MARICOPA COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
GOVERNING BOARD
JANUARY 13, 2009
MINUTES
A special study session of the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board was scheduled to be held at 6:00 p.m. at the District Support Services Center in Tempe, Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.
PRESENT
GOVERNING BOARD
Don Campbell, President
Colleen Clark, Secretary
Randolph Lumm, Member
Jerry Walker, Member
Debra Pearson, Member
ADMINISTRATION
Rufus Glasper
Pete Kushibab
Gloria Smith
I. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
President Clark called the Special Study Session to order at 6:07 p.m. She then asked Governing Board Member Debra Pearson to come forward to facilitate the following topics listed on the agenda:
A. Mock Training Session on Parliamentarian Role and Procedures
B. Discussion of creation of a Board “program” that will govern the Board’s objectives and direction for the year (negotiating and setting goals)
C. Discussion of Board Member Top Ten Programs and Areas of Focus for the Year
Mock Training Session on Parliamentarian Role and Procedures
Mrs. Pearson explained that she has done this type of training on different boards that she has served on. It is important to ask and respond to questions in an appropriate manner in order to maintain the credibility and professionalism of the board, and also in order for meetings to run smoothly. She stated that General Counsel Pete Kushibab had suggested that the Board adopt a modified form of Roberts’ Rules. Not all aspects of Roberts’ Rules need to be adopted but there needs to be agreement with the process so that all members are shown respect. In the event a vote is taken and there is no agreement, it is hoped to prevent “quagmire.” With Robert’s Rules, the Secretary makes a motion to the Chair as to what the next agenda item is and discussion ensues.
The topic of Citizen’s Interim and Board Comments was discussed. It was decided that the five minute time limit would remain in place for Citizen’s Interim and a two-minute limit would be provided for board member, Vice Chancellor, College President comments. The ability to “call a question” when a topic being discussed by a board member was not moving forward was discussed. If at any time a “quagmire” arises, “call a question” could be raised and a vote to continue or discontinue the conversation could be taken. The “call a question” is not for the purpose of squelching a discussion as this would violate the spirit of the Open Meeting Law. It was stated that during the history of the Maricopa Community College Governing Board, the necessity for “calling a question” has never come up. A response was made to this point that the ability to “call a question” was for the purpose of pre-empting a situation that would necessitate this. At one time, one board member “took another board member to the woodshed.” Was this an appropriate approach?
Board members received instruction on how to make motions and recognize board members. Board members do not have the authority to censure but they are able to go on record. Board members may not vote on anything that is not on the agenda. If a board member feels impugned and wants an apology, no apology is required. The board, however, can take a position by making a statement. The question was raised if this would require mediation. The Chancellor requested that the Legal Department hire a mediator. During the meeting, however, the gavel should be used to stop the conversation in order to move on. Mutual respect needs to be manifested towards each other. If a board member wishes to have mediation, it can be requested.
The need for an executive session during the middle of a board meeting was discussed. It was deemed that this would not be legal as the executive session needs to be posted in 24 hours in advance. It can be requested that the issue in question be placed on a future executive session agenda.
Discussion was held regarding the appropriate way to make a motion. Everything must be done through the Chair. Further discussion needs to be held on creating the role of Parliamentarian for the Board.
Next Meeting
Top Ten Programs
Parliamentarian
Board Member Specialization
Implementation of Board Orientation Session led by Board Members
ADJOURNMENT OF STUDY SESSION
The Study Session adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
_________________________
Randolph Elias Lumm
Governing Board Secretary