[ Background Discussion ] >> John Martin: [Background discussion] Greetings, everyone. Welcome to the Pasadena Area Community College Board of Trustees meeting. I'm going to ask Ms. Thomson if you would call the roll. >> Ms. Thomson: Mr. Baum? >> John Martin: He will be here very soon. We have reliable word. >> Ms. Thomson: Mr. Martin? >> John Martin: Here. >> Ms. Thomson: Dr. Fellow? >> Dr. Anthony Fellow: Here. >> Ms. Thomson: Ms. Brown? >> Berlinda Brown: Here. >> Ms. Thomson: Dr. Mann? >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: Present. >> Ms. Thomson: Mr. Thomson? >> William Thomson: Present. >> Ms. Thomson: Ms. Wah? >> Linda Wah: Present. >> Ms. Thomson: Ms. Israel? >> Hanna Israel: Present. Thank you. >> John Martin: Okay. Is there -- we have five items listed on our public posted agenda for closed session. Is there anyone here who wishes to address the board on one of those items? Okay, I see none. Then we will recess into a closed session to talk about the five items that are listed and we'll do everything in our power -- okay, everything within our reasonable power to get back here by 7 for the public meeting. [ Pause ] >> I'd like to call the meeting back to order. I want to report that there was no action taken in closed session and we have deferred action on item 20P until the next meeting because we did not have time to review that item on the consent agenda. Dr. Mann, will you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please? [ In unison reciting the Pledge of Allegiance ] >> We're going to go to public comments on non-agenda items, and I want to say a word about public comment. This is a meeting of the board of trustees. All public comment should be addressed to the board of trustees where the representatives of the residents of this district. It's not a place for name calling or finger pointing or comments addressed to anybody else but the board of trustees, and I hope that we can conduct our public comment in that matter.We have a number of rules that -- not rules, but bylaws that govern the public comment to allow members of the public to participate in our meetings, and they're stated in writing in the agenda. These are the board public policy on public comment that says, "Members of the public may request the opportunity to address the board regarding any item on the agenda. To do so, please request -- please complete a request to address the board form and give it to the board secretary prior to the deliberation of the agenda item." That means that we will not be accepting comment cards after we've begun deliberation of an item. Individual speakers are limited to five minutes, total audience participation on any agenda item is limited to 30 minutes. I actually, as you can see, I have a stack of cards and if everybody uses their allotted time of five minutes, that would only allow us six speakers in a 30minute segment that we've allotted for the public comment. We have a number of our items that we're looking at tonight have been also open for public comment in previous board meetings, and I've been pleased to also receive a lot of feedback since in-between meetings from members of the public about various recommendations that are presented to the board for action. So I'm looking forward to having the board continue to deliberate on these items, and then if there's a motion, we may be acting on these recommendations. So the first, or the public comment on non-agenda items, and I have four speaker cards on items that are not on the agenda. So we will start with Danny Hamman. [ Pause ] [ Applause ] >> Danny Hamman: My name is Danny Hamman and I'm a faculty member here at CEC, so welcome to CEC. I just wanted to read a portion of our own PCC Board of Trustees Bylaw #1290. Point #1 says, "The Board serves the district and therefore encourages employees, students and members of the community to express their views directly during board meetings." Then, there's point 2 and 3 where it talks about the technical procedures which I think you just read part of. And then point 4 of the Bylaw 1290 states, "The Board will make every effort to recognize speakers who have not advised the superintendent president as provided in items 2 and 3 above, but who, by holding up a hand, indicate the desire to be heard." I point this out because at the last board of trustees meeting, it appeared that members of the public filled out forms requesting to speak to different matters, and because of a technicality, the form wasn't submitted just before the discussion began; they were denied the opportunity to address the board. I hope the board will be more open to following Bylaw 1290.4 and "make every effort to recognize speakers even if they have not followed every regulation to the tee." Please air on being more inclusive. One other point I wanted to say, I also noticed on the agenda under public comment on non-agenda items the statement, the Brown Act prohibits the board from discussing or taking action on any item not on the agenda. However, I would like to read to you directly from the Brown Act Section 54954.2(a); it says, "No action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except that members of a legislative body or its staff may briefly respond to statements made, or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights under section," -- that number. "In addition, on their own initiative or in response to the questions posed by the public, a member of the legislative body or its staff may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her own activities. Furthermore, a member of the legislative body or the body itself subject to the rules of the procedures, et cetera, et cetera, they can provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the body in subsequent meetings concerning the matter or take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda item." I'd also like to read finally from the PCC Board of Trustees Bylaw 1290.7 which reads, "Members of the Board and the Superintendent President may ask questions of a speaker and respondent to the speaker's remarks on an agenda item. As to items not on the agenda, the Brown Act permits the Board to comment thereon, but the effect of the comment should not be such as to constitute commitment to any action." So the idea that you are unable to say anything to comments made on non-agendized item just doesn't seem to be supported by those things, but I don't know if you want to comment on that. [Laughter] [ Applause ] >> We'll follow the bylaw. >> Okay. >> Yuny Parada followed by Isabel Ramirez. [ Silence ] >> Yuny Parada: I would take comments, okay? Well, I am so glad that this meeting is taking place here at the location where Chihuahuita School once taught the underprivileged students of the area. Once again, I come here to beg you -- please, do not abandon the underprivileged of this community. It has come to my attention that CEC programs will for the time being remain at this location and gradually migrate to the main campus. This decision is completely contrary to the principles under which this location was built, funded and designed. It was for adults to provide vocational training, ESL, entry level education and specifically to the adult population. I have been told by highly esteemed board member that their priority is educating young people. I am sorry. The priorities under which this location came to exist was adult education. Please, keep it our way. [ Applause ] >> Isabel Ramirez followed by Paul Jarrell. >> Isabel Ramirez: Hi, good evening. I'm here because I want to know more about this decision, and I want to consider it because adult classes are a whole concept. I myself came to this campus and I have a great opportunity to learn other cultures, to learn English because English is my second language. So please consider it and don't move the classes as the concept of adult classes. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> John Martin: Paul Jarrell. >> Paul Jarrell: Thanks. Paul Jarrell, Professor of Biology. I'll keep this brief. As you know, Monday was the first day of school, and unlike other first days at schools I was a little more nervous than normal because I was moving into a new home. I was kind of like almost going into junior high or high school, or moving into the dorms at college. I just wanted to say I was pleasantly surprised. I wanted to acknowledge the work of Vice President Miller -- Jack -- and our facilities, the dean. It was a very pleasant move and it's been relatively seamless so far, so I wanted to thank them and acknowledge that to you. So thank you. >> Thank you, Professor. [Applause] >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Doctor Rocha, I passed over introductions. Were there any introductions that you'd like to make? >> Doctor Rocha: No, I don't have any, President Baum. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Any introductions any board members would like to make? Okay, we're moving on to item D, the approval of the minutes. Are there any changes that any board members found that need to be made to the minutes? >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Okay. We have a motion and a second on the minutes. Any further discussion? We'll take the advisory vote. >> Aye. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: All that's in favor say "Aye." >> Aye. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Motion carried unanimously. >> I'd like to abstain. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Oh, you'd like to abstain. >> Abstain. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: We have two abstentions for board members who were not present at the last meeting. On consent items, we'll go down the list. Trustee Israel, are there any consent items for Trustee Thomson? >> William Thomson: Yes, 29B. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: 29B? Trustee Wah? >> Linda Wah: None. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Trustee Martin? >> John Martin: No, thank you. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Trustee Fellow? >> Dr. Anthony Fellow: None. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Trustee Mann? >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: None, thank you. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Trustee Brown? >> Berlinda Brown: None. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Okay, well... >> Yes. >> Doctor Rocha: We have pulled 16P from consideration. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: 16P has been pulled? >> Doctor Rocha: Yeah. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: If you can make a note of that. Okay, we'll go to 29B. Trustee Thomson? >> William Thomson: Yeah, there's an item on here Fund 41 Capital Outlay and Fund 43 is Scheduled Maintenance under that heading. Delmac Construction, remember the contract apparently to increase it by $350,000 for additional miscellaneous district projects. What is the background of that? >> Oh, thank you. In fact, Mr. Miller will give you information that we have removed that. >> Yes, thank you. Actually, we are pulling that item and it will come back under another vendor at the next meeting; but basically this is the ongoing agreement that we have with outside contractors to help us with a variety of projects on campus. >> Okay, thank you. >> Are you pulling this one... >> So that item has been pulled? >> Yes, please. Thank you. The C-3100-2 Delmac Construction should be pulled from the agenda. >> Right. So that's removed from consideration and we may bring it back at a later time. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Okay, so 16P is pulled, 20P is pulled and then the contract with Delmac Construction is pulled from consideration. We'll entertain a motion on all the other consent items. >> Move approval. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Is there a second? >> Second. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Okay. Motion by Trustee Wah, second by Trustee Brown. Any further discussion? Okay, we'll go to the vote -- advisory vote. >> Aye. >> [Inaudible] >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Rest of the board, all those in favor say "Aye." >> Aye [in unison]. >> Geoffrey L. Baum: Motion, any opposed? Any abstentions? Consent items carry unanimously. Now, we move in to the action agenda, item F, the Information Technology Administrative Information System Selection. Doctor Rocha? >> Doctor Rocha: Yes, thank you President Baum and members of the Board of Trustees. Item F is an extremely important presentation on the next step of our adoption, proposal for the new administrative information system, or in plain English, the new computer system. Let me turn it over to Vice President Cable to make a brief introduction of our guest from the Ellucian company who will talk about the AIS system known as Banner. So, Dwayne. >> Dwayne Cable: Well, thank you very much. I'm actually not quite used to being so early on the agenda and I certainly do appreciate -- we probably ought to talk about the budget first before we start talking about it. But anyway, I certainly do appreciate it and I want to thank Ellucian and the team that's here. Basically, the overview today is to just give you some highlights in terms of what the primary or the more significant features and functions of Banner; and with that, Rick, I'm going to turn it over to you. Rick Legoza who's a senior executive for Ellucian. >> Rick Legoza: Hi, my name is Rick Legoza. I'm the senior account executive for Ellucian. So many people thought I work here at PCC over the years, but I do work for Ellucian. With us is Jeff Pomponi who's our Vice President for implementation services; Dan Frazier, Vice President to Western Region; Ted Fauce, who's -- would be PCC's full-time project manager on this project; and Brent Johnson [assumed spelling], general manager for student and financial aid systems solutions in our company, so and he'll be doing quite a bit of the talking today. Quickly and in case you don't know much about Ellucian and many people might be confused about our name, we have been around for a while, been around since 1968. Our first California community college system was over at San Diego Community College District in '72, so we've been working with the community colleges for a long time. We currently have 2300-plus clients. At any given term we serve about 13 million students. A significant number is our user groups; we're the largest user group in the world for higher education. In California, we're the largest higher education user group as well. It's a group called 3CBG, or the California Community College Banner Group. During those sessions, we share a lot of information, best practices, learn new things about our systems; it's a great way for people, colleagues to get together and talk about solutions like serving students. Another set of interesting number is 82% of the California community colleges use one of our ERP systems, or administrative systems; 37% of those districts actually use the Banner suite that was proposed for Pasadena. So that was a quick list of the institutions that are in the Banner suite currently. The Banner suite is actually maintained by a group of our employees in San Diego. They work out of what's called a California Community College Solution Center, and they maintain all state requirements, unique requirements for supporting the California community colleges. When we first got -- did our business plan for the solution center, we took the state requirements for California, stood them up next to all the requirements together, states, and they were about equal. So the California regs are actually about as large as the other 49 states. If you look at funding, funding as you know for California community colleges is 49th among the 50 states; even Mississippi beats you on that one. So unique problems, so we had to have unique solutions. Not many resources to support an awful large number of students, so again, we started the California Community College Solution Center, created a new baseline set of products just for California community colleges. We also have an office in Sacramento, and there we work with the chancellor's office and also the Legislature and listening on the board of governors as well to try to stay on top of where Legislation is occurring, where new regs are coming up so our clients are not caught without a good solution. The total solutions are -- come from several different areas. Even our global product looks at our solution center for solutions. Also, our international group looks at our California because California's problems become other states' problems as well. A good example is what back in 1974, I believe it was, when the first regs for faculty load came up and the 60% rule and a few others. Shortly after that, states like Kansas, states like Iowa had similar policies; California, good or bad, led the way with regulations and the work we did with California would spread to other states, so it was helpful. The Banner suite that we'd be implementing is a large comprehensive suite. Student system financial aid, finance HR and advancement; also a lot of products that you asked for that were required for, an example, integrated imaging; obviously, an institutional-wide portal for both students, faculty staff, administrators. So we have a large set of products. Now, to describe all of them, we'd be here all night and you've probably been through that before. What we're going to do is concentrate on student and because of what you went through on your educational master plan, we're going to concentrate on one area of the student system and that would be student success and retention, something I know is near and dear to your heart. With that, I'm going to transition over to Brent and talk about how our solution for the AIS system is set up to help students succeed, so with that, thank you. >> Brent: Thank you, Rick. Excuse me. About two years ago, the board reviewed Project 90 and beyond and one of the components for the student of your initiatives was student success and retention. So we focused this brief presentation to focus in on those particular areas. Part of the Banner solution includes the solutions that you see up on the board which are DegreeWorks, Course Signals, faculty feedback, Banner Relationship Management and performance reporting. So going through these, we're looking at DegreeWorks being the comprehensive web-based academic advising tool. It includes degree audit, what-if analysis, and also transfer articulation which was a key part of your plan as well to get more transfer students in. So those part of the tools, student ed plans and also using that student ed plan data to help drive business decisions on which courses to offer in the upcoming year, how many sections of a particular course do we need to offer to support the students' ed plans to make them successful. So here's an example of looking at the DegreeWorks program. You actually have it in your books, so it should be a little bit perhaps easier to read. But the focus on this is the student at the top which is Rebecca Teentow [phonetic], who's in the nursing program, and has a variety of curricula information through the center. But the keys are that in the middle there's a dynamic progress bar so that she can see at any given point how far along she is in her degree requirements. In addition down below, she also has -- it's hard to see but it has a green checkbox there which tells her the things she's succeeded in. She's progressing and then also in red the areas that are still needed for her to be successful within the program. In addition, she has drill-down capability for items that are still needed to successfully complete the program; and in this instance, she's drilled into a particular course called Site 24 and it brings up from the class schedule all the offerings of Site 24 that are happening within the next couple of years to help her as she evaluates her degree plan with her ed plan with her counselor. The other important item within the DegreeWorks are the student ed plans themselves, and they help students not only who are preparing or registered for classes today, but also moving forward a year, two years, three years out depending on how long their plan is set up. In this instance, you can see that the red arrow points to the springtime period, the courses that would be required during that time period, as well as the delivery method for those courses in case that's important to the class itself whether it's online, on campus or a hybrid mode. In addition, the lower portion shows additional classes and that would just scroll on throughout the number of classes they would need to successfully complete the plan. In addition, our delivered curriculum reports that would basically say for the next semester or two semesters, here's how many students need this particular class; here's how many have to take it because it's part of their ed plan; here's how many who could take it based on being an elective or something within their program. So it gives the institution operational efficiencies with planning for classes. So what we'd like to do now is instead of just us talking about it, we'd like you to hear from some of your peers in the California community college system that have used DegreeWorks to improve student services and increase student success. [ Pause ] >> [Film clip] Not every student comes here saying "I want to get a degree. I want to get an AA degree or I want to get a four-year bachelor's degree." >> For me personally, what student success means is that students come here and leave with a credential. >> I think there's lots of ways to define success and that's been one of the troubles that community colleges have had is getting that message out that we have a lot of students that come for a lot of different reasons. >> Here we are in California looking at recommendations from the Student Success Task Force saying educational plans are absolutely essential. >> It's imperative for students to start out with a plan as it gives them a layout of what they're going to be doing for the next two, three, sometimes four to six years. >> Pre-DegreeWorks, when working with a student we would spend most of the time gathering together the materials. >> Well, the before was always so much paper-intensive work for counselors and for students. >> We take general education, process with the major, print them on a plan together with the student. That would take up most of our time. >> Now we have a better tool to come up with better plans for the students with better monitoring of how they are progressing. >> It shows them exactly what they still need for their degree; it shows them the percentage of completion towards their degree. >> People might have thought, "Well, you're trying to replace people with a computer." That actually is not the case at all and what we are finding is that the face-to-face time with the counselors is better used. >> They come then into the counselor's office with much more informed questions for the counselor. >> By using DegreeWorks and interacting with this somewhat complex process, that student can pick things, can choose things which are actually improving their competitiveness in the labor market. >> And so the sessions I think are much more productive. >> The DegreeWorks program is just so perfect. >> I like DegreeWorks because it really does empower students. >> It permits us to play... >> Can we go on to the next section, because these are kind of getting repetitive and I want to make sure there's plenty of time to go through the presentation and allow the board members to ask questions? >> Sure, absolutely. So basically from that particular perspective, we look at the DegreeWorks being enhanced services operationally for student outcome success. The next item within the Banner solution would be the Course Signals product and that is how to identify underperforming students within classes. It provides automated communication and successful encouragement to the students who are having academic difficulty at the time. It provides intuitive red, green, yellow signals to make it easy for those particular students. Within that, here's an example of an instructor looking at the classes that they're teaching, selecting the geography class at the top; and when they do that, the Course Signals themselves are actually calculated which show in the column that's highlighted down the center. So these are each specific date period when the signals were run; it uses academic grade book technology, information from the student information system on assessment information tests, and calculates, if you will, a risk algorithm that basically says whether the student has potential to have difficulty in the class. As soon as those signals are actually run, it sends that particular information to the student and also to their learning management system if you're using one for the class so that they can see what their status is at that particular moment. We have a brief clip here that was from NBC News that talked about this particular product about Course Signals. >> [Film clip] Finally tonight, a story for all my fellow newly minted empty nesters out there -- for that matter, anybody who has just dropped a child off at college. It's that time they tell us they're ready to go, they have to go and now you've got to let them go; but how do you know they're okay and all launched on the right trajectory? What about things like, "Oh, I don't know, good grades and graduating from college." The story tonight from Purdue University in Indiana and NBC's Rehema Ellis. [Music] >> Rehema Ellis: [Background music] At Purdue University, this is what Orientation Week looks like for 7000 freshmen [background noise]. Tuition as much as $37,000 a year. With so much at stake, Purdue is committed to helping students manage their rigorous courses and their time. The result? 86% of freshmen make it to their second year -- but Purdue wants more. >> We wouldn't be true to our mission if we were not concerned with making sure that we serve the students well, making sure they finished... >> Rehema Ellis: Retaining students especially beyond the first year is a national concern. A recent study shows that 34% of all college freshmen did not return to the same institution for their sophomore year. It's the highest percentage of students who opted out or failed to make the grade in 20 years. This fall, Purdue has something new to help incoming freshmen and sophomores at a cost to the university of $47 per student. It's called "Signals," a first of its kind computerized course management system that not only charts quizzes and exams, but also student effort in the most difficult classes. >> Signals can take into account practice quiz outcomes. It can take into account the number of time students log in to check groups for the course. It can take into account the number of time students look at the homework... >> Rehema Ellis: Instructors use the information to track students' progress. Similar to a traffic light, green, yellow or red pops up on a student's computer or cell phone. They get a signal within the first two weeks of classes before bad study habits develop. Tyler Gentry was one of 2000 students in the pilot program. >> Tyler Gentry: In this case the signal was yellow and it says, "Caution. You can do better in this class." >> Rehema Ellis: [Background noise] His math grade went from C to B. >> Tyler Gentry: Once I saw it bump into the yellow, I was like, "Hey, I really need to step up my game here." >> Signals is not the answer, but it is part of the answer making students feel we do care how successful they are at this university. >> Rehema Ellis: [Background noise] One university helping students make the most of their investment and green-lighting their future. Rehema Ellis, NBC News... >> So that is the NBC News -- you talking about the early intervention system that we proposed here at Pasadena for underperforming students and to help them. The next few will go very quickly, I assure you. The next component is faculty feedback where course signals takes into effect grade book information. Frontline people like your instructors that are in the classroom often have information that needs to be shared with counselors that affects student success. And so in this case it's an early alert system beyond that that also allows institutions that might have monitored target cohorts, your athletes, your international students that might need additional guidance or overseeing. It's up to the institution, but that faculty feedback provides an opportunity for the faculty member to go into their class roster if you will; and within that class roster, they'll see under each particular name, if they wanted to create an alert about a student. In this particular example, Dustin Brown [assumed spelling], it says, "Select the issues that apply." These are defined by PCC and in this case the instructor has said they're late or not turning in their classroom assignments, and then they can offer recommendations, too, and in this case it said, "Consult with your counselor." And also interim comments that are going to be consumed by the relationship management solution to help those students who might be having some type of difficulty. And in this case, this faculty feedback is part of the early alert system; that information then flows directly into the relationship management component. That is where those early alerts are tracked from inception of when they're reported, until the time period of which they're closed. So you can see what the point of -- all the points of contact between the counselors are and to resolution. It provides for automated alerts as well. For example, if you had students who were expected to receive financial aid for an upcoming term but yet had not registered for classes, that might be an alert that that student is not coming back to the class for registration. So the system can automatically invoke communications to that student to try to get them engaged to return back to the institution. So growing enrollment, improving customer service. Here's an example of looking at the profile of a student, Sheryl Marlowe [assumed spelling], her academic and in student engagement information down below for the counselors to review. In addition, this one's a little bit harder to see but this shows an alert that was created manually by a instructor that basically said they found out Sheryl's father lost her job and she may have risked dropping out of the institution for lack of funds. And this also shows all the way to resolution the counselor working with the financial aid office to get an emergency loan for her so she could continue enrollment at the institution. Just an example of how alerts can be used and tracked in the system; and so it is used for engaging at-risk and excelling students. The final piece for student success and retention are part of it within the Banner solution is the actual student retention reporting. Here you would take your master plan goals and they would be electronically placed so that they could be measured and tracked. It provides intuitive scorecards and dashboards for executives, operational departments to be able to look at that particular data in an easy-to-read format. In this instance we're looking at your particular goals and objectives, and also the real time analysis on each side of each particular objective shows the status of that at any given moment. So as a manager you would be able to look at that particular item and say, "Is it on track? Is it off-track? Do we need to readjust our plans?" In this area, we're looking at improving retention across the institution. So that, if you would select that particular item and drill down to it, it would take you to the two-year and three-year retention rates at the institution. And here you could see whether you were trending favorably or unfavorably at the moment, and in this point we're down just a little bit, 2% off in retention in one year, 7% off in the third year. That would then be displayed in terms of graphically year over year where we can see the current addition as the red dot on this chart, the blue dot which means we've improved a little bit in the retention but we still have not completely met our goal. But again, these are your particular key objectives that you could measure from year to year. And finally, a couple of dashboard reports, one which is operational really; it's financial aid, and links to show the amount of works, loans, grants and information, money that's being spent for students. And then if you select any of those graphed bar charts, it would drill the person down into the detail of how much biddings is being offered, the allocation between federal institution and state money and how it's divided up amongst the students in terms of the packaging information. And then finally, there is some retention charts and things that are there which show you sequential spring to the fall, fall to spring, or would also show you year over year, fall to fall, spring to spring so that you could see like periods. And those are basically the components that would allow you to monitor your institutional objectives and goals. So those particular pieces, degree works, course signals, faculty feedback, relationship, management, student retention are a part of the proposal that you have seen before you with the Banner system and those would help PCC and their student success and retention initiatives. >> Okay, just to kind of wrap things up for you. Our proposal included a single point of responsibility. We have a team on site, full-time staff members that'll be here during the implementation process. We call them internally the "A-Team"; they're the team that knows, have implemented other California community colleges. They will be on site every day of the week throughout the -- at least one year, in some cases longer than a year. We've invested millions of dollars in the California community college suite of products. We continue to invest in that; it's the right thing to do. The other thing is our entire group on the starter group knows the educational master plan and sometimes I think maybe we know it better than some folks at PCC. We've studied the education master plan; we've mapped it to our products so we know what products can address goals and objectives within the institution; and now we're beginning to work with both our team and your team in addressing what the key performance indicators, what the metric should be and addressing those educational master plan goals. Finally, if anybody knows me, they know I have a passion for student success; I know it's important to you. We've been involved in the Student Success Task Force, the educational master plan; we've worked, in fact sponsored, Senate Bill 1440; and so we'll continue to do all those things and, you know, there are two things that we did talk about today -- student success being completion and retention; the third piece is employment. We'll work with your current system which happens to be a partner of ours and make sure that is a smoother process as well on the career management side. So with that, we'll take questions. >> All right. Thank you so much for the background information. We've had a number of presentations about the process. In fact, at the last meeting here two weeks ago when you were here, a number of the people in the audience even raised the hand that they were participated in the decision making and the recommendation. There is no action before the board on the agenda today, but this is an opportunity to ask further questions from the firm. Dr. Mann. >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: Yes. I wasn't here last time, so I don't -- this question has probably been asked and answered; but the only question that I would have having sat on the Student Success Task Force is, I know there are plans if funding becomes available for the chancellor's office to develop like an enrollment program or tracking program or degree certification program for the whole system. Now, I'm assuming that this program that you're recommending for us would coordinate with that and it would be compatible. >> It would -- well, we hope... >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: Well, I don't know what the right word is... >> We hope it's more than compatible and we hope it's us, [laughter] so, yes, it would be compatible. >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: And have you been -- or are you working if that winter starts, would you be involved in the development of this? >> We're working at the state level on the Students Success Task Force solutions as well. >> Dr. Jeanette Mann: Thank you. >> Trustee Wah. >> Linda Wah: I'm really glad to see we're moving forward on technology, so that's been a big -- something that really touches me and my heart to -- with the success of the college. So, and I'm also glad to hear that we're going to map out what the functionality is that we're going to accomplish. And so as I indicated to Vice President Cable and Vice President Miller, I hope that we see this map on a timeline so we know what operation functions that we're actually going to implement. And I'm assuming that we will implement those as they -- the switch will get turned on as we get the modules implemented or is it -- the switch gets turned on in 18 months. >> No, various parts of that will be implemented as we move forward. >> Linda Wah: Right, so I have a chance to see how things work. And I like setting metrics; I think that's really important especially since this is a sizeable dollar tab in these very financially tight times. I guess a couple of just general questions. Of the things that you have shown, will these modules be fully implemented I guess or adopted throughout the college, or is this just an example of what the capability is of the modules? >> I'm sorry, I didn't quite get that. >> Linda Wah: So the question is, of the modules that you showed... >> Oh yeah. >> Linda Wah: ...so that's an example of the capability of the software. And so the question is, will that capability be fully implemented here at PCC, or is that just an example of what they could do? I mean, do we know to what degree it will be implemented? >> Fully implemented, yes. >> Linda Wah: Okay. >> So DegreeWorks is going to be one of the first things so we can do educational master plans and, in fact, it'll precede registration. So we'll have self-service and master plans prior to registration, and right now we're aiming for the summer of 2013. >> What I have seen is we've gone through a lot of these projects at other places is that the departments as they get involved in the implementation, we'll take a look at different types of issues relating to that functionality, and some things they may choose not to implement as part of a choice, but it's an operational choice they make. But for the most part, everything that comes with that, we have it to be fully implemented if they choose to fully implement that function; but it'll be up to the departments and how they go about that. >> Linda Wah: So it'd be great to see at some point to what percentage of the module we intend to fully utilize because if we're buying four modules but we're only implementing up to 60% of them, then, you know, it's just... >> Well, that would be a concern if that kind of percentage was there, but our intent is to implement all of that functionality where possible. >> And I'll just add that Dr. Olivo in the counseling and the student services team are anxious to get started with many of these since they've been waiting quite a while. So it's one of the reasons why it's going to come up first and while they will continue to be very actively engaged in this process. >> Linda Wah: Great. Yeah, I would've imagined that would be one of the operations that would fully benefit from this, as well as just even the student tracking. And so just a couple really small questions and regarding the scenario where the students can query their own progress and their records, can they also query for what-if scenarios, so they change their major and then they can tell what the impact is and then does that -- will that flag someone, some counselor to say, "Oh, this student is maybe in danger of living here for 15 years instead of two years?" >> So absolutely, in terms of the -- if a student does a what-if analysis, we didn't have time to go into that; but if they would do a what-if analysis, I think I'll change my major today. As soon as they select that item it will relook at their program, their academic history bumped up against the requirements for the probe and give them a dynamic rendering of, "If you change it, here's the percentage fit you have right now in that program." So they could see whether they do better or not as well if they would do that. Absolutely. >> Linda Wah: And you gave a nice list of your clients and the California community colleges, are you implemented in other colleges and do you have integration of your data with universities -- other universities so that we can integrate the transfer? >> Yeah, actually, there's -- well, two things; we're in 99 total institutions within California. The integration of data between the two is actually something that's done statewide and we are a participant in that. It used to be called CCCTrans [phonetic], now it's called eTrans [phonetic] and our system obviously supports that. In fact, I think the alpha school was North Orange Community College District and they're our client for the eTrans. >> Linda Wah: Okay, and then, just one last question. On the -- I know one of the things that PCC has been struggling with is, you know, our classes fill up and then we get -- the kids get wait listed; and then the professors don't have the tools to immediately respond back when a seat vacates and they could fill up right away. So will we be able to utilize this software and how will that happen? >> It's an automated wait list process which automatically puts them based on priorities that the institution sets. So it could be as simple as first in, first out, or it can be based on students with disabilities first in, things like that. >> Okay, thank you. >> And the output of that could go to their phone. >> Right, so... >> Linda Wah: Excellent, yeah, the text. Great, thank you. >> Right, and I'm sorry, Trustee Wah, that's one question that I did have. So when all these tools are functional and operational that every student could access them from a mobile device... >> Oh yes. >> -- from an iPad or their cell phone. >> Right. Actually, in fact, lately we've been downplaying self-service on the web because smartphones are really the way students want to get their data; and one of the nice things about what we propose is open source mobile application, so you don't have to pay year by year for different applications. We have a comments area where all institutions contribute mobile applications and the institution can use which ones they want to take; there is no charge for those applications. >> Okay. >> And the tools are pretty simple to use; in fact, my nephew is being trained on them right now so he can get a job somewhere or so. >> Trustee Thomson. >> William Thomson: What's the cost for this? [Background laughter] Go ahead, no. Go ahead. >> The overall five-year cost as we discussed in our previous meeting was $10.5 million. At least right now as we are close to over a five-year period... >> I assume that includes software and all the equipment, et cetera? >> Software, implementation costs; there's hardware costs that will come with that, but the five-year total cost of ownership is roughly around $10.5 million. In year one, we would look at that being somewhere close to $6 million and we were going to spread the financing if you recall some of that discussion, to lower our cash requirements out of that, but... >> Year one and the budget we're proposing about $3.25 million for '12, '13 on a finance arrangement. >> Right. >> We better all bring our checkbooks. >> But how are we going to pay for that? >> Later on we get into... [ Applause ] >> Later on when we get into the budget presentation, you'll see it's part of Fund 41 -- Cap Outlay, Fund 41; it's monies that we have set aside, and again, through this finance arrangement we're trying to minimize the cash impact. >> And we reviewed that two weeks ago. We detailed on the last one... >> Yeah, we've had detail on this in several meetings actually. >> Trustee Brown. >> Berlinda Brown: So were we still considering leasing? I know we discussed that earlier. >> Yes, this is a... >> Is that still... >> Yes, the lease finance, but primarily finance on this package because it's a software base; there's not as much hardware to actually lease; although there are opportunities to do that as well in some cases and we're looking at that as well. >> Berlinda Brown: Thanks. >> Trustee Wah. >> Linda Wah: Yeah, I just wanted to make a comment because I heard the gasps from the audience on the price tag, but, you know, I think that PCC has been so far behind in technology and I think it's really damaged our ability to deliver service to students and also to give the tools that are needed to our staff to really do their job effectively. So hopefully when we see the metrics of what we hope to accomplish, it will be something everyone can agree on would be worth it for us. >> And so what's the next step? This is not before the board for action tonight, so what... >> Well, we wanted to offer this presentation, which is probably the most important informational presentation. Previously, Vice President Cable has described the year long process that led to the selection of Banners and new AIS; and you recall that the reason why we began this is because four years ago the board of trustees commissioned a report that essentially said that our current computer system that was installed in 1984 is basically dysfunctional. All of the tools, they described just one tool today to the DegreeWorks tool; there's about a dozen or more tools in the Banner product which is many, if not, most community colleges use. None of these tools are currently available to PCC students. So four years ago, the board commissioned a report to where are we going to go with technology and made the clear decision that it wanted a selection and to move forward. That process has basically taken four years to this night. What Ellucian are from -- Ellucian and the Banner product did tonight is just to try and give a visual of how this would be at the ground level that, for example, students on their cell phone would be able to register. For example, right now, you often don't have access to our computer system after 10 o'clock at night as many faculty know and as many students know, who have tried to register this week or had dropped that our current system, well over 25 years old, that if you don't know exactly how to press the buttons, it'll kick you out and you have to go all the way back in, and it's a huge problem for our students. The next step and Trustee Thomson and others have correctly asked you the cost question. You will hear in the budget report and the draft to the proposed adopted budget, the final of which we'll bring next week, the costs and then of course we anticipate that at the next board meeting we'll be bringing the complete contract itself before you for questions and review and for approval. So that's the next step would be to review the money part of it, the contract part of it at the next meeting. >> Thank you, and thank you for the presentation. I trust that all the information about both the financing and the content is available online or to any member of the public who wants to learn more about the recommendation that will be presented for the board, is... >> Anything that we presented we make it available via the web, so... >> Okay. >> Right. >> Any further questions or comments? Okay, thank you. >> Thank you, gentlemen. >> Okay, we're moving on to Item G. It's an action item for a possible action; there's a recommendation before the board. I have a number of comment cards that are divided among G and G and H, and so I'm going to call on them in a way that I think will maximize the number of people who are able to address the board. I have -- let's see -- one, two, three, four, five, six individuals wanting to address the calendar item, and so what's going to happen again is the board is eager to hear from the public. I've heard from -- had took public comments at the board meeting two weeks ago. I've received a lot of public comment in the couple of weeks since including personal meetings, phone calls, emails, as has have other members of the board, and tonight is an opportunity for it to extend and receive additional public comments. In fact I had a meeting with President Frazier from the Associated Students on this topic and we spent some time discussing the possibilities. So we're going to hear public comments, and then the board at the last meeting asked the administration to clarify some items with respect to the proposal, so we'll hear it from the administration about those clarifying items, and then the board will deliberate and ask any questions and then we'll see if there is an opportunity to act on the recommendation. So we have six comment items here. If we have more time; there's a couple of people who are G and G and H, we'll see where it goes; but we'll start with Julie Kiotas and Michelle Ireland-Galman, they want to share their time. [Applause] And Lynora Rogacs. And then as I mentioned, we have 30 minutes for this so I have about 8:06 and we will go ahead and take this to 8:36. >> Julie Kiotas: Good evening, I'm Julie Julie Kiotas. >> Michelle Ireland-Galman: And I'm Michelle Ireland-Galman. >> Julie Kiotas: I'd like to, first of all, thank the board for taking your time to hear us tonight. I know it's a thankless job and we appreciate you even though we don't always let let you know that we do so. I'm speaking on behalf of the faculty association this evening and I would like to make public the letter that we emailed to the board yesterday, so I'm going to read directly from the letter that we emailed the board yesterday morning. We are writing to you to make an urgent and formal request to postpone any vote to change the academic calendar per the agenda of the August 29, 2012 board meeting. The faculty association urges that you maintain the essential integrity of the shared governance and contractual process. We want to assure you that the FA is committed to consensus building for disclosure and collegial ethics that serve the most number of students following the most pedagogically sound educational practices. In that regard, the current calendar is the result of an impressive year-long deliberation in which all positions were vetted. After months of meetings with extensive input from all constituent groups, the college calendar committee co-chaired by Vice President Bell and Senate-appointed Krista Walter passed the calendar. It was considered and passed by the academic senate; it was approved by the college council; it was signed off by the FA; and finally, as recommended by President Rocha, it was approved by your votes. The process was rooted in full consensus building and it must be emphasized that any drastic change would undermine the stability of the college and negatively affect thousands of students and hundreds of faculty and staff. Thus, the current calendar, including fall, winter, spring and summer session, was established through a collegial process that included all constituent groups, faculty, staff and students. Formal consultation with leadership of the associated students and informal input from students college-wide reveal a compelling support for the current calendar. As leaders of the FA, we urge you to postpone your vote on a unilateral change in calendar. Your unilateral decision would set into motion a number of disturbing consequences; first, a violation of shared governance and deliberative process. [ Applause ] Second, this is a violation of our contract; effectively, it is an unfair labor practice. [Applause] Third, we consider this to be a destructive action to our college that would undermine both student success and access, causing academic regression for thousands of students. [Applause] It is a significant loss of institutional credibility in this community. It is a loss of confidence in the board's willingness to hear our collegial voices, and a questioning of why such an action of enormous repercussions should be taken the very end of summer and early fall when most faculty and students have been away from campus. [ Applause ] >> Now, on a personal note, our currently enrolled lancers have educational plans that were developed for them, in some cases, years before now by our dedicated counselors. Students are counting on the winter to finish up their course work in spring to be eligible for graduation and fall transfer. Not having a winter can potentially delay our students for a year before transfer. I respectfully request that you do not vote to remove winter session. [ Applause ] I also read, and this is very nice, I also read that Pasadena City College was selected as the reader's choice community college in a Los Angeles Times poll, and that is because we offer students our services like winter session. Thank you. [Applause] >> And on a final statistical note, we need the board to know that according to the chancellor's office, of the top 10 transfer community colleges, 60% offer winter intercession and have in the past; of the bottom 20 schools, zero offer winter intercession. [Chanting] Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Thank you, professors. Lynora Rogacs. [ Applause ] When there are outbursts, you do take away the time because that's counted against the five minutes a person, so... [Chanting] ...so Sam Resnick will follow that. >> Lynora Rogacs: I've had the wonderful opportunity in the almost 10 years that I've worked here to teach Friday-only classes for the vast majority of that time. Friday only classes offer at-risk students a necessary opportunity to advance their educational goals. In particular, I'm referring to parents of young children who simply cannot afford day care services three days, or even two days a week. Students with huge commutes who sometimes commute over two hours just to attend one day of classes, and full time working students who need to support their families and can only be given one day a week off of work in order to pursue educational advancement. Your proposed change to what you're calling as a misnomer, the Carnegie Hour proposes to change Monday, Wednesday's scheduling to Monday, Wednesday, Friday scheduling. The only way that that could possibly work is if you eliminate Friday only classes. Otherwise we don't have classrooms to change Monday/Wednesday scheduling to Monday/Wednesday/Friday scheduling. So your proposal would, in essence, make it virtually impossible for our most at-risk students, those with children, those with long commutes, those who are economically disadvantaged, those who need to work full time to pursue their educational goals. These are the very students that we have a sacred charge to protect and ensure that they have equal access to education. This proposed policy disproportionately hinders women from pursuing their educational goals... [Applause and cheering] [Background applause] ...since it is women who are the primary childcare providers in our society. This proposal disproportionately affects those who have full time jobs and thus is institutionalizing a classist -- classism policy here at PCC. That makes it sexist and classist. I urge the board not to do this to our students. And for the sake of your own reelection campaigns, [background cheering and applause] I urge you not to impose this policy here at PCC. [Applause] >> Geoffrey Baum: [Background applause] Sam Reznic followed by Christine Orchid. [ Applause ] >> Sam Reznic: I'm going to keep this brief because I know there are a very large amount of people that want to speak on this and because I'm also a student and I have to get home and do homework. But on that note I'd like to drill this into the board because they don't seem to understand what's essential to a student. The repetition is what makes you remember things. So I think I need to keep repeating it in every board meeting that you cannot cut winter semester. Winter semester is essential to students. There have been students and faculty who have gotten up every board meeting for the past at least a year and spoken on how important student -- this semester is to students. I'm sorry I'm making this up as I go along. I don't have a prepared speech, but, like I said, I don't have time, I have homework. [Background chuckle] Anyway winter semester is essential to students. That's about all I have to say. But I would like to remind the board of one other very important point. It only takes 1,000 signatures on a petition to recall a board member. I'd like to address this especially... [ Applause and cheering ] I'd like to address this especially to my personal trustee, Mr. Geoffrey Baum, who I would like to remind that if winter semester is cut, I will be initiating a recall election against you. [ Applause and cheering ] And finally I'd like to bring to everyone's attention, for anyone who's not aware, that there is a group of students outside this meeting who are being prevented from coming in and speaking to the board. Thank you. [ Applause and cheering ] [ Chanting ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Kirstin Orchid followed by Rita Demico. >> Kirstin Orchid: My name is Kirstin Orchid. I would like to know how you have money to implement this but you don't have money to give us the classes that we are asking for over and over again? [Background applause] That doesn't make sense to me. If you have money to implement this, you have money to give us all the classes we want and need for extracurricular activities and so forth. So please give us back the classes that you seem to be cutting over and over again and don't cut winter intersessions so that students can transfer when they're supposed to and stuff like that. And stop putting the disabled students at the bottom of the list and just letting the full time students get all the discounts, like on the Metro passes and take into consideration that disabled students cannot be full time and pass their classes, so they want to have the same consideration as far as discounts as everyone else. It's not fair that you just let the full time students get the discounts on the Metro and not the part time students that have disabilities that can't do full time status. [Background noise] Thank you. [ Applause and cheering ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Rita D'Amico followed by Kris Pilon. >> Rita D'Amico: I'll be very brief. I just want to say that we would like to know, what's the -- what's the gain in rushing this decision who creates so much -- that creates so much animosity? [Background noise] And we would like to know why now the academic calendar becomes the student calendar? This decision is forcing on us a major change that affects our teaching and our students. The college governance process is being ignored and we feel undervalued and not respected. I've been working here for 10 years and I've never seen so many people unhappy. I don't know any of my colleague or staff who is happy with this situation and everybody's complaining. So if you can please take this into consideration. Thank you. [ Applause and cheering ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Kris Pilon, and I saw your daughter at the Levitt Pavilion. It was great to see the graphic arts booth there. >> Kristin Pilon: Oh great. I hope you saw our students there. >> Geoffrey Baum: Yes, absolutely. >> Kristin Pilon: They were doing live printing [applause] four nights a week for all summer, so a great publicity event for Pasadena City College. >> Geoffrey Baum: Absolutely. >> Kristin Pilon: Thank you and good evening. I have lived in Pasadena and South Pasadena for 35 years. I've taught at the college for 20 years. I'm a taxpayer and a supporter of this community. I'm really confused about whether there is a monetary crisis here or not. The president and Mr. Miller have told the state that there is no crisis. They have filed paperwork indicating that and yet we're told all the time that there's not enough money to run this winter intersession. There's a $20 million savings account. We need $750,000 to run winter. That's like taking 75 cents out of a $20 bill. [Cheering]It's not going to break the bank to do that. [ Applause and cheering ] [Applause] I really don't think there's any reason to rush through this. This needs to be carefully thought through. This extremely affects a lot of programs on campus. Some of our vocational programs are approved by the state. We have particular hours for lab and lecture which might not fit into this kind schedule without some careful consideration. And so we really need to run this through a careful process. A month is not enough to really look at what this is going to do to the college. We need to give ourselves at least a year. Leave things as they are. Use the money that we have to keep the programs going and then evaluate, after we see whether or not the tax initiative passes and some of these other things, where we stand. And I guess I also would like to mention that if the board has noticed that all of the major recent changes on the campus are motivated by the administration, there's nothing coming from the faculty because we are constantly browbeaten by these kind of things that are imposed on us by the administration. There really needs to be more of an opportunity for faculty to participate in the development of the goals of the college. And it's not happening. In spite of what they tell you, it's not happening. [Background Applause] We are not considered. We are not asked. We are not spoken to about these issues. They come from the top down and it's really not -- it's out of balance, it's not fair, it's unhealthy for the college. Thank you very much. [ Applause and cheering ] >> Geoffrey Baum: I had two speakers who indicated -- or one speaker, Anna Torres [phonetic], who wanted to speak on G and H. So we have time, Anna, if you'd like to come and speak on item G. >> Anna Torres: Hi my name is Anna Torres and I am the ASPCC Vice President for Internal Affairs. [Cherring] I'll be brief so all these people can have as much time to speak as possible. As a member of the Associated Students, I got to move into my office this summer. And among my many trinkets I brought a portrait and the only thing it says is, "Listen." I receive many comments on this from people who tell me, "I like that 'listen' thing," and I've tried my best to keep that as a part of my integrity. All I would ask the board tonight is just that to listen. I'll read one of my favorite quotes, "A wise man will hear and increase learning, and a man of understanding will attain wise counsel." Some of the comments tonight may be poignant, but do not let that take away its virtue and its integrity. Many benefits can come from listening tonight if we all just give an ear to hear. Thank you. [ Applause and cheering ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Thank you. I misread one of the comment cards. I thought it was on the administrative organization. It's on the faculty, under faculty organization. If Joshua Fleming would like to address the board, if he's here? And my apologies for misreading this comment card. >> Joshua Fleming: [Applause] Yes, this is going to seem a little out of order now so I apologize [chuckle], it's going to seem a little out of the blue. >> Geoffrey Baum: That's my fault. I'm sorry. >> Joshua Fleming: That's all right. My name is Josh Fleming and I am an instructor in PCC Speech Communication Department. I'm also a member and have been asked to speak on behalf of the newly-formed Coalition of Progressive Faculty. Five years ago, PCC faculty broke away from the California Teachers Association. Today, many of us are concerned that the Faculty Association which took its place is not representing the viewpoints of the faculty at large. In fact, there's no way to know if they are representing the views of the faculty as they do not poll us to determine majority opinions. In recent months, and in particular in the past few weeks, we have become concerned that the union is not acting in the best interest of the entire faculty. We have noticed a lack of organization, transparency, and in particular, democratic order. On top of this, there has been at times a divisive and hostile campus which seems to be counterproductive to the current matters at hand. With the current contract negotiations on the table, we are disappointed in the lack of action by our union. We worry that the certain contract issues will dominate what should be a much broader discussion and we worry the district should take the behavior of a few as representative of the faculty body at large. In response to these concerns, a small but dedicated group has formed the Coalition of Progressive Faculty, an independent voice seeking transparency and democracy in our union. [Background comment] This is not a call for a condemnation of the union or its members and officers... >> On agenda item. >> Josh Fleming: ...but an offer of help. >> [Background comments]. >> Geoffrey Baum: Please let the gentleman finish. I had... [ Inaudible audience comment ] >> Joshua Fleming: We are here to inform the district that we believe that the majority of faculty [background shouting] on PCC's campus... [ Background shouting ] >> Geoffrey Baum: All right, well, they're not going to -- we're not going to disrupt any speaker [Background Shouting]. We are -- please continue. I'm going to have to ask people, if they're going to continue to disrupt our proceedings they're going to be asked to leave the room. [ Inaudible audience comment ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Please continue. >> Joshua Fleming: Currently we are gathering signatures to help support this claim and are confident that we will collect enough to convince the Faculty Association that it needs some reform to promote democracy and transparency. The petition itemizes eight areas of concern that we believe need to be addressed and obviously the sooner the better. In no particular order they are an adoption of a more collegial, collaborative and ethical communication style; the reduction of union dues as promised five years ago; the adoption of a democratic vote system to begin immediately and start with some of the items discussed here tonight; the voluntary adoption of the Brown Act; disclosure of union's finances, disclosure of the union's counter proposals to the administration; proportional divisional representation and finally that union negotiating priorities reflect the priorities of the entire faculty as determined by a democratic vote. We understand given the urgency of matters pertaining to collective bargaining that this does not come at the best time. We understand that negotiations and compromises could have and should have been reached by now. And what the Coalition of Progressive Faculty hopes is that the district will understand with just a bit more time an amicable agreement can still be reached. We ask for your support and patience as we try to make this a reality. Let it be clear that we are not trying to circumvent the process or the authority of the Faculty Association but we strongly believe that changes need to be made immediately. Our criticism is out of concern, not contempt. We ask for your support and patience and to our fellow faculty we ask the same by signing our petition. Famed Federal Judge Charles Pickering once observed that a healthy democracy requires a decent society. It requires that we are honorable, generous, tolerant and respectful. With your support and the support of our colleagues, the Coalition of Progressive Faculty believe that we can make this happen and in do so expedite a contract that can move us all forward. Thank you. >>> Geoffrey Baum: Okay so now we will continue with the agenda item. [Applause] My apologies for taking that out of order. [Background shouting, gavel sound] Thank you. So I will -- ma'am, I'm going to have to ask you to leave, I'm going to have to ask you to leave. We've got to -- okay so Dr. Rocha, the board asked for clarification. [ Shouting ] [Applause] 3 >> Geoffrey Baum: So we will take up the item. [ Shouting ] >> Okay, that's fine. [ Shouting ] >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay, so we'd like to... [ Shouting ] >> This is pathetic. [ Shouting ] [ Applause ] >> [Shouting] Do you know what a police state looks like? This is what a police state looks like. Do you know what a police state looks like? This is what a police state looks like. Where is the student representation? >> All right. [Shouting] [ Applause ] >> Geoffrey Baum: So we'd like to continue with the agenda. [Background shouting] We ask the administration to make a presentation. All right. [ Shouting ] [ Applause ] [ Inaudible shouting ] >> Oh sit down. [ Inaudible Shouting ] >> Geoffrey Baum: So Dr. Rocha, we've asked the administration to make a presentation. >> Dr. Rocha: [Background noise] All right thank you, President Baum. Item G on the agenda is the adoption of the tentative 2012/2013 Student Calendar. The calendar will include three academic semesters and the administration submits this to you with our recommendation for action and approval. What I'd like to do is to -- we have a brief presentation lead by Dr. Bell, and Dr. Bell and his colleagues will take the table and make a brief presentation on the tentative Student Calendar proposal and then we'd like to address all questions that the board may have and then I will sum up the item. I would say just as they're gathering, that this proposal as General Council informed the board earlier with the time line has been before -- formally been before the college and before the open session of the board since March. It was previously brought out two years ago. So we have had a process in which we've looked at that throughout the year and here's where we are. Though they will make a presentation on the merits of the case because last week as an open session, we put all our cards on the table and said this is what we'd like to do. President, I'm sorry, [chuckle] former president Thomson asked the essential question and the essential question is, why is this better for the college and why is this better for students? >> Point of order. >> Dr. Rocha: And so with that I will turn it over to Dr. Bell. >> Hanna Israel: Point of order, with all due respect our public comment hasn't ended. The time has come... >> Geoffrey Baum: There are no more comment cards on this. We've got to go with our presentation. [Background shouting] We followed our procedures. Okay so I'd like to proceed with the presentation. >> Hanna Israel: But we haven't... [Shouting] >> Geoffrey Baum: We followed our procedures. >> But we haven't... >> Okay, so I'd like to proceed with the presentation. >> [Background shouting] With all due respect, President... >> Geoffrey Baum: I have all the cards that were turned in before the meeting right in front of me. [ Shouting ] >> Hanna Israel: President Baum? >> Geoffrey Baum: I will leave the cards that I received for inspection after the meeting if anybody would like to see it. Please proceed. >> Hanna Israel: No, point of order. The public comment is allowed to take place until ... >> Geoffrey Baum: [Background noise] Trustee Israel, you're out of order. I need to go on with the presentation. I have all the comment cards that I've received. I have no other cards. >> Hanna Israel: What am I even doing here? [ Background Conversation ] >> There are students being attacked outside by the police and this is not acceptable. There are open seats in here and people are trying to come inside and they are being shoved back out by the police and the security. This is not acceptable. This is a public... [Applause] [Cheering] >> Geoffrey Baum: [Background noise and gavel] I'm going to declare a five-minute recess, a five minute recess. It's 8:35; we'll resume our meeting at 8:40. >> This is not a police state; this is the board of trustees. >> Geoffrey Baum: Call the meeting back to order. [ Background Noise ] >> Okay, oh there he is. >> Geoffrey Baum: Before we start with the presentation [background conversation] I'd like to recognize one of the leaders of our Shared Governance Group was asked to say a word on behalf of, on the conduct of the meeting. >> President Fraser: Thank you president Baum. Just to the board and to all the members of the community here, these are incredibly contentious discussions that we're going to have because they're passionate. We're all incredibly passionate about whether or not we have a trimester, whether we have a winter session, whether we have a quota system no matter what the discussion is. And one of the things that I try to make sure is conflict civility is something that we call it; it becomes tough when passions get heated. It becomes incredibly hard when people don't think they're being heard. My request is that everyone try and let the process run out. If there were no more comment cards I believe that there was not an attempt to hide them. If something went wrong that's unfortunate. I'm not questioning the integrity or the word of anyone at this table or in the community members. Things happen unfortunately. My request is that we allow the administration to make their case and I will be myself and I'm sure if the Shared Governance reps will also request to speak on the calendar on behalf of students and I'm sure that the other members of the Shared Governance will have the same opportunity assuming... >> Geoffrey Baum: I would prefer, why don't you go ahead and make your comment now. >> President Fraser: [Background noise] Okay I can do that. As you know the associated students have discussed this over the last few weeks. Unfortunately we played a bit of catch up given that a lot of what we come to hear comes out in the board packets over the summer. So while on the student calendar, you'll forgive me I'm a little bit, that was a little surprising to me, so I'm not quite as prepared as I was. A student calendar does affect students and the associated students is here to represent students and we've tried our very best to get as many polls and surveys and opinions out over the Week of Welcome. In fact, you would not allowed to get any of our freebees which you all have seen unless you filled out a survey which we feel was pretty effective trying to get everyone. Generally, the response has been almost, not completely, but almost universal that there still support among the students for the winter intersession. The main reasons for this and I just want to highlight one, relates to making up classes, various learning styles, study abroad programs where students in Mexico and Costa Rica will perhaps lose an opportunity to enroll for spring when they are out of the country. And as well, one of the proposals that I said to -- I made to Dr. Bell very recently so unfortunately it probably didn't make it here because it was so late, this is all very short notice for us, was that the original cost of [inaudible] was anticipated at $14 million. We've now reduced that to $10.5 million. My hope would be that we use some of that savings to fund a fuller winter session more than the 50 sections that's offered. Our recommendation is that we then use the 2012-13 process to build in a package of reforms because there are a lot of things that we believe in this college that need to be reformed; scheduling practices, from division centered to institutionalized centered. We need more pathway programs to get people through; we need more scheduled steps for students to go through and we think the winter may or may not be part of that. We think that if we're going to look at a calendar change it needs to be considered within the context of these broader reforms which we would like to see and larger reforms. Unfortunately the only time -- the only avenue lately we've seem to have had this discussion has been through board meetings and comments. And we haven't been able to sit down at a table with all of the groups and all of the people involved and really hash out what is best for us, what is the best way to move PCC forward and whether that may or may not include a calendar change, it could include a whole package of reforms. My recommendation is that we take the year using the banner savings that we've already encumbered based on the July, 2012 Board Report that was encumbered in Capital Outlay Board Fund 41, and use that to maintain a winter for this year and then immediately set a process in place to examine this issue in detail and come to a conclusion by 2013 on what we should do. And finally whatever we do, excuse me, that's all I could oh -- the other final thing was President Rocha indicated at one point and has mentioned in the Board packet that ESL Jam and Math Jam students would lose out over the winter intersession this semester. That's a problem. We anticipate that. We believe that in moving forward, if we implemented scheduling reforms and other reforms, we'd be able to account for these and include whatever semester intersession we had as part of that process. Unfortunately, we haven't had that ability to think innovatively and outside of the box and really examine what's best for PCC. The Associated Students, if there is a continued winter intersession after today, will be agendizing the option of using our graduation fund donation which we have negotiated that we will have the final control over what classes that funds, to kick start a Math jam and ESL jam period over this winter. It's not much, its $8,000 dollars but we hope that that money can go far and so that these students who it is said will lose out can at least not lose out completely and we would be happy to consider that at our next meeting should the winter intersession remain in place. I know that's a lot to digest, I apologize but that's it. >> Geoffrey Baum: [Applause] Thank you President Fraser, President Hanvey on behalf of the Faculty Senate would like to make [inaudible]... >> President Hanvey: I'd like to second President Fraser's call for a May civil discussion on this particular matter. As you can see tensions are very high over this issue. In that spirit the senate president, myself and vice president A. C. Panella met with the president on Monday and we have managed to garner an agreement to have a special capital meeting. The first date is still being planned but it will likely be on either September 11th or 13th. This will be a chance for faculty to address pedagogical aspects of this particular change. We are very eager that such voices be heard and look forward to hearing those views at that time so they can be addressed before a final decision on October 1st. Thank you. [Applause] >> Geoffrey Baum: [Applause] Okay, so we've heard from the public. We've heard from the Associated Students. We've heard from the Academic Senate Leadership. Dr. Rocha, would you proceed with the presentation? >> Dr. Rocha: Okay. Thank you President Baum and members of the board of trustees and thank you everyone for your comments that completely concurred that in any discussion of any issue before the board that civility and -- increases of our understanding and our ability to listen to each other. Back to where we was, [chuckle] okay -- and where we was, was last week when we took up this issue in great detail. And again I'll turn to Trustee Thomson who asked the essential question that we have had as the leading question in the background that is in your packet under Item G and the leading question that Dr. Bell and his colleagues will speak about and the only criteria that we have used to make this proposal and of course this proposal had a long time in development is what is best for the college? And what will improve students' success? I'm grateful to Trustee Thomson for framing that question so well and for giving us an opportunity to respond to it. So with that I thank you Dr. Bell and colleagues and turn it over to Dr. Bell. >> Dr. Bell: Thank you, Dr. Rocha, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen. I'm joined this evening by three deans of the college who will help me clarify some areas of the presentation specifically to some of the operational concerns if the board were to adopt the proposed calendar. And so I have with me at the table, Dean Jim Arnwine, Dean Cynthia Olivo and Dean Dave Douglas. Let me start by saying obviously given the emotions and the passions today, obviously this is a very emotional consideration for the board and I know you understand that and clearly it is for all members and constituent groups within the college. The administration's proposed calendar, we believe is in the best interest of students because it's going to afford the college a great deal of flexibility in course scheduling and how we build those schedules effectively for students. One of the things that is of immediate concern and is immediate focus for us is the fact that given the response to the budget we currently are looking at a 2013 winter intersession period where we will not be able to offer any classes to students. In my personal opinion, in the district's opinion, and in the administration's opinion, it's a huge disservice to students if we go through a six-week period coming up January to mid-February of this year and not be able to offer classes. The current calendar under consideration will allow us the flexibility to be able to put those classes into place, to serve students much more effectively than we would otherwise by making classes available in the winter intersession, normally what would be considered a winter intersession over the period that we would call spring. While there are some serious considerations about operational concerns and how we would do this, we will address the concerns of students specific to how we will keep them whole responsive to Ed plans. We've had several students have expressed concerns about educational plans which are currently in place which call for them to have courses that they would take during what we would normally consider a 2013 winter intersession, again the period from January 7th through February 17th, approximately the start of our current spring schedule in the current academic calendar. In the proposed calendar were it to be adopted, we would be able to look to put those classes in place to allow students to access instruction in those classes which are course specific for their educational plans over a period with again approximate winter 2013 intersession, the six-week period from the start of January, January 7th if you will, to mid-February. The flexibility within this proposed calendar would not only allow us to address those concerns of students within the winter intersession in those courses within the educational plan, it would also give us increased flexibility to be able to put in place classes at different term lengths across a 16-week spring semester again which will begin in January and run to about mid-May. We would have the opportunity and the flexibility to put in place classes which are normally term length classes which are the classes that most students look to a 16-week term length classes. We can mount classes of different term length within that academic period. Very much comparable to what we did this past spring, spring 2012, when we mounted the springboard 12-week intersession which allowed students to access classes similar towards completion. This proposal will allow us the flexibility to be able to do that. Why I said in the best interest of students because we will be able to then respond to students' needs with a great deal of flexibility and much more utility and efficiency than we are now in the current schedule where basically we will mount a certain number of classes within a six-week period and it doesn't serve students as efficiently and as broadly. Now it's been suggested that the winter intersession serves students well and in some respects, in many respects it does. When you look at some of the data for our students across the period that the winter intersession been in place, there's some things that fit into this proposal which we would like everyone to hear and take into consideration. Since 2009 to 2012, we've seen our sections within our winter intersession gradually decrease from a high of 5,000, I'm sorry 5,000 -- 597 sections which were offered in 2009 to a low of 271 this past intersession in 2012 and again the recognition that there will be no classes offered in the winter session for 2013. That approximates an average of about 530 class sections which have been offered to our students from 2005 to 2009. So clearly this is support of student access and student success. Those were offered at the time when we were much better able you do that and we were also looking at a situation in the State of California where all of those sections were fully-funded. The current budget situation now projected across the next four to six years suggests that we will not be able to do that and we have an obligation to meet it specifically our [inaudible] obligation of 4,077 sections. This again underscores why we're not doing classes during the winter. We look at our achievement rates and what we call our velocity and that is the speed to which students get to transfer across the period that we've had the winter intersession. Those rates have pretty much been flat. So there's really no suggestion that the winter intersession has accelerated students that much more quickly to completion. It has in fact allowed students within a certain period of six weeks probably in the intersession to access classes. But there's no clear data set to suggest that it accelerated students more quickly to transfer than what might be case if the current proposed calendar were to be adopted. So again the current proposed schedule in summary provides a great deal more flexibility in scheduling for students. It will be undertaken with a firm look to engage students in discussion about what classes they best need, so that they take that information and inform the decisions about what classes that fit into place, full 16-weeks term lengths classes or any classes which will be a shorter length with the focus again to position students to move what we think more quickly, more efficiently through the process towards completion of either the degree, transfer or certificate so that their time on task is spent more efficiently and more effectively. And again there are definitely some concerns with respect to operational needs and I'll engage in necessary engagements and discussions with all the constituent groups. We will begin that process earnestly and immediately to put all those things in place and give them extended and due consideration if this proposal were to be adopted. And now, I would turn it over to my colleagues specifically starting with Dean Douglas to talk a little bit -- give you a bit of a historical perspective of why the college moved from this calendar which was our model in the past to our current calendar that is comprised of the winter intersession. >> Dean Douglas: I don't know if it's the hair but apparently I'm part of the legacy system in terms of personnel here [chuckle]. I was trying to recall the best I could, what were some of the discussion that took place at the time we went away from a 16-week fall, and a 16-week spring and added a winter intersession to it. At the time, it was a time of what was apparently unlimited growth in terms of FDS and the administration at the time was interested in capturing as much of that FDS as possible so PCC could grow to the maximum amount. So from the administrative point of view, it served to add additional FDES into our calendar. It replaced a second summer session which was typically very low course offerings and wasn't gathering much FDES and it replaced that with the winter intersession. From the faculty perspective it was a win-win and you either could work during the winter intersession or earn extra money or you could have extra time off during the winter and personally as a faculty I took advantage of both of those at different times. From the student perspective the arguments put forth for it fell along a couple lines. One was the catch up argument and that a student could get caught up if they failed a class, a 1A in the fall, they could take it in the winter and get back on track by 1Aand 1B in the spring, something like that. The flaw in this was that for Math and Science students in particular and again I'm speaking from my perspective, the students that failed this class in a 16-week semester were the least prepared and least likely to be able to make up for that and to correct for that in a six-week compressed semester. Particularly in Math and Science classes, where you're meeting five days a week, four -- five days a week for several hours, extremely difficult for at-risk students and marginal students. The other flaw in that in my opinion, is that our at-risk students, the students that are least likely to stay with us and to stay in college and so on, we talked about student momentum and if you can pass off from a fall to spring semester and keep these at-risk students going, we have a much bigger chance of keeping them in college at a longer period of time. And if they cannot get courses in the winter session or they get called away to work more or so on, then we're very likely to lose them so that becomes a two-month exit point for those students, particularly at-risk students. The other argument put forth for students at the time was the "get ahead" argument, that students could essentially get a jump on a series of classes. They could take a 1A in the winter and take a 1B in the spring something like that and what we found in our division was there is this significant number of students from outside the PCC area that were taking classes. Often these were students at universities who were taking a class with would be their winter quarter; they would come to PCC and pick up a class. And again this is probably true more for some more advanced Science classes than there was particularly for developmental or beginning classes. As Simon pointed out earlier, it was an opportunity to do some unique things and we could send study abroad into Costa Rica, do some unique kinds of field trips that we couldn't normally do in the winter. So that was another argument that was put forward. There was an issue that was a big concern at the time and that was continuous enrollment. It was realized that if, for example, F-1 visa students or students doing internships were not taking classes in the winter because that was optional, that they weren't actually being enrolled in school. We found work arounds for those kinds of problems. We today for example our [inaudible] internship students are to be continuously enrolled in classes so we give them independent study classes in winter and so on. We found work arounds for that but that was one of the big concerns and issues at the time. It's interesting that the argument put forth that I hear most today was generally not discussed at the time and that was the argument about taking classes for transfer. I need winter because winter classes will count for transfer, not summer. And this wasn't something that was discussed at large at the time and I think the reason was people realized that and I went back and checked my old syllabi that I had before we implemented the winter intersession and indeed, you could conduct a full 16-week spring semester plus a first summer session and be done by June 30th, which I understand and Dr. Livio can correct me, is the cut off time for courses that will apply in the fall. So if you think about it, 16-weeks plus six weeks or six weeks plus 16-weeks, you can finish by June 30th either way. The other unanticipated consequence of it which again was not really discussed at the time was this sort of break in important committee work that was done, things like CNI had a basically a two-month hiatus because not all faculty who participated in those kinds of committees where there present during the winter intersession. So business shut down for a long time and then picked back up again in the spring. So again in my view, the winter intersession was an experiment and so far, an eight-year experiment. And experiments are always successful as long as you learn from them and I think it's not whether winter is good or bad, but there are certain advantages and disadvantages to it. And I think we need to put those in to our understanding of what the current condition is and again the conditions now are very different than they were at the time the winter intersession was implemented, primarily the economic situation. >> I have a concern about the courses that are in sequences, so basic skills courses, courses within a major or within a CT program where one course follows the other and so student and especially courses where you're building skills. A student finishes middle of December, they don't come to the next course and that's sequenced till late February. They've missed eight weeks interrupting that progress they make so it has quite an effect and we see this especially in my area where I see it in Arts programs but also basic skills I hear that that's a problem. The other thing is many of our programs have some kind of festival sequence or competition sequence. There's competitions in theatre, there's athletic competition, forensics competition, music festivals and those are typically on a calendar that run from January and culminate in mid-April or so -- late April. Right now we've created some intermediate courses that accommodate those activities through winter but they're extra courses. They're really for the most part standalone courses because they're not the full basic semester course. So students then take that we're providing that and then they take the regular say forensics course through the spring but their tournament season ends in April whereas our term goes till June. So if we aligned better with the typical kind of pace and scheduling of these intercollegiate kind of activities, I think it'll be much improved. These courses then that the students do take during the intersession to make sure that they have student status and can perform in these events just adds to their unit loads so we have increasingly strict maximum requirements for units for financial aid, eventually I think for registration priority and here they're building extra units to maintain these activities rather than just building it into our spring semester when those activities happen. So we just hate to see students take courses to participate in those kind of fields that they don't really need when they could just take it during the spring term. >>Dr. Rocha: And real quickly Dr. Livio's going to address one of the critical concerns and that is in any academic calendar or whatever it is, the aspect of support for students as they take classes and clearly you've heard the concern for students who would feel the sense of loss if they lost a winter intersession. So I would like Dr. Livio to address how we'll begin to look at that and how we'll work it to serve students. >> Dr. Livio: Our operational response if this should go through would be to launch into the pilot that we conducted this past year with Spring Forward. And so what we've done is we've operationalized an online graduation petition request for students where they can submit a request for a counselor to review their academic record to let students know what are the final courses they need to complete their degree. With that data, we would be able to help students plan what they need to take and if we would have Summer Session One that followed spring semester, we would be able to place students in those final courses so that they would fulfill their graduation requirements and their university admission requirements. >> Dr. Rocha: So again ladies and gentlemen in summary we see the proposed calendar as providing a great deal more flexibility to students an opportunity to serve students more broadly and much more efficiently than we do in the current calendar and also help us move students to completion that velocity concern much more quickly. And with that, we will entertain any questions from the board. >> Okay Dr. Rocha. >> After the trustees. >> Okay so now it's up to the board to ask questions and then see if there is an action the board would like to take based on the recommendation of the administration. I saw Trustee Wah's hand and then next Trustee Mann and then Trustee Fellow. >> Linda Wah: Thank you for the presentation. Dr. Bell one of the questions that we asked last board meeting, maybe I just asked it, was do we know what number of students would be impacted by the change and [Applause] so that we could actually help them -- to take measures to help them? >> Dr. Bell: [Background noise] Trustee Wah, I indicated at that time we do not know and it's not the fact that we can't gather the information. To get the information it is a manual process so it takes time for counselors to be able to go through, look at individual Ed plans and retrieve that information individually. So yes we are attempting to get the numbers, we don't know the exact numbers yet, that's a process we're undertaking right now. >> Linda Wah: How soon do you think that you would be able to have that information so that you could answer questions from the students and to help them? >> Sure Trustee Wah, I can also elaborate on that. Because we do not currently have any electronic educational planning system, we cannot provide that analytical data. What we do have however are counselors who evaluate academic records and we take notes on what students need to complete. And so we communicate through email to the students to let students know you have X, Y and Z courses that you must take. So we review that data and we manually contact the student to let them know the courses that we've mounted. That's what we followed for spring. >> Linda Wah: And so if they needed like that extra course during the winter session to matriculate then you would take measures then to ensure that they would be able to matriculate by... >> Our operation with the winter simply is on our pay per ED plans. We indicate for students if you can get a class in winter, you should take this class. If you cannot get that class in winter, take it in spring. And then return and we can design -- continue designing your ED plan. So it's always been if you can get a class during that intersession. There's never been enough to meet every student's need. >> Trustee Mann. >> Jeanette Mann: Yes I do have a question. It's my understanding that our choices between having a winter intersession where there would be no classes offered and starting a semester -- a 16-week semester in January. And if there were no classes offered, it's my understanding that all non-faculty would then be furloughed for a period of time. I was very -- it's very interesting to me that we have not had from the classified senate or from any classified staff. But Dr. Bell is that one of the operational concerns you were talking about will be the furlough of all non-faculty during that period? >> Dr. Bell: Correct, Trustee Mann. That's an operational concern and operational reality. If we go forth with an academic calendar does not have classes offered during the 2013 winter intersession, we will be looking at furloughs for classifieds, staff and managers. >> Jeanette Mann: Okay. So what that would mean would be that the faculty wouldn't be teaching because no classes would be offered? So there'd be no faculty and the classified staff and the managers would all be furloughed? So in a sense there would not be nothing going on during that period if we go ahead with the winter intersession now with no classes. Is that correct? >> Dr. Bell: Pretty much correct. >> Jeanette Mann: Okay now my other question is I'm going to make three things. >> Dr. Bell: Sure. Go ahead, yeah. >> Jeanette Mann: Okay that's first one, but before I go there I must say that very much concerns me. I was on -- when we first started working with a budget advisory group, I was a trustee on there and one of our priorities were to try to provide maximum classes for students and to try to avoid layoffs of full time faculty, furloughs or layoffs of full time employees and if we do this we will be providing furloughs to everyone except the faculty who won't be teaching either because they won't have any classes. The second point I would like to make is when I -- it's my understanding that the trimester system which is essentially what we're going into pedagogically is the most efficient and the most effective way to move students through a program because they can theoretically go do three semesters in a year rather than two semesters a year. [Background comment] And this then would have this effect and in fact on the very first, again on that first budget committee we were on, I suggested that we consider looking at a trimester system just for that reason because it would better serve the students. They would have three semesters and [background shouting] [raised voice] finally, finally, finally, let me ask if this is correct, number one, we would be going from six weeks and 16 weeks to 16 weeks and six weeks and it would end at the same time, is that correct? >> Dr. Bell: Yes what the proposed calendar would do, Trustee Mann, is put together three academic periods a fall, a spring if you will, there's [inaudible] winter session and a summer. The summer would be proposed to be 16 weeks in length. So there would be three equal instructional academic periods within that summer, again it could be configured as two eight-week sessions so a student who would need to complete a summer class to be in line with UCSCSU transfer could in fact finish the spring semester mid-May, take a class of first half of a 16 week summer session, conclude that summer class just about the time now that we currently conclude our spring semester and as Dr. Livio mentioned, then be better aligned to have a transfer level class at the end of the summer ready for consideration to a transfer university or institution now. So that's correct. >> Jeanette Mann: Thank you. >> Geoffrey Baum: Dr. Bell, before we speak to call in Dr. Fellow this is the time the board is deliberating about the proposed recommendation and this is the opportunity for the board to ask questions for clarification. We've received ample feedback and public input on this as well, Dr. Fellow. >> Dr. Fellow: Thank you Mr. Baum. One of the speakers today said that this would have an impact; I believe she probably was talking about the Carnegie schedule on Friday classes. Is that true that they wouldn't be able to offer a three block -- three hour class or something? >> Geoffrey Baum: We may have to research it more. As you know Trustee Fellow our current academic calendar is not aligned with the Carnegie hour. And so to be perfectly honest I can't answer that one. I would hope it wouldn't and I would believe it didn't, but I don't have the data to be able to answer that question intelligently but again our calendar is not aligned in Carnegie. >> Dr. Fellow: Thank you. >> Trustee Brown or Trustee Martin, Trustee Thomson -- Trustee Thomson? >> William Thomson: I'd like to go back to Mr. Hanvey for a moment if I may please, would you explain a bit more about the process or what it was you were suggesting that would defer our decision until October 1st or the first part of October... >> Dustin Hanvey: I guess the, if I looked at the agreement here let me just look at the exact wording of it. It says that the district may act to implement the calendar at such a point that they actually move forward the 2012 -- 2013 Student Calendar must be taken. This is known as the date of operation necessity which by this action the board identifies upon the recommendation of the administration as October 1st. So when we spoke to the president about this, we agreed that basically there would be time between now and that final date of operational necessity for us to have a forum in which faculties concerns pedagogically because the academics deal with pedagogical aspects of this would have a chance for those pedagogical concerns to be raised. And that would again give us about four weeks to arrange those. We're still trying to arrange what room and what date would actually be the possibility for that. But we've been hearing from many faculty that they have pedagogical concerns about this and Dr. Rocha agreed that they should have an opportunity to raise those before that date of operational necessity. >> William Thomson: Are you suggesting then that we defer a decision until this takes place? I'm not quite sure I understand the process here [background noise]. >> Dustin Hanvey: I couldn't speak on behalf of the senate because the senate hasn't taken that position. I would recommend very highly that any absolute final decision on this matter be made until those concerns have been raised first. Let a chance for faculties' voices to be heard first and then the final decision to be... [ Applause ] >> [Inaudible]. >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Thomson and then Trustee Israel and then Trustee Wah. >> William Thomson: Let me then refer back to Dr. Bell and get your comments on this suggested approach. Is that good bad or in different or what's your take on it? >> Dr. Bell: Well it would seem to me to make very good sense. The operational necessity if you will October 1st, our current academic calendar is set with dates at which we will begin the process of recruiting students in, advising students at the process to begin the registration. We will start registration for succeeding academic periods and this academic year which as currently scheduled would be the winter and the spring. The October 1st date is under the proposed calendar. That's the date at which we would have to announce to students -- to begin to advise students of the process. To President Hanvey's suggestion of being able to take that time between any given day, for example, now until October 1st to discuss the concerns, that's what I was speaking to when I said the operational necessities of putting this calendar into place. Absolutely that's something that we would need to do. >> William Thomson: So basically then we would -- if we went down this road we would be deferring our final decision until what the September 19th study session or whatever other date in September we would decide to have a meeting to address this as a final matter? >> Hanna Israel: Excuse me, Mr. Thomson, point of order. The motion that you have here today, the matter is... >> William Thomson: We don't have a motion. >> We don't have a motion. >> Hanna Israel: Excuse me the action that you have here today is yet to be decided, what the point of operational necessity refers to is the point of time when the decision that you make today, if you make it, would be implemented. You won't be able to make a decision by October 1st because the only board meeting you have left is next week before then. >> Geoffrey Baum: That's not true. We have one scheduled for September 19th according to the calendar. >> Hanna Israel: The matter of operational necessity Mr. Thomson, concerns the point in time when between now and that date when the district will negotiate with the union on behalf of the faculty on the working part -- the working calendar, that is terms and conditions of employment. >> William Thomson: I'm not following you on that. We can have a special meeting any time we want... [ Cheering and Applause ] >> ...so we can -- from a procedural standpoint or a governance stand point, we don't have to make a decision tonight if we choose not to do that because of what Mr. Hanvey is suggesting. We can have a special meeting anytime in September before October 1st and decide whether to adopt this or not. Right? >> Hanna Israel: That is true you could. >> William Thomson: Okay thank you very much. [ Cheering and Applause ] >> Hanna Israel: First I have a question for vice president Bell. How many students were enrolled in winter 2012? >> Dr. Bell: Total number of students? >> Hanna Israel: I'm sorry, yeah. How many were enrolled? >> Dr. Bell: Trustee Israel, I don't know the exact number again. What I can speak and tell to you is the number of sections that we had offered. >> Hanna Israel: Can I have a ball park range of students please? >> Dr. Bell: I would say on average we had 100 and, I believe I said 100 and 271 sections offered were the number of sections that we offered and so again I haven't done the math on the exact number students but I would 271 sections. Most students were taking a single class so that would probably equate to somewhere around I would guess... >> About 8000 give or take. You know about 8000 give or take. >> Hanna Israel: Okay, so 8,000 students. So winter intersession is a serious part of students' ED plans and so with this new change, and I'm not going to discuss the merits but the process. Implementing this change I feel there's no effective way to do it and students are going to be impacted by this [background applause] and at a time when PCC is so backlogged with students, I don't think this information can get to them quick enough. I've been an AssociateStudent for two years. It has been so difficult to get information out to students. There is no infrastructure in place, our AIS is very old, students register with old emails, they aren't prompted to fix them. So I'll just leave it there. But I also have a report from the budget and resource allocation committee, there was a motion to allocate $679,000 roughly from Fund 41, to mitigate this calendar crisis. It was passed by the budget resource -- I'm sorry, budget and resource allocation committee for recommendation to this board. So I wanted to let everyone know that there is a serious buy-in to save winter intersession. There's serious shared governance, participatory governance buy-in to keeping this calendar and like [background applause] if I can just echo the sentiments of Professor Hanvey, I think with how this meeting was conducted today, it proves that there's a lot of unanswered questions and there is a lot of collaboration that needs to take place before such a calendar change is made. And so I'll leave it there. >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Wah, you had your hand? >> Linda Wah: Well actually Tom, Trustee Thomson did ask a question that I wanted clarification on that I guess if the board were to defer the decision until and allow President Hanvey and President Fraser and Dr. Bell maybe to meet and to see whether or not we could mitigate this I mean is it likely that we would be able to come up with the solution quickly? So that the board could have a special meeting or... >> Simon Fraser: We can arrange a meeting anytime. We could arrange a meeting for next week if... >> Linda Wah: I mean with all of the issues is that even viable for us to even defer this? >> Simon Fraser: I'm sorry I don't quite understand the question, I'm sorry. >> Linda Wah: With all of the issues that you are -- and all of the, I guess contentions against the calendar would you even have the time to mitigate any of these issues? >> Simon Fraser: Again I hesitate to speak as the senate has not really discussed this trimester calendar. But I do feel that faculty were away, they were on vacation and we just got back this week and this week especially is extremely stressful and I think it would be really important before a decision is made on this matter for faculty to feel that they had a chance at least to express their views about it in terms of pedagogy from the senate's perspective and of course there are sort of load issues that the faculty association could discuss as well. But I just think in respect to those well-meaning faculty they just really want to make sure that they have a chance to weigh in first. I think it would be respectful if we were to let them have that chance before you make a decision. [Applause] >> Geoffrey Baum: Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: It's my understanding that the board has already made the decision that there will be no classes during the winter intersession. I hope everyone understands this. We're talking about a winter intersession [background shouting] with no classes. No classes, so the decision is really are we going to have a winter session with no classes and furlough all the non-faculty and the faculty also in a sense will be furloughed because none of them will be teaching or are we going to start the semester earlier and have everyone on campus, no one will be furloughed and then we will have two summer sessions where everyone will be employed and faculty will have classes to teach. That to me is the decision that we're looking at. [Background Shouting] >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Brown, did you have any questions that you'd like to ask about the recommendation? >> Berlinda Brown: Well, I think after hearing all the decisions and the questions and the emotions, I definitely will like to support this proposal. However, I'm very persuaded that one more week would not kill anyone. So I would actually agree with just giving the respect to what the senate president is saying. That would be my take just so that we could do this. Just so when it's done because it is got to be done one way or another. [Background shouting] But, we need to turn every -- we need, well I'm sorry, we need to turn... [Background Shouting] >> She's out of order Mr. President. >> Geoffrey Baum: Yes, excuse me. So I'd like to see if there is a motion or a... >> Berlinda Brown: So as I was saying, I think it would not be a bad idea to just discuss it with the faculty. That would be my [inaudible]. >> Geoffrey Baum: So we have a lot of discussion and public comment on this, and we make it very clear that this item would be on the agenda for many weeks and I think it is absolutely clear to me where the Associated Students stands on this. It's absolutely clear to me where the Faculty Association stands on the recommendation. It's absolutely clear to me what the administration's recommendation is. And so I'd like to entertain a motion on the proposed recommendation. >> Hanna Israel: I move to postpone this item. >> Geoffrey Baum: Is there a second? >> Second. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay lets have discussion on the motion to postpone. Yes, Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: Yes I'd like to speak against the motion to postpone. I see nothing that can be gained and as far as discussing the pedagogical changes, I don't know what pedagogy you're going to -- concerns you have if you don't have any classes at all. Otherwise you're just starting the spring semester earlier. So I think there's nothing to be gained by delay and so I'm going to vote against this and if this motion fails, I will move that we approve this tonight [Background Shouting] >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Wah? >> Linda Wah: Yeah I do think that this issue has been before us for quite some time and I'm disappointed that we haven't come to some resolution. But I do take into consideration I think President Hanvey's comment and also President Fraser's comments that there was an absence of some of the faculty who could weigh in and part of this process it's not so much that it's not our right to move forward it's not so much that the calendar can't work, but I think it's a process issue. People have to feel like they weighed in. Now whether or not, you know, we all vote with whatever the outcome is, or whatever the recommendations are, I just think that if we even delay this one week to the next meeting which is just next week, I don't see what harm it can do. And that was one of the reasons I was asking whether or not they thought that they could come together and come to some decision and recommendations in that period of time. So just, you know, I don't mind delaying until the time that I guess whatever's the critical point at which we need to make the decision. >> Geoffrey Baum: Dr. Rocha would like to speak to the motion. >> Dr. Rocha: Thank you, President Baum. Actually had some comments and some questions I think that would be germane to the motion itself and so on. So okay. First of all a couple of questions and I do want to speak to the fact that what the original recommendation which still stands, whether the board decides to defer action, today or next week, is a tentative action based on a legal counsel. The reason for a tentative action and the reason why the administration would strongly urge the tentative action tonight is to be able to afford the negotiation team the maximum opportunity to engage the Faculty Association on the negotiation of the impacts of the decision. And that only through that negotiation process, all right, can we come -- only when that negotiation process is formally engaged. So to further truncate the period from where we are tonight on August 29th, to September 5th, to the, you know, the deadline date if you will of being able to put this in for winter, would make it very, very difficult for the administration to have an extensive negotiation as we must have. So I would refer the members to that extensive recommendation of counsel. Now the reason why this is tentative, you are not deciding to adopt the calendar tonight. You are indicating that if we are able to engage the Faculty Association and complete the negotiations and so on, on the impacts that we can then act at the operational necessity. Now the other thing is I was actually was in that meeting with Dustin Hanvey [chuckle]. I was in that meeting because I was the one who called that meeting. Because Dustin and A.C. Panela, vice president, I did call them in because as a teacher myself I wanted to make sure that we certainly have heard all of the process concerns. Okay? It's rushed and so on even though this has been before the college for two years, even though the first decision for cancelling winter session classes which this board made first in 2009, okay, we certainly have heard at any point that the process it's a rush. We've heard this proposal before the public, before the Faculty Association since March. Actually I made it two years ago in open college council. And that's the reason why this calendar exists today, because the calendar committee is the one that developed this calendar. [Background shouting] That is a fact. All right, can I continue? Okay. So then, but what I had not heard, okay, apart from the process and the negotiation issues, I had not heard the concerns I would have as a teacher on academic and pedagogical issues. So I called the president of the senate in for a meeting so that we could talk about that. And as Dustin reported, we had an absolutely open and authentic chat and I gave him my assurance that if the board was to adopt the tentative calendar, that we would be able to move forward and with a set of extraordinary [inaudible] meetings, which would not occur until the board adapted the tentative calendar and gave guidance to the college as to which direction we were going this year. Some of the pedagogical issues which we discussed in this meeting, these are the issues that we need to discuss tomorrow. I was planning to teach this course [chuckle] in January. And instead, you know, there's a change. How will I make that change? I was planning to teach a new course in the spring, okay? How will I get the preparation time? That by the way is an impact, okay, on the faculty working condition. So until we adopt the calendar as a tentative calendar, we basically are unable to send that clear signal and sit down and talk about the pedagogical issues, the academic issues, and the negotiation issues with the union. Finally let me make it clear and, you know, then I'll get to some questions here, all right, as to why this matter is important to give guidance to the administration tonight. And that has to do with the Carnegie Hour. The Carnegie Hour has nothing whatsoever to do with this proposal. It is a proposal that has been before the Faculty Association as the faculty senate and others well know, since March. Comprehensive proposal not just on the calendar, we haven't even talked about the content issues, the advantages to faculty for example of being able to schedule their work load throughout the entire year, haven't talked on any of those because we have not received a response to any of those proposals since March. But the Carnegie Hour is something that we do want to move forward with for next year. And one of the -- and that will take a lot of work. And to do that the board will note in open session -- the board will note that our open collective bargaining proposal of last March included release time for faculty in the spring, okay, in order to prepare the changes in their courses for the following fall. So nothing will change in the hours or of the courses this year. But the calendar change signaling to the campus tonight that we intend to move forward with this would enable us to do the massive amount of work that we have in front of us to get this done. Now, as to the merits of the case, the way that I understand this in plain English, is that we currently have a calendar in place in which a winter session will start on January 7th, do we not Dr. Bell? >> Dr. Bell: Correct. >> Dr. Rocha: Okay. If I understand the so called three semester proposal we will have a winter session this year that starts on January 7th. Is that not correct? >> Dr. Bell: Correct. We'll have an academic period that begins on January 7th, correct. >> Dr. Rocha: So that if we adopt the tentative calendar, if the board adopts the tentative calendar tonight, that instead of virtually no students having their classes this winter, it would mean every single student in the college would have their classes starting January 7th. Would it not? >> Dr. Bell: That's correct it would be a full academic calendar. >> Dr. Rocha: All right so now it is a separate matter actually which doesn't have anything to do with Dr. Bell, okay? Later you'll have a board, I'm sorry a budget presentation. You have heard that budget presentation for six months, okay. The board has already decided by policy and by guidance of the administration that it will not take further money out of reserves to fund additional classes that the state is not funding us for. Absolutely the board has the -- I want to make it clear here. The board has the absolute authority and we will be guided by it if the board wishes us to take money from reserves to offer a few more classes in the current winter session, the board can decide to do that and I'll leave it to the board to discuss that. But two months ago, when we had a full discussion on the budget in front of the board, in which the president was the one [chuckle] who asked to borrow money to take care of the deficit which at that time was about $2 million bucks the boards guidance, clear guidance to the administration was we do not want to borrow money. We want you to balance the budget, current expenses on current revenue from the state, now if the board wants to change that guidance I would ask the board to change that guidance to us tonight when Vice-President Miller presents his proposed adopted budget draft which will go before the board on a week from tonight. That in itself will be an agenda item. Okay now back to the Math Jam, ESL Jam, Path Ways, Ujima, okay? Two years ago when we started, there were barely a hand full of students in those programs. When we started and by the way I want to thank all of the faculty and staff for a wonderful opening week which for all the challenges was very smooth. We greeted because the board supported our proposal to do the in district registration all 12th graders coming out of our in district high schools will get their classes Math Jam, ESL Jam, Pathways Jam, you got a couple of other jams in there. But all I know is that when I walked into Sexton Hall, Sexton Hall was jammed, okay? [Chuckles] Now my question is this, if the board decides to stay with its existing guidance to the administration and not to fund from reserves additional classes, okay, are any classes in the winter currently scheduled for those almost 1,000 students? >> No. >> Dr. Rocha: No, okay all right. Do we have any basic skills classes scheduled for those students? >> No. >> Dr. Rocha: No. [Background noise] So those -- now you can decide tonight to take money out of reserve that we don't have... [ Applause ] >> Dr. Rocha: ... but -- and I think we've already seen the budget presentation and your guidance to us has already been clear on that matter. Okay the basic skills students though those wonderful students that we just brought in, okay, under any circumstances will not have a class from the beginning of December to almost the beginning of March, okay. And of course, you know, as Dr. Bell showed, right, since we instituted in 2004, the new schedule the one that we're proposing is the one that P.C.C always had. Okay? The one that we have now is a new one that we instituted in 2004. So by returning to that we will be able to serve every student this winter. Okay. Is there any student Dr. Bell, Cynthia you're on the front line, okay, is there any student who is near graduation or transfer this spring under this tentative adoption, okay, who will not get their class to graduate, Dr. Bell. >> Dr. Bell: No, Dr. Rocha, [background shouting] if we are able to identify those students and those students' needs we will be able to put classes in place to accommodate those needs. >> Dr. Rocha: So -- fine thank you President Baum for -- I was going to append this to the end of my colleagues' presentation, thank you for that and for that reason I would urge the board to move forward with action on the recommendation of the administration. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay so there is a motion and a second to postpone this proposal for a week... >> Linda Wah: Can I ask one other question? >> Geoffrey Baum: Yes, go ahead. >> Linda Wah: Dr. Rocha, I understand a little better then what you're asking on this adoption on the tentative calendar [background noise] and so there is -- I think that you're asking for the adoption of the tentative calendar, a process of discussion of when to expect a final calendar to be... >> Mr. President I call a -- to order here this is a time for the board to be speaking. >> Linda Wah: Dr. Rocha... >> So anyway, Trustee Wah... >> Linda Wah: Okay so after the adoption of the tentative calendar you expect a process of discussion and then at what point do you expect -- and then we'll vote on a final calendar after the process of discussion? >> Dr. Rocha: What we'll do by adopting the tentative calendar tonight, it will enable us to engage the Faculty Association immediately, okay, like tomorrow, all right, and to begin the negotiation process on the impacts of the decision on wages and working conditions for faculty. That would -- by the way in your backgrounder that was precisely the issue that was brought before the board in 2009 and, you know, that we're bringing back this year. So yes, that's exactly what will happen. Now the requirement to negotiate in good faith, if I'm reading the material correctly and I believe that I am, means that yes the administration must return to you and report the results of that negotiation and you will have an opportunity to evaluate the results of that negotiation and yes you will make a -- I will put to you a final question or decision to move forward. But I think that, you know, so that would be the answer to your question [chuckle], Trustee Wah. >> Geoffrey Baum: So Trustee Martin hasn't had a chance to say anything. So I'm going to ask Trustee Martin, I'm going to make a comment and then we're going to move on -- we're going to take action on the motion. Every trustee has had a chance to address the motion. Is there something related to the motion that you would like to address? I'm recognizing Trustee Martin first and then we'll go to others. Did you want to withdraw the motion? >> Hanna Israel: No [chuckle]. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay so let me recognize another trustee... >> Hanna Israel: Mm-hmm. >> John Martin: Okay I've tried to really listen intently to the discussion on all sides of this and I have to say as a trustee, I'm trying to listen for substance and fact and have to kind of sort through the emotion and the more we get this back ground noise actually it makes it very difficult for me and I don't think it helps anybody who actually think that that's helping. As I analyze the motion to wait, I'm deeply concerned about waiting. I'm deeply concerned because I as a trustee on numerous occasions in the last several months have pleaded with both the district and the union to get together and to start negotiating and to work through a process. I know the district has put the proposal forward. I know it's very specific. I think we have to afford -- if we're going to do this -- we have to afford the administration and the faculty union as much time we possibly can to work through the second phase in what they have to do. So there's no question I do not want to propose this to another night. On the merits I've got old and new, I've kept the old one with me it's with me wherever I go whether or not I have the new and I've been cross-checking to bring it down to it most simplistic statement. My position has always been that I want to offer as many class seats as possible, that we possibly can for students with the money that we're afforded and when I analyze whether we want the best way to do that is 16-6 or 6-16, the conclusion I'm coming to is simply first and foremost this. That there was a minimal number offered in the 6-16 and those are subject to being cut based on budget constraints. Is there a greater possibility of getting those sections back for students in classes in a 16-6 then there would not be in a 6-16 because the 16-6, the six overlaps with the new summer 16 and there is infrastructure in place already for in the classified and the different positions and the campus offerings and stuff like this. It seems like a much more efficient use of limited resources to afford the highest probability for the most class sections and see it's possible for our students to go 16-6 with a 600 overlap with the summer than to stick to six by itself when it's had the minimal number attendance or the minimal number offering that it's had in the past back before our budget was cut. So to accomplish, I know there's deep concerns about the transition and the jump up and I do know -- I actually know people personally that come and try to get into those winter classes that aren't enrolled here and in some ways, I'm happy P.C.C has that service to our district. But on the other hand I feel a little amiss about that because our students that are here aren't getting those seats. So it seems to me, the best use of all resources and all personnel, instead of going 6-16 where the six is in jeopardy and limping along, to go 16-6 with the understanding that we do need to do as Dr. Bell said and have a methodology and a systematic to make sure some of those catch up, make-up, things that were needed in the original six in the middle could be afforded. So that's where I'm going to come down after listening to this along today so hence on the motion to postpone I'm going to vote against that and then I will support if there is one, an administration -- the calendar to move on to the tentative calendar so we give maximum time to both the Faculty Association and the district to negotiate through the things that need to be done to maximize the possibility of more class seats for our students. >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Israel you wanted to make a comment. >> Hanna Israel: Okay, so in regards to Math Jam and ESL, ASPCC is willing to bring to the board specifying the 2011-2012 donations to the grad fund. It was to the tune of $8,100 out of our operating account. That was also matched to become $16,000. So when it comes to not having funding for ESL classes we would like to offer that as one mediation. Okay, so the second point is there was a formal recommendation from the Budget and Resource Allocation Committee that vice-president Miller chaired to allocate funds to restore a winter intersession. You're shaking your head no? >> No, but that's good, go ahead I'm sorry. >> Hanna Israel: But, okay, as far as the make of the motion and the way it should go down in the minutes is that there was a $690,000 deficit with the winter... >> To be clear if you're -- what it was the motion was and it was passed to take $690,000 out of capital like Fund 41 to help with the $10.5 million budget deficit so... >> Geoffrey Baum: So the motion before the board is to whether to postpone this vote till next week. So can we dispense with that action right now because that's where we're going to? >> Mr. President, I call the question. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay the question has been called. I'm going to proceed to a vote on this motion that the move by Trustee Israel and seconded by Trustee Wah to postpone the consideration of this motion for one week till the next board meeting. I'd like to have the roll call vote taken so that we're clear on where that stands.>> Mr. Baum? >> No. >> Mr. Martin? >> No. >> Dr. Fellow? >> No. >> Ms. Brown? >> Yes. >> Dr. Mann? >> No. >> Mr. Thomson? >> Yes. >> Ms. Wah? >> Yes. >> Geoffrey Baum: You forgot to ask for Trustee Israel. You forgot to ask for Trustee Israel. >> Ms. Israel? >> Yes. >> Ms. Thompson [phonetic] what was the result of that vote? >> It's five no and three yes and one is a student trustee. >> [Background noise] No, no, four and four. >> Four no. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay, the motion fails there are four ayes, the student trustee vote was -- the advisory vote was aye. There were three ayes there were four no's. The motion fails. I'd like to entertain a motion to act on the administration recommendation. >> So moved. >> Geoffrey Baum: Is there a second? >> Second. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay, so discussion I would like to take an opportunity because I haven't had a chance to express myself on this and I've heard a lot on feedback on this in the past and I want to make it very clear where I feel on this. And I'm glad that that motion failed because it's in the best interest of students that if any action is going to be taken on the calendar it'd be taken sooner rather than later so that the administration, the faculty can get to work on it and to delay it would have harmed students. I was here when the calendar was changed before and I've worked within a system -- I've worked in academic institutions that have fall, spring, summer sessions as well and I've seen how effective they can be for students. And I've just looked at the numbers and I looked at our annual ARC report that we submit to the state and the indicators went -- after we passed the calendar in 2004 our student performance went down. The persistence ratea, the percentage of first time students with a minimum of first time students with a minimum of six units who returned and enrolled in the subsequent fall in 2003-2004 was 77.8%. The next year it fell to 76.9%. The year after that it fell to 75.9%. The successful course completion rate for vocational courses fell from 72.5% to the next year at 70.7% and the year after that it's just over 71%. The course completion rate for basic skill courses in 2004/05 was 64.9%. The next year it fell to 63%. The next year it fell to 61%. I strongly feel that it's in the best interest of instruction and for students that a fall, spring-winter, system is better for students. I'm not going to go whether it's good for the budget or not, I think it is better for students and I support the recommendation. >> Call the question. >> Geoffrey Baum: Trustee Thomson would you like to make a comment? >> I'll withdraw the move to like to call for just one minute. >> Geoffrey Baum: [Chuckle] Thank you. >> William Thomson: I'm a lawyer you know I can't say something in one minute [laughter]. I think a lot of good arguments have been made as to why the tri-semester approach is preferable given the situation that the state and the college are in at the present time. My point before was that I always think that there are advantages to be had and allowing people to talk, allowing people to get together and discuss things and then come back one week later, seven days later and make a decision. Obviously the majority of you did not agree with that but I would also say to audience that if you want this selected body or a judge or anybody to do what you want them to do, you have to stand up and speak politely, civilly and you don't yell, you don't shout and I think if we all can get back to that type of discussion we'll get some place in this college and in this nation. And I think that's what really is frustrating. So I guess having the majority decided not to wait a week and allow the discussions that Mr. Hanvey was suggesting and I think the Associated Students were suggesting, we're in a position where we have to deal with reality as it's been given to us and that is that if we adopt this new system, there will be classes offered in the winter session. I think we've had commitments from Dr. Bell and Dr. Livio that anybody needing courses to graduate or and/or to transfer will get those courses. We'll work with those people and the classes will be made available so based upon that I -- although I would have strongly preferred the delay to allow more talk to take place which I think is always beneficial, we are where we are. >> Call the question. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay, Miss Thompson will you take the role staring with the advisory vote please. >> Ms. Israel? >> No. >> Mr. Bell? >> Aye. >> Mr. Martin? >> Aye. >> Dr. Fellow? >> Aye. >> Ms. Brown? >> No. >> Dr. Mann? >> Aye. >> Mr. Thomson? >> Yes. >> Ms. Wah? >> Abstain. >> Geoffrey Baum: Okay the motion carries with five votes, one aye votes, one no vote and one abstention and the student trustee voted no. We move on to item H in the administrative reorganization. >> A point of order. Mr. Bell when a person abstains the only legitimate reason for abstaining is not having enough information. So I'd like to know if that the reason why Trustee Wah abstained and what other additional information she would require? >> Geoffrey Baum: Well I assume that we continue unless Trustee Wah would like to address that I'd like to move on to the next item. Okay Item H, the organization chart for academic and fiscal year 2012/2013 for the presentation and the board. >> Thank you very much. I would ask [background conversation]... >> Geoffrey Baum: Because of the long conversation and consideration of that agenda we're going to take a five minute break [background conversation]. [Silence] Do we have all the trustees present? Can somebody ask the superintendent to return? If the trustees can take their seats we will resume the meeting. [ Background Discussion ] >> Geoffrey Baum: While we are waiting for the president to return I did want to make an announcement that the Chancellor spoke on behalf of community colleges today on the vitality of the econom and he will be sharing some facts from the Chancellor's presentation today about the impact on community colleges and that they're worse across the state than even we're experiencing at Pasadena City College. Dr. Rocha, you have a recommendation for the board and a presentation to make on item H? >> Dr. Rocha: Yes thank you very much President Baum and members of the board, guest members and public I'll be brief because we do have a very, very important budget presentation to make following this item. I would refer the board and all members of the public and guests to item, it is H, right? Item H and if you go to your packet you'll see the backgrounder and item H we see organization chart for the college administration for academic and fiscal year 2012-2013 the annual presentation as a board and the recommendation of the administration is to approve the old chart if you have it. But I do want to just use this as my guide for this brief presentation, I won't read it out but I do want to touch on the highlights. [Background conversation] That the superintendent president recommends that the board of trustees authorize and approves the accompanying organization chart for the administration for academic and fiscal year and I do say that the board of trustees, this is a matter of transparencies, shall henceforth requires whether changes or not and I'm not proposing this because I'm sensing that there will be massive changes in it, but then each year I think for the sake of transparency, the superintendent president ought to come forward say who the members of the administration ought to come forward say who the members of the administration are what their accountabilities and what their reporting relationships are. The fiscal impact general funds as you will note and in a minute when we do the budget are in the '12-'13 operating budget. But I do want to point out that one of the major objectives of the recommendation is to reduce the total cost of the administration while increasing productivity and cost effectiveness. Okay, first of all I do want to point out that one extremely important reason for this organization is the necessity to make sure that we achieve our -- the reaffirmation of our accreditation, the self-study for which is due in about two years in March of 2015. It is clear from the recent sanctions against San Francisco City College that is threatened with closure, it is clear that it is the administration and the board of trustees that are held solely responsible for meeting all the standards whether there's budget or not, whether you have enough positions or not and so on. And that the standards of the accreditation commission make clear that as superintendant president, I have the responsibility to recommend to you as it says, a plan that oversees and evaluates an administrative structure for organized and staff to reflect the institution purposes, size and complexity. And this is the reason why I am making the recommendation to you because it will do just that. A couple other points, it will reduce and restructure administrative costs by gradually reducing the number of senior executives and managers. This is important in the budget presentation you will hear later [background noise] still yet, 90% of our budget is salaries and benefits which is hampering our ability to do other things in our missions. It will enhance revenue by enabling administrative resources to be put to such areas as international students and to train current deans and hire new school deans from fundraising and grants development. And another time I have informed you of the remarkable amount of money that we have raised in the last two years. We need to raise more and this structure will enable us to do that. Perhaps most importantly and here I want to come back to my own gut and where I live and my own value system. Itt will return through a mutual agreement with the academic senate, the academic management of disciplines to the faculty to where it belongs. This for example will enhance faculty evaluations and program reviews. Let me pause there for a point, for a moment, I came to West Los Angeles College, when I came to West Los Angeles College [chuckle], when I came to PCC, the college was on accreditation warning not for one year but two consecutive years. One of the reasons for that, there were many reasons for that is that the program reviews had not been done, the planning had not been done, the evaluations had not been done and at most colleges and others that I have managed, those responsibilities are essentially academic and professional. When I came to PCC, I returned -- speaking of sheer governance -- I returned to the academic senate the recommendations and the primary responsibility for faculty hiring and the recommendations on faculty hiring. In my core in my gut, faculty the teachers themselves need to manage their own disciplines. So it is the faculty who must perform program reviews. It is the faculty who must be supported to manage their disciplines. Part of the problem that I had when I was a dean was that as a dean, you're an administrator and I'm an English teacher but then if I went -- I do not have the disciplinary expertise to do an evaluation, a classroom evaluation of a Political Science teacher, or a Biology teacher. The person who should be doing that evaluation should be a faculty chair. Now that specifically is not in the proposal although what's specifically in the proposal is that we will come to -- we will use this year to come to a mutual agreement with the academic senate on what the appropriate academic management of the disciplines will be. And so this is one of the key reasons to it is that way back when, two years ago when I first proposed this to the board [chuckle], I innocently said, "Well gosh we don't have department chairs. We ought to have department chairs so that they can manage their own departments." This organization chart now will make that possible. There is no question that it will aid faculty collaboration or innovation across the disciplines. It's already happened, okay? When you reduce the number of silos, the number of villages if you will, it's much easier for faculty to meet across disciplines for example, to do SP1440 degrees. And one of the things that has gone almost unnoticed, almost never talked about is that in the old, org chart we had what I call village concept, Math Division, English Division, two basic skills departments absolutely essential. Almost every single student who comes in here needs to have Math and English. Math has always scheduled their courses as if they're the math college with their own classrooms, their own times, their own faculty schedules. English does the same thing. So when a student without ever coordinating that across lines because in order to do that under the old chart you'd have to go up quite a few ways, two vice-presidents and so on and so forth. It was never done. So one of the reasons for doing this and organizing together student services which has its finger on the pulse of enrollment management, you saw that wonderful tool that we're going to install if we move forward with that. One of the things that we'll do for -- it will enable us to coordinate classes across disciplines much easier so that English and Math course do not conflict as they surely do today. That's an administrative organizational issue. That's not a problem with the faculty or the students that's just administrative organization. And so you see some of the other points there that I've made. Finally, [background noise] we are going to propose to you as which is the charge that you gave me over two years ago to move forward with changing the computer system. We must move forward with this. In order to do that effectively, as quickly as possible what's necessary in order to do that is that you have to completely reorganize what's known as your processes and the org chart here will make it easier to do. So I am -- and the final thing I have to say has to -- because this is the first week of class, it has to come directly from my heart to the colleagues that are around in this room today, and I include everybody, the deans are here, the faculty and staff. Since I've been here in this college I have never seen a group of colleagues that have done more with less. We have unfortunately been in a funding crisis that as Chancellor Scott reported today has resulted in a reduction in enrollment in community colleges across this state of 460,000 students. Chancellor Scott reported today in the press that 82% of the community colleges in the state have already cancelled their summer and winter. And yet this administration, with all the changes, with all the budget cuts, have been working literally night and day and that's the kind of people that we have here in the administration and with this organization I will be able to support these good people better so that they can do what they came here to do and that is to serve students, graduate them and move them on to four year university and their jobs, so with that, the administration asks for your approval of the item. >> Geoffrey Baum: Thank you, Dr. Rocha, before we go into board member comments and I'm going to ask your forbearance on this -- general counsel did provide me two comment cards that were submitted before the item was brought up for discussion. I do want to recognize the members of the public who actually had submitted those cards in compliance with our bylaws. So I would like to recognize Dan Hailey [phonetic]. >> Dan Hailey: Good evening, good evening. Thank you for opening this up to public discussion. My name is Dan Hailey. I am one of the faculty members and I would like to address the proposed organization. I want to point out to you and I hope you will consider that the academic senate and the college council voted for a much different organization. We voted to retain the academic divisions each headed by a dean and I would also point out that the last accreditation report we had, the one where we got dinged on, the report actually commended the college for its strong organization. The proposed organization is going to interpose a separate level of managerial in between the academic programs and the administration. Right now the academic programs report directly to the vice president of instruction. With the proposed organization they're going to have to work their way through, what is it called -- a school pod and I don't know what that means but I think it's going to cut off access to the administration and I think it's going to cut off the advocacy role that the academic deans play right now. The mission of the school has always been education and I would hate to see the educational programs, the academic programs take a subservient role in the organization of the school. Thank you very much. >> Geoffrey Baum: The other individual requesting to address the board on this item is Paul Gerald. >> Paul Gerald: Thank you, thank you general council and all that. Bear with me a little bit I feel emotional I've got a few emotions running through. Some of them are anger. Some of my emotions are embarrassment, disdain, confused. So I'll try to be clear actually I had prepared what I wanted to speak about for the permission slip that I actually submitted for the previous action item G. So I put in another one for H so I apologize but it looks like I can probably do that anyhow -- speak about both of them. It strikes me that a lot is being done and my embarrassment for the board, not having been to many of these meetings, I'm a little embarrassed that the actions, the rules that your by-laws you didn't follow. I don't know how many students who this affects the most by the way. I'm a faculty, it affects me a lot. It affects my income, it affects how I do my class and things like that. But it really does affect the students the most and you got to hear from one of them I think and I know many of them submitted them by your bylaws prior to this item being taken up and were not permitted to speak and we still have probably more than of the 30 minutes left we had some time for that. So I'm embarrassed that you chose to do that but I'm thankful that you finally at least let me do this one here. I'm also a little bit embarrassed in myself because I did sign the petition for the coalition for progressive faculty. I'm also a newly elected faculty association secretary. I believe in this school, I believe in my administrators, I believe in my students and I believe in us working together to solve difficult problems. I don't think we've done any of that. I have also asked the coalition to take my name off the petition. I want to publicly state that while I agree with a lot of what they said in principle, their actions were unprofessional, unproductive and in no way progressive to speak on items that are of no relevance to what we're trying to accomplish today and that is to help these students get classes they need whether they be in a winter intersession, a spring session a summer 1, a summer 2, call it what you want. These kids need classes and we need to try to make that happen. I don't think the faculty association has done the best job. Obviously we'll admit fault for that. I don't think the administration had done the best job at enlightening the board about what truly is best for the students. You didn't hear from them. You didn't hear from the faculty. There are things that are in place to try to make this happen. What I like on a personal level I can make that decision very quickly. I can see it affects for you guys your budget. I can see it affects my income. But I need to hear from the students and other faculty about the sound pedagogy of these practices of changing a calendar quickly, all right, quickly. We can have a discussion and make a choice to change it in a year and that gives us time to put in place ed plans that can take care of these kids that are going to be left without classes. It really is a shame and I would really like to think that as we move forward that, you know, the administration both in my dealings with them professionally, as a colleague, across the table as a member of the FA, that we really like to think of wins for students, not wins for the faculty, not wins for the administration. And I really do feel that we will all feel better about those wins if they're done with the faculty and done with the students instead of against the faculty and against the students. And I really wish that you would hear that and let us have our processes in place and give us time to make good informed intelligent decisions that are the best for the faculty, the student and the organization as a whole. So thanks. >> And now we have a recommendation from the administration before the board. We've had a number of conversations as a Board of Trustees on this. In fact, this was a result of a direction that the board gave to the administration just about a year ago about how the administration could best be structured in order to provide the best service to students especially anticipating the severe budget conditions that we foresaw, not just last year but in several years. And so I want to open it up to the board members for questions about the proposal and then see if we're ready to take action. Dr. Fellow? >> Anthony Fellow: Yes, as you know I've been a university administrator and professor for 28 years and when I got elected to this board and spent time on campus I have never seen a structure like this. And faculty, you've all been at universities, I don't think you've ever seen a structure like this. A university needs strong deans and they need strong chairs under those deans. And today deans must go out and fundraise, which is very important. And so I'm very supportive of this proposal. I think we've got to get in line with other colleges and universities and have a structure of deans and chairs. And I think this is -- I thank you for bringing this forward. >> Is that a motion? >> Yes. >> Is there a second to the motion? >> Linda Wah: Second. >> Okay a second by Trustee Wah. Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: Well I think I have a couple of years on Dr. Fellow as a university professor and an administrator, and I must also say that I had never seen a structure like this. And I think that this is -- I strongly, strongly support the having department chairs for the reasons that Dr. Rocha mentioned. And I also I think if we really, really want to serve our students who we all know come in and are in need of I'll call it supplemental instruction, I think no one has ever found a really good term to figure out what that is. We need faculty who can address in every single discipline the best way to treat -- to teach unprepared students. And I think that happens best with a department chair who's familiar with the discipline and who can work with the faculty and who can find out what's going on across the country and who can keep their eyes open for research opportunities, know what's going on, take people to conferences, all of the things that department chairs do which are not administrative but really are discipline oriented. So I strongly, I strongly support this. This has been what my experience has been with what department chairs do and I think it's been a very effective system. It's been around I guess for well over 1,000 years and so I'm going to vote for it. >> Trustee Thomson? >> William Thomson: I have a few questions here. What is a school pod? >> Well, I think the -- well, I'm asking Dave to help me out. I think this comes from marine biology.. Aren't [laughter] -- whales come in pods? But I don't mean that pejoratively. Trustee Thomson, the question is a very good one. The [background laughter] essence of the organizational structure in academic affairs would be to move gradually towards a school-based architecture for the reasons that I've stated. It does more and more with Cal State and with future challenges. So that over time through -- and we have an agreement, by the way, with the Management Association that assures all the current deans will continue in their roles until, through voluntary or natural attrition, they -- that we will slowly move into one dean in each one of those schools. Now in the meantime, if you look at any one of those schools, you have more than -- more than one dean in the school. So we adopted the term pod so that as an administrative matter for Dr. Bell they would develop a process in which they might have, you know, the deans in, say, the School of the Arts and Design would form a pod and, say, together and would consult together something, by the way, that has not occurred in the past, and nominate one dean to, Dr. Bell, perhaps by you know, shooting, you know, or something like that or that would be able to work with Dr. Bell and coordinate the -- have I stated that fairly? >> Yes, [inaudible] [laughter] one dean within that cohort would come forward as the leadership of the pod [inaudible]. >> How would that one dean be selected? >> It would be selected from among the deans themselves. >> Would they rotate? No? It would... >> Dr. Bell: Ideally the recommendation would be they would rotate on some, you know, either one year or two year period but rotate through. Yeah, so you have some continuity rather than just year-to-year. >> Dr. Bell if you could bring the microphone closer. >> Dr. Bell: I'm sorry. Excuse me. >> Can you repeat that please so that [laughter]. >> The sense of the pod is that the deans within any one of the schools where we have multiple deans within a school would, among themselves, choose who would be the person who would be the lead person, if you will, to have the right communication, lead liaison with the Office of the Vice President of Construction that would be chosen among that group. And again it would generally be on a rotational basis probably two years ideally to rotate through. >> And the understanding would be that if this is adopted that Dr. Douglas is not going to lose his job as a dean and even though he might want to be relieved of that. [Laughter]. >> That's... >> [Inaudible] pod formation or something. >> Dr. Bell: That's correct. >> William Thomson: And then just one overall question to go back to what I raised on the last topic we were on. Put it into plain words, how is this best for the college and best for our students? >> Dr. Bell: Well again to paraphrase what Dr. Rocha says I think it's best because it puts the responsibility for leadership within any instructional area within the hands of the faculty. And I think the faculty are the best to sit with faculty, to consult with faculty, to make those kind of decisions within the academic discipline on what's best for the discipline, pedagogically and going forward. It puts that back with the faculty and not necessarily resting with an administrative dean and/or vice president. >> Anything you want to add to that or is that basically it? >> Dr. Bell: I'm sorry? >> William Thomson: I mean is that the entirety of why this is the best structure for PCC and the students at PCC? >> Dr. Bell: Well it's lead I don't know but I don't know I would say primary but it's a lead consideration definitely. It aligns well with, again, the models at four year campuses. The faculty, in my opinion, are closest to the students, understanding the needs of students, as well as, the pedagogy within the discipline the faculty are the ones who are more closely aligned with the student, understanding student needs. And when we talk about forward -- going forward in any academic division it is the faculty, in my opinion, who have a better sense of that and a better handle on that respective to what student needs are than I know I would as a vice president or even as a dean. So again I think it's better because it puts that responsibility back in the hands of faculty and they're much more close to students. >> William Thomson: Do you picture this as being a dynamic process? That is I mean I realize that part of the recommendation is that each year, annually the superintendent or president will make a recommendation as to what the organizational structure looks like. And we're not certainly anticipating or suggesting that that's going to change annually. But do you see this as a dynamic process or do you see this as something set in concrete for the next five years? >> Dr. Bell: Well [inaudible] question correctly Trustee Thomson I think it will be a fairly dynamic process because we're going through an evolution. Obviously we're going through major change at the college. It will be a dynamic process. Again when we -- before we get to a dean in any one of these schools there's going to be the natural process of attrition so that dynamic process is going to be in place. So yeah I don't believe it will be set in concrete per say. It will be the model, if you will, the model throughout which we'll move. But it will be a lot of dynamic involvement in there as we get to that point. >> William Thomson: Good, thank you very much. >> Dr. Bell: You're welcome. >> Anthony Fellow: Jeff, can I just add to that? >> GB: Go ahead, Dr. Fellow. >> Anthony Fellow: I think one of the great benefits I see is when you have faculty in charge of their unit you have greater innovation. The faculty are the ones in that discipline who know how this discipline is evolving. And I know in my university it's that we're able to bring together new courses because we know the field and I think you're going to see great innovation with this. >> Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: I would just like to point out as an example we're very, very proud of our stem cell research program that was started Dr. Wendy Johnson. And I remember the presentation where she said, you know, Dr. Jacobs saw this opportunity and suggested I go. Well Dr. Jacobs has a degree in biology and that's what would be happening if you had department chairs. This just happened to be she was the vice president for instruction. But I think that is typical of the kinds of things you can expect with a chair who keeps their -- that's part of their jobs is to look at what's developing in the field, look at research opportunities and to bring to the attention of their faculty and then try to get the funding for them. >> GB: Trustee Brown or Trustee Martin did you have a question or... >> Berlinda Brown: Well I have no problem with this structure. I think it's good and I think it will definitely help our students. I think it's the right thing. But I do have a question. I was not sure under which school or administrator will the UJIMA or PUENTE Program fall. So if I am a student and I'm trying to find out who do I go to -- who is it? >> Right and I'll ask Dr. Bell to answer. But UJIMA, of course, what you have here is just administrators on the chart. UJIMA is actually coordinated by a counselor, a faculty member, Gina Lopez who does a wonderful job. So Dr. Bell is that correct? UJIMA would report to whom? >> Dr. Bell: Under this model UJIMA would report to the Dean of Student and Learning Services. >> Right. >> Dr. Bell: That position. >> Berlinda Brown: Also PUENTE Program? >> Dr. Bell: PUENTE as well. >> Berlinda Brown: Great, thanks. >> GB: Trustee Martin? >> John Martin: I'll make a few comments. First I'm very appreciative of Dr. Rocha for bringing this forward. And the focus of the discussion thus far has basically been in we'll say right on the page, right beneath the Bob Bell name down in divisions and pods and such. A great deal of my focus is almost on the page going up. So first let me say when we're talking about Banner I really appreciate Trustee Wah who has an extensive background in that particular area, listening very intently to her questions and her comments and watching as she, you know, utilizes that expertise that, you know, I have not come close to. And as I listen to comments on all of these things and there's not near as many comments on this, of course, as there is on the previous topic. So I have to really appreciate the trustees who have lived in education where I have not. Okay, I've taught a part-time community college class. But, you know, I never got past my - the guy in charge of me, right, the chair or whatever he was. I don't know what he was, he was my chair. So the one thing that is of tremendous importance to me is the reduction of administration and we basically are down to two vice presidents. And we have heard meeting after meeting, complaint after compliant about seven vice presidents; it ought to be noted now there's two. And we ought to make that note at least once to represent what it does. There's a lot of positions that previously might have been at that level that are no longer at that level. Some are vacant and some are moved down and there's some that are being eliminated. And it's that cost savings that we need to do so that we can save the resources we have to offer the classes no matter what day of the week it ends up on or what day of the calendar year it ends up on. So when I focus on the first page I'm very appreciative of the two vice presidents. I'm very appreciative of the reductions. All that being said there's even one new position on here that I cannot support. I wanted to address that briefly, it will not stop me from voting on this but when that position comes up I just want you to know to be on the record I don't see the need to form a firmament -- a permanent full-time position for an inspector general. I don't see why we need to spend that money year-after-year and embed an office which probably needs some support to go around the campus, you know, looking for issues. Doesn't mean there isn't a need that may periodically have to be done there and when that need needs to be periodically done I think we contract it out for a brief period of time to do specifically what the college needs done to be inspected. They can issue an independent report and go on their way and we can save money year after year when it doesn't need to be done. And I know we -- we're doing a little bit of that now. There's a forensic audit that's going on. We're still waiting to hear, but, you know, apparently in what some might perceive being one of the worst case scenarios possible for potential fiscal impropriety the preliminary reports are showing that not one dollar of district funds were lost. So I don't want to overreact and create, you know, six digits of expense year after year after year after year in a position that, quite frankly, I think that money could be better spent in offering more sections or more classes or more some of anything. So I'm not real excited about a permanent inspector general. But other than that I'm thrilled and would be happy to support all the names on the first page the way it's presented and very appreciative of Dr. Rocha and the college for working through that and making this presentation. On the second page I just, quite frankly, I've been listening, I've been trying to sort through it and I don't know the way we are now or the way this is I don't really know which would be the best. And I have trouble, you know, hearing good arguments really making a proper decision and in cases like this I think listening I probably would side a little bit with my fellow trustees that have lived there so long and understand this way better than I do. Though I'm very appreciative of the comments and have a very high opinion especially a couple of the speakers that spoke tonight on this issue and who I know are, you know, really very, very tremendous PCC people. So that's kind of where I am on that. >> GB : Trustee Israel do you want to... >> Hannah Israel: Yeah, I had a question for Trustee Martin. When you say on the first page you support the names do you mean... >> John Martin: I'm saying on this page where and if I said names I'm obviously referring to the positions [inaudible]. >> Hannah Israel: [Inaudible]. >> John Margin: So this -- the first page is the one that starts with Dr. Rocha's picture. [Laughter]. >> Hannah Israel: Got it. >> John Martin: Sorry, thank you. >> Hannah Israel: Thank you. >> John Martin: I should have clarified that. >> Hannah Israel: Thank you. It's a little... >> John Martin: And then there's a couple second pages that start with, you know, Vice President Bell and Vice President Miller and so I'm -- and most of this discussion is on the Vice President Bell page with the pods and divisions and stuff. >> Hannah Israel: I just wanted the positions clear. >> John Martin: Yeah, so thank you... >> Hannah Israel: Thank you so much. >> John Martin: Thank you for helping me clarify that. >> One quick point, there are three vice presidents, Mr. Martin. >> John Martin: Okay, thank you. >> Well we don't want to... >> The third one being... >> [Laughter] [Inaudible]. >> We don't want Dwayne to run off. >> [Inaudible] left out [laughter]. >> [Inaudible] vice president. There is a senior vice president. >> GB: So there is a proposal before the board on the structuring of the administration. It is not a hiring decision. We're not hiring anybody with this recommendation. We're just approving a -- in the -- the structure that is being proposed or we're considering it for approval. I did have in my packet the newsletter from the crediting commission and that it addresses first the role of the governing board, roles and responsibilities. And they've actually, as we've talked about on many occasions this past year, put several districts on warning if not more severe sanctions. And the thing that's governing my vote and my feeling on this is the item on page four here -- on page three where it says get clear on the policy role of governing board members. And it ways remember the board hires and evaluates the CEO and we're in the middle of that process as we've discussed on the agenda and delegates all operations and responsibility for implementing policy in institutional operations to that CEO. So I see this as a fulfillment of that directive from the accrediting commission that we are asking the administration -- the CEO to make a recommendation and then by approving that we are then delegating the operation of the district to the CEO and then we will through our evaluation process hold the CEO accountable for the performance for the district. But we have to provide the CEO the tools to actually execute the responsibilities to which we want to hold him accountable. And so we have a motion and a second, is there any further discussion. Okay we will call the question, I will -- we'll take a roll call vote on that and with -- starting with our advisory vote. >> Put the mic to your... >> Up closer -- Ms. Israel? >> Hannah Israel: I'm going to abstain. >> Ms. -- Mr. Baum? >> GB: Aye. >> Mr. Martin? >> John Martin: Aye. >> Mr. Fellow? >> Anthony Fellow: Aye. >> Ms. Brown? >> Berlinda Brown: Aye. >> Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: Aye. >> Mr. Thomson? >> William Thomson: Aye. >> Ms. Wah? >> Linda Wah: Aye. >> Okay the motion carries unanimously. Congratulations, we have approved the organization chart for the administration for the academic and fiscal year. The President's report the budget item I, the budget development. >> Mark Rocha: Okay, [inaudible] in time for you what your like the Democratic Convention Sunrise Service. Gema and Marie and Bob I know the hour is late but the presentation is important because what you have before you trustees is the draft -- the continuing draft of the proposed adopted budget. This is not an action item but I've asked Bob and Jim and Marie to be here and to go over this briefly, to ask questions because it really is the sum and substance of what we will be bringing back to you next week for the final proposed adopted budget for fiscal year 2012/2013. So with that I present Vice President Miller. >> Bob Miller: Thank you, Dr. Rocha, President Baum, members of the board. First a very quick introduction of Gema Ptasinski excuse me. She is Renee's associate at Vicenti, Lloyd and Stutzman. Gema is a partner. Renee could not be with us tonight but Gema has been working very closely with Renee and with the college as we work through our needs here. Also I'd like to if -- with the permission of the board president I'd like to combine I and J together so we can more quickly get through this if that's okay. >> GB: Please do. >> Bob Miller: All right so first just a very quick overview of the proposed adopted budget. This is a budget that we will be bringing to you next week for final adoption. I'd like to remind the board that we need to present a budget to the State Chancellor's office by September 15th. You will get in your board packets on Friday night you will be getting a budget book for '12, '13 and you also will be getting the adopted budget summary document. So you will have the weekend and then a few days before we actually have the adoption on the 5th to consider that. Beyond that I want to do a very brief summary of this draft or just a reminder and point out a couple of additional things. Our '11, '12 adopted budget from a revenue point of view was$116 million. In actuality as a result of deferrals and trigger cuts and other types of things including what became known as a February surprise our income was $112 million. And, in fact, for all the reasons that we've talked about in the past this year our income will be $109 million. There is a nice surprise, if you will, there is an insurance refund item through Anthem Blue-Cross that we were able to re-claim. This is new news that came to us very recently. So that provides an additional $2.3 million of revenue which has helped us with our balanced budget. And that's a new item that had not been there before. Without getting into all the details of the expenditures although obviously I'm here to answer any questions that you might have on that our income is $109 million, our expenses for -- projected for '12, '13 is $111 million leaving a deficit of approximately $2.4 million or so, $2.3 million. You will notice at the end of '11, '12 we had a revenue over expenditures or a balance, if you will, of $1.8 million. That $1.8 million we are suggesting is going to be used to help us get to our balanced budget situation. That does get us to our balanced budget situation so we are recommending that instead of moving those monies, the $1.8 million, over to reserves that we use that money this year, one-time only to help us balance our budget. So in effect what we would be -- what we are providing you is a balanced budget proposal. That's what you'll see next week with a lot more detail behind it, okay. Any questions on that before I go on? Yes, Dr. Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: Yes, I do have a question. On the funding revenue it shows in 2011, 2012 other financing sources, actual $1, 400, 000 et cetera; projected $10,000 what is -- why -- what's the difference there? >> Bob Miller: Yes, go ahead. Marie will respond to that please. >> Marie: Okay, one of the sources of that revenue was we did not fund the dental insurance. So we did was to fund it and get the money back coming to fund one through the general fund. >> Bob Miller: So... >> Jeanette Mann: I'm sorry I didn't understand. >> Bob Miller: Yeah so let me explain, last year in order to... >> Last year's budget didn't Trustee Mann, we essentially borrowed because we had excess money in the dental fund. >> Jeanette Mann: Oh it's from the dental fund, okay. That's... >> [Inaudible]. >> Bob Miller: That's correct. >> $1.4 million. >> Jeanette Mann: I understand. >> So this year... >> Bob Miller: Right. >>... we're not borrowing that and adding that to revenue. >> Bob Miller: Exactly. >> Jeanette Mann: Thank you. I just didn't quite get what you said. >> Bob Miller: You bet. >> Jeanette Mann: No it's fine. >> Bob Miller: So moving on then so this gets us to our reserve. What we are projecting for our reserve and I would like to remind the board that past practice has been to set aside $12 million in reserves and the balance of the monies are typically used for operating contingencies that might occur. So that's built into that notion of our ending fund balance of June 30, 2012 being what is roughly $21 million. Now in the earlier page I noted that there was a net surplus of $1.8 million. 18.8 plus the $1.8 gets us to the $20 million 707. We are now recommending that we use that $1.8 million to help us balance our '12, '13 budget which means that we are effectively recommending that the reserves at the end of '12, '13 effectively be at the same $18 million, 8 mark. So we're effectively maintaining our reserves at the same level that they are. And again I remind you that there's a minimum of a 5% we have to maintain for the purposes of what the law says to us and the rest of it is there for emergencies, cash flow, other things. Okay, this gets to Item J and speaks to capital outlay. One of the things that we're doing this year for the purposes of very specific transparency is we are being very clear about the types of capital outlay requirements that we have. So specifically the Fund 41 begins with a projected balance of $18, 757, 860. You'll see a line that's titled deferred maintenance replacement. You see a variety of categories. We start with some of the technology categories; classroom information technology upgrades, phase one we're talking about 140 classrooms we're going to be working on this year. Technology replacement fund that's broader technology, technology disaster recovery, HVAC systems, restrooms, concrete what have you. On that line based upon the total needs of the district we estimate that there is a need for just over $40 million of deferred and replacement project money. We are basically recommending to the board that in Fund 41 we expend the individual line items amounts that you see in front of you under the '12, '13 budgeted column. You go down to the bottom just above the blue line where it says facilities and obstruction subtotal of $10, 000, 080. Then you go down to the next line the administrative information system and we are indicating that to fund the first year obligation for the Ellucian AIS system, the administrative information system, as well as, some hardware and some network infrastructure that will be required that that will be basically a financing and that would cost us $3.25 million year one. That would effectively leave a balance if we were to expend all of these monies on these projects of $5.4 million within the capital outlay fund. And as the year goes on we would be cautious about investing in all of these projects, basically observing the, you know, the proposition 30 and other things that might be impacting the budget of the district. But in effect we would be asking the board to approve these things. And, of course, many of them as individual items have to come back to the board for approval anyway during the course of the normal operating year. So that is -- that's our goal in for Fund 41 and, of course, the big difference this year as opposed to perhaps other years is that we are being 100% transparent about what will happen with these monies as we go forward. This is just a -- I'm not going to get into this. You've seen it many, many times before. But this is just that $10.5 million balance budget document that we've been working with. It's evolved since we first introduced it to you. We just indicate here that it's a working document. It kind of helps to show where we are, what the deficit is in terms of that $10.5 and we've now taken account for all of that and we've built it into the operating budget. The next two -- yes Dr. Rocha? >> Mark Rocha: So, you know, for the trustees' benefit that $2.4 million give or take is what before we were proposing borrowing money to do? >> Bob Miller: That's correct. >> Mark Rocha: Okay. >> Bob Miller: Now I... >> Mark Rocha: Now... >> Bob Miller: I'm sorry. >> Mark Rocha: And then now in the budget you're presenting to the board we do not have -- that budget is balanced without borrowing. >> Bob Miller: That budget is balanced without borrowing. But again a budget is a plan and what's important to remember is from a cash flow point of view we still have cash flow issues. And so we will be bringing back the president -- we'll be bringing back to you a recommendation to participate in the tax payer revenue anticipation note in the amount of $10 million for the purposes of helping us to manage our cash flow. And also I might add one of the advantages of the calendar that you've approved tonight is that we'll have a better sense of where our money situation is after the first 16 weeks, so to speak, and be in a better position likely to offer more classes based upon how our cash will come in and based upon our overall budgeting at that point in the year. So yes it's a balanced budget but again it's predicated on the cash coming into us in a timely enough fashion to finance our operations. Okay, now without getting into the detail of this I'm actually very proud of the fact that we have built into the budget the continuation of our student access and success initiative which is really tied to our mission based priorities in our educational master plan. So what you see here is the plan over these two pages of what the district will be investing in this year. Dr. Bell and all of the faculty and the deans and what have you in the various projects. And perhaps at a later time when there're more time we can certainly speak to all of these projects. At a later time we will also come back to the board and report to the board on all of the great accomplishments that occurred as a result of the funding that was allocated in the '11, '12 budget for the student access and success initiatives. But this money, every one of these projects is budgeted and we're -- and will help us to achieve our student success targets and so on and so forth. So yes, Dr. Rocha? >> Mark Rocha: No I just wanted to see the second page. >> Bob Miller: Oh second page, thank you. So down at the bottom there you see a total of $960, 000. So in essence that's that we wanted to share with you tonight. Next week as I indicated we will request the board to vote on a balanced budget and thank you very much. >> When is the budget due to the state? When do we have to take action formally? >> Bob Miller: We have to take action at the next meeting. The budget is due to the state September 15th. >> September 15th? >> Bob Miller: Yes, sir. >> Thank you very much. Is there any -- Trustee Brown? >> Berlinda Brown: I have one quick question. Going back capital, where is it -- the Capital 41 -- Fund 41. I see all these numbers and projections but how did you come up with these numbers for -- what was the rationale, how did you determine that we're going to spend 2 million 1 in C build [assumed spelling]. Is there some records that indicates that these are necessary? This is... >> Bob Miller: Our facilities team we have Jack Shillman in the audience tonight, Ruben Smith our -- one of the consultants that we brought on board plus our facilities supervisors and others. They've actually amassed this information over several years. Now I will be honest with you it's not amass to the degree that it should be which is one of the reasons we've recommended the hiring of an executive director for facilities. But I will tell you that these are very reasonable numbers for a plan of our size with the number of buildings that we manage, with the expense that we have. >> Hey Bob, to help Trustee Brown's very, very good question can you go back to the capital outlay. I think what the trustee is asking for and we should bring next week is she's saying, for example, facility equipment new and replacement, right. I'm trying to make sure I... >> Bob Miller: Yeah so that's $11.9... >> $1.5... >> Bob Miller: $1.5, right. >>... that we are proposing to spend $1.5 million on facilities and equipment, what Trustee Brown is saying is that, I think, forgive me if I'm not saying -- will you present the backup so that all the trustees can see what we're going to spend that $1.5 million on. >> Bob Miller: Yeah we can provide a projects list but -- yes, the answer is yes. But I want to be very clear the one $1.5 is a small portion of the roughly $12 million that's needed. But yes we can provide that backup. >> [Inaudible]. >> Berlinda Brown: Well this one just one example. >> Right. >> Berlinda Brown: All these numbers really don't mean anything to me unless I can say well this makes sense or it makes no sense. >> Right. >> No, I -- in other words on the capital budget which by the way... >> Berlinda Brown: I'm on. >>... this is the first time that I am aware that we presented a capital outlay budget of this kind. >> Bob Miller: That's right. >> So what I am charging Bob and the facilities team to do is to make sure that you bring back next week the backup to this. >> Bob Miller: Okay, we will do that. >> Right, is that what you're asking for Trustee? >> Berlinda Brown: That's correct. >> Okay. >> I'd like to see it too. >> Yes, sir. You'll have it. I think Dwayne would like to make a comment. He just got back up. >> Dwayne Cable: Well just as an example... >> Berlinda Brown: Well I know your's -- I know yours. >> Dwayne Cable: Yeah, just as an example the 140 classrooms at $13,000 per classroom which is work that we have done to make sure that the classrooms that are not smart that we're going to make smart is going to cost $13,000 each. So 140 times $13,000 gives you that number. >> Yeah we can... >> Berlinda Brown: I don't have a problem with IT. >> Bob Miller: We can and will provide that. >> Berlinda Brown: We have been going through things with IT so I have an idea of where the funds are going for IT. But the other numbers I have no idea. >> Bob Miller: Okay well we will bring back the specific information. >> Just so I understand, the Fund 41 has a current balance at the end of this year of $18.7. We're recommending $9.98 in various budgeted items for the coming year and it will end -- we're projecting an ending balance in that fund of $8.77 million. >> Bob Miller: Actually we started at $18,757. >> Right. >> Bob Miller: The subtotal for facilities and construction is $10 -- $10 million so that -- then we're going to take another $3.25 so the balance that we would have left if we were to expend all these funds is $5.4 million. >> Okay so that's where we would -- so we're significantly spending down this fund. >> Bob Miller: We are -- we would significantly be spending down this fund and as I mentioned we would be cautious and this board would have to really approve each individual project as -- during the budgeting -- during the approval process, if you will, of purchase orders and contracts and what have you. So every one of these projects you'll have a significant opportunity to approve. >> Right and just for -- just information how did we get -- how did we build up that fund so high? >> Bob Miller: The deferred maintenance fund? >> No, how did we build up -- how did we get... >> Bob Miller: How did we get... >> ... to $18.7? >> Bob Miller: Well because in years past the practice was to sweep the ending balance, the majority of the ending balance into this fund. >> So it's over years of savings, decades perhaps... >> Bob Miller: Yeah. >> That we were able to raise -- have a capital outlay fund... >> Bob Miller: That's correct and what we are... >>... shooting... >> Bob Miller: Recomending going forward is that, that be a transparent and a very conscious decision of this board to do that. In other words if you have reserves at the end of the year, if you end the end of the year with $10 million you can specifically say we'd like to put $5 of that into Fund 41. Right now we're suggesting that -- well we ended this year with $1.8 million and we're suggesting we use that money to help balance the '12, '13 year. >> [Inaudible]. Trustee Martin? >> John Martin: Yeah I have just a few comments. I think it's as simple as saying in prior years the $1.8 would have been swept... >> Bob Miller: That's right. >> John Martin: ... either into the capital outlay fund or into the Gasby 4345 Fund to build up the amount of reserves necessary to fund our... >> Bob Miller: That's right. >> John Martin: ... obligation. >> Bob Miller: That's correct, Gatsby 64. >> John Martin: And now this time and in some ways we're actually doing what the students who spoke and Trustee -- the Student Trustee Israel is we are this year dipping into reserves $1.8 million. We're just taking the $1.8 from last year that went to the good and dipping in the $1.8 this year to accomplish that task. >> Bob Miller: That's correct. In essence you are using your reserves this year to fund classes in other aspects of the operation. >> John Martin: So technically because you happen to run audits from year-to-year there was a surplus in '11, '12 and now there will probably be a deficit in '12, '13 and if all comes out right the two in total for two years will come out to zero. >> Bob Miller: That's correct. And I... >> John Martin: That's my first comment. My second comment question would be -- would ask you to run some kind of financial analysis between what the financing of the Ellucian Banner would actually end up costing us, either in some kind of internal rate of return or at some discount rate, some way of assessing what the finance charges are for that. I mean, we've got to know what that number is. I realize there's a cash issue here so it might be the prudent thing to do. But we should still see some math that gives us some idea of that and in particular because when we do go to borrow we do have a privilege of borrowing at a relatively low interest rate and it may even be more cost effective to borrow, you know, pay it -- borrow rather than lease it. I would equate our position on these pages when you're looking at a reserve of $18, $19 million and yet you look at our cash flow situation I'm right into the metaphor of being on a small raft in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and say oh no worries I've got plenty of water. That $18 million in reserve and you say well, you know, you need to have some reserve there in case of an emergency but there are times in the year where we don't. The $18 million is like saltwater, what good is it? You can't drink it if it doesn't happen to be the right time of the year. In business it's known as working capital. We all understand there's a certain amount of money, cash money that sits there and looks like it's just really great cash but it's working capital and it's necessary to operate a business between AR and APs and making payroll. And unfortunately the way the state is positioning this it's putting community colleges in a position to have to have a substantial what I would call working capital reserve in order to not have to borrow an excessive amount of money. Because borrowing money is like drinking saltwater, it dehydrates you. It means next year you don't have as much to fund what you really want to fund and do which is, of course, class section seats and offerings for students. So I want to be very careful. And the other thing we need to note is we have used Fund 41, I believe, as one of our emergency backup funds to borrow amongst ourselves at no interest in the past to meet that working capital and if we take it from $18 million down to $5 in a single year that will not be available to do that putting more pressure on our operating budget. So I wish there was a way the board could and all the right accountant type people are here that can make these -- I mean I would just realize what our working capital reserve is irrespective of our 5% emergency reserve that the state requires and needs to be there if there's a fire on campus or if there's some cataclysmic event or if there's some emergency and just say this is the working capital reserve just so we can make payroll and this is the real reserve in case an emergency happens. And if there's a number there above that then, you know, let's talk about what the best placement... >> Bob Miller: Right. >> John Martin: ... of utilization of those money would be. That would be the way I would assess that situation or else we're drinking saltwater. We're dehydrating ourselves. >> I think Trustee Martin those are essential questions. One thing that I suggest will happen is that after the adoption of the budget the creditor, ACCAC has put in new, much more stringent requirements of financial reporting. And that will enable us to come to recommend a policy -- a fiscal policy that addresses your question of how much [background talking] [inaudible] and of what type. >> John Martin: I appreciate that. I've got on other comment and again it goes back to how much, if any, reserves beyond the $1.8 we should use to fund classes today. I think we have made this comment correctly at meeting after meeting, year after year. I've been on the board over 30 years that we have the most incredible student body. They're -- the student government -- leaders in particular that have represented this college to go to Washington, Sacramento, that lobby in various places. The legacy, that tradition, that quality of student is tremendous. They've done a tremendous job. They represent the college better than any of us or any of the paid staff. And, you know, I think our current student body has inherited that tremendous legacy of students. They're fitting right in with that legacy, so compliments to you. And I think that -- those -- the leaders today of our student body that are following in that line want to continue that legacy and want to make sure that we leave to the next generation of PCC students that same pride. The more we dip into reserves for you today the more we are threatening the capacity of this college to offer quality education to the legacy behind you. And I don't think any of us would feel good about -- about that. So, you know, I think the $1.8 is perfectly appropriate and I'm glad we're doing that and I'm very supportive of the administration. I think the way that all worked out is wonderful. But if we go too much deeper than that I think we're either drinking saltwater or we're risking jeopardizing what we may be able to do for our students in the future. >> Any other further comments or questions about the budget presentation? Okay, we're going to -- do you have a comment? >> I just want -- we had Gema from Vicenti, Lloyd, Stutzman come all this way and she was so wonderfully patient throughout this evening. I just wanted to ask very quickly for the public record, Gema, that what we presented -- what we've been presenting and what we're presenting tonight that Vicenti, Lloyd, Stutzman are the independent accounting firm... >> [Inaudible] yes. >> That you've reviewed and vouched for. >> Gema Ptasinski: Yeah, our charge was to work with... >> Can we have a mic please. >> Gema Ptasinski: So our scope really was to work with management to ensure that the budget, the revenue, the expenditures are realistic and the assumptions and the current conditions that we're aware of and also the mission and kind of the decisions the board has passed down in terms of utilizing reserves or not utilizing reserves. So we've gone through that and we've done an analysis of the prior year budget, the current year budget, prior year results. And we feel comfortable that it's a conservative budget. It doesn't dip too far into reserves but it does utilize some of last year and again it's a plan. It will change and as things materialize in November it will -- it may continue to change. But management has been very conservative in terms of taking the November issue into consideration. So we're comfortable that it's a conservative budget. >> Are there any -- are there any other funds outside of what you're reporting tonight? >> Gema Ptasinski: We evaluated all of the budgets so for all of the funds. So even though only Fund 41 and the general fund were presented we've looked at all of the funds and asked questions about the spending and the reasons behind it or the revenues and the changes in revenues. So we have looked at all of them. >> Great, thank you. Are there any other questions from members of the board? Trustee Israel? >> Hannah Israel: I just have a quick comment on the page with the $10.5 million budget proposal. What you jump down to reductions in expenditures with the M classified hourly the new proposed cut reduction of $900,000 I just want to extend my gratitude to Vice President Miller and administration for significantly lowering the number of cuts on hourly's. I think that was a really good thing for students and hourly's on campus so thank you. >> Thank you. So that's the item on reductions. That was a $900,000 reduction in unclassified hourly and you're saying that it had a significant impact on students. >> Hannah Israel: Yeah it used to... >> Bob Miller: That number was $3 million to start with. So we got that -- we went from $3 million down to $900,000. So again as I indicated it's a working document. It's process. We've been through this through BRAC [assumed spelling] and other meetings and we were able to bring that down dramatically because of the impact that it had on students and faculty, et cetera. >> Thank you for that clarification. Okay, we're now moving on to the next item on the agenda which is announcements by shared governance member -- representatives and the Board of Trustees. I would like to start with our management association. >> Thank you I just want to thank -- I think they're all gone. No Jack is still here. Jack Ruben, Don Eckman, Paul Valdese, everybody who's been involved in getting our village together for us. People made a heroic effort and it's just been, you know, everything's not perfect but it's been a fabulous move in and we're up and running and we're doing really well so I just really want to send a shout out to them for their hard word. >> Thank you. >> President of the Academic Center, and I know it's very late but I have like a couple of things. First we in the Senate the report from San Francisco City College which has been put on show cause by the ACCJC. We continue to study the specifics of that report and have as one of our Senate goals for the upcoming year to make sure that PCC is moving in the right direction. Second we have met with leaders of the faculty association and agreed in principle to an MLU between the two bodies. This meeting is just the beginning of an effort to improve the relationship between the Senate and union while more clearly delineating the boundaries of the prerogatives of each. We are very pleased that the most recent union newsletter states that the FA will sign this MLU and we have been operating under its auspices in that spirit of shared understanding. Number three we believe strongly in the faculty prerogative when it comes to faculty governance. In that vein we are very pleased and thank the administration that they have agreed to amend, by our request, the past long-term plan to state divisions will migrate to a faculty organization structure as mutually agreed by the Academic Senate and administration. Number four, we are very pleased to announce that Stephanie Fleming of the Speech and Performing Arts division has been approved by the Shared Governance Committee and Dr. Rocha to be the new accreditation self-study chair for the 2015 cycle. The Senate intends to work with her closely as she begins her duties this fall. And finally [inaudible] on a bit of a lighter note we held our annual Senate retreat on August 25th at the Huntington Library and discussed the Senate goals for 2012, '13; goals that will be discussed and approved by the Academic Senate in September. There was a lively discussion there over many issues but there was one issue that I think I can fairly say the room reached consensus we would like a faculty pub on campus. One suggested location was the corridor underground between the C and R buildings. Just a thought to take into consideration, thank you. >> [Inaudible]. Students associated students President Fraser. >> Simon Fraser: Thank you. And so long as I get to entrance to the faculty pub I will support that. Given that I have to up at 5:00 in the morning I'll try to keep this brief. The Associated Students has been investigating just certain elements of the operation of the campus and the college as specifically relating to some of the programs that the Associated Students through either the student committee piece, student service [inaudible] or student representation [inaudible] funds specifically such as the ITAT [assumed spelling] and the student activity key initiative making sure that accountability is held on all of those expenses. Over the next few weeks we are going to be considering carefully our role in shared governance. We know that the shared governance policy is coming up for review and so we're going to be really considering carefully how we approach shared governance and how we continue to chase after the table and where we want to be a year from now. So that's something that's going to be coming up in the next few weeks. On a lighter note, generally a lighter note, I think I'd like to thank someone in a position that's incredibly undervalued and underappreciated every week, every start of the fall semester and every start of the spring semester which is our vice president for campus activities. And he's here in the room, Fernando Beccerra who has put on a marvelous spectacle in the quad if you ever go through it. Week of Welcome if the premiere, direct contribution by the Associated Students at the beginning of the fall and spring semesters and it's a shame that it isn't as recognized and I'd like to thank him for all the hard work that he's been putting in single handedly to ensure that the table is manned, the information is going out there. We provide an opportunity not only for the Associated Students but the Office of Student Affairs, Financial Aid, counselors throughout the week and its' one of the biggest highlights of the week so I'd like to thank him for that. And you'll notice on your tables a couple of the give aways which include this, this planner which unfortunately now has to be changed because it has an academic calendar in it. >> Oh no. >> Simon Fraser: We gave, we have 5,000 of these; 1,500 of them went to the new students on Welcome Day. We had 5,000 we're now down to about 300. Divisions have been requesting them like hotcakes and now we've got to do a second run. We'll have to do some edits. One of the things you'll notice if you turn to page seven.... >> Good. >> Simon Fraser: And -- is that we've also included lists of federal and state legislators for the areas that Pasadena City College serves and an explanation of why those numbers are there, why they're important and how you can use them. So there are not only intended to be resources for the campus but also resources to lobbying and how to really get the message across to Sacramento and federal governments on what you need and how you need it. These are widely distributed everywhere. We have business cards -- or not business cards, bookmarks with our fall academic dates on and some important information, book flags which are always popular. And finally after a meeting with Trustee Thomson and the Associated Students Executive Board we came up with this. I think it helped at the beginning of the meeting at least which gives some suggestions on tone and civility and conflict with civility which the Associated Students firmly believes in and whatever happens we are committed to. >> Thank you President Fraser and I do appreciate the efforts of the Associated Students in providing guidance on effective -- offering effective public comments during board meetings. I do sincerely appreciate your efforts. >> It's particularly rewarding to see that I actually whispered. >> Simon Fraser: We take the things that the Trustees tell us Mr. -- Trustee Thomson. >> Do we have a representative of the Classified Senate? No. Member of the Board of Trustees, Trustee Israel. >> Hannah Israel: I think Simon covered all of it so no reports tonight. >> Trustee Thomson? >> William Thomson: Nothing [inaudible]. >> Trustee Wah? >> Linda Wah: No. >> Trustee Martin? >> John Martin: Nothing. Thank you. >> Trustee Fellow? >> Anthony Fellow: [Inaudible]. >> Trustee Mann? >> Jeanette Mann: Well I do want to report on two of the bills which the board has endorsed. The first one is SB I think it's 1590. The one carried by Carol Luge [assumed spelling] which would strengthen the Chancellor's office and give the Chancellor the authority to appoint his Vice Chancellors. That did pass both Houses and was sent to the governor and the governor has sent it back saying that he will address this legislatively, whatever that means. And secondly the Student Success Act which was -- begun in the Senate and carried by Senator Lowenthal passed the assembly yesterday 60 to 0. It's back in the Senate where it will probably sail right through and we hope the governor will sign that. >> Thank you. Trustee Brown? >> No report. >> I'll make two announcements. One is just and I won't go through the details but the Chancellor did make a public statement about the state of the community college system today. I encourage all to read that. And also I did receive reports during the course of the meeting about individuals who wish to address the board that I didn't receive the cards or in a timely fashion. What I'm going to ask for future meetings is I'm going to ask the board clerk to be the recipient of all comment cards. And then we'll ask the board clerk to give them to me at the beginning of each item so that I have an extra set of hands to process those cards and so that nobody who has an interest in addressing the board within the -- within our bylaws is denied that opportunity to do that. Future board meeting dates. We will now be able to go back to the Robinson Park Multi-Purpose room. Is that correct Dr. Rocha? >> Mark Rocha: It is, we're all set. >> And that will be a week from tonight. And then we have a board retreat scheduled on September 15th and then a following -- there should be a board meeting scheduled on the 19th of September at a location to be determined. Any [background talking]. >> I have a potential work conflict and may not be present on the 19th. >> The 19th. Trustee, I mean President Rocha? >> Mark Rocha: Yeah we're going to work diligently so that perhaps the meeting on the 19th is not necessary. >> Okay yeah I have a potential work conflict on that night as well. I'm out of town [inaudible]. >> [Inaudible]. >> The 19th, he's got a work conflict, I've got a work conflict. So to be on the [inaudible]. >> [Inaudible]. >> Okay so seeing that -- so I trust that, Matt, we might be able to conclude our business on the -- at that retreat maybe on the 15th. Any future agenda items that board members wish to add for future scheduling? Okay, seeing none we will adjourn. Thank you very much.