>> I'm calling us to order this is the Board of Trustees Pasadena Area Community College District Regular Business Meeting Number 14, it is Wednesday, May the 19th in 2010. It is 6:45 p.m. Mrs. Thomson, would you call the roll? 

>> Dr. Hilary Bradbury-Huang. 

>> Present. 

>> Mr. Thompson. 

>> Present. 

>> Mr. Baum. 

>> Present. 

>> Ms. Brown. 

>> Here. 

>> Dr. Fellow. 

>> Here. 

>> Dr. Mann. Mr. Martin. 

>> Here. 

>> Mr. Abadia. 

>> Very good. We're about to go into Closed Session. Let me check and see are there any comments on Closed Session items. Seeing none, then we will refuse ourselves to talk about Government Code 54957 Public Employee Appointment (College President), Government Code 54956.9(b) Pending Litigation, and Government Code 54957.6 Labor Negotiations. 

[ Noise ] 

>> I'd like to us to order and invite Mr. Lindemann to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. 

>> Lets all stand. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God-- 

[ Pause ] 

>> Presidents Sugimoto, do you have any introductions? 

>> I actually don't have any introductions. Although I know you have a comment on non-agenda items so perhaps that would be the introduction once we get there. 

>> Once we get there. 

>> Yeah. 

>> Okay. Well we have a very important person with us Mr. Scott Lay, and so what I would propose to my colleagues is that we hear from Mr. Scott Lay if you would. Welcome and thank you for being with us on this auspicious occasion. 

>> Thank you so much Madame President and Board Members, to the new members I've had the opportunity to met Berlinda welcome to the Community College System. We need your leadership at this time and thank you for taking on this challenge. I'm gonna talk to you a little bit about of the budget situations that affects community colleges and a little bit about student success and the issues I think that are the hottest issues facing community colleges today. Let me first talk a little bit about the Community College League of California. We are your state association, we are the association of the 72 community college districts, we are formed 20 years ago, we're celebrating our anniversary this year reformed 20 years ago through the merger of the California Association of Community Colleges, the Community College Trustees and the Chief Executive Officers in California Community Colleges. We provide services to districts and government relations, leadership development and education services, and district services. We buy electricity for example for 34 districts. We have the largest investment fund for retiree health benefit so we do a lot more than just nag you in your e-mail boxes [laughter] which I know many of you are used to. I put the organizational chart. I thank you so much for your support of Jeanette Mann and her leadership at the statewide level. As you know, she is the first Vice President of the California Community College Trustees Board, one of two policy boards of the league. And she also serves in the league's board of directors which hires me and approves our annual budget. Now on to the news, first as you know, California is continuing to wrestle with an economic challenge that has plagued the state general fund, one in the very frequent boom and bus cycles or peaks and valleys, or feasts and famines, whatever you may want to call it in California's history between the 2007 and 2008 fiscal year, 2008, 2009 fiscal year, the stock market decline and burst of the housing bubble has significantly curtailed state revenues, as you'll see from this chart even in 2009, '10 even with 10.6 billion dollars in new tax revenues we still only saw a general fund increase by that 4 billion dollars. The peak to valley of this particular recession mirrors that of the 2000 to 2001 calendar year drop in the stock market, and in fact, of the state general fund in which California lost 200 billion dollars in personal income statewide. And that is the true budget problem that Sacramento is facing. Yes, it's accurate to say that a lot of investments we're made that may not have been sustainable in the long term but the major problem that is facing Sacramento is this decline in state revenues. As you know community colleges are funded and are Proposition 98 approved by the voters in 1988 Proposition 98, loads very slowly. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Proposition 98 provides a minimum funding guarantee for K12 in Community College Schools and within that there is a split of funds where the legislature prioritizes fund for K-12 and community college schools and within that there's a split of funds where the legislator prioritizes funds for K-12 schools and community colleges. We used to argue about the spilt because community colleges according to the 1989 authorizing legislation of Prop 98 said community colleges should get 11 percent of the funds allocated on Prop 98 because of Governor Schwarzenegger's leadership and the clear and compelling mission of community colleges right now, we are receiving 12.2 percent of Proposition 98 funds. Of course, if you're receiving a larger percentage of a shrinking pie as you see from this chart you know that times are still tough. The governor's budget as amended by his May revise released last Friday, would provide 2.21 percent enrollment growth for community colleges, a very small negative cola that would be applied to both K-12 and community colleges, 10 million dollar cuts each to EOPS and part time faculty compensation. Those funds would be redirected for career technical education and the governor proposes as additional categorical flexibility adding in categorical programs that were not made flexible by the legislature last year into flexibility for this year. Our position is that we oppose the additional cuts to EOPS and part time faculty compensation. We oppose any curricular based reductions where PE or arts courses or theater or arts courses might be singled out for reduction. And we're also continuing to talk about--and we're on record of saying that we believe Californians are willing to pay the same in taxes next year that they're paying this year. As you may know there is a 5-billion dollar tax cut that is scheduled to take effect on December 31st this year. And while none of us want to pay more taxes, many of us are willing to pay what we're paying this year again next year and by doing so we could not eliminate cal works, not eliminate child care, and not impose the 1.5 billion dollar on allocated reduction that has been propose for K-12 schools. Those are the issues that we're talking about. We're talking about these in the context that go beyond just the Community College Budget. But we understand the holistic nature of the budget and its impact on our students. Frankly, a state that does not have a welfare system, it is the only state in the nation without a welfare system, that would hurt community college students and we have to acknowledge that the elimination of 142,000 child care slots in California would hurt community college students as well. So we're talking about those issues as well even though they may know how that directed back on the community college budget. Small print, I'll just note that Theresa Tena our director fiscal policy and I updated this chart this morning. And what's note where it is how much the governors may revise actually addresses the out year short falls that the state faces. When this chart was written for a presentation two weeks ago, the out year deficits of the state went a 20 billion dollar range each and every year. The governors may revise because he's eliminating ongoing programs like CalWORKS, like child care does a lot to reduce a structural short fall going forward. So to the extent we advocate or the legislation accepts--or I'm sorry rejects, eliminating CalWORKS that does create a bigger budget problem down the road that either has to be fixed with additional revenues or additional cuts. We need to be honest about that. For community colleges we believe that at the end of the day this year we'll have a budget that will range from a cut of minus 100 million dollars about 2 percent cut to an increase of 150 million dollars which is around what the governor has proposed with the enrollment growth money. We're counseling districts to while continue to served as many of students as possible, don't bank the enrollment growth month that's been proposed in this year's budget. That money likely will be look at by the legislature as they try and solve this structural budget problem. Now let me talk a little about students success and I subtitle this part of my talk as recognizing fiscal reality in meeting the moral and economic imperative, I actually titled this as Community College Reform before, and let may first assert you that no, I haven't drank the Kool-aid. 

>> However, I do believe that community college reform and focus on student success is necessary right now. First, it's not an indictment of what the work of our faculty and our staff, our leaders, our trustees, our administrators. It is not an indictment of the work that we're doing nor is it a political fad. It's not a rationale for cutting budgets. Indeed many folks want to give us money the Gates Foundation just gave 2 million dollars to Cabrillo College to expand it's the Digital Bridge Academy. People see community colleges as a solution not the problem nor is community college reform and setting a higher standard for a success pie in the sky. Community college reform however is economically necessary for the state of California and our nation as a whole, it is achievable and I believe it's morally incumbent. First, let's talk about economic necessity. Many of you have likely heard of President Obama's goal of increasing the nation's college graduates so that we reclaim the international lead in college attainment, that's something in the neighborhood of 60 percent of the adult population having a bachelor's degree. Right now, the numbers--as you apply that, if you apply it from 18 to 64 year olds its 13.1 million more adults having a bachelor's degree or associates degree by 2020. However, I think that the brain trust have been looking at this a little bit more practically and are saying we really need to focus on the college going generation right now and let's look at the 18 to 34 year old and let's make that our goal. So we envision changing this chart to recognize that the California goal would be about 1 million and the national goal would be about 8 million. We're working with the National Center of Education Management Statistics NCHEMS on this right now. But that still a significant improvement to our current trajectory in California particularly at this time of austerity within higher education. Why is this economic--economically necessary for us to address college achievement? It's not that we haven't been doing a job. It's that we've been doing a great job on previous generations that are scheduled to retire. That's me right there. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> California is becoming less educated than other states, not only are we losing ground internationally, we are losing grounds to almost every state in the nation. If you look, historically California has been fantastic in terms of college achievement, our 64 and older population was third in the nation in the associate's degree or higher, and fourth in the nation bachelor's degree or higher, but as you see are 25 to 34 year olds are lagging the most of the nation. And many of us would find it difficult to even name 25 other states that we would say could possibly have a higher baccalaureate degree attainment than we have. That is an economic problem going forward you've heard it echoed in the Public Policy Institute of California's reports of needing a million more BA graduates by 2025. No matter barometer you pick we understand that in order to have an educated workforce that meets the needs of this economy and our employers we need to increase our college achievement. Now, lest you think I'm suggesting that we're driving of a cliff. [Laughter] I'd say, please don't panic because this is achievable. This is with the 1.5 million goal and as I mentioned we're likely reducing our goal to 1 million as we just focus on 18 and 34 years olds. And that would only require a 4.7 percent annual increase in associate and baccalaureate output within California's public and private higher education systems. That'll be a 4.7 percent annual increase. As you can see, no state is in markedly better position than California. This is a national challenge, although obviously with the largest population it becomes a larger challenge for us in terms of numbers. I believe that addressing the students' success is also morally incumbent upon us in addition to the economic goals because access does not deliver success equally. We lead the nation in access we don't lead the nation in success and when you disaggregate the data, something that we are often fearful for doing, we recognize that we have very systemic and pervasive achievement gaps for African-American and Latino students, something that must be addressed as California's future demographics show that we're going to be a majority minority state, and if we're going to meet those economic goals we must close the achievement gap. None of us would be proud to say we're part of a system that has a 15 to 20 percent persistent lag for African-American and Latino students, but that is a truth for every single college in our state. Also we take so much pride in having older students. We say our average student is 28 years old may go down 27 or up to 29. Frankly, students that start out college in their mid 20s or their late 20s are very unlikely to succeed. We must focus on getting students in immediately after high school equipping them to succeed with financial aid and support services because each and every year that they delay going to college the less likely they are to succeed. It's not so much an academic issue, it's a life gets in the way issue. If you're 28 years you're more likely to have a job, you're more likely to have kids, you're less likely to succeed in college. Now the good news is from 1992 to 1993 our headcount enrollment went up 28 percent while our total degree production went up 82 percent. That's great news of course we're not talking about huge numbers here, our total output degrees and certificates in community colleges, about 160,000 a year. That sounds like a big number but then we also take pride in having 2.9 million students. I'm no math whiz but 160 over 2.9, not a great percentage. That not so good news is that California while leading the nation in participation is a lagger in terms of completion. I know this chart is awfully small but you can see the green. I'll just tell you that on the left are the states that have the highest number of students per 100 fulltime equivalent students that are achieving a completion each year. Credentials, these are sub-baccalaureate credentials either a certificate or a degree. To the far left is Kentucky, to the far right is Nevada, in the middle is the national average, California is the redline and if you can't see it its sixth to the right. Now, we don't need to become the leader, we don't need to become Kentucky. Frankly, Kentucky has made up a bunch of certificates that recognize a number of units the students have taken not necessarily economically productive milestones in education careers. If we simply move a little bit over incrementally increasing the number of students that are achieving a credential annually in our overall denominator of students enrolled, we can meet that national and state goal of reclaiming the deed--reclaiming the lead in college achievement. We can improve student success and maintain access. That is a critical element you may have read about it in some of my e-mails. We're talking about success, access and equity concomitantly. Those are three quarter stones there are three pillars in which we stand. California's advantage is that--we have the best network of colleges by far. We are still the envy of the nation in terms of the distribution of community colleges around the state. We have a low a baseline which is political speak for we have a long ways to go [laughter] it's a lot easier to make progress when you have a long ways to go. And doing so over, a huge student population, again the 2.9 million denominator. There are a lot of folks either awfully close to getting a degree that just need to be nudged over the finish line. Indeed in our system there are a lot of folks that are eligible for a degree that just need an e-mail or a phone call to say fill out the piece of paper already. But we don't have an incentive necessarily to do so. We also have a highest public respect of all four educations segments. That doesn't mean that the voters want to raise taxes and give them to community colleges. But understand that the work you do is highly regarded, more highly regarded than the work that the University of California does than K-12 schools do and the California State University does. And I do give that with all due respect to folks in the room that I know have other professional affiliations. Community colleges are the work course and they are recognized for that. We have disadvantages as well. To come up with a one size fits all solution is impossible in the community college system. The difference between Lassen and Los Angeles is huge and that is a challenge even within the LA basin. Coming up with a one size fits all solution is very, very difficult with the diversity of population served, institution structures, and historical obligations institutions carry with them. We're a politically driven system controlled by local elected boards, we have limited funding sources, we are proud of our--having the lowest fees in the country, but also recognize that when we talk about our under funding relative to other states, it's almost entirely because of our fee structure and not necessarily because other states get more state or local revenues. 

>> I tell you that reform is coming and the question is who will lead it. I don't wanna get into politics here but we know that the 3 candidates for governor are Steve Poizner, Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman and I would just proffer that we have a window of opportunity in the 6 months before [laughter] Governor Schwarzenegger returns to the private sector. We've had our friendships and disagreements with Governor Schwarzenegger but he has by far been the champion of community colleges in the coroner office. I would say that we will be lucky to ever again have a friend like Governor Schwarzenegger who has had an open door, who has listened to our concerns and done all that he and his administration can to address our concerns. And so we want to do what we can to work on these issues while he is still in office. Obviously, it'd be a heck of a lot easier if the state budget was on an upward trajectory and not a downward trajectory but we have to play the cards that we're dealt. The league has thus created a commission on the future which is working to publish a report by September identifying policy and practice changes that would envision a 20-20 vision for student success. Not a pie in the sky if you double our funding, we'll have rainbows and unicorns everyday but rather what are some strategies that can reasonably brought to scale that can address the access, success, and equity issues that we care about with our big hairy audacious goal being that we're going to tackle that completion goal, whether it be 1 million or 1.5 million we're still settling on that right now, balanced with the participation rate. We're not going to cream students. We're not going to say our goal is to just get students through. It's about getting all Californians the opportunity to get through college on an equitable basis. Our commission has come up with 5 subgroups and is working 33 members on the commission and developing recommendations, are currently chewing on 28 recommendations that we believe that legislature will embrace and some of them are, I'll say, headline grabbing just in my work with other states with the Chronicle of Higher Education inside higher ed., all these publications that think that California is the backwaters frankly, that we don't care about student success. This is, you know, they say we hear about these concerns about accreditation. Well, that's just because California is so far behind every other state in addressing student completion. I don't agree, I don't buy in a lot of that rhetoric but we also understand that we have to go on the offense of one student success. One of the areas that we're talking about right now is--was being developed and now maybe in response to legislation authored by your hometown senator and that's SB 1143 authored by Senator Carol Liu. Senator Liu has been a good friend of community colleges. We strongly disagree with the legislation right now that we chop up a portion of funding, give you part of your money at census date and part of your money at completion. I know a lot of smart CEOs, CIOs, and CBOs in this system that would do the computer query and say, "Okay, well next semester, we're just gonna offer classes that have a high completion rate 'cause you could print it out of your database pretty quickly." And so if I look at who are the easiest faculty members, which time serve students that life doesn't get in the way too. Those are what--that's not what we want to focus on. We do wanna focus on getting students across milestones that lead to proven student success. So what we're looking at right now is an additive categorical program that takes the best of a system that the state of Washington has implemented and recognizes milestones and gives colleges incentive funds for getting students across milestones. We're not just talking about degrees and certificates. We're talking about getting those first generation students across the 15-unit threshold, one that has been proven evidence-based that if you get a first generation college student across their first 15 college units or indeed even across their first college level math course, their chances of succeeding and bringing all of the economic benefits of that home to their family increases dramatically. So we're coming up with this alternative right now. I hope that we don't have to rush and enact it this year because of some pending disastrous legislation but it is a strong sign of that work of the commission on the future that I'm very proud of. Finally, as we celebrate our 100th year as California Community Colleges, the 20th year of the Community College League, I thank the Pasadena area community college district for its support of the league, in particular for your support over the last year of Elaine Reodica, our regional representative who's a PCC alum and who's been camping out in Juan Gutierrez' office. I thank you for that support as we've been able to set up legislator meetings and frankly I think we're--we can take a lot of credit for killing president--or Governor Schwarzenegger's proposal to eliminate the competitive Cal grants what I've heard about 40,000 of our lowest income students and that's a lot to Elaine's work and the support that she got here at PCC. So, thank you again for all of your hard work and I look forward to updating you in the future as these items progress. 

>> Well, thank you so very much for coming. 

[ Applause ] 

>> I think thank you particularly to Trustee Baum for I believe inviting Mr. Lay. 

>> I--actually I think our president, Dr. Sugimoto extended the invitation and-- 

>> But certainly Geoff, this was one of your thoughts about bringing government relations to the board-- 

>> Yes. 

>> And I think it's important that the board does hear from our representatives throughout the state so I thank Scott for being here today. 

>> Absolutely, and Scott is--as you could see, is an amazingly effective advocate for community colleges up and down the state. One thing you forgot to plug was the annual convention for the league is going to be here in Pasadena in November and we're--I'm hoping we can all roll out the red carpet for the entire system when they come to Pasadena in November. 

>> And thank you for being a host district for that. I know Sherry and Carmen have been working closely with folks here so thank you and again thank you for allowing Jeannette to give so much time to the league's leadership. 

>> Please don't go. I at least have a question for you, Trustee Thomson too? 

>> Yes. 

>> Go ahead. 

>> Number 1, can we have a copy of your PowerPoint presentation? 

>> I'd be delighted to--I'll send it to the president's office--for distribution. 

>> Good, the second question then it's--it may not be the time to get into a really good discussion of it this evening but the committee you put together or a task force or whatever you were calling it, I'm just wondering is it--how practical is it or is it practical to try to come up with something that's going--I mean given the diversity of this state and the size of the state and the number of community colleges that exist and the better or worse of public education in different parts of the state, is there--can you really come up with some plan that's gonna be one size fits all or how are you gonna adapt this to be suitable in Napa Valley and also down in San Diego and Pasadena or wherever else? 

>> Well, I think one is it can't be a cure all. It can't get down to that level of detail. You have to look at what--and one of the criteria for the objectives of the commission is it scalable and applicable across populations. So some things and actually one of the items that came out of the commission is already introducing legislation, that's a transfer associate's degree which Chancellor Scott and Chancellor Reed are working on mandatory assessment, you know, there are a lot of wonderful boutique programs in this system and I wish we could provide those opportunities for all students. We simply cannot, you know, afford a 20,000 dollar program per students. So it's how do we--how do we use the items that can be scaled to move the needle? We're not going to have an 80 percent completion rate, you know, in 5 years. We really--and as much--as nice as that would be, we don't need it. We need to get to maybe a 40 percent completion rate and so some of it is kinda coming back into reality and thinking what can you achieve and what are the mainstream things that are already evidence-based other states are doing that can be reasonably implemented in California? 

>> And it becomes further complicated too because people [inaudible] will really tell you that it's not necessary to have a degree necessarily but do you have to have a certain training so the career and technical education center that we have from our standpoint, I think from the country's standpoint is every bit as important as the academic programs we provide. So it seems to me that certainly we have the obligation I think here and I suspect every community college has an obligation to kind of step back and do it's own strategic plan and I mean we've--as you know, we're going through a process now looking for a new president. 

>> And I think that's one of the issues that we have to give a serious thought to. How do we go about planning for 5 years from now or 3 years from now or whatever it is and putting all that together so it's a very exciting times in that sense, very challenging times also. 

>> Absolutely. 

>> Anybody else? 

>> Well, part of me is withdrawing my question 'cause it was so much what you were talking about but we happen to be setting goals tonight at the same time that we're entertaining a candidate for president so, I was wondering if you'd want to take a step out there and maybe suggest some goals to us, particularly perhaps around completion rates or whatever feels relevant with regard to career technical education 'cause in some ways I could read your presentation as leading out CTE. I mean clearly it's there when we think about completion rates of certain types of programs but it's never mentioned and people could think of what you're saying is entirely transferred to academics, right? 

>> Well those are certificates and degrees almost--virtually all the certificates were CTE certificates although we strongly recommend a focus on associate level CTE programs from macroeconomics sense if you are looking at corporations deciding to site in a region or a state, they do look at 2 years of college or more as a major indicator and so we benefit a lot more for having 2-year degree attainment rates than 1-year certificates. 

>> Okay. 

>> So CTE is definitely in there and we also talk about degrees and not just transfers, well they're gonna be meaningful transfers. We're not gonna criticize a student that goes to USC that is 1 unit short of having an associate's degree. So it's an imperfect science. We have these various milestones that we try to measure but CTE is definitely part of it but what we also hear from employers is the CT part of CTE, the career technical part, is not as important as the basic skills part. 

>> Uh-hmm. 

>> They can train frankly on the work--in the work place most of the skills needed to operate the machinery and the fact is during a 10-year lifecycle in a high tech firm the machinery they learn on in year 1 or year 2 is out of date by year 7 or 8. But if they can't read and comprehend the manual to learn what the new--how the new equipment works then they're education is basically worthless. So you have to look at how those 2 pieces integrate, so we're looking at, you know, yes, certainly retention, completion, we lose 25 percent of our students after the first semester, an additional 25 percent after the first year, you know, and then we spend a bunch of money on advertising to find new students to fit in the--to sit in those seats. I'll tell you that the purple cows which are the for-profits, the purple cow Seth Godin talks about is the beautiful cow you pay twice as much for you got out to milk the next day, you realize the milk's exactly the same as the milk from the black and white cow. That's what's happening with the CTE or with the for-profit schools. They are telling students that we're gonna get you through much faster and they do have some strategies that we can implement. When a student doesn't show up to class they pick up the phone and call them. 

>> Uh-hmm. 

>> We have absolutely no incentive to do that right now other than the moral one and I applaud the faculty that do, do that. What if we had an incentive to do it rather than go out and advertise to find a student to fill their seat next semester or next year? Those are kind of the BHAG or the big questions we're asking at this point. 

>> That's great. 

>> Just one last point I wanted to make is I appreciate your focus on the accountability measures 'cause it wasn't too long ago where we had a governor and a legislature that wasn't so supportive of community colleges and none of the current candidates that I know are--feel the commitment to community college or articulating commitment to the community colleges in the same way that Governor Schwarzenegger is--has. And so the need to demonstrate through degree achievement and showing the number of degrees we're awarding and focusing on that and their measures of success and course completion rate are gonna be more important than ever because we're going back into some unchartered territory within the next 6 months. 

>> And if we can depoliticize this issue this is not a fiscal conservative accountability issue, it's not a way of cutting budgets, it's--nor is it some do good total on left, I mean it's a confluence of as I say the political, the economic and the moral imperatives. None of us should disagree with the fact that we are wasting students' time and taxpayers' money if we don't have programs that are guiding students toward a finish line. Everybody that comes to a community college has some goal in mind and it should be our utmost responsibility to help them most expeditiously as possible reach that goal. And I say that as somebody that was enrolled in an allied health program in Orange Coast College and dropped out after the second the semester. So not everybody's perfect and it was no fault of Orange Coast College and I'll fight like heck to make sure that our colleges remain open access institutions that allow students to try and fail. 

>> Thank you. 

>> Thank you very much. 

[ Applause ] 

>> Let's move now to public comment on non-agenda items and invite Amparo Becerra, to the podium. I'm so delighted by what you wish to address. [Laughter] I'll let you break the news to my colleagues this is, this is great. 

>> Good evening. Can you hear me? Good evening! This is our PTSA board here at PCC. Good evening distinguished board, administrators, students, staff and community members. My name is Amparo Becerra, and I'm the current PCC-PTSA president. Our PTSA unit has submitted our annual report to the California State PTA with a total of a thousand hours of volunteer time. Whether we are at a meeting, on the way to the meeting, after the meeting, once or twice a month or even more we have a mission. Every minute counts. PTSA has stemmed from the national state and district PTA organization. The S was added to PTA to signify that the unit promotes student involvement. PTSA has been active here at PCC since 1942. So there's a lot of tradition and history. Tonight on behalf of the entire PTSA board we would like to present you the Pasadena City College Board of Trustees a symbolic check in the amount of 8,000.00 dollars of volunteer time. Please join PTSA next year when we kick off our membership drive at the PCC welcome day in August. We would like to thank the PCC Art Department for designing this check. Thank you for your time. 

[ Applause ] 

>> What didn't you happen to tell me? 

>> Shall we get the president in that? 

>> Scott, you were good Scott. 

>> The president--the president should-- 

>> But they're better. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Hey, the president's coming. 

[ Pause ] 

[ Laughter ] 

[ Whispers ] 

[ Applause ] 

>> So reports by members of the board on what we've been up to, Trustee Thomson. 

>> Well, I attended the meeting of the PCC Foundation recently and they are hard at work focusing very much on the transition to raising larger sums of money on behalf of the college and as we--those of us who are here this afternoon for the forum heard that was the only question asked of the Doctor Cardoza [phonetic] was how would she go about helping the foundation raise these very significant amounts of money. So the foundation is focusing on that. 

>> They're in the process of expanding their membership and we'll be taking some action. I think in the next meeting this month or next month rather, excuse me, to do exactly that so things are coming along fine in there. I also wanted to announce that by e-mail yesterday from the Pasadena Tournament of Roses Foundation. I see that the Pasadena City College Foundation is the recipient of a grant for event tickets and transportation for a performance of--in the heights for 100 high school students from the Upward Bound Programs. So, congratulations to the Foundation for a successful application in the Tournament. My heartfelt thanks to Tournament for granting the foundation's request and the money will be pretty helpful, I appreciated. 

>> Wonderful! Thank you. Trustee Baum? 

>> Just--I was delighted to be able to join with some colleagues and the President in attending the annual scholarship breakfast for the Pasade--for the President's Latino Advisory Committee last Thursday, it was--always a very inspiring morning to hear the--from the award recipients and to see the community support for our students. 

>> I have nothing to report. 

>> Trustee Fellow? 

>> Nothing this evening. Thank you. 

>> Trustee Brown. 

>> Let's see, on May 7th I attend the Business/Industry Education Partnership breakfast that Ms. Ellen Ligons sponsored up at--in Altadena was very good experience to meet. The different companies and people who were willing and have help our program here at Pasadena City College so that was a pretty good experience for me. And on the 13th, I also attended that Latino Advisory Committee breakfast where we honored several students and they received scholarships and of course they were happy. I also attended the--I think it was the TABES that's what we call it, right? That was today which was also a scholarship breakfast to honor our students and I must say that I am very, very happy to be part of PCC because we have some very dedicated staff here. I mean that--not only come and work but they get really involved with their student to ensure that they get that little push that little reassurance that, you know, we're here for you. We wanna see you succeed so I am very pleased and applaud them for such dedication to our students and I did also attend the budget meeting. I think it was on May the 13th and that's my report. 

>> Okay, thank you. 

>> Student Trustee Abadia. 

>> Alright, as some of you might have known the Associate of Students met with the President candidate tonight 6:30 and actually right now, we're having a forum it might be over already. So, that went well. I'm sure the students would be glad to give a report I guess on their--on how they feel about the candidates. Upcoming the--well actually right now, the election for Associated Students is going on. So, Election Day is May 25th and 26th so at that time we should know. This Friday is the basketball tournament among all the clubs on campus and I'll be playing representing Associated Students so-- 

>> Will you know which direction to go? 

[ Laughter ] 

>> I do. I know very well-- 

>> Let's move along-- 

[ Laughter ] 

>> So, yeah so--there are about 15 teams that'll be playing so I have a good feeling Associated Students will so, on June 5th the Associated Students put out a Spring Ball so it should be interesting and that will be all for tonight. 

>> Terrific, thank you, Mr. Tsay. 

>> It's a shame, I actually have a couple of things to announce but it's a shame because one of the things is for Scott Lay maybe Mr. Baum or Dr. Sugimoto would be able to relay then my sincere and warm thanks for his e-mails and the information that he gives us. I know for a fact that our lobby committee takes many of his positions and adopt that as they go to Sacramento Lobby and that he has been a great resource for us and also been, you know, a great leader in uniting the community colleges across California toward the effort to make sure that access is still provided for students, so maybe you'd like to relay that information. 

>> Second things goes to Dr. Bradbury-Huang from what I understand this is the very first time that Associated Students has ever had the opportunity to sit down with a candidate for president and he made that possible along the rest of the board so I'd like to give you my sincere thanks in that regards and last but not least AS is also offering a scholarship for students that apply for about the next 2 weeks and we're taking about 5,000 dollars of our budget to make sure that, you know, to offer to students for scholarships. So I hope if you guys meet any students that you guys like to tell us about, it would be good for us. Thank you. 

>> Very good and Mr. Lindemann on this special week of classified employee week. 

>> Yes ma'am. Tomorrow we will have our general meeting for classified senate held at the president's conference room. I think it's from 2 to 3 and then the day after that we're gonna have a little outreach program for facilities down there where we at least go down and thank all the people, the custodians at work at our night shift so we will be putting that about 5:30 tomorrow evening. 

>> Great! Dr. Bickley, more seconds. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> We have the nanoseconds from our May 17th meeting this Monday. We had a visit from Brian Ha who is a Membership and Advocacy Director of FACCC so we got our introduction earlier this week to the May revise and some of the implications. We also, the senate, completed its sponsorship of the Board of Trustees Senate Faculty Lecture-Performances with Rebecca Morris from the Visual Arts and Media Studies Division. She gave a presentation abstraction in everyday life in which she shared her insights into the origins of art that often come from everyday perceptions. It was very enjoyable and instructive and we thank the president of the board, Dr. Hilary Bradbury-Huang for joining us and as well as Dr. Sugimoto. We will be giving 10 scholarships to students. The board up the ante a little bit at our Monday meeting we'll be giving 1,000 dollar scholarships to 10 well-deserved students. The committee had interviewed 60 applicants this year and it gives a reflection to some degree of our economic reality. So we're pleased that we got some generous donations this year to help us out a little bit. I'd also like to draw your attention to Friday, June 18th we'll be having the Academic Senate Retirement and Awards breakfast in Creveling Lounge here at 7:30 in the morning and we will be inviting all the board members and the executive committee of the college. Thank you. 

>> Thank you. Dean Ligons. 

>> Hi. I just wanna remind to save the date, June 17th 7:30 for the Management Association Retirement breakfast. It will be held down at the Brookside Golf Club, I think that's what they call it. And then if you'll allow me to put my CTE hat on for a moment and assure you that we've already done here at PCC what Scott Lay's advising and that is we've tied all of our CTE certificate programs to the AS degree so students will leave with both a certificate and a degree because we learned from our advisory committee members that that's more valuable than just having the certificate. 

>> All of them wow, very impressive. 

>> And then finally I'd like to thank Trustee Thomson and Trustee Brown for attending the annual CTE Business Industry/Educators, oh yes! You too Trustee Fellow, excuse me. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Our Industry Partnership breakfast we had over 200 businesses represented gave 7 awards for outstanding partnership activities with those businesses. Many of the businesses provide equipment that we could not afford to buy so our students are learning on state of the art equipment because of them. So CTE is coming along. We know we had some hurdles to jump and we're trying real hard to get over them but we are doing what the league is recommending in tying all this together so the student is better prepared for employment when they leave us. 

>> We should thank you also for putting on that marvelous breakfast, the Industry Partnership breakfast it was first rate. You did a tremendous amount of work to make that happen and we're really very appreciative. Thank you. 

>> Thank you. 

>> That brings us to President Sugimoto. 

>> Thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. I know Dr. Wilcox said I probably shouldn't mention this but I found that it was already in an announcement that I received from Senator Liu's office and its a congratulations to Jo Buczko Coordinator for Student Health Services for her recognition by Senator Liu and Assembly Member Portantino as one of our outstanding women in business and Jo will be recognized at the 11th Annual Luncheon event to be held on Friday, July 16th at the Pasadena Hilton Hotel and we're very proud to have one of our own recognized by our friends in the California State Legislature. The only reason why she hesitated was she hasn't received the letter yet but it's gone out in an e-mail blast that she's one of our awardees, so we're very pleased about that. Former softball head coach, Sandy Iverson, who retired in 2007 is one of PCC's winningest coaches in our women's sports history and she's had 562 victories was inducted into the California Community College Fast Pitch Coaches Association Hall of Fame. So I wish to congratulate Sandy Iverson on that acknowledgment. And again as has been mentioned last Thursday was the President's Latino Adviser Committee--excuse me, President's Latino Adviser Committee Annual Scholarship Function which was lovely. I did send to the board and the executive committee an article that our keynote address speaker provided us, Adolfo Guzman Lopez wrote a beautiful article and he is with Southern California Public Radio wrote a wonderful article about the students who received the scholarships. It was very, very nice. At the Association of Black Employees, breakfast this morning, it's the 32nd Annual Scholarship Awards. Not only did they provide an honor for student scholarships and leadership but they also recognized 2 members of the college family, Kim Miles as our Assistant Dean of Scholarships and Financial Aid as our outstanding alum because she is an alum of Pasadena and also Lisa Austin in Office Services is what they call the Footsteps award winner and she had a very moving story to tell about what is happening with her, so congratulations to both of them. Now tomorrow evening and some of you hopefully have gotten this invitation here in our lovely Creveling Lounge at 6 p.m. is our General Scholarship Reception to honor students who are receiving scholarships from our foundation and Scholarship and Financial Aid Office so hopefully we'll see you all here. And as a reminder to all of you this is the Awards Scholarship and Celebration Season as you might well know and as we bring this academic year to a close many of our divisions and departments sincerely appreciate your attendance at these events. We know that you cannot make every single one of them however, the college family is grateful for any of the ones that you can attend in. It's very nice to see how our students are doing and it gives you a warm place in your heart when you see how many students we do honor and celebrate. So thank you very much, that's the end of my report. 

>> Thank you. Thank you. I fear we're about to lose that warm place in our heart because we're turning to budget update. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Although it's not as bad let's--you know? 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> And if--this is behind tab H in your notebooks and Dr. van Pelt if you would. 

>> Okay, thank you. And certainly there's no necessity to go over the May revise considering the good job Scott Lay did in talking about that but what I do want to spend a few moments on is the Total Compensation Model which is in your tab H. Note that it is a draft. Each one of these numbers is being vetted. The numbers in red represent best estimates, the numbers in black tend to be the numbers that we feel fairly confident about. Each one of them can't of course change. So you'll notice that 2.2 percent growth money is included because that is actually what we've been told. However, what I do want to spend a moment on is the concept which is not new is the total compensation, however, the manner in which its put together is slightly revised in that if a position is frozen it actually creates additional fund balances in that top portion of the newly funded or unfunded employee position so if a position opens up that number increases and to the extent the position has been filled of course it will decrease that amount of money. In the end the goal is to make the bottom line something that's sustainable and that's going to occur through the filling or non filling of positions. In the top section, it occurs through the health benefit costs. In the middle section, you will notice that Kaiser at 2.2 percent, that number we have been given and the other numbers are our best guesses. Typically, May and June are the times of the year when we start to get the revised numbers from the various different health care providers. And then the fixed benefit cost of STRS and PERS [phonetic]. PERS, we had been advised unofficially that the cost will go up 1 percent. STRS requires a more complex formula and process to raise that number. However, as long as we put 1 percent in PERS, we thought to put 1 percent in STRS as well but that will require legislative action. Unemployment insurance, I think I've mentioned this before has more than doubled from I think 0.30 to 0.72 percent. So that's an increase of 0.42. And then the bottom represents the raises or in this case, the nonsalary adjustments for the various different employee groups. So as these numbers start to arrive and we can fill them in, we will continually provide you with updates each time as a draft until finally the budget is adopted when we can particularly fill in the top section. So if there are questions on that, I'd be pleased to answer them but this is working progress. It will change by the week but we will keep you informed as to where we're headed. 

>> Trustee Baum. 

>> I just had 2 questions about the growth in COLA. So the growth will allow us to then--we get funding to offer more classes to accommodate the increase in number of students that we're trying to teach or to cover the unfunded students that we're already teaching is that correct? 

>> Well, and it also covers the support that's required in order to teach those students. 

>> But that's not added to just the basis of salaries. It's-- 

>> It is not just added to the basis of salaries, absolutely not. 

>> Right, right. But then there's a reduction in COLA-- 

>> Correct. 

>> That we're gonna have to find a way to absorb. 

>> That's correct. 

>> And that is theoretically a reduction in--'cause in the past we've had COLA funding and we've increased salaries based on it. 

>> That's correct. 

>> So that's a--how--I know we're in the middle of negotiations but it's--'cause I don't wanna address that but that's a budget issue that we're going to have to handle. 

>> And you'll notice that's in excess of 400,000 dollars. 

>> Right. Okay. 

>> Trustee Martin. 

>> And could you repeat what you said about when positions become available and which line on here. I missed that. 

>> Certainly, if you see the newly funded and unfunded positions employees which is about a quarter the way down there, right below increased-- 

>> Oh, in the blue. 

>> In the blue. 

>> Ah-huh. 

>> Okay, so the idea is that as a position becomes vacant for whatever reason that that salary money will show up in this section and it will actually have the effect of adding to the budget. As the position is filled, it has the reverse impact that it draws down from that balance. Because in the end, the total compensation model has to take into account the frozen positions and the newly funded positions because otherwise, where would those positions be funded? 

>> So let me ask you this question then, if there's growth money, it's supposed to be for extra sections and if it's for extra sections, don't we need to incur some additional expense above the people and sections we're paying for presently to fund the extra sections. 

>> Well, and the people to fund that will then show up as expense item in the newly funded position to the extent that we add sections. 

>> So looking at this, you know, at the moment, it's relatively balanced but we've included the revenue for extra sections but we really haven't included any kind of expense for extra section. Wasn't this the trouble we got in that took us from our norm of 85 percent towards personnel up to 90 and 91 percent? 

>> Well, that occurred for a series of more complex reasons as well. And that we tended to be cutting out of the supplies and so forth by reducing that which have the effect of making the salaries a greater proportion of the whole. 

>> Okay. 

>> So it also occurred for that reason. 

>> Okay. 

>> But--and the growth money isn't strictly intended to add sections. It's also not just for salaries but it also includes supplies, it includes all the support that's required in order to add sections. 

>> But here again, if we've added the revenue for the totality of the growth into the work comp model and not reflected anywhere on the page, the obligation that's necessary in supply support and in additional staff to teach those sections, it appears to be imbalanced when functionally it isn't. 

>> And what I've done is the change to the budget basis which is that central column. If you'll see, there's a red 80 percent which is an arbitrary number because it's in red. 

>> At the top. 

>> We're not there yet but-- 

>> At the very--the second line from the top, 

>> Okay. 

>> In the center. 

>> I see. 

>> Okay, that number will take a percentage of the growth money whatever we determine that number should be. 

>> Oh, so you put 80 meaning there's 20 left for supply-- 

>> That's exactly-- 

>> Support and other things. 

>> And that might be 75. It might be--I don't know what the number is. 

>> Yeah, okay. 

>> I plugged in a-- 

>> So that does account for some of it but it still appears to me unless the number of sections were presently offering we're over the amount of the growth so in essence, we're getting funded for more sections but not really offering more sections. That money doesn't really seem to be totally available to put on to a total comp salary structure, is it? 

>> Well, and the other thing is that we are significantly over cap. So we're funding a number of sections with our own money. 

>> Okay so then, the good news is it could go on to the work comp--total work comp model and the bad news is I'm looking at this with some excitement about we're gonna be able to offer more sections next year but that's not really true. 

>> Well, and it could be. The issue is that this is a--it's a pretty complex model because there are so many variables. However, it's also a dynamic one so as soon as new numbers show up, we have the ability to adapt to those new numbers. So it's possible that because we're spending so much of our money this year particularly to offer sections, if we were to get growth, that's gonna--it's going to actually take over the funding of those sections. So it is a dynamic model and as the numbers start to fill in, we're gonna be in a position to be able to adapt in a rather nimble way. 

>> And then finally, I guess the thing that puts a shiver up my spine was when, you know, earlier we had this in advance and I'm looking at this thing for the moment, many variables to come but we're more or less balanced in working the total comp model and then Mr. Lay comes in and says, well, just count on that 2 million 3 growth going away. Well that creates a different dynamic, doesn't it? 

>> Yes, it does. This is very much influx. It was contained in the January the 8th budget. It is contained in the May revise. However, it is entirely possible for it to turn into a sacrificial lamb. 

>> I was watching our research in student Mr. Wilcox--Dr. Wilcox shake his head as we talk about the extra sections that we're offering and it gave me a feeling that we are offering perhaps almost 2 million 3 more in sections presently that we're not being funded for over our cap. Is that what the quiet shaking of your head as he was--Brick was talking, I should-- 

>> I think as he said we have unfunded FTE-S. We've offered sections for which the state does not pay. So yes, we have unfunded access that we put on. 

>> Would you have any way--and I don't mean to put you on the spot, the 2.3 million worth perhaps? 

>> More. 

>> Well, it would be about 1500 divided by 3.8 so that's gonna be about 404.50 and each section is about 10,000 dollars. Therefore, it's about 4 and a half million dollars. 

>> Okay, that at least for the work--total comp model, that's good news. 

>> Yes. 

>> For those of us pushing for more classes that perhaps-- 

>> Tell me if I'm off base here though but we've--we're providing about 2000 more FTES over our cap that's unfunded. 

>> I think that it'll be closer to 1500. 

>> Okay, 1500. And on a revenue basis, we usually get about 5 to 6000 per FTES. 

>> About little less than 5. 

>> Right, so 5 times 1500 is still 7 and a half million dollars. 

>> Correct. 

>> So it's far more than that 2 million that we're funding, that we're providing--that we're providing. 

>> Yeah, that's possible but-- 

>> Looking at in-- 

>> In terms of the sections that we're offered, it's--I think that the numbers turned out to be 4.5 million dollars. 

>> Given the type [simultaneous talking]. 

>> I'll say the value of what we're offering. 

>> Yes. 

>> No, you're absolutely right. 

>> Shall we move on? Okay. We better approve the minutes. There are 3 sets before us. Shall we take them in order? Does anybody, well, first of all let's have a motion to approve the minutes from meeting number 11. 

>> Can we just move them all at the same time? 

>> I'm happy to do that, yeah. Motion to-- 

>> Motion to approve all three. 

>> Okay, and a second, Geoff? 

>> Second. 

>> Does anybody have any additions or edits to offer? 

[ Noise ] 

>> I want little itty bitty one. Meeting number 13 is actually Trustee Bill Thomson led the pledge. 

>> I was the one who put that away from you. 

>> Thank you. 

>> Let's--let's vote then. All those in favor of approving the minutes as they are with that little change, please signal with an aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Any no's, abstentions, motion is-- 

>> I think I'm abstaining on one of these. I haven't caught up to which number it is yet. 

>> May the 6th, the first one I think. You were absent, right? 

>> Yeah. 

>> Well then, abstain for all of them, how about that? Then we don't have to do 3 votes. 

>> Okay. 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Very good. Thank you. Approval of consent items, let's have a motion. 

>> Motion to approve the consent items tonight. 

>> Do we have a second? 

>> Second. 

[ Noise ] 

>> Please signal if you want to pull something for discussion. Geoff? 

>> Just the 126--125P and 126B 

>> 125B, 126B, well let's go to those, 125P. 

>> I just--on 125P I just noticed 4 retirements with the collective almost 80 years of service among those 4 employees and I hope the administration conveys our appreciation to the employees that are retiring. 

>> Thank you. 

>> 126P. 

>> And I just noticed that it's a contract and I am looking forward too and I hope we convey the return of Dr. Alquaddoomi we've--somebody whom we all have a great deal of affection and respect for. It will be great to have him back full-time with the district. 

>> Very good. 

>> Thank you. 

>> If there's nothing else, let's vote. All those in favor of approving the consent items, signal with an aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Any no's or abstentions? No. And student trustee Abadia you wanted to introduce somebody? 

>> Yeah. I have an introduction that I didn't spot in the audience. I wanted to introduce the board to my cousin, Jeffrey Mowrer, if I could have him stand up. He's an active student here on campus. He's in the Cultural Diversity Committee, Public Relations Committee and he just joined the AS Students Services Committee. So he'll be here next year so I'm sure you'll be seeing much more of my cousin, Jeff. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Wonderful, thank you. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> He's gonna get that water polo club going, right? 

>> Yes, that's Jeff. 

>> That's correct, yeah. 

>> Quite a talented family, a talented genetic pool. 

>> Yeah he's also worked on water polo. 

>> Does that take care of all of page 1? I think so. Oh, Presidential search, let me just say briefly. We'll say farewell to Dr. Cardoza tomorrow. We will welcome candidate 2 on Sunday evening about more information should be sent later in the day on Friday. Does anybody else wish to say anything at this point? So to be continued. 

>> One thing, is there a channel for people now that we've had one candidate visit to offer feedback. What was the process that you--? 

>> Right. So the process has been that everybody who has met with the candidate received a white feedback sheet which actually had pretty detailed questions on it. And those were gathered and will be collated. And I think the idea right now is that they will simply be shipped in FedEx to Stan so Stan can put together a proper board report for us that will include al the other background information checks that he is doing and anything else that comes into us. 

>> Okay. Can I just acknowledge the work of our president? He's done a tremendous job on the search and long hours. 

>> Yeah. 

>> Thank you, Hillary. 

>> Well, thank you. 

>> The board president or the district president? 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> And Mary and Linda. 

>> Our trustee president. 

>> All presidents, I think everybody and Mary and Linda and people who have been doing tremendous works. So thank you to everybody. It will be over soon. 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

[ Noise ] 

>> Let's do the resolution, supporting classified school employee week, we'll take a motion. 

>> Move approval. 

>> Second. 

>> And I have something here. Will this be the time? 

>> Yes, absolutely. If you could resolution, we ask [whispering]. 

>> Welcome. 

>> So be it resolved that the Board of Trustees hereby recognizes and wishes to honor the contribution of the classified professionals to quality education in the state of California and in the PCC district and declares this week, May 16 to 22nd 2010 as Classified School Employee Week in the Pasadena Area Community College District. 

[ Noise ] 

[ Applause ] 

>> Oh we haven't voted, so-- 

>> Yeah, we need to vote. 

>> Yeah. All those in favor of what we've just completed. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Very good. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Nobody would have anything no or abstentions to offer I know. How about we take the ARCC report and then go to goal setting. It would seem more timely in that way. So President Sugimoto, the ARCC report. 

>> Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang and I'd like to turn this over to Dean Kollross who will provide us with the ARCC report for this year. And there is a recommendation to the board. We do need to have the board take an action with this item and this is behind tab L in your notebooks. The board will need to receive the ARCC report as required by the state. 

>> Shall we take the presentation and then receive it? 

>> Yes. 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

>> Did we skip the goal setting? 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

>> I thought we'd do it after, after hearing this. There might be some connection. 

>> Okay, okay. Well, accountability reporting for community colleges which I guess the [whispering] came about in 2004 because of AB 1470 and this is just a quick background. It was first, the first Dr. Park came out in 2007. We're now in our fourth iteration. The 2010 report actually builds off of the others. And there are 8 performance measures. [Noise] Okay. The highlights for us for the 2010 report, as you could see we've had a steady increase in the successful course completion rate of credit vocational courses and I'd like to again point out Dean Ligons over here and her great work in vocational courses because this is really because of their initiatives that we've seen this increase. Steady improvement in our successful course completion rate at credit basing skills courses. We've been very focused on that in a very noteworthy improvement in our percentage students who are in at least 30 units. So we are seeing some definitive improvements here in our reports. One of the things I wanted to show you this year, in your packet what you have is the college level indicators for the college. And normally I'd run you through those but I figured you could read. So what I thought I'd do is just give you another perspective. And this one here is comparing Pasadena City College to the state rates on 7 of the indicators in that the first one spar is student progress and achievement. And as you can see, we are above the state rate on all of them except for the basic skills--oh my gosh, I'm sorry about that, except for the vocational course completion. That's the only one we're lagging behind in the state, right? And then this is the state, state wide rate and the PCC rate on transfer to baccalaureate granting institutions. And what I wanted to do is put down at the bottom for you is what the definition of the cohort so that you understand that that's first time students with a minimum of 12 units earned, so they actually had to have done something before they transferred. And again as you can see, PCC is ahead of the state wide rate on this measure. And now I'm gonna talk just a little bit about peer grouping which is one of the pages in there that you'll see where they actually take the college and we're putting to a peer group. This year for the first year, they have actually kept our peer groups the same and this is something that the college has asked for because it gets a little hard to track your progress over time when your peer group keeps changing. And the peer groups are based on what we call exogenesis variables. They are variables that are outside the control of the college. There are 6 peer groupings for each ARCC indicator but they don't do one for the college. The career development in college preparation one and that's because there's only 37 community colleges actually report that rate at this time. So again, the highlights for PCC on this, we are above the peer group average on 4 of the 7 indicators and we're within 1 percent of the peer group high on 2 of the indicators. This is the peer group analysis. This is also in your report but I wanted to just add a little dimension to this which is I've indicated in each of our peer groups who is--what college has the peer group high. And as you can, De Anza is doing a spectacular job, I think I'm gonna have to give them a call and see what they do up there because they are 1, 2, 3, 4 of 7. They are the highest in our peer group. Now I also wanna point something out about peer groups 'cause this is kind of interesting, is to note how many colleges are in each peer group. And for the first peer group's spar, we are only compared with 19 other colleges. And the second, our second peer group is comprised of 17 colleges. It's the third one that's interesting 'cause there're only 9 colleges on our peer group on persistent rate. And then for success and vocational courses, that is a really big peer group, there're 41 colleges in that. And the next one which is success in basic skills, there's only 13 colleges in our peer group for improvement. In basic skills there's--this is another big one, 47 colleges in that peer group. So the peer group sizes are not anywhere near the same and then the last one which is improvement in ESL, there's 21 colleges in our peer group. But this is all done at the systems office so we don't really have a choice about our peer groups. But I do have a choice about these peer groups and these are--I looked at our local community colleges and I took their numbers and I compared them to our numbers. So as you can see, I took Cerritos, Citrus, El Camino, Glendale, Long Beach, Mt. SAC, Rio Hondo, Santa Monica and I took their numbers and I compared it to our numbers on the 7 indicators. We are always going to be the gold number. And as you can see in some cases, we are right up there at the top, in some cases we're dragging a little behind. And as you can see, the one in the vocational course completion rate, Rio Hondo does exceptionally well in this, and they are very focused on CTE courses. So they always seem to be the high in their peer group and they're also always the one--the high one when I compare them locally. Again, this is us compared to local community colleges on basic skills improvement and ESL improvement. And this is persistence and we are very high in this. We always do very well in persistence. We do find that when students come here, they like to stay here. Sometimes too long but they do like to stay here. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Any questions? 

>> Hello. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Two questions. 

>> Sure. 

>> One, this focus on course completion rather than program completion or rather including both, why is that? Is that what ARCC asks us to look at? 

>> So, are you talking about a specific indicator or--? 

>> Yeah, it seems when we talk--okay [simultaneous talking]. 

>> So the first indicator-- 

>> You have to step back and ask. 

>> First indicator looks at program completion, the AA degrees, their certificates and then they break those out farther when you look at course completion in vocational and basic skills. Is that--am I getting to what you're talking about 'cause the first indicator spar is student progress and achievement and that is more of a completion. It's transfer out to a baccalaureate, completing a certificate of 18 units or more. Or and there is also some intent. It's a kind of a fuzzy indicator 'cause it's got a lot in it. 'Cause there is intent in there, there is actually transferring in there and there is actually certificate completion. But it's that intent they like they attempted or completed a college level math or English and they can be thrown into that cohort. 

>> Okay, okay. That's great. And then there is a lot of emphasis, it seems to me and I could just be wrong, on course completion. 

>> Yes. Well, particularly vocational courses and basic skills courses. They've pulled those indicators out separately. And you notice they don't look at course completion for college level courses that are not vocational courses that are transfer courses. They don't look at those. It's always vocational courses and basic skills courses that they look at course completion. 

>> Okay. 

>> So there's a logic for that, that make sense. 

>> Well, there is a logic that when they developed these indicators, they talked to the community colleges, the researchers, the administrators and say, what are the performance indicators that the college want to be measured on and this is what they came up with. 

>> Okay, okay. So they asked for it. And then the other one, I was really happy to see this 47 percent transfer rate. 

>> Yes, yes. It leaves room for improvement but it is good to see. 

>> It's a very nice number. But help me understand the definition. So first time students, are they first generation students? 

>> No, first time. 

>> Meaning? 

[ Simultaneous Talking ] 

>> They haven't gone to college anywhere else. And we also have to remember anywhere else that we can catch them because it's all about whether or not they've been recorded in another college. 

>> Okay. 

>> And with the minimum of 12 units, so they're already pretty high performance students then. 

>> What they're saying is that they have what we like to say is an intent behavior that they are gonna be transferred. So it's setting a parameter for them instead of, you know, and sometimes people will say, well, they came here, they took one course and then they went to another institution. Well, I don't really consider that a transfer student. I consider that somebody who took a course here because it was easy to get and then they went on. Should we really get credit? So what the Systems Office is saying, we're gonna put a bigger parameter on it. They have to take at least 12 units at that college giving them some foundation and behavior that we can track. 

>> Okay, great. So is this kind of a shared definition of when we talk about transfer rate, this is who we're talking about, these people? 

>> It hasn't always been but it's one of the things that--what I'm doing in office is saying that we have to actually look at how the state defines it and we should define it the same way, so from now on when I report transfer numbers, I'm also gonna use the state's parameters. 

>> Okay, great, thank you. 

>> I understand we're required by law to submit this but what does, I mean, once it's submitted, number 1, who gets it and what do they do with it? 

>> Well, it goes to the Legislative Analyst Office and then it's--they look at it and they use this as their way of reporting to I believe our senate and our assembly on how community colleges are performing. 

>> Okay. 

>> I hope. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> I hope that's why they're doing it. But Lisa seems to know. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> There're a couple of things first that I wanted to mention. Since you asked if we submit it, we actually submit the data. 

>> To the Systems Office. 

>> To the Systems Office and then they do the calculations and then they deliver the information back to us in this report. Then what the intent of this report was is to give to the legislators consistent data across all of the community colleges and the report that they can say yes. At least the system office has given information to them that is the same it's that consistent data set kind of thing. 

>> You know, the 4 year schools are involved in what's called the voluntary accountability or voluntary system and accountability which is how they report out some measures of how they are doing in the Systems Office and the Chancellor's Office. We should be very happy about this. They actually took this on themselves to do this for us is our way of reporting out to the state of how we're doing. 

>> Then the second question is now that we have this, what do we do with it? 

>> You personally? 

>> No. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> We collectively. 

>> Well, you know, we have done things within the past and one of the things we did last year is we actually developed a college goal where we say we wanted to beat or exceed the peer group average on vocational course completion. And as you can see, we've made--because we made that college goal, Dean Ligons went ahead and she started doing work with here CTE programs and her deans. And we've seen a significant increase in that percentage. And I think what the--what it says to us is we should be using the numbers to target and focus our energy in where we see we need to do improvement. 

>> Good, thank you. 

>> At the conference that Ms. Brown and I attended, one of the speakers says, "Can you tell me what your graduation rate is at each of your institutions?" And so would we use that first student progress and achievement rate as a substitute for that or where would it be in this transfer graph? Is it like 47 percent or is it 59 percent? 

>> I think you're better off with a spar because we do more than just transfer. 

>> Right. 

>> The transfer is fantastic but we do more than that because then it doesn't account for there are students here who achieve AA degrees or AS degrees or complete certificates and we always wanna take that into account. That's part of our focus. 

>> 'Cause in the private system at USC, our 6 year graduation rate for undergraduates we think is like between 85 and 90 percent. At Claremont, something like 90 percent. That's--and so the spar rate would be on--and I'm not comparing the two but I just wanna know that we know what that is. So you'd recommend the spar rate as the one that we look at. I think it's the better rate for us now. I also think it's important to remember that we are a finishing school, right? So sometimes, everything that we do doesn't get captured in spar because the first time student could be first time in Glendale and Glendale make it credit for that student even though they really do the bulk of their units with us. Now, I noticed that this Chancellor's Office is looking into that and changing that to give us credit if the student takes two classes at Glendale and fifteen classes at PCC we shouldn't be giving Glendale credit for them. We should get the credit 'cause we really educated them and they're looking at ways to account for that in these measures. 

>> Dr. Bradbury-Huang? 

>> I think that's particularly important nowadays because students are doing the swirling so they're going from college to college attempting to get all of their classes so the Chancellor's Office is gonna have to look very carefully at who gets credit for those students in the ARCC report. 

>> The other thing that they asked me to make sure that I let you know is that the basic skills course completion rate and the basic skills improvement rate is probably going to be influx and that next year we are probably going to see some changes in that rate for the college because they've been undergoing some data clean up and they also think we will be getting a new peer group for them so I'm telling you. 

>> And one last thing just to Mr. Thomson's statement. This is actually very valuable. What the state does is have an 800-page book and at the beginning it says, what the state wide measures are and accountability for the system, this is one of the few kinds of objective assessments of our performance against the peer group. Now, we all disagree about how these peer groups are chosen but we do have some consistent data that we can compare ourselves to others and I appreciate you also showing our customary peer group that we use on the single campus districts in Southern California. 

>> I just wanted to mention one thing. The president mentioned the swirling where students go to various campuses and you mentioned persistence. The state universities now students cannot stay there for ten years. They have--there's a certain amount of time they have to be graduated and I think the way the budget cuts are going particularly in the amount of students who wanna come to the community colleges, I think we're gonna eventually have to look at that here that we need to get students matriculated and out of the system. They can't really stay here for ten years because they're taking the place of other students who need to come and I think it's something we're gonna have to look at. 

[ Noise ] 

>> Well, so is it time for us to vote? We're voting to accept this. 

>> To receive? 

>> So, do I have a-- 

>> I'll make a--do you need emotion? I'll need to make emotion. 

>> Please yeah and a second. 

>> Second, second. 

>> Thank you. All those in favor? 

>> Aye. 

>> Yeah. Please signal an aye, any against or any abstentions? So the motion passes unanimously. Thank you to Ms. Kollross for a very nice presentation. So now we turn to our own goal setting and this conversation may be relevant to us. There were--a revised set of goals were in your desk packet also e-mailed to you. These reflect the conversation we had two weeks ago or at the last meeting and obvious things are missing like technology, accreditation. Has anybody moved to--to add or edit? 

>> I--I agree. I would love to be able to adopt a multiyear balance budget. I just--I don't know how achievable that is in this year. I mean I think it's a worthwhile goal but--but I don't know. I just--I don't know if it's--I don't think honestly, it's a possible goal this year given the--the budget situation given that we're still on negotiations on--with organized labor groups, collective bargaining units. So I would just strike multiyear and just say adopt a balance budget with prudent reserve but--but I agree with the goal 'cause we'd have to--we'd have to change our entire budget process for the district to or would, you know, I believe we would. 

>> We could ask what it would mean. Maybe the intention here is--is very simple as we move more towards multiyear budgeting and maybe we can't do it right now but it's to--to move there and to begin to keep always the--the larger context, the multiyear context in front of us as we budget because how we budget, knowing that we're gonna have flush years coming versus very tough years coming I think is different. 

>> Though clearly the detail of that kind of budget would not be what we're familiar with. 

>> Dr. Bradbury-Huang? 

>> You can certainly in that goal talk about adopting on a yearly basis a balance budget but I think you need to be able to say about some planning for multiyear. 

>> I like that. 

[ Simultaneous Talking ] 

>> So you're not--because you can't really adopt legally a multiyear budget. 

>> Yeah. 

>> So maybe something like adopt a balance budget with a prudent reserve while supporting student success through a sustained fiscal crisis, while planning for a multiyear context, something like that. 

>> Okay, we'll get the words exactly right. 

>> One other--I really appreciate you adding the veterans item there and I think it's not just to address the concerns but to work to ensure the unique needs of veteran students are being served. 

>> And we thank Allen for that actually. 

>> Yeah. 

>> At the end of last meeting when we were all sleeping, he said "Hey, what about these things?" Great! So say that again ensure-- 

>> Work to meet the unique needs of the veteran student populations. It's because ensuring their address means that we can hear them but I want to make sure we're actually doing some--we're making--taking action. 

>> That we learn what they are and then respond. 

>> Right. 

>> Great. 

>> Thank you Allen. 

>> Does anybody want to try to squeeze in technology and accreditation or should we simply assume that under strategic planning where these things are much clearly defined anyway. By supporting strategic planning we are supporting those goals. 

>> I think so. 

>> Yeah, I would agree with that. I think to try to add those as separate goals is gonna be--is somewhat redundant and difficult to wordsmith. 

>> Okay. 

>> I mean clearly we've got to do that. I think we all understand that and are devoted, dedicated to doing it. It's just a question of how we word it. 

>> Whether it needs to be highlighted. 

>> Yeah, exactly. 

>> Oh sorry, Allen. 

>> I forgot to mention this last time but I was hoping that perhaps you might be able to add one more goal. It's to increase access to student support services and things such as counseling, you know, stuff like that. Essentially when I ask students what's the number one reason and, you know, these are students have been here for 2 or 3 years et cetera. Why they haven't graduate or transferred, the most common reply that I get is I don't know what to do. 

>> Sure. I heard that request and the reason it's not articulated separately is again, I could be wrong, I see that pretty clearly in the strategic planning documents as well. So it's a little bit like technology and accreditation. We all think its motherhood and apple pie but does it need to be said separately, I don't know. 

>> I just hope it's addressed. 

>> Yeah, Brian? 

>> I think a good goal to try and accomplish would be to work--work to make--how do I put this? Work to make a dollar amount that are cost--that are cost to educate the students per pupil lower. I think that given the technology that is available nowadays I really do think that the cost of education per pupil should be going down. I really do think that that is I think that's something we as a college should strive for because there's really no, you know, reason why the cost of education should go up even with technology that's available when in fact, you know, it's just basic economy of scale with the more things we have the more the basic--the more our basic structure can be spread out for each student. So I really think that that should a board goal just lowering the cost per pupil or just finding ways of seeing how to lower the cost per pupil. 

>> Well, efficiency. I wonder it belongs in under budget? 

>> Well, that or again planning. I mean that's important but it seems to me that that's just one part of the overall goal of putting together a plan that provides for the education that is needed. I'd rather not have that as a specific goal because it's hard to forecast as to how realistic that may be. 

>> Or at least until we get metrics. 

>> Well, I would just comment that I appreciate Brian's comment and in particular that simplistic definition of student success that I used from institutional research had both the quantitative total student success count and a relative student count based on the number of student successes per dollar which I think perfectly parallels, exactly what he's saying. And so within that simple definition would be his answer. I'm not sure how to work that into the goals here tonight but I do think it's--it's an important consideration, we should be looking at the same way the ARCC report gives us important criteria that we can look at on a rational basis so I think that definition--some definition preferably something as simple as that as student success would do the same. 

>> You've been very clear about that and so this sentence invite metrics on the issues of efficiency and effectiveness is supposed to be moving in that direction. I don't think we wanna say this is the measure but we do want a measure. And I think maybe we could clean up the sentence to make it more clear. We wanna measure around efficiency and we're seeing some stuff on transfer and stars and whatever. 

>> The management for student is ought to be realistic. It's just they wanna come here, get their education and move forward. And I think that if we can lower the cost per pupil their cost to educate, if we can lower what it costs to educate students per pupil I mean we would then be I guess meeting the students' needs most effectively. And I think that yeah, I have a chance to find some kind of metric or [inaudible] would be a way of going about it but yeah, just to educate more 'cause right now, you know, we know we find ourselves in a position where we're, you know, where we have too many students that aren't being--pay back for. I do think that it's in our best interest to find ways to educate them more efficiently. 

>> Well then do we want to set a target, increase 5 percent efficiency, something like that? But that forces to be clear on what efficiency is which we are not yet clear on but it retches it up. 

>> I don't think a specific target is the best idea because it's--you put yourself in a tough position. I mean when you set specific targets like that. But I do think just the word more efficient so as long as I guess the dollar amount per pupil is going down you're having gaining ground. 

>> I'm actually right with Brian. I just--for this year would stay and unfortunately won't be here next year. I think what you're trying to address is let's create the scale and then in the future we can figure out how this weight or gain weight whichever our goal is. So, you know, I can buy into that. Obviously, I have an idea and so I'm hoping the college will embrace it but whatever comes out I do think in the establishment of the metric that define student success I'd even appreciate adding student success to the end of this but you can say it's implied and I'll accept that. 

>> I also I-- 

>> Publish a metric that we can work with maybe in 6 months down the road or something so that there's some-- 

>> I guess as a professor I applaud what you're saying Brian but education is very--even if you put it online you have a professor and you're just saving electricity in a classroom. But it's getting more and more expensive. 

>> We don't want the tail wagging the dog. 

>> Then there should be no reason why it should be getting more expensive because just given the technology that's continuing to come up. 

>> But Brian we have to pay the police-- 

>> If we don't have any technology. 

>> You have to pay professors who want raises, the police want a raise, everybody wants a raise. 

>> What technology are we talking about? 

>> What technology. 

>> It's not gonna go down, Brian. 

>> But I think that-- 

>> The point is right, by revisiting how we deliver the service in theory we should be able to-- 

>> It's premature for us to jump to either conclusion I think here tonight but I do think it's a reasonable goal and I guess I feel better about it after you articulated it for us to set the scale similar to the ARCC report upon which we're gonna measure it. 

>> Well, I think we might agree that we could avoid increasing the cost but I'm not prepared to say we're--I think you're asking us to forecast things and we don't have enough information to make a forecast based upon it. It's--it's a fine goal to say we're gonna reduce the cost but that just may not be realistic and I don't feel comfortable that we're prepared to adopt that as a goal. 

>> I think--I think the goals ought to be fairly broadly worded. Ones that are realistic and ones that can be attained and I'm not that persuaded that that one can so I think--I wanna applaud Hilary for putting this together and she has done a very, very fine job of it and maybe the thing to do is to let this go one more meeting where people have a chance to wordsmith this and bring it back for then final vote of adoption. 

>> I'd rather just adopt what we got and then take into consideration the suggestions that our student representatives will give in and assure them that we'll address some of those issues. 

>> How about a final try on this? Establish metrics on the issues of efficiency, effectiveness student success that we may set targets. 

>> Sounds good to me. 

>> No, okay clearly it's not gonna work. 

>> I don't--you don't need the targets for me. I'm with you. Let's create the scale. I'm happy this year as a goal and Mr. Thomson sounded like he was refuting something I said when what I said was I agree with what's on you and that's what he said. 

>> I was refuting and you said--I'm sorry. 

>> Yeah, I mean the way the tone came out I was agreeing with you. Let's set the scale that's what I've been promoting. Let's set the scale of student success. 

>> Okay. 

>> And that's what you've got here so I'm elated. 

>> It sounds like we're happy. 

>> It doesn't say student success but you put it in your sentence that would make me feel better but I can live even without it. 

>> I agree with John or what you just said--what John was saying. I think what I was just getting at was just look for ways in which, you know, just kinda look out for ways in which the cost to educate students per pupil can be lowered. You know, even though, you know, that in it on itself is not specific but as long as the board has it, you know, it hasn't [inaudible] okay, let's always be on the outlook or let's always be on the look out for new ways that we can bring that--that cost down just per pupil, that's it. It would be good way to move forward from here. 

>> Very good. Okay, so what's the pleasure of the board? Is this--will this do as a statement of our goals for the next year as we invite in a new president? 

>> I think you did a fine job as I wrote you and I move that we approve this. 

>> What are we approving? 

>> The text of-- 

[ Simultaneous Talking ] 

>> A few little squiggles based on the conversation. 

>> Does--could anybody here other than--can anyone here right now tell us what is in the text that we are approving? 

>> I think it's just general goals that she put forward. 

>> The two changes that are-- 

[ Simultaneous Talking ] 

>> Forgive me it's the lawyer in me coming out. But I like to know what it is I'm voting on before I'm asked to vote on it 'cause right now I would defy any member of this board to identify what's the entire content of the goals that we're voting on. 

>> I think it's the page that--it's in our packet. 

>> Yes but we've modified that in a number of respects. 

>> I'll mention the two things that I suggest in modification that I thought would adopt these friendly amendments. It would be adopt a balance budget with the prudent reserve while supporting student success to sustain financial crisis and plan for multiyear budget--incorporate multiyear fiscal planning, something like that. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> I think you just proved my point. 

>> Why do you get the spirit of it? You want the letter of it, is that it? 

>> Of course I do. 

>> Okay, so we will write it on your-- 

>> Okay, it wouldn't kill us to go another round on this. 

>> Okay. And then the last one is work to meet the unique needs of veteran student population at Pasadena City College. 

>> Mr. Thomson, what do you think? I will withdraw my motion if Mr. Thomson is-- 

>> I--again I-- 

>> He does make a good point. 

>> I'm not quarreling with this. I just think we've got to seat the whole document then make an intelligent vote that's all. 

>> Let's put it off our session then. 

>> Okay, we will bring it back at the next meeting on June the 2nd then. Okay, that's good enough [inaudible]. Academic calendar, discussion with possible action President Sugimoto? 

>> Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang this is one of the items that Dr. Wilcox chairs, the Committee for the Calendar so I'll return this over to him. 

>> Okay, thank you. I assume you're looking at the colored calendar at this point. Just a bit of organization, you know, as we develop the college calendar we do it two years in the future so that's why we're looking at the 2011-2012 year. And basically the pattern for the calendar that's being proposed for 2011-2012 follows the same pattern that was approved last year for the 2010-2011 year. And with one change and that is that the--the single Flex Day that's being proposed for the fall traditionally has occurred around the third week of the semester. This time we're moving it a couple of weeks farther into the term to get a little farther away from some of the chaos of starting a term, so it's being moved to October 12 is the proposed Flex Day. Out of fairness to the full committee and the process I do wanna point out that there was one group that did not sign on adopting the calendar and that was the Faculty Association. There was one descending vote among the community. The calendar was adopted on 9 to 1 vote. The--much of the discussion in the committee centered around the--what's the green week within June 2012. The idea is the calendar that we have this year has a 4-week period after summer but before the start of fall where there are no classes offered. Last year it was decided and approved by the board to split that 4-week time of no classes that's after summer and put one of those weeks in front of summer so there would be a week between the end of spring and the start of summer and then leaving 3-week of a vacation period after summer. That week was supported by students which gave them a week of vacation between the finishing of spring finals and starting summer. It was supported by classified because it gave them a week to get all the classrooms ready for the start of summer, get the labs ready, replenish everything and managers supported it because it gave them a chance to get all of the materials ready and the rosters ready for the start of summer. In the discussion of the 2011-2012 year the faculty association representative did not like splitting that 4-week period. The explanation being that it made it more difficult to take a 4-week vacation to go to Europe so--but-- 

>> Are you really representing them on us? 

>> I am. Quite honestly we have the minutes to document it. 

>> Okay, okay. 

>> And so that--but it was supported by everybody else. 

>> Vacations in Europe [inaudible]. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Forgive me for not following that on the page here the green is the week of--in 2000 or 2012, starts June 18th goes 24th and you've got a circle around the 25th. I'm not sure what that means. 

>> The blue circle is the first day of the classes. 

>> Okay. 

>> Yeah, so. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> Yeah. I'm sorry what was the dispute? 

>> The introduction--the class-- 

>> Let's let Dr. Wilcox respond please. 

>> The calendar that we have this year does not have that green weekend. If there's--you finish final exams in the spring and over a weekend then you start summer classes the next Monday. 

>> Okay, I got you. 

>> But that would be for 2011 and also 2012? 

>> Correct. 

>> Thank you. 

>> You put that weekend last year when you approved that calendar and we're following the same pattern proposed for 2 years out. 

>> So the argument is from--some faculty members who would prefer to take vacation in a block. 

>> The Associates of Students we have discussed this. We actually voted to support this week just because--we feel that just generally speaking we just have a weekend, you know, from a difficult semester from the spring and then jumping right into summer session. I mean you kinda want to have a little bit of, you know, just relaxation time and we don't really feel that just a weekend is enough time for it. Any person, I mean I prefer year round schools just in the sense that you don't have too long of time without going to school but you just sort of have, you have you know, this vacation split up in there, 'cause I mean when you go too long without going to school you sort of--you get lazy or you--or you just get bored, you know? So I do think that splitting up the vacation time is in the best interest of students just because that one week you have to sort of relax, decompress and then you start up again just with your full--with your full focus the next Monday and the week--vacation after that, three weeks, you know, three weeks it's sufficient time to still relax for summer instead of the 4 weeks, when we get to that 4th week and I get bored or something. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> And I appreciate this--and I'm glad that you waited in on this because I believe and I think we need to move to a framework where every decision must be made entirely through the prism of what contributes to student success and not what contributes to the convenience of people who work here. If--I would be more persuasive if there was an argument that it contributed to student success for the schedule. 

>> There's a whole issue that we've identified when we adopted the compressed calendar that we--in some measures, it seems like student success is not approved as a result of the different scheduling of the courses, there's less class--concentrated time. And so at one point I hope we will look at that issue. The other question I have is that I've been surprised actually when I've called the campus a couple of times when I realized its close, which seems to be normal business days and other things now or some are all these--when it says campus close, are these also paid holidays or how do we do that, like we have both Lincoln's birthday and President's Day as campus closed days. And so, you know, most places have President's Day and-- 

>> There are a number of days that are defined in the state as being these are official state holidays and then there are other days that are negotiated. 

>> Correct. 

>> So the--as your example, the President's Day is a state mandated day while Lincoln's Day is a negotiated day. 

>> Right and that--so that's based on collective bargaining agreements or? 

>> The negotiated day, yes. 

>> Right and the same like there's a day during the spring break that the campus is--the Friday of spring break is closed. 

>> Negotiated. 

>> Right and it's--and so I'm hoping, as we look at adding because there is always the days that--to me there's a lot of negotiated days of compensation, days off that are, that we haven't--that is considerable expense but anyway. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> I know that Dr. Wilcox says a negotiated days but the only thing that's negotiated is the day to take an off. We are given specific calendars from the Chancellor's Office that says that day can be taken on the Friday following the holiday such as Veterans Day or on the holiday. 

>> Right. 

>> So it's not as if it's truly a negotiated day per se. The only that they Cesar Chavez Day is a negotiated day, if we're going to celebrate it. 

>> I'm just saying that Veteran's Day is a state holiday, Cesar Chavez Day is a state holiday, Lincoln's birthday is a Federal holiday--I don't know a lot of institutions that take Lincoln's birthday and the Presidents Day off, you know? I think that it's a lot of days off. 

>> Oh, Dr. Bickley. 

>> Well the senate did support the week between spring and summer, they were--the faculty were mixed and the vote was mixed. In fairness to the Faculty Association Colleagues, there were some issues that were related to students' needs, one being that if we start that summer session so late in the month, we might lose students that would rather start earlier 'cause some of the colleges get out much earlier than we do. And then there was the issue of whether or not students, even PCC students, would perhaps start their jobs, get involved with their jobs and not come back after a week off. So those were some of the arguments that the Faculty Association representative made. But there was this issue about the wanting a block of time at the end of the summer and so that just, put that in the perspective. 

>> I'd just comment, I agree with Mr. Baum, Scott Lay who was here earlier sent an e-mail recommending in a few weeks ago that we watch the frontline episode on College Inc. that did a kind of report on the for-profit colleges and attributed a lot of the success of the for-profit colleges to their ability to identify and deliver on student needs. And I think when it comes to things like calendar, when it comes to these kinds of things we have to be extremely sensitive to student needs. So I have seen the overwhelming support behind this calendar would move its adoption. I would also--and it's a future agenda item so we'll wait for that time, I think at some point before this thing just keeps cranking through year after year and we're two years ahead, after we've accumulated some kind of data on the compressed calendar, we should have report highlighting best we can, the advantages and disadvantages of the compressed calendar on student success and other items. So that's another topic for later in the meeting but I would move approval. 

>> Can I just mentioned something Madame Chairman, I am all for it as a professor, I'm all for student success but I also think we have to have respect faculty too and the time they need--they need some time off to at certain times so I respect what you're saying, thank you. They're part of our community. 

>> These are not antagonist interests, right? 

>> No. 

>> Happy faculty-- 

>> Yeah. 

>> Happy students, happy-- 

>> Yeah, because the faculty and staff are part of the community with students. 

>> Are we ready to vote then to--oh, no student trustee Abadia? 

>> We need a second. 

>> Yeah just--my main thing is I just look at it from a student point of view. I mean, the finals tend to be a really stressful time as I'm sure everyone remembers. I mean it's a time of just pulling all-nighters and just studying, you know, just 'til the early morning. And generally speaking, you know, you kinda want to decom--you kinda want to relax after that whole thing. I mean I--I mean I have friends, you know, who pull, you know, two all-nighters in a row during finals week, you know, so I mean they--people seem to really get stressed out and they would I guess would like that--that week of just relaxation to start up again. And not only that but I do think that when they do start up again the summer session, you know, since summer session is a very fast paced semester it's--students sort of need that energy to sort of keep up with that fast pace and if--and if they only have, you know, one weekend to recoup their energy, I mean, I would probably imagine that-- 

>> But your point is well taken. 

>> You know? 

>> And I would recommend to represent the student point of view that student trustee second that motion for the calendars-- 

>> So I second. 

>> Let me take your advisory vote as well while we're at it. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> And those in favor of adopting the calendar as set forth signal with an Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Any nays or abstention? So the motion passes unanimously. Thank you. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> This will be the final substantive item, we're gonna differ the method by which enrollment numbers are computed for a later date. So this item N, adopt a resolution to authorize and improve the borrowing of funds, President Sugimoto do you want to-- 

>> Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. 

>> And we might be able to just adopt this. We've been briefed on it in the past. 

>> Okay. 

>> Well, I have some questions so I mean if you don't mind. 

>> Let me first ask Dr. van Pelt to at least give a quick presentation. He's not gonna take long and then so we can go to question. 

>> Okay, this is in preparation for a potential cash flow problem. So this is the tax and revenue anticipation note process. It always occurs in two phases. One is to authorize this essentially to stand in line. Later on, there will be an authorization to actually borrow the money. This is not the authorization to actually borrow the money. In fact we don't know at this moment whether we qualify because in order to qualify, you have to show at least negative cash position for one month. We haven't gotten to the point yet when we've been able to project our cash flow because of course we don't know from the state when the reapportionment payments are gonna come through. So this is a--it's a serious chicken and egg problem but it is in preparation to allow us to develop and to stand in line with the county in developing the tax and revenue anticipation note process. 

>> My only question is why do we need to adopt the resolution now? 

>> Because-- 

>> It says we're not obligated to--or committing the district to participate. 

>> What this does is that it allows the county and the bond council and so forth to prepare everything and to set it all in motion and therefore, if we did not authorize this, we would not be able to stand in line for the next TRAN. 

>> Stand in line meaning what? 

>> Meaning there's a lot of preparation work in the end there's a pretty thick document of--what they do is they compile all the potential districts with includes K through 14 within the county who want to participate, they then set up all the mechanisms for the borrowing so that if per chance, we decide to do it, middle of July, then all the work has been done. 

>> I think the question too is there a deadline by which we needed to get--? 

>> For this one, the deadline is today. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Oh my. 

>> They in fact, what they've done is they've extended it for us. There were two potential avenues for us to go, one is with the state and the CCLC, the league, and the second one is with the county. 

>> So this is the county that we have to adopt a resolution. If we're interested in pursuing it and there's no obligation to actually borrow the money yet. 

>> Basically, what we're doing is preserving an option for ourselves. 

>> Precisely. 

>> Um-hmm. 

[ Pause ] 

>> Brian? 

>> Yeah. If--I guess there's nothing wrong with preserving the option if it's a no cost to the school. But I just had one question though for the--to qualify for this you said we need one month and negative cash flow, like where would PCC stand on that or how would that--'cause we haven't had that or--I guess, can you explain that further? 

>> Yes. 

>> Like would we qualify? 

>> You have to show a negative cash balance, so that means that we have to have gone through our reserves and our projections would show that we would not have enough money to even have a zero cash balance. 

>> Okay. 

>> So is that possible? 

>> It is absolutely possible and it depends on when the state adopts a budget, more importantly when the apportionment payments come in. If they defer apportionments 'til September, it's entire possible that we would need the money. 

>> Yeah. I guess I would find it--I guess given the worst case scenario that we can find, find it prudent to just have this option, I think there's nothing wrong, wrong with that. 

[ Noise ] 

>> Are we ready to vote? 

>> We need a motion. I'll move approval of the authorizing the TRAN. 

>> Can I have a second? 

>> Second. 

>> Let's vote, all those in favor of authorizing not necessarily taking but authorizing us to do this. 

>> Just to adopt the resolution. 

>> Adopt the resolution, whoops, signal with an aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Aye. 

>> Any nays or abstentions? So that motion also carries unanimously. 

[ Noise ] 

>> Yeah, future board meeting dates. If you have your--if you have your calendars it might be good to consult them. There's 2 dates on here that are different from how we would normally proceed. So the suggestion is for Tuesday, May the 25th could a quorum gather by 5:30 p.m.? This will be pretty much a close session. 

>> I have a conflict with May 25th. I can do Wednesday, the 26th. 

>> Yup, yeah, that might be better. It's our regular--we'll make it 5:30. 

>> Wednesday is better. 

>> Okay. Wednesday, June the 2nd is normal. Friday, June the 4th. 

[ Pause ] 

>> I know we're looking at something. I'm missing it. 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

>> Item P. 

>> Oh, I'm on this. 

>> Item--Item P on your agenda. Item P future board meeting dates. 

>> Oh okay, I'm sorry, right here. 

>> I could make a meeting earlier on the date but I'm on a plane at 4 o'clock that day. 

>> So earlier suggested time, 10 o'clock? 

>> Yeah, 10 or 11. 

>> I have to work, so. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> This is an important meeting. 

>> So how about June 4th? 

>> Friday. 

>> How about the 3rd? 

>> The 3rd, I'm in Washington, I'm coming back that day. 

[ Inaudible Discussion ] 

>> 5:30 June 4th, I am obligated. 

>> Okay. Let's go to the next. How about the Monday? 

>> I have a conflict. 

>> What date is that, Hillary? 

>> 7th. 

>> 7th. 

>> What time are you talking? 

>> The evening. 

>> What about Saturday the 5th. 

>> I'm out of town. I'm out on the 5th. 

>> No Saturdays. 

>> So Monday or Tuesday, the 7th or the 8th. 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

>> Yeah, we spend all day Saturday already this morning. 

>> Yeah. I can't do it until probably 7 o'clock on Tuesday the 8th, 7 p.m. 

>> Okay. 

>> And Monday the 7th was out for you both? 

>> The evening is, yeah. 

>> That's not good for me. 

>> So Tuesday, June the 8th. 

>> 7 p.m.? 

>> You want it that late? 

>> But we've got a PCC neighbors meeting that evening so we have to cancel that. It can be done but-- 

>> June 9th. 

>> I think this is more important [simultaneous talking]. 

>> Yeah, I--I agree with that. I like to--what's wrong with the 3rd, I mean I realize that's pushing us a bit but-- 

>> Right, I'm just not--I'm not here. 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

>> Yeah, I'm not--my flight gets in at 8:30 that night. 

>> Yeah. 

>> Daytime on the 4th, Tony? You have your day job? 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

[ Laughter ] 

>> If we do it in the morning. 

>> We can do the morning. 

>> Yeah. 

>> Morning good? 

>> Yeah. 

>> Yeah. 

>> Yes, let's go for the morning. 

>> Okay. 

>> Like 6:30 in the morning. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Oh good God! 

>> What's the earliest we could do it? 

>> 7 o'clock? 

[ Laughter ] 

>> You and I like morning. 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

>> Well, the earlier the better. 

>> 8 a.m.? 

>> Oh 8 is good. 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

[ Laughter ] 

>> It's okay. 

>> We don't like it but can we do it? 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

>> I think so, okay, great, 8 o'clock. 

>> 8 a.m. of June 4th. 

>> On June the 4th, very good. 

>> Madame President? 

>> Yeah. 

>> Just to make things clear, it's a Closed Session, correct, for these are irregular meetings. 

>> Yes, it will be a Closed Session, mostly Closed Session, yeah. 

>> June 4th. 

>> Then Wednesday and then Wednesday June the 16th is our normal, our normal time, very good, thank you for your flexibility. 

>> So is there any special times other than--was this May 25th did we--? 

>> 26th. 

>> It's the 26th? 

>> Yeah. 5 o'clock you wanna do it, or 5:30, is that 5:30 or what? 

>> 5:30 seems to work for people. 

>> Okay. 

>> What--what date, what was that again for? 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

>> Wednesday the 26th. 

>> At 5:30? 

>> 5:30. 

>> 5:30. 

[ Inaudible Remarks ] 

>> Okay, good. 

>> Lisa is gonna have to give me a job here. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Aren't you graduated? 

>> But I will bring something up in the agenda items. 

>> May 26th-- 

>> Oh, I can't do May 26, I'm sorry. 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

>> Okay, back to the drawing board. 

>> I'm sorry. 

>> How about that morning? May 26th morning? 

>> I can do it after 9 o'clock. 

>> That's next Wednesday. 

>> Right. 

>> Yup. 

>> Or 10 o'clock. 

>> It depends, how long is this meeting gonna be 'cause I--I will be out of my office Monday and Tuesday that week. 

>> Yeah. 

>> That's up to us. 

>> I could do it. 

>> I'll do 10 to 11 but that's about it. 

>> How about 10 or later is even better, 11, does 11 work instead? I have a 9:30 to 10:30 meeting. I can be here at 11. 

>> I can't do that. We have to be at the university. 

>> How about lunch? Could you take lunch here? 

>> To come from Fullerton to Pasadena, no, sorry. 

>> What time is [inaudible] John? 

>> 9:30 to 10:30. 

>> No, I mean the evening. 

>> Oh it starts at 5. It's a big fund raising dinner. It's the big annual dinner. 

>> What if you were to come in by phone, Tony, we would-- 

>> Sure, that's good. 

>> We'd have a quorum and the dist--you're still in the district. 

>> Yeah, good. 

>> So, okay, what time works for you to come in by phone? 

>> Doesn't matter by phone. 

>> Okay. 

>> So 11 o'clock. 

>> I have a tough one to move. 

>> I don't have students that just have administrative duties. 

>> Noon. 

>> Noon would be ideal, will that work? We can have lunch. 

>> Okay, so mark May. 

>> May--Wednesday, May 26th, lunch time with Trustee Fellow coming in by phone. 

>> And then June at 8 a.m. 

>> It's 26. 

>> If I know that my dean is away, I'll sneak out but. 

>> Can we ask that this get e-mailed to all of us tomorrow? 

>> Yeah, just--yeah. 

>> So that we can-- 

>> But one more time. Tuesday, May 26th at noon. 

>> Wednesday. 

[ Laughter ] 

>> Wednesday, May 26th at noon, Wednesday June the 2nd regular 6 o'clock, Friday June the 4th at 8 a.m., Wednesday June the 16th at 6 p.m., very good. We are adjourned. 

>> Wait, wait, no, no, the future agenda items. 

>> Future agenda items, sorry. Go ahead. 

>> My future agenda item, I've been talk--when we went to the conference I also met with trustees from Santa Monica and Mount SAC and administrators who all said that they--their boards meet once a month. And I wanted to-- 

>> I have a plan you're gonna get. 

>> I just wanna put that on the agenda not for the next month but on the agenda for us to revisit our board meeting schedule. 

>> That's a good idea. Yeah. Trustee Martin, the calendar item for report is a future agenda item. 

>> It is a future agenda item and I would like that--following up on what Mr. Baum said, and I don't know if we have enough years updated to do it justice but-- 

>> This is compressed calendar comparisons to-- 

>> Student success. 

>> Is it working? 

>> I don't think-- 

>> We have at least 5-- 

>> Anything else? 

[ Inaudible Remark ] 

>> Okay. Now we are adjourned. 

[ Noise ] 

[ Inaudible Discussions ] 

==== Transcribed by Automatic Sync Technologies ====