Skip to Content

ITC Meeting Notes - 2015-03-13

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version

Date and Time: March 13, 2015 1:00 - 2:00pm
Location:  Phelps 2536


  • Denise Stephens, University Librarian, Interim Chief Information Officer
  • Bruce Bimber, Professor, Political Science
  • Cindy Bumgarner, Director, Summer Sessions
  • Linda Flegal, Assistant Dean, Mathematical, Life & Physical Sciences
  • Alan Grosenheider, Associate University Librarian, Library
  • Janowicz Krzysztof, Professor, Geography
  • Mary Lum, Assistant Dean, College of Letters & Science
  • Michael Miller, Director, Office of Financial Aid & Scholarships
  • Jeffrey Monteleone, Assoc. Director, Operational Work Systems, Facilities Management
  • Alex Parraga, Chief Digital Officer, News and Communications
  • Chris Pizzinat, Deputy Director, Development
  • Lisa Sedgwick, Executive Director for Academic Affairs, Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor
  • Cynthia Seneriz, Acting Director, Human Resources
  • Timothy Sherwood, Associate Professor, Computer Science
  • Robert Silsbee, Planning & Resources Director, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Admin Services
  • Christian Villasenor, Assistant Dean, Graduate Division
  • Kirk Grier,Director, Infrastructure, Enterprise Technology Services, Ex-Officio
  • Manuel Cintron, Director, Infrastructure, Enterprise End User Computing
  • Elise Meyer, Director Business Operations & Planning
  • Randall Ehren, Enterprise Technology Services

1. Review and approve the 2/13/2015 meeting notes.

The meeting notes were approved and will be made public.

2. Connect Report revisions

Based on the feedback to the 2/13/2015 presentation, the following adjustments were made to the report.

The demographic table of existing accounts was updated, but that produced no change in results.

Student accounts were excluded from the existing accounts analysis, but that produced no change in results.

3. How should ITC work?

Meeting days - A doodle poll will be sent out to determine our next meeting dates.

The ITC has 20 voting members, 1 non-voting CIO Chair and member, 2 non-voting ex-officio members, and 1 non-voting note taker. 

Quorum - It was decided that quorum requires 11 members to be present.

Voting - It was decided that 11 affirmative votes are required for approval.  Voting issues are introduced at one meeting, and voted on at the subsequent meeting.  Absentee votes are due before the voting meeting.  Since additional information may need to be presented after the introduction meeting, the ITC will first confirm that voting should proceed before voting at the meeting.  Both the affirmative and negative vote counts will be reported.

4. Populating the ITC Advisory Groups.

Issues for consideration from previous ITC discussion:

a. Fall ITC meeting suggested that the ITC solicit nominations for Advisory Group (AG) members from Deans and Vice Chancellors.  (Is this still the desired approach?)

ITC was granted authority to decide membership of these groups.  Not all potential nominating groups have an associated Dean or Vice Chancellor, nominations should also be sought from Lead Divisional Administrators, the Academic Senate Chair, Associated Students, the Committee on Committees, ABOG, Staff Assembly and the GSA.  Nominators should be sent a list of the Advisory Groups that indicates the suggested membership count for each group and maybe we will get 5 or more names in total per nominator.

b. What are the criteria for AG membership?

Members should have knowledge of the tools and/or the best knowledge of a particular type of IT in their area.  There should be participation of at least one user in an AG.  ITC may ask nominators to propose users.

c. Should ITC be able to recommend AG members

Yes.  ITC may know more about who is on the ground.

d. Should term limits for AG members be consistent with that of ITC members (3 years with option of renewal)?

Since membership is not role-based, i.e., we are soliciting nominations, term limits are an option.  This allows other people to have an opportunity to participate.  A normal term is 3 years, and ITC votes whether to renew or solicit a new member.  Terms should be staggered.  If an AG member retires, ITC may name replacement or choose a name off the nomination list.

e. Does/How does the AG composition reflect other existing IT-related groups (working groups, task forces, interest groups around campus)?

f. How will ITC and the AGs interact? (Including role of ITC facilitators)

There needs to be an AG lead.  We should use our expertise and recruit someone who can do the job.  ITC should always appoint the AG Chair, and the AG chooses the vice-chair with no expectation that the vice-chair would become the next chair.

There should be a dedicated ITC Liaison for each AG.  ITC liaisons should be a resource and engage with each of the AG.

We need to set up a working cycle for each year. 

There are 6 AGs, and we want to hear from each twice a year.  Each AG will be on the ITC agenda every 6 months (additionally if needed), and ITC will hear an AG update at each of our meetings.  Have them at the start of the agenda up to 30 minutes, unless we are voting.  They may inquire of us, what we want them to be thinking about.  Unless we have asked them for specific report.

There is work for them to do just addressing existing projects, opportunities, and/or initiatives.  But they also need to meet to discuss how they are using IT around campus - create community of knowledge around their areas.

We should permit and encourage interaction between AGs.  There was discussion but not consensus over the idea to have quarterly or annual meetings of the AG Chairs, Vice Chairs, Liaisons, and maybe the whole AG membership.

g. Are there limitations in the number of members?  If so, how determined?

After noting that there were at least 18 functional groups represented at ITC, it was determined that the goal should be <= 12 members per AG, but that is not a hard cap.  Additionally, Infrastructure is broken out by subcommittees.

h. Are there existing projects, opportunities, and/or initiatives that should be integrated into the work of the new AGs?

Topics for next meeting:

A Project Proposal must be submitted N days ahead of discussion meeting - lets talk about our ingest process at next meeting.  This is what we communicate to campus about how ITC works.

Connect-Platform-Service-Options-Report-v20150324.pdf8.19 MB