Public Comments continue
Paul Lefort, 47 year DuPage County resident. I have a few ideas about the HLC report. The HLC wants to make sure that the culture and structures that caused the problem cannot happen again. 3 suggestions — 1)agreed upon and diligently BoT protocol, such as living in the present not the past. Trustee Discussions in a round robin formation, no out of turn comments. last BoT meeting was dominated by one trustees lengthy problems with a previous problem.2) proving that policies and procedures are such that the mistakes that happened cannot happen again.
3) Communicate all policies as no-bid contracts. Make it clear and simple. Publish a running list on all no-bid contracts. I wish COD good luck in removing the probationary status. It is the most important thing you can do.
Kirk Allen — Change orders — names criminal code that governs this. States that a state or unit of local government must determination in writing that 1) circumstances was not reasonably or forseeable. Names other stipulations that pertain to change orders and public institutions.Class 4 felony to violate this. Discusses one of the change orders made for Herricane Graphics. Notes that one change order was “owner-requested change.” This does not meet the standard laid out by the law in the criminal code. Asks COD attorney to look into all change orders especially those for companies owned by COD Foundation members.
Elizabeth Anderson, Professor of English. Faculty member named in 6B. I want you to see me as a real person and not just a name on paper. I want to thank my colleagues. They make this a wonderful place for me to work. I am grateful for the opportunity to address issues. I have been here 10 years. Only the last 18 months have been negative for me. I ask you to reconsider item 6B and gather all the important information needed to make this decision.
John Staeck, Professor of Anthropology
I am here as a parent. Notes that two of his three children have been at COD. One is already a senior at Western Illinois after transferring form COD. The third will be here. I encourage you to spend the money you have for the right things. For education.
To the two colleagues who are not here — show up or get out. If you can’t show up, leave the post. We should not operate this way.
Think deep about this personnel issue discussed here tonight. Dig into it. That’s not micromanaging. That’s doing your job. This issue is going to hurt this college and the community unless you do the right thing, dig into it.
Public Comments ended.
There are new items/information that have been submitted today.
We are trying to hold ourselves accountable.
Wozniak — wants to pull 6B, 6D, 6E, 6F and 6H
Dr .Collins — wants to withdraw item C.
Only 6A and 6G remain from the Consent Agenda.
Asks for motion to approve 6A and 6G –Napolitano moves, Olsen seconds.
All Trustees present vote yes.
Chair Mazzochi — Asks for motion to approve 6B.
Napolitano — moves. Seconded by Bernstein.
Discussion — Requests going to Closed Session to discuss 6B.
Bernstein — is it under the rules to table this for one week.
Mazzochi — there would be legal implications. We need to discuss those in Closed Session.
COD Attorney — move to table it till the end of the agenda. We are saying we would discuss it in Closed Session but then need to reconvene to vote on it afterwards.
Napolitano — table it until following the closed session.
COD Attorny: It will become item 13A on tonight’s agenda. You will vote on it after Closed Session.
Moved and seconded. All Trustees present vote yes except Wozniak, votes no.
Next — DIscussion of Item 6D, hiring of Robert Dickeson for consulting hours.
Paul Lefort is brought back to discuss this hiring. Explains the volume of work that had to be done to go through the applications. There will probably be about 12 people who will be ready for the final search. We required that Dickeson be here more than originally planned because of the volume of work. We need to get to 3-5 final candidates to present to the BoT. We hope to be able to do that soon.
Napolitano — I remember Dickeson described as someonw with a deep Rolodex. I don’t remember there ever being a discussion of his firm doing the interviews. I thought he was just hte Rolodex, not the one doing the interviews.
LeFort — Part of his attraction and help to us was his Rolodex. But his initial contract did indicate he would be using the Rolodex and interview. We did not anticipate the volume of work that he would need to do.
Napolitano — will these 40 hours reduce the number of hours that Williams and Haynes will do?
Lefort — we are also looking for non-traditional candidates, form non-profits, military, etc. Dickeson has helped with this.
Napolitano — the travel expenses are for Dickeson or for whom?
Lefort — travel expenses for candidates
Napolitano — Hayes does have to interview all candidates anyhow?
Lefort– volume activity was the issue. We got more response than we had anticipated. We had a large number of applicants. On Monday night we will be presenting the results.
Napolitano continue to question why this is necessary and if this should be the end of the extra services needed.
Lefort speaks to the valuable service he has provided.
Olsen comments: I appreciate the context Mr Lefort. Olsen expresses his concern about the item. One of the trustees not in attendance tonight things that 15,000 was chosen to avoid BoT approval so he is concerned about transparency. But the presidential search is critical.
Bernstein- doesn’t see a transparency issue. Knows the people on the committee. Will vote for it.
Wozniak — why should we spend thousands of dollars on a search committee like this.
Mazzochi — From the outset we did vote to approve the retention of an educational search term. The committee thought it would be helpful to hire a firm with educational background and experience. Former Chair Hamilton thought at that time that if we did go over 15,000 it would have to come back for BoT approval. We have to decide now if we think it is important to spend an additional 15,000 for this.
Wozniak — The previous hiring the BoT was involved 100% of the way (audience laughter).
Chair Mazzochi asks the audience to refrain from laughing.
Wozniak — the BoT should be involved more.
Mazzochi — The BoT is not abdicating its responsibility. It would be hard for the BoT to review in detail the 300 plus people who have submitted their resumes. A committee needs to do that work. Now, if you don’t like the results, you will retain the ability to say you do no like any of those candidates. They are going to give us a range of applicants, 3-5. But there is nothing keeping any BoT member to look at any resumes. Mr. Hayes is open to Trustees looking at any resumes. But in contrast with what happened last time, we want to make sure we have a wide range of stakeholders so that we have support form the community. Our entire college community can get behind the candidate. I appreciate you concerns Trustee Wozniak. Please come to the forum on the 29th so you can have comfort that the process is working the way it should.
Trustee Roark — only candidates from Higher Ed?
Trustee Wozniak votes no.Motion passes.
6f — motion to discuss hiring of Perkins and Will for architectural services
Bernstein — do we know of any situation where the firm has had bad reviews?
Committee member Schmiedl– no one on the firm feels there was an issue with this firm.
BErnstein — do you know of any situations where the company had a dissatisfied company?
Napolitano asks a similar question. Have we done due diligence, extra step to check references.
Trustee Roark- what is the ICCB recommendation?
Committee member Schmiedl— they come in every 5 years to review the operating conditions of all community colleges in the state. They study documents including a Master Plan to see if a college is complying with all ICCB regulations.
MAzzochi — what is the deadline for a replacement if we do not approve of this firm tonight?
Committee Member Schmiedl- — the ICCB will notify when they are coming. The school ten has 90 days to submit all documents in support of that. Not knowing when that will happen, and given that the assignment is a 5 month assignment, if we don’t take care of it we might risk being out of compliance.
Napolitano–What are the ramifications if we are out of compliance?
Collins — SImilar to HLC, they do a recognition visit. They could cite us for being deficient.
Olsen — expresses concern about timeline, especially given current sanctions by HLC. This is in our control. It’s too bad the Board could not meet earlier to approve this. I’ve heard of concerns form community members that the firm is monitored and does only what they are hired to do. Does not go above that scope.
Mazzochi — expresses concern about timeline. Is in favor because of the timeline.
Napolitano — I have had mutual customers who have used this firm. I am in support of this.
Roll: All yes except Wozniak, abstains. Motion passes
6F — Perkins and Will hired for architectural services. DIscussion.
Olsen — similar discussion as to previous item and looks forward to approving it.
Mazzochi — this is also a facilities needs analysis. So I suggest to Administration that before expending fees for this, this will be presented at Shared Governance and input happens there.
Schmiedl — it is going to go in front of a committee that is similar to Shared Governance.
Roll- All Trustees vote yes except Wozniak, abstains. Motion passes.
6H 1 and 2. Wozniak votes no. Others vote yes, Passes.
Item 7. Approval of independent investment management firm for college funds.
Trustee discussion and questions on pricing and why this choice of firm was chosen. Five minutes of question and answer ensues.
Roll call: All trustees vote yes.