Bitterroot College of The University of Montana
Minutes of the Advisory Council
DRAFT
Meeting Location: Conference Room, Human Resource Council Building, 316 N 3 rd
Street, Hamilton
Meeting Time and Date: 3:10 – 6:00 PM, Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Chair: Lynn Stocking
Vice Chair: Dixie Stark
1) Call to Order and Roll Call a) Advisory Council members present: Terry Berkhouse, Patricia Meakin, Al Mitchell, Deb Morris, Dixie
Stark, Lynn Stocking, and Connie Ward b) Advisory Council members absent: Perry Brown, Jennifer Burdette, Pat Connell, Heather Green, and
Roger Maclean c) BC staff present: Victoria Clark (Director; taking notes) d) Members of the public present: Allen Bjergo (RC&D board chair), Norma Gilmore, and John Robinson
(past BC Steering Committee Chair)
2) Special Guest Speaker a) Bill Johnston, Director, UM Office of Alumni Relations & UM Legislative Lobbyist
Discussion Summary: Bill Johnston was invited to speak to the Council to provide members with guidance on how to approach State Legislators in terms of lobbying for the Bitterroot College during the 2013 Legislative Session.
Johnston began by asking Council members what they thought the purpose of a lobbyist was. Responses from
Council members included educating legislators, providing legislators with information, and promoting—in
Johnston’s case—funding initiatives for the Montana University System (MUS) to State Legislators. Also during this portion of the discussion, Patricia Meakin expressed her frustration with the present Bitterroot College funding situation, commenting that she wasn’t sure that having a UM/MUS lobbyist who advocated on behalf of the whole would result in an improvement of the Bitterroot College fiscal position; she remarked that in the case of the
Bitterroot College she wasn’t sure if a rising tide raised all boats. Meakin along with others wanted to understand how to answer questions from local legislators regarding the Bitterroot College and what the parameters were in terms of Advisory Council members going to Helena to advocate on behalf of the Bitterroot College.
Johnston replied to these comments at several levels. First he stated that his job was as a middleman to work with everyone who is elected to promote higher education. He asserted that for this legislative session the MUS had three priorities: 1) to support the Present Law Adjustment (PLA); 2) to support a Pay Plan increase so that higher education salaries remained competitive nationally, and 3) to support the MUS long-range building program with the new Missoula College facility of primary importance. In terms of Advisory Council members lobbying
State Legislators, Johnston clarified that MUS employees working on state time needed to clear any lobbying through Johnston and that in general the tactic was for everyone to work together promoting the MUS priorities with the sense that what benefited the whole benefited all. Johnston said that Advisory Council members lobbying under their Advisory Council “identity” would also need to clear their lobbying efforts through him. Too, Johnson requested Advisory Council members notify him if they were approached by a member of the legislature for information or comment. Johnson emphasized that, of course, anyone advocating as a private citizen on their own time was free to do as they pleased. In terms of specifically lobbying for the Bitterroot College, Johnston suggested the avenue of the general promotion of 2-year education. Several Advisory Council members as well as
BC Director Victoria Clark told Johnston that if testimony on behalf of the importance of 2-year education was needed that they would be willing to speak up. The issue of the Bitterroot College needing resources as well as a long-term funding strategy was reasserted by several Council members and members of the public. Johnston suggested that this situation seemed to be a question more for UM administration, and in particular the UM
Provost, than a question for the legislature.
3) Announcements and Documents Received
Discussion Summary: Victoria Clark presented a letter from John Robinson which Robinson was requesting be entered into the meeting record. Clark said the letter concerned the Bitterroot College fiscal position; she asked

DRAFT BC Advisory Council Meeting Minutes, 12-05-2012, Page 2 of 2 that in consideration of time rather than read the letter aloud at present that the letter be sent electronically to all
Council members and be read at their leisure. It was agreed to sending the letter out electronically and including the letter in meeting minutes for public disclosure (for letter text, see attached document).
4) Approval of Advisory Council Meeting Minutes from September 26, 2012
Discussion Summary: Following a correction of the word “troubling” to “trouble” in the first paragraph of Item 5
(Student Representative section), the minutes from September 26, 2012 were unanimously approved.
5) Public Comment
Discussion Summary: Norma Gilmore stated that she believed the University of Montana’s Early Childhood Center on the UM campus was a model education program, and she hoped that the Bitterroot College would follow the
UM model in its pursuit and delivery of early childhood education programming.
6) Student Representative (Heather Green)
No report; Heather Green was absent from the meeting.
7) Director’s Report – see supplemental materials (Victoria Clark) a) Questions on Director’s Report
Discussion Summary: Advisory Council members asked Clark to clarify the Bitterroot College FY2013 budget position with respect to the present fiscal statement that indicated a possible allocation decrease between FY2012 and FY2013. Clark explained that she continued to pursue this issue with the Provost but was not at present able to provide an explanation. Meakin remarked that the Bitterroot College needed an understandable funding model which would give the College the ability to plan for the future. Several Council members expressed an interest in understanding how the UM determined the Bitterroot College allocation from year to year. The Council asked for an understanding of the UM’s short and long term funding plan for the College. The Council also requested a more thorough understanding of the fiscal statements which Clark provided each month. Clark responded with agreement to all the Council requests, noting that in terms of the UM’s year-to-year allocation decisions and overall funding plan for the Bitterroot College she too needed clarification on this process. With respect to the
College’s fiscal statements Clark suggested that due to the level of detail behind the statements the formation of a budget work group might be the best way to approach this topic. Clark could then dedicate time to educating the work group with respect to the Bitterroot College fiscal statements and then the work group could report back to the Council as whole. Several Council members expressed interest in this idea, volunteering to be part of such a budget work group. Clark noted that due to the apparent allocation decrease coupled with the on-going fundraising effort in support of spring instruction, she believed that there was urgency in getting the Council up to speed on BC budget issues. Consequently, she asked that a first meeting of the budget work group take place prior to the upcoming holiday break. Council members agreed, and Clark said she would look to plan a first budget work group meeting within the next two weeks.
At this point, the time was after 6 PM and the meeting had lasted for nearly three hours. The Chair, with unanimous Council consent, suspended the remainder of the agenda until the next meeting date, and the meeting was adjourned.
Meeting notes subscribed and summarized by Victoria Clark