>> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. We're calling together the Board of Trustees, Pasadena Area Community College District regular business meeting number four; it's Wednesday February 3rd at 6 o'clock. Mrs. Thompson will you call the roll. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong >> Present. >> Mr. Thompson? >> Present. >> Mr. Baum? >> Here. >> Ms. Brown. >> Here. >> Dr. Fellows [assumed spelling]? Dr. Mann [assumed spelling] >> Present. >> Mr. Martin? Mr. Afdian [assumed spelling] >> ... yeah and tell me it's not. We will withdraw to closed session. In closed session there are two matters under review. The first, government code 54957, public employee discipline dismissal release, and government code 54957.6, labor negotiations with PCCFACSEA issue POA, Confidential's Management Association, Lyle, Engeldinger Delion [assumed spelling] Engeldinger will join us, thank you. Calling the open session to order. Jessie Baum [assumed spelling], would you lead us, please, in the pledge of allegiance? >> Jessie Baum: Please stand and face the flag, put your hand over your heart, and join me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [ Whispering ] >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: No action was taken in closed session. President Sukimoto [assumed spelling] introductions. >> President Sukimoto: Yes, thank you Dr. Hillary Beverly and I'm very pleased and honored to introduce this evening Unni Perada [assumed spelling], who is here as a member of our community, and will introduce us to our Chair, with that commemorative memorial, please Ms. Perada, can you come to the lectern. I should also mention this information is behind tab B in your notebook board members. >> Unni Perada: Hello, my name is Unni Perada, and I am a member of Pasadena Latino Forum. In 1915, an elementary school was founded where the Community Education Center is presently located. I named Chihuahuita School in 1916. During that time, just as now, a large community of Mexican and Mexican Americans lived in the neighborhood. This elementary school was segregated to serve the Mexican and Mexican American children of the neighborhood. One of the few things this beautiful city of Pasadena lacks is the presence of monuments and sites to reflect our Latino heritage. We would like to change that. I presented the idea of a monument to recognize this school existence to the President Latino Advisory Committee, and the project got unconditional support. The community will design it, the community will erect it, and the community will pay for it. A packet was distributed with information showing the placement of the monument, the preliminary design and the awarding of the plaque. The monument will be a stone with two bronze plaques on it, one in English and one in Spanish. Surrounding the stone, bricks will be placed inscribed with honors names. I want to thank all of the people involved in this project. The organizations here represented are Pasadena Latino Forum, Latino Heritage and of course, the President Latino Advisory for the their support. We also have Armenia Ortez [assumed spelling], and others members of the community, and at this time I would like to request for the Board of Trustees endorsement. >> President Sukimoto: We have a couple of comments. I'm also aware that we have a speaker from the group who would also wish to address this before we would do anything else, and that is Ms. Roberta Martinez. So maybe we'll take a couple of comments, and then we'll invite Roberta up. >> Unni Perada: Okay. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Yes, I had requested that this item be placed on this as an agenda item so that we could endorse it, but since it is not, what I would like to do is suggest that we place it as an agenda item for the next meeting so if the Board wants, we can take a quick vote to endorse it. I think this is a very important -- it is the only recognition of this school in this community, and it is on our property, so I want to commend you on that, and then I want you to understand we cannot endorse it at this meeting because it is not an action item, but we can give individual support. >> Unni Perada: Thank you, what is the process, I don't know? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, just to let you know that the school PCC, under the auspices of President Sukimoto hasn't been formally approved. >> Unni Perada: Yeah, we do have the approval, and I do thank you very much, and that is why we are going forward for it. At this point, of course, I would like to have also, the Board of Trustees' endorsement so that you acknowledge that existence, and also recognize that the Latino monument is here. And... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We can do that. Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum: I know Roberta Martinez is here to speak, and I just want to add my personal endorsement, and looking forward to an opportunity for us as a board to formally endorse this because I know all of the thought and work that has gone into doing this. And also, the heart, sweat, and labor in raising pledges that will cover the cost of this. This is a tremendous community-based effort and I'm... >> Unni Perada: Thank you. >> Trustee Baum: ...so glad that you actually approached me personally and it was something to me that was a no brainer and to have this opportunity and recognize it. I want to extend my personal gratitude for that leadership so that we at PCC can celebrate this important legacy of the history of Pasadena. >> Unni Perada: Thank you, thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you Trustee Baum. So let me invite Roberta Martinez to address us at the podium. Good evening. >> Roberta Martinez: Good evening. I get to wear my historian's hat for a moment. And I want to let you all know that when this actually comes to be, you will be setting precedent for the city of Pasadena. There is no other memorial that is connected with the Latino community that has been a part of history here from before its inception. And so I'm really excited that there is such enthusiasm for doing this for members of the community that are even here just locally in Pasadena, it's about -- 33% of the population. This is an exciting time, there is also a memorial that is going to be coming up for Contra Roblero [assumed spelling], and so it is exciting to be living and working with people during a time when history is being made fuller, richer and maybe some doors and sunlight is beginning to show in places that it didn't show before. And what you have before you is a little bit of history, just a simple one-sheet that talks about the school of Chihuahuita initially, it was known as Titleyville School, and it became Chihuahuita, which is an unusual sequence. Typically, it is a community name first, and then named for someone else. They did the reverse here and then became Freemont School and you can see the children that were at Chihuahuita that are up on the top. Those are kindergarteners, and then the picture in 1948 of Freemont School that these children attended. Thank you so much. If you ever have any questions, please feel free to ask, there's just so much history here that hasn't had a chance to be shared yet. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: You are a fount of knowledge. Trustee Thompson. >> Trustee Thompson: I want to, first of all, thank Roberta and Ms. Perada for being here, and bringing this to our attention, and I do support Jeanette Mann's request. We have this formally on the agenda at our next meeting, which is the 20th of this month, in which we then can take action because it's technically on as an introduction. We can't take an action on it this evening, but we will do so at that time. But it is interesting to hear you talk about the history of this community, and the fact that there has been no prior recognition of a good chunk of the heritage of the city. And that's very sad, very concerning, and I think it's delightful that we at PCC have a chance to break that. >> Unni Perada: Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Ms. D. Brown. >> Ms. D. Brown: Yes, I would like to take this opportunity to say that I definitely am behind this. This is a great opportunity for the Chihuahuita School, and for the Latino congregation and people, and we appreciate that, and I am definitely supportive. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum: I just have a question. Is the text for the proposed monument? >> Roberta Martinez: I think the text hasn't quite been finalized. >> Trustee Baum: Okay, I just wanted to see. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, thank you for coming out this evening, and thank you for sharing your historical knowledge. >> Roberta Martinez: I brought the history, and you brought the energy, and the... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We know [inaudible] >> Roberta Martinez: [Multiples speak] >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: This is a quick note that our next board meeting is actually Wednesday, February 17th so that would be the date that we would have this on the agenda. >> Trustee Baum: So it would be then, okay. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Let's continue with public comment on non-agenda items. Would Ms. Vanessa Gomez come to the podium? Ms. Vanessa Gomez, is she in the room? >> Trustee Baum: She is coming. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Good evening. >> Vanessa Gomez: My name is Vanessa Gomez and I am an accounting major, and I am here because I heard something about the labs being closed. And tutoring being cut off, and I am very worried about it. This is for me [inaudible]. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, thank you for bringing your concerns to us. Please understand we're not going to be able to engage that issue right here. Know that it is landed for us, and that we're also very concerned with what students bring to us, but by virtue of the Brown Act, we only talk about issues that are already on our agenda. So thank you for coming, and thank you for sharing that. >> Vanessa Gomez: Okay, okay, your welcome. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: And President Bradbury Wong, we can though direct the administration to get in touch with this student, and give her the latest information. We can do that without violating the Brown Act. >> President Bradbury Wong: Absolutely. When I say it landed, that's what I have in mind. I am going to invite Jimmy Recinos and Marco Valodez [assumed spelling] to come to the podium. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Good evening. >> Jimmy Recinos: Good evening everyone. I hope you can all hear me well. My name is Jimmy Recinos and I am a member of the Lobby Committee here at Pasadena City College. Essentially, what we are looking to take care of this semester are bills in advocacy of student interest, academic interest, things regarding social science centers, labs, campus activities, etcetera, all things academically related. And I would like to take this opportunity to make a formal invitation to anyone who would like to provide insight of any sort, any suggestions as we will be going into Sacramento and Washington later on in the semester in order to represent PCC students and their concerns in the best way that we can. So once again, this is an invitation to everyone. We're actually located right downstairs, in the AS Center, and questions, comments, or anything, we're ready and we very much appreciate it. I'll leave it to Marco Valodez. >> Marco Valodez: Just to touch up a little bit on what Jimmy said is, we're basically here to represent the Lobby Committee and to bring awareness at PCC to let everybody know that the lobby committee is here to represent students. That we are here also just ask you for any support, any help. If you have any recommendations on what we should do while we are in Sacramento and Washington, D.C., we are certainly open to accept any help from the board members, the students here and anybody in the community. So we do have some options that we are thinking about on how to bring students to vote here at PCC and start a chain of voting reactions throughout the state, and hopefully the country, so again, we're the Lobby Committee and we hope to hear from you soon. Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you very much. I know that as a board we always appreciate how much the Student Body Committee does. Would Trustee Baum and Martin have anything to add? >> Trustee Baum: I wanted to thank the students for reaching out. We met with them earlier today and the leadership they demonstrated by requesting the meeting, and the energy and commitment was inspiring, and I said, "Rather than elected officials and administrators making the case, nobody makes the case better than the students themselves." So we're very fortunate to have two individuals of this caliber, and a whole committee of students who are willing to kind of be boots on the ground, to make sure that we can do what's right in Sacramento and Washington. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay, Trustee Martin. >> Trustee Martin: I would like to compliment the students that you're here and it is obvious. I think the greatest testimony, even in more than what you say, is how you present it, and how you present yourself. And I really appreciate the way you are presenting yourself here tonight. I have appreciated the history of the leadership of the students for many, many, years here. You know, you come, you're wearing ties, you look distinguished, you're presenting that -- when you go up and talk to people, you're changing the impression of what a student is. You're saying, "We're serious, this means something to us, its important, we're dignified and we're here to represent that." And so I think sometimes just how you carry yourself sometimes, says as much as the message you take. So I want to thank you guys because I know the AS has done a great job over the years. I appreciate they have AS uniforms the one year, and different attire. So I think, guys, you've impressed me, you've inspired me, you're going to continue the legacy we have here and I wanted to say thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Thompson did you want to... >> Trustee Thompson: I had just a question. I was curious as to how your organization, you're group interacts with the Associated Students Board, which Mr. Say [assumed spelling] is the representative for and Mr. Avadear [assumed spelling] the student trustee. >> Jimmy Recinos: I'll take that question. More than interaction with AS student body members, we like to interact with students of PCC, however though they do represent student interest such as cultural, cultural events, cultural diversity etcetera, we always appreciate the opportunity to interact with people. To interact with members of different committees and we do speak with representatives of those departments in order to see how we can coordinate events in order for all of us to meet. Just recently, actually, we had a focus group in which we invited students of Pasadena City College to come and speak with s, and this was -- we worked this in conjunction with the Publicity Committee and it was great. We look forward to initiating more events, such as the Focus Group later on in the Spring, and as I said once again, anyone is open, it is not just PCC students, it's to faculty members, staff members, any suggestions, any comments are greatly appreciated. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay, I am seeing Allen Say wanted to get in. >> Allen Say: If I may shed more light on the Lobby Committee's interaction with associate students. The Lobby Committee actually is chaired by the Vice President of External Affairs, whom we have Robert Morgan as the chair. And he directs the Lobby Committee and works with the Lobby Committee through the associate student side. They work together to work on legislation and to reach out to the students, and basically provide a uniform message that we want to present up in Sacramento in regards to whatever issues that we might have here. Hmm, particular interests -- budget. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Thank you gentlemen. Moving on to the next item. This is, if you recall at the last meeting, we decided to take reports from members of the board, particularly on issues of the subcommittees, and then take these superintendent president's report and [inaudible] governance representatives reports at this point in the meeting, so let me turn to Trustee Thompson. >> Trustee Thompson: Well, the only thing I would comment on this, and we'll get into it in more detail when we get down to IMI on the agenda, which includes the contract with academic searching, and I would just simply say that we are in the process of certainly reviewing, in detail, contracts that come before the college and the board, and along with Mary Dowe, our outside council have taken careful looks at those contracts, and we want to make sure that we have them in the best form that we think we can. Dr. Mann, who is also on the committee and in charge of Policy Review is beating me on the back to get the policies reviewed and get those ready to be brought up to the board at the next meeting. So we're moving along. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Wonderful. Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum: I'm only going to add to my report from the board of governor's meeting earlier. I neglected to mention one of the most important aspects of our discussion and I am delighted that Lynn Wright is here, because she was in Sacramento for that discussion. It was on the basic skills initiative and that there is a growing urgency state wide about the attention that needs to be paid and the resources that need to be directed towards basic skills n education. At the expense of the transfer or the CTU mission, but we need to find a way to get more resources and be more innovative. And Dr. Wright has been a leader statewide on that effort in the development of a plan. And so you will be seeing more initiatives coming from Sacramento on the area of basic skills. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. Trustee Martin. >> Trustee Martin: I have nothing to report this evening. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Brown. >> Trustee Brown: Yeah, I had several things that I was involved in this past month. First, I had the opportunity to attend the new trustees training in Sacramento, which was extremely informative for me. I am now a little more aware of what my role is as a trustee member and I was able to meet a lot of new trustees with the same issues that I had and concerns, and was able to network. So I really appreciated that opportunity. Also, on January 25th I attended a Citizen for Quality Schools at Pasadena Unified School District and of course, the purpose of the meeting was to make everyone aware of their deficit, $21 million deficit and solicit our support in the measure that's going to be coming out soon in May -- the tax measure. On January 27, I attended the Citizen Oversight for the Major P [assumed spelling] which I went just to get an idea of what this committee was all about and I was good. And finally, on the 28th of January, I attended an African-American Advisory Committee meeting and I was really impressed with the approach that the committee is -- the oversight outreach -- the Outreach Committee is taking to improve students retention and success in the Pasadena area. And I am very happy and I told them I would be happy to be part of it. So that's what I have been doing. >> Dr. Hillary: Trustee Mann. >> Trustee Mann: Yes, I have a couple of things to report. I did attend the Legislative Conference with the President Sukimoto and we met with Sanfect [assumed spelling] with 10 of our legislators. Two senators and eight assembly members and I think the meetings went very well. One of the things that I think was very interesting was that the six colleges in Sandfect, which is Chaffey, Citrus, Glendale, Mt. Sect, Pasadena and Rio Hondo, we are 8,000 students over cap. Eight thousand students is the size of many community colleges in the state and I think the message that we gave was heard and the message that I heard and I think we all heard was that you better support the governor's budget proposal because that is as good as it is going to get. So that was the message we were trying to take to the hill. The only other thing is, as the student's indicated, Trustee Baum and I did meet with the student Lobbying Committee and I think that is going to be very fruitful. One of the things we did indicate to them is that we, trustees always go to the state lobbying in January and the federal in February. And maybe if we could get together earlier in the year, we could coordinate our efforts a little better. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Great. Student Trustee Alvedia [assumed spelling] >> Student Trustee Alvedia: None. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay. Allen. >> Allen: No reports. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay, Mr. Linderman [assumed spelling] >> Mr. Linderman: Yes, ma'am. We are continuing to get set up for classified days, I believe coming up in March and we wish to thank Crystal Colross [assumed spelling] today for a wonderful presentation that all of you will see later in today's program. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Faculty Senate Representative, Dr. Bickley. >> Dr. Bickley: Yes, just a short item or two. We are trying to streamline our cost for conference attendance, but we are not trying to overlook important matters that need, our faculty need training in and need to participate in on a state level. I wanted to let you know that one of our faculty will be attending the Accreditation Institute, state wide Academic Senate and we're sending two to the SLO Institute, both coming up shortly. And we'll give you a little report on that when they come back and report to us. Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. Management Association Representative, Dean Diggins. >> Dean Diggins: We have no report tonight. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Great, good. President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Just a quick report and I wish to congratulate Nikki [assumed spelling] Harman in the Child Development Center. Her program has achieved the accreditation by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. So congratulations to her and her entire program and the staff she has to reach that momentous level of accreditation. Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Dr. Bradbury Wong. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. I would like to draw my colleagues' attention to the measure PCC Measure P Oversight Report that came to us. Our report's back to me was that our arts building is coming in on time and under budget so congratulations to everybody who makes such an enormous piece of work possible. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Let's move to approval of the minutes. Entertain a motion to approve. >> Move approval. >> Second. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Any emendations? Student Trustee Alvedia. >> Student Trustee Alvedia: Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: No, anything to change, anything? >> Student Trustee Alvedia: No. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Mann, Brown, Martin, Baum, Thompson. No. Okay, all in favor. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Any no's? Motion carries, we have approved the minutes. >> Trustee Thompson: I thought it was a very good set of minutes for a very long meeting. >> Yes, yes, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We're not an easy bunch. Approval of consent items. Please make note of the changes in our folder. There's revisions to 112B, 116B, and 73P. Let's take a motion first. I'll entertain a motion. >> Trustee Thompson: I want to call one of them for a separate vote. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Let's take a motion on a second; do you want to mention what you pulling? >> Trustee Thompson: The change order one. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong:: The change order, which is number? >> 116B. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 116B, we'll pull 116B. So a motion please. >> Trustee Thompson: I move for approval the rest of the change orders. I mean consent. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Consent. Second? >> Second. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Let's go around. Trustee Alvedia, anything on the consent items. Trustee Mann? >> Trustee Mann: No. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Brown? >> Trustee Brown: Actually, I have a question on 73P. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 73P, got it. Trustee Martin? >> Trustee Martin: None, thank you. >> Trustee Baum? >> Trustee Baum: 5S110B, 112B, 116B. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 116B is being pulled as well. Trustee Thompson? >> Trustee Thompson: Yes, 115B. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 115B. So 5S. >> Trustee Thompson: 5S is the selection of the commencement speaker and I just wanted to get -- there's obviously a broad spectrum of names presented and wanted to get a sense from the administration, what is the priority that we intend to pursue any of these speakers? Does anybody already -- a strong likelihood? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Yes, thank you Trustee Baum and I would like to have Dr. Wilcox address this particular item. Dr. Wilcox. >> Dr. Wilcox: Thank you very much. But, I in turn would like to ask a greater expert on this and ask Dr. Scott Thayer, the chair of the committee that involved this, he's the Assistant Dean of Student Affairs, if he could come up and he would be able to answer any of your questions. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: Good evening. The question basically, on the commencement speaker list, I'll just do a quick overview of the process, 20 seconds and then get into more of the details. Hopefully, I can answer the question. The committee's met twice. We had representation from faculty, staff, administration and students. We basically, solicited the campus community for recommendations and we started that in October. We have been receiving input for the potential list. So what we'll do is we gather the names for the list just so we have a starting point. And then once we have an approved list of names, we can start to specifically identify potential speakers. Some of the recommendations have come with some people have some connections, we'll bring that back, discuss that with the committee to see who we can get, who is available and who really fits into the choice of the committee for the year. So, it's a combination of different things that we'll look at. Availability, obviously, is important and we always recommend and solicit any assistance, especially, if someone knows individuals that helps us to confirm them as the potential speaker. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. >> Trustee Thompson: And so we just -- is there -- who are the top three that you'd send letters to or approach out of this list, would you say? >> Dr. Scott Thayer: Well, we've been -- we do have a pretty broad list. We have sent our letters off to the president and the governor. Still waiting their reply. >> Trustee Thompson: Okay. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: And they do reply. It just depends on when. >> Trustee Thompson: Sure. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: And we may get lucky one year and they actually accept. But, we have been -- this year the Nesay [assumed spelling] Project is something that's been brought forth through the state. One name that sticks out is Warren Furtani [assumed spelling] who is the author of the bill. And so we have -- he's a potential name on the list that we can look at. >> Trustee Thompson: And there's a chance that we'll have some Nesay recipients to honor at commencement this year. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: And that's been worked on campus-wide trying to identify those folks. So that would be a nice tie in, potentially, for a speaker. So that's one area that we'd look at. You know, we obviously have our politicians. I guess you'd be one too. But, our area politicians that potentially could be -- if based upon availability. Just as an example, quite some time ago, maybe eight, nine years ago, Adam Shift was the scheduled speaker, but was unavailable. And so that's always an option to re-solicit him and say, "You confirmed once. You weren't able to attend. Maybe you can come back and actually deliver the address." So, just some ideas, I guess, in regards to who we may solicit. And then we have some folks on here that know people, our people on our campus have good connections with some people and we'll work our way down towards that. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Great. Thank you. >> Trustee Thompson: One, I mean, you've got many, many people listed on this on your list here who would be outstanding speakers and I would just make a couple comments about Coach Wooden. I don't know what his health is like these days. Last I heard it's somewhat deteriorating and I think he's 97 years old now. But, he spoke at the Civic Auditorium as part of the Speakers Series several years ago and he was just excellent. He came over to Blair High School and spoke a few years ago, as well and he is just a marvelous individual. In spite of his age he is as alert mentally, as well spoken as any of us will ever be. And he's just an extraordinary individual. So I don't know what the possibility of doing that would be, particularly from a health perspective, but I would just certainly say, having heard him speak and certainly having heard of this as well, he would be an outstanding choice if he were up to the task health-wise and available to come and talk. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: I'd just say thank you and I'll be interested to see, like, who are the top three or four that we go down. I want to say one thing too; my first PCC Commencement was one that Adam Shift was supposed to go to and he couldn't do it and Bruce Carter gave the commencement address. It was the best commencement address I've ever, that I've seen then and since. So, it can always work out well. Bruce Carter's the former Dean of Natural Sciences. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Yeah. Thanks Dr. Thayer. >> Dr. Scott Thayer: Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Let's move on. 110B also. Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum. 110 [Inaudible] >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: There's a number of items on this... >> Trustee Baum: Yeah, yeah. Okay. It was the Glendale Community College Project. I just wanted to know what that was? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto Yes, Dr. Jacobs. I know this one's yours. >> Dr. Jacobs: Okay. Our -- this is part of the -- it's the Workforce Innovation Partnership that we have in our collaborative grant. You know, it was $250,000. The collaborative grant was Glendale Community College. We're the fiscal agent for this. >> Trustee Thompson: Is it for a specific project or field? >> Dr. Jacobs: It's several, but the sector that's being referred to here, it deals with career paths and all that. Biotech is the chosen career path. >> Trustee Thompson: Biotech? >> Dr. Jacobs: Yes. >> Trustee Thompson: Okay. Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. 112B. Tom. >> Tom: I just wanted to call my colleagues' attention to the ACCT travel request for the National Legislative Summit. I just want to be clear about it. First off, there's an amended one because we project the cost to be considerably less. Number two, given the district's financial situation, I've asked my employer to underwrite a portion of the cost of that trip and whereas we'd sent four trustees last year, right now I'm the only trustee going. And there's significant business before the federal government with respect to supporting community colleges and, in fact, President Obama is scheduled to be the speaker at the conference as well; on the Tuesday of the conference. So, we're hoping to continue to aggressively push the message forward with Washington. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, thank you for representing us and thank you for your sensitivity to the cost. It is a tough time. 115B. >> Yes. Unless I'm missing something, the introduction to it, the recommendation is that we approve purchasing transactions P10-01711 through P10-01888. I don't see a 10-01711. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: I think you're right. And I just noticed that. Dr. Van Pelt? >> Dr. Van Pelt: We'd have to go back and check to see which 1711 is. And so we can bring that one back. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Could we at least then go ahead and perhaps, just bring that one back if that is just the one? >> Dr. Van Pelt: Yes. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay. Again, I'm thankful that... >> We're currently in the amendment that starts with 112, right? >> Yes. >> Yes. Right. >> 1712? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: It's as if one is missing. This is yours Trustee -- well, let's come to it as we're pulling it. 73P. 73P. Was that Trustee Mann? Trustee Mann? >> Brown. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Brown. >> Trustee Brown: Now, my question is regarding the stipends. Are these employees full time employees that are getting stipends or are they part timers or, I just need clarification. And if they are full time employees, I'm kind of wanting to know how do they take on this. So I just need clarification. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: President Sukimoto. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong. And there may be several individuals who can answer this question, but let me first refer this to Dean Engeldinger who then can -- because some of these are in the instructional areas and some of them are in other areas. So Dean Engeldinger, would you field this question please? >> Dean Engeldinger: These are a combination of full time faculty and others. But, I think that Dr. Jacobs knows more about this than I do. >> Dr. Jacobs: Yes, Okay. Most of them are full time faculty. But, we do have -- if you want to look at the list -- we have the first one is an adjunct, Ms. Blunt, who works out in the community with our parent classes. The others, if they do extra -- have extra responsibilities then, they are paid for those responsibilities. They get a stipend. So, Quet [assumed spelling] and Sandra Hanes has worked a lot with our accreditation, so we have a special project that she's working on to do that. And Richard Johnson is not a full time employee. He's part time with one of our grants. And likewise, the other person. So -- but they spend the extra time to do a particular duty or responsibility. >> Is Patricia is full time or a part time? >> Dr. Jacobs: That one was pulled. >> She's what? >> Dr. Jacobs: She's pulled. >> She's pulled? >> Dr. Jacobs: Yes, that was pulled. >> Oh, I didn't see that. >> Dr. Jacobs: She's not. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Dr. Jacobs: It should have been -- was it in the packet? >> Uh-hmm. >> So, what you're saying is that these are full time employees, but they take on additional duties. >> Dr. Jacobs: Yes. >> Thank you. >> Dr. Jacobs: Okay. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Thompson. Did you want to get in? >> Trustee Thompson: No, I was just going to say there's a revised version of this that's in our packet, which Ms. Staub is deleted from the agenda item. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. The last remaining one is the one that we've pulled for separate vote. So we can go ahead and call the question. >> I'm sorry, I should have called off 80P. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 80P. Go ahead. >> Have we talked 80P? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Sure. >> Okay. 80P is the recommendations for sabbaticals. I very much appreciate the work that was done on the sabbaticals and actually, if we approve all the sabbaticals it will actually save the district money. Assuming that we replace these people with adjuncts, which I assume we will have to with the demand on our classes, which leads us to the conclusion that our contract says we can give 2 to 4% of the faculty, maybe we should try to give more sabbaticals and save ourself more money. There have been times where we have given the full amount and it was always my understanding before that sabbaticals cost us money, but unless Dean Engeldinger is playing some tricks with numbers, actually the sabbaticals do not cost us money. >> Dean Engeldinger: Not this time. >> Not this time. Okay, so I'm very happy to work for the, I mean -- to work for it -- to vote for it, but I, because I see that not only are we giving the faculty the well earned sabbaticals, but it also is not having a negative impact on our ability to offer classes to students. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. All those in favor of the motion to approve the consent items with those revisions already noted, please signal by saying aye. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Any against? Motion carries, all is approved. Yeah. Now, we're going to turn to Trustee Baum on 116. >> Trustee Baum: Sure. I just... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: 6B. >> Trustee Baum: I wanted to see where we stood in wrapping up change orders for this -- the projects that are being proposed. >> Yes, Dr. Van Pelt, if you would please. >> Dr. Van Pelt: Okay. These are the last two change orders with costs. So, last time I promised that there'd be two more, totally $31,000. All the change order requests that could conceivably cost us money have now been dealt with and there will be one final change order which will either have a zero cost or it will have a credit back to the district. So that means that the total of change orders cannot go any higher as of now. It can only go down or stay the same. >> Trustee Thompson: So we're getting close to that 10% contingency. >> Dr. Van Pelt: Right. This is the absolute highest that it can go. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: I'll entertain a motion to approve 116B. With the revision. >> Dr. Van Pelt: So moved. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: A second? >> Trustee Thompson: Second. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: All Student Trustee Alvedia? >> Student Trustee Alvedia: Aye. >> All those in favor signal aye. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Anybody against? >> Trustee Baum: This is my symbolic vote against change orders. >> So we have Trustee Baum against, otherwise the motion carries. Thank you. Next item: Receipt of the 2008-9 District Financial Audit. >> Move approval. To submit and accept. >> Accept. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Is that a second for Trustee... >> Second. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. President Sukimoto? Just to remind you , this is the item that was brought to the board and, unfortunately, did not have discussion with possible action and we do need to receive this. We had plenty of discussion, I assume, with our auditor Heidi White, at our previous board meeting. >> President Sukimoto: Very good. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: All those in favor please say -- oh, let me ask Student Trustee Alvedia. >> Student Trustee Alvedia Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: All those in favor? >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Hillary Bevberly: Any against? Motion carries. Item I, Presidential Search... >> H >> Dr. Hillary Bevberly: Oh, H. Authorization to transmit the second quarterly financial status report, discussion with possible action. President Sukimoto? >> Move to transmit. >> Second. >> Dr. Hillary Bevberly: Any discussion required? Let's call the question. Those in favor? >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Hillary Bevberly: Student Trustee? >> Student Trustee Alvedia: Aye. >> Dr. Hillary Bevberly: Against? The motion carries. Thank you. >> Trustee Thompson: One, just one point I wanted to make about this though, is that according to this our revenues, our projected revenues for the year will be at $117.9 million and our expenditures are going to be at -- general fund expenditures are at $119.1 million. So that is a -- our revenues we're projecting are going to be less than our expenditures. And that's one of the reasons we've made the decision, also, to dip into reserves and that will have an impact on our yearend balance. But, we've made that commitment as a board to up -- to adhere to the priorities we stated. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. And -- Thank you Trustee Baum for that reminder. Item I, Presidential Search. Update discussion with possible action. Trustee Thompson, can you lead us through these items please? >> Trustee Thompson: Yes. As I said before, you do have in front of you the agreement between PCC and Academic Search, Inc. This has gone through quite an extensive revision and has been put forth to Mary Dowe [assumed spelling] our outside counsel and has received her approval as well, so if there are questions we'll certainly address those. If not I would move that we approve the contract. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Need a second? >> Trustee Baum: I'll second. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you Trustee Baum. All those in favor to approve the agreement between ourselves and Academic Search please signal by Aye. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Any against? So the motion... >> Trustee Baum: I oppose. I'm voting against it. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: You're voting against. >> Trustee Thompson: Does that need discussion? >> Trustee Baum: No. >> Trustee Thompson: Okay. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We are, so we've confirmed that motion six to one. Thank you. >> Trustee Thompson: The next item, if I may President Bradbury Wong. The next item is the ethics signoff, and what we've basically are asking each member of this board of trustees to do is to read through the document that you hopefully have in front of you, the Presidential Screening Committee and Board of Trustees, a document agreed to and signed by every member of the Presidential Screening Committee on January 19th and the Board of Trustees on February 3rd, 2010, which of course is today. >> Trustee Baum: Where is it again? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: That's in your maroon folder that was at your desk, that was on your desks today. >> Trustee Thompson: And basically the purpose of this is that in the course of reviewing candidates, we're going to be receiving confidential information about candidates and so we want it to be real clear that when we receive that we do understand that it is confidential, we understand that we are not to disclose to the public or anyone other than the screening committee and the board of trustees. And so that's why we're asking each member of the board to sign the document at the bottom of it. If there are questions we'll be happy to respond to those, but this is just simply to have a record that everybody here has signed the document and that means therefore, that when you receive confidential information you agree to maintain it and will in fact maintain it as confidential. It's critically important to the success of our search that we do that and so we want everyone to have signed it and put their name and signature on it to explicitly agree to it. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Logistically, shall we take a minute to read it, sign it, and then pass it back maybe to yourself? >> Trustee Thompson: That would be fine, sure. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay. Trustee Mann? >> Trustee Mann: I feel that it may not be necessary for the board to sign it since the board already, in our protocols and our bylaws, have a confidentiality requirements, but I see no reason not to sign it. I would also remind the board that as if there's a violation of confidentiality by board members, we do have a process for dealing with it and also it's part of our ethics. So for us, I think we actually may be higher standards than this so again, I think it's a good thing for us to do and probably we have imposed on ourselves stricter requirements and more stringent penalties for violation that is in this agreement. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. >> Trustee Thompson: Thank you. >> Who will this go to once we've signed, will it maintain by Academic Search or? >> Trustee Thompson: I would assume so, yeah that's probably, Dr. Hale is probably going to be the custodian of these agreements. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Shall we go to the chair committee, has everybody signed? Yep. Let's go to the chair of committee item. >> Trustee Thompson: Yeah Dr., not Dr., Mr. Martin is reading it. >> And the other thing, or should we move as a board to endorse the confidentiality code as well? >> Well, that wouldn't be a bad idea actually, that I think that we could... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So moved. >> Trustee Thompson: Is there a second? >> Second. As stated, as provided by this document. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So all those in favor to endorse the confidentiality agreement we've just signed please signal with an Aye. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Student Trustee Alvedia already signed this because he's part of the screening committee, separately. Very good, so motion carries to endorse. >> Trustee Thompson: The last item on here is the chair of the committee and, excuse me, the recommendation that has come forth from Dr. Hale and the board liaison committee, the ad hoc liaison committee, of Dr. Bradbury Wong, Dr. Mann, and myself, is that Richard Garcia, I guess it's Dr. Richard Garcia, proper title here, be the chair and that Annie Hu be the vice-chair. Dr. Garcia was nominated to this committee by Dr. Fellow, who is not here this evening to speak in support of this, but just to provide some information about Richard, he is not affiliated with the PCC previously and we think that's probably a positive thing and the ability to be able to look at things in perhaps a more objective way. But he has agreed to take on the task, he's agreed to commit the time to it, he has parted his day job, he works at this, what's that school called, USC or something like that. >> [Laughter] >> Trustee Thompson: But other than that he's a good guy. But he, a part of his responsibilities are, I guess, in human resources and so we think that he is a person who has good experience at this and will do a great job with the committee. Annie Hu is, I guess now the chair of the project P Committee and so I think Annie is a PCC alumnus, so she has certainly good ties, good knowledge of the college and we think that the combination will be a very good combination so we would -- I would move that we accept the recommendation that Dr. Garcia be the chair and Mrs. Hu be the vice-chair. >> Second. >> Wonderful. Student Trustee Alvedia. Oh, discussion. >> Student Trustee Alvedia: Can you just replay for me again who met on that topic and how much of the committee itself was engaged in that? >> Trustee Thompson: The committee was not engaged in this topic. We've had one meeting of the screening committee and every -- most every member of the committee was there including Mrs. Hu and including Dr. Garcia. Dr. Hale is the one who initially made the recommendation. It's been vetted by Dr. Bradbury Wong, Dr. Mann, and myself. Dr. Mann I think also has talked to Dr. Fellow and gotten some initial background. You might wish to share some of that with us Jeanette. >> Jeanette: Yes I talked to Dr. Fellow since he's unable to be here tonight. He said he has, I was particularly concerned with how Dr. Garcia was at working with people, bringing them together, moving an agenda, he said he has worked with him in several different situations, that he is very, he's very professional, he's a good listener, he knows how to get the essence of the topic and then how to get people to work together to move forward and he thought he would be an excellent committee chair, plus this is his field of expertise. He apparently, is active in the community, I think he's done some things with Pasadena. The city of Pasadena is just not the college, and so I personally, had reservations because he has had no contact with PCC, but after talking with Dr. Fellow I felt that he was probably the best person. >> I should also mention that Brian Alvedia is a member of the screening committee and was present at, I believe you were present at that meeting. >> Brian Alvedia: At the screening committee meeting? >> Trustee Thompson: Yes. >> Brian Alvedia: Yes, I was. >> Trustee Thompson: I thought it was Alan and so if either of you want to make some comments or whatever, we welcome your thoughts as well. >> Brian Alvedia: From what I understand, he is, his full-time job is in human resources, I believe, so yeah I thought he was a bright guy. I have absolutely no reservations. >> Trustee Thompson: Good. >> You basically answered my question, my question really wasn't about the individual, it was how the name worked its way up to us, what process it went through, where did it originate, and so and you answered that so I appreciate that. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. >> Trustee Thompson: So we need to vote. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Yeah, so now we'll take the vote. Would you advise us Student Alvedia? >> Student Alvedia: Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: All those in favor signal with Aye. >> [In unison] Aye. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Anybody against? So the motion carries and we're very grateful to Dr. Garcia for this work. >> Trustee Thompson: And I just want to mention, I heard from my appointee, my district appointee to the committee who couldn't be more positive about the meeting and that the composition of the committee, the faculty that she got to interact with and so there's a great deal of energy and excitement and enthusiasm for this endeavor and was pleased with -- had very high hopes for the process. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: And we're grateful to her and her >> Trustee Thompson: I would echo that as well and I think the three of us are, I guess Jeanette did not, was unable to make that meeting, but I thought also it was a very good meeting and a good committee, good group, I think we're going to have a very cohesive action by the committee, I think that will be really good as we start embarking on this incredibly important task. >> Well and I'll comment that I spoke to me member of the committee who echoes the same comments and my member of the committee was on the previous committee and listed off three or four things that are different that she said really looks to be a positive [inaudible]. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: You wouldn't remember what those are would you? It would be interesting to hear. >> They're not coming to me. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: When it comes to you, sure, when it comes to you it would be helpful, very good. Trustee Mann? >> Trustee Mann: Yes, when we get through talking on this can we speak just a little bit in general about the search, would that be possible? Because I had a comment I'd like to make about the search itself. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Go ahead, make your comment. >> Trustee Mann: Okay, I think it's very important that everyone actively to identify people who they think might be good candidates and refer these to our consultant or ask them to go to the website, which is what I've done in a couple of instances, or give the name to Dr. Hale. I think this is particularly important because in looking at Dr. Hale's outreach, neither he nor his firm apparently, have much experience working with community colleges. So the -- if we are going to identify extremely well-qualified people who come from the community colleges, I think we're going to have to make some effort ourself to get these names to Dr. Hale. Once he gets them, I'm confident that he will do an excellent job in following through on them. It's not his fault that he doesn't have this experience, he's never done a community college search before and apparently, his firm has done one, and that was the one that he has referred to. He gave us a long, he gave the committee a long list of his recruitment and it was all public or the names that we had given him. So I think we should get behind this and we should do as much as we can ourselves to identify well-qualified people and give those names to him for him to follow-up on. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Let me also mention that each of our meetings will include a presidential search update given its extreme importance for us. And regularly we will mention the number of, just sheer numbers I think could be helpful for us to hear the number of personal connections that are being made and the number of nominations and so on and so on. Just so we can all feel equally comfortable with how well things are going. >> Trustee Mann: And in response to that I will say that I have been contacted by, I think the three people from the Cal State system, with inquiries about the nomination process and I have referred them to our website, told them we are welcoming nominations and encourage them to, you know, nominate the person, but they did not identify anyone. I shared these with the other two members. So nominations are welcome and once you go into certain systems like Cal States and usually research universities is not considered appropriate to apply, you almost always have to be nominated. So I certainly encourage people to nominate. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We do through the sub-committee. Thank you. So moving on to item J. President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong. Very quickly for the board members and particularly for the sub-committee, a draft brochure is at your desk and this is taking the profile that Dr. Hale has provided us and we cleaned up wording and made sure we were consistent and I thank Juan Gutierrez and his group for pulling all the profiles together. So if you have other comments we'll want to get this out as quickly as possible. Obviously, the profile's already on the website, but certainly a nice glossy brochure makes a big difference also, so please let me know if there are changes and then I'd like to make sure it gets out by Friday as quickly as possible. >> Trustee Thompson: I just have, and what's the process for distributing, is this Academic Search will be distributing this or are we distributing this or do we have a mailing list to which we will plan to send this? >> President Sukimoto: Let me ask Dean Engeldinger if he might be able to address that question. >> Dean Engeldinger: Both. Both ourselves and Academic Search will be. >> Trustee Thompson: So we have a mailing list that we'll be sending it out to or and then Academic Search has their own? >> Dean Engeldinger: Academic Search has their own, right. >> Who's paying for it, is this part of Academic Search's responsibility. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: I'd like to close off this topic if I may at this point. We'll come back to it regularly and often and frequently. >> If we have any edits what should be do? >> I would ask that you send those to me and then I'll direct them to [Inaudible]. >> Okay. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So the item J is the public hearing regarding initial bargaining proposal from the Pasadena Area Community College District to the Pasadena City College Instructional Support Services issue. I need to open. I need a motion and then I'm going to open the floor for discussion. >> Trustee Thompson: No motion needed. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So, simply open the floor for discussion. Is anybody here to speak on the topic? Seeing none I will close the discussion. Thank you. Item K, update on integration of educational master plan with accreditation and the planning process, how it's all coming together. A presentation and discussion, President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Yes. Thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong and my goodness, look who quickly rose and is at the lectern. Mrs. Colross [assumed spelling] and I believe also Mr. Miller are available to speak on this topic and Ms. Colross, the floor is yours. >> Ms. Colross: Thank you very much Dr. Sukimoto and thank you for having me this evening. First of all, I just want to say that I am only the mouthpiece tonight for Task Force No. 1. Task Force No. 1 was assembled to address the accreditation warning, and I have to tell you a little bit about this group of people. They are probably the most engaged and committed group I have ever met. First of all, we have been meeting for the last four months for two hours every week, and to say that the conversations and dialogues are spirited, would be understating it. But the good news is out of those dialogues we've come up with what I think is some really interesting and revolutionary and innovative concepts about how we can move this college forward. How we can address the warning and how we can actually do, what I'm going to talk about tonight, which is right up there, institutional effectiveness and program review. What I have up on the screen or you have on your screens there is just kind of an overview of how we envision this. As you can see there's a mission statement. That's what we say. And then there's institutional functions. That's what we do. What program review and planning is, is I think Mr. Martin you said this at a few meetings ago, "It's where the rubber hits the road." It's really how we make these things happen. The task force had some guiding principles and right now, I'm only going to address the first two because I think those are the most critical. First of all, we were very very committed to the ideas of student development and social responsibility are embedded in the functions of the college at every level. And we mean every level, every area, everything we do. This concept, this idea that what we do with student development is very important. Second, we wanted to change our focus from being cost-center driven to being outcomes driven. In other words, let's put our money where we believe it needs to be so we reach the outcomes we want for this institution. Finally, the last one, you're going to see a lot more about that, it's the institutional effectiveness committee, you're going to start seeing some policies and procedures coming through and I think you'll find that pretty dynamic and exciting as well. The first thing that we had to do as a task force because we had to come up with what a program was. And we started with the educational programs. And I know, you're probably thinking that should have easy. It's not. We started with ACCJC, we looked at the Title V definition of an educational program, and we went to the Academic Center for the State of California and we looked at some of their work on this. And this is what we came up with. This is actually what we feel as a college is what we do, these are our deliverables, these five areas. These are the things that we need to do reviews on. This is where we need to make sure we are doing what we say we're doing. After that we went on to student learning services. Again, we looked at several different definitions, and I really have to draw your attention to this because the SLS managers came up with this. They group themselves into these five distinct areas. They said, "Enrollment services, how do we get students into the colleges? What are all the departments and programs that need to start talking to each other about that?" Then they said student support services, "Keeping students in the classes. How do we get those people talking about this?" Because there's a lot of people that do a lot of different things but they don't necessarily sit at the table at the same time." So this was very innovative, this was very exciting. Then we had two other areas we had to address, but let me just say, getting through the first two nearly killed us so we're a little lax on these two but I think you're going to see more on this shortly, we've got our guns going, we're ready. Ministry of Services, I can't exactly explain to you how that happened but it looks really good. Governance and Executive areas, some of that we talked about to address recommendation number 5 where we have to evaluate our governance structures and processes. And notice under there we've added the institutional effectiveness, the committee and the office that I'm out of, because we really feel we need to support the institution in how we're doing. This is just a conceptual model of the program review. As you can see, we have the areas for educational down the left side, we do a program review on various cycles, there's a tactical plan, there's an operational plan. We gave you two different examples, Dean Douglas from natural sciences put these together for me, this is how he envisioned it for his area. He also gave me another one. What we wanted to do was give the instructional folks a little flexibility in how they set up their tactical and their operational plans. Student learning services -- now this is an interesting one, because they took out one level, but what they do as part of their review process is they actually have to address the overarching areas, the AA, the certificates, the basic skills, transfer sequence, discipline, and GE patterns. So not only will they be looking at what they do in their area, but how what they do actually addresses the overall outcomes of the college. Finally, this is just a very, very brief on what we were looking at conceptually for the operational plan. What are the things that we have to talk about and do every single year? So this is it, the operational plan. This group has worked very, very hard. I know this probably seems like not so much work, but to get this many people to agree, to have these many people, and I wanted to say this too, this is the first time I worked on a committee where people call me and want to be a part of it. They call me and say, "Can we come? Can we be a part of this conversation? Can we be in this dialogue?" And it has been an amazing journey with them. Any questions, I'll take a few? Okay good. >> Trustee Thompson: I have a question. >> Ms. Colross: Don't go so quickly. >> Trustee Thompson: So just so I understand, the outcome of this is to reorganize our whole strategic planning process so what we've been doing in the past and having a retreat in May -- I think we all do that... >> You could dothat: >> Trustee Thompson: ...that still happens, so this doesn't replace that? >> Ms. Colross: What we were really trying to do is the way we did program review before, history did a program review, history didn't have to talk to anybody else. Psychology, Jim knows this, did a program review. Counseling did a program review. But they didn't have to talk to each other. Well we said, "Enough." History now has to talk about how did they interact with the AA and AS degree? How did they interact with general education? How did they interact with the transfer sequence? We've got to get people out of their offices, at the table and talking. >> Trustee Thompson: Because we do program review at, so this is, what's exciting to me is that in my time on the board, I don't recall program review information ever shared with the board of trustees about how like we conducted, and this year we're going to be taking a look at these three areas and then bring it back to the board of trustees. >> Ms. Colross: And that's one of the things that we're going to have the institutional effectiveness committee do. The institutional effectiveness committee adds a layer of accountability for us because these program reviews will have to go to another committee to be read. That's another thing that never did. No one ever read anybody else's program review, commented on it, talked about it. There was really no, as you say, "External evaluation of the review process." The Institutional Effectiveness Committee is going to allow us that extra layer of accountability. It's going to be a shared governance committee, people from all over the campus reading about how you do your review and what's actually going on. We hope it works. We feel very positive about it. >> Trustee Thompson: I'm hoping as a board member we're kept in the loop on the process and these program reviews are shared with us. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: We've actually sort of turned this upside down in some ways and you will be invited, the board members who are in the strategic planning process, to a March 19th meeting. >> Ms. Colross: Correct. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: And we need to have that on the calendar because we will be talking about it at that point. >> Trustee Thompson: Sounds terrific. >> Ms. Colross: Thank you. >> Bob: Okay good evening everyone. Let's just get rid of this real quick. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Bob is going to show us how this is tied into accreditation. So what we've got is planning, accreditation, and the educational master plan and how do we align all of these so that we're not going into many directions, but we are focused in one direction? >> Dr. Bob Miller: Yes, thank you Dr. Sukimoto. Good evening members of the board. Last, I think it was Thursday or so, Crystal and I were asked to come up with a presentation that showed what the interrelation was between the planning process, the accreditation process, and the educational master plan process. And we thought that was a great idea and a great challenge. So my job this evening is to try to walk you through that very quickly. You've got copies of this PowerPoint that were given to you tonight. But also what you have in your board packets for this time around was a series of documents that at the end of this presentation we can come back to and you can ask questions if you like, but the intent of those documents that are in your packet was to respond to some of the questions that people raised during the January 6th meeting. And in that packet, for the benefit of the audience, we have the educational master plan emerging issues, the follow-up memo that tried to respond to some of those questions, the Town Hall meetings overall summary document is in there. The executive summary for the environmental scan is in there. And then the emerging issues overview which I'll speak to in a second. And then of course there's a copy of the timeline. So as I said, after this presentation, we can come back to that but I didn't want to -- because what I'm about to talk about is not what's in your packet right now. This is addressing the agenda items specifically. As Crystal mentioned, it's been a very dynamic process and a very exciting process that we've been engaged in from the very beginning. And I have to say that as challenging as the warning has been for us from the commission, it really did provide the impetus that the institution needed to very seriously look at its planning process and to try and come up with one that was going to be effective, if you will, over the long term. So from the very beginning we looked at this as an opportunity to blend our program planning review process with the accreditation activity, as well as, with the educational master plan. So if we look at this chart very quickly. The educational master plan being at top, being at the top, based upon the plan of direction that the institution takes, we do our program review and we do our planning. As a result of that, we get involved in allocating resources that will in effect help us to make those or generate, or turn those plans into reality, if you will. The piece that we've added that is so significant, is this notion of institutional effectiveness and how we're going to monitor that, how we're going to basically instill within our own accountability, our own layer of accountability. And finally, how all of this feeds the accreditation process. And not just the accreditation process that occurs every six years, but the process that occurs on an annual basis and how this continuous cycle of improvement, if you will, and how we on a regular basis and an annual basis, make certain that our accreditation activity is in fact occurring annually and that everything feeds into everything else. The planning process that Crystal put forth there is designed so that every piece of information that comes out of the program, planning and program review process will, in fact, feed our accreditation process, so that instead of running around professionally as chickens with our heads cut off, when it's accreditation time, trying to pull together the data that we need, each year that data will be generated and that data will be placed into the appropriate database so that when it comes time to actually respond to the accreditation for the year or two prior that, we'll have all the data that we need and we'll be ready to go. Moving along I just wanted to remind you in relation to the educational master plan, in effect, we did our data gathering phase, which was of course our Town Halls, the college forums, the focus groups, etcetera, on the environmental scan, that resulted in these so called 58 emerging issues that we have now grouped into these six programs -- these six categories, programs, faculty, and staff, facilities infrastructure, internal processes, communications and resources that you've heard before. We are now engaged in the survey process. I'm very happy to say that we have a survey that's been launched. It was launched last Friday. We are pushing that out to people you see on this list here, as well as, PCC Foundation Board, our foundation advisory board, our alumni. The alumni office, today, did a wonderful thing, we sent out this survey to over 3500 of our alumni. Right now, our goal is to push this survey to literally thousands of people. We are linking the neighborhood associations, we are linking the chambers of commerce, we're linking the cities, we're linking anybody who will take the link to be honest with you and we're working very hard at that to try and get that survey out as far and wide as possible. And again, the purpose of that survey is to help us to prioritize and validate or perhaps, invalidate those issues and priorities that were identified. Then we got into the -- at the fourth box down in the bottom there on the right hand side, just to remind you, the program questionnaire, this is completed by deans and our student learning services managers. It's designed to gather information about the trends and the success and the needs for the programs here at the college. Thus far, we have over 30 that have come back from our deans and our managers. It's a great process that's going to result in our educational program evaluation and recommendations. Program questionnaire data will be used, as well as, other information. This will give us recommendations. It will look at existing program reviews. It will look and help us determine what potential new programs might be necessary. And it will help determine where we go with additional programs, if you look at growth projections for existing programs and possible new programs. Then we get into something called a program delivery systems analysis. This will be our facility needs, our administrative needs, our student support service needs and other support services, administrative services and what have you and activities that we need. That's what that part is about. And then this results in the educational master plan and that's program directions and recommendations, facility, technology, staff requirements and implementation strategies. That looks familiar to you and you'll notice I just added educational master plan. It is the educational master plan that feeds the college's overall vision of transfer, career and technical education, basic skills, and of course, it's about students, it's about the people and how we support those people, it's about technology. But again, that educational master plan is that which is going to drive and support our vision and our strategy going forward. And then just quickly, just to give you a very quick summary of where we have been. As Crystal touched on, this has been an amazing process and actually for PCC it's occurred at mach speed, if you will. We basically, re-envisioned our program planning and review process, we developed the data sets, we had broad-based participation and dialogue and discourse throughout this. We had a choice, compliance with our ACCJC recommendations and WASP recommendations or improvement. We chose improvement. As we were designing this, we chose improvement over that. And the focus has been the continuous cycle of improvement. We made sure that our educational master plan process dove-tailed well with the planning process and with the accreditation process. We built on this notion of institutional effectiveness committee. This is a concept that we envisioned last spring as part of our student learning outcomes process and part of that whole process. And, you know, I tip out hat to our faculty and any others for recognizing that we did need to have some sort of entity which will come back you as a shared governance group of policies and procedures that could act as an in-house accountability review agent, if you will. So everybody is embracing the need for that, and I think WASP, when they see what we're doing in our report, is going to look at us and say wow, PCC not only did you address the warning, but you took it further. And I think, I believe we're going to be, if you will, a shining light as to how to take this stuff seriously and then move forward with it. And I'm very proud of that for the institution. And then we developed the evaluation methodology that focuses on process and continuous improvements. Now, what's important here is the next steps. We have the accreditation follow-up report that we, it's due on March 15th, but we're going to get it out of here by March 10th. In your board packets at the next meeting you will have a draft, it will be a rough draft, but you will have a draft of the follow-up report. I say rough because there's still a lot of dialogue taking place as we hone it down but we want to make sure that the board has it in time to consider. At your March 3rd meeting, you will then have another opportunity to provide us your feedback and your comments and then we will take that back to the general campus community for their thoughts. So in any event, we are right on schedule for our follow-up report and with everything that we've done and we're not only going to respond to recognition number 1, but we're going to respond to at least two others and possibly three others of the other recommendations as well, so we're going to be ahead of the game. And again, we're proud of that. Then the other thing that is very important, based upon the model that Crystal went through with you, there's a lot behind that, and there's a lot behind that in terms of program design, software design, etcetera. So during the spring, we are going to create the software, we are going to design the software and create the software that's necessary to implement the design that our group has come up with. Then the, recently a wonderful idea, I believe, that Dr. Bradbury Wong and Dr. Sukimoto had, the notion of having faculty and staff roundtables evolving around the educational master plan. So there's going to be two or three or whatever the number is of roundtables that's going to occur in February and March, focused on the educational master plan where we will put the data and the information forward to the group. We'll get feedback and we will include that in our process. And then, we're going to spend time this spring dotting i's and crossing t's and the Institutional Effectiveness Committee which includes again, as a shared governance committee, that the mission, the purpose, policies and procedures, and then finally, we will have our educational master plan come back to you in late June for approval. And of course, I won't go over the timeline but you'll know that the board will be engaged between now and then in various discussions about the plan. In fact, March 3rd we are scheduled, we believe to have MIG and staff present to you and talk to you more about the educational master plan process and have some discourse with the board on that. So finally, I just want to remind you and you've got copies of this, I think you probably have received emails from Dr. Sukimoto, an email from Dr. Sukimoto about this and others, but that's the survey, I would invite you to go online and complete the survey and be one of what we hope will be thousands of people coming back to us to help us with this effort. So I think that's more or less the formal presentation. I'd be happy to answer questions about this presentation, about anything that might be in your packets, and we'll go from there. Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you Dr. Miller. A-D-D [inaudible] Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum: Thank you, thank you for the report and a lot of good information. A couple of quick questions. One is, we didn't have the environmental scan, we just had an executive summary of the environmental scan in our board book, we didn't get the whole thing. At what point in the process, for example, is going to be the data of what's needed layered over our current curriculum. Like for example, USC, we two years ago, made an unpopular decision to say, "We're really going to phase out German as a language so we can expand our offerings in Mandarin," for example. So when is that, where in the process are we going to have that kind of analysis saying the field, the industry, the demands are over here and here's our curriculum and how are we going to evaluate, how we're going to evolve our curriculum to meet those needs on the future? >> Dr. Bob Miller: First of all regarding the environmental scan document, you have the executive summary because just recently have we gotten all of our edits back to MIG on the full document itself, and it's about 75 pages. As soon as that is ready you will have it, so you'll have the full document, but we wanted to kind of give you a flavor of what was in that by virtue of the summary, the executive summary. To answer your question specifically, in the educational program evaluation process and the program recommendations process that is on this slide up here in the lower right-hand side box, there is a process by which what you were addressing is going to be explored, identified, and recommendations will come back to the college community as to the types of things that you're talking about. All of the data that we've collected through the environmental scan, all the data we're collecting from the deans and the SLS managers and others, will all come together plus, what consultants do, their knowledge of other things will come together and in the final educational master plan there will be recommendations or certainly, things that the district needs to consider, including the type of thing that you're referring to. >> Trustee Baum: And then just going back to the survey, who drafted the survey and who's going to compile the results? >> Dr. Bob Miller: The survey was drafted, was initially prepared by MIG, Crystal Colross and I worked on it as well. It went through two or three derivations. We independently quote/unquote tested it on our significant others and a few other people out in the community just to make sure that it was something that worked, if you will. Right, Crystal? >> Ms. Colross: Yes, we did. >> Dr. Bob Miller: Yes, we did. And we... >> Trustee Baum: Did they pass? >> Dr. Bob Miller: And they did. And what we really wanted to find out is how long it would take them to do it and did they understand it. And in fact, at least my significant other, my wife of 33 years, Barbara, love her to death, anyway, she actually provided some good edits because, you know, she obviously, is not familiar with a lot of stuff that we are so that was helpful and she was able to complete it in less than 10 minutes. And that was helpful as well. And again, the survey, if you recall, is divided into those six areas, those six inquiry questions that are designed to get to those six areas of what the emerging issues [Inaudible]. >> Trustee Baum: Yeah, I took a look at it and it was helpful to see it. In some sense, the only question I have too is it seemed a lot of mom and apple pie, you know, that every, virtually every category you would put very important or extremely important, so it will be interesting to see how the data comes out of it. Like should we have -- should we focus on transfer? Well, of course, we should focus, should we transfer on basic skills, of course, those types of questions. So I'm hoping we can extrapolate some data that we can actually delineate and use for decision making purposes. >> Dr. Bob Miller: And I, should not necessarily go out on a limb like this, but I would say that if this survey provides us information that basically begets the need for another survey to drill a little deeper, I certainly would not be opposed to that and I think Crystal and I internally, we could put something like that together, if need be. But I understand your point and I struggled with that a little bit myself. >> Trustee Baum: And I -- and the one thing too is just in the analysis of the data if there's a systematic way that, so me and my yoga fans can all, like I can get 100 yoga fans to kind of list that, we need to add yoga to the curriculum or we need to expand intercollegiate athletics or something like that. We can actually factor that in as for a specific group or interest. >> Dr. Bob Miller: In the design again as we intended but you specifically indicated, we did try to identify who these folks were as best could. But if in fact, those types of agendas sort of pop up, we can probably readily identify that it came from a particular group. >> Trustee Baum: And to the extent that we can with our web folks too instead of like a long survey monkey address I would just say, Pasadena.edu and then have a big button on the home page say take our survey. >> Dr. Bob Miller: Right. And in fact, right now, there's a small button on the home page but we're working on a big button. Yeah, Juan and I talked about that today as a matter of fact. So... >> Trustee Baum: Or even creating a distinctive URL. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Please signal to me if you want to get into this discussion. Trustee Mann. >> Trustee Mann: Yes, I do have a couple of questions and it may just be, well first of all I can't see these charts on the screen or any place so I'm reading them here. >> Dr. Bob Miller: You do have them in your packet. >> Trustee Mann: I do have them in my packet so, but none of these other screens are readable. >> Dr. Bob Miller: I understand. >> Trustee Mann: The -- I didn't hear how you're reaching out to business, for example I'm just going to ask you a couple of questions. >> Dr. Bob Miller: Sure. >> Trustee Mann: I know that every, in the newspaper you see like every year or so the 20 top employers in Pasadena and it usually starts off with the school districts, but somewhere in there you'll find Parsons, you'll find Jacobs Engineering, and so forth. Are the big employers in the city getting these surveys, are we reaching out to the business community, and I heard chamber of commerces. And the second part of that question is, I know we have advisory committees through Dean Liggens' programs for our career technical programs, are the advisory committees, the business people who participate in the advisory committees, how are they being involved? >> Dr. Bob Miller: To answer your question we are working directly with the chambers and that is working. I do have some calls out to some of the bigger employers in the area. I have not yet had a chance to talk with Dean Liggens about the advisory committee, but that is on the list and I am actually planning on getting to that tomorrow. So we are, as I said the goal is to push this out to as many places as possible, because frankly, just getting the links out there does not necessarily guarantee that anybody's going to respond, so the more that we can do that the better. So yes, I will definitely pursue the CT advisory committees. >> I would just offer a testimonial that Mr. Miller shared with me an email from the chamber of commerce president Lockiatta Flintridge [assumed spelling] not only responded but then forwarded it to the membership of the Lockiatta Chamber of Commerce. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, that answers one of my questions. Dean Liggens? >> Dean Liggens: Yes, I'd like to go to division page and ask a question, if I may. First of all I want to thank you and Crystal for these visuals, they're excellent, but I really am concerned that we at PCC keep leaving out three very important elements in our vision, and that is degree programs, economic and workforce development programs, and lifelong learning programs, all of which are in the statewide strategic plan. So my question is, could those be added to the vision, or do we just envision transfer, CTE, and basic skills? >> Dr. Bob Miller: Well, my response Ellen is we can certainly add whatever it is the institution feels that it needs to add, so to the extent that we don't see that the things that you're talking about economic development and degree programs are embodied within CTE or embodied within transfer and we want to add some more categories, certainly we could do that. One of the reasons why it's transfer, CTE, and basic skills is the sense that at least for the next few years that is the focus, that is the direction that the system needs to go in, but that does not mean that we could not add anything else to this. >> Trustee Thompson: I would just say from my perspective too, the degree granting programs will fall under transfer, economic development would fall under CTE, in my, from my perspective, but we have, yes, deemphasized lifelong learning and we're moving in that direction given the economic reality. As even though it's an important aspect, but when we're trying to prioritize that's how I would envision doing it as an individual trustee. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So it falls to me to thank you for your obvious hard work and I'm delighted that people are wanting to get on your committee, I think that's a very significant thing, so thank you. >> Dr. Bob Miller: Thank you. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Let me, let me remind you and ask for your help with this, the presidential search obviously is going to be deeply affected by this so let me know what is the best way to streamline that interaction so that this information is brought to the obvious candidates, like the screening committee and that kind of thing. >> Dr. Bob Miller: Very good, yes we'll talk about that. Thank you very much. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. Our next item is a budget update, presentation and discussion, President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Thank you again, and this is Dr. Van Pelt's discussion. >> Dr. Van Pelt: Okay, and I submitted a report along with a very conceptual draft with numbers. And let me just go to the draft, so that's the Excel sheet. The first three columns are from the league and that's their analysis of what the governor's budget is. Then the next column over, so this is the fourth column, was the 9/10 PCC adopted budget. Then what we did is, we took the percentage ratio between the second column which was this year's budget and what PCC ended up with, so therefore, it's a percentage of the overall system budget. And then what we did is we took that same multiplier and multiplied it by the governor's 10/11 budget in order to come up with the projection for what our share of the numbers that were presented by the governor three weeks ago would indicate. The absolute critical part is every one of these numbers will change, that's the first part. The second part is that this represents the state section of the budget, it doesn't represent that small federal, but it also doesn't represent the local portion. So when you see the two at the bottom there where it says variance, I compared this year's versus that projection for next year, so currently, it's projecting about a negative third of a million dollars. However, when you go up about, let's say a quarter of the way growth for apportionment, we've been advised and as Dr. Mann pointed out a little earlier, we've been advised strongly that this is the high water mark for the budget and therefore, during the process of the May revise and all of the budget wrangling that will go on after that, there's like no chance that these numbers will rise, the only chance is that these numbers will fall. There's another critical part too, is that because this is an election year, we've already been advised that people may have difficulty coming to consensus with the two thirds majority that's required in Sacramento, which might mean that we have an extremely late budget this year and in terms of cash flow that can create an issue for us. The next steps that we're working on, we've already had the meeting of Rack [assumed spelling] to bring them up to speed, the executive committee and the board of trustees of course, have gotten background information, now [assumed spelling] has as well, which means that the next step is that we'll put the ad hoc committee together which involves board of trustees budget sub-committee, it involves the executive committee, it involves the shared governance resource allocation committee. So that's about to commence now and then that will proceed on through the process of budget development. We also intend this year to do something different, which is to load our budget numbers very early so that they will be worked on for as long as it takes and certainly as long as Sacramento is debating the budget numbers. Part of the critical part really for us is cash flow projections and we can do our portion of it, but what we can't do is to project the apportionment payments and the deferrals of those from Sacramento. So as we become more in tune with that and as the trends begin to develop, then we'll be able to respond to that, and if anybody has any questions. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Would you happen to have a date in mind for the first sub-committee meeting? >> Dr. Van Pelt: Well, what's going to happen I think it will happen tomorrow as we start to poll, and we're going to poll starting with the board of trustees sub-committee to see which dates are available and which days of the week and which times and so forth might be the best, and then what we'll try to do is we'll try to wrap the college functions around when the board might be available. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: So it's not inconceivable that you'd meet before our next board meeting, for instance? >> Dr. Van Pelt: It's not inconceivable, it really is going to depend on the schedules of the board members. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. Trustee Mann? >> Trustee Mann: Yes, I want to thank you for this, this is just exactly what, well it's almost exactly what I wanted. I think it's very, very good to have how this affects PCC next to the system. The only problem I'm having is it's really complicated to read. And I had come up with some similar kind of numbers, just remembering that one time Dr. Kostler [assumed spelling] says, "We're about 100th of the chancellor's office and this is what it is," it fluctuates up and down and my numbers were just a little off, just do that in my head. But anyway I would hope that there would be some way that we could put this on our website. We have there, it says recent budget update and the most recent one is January 8th, but I think we put it on our website it's going to have to be something that's easier to read than this, and I don't know exactly how you're going to do that, but I think it would be very, very helpful to have at least the base numbers, like the numbers that are on there now, I think there's maybe 8, if we could just do those with a caveat that this is the first, this is the governor's budget and it's anticipated that there will be changes. But then it would be, everyone can see it, just like putting our approved budget on the website so it's out there for everyone and then we can just continually put updates. That seems to me to be an open process, anyone who wants to can look at, and the fact that it's going to change, well this situation is changing. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you Dr. Van Pelt. Let's move to item M, board processes and objectives, discussion of possible action. Trustee Baum, I think was going to tee up the conversation. >> Trustee Baum: I'd be happy to tee up the conversation on this. In our packets there is a -- if I can find it -- a collection of ideas that Dr. Bradbury Wong put together because we want to increase, to build on some of the discussions we've had to improve processes and functioning and make the board meetings even a more pleasant experience than they already are. >> Dr. Mann: If you look at all the people asleep it must be a pretty pleasant experience for somebody. >> Trustee Baum: For example, you see already today the move by, to move the reports to the beginning of the meeting and to get everybody actively engaged from the beginning, including the shared governance group, that's in deference to the process that we want to hear all voices and not just push everybody's feedback off until the end of the meeting. We want to look at even the physical dynamics of this space and making sure that it's more conducive to active deliberation and consultation by the board. Also just for personal expectations you'll see a list of other items that -- can we shoot for 9:30 end time unless pressing action will push us beyond that and how to streamline these activities, these processes of the board. So if you can all pull this out and take 15 seconds to read it and then we will open it up for discussion among the board, but I would also welcome, pleased to hear from other shared governance groups about things that could be contributed to a better, a more effective deliberation and action by the board of trustees. So do you all have this or is this, nobody has this document? >> Trustee Thompson: Yeah we do, it's in our red packet. >> Dr. Baum: Okay, the trustees have it. >> Trustee Mann: We have it. >> Dr. Baum: They say shedding expectations, length of the board meetings, working with the administration on posing questions in advance of the board meeting so that they're prepared for some of the issues we may raise, seating, as you can see, we're trying things out. Everything's on the table right now. [inaudible] Yes, literally. The student trustee remembering to consult with the student trustee, so it is truly an advisory vote that we will call on you before a vote is made so that we can weigh that as we take individual votes. And then, also inviting the student trustees to join in closed sessions when they don't include personnel issues as well. One of the... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Where is that? Or at least for dinner. >> Dr. Baum: Student trustee. >> Trustee Mann: I must not have the same thing, that I don't see. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: There's an updated one that came in your desk packet. >> Trustee Mann: Okay, then, I didn't see that one. >> Dr. Baum: And I'm looking at these as a reading, first reading, not for action or adoption right here and right now. One of the things that I talked to Dr. Bradbury Wong is too, is there a way to signal the president to be called upon without having to raise their hand or being assured that, and if [inaudible]. The Aspen Institute has something where you put your nameplate, your name pad on your side and then [inaudible]. So anyway, there's those types of ways to participate and get called on without necessarily, yeah, I'll just use the button here. And so there's some things for discussion. Dr. Bradbury Wong, was there any other issues that we should raise or need more illumination? >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Aren't you going to ask President Sukimoto also? This is very quick and this is just addressing the issue of recognizing individuals who wish to speak, and I have asked and Dr. Van Pelt is discussing this with the City of Pasadena, they have a system that they use in city council meetings that notifies the chair of individuals who wish to speak on particular items. But also I know that's very expensive so we've also talked about other means that we might be able to utilize that will help signal and one of them is simply the rearrangement perhaps of the way we're seated that will be easier for us to see who has raised their hand, but maybe to have a signaling system. And then, Dr. Van Pelt, I don't know if you have anything to say about that. >> Dr. Van Pelt: Yeah, I have spoken with the City of Pasadena to get their consultant and we've also spoken with their own electronics people to come up with like LED lights which could also signify, you know, a aye vote or a nay vote or an abstention or that you, you know, you want to raise a point. So we're doing it both in-house and with the City of Pasadena. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Thank you. A simple and cheap method while we're working on that is if you'll notice I've begun to look around more now that I can see us all, so just wave and I'll write you down and I'll just keep the holding pattern and I'll call it out so we know who's up, that would be very helpful. I'm interested in meeting ending times because I know we want to balance efficiency and effectiveness, but if we all share the same goal it would make it perhaps doable. I'm suggesting 9:30. >> Trustee Baum: If you do that I'm electing you Queen. >> [Laughter] >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Oh-oh, I hope I fail often. Trustee Thompson. I probably have a contrarian view on this one and it's probably my attitude is warped by my many, many years in the Pasadena City Council. But I'm much less interested in what time we try to end our meetings as I am with the quality of our discussions and if means we have to take a bit longer to talk about something as long as we have great discussions I'm in that camp and it's not that I want to go to midnight or forever, obviously, the earlier we end the better but I'm much more interested in focusing on the quality of what we're talking -- of our discussions of what we're talking about than I am looking forward to some set ending point. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Martin. >> Trustee Martin: I'll just say the older I get the more quality of conversation I engage the earlier in the evening it is. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Good. Well maybe we'll come to a resolution over the weeks ahead. Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Brown: Well I, there are several things that I think would work and maybe help us, you know, get out earlier if that's what we went, I know a lot of you work, but I think one other suggestion that Dr. Hillary has here is that we read our material ahead of time and send in our questions, especially, the ones where the consent items, so that we may have answers and some of the answers may be simple and some of them may not be, so that could well bring down the time that we, you know, discuss and that part. So as a new member I'm sure I would not be able to speak for many of you, but I think that would help. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay. I can say on that that I have conferred already with legal counsel, Mary Dowe, and she advises us simply to remember that all email is also discoverable and therefore, it's important that the questions and answers be kept separate. In other words we will not all see questions and answers, that's good to know in advance. Yeah. >> Trustee Thompson: And the only point I want to make too is just the physical layout of this dynamic to me I think I'd like to see improved because to have the management association so far, to me creates a distance that I think would be helpful, is less conducive, and the audience even beyond that. I miss some of the intimacy that we had in previous setups and then just the physical motor skills of trying to negotiate around the presentation material and the table and I think we can improve upon that and will certainly help my ability as an individual trustee to do my job. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Trustee Mann. >> Trustee Mann: Yes, I would just like to support what Mr. Baum just said. I wasn't kidding when I said I can't see what's on these screens and where I'm sitting here because I've never sat in this particular place. You can't see either one of those screens. From over there, you can, here you can't. So I would suggest that we until we get this worked out, why don't we just go back to the tables with skirts on them, we seem to function pretty well and if other groups want to use this fancy equipment they can, but you can't see the screen, there's not really enough room here, the angle is weird. So I think this just, we ought to just admit this does not work and try something that does work. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: President Sukimoto. >> President Sukimoto: Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong. Dr. Van Pelt and I have talked and I've certainly spoken with the board officers about coming in and we'll wheel things around, we will look at what we need to do so that we can make the arrangements more conducive to the meetings. And hopefully by the end of the month we'll have something that works. Now, Dr. Van Pelt did explain because we've got, how do I say, these outlets on the floors and ways that we hook up things we'll probably need to look at how do we rearrange those connections, so it won't be without some cost to do that but we will certainly make sure we look at the arrangements in ways that will be better for the meetings. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Well, thank you for your consideration. >> Trustee Thompson: I would like to invite the shared governance groups to offer any feedback to the administration too because I'd like to hear how it feels from your perspective. Obviously, we'll make the decision as a board but your feedback would be important and would help me as we consider this. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Great. And just to clarify for student trustee Alvedia so you can think about it and also let me know, it would be items like if we were to think about real estate, if we were to think about satellite campuses, that kind of thing, I think your voice in our closed sessions would be very welcome. So we look forward to that. So that you for your consideration. The last item of the evening is future board meeting dates. So we're looking at a regular schedule coming up. Wednesday, February 17th and Wednesday, March 3rd. And I would also urge us all to look at that calendar. I was taken by surprise by the retreat dates, etc., that are already on there and you could let us know if that's going to be a problem into the future. >> Trustee Mann: Could you remind us when the retreat date is, I can't find the calendar. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Trustee Martin what are we looking for that. >> Trustee Martin: Well, strategic planning retreat is March 19th on this calendar. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: And that's a whole college. >> Trustee Martin: Spring board retreat is April 21st on this calendar. >> Trustee Mann: We usually have the board retreat before the strategic planning retreat so that our representatives will know what, can take the board's ideas. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Yeah, so let me take that and look at it with President Sukimoto and figure out what will work for all of us. >> Trustee Martin: I was just going to let you know I have an employment related conflict for the March 3rd meeting. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Okay. >> Trustee Martin: If you're getting out by 9:30 I may not make it. If you're going to do one of those 11 to midnight things I might be able to get here. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: I'll do it just for you. >> Trustee Martin: By the end. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Alright, thanks for flagging that. >> Trustee Martin: I might not be bringing my A game with me but... >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Future agenda items. Student Trustee Alvedia. Trustee Mann? >> Trustee Mann: Yes I have, I have two I would like for us to put the -- I'm sorry I cannot say the name of them, the commemorative monument for the school, I'd like us to put that on as an action item, and I'd like to have it on as the next meeting so that the board can go on record on this really very important matter. I wasn't aware this was the first memorial to the Latino community but I do know that it is very important. I've had many, many, many calls from the Latino community on this. And secondly, according to our policies, as policy committee chair I was, had nothing else to do so I was looking at our policies, we're supposed to start the evaluation of our president on the first meeting in March and I would like to put that on the, the evaluation of the president on the agenda maybe for the next meeting, or that meeting because I think we need to discuss whether, since our president has not been serving for a full year we want to evaluate her then, do we want to evaluate her later, or what we want to do, but I don't think we can ignore our own policies on that. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good, thank you. Trustee Baum, future agenda items. Trustee Martin. >> Trustee Martin: I'm thinking. >> Trustee Baum. >> Trustee Baum: No, it's all on here. >> Trustee Thompson. >> Trustee Thompson: No thank you, nothing. >> Dr. Bradbury Wong: Very good. Oh Trustee Thompson is asking me to point out that our values are now on the back of our norms and I guess we would all find it helpful to keep them in front of us at our meetings. The idea being that in a presidential search time maybe listeners on the audio cast are also listening to who's the board that I'll be working with, so keeping that in mind. I also wanted to flag for you a letter than I had to write very quickly under difficult circumstances in Sacramento, but I think it flags what I hope is most important for all of us at this particular time. It was written to Senator Lou, Assemblyman Poritino [assumed spelling] and Chancellor Jack Scott. And now, finally, I'm going to move to adjourn the meeting and I would like to do, I would like to flag two things in doing so. One, a happy item, we know that the lunar new year is about to commence so Shenin Kwylu [assumed spelling]. And then a much more somber item. I'd invite us to adjourn with a moment of silence for Eve Naglu [assumed spelling] he was a faculty member in the languages division. Another of our staff Mia Adriano died at a very young age. She was with support services in the scholarship and financial aid office. And indeed in communication with Dr. Profumo [assumed spelling] I learned that her mother had passed away and I offer also to remember Dr. Profumo's mother at this time. A motion of adjourn.