Waterleaf Q/A

Napolitano: [asks about potentially merging options 2 and 3 and couldn’t the students cater instead of Sodexo, how would the contract with Sodexo be affected]

Stewart: as long as it’s associated with student experience, I would encourage and look for those opportunities.

Tim Myers (coordinator for the culinary program): outside events would still have to meet the course objectives for the students. With 16 weeks in the semester, we have to plan ahead and it’s hard to plan for last minute. When the kitchen is not operating, there would be safety / security issue.

Roark: was there student input?

Stewart: not over the last 10 days.

Myers: students gain the experience as part of their class. Students do wish they had more time. Currently, they feel a little cheated.

McGuire: this has been an excellent presentation. Would there be expenses?

Stewart: there might be but it’s hard to tell before development of new curriculum. We might have modest capital expenses.

McGuire: how often would Waterleaf be open?

Stewart: this would depend on the curriculum. After curricular needs are met would we look at what else we could do. If there are some days that are dark and there are opportunities for students, we’d look at that.

McGuire: about shifting the Monday / Tuesday nights, would there be additional revenue?

Myers: we would have to be careful whether our students are prepared for that.

McGuire: 18 months ago, the culinary program was a losing program.

Stewart: if this drives down the cost of the program, great, but it’s about the students first.

Mazzocchi: thank you for this very comprehensive presentation. What is a typical class size?

Stewart: Bruce was talking about classrooms across campus. Our concern is more about the lab space. As Bruce indicated, added 3 classrooms does not do much for us.

Mazzocchi: having additional regular classrooms is not a +.

Stewart: no.

Mazzocchi: would there be a demand in the community for these classrooms?

Stewart: We rely on the community to affirm that what we offer is what they need.

Myers: the program is accredited. Students can take the certification test to become cooks.

Mazzocchi: would there be an expansion in terms of certification?

Myers: yes. Hospitality students can also take certification tests.

Mazzocchi: when it comes to academics, if this were converted, would the current employees still be needed?

Stewart: I don’t think we can answer that yet. I don’t know that we can be 100% students. We still might need a skeletal staff to sustain the restaurant through 12 months of the year.

Mazzocchi: Would we still need an executive chef with a 6-figure salary?

Myers: I’m confident we can run it with FT and PT faculty.

Mazzocchi: could farm-to-table be tied to bringing back the farm to campus?

Myers: yes, we’d be interested in that.

Waterleaf discussion

Hamilton: opening comment: Waterleaf loses money and is not related to the educational mission. Trustee Bernstein will present options.

[We were given a Waterleaf Space Optimization Study handout, based on the Waterleaf committee.]

Bernstein states the Waterleaf was the dream of one man. He goes on to detail all the issues related to Waterleaf, deficits, ignored internal audit, current accounting investigation, adverse publicity because of all the money spent by managers. This is no reflection on the integrity of the Waterleaf Staff. It is time turn a new page.

Donna Stewart: we are here to share with you different options, three in addition to leaving it as is. We’ll hear from Brice Schmiedl, Ellen Roberts, and someone from the academic area.

Bruce Schmiedl: [goes over the current layout and specs] First option: convert the dining area to classroom space, 3 classrooms with 20 students each. This is small by our standards, and a 16-person conference room. The kitchen is unchanged.

Second option: similar but classrooms closer to kitchen, and smaller conference room.

Third option: gutting the entire building, classrooms, offices for faculty, kitchen converted to classrooms.

Costs for options 1 and 2 $110 to $150 per square foot up to about $500,000. For option 3, $180 to $225 per square foot because the demolition is more intense. Up to close to $2 million.

Ellen Roberts: I’d like to talk about bringing a third party to lease or operate the facility.  We have a contract with Sodexo for all dining services on campus. They are not interested at this time because of the location away from foot traffic, anticipated investment, and negative publicity in the press.

But they are more interested to the Wheat Cafe if academic space moved to Waterleaf space, they would be interested in that. They would then more readily provide catering to East campus, fewer labor costs. That would be under their current contract.

A second option we looked at was rental of space for events. We currently turn down 5 large events a month because of the lack of space. Sodexo could still cater event and still share the space.

Other option: leasing externally, demographics in the district are favorable. But there are challenges same as the problems Sodexo had. It would require a change in our current contract with Sodexo.

But rental would bring a potential revenue between $84,000 to $180,000.

Donna Stewart – Third option: conversion to an academic lab

I’m an academic dean, so presenting an opportunity for greater student experience is very easy. We can enhance the preparation of our students through more lab-based instruction and applied learning. We could offer new courses that were impossible before because of the lack of lab access. The students would gain exposure to different styles of service and cuisine. The kitchen at the Wheat Cafe is designed as a lab, it’s an artificial environment. What we have in Waterleaf is more representative of a real restaurant kitchen. They are not interchangeable. The Waterleaf has patio seating, conference rooms, all of which could be used in different ways for learning. With greater access to all the first floor, if we could move more courses there, that would open up more possibilities for the Wheat Cafe as well. Both would be impacted.

There are varieties of ways to take advantage of these opportunities. All the culinary students and many of the hospitality students, that’s about 900 students, with 8 FT faculty.

There are already courses that were designed to be taught at the Waterleaf. We would have no other place to go if this went away. But there are other courses we could create. We would leave the current Fall schedule as is.

Faculty are already working on curriculum revision, This is a lengthy process, in part because we reach out. We have a robust advisory board. We would do a full review of the curriculum, which could take a whole semester. We have a very thorough curriculum process.

In spring, we have a little more flexibility because students has not started. We could begin looking at transitioning some of the work we do at the Wheat Cafe, and moving some offerings into the Waterleaf because WC maxes out at 50 people. We’d also look at these Monday / Tuesday offerings, we would look at moving those later in the week to facilitate a more robust dining room. We’d move some of our hospitality planning, and use Waterleaf footprint for large events.

There might be also a course of fast casual dining in Wheat Cafe, something similar to Panera. Currently, we don’t have a lab, The WC would lend itself to that type of dining. We could try that in Spring 2016.

From the academic perspective, WC and Waterleaf go hand in hand. There are possibilities for WC as well, not just Waterleaf, such as a “grab and go” concept.

Longer terms, there are lots of possibilities, all focused on student involvement. We could turn to student employment, internship, etc.

Discussion between McGuire (who argues that a new budget is being drafting) v. Hamilton who argues that the budget is currently a draft, that multiple scenarios are being considered.

McGuire: Napolitano politicized the budget process by sending it to your email lists.

Mazzocchi: this is all out of order because the only motion is to approve the minutes.

Haimlton: Dianne, your concerns are heard. Our discussion should be civil and respectful

McGuire: and inclusive.

Hamilton: and inclusive, which is why you’re talking right now. This is a new process, it’s more open, it’s more collaborative. You’re welcome to participate. We cannot descend into bickering. It is unbecoming of this institution.

Wozniak: you say this is an open board. I get emails from my dad with information and update that he sends me, that you did not provide or share. And you say it’s an open board.

Hamilton: give me a list of these items and we’ll look at them and figure out, But we’re not going to descend in unpleasant discourse.

Wozniak: [keeps talking over her]

Hamilton: organize that information and let’s see where the communication went astray. This institution deserves better than this. [to McGuire[ You should have attended the budget meeting. You know we have a Waterleaf committee, you should talk to Charles, you can’t just complain at every meeting.

McGuire: if there are committees, they should be reporting.

Hamilton: you’re going to hear these reports tonight.

McGuire: I would have appreciated written reports ahead of time.

Napolitano: the only budget committee met, there are minutes that we are voting on right now.

Roark: if I missed the meeting, should I abstain.

Lawyer: only the budget committee can approve its own minutes. The board cannot vote on this.

Motion to remove item #7 from the agenda. Motion passes.

Presentation by COD alumnus Bill Hillman, Bill’s Amazon’s page.

Introduction by Professor Jackie McGrath

Roll call: Birt absent.

Agenda review: Mazzocchi asks that items 21 through 24 be moved to position after position 10, as 11, 12, 13, and 14 so they can be discussed after Waterleaf discussion. Motion passes.

Revised agenda approved.

McGuire thinks the agenda is incomplete because there is nothing on the presidential search. She is ruled out of order since she made the comments during the vote. Revised agenda passes.

Public comments:

Glenn Hansen

Harun Atcha:

I’m a recent graduate. I recently finished Noli Me Tangere, which started the Philipines revolution. I find Mr Rizal’s moderate revolution. I can help with your reform of the Waterleaf. I Last Spring, I spoke of turning the Waterleaf as student-centered building. My timing was less than ideal. The college does not want for money. The problem with Waterleaf is not that it lost money, but that it did with no benefit to the students. Hire students to work at Waterleaf. Consider the path of the moderation and reform the Waterleaf.

Bob Hazard

Claire Ball

I want to talk about the hiring of Alix Partners, and rush to judgement and need for expertise that were discussed. I disagree with both. The treasurer and comptroller were breaking the rules and COD policies. They could have had the best of intentions. The prior BOt could have asked more questions but they did break the rules. In the private sector, they would have been let go. There is a need for expertise but that is for every company. When the CFO of a company quits or is fired, there is a scramble but not the hiring of a private firm at $600 per hour. The department scrambles but makes up, it shows trust to the employees of the college. I believe these employees are honest and can do the work.

Paul Lefort

I want to know if this BOT is ready to turn the page on a new approach. It’s been 2 months since the change, but not all trustees have gotten the message. The need for change for COD culture is evident: the scandal at the radio station, previous BOT not asking questions, staff operating outside policies, no-bid contracts, audits reporting only to the president, previous BOT chairs making contract extensions with Breuder without proper discussion, allowing the buy-out, authorizing change orders before the Board approved them. That’s what we’ve seen over the past 5 years. That needs to change. The real question is can this board do the reform or continue the petty fight? If the latter, then, resignations are in order.

Tom Hebda

I’d like to address the Waterleaf. I’m a small business owner, I have served on school boards. I have rad about COD over the past year. I have enjoyed many meals at Waterleaf but was surprised, the first time, that no students worked there. It would be nice to have it serve the purpose it was designed for. Looking at other culinary schools in our area,  and this would be a major asset to the students as opposed to an empty liability.

Mark Misiorowski (waived)

Gino Impellizzeri

For those of us who have been reading the CT, there is reason to be concerned. We the people have had enough of the previous board, and those that have rubber-stamped all the president’s decisions. I tell the majority of this board, I say tighten your grip, keep up the good fight. For the mismanagement of the college funds, I was not surprised. We were misled by the referendum. People at the college told us it was about the students. Students, my foot. I like what you’re doing. Stop the increase in tuition, in taxes. That would prove that we have really turned the corner.

Kirk Allen

MR Bauer Foundation hired Glaser for work they need done. To date, the college has not provided any copy of the work product. Can someone explain how money can be spent with no work product. This should be turned over to the internal investigative team.

Trustee McGuire, you pointed out you knew that board policy was violated because of higher returns. You should resign. Do you know where property taxes are deposited? You can respond. I’ll give you my time. Each time money was deposited in investment account, board policy was violated. Arguments to raise taxes were always supported because it was only a small amount but now you oppose tax reduction even though it would also be a small amount.

Jan Shaw

I have not prepared remarks. The first time I attended, I was shocked that a student said no student worked at Waterleaf. We should be hiring students. I’d like to see less extra-curricular, high end stuff that competes with private companies. Student clubs: a club that is called “big government sucks” was denied as too political. You have model UN which is every bit as political. We’d like to see a return to academics. For the no trustees, get over yourselves.

Roger Kempa

I want to comment on property tax and tuition cuts, and about today’s article in the CT. The only justification for the fund balance was stockpiling cash and the BOt ignored their fiduciary duty and rubber-stamped the president’s decisions. The BOT should recognize that current students are current or future taxpayers. I recommend a further, greater than $5, tuition reduction, with further reduction of 0.5% per year for the next few year.  It’s going to have an immediate positive effect on the students. On Waterleaf, use it for something good.

“Good evening

Tonight you’re going to consider tuition decreases and tax abatements as a way of reducing the excessive fund balance that has been run up by Dr. Breuder. I would ask you to go slowly here, given the reliability of some of the numbers that have come out his administration, and wait until the forensic audit has been completed so we know exactly what we’re dealing with. I’m sorry if this offends the sensibilities of anyone who works, or worked, in our finance dept., but given what’s come to light over the past month, prudence takes precedence.

While you’re waiting on the audit, please take that time to consider other options. While it’s true that Breuder built up the fund balance by needlessly increasing tuition, by taking the maximum tax increase every year, he also did it by squeezing every penny out of the budgets of every dept. in the college. He did it by firing classified staff and forcing the remaining staff to take on the additional work of others or risk being fired themselves. He did it by cutting corners everywhere, by cutting student services. By cutting the time that counselors have with students in half, by increasing class sizes, by effectively doing away with release time for faculty to manage the Honors Program, the Forensics team, the Jazz ensembles, by cutting the The Buffalo Theatre, to name a few.

Let’s take this opportunity to take better care of our adjunct faculty. Every college needs adjunct faculty, so let’s attract the best adjuncts we can by compensating them fairly. You could increase their pay, you could offer them affordable insurance, and you could move the best into full time positions.

And yes, tuition is too high, but as high as it is for most of our students, it’s twice as high for our nursing students. One of Dr. Breuder’s first moves was to double their tuition. A good first step would be to bring their rate back down.

Last year at this time we were in the middle of the email scandal, remember? That had to do with getting funding for a New Teaching and Learning Center because we are at peak capacity during the middle of the day. Instead of building that building, we could lower tuition during off peak hrs, late afternoon, early morning, and evenings as a way of luring students into coming at other hours so we could utilize our existing facilities more effectively.

We could also offer tuition rebates as an incentive for persistence and earning good grades by our students. Instead of lowering tuition, offer cash back in the form of credit to student accounts for earning A’s and B’s that could be used for future classes or in our bookstore.

We have some time here while we wait for the audit, let’s use it bring COD back. If you’re not already, please consider talking with the classified leadership and the adjunct leadership, and the FOP and the Engineers directly, without SMT oversight because each group knows what needs to be done to make it easier for them to best serve our students. That’s all anyone here wants, to serve our students to the best of our abilities.

Let’s repair the damage to the fabric of our college while we can.”

“Good evening, I’m Glenn Hansen, President of the Faculty Senate and Association.

I seriously considered not speaking tonight, especially after I learned that a few of my colleagues have comments to share. I want to thank you for the extended conversations, considered debate, and presentations. I’d rather stay here late and learn something than to wait until action has already been taken.

This week many significant things happened to demonstrate an improvement internally at COD. One of which is that I participated in meetings with the Editorial Boards of the Daily Herald and Chicago Tribune (in alphabetical order) WITH the Board Chair and the Interim President. No scripting or editing what so ever. I’ve talked to Editorial Boards before but it was at a time of us vs. them at the College.

This is indicative of the New College of DuPage. We are working together to move this institution back to a focus on education.  Which brings me to why I’m speaking.

It is time to leave the partisan politics at the party committee meeting. I have participated in these board meetings longer than any of you.  The Board of Trustees has always been partisan, but it’s time for that to stop. While you have responsibilities to represent the taxpayers and supporters, your primary responsibility is to the students.

The previous college  president is gone and is waiting somewhere for his retirement bonus. Forget about him and fix the problems that were created in the last 7 years. It is time to lead and set an example. Debate the issues not each other.

As a model, Dr. Collins and Faculty Leaders have been able to sit together, discuss, and work to resolve issues. We have found that we can solve problems without verbal sparing, often by listening. We openly acknowledge we will disagree at some point, but then we will agree to disagree, not kick sand at each other.

You are disagreeing about even the littlest things. Such as conference travel. Here is a solution; it’s called Prior Approval. Every employee, except one, has needed to fill out a form for approval and another form for estimated expenses before doing anything. We negotiated part of our compensation into Professional Development Funds that require approval signatures before accessing.  I would need approval to renew a $20 professional magazine subscription. Oh, did I mention it requires a rationale too. I suggest you follow the same approval process, ask first and then learn the wonderful world of Concur to be reimbursed.

The message here is: get to work and consider the issues, not whether you like each other.  We have work to do together.

Thank you.”

Quick reminder: the BOT meeting will be streamed here. Streaming begins at 7pm.

Item #25

Mazzochi: last month, comments were made about the quality of the soccer fields. I hope somebody is looking into that.

Hamilton: for the record, one of the trustees raised about Mr Robling (??) who is donating his time at the transition team. He’s earning a small amount of money which he gives back to the college. So, he’s working for free. He was not my campaign manager, as I was not running for office at the last election.

Napolitano: regarding the sign-up sheet for comments. We discussed having a check box for people who are requesting action / feedback. That still has not been done. I would hope feedback could be put on the website.

Collins: we’ll have that at the next meeting.

Hamilton: Mr Wozniak, did you want to talk about the team-building we talked about yesterday?

Wozniak: we talked about working together at a soup kitchen in Aurora. I go sometimes with my church. We would go and help out for a few hours. That might be a good idea for all of us.

Napolitano: I support that.

Hamilton: it’s a wonderful idea. Let’s schedule it. Thank you very much.

Ham: trustee McGuire, we also discussed reimbursement.

Attorney: on April 30th, the board voted to suspend trustee reimbursement. Trustees Roark and McGuire raised issues. It was agreed that the Board would revisit that. Trustee McGuire was under the impression that ICCA mandates some reimbursement. I confirmed that, for instance, mileage, at minimum.

McGuire: as trustees, we have to be ambassadors for the college, attendance at chamber of commerce in Naperville.

Ham: I would like to say that the public dime is not a spigot. I don’t think it’s fair to go to an event, and then, turn in expenses, there’s nothing in the CC Act that mandates that.

McGuire: how do you define that? In the past, if it were presented with expense reports.

Hamilton: you need to ask in advance. You don’t go and turn in expenses. You ask and explain if it’s relevant to board activities.

McGuire: we’re going to have conversations about membership in organizations such as ICCTA. I know chairman Ham has strong feelings about that. I  think these organizations have value. I think the HLC might ask how we educate trustees. These organizations provide a broader vision of what it means to be a trustee.

Nap: [to the attorney] is it required by the ICCAct.

Attorney: based on my view, I struggle to understand how mileage might not be included.

Napolitano: We, as trustees, we don’t have to expense. As individuals, we’re not going to be reimbursed if we don’t submit receipts, which I don’t intend to do.

Hamilton: it’s personal choice. Some people think donating their time and energy… some people do that .This board is required to reimburse mileage, but not going to political dinners, or spending money on paper clips, and especially travel, if there is no benefit tied to the Board, the public should not be paying for it.

Attorney: are you directing me to do anything?

Hamilton: I am not. I think everyone has had their say.

Meeting adjourned.

Break for 15 minutes.

Item #19 – for information only, wine expenditures for Waterleaf.

McGuire: is the variance the correct figure for this one?

Jean Kartje: This is the correct one.

Napolitano: [reiterates that the item was not bid] This is not only for Waterleaf?

Jean Kartje: It will be for anything.

Item #20 – CurricUnet

Moved and seconded.

No discussion.

Roll call: all yes

Item #21 – ProQuest for the Library

Moved and seconded.

McGuire: It was a new thing to me when I became a trustee, everyone in the community can use the Library.

Roll call: all yes.

Item #22 – Daily Herald advertising campaign

Moved and seconded.

Bernstein: tracking error lead to overspending $6300. I thought the software would not allow to spend beyond the budget.

Joe Moore: I’m going to ask Joy Mortenson (???) to answer that.

Joy Mortenson: I was working off the wrong numbers. I should have double checked that, as it was my error. When we booked the ads, I did not have the budget for that.

roll call: all yes.

Item #23 – Public comments

Kirk Allen: I’m amazed. Ms Birt, I appreciate you would have liked to see a couple more proposals. Where was that concern for Res Publica. Had this diligence applied then, we would not have that situation. Ms McGuire, you acknowledge 5 months of violation of the policy. Policies are there for a reason. What about the audit? I commend the president for putting the officers on leave. You’re fired when you do that kind of stuff. I have not found anything about it, That is a concern. The justification that it’s only 5 months. It’s a policy. It’s not okay because of the return you’re getting. I believe there’s a violation of the Public funds investment Act. If it’s not true, you should resign.

Laura Reigel: I do agree with what Kirk Allen said. I’m gonna ask a few questions. With Datatel, I’d like to see the original contract. When there is a $500,000 expense, there may be changes included in the original contract. But there are now people being brought on site, with lodging, food, and cars. When we enter such large contract, that the Board had discussions about these contracts, rather than just these contracts been thrown at the board, rather than staff giving presentations. I have been asking for this for almost a year. This has not been made very clear. It appears that they started in 2009. The financial mechanisms make it look like they started before and the people who voted for that, Mr Wozniak, should have known that the information was not correct. I am concerned that the questions are not answered.

Roger Kempa: Much of this is for Trustee McGuire. There was a reason why I mentioned the trust funds, the Act has a special category of investments. According to the law, if you are going to buy it,m you have to appear before the Board and the Board puts a limit. Regarding the money market rates, it’s interesting IMET, they were presented with forgery and fraud, but nothing they really did. The reason for pulling money out there was political. But 5% is 5% and policies are meant to be followed.