>> -- oh, is this my -- >> Good evening, and welcome, Ladies and Gentlemen. This is the board of trustees Pasadena Area Community College District Regular Business Meeting Number Six. It is Wednesday, March the 3, 2010. Mrs. Thompson, would you take the roll? >> Present. >> Here. >> Here >> Here. >> Here. >> Present. >> Thank you. We are about to move into closed session to entertain two items. One Government Code 54957, public employee discipline dismissal release and government code 54957.6 labor negotiations. Dean Engeldinger will join us. Are there any comments from the public on any closed session matters? Seeing none, I invite us into closed session. [ Background noise ] >> I'm reconvening the open session and reporting that no action was taken in closed session. Trustee Mann, would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. >> Yes. Please join me in the Pledge. >> Group speaking: 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. >> Indivisible. It's important. >> I know. >> Thank you, Trustee Mann. President Sugimoto, do you have any introductions for us? >> Yes, I actually do. And I'm very pleased to announce that we have two U.S.A. all American team winners that are in the audience. [Inaudible] get this all together here. Let me describe for you what this is. It is one that we nominal students to. There's two students that we've nominated. It's the all U.S.A. today and it supports the all U.S.A. community college academic team programs. And the students compete from their peers -- from the -- now there's 112 community colleges, but when they were competing there were only 110 community colleges. And there's different teams. There's a team one, team two, and team three; and team one of course being the best. The students whom we nominate must be enrolled at the community college through December, 2009. They must have an accumulative college level GPA of 3.5 to 4.0 for all course work completed in at least the last five years from fall to the president, and they must be on track to earn an associate's or bachelor's degree or the equivalent of a US associate or bachelor's degree. They must have a minimum of 36 semester or 48 quarter units, and completed these at or transferred to a community college by December 31. I am very pleased to ask Dr. Stewart Wilcox if he will go ahead and introduce our two students who have made some of our teams. And he can also announce that. Dr. Wilcox? >> Thank you, Dr. Sugimoto. It is definitely a pleasure, it is one of the most fun things I have ever gotten to do in this job. What I'd like to ask if -- please stand, I'd like to introduce Deanna O'Brien. She is a first team on the all California team, which is the highest ranking achievement, being on the first team. She is a music and fine arts major and she's already been accepted to Azusa Pacific university. Deanna O'Brien. [ Applause ] >> And unfortunately, it looks like our other applicant, he said he could be here, Solomon -- not applicant, winner -- he's on the second team, Solomon Abbadela [Phonetic]. He hasn't been able to make it, but let me give you a little information about him. He's a business marketing major, he's one of our president's ambassadors, and he's -- his order of applying to schools is to USC and UCLA. So there's a little -- little rivalry schizophrenia there or something. And then to UC Irvine and Stanford. And even in absentia, if we could -- and perhaps -- >> Is that him? >> Talk about perfect timing. And entry -- [ Applause ] >> And entering the room right on cue is Solomon Abbadela. Welcome, and the applause were for you. >> Thank you, Dr. Wilcox. I would also like to introduce David McClair, who always manages this program for us every year and finds the outstanding students that we nominate for this program. These are academic students who have provided a lot of support for the institution and other students, they have lots of community involvement, and that is why these two students have made our all U.S.A. team. Congratulations to the two of you, and thank you, David. [ Applause ] >> We're -- let me just add that we're very, very proud of you. It's quite an accomplishment. So thank you, and thank you Professor McClair. >> May I make a comment? >> Please. >> I would like to also complicate Mr. McClair, is that correct? Because it seems like in the last couple of years we have had students that are at this level, which we hadn't had in the past. So I assume it means someone is really putting in the time and finding -- I'm sure we've had the students we just haven't put them forward. >> Want to address the board or anything like that? Okay. >> Let's move to public comment on non agenda items. I don't see any cards, is that correct? So if they show up later we will come back. Item D, reports by members of the board, board subcommittees and the superintendent and the government shared governance. Let me start with trustee -- >> A couple of things. The PCC foundation liaison group, advancement and foundation committee met, and then also Hillary and I were able to meet with the PCC foundation, several members from their executive committee, last week. And what I think we would describe as a very, very positive meeting. I think the people who were there and since I've served as liaison to that group for the last couple of years it was a very dedicated, energetic group of people. Great support for PCC, and really see that as the reason that they're there. And delighted to be a part of it. So we talked about a number of things, probably central to our conversations was the need to find money for PCC, surprise public education would be talking about finding money someplace, but that's what we were looking at. And one of the things that came out of that was that they were going to -- I guess some place in the past there has been prepared a strategic plan for the foundation and they're going to work on that, revise that, as they believe needs to be done. And bring to us in the near few months a strategic plan for the foundation that will include a mission statement as a key part of it as well. And fund raising will be central to that. We talked about trying to set up an alumni relations component to this. Right now given the ancient class of our technology at the college here they really don't have a complete or comprehensive list of alumni of the college, and they want to find that, put that together. And implement a plan to giving programs. So beware, everybody, you may be getting contacted about planned giving for Pasadena City College. So just be aware of that. Just I think it was a very good, very positive meeting, and we're delighted to be able to start the process of working together for the new types of opportunities for PCC and for the foundation, specifically. I guess the other thing I could comment on, our screening committee met last week, and Hillary and Jeanette may want to add to this. But it was a very good meeting of the committee, I think again the committee is working very well together. Dr. Hail's report on his activities, met with Dr. Scott in Sacramento, and also with Scott Lay with the community -- California Community League, and I think Dr. Scott and Jeff may want to comment on this. I gave Dr. Hail a number of people he thought would be right for consideration for PCC. Dr. Hail, independently of that has had conversations with a number of people. There have been some applications that have been received. As of last Friday when we had the screening committee meeting we actually went through an exercise of looking at C V's and evaluating those and at that time I think we had four applications that were actually available. But the expectation is that more will be coming in between now and the end of this month, when we hopefully begin doing the screening process and beginning to narrow down the applicants and to look more closely at prospective candidates for the present superintendent's job. That is unless you or Jeanette or Jeff want to comment? >> That seems adequate, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Trustee [Inaudible] -- >> Three quick things. One is as you can see, we're tuning a fine instrument here with the lay out of the board room and the table set up. So we're continuing to make minor modifications each meeting until we get it just right. Not too hot, not too cold, but just right. So we still welcome any feedback as to how the set up impacts the deliberation and the business of the board of trustees. I just completed a meeting of the Board of Governors for the state of California. We -- one thing I was pleased to do was to vote for the approval of a $350,000 contract to the Pasadena Area Community College district. And that was for a matriculation program that PCC will coordinate for the state-wide colleges across the state to convene stake holder work groups to identify through research and evaluate effective and cost-efficient models for the provision of matriculation services, including counseling and advising, orientation, and other services that support students' success that can be shared. Now that $350,000 I am sure will get passed through PCC out other districts, but I know that it will also provide some support, and I'm pleased and proud that we were able to take leadership on that grant proposal. And I see our counseling staff there, so I'm looking forward to hearing more about that. We adopted as a Board of Governors, not a board -- but for the system, not a Board of Governors, three goals. One was a focus on veteran's issues and how the community college system is serving veterans and what can be enhanced system-wide to better serve our returning veterans with the unique set of issues they bring to the campuses and to the classroom. There's an issue with the chancellor's office that believe it or not, the chancellor has no autonomy over whom he appoints as vice chancellor to the system. Those appointments actually come -- are made by the governor and so we want to modify the -- the legislation which might require some constitutional effort so that the chancellor can actually choose who's the vice chancellor for academic affairs, the vice chancellor for student affairs, and things like that. So that's a goal we're hoping to achieve in this last year of our governor's term. And then finally we want to be better aligned with our state Board of Education. Would be convening with the state Board of Education which has the governing responsibility over the K through 12 system to better improve articulation between the two systems' basic skills and other issues that we have a shared interest in. Finally, the other focus was on the OSHA grant and how the clock continues to tick on the achievement of the -- to access the $25 million that the OSHA foundation has pledged to community colleges up and down the state and how local districts really need to step up to take advantage of this rather than see this money go away for that -- the OSHA foundation will not provide if they don't make the match. And I know we will be talking about this in our district and how we will be responding to that in the future. Finally, I do want to extend a personal note of thanks and appreciation to Dr. Sugimoto and our counseling staff. I learned -- perhaps you saw it in the media, but since the last meeting some devastating mudslides came through part of my district in la Canada Flintridge and took out a number of houses of residents of the district, including the home of a PCC student named Brian Lagoona. And it was in the newspapers and it was a very tragic incidence that the family was completely displaced. And I contacted Dr. Sugimoto and Dr. Aleve o to see if we could reach out to the student to see if there was anything that the college could do to express its support. And Dr. Aleve o made contact with that student. Talked -- provided assistance during the first week of classes to make sure the student didn't suffer a second tragedy of being derailed from his academic program, and to me it was emblematic of the type of caring community that this district and this college represents. And I wanted to thank the staff and the administration for that, and to bring that to the college's attention. Thank you. >> Yes you may. >> Yes, I have two things. The -- Mr. Martin and I met with the budget subcommittee and he's not here, I just -- our first meeting, we pretty much previewed a huge amount of information. I think it was mainly just looking at information, defining the task, understanding that we are a brown act committee, and I think that's important for people to know because as a brown act committee we are open. Anyone who wants to know the deliberations, wants to hear certainly is welcome. And the notice -- the meetings will be posted. And I think that's a really good thing, because the more people that come in the more brains we have thinking on this, I think the better decision we will make. The second thing is as the -- I guess the chair of the policy part of these policy and contracts committee. Tonight we're going to look at three policies. We were scheduled to review 22 policies this year, so to meet our review of all the policies before the next accreditation, we received 4 from the administration. One we sent back to ask that some of the things be considered. So -- and while you might say we're pretty much where we want to be, but we will be bringing these forward. >> Great. Duly noted. Thank you. [Inaudible] -- >> Yeah, I have just one item tonight I'd like to talk a little bit about. Some of you may have read this in the Los Angeles Times. The Cal State universities are very concerned about getting young black high school students to a university. And what we have initiated about two years ago is a program that we call super Sunday where the chancellor Charles Reed and the 23 presidents of the Cal State university speak at black churches throughout the state of California. And we just completed our second weekend last weekend. And I have been very concerned about the -- that PCC black student population is really not representative of the number of young black people we have in the PCC college district. And I would like us to think about maybe a Super Sunday program throughout the district with the president and trustees speaking at black churches throughout the district, and distributing information about PCC. And it really has paid off at the Cal State universities, and the -- the parents particularly appreciate this sort of initiative. Also at this time, speaking of black students and helping black students get to college education, I want to commend my colleague Ms. Brown for the work that she's been doing. She doesn't know that I know this, but I know the work that she's been doing since her election in this area, and she's done a great job, and this is just an idea I'd like to throw out and perhaps that we can think about. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Yup, president [Inaudible] -- >> I really appreciate you mentioning this, Dr. Fellow, because at our last president's advisory committee for African Americans we have put together for the month of March a Super Sunday event. And in fact I am going to be visiting Ellen's church, the first AME on the 28th of March. But every Sunday this month we have sent out letters to each of the African American churches to ask them for an opportunity to address their congregations. So we are on-board and working towards that goal. >> I'm happy to hear that. And if you need me I would be very happy to speak. >> That would be wonderful. We'll put you on the list. >> Thank you. >> Trustee Brown? >> Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Trustee Fellow. And what I would like to report is first of all I have been working with PUSD and a couple of things. High school drop out task force, we met for the first time last Tuesday. And the goal of this fast forward [Inaudible] community is to reduce the drop out rate by 50%. A good, ambitious goal. But we are definitely going to be meeting like two times I week and identify areas that needs to be improved and we know that it's a good start. The next thing that I'd like to share is that this coming Tuesday superintendent Diaz will be presenting his vision for Muir, John Muir high school, to [Inaudible] the school board and I would like to invite you to go to the board meeting on Tuesday to hear this vision. This vision is right in line with developing or offering multiple path -- career pathways for the students and this is also a good opportunity for PCC to partner with PUSD. And that's why report. >> Thank you. Student trustee Abbadela. >> Just [Inaudible] what's going on, on campus right now. Right now, current, club week is going on, so all the -- I think it's [Inaudible] over 65 clubs on campus, they're currently recruiting students on campus, as well as welcome week. We are basically out on the quad letting people know what's going on, how to get involved with student government. So that's been going on. And just to let you guys know that a lot of the students have been very enthusiastic about the bus pass that we just passed this past week -- this past meeting. A lot of students have started buying them. I don't know exact numbers, but a lot of people are enthusiastic about them. [Inaudible] people I've spoken to specifically on an individual basis have been very enthusiastic about it. So -- >> Very good. >> Let me share quickly from the foundation on advancement committee meeting that we had, they're very interested in working with you all and they see -- they could see a role for themselves perhaps in helping out with welcome week. Because you know, many of them are alumni as well. So that might be a nice [Inaudible] nice marriage. >> Let's proceed to shared governance. And then come around to president soak mote o. Does that work? [Inaudible] -- >> I normally forget you, so this time I'm giving you the seat of honor and apologies for past overlooking, et cetera. >> No worries. A couple announcements. I'm following up with the bus passes, actually. I believe the current number is 500 passes sold, and it's only been about a week. So you know, if the trend follows then we'll have our number before the semester is out. So that will be good. A couple other things. We -- the AS sustainability committee just got the go ahead to build an organic fruit and vegetable garden on the south west corner of the L building, and it's going to be fashioned very closely to the permaculture garden we have in front of the D and C building. And we hope this will inspire people to, you know, start building their own gardens at their own homes. And from what I've heard, actually, three faculty members built their own drought resistant plants in their own gardens in their own homes. And hasn't been that long, so word is definitely getting around and it's definitely in telling people, you know, we should be more -- how do you say -- environmental friendly and that kind of thing. The second thing we're doing is the lobby committee is working very hard and pin pointing a lot of legislation in which to lobby when we go up to Sacramento on March 22, and you'll see in the consent items a -- 7 S that we're requesting for more student travel. So we'll be doing a lot of things with that sort of legislation. These legislation include trying to lower the book prices, making sure that the publishers can't, you know, export more money out of the students. >> We have good news for you, that one passed in the last consent item. So it's a done deal. >> It's a done deal? >> Yeah. >> Okay, great. >> Thank you, sir. Mr. Linden man? >> Yes ma'am. I'd like to thank Dr. [Inaudible] Bob Miller and [Inaudible] for all agreeing to be presenters at the classified days, which will be held, if everything passes this evening of course, the 28th and 29th of April. And we'd also like to thank Bob Cody for presenting to the [Inaudible] Senate on the managed [Inaudible] services, and we're disseminating the information on the revised mission statement and policy on [Inaudible] campus. Expect to have input back to campus [Inaudible] to the college coordinating council [Inaudible]. >> Wonderful, thank you. Dr. Vicly [Phonetic]? >> Thank you. We too are reviewing -- the Senate is reviewing the mission statement. The Senators decided they needed more time. They voted down the revisions that had come to us, but I don't know that we won't eventually pass that or with modest modifications, hopefully. With respect to the faculty lecture performance award, this is a Senate and board of trustees award that -- joint award, that we at least seek candidates for and the screening committee selects the winner of each year. We're beginning the process of asking for nominations and will be setting up a screening process and selection process soon. We also are having a development seminar for faculty at Glendale Community College. It's a joint venture that was initiated by the Senate faculty development committee, and I believe Dr. Lynn Wright helped and assisted getting this started. We're going to be, again, this will be open to both Glendale College and Pasadena City College faculty. And the topic will be the new college student and you. And we're hoping to educate each of the faculty on each of the campuses to the kinds of resources available on campus to assist faculty to improve student learning and success. So I want to commend Dr. Wright, I believe she's here, for her activity and role and leadership on this endeavor, and Chuck Ward our Senate faculty development chair for their work on this. We have elections coming up this spring, and we'll keep you updated on that. And that's my report. >> Thank you, sir. Dean Ligunez. >> Management association has no report tonight. Thank you. >> So we come to president Sugimoto? >> Thank you very much, Dr. Bradbury, [Inaudible] and I have a couple of announcements to quickly make. This is our second semester -- second week of our spring semester, and I'm very pleased to announce to the board and to all of our audience that at this point in time compared to last year we were overall 1.5% over in our overall FTS's. We do have fewer sections. So therefore, we're being very efficient in our utilization of our courses. Certainly what has happened, even though our head count is slightly down we have more enrollments per person. So that says something perhaps about the ability of people to take classes. More than likely they're not working, so they have more time to take classes. So that is of -- of news to us, and certainly we figured that we would have more students on campus in terms of in classes than we had before. So that's one of the announcements I'd like to make. On the fifth we have an event called the Teachapalooza symposium. Try to say that ten times real fast. It is on Friday and they will be in the CC lounge, [Inaudible] lounge, from 6 to 8 p.m. they will have a recognized key note speaker, and it will be for elementary and middle school -- how to motivate elementary and middle school students to become academically motivated. And it's sponsored by the PCC's teacher prep program. Also on Saturday, we have girl science day, and you will see that in your consent items March 6. Dr. Jacobs, I know you have details on that but this is what we have done every year. And it's a wonderful event for our girls who come to campus to be motivated to look at the sciences as a profession and hopefully we can motivate many of them to come to PCC and continue in their science endeavors. This is a very nice announcement, and Dr. Wright has been also acknowledged previously, but let me say this to all of you as a first announcement. Dr. Wright, one of our bright and shining stars, who is one of our faculty members and coordinator -- one of the coordinators in the TLC and has been very involved -- and I have to go through this -- very involved in our accreditation self study and is current working and has been working on a response to the accreditation recommendations. She has been appointed as the state-wide basic skills initiative professional development project director. She's not going to get that all on her business card, I know, it's far too long to say. But as of March 1, she is now the new project director, state-wide project director, for professional development. Congratulations, Dr. Wright. [ Applause ] >> That ends my report. Thank you. >> Very good. Well, the reports were so substantive I have nothing left to add. So thank you, everybody. Let's move ahead to item E, approval of the minutes. I'll entertain a motion to approve. Any changes from anybody? >> I just notice on page 3 under Dr. Sugimoto's report, is it the city of Pasadena integrated water resource plan, the last bullet item, as opposed to water integrated -- just a -- >> This is the one that Dr. Van Pelt is going to sit on. >> It is the water integrated resource plan. >> Water integrated instead of integrated water? Okay, I withdraw that. >> It was odd when I announced it too. I know I almost couldn't get it out. So all in favor of approving the minutes as is, please signal with an aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Anybody against? Any abstentions? Motion carries. Thank you. Item F, approval of the consent items with two little heads-ups. Heads-up. 89 P, you have a revised version in our package. What president Sugimoto calls peachy, our peachy, and 96 P has been pulled entirely. So I'd entertain a motion to approve the consent items. >> I moved. >> Second. >> Motioned and second. Any discussion? Maybe just signal, any items you wish to flag? Good Lordy Mrs. Gordy. All in favor of approving the consent items? >> Aye. >> I have never seen it. I like it, I like it a lot. All in favor, say aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Any nays or abstentions? >> Sir? >> This just might be a minor detail, my recollection might not be completely accurate, but I believe in regards to the student bus passes Trustee Brown abstained from voting, didn't vote against. >> That's on the amendments? >> I recall it as a no vote. >> That's correct. Was a no vote. >> Was a no vote? Okay, I apologize. >> But thank you for bringing that to our attention. Okay. >> Translate that [Inaudible] slide -- translate that [Inaudible] slide. >> Annual update on KPCC operations, presentation and discussion with possible action, President Sugimoto. >> Yes, thank you, Dr. Bradbury. Well, I'm very pleased to introduce Mr. Bill Davis. If he would come forward and provide us with information on KPCC, welcome, sir, thank you very much for being with us this evening. >> Thank you for having me, Dr. Sugimoto. >> Note that the committee reported back [Inaudible] -- >> Okay. >> And just so you know, the committee that met with you reported on our meeting at our last meeting, and prepared a report on that as well. >> Very good. Okay, well first off, again, it's a pleasure to be here and to report to you all. As I mentioned in the -- written -- my written report to you, the calendar year 2009 was a very successful year for Southern California Public Radio. Bucking economic and other trends, we actually saw increases in audience service. We saw increases in individual support for our programming. We enjoyed significant contributions towards the capital campaign and the construction of the building. So -- and -- on a quantitative analysis, it was an outstanding year. From a qualitative perspective, we were also very, very pleased with the performance. As I noted in my report last year, all of the finalists for the LA press club's broadcast journalist of the year were KPCC reporters or anchors. So we -- we feel very good about that, and I think we won 25, if memory serves, local regional or national awards for outstanding journalism. Which just leaves every other broadcast station in southern California in the dust. So we feel, again, very good about that. Most of the information that I provided you, particularly the financial information, is a fiscal year, July to June assessment. So the current year that we're in now, the current fiscal year, 2010, I would note that we are current right at about budget for our membership. We just finished up our membership drive. Our goal was to have 10,000 new or renewing donors. We had 9,998. Somewhere you ought to be able to round that up, but not sure that we're going to do that. When we say every contribution counts, it absolutely does. And I think we were about -- oh, we didn't have a hard financial goal. We were hoping to raise about 1.2 million, and I think we ended up about 1.19. So close. The annual contribution, it shouldn't surprise folks, was down slightly from the year previously. The economic turn-around, we're still waiting for signs of it. So what we're seeing is a growth in membership, which I actually feel pretty good about. That if you can't see year over year increases in the level or average gift or meeting gift, it's good to be adding to the number of donors. And I think we are now at about 42,000 annual donors to Southern California Public Radio. As I -- as Doug Johnson, I should say, mentioned in his report, we had 14 Pasadena City College interns. Five of those were in the technical area and two of those -- I'm sorry, nine of them were in the content area. I can update the report that Doug did to let you know that one of the interns, Lauren Ossen, is currently one of the three finalists for a full-time position producing on the Pat Moreson program. Don't know if she'll get it, that will be -- but she has performed extremely well and is certainly going up against some very stiff competition, but also doing well in that. And then I believe also Doug is about to hire one of the interns to be one of our fellows, which is a full-time position that lasts for one year, often times those evolve into full-time positions, but it's not guaranteed. And so, you know, hopefully in the next month or so I'll be able to up date you on the status of those two interns moving towards full time employment at Southern California Public Radio. So you know, those are some of the highlights. But I'm really here to -- to answer your questions, address any concerns that you all might have, and would be happy to entertain any questions or comments that you all have. >> Very good. Let me turn -- if I may, to the -- the chair of the committee. Is there anything -- >> No, again, just to recap, we had a very productive meeting a couple of weeks ago. Mr. Thompson, Dr. Fellow and myself, with Mr. Davis, and toured the new facilities at -- on Raymond Avenue. And we were delighted you were able to find a good location within the district, which is a key factor for us. And not only were we impressed with the financial statements and the fund raising capability, but also -- also the product, the editorial product, and the service you're providing to the community at large. But also the service to the use of the station as an academic and instructional resource for our students. And so I want to thank you. And Doug Johnson, who's also an adjunct member of our faculty, I believe, to make sure that there's a pipeline for PCC students. In fact, it wasn't planned, but we were talking through the studio and came across Roy Len who is working -- a student -- a PCC student who actually -- an interesting -- just a side note, he's a young man who got his degree already from the College of William and Mary, one of the top colleges in the nation. Came back to PCC to enroll because of the opportunities he would have to work in journalism at a station like southern -- KPCC. So it's interesting how some students who even already have their degree are coming back to PCC because of this opportunity. Two things we raised with Mr. Davis is how the transition is going from the old space to the new space, and then what beyond the academic instructional internship program, the financial statements that we continue to receive, what other benefits does the district get or the tax payers of the district get with respect to public visibility, promotion, the visibility of our faculty and the enhancement of our reputation. And we're -- talk about how many times PCC faculty, how many times our underwriting credit, our top of the hour credit gets out there so that it continues to enhance the reputation of this -- this institution. So very good meeting and we're -- we're delighted to have that opportunity. >> And one other thing I would add to that. In that conversation we discussed having some representatives of the PACCD board attend one of the SCPR board meetings on an annual basis. And we would make that part of -- I don't know which would be the optimal board meeting, but we have four board meetings a year. So if it would be the June meeting, that would be fine. If it would be the March meeting, that would be fine. But we will work to make that a regular feature of the SCPR board. >> Because we've been so impressed with your fund raising capability -- >> Yeah right. >> -- we want to make sure there's a close relationship. >> Hmm. Let me check the fine print in our -- >> I saw Trustee Mann's hand up. Anybody else wish to address Mr. Davis? >> I had a question and a comment. First of all, I'm very pleased about the number of interns we have and the kind of involvement that they had. The question I had, though, had to do with the money. >> Yes? >> And on the first -- and I ask Mr. Baum, and he couldn't answer it. So I'm going to ask you. On membership, it shows KPCC, 3 million and change, KUOR, 34,000, KPCE, 5,000. And S CPR, 3 million. Just a little bit more than KPCC. How does SCPR recruit from membership? . >> The -- per the contract, the -- the -- and actually, I did bring the contract if you want to reference that. The way the auditors determine this is if the contributions come in during the on-air portion of our fund raising activities or if they are clearly designated as supporting KPCC, those are allocated to the KPCC column. If they are coming through our direct mail or our e-mail or other non-broadcast activities then those are designated as SCPR. If they come in over the air and are flagged in zip codes in the in-land empire, those are attached to K O U R, and if they're in the Coachella valley, those are KPCC. So that's -- that's how the auditors make those determinations regarding membership revenue. >> Thank you. That's what I was hoping you would say. I remember we had a long discussion where we worked the details of this out. >> Right. >> Thank you. That was my question. >> Are there other questions, comments? No. [ Background noise ] >> I was just asking President Sugimoto what action we need to take here. And -- >> The discussion with possible action? >> We put it down as discussion with possible action. I don't know if there's any action -- >> As a might be of the council I would just move that we accept the report from Mr. Davis and reaffirm our -- how pleased we are with the on-going relationship. >> Second that, and suggest we extend our heart-felt thanks to Mr. Davis for a job very, very well done. >> A very friendly amendment. All those in favor of the motion so articulated, signal with an aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Anybody against? Any abstentions? [Inaudible] yeah, I -- give us your advisory vote, now that we've already voted. >> Aye. >> Thank you. I'll get you next time. >> One final comment, if I may. And it's actually not a comment but an invitation. We will be having the grand opening of the new facility, which we are calling the Moan Broadcast Center and Crawford Family Forum on Saturday the 20th of March from 6:30 until whenever it ends. And I believe all of the -- the PACCD board members have been invited. You should have received those. If you have not please notify me. And also we are having a public -- what would you call it -- open house on Sunday the 21, from 1 until 4 p.m. and again , all of you are welcome to attend that. But we really -- you know, from -- on behalf of all of the staff and all of the SCPR board members, I would be remiss if I did not thank you all for the incredible opportunity that we've had to work together in partnership with the district to extend the public service of the station and also improve the quality of the internship students for the students. So thank you all very much. Appreciate it. >> Thank you Mr. Davis. I want to draw ostentatious attention to the fact that I'm drinking from the -- >> You know, if you've actually heard me on the fundraisers you know how much I love those very curvacious coffee mugs. >> They're great, they're lovely. Yeah. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Item I, Educational Master Plan. Oh, excuse me, H. Excuse me. Yeah. Item H, media broadcasting of board meetings, presentation, and discussion with possible action. President Sugimoto. >> Thank you very much, Dr. Bradbury [Inaudible] I'm asking Dean Miller to come to the podium and give us a brief presentation on what we've already heard at our last board meeting. And this is for action. And it is behind tab H in your notebooks. >> Thank you Dr. Sugimoto, thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong, and members of the board. Again, as Dr. Sugimoto mentioned, is behind item H. And I want to start by saying that the presentation I'm going to make tonight is at the request of the board subcommittee on radio and communications. And the request was to basically come up with a basic proposal and then with a few options behind it. So I'm going to go through this pretty quickly. You folks have this information in front of you, but for the benefit of the audience I'll quickly purus this. The basic proposal is to go with what I think I called option two at the last meeting, which is to use the services of the Pasadena Community Access Cable Corporation and use their remote facilities. This would provide what I would call tape delayed cable and webcasting opportunities. The basic cost for that on an annual basis is $15,400. As far as options are concerned, I was asked to present some options. The first option would be the ability to provide live webcasting. And you can see from the -- from the presentation there, this is the equipment that we would need. It would be a one-time purchase of roughly $6500 worth of equipment to provide live webcasting capability. If we needed additional lighting and if we needed additional facilities there would be those two contingency items. I don't believe the that lighting would be necessary, but just want to safe from the budgeting point of point of view. And the facilities is likely going to not be very necessary either, unless we need some way to house the webcasting equipment if you decide to go on that option. Then the Gravicas [Phonetic] media manager, as we talked about last time, that provides further opportunities for webcasting and online applications, et cetera. You see those. And then these servers would be here at PCC, they would encode the content, we'll be able to push the live video using our own PCC network and web stream -- web site. The stream, however, it's important to note that without the Gravicas capability we could not index the video stream. However, the audio stream that we have right now is indexed, and would also continue. So the recommendation if you wanted a recommendation from me personally would be to go with the PCAC remote facilities with the annual rental of 15,400. If the board wanted to, we could go with the live webcasting. Again, a one time expense of $6500. And then just to be on the safe side a facilities contingency. So that cost would be $24,400. Although you could also just go straight with the PCC -- PCAC remote facilities option as well. As far as distribution is concerned, we were asked by Dr. Mann to see if we can provide a little bit more detail on distribution. First of all, webcasting at the PCC web site, if we went with the first option, the PCAC option only, we could still webcast but it would be on a delayed basis. And that would be through the PCAC facilities. If we go cable, we are definitely live and tape delayed on our own PCC channel, which is PCC channel 96 for Pasadena and Alto Dina. And then tape delayed, we have confirmed that the community -- the cable companies in the community of -- communities of Arcadia, Delmonte, San Marino, Madre, South Pasadena and Temple City will provide space on their public educational or governmental access channel to air our board meetings. The time slots will vary. None at the moment are willing to commitment to specific time slots, bit they will provide the time. We are still awaiting word from the cable operators in the communities of la Canada Flintridge and Rose [Inaudible] and then it was -- excuse me -- Mr. Martin who requested some information on student participation. In talking with Donna Rapella [Phonetic] over at the PCAC staff, he would be very happy to have our students work along side the PCAC staff. There could be a cost savings of somewhere between $50 to $100 per meeting. The students would be non-paid, however if they were hired by PCAC, much the way that KPCC that Mr. Davis just spoke about, with KPCC, then we -- in time they could be hired to work on the meetings. And he wanted me to just make the point that students do not replace professional crew, they're used to supplement the crew in order to maintain the quality. So in a very quick summary, that is the presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Miller. Let me turn to Trustee Baum. >> So, thank you very much for that presentation, doing the research and following up on the other inquiries of the board members last meeting. So my personal belief as well as -- I have consulted with the other members of the committee, would be to -- and I will make this as a motion, to -- to budget for the next calendar year the broadcasting of the very basic, lowest cost level, that would be for the contracting with the PCAC to cover our meetings an then to stream that -- to air that meeting on the cable channels, the PCC cable channel as we described. And then stream those meetings on their web site so we don't have to incur the additional expense of the live streaming. So that's what I'm going to recommend and make a move for our committee's consideration. And then realizing it won't be live, it will be tape delayed, but it will still be accessible on line. And then with our own web site we can link to it from the board page -- >> I'll second that. >> Okay. >> Just for clarification, you indicated calendar year. Are you saying academic -- >> Next fiscal -- >> Academic year? >> So we can actually put it in the budget. >> Okay. >> So I'm not saying -- I meant fiscal year. >> I just wanted to make sure that your motion was -- >> Right. I don't want to take money out of this year's budget for it. I want to give us time to plan for it. And then this would be a one year pilot so we could revisit it in a year to see how it's working. >> Oops. I see Trustee Mann, I see Trustee Thompson. >> All right, I have a question that may not -- completely understood the motion. The -- let me just tell you what I would like, tell me whether this is -- I still do not think we should be using cable unless we can reach our entire district. And unless there can be some time certain. So what I would be in favor of is just the webcasting, because that's available to everyone who has access to a -- to a computer. So what would be the difference in the cost if you just did the webcasting? >> There would be no difference in the cost. There would be a difference in labor. We have our own channel, 96. That is a PCC owned -- not owned, but operated channel offered on cable. So I think it would be a mistake not to include it on that. To the extent that it can be shared with the other systems I would be pleased to ask the administration to continue to do that. But the motion is not contingent upon a regular air time at cable systems throughout the district. >> All right, I understand that. Trustee Thompson? >> Just one question. Jeff, on the -- page 3 of the report under cable, it says live and tape delayed. >> I think that's a mistake, actually. I don't know that they can go live from here to 96. >> No. Not unless we have the -- the webcasting option. >> But even that would only be live to the web, it wouldn't be live to 96? >> I'm sorry, yes, you're correct. It would not be live to 96, that's correct. >> Okay. >> But what we -- what we would do is we would work with charter cable to move the drop that is now in Robinson Field over to here. So that might take some time to get that done, but I think that's what I would recommend that we do. >> If that were possible, that was be preferable. But that could be a very expensive undertaking as well. >> I just want clarification, [Inaudible] support this. >> I might need to ask you to repeat -- and here's -- is this as -- for one year only or -- >> The motion is to direct the administration to engage with the Pasadena Community Access Corporation, the -- an agreement to cable-cast PCC board meetings under the conditions at the cost described in this proposal and that's only -- for the 15,400 cost to be budgeted in the next fiscal year. And this would be a one-year pilot proposal that we would revisit a year from now to see if there's any enhancements or we think it was -- just was not -- a terrible experiment, we don't want to pursue it. >> Very good. I'm assuming Trustee Fellow still seconds -- student trustee? [Inaudible] -- >> I -- [Inaudible] I just had a question, is there any way to gage the amount of viewers that go on the web site and actually view it? Actually -- actually view the board of trustees meetings? >> If -- on the web site we could probably determine that to some degree, in terms of the number of hits. But of course viewing it on cable we could not determine that. >> Sure, but at least on the web site we'd be able to see? >> Yeah. >> Is there any way -- is there a minimum of a one year contract or is there any way to, like, a six month pilot to see how many people would watch that? Just -- >> It's -- I'm fine doing it for a year. I think the cost is -- I would prefer just to budget it for the year as opposed to a six-month experiment. >> And then just revisit it, see how many people actually watched it? >> A year from now we would say this is working out or it's become very intrusive, the cameras don't work out. Nobody watches it, that type of thing. Or that it's enhanced public access to our proceedings. >> Trustee Brown? >> I was just wondering, okay, so basically what you're saying, that it's got to be put in a budget for next year. Is that correct? So we're saying that next June is when we will be able to do the pilot, is that what I'm understanding? >> Starting on July 1, start our meetings in July. >> Okay. >> Yes, I do have another question. I just want this really very, very clear because it is going to determine how I vote, because we've heard this before. My understanding is that it's taped and there's no assurance as to when the meetings will be broadcast. One week, it might be at 4 o'clock in the morning, next meeting might be at 7 in the evening, next meeting might be another time. So if people wanted to actually watch it, it would be almost impossible to find out when it would be. That's what we were told several years ago and that I think was the reason why the board hesitated. Because I don't know how that is making -- making this much more accessible. That's why I support the web, because once it's up there a person can go look at it any time. Is that still -- could I to finish. Is that still the condition of this? >> Let me answer that. >> Trustee Baum? >> We have Pasadena City College channel 96. It will be at a regularly scheduled air time in -- on Pasadena City College channel 96 at an evening and day time viewing, is my understanding. >> That's correct. >> We will request from the other district, from the other cable operators a regularly scheduled air time that we could share with our constituents. So once we have content to give to Arcadia and Almonte and Sierra Madre, we would say if possible could you make this available every Sunday at noon so that it can be -- so they can plan accordingly. The challenge is sometimes the meeting may be an hour, sometimes a meeting may be four hours. And so it may be difficult for other -- other systems to accommodate that, given their public access schedules. However, it's my understanding that the channel we control will be a promotable air time, plus it will be 24 hour access through the web. >> Mr. Baum has described it exactly correctly, yes. Thank you. >> So let's call the question. Student Trustee Abbadela? >> Okay, I would probably vote aye. >> All those similarly in favor, please signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> All nos. >> No. >> Please signal with a no. Any abstentions? >> Me, [Inaudible] -- >> Abstention, okay? >> I'm still having a problem with that. >> Two, three, four aye's, one nay, and one abstention. The motion carries. >> Let me just clarify, this is strictly going to be a pilot program, correct? And we'll revisit it? Because one of the main concerns I would have would be do people actually watch it. >> We will find out. >> And I will just say for the record, regardless of how many people watch it, it's important for a public body at a time of great state-wide interest in the budget crisis to make itself as accessible as possible to the public, to observe the proceedings of the decisions that we're making with hundreds of millions of dollars of tax payer funds. And this is one small step in at least ensuring the public has greater access to what's happening here. So that beyond the 30 people who are here, anybody -- the 30,000 students, the -- more than 2 -- 1500 faculty can actually see what happened and what transpired during a board meeting. That's my feeling. >> Good. I move to remember our old colleague Mrs. Wells-Miller, and I will call her and let her know of this vote. This was also close to her heart. Thank you. Let's move on to item I, the Educational Master Plan update, presentation, and discussion. President Sugimoto? >> Yes, thank you, Dr. Bradbury Wong, and again I would call on Dr. Miller to give us a very brief overview on where we are on the environmental scan as part of the Educational Master Plan. Dr. Miller -- Mr. Miller. Sorry. >> Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Sugimoto. First of all I want to address the board and indicate that there's been a change in plans in the sense that based on schedules and people's calendars and providing the board enough time to consider the materials, we had a challenge trying to figure out when the best time would be to actually do this and present it. So we had a deadline of last Friday and we couldn't answer those questions we did put a full presentation on the agenda. However, subsequent to Friday we've had an opportunity to adjust the education master plan deliverable and the schedule for this thing and make certain that the M I G folks to join us on March 17. So I'm very happy to advice you that this evening instead, and with the permission of Dr. Bradbury Wong, our board president, the EMP presentation is going to be moved to March 17. In preparation for the March 17 meeting, tonight we provide you the environmental scan document, which is a very substantive document that we give to you for consideration for the next meeting. And in addition to that, next week we will be forwarding to you additional meeting materials so you'll have plenty of time to prepare and review those documents. And on the 17th MIG, Mindy Craig will be here and we'll do a 15-minute presentation. Overview of some of the items, if not all the items you see in the agenda that was behind tab I. And then we -- Dr. Bradbury Wong and Mindy will lead the board in a discussion about the materials that they have, that you have been given, and also we will respond to any of your questions and any of your comments, and take copious notes and go on from there. So we are looking forward to a good discussion on the 17th which we hope will lead to a study session some time in May to provide the board the opportunity to review the draft of the entire Educational Master Plan in its entirety. I would also say very quickly that the survey is -- continues to be out there. We have over a thousand responses thus far to the survey. The program reviews that are out there right now, we have over 54 that have come in thus far, so we are making good progress with the plan. So thank you very much. >> Thank you. May I just suggestion something and ask for clarification, if not now then later. The issue of study session in May presents us I think with a time difficulty, precisely because that's the time we'll devote most of our energies and focus to the presidential search. Now I see how the -- this work is clearly aligned with that, but devoting an entire study session to me doesn't seem realistic. So maybe we could think together about how to pull that off in synergy with the presidential search. But it wouldn't be a whole session. >> Absolutely. Obviously, we will work within the time constraints and the realities of the board given what's on your docket. But it is important that the board have an opportunity to review the draft in some fashion and provide feed back and comment, and we'll definitely get that to you in plenty of time for your consideration. So however we do it, we'll be happy to do it. >> Very good. Thank you. President Sugimoto. >> And just a quick announcement that Dr. Bradbury Wong and I are going to be leading a round table with respect to the environmental scan and the early -- excuse me -- the Educational Master Plan on March 15. And I know that we would like to have at various times, various board members to join us. Thank you. >> Just one question, Bob. What is the projected time aligned for this; when -- as best you can look in the future, do you see us being ready for adoption, [Inaudible] action -- >> The Educational Master Plan will be ready for adoption no later than June 30. We're on a tight schedule, if you will, which is one of the reasons we were vacillating back and forth on doing a presentation tonight and on the 17th. So definitely, our commitment is to have something ready for the new superintendent, president, and the college community to have in their hands, ready to go upon her or his arrival at the institution. >> Thank you. >> If I may offer my thought, the idea of those happening around the same time is to me more ideal than having it entirely finalized and then I think our part of the presidential search is to make sure that the candidates are very much aware of this. It will be a focal point of our conversations with them. >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. Trustee Baum? >> Thank you for passing along the environmental scan. I found it very interesting just by flipping through very quickly, some good data. And I just want to make sure, has our planning and research office had a chance to review this, and do they find the data to be consistent with what they've -- what they've been producing? >> Multiple times. >> Good. Because I want to make sure I don't read in this and say no, no, somebody else says that more of our students are coming from this zip code, not that zip code. Okay. >> So has your stamp of approval for being the sound data? >> Very good. >> Great. That's very important to us. Other comments or questions? Thank you, Dr. Miller, Mr. Miller, thank you. >> I keep wanting to promote him. >> Item J, budget update, presentation, and discussion. Let me turn to President Sugimoto and then if you would wish to comment again, if there's any more details, that would be helpful. Thank you. >> I think some good dialogue with the subcommittee would be wonderful. I'd like to turn this portion of the meeting to Dr. Van Pelt, who will take this item. >> Thank you. As Dr. Mann pointed out, last Thursday we did have the first meeting of the ad hoc budget advisory committee. And the committee is made up of members of the board of trustees, the executive committee of the college as well as the resource advisory committee, which is the shared governance group. And also, as Dr. Mann pointed out, we did go through a number of different pieces of material. And I think that what was distributed this evening with a -- basically a checklist. And I think it's in the folder. >> Some place here. >> Now what is most important here is that this is a work in progress. What we're trying to do is we're trying to identify issues that need to be resolved as guiding principles and directions for the development of the budget. The ones with the checkmarks in it were already dealt with. In some cases there are other items that are not checked and not bolded. That doesn't mean the people didn't agree. Those were items that might have been added or we didn't get to them. You also notice several of them have board of trustees, which means that those require board of trustees direction, and then there's one in there which is the state. Meaning the state will determine what the funded base is for F T S. So this is very much a work in progress. It's a checklist where when members of the committee come up with other things that need to be considered, they can be considered, then they will be worked into the framework of the budget. So we're working this from this form into the overall budget, and as more information comes from Sacramento we're going to be in a position to incorporate those and develop options. So right now there are a number of variables because the situation in Sacramento is very fluid, but as they become less fluid and more certain we will be able to come up with more certainty in these things. In the meantime, obviously, we're going to be developing options based on these guiding principles and directions. >> Very good. >> I checked in with our chair, John Martin, who t be here this evening, and I got a very detailed briefing which was helpful, overall. It underscores what you were saying, Trustee Mann, about how positive a meeting it was. Is there anything you'd like to add? >> No. Except maybe just to underline what Dr. Van Pelt said about the areas where its board of trustees -- since these are negotiable, the discussion was we would just carry it as it is now until that has -- that has been made. Because we can't have another body dealing with a negotiable item. The only other point I would like to make is down at the very bottom board of trustees election expense, whether or not it's budgeted. I was surprised to find that apparently some people on campus thought that meant campaign expense. Dr. Van Pelt quickly pointed out, but I want everyone to understand that actually this is the cost of the election, and the county -- we're required by-law to pay this. The candidates pay all their own expense of the campaign for new material. >> It is a staggering cost they have increased on us and we can do nothing about it. It's astounding to me. >> The cost of Democracy. >> Okay. >> Very good. Do we need any action on this? No, we don't. Thank you, Dr. Van Pelt, President Sugimoto. Item K, accreditation follow up report, discussion with possible action. We will find the final report under K, President Sugimoto. >> Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury Wong. And I'd like to turn this portion of the meeting over to Dean Miller who will describe the report to you in full and hopefully you've had an opportunity to read through this document. >> Right, and thank you Dr. Sugimoto and I will make this brief. I'm very proud to present to the board on behalf of a number of very hard working people here on campus follow up report Number One for your further review and approval, per item K. This item would then -- this report would then be supported to the ACCJC no later than March 1 of 2010. The people who worked on this were a wide cross section of faculty, staff, and managers that represent our shared governance groups. The response to recommendation Number One, which is basically the development of self assessment data sets was really the cause for the college being placed on warning, but of course we went far beyond that. We went from compliance into the area of improvement. We chose improvement. And this is going to help us to insure a continuous cycle of improvement in support of all of our students. So in summary, the follow up report sets forth the data sets required for the recommendation. It's a -- we include a reenvisioned planning process, the development of an institutional effectiveness committee, and we discuss the significant progress that we've made to date on recommendation Number Three. The report has also been vetted by two very highly regarded ACCJC consultants and facilitators, and they have determined our response to be very responsive to the recommendation Number One, and we will continue to do a little tweaking, but for the most part we are where we need to go. In closing, I would like to just state a very quick but sincere and profound debt of thanks for a number of people. I'm going to read some names. Dr. Wright has received many kudos tonight, she's going to receive one more as lead writer. As you may recall, Dr. Wright was our self coordinator, was the self study coordinator. And being Dr. Wright is Dr. Wright, she wants to see this through and was a principle writer of the document. And she was assisted by Crystal and myself. But Crystal has done incredible yeoman's work on this project as well and deserves an enormous amount of credit for getting the document to where it is today. Beyond that, there's a number of people on the accreditation response steering committee, and our recommendation task force. Number One, if the board will indulge me, I would like to read some names very quickly. Certainly the academic Senate led by Dr. Jim Vicly and our vice president Ed Martinez, Ed Martinez have been very instrumental in this work. Along with several other faculty. >> And Ed is in the audience. Thank you, Ed. >> And Ed -- Mr. Martinez is in the audience. We want to thank him. Of the classified Senate led by Latisha Valez and Barbara Salmon. Other faculty, Carol Curtis, Dr. Jacobs, Dr. Dully, Kim Miles, Dr. Wilcox, Mrs. Lugens was instrumental from the management association point of view, Dr. Van Pelt, Alan Say as our student representative, Beth Wells Miller and Pryor was very instrumental in this, in the earlier days of this activity. And now has been supported by Dr. Bradbury Wong. Mr. Thompson and Dr. Mann, to some degree in this effort. And we appreciate everybody. Beyond that, other people on the recommendation task force Number One, Solomon Dava, a member of our E and T faculty, Alex Tracellis and Dave Douglas, two of our division Deans, Dr. Levo, our counseling Dean, and yours truly. So there has been a lot of people who have been actively engaged in this. And without telling you about our list of to-dos for the spring and summer, they are significant as we move forward. Not only addressing and putting into effect that which we promise in the follow up report, redesigning our planning process -- Crystal and I were talking about that even before the meeting. But also working now, turning our attention to completing recommendations three, four, and five, and getting that report ready for October 15. So we are very proud of the work that we have collectively done, feel the job is well done, and we would appreciate your support tonight. Thank you. >> All right. Good, thank you so very much. Comments, questions? The -- the recommendation before us, well, let's enter contain a motion, then. >> Move that we approve the report for submittal to the A C CJ C. >> Second. >> Very good. >> We might even add words of gratitude to the motion. >> You think that's friendly? [ Laughter ] >> Only offered in that spirit. I'm not seeing questions or comments, so Student Trustee Abbadela, how would you recommend? >> Aye. >> All those in favor, please say aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Any no's? Any abstentions? With a debt of gratitude for all your hard work. I see many folks in the audience. So thank you very, very, very, very much. And good luck, fingers crossed, right? This is a big one for us. Yup. >> Thank you board of trustees for your support and your approval of this recommendation. We will make sure it gets submitted in a timely fashion, and thank you to all who have been involved in this process because it's been a very short amount of time to get this done. And it has been yeoman's work, and I really appreciate all the effort that's been put into this document. It is wonderful. Thank you. >> It is. I just want to mention, it is a lot of work. Having gone through many accreditations, I'd rather be tortured. [ Laughter ] >> I think [Inaudible] -- >> It was. Yeah. >> Actually, I'll tell you what was amazing, and Crystal said this at our last board meeting. People actually wanted to be on this committee just because of the excitement of being and doing something that was new and moving the college forward. So my kudos to everyone whose been on this committee. Because they've really struggled with this. But they've come out on the other side. And sometimes you have to go through some of the pain and agony to feel the glory and the wonder. So thank you very much. >> Very good. >> Item L, if you would lead us please, Trustee Mann. Policy review, discussion with possible action. >> All right, the first policy is policy number 40-50, standards of scholarship. And there was some question where the legal citation was accurate on some of these. Had we had a chance to check those, Dr. Sugimoto? >> Yes, thank you Dr. Mann. I actually have Crystal Koros [Phonetic] and Mr. Ed Martinez here who have worked on this policy. So if you could address the citing. >> Both checked it, and they are correct. It could be slightly confusing if you look at just the CCLC policy, because what they're referring to as standards of scholarship is different than what we are. So Ed and I both checked the codes. >> Okay, you agree with that Mr. Martinez? The codes are correct? >> Right. In addition, the -- the CCLC policy referred to a section of a code that was repealed. So we got the correct up-to-date section. >> As a member of the CC, and actually -- the CCLC board I will bring this up. Because I was -- I looked something up and I realized the code section had nothing to say on this. And so it's not really a service that we're paying for if we get the wrong codes. I really appreciate your doing this. So the first policy is a -- the policy is -- is not new. The only change in the policy is we add a policy [Inaudible] Pasadena Area Community College, and then the president superintendent will establish procedures that establish standards of scholarship. And as a -- as for the new members, what the board approves is the policy. We do not approve the procedures. That's an administrative task. But if you see something in procedures that you would like to suggest direction on, you're certainly will -- welcome to do that. And also we belong to the California Community College League and they have a model policy service. And that's what we're referring to, that we check -- keep our policies updated. And then there's a -- the shared governance and through the coordinating council, policies all go to them and they're reviewed before they come to us and they go to the executive committee. So by the time we receive them they've been approved by the executive committee and the college coordinating council and reviewed against the model policy. Is that correct, Dr. Sugimoto? >> That is correct, Dr. Mann. >> And that's what happened with all three of these that we're going to look at tonight. >> That's correct. >> So tonight the -- I would like to recommend approval of policy 40-50, the procedures come right out of the catalog and the new language simply says establish the procedures. >> Would you be willing to enter contain a motion to work with all three of them? >> Yeah. I will hold that until we go up to the third one. >> Terrific. Thank you. >> The next policy then that we'll look at is policy 41-15. This is a new policy, is it not? And this is simply -- is a policy that states about the baccalaureate -- about our transfer mission. And then again the procedures are pretty much aligned with existing procedures. And the last policy is the college credit for articulated high school courses. Again, this is a new policy. And the procedures still come from pretty much our existing practices, do they not? So really the policy we have here are the policies to have policy which would support these procedures. Mr. Martinez, do you have anything you would like to add to this? >> Only that policy 41-15 on articulation was based by and large on recommendations from CIAC, the California Intersegmental Articulation Council. >> Okay. Thank you. Dr. Sugimoto? >> Just very quickly, what Dr. Mann was saying is the policy is now memorializing in the way that we conduct our -- our business at the college and certainly the board in their approval of those policies will then support the procedures that we already have in place. >> Okay, are there any questions? >> Can I just ask one question that deals with policy? I take it professors only give A, B, C, and D grade, there's no minuses and pluses? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? If not, then I recommend that we approve these three policies. >> Second. >> I move, I mean. >> Second. >> Student Trustee Abbadela, how would you ad vice us? >> Aye. >> All those in favor signal with an aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Any against? Any abstentions, the motion carries to approve all three policies. The next item is also yours, Trustee Mann. PUSD parcel text. This evening we're discussing whether or not we would bring this item back, in terms of timeliness most likely to the next meeting, I'm thinking. >> Yes, I think we would almost have to address the next meeting. Because the election is -- is in May. We have supported PUSD bonds in the past and when we went out with the bond, the PUSD supported us and actually helped campaign for it. I think this is parcel tax is critical for the PUSD and one of the -- some of us have been working now for several years with PUSD trying to -- I shouldn't say some of us. I think the whole college has -- a movement has been working with PUSD, trying to help make a smoother articulation from high school to college and to improve the preparation of the high school students for college. If we get poorly prepared students we have to spend more money on basic skills. This is a -- the cuts that will happen if this parcel tax does not pass are draconian, and they're pretty draconian anyway. It will certainly effect the quality of the students that we have manage to us from the district. So I think there's a direct -- it will have a direct effect on the college. Because if you look at what is happening -- what the PUSD is proposing to cut is they're going to cut the number of councilors which will directly effect us. They're going to increase the class size which will directly effect us. We'll have fewer children in the third grade who will learn how to read and we'll have to teach them how to read at 18. And so since the PUSD is our largest district and the one district from which we receive students who have the most learning challenges compared to the other districts I think that we have an interest beyond the fact that it's -- I think the college has an interest in supporting this to try to keep the quality at least as high as it is. And so for that reason, I would suggest that we put it on the agenda for discussion. >> Very good. Questions, comments. Student Trustee Abbadela, and then trustee -- >> Just out of curiosity. How ambitious, I guess, is the -- will this new -- I guess, the -- the [Inaudible] tax be or you -- can you -- can you give us, like, some numbers -- >> Let me throw this in, if I may. There's kind of a fine line between discussing -- I should have clarified this before -- between discussing and just asking questions to determine whether or not it should come back to us. If and when it comes back to us we would really get into a meaty discussion. I should have clarified this. Just limit our conversation now to whether or not this is going to come back. >> Oh, okay. >> Whether or not we have an interest in this. >> We would have to act to bring to back. >> Okay. >> We would have to act tonight. So the motion would have to carry with the majority to bring it back to vote for or against. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> And I'm sure if we -- I can't answer that -- but I'm sure if we do decide to bring it back that superintendent Diaz, one of the school membership, will be happy to be here and to answer these questions. They have all the details. I am in the general sense, but it would be better to have someone who understands it. [ Multiple voices speaking ] >> I was just going to comment that the entire ballot initiative is on the PUSD web site. I went to that this afternoon and downloaded it and have a copy with me. And the other point I would make is just a matter of background and context is that voters are [Inaudible] San Bernardino, South Pass, have also recently passed parcel tax initiatives. >> Is that enough to bring it to the floor? >> Well, I -- there's no motion, so there's nothing to bring to the floor. >> I moved that we have this as an agenda item at our March 17 meeting. >> I'll second. >> Trustee Baum? >> I'm going to speak against the motion. I think nobody takes a back seat to this board in advocating for more financial resources for public education. Many of us have spent time going up to Sacramento, lobbying our legislators, making sure the state makes a significant investment and a greater investment in public education. However, we're a jurisdiction, and I don't feel comfortable putting this jurisdiction in a position to recommend a tax for another jurisdiction on its tax payers. So -- and I know that there is an active debate going on. I don't want to do anything that could possibly handicap the Pasadena unified school district, because I'm very committed to seeing that district improve and finding the resources to help that district improve. What I don't -- I think would be a mistake to have happen is if we brought it to this board and it did not pass. Because then that would actually harm their ability to pursue their campaign. And if it did come back I know there are individuals who are also concerned about this proposal. And in addition to having the school board present, we need to invite those who are opposed to it to come and make a presentation as well. But rather than doing that, I think we'd be better for our district to -- if individuals want to support it, that's -- that would be welcome and encouraged. But I don't think the district should be a position to weigh in on another jurisdiction's decision to try to increase taxes on its tax payers. >> Did I see Trustee Thompson? You were just drawing our attention to that? All right. Should we call the question. So was the language to recommend or support -- I -- in the motion. >> My motion was just to bring it back. >> Oh, that's true. This is a very good point. All right. [ Multiple voices speaking ] >> Actually had one quick question, if it's all right. >> Yeah. >> I don't know if this is an appropriate question, but in what way have we been supported in the past, I guess, in our fund raising efforts in the Pasadena school district. Is that an appropriate question for this? >> When we went up for a bond they endorsed us. They did not see this as a jurisdictional conflict. And I think Mr. Baum was very pleased when the then-mayor of la Canada signed the ballot statement, did not see that was a conflict. So I -- >> I -- yeah -- he is welcome to have -- >> So the question has been opposed and answered, thank you -- thank you -- >> As an individual he signed a ballot statement. >> If and when this comes back I think we have to be careful about the language that we end up using. But that's if and when. So let's see if we get there. Student trustee Abbadela, how would you recommend -- how would you advice us to vote on this one. >> If I could actually make a friendly amendment. >> Give it a whirl. >> Or actually just -- what about this idea, how about bring it back, but not necessarily with possible action. How about bring it back for discussion, for further discussion. Is that -- >> As a ballot measure I think that's useless. I mean, we either should take a position on it or we should let it go. There's going to be an election in May whether we do anything or not. It's not like filming our meetings where we can -- you know, we have leisure. >> Okay. All right. I would vote aye. >> Aye. All those similarly in favor, please signal with an aye. >> Group speaking: Aye. >> All those against? No. So the motion carries. You -- you caught that count, thank you, very good, trustee -- >> And so when it's agendaized, my only request is that a balanced presentation is invited. >> Yeah, I think that's always important to us. I must confess, I'm a little bit nervous in including dates for specifically bringing back items. I understand the motivation behind that. I just -- makes me a little nervous when we look at the plate and trying to play around with dates. So going forward I would hope we wouldn't have too many such motions. >> Well, it's just -- [ Multiple voices speaking ] >> There is an election -- >> Time sensitivity here, yeah. Although it is May. Okay, I made that point. Good. Student enrollment fee item N, that's actually me. You might ask why is the board of -- the president of the board bringing an issue to put on the agenda when in fact the president of the board can put an item on the agenda. And the reason I'm doing that is in deference to my colleague, Trustee Mann. So the long and the short of it is this -- I would invite us as a board to consider bringing back items such as generally speaking our policy at the state level for fee increase. I think it's an important item, it's one, however, that the CCCL board also represents us on. So the issue quite honestly is how -- how does the CCCL vote for us, how do we give voice to how we wish our position be presented. And my understanding right now is that the CCCL is against fee increase, and as I read, Scott Lays and others may have read this too, Scott Lays I thought very cogent statement of the facts that maybe only 3% of folks need fees to be as low as they are, and that a student fee increase could indeed better serve us. And then I'll pass along a little piece of gossip I overheard while on the campus. I heard about the amount of money that's being paid under the table to get feets in certain seminars. And it's in the multiples of hundreds that people are paying to get seats in class. And I ask myself, if students can afford a black market that's quite an escalation in coast compared to the official price. There's something wrong. And I think as a board I would want us to have that conversation. So here tonight I'm simply asking is this a conversation we would wish to have. Not a do we agree or not on fees, but it is a conversation we would wish to have. Would anybody wish to comment, trustee -- >> Yes, I had -- actually -- it's not the CCCL, it's the CCCT board that took -- that took a position against this. And without discussing, you know, the reason why, there's a very cogent reason why, I'll tell you in one sentence. A fee increase on community colleges will not go to the community college, it will go to the state general fund. And community college students are just being used at -- it's just another kind of tax. They have never, ever given the colleges this money. So that was the reason we did not take the position. But -- but if we want to have it, you know, discuss it -- and this was why I indicated -- I don't even -- I'm very surprised that Scott Lay has continued this discussion as, you know, the executive director of boards which don't support it, but that's -- you know, everyone has freedom of speech. So that's fine. If we can bring it back and discuss it, that would be fine. >> Trustee Baum. >> I agree with both your sentiment and Dr. Mann's, I mean, we should move to take it up as an agenda item only for the sake of the students. The legislative analysts office reported last week and recommended that student fees be raised to $40 a unit. And that's making its way through the capitol right now. And if there are fee increases, it's -- we as a board could weigh in, at least with an endorsement or recommendation as to how those should be applied or managed, that could be communicated to decision makers in the state. And we should be careful, that you're saying that's just a rumor. I don't want people to think that administrators or other students are selling spots in classes. >> The administrators, the faculty are not. The students are paying each other. >> How do they do that? >> Let's not get into it. If it comes back, we'll talk. >> I'm more interested in that. [ Laughter ] >> -- want to bring that one back. >> I'll make one statement that probably -- I don't know if it's germane now, but I think the state of California has betrayed its master plan just this week. San Diego State has raised -- the schools are all becoming impacted. San Diego State has raised its admission requirements 3.7 instead of -- before, all community college students that graduated from here were allowed in. Those days are over with in California, unfortunately. >> Very good. May I call the question? >> It there a motion on the floor? >> Okay, I move that we as a board make a -- a recommendation, make a statement on a policy regarding increases in student fees. >> I'll second it. >> That means we have a discussion of it. >> Right. That we bring it back for discussion. >> Very good. Student trustee Abbadela, how would you advice us? >> Aye. >> All those in favor? >> Group speaking: Aye. >> Anybody against? Anybody -- >> Oh, I'm against it. >> One, thank you. Any abstentions? So the motion carries, we will bring that back. >> You're on your way out? >> Future board meeting dates and items. Wednesday March 17 I'm flagging in the presence of Mr. Miller, that we will try to keep the agenda as bare as we can so we can devote as much talk as we can, but we also know that it's likely that the parcel tax issue will come to us. The 7th is regular. The 21st, I'm going to be talking with the officers about our evaluation this year. It's a little bit of a funny year, so how do we best use our time around -- around that. Anything to -- to add or flag? Trustee Mann? >> I would like to request an agenda item to be placed -- is that now or later? >> Sure. Go ahead. We're now at item P, future agenda items. Go ahead. >> Yeah. I would like us to bring back contract education to be put on the agenda. >> When you say contract education, are you meaning CTE generally? >> I'm meaning opportunity for schools to contract with -- >> Okay, very good. Thank you. >> Excuse me -- I think -- Mr. Miller, correct me if I'm mistake, is that not a part of the EMP, the Educational Master Plan? >> It will certainly be an element that will be discussed in the plan. Every indication is that it will be part of the plan at this point. I'm not sure to the extent that Mrs. Brown is talking about, but it certainly will be addressed. >> I'm just wondering if what Belinda's raising would fit in more appropriately with that discussion or do you think it's something that needs to be done separately? >> Why don't we just note it as separate and then we'll make that decision as the -- as the conversation unfolds. >> Thank you. >> I think -- Trustee Mann, you mentioned policy issues earlier on? >> Yes. But I'm not ready to bring them up, except for the agenda. Wait a minute -- let's -- let's -- change that. Let's look at by-law 1250. >> Okay. >> It has to do with the order of business and we're out of compliance. I'm the one that started it, I think we need to either change the by-law or get ourself in compliance with our own by-law. >> Okay, very good. Trustee Thompson, you mentioned there in your report from foundation and advancement; issue of strategic plan. Is that an item for future agenda? >> I think not. I think we can wait for the foundation to initiate action on it before it comes to us. I mean, do we want -- I mean, there's nothing we can talk about other than to say yes, go ahead and do it, or no, don't go ahead and do it. I can't imagine we would do that. So -- >> Okay. >> Don't see it as something we need to put on our agenda just yet. >> Okay. All right, motion to adjourned? >> Moved. >> That's always in order. >> Second -- >> Third. >> When John Martin's not here we get out a lot earlier. [ Multiple voices speaking ]