Haven Foundation Board Meetings

Minutes for Meeting of October 17, 2005

Havenhaus Session Room, The Haven Resort & Institute

Attending:

Board: Dick Sass, Paul Robillard, David Raithby, Mark Gunderson, Rick Jackson, Tom Lesosky, Connie Munro (by phone), Linda Nicholls, Suromitra Sanatani

Advisors: Randy Wong

Management: Ernie McNally, Cathy McNally

Guests: Joann Peterson

Apologies:

Bryan Croeni, Ron Adkins, Laurie Kelley, Gerry Owen

Call to Order at 9:15am by Chair, Dick Sass.

1) Check-Ins.

2) Appointment of New Board Director.

Moved by MG, and

Seconded by LN:

“The Haven Foundation Board recommends that the Foundation Members

appoint Suromitra Sanatani as Board Director.”

Carried unanimously.

3) Haven Vision and Mission. Revised draft version read by DRS.

4) General Board Affairs.

a) China Connection.

i) DRS advised that he and EMc will travel to China October 26, 2005 to meet with Mr. Liu (with translation by Sean Feng). He views himself and EMc as emissaries of The Haven Institute.

ii) There was in-depth discussion regarding:

(1) Amount of authority DRS and EMc should have in the discussions in China;

(2) The draft MOA and Exhibit A (Intellectual Property):

(a) Royalties – a percentage

(b) Licensing – a fixed amount

(3) Contract for Courses – number, type, term, implications in human resources (both assistants/interns, and leaders i.e. independent contractors).

(a) It was suggested that DR, EMc and DRS consult with independent contractors for non-proprietary courses re: what they want, prior to DRS and EMc going to China

[JP left meeting at 10:40am.]

(b) It as agreed that the list of specific non-proprietary courses be deleted from the proposal, leaving just the heading for now.

(c) CMc noted that this topic feeds into the Education/Faculty item i.e. a restructuring of the education function to define the Director of Education position and compensation appropriately, and the creation of another position to coordinate, could support the China Connection administratively.

(4) DR noted that what has worked in the China Connection is “cowboy” energy whereby someone spearheads an initiative, and then the structures can be created to support it. This encourages creativity and action in the early stages, rather than having things bog down in “institutional energy”.

(5) MG noted the importance of protecting faculty in China by, for example, establishing relations with the Canadian Embassy there.

(6) RW asked if our GO would be attending; DRS said no, but arrangements can be made for phone consultation.

(7) MG suggested that the final document NOT be formalized legally as this would necessitate retaining a Chinese lawyer; CMc noted that it is too late for this trip anyway, and that we should just do something as close as possible.

Moved by DR, and

Seconded by PR:

“That DRS and EMc be authorized to negotiate a deal in China with Mr. Liu of Hai Wen, and that the deal will subsequently be ratified by the Board.”

Carried unanimously.

(8) DRS requested that a sample of the course leader contracts used at The Haven be provided to him.

(9) PR noted that moneys received should go to PDS, and not the Foundation.

(10) MG suggested that insurance, legal fees etc. should be addressed for the China leaders (i.e. expand The haven umbrella coverage), and that someone should speak with Scott Streeter in this regard.

(11) LN noted that the leaders are currently entering China as “tourists” and that this should be changed at some point.

b) Faculty/Education.

i) CM advised that she had sent an email earlier today, summarizing the following:

(1) Faculty compensation

(a) A summary will go to Nov 18/05 Board meeting. Issue is not as critical as envisioned earlier on.

(2) Faculty Meetings

(a) Faculty meeting again Oct 29/05.

(b) CM will not attend, and believes it is important for faculty members to meet on their own.

(i) Process;

(ii) Governance; and

(iii) Curriculum

(d) She envisions them placing all identified issues under these three headings, then identifying a champion for each.

(e) She notes there is lots of energy which she would like to see harnessed, for example through volunteering.

(3) What Next

(a) CM sees the next step as being the re-structuring of the education side, for example creating two positions:

(i) Dean of Students (JP)

(ii) Dean of Education – responsible for curriculum development, process issues etc.; this should wait until after the Oct 29/05 faculty meeting.

ii) Discussion ensued regarding the focus, purpose and format of faculty meetings. It was agreed that the Board can provide leadership to the faculty by providing some key questions to address, such as faculty leadership. It as agreed that this will be done, subject to consultation with the meeting organizer (Derek LaCroix).

The meeting recessed for lunch from 11:50pm to 12:30pm.

iii) Defining The Haven.

(1) DR suggested a discussion regarding the type of educational institution we are wanting to become e.g mainstream (traditional)? Or more innovative (alternative)? He summarized the evolution of The Haven from the original workshop centre with a community focus, to an educational centre (in part for tax purposes), to, most recently, a more traditional educational institution. His question is where we want to position ourselves.

(2) RJ suggested that the situation is less black and white, and that he likes the term “human potential movement”.

(3) DS stressed the importance, from the sales perspective, in being able to describe who we are and what we’re into. He doesn’t support bureaucracy, but does support accreditation in order to have an identifiable project.

(4) DR noted that there is a lot of work done by himself, LN and JP which cannot be done by volunteers, meaning that someone eventually needs to be hired.

(5) SS inquired if polling/sounding has been carried out regarding what “our people” want today from us. This could take the form of focus groups, for example, in order to quantify the market.

(6) LN noted that we are starting to tap into the faculty, and that the next area could be the student body.

(7) PR suggested consideration of “strategic alliances” or “beneficial associations” in which The Haven might negotiate cross-overs with other institutions (e.g. Royal Roads, Malaspina, Justice Institute (JI)), similar to how the JI operates.

(8) LN stressed the importance of maintaining our current tax status.

(9) SS noted the importance of accreditation for fundraising e.g. it distinguishes us from “fly-by-nights” etc.

(10) The need for someone to handle the “mundane” matters of the S & P Committee was raised by MG. LN sees the creation of a Dean of Education, who is a visionary and ambassador. DR sees this as a functional issue – the GM’s manage operations, and someone else is needed to oversee faculty and education.

(11) CM noted her preference for partial PCTIA accreditation.

[CM left the meeting at 1:30pm.]

(12) There was further discussion regarding the implicating of PCTIA accreditation, including the costs of continuing the application, and the possible benefits of having it.

(13) It was agreed that CMc and EMc will provide the next level of detail (including costs and benefits) for proceeding with the PCTIA accreditation application for a specific area of courses; and for developing additional or revised programs such as a Certificate in Relational Studies, and Diploma in Relational Leadership.

(14) PR suggested a strategy of buying, rather than selling e.g. list theirs, the ask them to list ours.

(15) LN suggested we offer what others can’t/don’t/won’t.

(16) MG suggested we explore an outreach course at The Haven for UVic.

2) Committee Reports.

a) Facilities Committee.

i) TL advised that the Committee is planning a one-day session, facilitated by Bill Chalmers, in mid-November. This will be a charette, the intent being to integrate reports and information, and decide on a direction to move.

ii) The Strategic MasterPlan 2010 is now complete in draft form.

Moved by MG, and

Seconded by SS:

“That the Strategic MasterPlan 2010 be approved.”

Carried unanimously.

iii) It was noted that Linda Moore and TL will draft a budget based on this approved plan.

iv) De-Salinization (Reverse Osmosis) was introduced for discussion. TL advised that:

(1) The technology has developed a great deal since The Haven first experimented with this.

(2) David Babitch (currently in Phase III) is familiar with this technology and continuing to research it for The Haven.

(3) There are many pluses to the introduction of this type of system, including quality and quantify of water, resource conservation, and community relations.

(4) The estimated cost of the system is $100,000 and this could be a useful project for fundraising.

Moved by DR, and

Seconded by LN, that:

“A De-Salinization(reverse osmosis) system by approved in principle, and that this

be a possible donor appeal topic, and that further research be conducted.”

Carried unanimously.

3) Minutes of the August 15, 2005 Board meeting – adopted unanimously, with two specific corrections (p 6 and 7) and one general correction (the spelling of Jonathan Diderich’s name).

[TL left meeting at 2:05pm.]

5) General Board Affairs.

a) Faculty/Education (continued)

i) Leadership. There was lengthy discussion on this topic.

(1) LN suggests this is a full-time commitment - not necessarily 40hours/week at The Haven, but rather a strong presence on property, with faculty, and with students; a visionary, high profile. The first function of someone in this position would be to define the position. We should start big, and then modify (rather than starting small, and probably staying small).

(2) DR suggests we need someone who knows The Haven philosophy. The number of hours depends on how much time specific individual has.

(3) RJ calls this the quarterback; it would be an entry-point for information/liaison with faculty.

(4) There was a great deal of discussion regarding several issues including qualifications, approaches to filling the position, job description, reporting relationships, search versus competition, term for incumbent, and addressing authority as well as leadership.

(5) DR, LN, RJ, CMc and EMc requested to provide ideas for a draft job description to MG.

[RW and DR left meeting at 2:55pm.]

Moved by LN, and

Seconded by RJ, that:

“The three Board Members (DRS, RW, and PR), the Governance Chair (MG) and Bill Chalmers (with services paid), form a team, chaired by DRS,

with the mandate to design a process for establishing faculty leadership.

Carried unanimously.

4) Committee Reports (continued)

a) Governance Committee

i) Proposed D & O Insurance.

Moved by MG, and

Seconded by PR:

“That the proposed D & O Insurance be approved.”

Carried unanimously.

ii) MG inquired as to what Committees SS would like to join. She agreed to join the Development Committee.

iii) The possibility of additional directors was discussed. The Committee recommends considering Jim Reger. It was agreed to defer this to the next meeting. It was noted that Nancy Bradshaw will re-consider her possible involvement in one year.

2) General Manager’s Report

a) It was noted that this report will not be on future agenda’s because it will be circulated separately.

b) SS inquired as to whether the revisions I the forecasts are vetted through the Audit and Finance Committee. EMc confirmed that this is the case.

3) Committee Reports (continued)

a) Audit and Finance Committee

i) PR noted his pleasure with current numbers.

4) New Business

a) The Board wishes to formally recognize the excellent work of the Volunteer Committee for the 2005 Haven Experience in Victoria.

b) MG inquired as to the status of a form of acknowledgement for BW and JMc – CMc and EMc are working on this. RJ noted that a ritual burning of the mortgage (and subsequent potato cannon extravaganza) is tentatively planned for January 12-13, 2006. This may be a good time for the B & J recognition.

c) DRS noted his intention to step down as Chair at the end of the year. He is willing to be flexible with this deadline so as to have a successor in place.

d) CA noted that given her role as Executive Assistant to DRS, her continued involvement will be assessed as well. MG noted that the Governance Committee is addressing this issue. CA’s background and perspective were acknowledged, and she was encouraged to provide her continued input in some fashion.

5) 2006 Meeting Schedule.

a) It was agreed that Directors be consulted via email regarding the proposed schedule, so that it can be officially finalized at the next meeting.

6) Next Meeting – Friday, November 18, 2005 at 9am, at The Haven, Gabriola

Meeting adjourned at 3:25pm.

Action Items

1) EMc and/or CMc to provide a sample course leader contract to DRS and explain how it works.

2) CMc to consult with Derek LaCroix regarding providing faculty with key questions the Board would invite input on, such as faculty leadership. Subject to his agreement CMc will distribute same to faculty and Board.

3) CMc and EMc will provide the next level of detail (including costs and benefits) for proceeding with the PCTIA accreditation application for a specific area of courses; and for developing additional or revised programs such as a Certificate in Relational Studies, and Diploma in Relational Leadership.

4) SS to contact the UVic President regarding the idea having an outreach course at The Haven for UVic students.

5) DR, LN, RJ, CMc and EMc to provide ideas for a draft job description for the Dean of Education to MG.

6) MG to circulate Jim Reger’s bio to the Board Directors.

7) CA to poll Directors regarding the proposed 2006 meeting schedule.

Minutes recorded by: Carole Ames.

Minutes Adopted: November 18, 2005