GOVERNING BOARD
JANUARY 29, 2003
MINUTES

A retreat of the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board was scheduled to be held at 8:15 a.m. at the District Support Services Center, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.

PRESENT

GOVERNING BOARD

Ed Contreras, President
Linda B. Rosenthal, Secretary
Nancy Stein, Member
Donald R. Campbell, Member
Gene Eastin, Member

ADMINISTRATION

Fred Gaskin Ron Bleed Anna Solley Steve Helfgot Rufus Glasper Christine Hall Pete Kushibab Donna Schober Phil Randolph Linda Thor Maria Hesse Gina Kranitz Larry Christiansen Ken Atwater Art DeCabooter Homero Lopez Gene Giovannini Corina Gardea John Neibling, Ad Hoc Committee Jean Ann Abel Debra Thompson Dean Hermanson Jan Binder Rene Willekens Roy Cohen Teresa Toney Doug Sawyer

Ron Etter Conrad Mills Sue Kater Rosemary Kesler Randy Stapley Carnella Hardin Carol Counch Yvonne Zeka Rick DeGraw Debbie Bies Bob Bendotti Georgia Gudykunst Steve Schenk Nicholas Darus Sylvia Manlove Jim Moore Earl Monsour Alan Haffa Pat Case Chris Burton Janice Reilly Steve Moore

CALL TO ORDER

President Ed Contreras called the retreat to order at 8:25 a.m.

Retreat Purpose

The purpose of the retreat was to provide members of the Governing Board and the Chancellor's Executive Council with an update of the Strategic Planning Process as it pertains to MCCCD Values, Vision and Mission, Board Goals and Initiatives, Action Plans, Monitoring, and Student Learning.

Introductory Remarks by Governing Board President Ed Contreras and Chancellor Fred Gaskin: Both Mr. Contreras and Dr. Gaskin expressed appreciation to everyone present. They commented that the retreat had been planned in such a manner so as to provide sufficient time and information on the current status of the strategic plan.

Remarks by Dr. Rufus Glasper, Strategic Planning Committee Member
Dr. Glasper commented that since the retreat held last February, there has been no end to strategic planning. It has been a journey of linkages and evaluating their impact. During this process, the group has assessed how to move ahead and explored what lessons have been learned. As the past was reviewed, the group looked at events that determined where MCCCD is at, what things were uncontrollable and which were not. It has been concluded that through planning, reallocation, and perseverance, we can control our own future.

During previous discussions, the framework for strategic planning was established. Today's retreat will focus on process, planning, and budget. He stated we will be able to develop a mentality that is right, if it is believed that the colleges are doing the right things. These will be our mission and values.

With reference to MCCCD values, Dr. Glasper stated that enrollment is what drives this organization. He proposed that if we really live by the adopted mission and vision, this will be an opportunity to link those to our system. He also questioned if we knew what the Board's goals and initiatives really meant and what the organization is doing with them.

Dr. Glasper explained that action plans describe how our initiatives are made to work. It is important that action plans be monitored, evaluated, and improved upon. Student learning should be the base and foundation of what this organization attempts to achieve in order to achieve student success. Everything needs to be linked together and everyone needs to be a participant in the process of strategic planning.

Remarks by Dr. Linda Thor, Strategic Planning Committee Member
Dr. Thor spoke about the action plans submitted by the colleges and the District Office. All action plans were to be tied to the strategic initiatives with an emphasis on reallocation of money. Six themes which became evident in the action plans were: infrastructure, expansion of basic services, new programs and services, student services, technology support, and mitigation of risk factors. New funds requested were intended for faculty/staff, equipment/supplies, technology support, and new/remodeled facilities. At the conclusion of the action plan process, it was determined that a combined planning/budgeting process could be possible.

Remarks by Dr. Gina Kranitz, Strategic Planning Committee Member
Dr. Kranitz had retreat participants address what worked and what didn't work with respect to the action planning process. Responses were noted on flipchart pages and reproduced as follows:

Remarks by Teresa Toney on Policy Implications
Ms. Toney phrased the question, "Why would initiatives need to be in priority order?" She stated that all thirteen of the Board's Goals are important, however they are prioritized by strategic initiatives and operational commitments. During this session, retreat participants offered the following comments:

Strategic initiatives policy language (justification/evidence for priorities)

• Prioritized by strategic initiatives (then regulations)
• Action plans done by administration
• Vocabulary (simplify) (i.e., Language of Governance, Administrative Regulations)

Operational Commitments

• How we get/account for pots of money?
• How do we determine operational commitment?

Document the process and evaluate results of action plans

• Current - "goals will be monitored"
• New action plans funded must have
  • Review of past action plans

Keep process simple

Remarks by Dr. Larry Christiansen on Operational Commitments
Dr. Christiansen conducted an activity with retreat participants wherein he asked them to voice their thoughts on operational commitments. The following comments were made:

Business cost commitments first
Fund growth
Salaries
Etc.

Have we thought of additional commitments in case of catastrophe/crisis? Other funding sources?

Other unexpected costs (e.g., homeland security)

Look at similar institutions and review their best practices and learn from mistakes

FTSE rebate money use should be discretionary
^students = + commitments for operations

?^property taxes to maximum?- How would this affect the Bond Initiative? (Tax Override may be damaging)

New initiatives/re-invent ourselves -$
· Tie to strategic plan

Tuition increases may be the only flexible income source

Re-inventing - evaluate programs/costs

Review missions/goals of colleges and define parameters of these.

Whom do we serve? Make decisions not to be everything to everyone

Emerging opportunities
· Profit centers - what's our expertise and market it/(dual enrollment)

Move away from reliance on the state

Foundation finding other sources of funds

"Emerging icebergs" - Bush's tax cuts will affect us

Following this exercise, the following Broad Themes and Suggestions were drawn:

Broad Themes - Next Steps

• Cost efficiency/program review/reallocation
• Creative identification of new resources, reallocation of resources
• Can't depend on State funding
• Growth thing/theme
• Short-term vs. long-term investment in students
• Strategic plan ® funding
• 3-5 year plan/decisions
• External factors
• Include business costs in Strategic Planning but also look for priorities in business costs
• Look at colleges in categories/different type of colleges
• Colleges and District plans - review need as a whole

Suggestions (Small Points)

• Same mental model definition
• Keep simple
• Additional contingency for bumps in road
• Operational Commitments
• Cost Efficiency
• Non credit $ ® credit resource
• Partners in CBU's
• All colleges same level, same place, same time, need funding to come u

Look at specializing action (regional with colleges)

Explanation by Debra Thompson regarding "Green Book" (i.e., Background Material and Recommendations on the Alignment Planning Process
Ms. Thompson explained in detail what every section of the "green book" contained. The following comments were made with reference to the information contained in the book.

• Lots of information
• More firm conclusion
• Keep it simple
• Magnitude of linking the pieces
• Lots of ways to do things
• What will work?
• Need to replicate processes/organization that can be replicated
• Flexibility/creativity
• Outcomes should drive structure
• Need for education
• A group with knowledge of planning so when money is allocated, there is a match
• How do we get there?

Next Steps

• Communication to others/status of strategic planning
• Consider expansion/modification of mission to include 4 year programs
• Schedule of Issues - move from process to meet
• Rethink Bond efforts - Based upon external factors - work with high-schools
• Mission - Can we address things we didn't anticipate (be generic in review)? Do we have inherent in our process - ways to address-nimbleness/flexibility?
• What are we thinking about?
• Take advantage of situations that come up… Develop pool of money
• Should we plan % / $ amount related to new/unexpected things?
• Entrepreneurial funds/301 - Do we need to rethink - is it large enough to satisfy needs?
• SWOT/Models
• What would be an ideal process - where are we now?
• How do we get at nimbleness?
• Raise series of actions
• Input from established councils
• CEC/Chancellor/Board Rec. for '04-'05

Governing Board Observations & Comments

Gene Eastin:

• Impressed with comments & suggestions
• Property tax relatively stable
• Concerned with tuition
• State Aid ¯ - Will Continue ¯
  • May go away
  • Look To Employees To Share Costs
• ASRS Hurt - Should District Subsidize?

Linda Rosenthal:

• Colleges and DO need to look at opportunities to realign, be more cost effective, eliminate programs - Get Down to Basics

Nancy Stein:

• Problem with tuition increase
  • Foundation working hard, but it's getting tougher
• Cost Effectiveness - Needs to be fine tuned
  • Take a look at budgets
  • No apparent accountability for spending
• Budget & Strategic Planning -
  • Confusion x10
  • Need to get together

Don Campbell:

• Planning for Future
  • Shortfall of money
  • Programs we need to cut?
  • Costs to be members of organizations & trips to conferences
  • Need Contingency

Ed Contreras:

• Still not a clear plan for how to handle costs
• We are in a better position than others - enrollment growth
• We do not appear to be cutting back
• Need to set priorities on how we handle discretionary money
• Do we need a pool of money to handle community needs
• Need a statement/process
• State funding ¯ - Long Term
  • Need to wean ourselves
  • Find alternative resources
  • Endowments? Entrepreneurship?
  • Tighten our belts
• Team work on plan and come back for another retreat

Plus/Delta on Meeting

Concluding Remarks by Chancellor Fred Gaskin
Dr. Gaskin commented that there is still no clear plan or rationale on how we are going to handle costs. The Maricopa Community College District is still in good financial standing in spite of monetary cuts. It is important to set priorities and put a plan in place on how to proceed. With reference to revenue, need to wean from dependency on state funding. We need to look at ways of generating revenue. The group should come back with suggestions on generating growth and money.

ADJOURNMENT

The retreat adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

———————————
Linda Rosenthal
Governing Board Secretary