STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
February 22, 2006
Henry Wells Room
Minutes
Present: C. Bailey, J. Chase, C. Collins, M. Godbout, J. Goddard, K. Green, E. Hall, D. Hutchinson, L. Labar, B. Roberts, A. Rollo, E. Smith, A. Staples, M. VanDuyne, S. Zabriski
Absent: S. Grey, M. Groth, V. Munoz, N. Pellegrino, S. Sloan, L. Ryerson, P. Wahlen
Meeting began at 9:35 a.m.
Ellen H. facilitated the meeting.
I. The minutes for November 18 and December 2 meetings were approved. The minutes for the January 31 meeting were put on hold for approval so that a few changes and additions can be done before being approved. Notes taken during the February 2 dinner meeting with the Board were approved with one change.
The one agenda item for this meeting was “How does this committee now go forward with the plan?” The Board did express a huge concern about money issues. The College endowment has to be raised. It is their high priority in the implementation of the plan.
Ellen H. did share with the committee how excited Anne Parker Taylor was about the concept of the Academic Learning Center. Although not an improved plan or initiative, she would like to, on her own, do a design project with one of her classes in New Mexico.
The following questions were raised during discussion:
1. Now that that the Board has endorsed the plan, is there any money behind that?
The Board has approved money for the Science Building and the first $1.5 million for the Athletic Building. The Board’s approval of the plan was for planning and raising money. The funding process can now go forward. A campaign would include many components that would include but not limited to annual funds, increase to endowment, scholarships and increasing funds for operation money.
2. Will this committee take on the whole plan or will there be a process of prioritizing initiatives that should be done first?
It was decided that there would be four subcommittees led by senior staff members and strategic planning committee members would be divided among the committees. The purpose would be to first prioritize the larger initiatives in their specific area that would need a capital campaign and board approval before beginning, and second, to prioritize Quality of Life Initiatives that would not need a capital campaign and could be accomplished with little or no funding. These smaller initiatives would not need Board approval. The structure of this prioritizing would be to avoid overlapping of the various areas and initiatives. There would be four groups:
|
ACADEMIC
PROGRAM |
COMMUNITY |
PHYSICAL
ENVIRONMENT |
RECRUITMENT
AND RETENTION |
|
Jeanne
Goddard |
Amy
Staples |
Jim
Chase |
Bill
Roberts |
|
Emily
Rose Smith |
Steve
Zabriskie |
Chris
Bailey |
Carrie
Collins |
|
Muriel
Godbout |
Victoria
Muñoz |
|
Nicole
Pellegrino |
|
Michael
Groth |
Pat
Wahlen |
|
Lynn
LaBar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ellen
Hall |
Ann
Rollo Meredith VanDyne |
Diane
Hutchinson |
Susan
Sloan Karen
Green |
The following members still need to be added to a committee.
Lisa Ryerson
Phyllis will email a copy of the plan designating senior staff responsibilities and an outline of work that needs to be completed to all committee members. A meeting will be scheduled in approximately two to three weeks after the committees have had an opportunity to meet and prioritize.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:20a.m.
Respectively submitted: Phyllis Siemiatkowski