Chair Hamilton–in response to President Hansen’s remarks.

We were just discussing that [streaming] this week and it is in process. Your ability to get at old sessions is available now until 2009.  You will learn about this later on, in the interest of greater transparency.

CODFA Vice President Richard Jarman speaks

Kirk Allen: Thank you, For several months I’ve asked questions in regards to claims that have been made, or whoever I should sent it , where is the documentation that shows that Breuder’s membership in Max McGraw?

Under what authority can a Trustee incur legal expenses before those are approved by the Board?

Also in a FOIA,  I found that enrollment numbers were exaggerated and did not match what was reported to ICCB.

Handguns and M-14 rifles — you are brand-purchasing them without getting quotes for specific products. Kraft notes that there are other firearms available that would be less expensive than the ones that they are putting bids out for. You should not have brand RFP when there are others 44 millimeters that cheaper and used by military and law enforcement.

Last question — a legal bill to a Mr. O’Rourke. There is an MR Bower Foundation who could not hire Mt. ORourke and so they wanted the college to hire him so he could do the work for them. Was the payment made to Mr. ORourke made to the College of to the Foundation?

Paul Lefort: 45 year DuPage taxpayer. Congratulations to thie new BOT for establishing a new age at COD. I may not agree with all your actions but I appreciate your attempt to get more transparency. Does approval of a Donor Wall in the SRC seem appropriate or does in seem like previous excessive expenses?

Could you have an executive summary of some items of the mind-numbing 600 page budget.  There could be ways to make this document more accessible to the public. Budgets indicate priorities.

Visual presentation made at BoT meetings should be posted on the web site. I second live streaming as well.  Results of the audits should be posted. Confirm that the internal audit is reporting to the Board.

Bob Graham . I am intimidated by the time clock. I have a handout. First I want to congratulate you, especially recent trustees, which marks a more hopeful era for this college. I am here to speak on behalf on the COD soccer program. There are two student athletes here who are going to speak as well. Perhaps we could all speak together at the same time.  I am the second head soccer coach here at this program. Coach Jim Kelly took over this program and it became the number one program in the nation. My handout shows the prodigious accomplishments of this team.  We were an unproven team in the past at a relatively unproven sport. 40 years ago! We thought conditions would improve.  There is today a magnificent complex now, but it looks good driving by, stepping on to it is another matter. This facility is actually in worse shape than it was in 1977 when I was coaching it. That is not a good statement. Our team and our coach are working hard. Coach Kelly deserves more respect than he is getting by having that facility.

Eugene Refakes– resident of Glen Ellyn, lives a few blocks away. I believe in  fiscal conservatism, limited government, and personal economic freedom. I am manager of financial systems.  Allegedly due to poor financial iversight, I feel it is my obligation to taxpayers, many of whom are neighbors. We should be aware of the things that are alleged that are not understood.  We need to hear both sides of the story. I did research on some of the allegations we listed on our website. I took those concerns seriously. Here is my viewpoint on those:

Phone bill — are we paying for personal phone lines for families? The bill cited was for landline phones for regional Westmont Center.

The same concerned citizen- listed Red Box, meals, etc.  That was from a students credit card bill. The student was seeking reimbursement for a replication of locket payments. We included that document for the audit. The student provided credit car receipts and we reimbursed $44.

College paid sales tax? We are not exempt from all taxes. We are not exempt from utility taxes.

Michael DeSImone — soccer player and student athlete. This is not the first time we have approached the College about our facilities. The field conditions in 2013 were not up to par with a college level. Overwatering of the grass, the grass is too high. High grass impedes the flow of the game. Mud patches throughout the year. They are not reseeded at all. We spent our own money reseeding. The police caught us and asked us to leave.

Last fall the NCAA  had new regulations that all fields need to be 115 yards long . However, the field was refitted to 110 feet long. If the other team would have know n this — it was illegal — we could have forfeited our win.  We also could have sprained an ankle, torn an ACL, broken a bone. I don’t want this to be brushed off. This is for the future — not for me as I have already played two years and am moving on. Please fix this.

Angela Torrito- Student athlete at COD. I have already played my two years of Women’s Soccer. Women’s soccer team has most student athletes than any team at COD. We do not have locker rooms so we had to change in our cars or out in the open which was not comfortable. We have no scoreboards. We would greatly appreciate making these changes.

Roger Kempa- Several matters. One regarding the minutes of the last BOT meetings. I am not a citizen at large. I am a District 502 citizen. I’d like that to be corrected. Also I would like a statement I made about COD being the fastest growing college in the nation put in the minutes.

Questions — year end annual audit is something that should be in process right now. Are there any plans for taking care of that function? Can year-end financial projections at the end of May be made and made available to the Bot and the public? In the monthly financial report there is a budget to-expenditure report. There is no revenue to budget report however that in that group of items. There should be one. In the investment schedule published at the end of April– it is overstated by over 4 million dollars. This is major and relates to IMEt. Last–Trustee Birt- I would be amiss if I didn’t recognize you there and ask you if you can now state for the record any examples of disinformation out there?

Gino Impellizeri- Professor Emeritus of COD. First and foremost I must express my happiness that after 6 frustrating years, people have finally voted for the right people. It is a relief. You have hit the ground like parachuters who land with guns in their hands. Chair Hamilton — thank you for your courage for fighting by yourself in the face of what has happened here. The main obstacle has been removed. But there is still some housekeeping that has to take place. But there are some administrators and a member of the faculty who think that this place belongs to them and not to the public. It belongs to the residents of District 502 and to the State of Illinois. Students are here to be served. From the lowest janitor to the President — all of us are here to serve the students and the public, not to serve ourselves. We sent a strong and loud message to remind that Americans are good citizens. Unlike us Europeans, they are governable. But there is a limit to patience. But we are watching you, new Trustees.

It is customary at this time of year for citizens of these parts to turn their attention to their backyards. The snows of winter are a distant memory; the threats of frost have receded; the once-bone-hard soil yields to the gentle pressure of the gardener’s spade. So it seems fitting for my thoughts tonight to turn to gardening.

Visitors to the April 2014 Board meeting; some 2 months BEM (before email), 9 months BGP (before golden parachute), and a whole year BAL (before administrative leave); were greeted with an unexpected announcement that some agreement had been reached between the college and the DuPage County Forest Preserve for the latter to house the Community Education Farm. While laudable in principle, I thought this was little more than a ruse to deflect criticism from the decision to eliminate the farm on campus; indeed I had comments prepared that night in its defense.

One year on, there has been no progress in that proposal but, I am happy to report that the signs are promising that the farm will be back, where it should have been all along. In an era when sustainability is the watchword, the farm is emblematic of that philosophy and should stand as a centerpiece of collaborative, interdisciplinary educational activities that impact the entire community. The return to campus not only should happen, it must happen, and we will be monitoring its progress.

While on the subject of sustainability, the Senate passed a resolution in the summer of 2012 that called upon the Board of Trustees to adopt an approach to the landscaping and the natural areas that reflected both environmental and fiscal responsibility. Sadly this has not yet happened. It is time.

I am skilled in neither mathematics nor philosophy but I can sustain the following logical construct: if you water the grass less, you don’t have to mow it as often. You will save fuel; you will reduce the college’s carbon footprint; you will reduce the noise pollution. Replace expensive and delicate annuals with more appropriate sustainable plantings. The staff deployed in the almost pathological attention to flower beds can be put to more productive maintenance of the natural areas that have been sorely neglected these past six years. I note that the Strategic Long Range Plan has included sustainability in revised goal 8.4. Now is the time to demonstrate it.

Good evening,

I’m Glenn Hansen, president of the Faculty Association and Faculty Senate.

Tonight it’s time for my annual request for you to take a step further than is required and open the meetings to everyone by streaming it over the Internet. We have steamed and broadcast the meetings before. We did this until Dr. Breuder and Chairman Wessel ended the practice in 2009. This was after investing in the hardware and software. I ask you to do this again. If I can watch a city council meeting in a small town live, why not our meetings; especially at a time when everyone is still asking what is going on at COD?

Faculty members have been blogging at your meetings for a least a year, volunteers who are dedicated to the open access of information have worked hard to create a live stream of information. Our audience has grown tremendously, at one point crashing our blog site. I find out more about the meeting when read the blog than sitting in the gallery. It’s time for COD to step up and share the video recordings live.

We also endorse some other changes.

Besides streaming, continue to post the videos but don’t delete them after the next recordings are available. Archive them and make them accessible through the COD website indefinitely.

Last week there was discussion about closed meeting recordings. I wrote that they should not be available because of personnel issues, just as was advised by your attorneys. However, I did also suggest that the past years of verbatim meeting minutes should be turned over to the Attorney General. We don’t care how people talked to each other, but we would like to know if the discussion of Dr. Breuder’s retirement gift was appropriate and whether anyone saw the phantom contract extensions.

And lastly, we ask that the verbatim minutes not be destroyed, ever. Digital recordings take little space, a few pennies of hard drive or disk space, and therefore should be archived indefinitely. They are a part of our history.

I hope you accept these requests in the spirit they are offered. To move forward we have to make the extra efforts to be more than open.

Thank you.

7:29 pm Chair Hamilton moves to end the closed session.

Unanimous vote to end the closed session.

Chair Hamilton calls for the Regular BOT meeting to begin.

Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll call. All Trustees present.

Chair Hamilton calls for a motion to commence the Regular Meeting.

Chair Hamilton calls tore move Item 8B3 if there are no objections. Due to unnecessary scheduling. Chair Hamilton asks if there are any objections and there are none.  8B3 -Consulting Services — Levick Strategic Communications LLC.

The item is removed.

Public Comments. Chair Hamilton reviews the procedures for public comments.

The trustees are still in closed session.

A sparser crowd tonight:

There will be a Special Meeting today at 6:00 p.m. – Closed Session (Pursuant to Open Meetings Act) to be held in SSC 2200 immediately followed by the Regular Board Meeting at 7:00 p.m. to be held in SSC 2206.

The agenda is posted at the Board of Trustees website.

BoT meeting reconvenes 10:36 All Trustees vote to reconvene.

Motion that the BoT approve the consideration move to waive the Res Public invoice.

Mazzocchi: I so move but only that we release the invoice but the waiver be limited to the invoice itself and not to the substance of any attorney-client privileged communications.

Seconded: McGuire.

Hamilton: I’d like to make a statement about this. Res Publica was hired by a law firm and without any BoT knowledge under the thin veil of attorney-client privilege. We need to disclose to the public exactly what we are doing when we hire a law firm.

Any discussion:

McGuire: I wasn’t quite without BoT knowledge. I believe Chair Birt was aware of it.

Roll call: All vote yes.

Hamilton: I will entertain a motion to change authorization of bank signatures.

Moved and seconded.

Mazzocchi: I would like to make an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The current signature for all amounts allows the Treasurer or the President alone to disburse funds. My amendment changes the amount that goes out, with a large purchase it needs more than one signature. It’s a second control so that they go for the proper purpose.

Any check that goes out that is over 25,000 must be signed by someone on the BoT.

McGuire: Won’t it be awkward or cumbersome to implement. Won’t it be chasing people down.

Mazzocchi: We need to see what’s going on closer than we have been doing.

All trustees vote yes to the amended motion.

Hamilton: We have to vote on the change. We have to approve the original motion with the change.

No further discussion. Motion passes unanimously.

Hamilton: Motion that Fiscal year 2016 compensation for non-union, p/t teaching faculty credit assignments/Part-time Librarians, non-credit, non- classroom oriented assignments.

All trustees vote yes.

Hamilton: motion to approve the CDL Employee Drug Testing Program.

All trustees vote yes.

Announcements:

Budget committee: Napolitano and Bernstein

Waterleaf Committee: Bernstein will be heading. Also Paul Lefort, member of the public.

Napolitano: will the meetings be public? Open to the public or the trustees?

Hamilton: We need to discuss procedures. The procedures are not completely worked out. Initial discussion that I had with an attorney was that it doesn’t have to be open to the public. Only if two trustees are there does it fall under the OMA.

Hamilton: The good thing about having more frequent meetings. By next week maybe we can confirm if this will be an open meeting.

We will be meeting twice a month. We have the regular running of the college and we also have the investigations. we need to rise to the occasion and tackle the problems we are going to be meeting twice a month. One thing that dovetails with this is that I have to say that the Higher Learning Commission is going to be conducting  an advisory meeting this month. This BoT is equal to any task that the Advisory committee will put in front of us. With transparency, intelligence and energy I am sure that we will address all their concerns and solve any issues that they may have.

The next meeting is Thursday May 21 2015.

McGuire moves to adjourn.

Bernstein seconds.

Meeting adjourned.

Chair Hamilton: We are now reviewing several contracts for law firms that the College retained under the previous Board because we think the public needs to know.

Counsel: While we are in open session, let’s make sure we do not disseminate information that should not be in open session. We cannot get into specific details about advice received. If we want to to do that we should go into closed session.

Hamilton: Initially we are going to go over the law firms’ bills because Mr. Glaser has prepared a presentation on this for us. If there are questions we can go into closed session.

Linda Sands Vankerk stands up to the podium. She says that she and Glaser divided the firms up to look at who was paid what, and who engaged the firms. I am still not sure what we can say about the actual items.

Counsel: You can talk about who engaged them, who made the decision to engage them, the general type of work that they engaged in.

LSVK: Daniel Nielsen — Arbitration. For 3 grievances that went to arbitration. Both the union (CODFA) and the college had to pay for them. $650

Glaser: Donner and Company — we used this firm to begin to talk with Breuder about his severance package. $3428

Duane Morris — this was a mediator. This had to do with drainage at the tennis courts. 6,000

LSVK: Franczek  Radelet — $331,405. We had been using them under BoT Chair Carlin, then we were told not to, then were told again that we could. We engaged them for things like labor and employment issues, student issues, lawsuits, that type of things and immigration issues for full-time faculty. We were told to use different firms.

Fuchs and Rosselli $29,505

Glaser: John Donahue $5,000. Neither Linda nor I were involved in the decision to hire these individuals. They were hired to deal with some DuPage County individuals.

Robbins Schwartz — They had been counsels before we hired Franczek. At some point we were directed we could engage them again for employment, labor, student issues. 310, 143

Schiff Hardin   $20,000, $10,000 for litigation over flooring and $10,000 for supoenas with the US attorney’s office

Schwartz Woods and Miller — $ 8,938. This was related to WDCB because WBEZ had begun to filter into some of our band and listeners were having a hard time getting our station. This was to see about how we could address their filtering into our signal.

Williams Montgomery and John  $22,000

Total:  to date in 2015    $737,153

Mazzocchi: do we know who retained Schiff Hardin?

Glaser: we don’t know.

Hamilton: Who called Schiff Hardin?

Glaser: Breuder signed the engagement letter.

Hamilton: Who hired Res Publica

Glaser: Neither Linda nor I were involved with that.

Discussion about who retained Res Publica and what the process is when the college pays but does not retain, and how to ensure that invoices are legitimate. Glaser does not know. LSV states that “someone” would know.

Mazzocchi: Before issuing them a check don’t we know who engaged them?

Hamilton: I don’t think that Mr. Glaser knows the answer to that question. We need to move to closed session.

Mazzocchi: I’m being careful about my questioning and I want some answers. Don’t you need to know who engaged them before issuing them a check?

Glaser: we don’t know.

Mazzocchi: Don’t you have a custom in practice to confirm that an invoice was a properly generated invoice?

Glaser: We haven’t paid anything on that invoice. If the BoT doesn’t want to pay it, then you

Mazzocchi: I am asking if you have a procedure to check that someone is issuing a properly legal invoice.

Linda: Yes.

Mazzocchi: Isn’t there a step before you sign off on this to check that this firm was lawfully employed by someone on this colleg.

LSVK: Whoever engaged them would be the person. In this case I don’t know who it was. I don’t know if it was Brueder or the BoT.

LSVK: Somebody would have to sign off on that check.

Mazzocchi: So nobody has asked you to do that so far. Now, regarding Schiff and Hardin, who made the initial movement to engage them?

Glaser: Ken Florey made the recommendation

Mazzocchi: Who actually reached out an initiated that contact on the matter of the subpoenas.

Glaser: Ken Florey.

On the recommendation of Ken Florey, Dr. Breuder gave me authority to call them.

Mazzocchi: Did you talk to anybody on the BoT to ensure they were ok that you were hiring the Schiff Hardin law firm.

Glaser: No

Mazzocchi: How about for the Federal subpoena?

Glaser: No

Mazzocchi: Did you ever confirm their rates?

Glaser: We have paid them only for the retainer. We don’t know yet what the fees will be if we engage in litigation.

Mazzocchi: What is their hourly rate?

Glaser: The initial invoice was 10,000 to do an investigation. If we go to litigation we will know.

Bernstein: But how are they chipping away at that 10,000?

Mazzocchi: Are you suggesting that on the iMAT matter, Schiff Hardin is only engaged for 10,000?

Hamilton: Didn’t you know that when you engaged them that the matter would go over the 15,000? I am talking about the federal investigation, not the IMAT matter.

Glaser: You are asking two people who were not involved in the hiring.

Mazzocchi: They are billing up to 600 per hour. Isn’t that accurate. Doesn’t that concern you?

Glaser: That is not my initiative to unfold.

Mazzocchi: Who on the Board do you think may have engaged that firm?Did you ever inform the BoT that you had negotiated some kind of cap that ensured you would not go above 15,000?

LSVK: Tom is saying that he is not engaged in that.

Mazzocchi: But you know that you can’t pay above 15,000? Didn’t you think that it would be worth informing the BoT.

LSVK: Dr. Breuder has always been the one to communicate with the BoT. He would have been the one to communicate that.

Mazzocchi: Did you ever discuss going through a competitive bid process?

Glaser: given the sensitive matter of the subpoena, there wasn’t time for a RFP.

Mazzocchi: Have you taken steps to talk with Schiff Hardin that for the IMEt matter you haven’t gone over the 15,000? You’ve put no restrictions on that?

Glaser: That can not bill us over the 10,000.

Mazzochi: Are you sure?

Hamilton: At this point there are a lot of questions with regard to Res Publica. We need to go to closed session for that.

Glaser continues to go over his report on which firms were hired and for how much.

Napolitano: Is it the policy that the College pays for the Foundation? When it comes to a separate charitable organization. We’ve heard the name Ken Florey mentioned a lot. Has there ever been a waiver so that Florey could be Breuder’s attorney?

LSVK: I have’t heard anything about Florey being Breuder’s attorney.

McGuire: I don’t think that Ken Florey is Dr. Breuder’s attorney,

Hamilton: I have a tiny question. I have a bill for services to Thomas O Rourke for $36,000 to a Mr. Thomas Glaser. It’s not on that list.

Glaser: That’s a grant. He is not representing us in any legal capacity. We received a grant from Mt O Rourke. He is studying a population in Cook County and it is research that some of our criminal justice students are going to participate on.

Hamilton: For the discussion of pending litigation and the discussion of employment, performance, compensation or dismissal of legal counsel for the public body.

Hamilton: I will move that the BoT move into closed session.

Moved and seconded.

Napolitano: Could we hold the legal matters for the end so that the public in attendance can leave?

Hamilton: the rest of the agenda depends on what gets discussed in closed session. This pertains to the other matters we have to vote on tonight.

Hamilton calls for a motion to move to closed session.

Mazzochi votes no. All others vote yes.

Mazzochi: Could we have a time estimate so we know how long the public has to wait.

Hamilton: 30 minutes hopefully less.

DIscussion of IT contracts is concluded and voting us unanimously in favor.

Chair Hamilton:I would like to  change the order of the agenda. I would like to postpone Item 8A2 to the next meeting. This is on Strategic Planning.

I would like to discuss 8B5 first and then 8B1 last.

Hamllton: Any new business?

Mazzochi: There are things that stem from the financial report that came in the BoT financial reports that we need to have some discussion on. From the March and April financial reports we have some invoices that reflect over 50,000 in postage costs.  Some are discussed as a post card for COD as fiscally responsible, a PULSE postcard, IMPACT volumes 3 and 4.  I would like clarification on this. IMPACT is only supposed to be published 3 times a year.

Hamilton: I believe Joe Moore is prepared to talk about the extra mailings.

Moore presents the 4 cards in question. I will discuss how they were requested of my office, when, the timing of the mailings and the costs.

First week of March, we were asked by President Breuder asked Marketing for a postcard that would be sent to households in the District that would show why COD is the best value and the fastest growing CC. We sent out bids. That same week, we got a request for a second card that would talk about COD’s fiscal health.  That same week, we received a request for a 3rd card that would inform the public about our PULSE survey. Then, two other cards were requested on academic reputation and students opinions.  They were to include WDCB.

The last 2 were rescinded by Chairman Hamilton and no one has asked us for any postcards since.

Each card cost approximately 41,000 to print sort and mail.  Marketing had the budget for one card but not more. I told Dr. Breuder that. He then went to the Foundation for further funding.

We were able to afford the first postcard by expanding IMPACT that goes to 377,000 households. IT was expanded to 12 pages form the usual 8, and so we did not have the funds for the next issue of IMPACT as it now cost more than budgeted. That is how we had the funds for the first postcard.

Bernstein: Is the timing of these publications and mailings usual?

Moore: No, it is not usual. Not a sequence over a month and a half.

Bernstein: Do you have any idea why this timing?

Moore: I do not want to read Breuder’s mind. I know that there was a lot of negativity about the college at the time.

Hamilton: How divergent were these from normal marketing schemes?

Moore: These were not like other publications we had been sending out.

Hamilton: So we don’t normally try to attract students by sending out mailings comparing us to the state and to the country?

Moore: No

Hamilton: IS there anything that was messaged out, stray messaging outside of our overall marketing plan?

Moore: It has not been typical for us to send out information about a community survey.

Hamilton: Especially not one that changes surveys from one year to another. I understand that statisticians do not trust the validity of that data.

Mazzochi: IMPACT was expanded from 8 pages to 12. Did those pages that were added discuss the Waterleaf?

Moore: That was included.

Mazz: When were those 4 pages planned?

Moore: The entire issue was planned at the end of December, beginning of January.

Mazz: Was it originally slated to be 8 pages?

Moore: Dr Breuder decided by the end of December to make it go from 8 to 12 pages.

Mazzochi: Who gave you the guidance on these extra pages?

Moore: Dr. Breuder

Hamilton: Wouldn’t this normally originate from Marketing?

Moore: We always did get a fair amount of advising and input form Breduer. It was not normal to have these number of maiings in a row,

Mazz: You had funds available for one. How did you get the extra funds?

Moore: I explained to Breuder that we needed additional funds to be able to pay for the postcards.

Mazzochi: Who initiated the transfer of those funds?

Moore: Breuder

Mazz: How did that happen?

Moore: The funding became available but I am not the best person to say how that happened.

Mazz asks about the bidding process and Precise Printing

Moore: These cards were given to us one at a time. We did not see it as a series so we didn’t know that we needed to go to the BoT. When it became apparent, we went to the BoT. That’s when they were removed form the agenda.

Hamilton: The initial cards were done without the Board’s knowledge.

Moore: I am not the one in contact with the BoT. Breuder had that. He would have been the one to tell the BoT.

Hamilton: When we have variance with normal procedure we have to go to the BoT. Is that what you are saying?

Moore: IT came up to the 20,000 threshold. When it became apparent it was multiple cards and it was a series, we saw that we had to take it to the BoT.

Hamilton: I am trying to show that when you take a project apart and approve individual parts it can fly under the radar of the 25,000. Budget transfers are reviewed quarterly. If you have a project that is brought into pieces it can go by the BoT. We must have policies that prevent the transferring of monies of this magnitude. We need a policy that requires more frequent review. So we can show ourselves, our students, our administration, the public that we are fiscally responsible.

Napolitano: But each card is more than 25,000. Each one is above that threshold.

Moore: Postage, I was told, is not part of that, and the postage is what took it above that threshold. Greg Doty is I think the one who would have been responsible.

Moore: I had the budget to do one. Almost immediately the other requests came in. We had to go back and say we didn’t have the budget.

Napolitano: Were you told you needed to go to the Board?

Moore: The first seemed okay. Then it became apparent with the subsequent requests, that we would need to go to the BoT to approve funding.

Napolitano: Counsel, could you find out if there is indeed an exception for postage?

Counsel: I don’t know. I will have to look into it.

Napolitano: And what about the Foundation transferring money to cover it?

Counsel: I will find that out.

Mazzochi: I don’t want to ask Mr Moore about this because I don’t think he is the one to know how. I’d like to ask Mr. Glaser.

Glaser comes up to the podium

Mazzochi: Were you aware of this need to transfer the money from one budget?

Glaser: Yes I knew. Breuder asked me to replenish a line item in Marketing that did not have enough money.

Mazzochi: did Breuder tell you to transfer?

Glaser: It came through in the form of a note.

Glaser: It was a spreadsheet with a handwritten note.To use COD contingency fun d to transfer money to marketing.

Mazz: Isn’t contingency to be used for emergency?

Glaser: Not exactly

Mazz: do you prepare the annual budget?

Glaser: Yes

Mazz: The budget defines what an emergency or unexpected, non foreseen expenditure. Is that transfer noted anywhere? Where in the report is that transfer?

Mazz: Who on the Board did you inform of ths 150,00 transfer of money from contingency to marketing? This was in March? You didn’t think to alert anyone? What if the Board didn’t approve of it? The funds would have been spent and you would not have been able to retrieve them.

Hamilton: Vice Chair Mazz, this is what I was talking about. We have a policy that only allows for review of these trasnfers on a quarterly basis. We need to do these more frequently. In my opinion this is something that should not happen again. as a board we have to have a tighter control of these types of “emergencies.”  Next week we will bring forth a new policy.

Mazz: But I want to understand what would have happened if the BoT had not approved?

Glaser: They would have been put back

Mazzocchi: but how?

The chair gives the floor to the attorney who explains that there is no policy to allow the administration to just remove money from the contingency fund and to transfer it. But the policy is unclear.

Hamilton: I will take the floor and state that this is the problem and this is very serious. This is why we need new policy.

Bernstein: how many transfers occur a year?

Glaser; from contingency?

Bernstein: from anywhere to anywhere.

Sapyta: a couple hundred over the course of the year.

Bernstein: it would be easy to make it available to the Board, on the website.

Sapyta: sure, if IT can do it.

Mazzochi: how many transfers out of contingency this year?

Sapyta: 3

Mazzocchi: how many, in your tenure, were done for a mailer?

Glaser: none.

Mazzocchi: the grounds for the transfer must be documented as need. What were the grounds? What was the documentation? Who told you this was going to be adequate?

Sapyta: chain of command. The president tells you it’s adequate. You do it.

Mazzocchi: did you personally ask any BOT member to see if they were ok? Did you ask for a special BOT meeting?

Glaser: no.

Mazzocchi: because dr Breuder told you this was ok?

Glaser: yes.

Mazzocchi: did you ask anyone else?

Glaser: no.

Napolitano: so, this was an unauthorized expenditure. Are there any emails documenting this?

Hamilton: anyone else has questions regarding the transfer.

Break for 10 minutes.

Earl Dowling, VP of Student Affairs

Earl Dowling presents the Jack Kent Cooke Award and explains it as the largest private scholarship for community college students judged on achievement, academic ability, and the desire to help others. Our most recent Jack Cook Kent scholar is Omar Escamilla.

Omar will be transferring to DePaul to study Organizational Communication.

Omar is COD’s 8th recipient of this scholarship.

Dowling then presents the PHi Theta Kappa students who were selected as participants in the Phi Theta Kappa All-State Academic Team, Omar Escamilla and Paulo Mazza. Paulo will also be transferring to DePaul to pursue a degree in Organizational Communication.

Dowling also notes that Paulo has played the role of Chappy, the College’s mascot, and the secret is now revealed.

Dowling invites Professor Steve Schroeder and the Phi Theta Kappa members to the podium.

COD was named as in the top 100 out of 3500 chapters of Phi Theta Kappa. Distinguished Honors in Action award. This year’s topic was “Frontiers and the Spirit of Action. This year the COD team pursued the theme of  Anxiety as a mental health issue affecting college students.

COD was also awarded $500 for their winning case study project “Mental Health: America’s Forgotten Frontier.”

Hamilton asks for a motion to approve the consent agenda.

Trustee Mazzochi asks to remove 7B1 and 7B3 G  IT contract renewals

Napolitano moves, Mazzochi seconds.

Chair Hamilton announces changes to this procedure from now on.

From now on we will expect a competitive bid report for each purchase order. We will expect that sole source contracts for outside of professional services they will be very rare.  And if they are used staff will need to be prepared to offer a blind market report to know what expected prices might be.

Motion to approve. Unanimous

Smith Maintenance Company — contract for a total of over 1 million dollars.

Chair Hamilton asks for appropriate person to come to the podium to discuss this item.

Jim Ma comes to the podium.

Hamilton: Could we hear a summary of the contract and the bidding

Jim MA: We have 46 full time and 9 pt custodians. We do not have enough staff to clean the areas. We have 12 during the day, 5 in the evening, the rest at night. We use an outside contractor to supplement the workforce. This has been going on for many years. The contractor’s prices are lower than what we pay our employees. This is clearly an economic measure.

Hamilton: Questions?

Mazzochi: I just wanted to know if this is the cost-effective way to bid this,compared to hiring more people.

Jim Ma: We pay our employees 12 per hour to start plus benefits.

Napolitano: have we used them in the past?

Jim Ma: We have used them in the past. They lost their bid last year because their prices had gone up.

Mazzochi: were we happy with their services?

Jim Ma: yes.

No further questions.

Hamilton: The next item 71B. Grading and restoration north of Pond 9 to Landworks, $129,516.

Napolitano moves, Mazzochi seconds.

Hamilton: Could appropriate staff person come to the podium. Could you reveal the competitive process that led to this contract?

COD Engineering staff describes the bidding process that leads to awarding the contract to the lowest qualified bidder.

Mazzochi: Is this part of a larger schematic plan?

Engineer: Part of a larger plan. Pond 9 was expanded to improve storm water retention on campus. At the time we started this we did not know the route that the College road would take. Now as we have the actual road we see a low spot that doesn’t drain properly. We need to address this.

No further questions. Roll call: Unanimous yes from all trustees.

7bG3 — contract for 1,259, 000 for IT contract renewals.

Chuck Currier, VP for IT is up at podium. There are many items in this board item. Is there something specific that I can address?

Mazzochi– lots of different line items and because it is over a million dollars I would like to get an understanding of what these involve.

Currier: Fair number of maintenance contracts, license contracts that come up annually. We have aligned most of those to start at the beginning of the new fiscal year, July, so that they come up at the same time. IT makes it easier for accounting purposes.  Each one of these are different — licensing, maintenance, support. Could I concentrate on any particular one for you.  I do have a report on the big number, the Ellucian Inc contract.  Currier gives a report on this contract.

Currier says there are three approaches. 1 is “home grown.” tends to be costly. 2nd is “best of breed.” find modules form different vendors and weave them together.  That is intricate to achieve.  3rd is the “integrated sweep.” From one vendor, it is pre-integrated and therefore the work is less complex.  In 2005, COD had a mainframe and a combination of home-grown and best of breed.

In 2005, COD formed a selection committee. Faculty were involved in this. We put out requests and made site visits.  In 2006, COD approved Datatel and Colleague. The team selected and the Board approved this. Datatel is the vendor and Colleague is the product. Thus, we moves to an integrated sweep approach.

We tried to reduce the number of vendors. We wanted to get more efficient use of our staff.

Initial implementation in 2007. Student, HR, Payroll, etc all were part of this implementation.

From 2008-2015 various other products were added, all form Ellucian.

Currier provides further details of how COD purchases products form Ellucian.

Raises some caution about Ellucian moving to the cloud.

162,322 charge to the college for various services form Ellucian.