Governance Task Force/minutes 091106


 * Posted to the intranet on Tuesday, December 1, 2009 by Abby Ferguson

Report of the Meeting of the Governance Task Force November 6, 2009 Hampshire College

Present: Shelley Carey (call-in), Dee Dee Desir, Yaniris Fernandez, Marian MacCurdy (co-chair), Susan Tracy (co-chair), Shelly Ruocco, Jim Wald, Laura Sizer, Lee Spector, Andrew Hart, Josiah Litant.

Excused: Laura Nasir, Stephan Jost

Proceedings:

I. The meeting was called to order at 12:07 p.m.

II. TF members reviewed the principles discussed at the prior meetings. It was suggested that it should be added to the principles that HC is an "experimenting college." Discussion ensued. We will return to these issues at a later meeting.

III. Audit sheets were reviewed. Task force members discussed how to vet the material in the audit sheets. We agreed to take the sheets to the appropriate administrators to check for accuracy and to provide any additional information if needed. Examples from audit sheets were discussed, particularly discrepancies between practice and documents.

IV. Deadlines were discussed. It was agreed that the original November 16 deadline will not be possible because of the magnitude of the work and the need for completeness. But we expect to have the audits completed by the end of the semester.

V. Examples of what members might include in their narratives from worksheets were reviewed. The members noted that the College has few governance structures that are conducive to meaningful communications among as well as within constituencies. The Gov TF reiterated its charge to include student governance among other areas of governance in its study. Definitions of constituencies were reviewed: faculty, students, staff, administration, and trustees.

VI. Community outreach was discussed. The community is waiting to hear specifics about when and how community members will be able to get involved in the review process. We reconfirmed that in 'Phase II' we ask what works and what doesn't work in current governance processes, and we will go out to community members for help in determining this. In 'Phase III' we will form subcommittees augmented with community members. It was agreed that next meeting the GTF would decide where the narratives fit within the review process and what the next steps should be.

VII. The meeting was adjourned at: 2:05 p.m.