>> Roll. >> Mr. Thomson? >> Here. >> Mr. Baum? Mr. Martin? >> Here. >> Ms. Brown? >> Here. >> Dr. Fellow? Dr. Mann? >> Present. >> Ms. Wah? >> Present. >> Mr. Soto? [ Inaudible Remarks ] >> Okay, is there any public comment on Closed Session agenda items which are Government Code Section 54957, Public Employee Appointments: Vice President, Administrative Services; Vice President, Educational Services; Vice President, Human Resources; Vice President, Information Technology; Vice President, Student Services; and General Counsel? Also Government Code Section 54957.6, Negotiation with Unrepresented Employee: Superintendent-President, Designated Negotiators William Thomson, Mary Dowell. Anybody wishing to address the Board on either of the Closed Session items? None appearing, we shall adjourn to the close session. Be back in Open Session at 6 o'clock this evening. [ Noise ] [ Silence ] [ Music ] [ Silence ] [ Noise ] [ Inaudible Discussion ] >> Alright, the Board of Trustees is back in Open Session. There is one item of reportable action is on the agenda and then it would be dealt with at that time and that is Item F. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> To do the pledge of allegiance, let me ask Ms. Ashley Jackson if she would lead us the pledge of allegiance. >> Sure. 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. [ Noise ] [ Inaudible Discussion ] > The next item of our agenda is Approval of Minutes, Meeting Number 13, the Regular Business Meeting of June 15th, 2011. Are there any additions, corrections, or questions about the minutes? Would someone make a motions to approve? >> Move to approve. Move to approve. >> Second. >> Okay. Moved by Ms. Wah, second by Mr. Soto. Any questions? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say "aye." >> Aye. >> All opposed, motion carries. Okay, introduction of guests. Anybody have guests to be introduced? [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Okay. Announcements and recognition Board of Trustees, Ms. Brown you-- [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Dr. Mann. >> Ah, no. >> Mr. Martin? >> None, thank you. >> Soto? >> None. >> Wah? The one thing I would say is that I went to the annual meeting of the Pasadena Educational Foundation last week and one of the items on the agenda and also little presentation about was the middle school robotics competition that was held at Pasadena City College. And there were just--everyone is very, very pleased with the way that that went particular kudos given to Doug Haines and to Bob Miller for their good work in making it happen from the Pasadena Educational Foundation's perspective. They would love to come back next year and do it here. And it just went very, very well. So very, very positive comments about PCC and the environment et cetera, so very well done. >> Mr. Thomson, I did have an announcement but if possible, I would like to give maybe a 2 second report. >> Please, absolutely. >> Except would not consider as announcement. I just going to report that I did attend the meeting of the Little Hoover Commission on June 22nd. There were about 13 trustees there plus several guests who sat on the side. And the questions that they asked us were focus on governance and student success and I did receive a summary of the comments which they will then put in a report. I think your one thought it was a very constructive meeting. The Little Hoover Commission I actually read their report from 2002 and they made four really excellent recommendations on governance, all of which the legislature ignored. And so, you know, what I mainly said-- >> Why does not surprising? >> You know, if he would just reinforce this, like strengthen the chancellor's office, you know, and et cetera, he would just reinforce--just repeat these and get someone to pay attention to and that would be something. So I don't--I guess at 10 years ago, they did ask trustees to participate in this but I thought it was very, very positive and helpful meeting. >> Okay. >> Dr. Rocha any announces, reconditions, et cetera? >> I do, thank you very much President Thomson. >> Just a quick segue since you mention Dean Doug Haines, I did want to mention that at first day of summer school class, I stopped in Doug and was starting up our Power Academy. Doug, you know, I know you didn't prepare a speech, but could you just briefly shout out what the Power Academy is all about 'cause a great, great new program and partnership. >> Thank you, Dr. Rocha. It's been in works for a while to try to train inner--not inner city but members of our city electrical replacements if you wanna say. They're bringing population much like most of the trades and we had an opportunity to come along to take our general Electricity 248-A through D series which is certificate course within the program. And if you wanna say super charger it in relations with the City of Pasadena Department of Water and Power and also the Public Works. They need replacements. They need apprenticeships. They need ongoing training. So we started this relationship with guest speakers. There were two of their trucks here on campus. Students had a chance to see their employees. Couple of their employees were trained here of course and gave testimonials. Students had a chance to interface with them. Every week, during the summer, we'll either have a guest speaker or tour to see the opportunities within the city and help students can apply for and eventually--possibly be hired on by the city. I travel today, got a call today and then [inaudible] from the City of Monrovia said they're interested in looking at some partnerships. So small step and I'm look forward to working with them. Thank you. >> [Inaudible] what's the percentage of Water and Power employees of the City of Pasadena will be eligible for retirement? >> Really not sure on that. >> Pretty high I think. >> Yeah, it's pretty high. They're turning over as--you know, they're moving on. And then the new technologies, you really can't trade some of the older text and some of the modern equipment 'cause the gaps are very huge. You know, you say digital and they're it's like it's not--it's not in their vocabulary with the new students jump it and take it on and smart grid technology you've heard that were interfaced to empower generation. Understanding solar, two of the employees from Water and Power who were at the openings said, "How can we get involved in the solar program?" So, little recruitment on the side and then that was really great for us. So thank you for the opportunity. >> Thanks--Thanks Dough. You know, I just wanted to let the trustees know and the public know what the college is doing in career tech education to create training for true middle class jobs. So I'm very, very proud of this new program. The second thing I have, I want to throw it to Vice President Jacky Jacobs who present or introduced to you our new athletic director and new football coach and I'd throw it over to Jacky. Thank you President Rocha. And I am delighted to introduce the two very special people. >> I'll have the athletic director come forward and then you introduce the football coach. We feel we are quite blessed to have this person because he's not only has had a lot of experience--you can come on to the mic--has had a lot of experience in the athletic world. But he's the commissioner and--athletic commissioner. And so he will keep us out trouble. He's gonna put us on track. And he would keep us safe. So we'll be in good shape. So thank you so much for coming. Tell us just a little about where you've been and your backgrounds. >> I think we should start with his name. >> And your name. >> Oh, Mr. John Woods. I'm sorry. I'm so excited about him. >> Well, I'm very happy to be here. I've been on the job for the last two weeks or so and have had an opportunity to knock on some doors and visit with a lot of folks and I can tell you without reservation this is a great institution. The fact that you have 30 some thousand students on one side is real challenge. I was at Palomar for 35 years, started as a wrestling coach and then moved in to athletic administration my last 21 years. And I can say we were facility poor at Palomar. Our football team played offsite. We had a dome, gymnasium, which was built in the '50s. It was engineering project that was allegedly supposed to be very efficient but it was everything but. It was 120 degrees in the summer and it was 20 degrees in the winter and we couldn't heat or ventilate it. So when I saw the position here at Pasadena City College come available, I started going over your website and navigated to everything. And the first thing that struck me was your facilities in athletics. You've made a tremendous commitment to your student athletes. More impressive than anything is the athletic zone, your academic support area, it is the best I've ever seen and I thought we had a pretty good one. So you've done a wonderful job at developing the facilities for your student athletes. And we only hope that they can measure up to that commitment and anything I can do hopefully to influence that we certainly will. So I'm really happy to be here and I hope that you'll say that after 1 year or 9, 10 years, [inaudible] so. What I'd like to do is introduce your new football coach, Fred Fimbres. He comes to us from DuPage College in Chicago, he was there 5 years. But he is truly a Southern California native. He attended Cerritos College, played football at Cerritos, and ended up in the beginning of his pre-coaching at Cerritos. And coach--I wanna say 12 or 14 years in the community college system before moving to DuPage. I think we're very fortunate to have him. He's gonna do a great job. He's committed to community college athletes, which I'm also committed to. I think that's our first commitments to students and our community and our neighbor in high schools and we're gonna work very aggressively to get them here. So this is Fred Fimbres, our head football coach. >> Thank you. I'm honored and excited to be here. I was--feel blessed to have the opportunity to lead some young men and help them grown and create a group of young people that will make this institution proud. That will represent the institution, the community more importantly, and themselves and a positive way, having been a product to California Community College having competed against and coached against the Lancers. I know the tradition here. And I've paid attention from a distance, but I paid close attention to the things that are going on overtime and I feel very excited about what we're gonna do here and how we will make all of you proud. I look forward to hopefully meeting everyone of you in person and having a moment to visit with you and share any ideas that or take gustiness any feedback that you may have. But I promise you this, we will work ferociously every single day to make you proud in the community, in the classroom, and then strangely enough you'll see how we can win football games as a byproduct of doing things the right way. So we're gonna bring the PCC proud tradition of athletics particularly in football to the forefront and we're gonna have a group of young people that represent strangely enough the community at the community college. And we're gonna make you proud and compete viciously and we're gonna create some nice young men who will represent as well. I thank you very much and I truly I'm honored to be here, thank you. >> Thank you. Good to have you here both of you. >> And thank you Vice President Jacobs. Okay, we'll let--why don't we just welcome these two guys to [inaudible]? [ Applause ] >> It's too hot to work in pads, you know, out there. So the last-- >> I'm wondering why he brought to Chicago [inaudible]. [ Laughter ] >> The last item that I have very briefly, President Thomson is just an expression of gratitude especially today, I am wearing a pin of the classified staff, which is not to exclude by any mean my management colleagues or my faculty colleagues. 'Cause they know how deeply grateful I am. But I wore the pin today because this is a significant week as we transition from last week. We had so many retirements. And this week, we move into a new year and our staff, those who are here, I thank you sincerely and those for the record out there who are working while we speak to keep the college running, keep summer class going, get fall registration going. So I just wanted to say for the record to thank everyone especially on the classified staff who is working so hard in the service of the college, so thank you President Thomson. >> Okay, we now came to Shared Governance Representatives. We'll begin Ms. Chapman. >> Thank you, nothing this evening. >> Dr. Jacobs anything further? >> No, thank you. >> Dr. van Pelt? >> No, thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Miller? >> Just a quick comment. I wanna thank President Thomson for his compliments of Doug and I for the robotics competition. But I think it really is important to point out that there is a number of college personnel in the area of administrative services and facilities and what have you that made this a success. It was truly a college effort and I wanna make sure that everybody new that. I also wanted to say for whatever it's worth at the moment that both the--our new athletic director and our football coach are just stellar hires. I've had an opportunity to work with the athletic director just recently and again, just met the football coach and I think there is a new dawn--a new day dawning, if you will, and I'm looking for it to helping with the number areas in terms of enrollment, the issues for our student athletes. And then again, I think as Dr. Rocha mentioned, as you'll see when you see, the Board Report Item 4-P, there're a lot of changes that we've had put in the place to prepare the institution for the transition that we are under going right now. And if it really wasn't for the efforts of all of your staff and our managers and some of our faculty, we would not be able to get through 87 or 88 retirees. So what you see here in 4-P for example is some of the changes that are necessary in order for us to continue to do the business that we need to do for the institution and that they represent temporary adjustments in order for us to move forward. But it's all because people are willing to step up and to do the work that's needed to deal with 30 plus thousand students that we have. So, it's a great place to work. It really is. And there are great people here. >> Thank you. >> Ms. Kollross? >> No report. >> Dr. Douglas? >> No report. >> Mr. Martinez? >> Just a brief report. First of all the Academic Senate Board will have no meetings until the fall semester. So I just want to let you know that over the course of the summer, the senate officers and I will be working on the following. Number 1, a recommendation for the C&I committee on the awarding of credits for CLEP, that's the College Level Equivalency Program. We believe that this will be particularly advantageous for veterans. Number 2, a revise policy on prerequisites based on content review although we're waiting on a model from CCLC that will take us forward on the issue. A new policy on equivalency which is the process like which we determine that individual applicants or how individual applicants can qualify faculty positions when they do not meet minimum standards. A new policy on sustainability and possible revise updates on the policies on program discontinuance, student conduct, and academic integrity; and finally, enrollment priorities. So we'll be here and actively working over the summer. >> Very good. Ms. Jackson, congratulations. Welcome to your first meeting with us. >> Thank you, I'd also like to take this time out to introduce the new 2011-2011 Associated Students Board. [ Applause ] >> Starting from my left, Mon-Shane Chou the new Vice President for Public Relations, Hanna Israel the new Vice President for Sustainability, Simon Fraser our Chief Justice, Christopher Fennessy our new Vice President for Academic Affairs, Daniel Perea our new Vice President for Internal Affairs, John Fraser our new Vice President for External Affairs, Logan Thomas our new Vice President for Campus Activities, Erica Barraza our new Vice President for Student Services, and Victor Vasquez our new Vice President for Cultural Diversity. We're actually missing one of our members, Daniela Rueda our Vice President for Business Affairs. She's actually way in Spain on [inaudible] program. But she sends her regards, and I think I can speak for the entire associations board when I say that we're really exited to be here and we hope we have a great year. So thank you. >> Thank you, congratulations all of you, we're welcome you, look forward to working with you. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> You may sit down now. [ Laughter ] [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Okay, Public Comments on Non-Agenda Items. Anybody wishing to address the board on non-agenda item? Approval of consent items on page 3, we have Consent Items--are there any that should be addressed separately? [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Dr. Mann? >> Yes, I would like to call 7-B and 4-P for a separate vote. >> I would like to ask some questions just about 2-P in general. >> 2-P? Okay. Others be dealt with separately? Here's a motion to prove the other items? >> Move to prove the others. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> It then moved right after Mann second by Mr. Soto, approved, all except item 7-B, 2-P, and 4-P. Any questions or discussion? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say "aye." >> Aye. >> All opposed. The motion carries. Okay, Dr. Mann? >> On 7-B, I would like to vote separately on this because there's the authorization for the funding for the video taping of the board meetings for next year and since I was--am strongly opposed to spending money on this, I would like to vote separately because I will vote against it. >> Okay, we are in a situation here where both Vice President Baum and Trustee Fellow who voted for it are away. Could we perhaps get a courtesy vote from-- >> What's the time sensitivity? >> Well, the guys are here tonight. >> And while they're here we--I think we need to the contract approve, do we not, to deal with [inaudible]. So we gotta have a courtesy vote from one of you. I mean, there's no question I'll think both Mr. Fellow and Mr. Baum would--or Dr. Fellow and Mr. Baum would support this. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> I know. I have to put on the spot. >> You did. >> So what do you want? You want someone to move? >> Yes, please. >> So move. >> Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. >> This is very hard. >> Yeah. >> No, it's not. >> Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say "aye." >> I. >> Aye. >> Okay, let's raise our hands here. All in favor raise your hands. All oppose. Alright, we'll put it back on the agenda on the 28th of this month unless one of you is willing to cast a courtesy vote recognizing what Mr. Baum and Dr. Fellow will do were they're here? [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Mr. Thomson, I normally might consider that but I feel very strongly about this, I don't think that when we look at the number of people that was watching this video, that it weren't spending this much money on when we have perfectly fine, well-working audio test. >> Okay. >> Okay, we'll put it back on the agenda of the 28th of this month or next meeting. The next item was 2-P. Ms. Wah? >> I have some questions regarding the process. There were number of positions and there were quite a few salary class and step-jumps and I'm not sure what the process was. If--I'm not sure what the process is. Why some positions jumps so many steps and then I also have a question--it was on the people who are recommended for these increases in salaries steps and class changes, were they--was it an interview process or they just were already doing the--were they in the position? >> Okay, first of all thank you Trustee Wah for the question. With respect, we're looking at the item 2-P with the various change of statuses and without speaking individually to--you know, some of the changes. I would say first of all the--all these changes that were recommended by the previous incumbents in this case either Vice President Wilcox, I think for most of these course Vice President Jacobs is here for the instruction. And they have filed these are not arbitrary or discretionary moves and there was an internal but quick process. These are all temporary positions as you see. These are not permanent positions and will exist until they are filled permanently. When they are filled permanently, we will follow the hiring process to ensure that any qualified individual both inside and outside the college will have an opportunity to compete for the positions. And the position and the individuals who are named here understand fully that that's the case, that these are temporary positions. With respect to the various details of their rating, these go according to very clear, strict, non-discretionary salary scales that are already established for classified staff and for classified supervisors. And I would at this point turn to Dean Engeldinger but he is in parts unknown. For the interim between now and the time that we have new leadership in HR, I've ask Dr. van Pelt to serve as acting Vice President of HR. And so I would turn to him to elaborate and offer any kind of additional information in terms of the process we used in order to get this information on the docket. >> And there are number of different situations that exist here. Some of them are fairly routine. So Leslie Tirapelle a way of example is already the Interim Director of Distance Educations though her permanent job is librarian but this is an extension through June of next year. Similarly, Gary Woods is the Interim Division Dean for Business and Computer Technology. So, each one of these is somewhat different. In the case of the two managers that are involved, the person who is the dean, the associate dean of admissions and records retired and previous to that, Stuart Wilcox was doing both the job of Vice President of Student and Learning Services as well as the Associate Dean of Admissions and Records. So he was doing two jobs. Upon his departure and the incumbent's departure that really created two full vacancies. So in this case, Dina Chase was--I believe that in this transition plan Stuart had an extensa process within the organization to come up with ways of filling the gaps on an interim basis. So basically what Dina did is to go from her current position and she--you know, doing the transfers and so forth has interaction with the records--submissions and records in any event. So that turned out to be reasonable fit. And upon Kathleen Rodarte's retirement, Denise Carter was similarly tasked with doing that job, so what happens is that the difference in pay is relatively nominal and I think it's, you know, measured in--on the order of probably a couple thousand dollars a month, they're about to give or take, versus the full pay of hiring. >> So what it allows us to do is to go through and actually operate in the intervening time until we have the permanent organization in place, which means that the new vice president for Student and Learning Services and then, you know, whatever changes to the organization need to be made and then you got out and fly the position on a full fly. Meaning outside candidates and everyone else would apply for the job to the extent that these people applied and were successful. Of course they would continue and otherwise they would retreat back to their existing positions. So does that answer the question? >> Somewhat, so just to be clear then on--so the examples you used on Denise Carter and Dina Chase. The differences between the M-6, and M-3, M-5, M-1, how is that determined? >> That's done on a computer model basis and it's essentially certain factors are entered in and then the dollar number is produced by the model. And, you know, like I said the net difference in pay turns out to be on the order of 2,000 dollars a month, give or take. I don't remember the exact numbers but it's on that neighborhood. >> So it's not done by the lowest step to that particular new classification, is that? >> The management pay structure is not done on a traditional step in column basis. It's done on the basis of first of all the category M-1 through M-7. And then secondly with the number of years that person has been in the position, educational background and so forth. So there's a rubric involved. And in answering the rubric questions then the number is output. >> So that process then is clear and well known by everyone? Okay. >> Maybe well known but I don't think it's very clear. >> Well, it was clear to me which is-- [ Laughter ] >> Is it Dave--is it clear to managers what the process is? >> Yeah. The management--The members of the management association have had multiple presentations actually several years ago about the nature and structure of the management compensation plan. >> Okay, so the process is transparent to the people who know who should know, understand the process. >> Yeah, the entire management conversation plan was designed to be not subjective to be objective in it. So it's based on--the job has a position based on years of experience, based on, you know, years of service for the college and education, and so on. >> Okay, I just wanna be sure the process is transparent. And then regarding the interim, so even though we hire the new VPs, these positions may still then roll over, they just won't be interim. So who ever the VP is may appoint them permanently, so we still have? >> No, the new vice president has an opportunity to retain them during that the flying process and during, you know, the process giving acquainted. But it is not possible for these to be permanent positions without an external fly. >> Okay. And so at the time that the VPs come into place and what sort of the length of time that we expect to continue an interim position? >> Well these ones go through until next June or when filled. So it could be two months, it could be 3 months, it cold be 4 months. It's--As soon as the vice president determines the organization and understands what the needs are then they go out and they would fly the position. Okay. So to be clear though, for me, just--if a VP comes in, we would not expect that they would hold over an interim position for an additional 6 months? >> Well, we would not extract so I'm not--I don't know the answer to that question. So in other words, if you take the example for example of--well for example, let's take interim assistant dean extended opportunity programs and services. We have always had that management position. Okay, the person who had that position just retired. So we're just, by mutual consent and by policy as you've heard, we are asking someone to fill the stop cap on a temporary basis. That person is doing so and in most cases, doing that job plus the job they had, okay. Now, when the new vice president of student services is appointed, that person like any other current vice president, just like Vice President Jacobs has done with three of these actions today, continues to make assessments and we'll make an assessment as to whether the position, not the person, but to whether the will continue. And I should say I won't prejudge that but I should say that it's highly likely that the position of Dean of EOPNS and the position of dean of admissions are going to continue but I won't prejudge that. If the vice president and I recommended the board of trustees that those positions continue, those individuals who inhabit the position would have to--if they chose to continue the position, in that position, would have to compete for the job in the normal management search process that we use according to standing, written board policy. So I think I'm saying what I've said is so. And I think I've been fairly well schooled on this because of all--you know, I've observed and approved all of these actions. So is that helpful? So, in these cases at least the ones that are on 2-P, these are pretty--as Rick said, standard positions at the college has always had. And then I doubt but again without prejudging, I doubt whether the college is going to recommend that those positions go away 'cause on one way or another, the service needs to be provided to the students for both admissions and for EOPNS. EOPNS is by the way Educational Opportunity Program for under represented students. >> Ms. Martin. >> So. >> Did you wanna motion on 2-P or did you want-- >> Let Linda--I wanna make sure Linda is [inaudible]. >> I just had one other question. Well, just to followup then to what Dr. Rocha was saying. So, you know, one of the rationales that we all use when the Board voted to approve the VPs was that we were flattening out administration overall. So I just--And I understand that you need to wait for the VPs to get here so that you can decide what that actually looks like. But I just wanna be sure that we all get a clear picture of then of that flatten structure looks like and what the salary savings actually is. >> You are minutes away from that report that Vice President van Pelt will report the total booked up administrative savings. I wanna say absolutely clearly, absolutely clearly for the record that the expenses for administration and staff in the 11,12 year, will be with all these changes and all to come will be significantly, significantly in the millions of dollars less next year than this year, okay. And I wanna be--you know, that's been our north start and Rick will fill that in. So I thank you for your helpful questions and your opportunity for me to clarify that. >> Thank you. >> Other questions on 2-P, Dr. Mann? >> Yes, I do have a question. There and maybe Dr. Douglas can answer this. There is a procedure that the board has approved for interim management appointments. Was that procedure followed in this--in making these recommendations filling these positions? >> And I think that it was. But, you know, the truth is, that this was done in the transition plan with Dr. Wilcox and the internal process within Student and Learning Services I believe he did, and maybe Dr. Rocha knows better than I do. >> Well the management--the policy management--the policy of management positions is not limited to internal people that it supposed to be. I'm sure it supposed to be at the campus wide. >> There is an emergency hire provision within that policy that gives the superintendent president the right to invoke emergency hires and in the process of the transition in the executive committee decisions or discussion that was the determination. But you're absolutely right. There is a hiring policy effect. Dean Kollross and I were looking at that today for another position within the institutional planning office that we're looking at and we are going to go the other route which is the full post internally and fly except to route. But given the emergency nature of the transition and the speed in which all this happened, that's the method that was used for this. >> Yeah. >> And that's in the policy. >> The policy provides that. And again, what you're seeing here are only two of dozens of vacant positions that were left vacant last Friday. Many of which we are not filling and I suppose the most conventional--and I appreciate the question, Vice President Jacobs could tell you that for example with her transition plan and three of her, you know, appointments are in here, that we've worked that through the system for some month or so. >> If I might. The reason I raised this 'cause I think the whole point of that management policy was to get opportunities. I mean, first of all to be transparent but also to give opportunities for everyone on campus who might be interested to at least, you know, apply and sometimes when we do this, someone comes forward form a completely different area who turns out to be excellent. So I can understand this. This is a--or maybe an emergency but I would hope that we would provide all of our employees with as many opportunities as possible to advance. Even if just to take position for 6 months so they have the experience and they apply for another position, vacant. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> No, I think we're in complete agreement on that. In fact the most likely scenario trustee Mann is--that again, admissions is a classic one, okay. Admission is the classic position where you literally have to keep the store open, okay. So we have somebody in there. As soon as we have appointed a new vice president of student services, the position may continue but that person in keeping of what you'd say would shift out of an emergency, keep the store open, you know, for the next 60 days mode to fly the position for the rest of the year and open it to all comers. Although I would say and that all of these, you know, came through me, that when I spoke with Vice President Jacobs, retired Vice President Wilcox that we went over this, you know, person by person to make sure that there was no one who is being, you know, not considered. So was that--is that fair enough? >> Exactly. Yes, we follow that process and we even told some of them that as early as September or October we're going to start looking and advertising for the real positioning, the permanent position. >> Dr. Mann? >> I'd like to just make one final comment on this and then the questions I'm gonna raise 4-P, these are questions only about the process. I've known many of these people, I think these are outstanding employees, it's just the process I'm questioning not the individual appointments. >> Is there motion to approve 2-P? >> I move. >> Second? >> Second. >> And move and seconded, the advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say "aye." >> Aye. >> Aye. All opposed, motion carries. Let's move on then to 4-P. The revised agenda item that's been handed out to us. Dr. Mann [inaudible] with questions on this? >> I have a couple of questions on 4-P and I looked at the revised and maybe if we're lucky those answered--no, they aren't. On 4P on the second page of 4-P, and again, these questions is for the process only. Most of these are positions going, which are interim, where people go in as an interim position, are there new appointments Elizabeth Porter as being employed as an evaluator? I mean her time was being--is being reduced. But for example, the--Cynthia Smith who is moving from administrative assistant 1 to administrative assistant 2, this apparently is not an interim position but it's a regular position. And my question is that this go through the regular process for filling that position? I mean, was this position flown and made available to anyone who is interested in applying? >> No, in this case, Cindy Smith's job--her job is not up for filling, what happened is that her job stays as her job, however, great many more duties were added on to it as result of the necessities within fiscal of having both Cherry [phonetic] and Odessa [phonetic] to combine holding for positions leave. So what happens is that in this case, it's not a--it's not a fly position. She doesn't have to compete for her own job. What I did is in assigning in number of additional duties and responsibilities to the task and then in looking at the appropriate position, the administrative assistant 2 was the appropriate position. So otherwise, what would happen is if we flew the position internally then we could be in a remarkable position of having her not be the successful candidate. So that's not the process in terms of a new position that has to be filled. This isn't. >> Okay, but we do have a process and this goes to the other position questions I have which is on another page about the position review. As my understanding we do have a process for reviewing positions and I'm not sure what it is, it used to be we brought in an outside consultant. People could apply for classification review and I'm assuming these other two, this position review went through this process, that's one of my questions. So my question here is who made this determination, why didn't this go through our regular classification if these are temporary duties and wouldn't be this be a temporary position? And again, I'm not questioning the person at all, I'm questioning the process. I mean is it--you know, I was a manager in one of the Cal states. I might, you know, put a--give out two jobs to one of my employees but I couldn't then move them from one position to the next. I had to then go to human resources. There was a whole process for an expert in classification came and then reviewed it. So my question is how did this happen, was this based your judgment on Mr. Engeldinger's judgment, how did it happen? >> There are two parts of that. In the first, place the position review and there are people in position review. Those tend to be the position to where they morphed overtime and the job description and the duties actually don't bare as much relationship with each other as they should. And then what happens is that the individual request a position review. They go through the process, typically the process is that incumbent will go through and elaborate on the reasons why the position description no longer matches the position. Then it goes to the supervisor, manager, typically the vice president of human resources. There are discussions that occur back and forth among the group and there's a determination that's made as far as, you know, whether the position should be adjusted and there should be reclassification and then the extent to which it occurs. In the past-- >> And who makes that determination? >> Well in this case, the determinations actually made by the president upon a recommendation of the dean of human resources. That process is always taking place that way. However, we have had in the past a consultant who provided his opinion as an advisory opinion and to the president. But in all cases, it was the president's determination on that. >> So these positions here that say position review, the two position review, did these two positions go through that process? >> They went through the process. And again I wasn't involved to this. But my understanding is that it went through the entire process. There wasn't on an outside consultant. But it was done among the employee, the supervisors, managers, vice president, and then the president. >> So, okay. >> I think Mr. Martinez can tell you the details of one Judy Benson as secretary. >> I can speak to the position review for Judy Benson. She's the secretary for the Academic Senate and we did indeed make use of the appropriate evaluation forms. The other senate officers and I reevaluated her duties, wrote those up in the evaluation form and process and submitted those to human resources and got the approval that went on to Dr. Rocha. >> So for these two positions and from what I heard is this [inaudible] number process except we did not bringing it out, they weren't review by an outside consultant? Is that correct or were they reviewed or do you know? >> I don't believe they were reviewed by an outside consultant, no. And I don't believe they have to be. That was done as--I think as a methodology of objectivity but in this case, I think that there was sufficient discussion among the people that there was an agreement. >> Okay, I have no question. But now let's go back to the person moving from administrative assistant 1 and 2. Did this go through the regular process, were the forms filled out, with our--this kind of discussion and everything? >> No, and that's not a position review in this case, because what happened in this is that other duties were specifically assigned that fit another description. The position review is a process where the job is changed overtime and then the person--the job that the person was hired in no longer fits. In this case, the person was reassigned into another job. So that determination and that recommendation is mine and it's mine here that that is the appropriate position in looking at the two jobs and considering that the permanent task and responsibilities that now been added. >> Okay. I have--I have problems with this. I think we did not. There is a rope clear process for this. I think that it was not followed. I mean, I heard what you said that the person was assigned to another position with more responsibilities but actually I think that happens all the time all over campus and people still have to go through the process. So I am going to vote against this simply because of my concern, again, the process. Again, this has nothing to do with the person and the position who I think is excellent employee and a very loyal and faithful employee. But I think we need to follow our own processes. >> Is there--I'm not clear. Is there in fact a process to be followed that applies to this situation? >> Not that I'm aware of. >> Dr. Jacobs. >> The classical reclassification in my opinion, when a person--more responsibilities are assigned to position could have happen to the--you know, the Academic Senate President. She could have this position and suddenly, maybe something that is--he might have added to use it [inaudible] an example. He might have added devising of student athletes to that position, very unlikely. That would then--That would have to go through reclassification process. That is a reclassification and that's what the process I think it should go through, in my opinion. [ Inaudible Remark ] >> You know what I would like to do if maybe this, I-- >> Since--Why don't--well, my thinking is, I wanna--first of all, I appreciate the questioning and we want to assure you we wanna be absolutely scrupulous in making sure that any position that we fill for any reason or any personal change has had an open process and in recommending it to you I can do that and I do that with, you know, full-heartedly and strongly. Having said that, okay, and taking responsibility that with the crash of business that we've had in the last two weeks of vacating so many positions. And literally, I know for example this--when it came to me at the time and I was made aware of the process that was use, that Rich has described, it seemed to me an eminently reasonable thing to approve and to forward to the Board. And having said that, you know, if it's the Board's pleasure, since we wanna make sure that we have the--you know, the right process that leads to the right outcome, I'm perfectly open to taking this back so that we can re-clarify the process and bring it back on July 20th, if that's the Board's pleasure. I do think in either event, we will continue to ask Cindy to do the--asked respectfully, to do the extra work that has been assigned to her. >> What I'm trying to find out is, is there in place a Board policy that the governs this or any policy or anything in writing that governs what happens in a situation like this or is this something else? >> Well here, you know, maybe I turn to General Counsel Dowell. Again, these matters are matters of contract. These are contractual matters, the whole issue of assignment, the issue of reclassification, the issue of movement within the workforce. These are all covered under contract. So when we make a move including this one, we make sure that it squares with the existing contract, so. >> Yeah, if I may, President Thomson, members of the Board, Dr. Rocha, I have been listening carefully to this and I want the members of the Board and everyone else to understand that I have no previous information or background about this particular personal matter at all. But I wanna echo Dr. Rocha's suggestion that this particular piece--or Dr. Mann's suggestion that this piece be pulled off the agenda so it can be reviewed and brought back to you at the next Board Meeting. This--It happens to be as a confidential position so it would not be controlled by any applicable collective bargaining agreement that would apply otherwise to the administrative assistant positions whether there is or is not a Board policy, I'm not familiar with. But I think that this is something that your staff and I need to have an opportunity to discuss and that we can bring it back at the next Board Meeting with the better explanation for you. >> Is that applied in just to the one position here? >> Yes, it does Mr. Thomson to the--again, to the very sketchy information that I have about the position reviews, those were--those did follow a conventional position review process. As Dr. van Pelt said, there's nothing in the education code or your policies that requires that there'd be a consultant that review it rather there need to be an examination by your human resources office in consultation with the supervisors of the position where there's been an application for position review and reclassification. It's my information that that did happen in both of these cases and these are appropriately before you and can be acted on by you. >> Okay, Dr. Mann are there any questions or? >> No, that suppose are my questions. >> Okay. So as I understand it correctly then what were being recommended is that we do not to act this evening upon the change of position for Cynthia Smith? >> Yes. >> The Trustees [inaudible] before us and we can act upon them. Is there a motion to approve this item absent of the [inaudible]. >> So move. >> Second. >> And move and seconded. Any discussion--further discussion? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor to say "aye." >> Aye. >> All opposed. The motion carries. I believe that takes care of the consent items which brings us I think back on the Agenda to Item F. Superintendent-President Contract Amendment: Discussion with Possible Action. The-- [ Inaudible Remarks ] >> The issues here really are the extension of one year term on the contract with no change in salary or compensation for that. There is a moving allowance provided for 15,000 dollars, a onetime lump sum payment. The Board and the Superintendent-President agree that community relations and college advancement duties can be fulfilled more effectively if the Superintendent-President resides in the district. And so--if so enable him to move his--himself and his family into the district. The payments made upon the close of [inaudible] or completion of a list of property within the district, at least has to be of a year--at least one year's duration and the only other change in here is for change in Paragraph 15-C for termination without cause. The existing contract has a payment for 6 months or the expired term of the contract whichever is less. That will be changed to 12 months or whichever is expired term of the contract whichever is less. So with those changes is there a motion to approve the amended employee agreement effective as of July 6, 2011? >> So moved. >> Okay, moved by Ms. Brown. Seconded, I think, by Mr. Martin. Any discussion? Questions? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor to say "aye." >> Aye. >> All opposed. Motion carries. This brings us now to--where are we here? The item dealing with the Facilities Planning for the U-Building Programs. Dr. Rocha. >> Yes, thank you President Thomson. I will ask Vice-President van Pelt to come forward. What Dr. van Pelt is going to present is the up to the minute informative and update on everything having to do with the U-Building and the impending evacuation of the U-Building. We have--We are near--We are at the end of the internal process of consultation in which we have started from as we did last year from the premise that the U-Building needed to be evacuated as a result of not conforming to the current earthquake code. Given that, we had to relocate or make a plan for relocating primarily three units. The sciences under Dean Douglas, the health science under Dean Freund, and the health center, the Student Health Center. Those three units had to go some place else and then of course there's, if you will, a domino effect. So this will give you where we are with that and is informative not for approval but as an update of where the administration is planning to go in terms of seeing to the--moving out of the U-Building and the relocation of these units and the resulting dominos that fall as a result of all those move. So with that, I give it to Rick. >> There's nothing else to say. [ Laughter ] >> No, there are some details here. >> I did narrative and I did a chart to show and I think that that's pioneer in your packet or maybe not. This all begins in trying to maximize the space that we have on the campus and utilize it as efficiently as we can. And while they're not necessarily all directly related, indirectly they certainly are. So Information Technology Services is combining computing services with management information systems. That is in process now of moving into the first floor of the library, both where KPCC and where media center were. So that processes is heavily underway now. Now what that does is it creates the suite of offices that becomes open in the C-Building that public relations can move from the library, the very same area that information technology service is moving into, to move into the first floor of the C-Building. Student Health Center moves from the first floor of the U-Building to the first floor of the D-Building where computing services was in a computer lab. So by taking those to suites out, then health center can move in from the first floor of the U-Building. Natural sciences division which is basically the third and fourth floor of the U-Building has to wait until we can do the public bid for the acquisition of the portable classrooms and labs. That's expected to occur during the fall sometime so if we were able to move during the lateral part of the fall or during the winter intercession, then that would take care of the natural sciences division and that planning has been pretty complete with architects and so forth. So it's about ready to go out to public bid. Extended instruction which is Elaine's area needs to move out in order to move a computer lab back in for student use which is the one that needs to come out in order to make room for the Student Health Center. Health sciences division is really in several spots, most notably the R-Building and the U-Building first and second floors. They will move that U-Building occupants will move to CEC. And so what's happened at CEC is that the classrooms have been curved out and by compressing and better utilizing the available space more hours of the day, there's a spare capacity that's created and that planning is complete now as well with the exception of the radiological technology which requires additional engineering and so forth. But that process is about to begin. They need three portables on the--which we just approved tonight on the purchasing side for offices for the health sciences division. So those will go on the parking lot to the north of the building on PCC property. CEC is compressing as I said and we need to acquire four portables, three for the high school adult program and the GED program and one for [inaudible] skills. Those will go in the same parking lot. So we'll have a grand total of--and then there needs to be one for foster care as well which is a grant requirement. So that we'll have a total of five portables for the CEC, total of 8 portable and then we'll also add a restroom building. Computer lab I mentioned for the learning assistance center, TRIO program is about to move the carpeting, was going on today. So that's the upper bound classic and upper bound math as well as the Pass. And then Calworks is having to move from the second floor of the U-Building into the L-Building in the spot previously held by PASS. And then there's one other one too which is the foundation and the foundation which isn't included here. It's kind of a tertiary or a leak effect. They need to move out. We really need to solve the problem that we have with the international student program and by having the foundation move out of the second floor of the D-Building, then we can create a space right across the hallway from where international students now are and I think that we can help solve that problem as well. So we're working on that, so. And then the chart shows it more graphically in terms of precisely what I've laid out in the timelines involved. So, the last one will be the science village and parking lot 5A for the natural sciences division. >> Dr. Mann? >> Yes, I have a question. I've look at the chart but I must have missed it. Where's the foundation going? >> Well, we haven't solved that yet. >> Oh, okay. I heard they needed to move out period. >> Right. That much we do because there's just not space on the campus and, you know, we're trying to use every closet that we can. >> Have you considered the one of the houses across the street? >> That is one of the options. >> Ms. Wah? >> I know the restocks are not always ideal for everyone but I was just wondering, you know, I had the chance to tour the campus and I saw that apparel group and they had all those big sawing machines but you're moving them into portable, so where any of the programs adversely affected by the move? I mean, did they have this close same amount of space or sufficient space and with scheduling of any of the classes adversely affected by the restocks? >> I don't think that scheduling--well, I guess that depends on who the student is, whether they prefer a certain hour. But by in large, it's a matter of utilizing the spaces as efficiently as we can. The CEC has little usage in the afternoons and on Fridays and Saturdays and Sundays. So there is a spare capacity. Now by filling those slots, we think that we're gonna better--be able to serve the students. In terms of the [inaudible] skills, the tables might not be as large but I believe that Dean Hodge has worked it out to where the numbers of students who are previously served will be served again. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Soto? >> Just a quick question about the Student Health Center. Seeing here that it's being move obviously to the D-Building, is there adequate space there just to provide services to students was that looked at and-- >> Yeah, there was a very comprehensive program with Ken Yamaguchi and with Jo Buczko and her staff that was extremely exhausted with different options and so forth. It's actually a part of superior space to what they now have. It's more efficient. It's actually larger. They can accommodate more students and serve them better. >> Okay, thank you. >> Other questions? Thank you very much. >> Okay. >> I think you got to stay right there and move on to the next item which is the State and College Budget Update. This should be exciting. >> Thank you President Thomson. I won't give Dr. van Pelt a long introduction this time, only to say that as we all know, the State of California has a budget that has been signed by Governor Brown. And based on that, we have asked Dr. van Pelt to present a basic informative on what the effect of that is on our budget for '11-'12. This is again not a budget for approval but this is just an informative of what the effect of the signed budget is on our planning for '11-'12 and at a later date probably, you know, in accordance with law in September. We will be presenting to you a detailed, line by line budget for adaption in--for the '11-'12 fiscal years, so. >> So the budget was signed--I think it was signed on the June 29th and the budget act needs to now be interpreted by various different staffs. On August the 17th, the district will find out from the Chancellors office what our apportionment expectation should be, what the workloads are and so forth. In the mean time, the league has put out their estimates of what the impacts on PCC will be. And what you'll see in the upper left corners that our goal is 7.57 million dollars which is the conservative number that the league has put out for PCC. We will find out what the number really is, like I said, in about 6 weeks when the staff has digested it and is ready to present to the entire system. Now with that number in mind, and it's sort of midrange of what we are expecting, we're expecting basically between about 6 and 10 million dollars. So this is, you know, about halfway in between more on the low end. The retirement incentive and this was presented before is the savings of 3.14 million dollars. That's year one savings. The savings the following year are, of course, zero. >> So we've--all those savings were front loaded. The nonfilling of positions is two fold. One is actually not filling positions through a freeze, at least a partial freeze. But secondly, it's also the delayed effect of not filling the positions, July the 1st. So if it's filled August the 1st or September the 1st or December the 1st, those savings are then wrapped up. So this is an estimate because of that, because we don't know exactly. But I went through and calculated out what a reasonable number was and I think that that's the safe number, is 2.5 million dollars. So together, you know, that's a 5.46 million dollars of the 7.57 that we need. Optimization of the section is 1.5 million brings us to about a half million dollars away from where we need to be. And you'll see that it does include adding critical sections and it also means that we will meet the legislated workload reduction. The league is estimating that we will lose funding for 1,691 full-time equivalent students through the budget act. And the reduction of 1.5 million dollars would take that into account. That leaves a balance of about a half million dollars that would need to be found in order to reach the goal. And the revenue enhancement portion and it's a matter of gearing up, we will have a year now in order to gear these things up so that we can cover the 3.14 million dollars in the out year because that's a onetime saving now. We actually have to do some of these things and it does take planning and take significant amount of work. For example, to add F-1 visa students or the distance education, that the online overseas education and so forth along with some of these reductions like the energy reduction and the technology and so forth. So it does give us one year in order to affect these efficiencies for the next fiscal year. So--And if there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. >> Are there questions of Dr. van Pelt? Dr. Mann? >> Well first of all, let me compliment you. I think this is clear, easy-to-read, transparent, anyone can figure it out even Dr. Rocha and I are both English majors, right. [ Laughter ] >> That's why I made him do it. [ Laughter ] >> But I do have a question. Optimizing sections, if our workload reduction is 1691 FTES, does this mean we're going to have fewer sections or not? >> Well, I think that what's possible is to have fewer sections serving larger groups of students. It's possible to do it through distance eduction. I mean there are other ways of doing it. But ultimately, I think that it's a matter of, you know, it talks about low enrolled sections of reducing those. But simultaneously, adding the critical sections. But ultimately, you know, to reduce 1691 full-time equivalent students does require some work. So the--you know, the 1.5 million dollar estimated reduction means that we wouldn't take out of our coffers, the education of each one of those students. >> Which is what we have been doing, is that correct? >> Which is what we have been doing. >> Should say to a student and [inaudible] I'm very, very grateful to Vice President Jacobs, she worked with all of the deans and very difficult task of beginning to prioritize sections. So, one of the things that Chancellor Scott has consistently advised is that not all sections are created equal. And so, the answer to whether core general education section is needed for transfer and CTE programs are going to be cut, the answer is no. The--Whether some sections and programs that are according to Chancellor Scott, less priority which by the way the priorities are transfer, CTE and basic skills. So thanks to the very difficult work that the deans and Vice President Jacobs have done, they have taken the--you know, they've done the priorities and taken, if you will, the lowest priorities out. So as we say consistently that the effect on continuing students will be next to nil. We will of course face the situation in the fall when many more students then we can serve will be admitted and will be able to find no section, no matter what we do. But we're dealing with that, the budget as Rick is presenting it to you one and all, these are not soft numbers. These are hard numbers. The adopted that we'll present will be within affording of these numbers that you see here. So I think our budget for '11-'12 is set. As Rick has suggested though, we do have a year and we'll use the entire year, they have open and transparent consultation base on the Ed Master plan in our major priorities of how we continue to serve the many more students who, you know, want to--one of our classes continue to serves them as efficiently as possible. And so I know that's longer than your direct question but I wanted to elaborate that. >> Can I have another question? >> Yes, please. >> This is more of a comment but--and it's a question 'cause I just wanna make sure that I understand this. In looking at this, I don't see anything about furloughs, about layoffs, about reducing number of staff. The staff reductions we have had been--you might say voluntary. People have either taken early retirement or have left for some other reason and their position has not been filled. But we have not taken any action to either reduce people's positions or to eliminate people--positions that people are in, is that correct? >> That's absolutely true. >> I think that's wonderful. And I think you've done a great job on this Rick, really, really. Dr. van Pelt. >> Other questions or comments? You're getting of very easy. Thank you very much. Okay, the next item on our agenda is Future Board Meeting Dates. Wednesday July 20th, Regular Business Meeting at 6 o'clock in the evening. And then Wednesday, August 3rd of this year, Regular Business Meeting at 6 o'clock in the evening. Closed Session for both will begin probably at 5 o'clock but stay tuned for updates on that. >> Mr. Brown, I wouldn't be here for the July 20th meeting. >> Okay. Yes. >> I have a question. >> I'm sorry but I [inaudible]-- >> Whatever happened to the meetings in the community, we changed that? >> Just for the summer I think it was-- [ Inaudible Remark ] >> You can correct me if [inaudible]. >> I'm sorry, Trustee Brown. >> She wanna know about what happened to the community meetings, the study section we were having [inaudible]. >> Oh, yeah, I was just about to go on to that. So thank you for setting that up. I just do one as an FYI and to raise to the members' of attention the schedule as our next schedule meeting of course is a regular business meeting on July 20th. Our next schedule meeting after that is a regular business meeting on August 3rd. One of things that I'll speak to the officers about is whether we will have a second meeting in August because oftentimes we do not have a second meeting in August. I'd also had raised earlier to President Thomson the issue of the Board retreat and so which we are going to try and put in for a Saturday sometime in August or September. After that, Trustee Brown, we will--our goal is to get to the study sessions with the September--with the beginning of the September round. So our first Regular Business Meeting is on September 7th, Wednesday, September 7th. And our study session to start the year will be on September 21st. Trustee Wah has requested and we've been working on the study session for Area 5 in South Pasadena. We haven't made a stopover there yet. And I've spoken to other members including Trustee Martin so we will be scheduling. So then we will return to our usual pattern, usual, of the first meeting being a regular business meeting and the second meeting being a study session whatever the members decide to have that. The only other thing that I would--and again this is not a set date. But we just spoke about the budget and it may be necessary. Rick, could you explain the timing of the budget and why it might be necessary in September to call special meeting? >> We only find out what our apportionment is, August the 17th, and the budget is due to be approved by law middle of September by the Board. So that would leave basically one Board Meeting in early September and the question is how quickly the budget can be put together in those few weeks >> Right. So we're gonna try for September 7th for the adapted budget. I just wanted to flag to your attention. I'm sorry. >> I was just going to say, we haven't had a study session in District 2. And so I would like for us to consider maybe meeting in all the districts before we go back to where we've been before. And I would like to--for us to consider having a study session in Sierra Madre which is part of District 2 and which I think kind of feels disenfranchise or cutoff or something. So I would like for us to really consider having maybe the October session or maybe the September session if you're not too far down the road because I think we have met and didn't we meet once in [inaudible]. >> In San Marino, yes. >> In San Marino. So as I said I think we should meet in all the districts before we start repeating. >> Okay, we'll take that into consideration and sure we have some discussions about them. Future Agenda Items, anybody have anything for the Future Agenda Items? [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Okay. If not, anything else? And we are adjourned. [ Noise ] [ Music ]