STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE

October 14, 2005

Henry Wells Room

Minutes

 

Present:  C. Collins, M. Godbout, K. Green, E. Hall, F. Lacomb, A. Rollo, S. Sloan, E. Smith,

               L. Ryerson, M. VanDuyne, N. Pellegrino (Phone)

 

Absent:    C. Bailey, J. Chase, J. Goddard, S. Grey, M. Groth, D. Hutchinson, L. Labar,

               V. Muņoz, B. Roberts, A. Staples, P. Wahlen, S. Zabriskie

 

The meeting began at 8:35 a.m.

 

  1. The minutes from September 26 meeting were approved.

 

  1. Ellen H. reviewed the responses received from the community for the draft.  It was decided that the next best plan of action would be to create a three-person committee to analyze the responses in the different sections to see weaknesses that can be corrected.  One of the frequent responses received was referral to the fact that the draft talks about the honor code but not the community standards.  The community standards policy is mentioned in the Diversity section but everyone felt that it should also go under Faculty. A committee was formed and the following members are:  Emily Rose S. (Student), Amy S. (Faculty, Ellen H. was going to contact Amy to ask her to represent Faculty) and Muriel Godbout (Staff).  There was a consensus from the members in attendance that the overall response for the draft was in support.  One perception in reviewing the responses is that some felt that the draft did not include everyone and everyone in attendance did agree that the draft did include everyone but it may not necessarily say it in so many words for all to understand that it did. 

 

  1. Ellen H. discussed work groups on classroom renovations and a Teaching for Technology Committee.  It was decided that a subcommittee be formed and that the library be included as currently the library is reviewing space for technology resources.  Ellen H. would work on forming the committee and get back to the strategic planning committee members.

 

  1. The committee for the costing process consisted of Chris B., Muriel G., Diane H., Steve Z. Carrie C. and Ann R.  The committee assigned to the person who oversees the particular area of responsibility the job of identifying the need and then assessing what is needed to meet the need.  The responsible individual needed to determine within the 5-year timeline what can be done and the cost.  Each person was given two weeks to gather this information to be completed October 21.  Ellen H. did relay a message from Diane H. who was not in attendance. She wanted everyone to be sure to note that it was very important that there be real reasons or justification as to why something was needed and then to arrive at a cost.  Also, start-up costs and continuing costs need to be considered.  Ann R. added that even for those items that have been figured in the budget the College may need to seek outside funding. 

 

  1. The next meeting will include an update on the classroom renovations and Teaching for Technology Committee and the work from the areas designated from the Finance Committee.  The work regarding the summary of the community responses would be reviewed in the October 28 meeting.

 

Meeting ended at 9:10 a.m.

 

Next meeting will be Friday, October 21 in the Henry Wells Room at 8:30 a.m.

 

Minutes respectively submitted by Phyllis Siemiatkowski