Board Members Present: Susie Garretson, Chair; Ann Poulos, Vice-Chair (via telephone, 9:00 a.m. to 10:10); Susan Olberding, Secretary; Susan Golightly; Deb Hill; Leigh Kuwanwisiwma; Max Oelschlaeger; Carl Phagan; Peter Pilles; Wayne Ranney; Katrina Rogers; Carolyn Shoemaker; and Larry Stevens

Board Members Absent: Bill Beaver; Jon Bonnell; Louis Jacobs; Linn Montgomery, Treasurer; Ann Poulos (except as noted above) and Miguel Vasquez

Emeritus and Ex-Officio Members Present: Frances McAllister, Emeritus; and Chio Black, Reprsentative to the Muses

Others Present: Robert Breunig, Director; Ginger White and Lynn Yeager, MNA staff; and Jane McKnight, MAP II assessor.

I. Call to Order
Chair Garretson called the meeting to order at 9:05.

II. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting
Robert Breunig asked that he and the controller be allowed to make clarifications to the March 6 portion of the minutes dealing with the Powerpoint presentation on the budget. He assured the board that there would be no changes in actual numbers or intent, but only clarifications that would assist the public who were not in attendance to understand the proposed budget. A motion was made that the board accept the minutes to include changes to be made by Dr. Breunig for clarification of wording. The motion was seconded and approved. There was one abstention.

III. Report from the Chair
Chair Garretson began her report, and then allowed time for Ms. Jane McKnight to report to the board on the assessment of collections she had just completed under the MAP II survey. Trustees discussed the Petrified Forest’s proposal to expand the national monument, and whether it would be appropriate for MNA to make any public recommendations or statements of support for the proposed expansion. Carl Phagan and Bob stated that they would research the museum’s stand on issues in the past, and would make a recommendation to the board on this issue. Other trustees were encouraged to participate as well.

Bob explained that the MAP II assessment, provided through AAM (but not required for accreditation), would provide information on conservation of the collections department and offer suggestions for improvement. Ms. Jane McKnight reiterated that the assessment is intended to be collegial and informative. She conducted a two-day site visit and will write a report, including recommendations, to be completed around May 21. She found three areas of concern: 1) the collections policy, 2) staffing, and 3) facilities. It is very important that the collections policy be reviewed and revised, and that the board approve the new policy, as it is the basis for all collections care. The collections department, as with most other departments at MNA, is understaffed. Ms. McKnight stated that in 1988, when the last assessment was conducted, it was recommended that staffing throughout the museum should be increased (note: in 1988, staff numbered about 55-60, and today it stands around 35-40). She recommended that an archivist be hired when possible. The facilities that house the collections are inadequate for the future, and do not offer as much protection to the collections as should be expected. When asked about policies concerning deaccessioning, Ms. McKnight recommended that MNA review AAM’s policies to use as a guideline. Ms. McKnight stated that some MNA collections were vulnerable to flooding, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, as well as internal problems such as the gas heaters. Ms. McKnight assured the trustees that all problems and recommendations would be included in her report, including the suggestion of a new repository to house the collections. Susie thanked Ms. McKnight for her time and efforts.

Susie asked that in the future, the board move to accept the financial reports.

There was some discussion about the need to continue having a board meeting every month. Trustees agreed that meeting quarterly was too infrequent. Max noted that many members of the board are employed full time and are also active with several other organizations. In addition, MNA committees are active and meet often. Board meetings add significant amounts of time to trustees’ busy schedules. Trustees also felt that it might be more convenient to schedule a meeting every other month, and convene other meetings as necessary. It was decided that the governance committee would discuss the issue, and bring a recommendation to the board. Board meetings are scheduled for May 1, June 26, August 7, and October 2. The annual membership meeting will be held on June 5, with a one-hour board meeting scheduled beforehand to finalize the mission statement. Susie reminded board members to use the form distributed to the board to schedule and coordinate meetings.

Trustees agreed to try a consent agenda, and Susie reminded them to arrange committee meetings in the first weeks following a board meeting to allow everyone to see and comment on minutes of each one. Also, action items are included on the consent agenda, as long as no discussion is needed. The consent agenda will allow all undisputed items to be taken care of at once. Using a consent agenda, committee reports do not need to be considered individually, for instance, but can be acted on at one time. The sequence of events for a committee will be: 1) meet, 2) prepare the minutes, 3) distribute minutes to committee members, 4) have the minutes approved by the committee, 5) send approved minutes to Ginger White to distribute to other board members, and 6) have the minutes approved by the board at the next meeting. If #5 cannot occur before the board meeting, the minutes will be presented as a separate agenda item. In addition, written reports from representatives to the Muses, the Peaks, and other museum associates can be given to Ginger to distribute, and the need to give these reports orally will be eliminated.

There followed a brief discussion on the trustees who would be able to attend the next scheduled meeting on May 1. If a quorum cannot be present, other arrangements will be made to assure that candidates for the election by members in June can be approved by May 1.

The KNAU pledge drive went well: MNA was represented well by about ½ staff and ½ board members. Susie also thanked everyone who attended the community welcome for Robert, and thought it was very successful.

IV. Report from the Director
Robert reported that the auditors had been at the museum for four days, and expected to have a report to us in about 60 days. The community was very receptive to the announcement that the geology department was reinstated, and the Arizona Daily Sun provided above-the-fold space for the article.

Last spring, MNA was awarded a grant from the Flagstaff Cultural Partners (FCP) with two restrictions: 1) that MNA hire a permanent director, and, 2) that MNA provide them with a “business plan”. Robert wrote a letter-style business plan explaining the museum’s intent that was presented at a recent FCP meeting. Upon receipt of the letter, FCP approved the release of the $20,000 grant they had promised. Only a few days later, the FCP grant application was due for 2004. The museum has also applied for support for the Dia de la Gente festival in October from the Arizona Commission on the Arts. The museum is also seeking support from the BF Foundation.

An Anthropology Retreat was held at the Colton House with MNA staff and board and NAU anthropology staff attending. The meeting was very productive, and attendees had many good ideas. Everyone felt that MNA needed to have new exhibits that emphasize the contemporary issues and lives of Native American people on the Colorado Plateau. There needs to be more expression of linguistic cultural differences and more emphasis on issues important to the Native American cultures. The MOU being developed with the Hopi and MNA will serve as a good model for other MNA relationships with Native Americans. Leigh Kuwanwisiwma suggested that MNA develop a museum studies program targeted at Native American students. Chio Black suggested that MNA contact Charles Daley at the Institute of American Indian Art in Santa Fe about their museum studies program.

There was a short discussion on past members notifying board and staff that they would like to rejoin the museum after withdrawing in the last year. Bob emphasized that MNA wants to move forward in its programming, and thanked the board for helping to lay groundwork with past and future members. Susan G. suggested that MNA prepare a P.R. list of accomplishments of the museum to use for membership recruitment and development purposes.

V. Report from the Finance and Investment Committee
The finance committee has not met since the last board meeting. Linn Montgomery was absent, and Lynn Yeager, the Controller, gave a brief synopsis of the February financial statements. No motion was made to approve the financial report. Dennis Miller notified MNA that his firm, Miller – Russell, will be merging with a bank to provide investment opportunities for their clients. They will continue to provide management services for MNA’s endowments. Lynn has now allocated to each department the costs for utilities, insurance, telephones, IT support, vehicle use, and other MNA use in 2003 that were formerly lumped into “administration.” This will provide more accurate information on the costs to maintain each MNA department. Bob announced that museum endowments went from a total balance of $3.2 million to over $4 million as the result of the general economy and management by Miller – Russell.

VI. Report of the Board Development Committee
Susan G. reported that there have been no actions taken by the BDC since the last board meeting. There have been seven responses to date for the request for candidates to the board. She reminded board to contact those they had mentioned as possibly interested at the last meeting, and to have each submit a letter of intent and a bio, and to assure that each is a member of MNA.

VII. Report of the Fundraising Committee
Max Oelschlaeger reported that the fundraising committee had been working on several items. Foremost is the consensus of the committee that “raising $20 million of unrestricted endowments over the next five years will be necessary to sustain the present operations of MNA. Additional funds would be required to increase the scope of operations.” Of equal importance is the committee’s commitment to support the director, as “The Director considers facilitation and assistance with donors (and foundation contacts) as ‘job one’ of the FRC.” The committee is also developing a conflict of interest policy. Susie stated that a resolution is being developed to contribute a set percentage of general operating monies for an endowment to support fundraising efforts. This will be presented at the next board meeting.

VIII. Report of the Governance Committee
Susie reported that an Ad Hoc Mission Statement review committee had been established, with Carl Phagan as chair, and Tracy Anderson, Peter Pilles, Katrina Rogers, Carolyn Shoemaker, Sat Best, Elaine Hughes, and David Gillette as members. Gail Anderson will be at the museum April 5th and 6th to meet with members, staff and board to discuss the mission, vision, and values of MNA. This committee is a subcommittee of the Governance committee.

It was determined that subcommittees do not need charters unless they are separated from a specific committee.

IX. Report of the Building and Lands Committee
Larry Stevens stated that a site plan is needed for MNA grounds based upon its mission. The committee recently met to tour the campus, and is developing a database based on Susan Olberding’s list of buildings.

Ann Poulos and Larry will be visiting the federal WAC repository in Tucson next Tuesday. When asked a reasonable schedule for an MNA repository, Larry responded that it would be dependent on when funds became available, and that it would most likely take a major capitol campaign to raise those funds. It would also be necessary to have the MNA mission, a site plan, and a building plan and design to present to potential funders. Robert proposed setting a date of July 26, 2010 to use as a goal (to celebrate the 7 year’s of work of this board). He realizes this is an ambitious goal, but believes MNA needs to convey a sense of urgency about this issue. Max suggested the MAP II report be presented to the members at the membership meeting.

Susan O. reported that the recently formed Homestead subcommittee met to discuss the possible uses of the Homestead in the future. The building was renovated several years ago by the Wilson Foundation in anticipation of its being used as a rotating photography gallery and/or an eatery. The committee recommends that a feasibility study be conducted for the facility.

X. Report from the Collections Committee
See MAP II reporting, above, under Report from the Chair.

XI. Report of the Outreach Committee
The outreach committee has not met since the last board meeting.

Wayne reported that the publications subcommittee met twice with Brad Wallis and Pam Frasier of the Grand Canyon Association (GCA). There was some discussion concerning the editing and production of future Plateau Journals. Carol Haralson, the current editor, and Ms. Frasier remain positive about the proposed idea of making each edition more topical, as long as the character remains about the same. Max encouraged the committee to develop a business plan for the publication and finalizing an MOU with GCA. GCA has agreed to give MNA an additional $20,000 per year (about ¼ of the publication costs) for the next two years, but the agreement has not been finalized. Robert expects a business plan to be developed within the next three months. The “partners” anticipate that once the new format is finalized and the business plan developed, they will be able to utilize the publication even more as a membership perk. Susan O. suggested that the topics of future Plateau Journals be more closely tied to other MNA events and exhibits.

XII. Report of the Research Committee
The research committee is developing a “research policy” and will then move on to their vision. However, it is important that MNA’s overall mission and vision be determined before moving ahead with expectations of the research departments. Robert suggested that the committee make their policies neither too strict nor too lax, and to include the region of the Colorado Plateau as a parameter. The committee will need to determine the end goals – what do we want the research to accomplish? What is the responsibility of the researchers to obtain funding, and to what extent will MNA support researchers without outside funding? How will research be incorporated into educational and other MNA goals? Carl asked on what level the board would approve the policy (e.g., would they want to approve each project). Max suggested that the committee establish guidelines (i.e., synergy with education/research/exhibits and other core areas) that the research staff could use to develop projects and programs. Deb Hill expressed concern that the plans written in the past, such as the Year 2000 Plan were written without the commitment to follow through with suggestions and guidelines. She also suggested that the research policies include guidelines for funding. Peter agreed that although the past plans included useful information, they were only were general plans, and not policies that were consulted. Larry expressed concern that there was no comprehensive bibliography of what publications have been produced by MNA: a complete listing could aid MNA in better managing information and making it available to the public. Bob reiterated that conducting research and producing publications that explain the Colorado Plateau as holistically as possible are important goals for the research departments and the museum as a whole.

Carl briefed trustees on the contract science department. The museum has announced the new position of cultural resources project manager to compliment the biology skills of the program’s manager. The committee feels it is important to expand the program to allow it to better compete with the skills and services offered by other contract science organizations. Carl stressed that, although the department was originally started as a potential profit center, its other goals are to support research at MNA and to support the museum’s mission. It is important to this department that a policy for research is developed with programs and projects of MNA research and contract science departments that are well integrated. The committee is discussing the option of making the contract science department a for-profit entity to allow them to seek projects set aside for small businesses. On the other hand, as a non-profit entity, the department can seek grants, donations, and contracts on the basis of how they support the museum’s mission.

XIII. Report from the Muses
Chio Black provided the board with her written report of Muses activities. The next presentation of the Sedona Lecture Series will be by Robert Breunig on April 12th.

XIV. Reports from the Volunteer/Docent, The Peaks, and the Coyote Springs Representatives
Bob reported that Archaeology Day at MNA last Saturday was a great success. It included lectures by David Wilcox and Peter Pilles, activities with Carl Phagan, and kids’ projects – including awards. A demonstration of digital technology in archaeology was held by Western Mapping in Tucson that included the growth of prehistoric communities over time.

XV. Other Business
Frances McAllister enthusiastically stated that she was very happy about the improvements in functions of the board since last summer.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

XVI. Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 1:35 p.m.

Minutes approved at May 2, 2004 board meeting.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Olberding
Secretary to the Board