MCC Faculty Senate Minutes
CTL Conference Room
DATE: April 17, 2003
Senate Web Site: http://www.mesacc.edu/organizations/employee/facultysenate/
Members Present:
Charles Lewis, President-elect
Lyn Dutson, Zone 1
Phil Waclawski, Zone 2
Sam Martinez, Zone 3
Harold Cranswick, Zone 5
Jack Hinze, Zone 6
Naomi Story, Secretary, Zone 7
John Zikopoulos, Treasurer, Zone 8
Erin Rawson (Member at Large)
Philip Carrillo (Member at Large)
Mona Scott (Member at Large)
Greg Pratt (Member at Large)
Ann Stine (Member at Large)
Mehrzad Khorsandi (Member at Large)
David Nachman (Member at Large)
Members Absent:
Barry Vaughan, President
Danene Richardson, Zone 4
Chuck Horn (49% Representative)
I. Call to Order: President-elect Charles Lewis called the meeting at 3:09 PM.
II. Guests
Presentations:
J. Lyn Milner, Inst. Adv.-Advertising Insert
Lyn Milner spoke about MCCıs advertorial, which is a special newspaper supplement. One hundred twenty-five thousand copies of an eight page supplement will again be published on October 6. This will assist us to position ourselves for the Bond election in two years. Rather than selling stories to the press, MCC is telling its own stories in the insert. Lyn hires a special publications group from the Arizona Republic to write stories.
Lyn asked the Senate to submit a list of possible stories to her and our input. She stated that the Dean of Instruction wanted the stories to focus on academic program and student success stories. She needs lists by April 28 so that interviews can be set up with faculty before the summer. The reporters need to get on the stories so that we can edit early. Several ideas were shared with Lyn. Stories about former students and Red Mountain were suggested.
A question was asked about the cost of doing the insert. Lyn said it costs around $21,000. She noted that advertising is sold to contractors and suppliers to help with cost. She also reminded that 125,000 homes in the East Valley receive the insert. The President also gives copies to Commission and District people.
Another question was asked about the cost effectiveness of the advertorial. Do we know if any of the programs highlighted received any inquiries or increased in enrollment? Lyn said she did not know.
Email Lyn at lmilner@mail.mc.maricopa.edu or call her with 480-234-0059 about list and ideas.
Janice Reilly, Meet and Confer co-chair reviewed the progress and status of the teamıs negotiation with the Governing Board. Janice shared a faculty governance chart that illustrated the structure of Faculty Executive Council (FEC) and its relationship with the College Faculty Senates and various FEC Committees. It also listed district committees with faculty representation.
Janice thanked senators for sending letters to the Governing Board related to the Meet and Confer process. She encouraged faculty members to continue sending letters to the Board about the process, which has been the challenge with moving the meet, and confer negotiation.
Janice also reviewed Alan and her recent meeting with the Chancellor and VC Rufus Glasper to encourage movement. She had nothing new to report.
Janice also shared that the college faculty senate presidents have met with R and R, the PR and Marketing firm that FEC recently hired to assist us. The firm encouraged the Meet and Confer Team and presidents to focus on the process, rather than what we asked for because it appears that negotiations are at a standstill. The real issue is the lack of movement and engagement in conversation minimizes respect for good faith negotiations.
Janice said that there would be a presentation at the April 22 governing board meeting during the citizenıs forum period. She encouraged as many senators and faculty members to attend and show support.
Discussion followed.
Q: Has the board kept the budget under wraps?
A: The amount is not clear.
Q: Will the college faculty senate presidents talk?
A: They are now discussion about that.
Q: Has this process always been dysfunctional?
A: Itıs gotten worse. We get the same package as the other groups.
Weıve asked to deliberate with a Board member who would represent the Board. The board has a representative to negotiate for them. We find out that the designee was not really the designee. We are stuck at first submission.
Q: How many letters?
A: Trying to get together with other team members on the total
Q: What should we tell our faculty about the Board meeting?
A: Be there at 6:30 PM; it should end by 8 PM. Or ask them to write letters that focus on the process and how the non-movement violates the RFP rather than the salary. Letters should be sent to Ed Contreras and Nancy Stein and copied to Janice Reilly and Alan Haffa, Meet and Confer Team Co-chairs
Comments:
We donıt appear to have any leverage.
Is there a kind and nice way of asking?
What else is possible?
More faculty have written and the team is getting good letters.
R and R, the PR, marketing firm has been helpful and given good advice.
It does not appear that Gaskin would want to have this in the papers.
Focus on the process or we will have backlash.
If process doesnıt change, do we go into arbitration and mediation?
District knew the amount for salaries in proposed budget.
They have chosen not to communicate with us.
The chancellor has been heard to say that faculty at the top of the line
do not lose income, but this is not true.
Charles thanked Janice for her efforts and encouraged the senators to attend the Board meeting and/or write letters.
III. Additions and Deletions to Agenda:
Motion to accept the agenda with additions was passed unanimously.
Motion to approve minutes with corrections was approved with 14 ayes and one abstention.
V. Treasurer's Report:
John stated that as of March 31 our net worth in our money market account was $28,911.78. Our checking balance was $6,243.57.
A question was asked if we wanted to reorganize our money market account. John stated that this was difficult because weıd have to move quickly or do nothing. To get Senate approval to move in a timely manner would not be easy.
Another question was asked what do we need our money for? Based on Janiceıs report, we may be going into a conflict mode with the Board. A suggestion was to hire a recording secretary.
VI. Committee and Project Reports:
A. Student Outcomes Committee: Ann stated that ROC (Results Outreach Committee), a subcommittee of SOC, was having a special event on April 28, at 3 PM at the CTL Conference, Whatıs My Idea? for faculty to discuss ideas about to use the assessment results and how to implement results in the classroom. ROC is working with Dr. Maria Chavira, faculty developer to kick off a series of activities for faculty to use results and close the assessment loop. Encourage your faculty to attend.
Lyn also mentioned that several NCA self-study team members attended the NCA Conference. She was impressed that our (MCCıs) reputation is outstanding. She was amazed how well other colleges perceive us across the country.
B. History & Traditions Committee: Lyn shared that the Retirees Luncheon was very successful. Sixty out of 208 retirees attended the luncheon. A question was asked about getting the list by discipline. Lyn suggested that the senator speak with Betty OıNeill or Elaine Gough who have access to their names.
VII. Old Business:
this item was tabled for the next meeting.
B. Red Mountain Parking Issue (Harold/Barry): This topic was also tabled because Barry was not present. Harold did mention a meeting the Dean of Instruction about Red Mountain about administration there, but parking was not discussed. A comment was made that another issue with handicapped parking was that they have wheel uphill from the parking area. Charles will share this with Barry.
VIII. New Business:
A. PR Firm (Phil): Phil brought up an issue that was presented at his
Department meeting about the PR/Marketing firm being contracted
By FEC. There appears to be a fear about faculty doing anything in public.
A belief exists that if we are perceived as greedy, it could hurt the Bond election. A suggestion was to put any PR/Marketing story to a vote. This was discussed as not rationale. Once the PR firm prepares a strategy, it will go to the FEC for input. It would naturally be taken to the faculty for input. The PR Firm will be working with our faculty.
Charles clarified that the PR Firm was contracted to do four things this year: 1) Help FEC energize our faculty image; 2) Improve communication with our internal constituency; 3) Improve communication with our external constituencies; and 4) Educate FEC to take over our public
relations/marketing process.
A comment was made that such fear of reprisal stated earlier
is not well founded, especially when it was stated only by a few people.
However, we should expect that FEC will ask for feedback on any
strategies and processes. The ultimate goal is to regain respect for
Faculty.
Discussion once again focused on the issue is about process for
Meet and Confer and not about Salary. It was encouraged that
people meet with faculty to allay unnecessary paranoia.
B. Enrollment Instructions (Charles): A draft of the Enrollment Instructions
for Students with Special Status was distributed to the senators to review and provide feedback at the next meeting. The issue at hand was the chair needing to be part of the process when under-aged students enroll for classes. Charles asked the senators to look over the document. He will try to get and to send existing policies from Carol Petersen. Carol Achs would like input on the draft so senators should be prepared to discuss it at the next meeting.
IX. Information and Announcements:
about Talking Points. She reported that discussion is going on about simplifying the degree patterns to 3 degrees and eliminating the pathways. This would make it simpler for students and advisors.
FPG (Faculty Professional Growth) Steering Committee as a standing
committee to alleviate inconsistencies and establish good internal control for FPG. Any new FPG policy proposal will be electronically sent to FEC as an agenda item for their vote. The Long-Term Planning Subcommittee has proposed a Retreat for the new and old FEC members to formulate new ideas and identify concerns early on. An FEC member has done research about the 49% as being economically attractive. It also saves the district money for faculty. FEC also reiterated that district office program review, including the MCLI be conducted by an outside review process. A question was asked about how this is different from FEP or college NCA reviews which are self-study evaluations. Charles stated that the District Office is not evaluated by NCA so it makes sense to have its department reviewed by outside auditors.
Charles also announced that nominations for Zone reps. would be held in the CTL. Except for two zones, candidates were uncontested. There was a concern that faculty did not know the candidates ahead of time. Naomi shared names of zone election candidates from ballots that Barry had given her. It was also suggested that each zone get a distribution list of names and that this should be included in the SOP.
It was also reported that the Faculty Social was not well attended. It was suggested that more advanced PR was needed and that the social date should be set early in the year so faculty members will have the date on their calendars.
May 5. Wynn Call is incoming Chair of Chairs. The chairs have been discussing ways to improve their meetings next year. For example, they plan to be selective about who makes presentations and having key points from presenters in writing ahead of time. They want to focus on discussion time. A question was asked about the chair organization and whether it represented a collective voice or not. Harold responded that there was tendency for chairs to be reluctant to speak up. They want to do the job, but not necessarily step up and become a target.
Another question was asked about representing chair issues and supporting chair voices. Harold stated that strides were made this year with the two joint retreats with the Senate and the review of accomplishments, such as the occupational program directorıs compensation. Harold was asked to send out final decision on the compensation agreement.
X. Senator Reports:
Members at Large
A. Phil Carrillo (Member at Large): None
B. Mona Scott (Member at Large): None
C. Erin Rawson (Member at Large): Erin asked about the Trip Reduction Survey. It was basically stated that this came from the district office as a requirement from the Federal government. This was to see if we were aligned with environmental/ clean air standards or efforts. She stated that she has done plaques for the five retirees.
D. Ann Stine (Member at Large): None
E. Mehrzad Khorsandi (Member at Large): None
F. David Nachman (Member at Large): None
G. Greg Pratt (Member at Large): None
Zone Representatives
A. Zone 1: Art/Foreign Languages/Reading/Speech Communication/Theatre Arts (Lyn Dutson): None
B. Zone 2: Business (Phil Waclawski): None
C. Zone 3: English/Philosophy (Sam Martinez): None
D. Zone 4: Math/Music (Danene Richardson): Absent
E. Zone 5: Cultural, Social Science/Psychology (Harold Cranswick): None
F. Zone 6: Technology & Design/Family/Consumer Science/Mortuary Science/Phys. Ed. (Jack Hinze): None
G. Zone 7: CTL/Counseling/Library/Nursing (Naomi Story): None
H. Zone 8: Life, Physical Science (John Zikopoulos): None
X.I Adjournment: Meeting was adjourned at 5:20 PM. Charles reminded senators that the next meeting would be the last for the old zone reps. and the first for the new ones. In other words, we will have two meetings on May 1.
Respectfully submitted,
Naomi Story
MCC Faculty Senate Secretary