Skip to content


LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

November 1, 2006

Special Meeting

Adopted Meeting Minutes

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m.

Roll Call

Present: Brannan, Pelleran, Proctor, Rasmusson, Smith, Laverty

Absent: Canady

Limited Public Comment Regarding Agenda Items

No public comment.

TRUSTEE PROCTOR - PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH UPDATE

Conference call from Greenwood & Associates

Jan Greenwood, Betty Asher, Carmen Neuberger were present for the conference call.

Trustee Proctor stated that last week representatives from Greenwood & Associates were on campus to conduct interviews with members to accomplish the following:

  1. To become better acquainted with the Board members and to develop an understanding of each Board member's perception of the background, skills, qualities, and characteristics for the next President of Lansing Community College.

  1. To develop a view of the critical issues that Lansing Community College must address in the next 1 to 3 years and those issues the college must address beyond those 3 years.

  1. To develop an understanding of expectations the Board has for the new President.

  1. To identify issues that might affect the search process positively or negatively.

Trustee Proctor reported that to date only four members of the Board have been interviewed by Greenwood and Associates. He further stated that on October 23rd and October 24th two community forums under the direction of Greenwood & Associates were held to provide an opportunity for stakeholders and others with an interest in Lansing Community College to offer input on what should be included in developing a profile for the next President of Lansing Community College.

Trustee Proctor also reported that on Tuesday evening Greenwood & Associates also conducted an orientation for members of the search committee. He stated how impressed he and other committee members were with Greenwood & Associates.

Trustee Proctor stated that regarding the Presidential Search, he has come to the understanding of the following:

  1. The Board needs to identify at the outset the shared values or outcomes associated with the search.

  1. The Board needs to evaluate the college and where it needs to go.

  1. The reputation of the Board is the second most important factor considered by candidates.

  1. Recent publicity regarding discord between Board members has done serious damage to our efforts to have a successful Presidential search within the timeframe the Board initially set.

  1. Unless the Board can resolve its internal disputes the Presidential search will not be successful.

  1. Dealing with and resolving these disputes will require a commitment to do so.

  1. Participating in a series of workshops designed to focus the Board's attention on (1) their proper roles and responsibilities, (2) the selection of the College's President and (3) developing trust and relationships that are imperative for us to move forward.

Trustee Proctor concluded by making the recommendation for the search process to be delayed until the Board participates in a series of workshops conducted by Greenwood & Associates.

Discussion followed.

Jan Greenwood thanked the Board for the opportunity to work with them. She felt that the feedback from the search committee has been very helpful. Ms. Greenwood stated this was a great college and that they wanted to see the very best candidates in the country available for them to decide from. She stated they can best serve the Board when the Board is in agreement in terms of what the future of the next President will hold, with what is expected, and what they must accomplished over the next 3 to 5 years. She further stated that a seasoned President will not accept an offer if there is a split vote on or lack of agreement of what the assignments are. Ms. Greenwood believed that through a workshop format they could come to an agreement on what is the work that the next person must do and what the position description looks like. She stated that they could work with AGB and ACCT to put together a workshop. Ms. Greenwood recommended that a start date for the workshops be in January. She stated that some of the current events that have happened have impacted the Presidential search.

Trustee Pelleran questioned why they would wait until January to conduct the workshops.

Ms. Greenwood responded that they would need time to put the workshop together.

Trustee Smith commented that a series of workshops will help to get the Board off to a good start.

Ms. Greenwood asked if this was a reasonable plan and stated that they would need to proceed in getting the planning together for the workshops.

Trustee Rasmusson asked if the workshops would be in the evenings and less than a two-hour time frame.

Ms. Greenwood responded that she was looking at it being a 2-day workshop.

Trustee Pelleran asked if there would be a weekend opportunity to conduct the workshops.

Ms. Greenwood responded that they will look at some dates and offer them to the Board.

TRUSTEE SMITH - PERSONNEL & COMPENSATION COMMITTEE

Board Liaison

Trustee Smith reported that on September 25th sixteen candidates were interviewed by phone and that on October 16, 2006 the Board conducted face to face interviews with six candidates. Trustee Smith asked for the Board to proceed with getting the number one selection from each Trustee.

The floor was opened for comment.

Trustee Pelleran stated that she was prepared to vote, and that she was not at the interviews because of her job.

Trustee Smith stated that she was prepared to vote.

Trustee Rasmusson stated that Bev Baligad and James Humphries were the best. He stated that he would side on the favor of Ms. Baligad. Trustee Rasmusson further stated that his decision was based on his review of the materials and his having concerns about one of the jobs Mr. Humphries left, and the narrative letter he submitted. He said that he liked the interview questions but felt the process was too structured and would have liked a process that was unstructured to allow them the ability to get to know the candidate more. Trustee Rasmusson felt that the Board should conduct a second interview in an unstructured way, so that he would have the opportunity to ask Mr. Humphries more questions. Trustee Rasmusson had concerns with regards to Mr. Humphries not revealing that he was not working his last six months on the job but that he was suspended and that a claim was made that he was terminated.

Trustee Smith requested to have the floor.

Chairman Laverty opened the floor to Trustee Smith.

Trustee Rasmusson requested to be allowed to finish.

Chairman Laverty stated that Mr. Humphries had not been offered the job. He asked that nothing more be said about what Trustee Rasmusson had read and that saying more could open the College up for possible liability.

Trustee Proctor responded that he would like for Trustee Rasmusson to conclude his remarks.

Trustee Rasmusson responded that he thinks the Board needs to know more about Mr. Humphries and be given the opportunity to question him regards to his concerns.

Trustee Proctor requested that Trustee Rasmusson disclose the items he chose not to disclose.

Trustee Rasmusson asked if Trustee Proctor was aware of what limited business privilege was.

Trustee Proctor responded no. He stated that to diminish someone who has good communications skills in an interview sends up red flags for him. He requested to hear the rest of Trustee Rasmusson's statement.

Trustee Rasmusson replied that it is sufficient for him to make a judgment that the Board needs to hear from the top candidates in an unstructured interview process to really have a feeling for the type of person that they are.

Trustee Smith responded that this was a Board approved process and the questions in the structured interviews were questions approved by the Board. She stated that this was not a new process and that the Administrative Assistant was hired using the same process. Trustee Smith said that each Trustee had the opportunity to give his input on the questions and the process. She felt that Mr. Humphries did well on both of his interviews and that his credentials are very high. She further stated that he had lots of experience with Boards. Trustee Smith asked for the Board to vote on proven and substantiated qualifications of the successful candidate. She stated that Mr. Humphries had not been made an offer and felt it was inappropriate for the Board to make disparaging remarks. Trustee Smith asked for the nature of the discussion to be why they would want a particular candidate's name to move forward.

Trustee Pelleran stated that this position is a very important position and that it was not just the Board Liaison but the Associate General Counsel. She felt that this position and the process is part of the complaint that was filed with Trustee Proctor. Trustee Pelleran stated that the process was not open.

Trustee Smith responded that it was an open process.

Trustee Pelleran requested not to be interrupted.

Trustee Smith responded that it has been an open process and that Trustee Pelleran could not make that statement.

Trustees Rasmusson requested a point of order and stated that Trustee Smith was out of order.

Chairman Laverty replied to Trustee Smith that he would give her time to talk.

Trustee Pelleran responded the fact of the matter is that this is a Board hire and that it is a new thing for the Board to do. She stated that the fact that she questioned procedure became an issue about her right to question procedure. She further stated that with regards to process and procedure the Board has to get it right. Trustee Pelleran said that she would support the request for the Board to have the opportunity to fully interview the two final candidates that were discussed in an open meeting. She also felt that within that discussion it is well with in the Board rights to have some dialogue with the candidates. Trustee Pelleran stated that it is a very important position and that the Board should not neglect its responsibility.

Trustee Smith stated the Board measured the candidate on a phone interview and the Board measured on a face-to-face interview. She stated that she takes issue with the fact that Trustee Pelleran did not attend the phone interviews or the face-to-face interviews. Trustee Smith further stated that it was not an issue of process for which Trustee Pelleran was removed from the Personnel and Compensation Committee but the issue was with the way in which she was conducting herself. She felt that the notion that this had not been an approved process or an open process is a fallacy. Trustee Smith responded that each Trustee did not take advantage of that open process and were given all of the information for the candidates.

Trustee Proctor suggested that the Board interview each of the six candidates again because no decision was made by the Board with respect to any individual and that they were here tonight to make that decision. He stated that the only thing that took place was the Board interviews by the four Trustees that were present and that some assessment of the six interviews that took place were made.

Chairman Laverty responded that he disagreed because a Special Open Meeting was called where all the Board member could have been present. He said that the Board can do it all over again but that it does not mean all of the Trustees will be here. He stated that they had four of the seven Board members at that meeting and that a lot of time was put in by the interviewers and the candidates.

Trustee Rasmusson stated that he agreed with Trustee Proctor and stated that all the candidates were impressive and believed they could all do the job. He further stated that in trying to choose the best candidate the Board ought to have an unstructured process.

Trustee Pelleran stated that the Board members were polled of their availability by the Board Administrative Assistant. She stated that she had informed the Administrative Assistant that she was unavailable all day for the two dates that were eventually chosen. Trustee Pelleran felt that one could conclude that the meetings were purposefully scheduled so that certain Board member that had conflicts could not be there.

Chairman Laverty responded that he did not agree with that last comment and felt it was an inaccurate statement.

Trustee Pelleran responded that there was a statement made that they were allowed to be there and had the opportunity to be there. She felt that she did not have the opportunity to be there because she specifically said that she could not be there due to job conflicts. Trustee Pelleran stated that it is how the Board conducts itself and that in a public meeting, they are public servant and that it is an honor to be a public servant. She further stated that with that honor comes extreme and remarkable responsibility. It is about being open and adhering to the public processes that are set in place by law and by the Board Bylaws. She does not believe that the Board approved a process and as a committee member she believed that part of the meeting was to approve a process and that a lack of timing and due diligence on the part of the Committee Chair then necessitated an immediate response by the Board to get something done before a Board meeting. She again restated that this was a very important position and that she was not going to take it likely.

Chairman Laverty responded that her speech was wonderful and questioned if that was why at the last meeting the media had been notified well in advanced to blindside the Board and sabotage the Presidential Search.

Trustee Pelleran stated that the Chairman was out of order and asked of point of order.

Trustee Smith responded that a lot of verbiage has taken place that this process was poorly construction. She stated that this was a Board approved process and was not poorly constructed but inclusive. She also stated that she took time off from her job to conduct these interviews and was very committed. She further commented that if the Board stated they are committed to this process and committed to getting to an end then you do what is necessary to do that. Trustee Smith said that a commitment is what you do and not what you say and that the candidates have been brought through two interviews. She stated that she is now hearing that members of the Board had issues with type of interview questions but that there was sufficient enough time for each Trustee to help develop and give input on the questions. Trustee Smith said that none of the issues that Trustee Rasmusson is mentioning were mentioned at that time. She felt it was now unfair to the candidates to state issues with the process when there has been a clear path of the process. Trustee Smith felt that the next step in the process is vote and those any member is not ready to vote they may abstain.

Chairman Laverty asked Trustee Smith to explain the next step once the Board has voted.

Trustee Smith responded that this would be a conditional offer and that HR would have to find out if the candidate was still interested and they would have to complete a background check.

Trustee Pelleran responded to Chairman Laverty that her actions did not sabotage the Presidential Search process.

Chairman Laverty asked if the Board was ready to vote.

Roll call vote:

Brannan - Bev Baligad

Canady - absent

Pelleran - Bev Baligad

Proctor - James Humphries

Rasmusson - Bev Baligad

Smith - James Humphries

Laverty - James Humphries

Split vote.

Moved by Trustee Rasmusson and supported Pelleran to interviewed Mr. Humphries and Ms. Baligad.

Trustee Smith requested to redo the vote with all seven Trustees present.

Chairman Laverty stated that he did not feel this could be done because the Board has already voted and that there was a motion on the floor. He stated they can have a failed search or interview the two candidates in the motion.

Trustee Smith responded that she would not have a problem with interviewing the two candidates.

Trustee Proctor stated that his second choice was someone other than the second candidate.

Trustee Smith stated that she also had a second choice.

Trustee Smith requested a friendly amendment to offer each Trustee the opportunity to name their second candidate of choice.

Trustee Rasmusson stated that he would not be opposed to interviewing the second choice of Trustee Smith and Proctor and would agree to add that to the motion.

Chairman Laverty asked Trustee Smith if she was requesting to survey the Board for their second choice.

Both Trustee Smith and Pelleran responded that the friendly amendment has been accepted by Trustee Rasmusson.

Trustee Pelleran called the question.

Roll call vote:

Brannan - abstained from voting

Canady - absent

Pelleran - Bev Baligad

Proctor - Robert Norwood

Rasmusson - no second choice

Smith - Robert Norwood

Laverty - Robert Norwood

Motion carried to interview Robert Norwood also.

PRESIDENT CARDENAS

Chief Financial Officer

President Cardenas presented the final candidate for Board approval for the Chief Financial Officer. President Cardenas passed out the timeline of the search process and the recommendation for Ms. Catherine Fisher. (These documents are on file with the official Board Meeting Materials.)

President Cardenas also stated that during the final interviews she was joined by Hoa Nguyen and Bob Partrich, CFO from Grand Rapids Community College.

Move by Trustee Rasmusson and supported by Trustee Smith for the recommendation of Ms. Catherine Fisher at the Chief Financial Officer.

Roll call vote:

Ayes: Brannan, Pelleran, Proctor, Rasmusson, Smith, Laverty

Nays: None

Absent: Canady

Motion carried.

President Cardenas publicly acknowledged Chris Strugar-Fritsch who chaired the committee and Jan Stuart and Anita Evans who assisted with the process. She also thanked Ms. Beckie Beard for stepping in as the Interim Chief Financial Officer.

College Update

President Cardenas reminded the Board of the Administration Building Dedication in honor of Paula Diane Cunningham. This event will take place on November 8, 2006. She also stated that the Trustees will be receiving a invitation for a dinner the evening of November 28, 2006 for the accreditation committee team who will be on Lansing Community College's campus.

Chairman Laverty opened the floor for public comments.

Trustee Smith congratulated Anita Evans and Emily Baynes for being selected as candidates for the Kaleidoscope leadership program.

CLOSED SESSION

MOVED by Trustee Pelleran and supported by Trustee Smith that the Board go into closed session for the purpose of discussing purchase of real property and to discuss an item of attorney client privilege.

Roll call vote:

Ayes: Brannan, Pelleran, Proctor, Rasmusson, Smith, Laverty

Nays: None

Absent: Canady

Motion carried.

The Board entered into closed session at 6:11 p.m.

The Board returned to open session at 8:05 p.m.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Trustee Pelleran stated that she was sorry that Chairman Laverty felt personally offended that she exercised her right to speak her mind during and open meeting. She stated that she did not sabotage the Presidential Search and apologized for acting on her personal right to speak her mind and thanked the Board.

ADJOURNMENT

MOVED by Trustee Proctor and supported by Trustee Smith for the meeting to adjourn.

Ayes: Brannan, Pelleran, Proctor, Rasmusson, Smith, Laverty

Nays: None

Absent: Canady

Motion carried.

The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m.



LCC Board of Trustees
Administration Bldg
Phone: (517) 483-5252
Additional contact information »

Facebook Twitter YouTube Flickr