The Called Workshop Meeting of the Del Mar College Board of Regents (Corpus Christi Junior College District) was held on Saturday, December 12, 1998, in the Regents Committee Room, of the Heldenfels, Administration Building, Del Mar College East Campus, Corpus Christi, Texas, with the following present:

From the Board:

The first item on the agenda dealt with responsibilities of the Del Mar College Board of Regents, effective Board management, and role of regents. Mrs. Dunnam recommended that Board members avail themselves of a copy of the Handbook of College and University Trusteeship, Richard T. Ingram and Associates, Association of Governing Board of Universities and Colleges. Mrs. Dunnam indicated there might be a more recent edition available, as the one she had cited was from the 1980's, and Dr. Dicianna indicated he would check into whether there was a later version. A handout was distributed dealing with Significance of Trusteeship, Effective Board Management, Effective Institutional Oversight, Resource Development and Management, Performance Assessment, and Resources. Mrs. Dunnam reviewed the handout stressing the need for Board members to communicate, to be well informed, and to be monitors of such areas of the College as enrollment projections, financial trends, budget controls, marketing strategies, quality of academic programs on and off campus, continuous review of institutional policies, and be active with local, state and federal regulatory bodies.

In response to Mrs. Adler's request for information about the Coordinating Board, Mrs. Spann reported that eighteen individuals from throughout the State with community college experience are appointed by the Governor to serve on the Coordinating Board. Dr. Dicianna indicated that there is a Coordinating Board staff with which the College works, and various College administrators attend most meetings of the Coordinating Board. He further stated that the Texas Association of Community Colleges, an association for community college presidents, works with the Coordinating Board staff on a regular basis.

In continuing her review of the handout, Mrs. Dunnam indicated the Board also needs to deal with inter-institutional cooperation, deferred maintenance, accreditation, public image, trustee interdependence and power, and building the board. She stressed the importance of the unity of the Board when speaking with the public and that they speak for the community regardless of how they were elected. One of the Board's biggest responsibilities is hiring the College President and supporting him in his role. Mrs. Dunnam quoted from the handout, "...the trustees--not the faculty or the students--have hired the president, and they delegate to him or her the responsibility and authority for running the institution. Whatever else he or she may be, the president is their agent, and the trustees have a vested interest in, as well as responsibility for, doing all they can to help their agent succeed."

Mr. Munoz presented the issue of the response of the administration, and the president in particular, to requests from individual Board members and felt it was important for the Board to discuss the matter. Several Board members expressed the need to have information in order to function in their roles as committee chairs. Mrs. Dunnam referred to a memorandum that had been sent out by Mr. Diaz several years ago which dealt with a Board member requesting information that was not readily available. Ms. Natale explained that at times information may not be available in the format requested and might entail countless hours of a programmer's time to develop a program to extract or generate the information needed. In response to Mrs. Spann's question regarding an individual and a Board member requesting and receiving information, Dr. Dicianna responded that both would get the information; however, when a Board member requests information, it is felt that all Board members receive a copy to be able to respond on issues from the same bases of information. It was ascertained that the Board decides either in committee or as the Board on the focus or direction of the Board. Mrs. Dunnam stressed that the Board needs to be well informed, such as having available materials needed for Board and committee meetings as well as having advanced notice on upcoming Del Mar College or related important meetings, speakers, graduations, dinners, award ceremonies, etc.

In returning to the issue of requests for information by Board members, there was further discussion on availability of information and the need to have accurate information to be an informed Board member. It was ascertained that issues a Board member feels are important should be placed on a meeting agenda. It was reported that two Board members may place an item on the meeting agenda. Mrs. Dunnam asked the Board to make "responsible" requests and to request information to help the College.

As a point of clarification, Dr. Armenta explained that the Coordinating Board requests information on enrollment be reported as an aggregate amount for both campus, not reported on each campus. The report then triggers a response from the Commissioner to the College President that the College develop a report that responds to what plan the College will have, approved by the Board, to address the decline or the issue if the decline cannot be abated. The Coordinating Board monitors head count as well as contact hours. Dr. Armenta indicated he would provide the letter from the Commissioner which sites the regulation as it is written in terms of enrollment. Mrs. Dunnam indicated that while the Coordinating Board report is over a four-year period, the Board should be concerned about the yearly enrollment of the College.

Mrs. Spann asked for clarification on a request she had made concerning canceled classes and absences of adjunct faculty, because she had received a number of calls from citizens in the community. She asked what the policy was on absences and canceled classes. Mr. Alaniz explained that absences are reported for sick leave on which records are maintained. The data is not available on classes being canceled. He indicated that a report containing absences faculty for sick leave would be provided and was currently being prepared by the Payroll Office. The salary data she had requested was ready. Mrs. Dunnam stated that this would be an item to be considered on the agenda of an Academic Affairs Committee meeting. The policy indicates that faculty must report absences.

The next discussion item was on the Del Mar College Mission and Purpose. The Del Mar College Mission statement was distributed and reviewed. Mrs. Dunnam stressed that the Board at no time makes any decisions that are not consistent with the mission. The Strategic Plan was also distributed. Dr. Armenta commented that he had seen a state statute that was very prescriptive about the mission for community colleges. He explained that what many colleges have done is determine on a year-to-year basis or within the five year planner depending upon the needs of the institution and the role the institution is playing as the Board sees fit. Mrs. Dunnam asked the Board members to review the Strategic Plan and Mission. Mrs. Natale explained that unit plans tie back into the Strategic Plan, and she will be producing an Institutional Effectiveness update, which will discuss the measures and standards that are in the document and determine the College's progress toward reaching those goals. Mrs. Natale indicated that the results of the Self-Study Survey had been distributed to the Board, which was a one-paged document recording the responses of the various constituent groups. Student responses were taken from a stratified random sampling of the students' classes and administered by the faculty members of those courses. Faculty have a great deal of investment in the self-study process and reviewing and evaluating the quality of the programs at this College, and there was a greater response from the faculty.

Mrs. Dunnam stated that there had been involvement with area independent school districts with approximately 250 students in dual enrollment. Dr. Sloan reported that there were about 146 students this year enrolled in the Regional Technical Center classes that the College was contracting with the school districts to actually provide the instruction. High schools in the region contract with Del Mar College to deliver technical content for the students to receive high school credit, and when they attend Del Mar, it can be converted to college credit.

Mrs. Dunnam stressed the importance of the Board working with legislators as mandates were often attached to the bottom of bills and many will be unaware of the attachments and the implications of such riders. One example she cited dealt with records management which required Del Mar College to send copies of materials to the Library of Congress in Austin. Dr. Dicianna reported that climate controlled and secured storage space in the William F. White Library was being prepared to store records. Mrs. Dunnam further stated that, in Texas, amendments to bills, which had nothing to do with those bills, could be added, and this was one reason that the Board would have an active Legislative Committee.

The next item for discussion was on Long Term Planning. Dr. Armenta provided an update on the upcoming accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). He indicated that the College was currently undergoing a Southern Association self-study review, in which the College evaluates itself and determines the strengths and weaknesses. The self-study document is published in preparation for a review by outside teams of faculty and staff from colleges outside the state of Texas to ascertain if the College had been honest in its review. Dr. Armenta indicated that the self-study questions center around specific criteria to be written in "must" statements. He further commented that the self-study process was in the hands of the faculty, not the administration. No one who comes to evaluate Del Mar College is to have any contact with the College or know the administrators and faculty. After the team conducts an on-campus evaluation to verify the information contained in the College's self-study, a report is written on the team's findings. The College can identify a weakness and write it up with the action to be taken, and the team recognizes the College's self-diagnosis and remedy. After the onsite visit and positive report, the College=s accreditation is reaffirmed for the next 10 years.

Dr. Armenta explained that there was pressure from the federal government on the various accreditation associations, because in 1994 the federal government drafted legislation to accredit colleges directly. This was an attempt to stem the tide of federal financial aid fraud. Colleges were prevailed upon to monitor loans; however, while the colleges were not lending bodies, they were held responsible. As a result, the accrediting associations as a body proclaimed that they would monitor themselves. As a result, the process is now more rigid and vigorous with regard to "must" statements, accountability, and assessment.

He informed the Board that there are 12 principles committees and one steering committee headed by Dr. Jim Pierce. SACS holds only one person responsible at the institution for the accreditation process, which is the president of the college. While the president is the sole contact, the faculty is in charge of the process because they enjoy tenure, academic freedom, and can ask any question, and are seen as the major instruments for getting the most comprehensive, objective look at the institution. Mrs. Dunnam asked if there were any aspects of the current process that the Board needs to know. Dr. Armenta replied that updates would be forthcoming, prior to receiving a copy of the report. The accreditation criteria are updated on a yearly basis and procedures also change. Mrs. Spann asked if the loss of students played a role in the accreditation of the College. Dr. Armenta responded that the change in enrollment numbers did not necessarily play a role, but the College would be asked how it interpreted it and what would be done about it. The significant change is the constituency in the student body. The student body was less prepared for college transfer work, whether because of special needs that heretofore were not identified or just lack of adequate academic preparation. The question to the College would be, given its mission on remediation, what structures does it have in place to attempt to remedy the problems.

Mr. Alaniz stated that another variable where enrollment could impact the accreditation process would be the relation to the financial resources of the institution. All variables are taken into consideration, along with the planning and assessment process to determine the effectiveness in terms of financial utilization of dollars by the institution to continue to meet the mission. He indicated that Board members would be interviewed and data gathered from their perspective. Dr. Dicianna added, in response to Mrs. Dunnam's question about Board responsibility, that (1) Board members were serving on committees and other Board members would be asked to serve and (2) during the week of visitation, there would probably be a social to which Board members might be invited to attend and interact with the visitation team.

In terms of educational programs, Dr. Armenta stated that they were being reviewed, assessed, and evaluated. He stressed that the College's programs should be an outcome of academic master planning. The policy concerning academic master planning includes a statement that the academic master plan should be updated so that it drives the planning of the other aspects of the institution which support instruction. This has not been done recently; therefore, the next step would be to update this master plan. He further stated that Coordinating Board criteria was followed in assessing need before forwarding a proposal to institute a new educational program. Program reviews are done in a five-year cycle at the College. Dr. Armenta indicated that he would be making a report at the next Board meeting regarding the most recent cycle of program reviews. He indicated he would be making a recommendation concerning strengthening the process. Mrs. Dunnam indicated that she was pleased to know that people from the community were involved in the program reviews.

Mr. Solka, commenting on the Physical Facilities Master Plan, defining it as a is a road map that guides the institution from point A to point B, however developing a strategy to go to point C and beyond. He referred to the 1986 Master Plan and the 1989 update, which were distributed, which generated some current drawings which brought things up to a current status; however, it didn't do what a typical master plan should do and that was to determine a direction, for example, of 20 years but updated on a five-year basis. He stated that the design process includes identifying environmental concerns, investigating existing conditions, reviewing the academic plan that is prepared by the College, establishing design assumptions and parameters, preparing analysis, projections, and some degree of conceptual design, and conducting review meetings and workshop sessions. Mrs. Dunnam stressed the importance of beginning to work on the master plan with the changes that have occurred since 1989. Dr. Dicianna explained that the passage of current revenue bonds was completing the 1986 and 1989 master plans, working in arrears rather working forward. If the Board wishes, the Facilities Master Plan could be placed on the January meeting agenda; however, Dr. Dicianna stated that additional work needed to be done on the Academic Master Plan to advise Mr. Solka in planning for changes to the Facilities Master Plan. Mr. Whittle stated that he felt the committee chaired by Mr. Diaz, Long Term Planning Committee, should meet to determine decisions before further action was taken. In response to Mrs. Adler's question regarding implications affecting accreditation, Mr. Alaniz responded that the emphasis was placed on the institution having a master plan, the more current the better for the College; however, the process that we were still working on the 10-year master plan would cover the College. Mrs. Dunnam stated that the Board should make a determination on the direction it wishes to go for both campuses. Dr. Armenta added that as far as accreditation was concerned that as long as the Board understood the issue and recognized the need to update the plan, determining plans to correct it would be sufficient for the accreditation team to know.

Bond issues and alternative funding of major projects was the next item to be discussed. Mr. Whittle is chair of the Investment Committee and indicated that there were ways to create a revenue stream, and research has begun. He indicated that the Board could get where it wanted to go without burdening the taxpayers of Nueces County in a meaningful way. Dr. Dicianna indicated that discussions on avenues of income had been held with several banks. However, he stressed the need to have definite plans and needs on a parallel track. One source being discussed is tax exempt bonds, which are similar to revenue bonds. Periodic updates will be given to the Board. Dr. Dicianna indicated that the law permits an institution to receive $10,000,000 per year under the tax exempt bonds. In addition, drawdowns and even legal arbitrage are being researched. Revenue for specific projects was not being considered at this time. It was considered important to include non-Board members as advisory members on the committee to review sources of income. Mrs. Dunnam expressed the need to have an Investment Committee meeting to discuss all types of investment and revenue possibilities. Dr. Dicianna explained that investigating sources of revenue were attempts to solving current needs. Mrs. Dunnam explained that a number of needs included deferred maintenance, parking, the child care center, and a medical complex. In reply to Mrs. Adler's questions concerning the child care center, Dr. Dicianna explained that the Board had endorsed the concept of a child care center; however, a plan had been designed and a tentative location had been discussed. The College was working on obtaining outside sources of funding for the center. Mrs. Adler was interested in placing the child care center on a fast track in order to find an immediate solution to helping the 1800 single parents who were students at Del Mar with child care needs.

Mrs. Matula reported on the Empowerment Zone application that had been submitted by the City of Corpus Christi. The College had a portion of the application for the Del Mar College Center for Early Learning. The College had requested full funding in the first year, but Del Mar College was included in three different areas of the Empowerment Zone application. Mrs. Spann commended Mrs. Matula in her efforts in getting the application written. Mrs. Matula further explained that the Center for Early Learning would be one of the first things to happen in a process of building child care potential in capacity throughout the area. Not only would it be for the College's use, but for managers and child care workers, and to develop satellite locations throughout the Empowerment Zone area. West Campus borders one of the census tracks, as does the East Campus. She indicated a central location would be the basic location with training for the entire area for child care workers, and several projected satellite locations had been submitted in the application. Mr. Diaz suggested that the Board members review the plans that had already been made concerning the Center for Early Learning. Another area of importance was having all medical-related programs in a single complex. Ms. Jackson pointed out that the Board had already approved the feasibility study for the Center for Early Learning and indicated it was appropriate to begin looking for funding. Some funds had already been received.

Mrs. Dunnam asked those in attendance not seated at the table to introduce themselves.

Next to be discussed were legislative priorities, such as TASP, expansion of the Corpus Christi Junior College District, full formula funding, change in election date to coincide with school districts, eliminating legislation that requires all Del Mar College regents to run following the 2000 census, and eliminating legislation that allows installment payment of student tuition and fees. There was discussion to clarify the legislation in regard to election of regents after the 2000 census. It would affect those regents in districts which experienced a change, as had been the past situation, but current legislation would require all regents to run for election. After considerable discussion, it was suggested that these issues be considered in a Legislative Committee meeting. Dr. Dicianna provided an update on Texas Association of Community Colleges (TACC) proposing TASP legislation, which would eliminate 95% of Del Mar College's problem if approved in the format suggested, and pushing full formula funding in five bienniums. Dr. Dicianna stated that TACC had fought for a decade for legislation to provide installment payments; however, he does not know of any legislation to remove the mandatory aspect of current legislation. As an example of the College's problem, he cited that of the 1,600 students who had used installment payments for Fall 1998, 444 had not paid. Those who had not paid received three or more letters and were now being turned over to a collection agency. Mrs. Spann asked for a clarification of a statement Dr. Dicianna had made regarding the membership of TACC having unanimously adopted a resolution that community colleges would not solicit nor accept special item appropriations and that the elected board of trustees of 80% of the association members had also adopted resolutions. Dr. Dicianna explained that this statement was true for the last legislative session and its intent was to eliminate special line item funding. If schools received special line item funding, it came from the pots for all other schools. Reference was made concerning the medical complex being built at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, and Dr. Dicianna indicated that some funds might be coming from the pot; however, it depended on A&M's source of funding for the facility. Dr. Sloan indicated that funding for the medical education center was to be from tobacco money. The College was able to obtain information on proposed legislation, particularly those affecting community colleges, through TACC and the Internet.

Next on the agenda were development and public relations. In discussing the relationship of Del Mar College to the Del Mar College Foundation, Mr. Munoz reported that the Foundation had made application to the Internal Revenue Service to be designated as a public charity, thus there would be separation between the College and the Foundation. Then the articles of incorporation of the Foundation would be amended to eliminate Regents being permanent members. He further explained that this process takes two to three months to complete. Mrs. Dunnam reviewed the reason for the separation for the benefit of the new regents, and Mr. Munoz indicated that there had been a discussion of the concerns when meeting at the Attorney General's office but that there were no rulings or findings. He further stated that the meeting had comprised of talking about some problems and how to best resolve these problems. Several suggestions by the Del Mar group had been the separation and the bookkeeping being done by an outside agent, which the Attorney General's office had thought were good ideas. The College does provide support services to the Foundation Office.

Dr. Dicianna provided an update on the status of the hiring of a Director of Development. The position had been filled by a Canadian; however, it was going to be impossible to avoid a lengthy process in getting her approved to work in the United States. Therefore, the position as Director of Development will be readvertised with a January 15 deadline for candidates to submit materials.

It was further reported that the Director of Development would serve as the Foundation's executive director, and the College would provide space and clerical help. A memorandum of understanding had been approved by the Board to be reviewed on an annual basis. Mr. Whittle explained that it was appropriate for the Board to review and analyze the relationship of the College to the Foundation for the benefit of the new Board members. Mr. Whittle provided an explanation of the Board membership on the Foundation Board of Trustees. Because the Foundation did not have the resources to hire its own executive director, the College had agreed to provide that service. It was pointed out that after the separation the Board of Regents would no longer have a say in the Foundation bylaws, approval of trustees, etc.

Next item of discussion was the Del Mar College Former Student Association and its importance to the College. Mrs. Dunnam stated that the Former Students Association could have a most powerful influence on the school. She felt that this relationship should be strengthened and supported.

The last item under Development and Public Relations dealt with televising the Board meetings, which would increase awareness of public interest. There was considerable discussion related to cost, benefits and disadvantages of televising all Board meetings. It was pointed out that Board meetings were currently open to the public. Mrs. Dunnam asked Mr. Pugh, who was in the audience, to express his opinion on the topic. He indicated that since it would be in the area of public relations, it would be nice to provide this information to the public. He indicated that there would be a need to balance cost vs. the public. He further stated that the first issue to be decided would be whether the Board wanted to do it. Mr. Pugh indicated that the public would like to have the Board meetings aired. He did state that, if the meetings were to be televised, the nature of the meetings would be changed. There would not be the same give and take. He concluded his remarks by stating that, from the public standpoint, it would be a great idea. Televising Board meetings will be placed on the agenda for a Long Range Planning Committee meeting.

Ms. Jackson announced to the Board that the Del Mar College Foundation and the Former Students Association were hosting a retirement coffee honoring Ms. Celia Cruse on Wednesday, December 16, 1998, from 2:30-3:30 p.m., in the Bluebonnet Room.

The Board recessed at 11:50 a.m. for lunch. The Board went back into session at 12:10 p.m.

Buildings and Grounds was the next topic of discussion. Mrs. Dunnam stated that immediate concerns would be discussed in the form of hiring a construction manager firm or full-time staff for overseeing ongoing and future construction and safety. Mr. Ealy explained what had been done in the process of hiring a construction management firm. From a total of five firms which had submitted proposals, the College review committee had proposed two firms be considered based on technical qualifications and past performances. These two firms would be making presentations at the Buildings and Grounds Committee meeting on Monday, December 15, 1998, and the Board could address questions to the firms. Dr. Dicianna expressed his concern regarding construction projects on the campus as to completion deadlines. He stated there were three alternatives: (1) continue the dual relationship which was not working; (2) hire someone either directly or through a firm; or (3) hire and augment the College's staff. He asked the Board for suggestions in solving this problem. An estimated cost in hiring a management firm would be 2.5 to 4.4% of the total project cost for about $9 to 10 million in total projects, or about $250,000 or $400,000 in cost, which would be a two-year cost or more. Mrs. Dunnam asked for the best solution to resolve the problems the College had encountered. Mr. Tines stated that the Board had several alternatives; however, he didn't know whether they would be the most efficient. The Board could go to the management firm, hiring someone on campus, or having the coordinating architect use someone from his staff to be in charge of construction management. Mr. Diaz expressed concern about whether the fee would be prorated, since most of the projects were already underway. Mr. Ealy explained that the College would agree on a scope of work and then would agree on the amount of effort required to accomplish the desired work. The selected firm would serve as project coordinator and quality control. Mr. Diaz asked if anything was being done in penalizing contractors for those projects on which work was behind schedule. Mr. Ealy explained that penalties were usually assessed at the end of the construction period. Dr. Dicianna explained that Mr. Hilmy had reviewed the matter and it seemed very difficult to assess total responsibility to any particular area. After the presentations on Monday, the Board could decide the direction it wanted to take and the possibility of other alternatives to be considered. Mr. Tines reported that the Facilities Planning Committee would attend the meeting on Monday to answer any questions the Board may have after the presentations. Mr. Whittle stated that there must be a way for the Board to put into place something that would cause this problem not to occur again.

In regard to campus safety, Mrs. Dunnam pointed out the need to put campus lights back online which had been turned off due to construction. Mr. Ealy indicated that it was his impression that these lights were back on. Her second item was the construction maze, and she expressed the hope that the campus would be straightened up for the Spring semester. In response to Mrs. Adler's question about a front door, Dr. Dicianna explained that after construction was completed on the new classroom building and the demolition of the Skills Enrichment Center, then the main entrance to the campus would be completed in 2000 or 2001.

Dr. Dicianna indicated that the faculty and staff had been the most impacted by the construction projects, and he stated that they had championed it very well and had been the group who had complained the least. The items discussed under this segment would be placed under the Buildings and Grounds Committee with the exception of the College entrance, which would be placed under the Long Range Planning Committee.

The next segment dealt with academic affairs. With respect to remediation, Dr. Armenta reviewed the reorganization of the Mathematics and Natural Sciences Department. He indicated there were two remediation programs; one in writing and one in reading, but there was no remediation program in mathematics. There were remedial courses but no coherent program that monitors the progress of students. In light of this realization, Dr. Armenta had approached Ms. Mary Kay, in the Mathematics Department, and assigned her the charge and responsibility to begin meeting with the faculty to attempt to break that impasse regarding what suggestions and recommendations the department could make that would address the issues and develop a program that would parallel the same kind of design and structure and criteria that existed in the other programs in operation. Ms. Kay had met with the faculty and would be presenting to the Math faculty and other faculty some various choices that the Math faculty would make regarding which programs might be most effective and how they could be incorporated and adapted to the existing curriculum or whether or not the existing curriculum might need modification or change. He further reported that another realization which had come to light was the need for a department chair for the Math Department, which had been recommended by Dean Lopez and had been discussed with Dr. Dicianna. The reading and writing programs appear to be doing well; however, assessment of progress needed to be continuous. Mrs. Dunnam expressed concern about students who are unprepared for college work, and she stressed communication with the public high schools.

With respect to student retention, Dr. Armenta indicated that sometimes the faculty thinks they need to keep students in their classes at all cost; however, he stated that retention meant the department was interested in determining why students were not returning to the course. Department chairs have formed a Chair=s Council to begin looking at issues that cross departments. Faculty Council has a Retention Committee which is also looking at retention. Faculty are looking at the issue and will propose to the administration how to address the problem. Absenteeism in a nursing program is interpreted differently and can have more serious consequences than in other areas. Every syllabus, which is handed out the first day of class, addresses the absenteeism issue. Academic standards are prescribed in the College catalog, degree programs, instructor syllabus, and department, and these standards are in the hands of the faculty. Mrs. Dunnam stated that students are our customers, and faculty should be responsible and respectful.

In response to Mr. Whittle's query concerning a mechanism giving adequate time for testing to students with learning problems, Dr. Armenta responded that the College had a unit composed of two coordinator-type counselors who have background in disabilities, who work through the Department of Special Populations, who assess a student as well as accommodate students' needs for special exams. Mr. Whittle asked if some of the students in remedial programs possess special needs which had not been recognized. Dr. Armenta explained that some of these students might; however, assessment of these students is attempted. Dr. Pfoff described the Writing Center which serves the entire campus. She reported that the Writing Center currently offers 152 free half-hour tutorials for any student per week, and is also open in the evenings and on Saturdays. These labs are conducted by trained tutors, many with bachelor degrees and some with master degrees. With regard to the remedial, retention, and learning disability issue, she reported that she served on one of the three subcommittees for a Title III grant. The Title III grant had a three-prong attack and the committee she was on was specifically for remediation and retention. One of the committee's proposals would be to establish cohorts of students in learning communities and take remedial students who have failed all parts of the TASP and enroll them as a group of 20 in remedial reading, remedial English, remedial math, plus the one-hour freshman seminar. The second prong of that attack would be an intervention program, sometimes called an early warning and alert system, based on faculty referrals. Students would be identified by those faculty at various points throughout the semester. Intervention specialists would determine if the absence problem was an academic one, personal one, or a child care issue, and attempt to resolve the problem. In regard to Mr. Whittle's concern about learning disability, Dr. Pfoff indicated that another proposal would be to hire, appoint, or designate someone at the College as a diagnostician to work with students in remedial programs. Dr. Armenta stated that Title III or Title V funding might be a possibility for funding in this area. He further stated that Ms. Kay was now working on an integrated approach to addressing the needs of these student as a whole. Dr. Dicianna invited the Board to visit the Reading Center.

Dr. Armenta addressed the issue of academic facilities, equipment and materials by indicating that the Chair=s Council was discussing their needs and whether they were adequate. He questioned if the Board was desiring wish lists.

Students Affairs was the next segment to be considered. Mrs. Dunnam indicated that there should probably be a committee on student affairs as the student was our customer and the student was the most important component of the school, because without the students there would not be a need for the Board or faculty and staff, and yet they are probably the least spoken of at all of the Board meetings. She further stated that it was important to receive input from the students. Dr. Armenta indicated that attempts were being made to involve students in the reaffirmation process for their input. Dr. Dicianna indicated that there were students on the College-Wide Cabinet. Dr. Armenta stated that the relationship between faculty member and student was one of superior to subordinate when it came to assignment of grade and meeting of class requirements, so they are not a customer in that sense; however, the College wants to be of service to the students and be fair and outline the expectations for them and to provide them with the resources to succeed. Dr. Dicianna explained that accommodations are made for students with special needs; however, the student must self identify that he has a problem. Dr. Armenta asked for Mrs. Dunnam and Mrs. Adler, as chair of the Academic Affairs Committee, to give consideration to blending Academic Affairs and Student Affairs as the work was in conjunction and both reported to him. It was the consensus that the committee be called the Student and Academic Affairs Committee.

Under Student Affairs, Mrs. Dunnam mentioned recruitment of high school students. Dr. Armenta indicated that student recruitment needed more coordination, even though a number of faculty did go out into the public schools to discuss programs at Del Mar College, as well as counselors. There needs to be more systematic planning. The College has a recruiter with the possibility of reassigning a second recruiter from existing staff. He indicated that the high school population was declining, and projections indicate perhaps another 10 years of decline.

With regard to Facilities, activities, etc., for student campus life, Dr. Armenta indicated that the improvements in the Harvin Center were a great step forward in centralizing the various activities in one location and enhancing the looks of the facility. Better signage was needed. A point of discussion would be whether there was campus life and activities for the students. Dr. Armenta reported that a serious look at the value of student activities was needed. He indicated that the activities are provided because they complete the student's education or enhance what they learn in the classroom. Three major thrusts now exist: (1) Project Puente, a retention project headed by Ms. Maria Salinas who works with students from some of the organizations; (2) service learning with Sonya Hopkins, who places students into volunteer settings in the community where the students experience relevancy; and (3) collaborative learning, where students take more responsibility for what they are learning.

The next segment under consideration was on finance. Mr. Johnson discussed audits and had distributed a handout, detailing his audit plan for the upcoming quarter, audits currently being performed, and audits to be performed with Board approval. He pointed out that the approximate 600 agency accounts need to be reviewed for proper handling and would like to make a recommendation that smaller scholarship funds be set up in one scholarship fund and establish a dollar amount for each. Mr. Johnson asked for suggestions from the Board. Any software needs would be considered by the Business Office, such as cash management. He also encouraged the Board members to review the Internal Auditor Charter to get an idea of his functions. Mr. Pugh addressed the Board and commended Mr. Johnson's report. He had three comments: (1) The internal auditor should be prohibited from performing accounting responsibilities. He needs to be taken out of accounting as soon as possible; (2) This was a very ambitious auditing program; and (3) He wondered how the reports would be coming in, to the President or to the Board. In reply, Mr. Johnson stated that the initial report would go to the President and the department being audited to allow time for a response to the audit and recommendations. The audit would then be sent to the chair of the Audit Committee, with copies going to all Board members exactly as it was sent to the President.

Mr. Alaniz discussed investments. Investments of the College function under the Investment Policy, which is based on the Public Funds Investment Act. Mr. Alaniz indicated that on Monday the Board would be given a copy of a video and a copy of the law itself for reference and information. Daily activity does occur whereby his office is online with the bank and reviews bank balances. The disbursement needs for the week are reviewed, maturities that would be coming in were reviewed, and then a determination would be made on how much would be available for investment and the length of time to be covered. Mr. Alaniz indicated that there was no minimum investment in dollar amounts; however, the minimum in days was 33 days. Repurchase agreements are in place for 24-hour repurchase agreements. In the construction fund, there are 30-day repurchase agreements, where the money will normally sit in some cases for 30 days to get a higher yield than the 24-hour repurchase agreement rate. All of this investment is contingent on the level of disbursements anticipated for that time frame. By 8:30 - 9:00 each morning, Mr. Alaniz has an idea of what the College has. Dr. Dicianna reported that Mr. Alaniz had to keep enough money available in and out to cover all expenses.

Mr. Alaniz reported that in the agency fund, the check and balance should be kept at $100,000. Anything over $100,000 goes into a repo agreement, which would earn a higher rate than the checking account rate. In the other operating fund, current operations was $500,000 in the account. Anything above that was swept into a repo. His concern was liquidity to cover checks that come in. In response to Dr. Dicianna's question as to what the penalty would be for overinvesting, Mr. Alaniz indicated that in some cases there would be a loss of principal. Mercantile Bank is the depository Bank with their contract expiring in August. Mr. Alaniz indicated he wanted the Board's definition of the terms "timeliness" and "yield" and what the Board wanted from that activity, so he could follow those guidelines. He indicated that there was a level of professional judgment which needed to be utilized in certain circumstances based on information that may be coming forth that requires him to determine at what it should mature and for how much. Another factor was what would be available in the market. The policy was very restrictive, but it was based on liquidity, preservation of capital, marketability, and security. Mr. Alaniz indicated that during an Investment Committee meeting the policy would need a detailed review with a possible presentation from an outside source, such as investment bankers or the Bank people themselves with options for the Board to consider.

Also under the Investment Committee, Mrs. Dunnam suggested a discussion on calling the bonds. Mr. Alaniz responded that he had called Steve Elliott, Southwest Securities, to prepare a spread on calling the bonds. For informational purposes, Mr. Alaniz related that tax money would be coming in December, so he would make arrangements for the Bank to invest in 30-day certificates of deposit as soon as the money was deposited into the account. Also, in January or February there would be no state funds received. He indicated the practice that, when an investment was made, the investment was listed in a letter form and sent to the College President and the President of the Board for signatures as preliminary approval to comply with the policy. Then the final reporting was done during the Board meeting when the members would have the investment letter. To meet state requirements, quarterly investment reports are made, with one being on the agenda for the January meeting. Dr. Dicianna indicated that the audit report had been distributed but that he would not make any comments unless the Board desired, as it was on the agenda for the meeting on December 15. Mr. Diaz asked about sweep accounts, and Mr. Alaniz responded that he had not gotten a sure fix on the float, and that he needed to develop a pattern of activity. Mr. Whittle asked for suggestions of local financial advisors to be invited to meet with the Investment Committee. Mr. Alaniz reported that he knew of two individuals who were qualified to inform and advise the Board on investments. The Investment Committee would be reviewing ways the College could increase its income and investment of funds, including bonds and alternative sources of revenue.

Concerning the Millican account, Dr. Dicianna referred to a letter which had been received from the College=s present legal counsel dated October 1996 that indicated that there would be vulnerability if the accounts were combined. He also indicated that the College was following up on Mr. Juan Garza's suggestion that an opinion from the Attorney General's office be sought. In other instances, Dr. Dicianna indicated that opinions rendered by the Attorney General indicated "you could do it but you are not relieved of a charge of a gift of public funds" and those subject to charge were the nine members of the Board of Regents. Mr. Alaniz related a past experience with another account at a time when there was no foundation, so the scholarship was set up through the College. After the Foundation was established, the director attempted to move the Del Mar College money to the Foundation. The Foundation has a different investment regulatory process and can invest in equities that the College cannot. The money earned by the Foundation is greater than the money earned by the College. The money earned in interest for both scholarships is for a singular purpose, so if the money were moved to the College in spite of legal potentials, we have reduced the number of scholarships we would be giving to students. To better serve the students, he suggested that the money be moved from the College to the Foundation if the Board was willing to buy that type of exposure. Mr. Alaniz stated that another issue that needed to be looked at with legal advice was that neither the College nor the Foundation had a valid donor instrument to dictate how the funds were to be used.

The final segment to be considered was on policy review. Dr. Dicianna indicated that the only Board members who had the most current policy manuals were the new Board members. Ms. Natale provided an update on the process of converting the policy manual to software and placing the manual online. As soon as the document was proofread, it would be placed on the web page. Mrs. Dunnam indicated that once the policy manual had been completed the Board members should review it regularly. She announced that Mrs. Gonzales was chair of the Policy Review Committee.

Mrs. Spann questioned the policy relating to employees who have been let go, then had filed a lawsuit for which the College made a settlement and whether there was anything pertaining to the handling of a rehire. Mr. Alaniz indicated that if this were to occur it would be a disadvantage to both the employer and the employee and was incorporated into the settlement agreement whereby they would not apply at Del Mar College. Dr. Dicianna indicated that applying at the College would permit the person with another opportunity to file another suit against the College. Under hiring of staff, Mrs. Dunnam commented that formerly the College needed to have a balance of ethnic hirings. She felt that the College needed a campus that reflected the student body ethnic diversity. It was pointed out that the ethnic diversity was addressed in the 1997 Strategic Plan and updated in the Unit Plan. Dr. Dicianna explained that the College had made gains in affirmative action, and Ms. Cox had to sign off through a process. She makes sure that the committee making the recommendations had diversity; When the final pool has been developed, she makes certain that also has diversity. If neither of those occur, then the process is halted and restarted. Ms. Natale reported that faculty counts for the Fall semester were 29% minority, APT 39%, clerical 72%, and support staff was about 80%. College-wide the number of personnel on campus was 51% minority and had steadily grown over a 10-year period.

Mrs. Dunnam explained that, while not a criticism, the hiring plans need to insure efficiency in the search and hiring process. Dr. Dicianna outlined the hiring process and indicated that it was a lengthy process. Faculty input was desired for faculty positions, as well as for other positions. Dr. Pfoff had chaired the committee which developed the document related to the screening committee process, after working with the Faculty Council, Affirmative Action officer, Dr. Armenta and Dr. Dicianna. Dr. Dicianna recounted an experience he had with psychology applicants. The five candidates each taught a half-hour class and it took two weeks to schedule those five half-hour lectures for the committee to hear.

Ms. Natale responded to Mr. Whittle's question by stating that the screening committee process does not apply to classified or support personnel. Also, a determination had been on the Administration, Professional, Technical schedule of the positions that would not come under the scrutiny as would the upper level administrative positions. She related the experience of positive input received from faculty and deans who served on the screening committee for the Director of Institutional Research and Effectiveness position. The candidate chosen had taken another position, so the position was readvertised. Dr. Dicianna stated that if he became a benevolent authoritarian, he could hire someone immediately; however, the input from a variety of areas would be missed. Mr. Munoz read the material that the Board believes that changes need to be made and in what areas and identify areas for improvement and suggestions.

Mrs. Dunnam explained her reason for seeing that board decisions are carried out expeditiously on the agenda was that sometimes a new policy was needed and no update was given for some time. She indicated that nothing had been heard on the request for a new policy on gifts.

Mrs. Dunnam read the last items on the agenda, "Doing things at Del Mar College first class (We say that we are the best; therefore, let us do everything right the first time and all the time.) Second class or second rate is not good enough at or for Del Mar College."

As there was no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.

cwm1212.98/sp