The meeting was called to order at
Holden, Jeffries, Rasmusson
Absent: Canady, Mason,
Limited Public Comment Regarding Agenda Items
There were no comments from the public.
Strategic Plan Renewal Session
Chairperson Jeffries apologized for not having
the entire Board present. He
said that this is one of the most important processes, other than
selecting the president, which the Board has been involved in.
Chairperson Jeffries stated that notice was received from
Trustee Pelleran indicating that she would not be attending the
meeting today because she felt there was an Open Meetings Act
violation occurring in that the meeting was not posted in the
appropriate amount of time. He
to review everything and it was confirmed that everything was posted
in a timely fashion. He
asked Ms. Mendez to gather all of the communications that were sent
regarding this meeting, including time spent in scheduling the
As requested by Chairperson Jeffries at the
June 16, 2003 regular Board of Trustees meeting, a legal opinion
provided by Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone dated May 27, 2003 is
added as an addendum to these minutes.
The legal opinion reflected that the
May 16, 2003
special meeting did not violate the Open Meetings Act. It
is on file with the official Board minutes. Click here to view
President Cunningham thanked the Board members
that were present for attending the meeting.
She said that the staff views the strategic plan as marching
orders for the direction for the College.
The direction that the Board outlined for the institution three
years ago has served the College extremely well.
It has culminated in the Annual Results Inventory reports and
the President's evaluation. The
strategic plan is very important to the institution and that is why
many of the executive leadership staff and others are here to help
present and share with the Board what the College has accomplished
related to the plan.
President Cunningham outlined the context of the
meeting. She said that
first the plan will be reviewed, and what decisions were made, what
has worked, what things still need improvement and where the College
is going. The outcome
expected is to get reaffirmation from the Board.
Trustee Rasmusson asked where ISO 9000 fits in
President Cunningham responded that one of the
strategic drivers is continuous improvement.
She said that ISO 9001 was not something the Administration
proposed, but rather it developed from the Purchasing Department and
the Business and Community Institute in their desire to become ISO
President Cunningham and the following staff
members participated in the presentation to the Board (the PowerPoint
presentation is on file with the official Board materials):
, Ms. Nancy Lombardi, Mr.
, Dr. Bill Brown, Ms. Linda Birchmeier, Mr.
, and Mr.
President Cunningham provided an overview of the
strategic planning process.
Chairperson Jeffries asked what is the trend regarding allocating more
resources towards developmental education.
President Cunningham responded that the need is
still great. If
doesn?t meet that need, we don't know who will.
She said that it is a business we?d like to grow out of in
the years to come, but we don't see that happening right now.
Chairperson Jeffries asked how many MSU students
are coming to
to prepare themselves.
, Interim Dean of the Student and Academic Support Division, responded
that MSU students are attending the College to prepare themselves.
He stated that MSU is currently downsizing in developmental
education and the social safety net in terms of the intellectual
infrastructure and economic infrastructure for this community is
naturally migrating to the College.
Dr. Herder stated that there has been a 51% increase in the
last year in enrollment in the developmental
, Writing, and English As A Second Language programs and a similar
increase in developmental Mathematics.
He said that a particularly large number of students from MSU
attend LCC for Mathematics.
Trustee Rasmusson asked what the costs were of
running developmental education courses.
President Cunningham responded the costs are
surprisingly low compared to the other community colleges.
She stated that the College does it very efficiently, but she
did not have the exact costs.
Dr. VanKempen responded that he thinks the ROI is
above $1 and maybe it is $1.05
Mr. Cerny continued with the overview of the
strategic planning process.
President Cunningham announced that Mr. Cerny is
presenting because Mr. Ray Turner was unable to be present due to
illness. Mr. Turner is the
Director of Planning at the College.
Trustee Holden asked if there are programs that
will be presented today that have gone through the program review
President Cunningham responded that there are
suggested changes to the STAR Institute, but no other programs will be
a part of today?s presentation.
Chairperson Jeffries asked Mr. Cerny to elaborate
on the financial factors and long term revenue/cost model.
Mr. Cerny stated that the College's revenue
streams are continuously being reviewed and the millage component
really drove the College's revenue streams for the future.
He said that we would have been in a financial crisis if the
millage had not passed due to the reductions in State appropriations.
The administration is reviewing tuition, course fee
adjustments, and pursuing alternative revenue sources.
Chairperson Jeffries asked if the alternative
revenue sources included contact hours.
Mr. Cerny responded that currently Dr. Bill Brown
is conducting a study regarding contact hours versus credit hours.
He stated that this summer staff will visit each college that
has implemented contact hours and find out what went well and what
didn?t go well. This
information will be analyzed and verify if the College should also
implement contact hours. A
recommendation will be ready in September.
Chairperson Jeffries asked if five years is being
projected in the revenue model.
Mr. Cerny responded that the long range revenue
model is a projection of where we believe property taxes, state
appropriations, and tuition will go in the next five years.
Mr. Leone covered the results of the focus
groups. The first focus
was completed in May 2000 and repeated in March 2003.
The participants included the following groups:
former LCC students, community members, and business leaders.
Trustee Heywood stated that three years ago he
was concerned that the arts community was not involved.
He asked if the arts community was involved in the most recent
Mr. Leone responded that when we looked at
community members it was a random selection.
Trustee Heywood asked if anything had been done
to address that shortfall in the original planning process.
Mr. Leone responded that he is only doing a very
small part of the overall initiative and cannot speak to it more
President Cunningham remembered that Trustee
Heywood was concerned with that aspect three years ago and it was
addressed. She does not
recall a direction to revisit the entire plan as a result of the arts
community not being specifically involved.
President Cunningham stated that would change the entire focus
group process that was used previously.
Trustee Heywood stated that basically nothing has
been done to bring them into the stakeholder process.
President Cunningham responded that bringing them
into the stakeholder process was not his initial question.
In terms of the stakeholder process, President Cunningham
stated that she is on the Boarshead Theatre Advisory Board.
There are people committed to working with the theatres in the
area and they?ve involved the schools.
She said that Dr. Michael Nealon is working this summer with
Riverwalk Theatre. A lot
has been done to bring them in.
Trustee Holden asked how many community members
were involved in the focus groups.
Mr. Leone stated that each focus group had 6 to
10 people. He reminded the
Board that this was qualitative input.
The purpose of a focus group is to give a sense of what people
are thinking. It is not to
provide quantitative data.
President Cunningham stated that in the original
strategic planning process there were 400 people involved.
The purpose of the second round of focus groups was to verify
if we were still on target.
Mr. Leone continued with the overview of the
results of focus groups.
President Cunningham reviewed the new strategic
planning Board involvement process.
The first step is to provide a plan update, which is the
purpose of today?s meeting. The
second step will be to provide a review of the plan again in September
for any new board members. A
briefing book will be provided to the entire Board in September which
will contain strategic context, industry challenges, and college
issues. New briefing
sections will be given once a month.
She said that if the Board desires they may have a discussion
on the book once or twice a year.
President Cunningham stated that they will be requesting the
Trustees? feedback on the briefing book.
Mr. Cerny reviewed the Board briefing book
strategic context sections, which will include service area
demographics, student demographics, community surveys, focus groups,
legislative and legal issues.
President Cunningham stated that we will look at
renewing, revising, and institutionalizing the strategic plan.
She said the original strategic plan was a working plan and it
was intended to have results that could be measured, which has been
explained the planning terms that are mentioned throughout the
presentation and the strategic plan.
, and Guiding Principles? means institutional purpose and central
values. ?Strategic Driver? means broad thrust, long-term.
?Strategic Challenge? means a focus area which is mid- to
long-term and furthers a strategic driver.
President Cunningham stated that there are no recommendations
to change the vision, mission, or motto of the College.
She also stated that there are no changes to the guiding
President Cunningham outlined the strategic
drivers that will be discussed at today?s meeting.
They are as follows:
LCC Strategic Drivers
Comprehensive community college, with a careers emphasis
and user-level IT skills
Equity and Competitive Compensation
President Cunningham reviewed strategic driver
number one, Continuous Improvement.
Dr. VanKempen reviewed the strategic challenge
related to Continuous Improvement, which is as follows:
?Implement organization-wide continuous process, driven by
measurable results.? He
reviewed the approaches that have been implemented to meet this
Ms. Lombardi reviewed the Service Review results,
which is the second part of meeting the continuous improvement
Dr. Brown reviewed the Annual Results Inventory
reports, which replaced the former Board monitoring reports.
Mr. Cerny reviewed the Academic Quality
Improvement Project (AQIP) accreditation and reviewed its history.
President Cunningham stated that the strategic
challenge of implementing an organization-wide continuous improvement
process driven by measurable outcomes was met.
Systems have been established and managed forward at the
operational level and continue to drive the institution.
President Cunningham reviewed strategic driver
number two, ?Comprehensive? Approach with a careers emphasis and
User-level IT skills.
Dr. VanKempen reviewed the strategic challenge that is
operationalizing strategic driver number two, which is as follows:
Meet Lansing-area priority career and workforce development
needs, coordinating general education and careers division, BCI, and
Ms. Birchmeier reviewed distributive learning, which is another factor
in achieving the strategic challenge.
She presented highlights of the learning centers, training and
technology, on-line registration, percentage of virtual/hybrid college
credits, online degrees, eArmy U, and the number of credits per
Trustee Holden asked how much money is being
saved from on-line registration.
Mr. Cerny responded that an analysis has not been
done, but he said that the College is saving money.
Due to more registration occurring on-line, money has been
saved by not hiring as many registration workers.
Trustee Heywood asked what is the comparison of
effectiveness of hybrid classes versus students who take only
Dr. Brown responded that the numbers have been
too small in order to do a study; however, there is some data
available for 2002-2003 which will be helpful in conducting a study
Chairperson Jeffries asked how success is
Mr. Cerny responded that currently success is
determined by passing rates and grade point; however, in the fall,
when the academic accountability begins, there will be measures to
President Cunningham stated that she has asked
for a list of all of the students who enrolled in hybrid, traditional,
and virtual courses, the completion rate of those students, the grade
point average in those courses, and the pass rate if there are any
certifications involved. She
said that is the report staff is pulling together.
Ms. Birchmeier continued her presentation.
Mr. Cerny reviewed the Facilities Master Plan and
the facilities upgrades that include the following:
Delta Campus & M-TEC, Human Health Public Services,
, GVT Renovations, Arts & Sciences Renovations, and Property Sale.
He also reviewed the technology master plan, technological
infrastructure, ISCD mission, and ISCD/Oasis Goals.
Mr. Cerny also demonstrated the Hummingbird program that is
used by staff to run reports on the College's courses and programs.
The Board took a short recess.
The Board reconvened.
President Cunningham summarized where the College
is with strategic driver number two.
She stated that the following challenges have been
articulation to 4-year schools
Learning Master Plan
The ?Areas of Excellence? will now be called
?Areas of Priority Need?. President
Cunningham reviewed the strategic challenges that have been revised,
which are the following:
Facilities and Technology-infrastructure master plans:
Construct Delta Campus & M-TEC, HHS, Administration,
and renovate GVT; implement comprehensive web-based ERP
(Enterprise Resource Plan) system
?Areas of Priority Need? in Automotive Related, Health Care,
Developmental Education, Financial Assistance, Math and Science,
and have measurable improvements
corporate sponsorship for Star Institute, and explore Star2 with a
developmental education emphasis; develop a ?sunset? plan in
the event this cannot be achieved
President Cunningham reviewed the new strategic
challenges that the College is proposing, which are the following:
a comprehensive program that serves the community?s
leadership-development needs in the non-profit sector
LCC as an alternative energy center, with alternative energy
technology integrated into curriculum
Dr. Brown reviewed where the College is with
strategic driver number three, Local Emphasis.
Foundation focus was one of the major thrusts of the 2000
strategic plan. He showed
the Board how well the College represents the local tax base.
Mr. Cerny reviewed the recommendations to this
strategic driver. He said
that currently there is a bias on the program review return on
investment (ROI) formula for local, in-district enrollment.
For every dollar that we deploy State appropriations or the
property tax for the in-district students that programs attract, they
get that dollar back. For
the out-of-district students, programs received only 50 cents.
Since we've shown that the in-district is being represented
well, we are recommending that the bias in the formula be eliminated
for out-of-district students. He
believes that would not have an impact on programs in serving the
Chairperson Jeffries asked that if the bias was
eliminated from the formula, would it significantly change anything.
Mr. Cerny responded that it would change some of
the program review dollars in terms of where we spread them.
Chairperson Jeffries asked how the money would be
Mr. Cerny responded an analysis has not been
completed, but essentially this will be done for the new fiscal year.
Chairperson Jeffries stated that he was concerned
with this recommendation. A
couple years ago the College asked for a millage increase and the
taxpayers in the district are paying for that, which was the reason
for the bias. He asked if
there was an estimate of what the impact would be, and if dollars
would be shifted from in-district to serve out-of-district students.
Mr. Cerny responded that the only impact this
will have from an ROI standpoint is the dollars will be distributed in
different ways. From the
overall standpoint, he does not believe this would have a major
impact. He said that we
would still have the appropriation that any program that is outside of
the district will not receive property tax revenue.
we're talking about where the students are coming from.
Chairperson Jeffries asked if this recommendation
would change anything in terms of our view towards any of the learning
centers or any of the other programs that we provide outside of the
Mr. Cerny responded that yes, it would change the
ROI?s outside of St. Johns, as an example, because they're not in
the tax district. He said
it will get better because they will be getting the full dollar as
opposed to 50 cents. Mr.
Cerny explained that anything that is outside of the district will
still not receive the property tax allocation.
However, when the student comes in their state appropriations
essentially will be distributed whether they are in-district or
President Cunningham stated that the intent
behind doing this was to grow the outlying areas because of the worker
shortage. She said that
staff could go back and revisit the exact formula.
Mr. Cerny responded that a mock analysis could be
completed. He said that
because of the skill shortage inside the district, we need to ensure
that we get skills set in to the district.
President Cunningham said the challenge is that
as we look at annexing
, if we make it too convenient for folks to take classes and there is
no penalty attached, there would be no incentive for them to ever
become part of the College's tax district.
What we're seeing is that there's been a saturation of
those in our tax district and there is growth in the outlying areas.
we're trying to adjust the formula and how we do that can be
debated. She said that if
there are any suggestions, staff would be happy to review them.
President Cunningham summarized strategic driver
number three, which is being recommended to be revised as follows:
Local priority, followed respectively by contiguous counties
outside the local tax district, state and national.
The initial recommendation was to eliminate the ROI bias
against out-of-taxed district students.
However, President Cunningham stated that the recommendation
would be review to see what the impact would be if the ROI bias was
Chairperson Jeffries had concern regarding
eliminating the ROI bias against out-of-tax-district students.
He felt that the in-district taxpayers are going to be
responsible for paying for it.
Mr. Cerny responded that they are ensuring that
anything out-of-district doesn?t receive any property tax dollars.
Chairperson Jeffries stated that he understands
that, but if you lose state revenue sharing dollars it will need to be
picked up somewhere else.
President Cunningham said that the concern is not
the expansion, but the way funds are distributed for that expansion so
that tax dollars are not given to the programs outside of the tax
Chairperson Jeffries said that he is not against
it, but the College may receive the argument that tax monies should
stay in the district.
Trustee Heywood stated that international student
enrollment has increased over the last six years.
He asked why is international not a part of the strategic
President Cunningham asked him if he is asking
that the word ?international? be added.
Trustee Heywood responded, yes, unless there is a
logical reason as to why it was not included.
President Cunningham said that this driver deals
with local, state and federal taxes only.
She said that no international taxes are received.
There is an increase in enrollment, but it is a byproduct of
the work that is done, which is the intent.
Trustee Heywood asked if the majority of the
international students also work within the district.
responded that a majority of the international students are on a F1
Visa, which requires them to be full-time students and they are only
allowed to work at the College for a small amount of hours.
Trustee Heywood asked if they are then paying
into the tax base.
Mr. Howard responded that a student employee does
not contribute to FICA; therefore, it is greatly reduced.
Trustee Holden preferred to leave the language as
it is. She said that
international is a byproduct of some of the programs.
President Cunningham stated that there is not an
ROI formula in place for international students.
Ms. Lombardi responded that the return on
investment is done related to programs which have courses and credits.
She said that data can be compiled on how many international
students are enrolled, where they come from, and how much tuition they
generate. Ms. Lombardi
stated that is not the same as a return on investment
Chairperson Jeffries asked if the ROI formula
includes the issue of local millage.
Mr. Cerny responded that the programs that have
in-district students receive 100% and programs that have
out-of-district students receive 50%.
Chairperson Jeffries suggested rewording the
recommendation because the way it reads now it gives the impression
that the in-district and out-of-district students will be equated.
President Cunningham requested that staff
continue to run the formula as it is and do a mock report.
Staff will also be looking at rewording the
recommendation in order for the intent to be clear.
The Board agreed to not add the word
?international? as Trustee Heywood suggested.
President Cunningham presented strategic driver
number four, Equity and Competitive Compensation.
She said that the College was in an unfavorable position
compared to other community colleges in
three years ago.
was in the bottom quartile, compared to other community colleges.
The College did not have a step system, so people were being
compensated for seniority instead of being compensated for skill sets
Mr. David Davidson reviewed the strategic
challenge to meet this strategic driver, which is ?Equity Among
Faculty and Staff, and Competitive Compensation, within the Context of
Financial Balance.? He
reviewed the study, the plan, and the action taken to meet this
President Cunningham stated that the College has
met this strategic challenge and is looking at institutionalizing it,
which means that the Board automatically sets the parameters for all
future contracts. We will continue to review it and make improvements,
and it will become institutionalized.
The Board asked that the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) be
reflected in the data.
Trustee Heywood stated that he is not sure if this
should be listed as institutionalized.
President Cunningham responded that if it is kept
as a challenge then an approach would need to be defined in order to
meet it. Currently, there is
not an approach to meet it because the institution has achieved
competitive compensation which was something the college was lacking
before. This will not go
away, but it will continue to be reviewed and it will be operationalized.
Ms. Lombardi responded that we will continue to
have the strategic driver, which is the long-term thrust.
That will be renewed and continued.
However, what is being institutionalized is the challenge, which
is the mid to short-term approach to achieve the driver.
President Cunningham reviewed strategic driver
number five, Financial Balance. She
discussed what the College's situation was in the year 2000.
Mr. Cerny reviewed the strategic challenge to meet
the strategic driver, which is ?Implement a long-term plan to achieve
?financial balance,? bringing revenue streams nearer to equal
contributions and more in line with state norms.?
One of the charges was to develop a cost recover plan for BCI.
He provided an overview regarding the financial situation in
1999-2000 and 2001-2002.
Chairperson Jeffries asked if the tuition is
increased by $3 will it improve the financial situation balance.
Mr. Cerny responded essentially we will have a
fairly well balanced model.
Chairperson Jeffries asked if the Board wanted to
create a strategic challenge that would expand the boundaries, where
would it be included in the strategic plan.
Mr. Cerny responded that it would go under
Chairperson Jeffries said that if the College is
distributing funds outside the district, we should review the
possibility of expanding the tax district.
Trustee Heywood stated that he was in favor of
President Cunningham responded that the
has helped the College's visibility significantly.
She said that if the College were to expand to
there would be an approximate $1.1 million in increased revenue.
would bring approximately $3 million and the College has a presence
there that will continue.
Trustee Holden stated that she works closely with
one of the
board members and they are having these types of discussions.
President Cunningham stated that language would be
added to the strategic plan to review the possibility of expanding the
President Cunningham continued her review of
strategic driver number five, Financial Balance.
She recommended that the strategic challenge of bringing revenue
streams nearer to equal contributions and more in line with state norms
and develop a cost-recovery plan for BCI be institutionalized.
President Cunningham recommended that the following challenge be
added to the strategic plan:
sources of revenue to offset declining state revenue.
She discussed the specific approaches to meet this new challenge,
which were the following:
Leverage new technological infrastructure (ERP) to absorb
overhead through partnerships with nonprofit organizations and small
Develop LCC foundation revenues to match the percentages
of total revenue achieved by leading community foundations
There was discussion regarding the difference
between a community foundation and community college foundations.
Staff agreed to revisit the language due to confusion regarding
Trustee Heywood expressed a concern regarding voter
participation in the College's district.
He said that there is a disconnect and we have not done what we
said we were going to do with that.
Trustee Heywood recommended that a strategic challenge be added
dealing with increasing participation in citizenship.
President Cunningham responded that depending on
what success indicators are used in terms of measuring how civic minded
the students are, voting is one indicator.
She has seen data that shows the more students know about
government the less apt they are to vote.
President Cunningham said that was not focused on as a success
indicator because it would be duplicative of what the K-12 system is
doing. However, civic duty
is focused on in some courses in terms of community service.
She said that voting itself is not a indicator that can be
Trustee Heywood stated that is a concern to him.
Regardless of what the study states the fact is that voting is
the ultimate responsibility of being a responsible citizen.
President Cunningham said that she doesn?t know
how to actually get students to the voting booths; however, some of the
things that have been done are voter registration on campus and
Chairperson Jeffries asked if students have the
opportunity to register to vote when enrolling for classes.
Mr. Howard responded, yes.
The College by law must offer that opportunity to students.
Trustee Heywood felt that the College should do
more to encourage voter participation.
He said that a voter institute could be created and be more
involved in working with local municipalities in getting absentee voter
activities on campus. Trustee
Heywood reiterated his desire to see this become a strategic challenge.
President Cunningham responded that previously
Trustee Heywood had provided a list of suggestions to increase voter
participation. She said just
about everything on the list was reviewed and implemented if the College
wasn't doing it at that time. President
Cunningham stated that we would be more than willing to review how to
get students more involved and participating in that process and she
asked Trustee Heywood to forward any additional ideas.
In terms of having it as a challenge, she expressed an
uncertainty on how to measure the success other than voting and the
College does not ask students when they enroll if they voted in the last
election. However, the
College strives to create an awareness of this civic duty.
Trustee Rasmusson stated that other strategic
planners he is familiar with recommend dividing the world into what I
control and what other people control and you forget what other people
can control. He said that we
can control registering students or giving them cards, but we can't
make them vote. So, we just
forget that as a strategic plan. We work with things we can deal with
such as money and allocations.
Trustee Holden said that the College's mission
statement covers that component.
Trustee Heywood responded that it should be more
than a nebulous mission statement.
Trustee Rasmusson stated that the College could
invest a billion dollars in this activity and still not increase voter
Trustee Heywood agreed with Trustee Rasmusson, but
a statement could be created that expresses that everything will be done
to make the responsibility of voting a true part of being a citizen.
He said maybe it is a statement that should be made by the Board
through a resolution or some other format.
Trustee Heywood expressed that this has always been a concern of
his since he has served on the Board.
In his opinion, it should be strategic thrust that would enable
our students to leave the College and not only understand the
responsibility, but also to participate in the process.
President Cunningham stated that one of the
challenges that she has personally is that the College is measured on
this. She repeated that this
is not a measurement that she knows how to effectuate and if it is low,
how she could do anything about increasing it.
Trustee Heywood responded that he also does not
know how to measure it; however, there has to be someway to measure the
College's ability to impact this significant issue.
He said that studies have shown people who vote are also more
involved in community service projects and non-profit organizations.
Mr. Howard stated that 49% of the College's
courses have some service learning component.
He said that last year LCC students provided over 90,000 hours of
community service learning activities.
The other Board members did not agree to add this
as a strategic plan.
President Cunningham summarized the plan and what
the administration is asking the Board to approve.
She summarized what challenges have been institutionalized, which
ones are being renewed, and revised.
President Cunningham reviewed again the recommendation for two
new strategic challenges and the Board has agreed to include expanding
the College's boundaries as a strategic challenge.
President Cunningham thanked all the staff in
attendance for their time, research, and effort in putting the
presentation together. She
submitted the strategic plan, with the revisions, for the Board's
IT WAS MOVED by Trustee Holden and supported by
Trustee Rasmusson to renew the strategic plan.
Trustee Heywood stated that he is uncomfortable
voting yes until the changes have been made.
For the record, Chairperson Jeffries reviewed the
changes that were made during the meeting, which are as follows:
Strategic Driver #1 - No
changes were made.
Strategic Driver #2 ?
There was a change made to the third section, which was to construct the
administration building, not renovate it as it listed in the document.
Strategic Driver #3 ?
The language dealing with ROI bias will be revised to make it more
understandable. First a mock
study will be made before this will be implemented.
Strategic Driver #4 - No
changes were made.
Strategic Driver #5 ?
Expanding the College's boundaries was added as a strategic challenge.
The other change was made to the second bullet and it would read
as follows (change is in bold):
?Develop LCC foundation
revenues to match the percentages of total foundation
revenue achieved by leading community foundations?.
Chairperson Jeffries thanked everyone for their
hard work. He said that is
interesting to compare what was done today to what was done three years
ago and the incredible amount of buy-in that this institution has had.
Some call it a culture change that has occurred here and it's
been very traumatic on campus and off campus and unfortunately will be
part of the campaign that is on-going with certain Trustees.
Chairperson Jeffries said that some of the comments that have
been shared during the endorsement interviews about what this Board and
President have done to this college, which have been extremely negative
comments. He said that the
cause of the negative comments may be due to the change and it certainly
has been distorted. Chairperson
Jeffries wished the Lansing State Journal could have been present today
to see the strategic plan because it puts everything into perspective of
all the good things and the challenges the College has met.
Trustee Rasmusson addressed the staff.
In his opinion the College is a very well run institution.
He said that it is run better than Wall Street and it's because
of the staff.
Trustee Holden agreed with Trustee Rasmusson?s
statements. She said that
many of them have been involved in planning processes in the past;
however, there's never been one that has been institutionalized and
implemented as this plan.
President Cunningham thanked the Board of Trustees.
She said that when the strategic planning process began the Board
said they did not want an academic plan, they wanted a business plan and
wanted things to be different. It
took a lot of courage for the Board to desire a business model because
we are an educational institution, and education is known for not being
as aggressive or as accountable as some businesses, for example, using
an ROI. The only way the
staff could move forward was knowing the College had the Board's
Roll call vote:
Holden, Jeffries, Rasmusson
There were no public comments.
President Cunningham announced the Groundbreaking
ceremony on Tuesday, May 20 and invited the Board to attend and to
attend the breakfast prior to the ceremony.
She said that an economic impact study would be shared by Dr.
James Jacobs, a successful economic development expert.
The meeting was adjourned at