Introductory Items

September 1, 2016 9:00 am – 11 am Location: Location

Introductory Items 1. Call to Order & Roll Call Board President Davis called the meeting to order at 9:05 am and roll was taken:

Ken Brenner Pat Chlouber Charles Cunniffe Glenn Davis Mary Ellen Denomy Kathy Goudy Patty Theobald

All Trustees were present.

2.Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

3.Approve Agenda

ACTION: Trustee Cunniffe Moved to Approve the Agenda as written; Trustee Chlouber Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

4.Approve Minutes

ACTION: Trustee Chlouber Moved to Approve the Minutes for June 24 and June 27 as written; Trustee Theobald Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

6.Campus Update: Kathy Kiser-Miller added some information to her written report about the textbook pilot which is going well. Only 2% of students have opted out of the program, while participating students and parents love the program. She also highlighted the student club fair taking place in the halls today.

President’s report President Besnette Hauser gave her report and hard copies were made available.

Trustee Comments Trustee Denomy requested permission to be a leader of doing a presentation explaining the budget before Linda English retires. Board President Davis stated that this would be a good idea. Trustee Brenner asked that Board President Davis continue working with Ken on next year's Trustee workshop issues. Trustee Chlouber stated that Rachel Pokrandt, Interim Vice President, Leadville Campus, is doing a wonderful job in Leadville.

Consent Agenda At Trustee Goudy's request, the agenda item "Minor modifications/updates to HR policies (chapter 6)" was moved to one of the Action Items.

The remaining Consent Agenda item was Item 7. Accept Quarterly Financials (4th Quarter, FY 2015-16)

ACTION: Trustee Goudy Moved to Approve the Consent Agenda; Trustee Chlouber Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

Action Items

8. Minor modifications/updates to HR policies (chapter 6) Matt Gianneschi, Chief Operating Officer, explained a variety of modifications to policies 6.1, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.13, 6.14, 6.15, 6.15 and 6.17. The proposed policy changes included revisions that were inserted since the packet went out. Trustee discussion centered on changes to Policies 6.8 and 6.25.

Policy 6.8: Matt Gianneschi explained that the policy is about eliminating pay ranges which have been static for 6 years. Employees are "redlined" (not eligible for salary raises) when their base compensation reaches the upper limit on their pay grade range. In response to discussion with Trustee Goudy, Mr. Gianneschi suggested revision to the second sentence in the first paragraph so that it reads: "Colorado Mountain College (CMC) provides compensation for positions within the College that is competitive within the given labor market and internally equitable for the position type."

In Policy 6.25, discussion resulted in a change to the final sentence so that it reads as follows: "The President must include annual costs created by adjustments to the salary ranges in the college’s budget recommendations to the Board of Trustees for the next fiscal year."

ACTION: Trustee Brenner Moved to Approve the Minor Modifications/updates to HR Policies including the above changes; Trustee Goudy Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

Trustees requested that management send a follow up to them.

9. Board Conduct Trustee Censure (tabled from June) Board President Davis made a statement on behalf of the board:

During its August 31, 2016, retreat, the Colorado Mountain College Board of Trustees worked diligently to understand each Trustee’s perspectives and recognize the validity of their differing opinions. The Board recognizes the need to move forward, committing to shared values regarding the necessity of individual expressions while always acting in the best interests of the College. The Board pledges to collectively clarify its roles and responsibilities as well as develop a new Code of Conduct based on widely recognized governance practices.

The CMC Board acknowledges the need to provide greater transparency through technology and alternative mediums to ensure the public is always well informed of Board actions. As stewards of the public interest and the College’s resources, the Board of Trustees continues to encourage all members of the public to attend meetings, actively provide feedback or comment, and otherwise participate in their college. Now, therefore, the CMC Board of Trustees unanimously agrees to support the withdrawal of the Motion of Censure and commit to the development of improved governance practices and a culture of trust, transparency, collaboration, and shared values.

ACTION: Trustee Brenner Moved to support the above statement; Trustee Cunniffe Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

10. Cooper Commons Build Out Lease Option Agreement Richard Gonzales, General Counsel, presented the Cooper Commons Build Out Lease Option Agreement for its third hearing. If the amount exceeds the amounts in the draft lease, the College will bring the item back to the Board for approval. Trustee Goudy requested that Richard look into the exit paragraph in the existing condominium agreement. There was a question about any contractual language addressing the transfer of condominium ownership to other owners.

ACTION: Trustee Cunniffe Moved to Approve the Cooper Commons Build Out Lease Option agreement; Trustee Goudy Seconded the Motion and it carried unanimously.

The Board was updated on the Cooper Commons schedule: the RFP is out and there was a walk-through with about 50 contractors on August 31; there is a lot of interest in the project. The selection process will be on October 7 and the contract will come to the Board for approval. The College is hoping for an April completion date.

Information/Discussion 11. Legislative/Government Relations Update a. Looking ahead to 2016-17 Session

b. Spring Valley Cell Tower Strategy

The College is looking for solutions and may put some aggressive ideas on the table to make it work. John Karakoulakis has been advising management on deregulation and FCC guidelines.

c. Ballot Measures and Local Initiatives

Ballot initiatives: there are 5 statewide measures some of which will have an impact on the College. Amendment 69: The Colorado Care initiative – There are many opposed to this as it would raise taxes on residents. Initiative 101: raising of minimum wage. We only have 2 full time employees that make less than $12/hour. Initiative 145: Death with dignity does not impact the College Initiative 143: Raises Taxes on Cigarettes and does not impact the College. Amendment 71: “Raise the bar” would change the initiative process making it so more than simple majority is needed to bring an amendment to the voters.

Initiative 140: will give Colorado a Primary election rather than the current caucus. This initiative is in the process of being reviewed for the November ballot.

These Initiatives were referred by the legislature for the November ballot: Amendment T – No Exception to Involuntary Servitude Prohibition: this would strike all exceptions to the states prohibition on slavery and involuntary servitude. Amendment U - Limit on possessory taxation would eliminate taxation on federal lands worth less than $6000. This would have a small impact on tax revenues

The Eagle County School District is moving forward with their $144 million bond in order to add a wing for a career and tech center and CMC would be holding classes. The Government Relations Committee will discuss this and bring back with a resolution for a vote. Talking points should also be developed depending on what is presented.

There was discussion about the Board looking into criteria for adding to district – if put on a ballot, can mill levy change.

13. Refinancing Outstanding COP This is the 2nd hearing about refinancing outstanding COP. Financial Advisors will explain some different options. Due to changes in the proposed refinancing amount, the Board sated that this will be considered the first hearing required under Policy 8.9 (Real Property, Facilities and Land use) but this can be the second hearing for refinance for the original dollar amount described in the most recent Board meeting.

Next meeting date: we are looking for an alternate date for the October work session/meeting in Aspen.

Respectfully Submitted,

Pat Chlouber Debbie Novak Board of Trustees Secretary Recording Secretary Capital Work Session:

Matt Gianneschi refreshed where we are in the annual planning process and timeline.

Trustees are in agreement with separating projects from housing and land acquisition and non-housing and non-land acquisition projects.

 Matt presented the memo from June about a housing philosophy and College Council’s opinions.

 it will affect us if we don’t do anything

 doesn’t mean we will build everything/ look for partnerships.

 Some of the lack of housing can affect the communities and workforce - also…nurses, police, teachers, etc.

Financial Advisors North Slope, presented recommendations for financing short term projects. Discussion ensued about the various ways to fund projects and how donors might factor into funding.

Next steps: philosophical question about borrowing money and action item.

Housing philosophy:

 The College has heard compelling reasons we will be negatively impacted if we don’t keep thinking about housing alternatives.  We are having conversations about different partnership opportunities.  We heard the board didn’t say no to housing.  Portal for younger population to enter these communities and workforce.  Employee housing is another issue.  It isn’t tuition that drives our students one way or another; it is housing that is driving student’s debt.

Concern: maybe should do phased approach rather than doing housing all at once in all areas.

 Housing as investments should be a separate enterprise in another arm of the college

 Management will bring back alternatives within that philosophy

 Differentiation of student faculty and staff housing - it needs to be a balanced approach

 Philosophical question – using tax dollars for housing. Student housing different

 If no employee housing – may need stipend or at least gap housing

o Leverage the enterprise part of it to not burden the taxpayers? Maybe do more student and less employee or use other ways to do it so the taxpayer burden is less.

The Board requested that management bring more information on these ideas.

The Board asked for Dr. Hauser’s vision:

We will suffer if we don’t figure out how to be part of the housing solution. We can’t wait for someone else to solve it. She likes notion of being in the conversation about both employees and students and hopefully bringing them here to stay. This will affect economic development, workforce development, etc. including opportunities for partnerships. The College needs to be proactive and collaborative and need to do it together to provide more solutions than are available today.

Management will provide a range of options as it is still researching ideas with other entities, but needs a blessing to move forward and do more due diligence. The Board requested statistics and numbers from other entities that have tried housing. (maybe contract it out to real estate professional –this would be a lot of extra work for staff).

The Town of Breckenridge want us to take 3 units for 6.9 million (their cost – the appraisal came back as 5.2 million). The appraisal is based on an income approach – some assumptions in the appraisal world (more about the public world) don’t work in the College world. What is the most the College would pay for housing in Breckenridge? We would need to look at what the rent would be and revenue and whether we can afford it. (Asset Direct cost)

Aspen There is an enthusiastic push to develop property we have with the possibility of using some of new land once the owners see what we are developing. Starting down the road of development will give clarity as to where we can get the land later. There is a good fund raising opportunity at this campus would do a capital campaign plan. Management needs a commitment from the Board to move forward. Trustee Cunniffe thinks we could get 50% paid for by donors.  Option B could improve (housing) – there are still a few options on some of the housing  Partnership – Aspen institute – our housing/culinary, auditorium, etc.  Programs would not be taken from Spring Valley – Aspen’s Isaacson program would be a different niche than Spring Valley. Hospitality, customer service, arts, innovation center – technology, arts and humanities intersect – these come from employer surveys.  If we don’t develop Aspen, the lost opportunity would be unfortunate. We need to move forward with Isaacson school. We have lost momentum and need to step up to get ahead of other colleges starting some of these types of programs.

The Board asked the Foundation to move forward with feasibility study for donor projections. Management will flush out dollar amounts a little more by October. We will also do a feasibility study for Spring Valley’s improvement – using the 50th anniversary.

Breckenridge There are expansion opportunities for the academic center and student services.  New building would be 2 stories.  15 classrooms  some classrooms/student space and offices. The campus is lacking student spaces to serve students.

There will be better real life experience for our students by expanding. We are not serving as many students and some of the spaces are about student spaces which are not correlated to employer surveys.

EMT is a huge area In Breckenridge employment needs. There are 5 ski areas looking for employees.

There is a large untapped population when it comes to possible donors. The new building has changed visibility of CMC in the community and more have become involved. A capital campaign would probably work well.

Dillon The Town of Dillon is comfortable giving us the land if we have some type of timeline (3-5 years) for development. Dave Askeland thinks that would work. (if we don’t develop it, the land reverts back to the Town) The College may want to get an expanded view of the full plan in Dillon

Spring valley Projects include:  Wellness and fitness center  remodel student center- dining hall  residence hall wing Recruitment of students will suffer if we don’t upgrade. More student areas are needed. Fitness center is normally the most vital center but ours doesn’t support student environment.

Glenwood Center: Main project is land acquisition. The owners would like the College to have the land. It might have some charitable contribution but could be fair market value. The land is about 4 acres – some split by Blake Ave.

Vail Valley The projects proposed are to complete the campus. The demography is changing. The goal is to outfit a campus in concert with how the community uses the campus:  conference center

 student library/media center

 student housing

This would bring vibrancy to the area – a hub and center in the Vail Valley as no conference space exists. We will need something in writing from water and sanitation about land there.

Steamboat Springs Apartment style housing is biggest priority. Well over 80% of our students work in Steamboat and don’t have a place to live during breaks. A partnership with Brinkman could be inexpensive for us. The campus is also looking at a fieldhouse type building – similar to the Climax building in Leadville. The campus would like to remodel Bristol hall giving the campus more classroom space. They are also looking at a career center for workforce development/internships, etc. A long term vision: resort management and teaching hotel for culinary restaurant management program and hospitality program.

Rifle Rifle is looking at their downtown presence – it was done due to the need for classrooms and it has been successful in helping get downtown area students . The campus is looking at a public/private partnership with a mixed use building that has low income housing and rental space downstairs. Another option is– historical building that could get grant money to remodel. Many entities are collaborating in this. The campus is inserting themselves in many discussions to find the right fit as the lease for their current space is up in 2 years.

IT Master Plan Jim English gave an update on the IT plan. The College is working to take it and carry forward for the next 3 years. They are working on infrastructure and still working on the Ellucian upgrades, etc. including the possible reconfiguration of network. After capital plan has been set will work on the network reconfiguration due to technology needed.

Cloud storage: we may move the Disaster Recovery technology to the cloud rather than duplicate in Rifle. Jim is checking out what other schools are doing.

Discussion ensued about what criteria to use in the October workshop. The board will send Matt Gianneschi their choices for criteria. When discussing workforce outcomes remove the local aspect.

The workshop adjourned at 4:22 pm.