*********************************************

                DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION

    ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS

    A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS

    PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY

    REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND

    STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT

    AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.

             THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR

    ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR

    PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE

    HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL

    TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM

    CITATION.

                     *********************************************





         June 24, 2024 Study Session...



         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  Okay.  We're going to resume the meeting,

    and first up is David Borofsky with the Governing Board board

    assessment.  Thank you.

         David, thank you for driving down to be with us today.  We

    appreciate that you are so helpful all the time.  So thank you.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  My pleasure.  So this is about you.  This is

    not about me.  So I could stand here and lecture at you for an hour

    or two hours or three hours, but I'm not going to do that.

         What I plan to do is propose some questions.  I will give you

    some data based on the work that you did completing the assessment,

    and I know she's not here, but I want to publicly thank Andrea for

    pushing all of you to get this completed.  It's a much better tool

    when everybody has given some input into it.

         But it's a tool.  So the numbers are good numbers, they say good

    things, but there are some things that you're going to want to talk

    about, I hope.

         So goals today, just to look at the difference between the board

    as a unit and individual board assessments, and to talk about some of

    the open-ended questions and some of the answers that you all gave to

    those.

         So your overall average of the ratings of the 15 questions was a

    4.04.  Anything over 4 that I have seen -- and I have done, I don't

    know, five other colleges in the state -- so anything over 4 is good.





    So I think 4.04 is excellent.  It can always be better, and I think

    as you work together as a board, it will continue to grow when you

    solve and talk about some of the concerns that you have expressed as

    we get closer to looking at some of those questions.

         These are the highest-rated items.  Most of you have probably

    figured I don't read PowerPoints, so if you can't read, let me know

    and I'll be happy to read for you, but I know you can, because you

    have documents like that that you read to prepare for.  But

    essentially, you have talked about, as you have in the past, your

    ability to work across some of the issues that you have and do so

    respectfully, which is a change and it's a welcome change, not only

    for you as a board but for the college.

         Your responsibility and the way you have treated the interim

    chancellor is rated high, and that's a real positive.  Whenever a

    board says good things about its leader, not that everything is

    perfect, but when you do have those conversations respectfully, it

    means a lot.

         The fact that you express your authority as a unit and not

    individually is also important.  I know there are some comments about

    some board members having concern that people are trying to manage

    employees.  We can talk about that in a couple of minutes.

         So what are your thoughts on -- usually when I do this, and this

    is no fault of the tech, I bring all these paragraphs up one at a

    time so you can't see what I'm thinking, but that's okay.

         So I'm more interested in what you think about the items,





    especially 4, 5, and 10, and your ratings of, high ratings of the

    importance of faculty, staff, and students, a two-year institution.

         Don't all speak at once, because that won't work.  Greg?

         >> MR. GREG TAYLOR:  Yeah, I mean, I think it demonstrates that

    we are doing what we are supposed to be doing, quite frankly.  I

    mean, we should be keeping what's best for the college, what's best

    for our students at the core of everything we're doing.  I mean, of

    all the things you were just presenting before, I'm especially proud

    of the fact that the sort of respectful civility one was ranking the

    highest, because we had multiple conversations, all of us at the

    beginning of our time together, about how we needed to change the way

    that we interacted with each other and that we can disagree

    respectfully, and that we all have something valuable to contribute.

         It's nice to see that -- I mean, I feel like we have done that.

    It's nice to see that everybody agrees, but I think that in one

    regard, that's kind of a low bar, right, but from where we were,

    where this institution's board was in that regard, I think we have

    made a lot of improvements, and I think that's something to be proud

    of.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Great.  Thank you.

         Other thoughts about the highest-rated items?

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  I just would like to say that it's easy to

    work with a chancellor, an interim chancellor, who's as responsive

    and, you know, she works well with us.  So that was (muted audio).

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Great.  Thank you.





         Others before we go on?  Okay.

         So I think that one of the foundations that I have seen

    throughout Arizona of an excellent board, an effective board, is one

    who does work with their leader in a way that's positive.  That

    doesn't mean that you don't have disagreements.  It just means that

    you're all working toward the same thing, which is student success,

    as Greg said, and the fact that you do respect staff and faculty, as

    evidenced by the two retreats that we have had, and the work that has

    gone on at both of those retreats to create more synergy between the

    board and the executive leadership here at Pima Community College.

         So you're to be congratulated on that.

         So these are the lowest-rated items.  I will say that there is a

    juncture between these items that you rated as a board as a unit and

    how you felt individually, so you won't be surprised in a few minutes

    to see that some of the items are the same.

         So I raised a couple of questions in this slide.  I'd like you to

    take some time to think about that.  So you all said, or the majority

    of you said -- so 3.8 isn't horrible.  3 is -- I mean, none of these

    are horrible.  It's not like it's a 1.6 or something or a 1.8 like I

    got in one of my semesters when I was in college, but it's really

    less than what you have been, what you had been rating the higher

    numbers.  So what is it about educational services and programs or

    programs and services and facilities and maintenance that you need to

    know that you don't know?

         And you approved the strategic plan.  You approved, I was here,





    the budget.  So what information do you need to better understand the

    budget and/or -- it's not about rating question 3, as I said, but

    it's really about understanding the budget and being able to talk

    about those, so there are some big items there.

         What are your thoughts?

         I mean, this is being recorded, so you need to tell the

    administration what it is you don't have that you want about these

    items.  I have been at enough of your board meetings or watched them

    to know that these three items come up, one of the three, almost

    every board meeting.

         >> MR. GREG TAYLOR:  I guess I could say, I do think we have had

    some of those conversations about things that were missing, but in

    broad strokes, I mean, we have definitely had discussions about the

    timeline for how these things happen.  I mean, I think around the

    budget and stuff, Wade's probably articulated that more than anyone

    else around including us more meaningfully earlier on in the budget

    development process, because sometimes we hear things in the

    beginning, and they are thrown out as ideas, and as the machinations

    of that process goes along, certain things are abandoned or certain

    things are adopted and we don't know that.  Then when it comes back

    to us, it just looks like some things are vanished and some things

    all of a sudden there, because we don't see all of that, not that we

    have to be involved in all of it, but some better way to keep us

    engaged in that development process so that we better understand how

    we got from, when we had, like, the brainstorm in a study session to





    the final budget that's being shown to us, because there is kind of a

    gap there and it's to our disadvantage.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Okay.  Good.

         Luis?

         >> MR. LUIS GONZALES:  One of the questions in reference to the

    facilities and maintenance is I know that the word that Mr. Taylor

    mentioned, finish or diminish, but more importantly deferred

    maintenance.  I know that what the deferred maintenance is, but I

    would like to know, I guess we would like to know what is the

    follow-up and what is the progress on those, how is it impacting not

    only the structure but also the community of students, as well, too.

         I know, for example, the one on 29th that for a while it was a

    deferred maintenance with reference to the HVAC, and we did come back

    to that, too, but I think all of us need to know.  Myself, I don't

    know specifically the details in reference to the deferred

    maintenance, what it is, but also, the update, what has been the

    progress or when are we going to address those deferred maintenance,

    as well, too.

         That brought a little bit, not major concern but major

    information to know, for us to know.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Great.  Thank you.

         >> MS. MARIA GARCIA:  David, so the other thing would be what do

    you need to know about facilities and maintenance that you do not

    know.  The facilities as a whole, you know, when we have a board

    meeting, they bring up, like, the PTPST building needs to be upgraded





    or just different things that come up.

         I mean, doesn't facilities have an overall plan about how things

    are addressed with each building?  Don't they have the knowledge

    already, like Luis was saying, you know, the deferred maintenance?

    You know, one of the things about the HVAC that we rebuilt, that we

    invested so much money into the Trane stuff was because they allowed

    things to go bad, or that's what they were telling us.

         And now, here we are, it still isn't being addressed.  I have

    asked before, and I know we are going to have a meeting about it.

    The plan was that we're going to save $250,000 on our utility costs,

    but when they came up with this overall plan, you know, what did they

    include, what did they not include?

         So I don't know.  I mean, I don't know.  Maybe we shouldn't know

    all that, but I would just want a complete knowledge of where we're

    at over all our facilities.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Okay.  Greg?

         >> MR. GREG TAYLOR:  I think this is a theme that's come up

    throughout the year, and it's probably more applicable to educational

    services and programs, which is just, you know, I remember at the

    beginning of my time on the board, I think we all were saying we

    wanted more data, more outcomes data, graduation, retention,

    enrollment, all of those kind of -- and we are getting pieces of that

    now, which is great.

         I think where we're not quite there yet is sometimes I think we

    have had questions about the pieces that sometimes we get pieces of





    data but not the full set.  So, for example, we'll be told, well,

    this demographic group's enrollment increased by this percentage, and

    that's what we are given.  But we're not given the N underneath that,

    so was that one and now it's four or was it 40 and now it's 100?

    Because those are different.  And those are probably not the same

    percentages, but you can play with raw numbers to get to the same

    percentages.

         So I think a lot of the questions that we ask when we are

    presented those things is it's great what we are seeing, but we are

    trying to verify and make sure that under the hood it's as good as it

    seems like it is, and sometimes we are not given, at least initially,

    all of the information we'd like to have so that we can see the

    difference that some of these programs are making.

         But I think we are getting there.  It's improved from when I

    started till now, I think we are marching along that continuum, but I

    don't think we are quite to the end of it yet.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  I see Dolores taking a lot of notes.  That's

    good.  That's good.

         Wade or Theresa?  Anything?  No?  You good?  Okay.

         So your individual assessment, so you'll see, and you received

    from Andrea both this PowerPoint and the Excel spreadsheet, and all I

    did is say, I think it says DGB 1, DGB 2, et cetera, on the Excel

    spreadsheet, so I don't know who rated the questions how, and I don't

    know who wrote the answers that we're going to look at in a couple of

    minutes, but on this one, the individual, when you rated yourself,





    came up at 4.67.  You don't get a whole lot better than that.  Wade

    is smiling.  I have seen some at 4.94, so you guys aren't quite there

    yet (smiling).

         But this is pretty typical where the board is a unit, because you

    think that there are members who don't understand some of the things

    you understand, and there are, obviously when you rate yourself, you

    think you understand everything and know everything.

         Wade?

         >> DR. WADE McLEAN:  I think some people would call that grade

    inflation.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  Or ego, yeah, something like that.

    (Smiling.)

         So you didn't have any 5.0s, but you do have a bunch of 4.8s.

    These are the five 4.8s.  Again, this is the respectful way that you

    treat each other, the work you do with the chancellor, the support

    you have for the mission, the vision, and the values and the goals,

    the fact that you understand the difference between what you're doing

    as a board and what Dolores is doing as the leader of the

    institution.

         So I don't know if you have any comments on that, but basically

    you support the chancellor and you support the mission, as a board

    should and as you are doing.

         Thoughts on that before we move on?  Okay.

         These are the lowest-rated items.  Again, 3.8 is not low.  It's

    just lower.  Any time I say anything with math, I have to look at





    Theresa to make sure I say this right.  (Laughter.)

         So you'll notice again that educational programs and services,

    facilities and maintenance, and then effective planning, we have

    talked about that.  I think you all are feeling and you have rated

    these questions in a way that demonstrates that you just need to

    continue to work on that, and I think that's important.

         So any thoughts on the individual items?  Yes, Theresa?

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  You know, I didn't rate 13 very high, so I

    might have been the one that brought that down to 4.2, which is

    still, isn't that a B+ or something (smiling)?

         But the reason that I wrote it that way is because there have

    been numerous times over the last year and a half when we have a

    meeting, Wade and I meet with the administration beforehand, and so I

    guess the board is given the documents, what, like, 10 days early?

    Five days early?

         >> MS. MARIA GARCIA:  It's been a little better in that we get a

    draft, but it doesn't have all the information on it yet.

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  That's what I'm talking about.  So we all

    get the draft about 10 days early.  I know because of how things are

    run, right, that we want it at this board meeting, but all of the

    information isn't available yet.

         So I spend some time wondering why that information isn't there,

    and so I understand that it is the way it is because of the

    timelines, but not having that information there the first time you

    see it, the first time you run through the whole document, it makes





    it a little disconcerting, because then you have to keep checking to

    see when it's been updated, if it's been updated.

         There was one board meeting when I meant to say I can't vote on

    the minutes because the minutes hadn't been in the packet that I saw.

    So I never saw them.  But, you know, I got in a jumble and I forgot.

    So I voted on something that I really didn't feel -- now the minutes

    are okay, I have read them since then, but it's that kind of thing,

    but that's why I voted that lower for that No. 13.

         >> MS. MARIA GARCIA:  The other thing I wanted to add is the fact

    that by having the information, entire information as much as we

    possibly can, especially those long documents that are sometimes 24

    pages long, you know, the way my brain works is that I read it, then

    I have to go back and reread it and re-evaluate it, so it's not like

    I'm going to understand it the first meeting, and then I devise my

    questions.

         So that's something to think about.  We all think a little bit

    different in how we digest the information.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  So I think this is a common concern among

    boards.  I mean, I have heard this conversation at other boards, as

    well.  I'm not necessarily want to defend the administration, but

    having been on the other side of the table, as well, it's sometimes

    difficult to plan a meeting and have everything you need for that

    meeting.

         I will give you a perfect example.  I was in the parking lot.

    We've got an AC4 meeting Wednesday at 4:00.  I got a change to the





    agenda an hour and 15 minutes ago.

         I mean, that happens.  It's not 24 pages.  Fortunately it's one.

    But those kinds of things happen.

         I think you do the best you can, and I think the administration

    does the best they can, as long as they are giving you all the

    information they have, to your point, Greg, as soon as they have it

    in a way that you want it and can understand it.  Because you're

    making big decisions on a big budget and on lots of facilities all

    over the county.  It's information that you need.

         Greg?

         >> MR. GREG TAYLOR:  Yeah, I was just going to say one of the

    things, again, I'm trying to think of themes in our discussions that

    we have come up with, I think sometimes what we are given lacks

    historical context that can be critical.

         I think its origin is because the people who are putting it on

    there are so steeped in their field or in their part of the college

    that they know all the history.  There is something that's changed

    that we're being asked to vote on that, for them, because they do IT

    or HR, whatever, that's just kind of run-of-the-mill and they don't

    think much of it, but because we don't have all the context or the

    historical context, we look at it and we're, like, why the heck would

    we need to do that?

         So some kind of, I don't know, historical, I believe this came up

    recently when we were talking about one of the benefits things, when

    something was changing and we were all kind of scratching our heads





    trying to look at old meeting minutes, figuring out what was approved

    years ago, why did it change to this now, and the person that put it

    on there may not have even thought it was a big deal.  They just

    were, like, yeah, of course this is what happens.  But we don't have

    any of that context, even if we remember that it was on a previous

    agenda.

         So that, especially for things that come up routinely that we

    approve year over year, making sure that you can remind us about what

    the history of that item has been, or know that something that may

    seem run-of-the-mill for you because that's just how much that

    increases normally from year to year, we don't have that context.

         But it would be useful for us to have that, to know when we

    should be concerned about something or not.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  So surely when someone works in an area, IT,

    HR, budgets, they do it all day long and it's just in their head,

    whereas you're doing other things.  So sometimes you have to bring it

    down a notch or two.  Okay?

         So we talked about this a little bit.  So is there anything -- we

    are going to talk about ideas for goals in a few minutes, but is

    there anything in those items that were ranked lowest as board as a

    unit and as individuals that you would want to talk about, and maybe

    you have already talked about it a little bit today, and maybe in the

    past, so those three areas in educational programs and services,

    facilities and maintenance, effective planning, anything that you

    would want as something to think about as a goal, and you don't have





    to necessarily respond right now, but as you are thinking about

    hiring a chancellor, permanent chancellor, you want to make sure that

    he or she understands this particular piece of what you, as a board,

    need.  It should come from you, as the board, in a way that gives

    that individual the understanding that, hey, I need to know more

    about, we need to know more about programs and services as it relates

    to education and the budget process, et cetera.

         Those are things that you're going to want to talk about.  I

    would advise you to do it in a retreat format, just an idea to think

    about, when in fact you do make that decision.

         Okay.  So on to the open-ended questions.  These are the board's

    greatest strengths.  I think we have talked about a number of these.

    Really, you all focused around listening to each other, positive

    dialogue, respect, and I know we are in a public session, I will say

    it anyway, having watched this board for the last three-and-a-half

    years, first as the director of AACCT, and then, as Maria is smiling

    at me and I'm not going to go there, I promise, then as the executive

    director of AC4, there has just been a 180-degree difference in how

    you all work together versus how the previous board worked with the

    two members who have been consistent moving forward.

         So I do think that's, to the five of you, to your credit, that

    you have been able to do that.  Listen, you don't always agree.

    We've said that a hundred times.  And you won't agree going forward

    on everything.  But you do it in a way that demonstrates that

    everybody's opinion counts and everybody is allowed and encouraged





    and desired to make sure your opinion is known, whether the vote is

    5-0 or 3-2.

         Thoughts on this?  Okay.

         Some of your major accomplishments, you can see all of those.

    Continued effort to curb board members' attempt to micromanage, I

    don't know who wrote that.  Anybody want to talk about that?  Or not?

         Okay.  Improvements.  I think we have talked a little bit about

    this in terms of enrollment, budget development, policies,

    procedures, if you're not reviewing policies regularly, I would

    advise you to do that.

         I have been with some other boards who have, one in particular,

    completely rewrote their policy manual, actually two, completely

    rewrote their policy manual.  Others have in a retreat format.

    Others have done it piecemeal, you know, five of these, five of

    those, five of those.

         They are just things that you might want to do differently.  I

    know you spent a lot of time on BP 1.25.  There are probably other

    policies that you might want to look at, as well.

         Then goals.  Lots of ideas.  The last one I think is interesting,

    that there shouldn't be any goals until the new chancellor's onboard

    and you can all work together to set those goals.  Doesn't mean you

    shouldn't have ideas, though.

         So thoughts on the goals?  Theresa?

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  I do like that last statement.  You know,

    we pulled the strategic plan from the agenda today because of that.





    You know, we were looking back through the videos that they had here,

    and both candidates mentioned the importance of having a strategic

    plan.

         Dr. Garcia was really vocal about how, you know, we needed to

    look at it, make sure it's exactly -- and she wasn't saying, I don't

    think she was saying us, the board, that we need to look at it.  I

    think she was including herself or whoever the new chancellor is.

         So that's, I do agree with that last statement.  But I do like

    the idea of having goals, because if you have a goal, we can still be

    working toward some things between now and when the new chancellor is

    onboarded, not that we're going to be doing a lot in July and the

    first week of August, but, you know, maybe we could do something.  So

    I like the idea of having some goals that are more for what we, as a

    board, want us as a board to do, and not for the college.  I don't

    know if that makes sense, but...

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  It does, and it's a conversation that the

    five of you should have with or without a facilitator to bring out

    some of those ideas.  And to your point, it's not about the

    expectations of the college; it's the expectations of the five of you

    and what you want to accomplish as a board.  So certainly something

    to think about.

         Other thoughts?  Okay.  So I do think you continue to grow and to

    understand your role.  Your ratings are really good.  You do

    demonstrate support where support is needed and certainly wanted.  So

    I think you have done well.  I think you have had a good year.  I





    think this is a good report to send to HLC.

         It took me a while to find this picture.  I was looking for one

    that Wade would like (smiling).

         Any other questions or thoughts?

         >> MS. MARIA GARCIA:  Thank you for your support.

         >> DAVID BOROFSKY:  My pleasure.  Any time.

         Thank you.

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  Okay.  And then moving on to 4.1, the HLC

    additional location, substantive change application.

         Is there someone who is presenting on that?  Amanda?  Thank you.

         >> AMANDA ABENS:  Thank you, board, Chair Riel, board members,

    interim chancellor.

         So we have been delivering education by contract to the Federal

    Bureau of Prisons at the Wilmot site for quite some time, for

    decades.  The HLC application for that site had been submitted and

    accepted and approved by the HLC back in 2017.

         When that did, that application was submitted, and it had all of

    the programs that we ran, it described the program exactly with one

    exception.  There technically is two street addresses that we have

    classrooms at at that site.  That has been consistently, again for

    decades, but because there is two street addresses, the HLC does

    require that each address be a separate approved additional location.

         So this was something that was discovered through auditing, all

    the work that has been done in the provost's office with Melissa

    Stoddart overseeing the additional locations.  So this is something





    that we are correcting so both of those addresses can be approved

    sites by the HLC.

         So that's a correction to this.  Happy to answer any questions.

         >> DR. WADE McLEAN:  I move we accept the corrections as

    presented.

         >> MR. GREG TAYLOR:  Second.

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  All in favor say aye.

         (Ayes.)

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  Any opposed?

         Motion passes unanimously.  Thank you, Amanda.

         >> AMANDA ABENS:  Thank you.

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  Do I have a motion now to go into exec

    session?  I think we are done with everything here today.

         >> MS. MARIA GARCIA:  So moved.

         >> DR. WADE McLEAN:  Second.

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  All in favor?

         (Ayes.)

         >> MS. THERESA RIEL:  Okay.  We will not be coming back here, so

    don't stick around.  You all go home and enjoy your evening.

         We will see you at our next meeting sometime, but good night.

         (Adjournment.)





                         *********************************************

                DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION

    ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS

    A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS

    PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY

    REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND

    STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT

    AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.

             THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR

    ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR

    PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE

    HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL

    TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM

    CITATION.

                     *********************************************