THE ST. CLAIR COLLEGE OF APPLIED ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY

M I N U T E S

of the

338th MEETING OF THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS

	HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 26, 2001

in the Board Room, Thames Campus, 1001 Grand Avenue West, Chatham, ON at 6:30 p.m.

P R E S E N T:		Ms. V. Barker
		Ms. M. Bearfoot-Jones
Mr. J. Belanger
Ms. K. Bevan
		Mr. L. Browning
		Mr. R. Feldmann
		Mr. S. Funtig
		Mr. R. Marentette
		Ms. L. McGeachy Schultz
		Ms. C. Pare
Mr. R. Pollock, Chair
Mr. M. Vourakes
Ms. P. Williams
Dr. J. Strasser, President
Ms. D. Desjardins, Executive Assistant and Corporate Secretary

Also present:
Mr. B. Harvey, Vice President, Business Development
Ms. L. Logan, Vice President, Corporate Services
Ms. P. McFarlane, Principal, Thames Campus
Mr. T. McCarthy, Executive Director, St. Clair Foundation
Mr. R. Erwin, Administrative Staff Association
Ms. R. Hicks, Faculty Observer
Ms. P. Abbott, Support Staff Observer
Ms. T. Comartin, President, SAA
Ms. G. Duff, President, TSI
Mr. T. Beale, Manager, SAA
Mr. D. France, Manager, Student Centre

A B S E N T: 		Ms. D. Livneh
		Mr. R. McMaster

					- 2 -				2001 06 26

A quorum of the Board of Governors being present, and notice of the meeting and the agenda having been duly sent to all Board members, the meeting was declared to be regularly constituted.  A copy of the Notice of Meeting and Agenda is attached as Appendix  A.
						
Mr. Richard Pollock chaired the meeting and Mrs. Desjardins was Secretary.

1.0	ADOPTION OF AGENDA AND DECLARATION OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.  Item 3.2 – Election of Chair and Vice Chair, was added to the agenda.

RESOLVED THAT the agenda be adopted as amended.

2.0	CONSTITUENT REPORTS

Ms. Tammi Comartin, President of the Student Athletic Association introduced herself and highlighted her expectations for the coming year as SAA President.  Ms. Ruth Hicks, Faculty Observer, announced this would be her last board meeting.    

3.0	POLICY DEVELOPMENT

3.1	Charter Discussion with Peter Wright

A copy of Mr. Wright’s overheads is attached as Item 3.1.

The Chair provided some introductory remarks and welcomed Mr. Wright to the meeting.  Mr. Wright provided a brief history of the legislation and regulations governing the colleges.  He noted for many years the colleges had been asking for more flexibility and autonomy around areas such as program approvals, investment policy, etc.  In March 1999 the Ontario Jobs Investment Board published their report  “A Roadmap to Prosperity” and used a term “a new charter for colleges”.  This is the first time the term “Charter” was used.  The intent was to take greater advantage of the potential of colleges as significant contributors to the economy, to allow them to be more market driven, and more flexible.  It brought together a series of things the college system had asked for and this was the first time the concept of a new charter publicly raised. 

Mr. Wright pointed out the government has been trying to figure out how it can manage what it has to manage.  It has shifted focus from the approval and financing approach to performance based funding in which funds are conditional on performance or tied to a purpose. Government is moving to different kinds of accountability (KPI’s) and they have tried to get themselves out of day-to-day management and into a policy setting role at a very high level.  Using the overhead comparing Operational Enterprise and Polytechnic models, Mr. Wright explained 

					- 3 -				2001 06 26

operational enterprise gives the colleges more freedom but keeps it as an agency of the government.  Polytechnic moves the system out of being an agency of the government.  He briefly compared each of the areas and he noted the percentage of revenue that government grants make up ranges from about 80% down to about 25%.  There is one college that gets 25% of its money from government. 

In response to the questions asked of Mr. Wright in the letter from the Chair he made the following points assuming the government wants to be reasonably bold, and assuming the government goes with the recommendations in the Investing in Students Task Force.

1.	What benefits would accrue to the government from a new Charter? 

•	It would reduce the size of government
•	More responsive institutions
•	Stronger boards and stronger colleges
•	Would cause the colleges to mature and stop looking to the government for answers
•	They would get better economic development in the province because they would improve the links between colleges and business
•	The college would need to look to its community instead of going to the government
•	Reduce the number of colleges going into deficit
•	Free up the entrepreneurial spirit that is in the colleges which means each college will take more control of its own destiny
•	Give the students more choice in terms of institutions and programs – colleges will become more diverse
•	The government would not have to worry about the double cohort because the colleges will want to take in more students
•	Reduce the cost of government – college is cheaper than university
•	More useful research if colleges get into research.  University research has extremely limited public benefit.  Applied research by colleges if they link government funding with funding from the private sector the quality and usefulness of research will improve. 

2.	What benefits would accrue to the colleges?

•	The system would become more mature and look to itself rather than the government.  
•	The colleges can reduce the expense and energy spent on getting government approval and spend that money, time and effort on other things more useful
•	The value of the skill in pleasing government will be less valued and the skill in pleasing clients will be more valued.
•	Colleges will be able to build on their strengths and community needs
•	More specialization will be created
•	More opportunity for cooperation will be created
•	Colleges will develop a spirit and attitude they can do things for themselves rather than depending on government money

- 4 -				2001 06 26

•	Boards would be given the powers to match their responsibilities.  Now Boards are accountable for a lot of things but the government is in control.  Responsibility and power will be aligned.
•	Boards will be allowed to do more risk taking
•	Colleges will be allowed to use their existing assets to lever new ways to grow.

3.	Why would St. Clair College be interested in seeing a change in the legislation which would adopt a new Charter?

Mr. Wright asked the question:  Do you want to control your own future or do you want somebody else to control it?  He noted there are several colleges ready to make significant changes in the next few years.  Durham College has been at it for 10 years.  Humber and Conestoga have been at it for at least five.  

The changes will allow the college to respond more quickly and be less affected by changes in government funding.  This will position the college to survive in the next decade and will allow the college to build relationships with other institutions and partnerships.  It will allow the college to succeed.  

He concluded by noting there will be more change in the next 10 years than there has been in the last 30.

The Chair then asked Mr. Wright to relayed to the Board what the Minister said at the recent General Assembly meeting.  Mr. Wright advised the Minister told the group the government values the colleges and sees the colleges as critically important to the future of the province.  The Minister also stated she would like to have some consultation with the Boards and Presidents to see if government is on the right track and she indicated to the group she would like to be bold – not just tinkering but dramatic evolution legislation will hopefully be introduced this fall.

3.2	Election of Board Chair and Vice Chair

At this point Mr. Funtig took the Chair..  He noted one nomination has been received in writing for each position.  He advised the nomination for Vice Chair is Lynn McGeachy Schultz.  He then opened the floor for further nominations.  Nominations were closed and Ms. McGeachy Schultz was acclaimed as Vice Chair of the Board for the term September 1, 2001 to August 31, 2002.

Mr. Funtig then advised a nomination has been received for Mr. Richard Pollock as Chair.  He opened the floor for further nomination and seeing none, Mr. Pollock was acclaimed Chair of the Board for the term September 1, 2001 to August 31, 2002.

							- 5 -				2001 06 26

4.0	MONITORING REPORTS

4.1	Overview of New Initiatives

A copy of Ms. McFarlane’s overhead presentation is attached as Item 4.1.

Ms. McFarlane recalled that a status report was presented at the May meeting on the Strategic Skills Initiative proposal.  She commented there is still no official announcement to date.  At that time there was a question about how the two major projects, FCEM and the James Burgess Trades Training Centre, would inter-relate.  She commented there would be a full report to the Board on the FCEM in September.

Ms. McFarlane reviewed the two projects within the framework of the College Mission, Values and Strategic Goals and what the congruency is between the two projects within that framework.  She concluded that both projects are congruent with the mission, values and strategic goals of the college, and the academic integration is there which will optimize the benefit to the students and the community and the administrative integration is there along with the Foundation and their involvement will help optimize the accountability and benefits to the College.

In response to a question, Ms. McFarlane noted growth is anticipated by about 40 post-secondary students per year and we are also looking at growth in apprenticeship in Wallaceburg this year alone of 20 new apprentices meaning additional revenue is forecast.  The Chair asked that when the FCEM report is presented to the Board in September that the Wallaceburg Centre is included in that report.

5.0	INFORMATION REPORTS

5.1	Foundation Liaison Report

In the absence of Ms. Livneh, Mr. McCarthy provided a report on a recent trip to visit a leading machine tool manufacturing company in Spain.  

5.2	Unaudited Financial Statements for year ended March 31, 2001

Ms. Logan noted the Audited Financial Statements will be presented to the Audit Committee in July and will then be presented to the Board in September.  She commented the College has had to record vacation pay for many years and we are one of a few colleges who actually book that vacation pay.  This year there is a new requirement to accrue future employee benefits.  She provided a brief overview of the highlights of the statements and noted the statutory statements are not complete as yet.  

				- 6 -				2001 06 26

It was recommended by a governor that the current Audit Committee be recognized and its mandate be extended until September 1st and that the Audit Committee develop a policy relating to the its role as the only Committee of the Board.  Mr. Funtig, Chair of the Audit Committee, advised there will be policy written on the appointment of auditors and the role and function of the Committee and the Finance Department.

RESOLVED THAT the Unaudited Financial Statements for the year ended March 31, 2001 be accepted for information AND THAT the mandate of the current Audit Committee be continued until September at which time a draft  policy with respect to the Audit Committee will be tabled with the Board.

It was also,

RESOLVED THAT the Audit Committee be authorized to approve the Statutory Financial Statements for submission to the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities.

5.3	College Sector Highlights

A copy of the Corporate Services Sector highlights is attached to the Minutes as Item 5.3.  These highlights were inadvertently omitted from the agenda due to technical difficulties in the Board office.

RESOLVED THAT the College Sector Highlights be accepted for information.

5.4	Board Meeting Schedule – September to December, 2001

 A copy is attached as Item 5.4.

A governor pointed out there is a need for the Board to have the opportunity for discussion around such topics as honoury diplomas, board development, board recruitment and performance, as well as meeting with the Foundation Board.  She commented there is a huge opportunity for board education that we have not had.  She was concerned that if the Committee of the Whole meetings were eliminated the opportunity for this would be lost.  It was agreed that the Committee of the Whole concept should be maintained through the 

					- 7 -				2001 06 26

next year because the Board has more challenges to deal with in the coming year.  It was also suggested that there might be a better name for this Committee.
  
RESOLVED THAT the Committee of the Whole meetings be maintained.

A governor stressed that Full Board items must not be dealt with at the Committee of the Whole meetings and these meetings be held solely for policy development and board education.

RESOLVED THAT the attached meeting Schedule be approved.

6.0	DATE OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Full Board will be on Tuesday, September 11, 2001, in Windsor.