Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Meeting called to order at 1205.doc


Cedar House Sport Inn, Truckee
TUESDAY, January 12, 2010
Board Members Present: Ken Cutler, Cindy Flores, Hale Carr, Doug Flynn, Kelli Twomey, Gretchen Sproehnle,
Emily Farrell, Ann Holmes Delforge, Lil Schaller, Lisa McPherson, Bill Hudson, Doug Pierini, Lianne Nall, Mary
Lynn Willis, Joy Doyle, Donna Morgan, Nancy Gisko, Raine Howe, Alison Elder, Terri Viehmann, Sidney Scott,
Nathan Kendall, Michelle Larson.
Also present: Laura Abbey Brown, Executive Director and Kim Bradley, facilitator

President, Bill Hudson called the meeting to order at 12:34 p.m.

Bill Hudson, Introduction
        Vision and goals for the day were discussed. Introduced Kim Bradley, today’s facilitator.
        NLT Chamber of Commerce Recognition Event is next month.

Motion to approve November board minutes (no full meeting in December): Kelli Twomey; second: Donna
Morgan. Board unanimously approved the motion.

      Thank you notes from TTUSD Board were routed and noted that this is the first one we have received.
      Laura recognized Bill Hudson – our fearless leader – as one of the Olympians featured in the Olympic
       Heritage Week going on right now.
      SFS sold out Northstar $25,000!!! Sugar Bowl was huge, Royal Gorge was close to a sell out as well.
      Kelli noted that the Tuesday Morning Breakfast Club donated some funding to backfill some of the lakeside
       grants that Ex in Ed was not able to fund in full for the Fall Grant Cycle.
      Ex in Ed joint meeting with the full TTUSD board in December – highlights include:
            o Financial state of the state is still not good – we are not as bad because of Basic Aid status but
                 times still tight
            o Review of school district: next big step is to focus on the high school level – High School Task
                 Force (17 people) made up of teachers, students, parents (both middle and high school),
                 administrators to maximize resources; look at how they can most efficiently work while providing
                 the highest quality of education.
            o We discussed how we could best work together to be most efficiently – one request was that Ex in
                 Ed could take more of a leadership role surrounding education issues. Spent some time discussing
                 our role. How we could support with our granting – change so that grants come in via PLCs (entire
                 grade level or department vs. individual teachers) or from Academic Coaches – formalize that
                 process to help support the educational model.
                           Filtering through PLCs maybe not the best idea – we should have a broader scope, can
                            accomplish more. These ideas will be discussed further with the Allocations Committee.

Ex in Ed Mission Statement
        Current mission statement was reviewed and discussion followed on whether it still reflects who we are.
        Parameters on who we are raising funds for – add preschool? Add college level?
        Examples of why we want to stay broad and more inclusive.
        The word “quality” maybe too mediocre?
        Encourage, enhance, empower
        TTUSD going through a lot of changes – also looking at Charter schools which are gaining more traction.
         Where do they fall? Ann explained that we have done that in the past – relationship between the district and
         the charter school. They have a relationship with, but are not part of the district as a whole.
        Eliminate the grade levels in our mission statement and leave it up to the discretion of the allocations
        Acknowledge the engagement and support of the community. “Partner” or “partnerships”? Include the
        Short and succinct – one line – we should all be able to recite. Eliminate second line?
        Discussion re: advocacy? We need to be cautious on this front. Maybe don’t include in Mission Statement.
        Capture ideas now and have a core group come up with 3-4 options for the larger group.
         Ideas that came out at the meeting:
             Our mission is to provide and support excellence in education within the Tahoe Truckee Unified School
              District (through community engagement).
             We strive to enhance a quality public education for all K-12 students within the Tahoe Truckee Unified
              School District through fundraising, grants, and community partnerships.
             Our mission is to strengthen public educational opportunities for all students within the TTUSD through
              partnerships within the community.
             To help provide a first class education for students within the TTUSD through fundraising, grants and
              community engagement.
             To assist TTUSD to strive for excellence in public educational opportunities.
             Use our tagline? Community and Business helping students reach new heights in public education
              (needs to include TTUSD)
             Vision vs. Mission Statement???
             Buzzwords: strengthen, enhance, empower, encourage, help, support, participation, engagement,
              excellent/excellence, quality, first class, assist, strive, public/TTUSD
   Nancy, Alison, Kelli, and Michelle offered to take the project to a subcommittee level. They will take the above
    renditions and blend them together into two options that they will present to group next month.

What do we advocate for?
       Endorsed Measure U, L, and probably should endorse Measure A.
       Did not take a stand on the recall issue. Very clear rules set by IRS as to what 501(c)(3) organizations
        can/can’t do.
       Want to be able to decide on a case by case basis, but want to create a process that we can follow as an
        organization to filter or help us get to a decision for future.
       Laura presented the New Opportunity Decision-Making Process handout. Discussion followed and the
        document was revised to include a screening of legal issues and
       Add a level of output to state if opportunity was accepted or rejected and briefly explain why.
       Laura will bring the revised Process to the next board meeting for approval.

Ex in Ed’s role in educational issues
        Do we want to take more of a leadership role?
        Educational forums or issue briefings? – staying neutral.
        Technology is an example of a decision that our board made, followed through on, and had a huge impact.
         Didn’t tell district what we wanted them to do, more what we were comfortable doing with our funding.
         Maintained a neutral role. Not our intent to tell them what to do. Made offer to bring in an expert to help
         develop the plan, initially turned down, offered again.
        If we did offer any kind of forum, keep them short. We shouldn’t be the messenger of board decisions, but
         can provide information to the public. Innovative techniques in education, information geared toward parents.
         PTO/PTA can support parent education in addition to being a fundraising organization.
        We shouldn’t try to be everything to everyone – go back to our mission and make sure we are following it.
         We have a pretty good formula doing what we do now.
        Comment: I don’t support always being neutral because I think the community looks to us for guidance.
         Everything should go through our criteria
        We see ourselves as a neutral organization, but from time to time we need to evaluate on case-by-case basis.
        Not our mission to go out and initiate events, but can participate if it makes sense
        Candidate events, nights, give candidates opportunities to talk – not taking a stance but bring all candidates
         together. This would expand our mission.
        Provide layer of support beyond what TTUSD can do.

Endowment Merger Conversation:
     Bill explained that they have started negotiations, but felt like it was a little rushed, wasn’t sure that was
      where everyone on the board is OK with it. Don’t want to go to them to negotiate and bring it back to the
      board if not everyone is ready for this; would reflect badly on us.
     Pros and Cons were presented – don’t want to be repetitive but it’s a big decision.
     Raine: when I worked with the hospital, their money grew much faster under the Parasol Foundation, which
      is their community foundation. Also when your endowment is managed by a community foundation, keeps
      that money at arms length – a potential benefit to donors because they know that you won’t dip into it on a
      rainy day. Perception that their money is protected.
         More potential for planned giving through TTCF. Currently they don’t have education as a fund so they don’t
          push it. They have nature, music, etc. If money comes into the TTCF and is specified for education, they go
          to TTUSD and ask where they should put it.
         Q: How has our performance been? A: has been good. We have the same financial manager and therefore
          same strategy. TTCF can participate in different funds than we can because their base is bigger.
         Q: What happens if UBS goes belly up? FDIC does not insure individual funds, only cash portion of our
          fund. As long as they are in an FDIC insured account, it doesn’t matter who the investment manager is.
         Costs to run the organization if we were on our own were presented.
         Laura, Bill, Executive and Financial Committee have discussed at length and feel the long-term benefits will
          be greater for us.
         Q: We would be paying over $5,000 more per year and we have been told that our office space is secure. We
          would be spending more money and the long-term financial picture shows that we wouldn’t necessarily
          perform better.
         It helps TTCF move up a level and ultimately us too. Potential for us to gain more than the $5,000 that will
          come out of our pocket. Part of the “what’s in it for us” comes back to the commuity support – give us access
          to do grants that traditionally we haven’t been able to do, gives us the potential for legacy donations, and
          gives us fundraising leverage among our community.
         Comment: Community Foundations are made up of many funds. When a donor has a fund in a community
          foundation – they have already parted with money and gotten their tax write-off. Once it’s there, it’s easy to
          move it (the money) into education. These benefits will probably take time, but it is an opportunity that does
          not currently exist.
         Q: Do we have someone currently willing to be on their Financial Committee? A: yes, Mark and Bob are
          willing though haven’t committed yet.
         Publicity of the merger – if there is a press release from TTCF, we’d request a joint press release so we have
          editorial input.

Motion to approve the merger of Ex in Ed and TTCF endowment funds if all proposed terms are accepted by
TTCF: Kelli Twomey; second: Ann Holmes Delforge. Motion passed with 18 ayes, 0 nays, Emily Farrell and Doug
Pierini abstained.

Big Bang Funding Discussion:
         Ann Delforge updated the board on the Technology Committee’s current status. They received funding from
          Measure A for the first tier of the newly developed and approved district technology plan. There currently is
          a $59,000 shortfall between the Measure A funding available and the cost of tier one.
         Ann made the proposal for Ex in Ed to fund the $59K shortfall from our $70K “big bang” money.
         We currently have last year’s $70K and this fiscal year’s $70K (endowment interest money) to spend. We
          are proposing to use one “chunk” at a time. We’d like to fund the technology now and wait until the spring
          to see how the remainder of our fundraising goes to determine if/how we spend the other $70K.
         Q: Are the other funding options exhausted? A: Last year we didn’t spend the $70K because there really
          weren’t any projects out there for us to fund. We feel after our long history with Technology, this would be a
          great place for us to put some money. We will continue to talk about other funding options at future board
Motion to approve the technology funding for $59,000 to fill the shortfall for the tier one of the technology plan:
Michelle Larson; second: Alison Elder. Board unanimously approved the motion.

Kim recapped the day:

         A group (Nancy, Kelli, Alison, Michelle and Laura) is meeting on Tuesday to rework the mission statement
          and will bring back a few possibilities to the board for review.
         Laura and Bill are directed to follow up with Lisa at the Community Foundation regarding the endowment
          and our points of negotiation.
         We approved funding the $59,000 technology "short-fall" to bring TTUSD up to "tier one" standardization
          (per their new plan) within the district. (Measure A funded $260,000, but the whole thing cost $319,000). We
          will discuss other "big bang" funding ideas at an upcoming board meeting.
         There will be more follow up with the allocations committee regarding some of the suggestions made
          regarding our granting at the joint TTUSD/Ex in Ed meeting - i.e. grants coming through PLCs or academic
          coaches, funding pilot programs, stipends for teachers to "check out" other schools/programs.
          Recommendations will come back to the board.
         Laura will revise the "Decision Making Process" and questions and bring to the next board meeting for
          review and approval.
Thank you all!

Adjourned 4:15 p.m.

Next Meeting: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 in Tahoe City
Submitted By
Gretchen Sproehnle, Board Member – Recording Secretary

To top