[1. Certification of Notice Posted for the Meeting]
[00:00:04]
NOT ONLY SUBCONTRACTORS? >> NO, EXPERIENCE OF WORK THEY HAVE DONE AND THE CAPABILITY. IF THEY HAVE ONLY DONE $5 MILLION PROJECTS AND THEY ARE DOING A 50 MILLION --
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: THANK YOU. >> P. RITTER: ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS? >> CHAIR D. FLORES: HAVE THAT AS
PART OF THE DISCUSSION. >> P. RITTER: THANK YOU.
ONE GAVEL OUT. >> I CALL TO ORDER THE TEXAS BOARD OF TRUSTEES. 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. THE BOARD MAY NOT TAKE FORMAL
[2. Citizens Desiring to Address the Board]
ACTION ON MATTERS NOT PART OF THE OF THE MEETING AGENDA.WE'LL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE. SPEAKERS SHALL ADDRESS THE
[3. Discussion of Board's Role in Employment of Personnel]
PRESENTATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE CHAIR OR THE BOARD COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE. CHANCELLOR, WOULD YOU PLEASE CERTIFY THE NOTICE TO HAVE THE MEETING AND AGENDA ARE ON FILEIN THE OFFICE OF THE CHANCELLOR? >> I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WAS POSTED AS REQUIRED BY THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE
551.054. >> S. WILLIAMS: I HAVE NO CARDS
>> S. WILLIAMS: NO CARDS. OKAY.
THEN WE'LL GO TO DISCUSS THE BOARD'S ROLE IN THE GOVERNANCE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. TO THE COMMITTEE AND BOARD MEMBERS, I'M NOT GOING TO SPEAK AT GREAT LENGTH ABOUT THIS.
BECAUSE THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE.
IT HAS BEEN RAISED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS SO I CAN SET THE TABLES SO TO SPEAK. IT'S RAISEDVIOUS MEETINGS. THE QUESTION, WHETHER OR NOT THE BOARD IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO BE INVOLVED IN THE DECISIONS REGARDING IRING OF FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATORS IN THE DISTRICT.
THAT'S WHAT POLICY CURRENTLY PROVIDES.
THE SHORT ANSWER IS TEXAS LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE THE BOARD, IT IS NOT PROHIBITED FROM DOING SO. WHICH IS WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY BUT IT'S ALSO NOT REQUIRED. 130.082 OF THE EDUCATION CODE GIVES THIS BOARD GENERAL AUTHORITY AND POWER.
IT CONTAINS A PROVISION, THE DELEGABLE DUTY PROVISION, ANY DUTY OR POWER THE BOARD POSSESSES IS A DELEGABLE DUTY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THOSE RESERVED BY STATUTATORY INACCREMENTS OF THE BOARD. THE AUTHORITY FOR HIRING AND FIRING HAS BEEN FOUND BY COURT CASES AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS WHICH IS DELEGABLE. IT CAN BE DEL DELEGATE TO THE CHANCELLOR, IN THIS INSTANCE. YOU DON'T NEED -- YOU HEARD FROM EXPERTS IN MY TIME HERE FAR MORE ELOQUENT THAN I AND BETTER PREPARED ABOUT TALKING ABOUT THE ROLE OF A BOARD.
AND THE PROPER FUNCTION OF A BOARD.
I PULLED A OUPLE OF THINGS I THINK ARE IMPORTANT.
WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE BOARD'S ROLE IN SETTING POLICY AND ESTABLISHING THE POLICY FOR THE DISTRICT AND THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OF THE DISTRICT. A.C.C.T. DOES I THINK IT SAYS BETTER THAN I COULD IN A COUPLE OF INSTANCES HERE.
I'LL READ THESE. BECAUSE IT HELPS THE BOARD TO APPRECIATE THE POSITION OF THE BOARD.
A.C.C.T., WELL PERFORMING BOARDS GOVERN AS THE STRATEGIC POLICY LEVEL AND DEVELOP MECHANISMS FOR AVOIDING MICROMANAGEMENT PRESERVING AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE.
THEY HAVE A CHART -- THIS IS ANOTHER PROMULGATION.
BOARDS TYPICALLY RESERVE THESE FUNCTIONS FOR THEMSELVES, SETTING BROAD POLICY PRINCIPLES, APPROVING MAJOR POLICIES, NEW PROGRAMS AND/OR TERMINATING OLD ONCE, RENEWING AND APPROVING STRATEGY AND LONG-TERM FINANCIAL GOALS, SELECTION, OVERSIGHT AND COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT. THE TERM PRESIDENT AND CHANCELLOR ARE USED INTERCHANGEABLY.
APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET RECOMMENDED BY MANAGEMENT.
REPORTING CONTROLS AND ASSESSMENT OF BUSINESS RISK.
AND OVERSIGHT OF THE ENDOWMENT. IF WE HAVE AN ENDOWMENT, WE HAVE
[00:05:04]
A FOUNDATION THAT MANAGES MOST OF THAT PHILANTHROPIC ACTIVITY.THAT SAME FROMMINGIGATION SAYS MANAGEMENT IS GENERALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND STRATEGY, SELECTION AND SUPERVISION OF STAFF, DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BUDGET, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF OPERATING PROCEDURES. WHEN WE START LOOKING T THE QUESTION OF WHAT ROLE SHOULD THE BOARD PLAY IN HIRING DECISIONS? IT'S A QUESTION OF WHAT IS THE PROPER PLACE FOR THE BOARD BASED ON WHAT I WOULD COMMEND TO THE BOARD AS BEING BEST PRACTICES.
AND WHAT IS THE PROPB ROLE FOR MANAGEMENT IN THE DISTRICT IN THOSE AREAS. SENSITIVE TO ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT GO INTO ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER OF THAT.
I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE BOARD TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WHERE THE BOARD SEES ITSELF IN THOSE AREAS.
THE QUESTION WAS RAISED, DOES IT POSE LEGAL LIABILITY FOR THE DISTRICT TO HAVE THE BOARD INVOLVED AT THE LEVEL IT IS CURRENTLY IN THE HIRING DECISION? AND I WOULD BE-- I WOULD TELL YOU THAT IT DOES INDEED PRESENT THE POSSIBILITY OF OR HE SPECTER OF THE ESPONSIBILITY OF LEGAL LIABILITY BECAUSE THERE ARE CERTAIN PROHIBITED THAT THE LAW SAYS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IN MAKING HIRING DECISIONS.
THIS BOARD IS NOT EVIDENT BUT MOTIVATED BY THOSE ILLEGAL MOTIVATIONS, BUT IT'S HARDER TO DEFEND A BOARD WHEN THEY ARE INTIMATELY INVOLVED. IF THEIR MERELY SETTING POLICIES AND THESE ARE THE DECISIONS MADE BY MANAGEMENT AND WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW MANAGEMENT'S SUITABILITY AT THE APPROPRIATE INTERVAL AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT MANAGEMENT IS DOING WHAT THE BOARD IS ASKING IT TO DO, IT'S EASIER TO DEFEND THAT AND SOMEBODY TAKES ISSUE WITH THE HIRING PRACTICE OR A DECISION MADE, MADE AT THE APPROPRIATED, I WOULD SAY APPROPRIATE, MANAGEMENT LEVEL AS OPPOSED TO BOARD LEVEL.
THAT'S A CONSIDERATION AS WELL. WITH THAT BACKGROUND, I WOULD DEFER TO YOU. AS POLICY PRESENTLY EXISTS, THAT WOULD REQUIRE IF THERE WAS TO BE A CHANGE FROM THE WAY THINGS ARE PRESENTLY DONE, IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF CHANGING TWO BOARD POLICIES TO EFFECT THAT CHANGE AND DELEGATE THAT AUTHORITY TO THE CHANCELLOR. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HELP YOU
WITH. >> CHAIR D. FLORES: YOU'VE GOT THAT IN HERE, THE TWO PLACES IN POLICY WHERE THAT EXISTS IN
TERMS OF -- I KNOW YOU HAVE -- >> IT WOULD BE--
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: CHANCELLOR QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES.
>> A CHANGE TO BAA OCAL, THE POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND BFA, WHICH IS THE CHANCELLOR DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
>> S. WILLIAMS: QUESTIONS? >> C. COMPTON: I HAVE SOMETHING I WANT TO SAY. I LISTENED TO PROS AND CONS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF DALLAS TO DO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OVERSIGHT OF THE DISTRICT.
AND WE DETERMINE BASICALLY LEGALLY WHAT WE CAN USE AS MEASURES OR INFORMATION THAT GIVES US THE ABILITY TO EXERCISE SOME OVERSIGHT IN THESE DIFFERENT AREAS.
THE ONLY THING THAT WE ARE VOTING ON IS WE'RE APPROVING A CONTRACT. WE'RE NOT ULTIMATELY MAKING THE DECISION WHO IS HIRED OR NOT HIRED.
CHANCELLOR MAKES THE RECOMMENDATION.
BECAUSE WE DO REPRESENT THE COMMUNITY AND WE MOVE AROUND ALL OVER TOWN, YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN YOU FIND OUT SOMETHING THAT YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR, WASN'T EXPECTING, WHATEVER.
WHAT I SAW WAS SOMETHING THAT SAID, WE HAD GET A RECAP EACH MONTH OF WHAT DECISIONS OR HIRING.
BUT IF YOU ARE JUST GETTING THAT THEN IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE.
SO IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU THE ABILITY TO QUESTION OR ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT ANYTHING HAT HAS HAPPENED.
YOU MIGHT NOT EVEN KNOW THAT, AND MOST CASES WE REALLY DON'T, WHO IS IN THE PROCESS F BEING HIRED.
SO THAT WAS THE SECOND THING. LAWSUITS.
YOU CAN SAY RIGHT UT THERE, AND I THINK YOU DID THAT LAST MONTH
[00:10:02]
PHIL, AND VOTED HERE OR PRESENT. BECAUSE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THIS BOARD, WHETHER WE'RE APPROVING THIS CONTRACT OR -- STILL AT THE END OF THE DAY WE'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTIONS THAT ARE TAKEN.YOU CAN SUE A HAM SANDWICH AND EVERYBODY IS GETTING SUED WHETHER YOU DID SOMETHING RIGHT OR WRONG, COLLECTIVELY.
I'VE BEEN DOWN THAT ROAD BEFORE. SO I WOULD NOT HAVE SAT ON THIS BOARD IF I WAS WORRIED ABOUT GETTING SUED OVER WHATEVER.
I FEEL THAT I'M HERE BASICALLY TO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS AND USE MY BEST JUDGMENT AND ANY GIVEN SITUATION.
BUT I THINK IT'S KIND OF SHIRKING YOUR DUTY IF YOU KEEP GIVING UP YOUR OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES THEN EVENTUALLY THE BOARD BECOMES OBSOLETE. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO COME DOWN HERE. YOU CAN SEND US A BOOK OF RECAPS EVERYTHING MONTH AND WE CAN READ WHAT YOU DID.
I DON'T THINK THAT WAS WHAT WAS INTENDED.
THAT'S KIND OF THE WAY I FEEL ABOUT IT.
PLUS WE HAVE THESE ISSUES WHERE THE PERCEPTION IS THE MANAGEMENT OR WHATEVER THEY ARE NOT GIVEN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO DIVERSE CANDIDATES, GROUPS, OR WHATEVER. SO WE'RE SHIRKING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO EVEN LOOK AT THAT ON A ROUTINE BASIS EVERY MONTH. I MEAN, I'M NOT SAYING IT WILL.
I DON'T REMEMBER THAT IT HAS BEFORE.
THAT'S ALWAYS, IF I REMEMBER, MADE MY MANAGEMENT.
BECAUSE I KNOW YOU SAID IT WASN'T A DIVERSE -- YOU WERE GOING TO REOPEN THE SEARCH OR WHATEVER.
AND THIS IS EXTREME BUT JOE COULD HIRE HIS MOTHER FOR A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. AND WE WOULDN'T KNOW IT UNTIL WE SAW THE RECAP. AND MIGHT NOT KNOW IT THEN. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. AND I KNOW SONNY, YOU WILL SAY IT COMES BACK TO THE THE TRUST FACTOR.
BUT IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE SITTIG IN JAIL BECAUSE THEY TRUSTED PEOPLE. AND I DON'T WANT TO BE ONE OF THEM. I'M THROUGH.
>> S. WILLIAMS: QUESTIONS? >> I MAY TAKE A BIT OF AN OPPOSING VIEW. I THINK THE POTENTIAL LEGAL LIABILITY OF US TURNING OW A RECOMMENDED CANDIDATE WOULD OPEN UP A LOT MORE OTENTIAL PROBLEMS FOR THIS BOARD.
AND THE ENTIRE IME I'VE BEEN ON IT, I CAN'T THINK OF A SINGLE TIME WE TURNED DOWN A CONTRACT. IT'S LIKE A RUBBER STAMP.
OKAY, NEXT. BECAUSE AGAIN, WE DO HAVE TO TRUST THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS TO HAVE COME TO THIS POINT WHERE THERE IS A CONTRACT CONSIDERED, I THINK WE HAVE A COMMITMENT FROM OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PEOPLE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO A BETTER JOB OF DIVERSITY IN OUR HIRING PRACTICES. MADE SOME ASSOCIATIONS AND CHAIR FLORES MADE GOOD SUGGESTIONS WE ADD THAT AS A SEPARATE PRIORITY ITEM IN TERMS OF OUR BOARD MISSION.
I FOLLOW THE PHILOSOPHY THAT IS MORE OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION THAN GOVERNANCE WHEN IT COMES TO PERSONNEL.
>> C. COMPTON: THIS HAPPENED BEFORE, I WANT TO SAY IN THE EARLY 2000S, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE PARTICULARS ABOUT IT.
AND WE AGREED AS A BOARD F THERE WAS AN ISSUE AHEAD SOMEBODY HAD SOME CONCERN ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WAS ON THERE, SOME ISSUE, THAT WE TAKE IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND ISCUSS IT. BUT TO ME, THAT'S A PERSONAL DECISION. EVERYBODY KNOWS ME AROUND HERE.
I MAY NOT WANT TO TAKE IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS BECAUSE I THINK THE
>> P. RITTER: FIRST OFF, I APPRECIATE THE EFFORT THAT'S BEEN PUT IN BY CHAIR FLORES PARTICULARLY IN THE PAST YEAR ON BOARD GOVERNANCE. AND BRINGING IT IN ACCT AND HELPING US TO KIND OF REFLECT ON HOW WE DO OUR BUSINESS AND THINGS WE MIGHT CONSIDER IN TERMS OF DOING IT BETTER.
I THINK PROGRAMS SUCH AS THE STAFF EVALUATION PROCESS CAME OUT OF THAT. THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS CAME OUT OF THAT. I THINK THE ISSUE OF WHAT IS THE PROPER ROLE OF THE BOARD AND STAFF IS NOTHER IMPORTANT
[00:15:03]
DISCUSSION WE'RE BEGINNING TO HAVE NOW AND THAT WE STARTED TO HAVE I GUESS SINCE THE PRIOR MEETINGS.I DON'T THINK THAT THE BOARD SHOULD GIVE UP IT'S OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY, ESPECIALLY ON THE STRATEGIC ISSUE LIKE THE DIVERSITY OF OUR WORKFORCE. AND WHETHER WE'RE MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, IN A WAY THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH IN TERMS OF PACE AND RESULTS. IF WE'RE HAPPY WITH WHERE WE ARE NOW, AND THE PROGRESS, LET'S KEEP DOING IT THE WAY WE'VE ALWAYS DONE. I DON'T THINK ANY OF US ARE HAPPY WITH THAT. I DO THINK THAT THE ACCOUNTABLY RESTS WITH US AS A BOARD BUT SPECIFICALLY WITH THE DECISION OF THE CHANCELLOR NEEDS TO MAKE IN A VARIETY OF SETTINGS AND INVOLVING THOUSANDS OF MPLOYEES THAT COLLECTIVELY, THE DECISIONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE BOARD TO BE INVOLVED WITH AND MANAGE. I'VE NEVER BEEN IN A PUBLIC OR NONPROFIT BOARD THAT WORKS THE WAY WE DO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS AND REQUIRING APPROVAL AND COMING BACK. THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT'S DONE IN CITIES OR COUNTIES OR TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITIES.
I MEAN, WE'RE OUT OF STEP IN TERMS OF BEST GOVERNANCE PRACTICES ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD MAKE ANY KIND OF CHANGE WITHOUT CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE ISSUE. THIS IS ROOTED IN DIVERSITY, NO QUESTION ABOUT IT. THE FACT WE'RE NOT IN TERMS OF A DIVERSE WORKFORCE ON A WHOLE BUNCH OF LEVELS, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, MAKE A CHANGE WITHOUT HAVING A CONVERSATION HOW WE'RE GOING TO HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE FOR ACHIEVING RESULTS. WE WOULD HAVE TO AMEND TWO POLICIES AS GENERAL COUNSEL POINTED OUT, HAVING THE INFORMATION WE'RE CURRENTLY RECEIVING SHOULD CONTINUE UNTIL WE COME UP WITH A BETTER WAY TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO MEASURE OUR PROGRESS IN THAT AREA AND WHO IS GOING O BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND WHAT LEVEL OF THE ORGANIZATION.
AND THAT BECOMES EVEN A MORE IMPORTANT DISCUSSION TO HAVE AS WE MOVE TOWARD THE UNIFIED ACCREDITATION.
I WOULD SUPPORT THE NOTION OF AMENDING THE POLICIES TO AFFECT WAIT THE CHANGE THAT HIRING DECISIONS ARE THE PURVIEW OF THE CHANCELLOR. AND THAT WE COMMIT TO THE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE AND TO THE BOARD AS A WHOLE THE DISCUSSION OF HOW WE'RE GOING TO CREATE THE RIGHT METRICS AND FRAMEWORK TO ACHIEVE THE DIVERSITY GOALS, WHICH WE'RE NOT DOING TODAY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> D. ZIMMERMANN: SOMETIMES WITH DIVERSITY, WE FOUND THERE IS NOBODY OUT THERE.
IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS. YOU CAN ASK FOR A PURPLE UNICORN AND IT DOESN'T MEAN ONE IS GOING TO SHOW UP.
THE IDEA OF REARRANGING TO BE ABLE TO GET TO DIVERSITY ISN'T GOING TO PUT THE CANDIDATES OUT THERE.
WE GET TO SEE WHO COMES AND GOES, I APPRECIATE THAT PART OF THE REPORT. I DO.
BECAUSE THE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED AND GONE AWAY.
I APPRECIATE THAT PART OF THE REPORT.
NOW, AS FAR AS NO STEPPING IN, NO, DON'T HIRE THAT ONE BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WHAT. BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE ME SAYING THAT BECAUSE IF THE OFFER HAS ALREADY BEEN GRANTED, THEN I THINK IT SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. BUT IT'S NICE TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT WE'RE KIND F IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SUCH A BIG DECISION. I'M KIND OF HALF AND HALF.
>> C. COMPTON: BECAUSE I GOT SOMETHING ELSE AFTER YOU GUYS
FINISH. >> CHAIR D. FLORES: I WAS GOING TO SAY, WE'VE HAD MORE THAN THE INSTANCES NOT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN THE PURPLE UNICORN, THOSE MAKING THE HIRING DECISIONS HAVE DECIDED NOT TO HIRE THE PURPLE UNICORNS THAT ARE QUALIFIED.
THAT'S MORE THE ISSUE. WHETHER WE CHANGE A POLICY OR
DON'T, I'M NEUTRAL. >> S. WILLIAMS: IS MOST EVERYONE
HERE NEUTRAL? >> M. BRAVO: NO, I SUPPORT CHANGING THE POLICY. WE'RE NOT INTERVIEWING THE PEOPLE. WE DON'T UNDERSTAND ALL THEIR FULL, WHAT THEIR JOB ROLES ARE. AND I TRUST THAT THE CHANCELLOR AND HIS STAFF ARE GOING TO MAKE GOOD DECISIONS.
OUR JOB IS TO HOLD THE CHANCELLOR ACCOUNTABLE AND GIVE HIM THE TASK OF DIVERSIFYING. AND THAT'S OUR DECISION, NOT, I
[00:20:01]
DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE DECIDING THIS.BUT I DO LIKE THE REPORTS AND I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE GETTING
THOSE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. >> S. WILLIAMS: ANYTHING ELSE?
>> C. COMPTON: THE ONLY THING I'M GOING TO SAY, WELL, LAST THING I'M GOING TO SAY. REMEMBER DISTRICTS THAT'S HOW THIS BOARD BECAME DIVERSE AND GAVE THE PEOPLE OF COLOR A VOICE TO TRY TO ADDRESS ANY INEQUITIES, ISSUES THEY MAY ARISE AND YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR VOICE.
AS I SAID, BY THE TIME WE SEE IT, IT'S ALREADY DONE.
IT'S JUST A PIECE OF PAPER. AND YOU ARE RIGHT.
HOW DO E HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE? WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE? IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE AND I KNOW YOU ARE NOT GOING TO STOP GOING TO THE GROCERY STORE OR WHATEVER, HOW DO YOU ADDRESS THAT? HOW DO YOU BRING THAT FORWARD? BECAUSE LAST I HEARD, YOU COULDN'T EVEN SPEAK ON THIS UNLESS YOU TOLD THEM IN ADVANCE WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY OR WHATEVER.
SO YOU ARE CLOSING DOWN INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT AT EVERY CORNER, YOU ARE SHUTTING IT DOWN. AND THAT'S WHY I SAID AT SOME POINT THIS BOARD WILL BE OBSOLETE.
YOU COULD SEND A GENERAL MAILER TO DALLAS COUNTY AND TELL THEM WHAT YOU DID THAT MONTH OR YEAR. BECAUSE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE CAN'T SAY ANYTHING OR PROVIDE INPUT.
AND THESE PERSONNEL ISSUES, MOST OF THE PERSONNEL LAWSUITS WE GOT AND YOU ALL MAY NOT BE PAYING ATTENTION BUT I HAVE, WE DON'T EVEN SEE THEM. SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SETTLED WITH AROUND HERE THAT NEVER CAME TO THE BOARD.
AND WE NEVER KNOW IT HAPPENED. AIN'T THAT RIGHT, ROB?
>> THAT'S NOT CORRECT. >> C. COMPTON: I'M EXAGGERATING BUT HAVEN'T YOU SETTLED N A NUMBER OF LAWSUITS BELOW A CERTAIN THRESHOLD AND THE BOARD NEVER KNEW IT HAPPENED.
>> F IT'S WITHIN CERTAIN AUTHORITY THERE MAY BE SETTLEMENTS. I DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS LAWSUITS, BUT THERE HASN'T BEEN A LAWSUIT FILED THAT THE BOARD IS NOT AWARE OF IN MY TENURE BECAUSE THAT'S AN ACCO - I'M NOT TAKING A POSITION. I THINK THE BOARD NEEDS TO MAKE A DECISION, THE BOARD CAN COME TO A CONSENSUS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. TRUSTEE COMPTON MENTIONED THE OVERSIGHT OBLIGATION, THE BOARD HAS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MATTERS. YOU ARE THE GOVERNING BODY.
YOU ARE ELECTED DULY, TO THE POSITION AS A TRUSTEE BECAUSE YOU HAVE THAT ULTIMATE AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY.
TRUSTEE BRAVO SAID WE HOLD THE CHANCELLOR RESPONSIBLE.
THAT'S THE STRUCTURE OF A HIGHER-EDUCATION BOARD.
THE BOARD HIRES A CHANCELLOR TO RUN THE OPERATIONS OF THE DISTRICT IN THIS INSTANCE. THE CHANCELLOR IS ANSWERABLE TO THE BOARD. THE BOARD EVALUATES THE CHANCELLOR'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRATEGIC PRIORITIES AND MISSIONS AND DIRECTIVES OF THE BOARD EITHER EFFECTIVELY OR NOT. IF IT'S NOT EFFECTIVELY, I WOULD SUBMIT THE CHANCELLOR IS REPLACED BY SOMEBODY WHO IS MORE EFFECTIVE IN THE ROLE. THAT'S A TRADITIONAL, VERY TRADITIONAL AND VERY OVERSIMPLIFIED VIEW.
BUT THAT IS THE STRUCTURE OF A GOOD FUNCTIONING BOARD.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING FOR A MOMENT THIS ISN'T A GOOD FUNCTIONING BOARD. I THINK THIS IS A FABULOUS BOARD. I REPRESENTED BOARDS THAT ARE ARE NOT. BEST PRACTICE WOULD BE TO SET THE STRATEGY PRIORITIES FOR THE DISTRICT, TO SET POLICY FOR THE DISTRICT, AND DEPENDING UPON MANAGEMENT, IMPLEMENT THAT POLICY. REPORTING IS ERY CRUCIAL TO YOUR OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES. IF THE REPORTING ON THOSE ISSUES IS NOT ROBUST ENOUGH YOU CAN GET THE INFORMATION YOU NEED IN ORDER TO ASSESS THE SUITABLE OR EFFECTIVENESS OF SOMEBODY IMPLEMENTING YOUR POLICIES AND DIRECTIVES, YOU ASK FOR MORE
[00:25:01]
INFORMATION. YOU CAN NEVER BE DENIED ACCESS TO INFORMATION IF YOU WANT TO REQUEST IT.IF YOU NEED INFORMATION TO DO YOUR ROLE AS A TRUSTEE, YOU ASK FOR THAT INFORMATION. IT NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED TO YOU.
THERE WAS AN INSTANCE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS NOT TOO LONG AGO WHERE SOMEBODY OVERASKED. AND THE COURT INTERVENED BUT A REASONABLE REQUEST BY A TRUSTEE, IS SOMETHING THE TRUSTEE SHOULD GET IF REQUESTED. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT
WAS CLEAR. >> C. COMPTON: LET ME BE CLEAR.
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS WE'RE DELEGATING OUR OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY? DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT?
>> NO, ACTUALLY IF I ID, I MISSPOKE.
YOU ARE DELEGATING UNDER YOUR AUTHORITY TO MAKE HIRING DECISIONS, BEING DELEGATED, I PROPOSED BY A POLICY CHANGE, DELEGATED TO THE CHANCELLOR. THE OVERSIGHT OF THE DECISIONS MADE IN THE DISTRICT IS ALWAYS THE BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THAT I WOULD SAY THAT'S NOT DELEGATED IN THAT INSTANCE.
YOU STILL HAVE OVERSIGHT. YOU LOOK TO THE CHANCELLOR AND SAY, WE DELEGATED YOU THIS RESPONSIBILITY.
AND WE LOOK AT HOW THIS HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED OVER THIS LAST PERIOD OF TIME. WE'RE NOT SATISFIED.
WE WANT YOU TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS AREA OR THAT.
THE SAME S TRUE, TALK ABOUT DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION.
I AGREE STRONGLY WE NEED TO IMPROVE OUR PERFORMANCE IN BEING INCLUSIVE AND DIVERSE AS A DISTRICT.
THAT IS A CHARGE YOU MAKE TO THE CHANCELLOR TO SAY, DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO MAKE US REFLECTIVE OF THE GOALS WE WANT TO ACHIEVE WITH RESPECT TO DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION.
IF YOU DON'T, WE'LL FIND SOMEBODY WHO CAN.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: FIRED. >> I LOOKED UP.
I'M NOT DOING THAT. >> D. ZIMMERMANN: HE WANTS
TO KEEP HIS JOB. >> ALL OF US ARE ULTIMATELY ANSWERABLE THROUGH THE CHANCELLOR TO THIS BOARD IF WE'RE NOT EFFECTIVE, YOU WILL HEAR ABOUT IT AND TAKE ACTION APPROPRIATE TO THAT. I'M SAYING IT'S AN NOT ABDICATION OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.
THAT ROW MAINS UNDER THE 130-POINT O82, YOU ARE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY. THE LAW IS CLEAR, YOU CAN DELEGATE THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS.
AND THAT'S, GAIN, I'M TALKING MORE THAN I SHOULD.
BUT AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, YOU CAN'T RUN A HALF A BILLION DOLLAR A YEAR ORGANIZATION BY YOURSELF.
YOU HAVE TO DEPEND UPON STAFF. AND NO BOARD CAN BE EFFECTIVE IF INVOLVED IN THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS OF A HALF A BILLION DOLLAR ORGANIZATION. THE LAW RECOGNIZES THAT AND SAYS IN THE STATUTE, YOU CAN HIRE A PRESIDENT, AGAIN, INTERCHANGEABLY WITH CHANCELLOR, AND DELEGATE TO THE CHANCELLOR OR DESIGNEES THE OTH AUTHORITY O CARRY OUT THE AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD. IT WOULD BE MY SUBMISSION THAT THE CHANGE TO POLICIES AS I PROPOSED HERE WOULD NOT BE INCONSISTENT WITH THAT STATUTE AND THERE IS CASE LAW THAT SAYS THAT. THANK YOU.
>> S. WILLIAMS: I'VE HEARD SAY CONTINUES -- LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS. LET'S NOT CHANGE ANYTHING.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE CAN'T CHANGE IT IN MONTHS OR YEARS FROM NOW. WE COULD CHANGE IT LATER IF WE
WANT TO. >> POLICY CAN BE CHANGED AT ANY TIME. I AGREE, YES.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT -- I'M NOT SPEAKING FOR THE CONSENSUS
HERE. >> P. RITTER: WHAT WE'RE GOING TO KNOW IN SIX MONTHS THAT WE HAVEN'T LEARNED OUR DISCUSSED.
THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING WOULD SUPPORT A CHANGE NOW.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: MIGHT WANT TO PULL FOR A CONSENSUS.
>> S. WILLIAMS: [INDISCERNIBLE] >> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE CAN'T
VOTE. >> P. RITTER: SUPPORT CHANGE.
>> CHAIR D. FLORES: HE'S TAKING A CONSENSUS OF WHERE WE ARE ON
THE ISSUE CHANGE OR NOT CHANGE. >> S. WILLIAMS: NO WHAT?
>> D. ZIMMERMANN: NO CHANGE. >> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: I
SUPPORT CHANGING THE POLICY. >> D. ZIMMERMANN: I'M AGNOSTICB.
KEEPING IT THE SAME IS THE SAME. >> M. BRAVO: I SUPPORT A CHANGE.
>> S. WILLIAMS: KEEP IT WITH THE VOTES.
>> TWO AGNOSTICS. AND YOU ARE THE DECIDING --
[00:30:02]
>> S. WILLIAMS: CHANGE. >> VICE CHAIR W. JAMESON: PUT IT
ON THE AGENDA. >> THE DIRECTION, THIS WAS NOT A VOTE OBVIOUSLY. THE DIRECTION AS I UNDERSTAND IT FROM THE BOARD BASED UPON THE CONSENSUS, TO BRING FORWARD FOR FIRST READING POLICY CHANGES. IF THAT'S THE DE THE DESIRE OF E
BOARD, WE CAN DO THAT. >> CHAIR D. FLORES: WE DON'T HAVE A JANUARY BOARD MEETING, MONTHLY BOARD MEETING.
[4. Overview of Regular Agenda Items]
WE DO HAVE A PLANNING MEETING. I WOULD SAY, WHAT, THE JANUARY PLANNING MEETING? PUT IT FOR FIRST READING.>> CHANCELLOR MAY: WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE OTHER ITEMS AT THE
TIME WE NEED TO DEAL WITH. >> IT WILL BE FIRST READING AS ALL POLICIES ARE. YOU WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE LANGUAGE. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION. I HAVE HE LANGUAGE PREPARED.
>> I DIDN'T KNOW THE WAY THIS WAS GOING TO GO.
>> S. WILLIAMS: ANYTHING ELSE? >> NO, SIR.
THERE IS A RESOLUTION ON THE BOARD AGENDA, THE REGULAR AGENDA ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY, A RESOLUTION HAT CERTIFIES THAT THE BOARD DID ITS ANNUAL SELF-EVALUATION THIS YEAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD POLICY. THAT IS MERELY SO WE HAVE SOMETHING IN OUR RECORDS IF APPROVED WE THE BOARD AND I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU APPROVE IT, WE DID OR SELF-EVALUATION THIS YEAR AND SIGNED AND KEPT WITH THE RECORDS OF THE DISTRICT.
>> S. WILLIAMS: ANYTHING ELSE? >> CHAIR D. FLORES: RE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.