Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Board Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees back clearer attendance expectations but counsel warns enforcement limits for gubernatorial, legislative appointees
Summary
The VSC executive committee asked counsel to draft clearer attendance guidance for trustees, but the general counsel warned enforcement would be limited against gubernatorial and legislative appointees and suggested the handbook and board-appointed trustees be the primary enforcement avenue.
The executive committee of the Vermont States Colleges (VSC) board of trustees asked general counsel Patty to draft clearer guidance on trustees' attendance expectations and to return a proposal for executive-committee review before the June board meeting.
Patty, the committee's general counsel, told trustees that while "the board could indeed have a policy," a "true attendance problem ... is problematic because the board would have a difficult time enforcing an attendance policy against a gubernatorial or a legislative appointee." She recommended using the trustees' handbook to clarify expectations and noted the board could enforce rules more readily against its own board-appointed trustees, "of which there are 4."
Trustee Tristan Mahalley said he was "in favor of a policy, and I'm in favor of policy that's very clear, has a certain number of meetings," adding he was "less worried about enforcement because ... the purpose of the policy is not to literally have the board vote to kick somebody off." Trustees discussed concrete thresholds as examples; one trustee suggested language such as when "someone who misses 2 out of 3 meetings in a year" the chair would consult with the executive about continuation.
Members also emphasized that committee attendance should be included in any guidance and that the committee should stress the importance of the limited in-person meetings and retreats. The committee agreed Patty will prepare a draft and circulate it to the executive committee for comment; options for review included email commentary or an additional short executive meeting prior to the June in-person board meeting.
No formal policy was adopted at the session; trustees directed counsel to return recommended language and a process for committee review and board consideration.
