There have been technical difficulties with the audio tonight and we do not have a blogger in the room. Regrettably, we were not able to capture the new trustee’s introductory remarks.

We pick up with some of the public comments starting at about 7:20pm. Faculty leadership’s comments will be posted in full in a separate post.

Several speakers commented favorably on the new free speech policy and thanked Dr. Collins for its implementation.

Laura Riegle spoke about the downgraded bond rating and chided the boycotting trustees.

Mike McPherson spoke about photos of the college sports teams.

Bill Graham, local resident, supports new trustee Olsen and expresses thanks for willingness to serve. Looks forward to less drama and more business being done.

Clare Ball, member of local Libertarian group. Welcomes David Olsen but protests the process of his selection, disregarding existing pool of candidates. Selection was politically motivated. States that she is angry only at the boycotting trustees who gave up their vote.

John Kraft, Edgar County Watchdogs. References drama created by the boycotting trustees and their dysfunctional legacy.

Roger Kempa. A lot is being rammed through this meeting, lacking documentation. Discussed goal of new financial policy to create more transparency.

Miguel Marino, was involved with student government and later a COD employee, still has faith in board to find balance. Congratulations to Trustee Olsen. Young people can take on big roles. Don’t fear conflict, it is a step toward change and progress.

Kirk Allen, downgrading by S&P traces directly back to bad governance. Asks that all trustee and administrator wine/dines be reimbursed to the college. Points to collusion between Breuder and BOT Chairs Birt and Carlin. Closed session recordings must be released. Voting against it says you have something to hide. References how the Watchdogs have found a second secret contract with no work product, made by Glaser, that the BOT had no knowledge of. Pursue criminal charges for theft of taxpayer funds.

Paul Lefort, 47-year DuPage resident. Support of ethics training on the agenda tonight, lists details of 10 serious ethics breaches.

Keith Yearman, Prof of Geography. ICCB has been silent or inactive when complaints brought to their attention about issues at COD. Apparently has no enforcement authority. Its own executive says it is a primarily a coordinating board. Legislature gave it no oversight authority or neutered it over the years. Call upon Jeanne Ives to lead effort to give it more authority.

The two factions of the BOT each called a meeting for this evening. The boycott trustees called theirs at 5:30pm, and the Clean Slate called theirs at 7pm. The agendas and board packets are the same.

The bloggers will not be covering tonight’s meetings. We encourage everyone to watch the live stream at this link:

http://www.cod.edu/multimedia_services/botmedia.aspx

As usual, we refrain from editorial comment.

Full text of Secretary Napolitano’s comment during open Trustee discussion:

There were a few questions/comments about items listed on the consent agenda.

Bernstein addresses the absent trustees and asks that the consent agenda be the agenda for the special meeting next Thursday so that items crucial to the operation of the college can be dealt with.

Napolitano describes a conversation he had with McGuire just after learning of Hamilton’s resignation. McGuire asked Napolitano to support her for chairman and said that she wanted to overturn the voiding of Breuder’s contract. She wanted to bring him back and end his lawsuit, as well as reinstate Glazer and Spayta. She said she would cease cooperation with investigations. Other details about the attorneys.

Mazzochi points out RFP in current board packet for board training in ethics and governance. Will not be issued until there is a board quorum. Hopes that by continuing trustee discussions, will be able to move quickly through backlog of business. Closes meeting.

Mazzochi launched into another commentary about COD’s response to the HLC findings. She expressed concerns about the memo circulated earlier today, not sure that enough is being done.

Collins and Mazzochi faced off. Collins says that the board is not here, and that three trustees cannot give him direction. They go back and forth. “You can’t discipline me.” “That sounds like a threat.” Mazzochi insists that it is worthwhile to have the trustees who are present ask questions and give feedback. Collins says that he has extensive expertise with HLC and has served as reviewer himself. They should trust his expertise and know that he is doing his best to use that expertise. Mazzochi comments that despite his expertise, we find ourselves on probation.

The tone of this is tense…. goes on for a while.

Mazzochi says that the SLEA situation is a perfect example of her concerns about a lack of “soul searching”: it’s not enough to stop awarding the credit; she wants to know what structural or systemic issues allowed this to happen, and/or what personnel were responsible, and how have these been resolved? Kartje is called on, says she will provide report later. More discussion between Mazzochi and Joe about the SLEA whistleblower and whether faculty concerns are taken seriously.

Roark says that she wants to see more progress on faculty – administration relations.

Bernstein says that he would like to see the response further fleshed out.

Mazzochi responds to Roark that she had wanted to include a presentation on the reasons for the VNC on this meeting’s agenda but postponed until there can be a quorum.

At this point in the meeting, there was no other agenda business that could be conducted. Mazzochi made a lengthy comment about the need for public discussion to hold each other accountable and to have the public hold them accountable.

She also commented that the three trustees in the room are very new to the college. Need for trustees and administrators who have been at the college longer to scrutinize earlier decisions and actions at the college and completely address HLC concerns. “Findings are findings” – not appropriate to argue with or deny them.

Student Trustee Report. Roark discussed her recent experience at the ICCB student representatives caucus. She brought back ideas about textbook affordability and making scholarships better known and accessed by students in need. Also looking ahead to a day of advocacy in Springfield which will address the state level budget impasse.

Trustees expressed interest in the textbook affordability issue. Roark commented that other schools who also work with Follett have cost-saving strategies in place as part of their Follett contract.

Roark also reported on her poll of other student leaders regarding how the current BOT situation is affecting students, reading several comments she received from students who overall seemed confident that their credits will safely transfer but expressed concern about the public perception of the institution.

Once again there is no quorum. Public comments overall were similar to those in recent weeks.

Glenn Hansen, President COD Faculty Association

Last month after the release of the HLC findings, the Association with the help of IEA staff issued a press release. Our statement was simple and clear. We want to assure everyone that there is no question about the quality of the educational opportunities we provide or the credit you will earn at College of DuPage.

Monday, we return to our classrooms and begin another semester of outstanding opportunities for anyone who enrolls in our classes. We close the doors to our rooms and all the noise goes away.  There is tremendous sound proofing in our teaching facilities, what happens or doesn’t happen in the board room or administrative offices is gone. I want to thank everyone who makes that possible.

As for tonight, there isn’t much more to say that hasn’t been said. The misguided boycotting is not fixing anything. But, it is actually hurting many things, some of which will effect students soon. I have a suggestion from the halls, and I suspect you may have suggested it already, if so please let me add our endorsement.

After a conversation with a manager and administrator we would like to suggest to the absent Trustees that a meeting be held to only do the business of the College that must be approved. For the issues you don’t agree on, leave them off the agenda. If anything is on the agenda you can’t support vote 3 to 3 and call it a night. That’s a better result than not having a meeting, you will have served the students, employees, and the district but not lost on your issues.

Soon someone will be appointed who will decide everything for you.

Richard Jarman, VP COD Faculty Association. 

Last week I committed a grievous error by preparing my remarks expecting a full turnout for at least one of the meetings. Silly me. And then I was left to ad lib, a process I have never been comfortable with. So tonight I took the opposite tack, with the fairly confident expectation that the Boycott Three would be umm boycotting. Again. Yes again.

This makes either the fourth or the fifth time depending how you count last week’s one or two meetings. Well at least we only have one agenda. We are meant to believe that not one of the three could be available this night, even through the technology of the telephone. Just what implausibly low probability is that?

I believe it is not a stretch for me to state that the entire community is appalled by these antics. And by entire community I mean faculty and staff at COD (we had the joint letter last week initiated by CODAA; Perhaps those three have yet to read it), as well as the larger community. Am I wrong here? I have yet to hear resounding support for their position, except maybe from a couple of internet trolls.

Some might want to argue that it’s two groups of three with cases of equal merit. I disagree. One group has followed the letter of the law and shows up ready to work, even willing to entertain an agenda presented by the other group, which is apparently unwilling even to show up for that.

I don’t need to point out again the harm that is being done, the money that is being spent (there is some irony in the money being wasted on having lawyers show up for closed sessions that never occur because trustees who vent to the newspapers about money spent on lawyers don’t appear), the academic programs that are not being advanced for approval, the personnel decisions.

Of course it will all end with the selection of Trustee Number Seven. Here again, the Boycott Three have demonstrated contempt for the process and disdain for the applicants by refusing to participate. With weeks to go they are acting outside the process openly sending letters to ICCB saying they will have to choose. Is that what anyone associated with this college really wants? I can only hope that this gambit backfires massively. We shall learn soon enough but not soon enough.

And all the while the HLC is watching. I am not sure that the Boycott Three understand this?

We did not have a blogger present at this meeting. There was no quorum since Trustees Birt, McGuire, and Wozniak once again did not attend.

Video will be posted here:
http://www.cod.edu/multimedia_services/botmedia.aspx

Comments by Richard Jarman, Vice President, COD Faculty Association: 

I was planning to say, “And then there were six.” But actually there aren’t. There are just three. Again. Of course over the past few months there have been several occasions when there were six, even a five a time or two I recall.

Not knowing which agenda would be followed, either, both or none, I was not sure what to prepare. Would I being speaking near the beginning, as has been the right and proper thing since last April, or buried somewhere around item 18?

I need to remind the absent three of the HLC letter action letter of December 16? I quote:

‘The College is out of compliance with Criterion Five, Core Component 5.B, “the institution’s governance and administrative structures promote effective leadership and support collaborative processes that enable the institution to fulfill its mission…”’

I pointed out in December, though three were not here to hear it, that boycotting meetings en masse is counter to what is required in effective leadership. You all have until February 2017 to get it sorted, or the consequences will be dire, and upon your heads will they be. Though of course the real victims will be the countless thousands of students who could be left with ruined accomplishments, not to mention all the employees of this fine college. Think on this as you perpetuate your squabbles.

Superficially, 3 = 3. But at a deeper level is there really equivalence? By what moral authority do you serve? For the Slate Three it is clear based on the last election and almost everything that has been written and spoken since. But what of the Boycott Three, or the Breuder Three, or the Herald Three? I would ask the question, who do you represent? Who are you speaking for? Where is your mandate? Do you claim to represent the best interests of the college, the students and the taxpayers? Or are you clinging to the ruined legacy of the past? Unless you are tone-deaf, you must know that time is passed.

Comments by Jackie McGrath, Professor of English:

My name is Jackie McGrath. I’m an English professor at COD, and I love this school. I’m committed to setting it back on the right path, in the wake of the HLC probation findings last month. We have four semesters to set things right, and maintain our accreditation. It is a task we should all take very seriously. But what I am concerned about is that it’s been three weeks since that report, and the acting interim president has yet to describe a plan or take any formal actions to address the issues listed in the Dec. 16th HLC report. In his Dec. 16^th email to the college, Interim Acting President Joe Collins stated, “I will do everything in my power to move swiftly to address all of the HLC’s concerns.” I implore him, and I implore you, this board, to follow through on that statement.

I am here to ask this board to direct the interim president to articulate and share a plan and a timeline for how to address each item listed in the HLC report. I also ask you to direct him to modify his annual goals to account for how he will act to address the issues for which we are on probation.

It is too urgent, and the future of our college is deeply concerning to so many. I know at least three members of this board take the probation seriously, and I ask you to hold the current leader of this college accountable for writing a serious action plan—and documenting all outcomes—so that we are all ready, in 2018, to show that we took this seriously and remedied the issues, for the sake of our students and our school.

Earl Dowling introduces tonight’s report.
COD Football team presentation.
El Toro Bowl 12/05/15– in Arizona. COD is the runner-up though the team did not win.
Slide presentation of the football team’s trip to the El Toro bowl.

Earl Dowling presents Kotryna Statputye, COD winner of the Dr. Pepper Scholarship. 100,000 tuition scholarship to be used at any college where she wants.
Dowling notes that Kotryna is a Presidential Scholar.

Chair Mazzochi– report on presidential search feedback.
Hayes and company has done interviews of stakeholders, have held public forums.
Characteristics that stakeholders have identified as needed in the next president: Technical skills, educational background, intellectual distinction, experience managing a large complicated institution, financial human resources, collective bargaining, ethical, person who will put in checks and balances, experience in classroom teaching, track record.
Chair Mazzochi presents a long list of the traits that stakeholders would like to see in a new president.

Next step– Monday 6pm the committee will be meeting. Invites the public to attend and provide input to the committee.
Informational items for the BoT.
We cannot take action on the consent agenda due to lack of quorum.
Trustee Bernstein– reads parts of a letter from Trustee Birt he received today. That letter asks for a reorganizational meeting before meeting.
Bernstein suggests their collective decision to boycott the meeting might be a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
Bernstein lists the things that will not happen tonight because there is not a quorum:
–approval of consortium purchase for A and P models.
–Computer training for library
–Ethics training for staff and faculty
–approval of purchase of COMCASt spotlight for advertising for the MAC
–purchase of an electric organ
–contracts for various services
–Approval of certificates in various programs.
Bernstein says to the absent trustees — I have tried to reach out to you and will continue to try to work with you, but I can’t if you are not here. To the absent trustees: Please don’t hold the College hostage.

Trustee Napolitano — notes this is his third elected Board service. I call on my fellow trustees to come her, to work with us and discuss the things we must do. We have 60 days to work together to select a new trustee. I want an open and transparent process in which we all evaluate candidates and do that together. I participated in that kind of process before. It was open and transparent. We need full cooperation from all BoT members to do this. We must come together and find common ground to move forward. Or we can stay home, complain about others, and put our self-interest ahead of students, faculty and taxpayers. I welcome the trustees to join us at our next meeting. We need to move forward.

Chair Mazzochi– apologizes to people who are not being approved for appointments, transfers and promotions, I will continue to make it an agenda item so it can be approved.
I hope everyone really sits and reflects on where we want to go.
I wish everybody the best as we move forward to our next year

Next BoT meeting will be Thursday January 21st 2016 at 7pm
Move to adjourn because they cannot go into closed session. Meeting adjourned.