Classified Staff Council Meeting Minutes

Thursday, March 17, 2011 1:00-2:30 PM, CN 301

I. Welcome, Introductions and Call to Order

Brett Haselton moved to call the meeting to order at 1:05 pm.

Present: The sign-in list was misplaced and there is no record of those that attended on file.

II. Approval of Minutes

The approval of minutes for 2/17/2011 was postponed. Classified staff is asked to review the minutes for both 2/17/2011 and 3/17/2011. The council will re-vote on 4/21/2011 for minutes of 2/17/2011 and 3/17/2011 meetings.

III. Guests

A. Tony Ledesma, Employee Collaborative Circle (name subject to change)

For more information on the collaborative or to become involved, contact Tony Ledesmadirectly.

Tony expressed a desire to start a college collaborative in order to move the college towards becoming a democratic organization as discussed by Traci Fenton, the professional development conference keynote speaker. Since Tony has been an employee of all three categories (Faculty, Classified and Administrative) here at Metropolitan State College of Denver, he feels a strong connection with all employees and their needs. He desires input for his idea from all employees and is particularly interested in the Classified Staff input. He also mentioned that all employees should view the videos of the conference online if they didn’t have a chance to attend the professional development conference.

The overall concept of the collaborative is that it will be a supplement to the existing councils where all employees can come and anonymously voice their opinion about new, old and existing business at the college. Ideas can be presented and voted on to be presented to the president in a manner that is safe and free of fear.

After the professional development conference and the close interaction with Traci Fenton, Dr. Jordan has started working with human resources to train mid-level managers on the 10 principles of a democratic workplace. Tony explained that in the 10 principles, the individual and collective principle seemed the most important to the classified staff. He then ranked the implementation of the 10 principles in order of perceived importance starting with accountability and immediately followed by transparency. He stated that ideally it was his hope that all employees would be invited by the college to gather and address all issues, concerns and challenges with the institution at the collaborative.

One example that he used as progress for the institution was that there was open dialogue regarding the possibility of plus/minus grades. The discussions included all employees at the college and the impact of the final decision from the student to faculty to administration. He used this to show that the collaborative would be effective for situations similar to this one and would become a constant platform for discussions that needed attention.

After explaining his idea, there were many questions from those in attendance:

  1. When you refer to input at the collaborative, are you referring to individual employees or representatives of employee groups?
  2. Individual employees are encouraged to attend. This is not a place designed for a group representative although if that is what the group chooses, a representative will not be banned from participating.
  3. Once the input is given and collected, who does it go to?
  4. This isn’t final, but I would like to see groups like Metroleads pioneer this idea and help get it started.
  5. Who will the information be given to after it is collected in the collaborative?
  6. Dr. Jordan first (always), followed by Dr. Golich and then the Vice Presidents of the institution.
  7. What about issues that need further research?
  8. The collaborative isn’t set in stone, but this could be something where there is a subgroup that could be appointed to research the idea and then present their findings to the collaborative at a later date. An example of this already in practice is the Strategic Planning Committee using SWOT analysis throughout the institution.
  9. In the collaborative, what gives your input weight?
  10. The collaborative is legitimized through the participation of the President of the college, and the Provost. A problem with faculty senate is that the President and the Provost are guests only at the meetings and are not allowed to participate otherwise. In the collaborative, the president will be participating which will give the collaborative direction. The weight of the issues presented comes from the people who participate in the collaborative by sharing their experiences such as policies and procedures that may look good in writing but in their experience don’t work well.
  11. Will the collaborative eliminate the Classified Staff Council, the Council of Administrators, and the Faculty Senate?
  12. No, it will be in addition to the existing councils, it is not meant to replace anything.
  13. Will this become a forum for people to air out their complaints and ultimately become unproductive?
  14. The mission of the collaborative is to create solutions. Employees should be prepared to vent elsewhere and then come to the collaborative with input to problems and present solutions to problems.
  15. What is the timeline for the collaborative?
  16. I don’t know.

Tony Ledesma then talked about participating in an ombudsman program in order to prepare for the ombudsman committee which will look at the ways the institution can provide an ombudsman for employees. He also shared Dr. Jordan’s version of the definition of preeminence which he felt was imperative to how the employees preceded with the institutions mission.

Metro State will be preeminent when the Denver community will recognize us as the place that transforms citizens. (This is a paraphrase of what was actually said by Dr. Jordan.)

IV. Old Business

A. Strategic Name Change Initiative– The Board of Trustees announced that they had voted on the new name Denver State University (DSU). The new name is anticipated to be presented to the legislature in the new session and,if approved, would not be implemented until fall of 2012. One of the main arguments being heard against the new name is that Denver is not a state; however, the moniker is grammatically correct since “state” refers to “university,” indicating that our college is a state-run and state-funded institution. Further discussion reflected on the Classified Staff’s desire to have the name changed to Metropolitan State University of Denver (MSUD) since it was not much of a shift. The Council stated that they felt that even though Classified Staff did not want much of a shift in the name change that the Administration desired a large change. Yet, during the Classified Staff focus group conducted by Sector Brands, approximately 75% of the participants voted for Denver State University as their first choice for a new name.

Metza Templeton shared that, at the Alumni Board meeting, Dr. Jordanassured the Alumni Board that the cost of the name change would not come out of general budget, but would be funded by private donors.

There was additional concern regarding the new website for the new name. dsu.edu is a registered domain name, but as of the date of the meeting, denverstate.edu was available for purchase/registration.

V. New Business

A. SWOT Analysis Update– SWOT is an acronym for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. The CSC was looking for participants in the classified SWOT analysis occurring on 3/29/2011 which is to help the Strategic Planning Committeemake a plan for future planning. The CSC will link the previous strategic plan on the CSC website for employees to reference. Pat Yarrow shared that she helped facilitate the SWOT analysis for Administrators and found it interesting. She plans to participate in the classified staff SWOT analysis as a participant and not a facilitator. She shared that the comments made in the analysis would be shared with the Strategic Planning Committee without names.

B. CSC Elections and Vacancy – The current CSC secretary, Megan Webb, will be leaving office on 4/1/2011. Havilah Lilly volunteered to fill the position until the next election. The bylaws are in review for the procedure for an interim executive position. It may require a special vote among the classified staff.

VI. Regular Reports

A. President’s Cabinet, Brett Haselton, CSC Rep – Nothing to report.

B. Strategic Planning, Pat Yarrow and LoriAnn Garcia, classified staff on the committee reporting, not CSC Reps–SWOT analysis has started with all of the different groups in the institution. SWOT analysis for Classified Staff will be on 3/29/2011.

C. Alumni Board, Metza Templeton, CSC Rep – Discussed the strategic name change and the Alumni perception of the change. Overall, there are mixed feelings. The Alumni Board viewed a presentation by the Center of Urban Education and was thoroughly impressed by the impact of the program.

Information from Metza regarding the Legislative Bills:

  • The Mesa State bill was buried in committee
  • The PERA bill addition is expected to continue. It was voted out of committee but will be heard by the House.
  • The PERA bill has a recommendation of an extra 2% being deducted from classified staff employee’s paychecks, but it isn’t actually included in the bill yet.
  • The link for reviewing bills in committee will be placed on the website.

D. Advocacy Committee, Pat Yarrow, Chair –The advocacy committee is available to assist classified employees for a variety of reasons, including mentoring new employees and helping with employee/supervisor conflict, disciplinary hearings and relationship building. The committee is pleased to report that there were no new requests for help with conflicts in the workplace this last month. The committee does need more members to help with issues as they arise. If you are interested in helping, please contact Pat Yarrow.

E. Elections and Bylaws, Brad Pepper, Chair – Brad was not present, but the council discussed the need to have a portion of the bylaws clarified. A decision regarding accepting write in votes must be decided before the next election.

F. Professional Development Committee, Liz Gettings, Chair –There will be another brown bag for May, but there will not be one in April which is a busy month. More details will be provided as the date in approaches.

G. Scholarship Committee, Cheryl Sipe, Chair – Cheryl was not present, but Janet Maestas and Eileen Rodgers were awarded the Classified Staff Memorial Scholarship for the spring 2011 semester. There will be an application for the fall 2011 scholarship available soon.

H. Social Events Committee, Megan Webb, Chair – There is an event planned for 3/31/2011 for a delayed St. Patrick’s Day celebration and farewell to Megan for all of her hard work on the council.

I. Ways and Means, Jeanne Rendon, Chair – Jeanne was not present, but there was no money spent since the last report.

VII. Open Discussion

One question was to explain the mission and purpose of the Classified Staff Council. Brett Haselton explained that the CSC is the classified staff’s voice at the college and the council is in existence to listen, interact and carry the concerns of the classified staff upward (to higher level management).

Open enrollment for classified staff is 4/20/2011 through 5/23/2011. Vendors will be on campus on 5/6/2011. Rates for open enrollment are not yet available.

One classified staff member asked if the council had sent out an email to all classified staff for nominees for the ombudsman committee and if people had been selected. It was suggested to re-send the email and hold a vote on the nominees for a final decision on who should be on the committee.

Brett Haselton asked Kami Phillips how Judy Zewe was doing and her progress. Kami expressed that Judy was feeling much better and was expected to return to work in April.

During his time with us, Tony Ledesma also indicated that it might be in the best interest of the classified employees to look into paying 1-2 Capital Hill lobbyists for issues such as the additional PERA reduction. He felt that it was important to have someone specifically lobbying on behalf of the classified staff.

VIII. Adjournment

Brett Haselton moved to end the meeting in order at 2:15 pm.

Metza Templeton seconded

Motion carried by majority vote

Next CSC meeting: Thursday, April21stfrom 1:00-2:30pm, CN 301.Page 1 of 5