>>Chair Greg Musil: If I could have your
attention, please. I’d like to call to order the October meeting of the Johnson County
Community College Board of Trustees. We are Cavaliers in honor of our Student Senate
president Donny Whitton, who will not be with us today, but who brought that up last meeting
that we should be proud of the Cavalier brand. Let’s start our meeting with the Pledge
of Allegiance, please.>>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 Greg Musil: Thank you. Roll call and recognition of visitors.
>>Ms. Terri Schlicht: This evening’s visitors include Dick Carter, Frank Sodilar, Finnegan
Grondahl and Ruby Grondahl.>>Chair Greg Musil: The next item on our
agenda is the Open Forum. The Open Forum section of the board agenda is a time for
members of the community to provide comments to the board. There will be one Open Forum
session during each regularly scheduled board meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes
unless a significant number of people plan to speak, in which case the Chair can limit
the amount of time per speaker. When addressing the board, registered speakers should be respectful
and civil and should not address matters related to individual personnel matters of the college.
As a practice, the college does not respond in this setting when the matters concern personnel
issues or matters that are being addressed through our established grievance or suggestion
processes or are otherwise before the board for consideration. I have one registered
speaker this evening, Brett Cooper from our faculty math division. Brett, if you’re
ready, please come to the podium.>>Mr. Brett Cooper: Thank you, Chairman
Musil, Trustees and members of the administration. Wanted to take this opportunity to discuss
something that’s going to be a part of the recommended Facilities Master Plan, consolidation
of the math or consolidation of the five resource centers. I just want to in case you didn’t
get to see it, you were emailed a letter from Brenda Edmonds, one of our faculty members,
on the same topic. I will try not to duplicate any of that information. I’ll be brief.
I think my opinion on the proposed consolidation of the resource centers is pretty well known
amongst the administrators. We’ve had various conversations about it. Johnson County Community
College is a leader among community colleges nationally. The one thing that I keep hearing
from the administration and the consultants regarding the consolidation of the resource
centers is that this is a, “national trend.” Leaders do not follow trends. Leaders
set trends. In my not quite three and a half years here at the college as director
of the Math Resource Center, we have hosted visitors from Kansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska,
Minnesota, and currently we have a visitor from Pakistan for the semester. I’ve been
contacted by math faculty from Massachusetts all the way to New Mexico. These aren’t
random visits or contacts. They didn’t look us up randomly on higher ed jobs or anything
like that. We have a reputation. These are intentional because they’ve heard about
Johnson County Community College and the Math Resource Center in particular. And I believe
it was 2013, a SWOT analysis was conducted by the college and the resource centers, all
five of us collectively, were identified as the number two strength. So not only are
we known nationally and internationally for our resource centers, but we’re also appreciated
locally by the students, faculty, staff and community atlarge.
As far as the national trend goes, a 2010 study by ACT of “highly rated practices” for
retention of community colleges community college students found that 53 out of the
66 community colleges in the top quartile for retention had a combined resource center
while 47 out of 67 of the bottom quartile colleges for retention had combined resource
centers. So let me just say that again. 53 out of the top 66 versus 47 out of the
bottom 67. There’s virtually no difference. So, yes, this is popular, yes, this is a trend,
but there is at least the study shows that there’s no real impact on student success.
And there were, I believe, 265 community colleges in that study. Students who use
the Math Resource Center are very satisfied with it and the service they receive. 98%
of the students in our last survey said that they were either satisfied or very satisfied.
In fact, 77% said they were very satisfied with their overall experience. The largest
complaint was actually the noise level, 48% said that that was something that concerned
them. Consolidating all five resource centers would essentially put about three times as
many people together, which would almost certainly increase noise issues. During many of the
discussions recently, the Math Resource Center has been held up as a great example of how
resource centers can work, and I believe that’s earned. Much of the reason is because it
was designed that way. We were we are the geographic center of the math division, as
designed in 1993 when CLB was built. We have the math about half of the math classrooms
directly across the hall from us. We have faculty offices directly in the hall behind
us. We’re on the main thoroughfare between the Galileo’s Garage and the main campus,
so we get lots of traffic. The students become a part of a math community,
whether they’re in elementary algebra or differential equations, when they’re in our area, they
are surrounded by people doing math, teaching math, thinking about math. From what I’ve
heard and seen, this is actually fairly rare in community colleges. Moving the Math Resource
Center would have a drastic negative impact on that. I am not afraid of change. In
fact, I welcome it as most, if not all the faculty in the math division and campus wide.
However, the change for the sake of change often leads to undesired outcomes. Little
to no discussion has happened regarding either the two-resource center plan that was presented
at the board retreat in August, nor the new one resource center plan that just recently
came up. Sorry, I lost my place here. In the the original plan of having the two resource
centers with math and science together in the current location of the Math Resource
Center, at least we would still be with the math classrooms, easy access to the math students
and the science students would not be too far from their labs or faculty. Another
thing that should be considered is when a panel of faculty was asked to prioritize the
various projects of the proposed Facilities Master Plan on which you are about to vote,
consolidating the resource centers was at or near the bottom while the administration
placed it near the top of their priorities. In this case, the faculty who are in contact
with students all day every day likely understand how this move would impact the students much
better than members of the administration. I I understand they are doing what they
think is best, but I think in this case, our closeness to the students is going to give
us better information on that.>>Chair Greg Musil: Brett, we’re at about
seven minutes, but I’ll give you a chance to finish up.
>>Mr. Brett Cooper: Okay. But from what I’ve seen and heard, the pros and cons have
not been discussed openly, only the move, whether the move should happen or not. If
you if they have been considered, they have not been communicated well. I ask that you
delay the vote to approve the consolidation of the resource centers until proper research
and consideration can be discussed and considered. Thank you for your time.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you. And for the members of the audience, including the
TV audience, this will be an item discussed at some length later in the agenda as we consider
our Facilities Master Plan and hear both from Dr. Larson and our consultant and others,
so. Next item is awards and recognition.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Trustee Musil, we have no awards and recognition tonight.
>>Chair Greg Musil: And Mr. Whitton is not able to be here for the Student Senate
report. So it’s time for you, Mr. Carter, the college lobbyist. Thank you for coming.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: Thank you. I’ll do my best to keep you moving along because I
know you have a full agenda this evening. This will be a brief report. The report
is purely about finances. The state is down another 45 million for the month ending in
September. That puts us about 30 $39 million in the red. Had we gone the month of September
and the remaining nine months of the state’s fiscal year without any additional decreases
in expected revenues, we probably would have had about $5 million in the bank. As it
is now, we’re about $39 million in the red, which signals there definitely will be current
year cuts or allotments at some point, likely before the legislature convenes in January,
but certainly not before the general election here in the first week of November or so.
Another interesting point as it relates to the budget, the governor appointed a Consensus
Revenue Estimating Working Group and that group was brought together to make some recommendations
on what processes could be done to help the budget outlook be a little bit more stable
in their reporting mechanisms. And a couple of the of the recommendations out of that
group I think are worth noting, at least just just to keep in mind. One is that one recommendation,
and again, we have yet to see if these will actually come to fruition, but one recommendation
is that we no longer look at the monthtomonth budget comparisons from the year prior. That’s
kind of where we’ve been at just simply because of the state of the budget. That’s one recommendation.
The other one is that in the legislative process, presently the nonpartisan Legislative
Research Department assists in assembling the fiscal notes for the bills as they are
as they are proposed and as they are heard in various committees. One recommendation
would be that the Department of Revenue provide the fiscal notes for those particular proposed
bills that we hear each each day during the session.
It’s just it’s just of note. It’s interesting to those of us that follow the process and
it certainly does play out when you talk about what the budget, the budget projections look
like. Then, finally, as it relates to school finance,
the Supreme Court did hear the adequacy portion of the school finance lawsuit on September
21st. It’s doubtful that they will issue an opinion prior to the general election.
I do think that they will do something around the time that the legislature starts, certainly
that is the funding formula for K12 schools is going to be the driving factor in everything
that we talk about come January. So I’ll stop there, Mr. Chairman, and if there are
any questions, I’d be happy to entertain them.>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Lindstrom?
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Carter, when you say 45 million down, what does that
actually mean? Is it based on last year’s revenue? Is it based on what we thought
estimates should be under this budget?>>Mr. Dick Carter: It’s based on what estimates
were were thought to be for this year, current year budget. I did not compare to I think
it might be up over last year’s amount.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Okay.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: As far as the where we are overall in the budget.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: But it’s based on the estimate, though?
>>Mr. Dick Carter: For the current year budget, yes, sir.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Yeah, okay. All right.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Any other questions? When you say fiscal notes for benefit of
people watching that don’t understand that,>>Mr. Dick Carter: Sure.
>>Chair Greg Musil: if you have to find a bill that’s going to cost the state something,
the Legislative Research Department says this is going to cost the state $30 million a year.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: Correct.>>Chair Greg Musil: And if I have a bill
that raises taxes or fees, the Legislative Research Department will say this is going
we estimate this will make the state richer by $30 million. Whatever the number is.
>>Mr. Dick Carter: Also correct.
>>Chair Greg Musil: How long has the nonpartisan Legislative Research Department been making
those fiscal notes?>>Mr. Dick Carter: As long as I’ve been
involved, which is 20plus years. It it serves as the staff arm for the legislative body,
whereas one of the cabinet level agencies is typically appointed by the administration
in charge. And so there’s all kinds of different you could draw a lot of different things from
something like that.>>Chair Greg Musil: I’m just troubled that
we both of these appear to be eliminating a nonpartisan objective way of looking at
our budget and then transparency in reporting it to the people, and none of that was an
issue when we were meeting our projections, none of it was an issue when things were good.
But now when things have been bad for a while, we want to get rid of that, and I would
I would not support that if I had the opportunity to voice an opinion elsewhere, but. Any
other questions for Mr. Carter? Thank you, Dick.
Next item are committee reports. The first one is Collegial Steering. Trustee Sharp
and I attended the Collegial Steering meeting last Tuesday. We had four or five new members
of the Steering Committee. That is made up of the president and vice president of
Faculty Association, the president and vice president of the Faculty Senate, the chair
and vice chair of Educational Affairs Committee, all those six are faculty members. And then
Dr. Korb and Dr. Larson were there on behalf of the administration. We spent the first
meeting really spending most of our time just kind of getting to know each other, finding
out what our backgrounds were, where we came from, why we ended up here, what our interest
is in Johnson County Community College, and I think that was a good leadoff for the rest
of the year in a committee where we we try to have kind of frank and frank and candid
discussions and not have to be too diplomatic about it and trust one another that we can
talk about issues on campus in an open manner. So we didn’t really get into too much substance
as we normally would do. Trustee Sharp, anything else?
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Nothing.>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank the members of
the faculty that come to that and administration, too. It’s valuable for the trustee chair
and the vice chair.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Mr. Chair?
>>Chair Greg Musil: Yes.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Question, if I might.
So there was no discussion regarding the Facilities Master Plan in Collegial Steering?
>>Chair Greg Musil: I don’t recall that topic coming up at all. I’m looking out
there and I don’t see I see heads shaking, as mine is.
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: The next item is Human
Resources. Trustee Ingram.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Yes. Pardon me.
Human Resources Committee met last Monday, October the 3rd. We had a benefits presentation
that was provided by Mr. Zimmerman and included an overview of the college’s current benefits
package. Highlights of that presentation included the three groups of benefit eligible
employees and differences in the coverage that is offered to each group. Also, KPERS
benefits for the three tiers of employees as defined by the state, as well as statemandated
rules regarding KPERS retirees who return to work at the college after retirement. We
also have had an FLSA update. Mrs. Centlivre provided an update on recent changes to the
Fair Labor Standards Act, which pertains to overtime for employees, excuse me. Points
of emphasis included classification of employees as exempt or nonexempt, the salary threshold
for exempt employees, employee job responsibilities, and going forward updates will be required
every three years. We also had a report on the benefits of the 403b plan update. The
benefits committee recently met and agreed to pursue the following proposed changes to
the administration of the community college’s 403b and 457b plans. This includes hiring
an independent investment advisor, consolidating from four recordkeepers to one recordkeeper,
and streamlining the investment menu. To move forward with the proposal, the procurement
department will issue an RFP for an external investment consultant.
Dr. Korb also stated that she will present an update and comparison data on the Johnson
County Community College wellness program at a future meeting. And that meeting is
scheduled for December 5th, and that concludes my report.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Questions? I can’t help but note that the changes in the Fair
Labor Standards Act were not changes in the Fair Labor Standards Act. They were changes
in regulations by the Department of Labor. Right? We didn’t change the statute. We
changed the interpretation by the Department of Labor in Washington?
>>Dr. Judy Korb: Well, they changed the threshold for so it was I mean they have a
they have a minimum salary amount for exempt and they did change that. So
>>Chair Greg Musil: My point is, “they” is the regulator and not the Congress.
>>Dr. Judy Korb: Oh, yeah.>>Chair Greg Musil: Okay. And 403b is
like a 401k for other folks.>>Dr. Judy Korb: Yes.
>>Chair Greg Musil: It’s our Retirement plan. Thank you. Trustee Cross, Learning
Quality?>>Trustee Lee Cross: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Learning Quality Committee met on October 3rd, 2016, at 8:00 a.m. Trustee Sandate
and I were present along with many other people. Among the presentations was one by Lenora
Cook regarding Affiliation Cooperation Articulation and Reverse Transfer Agreements. Ms. Cook,
who is the Dean of the Health Care Professions & Wellness, presented a new affiliation agreement
with Two Trails Healthcare, Inc., doing business as the Healthcare Resort of Olathe, to provide
clinical experience for the students enrolled in the practical nursing program. The agreement
was approved by committee. Complete details can be found in this board packet and also
subsequently in the Consent Agenda portion of this board packet. There was a presentation
by Mark Van Gorp, the Chair of the Educational Affairs Committee, presented several course
modifications that are stated here, in these minutes and in the board packet. The requested
modifications will be sent to the full board for approval and can be seen subsequently
in the Consent Agenda portion of this board packet.
Randy Weber, Vice President of Student Success, gave an overview of the census date census
data it should be data, right? Where’s Randy? It says date, but it should be data, right?
enrollment report, showing the enrollment trends for this year and how the data compares
to the previous year. The reports can be accessed by clicking on the following link
in the board packet. And then Vince Miller gave a report regarding Review Accreditation/the
Academic Quality Improvement Program activities that we undergo. Vince, as you may know,
is the Dean of Academic Support, presented an update on the winter Winter Term AQIP Action
Project. The goal of this project is to offer a wide range of online courses during
a winter term at the college beginning in December of 2016. There was a small pilot
completed in December of last year through January, and the statistics of the pilot were
presented to the committee. The winter session for 2016 and ’17 will begin Wednesday, December
14th, and last and the last day of the session will be Wednesday, January 11th. There will
be a pilot ran during the Thanksgiving Break offering extended hours for technical support,
and the next step in the plan is to offer technical support during the upcoming winter
break. Is Vince here? Vince, we talked I think we talked briefly, I was on the phone.
We talked briefly about limiting students enrolling in more than one class, didn’t we?
>>Mr. Vince Miller: That’s right.>>Trustee Lee Cross: I could hear very
remotely. But we’re going to limit students’ ability to take more than one course, is that
right?>>Mr. Vince Miller: They actually could
enroll in more than one, but we’re going to run reports and if somebody is enrolled in
more than one, we’re going to ask them to choose one class, because last winter we had
somebody who took two or three and they failed that because it was too much to do in the
four weeks.>>Trustee Lee Cross: So we’re not here
to limit anybody’s freedom, but just regulating our students’ ability to have success?
>>Mr. Vince Miller: That’s right.>>Trustee Lee Cross: Okay. Thank you.
Finally, Professor Stu Shafer, Professor of Sustainable Agriculture, was granted a
sabbatical for the fall of 2015 semester to research and formulate a strategy for next
steps in the development of sustainable agriculture at the college, which included investigating
existing sustainable agriculture programs at the community colleges and universities
in the United States. The goal was to initiate curricular coordination with other agricultural
programs at the Kansas community college level, as well as outline proposals for new curriculum.
Professor Shafer was able to accomplish most of the six objectives outlined in his
sabbatical report and he has outlined a fiveyear strategic plan in alignment with the mission
of the program. Some of these goals include developing curricula, building an Open Petal
Farm on the JCCC campus and building and maintaining network networking and collaboration opportunities
for agricultural education among institutions and organizations in the region and state.
And I had the privilege of sitting in for Trustee Cook, Mr. Chair, at the KACCT conference
last month, and I believe Seward County Community College is I think the only other I see Dr.
Larson’s head shaking in approval because as I wander off script here, people get nervous.
But I believe Seward County>>Chair Greg Musil: We’re all a little
nervous.>>Trustee Lee Cross: also has a sustainable
agriculture program, and I was offered a tour, but I had to leave to rescue my wife with
the two kids so that concludes my report, Mr. Chair. Thank you to staff, as always,
for preparing this, and thank you for everybody that gave presentations that day.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Questions, Trustee Sharp?
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: I did have a question. It seems like in one of the meetings
that I was in, we talked about the increase in Winterim offerings, and this last year
was 2015 was a pilot with help me with the numbers, 15 or 18 classes. And this year
the Winterim will be how many classes will be offered?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Vince?>>Mr. Vince Miller: It’s going from six
to 20.>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Okay, so six
to 20.>>Mr. Vince Miller: Yep.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: That’s I just want to commend you all because that’s an
awesome opportunity for students coming home for winter break. I love that we’re being
flexible and really meeting students where they are, when they’re here. I just, I think
that’s awesome. I would encourage everyone to share it with their college students.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: I concur, Mr. Chair, on the comments.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Cook.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I’d love to have a copy of Professor Shafer’s report and paper, particularly his five steps,
his fiveyear plan. And I guess a question that and I haven’t I haven’t this is a surprise
question so I don’t expect an answer. But I I guess I’d be interested in the alignment
of his paper with the facilities plan where in the Tier 2 we talk about promoting our
sustainability program. And so I would just be curious to see how his thoughts align with
it didn’t work. My computer is going off. It’s a secret story.
(Laughter.) how his position aligns with how his position
aligns with the facilities plan.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Yes, I had an answer
for you, but your computer threw it off. (Laughter.)
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: I’m sorry, a leprechaun came in the night and I can’t turn it off.
(Laughter.) I’m sorry. Go ahead.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Yeah, the sustainability, the ag program that we have is pretty remarkable
for a suburban or even urban environment. And it’s really pretty far out there. It’s
one of those programs that helps to differentiate Johnson County Community College versus other
schools, not just in the state, but also across the country. It will be interesting to see
how that would fit into the Facilities Master Plan. That space over there, if you ever
have a chance to be on campus and go over while while people are working in that, it’s
really kind of an amazing thing to watch. It’s a lot of fun and it can make a big
impact for our community.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: I looked back through
the president’s report again and I didn’t see that in there. But I think, Mr. Chair,
for the at the least the public, maybe a 15second commercial on the award that our college just
got on sustainability, having defeated Michigan State in that category last year, I think
you talked about it last time, but being we’re on the topic.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Which is more than the Fighting Irish did on the football field.
Jay, could you please take the podium and kind of give us a little background on that?
Do you mind if we do this, Mr. Chair?>>Chair Greg Musil: Dr. Jay Antle.
>>(Inaudible).>>Chair Greg Musil: Dean Miller learned
that sitting in the back row doesn’t exempt you and you sat in the second row, so come
on up.>>Dr. Jay Antle: I’ll make this quick.
But thank you for the time. We’ve been fortunate enough because of all of the efforts
of people on campus to win three national awards over the course of the last few months,
one of which was, that you’re referring to, is from the National Recycling Coalition,
which gave us the Outstanding Higher Ed Recycling Award for the entire country, which is the
one you were referring to. We also won one through the American Association of Community
Colleges their Green Genome Award. Then we also got the twoyear college of the year
award from the U.S. Green Building Council.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Thank you.
>>Dr. Jay Antle: And so and the Facilities Master Plan I think will fit nicely with some
of those accomplishments.>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair? Go ahead,
Mr. President.>>Chair Greg Musil: Yes.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Well, and that’s Jay, I’d just like to commend you for all that
you do for sustainability because it really has helped, it has raised our reputation across
the country and this is a kind of a niche that we really stand out in so that doesn’t
happen without your leadership so thank you very much.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Cross.>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes, Mr. Chair. I’d
just like to note that Jay’s report was during my committee presentation, so.
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Thank you, Jay. (Laughter.)
>>Chair Greg Musil: I’m sure it had to be especially well done.
>>Dr. Jay Antle: Am I done now?>>Chair Greg Musil: You may sit down, Jay.
Thank you. And believe me, we all understand that you could stand up there and talk for
a lot longer about your program. We appreciate your recognizing the agenda.
Okay, we’re ready to move on to Management Committee. Trustee Dr. Cook.
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: I’m deferring to Trustee Lindstrom, who chaired the meeting.
I was at the ACCT meeting and did not attend.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman,
the Management Committee met at 8:00 a.m. on Wednesday, October 5th here in the boardroom.
The information related to the management meeting begins on Page 4 in the packet and
runs through Page 15. Reports, there were six reports that we received. The management
the first report was Dr. Barbara Larson presented information on in agreement with the Johnson
County Department of Health and Environment for Johnson County Community College to become
a closed dispensing site in the event of a catastrophic biological event. This agreement
can be found in the Consent Agenda. The next report was Rachel Lierz gave us a budget
monthly update. She provided preliminary budget calendar and the proposed budget guidelines
for fiscal ’17’18. The board is scheduled to take action on the guidelines in December.
I am pleased to report that at this point, and I think Trustee Cross would be rather
pleased with this, the draft guidelines include a recommendation that tuition rates not be
increased next year. The next report was Mitch Borchers. He presented a sole source
report, as well as a summary of awarded bids between 25,000 and $100,000. That summary
is on Page 6 of the board packet. Rex Hays then provided a monthly update on capital
infrastructure projects, and this report begins on Page 10 of the packet. And our fifth
report was from Tom Pagano and he gave a quarterly report, expenditure report on network infrastructure
equipment and services. That report begins on Page 12 of the packet.
Tom, did I mess your name up? I did>>Mr. Tom Pagano: You got it.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Okay.>>Chair Greg Musil: Tom was fine.
(Laughter.)>>Trustee David Lindstrom: The Management
Committee has two recommendations to present this evening. The first is the MA4 Monitor
Facilities Master Plan, and and the sixth report was Rex Hays and Barbara Larson presented
this information, the proposed 2016 Facilities Master Plan, and at this time, we have a presentation
on the proposed plan, and Dr. Larson will introduce our speaker, Michael Johnson. Barbara.
>>Dr. Barbara Larson: Yes, thank you, Trustee Lindstrom. The presentation this evening
is the culmination of nearly a year of study regarding how our facilities are used today
and how they may best meet students’ needs in the future. It’s been a highly participative
process and I want to acknowledge the many individuals who are here this evening who
have been directly involved in teams or have contributed to discussions. I especially
want to publicly thank Rex Hays for his expertise and diligence in driving this process toward
completion. One of the wisest decisions we made was recommending the SmithGroup to
guide us in this process. Led by Michael Johnson, we had a team at our disposal who
are knowledgeable, datadriven, and responsive, and not likely to adopt a cookie cutter approach
to master planning. They listened to us, and helped devise what we think is a solid
blueprint for the future. We also benefited from having Frank Sottler, a local architect
who partnered with the SmithGroup and who is extremely knowledgeable about JCCC, this
campus, its buildings, and our history. And with that, I’m pleased to turn this presentation
over to Michael Johnson of the SmithGroup to lead us through this presentation. Michael.
>>Mr. Michael Johnson: Thank you, Barbara. So, I’m Michael Johnson. I’m a campus
planner at SmithGroup JGR. We have 30 slides today to summarize kind of the high-level
recommendations that as Barbara said is has been a year’s worth of work and a summary
of 140page document and several appendices, et cetera. Thank you for the kind words,
Barbara. I will say that I have the best job in the world, I get to do this with colleges
and universities all over the country, and it’s been really fun to be part of the JCCC
family for the last year. You guys have a wonderful institution here and and live
up to your reputation as leaders in higher education. So the the schedule, as Barbara
said, was a 12month process punctuated by seven inperson visits with our crossdiscipline
team. We had a robust engagement process that was outlined by a regular Steering Committee
and advisory team that met every time we came to campus, and in between via video conference,
and then a series of focus groups and and kind of more asneeded open houses, et cetera,
with students, faculty members, et cetera. The whole the process, as Barbara said, was
datadriven. It was built on a benchmarking exercise of your peer institutions and institutions
across country and then verified against data coming right out of your departments and and
several of the folks on the cabinet and representing various aspects of the college that laid out
a pretty defensible series of recommendations regarding space needs for the future based
on enrollment projections given to us by the college and based on where we think some and
where you think you all think some of your departments are going. And so that, in a
summary, that in itself is a 100page report. But in a onepage slide summary, that that
says that we feel you have a deficit of academic space given where your trends are going. It’s
a surplus of general classroom space and a deficit of of technical class laboratory kind
of space, and you’ll see how that kind of has played out.
Generally, then, we feel like there’s a surplus of some other academic spaces on campus, which
include some of your auxiliary spaces, student union, et cetera. It all rolls up to a deficit
of space. But that’s in the specific kind of technical spaces needed.
We worked with the team to develop a series of guiding principles, which really is probably
one of the hallmarks of this master planning process, and and you know, maybe to diffuse
some questions later on about what it is that you as a as a group are actually approving
today, one of the main things that you’re approving is the general vision and direction
of this master planning process, the guiding principles that kind of guide decisionmaking
and have guided our decisionmaking to date. You’re not going to be approving the specific
projects. Those actually, you know we feel are logical given the kind of process, but
you’ll have the chance to approve those, kind of, as each of those come up individually.
So the guiding principles is a key moment, I’m going to pause on this slide. This was
well welldocumented and and a very strong point of discussion rallying around themes
that talk about quality and developing 21st Century spaces for the future of the college,
improving the utilization of the existing spaces and future spaces, focusing on the
kind of typology of spaces and the alignment of those spaces with your college goals , the
location and the appropriate adjacencies to encourage where the college needs to go in
the future, a welcoming experience, a communityoriented experience, a sustainable campus moving towards
the future. And then ensuring that these recommendations are both feasible and adaptable
and flexible moving forward. We began to rally around a very simple diagram
that that reinforced your campus core, a really lovely campus core, and attempts to better
activate that pedestrianoriented campus core with 21st Century learning objectives, embraces
kind of common space, both inside and outside those buildings, and then supports that with
a circulation system that does a better job of connecting visitors and users of the campus
from a vehicular experience on the exterior campus to that lovely kind of pedestrian experience
on the in the core of campus. And then supporting that kind of robust core with a series of
centers of excellence that rally around what you are good at as a college in those areas
that those happen. So an arts neighborhood, a career and tech neighborhood, and a community
and wellness neighborhood that all support that core, and emphasize a more kind of robust
and important front door that you’ll see some recommendations for later on. This is a
view at the corner of, kind of, Quivira and College looking back at the campus, again
kind of reinforcing those ideas of a renovated campus core, an improved access and linkage
from a vehicular exterior to pedestrian interior, and then finding infill opportunities to support
those neighborhoods that we identified in those centers of excellence.
We use the guiding principles and via several means of meetings and outreach to to decide
on a series of initiatives and and the goal that this plan can guide the next 10 years
and beyond of the college with a series of very visionary but implementable strategies.
We broke those up into what we were calling tier 1 strategies and tier 2 strategies. The
tier 1 strategies you can see are the first four listed and the tier 2 beyond that. I’m
going to not pause on those here. You can read those faster than I can say them. But
we will go through each one of those indepth in the following several slides.
So the first initiative is an idea to to emphasize an improved investment in CTE and and the
arts on the campus, specifically the visual arts. And so our space planning guidelines
showed a need for approximately 85,000 assignable square feet, including combined welding, to
serve both the college and BNSF in addition for the CTE in addition to some art spaces.
And the strategy that several strategies were kind of discussed and and reviewed, but
the strategy that kind of bubbled to the top was an idea of creating a new CTE building
and constructing a new Arts building along the along the east side of the campus that
kind of reinforces the arts neighborhood, and then renovating ATB for combined welding
uses and some other ancillary uses. Also, kind of maintaining the opportunity to renovate
and expand the WLB for BNSF specialty labs south of the ATB building.
The second strategy and initiative revolved around active learning classrooms, and the
college is doing a really good job to promote active learning in several of its facilities,
mostly within existing kind of rooms. The one the one challenge that we heard from faculty
and students and staff members was that perhaps we were trying to do too much in too little
space, and so we set a goal that by in the next 10 years we would achieve 50% of our
classrooms in active learning, achieving assignable square feet metrics of 30 to 34 assignable
square feet per station, and you can see the number of stations per classroom. Two strategies
to achieve that, both some through architectural renovation, which would require kind of the
the removal of walls and a joining of some underutilized spaces throughout your college
that that could kind of create the appropriate size to active learning classrooms. And
then we think we can achieve the remainder of those active learning classrooms within
the walls and through furnishing adjustments.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Michael, when you say
active learning, what do you mean active learning?>>Mr. Michael Johnson: Yeah, act moving
away from a didactic kind of environment, kind of like we’re in today, where a faculty
member may stand on a stage and engage students in a seated desk, single desk kind of moment,
to a more opportunity to be more flexible, have group learning opportunities and and
have a kind of varied experience through the learning opportunities. Is that helpful?
The aforementioned idea regarding the academic resource centers, again, was one of the single
singlemost complaints that we heard early in the stages when we kind of were identifying
some of the issues was that as it relates to student success, students were having issues
locating and and getting to the appropriate resource center. And so as we looked at
your resources today, you currently have five resource centers in four different buildings
and three different floors. As an outsider, it’s challenging to navigate, and that’s a
concern given that student success is a primary driver of change in the future. We have
a couple of ideas and two options that that we’d like to test with the group today, and
I think should form a foundation moving forward. One was two resource centers, combining
the Math and Science Resource Centers in the CLB building, and you can see the stacked
diagram on how that could be achieved and the different moves that might accomplish
that. And then the second was an Achievement Language and Writing Center in the library,
which, you know, kind of got halfway there. This was a would be an improvement over
where you are today, we feel, but I think in many ways might still be a compromise.
And so we did test a second idea that centralized those learning centers and resource centers
on a on the first floor of the library, again, you can see the stacked diagram on how that
may be achieved and the different reasons for being able to do that are varied. The
literature, you know, certainly supports the kind of impact of access, of visibility, and
of location of these to that are kind of implicit in the in student success moving forward.
There also is a general move towards multidiscipline and crossdiscipline learning in higher ed.
And so this idea that our students that are coming out of college today need to be
Tshaped, they need to have a deep disciplinary knowledge, but also need to kind of balance
that with a with a very robust crossdiscipline understanding, and I think that this idea
would support that. And in many ways there’s not, as Barbara said, there is not one solution
that works on all college campuses across the country. There are trends that are moving
towards an integrated resource center, but as it relates to JCCC, your library is a wonderful
asset, it is in the middle of campus and it is has a surplus of space currently.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: When you say literature, what are some examples?
>>Mr. Michael Johnson: Yeah. The I’d have to I’d have to cite specific examples
for you, Dr. Sopcich, and I’d have to get back to you on that with some with some citations.
But the you know, I think we are seeing in several of the projects we’re working on,
again, I have had the great opportunity to work on community college master plans across
the country. Most recently, you know, Metropolitan Community College in Omaha, Nebraska, has
used their Sarpy location, their South Omaha location, to centralize their resource centers
and their connector building. We’re seeing this at we’re working down at Austin Community
College in their Highland Mall campus and a lot of press that they’re getting from the
accelerator building, which in many ways is attempting to colocate these learning centers
and is getting a lot of good success from that. We’ve done similar things at Maricopa
Community College and El Paso Community College, et cetera. So there are the trends are out
there, and so. Other questions, comments? The fourth of the kind of tier 1 initiatives
is it relates to the front door and wayfinding of the college, and this has several components.
This idea that the college currently has a vehicularoriented exterior mostly that kind
of orients folks to a parking resource, but is a little bit disorienting in that you don’t
know that this wonderful resource of campus kind of courtyards and quadrangles exists.
So the recommendations here are strengthening some of the gateways both at the corner of
Quivira and College at the gateways along at College and Quivira and the opportunities
from a security standpoint to close these down during off hours, if needed, an idea
to include a a fourth kind of egress access to the south I think also improves the accessibility
of the campus and the safety of the campus. And the idea that we can orient individuals
arriving via bus or via car to where they need to go and have these kind of moments
of of acknowledgment of where they are and how you get to the center of campus from as
you migrate from a vehicular to a pedestrian. Some ideas that have been tested about, again,
these are scalebased and other things. But about the idea of kind of marking the corner
of College and Quivira. And then also related to this, and I mentioned the kind of opportunity
to gate some of the entries, but the security considerations all play into this front door
and wayfinding as well. The college has embarked on several considerations over the
last over the last few years regarding security, and has a really robust security program in
place, including the law enforcement professionals and the training communication systems that
are ingrained in the campus culture, the security camera expansion, the adoption of these CPTED,
you know, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles. We think that the augmentation
of that with this egress route and the security gates kind of help support those those goals
in a meaningful way. And finally, from a wayfinding standpoint,
we had a really robust conversation about what is the front door, certainly the Carlsen
Center has a certain amount of presence on campus. But you at the end of the day really
want to drive your firsttime visitors and firsttime students to the Student Center.
It is where a lot of this overlap happens. And this is kind of what they what they
arrive to, and so the idea that we could turn this, which is actually oriented to the court
yard in the Student Center, into a place that kind of orients folks back to the street in
addition to the court yard, maybe provides a slight addition to the building, but also
takes some space out of the an oversized bookstore to create a more welcoming front door. And
then how that might look at the at the street level currently and then in the future with
an improved, secure kind of dropoff experience and improved branding experience and some
more accessible parking resources as well. The tier 2 initiatives start with an idea
of activating and improving collaboration spaces on campus. The idea that learning
and a lot of the robust learning in the future will happen as much outside of the classroom
as inside of the classroom. And so this notion that when we benchmark JCCC against
other institutions that your collaboration spaces are perhaps a little deficient. And
so a goal to get to 7 to 10% of your total assignable square feet in the next 10 years
through primarily two modes, and that is taking back some of your extrawide corridors for
better open collaboration space that allow kind of spilling out of the classroom and
allow the learning to kind of take place directly after the classroom environment, and then
and then strategically locating enclosed study spaces that are can be assignable, can be
checked out, maybe require some architectural renovation and furnishing enhancement to do
this in visible locations. Secondary recommendation about office spaces, generally, you have about
the right mix of office spaces, but we felt that as we looked across the college there
are some locations where are currently occupied by offices that should be given back to the
student, an example being the first floor of GEB here, an existing condition that could
be much more active and understood with some student spaces, more transparent kind of vertical
circulation moment, and the idea that it could be given back for collaboration areas as well.
A major trend in makerspaces that I think the college is perhaps a little behind on
when we look nationally and the idea that we might be able to use some of our first
phase projects to to at least test some of these makerspace ideas in both a new CTE and
Arts building and then maybe also considering a community makerspace that could be a revenue
generator, could play very nicely with a combined learning center in the library as well.
You heard a lot about the sustainability goals, and I’ll reiterate what Jay said, that the
attention that JCCC gets nationally for what you’ve done already from a sustainability
standpoint is welldeserved. The zero-waste landfill campus by 2025 is unparalleled in
higher ed. You’re halfway there and I really know you’ll get there, and that’s a wonderful
thing. We wanted to augment that with recommendations to encourage JCC along the JCCC along the
path of a renewable energy campus by 2050 in line with the president’s climate commitment,
which means looking at looking at surface parking lots to generate power, continuing
to do looking at rooftops to generate power, continuing to do what you’re doing in existing
buildings and new buildings to reduce energy use as well and reduce your carbon footprint.
Augment that with some ideas about water conservation and stormwater management, as
you sit kind of on a hilltop, this idea that you might be able to not only treat stormwater
in a more meaningful way, but also be a better neighbor to to some of to the rest of the
community. And then a recommendation about the athletics,
again, you saw the kind of general idea of a of a wellness and communityoriented neighborhood
and you also saw the recommendations of an improved Student Center dropoff and additional
parking, which might require some grading. This this would be and could be layered
on with an idea to colocate the your soccer stadia, softball stadia, with the baseball
stadia, additional parking, public facilities and/or rest rooms, and then refurbishment
of the gymnasium to kind of round out this district. You know, in the gymnasium this
could be mostly surficial kind of things, you know, the idea of upgrading bleachers
and reconfiguring some of the courts and enhancing lighting and painting and all those kind of
things I think could continue to enhance this as a multiuse communityoriented venue in the
center of campus. And so we’ve done a lot of order of magnitude costing to help, kind
of, the college make decisions. This is, again all are done on a predesign level, but
the idea that we are able to take those priorities and kind of give some costs to them and understand
how that might fit into, you know, where the college wants to go over the next ten years,
again, these can be can be broken down in many various various ways and should not and
do not preclude additional studies as you go into the design phases on each of these
projects, et cetera. But this gives a kind of high level or a ballpark level cost for
some of the recommendations that we’re making at both for the tier 1 and the tier 2 initiatives.
And, you know, we’ll end with a kind of image back looking from College Boulevard back over
the college, and this idea that a lot of this supports the history of the college, where
the college needs to go in the future, you know, I think the future is really bright
and I think that some of these very, you know, organizational and incisional changes can
help kind of along that path.>>Dr. Barbara Larson: In terms of next
steps, because I’ve received some questions about, “Well, what is it that we would be
approving?”, and you’re approving the plan. You’re approving an agreement that these
are our priorities in terms of our capital needs. We did prioritize those tier 1 and
tier 2 and we’ve also talked about the fact that the tier 2 priorities are more likely
to be unbundled and addressed as we can in budget cycles. You know that Rex brings
about $2 million in projects each year for roofs, for masonry and it would be very conceivable
that we would add another solar panel on a roof as part of those plans, but not the $22
million in those tier 2 priorities. In terms of the tier 1 priorities, we would like to
begin the planning if there is an affirmative vote on the master plan. You’ll recall that
the board approved $2 million this year for design fees, knowing that this was coming
in terms of the Facilities Master Plan. So again, if there is an affirmative vote on
this tonight, staff would proceed with issuing requests for proposals to identify architectural
firms and construction management firms that, again, you would see and approve, because
those would be substantial costs before you. Once we would have an evaluation team and
recommend and approve an architect, then for the CTE and Art building, those would be the
first projects out of the gate. We’d obviously be very involved with stakeholders in terms
of programming those buildings and identifying the costs in a much more refined way. We
wouldn’t come to you and say, well, at this point the architect thinks it’s going to be
a range that’s 20 to $25 million. So again, we’d hope to then move forward with financing.
We know that we would finance a portion of this. We’ve shown you some scenarios
of borrowing up to $50 million, which we can do without raising the mill levy. So issue
debt perhaps in late summer, early fall, and hope for groundbreaking for new buildings
in approximately a year. On the next slide, in terms of the other tier
1 priorities, we have not budgeted funds for those for this year. We would like to proceed
with RFPs to identify an architect, but knowing that the actual budget and commencement of
a contract with an architect, again, couldn’t occur until ’17’18 when we could actually
budget those design fees. So those would be a bit behind those other projects. Just
any questions on that? And again, each step, and we keep saying this, tonight you’d be
approving the plan. But individual projects would obviously come before the board as you
as we recommend architects, construction managers, and discuss plans and renderings with the
board.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman,
if I might continue with the management report in this regard.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Certainly.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: I want to I
want to acknowledge staff and thank them for tremendous work that they’ve done in putting
together this this proposal, and as Dr. Larson said, we are tonight we are really considering
the master plan concept and priorities, and that’s the extent of what our vote is going
to be here. And so, with that, I would like to make a recommendation, and it is the recommendation
of the Management Committee that the Board of Trustees accept the recommendation of the
college administration to approve the 2016 Facilities Master Plan as presented, and I
would make that motion.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: I’ll second the motion
and a comment.>>Chair Greg Musil: It’s been moved and
seconded. We will have discussion, Dr. Cook.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Well, first of all,
Michael, thank you for the great work. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I hope
as trustees we don’t look at this at a onetime glance. There’s really a wealth of information
in here about not only the history of the college, but what our facilities are and what
we have planned going forward. So I really appreciate that detail. This is this is
kind of to me a bible of our facilities, where we’ve been and where we expect to go. Having
just attended the ACCT symposium, and the conference, we had a day and a half symposium
prior to the annual Congress, and the symposium dealt with five draft papers from people all
over the country focused on Workforce Development and student collaboration. It was quite
interesting that it aligns with what we’re dealing with here. And one of the elements
that came out of that is that who’s who’s our competition as community colleges? And
there are private businesses that are really making inroads into dealing with Workforce
Development nationwide. Gallup indicated in their recent poll that 6 million jobs go
unfilled a year, and it was interesting that when they surveyed the colleges, the colleges
were saying 98% said we’re doing a good job of training people for the workforce, when
in fact 11% of the employees said that they were receiving students that were properly
trained, and 13% of the students indicated they were properly trained. So this whole
issue of Workforce Development and how we’ve categorized our programs and facilities I
think is a current issue that community colleges need to address if they’re going to stay in
business on their workforce plan. I don’t want to take your words, Trustee Musil, but
I I thought at the Foundation the other night you did a fabulous job, and I think Dr. Sopcich
has talked about this as well, that we have our general ed students to deal with, we have
the community services, and I appreciated those points that you put on regarding the
agreeable factors to discuss the master plan, but then but then we also have this community
this community engagement. And I’m still troubled by the fact that we have a number
of longterm residents who have lived in this community and have not been on our campus.
We we had a meeting that Trustee Lindstrom and I were available to attend a couple of
weeks ago, a small group that was using the Regnier Center. And one of the persons came
up to me and said, “Thank you, this is the first time I’ve been on this campus,” and
it was a longtime resident here, a very prominent person. Now, that’s not anybody’s fault
other than I think I look at that as a trustee and say how can I engage people to make them
aware of their community college? Those of us that are here every day, we kind of
take that flow for granted. So your whole pathway really strikes a nerve with me and
how we can make it I don’t want to say necessarily easier, but more comfortable. I think Trustee
Sandate, you said that in your interview when we discussed with you how how easy or not
so easy it is for students to maneuver around the campus.
So having said all of that, I look at this, Trustee Musil, as a way of how are we going
to remain competitive and how are we going to engage students in such a way that we we
enhance their teaching and learning experience. And I appreciate the comments from Mr. Cooper.
I would assume that as we go forward, that we would continue to have discussion about
how these spaces affect people and and but I hope we look at that in the sense of how
can we enhance the teaching and learning experience for all the components of our college and
not just a few. Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: I was going to say
it from the outset that, I mean, we’re going to be 50 years old in 20182019. And I have
watched the trends over the last couple years about online learning and our College Now
enrollment and our oncampus enrollment, which has reduced. I know we’re up this semester,
so. And wondering if we would ever build another building at this college given the
trends in higher education. And then I think we’ve had a great opportunity through a retreat
in February and a retreat in August and tours of some buildings on this campus that many
of us don’t get to. ATB is the Arts and Technical Building. The Arts and Technology
building. It was built in 1981. It has basically not been touched since 1981. It
desperately needs some modernization or a different place to put those programs. And
I think all of us I grew up with my daughters coming here for College Now and for summer
classes and they took gen ed classes and they were taking classes to transfer to the university
of Kansas and Kansas State. I don’t think as many people in this in this community realize
that this is a comprehensive community college, and I finally learned what that means. I
think Mickey, Dr. McCloud put it best at the retreat in August. We prepare students for
a twoyear degree or to transfer, we have continuing education so that our workforce can continue
to come back and learn new skills, particularly in times of underemployment or unemployment,
and thirdly, we we teach people what used to be considered vo-tech, technical career
skills that actually get real jobs, and that we use every day, whether it’s an HVAC person
who comes in to redo our duct work or work on our furnace and our air conditioner, or
somebody that works on our car at Burnett Automotive across Quivira or other if when
they’re wiring our house, they’re electricians. We do all three of those things. And if
we don’t do those three, we’re not a comprehensive community college. So really the choice
to me and I know that the Resource Center is an issue, and I understand and we’re adopting
a plan and priorities, but we’re not pouring concrete. I think that what I’ve heard supports
the idea from a common-sense standpoint and enough from a data standpoint to say one Resource
Center where I can get my I can talk to an English somebody on my writing project, somebody
on my math project and somebody on my biology project makes not only common sense, but seems
to make pedagogical sense. I don’t know that that’s true or not. But it kind of
makes sense to me. But I do know that if we don’t adopt the career and technical education
portions of this plan, then we will not be a comprehensive community college. We will
drop back to something other than that and we will leave a lot of gaps in the workforce
in this county that we we don’t want to we don’t want to lose because there are students
that want to come here and get the best technical education they can get and go out and get
a job without a fouryear degree and do very well in life and provide all the services,
technical and otherwise, that we need. You know, we’re planning now for 10 to 25
years from now, maybe 50 years from now, and that’s what makes this both kind of exciting
and scary at the same time. I think the college has shown over the years an ability
to adapt and to move and to wiggle around the the path that we’ve been that we’ve chosen.
And I think that’s what this plan here tonight suggests. I’m I mean Brenda Edmonds wrote
wrote us a letter today from the math department about consolidation of the Resource Centers
with similar thoughts to yours, Brett. And I was struck by the fact that she recognized
and we all agree that there isn’t a right or wrong answer, there needs to be the right
questions asked. I think they’ve been asked so far. I think they’ll be asked going into
the future. I’ve always been struck by the fact that I think this board is made up of
public servants. When you see the presidential election or other campaigns, the politicians
always know the right answer, it’s their answer, and there’s no other answers. I don’t know
that this is the right answer or that it’s the only answer. But I think it sets us
on a path that gives us a chance to be better going forward than we would be without it.
And so for that reason, I’m going to I will support the master plan as proposed, knowing
that the discussions, the debates, the fusses and feuds will continue because that’s kind
of what we do. Trustee Cross.>>Trustee Lee Cross: Yes. Are there any
we talked about it at the retreat, but do we have any designs for a southern exit or
entrance at the college? Frankly, with respect to safety and security?
>>Mr. Michael Johnson: Yeah. And you’ll notice one of the changes since the retreat
is the idea that we can add a an egressonly route to the south here, can be can be gated
when needed. I think that would what it allows you to do is at least begin discussions
with the city and with others about if that wants to be something more than that. But
I think that at a minimum, the idea of continuing to pursue a south egress route in the in the
under the guise and under the idea of security and campus safety is is a good idea and it
is a pivot that we’ve made since we met last in August.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: I appreciate that. One other question, Mr. Chair. The makerspaces,
I mean I appreciate some of the objections. I too I guess for the time being concur
in the result here, and I don’t know if this is the right thing, it makes sense, reasonable
business sense for the administration to move forward with this. So I appreciate the objections.
But with respect to the makerspaces, trying to be a devil’s advocate and perhaps a litigator
and how is it not just a waste of space?>>Mr. Michael Johnson: You know, I think
that’s a good question. Again, there’s a lot of support for the idea of allowing students
the space to tinker outside of the classroom, to work collaboratively outside of the classroom,
and that can take many different forms. I think from a CTE perspective, you know, that
could be a space that has, you know, hightech equipment and can be, you know, transferred
in and out to allow those things to happen. You know, from an arts space or from a general
kind of community space or general education space, it could be something much different.
It could be, you know, these MakerBots or these 3D printer kind of things and testing
things out more ways so I think it’s part of the education, the shifting trends of education,
and I also think, you know, it’s proven through the space study that you probably have some
excess space in your core campus. And so it may be an opportunity to test some of these
ideas that especially if we’re thinking about migrating away from general classroom spaces
and into things that encourage more collaboration in a more meaningful way.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Do you think it’s possible that undergraduates are going to
like more opportunities to see each other? Is that generally a good idea?
>>Mr. Michael Johnson: Do I think that undergraduates will have
>>Trustee Lee Cross: I just think it’s a tremendous selling point. I’m trying to
be subtle in the point. (Laughter.)
But I think that if undergraduate students have more opportunity to, say, see coeds or
see each other, I can’t imagine that that hurts a college’s ability to say, hey, come
here.>>Mr. Michael Johnson: I think, you know,
I think that the right response to that in a higher ed kind of conversation
(Laughter.)>>Trustee Lee Cross: You don’t have to
answer that, don’t worry.>>Chair Greg Musil: Let me help you with
that one.>>Mr. Michael Johnson: No, I really, I
think that the way that we’re using campuses is shifting. And I think that that means
that in many ways we need one of the reasons for the physical campus to maintain is the
spaces to come together and to collaborate.>>Trustee Lee Cross: And I think, in my
experience with the ACCT and KACCT, I concur with Dr. Cook’s assessment that this is a
trend, and I think a profound, hopeful hopefully good evolutionary step, so.
>>Chair Greg Musil: The one example I can think of is Dr. Sopcich and I were going is
it the Sunflower Room? for a luncheon, and there were three students sitting at these
hightop and there was not an electrical outlet anywhere near them. And maybe batteries
will eventually get okay on laptops that they don’t need them, but it was it was not it
was not a modern place, you couldn’t collaborate. You were straight down a wall and you had
no place to plug in. So I think that’s the kind of stuff we’re trying to to get better
at. We have great technology on campus and wireless and everything else, but we still
don’t match the needs of a student in 2016. No eighttrack players anywhere.
(Laughter.)>>Dr. Michael McCloud: Which is unfortunate.
>>Chair Greg Musil: It is.>>Dr. Michael McCloud: If you have when
you’re finished with your comments, I’d like to actually address a couple of things, particularly,
you know, some of the issues that were brought to light concerning the the learning centers.
Notwithstanding the immense draw that Wescoe Beach has for our KU friends in forwarding
their desire to be on campus if you’re looking for a place for folks to meet coeds, as an
Iowa Stater I’ve heard legendary tales. So…>>That one, there.
>>Dr. Michael McCloud: There you go.>>Chair Greg Musil: Out of order.
>>Dr. Michael McCloud: But the but the reality of what we’re about is really about
the synergy that we’re creating for students, and, you know, to address both Brett’s issues
and the issues brought to the table by Professor Edmonds, there an almost underlying tone to
the letter that the administration is making moves without the consultation of faculty,
without the consultation of those most affected, and there is also kind of an undertone that
we’re simply following a trend for the sake of following a trend. I think both things
are incorrect. First, in terms of following a trend simply to follow a trend, I agree
with Trustee Cross, I have generally not been a fan of makerspaces, particularly community
makerspaces, because of the increased issues of the supply and demand of the infrastructure
to support those, as well as the training necessary and the kind of risk management
that comes with those. So there are parts of that that I think I would speak against.
In terms of the issue on the table concerning those who are most affected by the math center,
those who are most affected by the math center is not the math department, it’s actually
the students. The math department has put together not only a comprehensive plan and
an approach that has obviously benefited our students, as is highlighted by Professor Edmonds
in the success rates that those students have. Pedagogy cannot be inherently tied to space.
What can be inherently tied to that space is convenience for the student. The convenience
of the math department is an important piece here. But the convenience of the math department
cannot overshadow the convenience to the student and to everybody else, because students come
here not simply to be a part of the math department, but to take courses in everything else. There’s
a question in Professor Edmonds’ letter that talks about the 4,009 unique users who went
through the math department’s Learning Resource Center. What is actually left out of that
data is the rest of the data that came with that from institutional research. The crossover
between students in the Math Resource Center and the allacademic center is 763 students,
and the Language Resource Center is 119 students, the Science Resource Center is 927 students,
and the Writing Center is 925 students. That is 2734 crosspollinations of students who
would benefit from having those colocated in one space who are already utilizing multiple
learning centers on this campus. While there are 4,000 people going through that, those
students are also using other services that they could benefit from. If this were a
conversation about us changing pedagogy and changing the way in which the math courses
were delivered or the way in which Brett socializes and trains his staff, that would be a conversation
that faculty would not only be brought into, but faculty would lead. This is a conversation
about bringing those services into a location where those students have the most opportunity
to utilize this service and the other services that they need to be successful across their
entire academic plan, not simply in math. I believe that what Brett does is above the
board and above what most people could do. I believe if we took the dedication that
this math faculty has to that learning center and we took Brett’s model and we put them
under an overpass on I70, those students would be successful. What I also see is that that
success is a model for the success of every other learning center that can be colocated
and transmitted by the use of that collegiality between both those faculty members as a model
for every other faculty member in every other department to be able to see what that looks
like. This is not a step backwards, it is a step forward. It is not following national
trends for the sake of following national trends. It is following a trend of both
common sense and the idea that we will create an academically superior learning center model
here, and I will be quite honest that I’m a little jaded on the fact because I created
one of these in my last stop, it was different because those folks were building a brandnew
campus on which there were no preexisting learning centers that folks were already attached
to. So that emotional attachment to those spaces was not there. But what I can tell
you is that it creates a synergy for students whereby they are able to get all the help
they need in one place, and the numbers bear out that a quarter of the students who come
to see seek help in that center also use other centers scattered across campus. This would
be a boon to those students.>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair?
>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Cross.>>Trustee Lee Cross: One other point. I’m
sorry. You know, these meetings are not just for the politically ambitious, or geeks
that care about policy. Decisions are made at these meetings, and I know that we had
a number of different meetings and retreats on this issue with lots of opportunity to
show up. So at the risk of creating controversy, I mean that’s why these meetings matter, public
discussions matter. So we can make this policy. I think this is a good move and
I just wanted to say due process requires people to show up when you have opportunities
to be heard.>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Ingram?
>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: I I really appreciate your comments. Thank you very much, because
I had some questions about that as well earlier. The one thing they would like to go back
to is is just that little piece on that south egress, because that was that I questioned
at one of our trustee meetings before. But I would really like to see I mean if that’s
a safety issue, I would like to see that happen, not be put off on tier 2.
>>Chair?>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: So I think that
hopefully will come to the top. Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Sharp.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a quick question about
ATB, and with all the different charts and graphs and blueprints and everything that
we’ve seen, I’m forgetting, once we move welding out and we move arts to its own building,
what do we have left in ATB, the renovated ATB?
>>Dr. Barbara Larson: That is the combined welding, so welding would not move.
>>Welding is staying.>>Dr. Barbara Larson: Welding would stay.
So the new CTE building does not include welding.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Okay.>>Dr. Barbara Larson: And so then we would
renovate ATB for combined welding of BNSF and JCCC welding. There is some space that
will be needed for campus services, our grounds, because there is a deficit of space there,
and they are currently located in the WLB. So some of the space would be for campus
services but for the most part, it will become a welding building.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Okay. And then what will be in CTE?
>>Dr. Barbara Larson: HVAC, electronics, HVAC, Richard, help me.
>>Automotive.>>Dr. Barbara Larson: Automotive.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: That’s the construction and automotive okay.
>>Automation, engineering technology, electrical technology, HVAC.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Okay. Sorry, go ahead.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: If you look at the ATB there and then you see the WLB behind that,
what you don’t see in between those are these sheds that we have. Those will disappear.
And then the people who work in that and teach in that will have the opportunity to
teach in a place that’s better ventilated, just more suitable.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: Right, that’s not 40 years old. Eight different types
of ventilation projects. I love the the wayfinding and the central resourcing. Anybody
who’s watching this, heck, anybody on this board, trying to find your way around this
campus and then trying to find a parking place that is somewhere close is a relative and
we do have parking passes, so I shouldn’t complain about that. But if I’m going to
go to the Student Center, I’m not going to park in my parking spot. But trying to find
the right place to park for where you’re going on campus, especially if it’s not one of the
main buildings, is very difficult, and I know where I’m going for the most part. I think
that the campus can be overwhelming. And so I loved that that screen, the slide with
the parkways, almost like parkways. I mean they look like parkways. And really making
the campus more walkable and studentfriendly. I also love that we’re looking forward and
we’re we’re being planful and strategic about our facilities. My concern is that I wish
we were being more planful and strategic about our enrollment. I don’t feel that we have
the enrollment in those programs or as a whole to sustain or justify new new buildings. Very
few places are putting down brick and mortar. And I would be curious, Dr. Cook, about
your experience on the ACCT ACCT board about what other community colleges are seeing in
their enrollment. We typically go down when the economy is good. So we’re we’re building
a new building when our enrollment is going down. So that’s some of the concerns that’s
the biggest concern that I have, is I don’t I would rather be spending money on figuring
out what’s up with our enrollment, figuring out how we’re going to deal with College Now,
a marketing plan, you know, we’re as many students as KU and our marketing budget is
a fraction of a fraction, and I think that has to deal with with some of the enrollment
challenges. So those are those are some of my concerns with building a new building.
And I I know that this is just the plan, but the very first step of the plan is new
buildings.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: If I can add something,
Karen, I’m going to call on you. One of the things when you look at our enrollment
numbers, what’s also part of that are our continuing ed numbers. And between Richard
and Karen, they’ve done a really masterful job of I don’t want to say transferring students,
but trying to meet students’ needs. And how many how many students do we have using,
for example, welding and things like that through CE?
>>I don’t have the exact breakdown by program, but we’re serving over in 19,000 students
a year and a lot of our collaborations right now that we want to with CTE, we do all those
offsite (Inaudible). So if we’re doing a (Inaudible) for, say, (Inaudible), we’re
having that happen all on their site and sometimes that works, sometimes it’s a disruption, trying
to (Inaudible) those employees. So to have the opportunity to bring them here, and then
there’s also that continuing cycle of CE. The more we get them here, the more they’ll
return for those licensing requirements on continuing ed, which they need to work.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: You know, and I can’t believe I’m going to say this, but I was just
up in Calgary through the League for Innovation visiting Southern Alberta Institute of Technology.
Are you familiar with that one?>>Oh yeah.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Yeah. It’s a place that’s like on steroids. It’s absolutely
phenomenal. Imagine a 50,000student technical education facility. It’s it’s really overthetop.
And I’m sitting across over dinner they have, by the way, four culinary locations
throughout Calgary. And I’m sitting across from their head finance guy, and we’re talking
about how some of these projects, because their projects, for example, they actually
had a $90 million parking garage you want to take that one on? with their soccer field
on top of their parking garage. It’s really kind of fascinating. Their buildings are
five, six, seven stories tall. It’s phenomenal. And I said how do you why do you I can’t
believe you do this type of stuff up here. And he goes, “You know,” and he said,
“I didn’t think I’d ever believe this, but if you build it, they will come.” And
so by having those facilities that are contemporary, that are current, that are inviting, you have
a better chance to get those students on your campus to use those facilities. Now, I don’t
know if I’d go to the bank on that one, but it was kind of interesting to hear this guy
talk about it, especially at an institution that invests so much they’re working on a
project now that’s 400 million you know, that invests so much in their facilities and technical
education. It’s fascinating. And that’s because we’re involved in the League and we
get to experience that kind of stuff.>>Chair Greg Musil: I think the enrollment
connection, as I see it, is if we do not spend a ton of money on our career and technical
education programs, whether it’s in the correct shell building or someplace else, if we don’t
spend millions of dollars on those, those students are going away. They’re not going
to be here and they’re not going to be taking general education courses on campus. And
we’re not going to get more of them. And we’re not going to get the continuing ed people
in who now don’t have any space, evening or otherwise, to come into our welding or our
auto or HVAC or otherwise. So I think there’s that link. I also I also think the entire
plan works together to beautify, unify, explain our campus. The athletic facilities, which
hasn’t been talked about yet, but consolidating those, kind of, in the front door off College
Boulevard on our western entrance is a is a good thing. And, you know, one of the
things I asked was these are these are highcost programs per student relative to an English
transfer student or a history or political science, like I would have been. But they’re
not expensive necessarily compared relative to other programs on campus. There are expensive
programs on campus per student. Nursing would be one. HVAC would be another. But
they are turning out students who are filling critical jobs in our community and making
a decent living with the opportunity to have a good career.
So, yeah, I I don’t know, I don’t think anybody in higher ed knows the secret to better enrollment
in good times, but the other thing about the technical thing that I learned, most of our
our general ed enrollment is countercyclical to a large extent. When the economy is down,
we had our biggest year in 2011, our biggest student enrollment and our biggest credit
hours. But in technical programs, they’re cyclical. When right now we’re building
houses and office buildings and warehouses and we need HVAC technicians and electrical
people, and so it’s it’s the whole thing about this campus is our stakeholders are so broad
and so diverse, that trying to find one way to make it work is is just impossible. And
so that’s why I’m comfortable that while I’m not absolutely certain this is the absolutely
perfect way to do it or the only way to do it, I’m comfortable that what has been studied
for the last year is what we ought to take the step and do tonight.
Trustee Cook?>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Three responses.
First to Trustee Sharp. The trend in the country, the factor in the country is just
like ours, as as employment opportunities rise, people go back to work and their enrollments
drop accordingly. In a need of retooling, they go back to school and get retooled. Response
to Dr. McCloud, on your points about the Collaboration Center and the labs. One of the sessions
I attended, I don’t know, Henry, if you attended it, but it was the Austin Community College
made a presentation on their acceleration lab. They have purchased an old JC Penney’s
store and renovated it. I think it was like 35 or 40,000 square feet and they’ve combined
multiple disciplines into a lab process for the convenience of the students. And along
with that, I would remind us that Richard Fort made at least a very impressive statement
to me in our board retreat when he commented that our career and tech ed students also
are aligned in our gen ed programs, for example, English. And when we heard the Gallup reports
about lack of workforce development, part of it has to do, well, this person might be
able to weld, but they have difficulty communicating with one another. And, Richard, I appreciated
you making that comment, and I think it sets our college apart that we we have dedicated
faculty in all components, in all disciplines to work together for the benefit of the student.
And my comment to Trustee Musil’s remark about the enrollment and the competition goes
back to what I said earlier. There are private businesses that are going to step forward
and meet this Workforce Development if community colleges who are already in place in their
communities don’t do it. And so I’m I’m very excited about the opportunity to position
this college, we have a we have a new 20year agreement with BNSF, and I thought, Barbara,
the the dialogue of the willingness on both BNSF and our staff to work together, Trustee
Sharp’s question on the welding lab, because BNSF, as I understand it, has some unique
welding delivery systems which our whole college can leverage. So I appreciate that that
partnership. Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: It’s probably worth
discussing for folks watching this that Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad has been in a partnership
with the college for 25 years.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Since 1985 I believe.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Since 1985, to train its welders and engineers and brakemen and
others for the entire railroad system here at Johnson County Community College and have
helped us to create the National Academy of Railroad Sciences. And they bring 10 to
15,000 people through here and through this college, or through this town, this county
a year who will spend a number of weeks in town learning their trade. And we have we
have leveraged that to great extent to the college and, frankly, having never been in
those buildings before, the the sheds that are going to be torn down that were built
initially with just a roof and then they added a metal side and they’re not heated and they’re
not cooled and there’s no ventilation and people are wearing personal ventilation masks
because of some of the techniques and materials used. It is not what it is not the best
training that we can offer, and keeping Burlington Northern Santa Fe as a partner in this community
is is a big is a big step forward. So I think that’s we keep we say BNSF as if everybody
knows what we are talking about. It is a large partner for the entire county.
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: And when I was with the CVB, the city appreciated all those room
nights generated by those thousands of people that came every year.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Any other comments? Sorry we made you stand the whole time.
Trustee Sandate?>> Trustee Henry Sandate: You know, it
was mentioned by Trustee Cook that I was talking about making it easy for the student, and
I still embrace that concept, not only from the standpoint of coming on to campus and
maneuvering around through the buildings, which you’ve already discussed, were difficult
to find your way around here, but I had I’ve had opportunity since our meeting when we
were reviewing this about a month and a half ago, and I’ve talked to many, many students
out in the community who who go to school here, and I just asked them what they thought
and invariably every one of them said, “You know, it’s a great college,” they said,
“but it was really difficult to get around, to find your way around.” And the things
they named were signage, parking, finding the resources actually, you know. And I
respect and I I totally understand the passion which our speaker up here from the math department
spoke with about how his concern is he doesn’t want to disrupt or take away from what’s a
really fantastic service, but along with, you know, Dr. McCloud, to his point, that’s
my feeling is that I want to see that emulated for every subject, you know, whether it be
science, English, you know, psychology, whatever it is, you know, I think I think we’re doing
something wrong with we’re doing something right, excuse me, with the math department
and the services that we have there available to the students, and I think it’s important
that we have that same success on all the other fields, if you will. And with that,
the ability to find them easily almost in a onestopshop, if you will, to borrow a term,
from the standpoint of not only being in the same building and having access to those,
but I think visibility wise and just foot traffic wise, with little effort to walk in
and know that they exist there along with other services, whether it’s dining or whether
it’s, you know, finding your way for, you know, to buy merchandise, whatever the case
may be that helps in the study process and success at producing qualified, educated students
who leave our campus. So that’s that’s my focal point is making it easy for the student
and or for that matter, anybody who steps on campus, whether it be for the arts, culinary
arts, you know, the Nerman, or vocational, you know, intentions, that’s what I want to
emphasize. And so just my own personal experience, you know, it’s a difficult it’s a difficult
experience finding who you’re looking for, where you’re going and what you want. And
so after talking to many, many students just out in the general public, I’m convinced that
that’s, you know, the the reason to move forward with this. And I totally support it myself.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Lindstrom?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman,
if there are no further comments or questions, I would call for the question.
>>Second.>>Chair Greg Musil: Okay, the question
has been called for. I think everybody has had a chance to speak. All those in favor
of the motion which was to approve the Facilities Master Plan as presented say yes.
(Yeses.)>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed no.
>>Trustee Stephanie Sharp: No.>>Chair Greg Musil: It passes 61.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman, the second recommendation is MA1, review of
review and update of Policies for Data Classification and Security Policy. Tom Pagano why do I
have so much trouble with that? Tom Pagano reviewed the proposed new Data Classification
and Security Policy, which is 53000. The new policy formalizes the expectations that
the college data will be evaluated for sensitivity and stored and secured in accordance with
its sensitivity classification. The college’s Information Systems department will define
data classifications and administer guidelines for the appropriate storage of and security
of college data through a new Data Classification and Security Operating Procedure, which is
53001, which will accompany this policy. And it is the recommendation of the Management
Committee that the Board of Trustees accept the recommendation of the College Administration
to approve the New Data Classification and Security Policy 53000 as shown subsequently
in the board packet, and I will make that recommendation.
>>Second.>>Chair Greg Musil: It’s been moved and
seconded to adopt the new Data Classification and Security Policy. Are there any questions
or any discussion?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: If I might,
Tom, I I made a mistake on your name several times. Would you mind explaining just maybe
in a minute or two what exactly we’re voting on?
>>Mr. Tom Pagano: Sure.>>Chair Greg Musil: Come to the podium.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Please. I know what we’re voting on, but I wanted he’ll
explain it far better than I could.>>Mr. Tom Pagano: It’s hard to say an Italian
name with a Boston accent. (Laughter.)
Basically, it’s part of the expansion of increased security in every industry. We’re not alone.
It’s just something that’s affected healthcare, financial, and so on. So it’s just a way
to segregate your information so the most private information is the most protected,
and the least information which would be publicly available information is the least protected.
It’s all protected, it’s just different levels of protection. So that would mean
some data would be encrypted, some data would not be encrypted. So it just depends on
which level you’re talking about. And that’s really it. And that drives pretty much the
entire policy. And then coming off that, we build the rest of our systems and how we
pull that data out to integrate it into a data warehouse. That brings that takes us
to that next level of deciding who has access to that data in terms of roles and responsibilities
as they move to different positions and so on.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Any questions?>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Thank you, Tom
>>Chair Greg Musil: If there’s no more discussion, all in favor of adopting the new
data classification policy say yes. (Yeses.)
>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed, no. Motion carries unanimously.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman, that concludes my report.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you, David. Treasurer’s Report. Trustee Cross.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Thank you, Mr. President Mr. Chair. The board packet contains the
Treasurer’s Report for the month ended August 31st, 2016. Some items of note include Page
1 of the Treasurer’s Report is the General PostSecondary Technical Education Fund Summary.
As of August 31st, 16.7% of the college’s new fiscal year has expired. State Operating
Capital Outlay and Technology Grant payments of 10.8 million were received during the August
period and recorded in the General PostSecondary Technical Education Funds.
The college’s operating grant funding was $431,000 less than last year due to the state’s
4% budget allotment, or cut, for fiscal year 2017. An ad valorem property tax distribution
of 5.2 million was received from the county in September and will be reflected in next
month’s report. The college’s unencumbered balance as of August 31st, 2016, in all funds
was 87.8 million. Expenditures in the Primary Operating Funds are within approved budgetary
limits, and so therefore, Mr. Chair, it is the recommendation of College Administration
that the Board of Trustees approve the Treasurer’s Report for the month ending August 31st, 2016,
subject to audit.>>Second.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Moved and seconded to adopt the Treasurer’s Report. Any questions
or discussion? If not, all in favor say yes.
(Yeses.)>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed, no. Passes
unanimously. Monthly report to the board, Dr. Sopcich.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: In lieu of the what we have for the Executive Session, this will
be very, very brief. First of all, I just want to thank all of you for making that vote.
That was a, I think one of the more significant votes in the history of the college. I would
equate that with the votes that were made in the late ’60s by the Board of Trustees
at that period of time when they built this campus out here. So thank you for stepping
up. It’s an incredible demonstration of faith in our in staff and faculty and everyone
here on campus. You know, building buildings are I don’t want to underestimate it, but
it’s relatively easy to do. What matters is what goes on inside those buildings once
they’re built. And I think all of our faculty, staff are up to the task of making sure that
what goes on in those will provide the best type of instruction possible for our students
to give them the best chance to succeed. So thank you.
And lastly, there was a lot of talk tonight about enrollment. I want to make it clear
that this semester we’re up. A lot of schools across the state are down, maybe across the
country, but we’re up. Now, we’re up .3 of 1%, but nonetheless, we’re up. And I
think that’s a tribute to everybody here who has worked so hard on reaching out and doing
what they can do to make sure that we continue to have students who come here for success
and as this college plays such an important part in their lives so that concludes my report.
Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you. That is
the ultimate Lightning Round.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Mr. Chairman?
>>Chair Greg Musil: Yes.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: I have a question.
>>Chair Greg Musil: You may ask it.>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Joe, are there
any other institutions of higher learning that you know that are up in the metropolitan
area?>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: I honestly, Dave, I
couldn’t respond to that. Have we heard?>>Yeah. KCK I believe was up a little bit
and I think Metro was up a little bit.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: Metro is up, too?
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you.
>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: And thank you for just refuting everything I said, so. We won’t
be calling on you next time. (Laughter.)
>>Across the state, the others are down.>>Dr. Joe Sopcich: That’s more like it.
>>Chair Greg Musil: We have no old business. And we have no new business. Reports from
board liaisons. We’ll start with the Faculty Association. Dr. Arjo.
Thank you for being here again. I know you probably don’t have a choice, but we like
to see you anyway.>>Dr. Dennis Arjo: I’m happy to be here
and I thank you again for the opportunity to address the board. I’m just going to
be brief as well. I would like to say a few things about the Facilities Master Plan
and the vote. I came on to that, my own participation was fairly late when I became
the FA president, but my predecessor was involved from the beginning and a lot of other faculty,
and obviously, we’ve been following this whole process very closely from the beginning so
we are also very gratified to see it come to this rather major transition point and
we look forward to seeing what happens next. We look forward to continued participation
among faculty, especially as we start to get into some of the details of how these buildings
are going to be designed and used and so on. Just to reiterate a couple things that have
been pointed out a few times already. Clearly the Resource Center question is going to be
a significant one. I thought my colleague, Brett Cooper, did a very nice job presenting
his concerns. I thought Dr. McCloud did a very nice job presenting his perspective.
I would echo Trustee Musil that there’s really no right or wrong answer here, we’re
kind of in a good position. What we have works great. I think whatever happens next
will also work great, so long as there is a commitment that we will use the abilities,
the talents, the commitment of the math faculty to its fullest, whatever comes next. I would
also just point out, kind of push a line that buildings are great, technology is great,
but at the end of the day, they don’t teach, professors teach. And so as we move forward
with this, I think this is an exceptionally good opportunity to also think about committing
to fulltime faculty who can bring energy and institutional commitment and continuity to
the programs that are going to be going into these new facilities and building on what
we already have as we continue to move ahead.>>Chair Greg Musil: Great points. Questions?
Trustee Cross?>>Trustee Lee Cross: One time when I was
in law school, at a third-tier law school in this city, the lights went out, and our
professor kept going. He kept teaching. He said flip those laptops open, we need
some light! And so I guess at that school and among other places in this area and in
this state, I learned a work ethic and certainly from the faculty here that I had. I guess
my question to you is, do you think that you could teach under an overpass on I70?
(Laughter.)>>Dr. Dennis Arjo: Well, I’m a philosopher,
our hero was Socrates.>>Chair Greg Musil: Might not even be under
an overpass.>>Dr. Dennis Arjo: Socrates roamed the
streets of Athens teaching to whoever he could corral and force to listen to him. So, yeah,
I mean we could teach, we’ve been teaching for a couple millennia, and technology has
changed, but the teaching has always been about a commitment, engagement, and effective
communication. That doesn’t change. I mean you want the facilities to augment that
so you can do some more things. They excite students, but what keeps students excited
is what goes on in the classroom.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: I thought you would
have answered by saying it only appears to be an overpass.
(Laughter.)>>Trustee Lee Cross: And Mr. Chair, if
I may, I thank the president for his answer and for any record or transcript, I was kidding
and I would not advise the college from a liability standpoint to teach under an overpass
on I70. Just so we’re clear.>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you very much.
>>Dr. Dennis Arjo: Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: That engagement is
certainly seen from our faculty on campus and we appreciate that. Thank you. Next report
from a liaison is Trustee Lindstrom. Johnson County Education Research Triangle.
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: Trustee Cross, I think Dr. Arjo could do it in the day or
night under the overpass. Mr. Chairman, the JCERT board met on Tuesday, September
20th, at KU Edwards. At that time, we heard from the the board heard from Parker Communications
related to work being done in the area of media relations, the website. They have
a new enhanced website. I would encourage everyone to go on the website. It’s www.JOCOTriangle.com.
We also got an update on social media. There’s a Facebook page. It’s @JohnsonCountyEducationResearchTriangle.
And Twitter is @jocotriangle. And then also we heard about several speaking opportunities
for people to become more aware of what is going on with JCERT. The board also received
updates from the universities. September revenues were up 3.87%, around 15 million.
And if the last two months of the fiscal year are flat, then and I anticipate they’ll
be up, but if they are flat, then this year’s revenue in Johnson County will be up approximately
2%, which is good news. The next meeting is Tuesday, November 15th, at 7:30 a.m. It’s
going to be held at KU Medical Clinical Research Center, which is 4350 Shawnee Mission Parkway
in Fairway. And I’ll take another two or three minutes, last last meeting I gave a
little update on KState Olathe. This month I’m going to give a little bit of an update
on KU Edwards campus. And you were earlier talking about opportunities for jobs and Workforce
Development, and this is an area, again, where I think KU Edwards is doing a fantastic job.
The JCERT programs at KU Edwards focus on the BEST disciplines, and BEST is business,
engineering, science, and/or technology. KU Edwards has launched 13 academic degree programs
funded specifically by JCERT. These include undergraduate degrees, a Bachelor in Business
Administration, Bachelor of Science in Information Technology, Bachelor of Science in Exercise
Science, and a Bachelor of Science in Biotechnology. The graduate degrees include a Master of
Science in Project Management, Master of Engineering in Project Management, Professional Science
Manager and Environmental Assessment, Master’s in Educational Technology, Master’s in Accounting,
Master’s of Applied Science and Analytics, and that’s online, and then Master’s of Civil
Engineering. The certificate programs are two. They have an undergraduate Certificate
in Accounting and a graduate Certificate in Professional Workplace Communication.
All of these programs were created after conducting a thorough needs assessment of Johnson County
and the region to make sure make certain our programs are addressing the workforce needs
of the community. Then there is an applied statistic in analytics is the first online
program, as I mentioned. It is also the first program with KU Edwards and KU Medical
Center cooperating. The latest degree launched this fall is civil engineering. According
to Forbes.com, civil engineering is among the top ten best master’s degrees for jobs.
It is also one of the top ten degrees in highest demand, according to the National
Center for Education Statistics Postsecondary Education Data Systems. And most of you
know, Kansas City is a leader in this field, as our area is home to many of the top 20
engineering and architectural firms, which have roughly 10,000 area employees. The
program gives students an opportunity to advance their education in a high demand field right
here in Kansas City. The new 30 credit hour master’s degree in civil engineering program
focuses on structural engineering and prepares students for roles that require technical
expertise and leadership skills. And then finally, from August 15th to August
16 in 2016, over 66,000 individuals have participated in or attended event academic programs in
our BEST building, including the BEST Conference Facility.
So Mr. Chairman, that concludes my JCERT report.>>Chair Greg Musil: Questions? I’m sure
Dr. McCloud would agree that with a Iowa State grad at the head of KU Edwards Campus, there’s
no chance that they’ll have a problem.>>Dr. Michael McCloud: Oh, no. He’s gonna
be fine. Dave is a good man.>>Chair Greg Musil: All right.
>>Trustee Lee Cross: Mr. Chair, there’s a hand in the audience I’d like to call on.
Mr. Antle.>>You mentioned a new master’s program in
environmental assessment. One of our graduates here at the college is in that program and
so she’s looking forward to a (Inaudible).>>Chair Greg Musil: You didn’t want to
speak earlier. But now it’s fine. Dr. Antle.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you. Those kind of student success stories, we’ll always
take those comments. All right. Other questions? If not, Dr. Cook, Kansas Association
of Community College Trustees.>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The association meets quarterly. So we have not met since our last meeting. The
next meeting will be in December. I will say, though, that whenever we meet, two things
come up usually, the status of athletics and funding. And the Wichita Journal reported
an article today that eight colleges are pursuing the possibility of starting a different athletic
conference so it will be interesting in December to see how that discussion unfolds. That
concludes my report.>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Ingram on the
Foundation?>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Thank you. A
crowd of 100 attended the Foundation’s annual dinner, which was held on the Yardley Hall
stage this past Monday evening. Highlights included the presentation of the Foundation’s
Colleague Award to Felix Sturmer for his years of advancing the culinary program, and the
Hugh W. Speer Award for Distinguished Service to Jill Gerlach for her many years of outstanding
service and leadership to the Foundation. It was also announced that for the 2015’16
academic year, the Foundation working with the college’s financial aid office awarded
$1.1 million to assist 1,147 students with tuition, books, and program needs. This
is both the highest amount ever awarded and the most students ever to receive scholarships
in the history of the Johnson County Community College Foundation.
This past Sunday, over 240 people gathered on campus for the annual LaceUp for Learning
5k Walk/Run. The event raised nearly $6,000 for student scholarships.
Calendar reminders include the Foundation’s Executive Committee meeting on November 1st
and certainly Some Enchanted Evening on November the 12th. We’re close to a record annual
raised amount raised for the event and we will have those final numbers for you at our
next meeting. Thank you.>>Chair Greg Musil: Thank you. Questions
for Trustee Ingram? Since our last meeting, the annual Vol*Stars recognition breakfast
was held. The Vol*Stars are our volunteers who serve as docents, ushers at Performing
Arts Series and other events in the Carlsen Center. I don’t remember all the details,
but over $200,000 worth of value based on an hourly rate of services that we would have
to expend if we didn’t do that. What was most amazing to me was that they also raised
enough money to buy one of the chairs in Yardley Hall to re refurbish it so that they had their
nameplate on the back of it. And it’s it’s just amazing. They also fund a scholarship
every year, they have a scholarship fund that’s raised. So they’re volunteers that come
here and give their time, some of them thousands of hours over 30 years, and they also give
their own money for this place. So it’s it’s an inspirational group and the Foundation
the Emily Behrmann did a great job recognizing them as part of the college community.
The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda. The Consent Agenda consists of items
that are routine in nature and have been reviewed by various stages of the college administration
and committees. Any member of the board may request that a particular item be removed
from the Consent Agenda, otherwise it’ll be considered at one time and in one motion.
Are there any items that a member would like to remove from the Consent Agenda?
If not, do I hear a motion to approve the Consent Agenda?
>>Chair Greg Musil: It’s been moved and seconded. All in favor say yes.
(Yeses.)>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed, no. Motion
is carried. The Consent Agenda is approved. We do have an Executive Session tonight for
the board. I would like to entertain a motion to go into Executive Session for the purpose
of discussing consultation with an attorney which would be deemed privileged in the attorneyclient
relationship in order to protect the privilege and the board’s communications with its attorney
on legal matters, discussions concerning safety and security matters. The session will last
60 minutes and no action will be taken during the session. We would like to invite Dr.
Sopcich, Dr. Korb, Dr. Larson, Chris Gray, Greg Russell, Rex Hays, Alisa Pacer, Dr. McCloud,
Randy Weber, Tanya Wilson to join this Executive Session. Do I hear such a motion?
>>Trustee David Lindstrom: So moved.>>Chair Greg Musil: Moved by Trustee Lindstrom.
>>Trustee Jerry Cook: Question. What time will it start and what time will it end?
>>Chair Greg Musil: We will take a fiveminute recess and we will start when the clock strikes
7:00 p.m. on the dot. Is that a second?>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Second.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Okay. Trustee Ingram seconded. All in favor say yes.
(Yeses.)>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed, no. Motion
carries. Thank you all for coming. You’re welcome to wait until we come back into public
session.>>What time do we come back?
>>Chair Greg Musil: Or you may go home and enjoy the evening.
(Executive Session.)>>Chair Greg Musil: We’re back in open
session after our Executive Session started at 7:00 and ended here at 8:00. It was for
60 minutes. I’m looking for a motion to go into Executive Session for an additional
15 minute no more than an additional 15 minutes for consultation with an attorney and discussions
concerning safety and security matters. Same items as before with the same people being
requested to be present. Is there such a motion?
>>Trustee Lee Cross: So moved.>>Trustee Nancy Ingram: Second.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Trustee Cross moved. Trustee Ingram seconded. All in favor
say yes. (Yeses.)
>>Aye.>>Chair Greg Musil: Okay. We’ll go back
into Executive Session at 8:02 and be done by no later than 8:17. Thank you.
(Executive Session).>>Chair Greg Musil: All right. We have
returned from our second Executive Session, which we went into at 8:02, for 15 minutes
and returned to open session at 8:17. No action was taken during our Executive Session.
There is no nothing else on the agenda, so we’re ready for a motion to adjourn.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Moved and seconded to adjourn. All those many favor say yes.
>>Chair Greg Musil: Opposed, no. Motion carries unanimously. Thank you all.