I. General
A. Call to Order
Janice Reilly called the meeting to order at 2:35 p.m.
Members Present: Carmela Arnoldt, Joanna Chamberlain, Hazel Davis, Bill Farrar, Amy Goff, Mark Gooding, Alan Haffa, Karen Hardin, Rosemary Kesler, Hank Mancini, Jane Marks, Larry Miller, Saundra Minckley, Brian Murphy, Ricardo Provencio, Jim Reed, Janice Reilly, Laura Ruiz-Scott, Karen Schmidt, Dennis Shaw, Gail Shay, Linda Smith, Vernon Smith and Barry Vaughan.
Carrie Taylor took the minutes.
B. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as written.
C. Approval of October 9, 2001, Minutes
The October 9, 2001, minutes were approved as written.
D. Committee Reports
1. Meet and Confer
No report.
2. Professional Growth
No report.
3. EBAC
No report.
4. FAC
Council was told that Jim Devere gave an extensive report on the new SIS project. SIS will be very expensive. There are projected budget cuts. The FAC representatives were asked to convey to FAC the strong sentiment that benefits funding is the most important part of the budget. Council discussed how the amounts of flex credits for employees have not changed in nine years and the erosion of those amounts. The point was made that a formula including an inflation factor needed to be developed for the flex credits. A concern was voiced from the members that many technological decisions were made based on the administration's needs and not on academic needs. Council discussed the need for faculty to be involved in technology decision-making in the District. Council was informed that Jim Devere would discuss the new SIS project with Council at its next meeting. One idea discussed at the SIS Steering Committee is to have one District-wide transcript. Council voiced concerns about this idea stating the strength of the District comes from the individual community college cultures and not the District. Council next discussed the advantages of a district-wide transcript. Janice Reilly told Council that Council members and faculty needed to be educated on the issues involved in the new SIS program.
5. Legislative
Council discussed the upcoming elections and election requirements.
6. Intellectual Property Rights
The Intellectual Property Rights Committee will meet in November.
7. Common Pages
No report.
II. Old Business
A. Benefits/Insurance
Council was informed that some information had been collected and that more information was forthcoming on the benefits/insurance issue. A motion was made and seconded that stated “Given the increasing costs of health benefits, FEC requests EBAC to make an in-depth analysis of the cost of offering MCCCD retirees the option to stay in the employees' insurance pool, with the understanding that the $1500 paid toward a benefits package would be the responsibility of the retiree.” Discussion ensued. One suggestion given was to survey the faculty to see how many would continue teaching if given the option to stay with the benefit plan offered at Maricopa upon retirement. The point was made that if high-salaried faculty retired, the District could hire younger faculty at lower salaries that would even out the cost of offering retirees the option of staying with the Maricopa benefit plan. Also, if this happened, more insurance companies may submit bids to be the District’s insurer. Council was told that Governing Board members have the option to obtain benefits through the Maricopa health insurance plan. It was stated that employees should be given the same option. It was suggested that Council members speak with their faculty at the campuses. Council discussed the motion further. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously. Council received a memo from the group who asked Council to discuss this issue.
B. Peerpoint!
Carmela Arnoldt reviewed article topics for the next issue of Peerpoint! She again asked for volunteers interested in the issues to write articles so that all of the articles will not come from one person or campus. A suggestion was made to include a comment section for feedback and input from faculty.
C. SB 1295
Council received and reviewed copies of a handout from CEC regarding a status/update on retirement plans. Council was told that they would receive the minutes from CEC. Janice Reilly stated that the handout showed that the benefit program from SB 1295 has not gone before the Governing Board yet. She stated that Dr. Randolph had said that he would support anything that did not cost the District additional money. Council was told that Diane Johns, who presented this topic to CEC, was asked when this would go to the Governing Board. Diane had responded when the state had firmed up the program then the Governing Board would be approached. Council was reminded that the Governing Board does not like to commit to anything that is over one year and may say that they would approve this program one year at a time. There is also a Maricopa plan being considered, but there is no long-term disability in the program. CEC did hire a consultant to review the optional plan.
D. Lobbyist
Feedback was received about the advertisement sent out to Council.
The advertisement is still in development.
E. Aramark Food Service
A request was made to invite the person who signed the Aramark contract for the District to speak with Council so Council may know how these decisions are made. The point was made that Council could inquire if Aramark is meeting the agreement stated in the contract. Council discussed whom in the District signs contracts. Council asked Janice Reilly to research this matter and report back to Council. Council discussed concerns stated in previous discussions.
F. High School Students/Developmental Courses
Council reviewed the previous discussion regarding the high school students
taking developmental courses at a community college when other options
were available to them. Council was told that the involved department
chair found out about this situation after the semester had started.
The council member was told that any individual who passes the assessment
test for English 101 can take classes offered at the college. It
was suggested that the language in the Common Pages be changed to prevent
such a situation. Council was told that the Arizona Revised Statutes
state that a community college must allow students who attain certain scores
on the SAT or ACT to be admitted. Council reviewed the following
Common Pages sections. Section 2.2 Admission/Registration, section
B -- Students Under 18 years of Age gives circumstances under which students
shall be granted admission:
SAT I
composite score of 930 or more,
SAT II composite
score of 500 or more, or
ACT composite
of 22 or more
The Common Pages state that a student shall not be denied admission
due to age, etc. if the student has achieved at least the test scores specified.
Also, in Sections C 2 & 3 of the Common Pages (Admission of Students
in Special Status), it states that an
under-18 year old student may take "the appropriate college assessment
tests" to demonstrate necessary academic skill level, but it states that
special status is determined by the "designated college administrator in
consultation with the department chairperson." It was noted that
a department chair was not consulted in this situation. A concern
was voiced that it sounded like faculty, who should have input in this
type of situation, did not have input and that the Dean of Instruction
should be asked why the Department Chair was not consulted. One Council
member emphasized that the students were not to blame. Council discussed
the sections of the Common Pages and the Arizona Revised Statutes involved,
and a question arose as to whether the Common Pages were in conflict with
the state law. The point was made that the concern is that a high
school student is taking a remedial course in the college, not at a high
school and therefore denying the seat to an adult student who does not
have other options about where they take the course. Council requested
that this situation as well as the District policy and the involved Arizona
Revised Statutes be reviewed further, and a report be brought back to Council.
G. Book Store Issue
A motion was made and seconded stating, “FEC will identify common bookstore needs and concerns from the Maricopa Community Colleges and invite the appropriate District representatives to meet with FEC to discuss how the current bookstore contract will meet those needs.” Council reviewed the needs and concerns stated in past discussions. Council was told that the contract was negotiated so that the District gets a return from sales that go into Fund Two to be used for scholarships and discretionary spending. The point was made that students may not be aware that they are funding scholarships and other spending when they purchase books. Council discussed how to proceed on this issue. The point was made that the motion was in two parts and the first part, collecting data on needs and concerns, needed to be done before Council invited District representatives to speak with Council. Council agreed that data should be collected at each campus and that this issue should be discussed with the Faculty Senates. A suggestion was made to collect data from department chairs and department secretaries who should have the information readily available. Council members were asked to bring data in writing to Council. A vote was taken, and the motion failed with seven yeas, nine nays and two abstentions. Faculty Senate Presidents were reminded to poll their faculty regarding the needs and concerns and then report back to Council.
H. Instructional Council Issue
A motion was made and seconded stating, “Instructional Councils may change or waive minimum hiring qualifications only with a two thirds majority vote of discipline specific members.” Council read language in the RFP that involved instructional councils. Council was reminded that previous discussion had focused on taking the burden of decision-making from the chair of the instructional council. Council discussed the motion. The point was made that the motion puts procedures in place and is not policy. Council discussed past situations where requirements have been waived or other qualifications were accepted in lieu of the stated requirements of the instructional council. A concern was voiced regarding one recent situation in which a chair made a decision that the rest of the instructional council opposed. Council discussed the need to inform people of the issue such as the Deans of Instruction and the Instructional Councils. Council discussed the motion and the need to place this issue in the Meet and Confer process. The motion was withdrawn. Janice Reilly requested that a new motion be developed to include placing this issue in Meet and Confer and brought to Council at the next meeting.
III. New Business
A. FAC/EBAC Stipends
A motion was made and seconded stating, “The Faculty Association will give stipends to faculty representatives of the EBAC committee at a rate of 1 credit per semester and 2 credits for summer, and will give a stipend of 2 credits per year to the faculty representatives of FAC committee.” Council discussed the motion and the workload of the representatives of both committees. The motion was amended to state, “The Faculty Association will give stipends to the EBAC and FAC faculty representatives at a rate of one (1) credit per semester starting in Fall 2001 and will amend the budget accordingly.” A vote was taken, and the amended motion passed unanimously.
B. Men’s Basketball Scrimmage
Council was presented with language for a motion to censure. A motion was made and seconded to approve the language. Council discussed to whom the letter should be sent. One suggestion was to send the letter to Anna Solley and Mike Rooney. A concern was raised about the word censure that led to further discussion. Council learned that due to the change in the “window of recruitment,” the scrimmage had been scheduled earlier so that the athletes could perform in front of recruiters. Council learned that the change was made at a meeting in March 2001 and thus the athletic directors knew of the change for some time. Council members voiced concern of the expectation that instructors would excuse the athletes from classes for the scrimmage, and instructors objected to that expectation. An opinion was stated that this was an arrangement between the District and the Athletic Association. The language for the letter in the motion was amended. A vote was taken, and the motion passed with three abstentions.
C. FPG/MCLI Distinction
Council discussed the previous conversation regarding a distinction between the Faculty Professional Growth Committee (FPG) and MCLI. One Council member gave an historical account of issues in past years when she served on both on Council and FPG. Council discussed the need to educate faculty who erroneously believe that Faculty Professional Growth is supervised by MCLI. Council was informed that the relationship between the two is cooperative with MCLI giving support to FPG. Also, MCLI only houses the FPG staff who needed office space. Another Council member stated that while he served on FPG, the committee made its own decisions and there was no interference from any other group. Council members were asked to discuss this issue with their FPG representatives and with their faculty senates. It was noted that faculty were positive about the recent changes in professional growth. Council was told that the procedures are being streamlined and will come to Council to be approved. A suggestion was made that the web page should have the Faculty Association’s logo and not MCLI’s logo. Council was told that the Faculty Association was responsible for the FPG web page and should take care of changing it. Council asked Janice Reilly to request that the MCLI logo be removed from the web page. Council received a letter from one faculty thanking them for addressing this issue.
D. OYO
Council was informed that had issue had been raised regarding OYOs. Currently, OYOs at some campuses are not evaluated. Therefore, an OYO could work at four different campuses, for example, then become a fifth year probationary faculty without ever being evaluated. Council expressed concern and reviewed the language regarding OYOs in the RFP. Council discussed the purpose of hiring OYOs. Council was asked to review Sections 2.11.6.1. and 2.11.6.2. of the RFP. Council discussed briefly other OYOs issues.
E. Professional Growth Funding/FPG Recommendation
Janice presented a recommendation regarding the additional $100,000 given to professional growth for 2001-2002 only. The recommendation stated, “The FPG committee’s recommendation for the allocation of the $100,000 is: 60% or $60,000 to the Travel fund, 40% or $40,000 to Projects, specifically Summer Projects.” A motion was made and seconded to approve the recommendation. A vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously.
IV. Information
A. Strategic Conversation
Council learned that Nancy Stein would be the Governing Board President in 2002. Janice Reilly stated that Nancy had approached her to inquire if the faculty would like to hold a strategic conversation with the Board. Council discussed the opportunity and agreed that a meeting on the hiring process was a good idea. A suggestion was made to form a subcommittee to work on the issues and format involved. Council briefly discussed the best format for meeting with the Governing Board.
B. Strategic Planning
Rosemary Kesler informed Council that she was on the District’s Strategic Planning Committee. Rosemary stated that the committee is gathering comments and information from all groups in the District. She distributed a handout of questions and requested that Council members take the questions to their faculty for comment and feedback to the committee by December. Council requested Rosemary to send the list of questions via MEMO so that the Faculty Senate Presidents could forward the questions easily to all of their campus faculty. Rosemary Kesler was asked how the strategic planning outcomes were tied to the bond. Rosemary responded that outcomes have been developed but that the bond was currently a separate issue, although it should part of the strategic planning. The point was made that FAC should be a part of strategic planning also since that committee develops the budget. Rosemary restated that the strategic planning committee was only seeking information and comments at this point. Council briefly discussed the bond issue and for what projects/programs the money would be used. Council was told that nothing has been planned as of yet for where the bond money would be used. Council expressed great concern over this. The point was made that the District needs to think about the current economy and how it might affect a bond election. Council was told that the 301 Committee has not approved any projects for January because the 301 money is coming in so slowly that it is not known if programs can be funded.
C. Other
Policy for Maricopa Employees in National Guard/Reserve Called to Active Duty
Council learned that the Governing Board would vote on a policy regarding those employees called to active duty. The policy would allow employees to take a personal leave of absence and the District would pay for benefits up to six months and would also make up any difference between the employee’s pay and his/her military pay.
Field Trips
Council was informed that Mike Napier said that the RFP language on field trips in courses was ambiguous and needed clarification.
Capella University
Council was informed that a group of faculty from Capella University would speak to Council at Council’s next meeting. A meeting is also being held at RIO on November 11, 2001, and all are invited to attend. The presentation will be on the graduate program at Capella University.
Guests at FEC November 13, 2001 Meeting
Rose Pfefferbaum will come to give a presentation on terrorism planning. Jim Devere is coming to speak on the new SIS program. The Meet and Confer Team will address questions regarding the salary proposals presented to the Governing Board on November 6th. EBAC will also give a presentation at the Governing Board’s November 6th meeting.
V. Significant Happenings/Presidents’ Reports
CGCC
CGCC is beginning the process of searching for a new college president.
An ad hoc
committee has been formed to select the members of the search committee
for the college president position.
EMCC
EMCC had a meeting to discuss the 2004 bond issue and what EMCC will
do regarding
expansion, etc. EMCC is kicking off its United Way campaign for
this year. Groundbreaking has occurred for Phase 2B of EMCC’s buildings.
GWCC
The memorial for Mark Richard is tonight. Those who wish to contribute
can donate to a memorial scholarship fund in Mark’s name as well as a trust
fund for his daughters’ education. A speaker came to GWCC to speak
with GWCC students about Islam and the situation in Afghanistan.
GCC
The climate study work continues. The NCA is coming for a review.
The forensics team spent four days in Los Angeles and took second place
in the competition.
MCC
All is well.
PC
PC employees met with the new PC President, Dr. Gardea, who is from
Dallas County
Community Colleges. Dr. Gardea will start in November.
PC is moving forward with its strategic planning. On Saturday, October
27, 2001, PC will host a Model UN conference.
PVCC
PVCC is working its budget review process. Hank Mancini received
a letter from the
university in Guadalajara, Mexico that will allow PVCC students to
continue their education at the medical school there.
RIO
Rio is starting its United Way drive this week. The ramp that
comes out from the
building is where the KJZZ/KBAC station is. The drywall is being
redone and when the remodeling project is complete both the radio station
and the Reading for the Blind unit will be housed in that area. A
faculty member from CGCC who is the former minister of commerce in Afghanistan
came to RIO to speak at a forum. Future forum topics will include
terrorism and related issues. RIO will hold a retreat at GWCC on
October 24, 2001.
SCC
SCC’s United Way drive is going strong. A new faculty social
was held the previous
Friday. SCC’s President has decided to reconnect with faculty
and meetings with the faculty and the President are being held to discuss
issues such as pre-bond planning. SCC is working on securing an extension
campus in the Cave Creek area. The new Dean is receptive to faculty
ideas and brings new ideas with him to SCC.
SMCC
The new SMCC President will host a large community meeting to discuss
his plans for
SMCC. The new President will outline his ideas and visions at
the Spring Convocation. The President has included organized policy
making groups and faculty in the planning.
VI. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 6:20pm.
VII. Executive Session
The Executive Committee met to discuss personnel issues.
* * The next Council meeting is November 13, 2001. * *