>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thanks, Jason. Good evening.
I would like to call the May meeting of the Johnson County Community College Board of
Trustees to order. Would you please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.
>>I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic
for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Roll call and recognition
of visitors. Ms. Schlicht.>>Ms. Terri Schlict: This evening’s visitors
include Dick Carter, Roberta Eveslage, Alison Genstner, Dennis Batliner, Cheryl Batliner,
Blake Koger, Susan McAffee, Matt McGabe and Nick Cole.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Awards and recognitions. Dr. Sopcich.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Thank you, Trustee Cook. We’d like to start off by calling Professor
of Science Lori Slaven to the podium. Lori.>>I have Brenda Edmonds with me also. Thank
you. Thank you for this opportunity. We are here to talk about our second annual Science
and Math Poster Symposium, which was held on April 27th. We had over 150 posters that
were presented, and over 170 of our students were involved in this event. The goals of
our symposium include the following: to provide students with an opportunity to showcase their
work in terms of research or a project in a conference type setting; building confidence
in communication scientific and mathematical information; providing students with feedback
from judges who are experts in their fields. And our judges were made up of our faculty,
our staff, our Board of Trustees members, administrators, and we had over 50 of you
involved and supporting our event and our students. It also provided an opportunity
for science and math students and faculty to collaborate and to provide an opportunity
to stimulate interest in the science and math fields.
And we want to recognize one of our students and their faculty mentor. This is professor
Nancy Holcroft Benson, and this is one of our students, Melvin Santoso. He’s also an
Honor student here at the college. He’s also in my Gen Chem. Had him all year for Gen Chem
I and Gen Chem II. So he’s one of my students, too. And I’m going to turn this over to Melvin
for a moment.>>Thank you for the opportunity of having
me present in the JCCC Math and Science Symposium and also in the Honors Program. So basically
I built models of species that we don’t normally see in the United States and/or are endangered
in the wild. So, once again, I would like to thank the college for providing me with
the resources for this project.>>That’s excellent.
Foundation graciously gave Brenda — Brenda conveniently has laryngitis. And so we did
receive a grant from the Foundation to support the symposium. So thank you.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: And hold on, Lori, Brenda. If you haven’t had a chance to attend a poster
session, it’s really one of the coolest things that you can see here. But it says here you
had 50 judges made up of faculty, staff, administrators. You had 17 faculty mentors. It’s really kind
of a huge event to pull together. So thank you so much for doing it. Those are a real
challenge, but certainly the students loved it. And in fact, there’s even a note here
that Emily Norton’s parents came here all the way from North Carolina because they were
so proud to see her work. So thanks for making that possible.
>>Thank you.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Thank you. One more recognition
I’d like to share with the board. On Thursday, May 3rd, Johnson County Community College
was recognized by the Olathe Public School Board, Board of Education, for our partnership
with Olathe Public Schools as evidenced by our involvement in their Career Expo, their
21st Century Academy programs, College Now, our outreach to Hispanic students and youth
dealing with economic challenges, the fine art events at the Carlsen Center, and numerous
other programs that support students. Specifically recognized were Richard Fort, interim dean,
industrial technology; Denise Griffey, program director, Early College Community Outreach
and STEM; Melissa Jimenez, recruitment coordinator; and also Trustee Ingram. If you check out
the Olathe Schools website you’ll see a screen, massive screen photo of everyone involved,
and I do what I do best is simply hold the award that was given. And, Trustee Cook, I
would like to present this to you as a recognition of all the fine work that we do with the Olathe
School Board.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Well, thank you, and
I’ll return it back to the college. (Laughter.)
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: I will store it away properly. (Applause.)
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: And that concludes recognitions and awards.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Appreciate it. And again, an award isn’t usually given
to an individual for the individual’s work, but for the organization’s work, and I want
to thank everybody and congratulate everybody for this recognition by the Olathe School
District. The Open Forum is the next item on the agenda.
It’s an item each — scheduled at each regularly scheduled board meeting. Speakers must register
by completing the registration form prior to the Open Forum agenda item, giving his
or her name, city of residence, name of group or — he or she is representing, the topic,
and a brief one- or two-sentence summary of the presentation. Each registered speaker
is allowed five minutes to speak behind the podium. If there are a significant number
of registered speakers, the time will be reduced for each registered speaker. When addressing
the board, registered speakers are asked to remain at the podium, should be respectful
and civil, and are encouraged to address individual personnel or student matters directly with
the appropriate college department. Personal insults, profanity or language that is not
appropriate to be aired live on television, and offensive comments based on protected
status or class are prohibited. The chair of the board has the authority to keep order
and impose reasonable restrictions on any disruptive behavior of those participating
in the board meeting. We have a number of registrants tonight. You
will each be allocated five minutes. And the first is Dennis Batliner. Please come forward,
Dennis. And, again, for the record, if you would state your name and address, that would
be good.>>Dennis Batliner. 10000 Perry Drive, Overland
Park, Kansas. I first spoke about the track issue back in January, along with some other
people, with great hope for a reasonable discussion, but I’ve gathered that you only view us in
a negative fashion and as a problem to be solved. My wife, daughter, and son all graduated
from here, and they all went on to earn bachelor’s and our children earned master’s degrees due
to the excellent start that they had here in their education. As a long-time taxpayer,
why would I do anything to negatively affect the college? I wouldn’t. You know my son was
a track and cross country athlete and coach here and is now in Arizona coaching young
men and women to be better athletes, better students, and better people. There are hundreds
of student athletes who have gotten their start here and have gone on to do fantastic
things, like Ashley Reid, who turned her life around here while she was at JCC as a track
athlete and she was named JCCC Athlete of the Year. She went on to Colorado State University
and was their first Wilma Rudolph Award winner, which is given to student athletes who have
faced immense personal, academic, and/or emotional trials, and rose to achieve academic success
while playing intercollegiate athletics. A video of her amazing story, part of which
was filmed here on the campus and at Olathe East, is on YouTube. So eliminating the largest
athletic programs at JCCC eliminates more than future opportunities. It eliminates positive
community marketing. It eliminates 60 students from JCC, where enrollment is now down 15.3%
since 2011, while the overall Johnson County population is up 8.6%.
So our group that’s been trying to change your minds has been surprised at every attempt
to have an open dialogue with the administration has been stymied. While we offered positive
ideas to save the programs, the administration responded with negative rationales that don’t
make sense. Where are your efforts to think of innovative solutions? We haven’t seen any.
So why were we stymied? We now know why, and we got e-mails to talk about it. In an e-mail
by Mr. Sopcich to the Board of Trustees on March 14th, some of the things that are in
it said, consequently, you have been strategically targeted, the board, and will continue to
be targeted as long as they, us, feel there is the opportunity to reverse the decision.
This group realized early on that to pursue the administration after we made a recommendation
and decision is fruitless because we will stand firm for what we believe is the right
decision. Their only hope, our only hope is to go after you, the board, according to Mr.
Sopcich. Most importantly, the effect on the administration will be significant. The marginalization
that will have occurred with this reversal will be as disincentive for any of us to make
any hard decision in the future, realizing that the board can overturn an operational
decision once public opposition surfaces. Targeted. Strategically targeted. We’re not
the military. We’re a group of citizens and we’re now concerned about more than just athletics
programs at JCCC. This is a public institution run on the rule of law and democratic principles.
We are not micromanaging. We’re questioning the elimination of highly successful 32-year
programs that are the largest and some of the most diverse athletic programs on campus.
Targeted is used pejoratively. We’re communicating, or trying to, with our elected officials whose
job it is to represent us. Let me remind everyone of Kansas Statute 71-2001. It’s under the
board’s photo. Quote, the Board of Trustees shall have custody of and be responsible for
the property of the community college and shall be responsible for the management and
control of the college. Sounds pretty clear to me. The board is ultimately
in charge of everything, including funding. But we have been told over and over by the
administration there was not enough funding, there was not enough money. Not enough money
to fund the track and cross country programs that cost about $410,000 at the time and a
new outdoor track that cost about $1.4 million. Not enough money. Yet recently the administrative
staff has found a way to reallocate an additional $7.3 million, $7.3 million, for the expanded
scopes in the Facilities Master Plan that was discussed at the board workshop on February
14. The total of the project now is up to $110 million. Yet you can’t find funding for
track and cross country.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Dennis, your five minutes
is near, so if you could wrap up.>>I’m done. Thank you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Next speaker is Blake Koger.
>>Blake Koger. 24853 West 148th Court, Olathe, Kansas. I have to first apologize for missing
the last board meeting. I — I didn’t double-check the website. I wish I could have been here,
but I know I think a lot of us missed it. But maybe — maybe you all needed some space,
so. I’d like to open with another heart-felt story of the program impacting lives and enhancing
the community. But that doesn’t really seem effective. We’ve told you many of those, and
many have written on those. So I think that those — it’s clear that you all think that
those stories exist at the same rate and as all other programs on the campus. So I won’t
spend time on that. What I will do is give you another observation from our community,
a community of literally thousands that you all and especially the administration constantly
call a few or a couple of people. Clearly this group is missing the point. You think
this passion exists in other programs? Clearly — what other program has had any alumni event
on campus with over 500 people join in person? Over 500. We have a full list of names and
contact information for each of those individuals. If any of you had bothered to show up, you’d
have seen that. I still can’t believe it, not a single one of this college’s leadership
showed up, 500 proud alums of this school ignored. I mentioned it a few board meetings
back that I really should come to expect this. It’s clear that your preferred course of action
is to discredit, to marginalize, and to trivialize our efforts in the voice of this community.
And we only have a few of us here today. So I’ll take some keys from President Sopcich
in his lengthy March e-mail. He mentioned that he came in on a Saturday to respond to
what he called “allegations, accusations, slurs, and inaccuracies levied by the few
individuals who are leading this effort, who by the way, many of whom live in other parts
of the country.” For one, we literally live here. I live here. I came here because of
this program. Five hundred people, at least, live here. If he’s referring to Brian in Phoenix,
well, he’s moving back this summer. But if someone doesn’t live here, are they not entitled
to their opinions, their voices to be heard as alumni? Also, because we have vastly different
viewpoints on this doesn’t mean we’re inaccurate. And because we are addressing them directly
at you, I guess that feels like allegations and accusations. Finally, I assure you there
were never any slurs. That’s absolutely preposterous. He then goes on to say after three pages of
single-spaced prose with much more to write on, I realize that these comments didn’t merit
a response, nor my time, by responding to their comments, I legitimized them. I guess
he wouldn’t want to legitimize the few of us, he wouldn’t want to legitimize the democratic
process. President Sopcich’s e-mail further notes the
exorbitant costs of the program and building new facilities, etc. There’s a massive under-utilized
base of proud alumni, the thousands I mentioned, but to my point, you haven’t considered alternate
sources of funding. What if there was a local sponsor or group or a private entity that
would have given to the programs? Seems that would be worth consideration. Maybe you reduce
scholarship numbers, you tighten the budget. There are a lot of options. But you chose
to simply cut the program, which is baffling. Finally, President Sopcich wrote to you about
how the most important effect of listening to us is that the administration would be
marginalized. The administration would be marginalized. He said reversal will be a disincentive
for any of us to make any hard decision in the future and will become even harder for
leadership to make difficult, challenging decisions where there’s a possibility that
those decisions will be overturned. This happens all the time. This happens every
day. Some plans or work you do gets reversed. He added that, quote, institutionally, all
decisions will be subject to, in effect, a public referendum. Such a reversal regarding
the track will be a clear signal to the campus community and community at-large that a couple
people can influence operational decisions and ultimately change the future direction
of this college to accommodate their self-interests. It’s amazing what a few people can do with
a well strategized social media strategy. End quote.
This isn’t just a social media strategy and, yeah, I think we’re pretty good at this. But
self-interest? Are you kidding me? You think I’m standing here today for my self-interest?
I’m not. I want others, I want future generations to have the opportunities I had that changed
my life, other youth in our community. Self-interest? This is part of democracy and part of being
a community college. Sometimes, just sometimes we need to listen to the community. As he
noted in his e-mail, when you consider this issue, please do not underestimate its significance.
The real issue isn’t about the track or the track program. The real issue is about the
future of JCCC. And he’s exactly right. That’s why we’re here.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Blake. Next speaker is Nick Cole.
>>Nick Cole. 12232 Connell Drive, Overland Park, Kansas. So there are a few things that
I’d like to touch on with you guys. Number one is something that Dr. Cook says in his
opening statements in that we’re supposed to contact the administrators of the staff
and the departments when it concerns a particular issue, and multiple times that we’ve been
up here over the past few months it’s been suggested to reach out to Dr. Sopcich, Mr.
Weber, Mr. Gray, a few others, to have a meeting, which I did. I took time out of my day, away
from my family, away from my job, to do just that. We had key stakeholders in this community,
for example, Coach Van Rose, who has coached 50-plus years in the Shawnee Mission School
District, wanted to allocate some of his time, take time off even, to try to attend that
meeting. Multiple other coaches who have been in this community for a long time wanted to
do that. But the problem was, it was stated very clearly to me throughout the process
of setting that up that there was no interest on the administration’s end on having an open
dialogue with us. All that you guys were interested in was telling us things that you’ve already
told us or things that we found out through core document requests. Why in the world would
we waste somebody like Coach Van Rose’s time to come up here so you can tell him things
that you’ve already told everybody else? Why would we be interested in that? So the meeting
was effectively shut down. So we — we tried. We tried to meet with you guys. We wanted
to have that open dialogue. But there was not interest on your end. So I — I’m just
confused on why the board, who, Dr. Sopcich, is your boss, technically, would tell us to
reach out to you and others in the administration office and try to set that up, but then the
administration would say we’re not interested in hearing from you and your opinions and
your ideas and your concerns, we only want to tell you canned statements, and if you
aren’t okay with that, then we don’t want to meet. So you’re effectively telling your
boss I don’t care about your recommendation, we don’t want to meet with these guys. So
that, to me, is a huge issue. If I did that at my work, if my boss said, hey, you need
to meet with that client, and I tried to limit the terms of that client meeting and then
shut it down, I might get fired. So I’m just going to — I’ll leave that one there.
Another thing I want to touch on is Dr. Arjo, who spoke recently — we do, after we leave,
we tend to watch the rest of the meeting because we do have an interest in it, and he’s a member
of your own faculty. One of the things that he commented on was our group’s utilization
of the democratic process and how impressed he was that we were willing to do that about
something that we’re passionate about and that we’re concerned about. Clearly we are
trying to communicate with you all and utilize that process. We’re not targeting the board.
We’re not attacking you. We’re not trying to slander any of you. We’re simply doing
what we are supposed to do, appealing to our elected officials. One other thing that I
know was touched on was the Maricopa District example, how we’ve used it to compare programs,
women’s soccer to women’s soccer, track and cross country to track and cross country,
as an example of how they’re doing more, they’re very successful with much less resources than
what this community college has. Where in that same example it was Randy Weber used
comparing the football programs at four of those member schools being shut down by that
district as a reason to essentially discontinue one program at one community college here,
which we’re trying to use that as an example to show you some positive things that you
could be doing with programs, and at the same time, Mr. Weber wants to use that as a way
to cut down your own athletic department. To me, that does not make any sense.
The last thing they want to touch on, and I think Mr. Musil is not here, but I think
he was the one who last time we were here spoke and said that he was a little bit offended
or some of you were offended that we would question the integrity of this decision. My
response to that is, good, you should be offended. It’s not bad to be offended. It’s okay. In
fact, a lot of times, a lot of positive things, a lot of positive change comes out of someone’s
taking offense to something else. It drives them to do something. But your offense should
not be directed towards us. We didn’t make the decision. We’re just here trying to appeal
to you to invoke positive change, evoke positive progress for this college, for this community.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Nick, your five minutes is up, so if you can bring closure.
>>I’ll close out with this. If you’re going to be offended, be offended that the administration
did not provide you with the proper budget details for the reason that this program is
being cut, was due to budgetary concerns. How can you cut a program for budget reasons
if you don’t know the budget of that program, which Mr. Musil even said you guys didn’t
know the budget of the track and cross country programs when you agreed that it was okay
to cut them, when the reason for cutting them cited was budget. That doesn’t make any sense.
How can you cut something from a budget if you don’t know the budget for that program?
So, yes, take offense, but don’t direct it at us; direct it at those who should have
provided you that information and direct it at internally because that information should
have been asked for when it wasn’t provided.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you.
>>That’s it.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Appreciate it. Next speaker
is Larry Fotovich.>>You know the comments are fresh when someone brings a laptop
up, right? My name is Larry Fotovich. My address is 14222 West 158th Terrace, Olathe, Kansas.
First, let me say that I have nothing but glowing reviews of my time here as a student
from 1981 to 1983. Honestly, the professors here at that time were better than those at
the university where I graduated. But this is the first time I’ve ever addressed the
board, and the fact that I’m here tonight to lodge a complaint in juxtaposition to that
praise should concern you. My daughter — sorry. Okay. My daughter, who is also here tonight,
couldn’t comment because she’s working as the “Campus Ledger” video executive producer
and is directing the recording of this meeting tonight. But I’m here to tell you about her
experience with a couple of her professors and how the formal complaint system let us
down. Instead of an investigation of her allegation of abuse, which is what the Ethics Point system
promises, the Human Resources Department funneled her right back to the Chair, who was copied
on the very e-mail that she cited as abusive. Never mind that she — that the Chair already
had nearly a month after receiving the e-mail to make things right, but she didn’t. But
we trusted in the system, and as uncomfortable as she knew it would be, Laura went right
back to the person who witnessed the abuse and said nothing, and in that meeting the
Chair didn’t even have a copy of the three-page e-mail to reference. So what does the e-mail
look like? I have it right here. It is three pages of single text — or single-spaced text
and it isn’t as it purports to be a self-improvement pep talk, but an airing of grievances. Here
are some of the professor’s words. She said, it’s not about how I feel, but about being
honest. You misled me. You were dishonest. And then it goes on from there. Of course
none of that is true, and I think her comments are reckless and defamatory especially since
the e-mail was also copied to another one of Laura’s professors. It’s also worth noting
that in the e-mail she questions Laura’s eligibility for receiving one of the Dunham Music Scholarships
awarded to the college’s most promising vocal students. That award was made last summer
and Laura made — and Laura met the requirements, but because the professor didn’t get another
hour of private voice lessons out of the deal, she wouldn’t let it go. It’s just one of the
many perceived slights that most adults would have gotten over with — or gotten over by
now. But the really shocking part is when Laura brought up the e-mail to the department
chair citing her accusations that Laura was dishonest, the chair’s response was she can
do that, it’s not a democracy. I know things have changed a lot since I was last in college,
but I don’t think in this viral media environment where people in power are held accountable
every day for unfairly treating those who view them as mentors, that libel is a good
quality to have as an acceptable college policy. So maybe you’re thinking this is a one-off
instance of poor judgment. It is not. Three days earlier I asked the same question of
the Arts and Humanities dean and I got a similar response. He said there are academic freedoms
that are allowed in the classroom. When I asked whether libel is one of the — is against
the college’s policy, he said no. When I framed the question a different way to make sure
he understood it, he confirmed again that questioning a student’s integrity is allowable
in an academic setting. He said it was okay because this isn’t an employable situation
and the student isn’t financially harmed. I guess my question to the board is, what
teaching techniques require a professor to falsely call a student dishonest? Everywhere
else that person would be considered a bully. In the jobs each of you have held or currently
hold outside of your trustee position, would you want to put your name to an e-mail that
makes wild accusations against an 18-year-old? I hope the answer is no, because I know the
psychological harm that occurs when a student is unfairly treated by two of her professors
while those supervising them circle the wagons. Yes, that’s right. Another professor in the
same department after class when everyone else was gone asked her to come into her office
and then proceeded to berate her until she cried. Now, I’m married to a teacher, and
the one common gene that good teachers all have is that they are selfless and the last
thing they would ever want to do is to get even with a student by making her cry in a
closed office ambush where no one else could witness it. But I believe Laura, and the fact
that this professor is alluded to in the three-page e-mail should also make you trust her. As
the semester winds down, I would like this community — this college community to reflect
on Laura’s future success someday and ask didn’t her career start at JCCC? Not what
could Laura have become if only she hadn’t attended JCCC? I hope you will look in this
matter further. We’ve taken it as far as we can and you are our last hope for justice.
Thank you for your time.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Larry. Appreciate
it. That will be addressed with our staff and appreciate you taking the time to bring
that to our attention. The Open Forum is closed, and as we normally
do, we do not get into dialogue. I will just say regarding the track issue that I was scheduled
to be at that meeting, along with Trustee Musil, and when I believe the information
was shared we don’t want to talk about why the decision was made and what it was based
upon, we no longer want to meet with you, I felt badly about that and — but that was
a decision that evidently the track group did not want to hear all of the decisions
that went into that process. I think this board has made a decision in the best interests
of the college moving 50 years ahead as to how that whole front door of the college will
look, the track, the existing track is a part of that, and we’ve had to make decisions about
how we’re going to move ahead for the college and that — the budget is one piece of it.
The front door was another piece of it. How we review all of our programs is a third piece
of it. And I’ll leave it — I’ll leave it at that.
Next item on the agenda is the Student Senate report. Ms. Boukhaima. Thank you.
>>Hanan Boukhaima: Good evening. Tonight I would like to talk a little bit about our
new executive officers, Clubs and Orgs Awards, our renewable energy goals, and student health
care portal. You can see the new logo Student Senate. So we voted on this officially our
logo now. Here is our new executive officers team. They will start at the end of this semester.
I think it’s a great team and they will achieve great things. Some of you I guess met Tiger
already. So you know if — Clubs and Orgs Award. This is the list of the different categories
of the awards and the recipients. We had a great year and I think there’s a
lot of events that were very successful on campus, outside campus, too. You can see that
there is some names like Veterans Clubs or some of our Student Senators have been getting
awards and… and one of our awards, that Student Senate Spirit Award, I would like
also to thank the Foundation because they — there is some monetary coming with that
award. Renewable energy. This is a screenshot of
JCCC Facilities Master Plan. 2020 is going to be here soon, and 15% I think we are a
little bit far. This is what we have right now, renewable energy on our campus. It’s
about 1%. So every year we pay about 2.7 million for our electricity bill. And the solar that
we have on our rooftop, Hospitality Culinary building is the only building who has like
all the rooftop covered. I believe maybe the upcoming buildings, the new buildings we’re
going to have on campus hopefully will have the solar on the rooftop. But we are still
very far from the 15% of renewable energy. That would be about $4 million to invest.
And if we try to reach the 100% by 2050, that’s also about $1 million a year. And those are
goals. Student health care. This is a screenshot
from the Kansas Board of Regents. As you can see, they are all having the United Healthcare
Student Resources for the students, and the list — the list that you have in here is
only like four-year colleges. The question that I have for the board is why community
colleges are excluded from that policy, if you can at some point — we did all the research
from the student side, but we don’t have an answer to that. Meanwhile, there is a portal
that costs a little bit — costs about $500 and Student Senate would be paying for that.
It’s basically just a portal that shows different health insurance policies available for the
students on the market and they will be able to have someone as a customer service that
would explain the different policies. It’s just $500 for the whole college. And that,
Student Senate would be paying for that. This is my last — yes, sir?
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Ms. Boukhaima, but how does this work if you’re a student? I mean
does it cost a student? Does it cost these colleges? Because these are all Regents schools.
There are no community colleges. But how does it work at the Regents schools?
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Basically you have to be a full-time student, so 12 credits. As you
can see up there, there is graduate students, for example. I’m not eligible. That means
it’s only available for most undergraduate. I believe that if there is a health center
or clinic on campus, that makes a difference. And we used to have one on our campus.
(Laughs). So that’s the only kind of criteria for that
policy. So why is it limited — is it the Kansas Board of Regent limited it to only
universities and not community colleges? Or is there another criteria that community colleges
needs to — we don’t know.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: I think it’s a school
by school decision when it comes to community colleges. So those local boards would make
that call.>>Ms. Boukhaima: All right.
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: So when we used to have a health clinic onsite, were we part
of that Board of Regents buy-in?>>Ms. Boukhaima: No.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: No. This is a student — this is student health care program that
apparently doesn’t cost the schools anything.>>Ms. Boukhaima: No, it does not.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: The students have to pay for it themselves to get some kind of health
care.>>Ms. Boukhaima: It’s optional for the students.
It’s not mandatory. The cost that that policy right now, it’s $144 a month, which is one
of the most affordable health options you can find.
>>You have to be a full-time student. 12 hours.
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Correct. Optional.>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: What’s the cost
of the health care clinic on campus when it was here? Do we know?
>>I don’t know. That’s been –>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: It’s been quite a few
years.>>Ms. Boukhaima: So we used to pay — the
college used to pay for the supplies and we had a nurse practitioner, full-time, on campus
and there was a Shawnee Mission hospital that was paying for that. So we were paying — providing
a space and paying for the supplies. That was the cost. I don’t have the exact number,
but…>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: We can do some — we can
look into that as far as what we did historically.>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: I understand.
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Thank you. Thank you, everyone. It has been a great — great for me coming
up here and talking to you and I’m very confident that Tiger will do a great job next semester.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: And where are you going next? What’s your next step?
>>Ms. Boukhaima: I will be probably graduating next year, at the end of fall, maybe spring.
I will still be involved on campus. And I don’t know where for spring yet.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: All right. Well, thank you. You’ve done great job.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Dave?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Yes, I did. Could
you go back to the the slide that — the awards?>>Ms. Boukhaima: Uh-huh.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: You’re missing an award. This — you should have gotten the
Student Senate Report of the Year Award. (Laughter.)
>>Ms. Boukhaima: There would be only one candidate for that I would think.
(Laughter.)>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Cross?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Boukhaima, I just wanted to comment
on what a good job I think you did this year, particularly with the grace and class that
you handled Secretary DeVos that night. I think you did a great job that night representing
the college and all of us. So I just wanted to say thank you.
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Ingram.
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: And I was just going to say thank you for bringing this up this
evening. I know that’s been something that we have spoke about very, very briefly. But
thank you. It does give us an opportunity to look at what happened in the past and see
if that’s, you know, something that we can act on. So thank you for bringing that up.
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Lawson?
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: I’m so proud of you and I’m so excited that you’re moving
on and yet it’s — I’m going to miss you on campus as well. So I’ve seen you in the Senate
meetings conducting that and it’s very official and it’s helping to build leaders within the
college as well to show them what government is like, and so that is something that just
is a — I get excited when more people are involved in politics and knowing what’s going
on. And then these presentations have been just really helpful to know what’s going on
for the Student Senate and how we can connect. So thank you also so much for the health center
because that piqued my interest. So congratulations.>>Ms. Boukhaima: Thanks.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: I will just echo what has been said. But beyond that, this slide
is evidence of the — the sensitivity I guess I — I sense from you and the leadership for
digging in to issues above and beyond what one would think as a Student Senate. And also
your knowledge and involvement with the sustainability program. I had a chance a week or two ago
to try and make a smoothie on the back of a bicycle because you — you were out on the
campus promoting sustainability and I didn’t pedal fast enough I guess to get the thickness
that I needed to have. But your involvement on issues like sustainability and looking
ahead to the future, I — I sensed your angst when you said 2020 is not far away and if
we’re going to meet that goal we’ve got a lot of work to do. But thank you for everything
you’ve done. It’s really a pleasure. And some of us have had a chance to meet Tiger and
you’ve trained him well, so thank you very much.
>>Ms. Boukhaima: Thanks. (Applause.)
>>Chair Jerry Cook: College Lobbyist Report. Mr. Carter.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin my report this evening, I’d
like to exercise a point of personal privilege and acknowledge the very kind words of encouragement
upon my mother’s passing from many around this table and in this room. The flowers from
the college and the Foundation, the personal visits to the visitation and the — from the
administration and to the memorial service, and the cards that I received, I just want
to thank you. The legislature adjourned sine die on May
4th this year and the reason I put it in those terms is because normally we would be waiting
for about 20 days and the legislature would come back for sort of a ceremonial closing
of the session for each year. The way the adjournment resolution was run this year,
there was no 20 days and the legislature is now done and complete with their business,
so should the governor choose to veto any legislation that is still before him, there
will be no opportunity for the legislature to attempt to override that veto. The — the
budget passed a day before the legislature adjourned, and so you’ll have to excuse the
typo that’s in the first paragraph where I indicate that the Thursday before they adjourned,
on April 30th, that the budget was passed. That was actually May 3rd. And one of the
chief things that we were advocating for the entire session was restoration of the cuts
that were made in fiscal year 2017. I’m pleased to say that we did have some success in that
arena and — and while we didn’t get back the entire 24 million for the system, it was
about 15 million, and that’s a 62% restoration of the cuts that were made that will be returned
to our budget in this — in this budget cycle. The — for us, the cuts were approximately
$800,000, and so that represents a roughly $500,000, maybe a little bit more than that,
restoration to our budget, and that’s a conversation that we’ve been having all throughout the
session here on campus with the Government Affairs Task Force is just to stay on top
of that and see exactly where that might end up. Those dollars will flow through the Board
office, like all of the block grant dollars that we receive do. I’ve attached a budget
worksheet to the report, just for your information. I think it’s interesting, it shows what the
4% budget cut looks like. It doesn’t break it out by individual institution at the community
college level. However, it shows what the 4% cut looks like, the requested restoration,
the actual restoration, and then the difference of what that looks like. And so it will be
a little bit before we see what check comes in the mail as far as receiving the restored
funds. But that is in fact good news. A couple of other items that were included in the Budget
Conference Committee Report that we also advocated for was the National Guard Tuition Assistance
Program. It wasn’t fully funded. The difference is several hundred thousand, but we’re pleased
that that part was also passed in the budget, as well as the governor’s budget recommendation,
which included full funding for CTE programs, both in fiscal year 2018 and ’19. So, again,
those are good news items that we have not seen in quite awhile. Finally, as it relates
to the budget, the KPERS contributions on behalf of the state were also fully funded,
and that’s something that we’ve not seen in quite some time that the payments are being
made to the bonding agency in the full amount, both for 2019 and 2020.
The other interesting thing that we have in this year’s budget that we haven’t seen in
more than a decade is an ending balance. In the current fiscal year we’ll have a $447
million ending balance, and for the next fiscal year it will be approximately 375 million.
That’s great because things like that help boost the credit rating for the state of Kansas.
That has in fact occurred recently, the credit rating was upgraded and our only hope would
be that the trends continue in this fashion. And it wasn’t without challenge. Talking a
little bit about K-12 because, again, that was the big piece of what was being discussed
and what delayed everything else throughout the legislative session, there was a $192
million investment made in the next budget cycle for the adequate finance portion of
K-12 education. It’s a little over $525 million for the 5-year period. That has been signed
by the governor and it’s now before the Court. They will take it up later in May for review
and we will — we will have some level of understanding of what the Court plans to do
hopefully later this summer. If it is not adequate or it’s not deemed adequate by the
Court, there will be a necessary calling of a special session of the legislature, and
that will have its own set of issues should that happen. So, again, stay tuned and we’ll
keep you apprised of what’s going on with the waiting game.
A few other issues of interest that we’ve been following that I’ve been reporting to
you on the entire session, concurrent enrollment. That particular piece ended up as a pilot
program for one year in English comprehension — Composition I, and that program did not
make the final cut for what was passed in that particular bill. Another item that we’ve
talked about, too, and I think we’ll be talking about it in the future is the Dark Store Theory
piece. Again, no legislation was introduced. There continue to be ongoing Board of Tax
Appeal cases, as well as I think there will be court cases that follow. We’ve been put
on notice that there could be a need to return some of the dollars, depending on the outcomes
of some of those Board of Tax Appeals cases. I think there will be appeals, even — even
after those occur. But those could go back to 2011 and so, again, very important things
that we need to be following. Even though there’s no legislation, it will still continue
to be talked about in the legislative circles. And then finally on the legislative arena,
campus carry was at one point an issue that was added as an amendment to one of the concealed
carry bills that was out there. It was later stripped out of the bill, and in the end,
that bill did not pass either. And so that issue was left open as well.
And then, finally, just a comment about an event that we held during the legislative
break. On April 19th, we had issued an invitation about a month prior to the Johnson County
delegation to attend a luncheon, one of our hospitality lunches at the Culinary Academy,
and the — we had about 11 legislators that attended, received great remarks, not only
about the meal, but just the fellowship and the conversation that was held. I know that
several administrators and a couple of trustees were there and it provided a great opportunity
just to build on those friendships that we have with the delegation. We are going to
try and do that again in October, and so we’ll see if we can pick up some of the people that
maybe weren’t able to attend in April. So, Mr. Chairman, I would conclude there — my
remarks there and answer any questions as I’m able.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Any questions or comments? Trustee Ingram?
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: I have a question. Can you take us a back a couple years ago
to when KPERS wasn’t fully funded and then they were supposed to begin that repayment
with 8% interest. Is that right? Do I remember that correctly?
>>Mr. Dick Carter: I think that’s the correct amount of interest that the state was charging
itself.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Okay. And help me
— bring me up-to-date on that.>>Mr. Dick Carter: I don’t recall specifically
what happened when those payments were pushed off. I do know that at the time we were still
sweeping dollars from KDOT to make a lot of — to cover a lot of areas of state government.
But I don’t know that I can get very specific going back that far.
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Well, that affects a lot of us here, so…
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Cross?>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes, sir. A couple questions
for Mr. Carter. The legislature adjourned sine die because they anticipate Governor
Colyer won’t veto anything; is that correct?>>Mr. Dick Carter: I don’t know that I can
— I don’t know that I can make that proclamation. I know that there are a number of items before
his desk. I’m trying to think if there are any that are significantly controversial,
but I don’t — I don’t know that there are and I suppose he still has line item vote
authority on the budget.>>Trustee Lee Cross: I mean my observation,
for better or for worse, I mean he’s worked fairly well with them, so it seems they’re
somewhat confident that he’s not going to veto anything. Is that —
>>Mr. Dick Carter: I think that’s probably a fair assessment. I know that they’re hoping
that.>>Trustee Lee Cross: One other quick point,
if I may, Mr. Chair. It was March of 2014 at Quisenberry’s Funeral Home in Tonganoxie,
Kansas, that Dr. Sopcich showed up at my grandmother’s funeral, and it meant a lot to me and I’m
sorry we couldn’t have done more for you, but our sympathies.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: Thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thanks, Dick. Appreciate
it. And any other comments? Thanks. Appreciate it.
Committee reports. The first one is the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee did meet on
Thursday, May 3rd, in this room. Your minutes reflect the large number of people that were
in attendance at that meeting. We did have a chance to meet Chestor Moyer and Cory Robinson
with RubinBrown, our auditors, and that external audit is in process, so we had an update on
that. We had various reports, again, as they’re listed, Procurement Services, it’s an area
that some of us have really been very appreciative of how the Procurement Services work here.
And again, that involves a lot of people, but how we put out RFPs, how they come, in
how we procure products and materials for the college is really in good hands and the
audit process reaffirmed that. We had a little discussion on password control and what’s
going on with that in our data security system. We had quarterly projects updates, as you
can see, facilities rental and hosting audit, cloud operating — or cloud computing audit,
and business continuity planning internal audit. Don’t ask me any questions about the
cloud, because it’s way above my head. But I really feel good that we have it in good
hands with our staff. We had audit recommendations follow-up, review
of the ethics report online update and you can see that report quarterly, February 1
through April 26th. We had 14 reports that were received on the Ethics Report Line, five
anonymously, ten of those have been addressed favorably, and 14 have been reviewed — I
guess 14 have been reviewed and appropriately addressed. So we’re in good stead there. 2016-’17
benchmarking report, Ms. Vogler gave a report showing our statistics compared to other benchmarks,
and in each of those categories we are very favorable in how we benchmark. So I think
we can really feel good about all of that data that goes on day-in and day-out. We had
a report on the KOPS-WATCH and we had an executive briefing. Trustee Ingram, do you have anything
to add to that?>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: I do not. Great report.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: What is KOPS-WATCH?>>Chair Jerry Cook: It was a two-hour meeting
and a lot of detail and I’ve gone over it rather quickly, but — I’m sorry?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: I’m not familiar with what KOPS-WATCH is. What is KOPS-WATCH?
>>If you see something, say something. It’s the mechanism by which we encourage the college
community to report issues of concern.>>Dr. Weber: It’s an acronym for Keeping
Our People Safe, that whole theory if you see — in each of the rooms you see the candy
stripe signs, that’s part of our strategy.>>Oh, thank you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: It’s actually been in place for what, four, five, six years? Several
years. And it’s one of those things where I think we’re trying to communicate better
and more effectively to all students and faculty about if you see something that’s not proper,
report it, and that is something we continue to work on. So…
Okay. Any questions on the Audit Committee? We meet quarterly. Next one is scheduled for
August, I believe. And but I — I don’t give that report justice because of all the committees
that we have, that one — that one takes at least an hour and a half to two hours, and
even when I’m conducting the meeting, and I like to move things along. But good detail
there. Next item is the Collegial Steering, and we
did meet, what, this past I guess it was last week already. And we had one item on the agenda,
and we asked each of the representatives to give — share two or three values that they
thought their organization brought to the effectiveness of the college. And so, again,
for your review, representatives are from the Faculty Senate, the Faculty Association,
Ed Affairs, trustees, and administration, and we asked each of them to list those two
or three things. Again, a very good dialogue took place and I think what came out of it
was each of the organizations took that question rather seriously and in some cases we had
one- and two-page handouts. I won’t go into all of the detail of each of those, but I
think in that discussion, and Dr. Arjo may want to respond to this, but he said in part
the awareness we have of what the other organizations within the college are doing is helpful to
help us understand where we may have differences and where we can work together. So a lot of
it had to do with collaboration and representation, and Trustee Ingram even represented the Board
in terms of what the Board brings and did a really good job about advocacy to the community,
advocacy to the staff, to the faculty, and but this — this opportunity, we have to be
engaged in the community and understand how the community is thinking within the county,
bringing that back to the college. I have high hopes that as each organization is working
on that even in more detail that we’ll continue to have good dialogue. Dr. Sopcich summed
it up in terms of the administration saying that we think we bring a message of advocacy
for students. And I believe all the organizations are advocates for students, in many cases
it was implied and understood, and in other cases we just say, hey, that’s what we’re
here for. So the whole idea was how can we, with our — with our different silos of operation,
work together, share our differences and share our concerns and advocate for whether it’s
faculty or staff or students or each other to make this college the college that it is
and can become. Again, I will defer, Nancy, to fill in the
blanks.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: I think it was just
really helpful. I would add that just after our HLC visit that we all had gone through,
you know, we felt like we could continue to bring that conversation and move it forward,
and all the groups expressed at Collegial Steering how important it was to go through
that exercise. And I think that was what came back as feedback, how beneficial that was
to just sit and pause and think a little bit more about how collegially we all are here
for one purpose, and that’s our mission. So it was a great meeting. I’ve had lots of good
feedback.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Well, it’s
easy within our silo or our organization with turnover to not understand what we’re about.
We have questions here, you know, Trustee Cross, the question on the KOPS issue, it’s
always good to review that, what is that, what are we doing, why do we do that? So if
we understand that internally within our little area of domain, then how do we share that
with the rest of the campus, with the rest of the college, and get to a better understanding?
So thank you. Human Resources. Trustee Cross?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Human Resources Committee met May 7th
here in the Hugh Speer Board Room. Trustee Lawson and I were present, along with I think
every member of the cabinet except Dr. Sopcich. We discussed the employee assistance plan,
procurement services issued a Request for Proposal for the college’s employee assistance
plan and student assitance plan benefits. A brief description of the college and the
requirements were outlined in the Request for Proposal. Vendors were asked to respond
with quotes for the upcoming 2018-19 benefit plan year and the initial term of the contract
will be from June 1, 2018, through May 31st of 2019.
The college utilized the consulting services of Holmes Murphy & Associates to assist with
the drafting requirements of the RFP and to assist with the evaluation of the submitted
proposals. Thirteen firms were invited to respond, the eight firms who responded with
the proposal are listed in your board packet at Page 1 and the entire report is at Pages
1-4. Ultimately ComPsych, the current incumbent, was selected. And so it is the recommendation
of the Human Resources Committee that the Board of Trustees accept the college administration’s
recommendation to authorize the President to negotiate a contract, subject to review
by college counsel, for the provision of the Employee Assistance Plan with the New Directions
Behavior — Behavioral Health for the period of June 1st, 2018, through May 31st, 2019,
the blended monthly subscriber rate for the New Directions Behavioral Health plan is $13.22
per participant. The proposal includes no increase in the contract for the two additional
years and these rates represent an approximate 13% decrease from the 2017-18 per participant
benefit plan year cost, and I so move.>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion. Is
there a second?>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: Second.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Is there any discussion? Any discussion?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Thank you for staff —
>>Chair Jerry Cook: All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Ayes).>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair, we also had a presentation regarding an overview of salary
increases proposed for the fiscal year 2019. The recommendation by the administration and
staff includes a 3% salary increase for full-time, part-time, nonbargaining unit employees, a
3% increase in the adjunct faculty salary table. And so it is the recommendation of
the college administration and I believe now Human Resources Committee that the Board of
Trustees authorize effective July 1, 2018, a 3% salary increase for all nonbargaining
unit salaried and full-time and part-time hourly employees employed as of June 30th,
2018, and a 3% increase in the adjunct faculty salary table, and I would so move.
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: Second.>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion and
a second. Any discussion?>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: I just have a question.
Can you or could someone remind me where we gathered that — where did that 3% arrive
from? Where did that come from?>>The 3%, after we had the salary study we
talked to — we have two salary consultants that we talk to and we just basically had
discussions with them on what do we need to do to be competitive with our rates and with
the salary study recommendations we came up with 3%.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair, if I may, Becky, we talked about at the committee that
generally it’s been my experience at the college that the staff and — the staff, administration’s
pay increases will follow from essentially what the faculty negotiate?
>>True.>>Trustee Lee Cross: And there is a slight
difference I think in 2015, was a little bit lower, but then followed the 2.75 that the
faculty got thereafter. So generally the part-time and full-time employees have followed the
faculty rate increases?>>Traditionally they do. And it was in fiscal
year ’14 that there was a mediation, we had another salary study that we had many individual
adjustments on and so at that point that the I think 2.75 and the staff got a 2%. And then
we made the adjustments — (Inaudible). So we have had times that we’ve had to deviate
from that. But typically they mirror one another.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Any other discussion?
Trustee Lawson?>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: And we are still
negotiating in good faith. So that’s where —
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Correct.>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: — we were discussing
in the committee there could be that –>>(Inaudible).
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: Correct.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Any other questions or
discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Ayes).>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair, there is a, on Page 4, a Human Resources working agenda
there for your review since you’ve forgotten what goes on in that committee. That concludes
my report.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Trustee Cross.
Any questions about the working agenda? Learning Quality, Trustee Lawson?
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: We did not have any recommendations to move forward. Just
kind of to give a recap, Professor Doug Patterson gave a phenomenal sabbatical presentation
on astronomy. At the end we had some questions about the possibility of having some research
equipment quality foundation that they are looking at because I think that would be pretty
exciting to be able to include elementary school and high school and some of the other
partnerships within the county and the region to actually have published work and have their
name on that. So that’s stuff that they’re, you know, looking at down the road, so it
was exciting to kind of hear some of those future plans. And then we had a great presentation
on Pathways with Dr. Weber’s team and just the progress of where we are on that and continuing
to get some updates, and the importance of trying to get students engaged in the process
because a lot of the times our systems are there, but then about how do we get those
students into that system and typically a high probability of our students, and I’m
familiar, I’m a graduate of a community college, I only went to school to go to school and
then I left. So how do you capture those students that are moving so quickly and don’t have
the time on campus to be a part of some of the clubs that maybe some of our faculty might
be able to capture. So just being able to engage the faculty and the students and the
wrap-around services that we have for them to be successful and to increase our graduation
rates. So that was a great presentation by your team. Thank you so much, Dr. Weber.
And then we also had a great discussion by the Assistant Dean, Marge Shelly, about the
opportunities for seniors. So I don’t know if maybe Trustee Snider might want to come
in and talk a little bit about that. But we are seeing a growth of senior citizens in
our county, and so we were just looking at the program that we have for 60-plus and how
we can encourage to fill that.>>Trustee Paul Snider: You gave a thorough
report.>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: That concludes
my report.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you very much.
Management. And you have a few items for our consideration.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: I do. I have a rather lengthy report, so please be patient
with me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Management Committee met on Wednesday, May 2nd, 2018,
at 8:00 a.m. right here in the board room. Trustee Snider, Trustee Musil and myself as
well as staff were there, and that information begins on Page 8 and runs through Page 24
of the board packet. The Management Committee received several presentations from staff
beginning with John Clayton, Executive Director of Institutional Effectiveness, Planning and
Research. He presented information on an agreement with the University of Wisconsin-Stout for
a joint venture to offer benchmarking services to the four-year sector of higher education.
This agreement information can be found on the Consent Agenda on Page 42 of the board
packet. Rachel Lierz, Associate Vice President of Financial Services and Chief Financial
Officer, provided a semi-annual update on the college investments in the Kansas Municipal
Investment Pool. Mitch Borchers, Associate Vice President, Business Services, provided
a Sole Source Report. Rex Hays, Associate Vice President of Campus Services and Facility
Planning, gave a monthly update on capital infrastructure projects. And this report can
be found on Pages 14 and 15 of the packet. He also reviewed a report on the financial
status of Facilities Master Plan projects. That report is on Page 16 of the board packet.
We also received a progress report on the two new buildings, the Career Tech Ed Building,
and the Fine Arts and Design Studios. Tonight we have 11 recommendations to present
to the trustees, nine of these are for RFPs and existing contracts and can be either combined
into one recommendation or handled separately, and I’ll leave that to the trustees for their
preference. But first, a recommendation as related to the fiscal 2018-2019 budget. Here
Rachel Lierz reviewed the management budget recommendation. As the board is aware, we
followed the progress of the budget development for months now, and the guidelines used to
build the budget were approved by the Board of Trustees on December 14th in 2017. As reported
at the April 4th, 2018, Management meeting and board budget workshops last month, one
adjustment to the guidelines is included within the proposed budget. Based on information
now obtained from the county appraiser in March of 2018, Johnson County property values
have increased by more than 5%. The projection first used when the budget was — budget guidelines
were adopted in December. Now that the Johnson County property tax assessments have increased
by more than 7% on average, in order for the college to achieve approximately the same
amount of property tax revenue, 99.5 million, a .25 mill reduction from 9.5 mills to 9.25
mills is now recommended. The proposed General/Post-Secondary Technical Education Funds budget for the fiscal
2018-2019 is presented on Page 6 in the packet and, therefore, it is the recommendation of
the college administration that the Board of Trustees approve the 20 — the fiscal year
2018-2019 Management Budget subject to the adjustments as required when final beginning
balances are assessed, valuation amounts have been determined, and I’ll make that motion.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion. Is there a second?
>>Second.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Motion and a second.
Any discussion? Trustee Cross?>>Trustee Lee Cross: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I appreciate the report from Mr. Trustee Lindstrom and all the work that the administration and
board does. But I speak here to speak in objection to the decrease in the mill, and frankly thanks
to our fiscal discipline, as we near our 50th anniversary here at the college I believe
that we should reinvest any additional funds that we do have as a result of this appraisal.
I oppose any cut to the mill levy because we must first and foremost strengthen the
college for our next 50 years. We should reinvest in our students, faculty, staff, programs,
and infrastructure that our college is known for specifically any extra revenue say 60%
should be used to lower tuition or strengthen our move to cost-free community college for
all. I think the majority of the remaining balance should be used to compensate our faculty
and staff as they help directly produce our greatest product, our students. Finally, in
a time of medical, physical health, obesity problems and when communities are in dire
need of common experiences, say through sports, we should save, strengthen and expand our
social and physical infrastructure on this campus. As I’ve said many times and though
I’m personally opposed in working in opposition to this possibility, there remains a strong
possibility that we have a new conservative governor next year with conservative gains
in the legislature and, frankly, it’s a very real possibility that we’re going to have
to raise the mill in that climate just as we did in 2013, which was my first vote on
this board to raise the mill. So, again, I appreciate the administration’s work. I understand
that they’re making a very reasonable decision. I just respectfully disagree and dissent.
I just believe that we should invest in our college for our students, faculty, and staff,
and the infrastructure so that the next 50 years are frankly as great as the past 50
years.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Trustee Lawson?
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: Thank you, Trustee Cross, for saying that because those are some
of the similar concerns that I have. I prepared a little statement just to kind of explain
my vote to the public. Throughout this process, I’ve asked questions as to what would be the
best interests of Johnson County Community College, our faculty, and our students. The
desire to return to the taxpayers of Johnson County is a strong one, but it is also to
be tempered against being fiscally responsible. I voice concern and I get asked questions
about using triggers, property values, and phase-ins in case our property value do not
continue to increase, a hedge against any potential down-turns or changes enacted by
our state legislature. In the end, after hours of work with our staff and administration,
which I am very grateful for and thank you for your time, I am convinced that the reduction
in the mill by .25 will serve the community and maintain our college moving forward. As
a result, I am voting yes tonight. While I have reservations in that I remain an advocate
for responsible budgeting and seek to avoid short-term reductions that may later have
to be reversed, I believe this rollback is the best compromise possible and vote for
both our community and to show unity in our Board of Trustees.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. Any other comments? Trustee Snider?
>>Trustee Paul Snider: I would just say I think this is, you know, an important position
for us to take moving forward, particularly one that being that it’s a voluntary position
for us to take, we’re not under the property tax lid, and so I think it’s responsible,
incumbent upon us when we have the opportunity to, in my view, do the right thing for the
citizens so that at some point in the future we’re not hammed in by certain legislation
we wouldn’t want, to lead by example.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. I would just
say that we’ve been the beneficiary of a county that has very strong assessed valuations over
the years, and I think every county government, whether it’s city or county, have been sensitive
to that assessed valuation and that they shouldn’t capture a windfall, if you will, by either
retaining the same mill levy or increasing it. I did vote for the increase in the mill
levy back in 2013 because at that particular point in time I thought we needed to have
the extra levy and the revenue as it pertained to the conditions of that particular time,
and we approved that and voted it on. I think we received a little criticism last year when
we didn’t roll it back. I think we left it flat. It was down just a little bit, as I
recall, when those final adjustments came through. And I believe that as assessed valuation
continues to grow in this county, and in some parts of the county assessed valuation was
up 25 to 30%, as I recall Paul Welcome’s message, and I don’t believe that we can always rely
on the taxpayers to say, yes, we’ll just raise our levy or keep it where it’s at. And so,
Paul Snider, I’m with — with you in terms of being sensitive to that particular need.
So I’ll be voting in favor of this motion to reduce the levy by .25.
Any other questions? Trustee Lindstrom?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: I — I made the
motion, so obviously people know how I feel. But I would like to say that I appreciate
the dialogue and the different positions of the trustees, and — and the process that
we go through and the support from staff. So please know that I do truly appreciate
the dialogue.>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion and
a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. (Ayes.)
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed?>>Trustee Lee Cross: No.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Okay. Motion carries. Continue, Trustee Lindstrom.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Okay. All right, our next recommendation is to establish a
guaranteed maximum price for gym refurbishment related to the Facilities Master Plan. Work
has taken place with college stakeholders to develop an architectural and engineering
drawings. This work has progressed to a level of confidence at the construction document
phase so that JE Dunn Construction is now able to establish a guaranteed maximum price,
or GMP, for the gym update. Prior to the — prior to offering a recommendation, I would like
for Rex Hays, who is on engine reserve, I understand, to come on up and give us a little
update on the project. Rex.>>Mr. Rex Hays: Thank you, Trustee Lindstrom.
College stakeholders have been working hard for the last four months to come up with a
scope of services for the gym renovation project, and those recommendations are new bleachers,
new seating, two new scoreboards, new lighting, and painting of the entire gymnasium. But
due to budget and timing constraints, it will not include the gym lobby work, and that’s
due in part to costs related to removing ceiling material, along with the original scope of
work, which is to add baffles hanging from the ceiling, along with painting and new lighting.
So that — the total lobby work, the total amount of the lobby work is 150,000. So that
would put us $150,000 over the original $1.3 million budget. So administration is recommending
that we move forward with the gym renovation work and then treat the lobby renovation work
as a stand-alone project and do that in the future as soon as we can identify funding
and hopefully perform that work as soon as the summer of 2019. So I’d be glad to answer
any questions.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Any questions?
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Was the lobby in the original plan?
>>Mr. Rex Hays: Yes.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Okay.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Lindstrom, proceed.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Rex, thank you.
I just would make a comment that this was one of the aspects of the Facilities Master
Plan that I advocated and I was obviously disappointed that we weren’t able to do the
whole project, but I have tremendous confidence in staff and their recommendation is to go
forward in this direction, and I believe that’s the right way to do at this time. I would
encourage us also to make sure that we consider this in future so that that work can be completely
done. But thank you, Rex. But with that, I would make the following recommendation. It
is the recommendation of the Management Committee that the Board of Trustees accept the recommendation
of college administration to approve the guaranteed maximum price proposal from JE Dunn Construction
Company for construction manager at-risk services for renovations to the gymnasium in an amount
of $1,129,356, and I will make that motion.>>Second.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Any discussion?
All in favor signify by saying aye. (Ayes.)
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman,
you mentioned briefly in your audit report about the process and integrity of that committee,
and as — as I go with the remainder of our recommendations tonight, I think that would
— would be somewhat relevant because we have nine recommendations from this point forward
from the Management Committee. These are all on-call service contract renewals recommendations,
and the Management Committee reviewed nine RFPs for on-call services from Mr. Borchers.
All of these renewals are for existing contracts. The on-call arrangement provide staff with
the opportunity to move forward on smaller facility improvement projects efficiently
and effectively. Information on these recommendations can be found on Pages 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12,
of the board packet. There are a number of those. There you can see that they are for
architectural, carpentry, civil engineering, code consulting, electrical repairs, landscape
design, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing services, structural engineers, and the painting
— the painting and wall coverings are covered in those RFPs. The combined total not to exceed
of these nine recommendations is $1,125,000, and unless there’s a preference from any of
the trustees to take them separately, staff and I would recommend that we take all nine
RFPs as one recommendation.>>Chair Jerry Cook: I assume they were all
vetted extensively in committee?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: They all were
vetted in committee. And this is a — although it’s not a regular occurrence, this has happened
in the past from — on Management Committee.>>Chair Jerry Cook: What’s the board’s desire?
Take them as a group or deal with them individually?>>Trustee Lee Cross: So moved.
>>Group.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Is there any one that
anybody would like to pull off of that nine for further discussion?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Let’s do them all individually.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Okay. Proceed with your
motion.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Okay. All right.
Well, therefore, it is the recommendation of the Management Committee that the Board
of Trustees accept the recommendation of college administration to approve the renewal of annual
contracts for nine on-call professional services and trades, and I will make that motion.
>>Second.>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion and
a second. The detail of each of those motions is in your board packet information. The minutes
will reflect the details of each of those motions. Any questions? All in favor signify
by saying aye. (Ayes).
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman,
before I conclude my report, I would ask Trustee Snider if he has anything to offer as relates
to the management meeting.>>Trustee Paul Snider: I do not. So thank
you.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: That concludes
my report.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you. And I know
you have a pressing commitment. So if you have to leave early —
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Well, I have another report, too, later.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: I guess we better move ahead, then. Treasurer’s Report. Or the President’s
Recommendations and the Treasurer’s Report. Trustee Cross.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. The board packet contains the Treasurer’s
Report for the month ended March 31st, 2018. Some items of note include at Page 1 of the
treasure’s report is the General/Post-Secondary Technical Education Fund summary. March was
the ninth month of the college’s 2017-18 fiscal year. An ad valorem tax distribution of $3,774,589
was received from the county treasurer on March 19th and was distributed as follows:
to the General Fund $3,561,218; 13,511 to the Special Assessment Fund; $199,860 to the
Capital Outlay Fund to get us our total. Also during March, the college made payments of
17 — made payments of 17 — made payment 17 of 20 on the semiannual payments on the
Series 2009 Certificates of Participation for OHEC, and payment 1 of 40 semiannual payments
on the Series 2017 Certificates of Participation new Career and Technical Education Building
and Fine Arts and Design Studios. And Certificates of Participation are just bonds, right?
>>Yes.>>Trustee Lee Cross: We just call them something
different now? I just wanted to make sure I was following. The college’s unencumbered
cash balance as of March 31st, 2018, in all funds was 114.7 million, which is approximately
14.4 million higher than at the same time last year. Expenditures in the Primary Operating
Funds are within the approved budgetary limits and, therefore, Mr. Chair, it is the recommendation
of our college administration that the Board of Trustees approve this Treasurer’s Report
for the month ended March 31st, 2018, subject to some audit.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion. Is there a second?
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Second.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Any discussion? Any discussion?
All in favor signify by saying aye. (Ayes.)
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries.>>Trustee Lee Cross: That concludes my report,
Mr. Chair.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Dr. Sopcich?
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Thank you, Trustee Cook. First of all, I hope you had a chance to review
the President’s Report to the Board. It’s about 40 pages this month. A lot of great
highlights and accomplishments by faculty and staff throughout the campus. So please
take the time to read this. It’s excellent. A couple things. First of all, the Higher
Learning Commission has come and gone. Special thanks to John and Sheri Barrett for all of
your work, but also for across campus. It was a huge initiative. You know, you go to
these conferences for the HLC and you hear these horror stories with regards to the committee
showing up and the rooms are mixed up and they don’t have food and all that kind of
stuff. Everything here was masterful and they definitely gave you high praise and your team
for making it happen. But most importantly, the college fared well and represented ourselves
very well. In their exit interview, they were very impressed with everyone here and the
quality of what we do. We look forward to their draft report, which should come in a
couple months, I presume, right?>>Yes.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Okay.>>Hopefully by the first of July. Sometime
in July.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Good. We just wanted to
hear your voice one more time, we’ve been hearing it every meeting for the last six
months. (Laughter.)
Thanks, John. A couple announcements. This is a great collaboration, and I just want
to share it with the board. The University of Kansas Health System and the University
of Kansas Medical Center have partnered with us to put together a program to help individuals
better understand how they can improve our maintain a healthy life style through healthy
eating habits. There are eight sessions planned once a month over the next eight months, and
the titles are things like Cooking With Whole Grains, Healthy Eating to Promote Cancer Prevention,
Nutrition for Brain Health and Reducing Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease. These are really relevant
today in our world. The program is free. It’s going to be at the Wylie Hospitality and Culinary
Academy, but space is limited. So please call (913)588-1227 and say, “cook right, eat right,”
and they will sign you up, but make sure you call as soon as possible. And hats off to
our culinary department for working with KU in this regard.
Last week we were notified that our college was voted number 7 on a list of the nation’s
25 safest universities and colleges across the United States by an independent study
by YourLocalSecurity.com. We looked into this website and this deal wasn’t an appointment
that you pay for. So in other words, we didn’t pay for it, we didn’t have to buy an ad. This
was a legitimate survey of universities and colleges across the country with regard to
safety. I’ll give you a little bit of the criteria, or who they talked to. First of
all, the Campus Safety and Security Survey, which is done yearly by the Department of
Education. They collect the FBI Uniform Crime Report, campus size, types of campus with
regard to four-year, two-year, private and so on, campus location, and data availability.
And I’ll give you the rankings. Number one was Oregon State University. Number 2 was
the University of Phoenix in Tempe, Arizona, which is an online deal, but apparently they
have an actual physical campus as well. Rutgers University. University of Virginia. Number
5 is the University of Oklahoma. Number 6 is the University of South Carolina. And number
7 was Johnson County Community College. This was an outstanding testament to the work that
not just our police department, who do an excellent job, but all of us do on a daily
basis, such as our KOPS team, our Behavioral Intervention Team, the way we implemented
and handled the concealed carry on campus. If you remember our website and videos were
used as examples by other institutions and by numerous local and national media outlets
as an exemplary way to communicate on this controversial topic. So hats off to everyone
here. That’s a big deal and something that we can be really proud of. And also, thanks
to the trustees, too, who have approved the safety recommendations that we make consistently.
The last thing I just want to say is, in closing, you know, May is always a great time of the
year. We talked earlier about the poster sessions in the CoLab. Some of you may have seen those.
Deborah Edmonds and Lori Slavin were up there today talking about what they do. I gotta
say that it’s so incredible to go and talk to the students and see and experience first-hand
their pride and their excitement, but also their knowledge and the substance of what
they’re talking about. And that’s a real tribute to the faculty, many are here now who have
— who oversee those students and those poster sessions. So I hope next year if you have
a chance, make sure you drop by. They’re really outstanding. We have a lot of honors that
are given to students and faculty and staff. For those of you who were able to attend our
Outstanding Student Awards, those were — talk about inspirational. And that’s something
that happens every year. It’s, again, a real tribute to the faculty and also to the staff
that are really support these students and empower them to do what they need to do to
be successful. Graduations will be going now it seems like every night. I know tomorrow
night will be the Honors graduation ceremony, the Honors Program. I know we’ll have outstanding
participation by trustees at every ceremony, which is wonderful and very much appreciated.
I have to they each one of these is a celebration of student success, their accomplishments
in the classroom, in extracurricular activities, and in their lives. And when the faculty and
staff are honored, it represents outstanding work above and beyond the expectations with
a commitment to the very student success that we talk about tonight. So I’d like to thank
everyone on campus for a terrific academic year and that includes our trustees for making
all these celebrations of students’ success possible. So thank you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Dr. Sopcich. Any comments or questions? I don’t believe
we have any old business. We have no new business tonight. And reports from board liaisons.
Faculty Association. Dr. Arjo.>>Dr. Dennis Arjo: Well, thank you. As you
know, this will be my last chance to address you in this capacity, and as I said last time,
tradition holds that my job tonight will be largely just to introduce — not just — but
to introduce the new FA president. (Laughter.)
Before I do that, I want to take a moment to thank the people who served with me for
the last two years, my officers. So that would be Dr. James Leiker, who was our UNISERV rep;
Rhonda Barlow was our secretary; Brett Cooper was the treasurer; Ron Palcic, past president;
and of course Melanie Harvey was the vice president. And Melanie is going to be, as
you know, the new FA president. So I’m going to have her come up and say some things about
herself and introduce herself to you. But first I’m going to do the academic thing and
give her kind of a formal introduction as we do in the academic world. So Dr. Harvey
received her bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Anderson University in 1996. And from
there she moved on to Vanderbilt University, getting first a Master’s of Science and then
a Ph.D. in organic chemistry. She came to JCCC after a stint at St. Mary’s, University
of St. Mary, and she came to the college in 2008. So she is finishing up her tenth year.
Most of you know Melanie quite well, and if you’ve done anything with her, she’s been
involved in many, many things. You know her energy, her commitment, her excitement, her
dedication to her students, to teaching, to academics, to the college. So I am very confident
that the FA is in very good hands and I know you will enjoy working with her. And so with
that, I will turn it over to our new FA president. (Applause.)
>>Dr. Melanie Harvey: Well, I want to thank Dennis for serving in this role for the past
two years. He has worked harder than most people realize, and he’s done this job with
a lot of wisdom and patience, and I’ve really enjoyed working with him as vice president.
I know he’s a very eloquent speaker. So I’m — I’m sorry.
(Laughter.) But he has also — just working with Dennis,
he has become one of my favorite people here at the college, and I’m going to miss him
being in this role. I was really enjoying being the vice president. But I think I’m
up for the challenge. So that being said, I’d like to tell you a little bit about my
new officer team. I have a very talented team of individuals. I think that they are going
to work really well together to bring a lot of different opinions and ideas for the faculty.
Jim Leiker is our new vice president, and he has held this position before. He’s currently
on our negotiations team. He’s had numerous leader scholarship roles at this college and
outside the college, including serving as Chair of Ed Affairs in the past. He’s the
current Chair of History and Political Science. He’s a dedicated scholar of Kansas history
and he’s widely published. He’s also the person who started our College Scholars Program and
the Kansas Studies Institute here at JCCC. I think Jim is going to make a great future
president later, so I’m real excited to have him on our team.
Terri Easley-Giraldo is our secretary. And she is an expert in communications. She’s
a professor of speech and debate here at the college. She’s won numerous awards, including
most recently she was one of the Distinguished Service Award winners and she’s also on our
negotiations team. And she’s been amazing to work with.
Eve Blobaum is our new treasurer. She’s a professor of sociology and she currently serves
as the Co-Chair of the Sociology Department. She was awarded the Outcomes Assessment Award
this semester for this year. Brian Wright is our new UNISERV representative.
He’s served as the vice president in the past. He’s a professor of political science and
he runs our award winning and just won the — I saw the Outstanding Student Organization
Award earlier tonight as they were sharing student organization awards, but he runs the
JCCC Model U.N. program. Okay, so that’s our group, and this is the
end of the year, as Joe was just talking about, we celebrate a lot of student accomplishments
at this time. It’s a season for poster sessions and concerts and presentations and awards
and all sorts of performances and programs, and of course graduation, which is super fun.
All these events remind us just how special this place is, how amazing our faculty are
at providing opportunities for our students to shine and really show what they can accomplish.
So we love to celebrate our students, and that’s the reason that we’re all here, right?
So I do have a couple items I want to talk about. But I’ll try to be somewhat brief.
We’re still in contract negotiations, of course. We’ve not yet reached an agreement. But we’re
hopeful that as we resume negotiations next week, that we’ll move closer to a place that
balances the needs of everyone that are impacted by our negotiations. We talked a little bit
about the mill levy tonight. Of course property value’s going up, and I just wanted to note
that the change in property values, it does impact the cost of living for all the residents
in Johnson County, including our students and our employees. But I do appreciate the
difficulties of you guys, your decision with the mill levy and the budget. So finally I
want to talk about this week I was reminded that one of our core values at Johnson County
Community College is collaboration. We did a lot of reflecting on our shared governance
over the past few weeks, especially between Collegial Steering, which we did bring a handout.
That was us. It was only one page, not two pages.
(Laughter.) But we did have a chance to reflect on our
role on campus, and on shared governance at this institution, especially when we met with
the HLC group. So when you’re meeting with a group and you’re talking about a topic,
you have to sit and think about, well, what is it like here, and do some self-evaluation.
So our faculty leaders met with HLC representatives and we did discuss the topic of shared governance.
And I should say, in the 10 years that I’ve been here, I’ve been here exactly 10 years,
this is my — I’m just finishing, I have seen us come a long way with shared governance
in the sense that when I first came, we have all these things that we didn’t have then.
We didn’t have faculty chairs before, and those are sort of one of the hallmarks of
having a shared governance type system. We participate now in AQIP projects, strategic
planning, and the program review. I found myself kind of liking the program review when
I — like, okay, well, it’s effective in a lot of ways, even though it’s really a lot
of work. And so I couldn’t believe I was — I was praising the program review process, but
sure enough, it is one of those things that contributes to our shared governance here.
That being said, many faculty voiced dissatisfaction in the degree of collaboration involved in
decision making. So I think that where faculty are right now is that while we have experienced
a sharing of much of the work done at the college, and I think a lot of this work does
inform decision making often, there’s still room — significant room for improvement I
think in the way that faculty are included in decision making. So I think there’s room
for improvement there. And we also when we met with them, they did express some concern
about the roles and relationships of our Faculty Association and our Faculty Senate, and they
were very — they were very direct with us about that, the relationship between these
groups. And it wasn’t something that we’re not aware of. We’re completely aware of this.
We’re at a moment right now where our faculty are very united around negotiations. But we’re
also at a bit of a crossroads in how to manage our voices when we talk about shared governance.
The Faculty Association was chartered in 1979. For the past 39 years, the FA has worked not
only on collective bargaining and negotiated issues that are in our contract, but also
the ones that could potentially be in our contract. We’ve handled professional employment
issues such as advocacy, professional development, mediation, we’ve managed faculty representation
on college wide committees. We’ve worked on relationship building. We are involved in
political action locally and as part of KNEA and NEA at the state and national levels.
And while Ed Affairs skillfully handles the curriculum items for our campus, the role
of the FA has grown over these many years to include almost every other imaginable item
that warrants collective faculty involvement. So the problem is that much of the identity
crisis that seems to be ongoing for the Faculty Senate stems from the fact that the FA has
not been willing to relinquish items that have historically and experientially belonged
to our union. So we haven’t been able to — willing to sort of give away areas of influence to
another group that doesn’t have the same legal relationship and standing.
So this has been sort of our internal conflict between the faculty, and I just wanted to
give you a little bit of historical context for that because this is something that we’re
going to have to address as a faculty. We’re going to have to work together and figure
that out. So I would say that maybe is our homework that we have to have a clear, united
voice for the faculty if we’re going to improve shared governance. And so that is — that
is our part of that. So that’s all.>>Chair Jerry Cook: A couple of things.
>>Dr. Melanie Harvey: Yes.>>Chair Jerry Cook: First of all, congratulations
on your election.>>Dr. Melanie Harvey: Thank you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Secondly, your page was single-spaced, 6 font —
(Laughter.) It was well done. Appreciate that. Secondly,
Dr. Arjo –>>Dr. Melanie Harvey: It was tiny, but not
6 font.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Dr. Arjo, congratulations
on your tenure. I believe being the head of a Faculty Association, although not as difficult
as being the principal of a high school these days, but it’s sometimes very similar in that
everybody has an opinion or an idea that’s in their best interests that they want you
to support and defend and take to the pinnacle. And I love the discussion on shared governance,
I love the discussion on academic freedom. They’re very similar. And sometimes we think
it’s okay when we get our point across and everybody accepts our viewpoint. But I really
enjoyed Collegial Steering on the 3rd and the discussion about what it is we think we
do in our — in our organizations and how we can work together, and I appreciate your
comment about the work that the faculty has to come to — come to grips as to what is
their role with each other and supporting and helping individual faculty, as well as
departments. I think all of us understand that and we just have to work together to
get there. Any questions or comments of the new president?
>>Dr. Melanie Harvey: Thank you.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Congratulations
and thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thanks. And don’t worry
about this philosopher. His eloquent speech just appears to be eloquent speech because
a philosopher will say that’s not really reality anyway, so don’t worry about it.
(Laughter.)>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thanks. Thanks, Melanie.
Trustee Lindstrom? Research Triangle.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. And I need to at the conclusion of my report, if I can.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Yeah.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Thank you. The
Johnson County Education Research Triangle, or J-CERT, is a unique partnership among the
Johnson County taxpayers, the University of Kansas, and Kansas State University. The partnership
was created in 2008 when county voters supported a 1/8-cent sales tax to create economic stimulus
and advance academic research and business endeavors at Kansas State Olathe Campus, KU
Edwards Campus and the campus — I’m sorry, and KU Clinical Research Center. While KBOR
maintains constitutional authority over the universities, a seven-member board composed
of elected officials from Johnson County has been appointed to ensure that the use of public
funds complies with state and local law. The board oversees funding, conducts annual independent
audits, and produces year-end reports. Members appointed to — members are appointed to four-year
terms and may serve two terms. The Johnson County Education Research Triangle
authority is comprised of the following representatives: from Kansas State appointment is Overland
Park Mayor Carl Gerlach; the Johnson County Commission appointment is Commissioner Jason
Osterhaus; the KBOR appointment is Mike Copeland, mayor of Olathe; the University of Kansas
has two representatives, first is Leawood mayor Peggy Dunn and Kansas Representative
Melissa Rooker; the governor has one appointment, and that is Senator Julie Lind; and the Board
of Trustees has one appointment as well, and I serve in that position at this time.
The authority met on May — Monday, May 7th, this past week, at 7:30 a.m. at the KU Edwards
Campus on Quivira Road in Overland Park. There were — there we received an update from Suze
Parker from Parker Communications Group. She explained the recent efforts to better inform
the public about the work being done, including website additions and activities, social media
activities, and a strategy to have J-CERT members present programs at community clubs
and service organizations. 2019 will be the 10th anniversary of J-CERT and the authority
is now discussing ways to celebrate the accomplishments and many benefits afforded to our community
and our residents. We also received and reviewed and approved the minutes from our last meeting,
accountant and audit reports, as well as payment of invoices for our accountant and attorney.
University reports were given by Dr. Ralph Richardson from Kansas State Olathe, Dr. David
Cook from KU Edwards Center, and Dr. Roy Jensen from KU Cancer Center.
Finally, we were honored with the attendances of three additional and illustrious guests
at our last meeting, the Kansas State University President, retired Chairman of the Joint Chief
Staff, General Richard Myers was at our last meeting. The KU chancellor, Douglas, Doug,
Dr. Doug Girod was at our meeting, and as I mentioned earlier, KU Cancer Center Director
Dr. Roy Jensen. All three gentlemen expressed their sincere appreciation of the gift that
is J-CERT, and just as importantly, bring — the opportunity of bringing together people
in organizations to achieve remarkable results such as the statistic — and this is a remarkable
statistic — that if you live in this area and you’re under the auspices of KU Cancer
Center, your chances are 25% better of survival and cure because of J-CERT and the KU Cancer
Research Center. And that’s a remarkable statistic. Sales tax revenues for the month of March
were $1,441,156.44, or 8.7% over last year’s same period in 2017. The next meeting of the
Johnson County Research Triangle will be on November 7th, Monday, at 7:30 at the K-State
Olathe Campus, which is out on Innovation Drive in Olathe, Kansas. For more information,
I would recommend people go to www.JoCoTriangle.com and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Mr.
Chairman, that concludes my report.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Trustee Lindstrom.
I appreciate the comment about the chance in Johnson County regarding cancer. Dr. Jensen
is a remarkable individual, and hearing him sometime ago I was also impressed with the
network they have with hospitals in the state of Kansas. And I think all the hospitals in
Kansas benefit with the cancer research and assistance they can get from the KU Med Center
in that regard. So thank you very much for that. Any questions of Trustee Lindstrom?
Thank you. And you should leave for your other engagement.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: The next item is the
Kansas Association of Community College Trustees. Our next meeting is June 1 and 2 in Kansas
City, Kansas. It’s a time when we’ll celebrate graduates of the Kansas leadership I guess
Institute through KACCT. And we have people participating in that. Dr. Noah Brown of ACCT
will be here as guest speaker on Friday and Saturday, and Trustee Ingram and I will be
attending that meeting. If any of you desire to go, let Terri Schlicht know and we’ll make
that arrangement. But that’s up at Kansas City, Kansas.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Hotel acomadditions?>>Chair Jerry Cook: I’m sorry?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Will we get hotel accommodations?>>Chair Jerry Cook: Well, I guess you can
have them if you need them, but…>>Trustee Lee Cross: I’m kidding.
(Laughter.)>>I’ll drive you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Foundation. Trustee Ingram.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Yes. On April 12th,
the Foundation supported our international students with a luncheon in the Wylie Hospitality
and Culinary Center. The college boasts rich diversity and a strong global perspective
thanks to our more than 1,300 international students. There is still time to support our
international students through a crowd funding campaign that is set up through the Foundation’s
website. The Foundation directors met on Wednesday, April 25th. The highlight of that meeting
was the introduction of Chris Gray and Dr. Randy Weber to the board. Each gave a PowerPoint
presentation of the work of their respective departments and it was very well received,
so thank you to both of you for doing that. A very successful Cohen Community Series was
held this past Saturday, May 5th, starring Phil Vassar, and we look forward to hearing
the final amount that was raised for scholarships. And for those of you who were there, it was
a great concert. He was awesome. On Tuesday, May 22nd, the Foundation’s annual luncheon
will be held in the CoLab at noon. This has been previously announced to the Board of
Trustees. We hope you will attend. We will celebrate the year’s accomplishments and look
forward to everyone joining us. And that concludes my report.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Thank you, Trustee Ingram. Questions? Next item is the Consent Agenda.
It’s an item where we deal with a number of routine items. Is there anybody that would
like to remove an item from the Consent Agenda? Any item to be removed? If not, I would entertain
a motion.>>So moved.
>>Second.>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion and
a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Any discussion? Any discussion? All in favor signify
by saying aye. (Ayes).
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Opposed? Motion carries. Like last month, I’d like to have an opportunity
for trustee comments. We do have an Executive Session, but before we move into Executive
Session, Trustee Snider, any closing comments?>>Trustee Paul Snider: Just thank you. I
had inquired, I had a few budget questions after the last meeting leading up to this
and they were answered very thoroughly and I appreciate the work on that.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Good. Thank you. Trustee Lawson?
>>Trustee Angeliina Lawson: I received this photograph signed by U.S. Senator Pat Roberts
from our D.C. trip. So that was a nice surprise. So thank you to him and his office for that.
That was a lot of work that we did up in D.C. and thank you so much for everything that
you did in helping to get students there and get the agenda focused on what we need to
be talking about. So thank you.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Cross?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Nothing, Mr. Chair.>>Chair Jerry Cook: Trustee Ingram?
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Oh my goodness. Where do we start? I’m just going to say that Trustee
Lawson and I had the opportunity to kick off the graduation season last Friday night at
the Police Academy and it was wonderful. It was her first graduation, very exciting. And
I’m waiting for the next leadership class. Next month. So… thank you.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: As am I. So good. I would just like to echo Trustee Lindstrom’s remarks.
I appreciate the professionalism when we share a differing point of view as trustees and
I — I value that and respect it and it’s important to have that kind of dialogue and
I appreciate that very much. The other comment I want to make is that I feel badly for the
public that doesn’t get to experience what we experience when we’re involved with programs.
So at the Honors Student Luncheon last week, I was privileged to sit at a table where one
of the faculty members — in fact, one of the recipients had received her GED here and
now was getting recognized and going to — going to go to a four-year school to get her degree
in history. And I was told by the faculty member of another student who got their GED
here, got a four-year degree and I think was getting a master’s degree from KU in history.
And so the — the example after example of success stories of students who, for whatever
reason, maybe had difficulty in high school and at some point in time say I need to come
back and get my GED program, and then that launches them into a whole new — a whole
new set of opportunities. So I feel badly, public, that you don’t have a chance to hear
those and see those, but be assured that we have story after story after story by students
who have been touched in a very positive way by faculty and staff and other support people
on this campus that gives them an opportunity to become something they are yet to become.
And so thank — thanks to everybody for that. And I appreciate the opportunity to hear those
stories. At this time, I would like to entertain a
motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing matters exempt from
the Kansas Open Meetings Act relating to privileged conversations with legal counsel and the attorney-client
relationship and consultation with the board’s bargaining representation in employer-employee
negotiations. This session will last 20 minutes. We will resume the open meeting in this same
location. No action will be taken during this session. We would like to invite Joe Sopcich,
Barbara Larson, Becky Centlivre, Jim Lane, Gurb Singh, Mickey McCloud, Randy Weber, Rachel
Lierz, and Tanya Wilson to join in this Executive Session. I would entertain a motion as such.
>>So moved.>>Second.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: Move by Ingram, seconded by Cross. It’s 5 till. We’ll start the session
at 7:00 and we’ll go for 20 minutes. Thank you.
(Executive Session).>>Chair Jerry Cook: We are back from Executive
Session. No action was taken. At this time, I would entertain a motion to adjourn this
meeting.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: So moved.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: We have a motion.>>Second.
>>Chair Jerry Cook: And a second. All in favor signify by saying aye.
(Ayes.)>>Chair Jerry Cook: The May meeting is adjourned.
(Gavel)>>Thank you.