Minutes

MiraCosta College Community Relations Committee

Regular Meeting

June 2, 2010 at 9 a.m.

OC Aztlan A & B

The meeting was called to order by Cheryl Broom at 9:05 a.m.

Members Present:Cheryl Broom, Zak Ruvalcaba, Bonnie Hall, Dana Smith, Tracy Williams, Jan Moberly, Benny Perez, Yvette Duncan

Others Present:Gabe Waite;Kimberly Coutts; Morris Reps. Erin,Harry and Jason; Lorie Nolte; Mario Valente

Discussion Items

Re-Branding/Name Spelling Change:

Bonnie Hall and Cheryl Broom reported back the feedback garnered from the Administrative Council and other committees consulted about the re-branding/logo issue. The Administrative Council, which is the council with the decision-making authority on this project, did not make a decision about the name spelling. Administrative Council also advised Bonnie that because the controversial aspects of the issue went viral, the Community Relations Committee will need to rein it all in, shift and sort the feedback it has received, get back to the established process, and move the project forward. Members of the committee concede that the timeline for implementing the new brand and logo will have to be readjusted to allow more time for modifications and reconfiguring.

Kimberly Coutts reported back a preliminary summarization of the comments received from the college Web site logo survey, and presented the results to the committee. The Web site home page offered the three logo choices for people to consider and comment on. Those who responded to the survey were comprised of students (1,783), faculty (287), staff (282), administrators (20), community members (318), and others (147). The voting showed that logo #3 received the most votes of the three logos, but only 38% chose it as their favorite. Many people did not make a logo choice, preferring instead to state their opinions in the comments section.

Students and community members were by far the most positive about option C than any of the other constituent groups, with 37% and 34% choosing this option, respectively. Faculty and staff were, in general, far less supportive of the logos and of the re-branding issue. The committee discussed the possibility that some of the negativity was due to the fact that discontent was spread by “all mail user” e-mails.

Kimberly Coutts stated that the negative comments focused on these prevailing themes:

  • Cost
  • Prefer existing logo
  • Looks like Microsoft
  • Looks like Sprint
  • Should give students a chance to create a logo
  • Confusion over colors

The committee agreed that a lot of the negative comments stemmed from misinformation or a misunderstanding of the process. For example, those who questioned whether now was a good time to spend the money on re-branding, are most likely unaware that the project was funded and approved long before our current budget crisis. Further, cost to replace consumable items is already figured into the PIO budget, and will be a very minor expense. Those who went into a panic over the name spelling (from MiraCosta to Mira Costa) were assuming it was a done deal, when the committee was still collecting feedback.

Dana Smith brought up the point that the responses are very mixed, with no clear consensus to help guide the process, and also pointed out that the comments show that nobody LOVES the proposed logos, and wonders if we should rethink the choices, and that maybe the college and Morris are not on the right track.

Jan Moberly stated that perhaps people felt “ambushed” by what they felt weresudden choices, and that they felt the process was moving too fast. Other committee members agreed that maybe there should have been an e-mail notice that warned that the re-branding and logo redesign were coming down the pike. The committee agreed to keep the campus community better informed as the process moves forward.

Reps from Morris pointed out that it is not uncommon for such a large number of responses to be very mixed, and that with a survey of this size, it is unlikely there will ever be a clearer indication of general preference.

A logo workgroup was formed that will meet over the summer to carefully read the more than 1,000 comments received in the survey, organize the responses, and report back to the whole committee in the fall.Members of this workgroup are Cheryl Broom, Dana Smith, Gabe Waite, Bonnie Hall (until July 1), Yvette Duncan and Kimberly Coutts. Morris will also read the comments and will work with the workgroup on re-assessing the logo choices.

Web Site Redesign:

Mario Valente joined the meeting at this point.

The Web redesign will proceed over the summer; Zak Ruvalcaba has set aside time to do the programming, even though the color palette and logo are still undecided. These style elements can be plugged into the redesign when they are ready to be implemented. Jason at Morris will work closely with Zak during the Web redesign process. Morris will help assess the site’s usability, and compare our Web site to other comparable sites, to see what works and what doesn’t. Morris has a Web survey they want to submit to a few keyMiraCostans to help evaluate our current Web site, and Morris has some of its own employees who will provide feedback after assessing our site. Zak, Mario, Cheryl and Jason will lead a Web team, and Zak and Cheryl will disseminate the survey.

Cheryl Broom pointed out that the home page is a marketing tool, and not intended to mainly benefit MiraCosta insiders, thus the focus needs to be onreaching out to those in the global community who seek information on our college.

Mario Valente indicated that perhaps people were resistant to the entire re-branding project because the current logo has remained unchanged for 25 years. He pointed out that if it had been modified periodically, like most famous logos are, it wouldn’t seem like such a big deal to see it change. And he indicated that the look of the home page should be changed across the board, and used on all outreach tools such as schedules, catalogs, etc. so it gives the impression that we’re all one family.

Meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.