QUICKLY NOT LIKE AND VICE VERSA.
>> P. RITTER: MAYBE PE PEARLA CN LOOK INTO THIS.
I SUSPECT THERE ARE TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES WE CAN ACCESS INDIVIDUALLY.
AND I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT IS OUT THERE.
IF SOME OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS, YOU KNOW, RE OFFERING THAT TYPE OF THING, WE MIGHT CONSIDER TAKING IT AND TRYING TO ACCESS INFORMATION THAT WAY.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: MAYBE YOU DO A SEARCH.
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: I SUSPECT WE GET NOTIFIED NOW.
>> I'LL INCLUDE THEM ON THE MEMO AND CONFERENCES AND STUFF THAT
[00:30:01]
IS OUT THERE.>> CHANCELLOR MAY: MAYBE USH THAT OUT BECAUSE THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF IT.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: MORE AND NOT SO MUCH IN THE PACKET BUT AN EMAIL WITH THE LINKS SO WE CAN CLICK ON THE LINK.
>> ALSO AS PART OF THE OPERATIONAL ROLE WE PLAY WE'RE MEMBERS OF VARIOUS ORGANI ORGANIZATIONS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS, COLLEGE AND COMMUNITY ATTORNEYS.
[6. Discussion on Current Practices of Committee Note Taking and Board Minutes]
WE GET TOPICS.WE WILL SEND THOSE AS WE GET THEM.
THEY MAYBE OF INTEREST TO A BOARD MEMBER AND OFTEN VERY TIMELY AND INTERESTING.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: ANYTHING ELSE? WE'RE AT 1:35 AND WE'RE SLATED TO END AT 1:30.
IF THERE IS ANY TOPIC YOU ARE INTERESTED IN, YOU WANT EITHER TRAINING OR PRESENTATION ON OR A PODCAST ON, LET US KNOW.
WE HAVE A BEGINNING LIST AT LEAST.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH WE WANT TO DISCUSS THAT.
THERE WAS A DISCUSSION LAST GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE MEETING ABOUT HOW GOOD A JOB OR LACK OF A GOOD JOB WITH RESPECT TO NOTE TAKING.
MINUTES AND NOTES OR EVEN BOARD MEETINGS ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE VERBATIM.
IT'S A VERMREFLECTIVE OF THE GENERAL AREAS OF DISCUSSION THAT OCCURRED.
IF SOMEBODY WANT ADMORE COMPLETE PICTURE, THEY COULD RESORT TO THE WEBSITE, WHICH HAS BOTH VIDEO AND AUDIO TRANSCRIPTION, AS WELL AS VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION OF THE MEETINGS.
MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE WE DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB, GINA IS TAKING NOTES.
THOSE PEOPLE REFLECT THE HIGH POINTS THAT ARE DISCUSSED.
IT'S NOT INTENDED TO BE A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTION.
[9. Adjournment]
>> P. RITTER: I'VE NOTICED A HIGHER LEVEL OF DET
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.