>> Pasadena Area Community College District, Regular Business Meeting Number 19. It is Wednesday, June 2nd in the year 2010. Mrs. Thomson, would you call the roll. >> Dr. Bradbury-Huang. >> Present. >> Mr. Thomson. >> Present. >> Ms. Brown. Ms. Brown. >> Present. >> Dr. Fellow. >> Here. >> Dr. Mann. Mr. Martin. Mr. Abadia. >> Very good, we are about to move into close session and before doing so, we will take comments on items to be discussed in close session. So I'm going to invite James Aragon to please take the podium. >> Good evening Board Members, administrators and staff. My name is James Aragon. I'm an assistant professor and counselor here and the co-coordinator of the Puente Project on our campus. I'm also a community member and I came here today on my day off actually, I'm not working today but I thought it was important that I did come today and just speak a second in regards to the hiring of the upcoming--well, upcoming hiring of the president of the college and specifically, I came here to thank you, the Board Members, for allowing us, faculty staff, administrators and other community members to hear the--to hear the candidates during the open forum. I thought that was a wonderful opportunity for all of us and I just wanna let you know how much I appreciate that and I know how much our campus appreciated that. I know I've come to the board many times in regards to several issues, in regards to hiring practices, so I really appreciate the inclusiveness, the transparency in this hiring process and I just wanna say thank you very much. I think it sets a wonderful example for the continuing hiring practices here at the college where the community can have some input. I hope the academic senate and the other policy hiring--the other policy making bodies can follow your lead. So I sincerely appreciate that. I look forward to whatever the outcome is and I wish you all the best and again, thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang for your leadership and all of the Board Members. I wish the other ones were here. They could hear me but they'll see and hear the minutes, an audio video or the video feed or the online feed. So thank you again very much and have a very good evening. >> Thank you. >> Wow, thank you Mr. Aragon that you would come on your evening off to simply offer praises, astounding and I'm very deeply grateful, thank you. [ Laughter ] >> Let's clap for Mr. Aragon. [ Applause ] >> That was really good. [ Laughter ] >> Mr. Aragon suggested in closed session we will discuss Government Code--man, I've aged in my months as Board President. [ Laughter ] >> Government Code 54957, Public Employee Appointment of the College President and also Government Code 54957.6, Labor Negotiations for which Dean Engeldinger will join us. Apologies for our unusually long closed session. Thank you for being with us this evening. I'm gonna call on Student Trustee Brian Abadia to lead us in the pledge. >> I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Any introductions President Sugimoto? >> None at this time. Thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. >> Very good. We'll now move straight to our comments on Agenda Items. There are--I have counted 8 sheets so I just like to give you a heads up on our usual practice. As all of them are on the same item, oh then its--then I'll take them before Item J comes up and please hold in mind that we normally devote no more than 30 minutes to all comments. Therefore, as you know, if you do the math, if everybody took the usual 5 minutes, it would go over too long. So maybe in the time between now, when you speak you might think about how to deliver your message in a short but sweet way, thank you. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Emphasis on this week. [ Laughter ] >> Emphasis on this week. Just kidding. >> So reports by Members of the Board. Let me go to Trustee Martin. >> Well I was attended as to Trustee Brown the Ad Hoc Budget Committee. We're gonna be discussing budget on the agenda so I don't think we need a long discussion on the fact except for appreciation to all the members of the committee. There's a very cooperative spirit in the room. I think everybody is working collaboratively and working towards the common good for PCC and students. So I'm very impress with the Members of the Committee and a very appreciative to be part of the process. >> Terrific. Trustee Fellow. >> Nothing, thank you. >> Trustee Brown. >> I have no report. >> Trustee Thomson. >> Just briefly to say that the PCC Foundation is moving forward with its plans to add a number of new members. I think they have six people that they have approved and I will be coming on board. I will release report with the names of those individuals in our next meeting. >>Very good. Student Trustee Abadia. >> Yup, and today, we have the Associated Students meeting and just a couple of updates of what happened in there is that we decided to help fund the Campaign for Excellence which is basically and we would hire a firm to allow us to accumulate potential donors and Campaign for Excellence will basically be a drive to solicit funds which will basically go back to what's the equivalent to the other PCC Foundation. As well as--we have [inaudible] by SPCC a Student Body Committee, we decided to support the non-construction of Hahamongna Arroyo Seco or we decided to support not--we decided to support there'll be no construction on that site. And we've also decided to take part in AS Career Basketball Game so that will take place and time next week and that's all about it. >> Terrific. Thank you. Mr. Tsay. >> This past week, AS election has work included and we do have a new group of elects who are going to be taking office at the 26. I'm sure that they will show themselves shortly and introduced themselves to in the near future. >> Indeed. On our agenda, in fact, this evening was it, Item N, we will actually do--oh, we will actually receive an update from Students Trustees on privileges but then we'll also do oath of office for Student Trustee Nolan Pack is in the audience. Thank you Nolan for being here. Okay, Mr. Lindemann. >> Yes ma'am. The Classified Senate had their elections and we have their elections and we have 7 new senators elected for 2 year terms. We're going to be electing officers next month. We had our general meeting on the 20th of which two scholarships for 300 dollars were awarded. We also had a small meeting with facilities as kind of an adjunct to the general meeting to let them know and also show the proclamation from the Board supporting Classified Week and they were very happy with that. We're gonna be holding our officer election next month also so we should see new faces coming around on that. >> Very Good. Dr. Bickley. >> Yes, thank you. We will be having our annual breakfast and I'd like to send a flyer around. This is our Retirement and Awards breakfast. It's been a tradition at PCC for quite a while and we'd like to invite the Board and the Executive Committee Members to attend. I believed, many of you have already received personal invitations but we'll just make it a public invitation here. That will be on Friday, June 18th at 7:30. Friday, June 18th at 7:30 in the morning and we have breakfast. Secondly, you're invited on Monday at 2:30 in the President's Conference Room. We will be granting--the Senate will be granting 10 scholarships to students who had applied for the Senate Scholarships for this year. I think we had 65 applicants, something like that and our committee worked extremely hard to narrow that down to 10 and we ask them to narrow it further but they just couldn't--couldn't see any of those 10 candidates not get a scholarship. So we will be awarding those scholarships just prior to our last Senate Board Meeting of the year, Monday, June 7th at 2:30 President's Conference Room. You're welcome to attend. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. And Dean Ligons. >> No report. >> Very good and President Sugimoto. >> Thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. I just wanted to report that we did have a General Scholarship reception and honored a number of students with scholarships. We also had the Community Education Center Graduation last week which was wonderful and thank you to the CEC for the wonderful reception and congratulations to those graduates. WE had an OMD Tapping and we had alumnus from way back in the 1942 over here. You know, it's just really wonderful to have them and Jason Herbert and Josh Acevedo did a wonderful job of organizing and getting them all together. As a reminder, on the same day that we have the Annual Breakfast for the--and the Academic Senate Annual Breakfast is certainly our commencement that evening, June 18th. That evening, we will be honoring our Japanese Americans who were relocated during the 1940s and were interned and we will be giving them honorary degrees. And right now, I believe we've got 20 individuals or families who will be here and so we do invite the board to be there and to congratulate them and meet them and it will be a wonderful event. Also in that group is a woman by the name of Esther Nishio and Esther was a test case who came back to California and was the first Japanese American on the West coast and the first place she came for her education was Pasadena City College. And under threat of bombs and everything else, Dr. Harbeson who is the president at that time welcomed her and I met her last week and she came in and her husband was with her and her husband looked at me and said, "Are your parents George and Ruri Sugimoto?" And I said, "Yes." And he told me that he sold them their first home in Pasadena. >> Wow. >> So it was quite a reunion. And so she will be at the event and I'm looking forward to having all the Board Members there to meet them. We also have our reception for our summa cum laude's that evening so we will be going back and forth between two receptions. So please, let us know if you haven't already and I think Dr. Fair [phonetic] is in the audience. I assume all of you will be there at our commencement. I look forward to it. It should be a wonderful event. And also, thank you for the Trustees being at our Annual Retirees Reception earlier today before the Board Meeting, it's always wonderful to celebrate the number of years that retire--that our employees had been with us, 275 years total of retirees time with us and their service to the college and to our students is wonderful to recognize. So, thank you very much for being there. That ends my report. >> Thank you, wonderful, wonderful. Here's what I would proposed to my colleagues that we complete the minutes and the consent items and then bring Item J forward. Most of the speakers in the audience wish to speak to Item J. Is that work for everybody? Very good. So then I'd enter a motion to approve the minutes. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Many of these are very brief minutes; therefore I think we could take them as a group. Is there any corrections anybody wishes to offer? Okay, hearing none. Student Trustee Abadia, would you like to advice us even though you have to abstain on the couple of them? [ Laughter ] >> Yup. Aye. >> Thank you. All those in favor signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Any no's? And approval of consent items let me take a motion to approve the consent items. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Thank you. What consent items if any do you folk wish to bring to the Boards' attention? Sir? >> I have a question about 168-B. >> 168-B, you got it. Anybody else? No, okay so let's look at 168-B. [ Noise ] >> This is [inaudible] of the following presenters on the attached list for Extended Learning fee classes on the designated dates. I'm curious there's--it must be 15, 20 or more for Good Times Travel Inc., Colorado Rockies, Rail tour, Eastern Sierra tour, California Gold tour, Las Vegas Mirage Resort tour, what is this? [ Laughter ] >> Perhaps I should be asking. How do we get to be a part of this? [ Laughter ] >> Let me turn this over to Ms. Elaine Chapman who works with our Extended Learning, so Ms. Chapman. >> For quite some time, we've offered tours both day tours and then there are some overnight tours and the companies that we've worked with we've worked with for quite a while. These are the offerings coming up for this year because this is the yearly consent for the contracts. We list them all and in addition, we have to split them up because there is single occupancy double et cetera, et cetera. So it is by motor coach, they take them to the various locations and it's all done through a tour guide. >> How is this [inaudible] Extended Learning? >> Well, they are in essence the programs that do offer fee-based classes and opportunities for continuing education, life long learning, doing corporate these types of activities into their programs. In essence, it does give opportunity for citizens, community members to get out as a group and to experience new activities. >> And they pay for the tours? >> That is correct, completely. Completely. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Would you be more comfortable if they call themselves sober times. [ Laughter ] >> Exact name, isn't it? >> I'm not sure I would believe it but-- [ Laughter ] >> All right. >> I do want to comment also all of these fee-based classes are paid for by the participants so there are no general funds going to any of these and I'm looking at Ms. Chapman who is nodding her head. >> Right. >> So participants pay for all of the fees in these Extended Learning opportunities. >> That is correct. >> So all those in favor of the consent calendar as presented, please signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> All those against? Any abstentions? The motion carries unanimous. >> I have one request. On 167-B where the contracts and there was a contract with some of our standard legal firms and I would appreciate just providing some time to the Board a list of the legal rates of the various firms that we're employing just to have that information. >> We will do that. I should also mention my apologies. In your [inaudible] is revised 167-B and the revision is on the last page which is on page 3 of 3. There was a change in the amount for the Center for Adult Development from 5 dollars or 525 [phonetic] for eligible employee. So in your approval of those consent items, we included the revision of 167-B. >> So noted. All right, let's proceed then to Item J fulling it up. This is the item on Presidential Search Update: Discussion with the Possible Action. These are where the yellow carts come in to effect and I would invite Ms. Glenna Watterson to the podium and then if Randy, the AS, maybe afterwards. >> Hi. >> Thank you. >> Good evening Board of Trustees. Thank you for hearing from issue tonight. Thank your for keeping the lines of communication open throughout this presidential selection process. There will always be issues on both sides of the institutions like this. But it's been nice to have at least a dialogue regarding the selection of our president. I don't have to remind you how crucial this is, at the selection at this time when all community colleges are looking for stability, continuity and physical prudence. I have been in daily consultation with the elected issue board and how we view the happenings in the past two weeks and what stands we feel may have some weigh in on this decision, your decision. We will not get sucked into unsubstantial rumors and allegations. That's not appropriate. Issue however, would very have like to have seen more than the two candidates. We feel that with one candidate had dropped out o f the running they should have been replaced by another on the committee submitted list. We understand that those who were not selected have already been notified. But we ask that you forego any feelings of discomfort and go back to the others on the list. Let's get out of that comfort box. This is important. We want to be sure this time. We need the best of candidates and we don't feel we're there yet. Thank you. >> Thank you [ Applause ] >> Good evening Randy. After Randy, Shant Jaltorossian. >> Good evening. My name is Randy Villegas. I'm a current student here at Pasadena City College. It is known, there are a couple of candidates to the vacant president position of our campus. Although these two candidates both have nice attractive resumes, I feel that they lack knowledge of the current issues here at hand at PCC. I therefore request that we do not rush this issue and that we invest more time and money to make sure that we select well qualified applicant in order to prevent what has happened in the past to come back and hunt us again in the future. We should learn from our mistakes and we should learn that the position is vital to success of our students and our beloved campus and I hope that you'd consider and agree with my concerns. Thank you for your time. Have a wonderful evening. >> Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Good evening, Shant. After Shant, Dan Meier. [ Noise ] >> Good afternoon. I speak to you as a current student here at Pasadena City College. First of all, thank you for allowing me to address the meeting. This is directed to all of you and I'm soliciting a response from anyone who cares to give one. I would like to know if any of you have any comment about the Associated Student Executive Board recommending that the trustee supplement, the current candidates for president with additional candidates for consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Let me just point out for those who may not know this. Because of the Brown Act we hold ourselves to only posing questions for clarification to make sure that we understand what's being said. When something is as clear as it is, we let it go. We do not enter into discussions. We simply are not permitted to do so. Thank you, Mr. Meier. >> Daniel Meier, faculty association and also a member of English and [inaudible] Departments. It's been 20 years since I've addressed the board directly; not since the time when I worked in committee to see two new board members at the time, Susan Milly [phonetics] and Jeanette Mann. Tonight, I want to speak to the issue of the faculty staff and students, you know, who have not addressed you in e-mails to support your extended contract of our current president until we can address our concerns regarding the hiring process and qualifications that candidates presented. There's a petition we've circulated that I'd like to read if I may. "We, the undersigned staff, faculty, and students strongly express our support for Dr. Lisa Sugimoto to continue as president of Pasadena City College. Dr. Sugimoto has been part of the Pasadena College Community for many years as teacher, counselor and now as president. Dr. Sugimoto understands the college goals, its faculty, and how to lead PCC into the future. She possesses the qualities of leadership in her demeanor and the way she handles the difficult challenges of balancing the needs of students, the community, faculty and staff. We are extremely pleased with her. She has built a high tangible morale not felt among us for several years. We implore the board to consider the voices supporting her as president of Pasadena College into extended contract. We feel she is far superior to any of the candidates being presented to us." This petition is still circulating, but you can see there's numerous signatures you see that you've not seen in the e-mails that have been sent to you. So, thank you very much. >> All right, thank you, sir. [ Applause ] >> Eduardo VilaJo followed by Adrienne Echols. >> Hi. My name is Eduardo VilaJo and I'm a student here at this campus. I have a question towards one of the candidates that are looking to be put into power. I know that he has a very--let me put this kindly--his personnal conduct might be in question. I have heard that he has been moving right. He has a--maybe he works here one year, works there another year and I want to know if you guys are looking into them. That's something that you guys are looking for. And thank you for your time. [ Applause ] >> Thank you. >> Adrienne, followed by Eric Rosas [phonetic]. >> Good evening. My name is Adrienne Echols. I'm speaking on behalf of my History 9A classmates. And we wanted to know that for the selection process of the president if students input or opinions is considered or solicited at all. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Thank you, Adrienne. [ Pause ] >> Eric. Eric Rosas. Oh, am I confused here? Was that Eric Rosas? No. That must have been Adrienne Echols. Okay. Then let's hear from James Walker if he's still around. And then as president of the Ad Hoc Search Committee, I'd be happy to make a few statements that I hope will help clarify things too. Good evening. >> Good evening, lady chairman of the board. My name is James Walker. I am a student here at PCC. I've been here for about 18 months and I'll be here for another year. I wanted to talk concerning this issue because, as a member of the community not particularly involved in any major fraction of demographic, just as a member of the student body, simply reading The Courier, listening to what people talk about when they discuss how the college is run in the quad [phonetic]. It seems apparent to me that many of my contemporaries are concerned about our current position. We are concerned that the AS is concerned on our behalf, that it is requested that we expand our search. I think there are many of us that are concerned that the faculty association seems to feel much the same. I understand there is a process. I understand there was a consultation. I understand that there were originally six individuals that were pushed forward by the board. It was narrowed down to two. I'm not here to suggest that this--that the board should adjust how it deals with the process of hiring. It's your duty, it's your job, and it's for you to decide. I just want to put out the idea that we've come through some trouble times as an institution and the role of president is so important and our current incumbent is doing such a good job to repair some of the damage I feel we had from our previous issues. It's very important to me, and I think to many of my contemporaries, that the person that comes in and takes over this role comes in with the goodwill of the student body, comes in with the goodwill of the faculty that we start on a positive footing. And that is why I'm hoping that there is room to expand, perhaps take a closer look at where we stand before this moves forward. It appears to me and to many of the people I've discussed this with that proceeding any further right now is unlikely to foster a positive attitude at the dawn of what we hope is a long prosperous era for whoever takes over. Thank you. >> All right. [ Applause ] >> So let me say a couple of things to bring, at least, some more clarity. People are posing questions like, did students have a role, et cetera. So I think there's a place for explaining a little bit more of the search process. But before doing that, I want to assure you all that the board unanimously has a very deep regard and deep affection for President Sugimoto and we, like you, believe she has transformed the morale on campus and we are deeply grateful for that and we are glad to be in this position that you have brought us to. So thank you again, President Sugimoto, for that. So, very quickly, our search process started something like six months ago. So to suggest that it's precipitous is perhaps an overstatement. We developed deliberately from the beginning a very inclusive process and probably the most major factor in that was pulling together the screening committee. As a board, we brought some people, each of us suggesting one person for the screening committee and then the campus made up a majority of that committee. Students were represented, in fact, probably more percentage wise than any other body on the screening committee. They had two representatives and they both happen to be sitting here at the table. The screening committee took on something like 50 applications. I say "something like" because, in fact, 45 is--was deemed acceptable for having the necessary qualifications. And then within that, we had literally a plethora of sitting presidents, vice presidents, vice chancellors from the community college system in California. The screening committee pretty much did its work and they did it extraordinarily well. And they presented to us upon our request six candidates that they believed were all marvelous candidates and we also took them at their word because the chair of that committee, Dr. Richard Garcia, came and stood before us just to tell us that the screening committee had voted unanimously that this was both a very productive process, a very robust process, a very honest process and that the six people that they representing were very strongly supported. >> We then as a College Board asked not to know anything about the ranking of these folks so that we come with a clear mind to our conversations and our deliberations on May the 8th with them. We did indeed wish to bring three candidates to campus. We invited three candidates to campus as some of you may know, at the very last moment one of those candidates stepped away and did so only for a personal rather emergency family reasons that showed up and nothing to do with PCC. And so, we continued on and brought two very fine candidates to the campus community. Feedback was organized in two ways, one essentially the informal and the formal leadership of the campus met with each of the candidate in small meetings. For example Dr. Sugimoto and her executive team have a one and a half hour breakfast I believe with each candidate. Most of the deans did so and all of the folks around this table. Each had a time for a small group conversation, a meaty [phonetic] conversation and feedback was solicited from them, anonymous, confidential to the board which was put together. At the same time, the entire community not just the campus but the external community was invited to a forum held here in this room something like maybe a hundred or so people showed up and feedback sheets were solicited from there. In both places, student input was taken and indeed each evening for at least two hours with each candidate was blocked just for the students to meet with the candidates. I feel very confident that not only did we have a participative process but that we followed it to the hilt, to the T and I'm frankly very proud of that and all the work that the screening community in particular did in that effort. Then the final thing that I would offer is we have been taking input literally up to last minute. Recently, I just shared from the input from the virtual psych visit. That was the last thing that was invited at the screening community. That was a visit to the campuses of the candidates again by the leaders on the screening community. And they shared their confidential notes, reports, having talked with their counterpoints in the other campuses. That along with our senior consultant Stanton Hales whose job is basically to investigative reports and so all of that has indeed been brought to the Board and continues. You know, we understand that no stone will be unturned. I just turn to my colleagues, is there anything that you would wish to say or that you would wish me to say please let me know. I want to make sure that you feel that your questions are being answered. I want you to know that we have listened, that we have taken feedback over this entire process. Myself and colleague Bill have worked very closely with all the work, you know, every week meeting with Stanton Hales by phone to know what was going on and to take advice and so on. Maybe I should ask Bill. Would you wish to say anything? >> I would, excuse me--add to that is that you were very good at with the help of the people of the faculty, other parts of the stuff, gather meeting Friday afternoon with some students and others. And a numbers of concerns were raised and we--excuse me, we have taken those very seriously and investigated those issues. The people who were identified have been contacted or spoken with and I think as of this point the process is moving forward. And if there are still are--is anybody with bona fide issues and if you have any first hand knowledge or credible evidence to support some of these, bring those to us. We will certainly investigate that. Take all of that very seriously. But we cannot really go in the basis of hearsay or when somebody sometime in the past supposedly had said or may have done. We got to move pass that. So if you got something credible evidence, bring that to us. Otherwise, let's just take to the discussion of the issues and the process forward. But we appreciate very, very much the participation of everybody. We had as Hilary has said, at least hundred people of each of the forums, I think probably close to 150 or a couple of hundred at those, feedback of forums were solicited. That's been compiled. The data from that has been put together and we have that information. We're using that as we go forward in making a decision. >> Alright, good. There is one latecomer to us so let's hear from Jason Herbert and then ask Allen [phonetic] to speak also. >> I just want to thank the board for the transparency. I understand and the students understand that there's no issue with the steps that you've taken, the selection. They asked me if we submitted official request to the board of trustees through a unanimously voted motion to just either extend the candidates, bring more candidates in or restart. I speak on behalf of the students. They're here. I speak on the behalf of the candidates, the faculty, the senate the classified senate. Just there's something about these candidates doesn't work, doesn't fit and it hurts me that our voices are not heard. Our voices haven't been-they have been ignored and fallen in deaf ears. And we--it's frustrating as a student when the president of the Board admits openly in a public forum that our voice isn't the most important voice on campus when it fact it is. And I just--I wanted to thank you for your support. I think that the candidates. I met the candidates. They are great. They're great on paper. Dr. Desdemona Cardoza and d Dr. Mark Rocha are fantastic. They're just not for this campus and we just ask you an employee to please either restart or bring in a new candidates to because we want what's best to the campus and these two candidates aren't what's best for the campus so please just listen to us. [ Applause ] >> Allen. >> Well, I think the board has heard what the public has to say about this issue and I would like to say a couple of things. After the search committee for the six final candidates to the board, I included a letter to Dr. Garcia to give to you guys how I felt. You know what I don't think any of the six are the perfect match or the right match for PCC. And again, at another close session meeting at 12 o'clock when I appear before you guys, I wrote another letter and read it in front of you guys. I keep saying the same thing, asking for the board to reconsider more candidates, asking the board to consider the voices of the public. And frankly, I have to say I'm very disappointed. I'm very, very disappointed and I think that's the general consensus out there in the public. So I just like to [inaudible] the board to reconsider. You think about the options that are available to them and possible to really think about doing the right thing for PCC. Thank you. >> Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Do any of my colleagues wish to offer anything on closing? >> Not really. >> I just want to mention that I've been involved in faculty searches for 24 years and I do want to comment the board about the openness. As a matter of fact we don't put our university presidents to as much rigor as this board did. We only bring him usually for 1 day assuming that we do a lot background checks. And I do wanna tell the students that a lot of students have written to me and I hope I have responded to you either by phone calls or e-mails. And I think most of the board members, all of them certainly do listen to your words and certainly want the best president for Pasadena City College. I think that's why we're here and why we run for this board. And I can assure you that we have done--put a lot of work into this and did a great job. Especially, I wanna commend Dr. Bradbury-Huang for the--really the hard job she did and trying to tackle less and put us in line and move things along and so I appreciate that. But it was done very professionally, it's very transparent and I think you will like the decision we make and I hope you do, thank you. >> Alright, thank you. Student Trustee Abadia? >> First of all, I do want to clarify this. This was clearly a transparent process as well as inclusive one. I guess there's no quarrel with that. I think the quarrel is with the way I feel is with a lot of--the campus community has been specific [inaudible] to express that. >> I had a tremendous opportunity to meet and spend a substantial amount of time with the two candidates within the campus, within dinners and in forums. But just based on the constant feedback that I received either through e-mail, through either--if you're speaking with people individually and just my contact for the campus community being here everyday, I found it a reasonable request. I mean, I don't find it an extreme request. I find it very reasonable that the campus to allow to simply meet more candidates. I mean, I know that at the end of the day it is up to the board to make a decision but I do think that allowing the campus, which is the constant thing like I have been hearing that people just wanna meet more candidates. In allowing the campus to just meet more candidates, I don't think that would be a bad thing. I think if anything that would just make it that much more of inclusive process. I mean, given that there are--that there's clearly are groups who are--who are not content with, you know, the outcome of the search so far. And the constant feedback that I personally received from members of campus community has been consistent in its message in just simply wanting to see more candidates. Now, I wanna be clear, this is not necessarily to put down the two candidates that have been presented. They're clearly, as James said, they looked--they're still on paper. No question about that and I'm not passing judgment over the two that have been presented. You know, but rather this we look at as a chance to allow the campus to feel as though they haven't--you know, their opinion counts in this given that there's a clearly a, I mean, I guess a resistance to the way things--to where things have gotten so far. And my personal stands alongside with the associate students and just asking for the reasonable request to simply allow the campus to meet more student--meet more other candidates that were presented to the board. Given that the board--I mean, you know, it's understandable that the third candidate did drop out of the three finalists and it's clearly, I wanna make it clear that was for personal reasons, however, I do still think that candidates does deserve to have at least three candidates to come, you know, meet with the campus and just allow the campus to feel that they have options. It's clearly--I mean, being able to having choose between two candidates as opposed to three, it gives the campus less options. So, I mean I personally--I've asked the board and I would like to ask the board if you can go on with a reasonable request of allowing other candidate, possibly another two candidates as a finalist, just come to campus and just allow people to meet them. That's-- >> I feel I'm between a rock and a hard place. I watched TV, I see politicians answering questions and wonder why do they just keep saying the same thing over and over? Why don't they just answer the damn question? You're posting a question to which I am going to say with a hundred percent confidence we have brought two very fine candidates to the campus. Moreover, there is one other thing I want to say as delicately as possible because it is confidential information. I want you to know that of the 200 feedback sheets that came in a vast majority, a vast majority were positive, okay. So when people say--when people say, but everybody I talked to tells me it's X,Y and Z. I want you to say there's also a data that at the very least causes us to say there's at least two sides to the story here. So if we could leave it at that, it may not be a satisfying end to the conversation but I don't know that we can resolve anymore than we have. I don't know that we can have a process that's been anymore participative. Perhaps we'll look back and wonder was it too participative? You know, we learn as we go along. This is where we're at with two very fine candidates. >> Just one--one, one brief comment. Again, you may not agree with the decisions that's being made but that does not mean that we do not hear what you're saying. But we have taken everything you said very seriously and as Hilary suggested and as all the reference, investigations that have been made, have come back, we have two very fine candidates that we're choosing between. So the fact that that the decision may not be in according to what you're asking does not mean you're not being heard. As a lawyer I argue before judges all the time. Sometimes they don't do what I want them to do but I know that they hear what I'm saying and they're just not getting it. But anyway-- [ Laughter ] >> I don't mean that to be [inaudible] door or anything else. It's just that this is a process that everybody has had a role and an opportunity to take part in. You've done in a great way including--starting with the screening committee, the process. We--the committee came to us anonymously. If you may recall early on through Richard Garcia, the chair, so the process are working, the committee recommends unanimously that we go forward with this process. We then took a vote and did exactly that and so the process has worked well and we'll see where it ends up but we have heard what you've said believe us. And we appreciate the thoughtful way in which you raise the issues and the concerns and we have looked into the issues that have been brought to us. >> Last word goes-- [ Laughter ] >> O hold on. No there's somebody else even behind you. So, please Ms. Watterson. >> We understand. This is your decision. You have to work with this person. We have to work with this person. We're willing to do what it takes to make this college run. We don't care who's in charge. We got a pillar of people here that have been here for years and years and no matter who comes on campus this place is gonna work. I asked that the-- [ Applause ] >> I asked that the board take into consideration when the new person comes on if they start to see issues, we don't wanna wait two years. We don't wanna have another two years like we have so can we please have a process of evaluation before constructs are renewed and that you take that into consideration too and to listen to us then because I can work with anybody, believe me. I don't know if anybody remembers Mrs. Bodo [phonetic] but I do and I can work with her. I can work with anybody. So please, please understand that we understand your position. This is very difficult for all of us. We will work. Nothing's gonna stop these people and we want some evaluation before contracts are renewed, okay? Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Appreciate the constructive nature of your comments, thank you. Okay, last one, last yellow card. Miguel Novelo III. [ Silence ] >> Hello, good afternoon. I wasn't really gonna comment but I post a couple of questions and something else. You have members of your faculty as well as students here and like the campus isn't really consist of the board so it consist of your faculty and your students so if you keep them happy, basically, your campus is gonna run a lot better first of all. Secondly, I'm not hearing anything about why these candidates are good? All I'm hearing is that the board have seen it, they've talked to them, yada, yada, yada what not, that they're okay but I'm not hearing any like reason to why you feel that these candidates are gonna be good for the campus. Like your student associates here, I mean I've never spoken with them and they're obviously very intelligent men but like how they say that they've talked to them but like I haven't talked to them. Hundreds of your students I never talked to them. It may never even affect me but still to this day like how am I suppose to know if they're gonna be a good candidate or not? That and basically without doing the whole run around like all I want to know is why they're gonna be good for the campus. That's all I would like to hear. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Let me simply say now is not the time but when the time is right we will certainly talk about that. [ Pause ] >> Alright, so actually because so many students are in the room if my colleagues will allow let's bring forward the oath of office for the student trustee. [ Pause ] >> Okay, I'm being advised that we need to talk about some student privileges before we do the oath of office so Nolan if you would just hang on a little bit we'll do that and then we'll bring you up while your colleagues are still in the room, okay. So item N, President Sugimoto. >> Yes, thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. Under item N, every year we are to reaffirm the privileges of the student trust--well, we are recommending as the administration to reaffirm the privileges of the student trustee specified in the Pasadena Area Community College District Bylaw 1030 section 5. >> So if the board would, I like to turn this back over to Dr. Bradbury-Huang for discussion and possible action. >> Very good. So this is a policy that's not new to us. May I entertain a motion in support? [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Second. >> And a second. Does it require any discussion? Let me list for folks who may not know. The privilege is to speak to an item before a vote is taken. This is the advisory vote. To make and second motions that's somewhat unusual compared to counter points at other schools, to cast an advisory vote, shall not attend closed sessions except to the extent that any nonmember of the governing board could attend and to receive compensation, rather small but nonetheless. Those are the privileges of the student trustee. So, all those in favor of continuing to extend these privileges, please signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> All those against, all those abstaining, the motion passes unanimously. So having clarified the privileges, it's now my honor to call forward Nolan Pack to be sworn in. >> Sure, yeah, come to the-- >> I'm asking where do you want me to go. >> He can come to the podium and speak at the podium. [ Inaudible Discussions ] >> So why don't I come closer to you and you'll repeat after me. >> Okay. >> Good idea. [ Noise ] >> I gonna go. Okay. So for the office of student trustee, for the governing board of the Pasadena Area College District, please say after me. I Nolan Pack. >> I Nolan Pack. >> Do solemnly swear. >> Do solemnly swear. >> That I will support and defend. >> That I will support and defend. >> The constitution of the United States. >> The constitution of the United States. >> And the constitution of the state of California. >> And the constitution of the state of California. >> Against all enemies foreign and domestic. >> Against all enemies foreign and domestic. >> That I will bear true faith and allegiance. >> That I will bear true faith and allegiance. >> To the constitution of the United States. >> To the constitution of the United States. >> And to the constitution of the state of California. >> And to the constitution of the state of California. >> That I take this obligation freely. >> That I take this obligation freely. >> Without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. >> Without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. >> And that I will well and faithfully. >> And that I will well and faithfully. >> Discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. >> Discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. >> Congratulations Trustee Pack. >> Thank you so much. [ Applause ] >> I'll ask the student Trustee Pack to sign in a moment and for now I just love you to offer a statement to the Board [inaudible]. >> Sure. Alright. Many of you have probably heard me speak here before so I'll keep it brief. But thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang for the introduction and also to the Board for giving me the opportunity to speak here tonight. Some of you I have already had the pleasure of working with. Others of you, I'm truly looking forward to the next year and I hope that we'll have the opportunity to get to know each other on the road ahead. I feel really privileged to be joining the Board as the student trustee at such a pivotal time in the history of this institution. In [inaudible] to Dr. Sugimoto, I will affirm the sentiment that she expressed when assuming the presidency that she currently holds and say that this has been a year of tremendous healing. Soon the hard work put in over the last year will come to fruition and I am honored to be playing a part even towards the end of that process. And perhaps I'm an optimist but I do feel that this upcoming year we'll bring progress, achievement and continued success for Pasadena City College. So again, thank you for this opportunity to address the Board and I look forward to a year of healthy, constructive dialog and continued service to this college that we all know and love. >> Very good. [ Applause ] >> Nolan, you take the seat at the next board meeting. [ Laughter ] >> Brian, continue to enjoy. [ Laughter ] [ Inaudible Discussions ] >> So, let's turn to yeah, item G, the budget update presentation and discussion. >> Thank you Dr. Bradbury-Huang. I'd like to turn over the discussions behind tab G to Dr. van Pelt. >> Thank you. We did have an Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee meeting last week and we did resolve our guiding principles and directions. I would point out that despite the fact that each one of this has a check mark in them; it does not mean that we have committed to actually implementing some of these things. For example, the involuntary furlough program will be developed as distinctly opposed from will be actually put into place and implemented. So the idea is that we will do all due diligence so that we're prepared for any contingency but these are study items in anticipation of any eventuality. We also agreed that ARC funds will be integrated into the general fund with 300,000 dollars available for innovation based on strategic planning priorities and that the district will contribute up to 1.4 million dollars to the other post employment benefit fund if it is not fully funded. So those are the last items in terms of the guiding principles for budget development. We also updated the draft total compensation model and it is still a draft. We are still vetting numbers. You'll notice that we are turning some of the red numbers into black numbers. That's particularly true in the health benefits cost so that you can see the Blue Cross, the PPO which is in the middle of the page on the total compensation model. We are estimating a 12 percent and it's coming in 11.27 percent which is the bigger of the two, the Blue Cross California care HMO. We also estimated at 12 percent, however, it comes in at 5.5 percent. But you'll notice that it's a far smaller number so the impact is less. Kaiser at 2.2 percent we had before. Dental, we estimated at 5 percent, it's coming at 4.9 percent. So as we get additional numbers, we are plugging those into the model and then the model is--the bottom line is being developed. The one big open issue is going to be the State Teacher's Retirement System. We do know that PERS, the Public Employee Retirement System has committed to 1 percent. So we've plugged in 1 percent for stirs [phonetic] but we're anything but certain on what that number will be. It actually does require a legislative action and we're not at all clear on whether that can be done in time for implementation July the 1st. So we're leaving that at 1 percent for the moment but we do have to clear that up. Now, there has been a flurry of activity in Sacramento particularly in the senate and the assembly and also the non-partisan Legislative Analyst Office. The LAO has forecast that the economy will be slightly better than they had anticipated to the tune of about 1.4 billion dollars for the state revenues. That has taken a little bit of the pressure off but realized that the problem was more than 19 billion dollars so it still relatively small amount. There is still pressure from The Legislative Analyst Office on physical education courses and they are proposing to cut the PE instruction by 50 percent which would result in a reduction in expenditures of 150 million dollars. For Pasadena City College the PE expenses total about 3.5 million dollars. The chancellor's office and the league are proposing that last year we had a work load reduction totalling 120 million dollars system wide. And that was really anticipation if taking out some of the lower enrolled courses anyway. So their position is that this would be a double whammy of the same item. Our work load reduction last year was 744 credit full time equivalent students. And when you calculate that out it turns into about 3.4 million dollars. So the PE number and the full time equivalent student number are very similar. The LAO is also proposing still that the fees be increased to 40 dollars per credit unit and they are also agreeing with the governor in terms of the 2.2 percent enrollment growth. However, the funding mechanism for that growth is significantly different. The LAO would propose that the 40 dollar per credit number that the increase from the revenues from that number would be what pays for the 2.2 percent enrollment growth. They are also proposing that 0.38 percent negative COLA [phonetic] that had been proposed by the governor be eliminated. For Pasadena City College, that would be an additional 406,000 dollars. Now, realize that the senate and the assembly have their own versions which are remarkably complicated. Tomorrow they are expected to go into a conference committee to try to resolve some of these items. The budget process as a whole is long and it's cumbersome and it's very politicized and how that turns out is something that we just have to wait and see. In any event, what we're doing as a district is to position ourselves so that we can deal with any eventuality and I think that the Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee through their work has been putting us in very solid position to be able to do just that. So if there are any questions, please [inaudible]. >> I don't see any. >> I'm gonna summarize what I heard to make sure I understood it. So I'm just looking at the total current [phonetic] model for example. And in the total current model in revenues is a million for, okay. >> Right. >> In the top red number. >> Right. >> So I got most of the [inaudible] we were hearing from the state. We're very positive but now you're saying either the PE if the PE item works its way through or I didn't quite get the 744 credit item. But either one of those could potentially be a negative 3.4 million. Is that-- >> No, what I'm suggesting is that they're proposing that we eliminate--that they eliminate 50 percent of PE programs which would save on the apportionment however they would make that up in terms of funding the 2.2 percent. So the net effect is still unclear in terms of how they propose to do that. >> Okay. So if both of those things happen, we just still have the million for on the page? >> That's correct. Plus they are proposing that the negative COLA be eliminated which should actually increase that number to 1.8. >> It's by 400,000 to a million, 8 million. >> Correct. Now, you know, the wrangling [phonetic] and we said the last time when the governor proposes this may revise, that just starts the ball rolling in terms of the heavy slugfest and hopefully by tomorrow we will have a better sense of the two bodies, the senate and the assembly. If they can come together, that is very strong voice of course. >> I always worry that the legislation when they see 1.9 billion they'll find other programs to spend it on. But they heard today that the make up programs has been--I heard there's not gonna be a budget until August. Do you know anything different? >> Well, and we've also been heard that it could be September. But the reality is that in terms of what occurred this week this has b been blitz [inaudible] in terms of speed. This has been extremely fast. Now, that doesn't mean that as the details work their way through, some of these is based on the June revenues being increased by the way. So the April numbers were very low but they expecting and it was because of the tax revenue collection process that the May numbers, particularly the June numbers, should be more positive. So I think that it would be unrealistic to assume that they would come up with a budget very quickly because they need to see how the revenues are coming into the state. But in terms of what's been occurring in the last few days, it's been amazing, extremely fast. So if they can keep that up, then we could have a budget earlier. But the worse case scenario right now that they're proposing is September budget. [ Noise ] [ Inaudible Discussions ] >> Alright, item H, Adoption of Resolution Number 458 to Authorize Interfund Cash Borrowing: Discussion with Possible Action Dr. Sugimoto. >> Yes, and we just keep all of Dr. van Pelt's agenda items together. So this is also his. Dr. van Pelt. >> Okay. So as we just discussed, it is possible that we won't have a budget until September. If that were to occur, then we have a cash flow issue that we have to deal with because we won't have the apportioned payments that would be authorized under the budget act. Therefore, what we're proposing is that the non-restricted funds that we have available which is particularly the capital outlay fund as well as the supplemental health fund, which is also known as the GASB 45 fund, that those moneys would become available to us through interfund borrowing. And that as the apportionment then rolls back in then we would replenish those funds. So what that would allow us to do is to have inter--free loans by borrowing from ourselves from different funds. >> Very good, so let's have a motion to support that. >> Moved. >> Second. >> Okay. And those in favor of basically taking loans without paying interest from ourselves signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Anybody against, any abstentions, motion moves, motion is carried unanimously. Thank you Dr. van Pelt. Right. Establishment of an Ad Hoc Subcommittee for Measure P Citizens' Oversight Committee Membership Appointments: Discussion with Possible Action. I think we can take care of this one pretty quickly. You probably don't all remember but we actually have a subcommittee for measure P and I am the chair of that subcommittee. [ Laughter ] >> So that makes it very easy. The context as I understand it at least of this request is each of us appoints our own representative from our district to sit on measure P. That's taking care of this is different. In addition, there are four positions that are district wide from any part of our district that slot in to four different categories. One of those categories is essentially taken care of because it will become the student, it will be the student trustee which would be Nolan, Nolan Pack, is that correct? >> Yes. >> And then the other, I'm imagining, we happen to meet the leadership group of PTSA at the last meeting. So we would go back to that group and invite or take suggestions from that group about who would join. That leaves two categories. One is somebody who is active in the district and local business organization and the other is somebody active in a bona fide tax payers' organization. And so what I would like to do is invite nominations for particularly these two positions, folks that you know who you would recommend to take these positions, please just send me their name, their resume, whatever you feel is appropriate. Geoff Baum has already done so, so that's great, he's kind of hit the ground running. I would say let's bring this back to the board at the next meeting so, you know, in the next week, 10 days like that and I will call on my colleague. How about Dr. Fellow, would you be willing to look at those nominations with me so that we can bring back-- >> Sure, I'd be happy to. >> A recommendation to the board and work this fairly quickly. Does that sound like a process we can all live with? And I'll send out a reminder over e-mail. So basically just consider who all would be good nominations. Let me also ask for the advice of Dr. van Pelt because basically you've been leading the measure P. Is there anything that I'm missing here, anything that you'd have me add? >> No, and the next time we would also include the nominations from the individual board members. >> As well yet again. >> Well, essentially the board nominates the board as a whole approves. >> Okay. So each of us in addition to these two at large, we should bring also our own individual. >> Now, realize that not everyone has an open position. >> Right. >> I think they were still waiting for a nomination from Dr. Mann and I think from Mr. Thomson. >> Oh, okay and Dr. van of course is [inaudible]. >> The other ones are taken care off. >> Okay, okay, okay. We'll take care of that, very good. And so we'll have that as an agenda item on the next agenda and that way we stay on the-- >> Right. >> On the dead line that you've tasked us with. Okay, great. Goal setting, item K, discussion with possible action. This is one we're somewhat familiar with. Trustee Thomson does it meet your approval? >> It does, I'd like to add that actually. >> Alright. >> Particularly after listening to the budget discussion and the uncertainties associated with that. I would suggest that we add as goal number 11, represent the College with respect to external relations, including advocacy for its interests, before the State Legislature and other governmental entities. [ Inaudible Discussions ] [ Noise ] >> Very good. Let's bring this to a vote. Can I have a motion to adopt the now 11 goals? We can never have too many goals. >> I move that we adopt [phonetic]. >> Move that we approve, very good. Can I have a second? Let's bring this to discussion. >> Well. I've been with you and [inaudible] home and I think these are excellent. I think it will take us places if we follow these goals. I think they are very effective at what we want to see accomplish for our school. >> Very good. We could say they signal the future that we aspire to. >> Yes. >> Very good. Student Trustee Abadia, your advisory vote please. >> Aye. >> Very good. All those in favor of adopting the 11 goals, please signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Any nays, abstentions? So the motion passes unanimously and we'd get, hopefully, yet another cleaned up copy, and we'll keep that as a record always in our folder. [ Pause ] >> Right, accreditation update, discussion with possible action, President Sugimoto. >> Yes, behind tab L is your accreditation update, it is basically information to the Board of Trustees report and I don't know if you have any question but Dean Miller and Dean Kollross are here to answer any of your questions. >> I actually do have a question. I'm still not clear--excuse me--presenting our report and apparently, there was some feedback from the report that we sent it and I needed to kind of know where we are. So apparently, that's what I understand. >> You're correct. We did submit our followup report and we got a copy of what was sent in, and we did respond to that in a letter. And what happens now is all that information goes to the commission in June and they meet, and they'll make a decision and then they'll send us another letter saying how we did. >> So when do we-- >> We usually gonna find out until the end of June because the commission meets about the middle of June. >> Thank you. >> Is that good? >> So maybe at the July meeting we might get an update. >> I would say definitely that July meeting we'll know exactly where we are. >> Terrific. Thank you. Anything else? Maybe at the July meeting then we have a more vigorous discussion. Alright [inaudible]. Policy Review: Discussion with possible action. Let me turn this to Trustee Thomson. >> Yes. We have one revised policy and two new policies. The revised policy number 0200 pertaining to the undertaking missions set forth and the following statements and hopefully everybody got a chance to look at that and if any questions, I'm sure that Ms. Kollross just answer them right off the bat. I would move that we approve the amended policy. >> Second? >> This is all three together? >> No. That's just the amended policy. >> Okay. This is the mission. >> Yes, 0200. >> The mission statement which is an incredibly important thing especially for the board whose duty it is to work on the policy. [ Pause ] >> Are we ready to vote? Okay. People wanna read it. >> I'm sorry, are we voting on the first one or all three? >> It's just 200, the first one. >> Just the mission, yeah. [ Inaudible Remark ] [ Simultaneous Talking ] >> You got it. >> If you're finished and ready to vote, we're ready to go there, yeah. Okay. All those in favor, signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Your advisory vote is for the mission. >> Just say aye. [ Laughter ] >> Any nays or abstentions? So the new policy, yippee, unanimously approved. I'd like to make a quick comment. This mission statement has gone through several iterations and my thank you to all of the constituent group members who worked very diligently on getting this one through, and thank you to Dean Kollross and we are so very pleased. Thank you Board of Trustees for getting this one through. This was one of the accreditation requirements and we needed to get this one done and we are very happy. We will be revisiting the mission, not just every six years but certainly looking at it periodically so it doesn't sit and wait until we have an accreditation visit again. So thank you. >> The other two, 4055 and 6010 are new policies and perhaps that you or Crystal might explain the background of these, why we're being asked to approve this. >> For 4055, I'd like to bring Ed Martinez up. This is--Ed's been working on this one for over a year. It has some new title five language [phonetic] in it and I think Ed can speak to it best. >> Okay, thank. Actually, I've been working on it for couple of years, it's taken a while. [ Laughter ] >> What happened is that our policy on course repetition was previously incorporated at 40/50 which defines our grades are standard grades, substandard grades and such but we were advised by CCLC that it should be at its own policy. So we came up with this version, number 4055, that incorporates all of the recent--relatively recent changes in title five that defines when students can repeat substandard grades, the special circumstances at which they can repeat courses in which they have earned a C or better and it simply list the procedures under which all of those circumstances apply. >> I would move approval. >> I'll second. >> Second. >> May I ask a question of clarity? So, if I'm reading the procedures correctly, if a course is repeated in past, then the passing grade replaces the previous unpassing grade and the previous unpassing grade is not computed in the grade point average. >> That is correct. A substandard grade can be repeated. >> Is the unpassing grade noted on the students--still noted on the student's transcript? >> Yes, it visibly appears there, it could--no grade is ever removed from a transcript. >> I will note that it is annotated in the right column so that anyone who reads transcript understands that it has been repeated and that that grade will not count in the GPA but it is always noted on the transcript as a substandard grade. >> I was gonna ask the same question. I will go through my head. I can tell you many stories of that. I had one student who repeated my course three times. He is making a million, over a million now as a baseball player. [ Laughter ] >> Is that because he took your course three times? >> I had him through. >> Very good. All of those in favor of the new policy signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> All those against? Advisory vote? >> 6010 pertains to new monthly academic employees and employees [inaudible] having physical demands in requiring pre-employment physicals to, anything beyond that or-- >> The only thing I'd like to add is that this is a legally advised policy by CCLC. >> Move approval. >> Second. >> All those in favor, signal with an aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Any nays or abstentions? Pass as unanimous. [ Noise ] >> We are. We are close to done, are we not? >> Do you wanna correct the future meetings? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So in terms of future board meeting dates, I would recommend that we strike the Friday, June the 4th meeting from our calendar and replace it instead with a meeting for next Wednesday, is that the 9th at 6 p.m. Can you double check if that works for everybody? This will be a special meeting, majority of it held in closed session. And then, Wednesday, June the 16, a regular board meeting remains with us. >> Well, I will be there but I'm giving up the meeting with the coach at USC football so. [ Laughter ] >> You will be okay. >> Shows how much I love this place. [ Laughter ] >> We are honored you will be with us Dr. Fellow. >> Yeah, we're honored. >> You were just the man. >> So that brings us to the final item, future agenda items. We had a request earlier on from Trustee Martin about rates for legal services, anything-- >> I don't really need that as an agenda item if we passed it already. I just, for reference, like to see it. >> Have an information, okay. Great. >> By the written report. >> Listed. >> Other agenda items that people would wish to see, [inaudible]? >> Before you adjourn, I would like to thank both Allen Tsay and Brian Abadia for tremendous service to this Board and to this college. >> We've been very fortunate to have your involvement, your participation, you're both been willing to speak up and give us advice. You've taken leadership on campus among the students and we really appreciate that. Is Nolan still here? >> Yes. [ Laughter ] >> Yeah, there he is. [ Laughter ] >> I was just going to say that--oh, you're gonna have a big pair of shoes to fill because Brian has done a very good job and of course Brian himself had to fill the shoes of John Campo. >> While you're lauding him, let's have him in front of us. >> Oh, alright, fine, okay. But Brian had to fill the shoes of John Campo and in turn Sean O'Connor and we've been so fortunate to have terrific student trustees and Allen involving the student organization and we're just very, very grateful for that. So, both of you, thank you very, very much. >> It so happens Trustee Thomson, maybe Trustee Thomson can-- [ Applause ] [ Inaudible Discussions ] >> Yes. >> Thank you sir. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Great. >> Right. Thank you so much. [ Inaudible Discussions ] >> Alright. >> Thanks very, very much. >> Thank you so much. >> Don't be a stranger. >> Absolutely. >> Send post cards from Berkeley. [ Laughter ] >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Can I just mention one thing? There's a possibility this may be my last meeting until August because I do have to go to Washington, I think on 16th and then I have to--I have to go to Europe to teach. >> Oh. >> I'm sorry. >> [Inaudible] country of Italy, right? Poor thing. >> I know. >> Lawrence [phonetic], I'm sorry. >> I keep telling him he should take his lawyer with him. >> And Dr. Fellow, we don't have any lovely parting gifts for you now. [ Laughter ] >> You [inaudible] deserve any. >> But I'd be at graduation. >> Very good, I'm glad. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Thank you. I didn't get the chance because she was in class but I would like to introduce the new president-elect, Jamie Hammond, if you like to introduce yourself. >> She is an excellent protégée of mine. I highly recommend her. [ Laughter ] [ Applause ] >> We look forward to working with you Jamie. >> And on the final note, I just like to thank the board for the goals. I think they're very admirable especially, you know, we allow the students to have them put on that. And I'd like to be refer back to goal number three where you guys state that supporting strategic planning efforts to allowing campus constituencies around shared interaction for college. I know you guys are the leaders of PCC, however, I think I've read in the books somewhere that sometimes, you know, the leaders sometimes needs to take the backseat and the people lead them. >> I think that was the itching. Thank you for your perseverance and thank you for all your input over the year, Allen, we really appreciated it. Brian? >> I just wanna say it's been an honor working with all of you. This is clearly a terrific Board with very terrific constitution and I wish you all the best. I wish Nolan Pack as well all the best in the coming year and the coming times. It's gonna be a very pressing time but I have the utmost confidence in this board that this board will be able to lead this institution in the coming future. Thank you. >> And you better get A to Berkeley. >> Then come back here. >> Motion to adjourn. [ Noise ] [ Silence ] ==== Transcribed by Automatic Sync Technologies ====