Majority decides  it should be up to President as they lack expertise and originally gave her authority as to when to close down in-person classes; minority  says reopening in-person classes is of such  grave magnitude  that it should be the Governing Board’s ultimate responsibility

At its April meeting, the Yavapai Community College Governing Board discussed whether the decision to reopen face-to-face in-person classes should be made by them or the President.  The discussion, which was opened by Representative Paul Chevalier, focused on the seriousness of the Covid19 threat to students and who should assume the enormous responsibility of deciding when the College reopens face-to-face in-person classes.

Paul Chevalier

Chevalier reminded the Board that if students are returned to face-to-face in-person classes before an effective vaccine is available, the decision presents a life and  death situation. Because of the unique circumstances and the weight of making such a  decision, he argued that the Governing Board “should not” delegate the responsibility to make that kind of decision to the President.  He also said that the Board is responsible to the public and should not delegate this issue because of that responsibility.

Deb McCasland

Governing Board Chair Deb McCasland argued that President Rhine was in a better position than the Board to make the decision to reopen face-to-face in-person classes because she is in communication with other colleges and many other authorities that she will provide guidance.  When compared to Dr. Rhine, McCasland said “I don’t believe that as a Board member I will have the vast range of knowledge needed” to determine the appropriate time to reopen face-to-face in-person classes.

Lisa Rhine

President Rhine said that reopening face-to-face in-person classes was “operational” and “her responsibility.”  She also said that she  did not think removing the final decision from her was necessary.

Pat McCarver

Board member Pat McCarver indicated that she wanted to be notified in advance of the decision to reopen, and surmised that this would happen.  She reminded the Board that it had delegated to the Community College President the decision of when to close face-to-face in-person classes so allowing her to determine when to restart face-to-face in-person classes appeared consistent with the earlier decision.

Ray Sigafoos

Board member Ray Sigafoos said he was not an “expert in this matter” and the President should rely on experts.  He also said that he doubted the Governing Board would have the kind of information available to it to make the decision as to when it was appropriate to reopen face-to-face in-person classes.

Ultimately, McCasland, Sigafoos, and McCarver voted to leave the ultimate decision of when it was appropriate to reopen face-to-face in-person classes in the hands of President Rhine.

Video clips of the discussion by the Governing Board on this issue can be found in the video posted below.

Board asks for more data regarding County high schools, overall trend in last decade, and ponders  whether remedial classes are needed at all

40% require remedial help.

According to data gathered and reported to the District Governing Board in November by Tom Hughes, Yavapai Community College Director of Institutional Effectiveness and Research, about forty percent of incoming students require courses in remedial math, English or both.  “They come not ready for College,” said Mr. Hughes.  He pointed out that this costs them more money in terms of tuition and increases the timeline before they will graduate from Yavapai with a degree.

The Governing Board was interested in obtaining additional information about this figure.  Chair Ray Sigafoos wanted to know if things had changed over the past years.  Does the 40% represent and increase, decrease, or no change in unpreparedness over the past? The College agreed to respond at a later date with this information.

Third District Representative Paul Chevalier wanted information about the various high schools in the District.  Do some graduate more students under-prepared for College than others? He also wanted to know if there regional differences between the east and west sides of the County.  The College has the information and will provide it at a later date to the Board.

Second District Representative Deb McCasland shared that during the latest  Association of Community College Trustees conference she attended that  some community colleges  have done away with developmental courses.  The reason for this is a belief that students involved in developmental courses before they get to credit courses “tend to drop out” before completion.  Florida, for example, is a state that has eliminated developmental courses.

You may view Mr. Hughes report to the Board on this topic and the Board discussion in the short four minute video clip below.

Was solicited at hotel and local market while attending conference; finds old San Francisco no longer exists

Yavapai Community College District Governing Board Chair, Ray Sigafoos,  attended the Association of Community College Leadership Conference in San Francisco in October. Steve Irwin and Deb McCasland also attended the same meeting. The conference is described as “the largest professional development opportunity for community college trustees, presidents, and other thought and policy leaders. . . . Community college leaders … share …  experiences and expertise, network with people from around the country and beyond, and expand [their] knowledge of the community college sector.”

Sigafoos brought a chuckle of sorts to some of those in attendance at the November Board meeting when at the outset of his report about attending the conference the lamented the loss of old San Francisco.  Mr. Sigafoos found the “old San Francisco” had disappeared. 

The two-minute vide clip below contains his opening remarks and a comment by Steve Irwin saying he “dressed appropriately” and had no similar experiences.

November 12 meeting   is last gathering of Board  this year; next regular business meeting  Tuesday, January 21, 2020

The Yavapai Community College Governing Board will enjoy a nine -week break before its next regular  public meeting.  The last regular  meeting in 2019 was held November 12.  It is not scheduled to meet again until January 21, 2019.  There are currently  no special meetings scheduled during the nine-week lay-off.

In addition to the absence of Board meetings for this nine-week period, the Board has decided it will not meet in June or July of 2020.  It will most likely hold a retreat in August and  return for a regular meeting in September. 

The result of the current schedule is that the Board meets for regular public meetings only eight  times a year.  For four  months (December, June, July, August)  it holds no regular public meetings. It usually holds a special meeting in August and resumes regular meetings once a month in September, October and November.  

Given such a light schedule, there is probably good reason why the members are not paid in any fashion for their service

“Most important thing Board could do to improve function”

At the November meeting, Third District Yavapai Community College Governing Board member Paul Chevalier continued his effort to encourage greater discussion of important Community College issues among Governing Board members. He argued that if the Board engaged in extended discussion it would be possible to arrive at a consensus on a particular issue.

He noted that when he was  Chair of the Verde Valley Board Advisory Committee (VVBAC), the Committee made 22 recommendations with 21 of them being unanimous.  He said that sometimes obtaining a consensus may cause issues to be carried over from one meeting to another.  That, he said, would result in “better Board decisions.”

You may view his comments on the video clip below.

Suggests that Arizona law requires more than holding meetings and receiving documents from president to satisfy legal mandate it examine “management, condition and needs” of college; attorney disagrees but says Board could change the “means” it uses to satisfy the law

Representative Paul Chevalier triggered a discussion at the October 8 District Governing Board meeting on the question of whether the Board was complying with a provision of state law in its oversight of the President’s operation of the college.  He suggested that the means being used by the Governing Board over the past several years to evaluate the management, conditions and needs of the College was too limited and possibly contrary to the intent of the legislature.

The current evaluation process relies entirely on Board meetings and documents given to the Board by the Administration to meet the evaluation standard set out by state law.  Chevalier contended that the language of AZ 15-444 (4) “orders us to visit each community college under our jurisdiction AND examine carefully INTO management, conditions and needs. If the President is our only link to operations we cannot do this effectively.” (Board members under current process cannot talk with staff.)

The Governing Board attorney disagreed with Chevalier but suggested that the Board could alter the traditional means it has used  to examine the management, conditions and needs of the College.  There was a suggestion at the end of the discussion that a local legislator ask the Arizona Attorney General for an opinion on the meaning of the statue to determine the nature and extent of the Board’s obligation to examine management, conditions, and needs under exiting law.  However, because it was a discussion item, no formal action (no vote) was taken.

You may view an edited version of the nine minute discussion below.  You can see the entire argument on video on the Governing Board web site when it is published.

To some, it appears Sigafoos is attempting to totally marginalize McCasland as a Board member; his effort also appears to have as its goal maintaining iron-fisted control of all Community College matters in the hands of the west-county voting bloc no matter how small

Recall that at the January session of the Community College Governing Board, the west-county representatives voted as a bloc to reject Deb McCasland as the Board secretary for the coming year.  Instead, they placed both the Chair and the Board secretary’s position in the hands of west-county representatives. McCasland had more experience and seniority as a Board member that Steve Irwin; however, she was rejected.

At the February meeting, representative Paul Chevalier wrote to the Board members of his concern over the fact the east-county had been shut out of any Board leadership positions for over a decade.  It is seems pretty clear after the February meeting that the west-county representatives cared little about his observation.

Also, at the February meeting, representative Deb McCasland made a request that she be appointed co-liaison for the Board to the College Community College Foundation. The Board liaison serves as the point of contact for information review, input, and approval prior to Board receipt. Board liaisons attend and participate in all meetings and conference calls of their assigned committees.

 Chair Sigafoos, who holds the sole power of appointment, said it was not possible to appoint McCasland.  Rather than appoint McCasland, who has a long history of working with the Foundation before retiring, he said he had two requests that the two members from the west side of the County remain.  (The Blog assumes the request came from west County representatives McCarver and Irwin who now are the two Board liaisons and sat with their mouths tight-lipped during this part of the meeting.) 

Rather than appoint McCasland because of her experience and seniority as a Board member, and relieve one of the existing members of the position, Sigafoos lamely explained that if he appointed McCasland he would have a quorum at the Foundation’s monthly meetings.  And he couldn’t do that. 

Sigafoos appeared to be heading toward appointing Paul Chevalier and relieving  McCasland of her current liaison position to the Arizona Association of Community College Trustees (AACCT). The AACCT, it should be noted, meets at most once or twice a year and is as lightweight of an appointment that you can get. When Chevalier refused the appointment, Sigafoos back-tracked and appointed McCasland.

It is suspected that Sigafoos wanted to leave McCasland with no liaison position at all so as to further marginalize her as a Governing Board member.

For those unaware, the Foundation meetings are viewed as major monthly social gatherings on the west side of the County with community leaders attending who reside primarily in Prescott and Prescott Valley.  It is often during these meetings and under the influence of these powerful west side civic leaders that the future course of Yavapai College is charted.  Persons like Board member Steve Irwin see the monthly meetings as a rare opportunity to develop contacts with community leaders that can no doubt help  his real estate business.

Because of the ruling by Sigafoos, McCasland is essentially barred from attending any Foundation meetings. 

Just another insult to the residents of the east side of Yavapai County.

You may view the discussion and ruling by Sigafoos on the video clip below.