UMass Amherst Alumni Association

About Us

Board of Directors Meeting Minutes

Saturday, May 12, 2007
Memorial Hall
UMass Amherst Campus
10:00 a.m.

Board Members: Elaine Barker, Mary Custard, Hal Lane, Sean LeBlanc, Kathleen Mitchell, Kim Sherman, Anna Symington, Bill Carroll, Rick Williams, Thin Aung, Mike Fiorentino, Jackie Govoni, Kerry Mulcahey, Andy Hochberg, Alex Chan, Ron Grasso, Tom Campbell, Dave Richter, Shyno Chacko, Ed Rubin, Diego Figueroa, Bob Shaughnessey, David Hautenen

Absent: Marc Rossen, Christine Lopes, Peter Alemian, Suzanne Morse, Paul Sienkiewicz, Jessica Giangrande  

Staff: Deb Masloski, Kevin Fleming , Elena Lamontagne, Norma Heim, Janine Sicks

Guests: None

Call to Order: The meeting convened at 10:05 a.m.

Approval of Minutes
Motion:  By Elaine, seconded by Kim, to approve the minutes from the February 10, 2007 Board of Directors meeting.  The motion passed unanimously.

President’s Update
Hal noted that he enjoyed the evening at the Pops, and that they honored a Nobel Prize Laureate from UMass Medical.  Graduation and Commencement Ball are coming up quickly, and he urged Board members to attend these events if possible.  Hal also conveyed that the Distinguished Alumni Awards were classy, held at a wonderful venue, and gave good visibility to the Alumni Association, and he commended the Programs and Services Committee for their work on the event.

Hal’s final note was that it had been a pleasure to work with the Board of Directors in his tenure, and thanked everyone for their work.  He noted that the Alumni Association is earning the respect on campus that they deserve, and urged the group to continue to work towards greater achievements.

Executive Director’s Report
Deb discussed the termination of the student loan contract with Chase Education, due to the company’s interpretation of a New York Law regarding ethical practices in the student loan industry.  The Alumni Association, nor our student loan company, has done nothing wrong, however the contract will be terminated to ensure that no appearance of impropriety exists.  The Alumni Association will not have any liability issues, but is investigating what will happen with the remaining money Chase owes the Alumni Association under the current contract.

Deb relayed a recommendation by the Alumni Association to switch our online community vendor from PCI to Harris.  Alumni Association staff conducted a thorough review of online vendors by calling for proposals for new online vendors, creating a list of functionality needs, viewing several vendor website demonstrations, and calling current client references of each.  It is also within our current budget structure allotted for our online community.  Deb also noted that the UMass system is likely to contract with Harris as well, and if they do this by June 15th, we will receive a 10% discount.  It would be a four-year contract.

Deb also discussed the Executive Summary Program Review that was in Board members’ packets, and had previously been approved by the Executive Committee.  The intent of the program review was to drive value in Alumni Association membership through programming, particularly by life stage segments.  The program review calls for:

1. Expanded career services and club programming in strategic areas (noting Glen Mangurian’s breakfasts in Boston as a good example)
2. Expansion of Athletic programming (such as the football game in Chattanooga, or a bus trip to the upcoming football game against Boston College in the fall); it was noted that this will be expensive because of the travel and promotion involved
3. Restructuring of committees, including: combining programming aspects of programs and services and student programs and services
4. Volunteer recruitment, including: freeing up more time for staff to recruit volunteers by hiring one additional event planner on staff.
5. Expanding the online Career Services component to our website
6.  

Bill asked about a paragraph in the Program Review relaying alumni survey results that showed there has been “little or no perceived value to membership,” asking if the time and money the Alumni Association has devoted to membership has had no effect.  Deb responded that Association members perceived little programmatic value to membership, whereas non-members perceived no benefit at all to membership.  Ed asked what the current breakdown was for internal vs. University support for programs.  Deb noted that we receive $800,000 of support from the University, and that the Alumni Association funds 62% of total alumni relations operations.  She noted that research on other institutions showed that the average alumni association supported 70% of its operations. 

Dave Richter asked if there was a way to plug life membership in Hal’s commencement speech, and Hal noted that the Chancellor’s Office greatly restricts what he can say during his speech.  Dave also asked if we can have an “Alumni Connections” section of the Alumni Magazine that relays stories of the best connections alumni have made through membership.  Staff members noted that we only have 5-6 pages of space within the magazine, but it might be something we can incorporate into that space.  Alex asked if we were able to expand the role of student employees to help Kevin with some of the event planning activities to free him up to do more of the volunteer recruitment emphasized in the Program Review.  Deb noted that there is a high degree of turnover among student workers, and that an additional event planner on staff would be the best way to enable greater volunteer recruitment. 

Deb and the Association staff also made several announcements.  The Student Alumni Association won both the Spirit Award and the Outstanding Event award at the First Annual Student Affairs Awards (called the “SAMMIES”).  The Alumni Association would be hosting a tent at the A-10 softball tournament on campus at noon later that day. Norma told the Board that membership brochures and fliers promoting the $20 membership for new graduates were distributed through school and college folders at graduation, and that the Alumni Association is sponsoring the last issue of the Collegian.  In this issue, there will be tips for the real world that tie back to the Alumni Association, as well as editorials about the benefits of the Alumni Association and membership.  The issue comes out on Tuesday.    

Nominating Committee Report and Officer Elections
Motion:  Elaine made a motion, seconded by Rick, to accept the Nominating Committee’s report.  After discussion (noted below), the motion passed unanimously. 

During discussion, Anna noted that there was a very detailed report of the Nominating Committee’s process included in the Board packets, and that the Committee wanted ensure transparency and fairness throughout the process.  She told the Board that the Committee examined the current composition of the Board and the strategic needs of the Board going forward, established evaluation criteria, afforded every candidate interviews with two interviewers, and that interview questions were distributed ahead of time to set candidates at ease.  A similar process was used for the Officer positions, but questions were not distributed ahead of time in order to see how the Officer candidates “think on their feet.”  Anna recused herself from all discussions of the Officer process, because she was the only member of the Nominating Committee that ran for an Officer position that had multiple applicants. 

Ed asked how leadership ability and interpersonal skills were determined.  Anna responded that those 2 criteria had been determined through the interviews and letters of interest.  Bill told the Board that he was upset that there were so few people nominated for officer positions, and that a number of the Nominating Committee members were placed on the Officer ballot.  Ron noted that the low number of nominees is a result of the lack of interest by the majority of Board members to become officers.  Dave Richter also told the Board that meeting 12 times a year makes it very difficult for a lot of out-of-state Board members to run for an Officer position. 
Anna noted that 3 people from the Nominating Committee applied for Officer positions, and two of them were unopposed in those positions.  She also told the Board that no one on the Nominating Committee discussed beforehand who among them was running for an Officer position, nor for what position they were running for.  She also reiterated that she recused herself from all discussions relating to the Officer elections, because the committee was dedicated to transparency and fairness.  Finally, Anna noted that if they did not believe that the best candidates were put forward for the positions, the Board did not have to vote in the slate that was put forth.

Ed asked why the maximum number of candidates were not placed on the general election ballot, and also if any women were not placed on the ballot.  Anna responded that there was a specific cutoff score at which candidates that fell below were not placed on the ballot.  She also told the Board that every effort was made to address diversity in age, gender, profession, etc.  Deb added that one recommendation that has come out of the committee is that all Board members need to be responsible for recruiting potential new Board members throughout the year.  It is difficult to get the diversity in candidates we seek through a general call for Board volunteers. 

Motion:  Mike made a motion, seconded by Sean, to call the question to approve the slate of officers as proposed by the Nominating Committee.  The Motion passed with 23 Ayes and 1 Nay.

Anna explained the election process, noting that individuals can only accept a nomination for one Officer position.  She also conveyed that eligibility is based on overall Board service, and those Board members whose term of service as an officer will not exceed the maximum allowable years of Board service are eligible.  She then read the Officer slate proposed by the Nominating Committee, and asked for any additional nominations from the floor for each Officer position.  No additional nominations were received.  Staff then distributed paper ballots to each Board member present.  Staff then collected the ballots once filled out, and tallied the results in a different room.  Once the staff had tallied the ballots, the results of the election were announced:
President:  Kathleen Mitchell
Vice Presidents:  Mary Custard
                          Sean LeBlanc
                          Anna Symington
Secretary:  Kim Sherman
Treasurer:  Ron Grasso

Hal praised the Nominating Committee for their work, and thanked them for endeavoring to be as fair and transparent as possible. 

Bylaw and Standing Rule Amendments
Motion:  Elaine made a motion, seconded by Kim, to accept the bylaw and standing rule amendments as written.  The motion passed with 2 abstentions.

During discussion, Ed noted that Board members received the Board packages in their finality on Thursday.  Deb noted that the bylaws changes were originally distributed on April 12th, and that the budget was the only new item in the packets distributed Thursday.  There were also several questions on why the chair of the Audit committee did not have to be a Board member, which Andy noted had been settled at the prior Board meeting when the Charter had been accepted. 

FY 2008 Operating Budget
Elaine noted that the FY 2008 operating budget proposal came through the committee structure, with much of it based on the Executive Summary Program Review.  She noted that the deficit in operating budget was due to the loss of some sources of revenue and proposed increases in programming and staffing resources.  Elaine also discussed that the Alumni Association had always operated in the positive in her tenure, but this year they are asking the Board to approve taking money out of their assets to fund the budget.  She believes that the Alumni Association staff has an excellent plan in place to increase membership and to spend the funds wisely, and that the additional funding is worth the risk.  Additionally, Deb noted that, 4 years ago, the Alumni Association had to cut several staff members due to a $400,000 budget cut from state funding.  We are currently operating near our prior staffing levels, but have not received the accompanying increase in funding from the University.  She also made the Board aware that, if Cristina had stayed on as the Executive Director, the Alumni Association would currently be facing a $125,000 shortfall in the budget.  Deb recommended that the Board ask the Chancellor’s office to fund the shortfall, but barring an unexpected infusion of cash from the President’s Office, she does not believe that they would approve the request. 

Motion:  Made by Mary, seconded by Mike, to approve the budget as proposed.  After discussion (detailed below), the motion carried unanimously. 

During discussion, Dave Richter asked if the Alumni Association decided on the qualifications of the two proposed additional staff members, or if the University determined those.  Deb responded that, though we would be funding the positions, we would work through the University to generate the job description, salary, qualifications, etc.  Dave also asked if the Executive Director position could be structured with an incentive-based compensation to focus on membership increases.  Deb discussed that the there are several upper-level Foundation positions that were hired under incentive-based conditions, but noted that the Alumni Association would have to assume all responsibility for salary, benefits, etc. However, she suggested that building in an incentive component on top of the University salary might be a good compromise.  Hal thought that it would be a good idea to provide incentives based on membership to the whole staff, not just the Director.  Mike expressed his belief that the only thing you can do with state employees is a salary adjustment once annually, and that there were no other bonus opportunities available. 

Alex asked if the Association had the money to support the proposed operating deficit.  Deb noted that the Association had been originally projecting a net increase in assets of $103,000, and as of March 1st, we are currently projecting an increase of $359,000.  She also discussed that the budget incorporates a loss in catering sponsorship for our events, but that Norma had put together an excellent proposal to retain that sponsorship.  Elaine also noted that there is still potential for more sponsorship and partnership programs to bring in revenue. 

Ed inquired about the Liberty Mutual partnership, and whether we get revenues just from new accounts or renewed accounts as well.  Deb noted that our contract was reviewed by our legal counsel, that we receive royalties on both new and renewed accounts, and that our partnership with Liberty Mutual has been very lucrative.  She also noted that, due to a new law that requires all individuals to have insurance, she thought that we might have an opportunity to capitalize on young alum participation in the Liberty Mutual program. 

Bob asked if the staff had inquired into the Microsoft Office program he had suggested for the club websites.  Deb noted that the staff did a very thorough review of potential vendors, including the program that Bob had suggested, and that Harris was the best choice in terms of functionality, customer recommendations, cost, and support.  She also noted that we have been very clear in structuring the contract around our needs, expectations, and deadlines.

Board of Directors Website
Deb introduced the Board of Directors Website as a project that arose from the Board’s desire for increased access to information.  Elena noted that you must be a registered member of the Online Community in order to see the Board of Directors site, and that Board members must enter their last name and ten-digit ID number to log-in.  Once logged-in, they will see the link to the Board website at the bottom of the welcome page.  It is a secure site that only members of the Board of Directors have access to, and will contain a host of information provided by staff members.  Elena noted that the site is a work in progress, and that not all information is on the site as of yet.  Along with increased access to information, Deb expressed that the goal of the site is to replace mailing out packets to the Board.  All information will be posted on the Board site, and Board members will be notified via email when information is posted to the site for viewing. 

Rick thought that this would be a great tool, particularly for the Grants Review Committee.  Deb thought this might work but that it may be a matter of individual preference, noting that some individuals prefer to read that amount of information on paper rather than a computer screen.  Bob asked if this would be downloadable to laptops on campus, so that Board members can look at the documents as they are going through the meeting.  Norma relayed that she is in the process of talking with the Office of Information Technologies (OIT) about providing internet access to Alumni Association Members.  Alex also inquired about the potential to host a discussion forum on the Board Website.  Deb noted that our current provider does not have this capability, but a discussion board may be possible when we switch to our new vendor. 

Committee Reports
Alumni Career Services:  Kim informed the group that they have an event with Mike Tannenbaum, General Manager of the New York Jets.  She discussed the “catch-22” of getting big names for events:  Development needs to know that there will be a large number of attendees at an event to let us use a key prospect as a speaker, but we have trouble getting a large number of attendees without a big-name speaker.  Kim noted that the staff will be working on this issue with Development Officers over the summer, but asked members of the Board to refer any names of individuals they believe would be good speakers. 
Audit Committee:  Andy noted that they selected a new auditor.  The Alumni Association previously used an individual that did not have the depth of experience that they were looking for.  After a call for proposals, the Alumni Association has hired Coskin & Rufkiss as our new auditor.  They also are the auditor for the UConn Alumni Association, so they have a good understanding of our needs.  They also have a better reporting system than our former provider.    
Finance & Investments:  Ron conveyed that Alumni Association investments are up 8.1%, and that CPI is between 2-3%, which is above our goals.  The Committee chose John Theopolis of Linsco/Private Ledger as our new investment consultant, and he will make recommendations on where to invest our money (we are not investing in their company).  Ed asked if our relationship with John means that we have a relationship with Linsco.  John is independent, but uses Linsco as his broker dealer.  As such, we do have a relationship with Linsco, but we rely on their extensive efforts of due diligence.  Ron also noted that the fee is a flat rate of 95 basis points, in comparison of 1.07 for the other finalist.  Elaine also interjected that the reporting from Linsco will be a vast improvement from our former provider.  Alex inquired if it was an “at-will” relationship, and Ron noted that if we sever the agreement, we are actually rebated the unused portion of the fee. 

Motion:  Bill made a motion, seconded by Dave, to approve the investment consultant hiring recommendation.  The motion passed unanimously.

Old Business:  None

New Business: 
Kathleen wanted to recognize Thin for being a stellar student, and noted that the Board of Directors has been gifted to have her as a member.  She also suggested that the same “buddy” system that is in place for new Board members might be a great program to replicate for new Association members.  She thought that it might be very powerful to hear from volunteers, particularly Board members, thanking them for their membership.  Ron also thought it would be a great opportunity to find out their motivations for joining and discuss them as a Board in meetings. 

Bill noted that Deb does a tremendous job, even while doing two jobs currently, and does not always get the credit she deserves. 

General Announcements:  None

Adjournment:  The meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m.