MEETING SUMMARY
GOVERNOR'S WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

1:30 to 3:30pm
Wednesday, November 20, 2002
Veteran's Service Building, St. Paul

Welcome and Introductions
Roger called the meeting to order and new member introductions were done for Peggy Ann Anderholm from Marvin Windows & Doors, John Molinaro from the West Central Initiative, Leah Schwachtgen from the Montevideo School System, and Ray Waldron, President of the AFL CIO.

I. Approval of 10/23/02 meeting summary
Roger asked for approval of the 10/23/02 meeting summary. A motion was made, seconded, and approved to accept the summary as written.

2. Summary Portfolio Report to Stakeholders Discussion
Roger referred members to the rough draft of the "Summary Portfolio Report to Stakeholders" sent in advance of the meeting. He noted that this was the GWDC's first attempt to frame for the Legislature and new Governor the scope of Minnesota's workforce investments and to help portray the "collection" of programs and services as part of a broad portfolio that, like an investment portfolio, has investors, a measurable return and broad goals. Commissioner Yanisch was pleased to see that the GWDC is trying to use "business" language that is understandable by the private sector. She suggested that the draft report be reviewed by a person within the business community to get their feedback on the document. Michael Murphy said the concept of this portfolio suggests investments and return on those investments. Michael said he would offer some feedback regarding the role of higher education as well as some small editorial comments in writing to GWDC staff.

Roger suggested that the report should help frame a discussion of training dollars -- what the Legislature's approach will be, and how the GWDC can be supportive. Commissioner Wilson said the new Commissioner of Finance (Rep. Dan McElroy) understands the projected numbers very well. Earl noted that any requests for training funds must be well substantiated and that programs/partners should not inflate requests for funds in order to increase the appearance of program value.

Representative Bob Gunther suggested that there will be major reallocation of funds. Bob said he will need to do further research before offering specific ideas about where the reallocations may take place. Roger expressed some concern that funds might be cut from useful existing programs to fund new programs. Senator Arlene Lesewski added that the GWDC must put together a package to take to the Legislature that shows the continuing need for current programs as well as the high rate of return we get from investing in training.

Willie Negaard suggested that the GWDC should examine how to change people's views of immigrant workers and also how to keep immigrants in Minnesota. A large portion of the population will retire in the next four to five years; school attendance is down; and, the worker shortage could be worsened by immigrant workers who are in this country illegally. In greater Minnesota, the immigrant workforce has been the key to workforce growth. Willie said his area's workforce grew about 5%. This increase can be accounted for in the increase of working age international immigrants to that area and those who immigrated to Minnesota from another state. The immigrant population is an important focus that should be highlighted in the Portfolio report.

Roger repeated the basic themes we have continually come back to: we have basic structural issues creating our workforce challenges. In the midst of this slowdown, the emphasis is to find jobs for people. The emphasis a few years ago was to find people for jobs. Within a year or two, the big challenge will be to find people for jobs again, and the shortage of skilled workers will be acute. There is currently a shortage of skilled workers in Minnesota who have specific skill sets. These shortages require post secondary education, and in the future these shortages will hurt Minnesota. One of the responsibilities of the GWDC is to keep reminding the Legislature of this. Representative Gunther agreed, and added that if the GWDC plans to address future worker shortages, something drastic must happen. The limiting factor to our economy will be to have workers ready for large corporations before the corporations decide to move somewhere else.

Senator Lesewski suggested that a letter should be sent from Roger, before the session begins, to each Legislator outlining workforce issues and possible solutions. Senator Lesewski also suggested that the GWDC should hold an "Educate the Legislators" meeting. At this meeting, there could be a few presentations on immigrant workers, training, and other workforce issues. Sandra Peterson suggested that a small committee should visit some of the key leaders to discuss some of these issues as well. Roger affirmed that there would certainly be some outreach to Legislators early in the session and that staff would help organize that outreach.

Earl suggested that the GWDC should find out membership information for the Legislative committees and have informational sessions with the committees first. Willie suggested that the GWDC may want to target new legislators as well because they may be more receptive at the beginning of their terms.

Joan Volkmouth asked if the Council has a plan in place to work with the new Governor elect to discuss with him what the GWDC is working on. One suggestion was made to hold a meeting at one of the WorkForce Centers for Governor Elect Pawlenty, so he can see first hand how a Center is run. LaDonna Boyd volunteered the Dakota County WorkForce Center for the meeting. GWDC staff said they would look into this.

Joan also suggested having testimonies from people who have benefited from workforce programs. The GWDC could put together a case study where the GWDC showcases a city, county, or a personal story, which includes data and anecdotal information. Senator Lesewski said one of the points in this package should be, "What would happen if training dollars were not spent?" Representive Gunther agreed with that statement, and furthered it with, "What is the cost of us doing nothing?"

Roger raised the question of what is the best argument for job training. The value of job training is not always easy to depict, and he wanted to know if the GWDC has solid evidence that training dollars better Minnesotans. Randy Johnson noted that his area has calculated return on investment for their programs over several years. They have found significant returns, as high as 500% return on training dollar investments.

Roger thanked everyone for their review of the early draft and thoughtful contributions during this discussion. He said staff would incorporate these thoughts into a next draft to be reviewed by the Executive Committee. He encouraged all members to forward comments on the Portfolio report to staff via email. Roger also said that he welcomes input as to who should be in a group that will meet with legislators. Also, included will be meetings set up with key leadership early in the session.

III. Discussion of WorkForce Center Strategic Plan

Wayne DeBruin reminded members that the GWDC is charged with providing the Legislature an update on the WorkForce Center Strategic Plan that was produced in January 2002. He said that the basic structure of the plan will be unchanged. The analysis will stay the same, with small updates provided throughout the text to reflect changes that have taken place since last year. The recommendations will remain essentially as they were last year, with greater clarity and/or specificity being added in a few cases. We did see opportunities to make improvements in some cases, for example, on the issue of decisionmaking authority regarding WorkForce Center siting. Also, the Appendices which provide information primarily of value to Local Workforce Councils are being updated. Some of the issues that will get further attention in the recommendations in this report include:

A) Infrastructure - siting and other decisions
B) System Coordinator at each of the WorkForce Centers
C) Membership of Local Workforce Councils in relation to partners
D) Gradual transformation of the staffing patterns as people retire or are replaced

We also feel that enhancing the Performance Measurement section is a good way to get our "story out".

Roger asked Earl to talk about the first issue. Earl said the biggest issue is limited dollars invested in the infrastructure, also noting that there are no funds just for WorkForce Center infrastructure - everything comes off the top of programs. The cost allocation plan comes from the consensus of all the programs working within the WFCs to pay for rent, lighting, etc. This allocation plan then rolls up to the State level, so we can watch that we don't overspend. Earl said that MDES took central control of allocating administrative costs because it would be a huge responsibility for a Local Workforce Council to allocate funds from 89 programs, figure out what percentage is allowable for administration dollars and then giving it to each WorkForce Center(s), and let them sort it out. Earl noted that, as a response to concerns that decisionmaking was not open to sufficient input from partners and field staff, the Issues Team has been reinstated. This group comes together quarterly or more often, as necessary. The Issues Team has a "Facilities Committee", that is working to clarify the site decisionmaking process and related issues.

Senator Lesewski asked if someone can put together a laundry list of recommendations as to what should be looked at some sort of criteria in regards to a site location of a WFC. Wayne said that criteria already exists in the Strategic plan, giving locals a better chance to be involved in the decision making process. Luke added that the Issues Team "Facilities Committee" has an upcoming meeting scheduled to address these issues and that GWDC members would be invited to join that discussion, if they wish to do so. Roger asked if there would be any movement on this issue before Earl's departure. He said the Issues Team would meet at least once before the end of December and we would report back to the GWDC.

A Credentialing update Wayne reminded the Council that the Systems Excellence Committee has been shepherding one of the key recommendations from the Strategic Plan, namely, the creation of a credentialing process for Local Workforce Councils to ensure that the Centers in their area meet basic quality standards and have set goals for continuous improvement. The Committee is seeking the Council's "provisional approval" on the draft standards which were also presented at the last full Council meeting. Roger asks for comments.

David Nasby said he feels this is a tremendous guide and will keep Minnesota as a leader nationally. The credentialing worksheet is a very useful tool for a local WSA, but he has concerns about a two tier arrangement. David expressed concern that if a two tier system is adopted, things often move from the second tier into the first and soon becomes a mandate. This creates a dangerous precedent to take away local authority piece by piece. David said he's not concerned what today's document lays out, but rather what the document may look like in three years. He added that the difficulty really comes in the way it gets delivered to the local board - specifically, whether Local Councils really have the autonomy to work with it as they see fit.

Wayne said his vision for this document was for it to be a useful tool to get people from different partnerships to sit down and work issues out, it's a tool that will open up discussion and ways to look at the different criteria and determine what the best course for continuous improvement is in a given local area.

Willie made a point that this information has been gathered over a six month timespan, with a tremendous effort by staff to go out and talk to many different Workforce Councils and get their input. The standards, and the worksheet reflect the gathering of those comments. He added that the South Central area has already begun to use criteria like this and that it is working well in his area.

Lee Helgen commented that the discussion, and Dave Nasby's points clearly highlight where the tension points are. He suggested that the credentialing process be used as a tool for the Local Workforce Councils to give it a try and come back with some suggestions, and its important that it is not a mandate from "390". Koryn added that the intention was to move from provisional approval into "beta testing" in four sites around the state. In these sites, Local Councils, staff, and GWDC staff will work together to look at how the standards and worksheet fit with local business plans, and other implementation issues. At the January meeting (or later if necessary), we'll have some feedback from the "testing" sites and then move forward with implementation of the process throughout the state.

Earl reminded everyone that the WorkForce Center Strategic Plan was a legislative mandate, not a state agency mandate. The Legislature requested that the GWDC do the plan, and also required that all this have input from the WorkForce Centers themselves and Local Workforce Councils. Roger affirmed the discussion and said that we were looking for provisional standards as written, with the understanding we're going out to four sites, we'll get some additional feedback from them, make necessary changes, and bring any significant issues back the full Council. We will move ahead, as planned with a report to the Legislature in January as required by statute. Roger asked for a motion to approve the standards as presented and to go ahead with the four testing sites. The motion was seconded and approved.

Roger noted that the scheduled April 18th date will need to be changed as this is Good Friday. An alternative date will be chosen and we'll get that information out to everyone. Roger ended the meeting with thanks and farewell to Commissioners Earl Wilson and Rebecca Yanisch as this will be their last meeting before Governor Pawlenty takes office.

The meeting was adjourned.