Task Force Meeting Information

May 8 and 9, 2008

Casper College, Casper, Wyoming

 

Task Force Members Present

Senator Henry H.R. “Hank” Coe, Co-Chairman

Representative Del McOmie, Co-Chairman

Senator Rae Lynn Job

Senator Michael Von Flatern

Representative Pete Jorgensen

Representative Lorraine Quarberg

Lynn Birleffi, Cheyenne, Representing Travel, Tourism & Recreation

Glenn Dalton, Rock Springs, Representing Community Colleges-Vocational Programs

Joan K. Evans, Cheyenne, Representing Workforce Services

Steve L. Johnson, Sheridan, Representing Mining

Tom Kinnison, Sheridan, Representing Small Business Community

Bryan Pedersen, Cheyenne, Representing Public-At-Large

David R. Reetz, Powell, Representing Community Colleges-Academic Programs

 

Task Force Members Absent

Jerry Austin, Wamsutter, Representing Oil and Gas

Mary Behrens, Casper, Representing Health Care

 

Other Legislators Present

Senator John Schiffer

Representative Roy Cohee

 

Legislative Service Office Staff

Dave Nelson, School Finance Manager, Long, School Finance Analyst

Matthew Sackett, Research Analyst, Josh Anderson, Staff Attorney

 

Others Present at Meeting

Governor Dave Freudenthal.  Please refer to Appendix 1 to review the Committee Sign-in Sheet
for a list of other individuals who attended the meeting.

Call To Order (May 8, 2008)

Co-Chairman McOmie called the meeting to order at 8:30 am.  The following sections summarize the Committee proceedings by topic.  Please refer to Appendix 2 to review the Committee Meeting Agenda.

 

Task Force Mission

The members of the Task Force introduced themselves to the other members and the audience. 

 

Senator Schiffer noted that the Task Force was addressing a difficult and important issue. Senator Schiffer stated that there are three specific points of interest.  The first area is capital construction and the issue of how to address the planning and building.  The second point area is operations and programs with particular attention on the funding formula and whether the formula meets the needs of the state.  Senator Schiffer noted that if the task force can outline a formula that makes sense it will have solved a difficult problem.   Senator Schiffer stated that the third area of interest is how to create a community college system statewide and maximize investment in community colleges by having a seamless educational system.

 

Representative Cohee stated that the activities of the Task Force may not be popular but they are necessary.   Representative Cohee noted that the question is whether the state is getting the bang for its buck.  Representative Cohee noted that the current system has served fairly well but there was a question as to whether the system has stayed on task or just moved with the times.  Representative Cohee noted that the state has a short window of opportunity and that the wealth may not always be there.  He stated that the workforce is not diversified and stated that the community college system could be used to develop Wyoming's economy.  Representative Cohee stated that some options could include drawing the University into the conversation to help serve all of the state and guard against redundant efforts with a small population.  He noted that it is important to fill the needs of short and long term workforce development and do what is best for the state of Wyoming.  Representative Cohee noted that the actions of the Task Force more than likely will not be the final answer but will start the discussion.

 

Senator Coe noted that the Task Force has the opportunity to do something wonderful for the state.  Senator Coe stated that it was important to keep an eye on the local counties and to not forget what the locals have done.  He stated that it was important to consider whether the other counties should be paying?  Senator Coe noted that the Task force is needed to help bring continuity and that it may not be possible to have local control with the large state contribution, but that it was important to not forget the locals.

 

Representative McOmie asked the Task Force to not deal with turf wars but instead to look at what is best for the state.  Representative McOmie stated that there may be a need to look at a board of regents.  He noted that it was important to look at the activities of the Task Force as an opportunity, not as a threat.

 

In the afternoon, Governor Freudenthal spoke concerning the mission of the task force. The Governor noted that the State has significantly enhanced the funding of community colleges and that the State had the capacity to do so moving forward.  He noted that the President’s council has largely been the driving force but now the state has taken an increasingly active role, paying 60 percent or more of the expenses.  The Governor noted that the State has recognized the need for expanded workforce training and that it was appropriate to look to the community college system.  The Governor stated that an important concern is to determine the interest of the state in funding community colleges.  The Governor stated that some questions to ask are what is the State's interest in spending State dollars and what is the administrative system to account for the interest of the State?  The Governor noted that there is no constitutional measure that gives the initial guidance and that to this point the template for what the community colleges are doing comes from political interaction rather than determining the needs of the state.

 

In response to a question, the Governor stated that once the Task Force can answer what the state’s interest is, any remaining questions become easy.  The Governor stated that it was not the place of the Task Force to tell the colleges how to run their institutions but it was appropriate to tell them what the State is willing to pay for.  The Governor noted that there is no constitutional requirement that any community college exist and that the State can tell them what the State wants done and if the college does not want to do it the college can just not take the money.   In response to a question, the Governor stated that it is necessary to ask for serious accountability to determine that the interest of the state is being accomplished.

 

The Governor noted that the State interest needs to be defined by the State and that it would be unfair to delegate to the colleges to decide the State’s interest.  The Governor suggested that the Task Force not get lost in saying that is has to have all the answers but rather to focus on what the State is willing to pay for and what is the feedback.

 

Community College Information Session

 

Mr. Dave Nelson of the Legislative Service Office stated that the materials given to the Task Force were intended to give a broad general look at the history and current state of the community college system.  Mr. Nelson noted that the process of looking at community colleges is not new and that this Task Force was created to continue the effort of the Governor’s Blue Ribbon Commission.  Mr. Nelson noted that the Commission put in a lot of work over last summer and that of the 35 recommendations that were made roughly 11 or 12 were submitted to the Education Committee and the majority of those were adopted by the Legislature.  Mr. Nelson noted that the Commission focused on two topics, workforce training and governance.  Mr. Nelson noted that several of the governance issues, including strategic planning and auditing were acted on by the Legislature.

 

Dr. Jim Rose of the Wyoming Community College Commission noted that the community college system was an evolutionary product.  Dr. Rose note that in the 1930’s the State first began to look to community colleges for B.A. preparation and in the 1940’s the first colleges were founded.  Dr. Rose stated that we now have a system of 7 colleges with 9 campuses and 40 outreach sites with semi-autonomous local boards.  Dr. Rose noted that the Commission does not oversee the spending of the colleges and that their funding is given as a block grant.

 

Dr. Rose noted that the some of the functions of the commission are to advocate for the colleges, establish tuition, establish residency requirements, maintain an administrative computing system, collect funding, provide required reports and coordinate a variety of programs.  Dr. Rose noted that the Commission does not act as curriculum overseers but rather has an administrative role.

 

In response to a question, Mr. Nelson noted that the University would be invited to provide input at the second meeting of the task force.  Dr. Rose noted that as part of the strategic planning process of the Commission they sent a questionnaire to the University, among other groups and that the Commission was expecting to receive feedback directly from the University.

 

In response to a question, Dr. Rose noted that the optional 5 mill levy has been done but not frequently because, until recently, it could not be used for general operations or cap con but only for specific uses.  Dr. Rose noted that the principle elements of the comprehensive community college system mission are academic preparation, career-technical preparation, community education and adult literacy and GED preparation. 

 

Ms. Brenda Long of the Legislative Service Office provided a handout of a presentation on community colleges (see Appendix 3 for a copy of the handout).  Ms. Long presented information on the standard type funding of the colleges since 1999-2000 through 2007-2008.  Ms. Long noted that there was an increase in funding of about 104%.   Ms. Long noted that there are certain other appropriations that are not included in the information, but with those additional monies included the increase would be approximately 116%.  In response to a question, Ms. Long noted that the information presented does not include capital construction or major maintenance funding.

 

Ms. Long noted that the main streams of revenue for colleges are tuition and fees, local 4 mill and 1 mill funding, other local funds and state aid.  Ms. Long noted that the state aid piece includes both regular distributions and $30 million for health insurance.

 

Mr. Matt Petry of the Wyoming Community College Commission provided a summary of revenues.  Mr. Petry noted that there are unrestricted funds and restricted funds that are used by the colleges.  Mr. Petry provided annual budget summaries of the colleges.  Mr. Petry noted that the numbers showed increases in revenues and expenditures.

 

Mr. Matt Sackett of the Legislative Service Office provided information on the community college historical mill levy revenues.  Mr. Sackett noted that the community college base 4 mill levy for the regular support of the college is assessed only in the 7 home counties.  Mr. Sacket stated that the optional 1 mill levy which is unrestricted is imposed by all 7 community colleges.  Mr. Sacket noted that the 5 mill optional levy has been imposed very rarely by the colleges.

 

Ms. Long described the proposed funding formula for community colleges.   Mr. Long noted that the rules for implementation of the funding model were not adopted. Ms. Long stated that the Commission has adopted emergency rules to provide funding for 2009 for half of the 09-10 appropriation.  Ms. Long noted that the proposed formula is a work in progress and noted that the formula is expenditure based, biennial based, uses unique data, considers credit courses only and includes factors to recognize cost differences.  Ms. Long noted that the formula identifies fixed and variable expenditures and includes adjustment for implementation.  Ms. Long described the formula in 3 phases.  Phase 1 provides for the establishment of a baseline and is applied to each individual institution. In phase 1, a per credit cost baseline is established and at the end of the phase there is a starting cost proxy.  In phase 2 there are adjustments to project the next biennium operating costs including inflation, changes in enrolment, a workforce development add-on and state approved increase in salaries. If there is an enrolment decrease there is a reduction in the calculated cost because there are less credits, but the formula caps the loss at 2%.  In response to a question, Dr. Rose noted that the cap was there because even if a college were to lose enrolment the college will still have a lot of the same costs such as the same number of staff and infrastructure.  Ms. Long stated that at the end of phase 2 the number represents the total projected community college unrestricted operating cost.  Phase 3 involves the consideration of projected revenues.  This phase considers the operating cost less the estimated revenue available to determine the amount of state aid to community colleges.

 

Ms. Long described some observations about the funding model.  Ms. Long noted that the proposed model builds upon dollars that were funding under the prior system and that it focuses on expenditures for each college rather than a statewide system and thus may reflect individual management.  Ms. Long noted that the model looks at data from two disparate points in time to find baseline and noted that the cost factors of 1, 1.5 and 2.0 for differentiating between courses may not reflect actual differences in cost.  Ms. Long noted that the 2% soft landing provision in the formula may not be reflective of the actual cost. Ms. Long stated that the optional 1 mill levy is not considered as revenue and that the formula may work as an incentive to grow higher cost classes at the expense of some other class.

 

Ms. Long described the major maintenance funding that the colleges receive. She noted that resident life facilities are excluded.  Each category is multiplied by the appropriate Wyoming adjusted replacement cost factor and then is multiplied by the cost to maintain in fair condition, currently 1.5.  Finally, that amount is distributed to each college based on that college's proportionate square footage of the whole system.

 

Several handouts were provided to the committee.  Two handouts related to governance that were provided to the Governor's Commission (see Appendix 4 and 5) and two handouts related to legislation passed in the most recent legislative session (see Appendix 6 and 7).

 

Mr. Petry provided information on recent capital construction appropriations to the community colleges.  Mr. Petry noted that the State has taken an increased role in capital construction.

 

Mr. Nelson provided information to the Task Force on outreach programs including BOCES and BOCHES.  Mr. Nelson noted that if a student is involved in Dual enrolment there is funding from both the k-12 system and community college full time enrollment funding.  Mr. Nelson noted that there is not a lot of available data or state oversight on these programs.

 

Ms. Nicole Novotny of the Wyoming Community College Commission provided information to the Task Force on workforce and enrollment. In response to a question, Ms. Novotny noted that using a duplicated headcount provides an inflated number but it shows how many courses students are enrolled in.  Ms. Novotny noted that citizens that have completed high school and citizens with an associate's degree tend to stay in the state more than citizens who do not complete high school or citizens who obtain a bachelor's degree.  Ms. Novotny described four areas of performance assessment, the percent of May graduates working 1 year later, graduation rates within 3 years, adult basic education and GDE programs.

 

Meeting Recess

The Committee recessed at 3:50 pm.

 

 

Call To Order (May 9, 2008)

Co-Chairman McOmie called the meeting to order at 8:30 am.

 

Statewide Strategic Plan

Mr. Jack Russell of the Wyoming Community College Commission addressed the Task Force regarding the activities of the Commission.  Mr. Russell noted that the Commission does not see the task force as a threat but rather as an opportunity.  Mr. Russell noted that under HB0017 the Commission is required to report on a strategic plan and to assist in making education seamless in collaboration with the Department of Education.  Mr. Russell noted that the rules for the funding model were not adopted and have now been returned to the Commission with 9 LSO observations and that new rules can be adopted.  Mr. Russell noted that the Task Force is going to review and develop recommendations and that the Commission would look at ways to dovetail with the task force.

 

Mr. Russell said that the Commission had four suggestions of how to be helpful to the Task Force.  Those included setting dates to either precede or follow Task Force meetings and to be available at Task Force meetings, obtaining information from others by distributing a questionnaire, integrating adult basic education and GED into the funding formula and holding a 2 day meeting in June to look at the funding formula in light of Task Force observations.

 

Mr. Russell provided a handout to the Task Force (see Appendix 8 for a copy of the booklet).  Mr. Russell noted that this provided information on a way into the future.  Mr. Russell noted that one of the major difficulties involves capital construction projects. He noted that in 2007 the Commission prioritized a list and got some of those projects approved but in 2008 they prioritized again but received no funding.  Mr. Russell noted that there are two lists, list A which is meritorious and in order where the college will provide matching funds up to 50% and list B which is for locally funded projects that need approval for maintenance.  He noted there is also a third, floating group of projects which are meritorious but not on prioritized list and that this gives impression of the colleges speaking with multiple voices.

 

Mr. Russell noted there is a need to make the system seamless.  He noted that the p-12 system has a clear channel for building as does the University, but the process for community colleges lacks clarity.  Mr. Russell noted that the Commission stands ready to assist the Task Force.

 

State Revenue Forecast

Mr. Steve Sommers of the Legislative Service Office provided a handout to the task force regarding state revenues (see Appendix 9 for a copy of the handout).  Mr. Sommers noted that there are three types of revenues, dedicated revenue which is dedicated by the constitution or the federal government to be used for specific purpose, earmarked revenues which are set by state statute to go to a specific area and discretionary revenue which can be spent in any program.  Mr. Sommers noted that earmarked revenue can be changed but it requires a statutory change and is not always easy to change in the legislative process. Mr. Sommers stated that the Consensus Revenue Estimating Group (CREG) meets in October and January and their projections are used for setting the budget.

 

Mr. Sommers noted that there are three main sources of revenue: severance taxes, federal mineral royalties and coal lease bonus.  Mr. Sommers described where those revenues are distributed by constitution and by statute.  He noted that CREG does not project coal lease bonus money because it is uncertain as to when the money will be distributed after a sale.  Mr. Sommers noted that all of the revenue has been dealt with one way or another and that would give some indication of what an agency would be up against when it seeks an appropriation through the legislature.

 

Future Task Force Work Schedule

The members of the Task Force had a discussion of the future work of the Task Force.  Senator Coe noted that there are 3 major things the Task Force should consider: governance, funding and capital construction.

 

Mr. David Reetz noted that in addition to those three considerations there is one other item and that is the essential purpose of the community colleges, in order to add that context to those items.  Mr. Reetz asked that for the next meeting the interested parties be invited to provide written statements on their views.

 

Mr. Bryan Pedersen stated that the biggest point is, what is the purpose of the community colleges?  What do people and students want in their community college?

 

Ms. Lynn Birleffi stated that it is all about the governance in the end and that is the most important thing to come to a consensus on.  She noted that the current system is not centralized enough to enable a statewide discussion.  She stated that the governance system would allow the state to see where it is spending its money.

 

Senator Job stated that the purpose or state interest is pretty clear.  She noted that the community colleges are achieving and that it was important not to confuse the job of the Task Force with their job.  Senator Job stated that there is a need to revisit the role of the Commission and to consider whether the Commission should be regulatory or some kind of educational leader.

 

Mr. Steve Johnson noted that if the system needs to change the Task Force should consider what those governed by the system would prefer to see.  He noted that they should consider what the education system should look like in order to be seamless.  Mr. Johnson noted that it was necessary to use the resources available in the room.

 

Mr. Glenn Dalton stated that the community colleges are doing a great job.  He stated that the Task Force should consider what does a student want and what does industry wants.  He noted that the Task Force should not fix it if it is not broken and that the colleges are doing an excellent job.  Mr. Dalton noted that the colleges need to have local control because they know the future of that community.  He noted that the jobs are in Wyoming and if the State does not train them, the workers will come from somewhere else.

 

Representative Jorgensen stated that it was important that they do not constrain the kids and that is was necessary to be fair and to let the system decide on education and training.

 

Ms. Joan Evans stated that it is important to define what the state will pay for.  Ms. Evans noted that employers ask her agency to find a skilled workforce and the community colleges are the vehicle to provide those workers.  She noted that the definition of roles is critical.  Ms. Evans stated that one way to help deal with the fact that the State does not have enough people is to train them in an efficient manner and coordinate efforts.

 

Senator Von Flatern stated that the governing aspect needs an overhaul.  Senator Von Flatern noted that the Washington state model is something that the Task Force should look at.  He stated that the State’s interest is well defined; having higher education is the interest.  Senator Von Flatern stated that there is a need to strengthen the commission in order to have somewhere that industry can go to and voice concerns rather than travel to 7 different colleges, but that it is important to make sure that the system is designed in a way that the locals can react quickly.  Senator Von Flatern suggested that presidents and the advisory board do the day to day, with a central group with more power to make sure issues related to duplication are considered and make sure certain courses or programs are being offered.  Senator Von Flatern noted that solving the governance issue would help with determining how to solve the funding issues.

 

Representative Quarberg stated that every issue has two sides and that it was important to go in to this process with an open mind. Representative Quarberg noted that the State has realized the importance of community colleges but that it was important to make sure that the State’s interest is being served. 

 

Senator Schiffer stated that the Hathaway program empowered the students to decide what will happen and that the students will go where they want to go.  Senator Schiffer noted that it was important to give the governing board the authority to really move forward and look at things independently and that they may need a firewall in order to give them the appropriate amount of independence.

 

Representative McOmie noted that there needs to be a system for the prioritization of capital construction.  Representative McOmie noted that it was necessary to restructure the governance piece for accountability and that if the Task Force can reach consensus on that issue the other issues will fall into place.

 

Mr. Tom Kinnison suggested that the Task Force needs to focus and that at the next meeting the Task Force should pull their chairs in a circle and ask the stakeholders for their thoughts on governance, funding and capital construction in writing.

 

Senator Coe noted that for the next meeting the Task Force would take testimony from the stakeholders in writing.  He noted that the Task Force wants their input but they want it ahead of the meeting.

 

The Task Force set their next meeting for June 16 in Casper.

 

Meeting Adjournment

There being no further business, Co-Chairman Coe adjourned the meeting at 12:00 pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

Senator Coe, Co-Chairman                              Representative McOmie, Co-Chairman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix		Appendix Topic		Appendix Description		Appendix Provider
1		Committee Sign-In Sheet		Lists meeting attendees		Legislative Service Office
2		Committee Meeting Agenda		Provides an outline of the topics the Committee planned to address at meeting		Legislative Service Office
3		Community College Info		Presentation of information on the colleges		Legislative Service Office
4		Governance		Governance alternatives and issues		David Reetz
5		Governance		Governing Boards		David Reetz
6		Commission-duties		Summary of HB0017		Legislative Service Office
7		Capital construction		Summary of HB0081		Legislative Service Office
8		Action agenda		Report on community colleges		Wyoming Community College Commission
9		State revenues		State revenue sources		Legislative Service Office