[ Inaudible Discussions ] [ Noise ] >> Let's call the order of the meeting of the head Board of Trustees, August 3rd, 2011. Ms. Thomson, will you call the roll please. >> Mr. Thomson. >> Here. >> Mr. Baum. >> Here. >> Mr. Martin. >> Here. >> Ms. Brown. >> Here. >> Dr. Fellow. >> Here. >> Dr. Mann. >> Present. >> Ms. Wah. >> Present. >> Mr. Sotto. >> Present. >> Full board this evening, welcome back Dr. Fellow. >> Thank you, good to be back. [ Laughter ] [ Noise ] >> The closed session items are Government Code Section 54956.9A: Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation the Donald Hunt Grievance· Case No. 72·390 00082 CEPO, Government Code Section 54956.9B: Conference with Legal Counsel Anticipated Litigation (one case) and Government Code Section 54957, Employee Appeal Pursuant to 5CCR, 59336B4: Appointment/Employment of Public Employee: General Counsel, and Public Employee Appointment: Chemistry; Counselor; English as a Second Language; Psychology; and Computer Science. So anybody wishing to address the board any of these closed session items, closed session agenda items, you may speak to us now if you are. None appearing, we will then adjourn into our close session and return at 7 o'clock. >> Yeah, good. [ Inaudible Discussions ] [ Laughter ] [ Music ] [ Silence ] >> The Board of Trustees is back in open session and there was a reportable action taken in the closed session. So we're ready to begin with the Pledge of Allegiance I'd like acknowledge the presence of Dr. Fellow and would like him to lead us with the Pledge of Allegiance. >> Please stand. Place your hand over your heart and repeat after me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. [ Noise ] >> Okay. The first item on the agenda is the approval of minutes, Meeting number 15, the meeting of July 20th, 2011. Are there any additions, corrections, questions with respect to the minutes? Is there a motion to approve? >> Move. >> Moved by Ms. Wah. >> Second. >> Seconded by Ms. Brown. Any other--any questions, advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? Motion carries. >> I abstain, I wasn't present. >> Okay. Then we are back on to announcements and recognitions, Board of Trustee. Ms. Brown any announcements? >> Actually yes, I have a couple. First, I would like to say how grateful I am to PCC for extending the opportunity for bringing in vendors, local vendors to give them the opportunity to learn what we have to offer here at PCC and how they can be part of the process. So I don't know who I need to thank but I wanna thank you, my community thank you. >> You're welcome. [ Laughter ] >> I don't know who to say thanks to but-- >> You're talking about the--Trustee Brown, you're talking about the Vendor Conference? >> Yes, I think this is good. >> That was one of our announcements but in all seriousness, the thank you goes to Vice President van Pelt who will fill us in a little bit in a moment on what's happening this weekend. >> Thank you. Now, I attended the African-American California Community Trustee second summit on July 21st, and this summit it focused on best practices on models for graduating African-American males to this economical--to this educational system. The presenters discussed the findings and researches and studies and examples of community colleges that are closing the educational gap by utilizing these models. And I was very excited to attend that conference. Also, just as a background, the African-American California Community Trustee is caucus of the Community College League of California which is adopted--adopted in 2010. And I as a member of that caucus have--did commit to host our third summit here in Pasadena next year. So I really would like to encourage you to come on board and help me out, I don't know where I'm gonna start. But because information was so important, the research, and we know that colleges are closing the gap for these cohort of students. And I would like to maybe--I know we at PCC we're doing a pretty good job because we're exploring a lot of things, our Education Master Plan has it all worked out. But there is always more, so I would like us to look at this a little more and see what we could do, that's all thanks. >> Dr. Mann? >> I have nothing to announce. >> Mr. Martin? >> None, thank you. >> Mr. Baum? >> No report. >> Dr. Fellow? >> Nothing, thank you. >> Ms. Wah. >> I have a couple things. One is I would like to congratulate Dr. Cathy Wei who did win the faculty award which we nominated her for for the Associated Community College Trustee so she will be honored in October at the conference in Dallas. And a couple of community things, I was at two--one kind of major thing in South Pasadena. South Pasadena last week hosted the opening reception for Dr. Sun Yat-sen in the community and for those of you who may not know Dr. Sun Yat-sen he is considered like the George Washington of China. So he was the one who kind of liberated China from, I guess, the dynastic world there under. But the reason South Pasadena honored him and served that opening was because when he came through the US to get support from the US, they hosted him at the--what is now the Oneonta Church. So that was really a major event for the community. And the other thing that Trustee Brown and I had the opportunity to meet with the YWCA in Pasadena last week and they talked about how they would really like to work on more partnerships, closer partnerships with PCC. And one of the things I mentioned was internships. And so, I told them that we were meeting with Ms. Chapman regarding the internships. But also, one of the other things that they mentioned was they have a program called Just For Girls and they take about a hundred--last year they had about 135 girls from your high school that they've been mentoring through since 10th grade. And every--this year they matriculated from high school and every one of those girls was accepted into a 4-year college, so I thought there's--you know, it just kind of calls to mind some really great opportunities for the college and the community to really partner on some programs. >> Good. >> Just a couple of quick things. On the 12th and 13th of this month, Pasadena City College is gonna be hosting an organization called Invent Now which is a group of inventors. It's co-hosted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. I have been asked to be a part of that and to actually address the group. So that will be awfully nice. The other thing is that tomorrow, Dr. Rocha and I have both been invited to attend an event at Fuller Seminary where they're having a delegation of people from China over. And I have a couple of hours of presentation and a luncheon to follow with that. So that should be exciting. Fuller has been doing a lot of work, have been trying to reach out to people in different countries particularly China has a major effort on the part of the college, so. Dr. Rocha? >> Great. Thank you Pres. Thomson, just briefly, members of the Trustees first item is just a referent, president's report to the communities out and you have one of the few paper copies extent, okay? And I wanted to ask Trustee Juan Gutierez to come up and to take 30 [simultaneous talking]. [ Laughter ] >> I'm sorry, no I said "trustee." [ Inaudible Remarks ] [ Laughter ] >> One has 38 seconds to show you the online version of this which is really actually a big thank you to Juan and his staff. But it's a really advance, a great advance in the way we're able to get our communications and publications online in a really crisp, readable format, so Juan. >> Thank you, Dr. Rocha. What we've done with the president's report is removed it from its static printed form and created an online view book. We've also created an iPad version, a PDF and a text version for ADA requirements. But basically the view book is something that's multimedia and actually draws folks in. And it has some characteristics of a book as well but it actually brings up videos like-- >> Welcome, I'm Mark Rocha, President of Pasadena City College and I did want-- >> Alright, that's quite enough. [ Laughter ] >> The great thing about this is it allows the reader or the user to be able to zoom in on portions that they would like to view and also print out things. It's a vector-based program. So when you zoom in it doesn't get pixelated which is great. You can include links to websites. So in this case, we'll click on Trustee Baum and then we go to his bio. So we add a lot of links. We've added photos and we have included video on a couple of different ways, when we get to the foundation page really quick. >> Show that Center for the Arts--okay. [ Background Music ] >> Hello I'm John Singleton I encourage you to support Pasadena City College Center for the Arts. Your help is needed to fund the new PCC Center of the Arts Facility. >> So that's John Singleton basically asking folks to contribute to the Center for the Arts. Rick van Pelt, Dr. Rick van Pelt put together a really cool [inaudible] by outside of the Center for the Arts as well so folks can see the outside of the building. The next issue, we'll actually have the inside of the building so you can see how the classrooms are laid out. And finally, we have the [inaudible] video as well. But we've incorporated a lot of social networking like Flickr and Facebook as well. Here, we have our Flickr page to our commencement. So we have all the photos we took for that. So it's really interactive. And for the folks that still want it printed, we have a form up on the website that says I would like a printed copy. So when that gets submitted, it comes to my office and we send it out. So I just wanted to briefly show you that. >> Alright. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Charge for the postage though. >> We will. [ Laughter ] >> Anyway, and thank you very much Juan and everyone who had a hand in the content for that. And we think it's an important service to our community and we thank the Trustees for the support of it. Very briefly then, we return to Vice President van Pelt to, you know, say for the record what we're doing this weekend with vendor outreach. >> So what we're doing is we're having 2 sessions on Friday and Saturday. So for the business people who wanna come during business week and for those people who can't make it, we will do it again on Saturday morning. And what we're trying to do is to demystify business with PCC so that small vendors have some sense of how to get on to our vendor list. It helps us in terms of developing the contact list. So when we have need for certain items that we have a deeper, deeper list to go to. So this is, you know, a common effort between us in Admin Services as well as Public Relations and Purchasing Services. And we've also advertised throughout the district. So this is not a Pasadena event. This is district event of trying to bring all the vendors, consultants, professionals and so forth in so that they can understand how PCC works. And this is the first of a series. So what we're gonna do is we're gonna ask the vendors how often we should get together and what the subjects of future meetings will be. So this is trying to cultivate the relationship for a long time. >> I'll be there, I'll be there. >> Thank you, Rick. >> Is that it? >> That's it, President Thomson. >> Okay. Associated Students, Shared Governance Reports? >> No reports. >> Ms. Albright >> Well, I'm still on vacation but I'm so dedicated to this college, [laughter] FedEx though, so I do have some things just-- >> We're appropriately impressed. [ Laughter ] >> The senate has changed its meeting times now from 10 to 11 on Wednesday, every other Wednesday. And the new senators and have been sworn in and the new senate officers were installed today. So Gary Potts is President. Debra Cantarero Vice President, Julio Huerta is parliamentarian. They do not have a secretary as of yet, and Monica Palacios is the treasurer and the Board of Trustees representatives will be myself and Melissa Bargsten. We're gonna be switching. The other senate representatives will be Diana Ashkensay, Sam Bersane from facilities, Sharon Gonzales from CEC, Wendy Lucko and Jeannie Sullivan. The Classified Senate will have a retreat on Friday, September 24th from 8 to 4 at the Huntington Library. And I guess the Academic Senate will be having theirs on Saturday, September 25th. >> Did I say that? Is that correct? >> Technically, okay. And the Classified Senate will also be leading a hand in the new faculty orientation on Monday, August 22nd, and Welcome Day on Friday, the 26th of August. And that's it. >> Thank you. Mr. Martinez? >> Just very briefly, I just want to let you know that the Academic Senate is working on some technical issues on our new degrees in psychology and sociology. The Chancellor's Office indicated that those degrees had not yet ben approved. But we do expect that approval soon. Again, I think it's just some technicalities that they want to make sure that the classes are clearly articulated. But we'll keep you informed on that progress. >> Thank you, Dr. Douglas? >> No report tonight. >> Mr. Miller? >> No report. >> Mr. Sotto, I should have called you earlier. I apologize for that. >> No report tonight. >> Dr. van Pelt? >> Nothing else. >> Thank you, okay. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items, okay, Approval of Consent Items and we are going to take 30-B and 19-P separately. Those are the motion to approve the other consent items. >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Any discussion, questions, advisory vote? >> Wait, I had a question on one that I forward d earlier and I'm amiss to remember the number to--it was a million dollar-- >> 25-B. >> Yeah, I think it was a million dollar plus award on securities surveillance and I just would like to have some assurance of the competitive process and other vendors, how many other vendors was this the lowest bid. What are the special--which number is it down here? >> It's 25-B. >> Let's take that one separately too then. >> Okay. >> So I think we have a motion to approve the rest of them. Is that correct, and a second? >> Yes. >> Any other questions or discussion, advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? Okay. Let's--if we made deal with 25-B and then we're gonna do a 19P. We'll hold 30 for a little bit later in the meeting. John, you had a question on 25B. >> Just what I articulated a second ago. >> Go ahead Dr. van Pelt. >> This was done through the California Multiple Awards schedule system which is a Department of General Services in the state. So what they do is it's similar to GSA on the federal level to where they negotiate the best prices. By definition, you don't do better than GSA or CMAS pricing. So these are pre-approved and they are specifically called out for and permitted under the law that you don't--this is considered going out to bid when you enter into an agreement with one of these pre-approved vendors. >> So in that kind of system, it must be that based on the price per camera or there must be some--this is a security system for monitoring parking lots. So there's cameras, there's line, there's I don't know what else goes, monitors. >> Labor rates. >> Which, you know, in it of themselves are very subset so it's hard to say when you do what GSA bid, how do we know SSI was the best for our particular circumstances? >> Each one of the prices is actually negotiated. So on the state level through the Department of General Services, so these are the prices for each one of the units and it is predetermined. It's essentially picking off of the shopping list. >> So any community college that wants to go out for security system basically would go to GSA or what's it's called? >> It's the Department of General Services, CMAS. >> Department of General Services and these are the prices that every camera is gonna cost you X. >> Any public agency. >> Okay. >> Or they can do a bidding process themselves. >> And they do. >> Right. >> No, no. I'm saying an individual college can do a bidding process. >> Absolutely, yes, right. >> But 2 questions that I have, one is that do we have some surveillance system in place 'cause it made it sound like it was the completion of a system. >> It's the next phase of the system. Yes, we do have it in place now but it's a pretty significant expansion to where it will cover all the parking lots, the parking structures and so forth. >> Did SSI do the first part of it? >> Yes. >> So, this system will integrate with-- >> Yes, absolutely. >> With what they did. And then, are we taking money from our general apportionment that we would use to offer classes and spending this on this or where is this money coming from? >> This is out of the restricted general fund, out of the parking revenue. So what we did a few years ago if you recall is we raised the daily permit fee from 1 dollar to 2 dollars and that was to enhance security so this is the honoring of that commitment. >> So these are funds that are charged specifically for parking permits either daily permits or semester permits. >> Specifically daily permits. >> Oh this is--and we have enough funds out of daily--2 dollars a day per car. >> And it's taken us a few years to get to this point but--and it's taken a lot of research and planning for how to technically accomplish it but yes, now we're ready to actually to do it. >> Thank you. >> Okay, thank you. >> Other question for 25-B. Is there are a motion to approve. >> I move. >> Second. >> Okay. Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Okay. So let's take 19-P if we can now, Dr. Rocha. >> Yes, thank you President Thomson. I start this item--this recommendation as this appointment of Gail S. Cooper as general counsel, the same way that I started my recommendation of the previous appointments of the executives and that is to thank the hiring committees who were involved in the search screen and recommendation process. As you heard from Dr. Hernandez that the process was a very, very good search, a lot of hard work and I'm very, very grateful to my colleagues who served on that committee. The recommendation I made to you today comes as a recommendation from the hiring committees and comes from an excellent opportunity to interview and to present Ms. Cooper's credentials to you. You have those credentials in front of you. She is a graduate of UCLA Law School. She is an experienced and trained litigator. She has been practicing law at the highest level for 27 years and admitted to the California Bar. And so, President Thomson, I submit the appointment of Gail S. Cooper to the position of General Counsel. >> Is there a motion to approve? >> Move approval of the appointment. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Any questions or discussion? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor, say aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? Motion carries. Welcome, Gail. If you would like to come up and-- [ Applause ] >> Thank you very much. I'm Gail Cooper. It's nice to meet all of you. I am very honored and very excited to accept this position and I look forward to working with each and everyone of you. >> Well, you're welcome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks, Gail. >> And if I may, Mr. Thomson. I'd like to invite Ms. Cooper to join me [inaudible]. [ Laughter ] >> That would be a very good idea. >> As to start the training. [ Laughter ] >> I do wanna say as I said previously to some others that we really have been very, very fortunate to have the services of Mary Dowell. She's done I think an absolutely magnificent job for us the past roughly 1 year where we've had her available ad meetings and available to call upon and she's given us excellent advice and I think we've--and the PCC, the college in general had benefited tremendously from her help, so thank you so very much, Mary. >> That's very kind of you Mr. Thomson. And it is a Liebert Cassidy Whitmore's privilege to have served this college for many years. We look forward to continuing to work with you for a long time and working with Ms. Cooper to streamline your legal services and get things better. >> Right, thank you. Let us move up into the agenda Item I, Redistricting Proposal: Discussion with Possible Action. I understand our consultants who are here or perspective consultants who are here have an airplane to catch up at Burbank at 9 o'clock so we want to go to that and Dr. Rocha? >> Yes, thank you President Thomson. I want to thank Vice President Miller and Dean Crystal Kollross for preparing this presentation. I'll turn it over to Vice President Miller. This is a followup to the last informative about the Redistricting Process and tonight it comes with further information by a firm-- >> Right. >> That were proposing handle this for the district. So with that, I'll turn this over to the Vice President. >> Thank you, President Rocha. Just by way of reminder, at the Board's July 20th board meeting, Dean Kollross presented a redistricting overview and recommendation document which was in your board packets. In preparing the recommendation for you, staff vetted 2 highly qualified companies and based on qualifications, experience strength, the overall proposal price and the affiliation we have in the Community College League of California, staff recommended that the district contract with CCLC to use what they call their CCLC Redistricting Program. And this is a program of the league developing supportive member in the districts in partnership with a company called Redistricting Partners which is a very highly and experienced contractor in a wide array of demographic studies and research for public entities. After the presentation is made on the 20th, the Board directed staff to invite CCLC and Redistricting Partners to come before it at their next board meeting to explain the proposal, the process, the timeline, and to be available for further questions. Tonight, we have representatives of the league and Redistricting Partners here to help us with that presentation. And if the Board so chooses after the presentation, staff would ask the Board to consider approving the redistricting agreement between the district and CCLC in order to begin the redistricting process. So in you board notebooks tonight under Item I is the PowerPoint presentation that the representatives are gonna give and with that, I would like to introduce and welcome to the podium, 2 principals who will make the presentation. The first is Kimi Shigetani who is the Vice President with the Community College League of California and then Paul Mitchell who's the president of Redistricting Partners. Welcome. [ Pause ] [ Inaudible Remarks ] >> Good evening. I'm Kimi Shigetani. I'm the Vice President of the Community College League of California and I'd like to thank the Board for listening to us this evening and I know that some of the board members have heard some of this presentation before in a much more general sense at some of our conferences. So if you don't mind bearing with us. The League Program is a district service focused on the redistricting and voting rights, act analysis that's required of all districts and anybody actually with a publicly-elected board in 2011. The league runs multiple programs to the benefit of the district's--primary concern is to provide them with services at lower costs. And so when this opportunity came open with Redistricting Partners to provide a service with a firm that has some unique political experience within the California Community College System we thought it was a good one and the price point certainly that Redistricting Partners were able to set with us have been advantageous to the districts. Right now, we have contracts with--actually this is an updated, 13 districts including in this LA area, Mount San Antonio, Citrus, Compton and Redistricting Partners is also working with the LA Community College District on their analysis and I'm gonna let Paul Mitchell speak a little bit about his experience and background with the community colleges. >> Thank you very much. By way of background, I actually attended PCC. I attended PCC when I was straight out of high school and I was doing teen counseling at Blair and Muir and PHS and South Pas and working at Saint Luke Hospital. I ended up finishing my community college at Orange Coast and then going on and ultimately finishing my master's degree at USC. The firm that we have, Redistricting Partners, is working throughout the state and it's very proud to be working specifically with the community colleges where I have a very strong background. So--and Pasadena area is also something very close to me. I grew up in Glendale and I'm glad to be able to work on a number of contracts down here in the San Gabriel Valley, so thank you. >> Redistricting as many of you know is the process of drawing district lines. When we talk about district lines within the context of redistricting, we're talking about your trustee areas, not the external districts lines. We've had an assign note a couple of districts ask us and we don't change the external lines of the district. If you wanna do that, that's a whole separate conversation with your general counsel now. Redistricting is done once every 10 years after the release of the census and the State Redistricting Commission has been in the headlines lately and certainly the well known examples of the Congress and then the state legislature. >> The main focus of redistricting is to bring people closer to its government. Redistricting Partners is using traditional redistricting principles to create lines that will work for both the governments and their constituencies. The number--we have here 6 main criteria that are traditionally redistricting principles that Redistricting Partners and the Leagues Program will be following. The first is that district of the trustee area should be relatively equal size and we're talking about people, not necessarily just citizens and that's sort of a different piece of this. And so what you see here is the 7 trustee areas, their current population based on the 2010 census data and the deviation from which they are all--they need to be equal. So--and really, generally speaking a plus or minus 5 percent has been in the past [inaudible] sort of the standard. With the current data that we have though and the ability to do GIS mapping and everything else, really as close to as zero percent deviation is what's preferred. The second principle--and I'm gonna run through these and then Paul's gonna go into the communities of interest and some more details on the map. The second is that the district area should be contiguous. They shouldn't be hopping and jumping. Constituents shouldn't have to go kind of over the hills and through the woods in order to talk to the representative. It should be a fairly simple process. They should maintain communities of interest under the Federal Voting Rights Act. So that's something that Paul will be discussing in a minute. Typically speaking, they should follow existing local government lines if it makes sense for the trustee areas and for those communities. The district should be kept compact in appearance and function. You don't--as obviously more rural areas have larger trustee areas in these--in a more urban area like this they should be as compact as possible. And then lastly, is about reducing instability or displacement and this is often referred to as protecting incumbency. And the reason for that is not to protect individuals who are already elected but really because the voters have already voiced their opinion and so that choice should be protected and as much stability should be kept as possible on existing boards. >> So the Voting Rights Act is the big issue in redistricting always. And there're 2 things that are operative in the voting rights act. The first is Section 5 which affects only 4 counties, none of which are nearby here and the second is Section 2. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act says if you have a district that's a 50 percent of one minority group, then it has to be--it's protected. Now this is different than 10 years ago. Ten years ago, it could be 50 percent when you add multiple ethnic groups. This is a Supreme Court decision mid decade, placed that back at 50 percent of any individual ethnic group, so it's changed a bit. The communities generally protected by the Voting Rights Act include Latinos, Asians, and African-Americans and throughout this state, Latinos have increased the most. Asians have increased second most and African-Americans have shifted a lot. They've shifted a lot out of urban areas and into places like Riverside. We did the redistricting in Elk Grove and we saw places in Elk Grove where African-Americans grew by 200 percent. In places like Northwest Pasadena as we'll get into, you might see actual African-American declines as a relative part of the population. And just to give an example here. This is the region and showing the African-American density in Northwest Pasadena, you can see even looking at the broader scale the entire city. You can see Asians as well showing in San Gabriel Valley. Eight of the 10 most densely Asian cities in the state are in the San Gabriel Valley. Latinos are also very densely populated in LA but as you can see, they're not as densely populated in the foothill region. In addition to those VRA-protected communities, there are other communities that we can have data for. As an example in--around PHS, you have a significant Armenian population, not as significant as in Glendale but there are Armenian populations. We can also find other sub-ethnicities. We can find other communities of interest that might wanna be protected through redistricting. To look at your ethnicities, we were able to do some work that's not reflected in your handout just to give a little bit more background. You have--some of the districts have strong ethnic basis. If you look at districts 1, 2 and 3, they have Latino and African-American bases, 5, 6, and 7 have significant Asian bases. This is eluding overall population, not the voting age population of the citizens. When you look just at the voting age population of the citizens, you see some shifting in those numbers. The most important numbers in this are those District 6 and 7, the percentage of Asians in those districts gets very, very close to being something that should be considered as a majority-minority district. And if you see in District number 3, the 38 percent Latino, that is an influenced district as well as 1 and 3 are influenced district for the African-American population. If you look at how that looks when you look at it on the map, district 1 has a pretty significant African-American population. You can see that it's geographically dense in one particular part of the district. District number 2 does not have the same high density of any particular ethnicity, although it does have 19 percent Latino. District number 3 is a very diverse district with an African-American influence and a majority of its population is Latino but that doesn't translate to a majority of their voting age population. As you can see the Latino concentration and then related the African-American concentration. In District number 4, you have again an ethnic concentration but this ethnic concentration is the Asian voters and you can see the Asian voters particularly concentrated on the eastern side. And that's where you'll also find District number 5's fairly concentrated Asian population and District 6's fairly concentrated Asian population. District number 6 is also one that has a fairly concentrated Latino population. District number 7, again, fairly concentrated--strongly concentrated Asian population. The important thing with these subgroups is to see whether or not you can get any of them to 50 percent. And we have looked at the data, looking at citizen voting age population, looking at potential ways that you could draw these districts and it is not possible to create a 50 percent African-American district. It is not possible to create a 50 percent Latino district but it is possible to create a 50 percent Asian district and it's definitely--that's where the district should be looking at a very sophisticated drawing of lines to make sure that you're complying with the voting rights act on that part--on that side of the district. Now, other criteria can-- >> Just so I understand it, so what you're saying is Voting Rights Act says that if you have the ability to draw a 50 percent plus of any ethnic group, you should try to do that if it's within shooting distance. >> Yes. And that's exactly what happened as an example when you look at the state redistricting effort. They drew the first Asian majority-minority district in the assembly right here in the San Gabriel Valley. They also in the San Fernando Valley created 2 new majority-minority districts, one for Congress and one for the assembly, districts that didn't exist before as majority-minorities but the populations there is--existed in dense-enough population to create it. Now that's not to say that--I'm sorry, go ahead. >> And is that more important than say keeping geographic or government boundaries in place or is it one or the--I mean can you balance all of those? >> The legal requirement probably trumps the requirement to--you know, the decision locally that we wanna keep a certain geographic boundary or we wanna follow the lines like they used to, that VRA requirement and your attorneys will probably be able to speak to it well, generally trumps that. Now, that has--there's a little caveat. If I could go into a database and create an Asian district but the only way to do it was to connect 3 different populations that weren't cohesive in a district that look like a total gerrymander, then you wouldn't have the same requirement. But if you can draw them in a cohesive, compact district, then that's a pretty strong argument that you would wanna create that district in order to avoid any federal voting rights act problems. I'll let Kimi speak to the rest of the process and then I'm obviously happy to answer of the questions but it does get pretty technical. [ Noise ] >> So the League has developed a sort of flat rate program. I know that the board's already discussed the pricing I think at an earlier meeting. So the full contract will require an in-depth analysis of the citizen voting age population, the general population and then the ethnic subgroup growth, any concerns raised by the board members and/or the public and really the idea here is that you know your community better than we know your community and our goal is not to divide neighborhoods or to draw lines that don't make sense to the existing board or to any constituents. >> So that's where the input from the board and from the public comes in. So the next step for our process is that we would create options. We typically say we're gonna create 3 map options in some districts there's this only 1 map option. In this district I'm thinking there could be several based on the numbers that we've been seeing particularly with the Asian population. The Board then has a chance to review, leave them open for public comment, and then give us any public comment back, and then finally the Board then votes on the map option. We file any necessary paperwork with the county and then that sort of wraps up the process at the County Registrar. This is a potential time line, this is obviously our initial meeting here and then September 21st we would be presenting the Board with 3 map options assuming our contract goes forward. We recommend strongly a 30 to 60-day public comment period. Really that the district follow whatever public noticing system they had in place already and that they follow their existing guidelines, and then we would come back, the Board would select one of the map options and then we would take that forward to the County Registrar. And we have in place some systems to collect public comment back if its not--if folks from the public or from the Board wanna take the map side and look at them, examine them in detail and then send us public comment back we have a system of collecting and reporting all of that public comment and we would then submit it as part of the final package to the Board so that they have it as well. >> Are there questions? I believe that concludes your presentation? >> It does. >> Is there a deadline on the time line? >> You might have received already a letter from the County Registrar. The letters I've seen have generally have been around November 1st for completion. Now, the law is that if you don't draw your own lines by the spring, the registrar could actually draw them and then charge you for it. So there are 2 kinds of deadlines and generally we're trying to get most boards especially now they can be around November 1st. >> Is the November 1st deadline a hard and fast deadline, or have you're timeline suggests it's not? >> You know in our view it's not a hard and fast because there is a period of time when the county is not gonna go out and impose lines on you, but they might start sending you letters more regularly. >> Mr. Baum? >> I just want to reassert something that Mr. Martin mentioned at the last meeting that I hope going forward that a principal for our district that's been important especially being an educational district is that the individual trustee areas are closely aligned with the feeder public school districts so that we--that's an important boundary that we like--that I believe strongly should try to be maintained that each feeder school district, and we have several of them have a trustee. So whether it's Arcadia, San Marino, South Pasadena, walking out of Flint Ridge I think that's--how do we assert that type of principle to the process? >> Yeah, I believe you assert it just like you did because there're--looking at the current lines there are a lot of contiguous lines between the existing boundaries and the boundaries for the high school's unified school districts and that can be maintained. There--as it looks in the last pre-draw you guys got really close to almost exact population in the last pre-draw, it's like every district was 55,000 people and so there were some things that weren't exactly aligned to the school districts and something like that might continue and would likely continue, but definitely you can make that your top criteria after the voting rights act. >> That has to be subordinate to the voting rights act. >> Yeah, just like in the state policy the--all the criteria the state commission had was all subordinate to 2 things, equal population 'cause that's federal law, one man, one vote. And then the Voting Rights Act more particular things about the ethnic breakdown of districts. >> Then define the term retrogression, you said [simultaneous talking] they said that's not permitted. >> Retrogression is--it's really, it's the fancy way of regress. Retrogression is technically taking a group of voters and putting them in a position where there're worse off than they were prior to the line redraw. So if you took and area of African Americans and made them less able to elect somebody of their own group, then you have retrogressed them. It's a legal term. >> So when--'cause I'm very proud of the diversity of my district. I have a significant Latino population, significant African-American population, and others. I have say 20 some percent of African-American population in my district. If the new lines create has instead of 20 has 19 is that considered retrogression? >> It's not considered retrogression because they're not covered by Section 2 because they didn't get to 50 percent and can't get to 50 percent. >> Uh-hmm. >> If you took a district that was 50 percent already and knocked them to 49.98 that would technically be retrogression. >> So it's really about when you get to 50 percent. >> In Districts 1, 2, and 3 here do have segments of the African-American population from up Northwest Pasadena and I think that would be still maintained that each of them would have some African-American population. There could be desire on the board's behalf to try to strengthen the African-American population in one district but that would have to come from you. That's not something I would be deciding. >> Okay, thank you. Other questions? Mr. Martin? >> Paul, thanks for coming I appreciated meeting you at the league conference and if you might--one of the comments I think you shared with us there was at some place in the criteria I guess further down the food chain you had mentioned that our Greater Pasadena Community College Area had a history of voting across ethnic lines and at some place in the process there was some appreciation is not the right word but I don't know what the right word is. There was some articulation of that in the process. Can you just say it better than what I'm trying to say remembering our conversation? >> Remembering our conversation, a lot of what I'm doing is Voting Acts Analysis and racially polarized voting analysis which is a precursor for some districts that don't have district lines yet. They have to do this voting analysis to see if they have any racially polarized voting. The San Gabriel Valley particularly in the Asian community doesn't exhibit some of the strong racially polarized voting you might find in places like Orange County or in the San Francisco Bay area. The Asian community in this area seems to act a little bit independent of those ethnic considerations. They're not as much block voters, there're republican Asian voters and there are democratic Asian voters and independent Asian voters. In other communities they're more polarized and there have been races that I've looked at in particular the John Chiang controller's race where Latinos actually were voting in higher numbers for the Asian candidate than the Asians themselves. And so there are some interesting dynamics that underlie the districts ethnic populations and its diversity. It is not as polarized as other parts of the state. >> Other questions? >> Dr. Rocha what is your recommendation? >> The recommendation of the administration is to move forward to engage the consultant to authorize the move forward to engage them to do this work on behalf of the district. >> Now are--is included in that this time line that they've proposed or just making a decision to see if [inaudible] higher results. >> Well I'll leave that to them to you know, to finalize by mutual agreement the final time line but I take the time line that was suggested as a general target, a general goal is great. >> Is there a motion to approve the recommendation? [ Simultaneous talking ] >> Second. >> Okay. >> I believe it is seconded. Any further discussion? Dr. Mann? >> This isn't a discussion, I just wanted to say that I am going to abstain on this vote because Kimi is the Vice President of the League and I'm the Vice President of the League Board and I just wanted to make--I don't want it to look like I'm voting, so-- [ Simultaneous Talking ] >> The president of the league. >> No I'm the Vice President now of the League Board. Complicated. >> You're the president of some board. >> I'm president of the CCCT board. >> I see. Okay. [ Laughter ] >> You're a very important person. >> Well obviously so. [ Laughter ] >> Okay. >> And I would--excuse me, and I would like to have a minute to show why I abstained from this vote. >> Right. We will do that. Other comments or questions? Advisory we vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say Aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? >> Abstain. >> Abstention. Yes. Okay. Motion carries. Thank you very much. >> Mr. Thomson if I may just-- >> Hope you don't miss your airplane. >> Say one very quick thing. When Dean Kollross and spoke to both Paul and Kimi on the phone we were very impressed with the depth of knowledge and the skill sets and because of the Voting Rights Act we thought this is very important so we appreciate this but I did want to also mention that the primary driving force on this was Dean Kollross in terms of preparing the proposal and the recommendation for you last week. So we wanna thank her for that effort and we wanna certainly thank the League and Redistrict Partners for the partnership that we are about to enter into. Thank you. >> Good. We look forward to working with you on this. >> Thank you. >> Let's go back if we can please to the consent item on 30-B, Interfund Transfer. We have a request from Ana Mae Jones to address the Board with respect to this item, so Ana Mae? [ Noise ] >> Thank you President Thomson. >> You want Dr. Rocha to kinda lay the foundation for this first, or? >> Sure, that'd be great. >> I'd like to hear from Ana Mae first. [ Laughter ] >> That's okay too. President Thomson, members of the board, Dr. Rocha, members of the administration my name is Ana Mae Jones. I'm president of ISSU, the second largest bargaining unit here on campus. I provide administrative support to the foundation as my job and I also represent all of the bargaining represented classified employees on the Budget and Resource Allocation Committee, the shared governance that deals with budget. I have some prepared remarks that I'd like to read at this time. I want to speak to you this evening on consent item 30-B wherein this board is asked to approve an interfund transfer of 3.95 million from the general fund as a year end sweep into various capital outlay accounts. Without commenting on the importance of capital expenditures, ISSU is instead concerned about what appears to be a noticeable difference between A, the story of the district which has limited financial resources and sweeps all year end balances or B, the story of a district which in 2008 committed to an ongoing and not insignificant allocation of these limited resources for another employee group, both of these story lines concluding in the same way. There has been a 5-year and counting negative impact on ISSU unit members' compensation. First I want to remind this board that the last time ISSU received any COLA or other significant salary adjustment for its unit members was 5 years ago, July 1, 2006 when we received a 5 percent COLA. A review of the fourth quarter 3-11Q for that same '06-'07 fiscal year reveals the district also swept 8,255,174 into other outgo accounts and increased reserves. It was a very good year. The fourth quarter 3-11Q's for the next 3 years '07-'08, '08-'09 and 0'9-'10 reveal the district swept another 16,112,054 dollars and what did this Board approve vis-a-vis ISSU member salaries in the same time frame? Unfortunately, nothing. Utilizing the federal government's inflation calculator one can ascertain that what cost a hundred dollars to buy in 2006 now costs 111 dollars and 97 cents in 2011 for a 12 percent rate of inflation since our members last salary increase. As you will recall that this board approved a new Management Association Compensation Plan in 2008 which resulted in 33 out of 54 managers receiving an annual adjustment of more than 3 percent and average annual adjustment for the entire group of 10.88 percent and 2 managers receive more than 35,000 dollars annual increase each. While not keeping pace with inflation, the upward salary adjustments from this sector of district employees did provide some relief, a respite, which our ISSU unit members have not yet similarly experienced. Thus it is rather disappointing for anyone to argue that either A, the buying power of all district employees or B, the shared sacrifice needed due to budgetary constraints has been proportionally spread across all district employee groups. For the ISSU bargaining unit already in the lower tier of district compensation, the trickle down effect to salary increases has not yet been realized. Most recently, the ISSU membership had an expectation that the salary schedule adjustment this Board approved 2 months ago amounting to approximately 75,000 dollars annually for 230 members would be effective July 1, 2010 not 2011. Unfortunately I had to report to the membership this spring that the district and ISSU were not able to reach agreement on the July 1, 2010 effective date which would have resulted in a very small retro-check for each of my unit members. As an example, my adjustment was 17 dollars and 77 cents gross per month or four-tenths of 1 percent. Needless to say, many of the members of our bargaining unit whose average annual compensation is under 45,000 dollars were discouraged about this result. I hope you will agree with me that there is no question, everyday ISSU unit members come to this campus and faithfully performing a myriad of tasks, many done behind the scenes and without public acknowledgment allowing this district to smoothly operate. Thus this evening as you cast your vote on what has been reduced from an extraordinarily important financial decision to a routine consent transaction, ISSU ask you to carefully consider 2 things. First, what signal does this week send to our unit members who have waited patiently for 5 years without any tangible upward adjustment to their compensation, and second, how quickly can the district and ISSU partner together to expeditiously address and remedy the concerns addressed this evening. Thank you. [ Applause ] >> Dr. Rocha? >> Yes I wanted to thank my colleague, Anna Mae, for her comments. We had a very constructive conversation about just this issue yesterday. I understand the concerns that Anna Mae has just expressed and I did want to make sure that we reminded ourselves that ISSU and the district arrived at an agreement in the current contract that calls for this year a--to come to mutual agreement on reorganization of the workforce is very appreciative to ISSU and Anna Mae doing that. We're gonna work together in concert to make sure that we move through this process of reclassifying the entire classified staff which I hope that my recommendation will be a significant upgrade to the entire classified staff workforce. So there's nothing in Anna Mae's comments that I see as anything but complimentary to--complementary to the efforts of the district. And so with that President Thomson I think Vice President van Pelt and I are ready to report. >> Please do. >> I did in--out of respect not just to ISSU but to the entire college community, I requested of you and I appreciated President Thomson to pull this item in advance specifically for the purpose that I didn't want it to just glide by on a voice consent vote. Okay, as for the item it is a--the 30-B interfund transfer. So I call your attention to that and I will by way of introducing Vice President van Pelt to give us the details on it. I wanna say this, you know, and Rick will give us the expert's version. I 'm gonna give you the layman's version. The reason why we're able to recommend to you this interfund transfer is because the district's budget management was excellent this year. Rick will report that we over performed on revenue by almost a million dollars and that we went under budget by almost 3 million dollars resulting in an increase to the reserve balance of about 4 million dollars. It has been a common practice here at the college and especially urgent this year to put money that was over the anticipated operating budget into what we call capital fund 41. The board has long approved one urgent matter and that is to move forward with the technology upgrade in the ERP. The other matter that is new this year is the capital need for the U building. Dean Douglas is here and we are shortly to move our science program into bungalows on the parking lot. That in itself will cost money and Dean Douglas has been looking at plans that we've been drawing up replacement for the U building that when we replace the U building that cost will come in at roughly 70 million dollars which would exhaust everything in our current capital fund and then some. So the needs are real. I would also say too that everything that the ah, that is moving into capital fund 41 is fundable which is to say that at any moment for any purpose that the board deems appropriate that money can be retransferred back to the operating accounts. So with that I do want you in introducing Rick, thank Rick and his staff, major gold star for performance in one of the most stressful budget years the community colleges system has ever had to come in significantly under budget on top of the cuts that we sustained. So Rick if you would take it from there please. >> Thank you. At the district we've always been able to separate ongoing revenue streams from one time revenue streams and then what we try to do is we try to fund ongoing expenses with ongoing revenues and we try to fund one time expenses with one time revenues. Were we not to do that then we would have to presumably take operating funds the normal general fund in order to fund this one time projects. >> So that's the reason why the district has over many years swept these accounts at the end into this one time projects and if I can just show in terms of where the money goes, on the second page of my report on interfund transfer in the colored area listing the projects. If you see that we currently have 20 million dollars left over and if you just go up the line, what you'll see immediately is that we basically have 11 million dollars tied up in the ERP system and in the U building space. So that means that more than 50 percent of this money is tied up in those two projects. We would expect that the 6 million dollars is going to be spent within the next six months and that has a major impact on the bottom line of fund 41 and that's one of the reasons why it's important to move money over from the positive ending number into funding those projects. As Dr. Roach pointed out, there was growth money that was somewhat unanticipated on our part that helped to raise the revenues by about a percent what our projections were and what the Chancellor's Office provided to us last September and that was the number used in our planning process and then we did under expend by three percent so there is a grand total of the four percent under expend--four percent positive impact on the bottom line. So, that's the reason why the administration is recommending that we move this 3.95 million dollars from the general fund into fund 41. >> Questions of Dr. van Pelt? Ms. Brown? >> Well, I think the--your staff is doing an excellent job. I am just having a hard time understanding how we could be under budget over 3 million dollars, I read it and I'm saying well, if all that we went through the budget and everything seemed to be like just perfect all the few presentations that we have, I am wondering how that came about. And I'm also wondering if--on the same note that we have on the performance this year could it be reversed next year and maybe we, you know, be more than 3 million so I kind of need some clarification as to where did that money just came from. >> Let me just help out Trustee Brown. First of all, the question is quite fair, of course the--first of all, the under budget comes from markedly reducing the administrative expenses. We--in this budget this year, we spent 2 million dollars more than the state [inaudible] for student enrollment on sections and students and as student classes, we are not reducing faculty, we are not reducing instruction. It comes from a long standing operational policy to most of the under budget comes from holding vacant administrative and staff positions that come vacant as a result of natural attrition, okay? These are not the new retirements, not the new retirements which will be--affect next year's budget. Okay. These are every time we get a vacancy, we hold on to it and we fill some of them but we have not been filling them at a very fast rate as the staff can attest. We are however, redoubling our effort to make sure that our faculty hiring as you know stays where it is. So that's the basic answer and then of course when you reduce salary cost through natural attrition on the part of non-instructional expenses, you markedly reduce your benefits cost because each salary dollar you have to add 28 percent to each--28 cents on top of each salary dollar for various fringe benefits. And finally I would say that the district already has, you know, put some significant money from the reserves this year into ensuring that there are no salary reductions in most surrounding districts there have been but there have been no furloughs, that there have been no changes, you know, along those lines and we're proud that we've been able to accomplish that. But the primary reason is we are filling positions on an as needed basis and we are moving through a continuing cost effectiveness, you know, evaluation to make sure that we can deliver the services to students and faculty at the lowest possible administrative cost. We have significantly reduced our administrative cost this year. >> So let make sure I'm understanding. For year, 2010 to 2011, we reduced approximately 4 million dollars just by attrition? >> Well we, you know, maybe Rick can fill in the details I'd say--first of all, there was--we had a little more revenue than we anticipated which is, you know, a good thing. And then we had--because remember part of our strategy was to try and increase revenue and then expenses were lower by about three million dollars. Okay. A good chunk of that, the majority of that was in salary savings through attrition. >> Thank you. >> Other questions? Mr. Martin? >> Yes. It's clear to me where the money is going and in the report I'm a little confused on the layout of 30-B because it talks about increase and decrease and then it kind of lists everything twice under this incoming transfer, incoming transfer, you understand what I'm asking? Is there a quick explanation to that and if it's not quick, I don't need accounting 101 here tonight. I'll get it offline but it's just confusing to me. >> There is a technical reason to do it. First, we have to receive the money and then we appropriate the money. >> Okay. I'll go with that. >> Other questions? >> I just wanna offer--just a quick comment of praise for the administration because as far as I know, no district in the state is in the position to be able to meet some of the challenges that we're facing because of the state budget and also some major issues that we are facing as an institution and we're having to vacate an entire building and relocate several departments offsite and then along the way, the investment in our technology infrastructure so we're very fortunate to be in this position to make those transfers. >> We have a request from [inaudible] on Consent Items. Did you intend to address this item? Okay. You had Consent Item E which just means consent items in general so, okay come forward then please. [ Pause ] >> Hi, thank you for this opportunity to speak. I came to the meeting tonight just in support of students in general. I didn't plan to speak right now but this is a very personal and emotional issue from me as I have been seeing this pattern of spending year after year as a student at PCC about to transfer out. And some I'm gonna speak now about this because of the history of cuts that have been going on campus. And there was a question about why is their money left over at the end of the year. And when I hear this discussion come up in board meetings there is talk of how many is being saved but the one thing that doesn't get discussed is the fact that since '07-'08, the number of sections available to students has decreased. For this upcoming year, 300 sections are going to be cut across the board and I know that there is talk about them being low enrolled sections but 300 sections will be cut and the plan is to cut another 300 sections the following year. At the same time, there is talk about the funds that I left over at the end of the year because as these cuts are happening and we're told there is not money for our classes, the money from the general fund that would fund those sections it's considered ongoing funding and then we get to the point when there is money left over and it gets swept like tonight. We're looking at sweeping 4 million dollars that is currently ongoing money into one time accounts and so I just wanted to speak to that issue because I know once the money gets swept into capital outlay, we're told it's money that's not able to be allocated to classes. >> And so I think it's really important in all of this discussion despite talk of being over full time equivalent students at our school to recognize that there is money left over each year as classes are being cut. And so I think the discussion has to open up and I think that we have to recognize that this is money that could be funding sections for students, and so I really hope that in this decision we make tonight you take that into consideration because students have been asked to bear the brunt of the economic disparity that's coming up. So thank you. [ Applause ] >> Thank you for a thoughtful way of presenting that Dr. Rocha? Any response to that this evening or-- >> No comment. >> Okay. Other questions or-- >> Just move approval in the interfund transfer. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> I actually--do you have a response briefly if I may-- >> Okay. Sure. >> --to the student's comments 'cause I'm very sensitive if you've come at any of these meetings, you know I'm the more class guy 'cause--and so I'm very sensitive to that. Actually we had a report last meeting about the number of sections and I'm not aware what's coming that you must be aware of on the 300, but I really do support as many class sections as we possibly can. In some ways, I actually believe we're doing that indirectly and here's why. We have a real issue with the U Building coming down and having to move chem and all those sciences into other facilities. If it weren't for these one-time moneys being able to do the moves by the trailers and accommodate that we would have to go into operations and use operational money to fund those kinds of things. What you heard tonight was we actually--were able because we have done this now and we have done this in the past are working on a plan where it's those previous one-time moneys that allow us to make those kinds of emergencies so that there can still be a chemistry and science, and program that's so important and at the same time not have to cut classes on our ongoing basis to take care of that funding which allowed us to spend 2 million more on classes than that the state gave us, which I say to Dr. Rocha and to all those thank you, thank you for doing that because--I think it's an excellent point in everything we do touching operational money this is money that could be used for more classes. So I'm looking at this as helping assure that in the future we can continue to use every operational dollar for more classes by not having to cut into operations to move people into the U Building or get our registration so you can go through it in a timely manner through NERP. So I'm very sensitive to your point and I deeply appreciate your comment. >> It has been moved and seconded I believe that we approve this item. Any further discussion? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? Motion carries. That completes the consent items I believe and now we're back to Item F, Campus Police Report 2010-2011. Is this just an informative item? >> Yes. I'll throw it back over to Vice President van Pelt and in doing so thank the Chief Scialdone for being so kind as to work around us and wait patiently for his report, so Rick. >> For those of you who recall about five or six years ago, Frank Scialdone stepped into be an Interim Chief and we asked him to come back and reprise that role. He was the former Chief of the Fontana Police Department and Rialto Police Department. He's been a City Council member and the mayor of Fontana as well so we're honored to have him back and he's doing a phenomenal job and we'd ask him now to do a brief report on campus safety. >> Welcome! >> Thank you everyone. Good evening President Thomson, Board of Trustee members, and President Rocha. I'm both honored and pleased to be here this evening to present to you the status of safety on our campus. And to summarize my comments, I would just like to start by saying our campus is safe. We have a very secure learning environment for our students, a safe working environment for our employees and staff and welcoming and safe environment for the folks who come on to our campus as visitors. This didn't happen by accident. Working collaboratively with all aspects of the college community has allowed this environment to flourish. This evening to assist us in evaluating how safe or campus is we can turn to a time relied evaluation tool if you will and that's what type of crime actually happens on campus, what's the level of that crime and how do we compare it to other campuses. With that in mind when we conduct such evaluations, there are a couple of things that we must keep in mind that, number one, all crime is not reported and number two, that we have no way of knowing what the unreported crime really is. So this evening's report will be based on the facts that we know which is reported crimes. And one thing I really have to stress to the Board is the number of incidents is so small on this campus that an increase or decrease of one or two incidents in any crime category on a statistical percentage basis is enormous. So when you look at percentage increases, percentage decreases, when you look at those types of things keep that in mind that one or two incidences can skew the numbers because the numbers are so small, very important. Just a brief history on how we measure crimes, you probably heard of what we call in the police business and law enforcement world, Part 1 Crimes. And those are the crimes that are reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the state of California and there are seven of them, criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. You also hear a lot about those kinds--various kinds being broken into categories, violent crime and property crime. Obviously, criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, and assault are violent crimes and the other crimes, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft are property crimes. Now, it's interesting and going back and looking at the actual reported crimes in those categories for our campus. The crime trends on this campus since 2006 have been downward. The Part 1, reported crimes that I just enumerated, has decreased by 53 percent since 2006 as compared to the most recent 12-month period on campus. That's pretty phenomenal. It's interesting to note that on a nationwide basis and most of the criminologists are really kind of baffled and still trying to research and figure this out because, you know, for decades the theory was when unemployment goes up, when the economy goes south, the crime goes up. Not happening this time. Crime is continuing on a downward trend nationally. Not as significant as it is here on this campus but is continuing on the downward trend nationally even with the high unemployment and even with the economy the way it is. So to say that we have been decreased by 53 percent since 2006 is pretty phenomenal in those crimes areas. And I--in your report, we actually have the number of crimes and when you--when I talk about the numbers, you can see how small some of the numbers are and, you know, how one or two incidents can have a 200 percent, you know, difference in the crime rate. One of the things that are not reported and I apologize for not having this in the report, but it's something I thought of after I submitted it that I thought you might be interested in, and that has to do with a crime category that is not reported to the state or federal government and is not reported in the Annual Clarity Report that we have to do to the federal government on campus crime, and it's vandalism. And vandalism increase, unfortunately, we had a 69 percent increase in the last 12 months over the previous 12 months in vandalism, but again, the numbers are very small, 39 to 66. But I just thought you might be interested in that. How do we compare it to other colleges? That seems to be the thing that folks like to know. How do we do to, you know, compare it to somebody else? So I thought I would just give you a little bit of comparison, a little bit of history as to how we do that. We cannot do that by raw numbers per se because that would be an unfair comparison. We would not be comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges because the--the size of the college community, number of students makes a difference. So what we do is we look at crimes per a thousand students. If we look at crimes per a thousand students, we can actually compare our campus to other campuses from a percentage basis on that percentage. >>So we did that. We looked at five other area of community colleges in our area to see how do we--how did we do? Are our number is pre--you know, are we pretty much the same? Are we higher or are we lower, you know? How do we stand with those folks? And again, when you look at the Clarity Report because the Clarity Report is different from the FBI Report and the State Report because it does not include larceny-theft, so when you take the larceny-theft numbers out and you look at the Clarity Report numbers, the five campuses that we compared our campus to averaged one crime per one thousand students. Our campus averages one crime per one thousand students. We are exactly right on target in our crime per a thousand students as the five colleges that we compared ourselves to. We are a little bit different in the violent crime rate. The violent crime rate for these five campuses, the average is 0.2, 0.2 crimes per thousand students. We're at 0.4. We are lower in property crimes by two-tenths of a point. As you're probably familiar with the Clarity Act, the Clarity Act have some additional reporting requirements on college campuses than from municipalities, counties, and those types of things and those have to do with weapons violations, drug violations, and liquor law violations. So we wanna compare how we did with those folks and because they're a year behind in reporting the most recent statistics reported to the federal government in those areas is 2009 so we compared our 2009 statistics with the 2009 statistics from these five campuses. Interesting to note, a couple of the areas that are interesting to note. In the weapons violation section, for example, the average number of weapons violations per a thousand students is 0.04 incidents per a thousand students. On our campus, it's 0.1. So you can see it's at least--it's a little over double. But again, the numbers are so small, you know? When you're looking at our campus, we have three one year, four the next year. The numbers are so small that it's almost meaningless because the numbers are so small. The one area--again, when you're looking at those, that's a little bit more of a concern to me and that's the drug violation area, and when you look at drug violations per a thousand students on those five campuses, they're 0.03. We are at 0.8. And if you happen to look at this year's 2010 figures and we don't have 2010 figures for the campuses that's why I can't compare them, we're at 1.2. Now, what does that mean? What does all this--what do all these statistics mean to all of us and to all of you as the elected folks for the college district. So with that, my assessment is our campus continues to be--to remain safe. It's a safe learning environment. It's a safe working environment with a very low crime rate. As compared to the five area community college surveys, we're right in line with them, a little bit higher in the violent crime rate, but again, the numbers are so small. It's almost meaningless. The Clarity Act numbers to me, especially the--the drug numbers, that's a little bit more of a concern to me. However, we need to keep in mind that our numbers may be higher, you know, and it may be attributed to a proactive--a more proactive policing style by our campus police officers than the other campuses. We are a proactive policing department here on campus. What this does when you're proactive? It'll drive up your numbers. It'll drive up those numbers that are higher than the other campuses. If you're not proactive, you just Laissez-Faire and just sitting back, and waiting for something to happen and not trying to be out there and look for things and prevent things from happening, you could get smaller numbers. Proactivity increases numbers. So with that, I would like to commend the staff of our police department, our police officers and stuff, for this proactivity because I think that's what helps drive, you know, a 53-percent reduction in crimes since 2006 is proactivity. Working collaboratively with all the groups in the campus, we the police and safety services, you know, are gonna kinda examine and maybe come up with some strategies and look at this are of drug violations on our campus, see if there is anything we can do. We're part of the [inaudible] committee, we're part of a whole bunch of different committees here on campus, and we will continue to examine if there's anything we can do to help reduce that number. In conclusion, I wanna thank you the Board of Trustees for their leadership and their support for ensuring our campus is safe for our students, staff, and visitors. And with that, I will end my report and I'll be here--if you have any questions I'd be more than happy to address it. >> First of all, thank you very much for the report. I realized you've not been with us in this capacity at least this time all that long so there are lots of things that sort of would yet need to look into further. But I do find the concern that you have expressed and reported about the drug violations and liquor violations being so significantly higher to be concerned. I'm wondering is there a way in which we can pursue this and investigate to find out if it is due to our perhaps over--not over, but heightened sensitivity to things like this, the more active our police force is, as opposed to other campuses. How do we really determine the cause of the increase--quite significant increase in violations? >> Well, you know, with over 33 years in law enforcement, what you're asking is to compare our police organizations to [inaudible] two police organizations to other campuses in the proactivity levels. And my experience shows that that's never gonna happen. There's a culture of the individual college. There are board policies. There's a whole bunch of things that go into why one Police Department whether it's a college police department, a municipal police department, a sheriff's department there's a whole bunch of reasons that go into why one may be more proactive than others and you will never get a definitive answer as to why. In my experience, that answer has to do with leadership, it has to do with how you lead the folks who work for you, it has to be what your expectations as leaders and those are things that are kind of an intangible thing, you know we talk about leadership. I just struck leadership through Cal State Long Beach Criminal Justice Institute and, you know, leadership is kind of a--at times a nebulous concept, you know? So I attribute proactivity in those types of things to the leadership of the department. What's important to the department? What's not important to the department? So it's kinda hard to actually do that and I would caution the board about trying to go to these colleges and say, you know, are we more proactive than you? How come and that kind of stuff? I would caution you. >> I guess that's not really what my concern is. I would like to get to the cause. Why are we having this increase in drug violations and alcohol violations? I thought you were suggesting that heightened proactivity might be-- >> That might be. >> One explanation for that. But regardless we compare ourselves with other campuses the raw numbers suggest there is quite a significant increase between at least on drug violations between '09 and '10. >> That is correct. >> How do we investigate and find out what the cause of that is? >> That is correct and that's one of the things in my report that I mentioned that we need to study that issue. That would not--if it wasn't for researching this report and putting this forward, we would not have identified this issue. Now, the question is what we're gonna do about it. >> Thank you. >> And working collaboratively with the various, you know, college groups here on campus, we need to try to identify why and that's our responsibility to do that and report back to you what we find. I can't answer that question. >> Sure. >> But I do think proactivity is part of it, not all of it. I still think there's--there is an issue, but I can't-- >> Well, this is not an issue that's unique to PCC, I mean this is an issue that's across the country and, in fact, what they've been finding for a number of years is that--I mean drinking has always been an issue at most universities for sure. But what they have found the last several years is what's referred to as, probably, by other names as well, but as binge drinking. Go out and to drink to get drunk, not to enjoy the alcohol or not to enjoy the social experience, or whatever else but drink for the purpose of getting drunk. Is that what's going on here? And I mean that's the type of thing I think we need to try to pursue and get to the bottom of. >> No. I don't believe so. And the colleges that have those types of problems are the colleges that have dormitories-- >> Dormitories. >> Where there are people living on the college or your four-year colleges and those type of things. I mean, you know, when you look at our Liquor Law violations, in 2009 we had eight. In 2010, we got six. >>Those numbers are small. That's why I'm saying--do we have a liquor problem, you know, somebody comes on campus and does something stupid. You know, I'm more concerned about, you know, the drug violation issue and that's really what I would like to spend my time on because the numbers are so small. I mean if you look at--you know, in 2010, we had six. That's one every two months. I mean that's like, you know, some drunken walk on campus from--came over the bar across the street and we have that Liquor Law violation at three o'clock in the morning, you know? So--but the drug violations are the ones--are the ones that are of a concern to me and that's what I would like to spend some time on, see in is it our just--you know, it's not just our proactivity, but I do think that some of it. But I think there might be some other underlying causes that we need to look at. >> Other questions or comments or--Dr. Mann? >> Yes. I have a question. This is violations on campus so this could be people who are not students. Is that correct? >> Some of them are. Some of them are not. >> Some of them are not. Well, the reason I asked this is because I've been working with a group called Project Pasadena where there's going be a count of homeless people and apparently, it's been identified that there's very large group of homeless--chronically homeless people who live next to Hill Street Library which is right across the street from us. Many these people have serious drug and alcohol problems and, you know, the city has finally recognized this. And so I wonder if that might be a part of it that there is a--I mean there's a contention of people who live in the alley and live in the parking lot, and I wonder if this is where we're getting some of these violations. Do you know? >> Yes, I do know, and the answer is yes. Now, let me tell you how I know. One of the things that this surprised me is the number of calls we get at the GM Building for transient people who just happened to walk in and shower or go in the wait room and, you know, the staff confronts them 'cause they're not students and let's just say they're not polite to the staff when the staff ask them to go leave and we get called. If we don't get at least one call a week like that, I'm surprised. And I--it's just one of those things, but I will tell you also that I've been here two and a half months now and a lot of the folks that we actually arrest in our parking structure doing crimes, they're not students here. >> Okay. >> You know that they're--you know, I'll give you a great example. We had a parolee trying to steal cars in our parking lot. Actually, he went up to a car where there was a student sleeping inside the car, opened the car door, and the student, you know, scared the guy away. Thank goodness the guy decided not to do anything. Contacted our cadet and we subsequently, you know, arrested him. He had narcotics on him so he's one of our narcotics numbers, but he was also trying to break into cars. He is on parole for stealing cars, so yeah. You're absolutely correct in your assessment because we are in an urban area and like I said--and I wasn't joking, you know. Somebody can walk in off Colorado Boulevard. We could be around Parade Day and have five drunks in our stand, you know, watching the parade and they're stumbling through the campus doing stupid things and we arrest them and all of sudden we got five Liquor Law violations, you know. That could happen, absolutely. >> Well, one of the reasons I raised that I wonder then if maybe--because I'm kinda sure you're doing this. Maybe we should be working with the Pasadena Police also to see about this although this homeless project is to try to get the people housed and away from the campus, but they do it in very small segments. >> Well, I've been in contact with the Pasadena Police Department and I asked them to do, you know, a study, you know, what's the crime around the campus? And guess what? The crime around the campus--their major crime around the campus is alcohol and drug violations and that's their crime around our campus. So what's happening in the city area around our campus is what's happening on our campus. There's a direct correlation between the two. They are aware of it. We're aware of it and we're working with the Crime Analysis Unit and, you know, we're trying to analyze that kind of stuff, but we have an open campus. I mean anybody--you'll be surprised the number of people we find on this campus at 3 and 4 in the morning, you know, riding their bikes or, you know, my the mirror pools taking baths or whatever. You'd be surprised the number of people that we find and those types of stuff drives up your statistics. So, you know, the high number of drug violation, you know, I bet if I actually pulled all the reports which, however, I didn't do, but I bet you most of them aren't students. >> Thank you very much. >> Other questions. Mr. Martin? >> I'd like to know the five colleges we were compared to. >> Well, I'd be glad to give those--I can give them to you sure. Again, I always--let me give you a caveat, okay, because I've been down this road so many times. I'll give them to you and I'm not trying to not give them to you. I just wanna be real clear because, you know, when I start giving you all these colleges, all of sudden, you know--what are you doing this for? Why are you calling me--you know? And you start getting those people upset at you. But Glendale Community College Mt. SAC, Santa Monica College, Chaffey College, Sorrento College. >> Rio? >> Sorrento's. >> Sorrento's. >> Those are the ones we usually-- >> So those are the five that we did. But again, you know, I hate--'cause I got burned doing this several times. >> I'm not gonna call them. [ Laughter ] >> No. It's not even that. >> But I did wanna know since we're doing all these comparisons what we were comparing against is important so I wanted to hear the names. >> Yeah, yeah. >> Mr. Baum. >> Yeah. I don't wanna do it hear but also I do wanna say--make the statement that this board supports taking the steps necessary to ensure a safe campus. Earlier tonight we just approved over a million dollars for surveillance system for our parking lots. So it's--I would say we're sparing no expense, but at the same time, at some point, I'd like to have a dialogue with the administration so the board can discuss the policies for, you know, the composition of our department, how we go about it, what are the measures we take, what is the role of Campus Police Department and our academic program, that type of thing too because there are occasional policy discussions about whether we should arm or not arm our law enforcement officers or whether or not we should work more closely, or perhaps contract with outside agencies to provide law enforcement services to PCC too. >> And trust me. I know the leadership of this board is--have safe on mind. I know the camera surveillance system you just approved this evening. We've been an integral part of that planning or we're part of that process so we understand that and we appreciate your support. And I think the board's policies has helped--is what threw these numbers down, you know, I mean let's face it. Everybody wants no crime. They want zero, you know, but we also need to be realistic that, you know, we can talk about the war and crime and eliminating crime, you know, we can reduce crime, but you're never gonna eliminate it because crime involves individuals and individuals are individuals. >> Other questions? Okay. Well, thank you very much for the report and for all you're doing for Pasadena City Colleges, I appreciate that. >> And if I can say if any of the board members would like to call me and discuss any issues, just give me a call. I'd be more than happy to, you know, have you come in, show you the operation, show you how we do things, why we do things, you know? >> Your police department so come in and visit us. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next is Item G, student activity fee, discussion with possible actions. Dr. Rocha? >> Yes, President Thomson. For this, I will introduce Dean Scott Thayer. [ Noise ] >> Thank you Dr. Rocha, Mr. Thomson, members of the Board, administration, students. This evening, in your packet, I put some information regarding the--the Student Activity Fee, the Student Service Fund in particular, and to give you a breakdown, the distribution for the 2010-2011 year. I'm referring to this document here. The first page is the overview and then the following pages will just be the specific breakdown of where the money was allocated to. This past year, the Student Service Fund funded over 126 programs. As you can see, on the bottom of the first page, the breakdown there of 126 with the--the total amounts being spent from the Activity Fee versus the traditional Student Service Fund, on page 2 you can see on the left hand side is the account name and this was set up in Student Business Services under specific accounts, and also on the far right you can see the category that was placed into. >> So during the initial meeting in the Student Service Fund. We put each--we developed these categories to kind of place programs into before we started our process of reviewing applications and then allocating funds. We've gone over in the past but just to give you an overview of the Student Activity Fee collected around 575,000 dollars this year. And as you can see on the sheet the expended amounts of 453 and the Student Service Fund which was our traditional Student Service Fund which is the contribution from the bookstore, food service and vending was 355,045 and that was distributed as well. I know some of the questions that you've had in the past were regarding the programs that were funded so I wanted to give you all--the full funding list. What we attempted to do is also to attach an EMP code to the items. Prior to our allocation the EMP had not been officially adopted and approved by the Board yet. But what I did after the fact was tie it back into what the student--what the EMP code was, Educational Master Plan and how it addresses those items. And that's something that we're looking forward to in the future for any future requests is to attach that code so that we can make sure it's in line with the mission and--of the institution. The activity fee was as you all know was revised in May of last year, 2010. And it was implemented in the fall. As a committee, as a group we categorized the programs, we put a call for proposals out for the first three weeks of the semester. We received request from the college community and in our first meeting we had presentations from the actual folks who were looking to be funded. So just to give you a sense of our process and that's something that's been ongoing. The composition of the committee is the College Vice Presidents for Administrative Services, Student Learning Services, myself, I serve as the chair of the committee, Academic Senate, Classified Senate and four student representatives that sit on this committee and that has been standing Board policy and we've been operating under that guideline for as long as that policy has been in place. The--so, the goal was to try to present to you just a breakdown of the information and to try to answer any questions that you have. We know that questions have come up, this was a--the first year that we had the ability to actually collect this fee and we really made it a point to track these funds and that's why, you know, I can't state enough that we did work with Student Business Services. And so every program that was funded was allocated an account number and that's how we were able to make sure that we--when we funded a project that we knew what the balances would be throughout the year so we made sure we did that. One of the big accomplishments of the Student Activity Fee and Student Service Fund has been the Metro I-Pass Program. We have over 4000 students who participated in that program this past year and we are hoping to expand and grow that program. That is the goal to get as many fulltime students to participate in that program so that we can alleviate some of the issues on campus if it means, you know, in line with the college goals and sustainability. Also, it's an affordable option for students to get to and from campus, so that is one of our highlight programs. Also, you know, just historically we've had programs that have been funded at the Student Service Fund, the Marching Band our Lancer Band that marches in--in the annual parade, our forensics team, our award winning forensics team. Just to give you a sampling of those and we have those categorized. The--and then a lot of different programs. One program in particular I just wanna make note of is--was a new program this year was the Performing Communication Arts program and the Kinesiology Health and Athletics Program collaborated to provide televised or radio broadcast for some of the athletic events, so that merged the students in both divisions and it helped to enhance the student athletes in regards to the experience for the commentators to have the ability to do comment--that's commentation play by play of the games and then for the Communication Performing Arts folks to collaborate so that was something that--that we thought was a very innovative program this past year. Also we have looked at trying to adjust the [inaudible] our guidelines because this is our first year. I know that that has been a question so our attempt was to come forward today to answer those questions. Hopefully to make sure that every--everyone is clear on what we're trying to do and I know--and this discussion's dialogue it has been very robust with the students and at times we have not always agreed on the approach but I believe at the end we all agree on the--the benefit that this program has provided to the students. So, with that I will end the formal comments and I guess ask if there are questions. >> Dr. Rocha and Mr. Thayer is there action--what action are we supposed to be taking with respect to this? >> Well he hopes nothing, right? >> My hope is that [laughter] I've answered all your questions. [ Simultaneous Talking ] >> Your hope no action to be taken, there's no action. >> That's my hope. >> The--there is no formal action that the administration has recommended that the dean wanted to make a report 'cause previously there--to correct any perceptions or misperceptions about how the money was being spent. I think you can see by this report that the money is being spent wisely on--and that actually a very small minority of the funds, percentage of the funds are going to student clubs although even that is a worthy expenditure. The other issues are, you know, proposed changes to internal procedure of the Associated Student and those--those discussions are ongoing and--but no other formal action is being recommended tonight. >> Well there's a highlighted portion here on the second page of the report, items D and E. >> Yup. >> What's the significance of that? >> Well those--that is in response to some of the Board concerns that were expressed in the previous meeting. There are two issues that we have on the table discussion for Associated Students. I've met with the dean and with Trustee Soto and together we drafted those--those provisions that you see right there. So, those are again, not changes to the policy, to the Board policy or procedures but those are suggested changes to the internal allocation and oversight procedures of the--of the Student Service Fee. >> But there's no action this Board is expected to take with respect to either of those items? >> No we just wanted to communicate what at this point our--our position is. >> Mr. Martin? >> Okay. First I thought this was a very good report. I in particular appreciate the way you divided the new funds from the 10-dollar fee from the previous funds, from bookstore and other sources. I think this was a very comprehensive report. You've done a wonderful job. I've been highly complementary of the student in their commitment to helping leverage community service as a way of getting funds and promoting community service and volunteer service to the campus and the community is a wonderful thing. I've been very complimentary of that, of the students. I think it's tremendous you're picking a bypass. >> What I wanna confirm is, is this procedure in place now? >> No. >> Okay. >> But you're moving in that direction where these funds would pick a bypass. >> We are engaged in discussions-- >> Okay. >> --with Associated Students, yes. >> Well, assuming that all goes well that would definitely be a feather in the cap of the program. I still believe that this last year was a test on the 10-dollar fee. And there was an opt out to the test that very few--very, very few people elected to take which it was used as an argument that it was a success and that the students really didn't mind the 10-dollar fee. >> I think in total fairness to the testing method we should flip it and I think we should reverse the test and try for one year and opt in process and see how many opt in versus those who don't. And at the end of that year of test of opt in versus opt out I think you'll have a better picture of how students really feel about it. Despite all the great work that you are doing I think it's difficult for 30,000 on every campus and every remote location that PCC offers instruction to be really taxed with this additional 10 dollars and that's a lot of money for students. And so, I would entertain a motion and I say entertain without making it because the first thing I learned as a Board is you gotta learn how to count force. So if there isn't somebody else who's willing to make the motion that I could second there's no use wasting time on it. But I would entertain a motion that switches the process or ask the administration to gauge in switching the process at a timely manner. You can't do it for this fall. But whenever you could do it to an opt in process rather than opt out and run that for a one year test. There is a Board member that has a similar way of thinking I would be delighted to second that motion. >> I would--you know, I'd move that. >> I'm sorry, what? >> I will move that. And I would like to speak to my motion after Mr. Martin seconds it. >> Well I'll second it then so at least there's enough-- >> Revision to the policy. >> No it's-- >> It'd be-- >> It would be--it would be a suggestion I guess, I don't know how we could--exactly would do it. I guess the thing that concerns me and has continued to concern me, I--you know, I had opposed this Student Activity Fee because we have 4000 students using the Metro I-Pass, 30,000 students are paying for it. That is a concern to me but what concerns me even more, and information which I've never really had and have always wanted to know is how much of this Student Service Fund comes from the bookstore? What we hear from all students how expensive books are, how they can't afford to buy the books and then there must be some margin of profit that is--that is not being used or not necessary because it's performing these activities. And I assume of the students had an option of opting for paying less at the bookstore and for having a marching band, not that I don't support marching bands and think that they're wonderful I think most students would rather pay less for books and the college then would need to figure out other ways to fund these programs. It seems to me like many of these educational programs are just at the heart of the academic program, I don't see why the--why they're being funded by students. I agree with the student who spoke although I've been reading the body language and apparently the students here support the Student Activity Fee and this 575,000 that was collected for it could offer a lot of classes if that's what we're gonna do with all of our money. >> Dr. Mann let me as for a clarification as to what--what is the motion you're proposing to make? >> That we--that we reverse, that we reverse just as Mr. Martin said, instead of giving students the option of opting out of this fee we give them the option of opting in, so when they register it would be optional Student Activity Fee and then they could check to pay rather than have to ask to go out. >> Yeah, let me first ask Dr. Rocha to comment on-- >> I think it would be useful for all of us on the Board to turn to council for some guidance about what the rules of the game are on policy and what the administration can do in terms of for example, this specific motion and other changes to procedure. >> Mr. Thomson, members of the Board, Dr. Rocha my comment tonight primarily relates to the strictures of the Brown Act more than anything else. The motion that has been offered by Dr. Mann it would--is not reflected in the agenda item that is before you and I--it would be a significant modification in the way this fee is administered. And nothing in the agenda item would have given the public notice that that kind of significant change in the way the fee is being administered would be before the Board tonight. So I don't think--I'm not saying the Board couldn't do that, but I don't think you can do that based on the agenda item that you have before you tonight. >> So your recommendation would be that the motion not be acted upon this evening? >> That's correct. >> I'll withdraw the second and I'm sure Dr. Mann-- >> I will but I wanna ask a question. I--I'm not challenging council on this but actually we always say discussion with possible action, we never identify the action so what you're saying is it would have to read, flip of the student fee or change in the way the Student Activity Fee-- >> Exactly. >> What--what kind of action would be allowable then based on this? >> She said with Brown Act we that we can do whatever we want. >> No, but I'm just saying based on how we agendize it got--we have the opportunity to take some kind of action if we wanted. >> Well, frankly I think that what is before you tonight is an opportunity to express the Board's support or lack of support for the kinds of discussion that Dr. Rocha has identified or going on with the students. A direction for example to the dean to continue to pursue the proposal that Mr. Thomson vote--noted was highlighted. I think the Board could vote to express its support or opposition on that. But to change the way this fee is administered based on the agenda item before you in the way that Dr. Mann is proposing is not something that a member of the public would be able to look at this agenda item and see was going to happen. >> Ms. Brown, Ms. Brown-- >> Well based on that I withdraw my motion. >> Let's listen to Ms. Brown first and then we'll-- >> Thank you. Well, as I recall when we first suggested that the students pay 10 dollars for activity fee this was a volunteer thing and I am not sure why we--if the students or contributant is fine we ask for them to come back because we're not happy with the report. The report was not explaining how the funds were generated. Today we have an excellent report which shows everything that's been done, why are going to suggest to change what the students are giving voluntary to meet these needs. I think the students should, my opinion, they should have the right to continue with what they're doing because it is something that they really want to do. So that's my take on that. >> Okay. Ms. Wah first then Mr. Baum. [ Applause ] >> I think that any of the Trustees certainly has a right to make a proposal, to make a proposal or to ask for this item to be agendized and then for that motion then to be made at a future meeting. I would have to say I would not support it and I think that we have heard significant input from students who thought that the Board was against the Student Activity Fee and in reality they were just questions asked about how it was administered, and actually I still have questions about that. But I do agree. I think that Dean Thayer has made an excellent effort to produce the information that was asked for. I think this gives us very clear information about how things are done and I think we've had significant input from the student community about the benefits and how greatly they support it. >> Mr. Baum? >> Well I just wanna say a couple of things. First, I appreciate the report. It's a much better summary and it also includes the Student Services Fund and the Student Activity Fee and to see how those are allocated is very helpful. And in principle I support a Student Activities Fee to enhance the co-curricular programming and opportunities here at PCC. I've gotta confess I am frustrated right now because I had--I have proposed based on the last report an amendment to the policy and I had a specific language to propose an amendment to the policy. When it was agendized here I saw a revision to the procedures so what I--and that was--went a little bit toward the amendment to the policy that I had suggested but it was not as--as far as I would have gone. But what I'm hearing today is that we're not near a resolution of the procedures and so I would then support a review of the policy and to put the language in that I feel would enhance the oversight and the effectiveness of this fund by adding a simple lang--a language. Now, what our council is telling me is that I--that it's not agendized in a way that I can propose a revision to the policy. >> Not tonight. >> So, so I think that we--I was hoping we would be able to bring this to a resolution at the meeting today but clearly that's not going to be the case. >> I will say for the record my belief is that there should just be a--oversight by the administration of allocations of the fee that are just brought and reviewed and approved. That it is not a--we approve so many different allocations and expenditures for field trips, for other things as a Board but this fund is a little bit different and therefore I was going to give the administration an opportunity to review and approve allocations of over 2500 dollars but make no change to the way the fee is allocated. That was going to be my recommendation and to share with the rest of the Board. And so, what I saw is a proposed revision to the procedure that raise that limit from 2500 dollars to 10,000 dollars. We can talk whether--what that limit should or shouldn't be and if necessary I would put that into the policy. But that's where I stand as a Trustee. Because I did have some concerns about allocations. I didn't see that this fund was intended to hire staff and last year these funds were used to hire coordinator, a staff. And I think that was a misdirection of what the intention of what we thought the fund would go and there were other ways that we wanted to make sure was allocated to enhance the academic and opportunities for students at Pasadena City College. Barring that then I would not be opposed to the motion that Mr. Martin and Dr. Mann raised if that's what--where we need to take it. I understand there's difficulties at this late stage of registration in the semester to make the opt in but if--but if the minor modification that I had proposed a couple of months ago is--is not possible then I would be willing to entertain a more restrictive way of going about doing it. >> First Mr. Soto then Dr. Mann. >> Thank you President Thomson. Maybe this will alleviate some concerns that have been voiced in terms of--I know Dr. Mann has spoken to the cost of books and--and that's something that this fee for this year we maybe looking into perhaps getting some sort of rental program with Kindle or iPad so that we can have many books on one program so that students can be able to access those books at a cheaper cost than having to go and pay. So in that way we can help students and this fund can go to that. Now, as to the bigger picture of the ultimate oversight of this and the funds, funds right now--and in some place, correct me if I'm wrong, some--do not some of these things, some of these things that were funded, Dr. Thayer would come to this Board as a Consent Item at some point for some of these trips? >> There has been this past year you've seen like some--a list of funding and the Board Report for this specific item and it would state Student Service Fund as one of the funding line items. It was-- >> But a number of them didn't come through to the Board, correct? >> It was coming individually. It wasn't coming say as a slate. It was coming individually based on the funding that was allocated they would--in their Board Report identify that part of those funds are coming from the Student Service Fund. >> So just to be clear, some of these trips and a lot of this money that is over a certain amount already comes to this body to be approved in the form of a consent item? >> Yes, some of it does. >> Okay. >> So in that way there is that oversight of those funds. Second, as far as the SSF Committee we have, the Vice President for Administrative Services who looks over the college's budget overall as well as the VP for Student and Learning Services on that committee, so those are two administrations, not to mention Dean Thayer. Yes, we have four students on that board but I do believe having those other members of the administration there does help in the oversight process of these funds. As far as the opt in, I think right now students--students haven't really voiced concerns for paying these 10 dollars. We've had a very limited number of people asking for refunds and I don't--as far as an opt in I--I would not be in favor of that and I don't think many students right now would be in favor of that especially considering that as of right now, in a way we kind of have a benchmark because of the way it has been administered on how we can spend funds and a large part of that can help out as far as the Metro I-PASS road and we are in discussions about that. >> Dr. Mann? >> Okay, I'm going back to the very beginning. There's a policy here, the Student Service Fund, where did that policy come from? Is that Board policy or is that--? >> Board policy, Board-- >> It would help if you identify it then by its--its number. >> 4630. >> 4630. >> Yes. >> Okay. And that simply says that the Student Service Fund Board Director shall provide procedures for the annual allocation of funds. I mean that's--that's the basic policy. I just wanna say I agree with Mr. Baum that what we probably ought to do is look at that as a policy because the Board does not approve and mess with procedures. But I do think there's a--there is a-- >> Where I'm confused is the Board did take action to allow the imposition of a 10-dollar student fee. >> Right, but that was not a policy. >> That--and it's--for some reason it's not appearing in the policy, it appears in the procedures. So, I'd ask council's guidance too. When we took the action to establish the Student Activity Fee it was a Board action. But it didn't actually modify the policy. So I--I'm puzzled so we need some clarity and then if we were to modify that we would then focus on the policy as opposed to the procedures. >> If you're able to respond to that, go right ahead. >> Mr. Thomson I regret to say that it's difficult for me to respond and briefly here's why. This is a fee that was discussed and implemented apparently in the--roughly spring 2010 timeframe and I was not acting as your "General Counsel" on a daily or weekly basis at that time. That was before Dr. Rocha came to the college and I--I was not involved in those discussions so I don't have the institutional history. I am--I'm gonna recommend to Ms. Cooper that we get it so that we can be in a better position to answer those questions. But to the extent that with policy 4630 was or was not amended at that time I can't speak to that because I wasn't involved in it. And I regret that I don't have that history for you. >> Mr. Martin first. >> Okay. This is becoming a bit of a complicated discussion because there's several parts moving simultaneously. Mr. Baum's concern about some of the procedures, and we have this opt in out thing, and then why isn't the 10 dollars in the policy. So I'm gonna make kind of a procedural suggestion. I would appreciate without, if they don't wanna respond obviously, don't wanna put them on the spot but if Mr. Fellow and yourself would respond to the opt in opt out issue. The students have been faithfully coming out every night and sometimes like tonight, staying late. If there isn't four votes that I wish there was for opt in, I'm gonna let it go because I don't wanna keep dragging this through the discussion every time something that says Student Fund Service Fee comes on the agenda. But if there is some support for it then I would ask as suggested by Ms. Wah that that particular topic get its own agenda topic and we hit it straight on and resolve it one way or the other. And so it would be helpful to me if you and Mr. Fellow feel comfortable to respond to that or maybe you don't, to hear that and maybe let that one settle one way or the other and then from there you can pick up other potential procedural issues to the policy that seem to need-- >> First turn back to council on that one, is it appropriate for--it's not an official vote or anything of that nature but is it appropriate for us to kinda offer our thoughts as to how we might vote on something that's not before us? >> I'm sorry Mr. Martin but I don't believe that it is. Essentially what you're asking for is a straw vote and--but it's still gonna be a collection of concurrence on a matter that is not actually on the agenda and you've not had a--and I recognize that you're suggesting that it would come back for future action by the board and that can happen but I think that to ask for a--basically kind of [simultaneous talking] vote is not appropriate. >> Here's what I'll do. Under Future Agenda Items I'm gonna ask that the opt in policy be placed on the agenda and I'm gonna ask my fellow Trustees if you're against it vote "No" so that we don't have to drag the students and everybody through this discussion one more time. >> And if you're unsure or you're willing to discuss it again then obviously you're not committing that you're gonna vote "Yes" but certainly if you know you're against it vote no and I won't take offense because normally we stress this when a trustee has something to be placed on the agenda. We are very gracious about it but I'm asking you don't be nice, go ahead and vote "No" if that's the way-- [ Laughter ] >> Dr. Mann? >> I would just like to make one further comment I think about this. I don't think it's going off there. I do appreciate the students who are here but I don't consider this a significant representation of 30,000 students. I do a lot of work with foster kids, 10 dollars means a lot to some of them. And to single parents and I think there's a whole body of students who we never hear from at the board meeting. And I would just like to ask Mr. Thayer but how many students vote in the student election for the student officers? >> There is this less than 1,000 this year. >> Less than a 1,000 and so I appreciate those students, those are the students who participate in government and participate in the clubs and their activities are being funded by the other 29,000. And I have spoken with these students they don't come to board meetings because they have to work or they have kids and so I--that's why I would favor this considering, further consideration of out policy to see if we really are doing the best for all of our students. >> As I understand the request and it would be basically to have this put on the next agenda, the next board meeting's agenda and I suppose one of the options of that would--I'm sorry, yes--you speak first. >> Hi, sorry not to interrupt the discussion-- >> No please go right ahead. >> But just to talk about the opt in/opt out suggestion that's been mentioned so far. While this is definitely a small portion of the students that we do represent us and I as representative I can say that we do speak to a lot more than what you normally see on a regular basis in terms of the student activity fee. And I can say that overwhelmingly it's all positive. And so in terms of any like significant [inaudible] like an opt in or opt out procedure I think it would probably be a bit from my perspective a bit more detrimental rather than helpful to the procedure in general just as student representative because even though there are over 1,000 students that voted in this year's election and even though there is a small group of students that regularly attend Board of Trustees meetings there is a very large portion of our campus and of the students that do attend PCC who go to the events that are funded by the student activity fee who do benefit from the educational program that are funded by the student activity fee [applause]. So I personally would say that an opt in/opt out change would not really benefit the whole procedure in general. This is my opinion. >> Thank you for those very good comments. Again I think to try to bring this to a close for now there is really no action that we--I mean there are limited things we could take but I don't think I don't hear people proposing any motion right now that we can take action on. So my suggestion would be that we put this back on the agenda for the next meeting we have which I think is September the 7th of this year and at that time we word the agenda in such fashion that there can be action taken whether it be the opt in/opt out way of funding the program or other oversight considerations or whatever it might be that the people want to have the board be in a position to take action upon and we certainly welcome suggestions from the students and my thought would be that perhaps Dr. Rocha can work with the board officers to word the agenda item for the next meeting so that we can have the freedom, the flexibility, the authority to take the action that the board may wish to take. >> I will resubmit my language so that I propose for the amendment of the policy. >> Is that satisfactory? >> I obviously should appreciate that because I'm the one that wants to switch it but again in fairness for those that are here I would if the council permits like to be able to vote on whether we should put on the agenda opt in/opt out option. Are we allowed to vote that as a feature agenda item or not? I mean that's a board discretion that something that it could do. >> My concern and Mary can speak this with more authority than I but my concern would be that that's kind of a roundabout way of getting the same result that as a straw vote-- >> Well, I don't think it is. I think that that's-- >> Well, Mr. Martin and members of the board can request that item should be placed on a future agenda and it doesn't require a vote of the board for it to happen. It's an element of new business and board members do it. I agree with Mr. Thomson to ask your fellow board members to vote on whether it should be on the agenda and in the future is another way of getting a straw vote. I think as a member of the board you've requested that an item be on the agenda and the staff will work to make it happen. >> Okay. >> I have a question. >> Yes Ms. [inaudible]. >> Just going back to Trustee Baum's request. Now is this something that is we're all as members should we all agree to change that language or one person has the right to just request that. I just need to know that for my sake? >> It would be on the agenda and we'll have a discussion and the board whether to take action or not take action as the board wishes. >> For the revision of the policy? >> Correct. >> I would present it to the whole board and then the board could vote for it or against it. >> Thank you. >> What I suggest acceptable to the board as a way of concluding this issue this evening. Okay, then let's move on with that, thank you very much, Mr. [inaudible] for a good presentation, probably unexpected from your standpoint discussion but--we next move to item H on the agenda, authorization to negotiate an interim agreement with Los Angeles County Metropolitan transportation authority and Foothill transit. Dr. Rocha? >> Yes, this is enacted in some ways to-- [ Simultaneous Talking ] >> It's not the way we'll take action on this evening or defer to next meeting as well? >> I-Pass. I-Pass version 2.0-- >> It is important if we're going to have this program in effect for the fall semester that it sd be dealt with today because otherwise it will be partially into the semester. So if I can just go through what the issues are--Los Angeles County Metropolitan and Transportation Authority started out with an I Pass program which was essentially the student ID cad that had a sticker on it that allowed them to access their buses and trains. So when we began the program 3 semesters ago it started late and we got a little over a thousand students to participate thereafter we got approval earlier and as you can see the numbers, the numbers went from 15 percent the first semester to 30 percent the second semester to 32 percent for the third semester of the fulltime students. Since then MTA has changed to what they call an I-TAP program which is an institutional transportation pass, access pass and it's basically a smart card that has a chip in it. And what happens then is a student will be able to swipe it in front of a reader and it allows MTA as well as foothill transit to be able to document and track the student. It also has the advantage then that future semesters a student would just be able to pay the fee and their card will be recharged. It's important to MTA to be able to track, who's actually using it and what their patterns are. In terms of the benefits to the students it benefits more than just the students who use the I-Pass or the I-TAP Program because what it does do is it takes any number of 100 vehicles per day out of the parking lots and creates parking spaces for the students that remain, it helps in turnoff the neighbors because the students aren't circling the campus looking for parking. >> So basically it helps the people who are using public transportation and the ones who are driving their won vehicles. And of course in terms of sustainability it's a big deal to be able to reduce individual vehicle ridership. The cost for this semester would be 115,000 dollars for MTA and 30,000 dollars for Foothill transit. And of course the second we merged those 2 programs. And it really is going to be important that if we want to do it in the fall semester that we kick it in gear and probably start selling Monday or Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. >> Questions Mr. Baum? >> What are the funds for the 145,000 dollars that you're asking? >> What we have done in the past is we've split those cost 50-50 with the student activity fee and one of the proposals is that the students take over that portion of the fee and that we absorb the loss of revenue on the parking permit sale. >> I could support it if that was the package that was presented in the procedures. Is that before us? >> No, it's not before you. I think the, you know I wanna be frank, we brought up this proposal, the previous proposal because of an agreement that we made with Alex, and Scott and I met and I apologize we invited Ashley to the table but I think she was ill and wasn't able to attend the meeting. We made clear of the administration's position and that the board's position that we felt that it was time to talk about the subsidy that was coming from parking revenue or if you will students and staff and others, visitors who park to the Associated Student fee since it seemed that they were unallocated funds from the fee at least from the last year's report. I want to be frank that the students turn their proposal back they do not agree with the proposal and so this proposal though is to--what I would suggest we do we are nonetheless have a strong interest in moving forward to give the vice president the authority to enter into a contract to activate the passes because it is a vitally needed service by students and then to defer the matter of the source of funds having made clear what the administration's position is, having deferred the matter for the source of funds until obviously this meeting that we're clearly going to have clears that up. That's my suggestion. >> Are there questions or--Dr. Mann? >> Yes, I have a couple--I have a comment and then a question. I remember last year this came to us about this time and we had to act on it because we didn't have time to get it [inaudible] and we hadn't but I don't see why we have--why we didn't get more time. I don't know. Why do we get this at the last minute again? That's my question. Is it something to do with the working with the MTA or what happened? I mean we knew this contract was coming too back in June or May even. >> Several things occurred that the close out of the previous contract occurs after the semester ends and we tally up all the information to get the reports to MTA. They then have their own process for approval that they have to go through. >> Alright, that answers it. The second question I'd like to ask from Dr. Rocha for clarification for something you said. You said, "We sent this proposal to the students and they sent it back?" >> No, not this proposal. >> What did you send to the students that they sent back? >> I apologize, Trustee Mann, the previous agenda item with that shaded text. >> And they didn't--so they didn't want to pay it. >> A propose draft revision to internal Associated Student Board allocation policies that was meant to address the concerns that Trustee Baum and others very rightly brought forward. I met several times and negotiated that proposed draft revision to those procedures with Alex and with Scott and as I've said Ashley wasn't able to make it though she was invited because she was ill. The associate I am informed although I had no direct knowledge, I'm informed that the Associated Students informed us that it would reject the proposal that I had previously tentatively arrived at with Dean Thayer and Trustee Soto-- >> Excuse me and that proposal was the student service fund, fund 100 percent--I'm doing this of our metro one pass transportation program. That's what was reported to you was rejected by AS? >> Correct and so what I'm saying is what's being authorized here has nothing to do with the 50-50. >> I absolutely understand that. >> Which is a matter that we can defer for further discussion and everything to do with the need to make sure that many thousands of students who are innocent of this entire discussion have the opportunity to get their bus passes. >> Ashley wants to say something here. >> Yes, thank you, again I apologize for not being there the systemic flu can be pretty vicious but we actually have a letter that one of our representatives Hanna Israel [phonetic] who is our vice president for sustainability would like for me to read to you all is it alright if--and it's on the Metro I-Pass and specifically the allocations of funds and possible suggestion for where the source of those funds could maybe come from, if that's alright? >> Well certainly, you know it is up to President Thomson but I've seen the issue before the board has nothing to do with the allocation. It has nothing to do with the allocation. The issue for the board, I want to clarify so that we can not make this a longer meeting than it already has been. The issue for the board is whether we authorize the vice president to enter into a contract with Metro that would enable us to click in the bus passes. The source of funds is an issue and an issue yet to be resolved. [ Simultaneous Speaking ] >> Regardless of the source of funds we are saying go ahead and do it. A motion to approve it? >> Second. >> And there's a second from Dr. Fellow I believe. Any further discussion? Dr. Mann? >> Yes, I'm going to vote for this but I think we ought to really think about the implications of the students and I would hope that at the next meeting we could hear this letter and have a better understanding of their position. >> Absolutely. >> We will do that. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Baum? >> And I'm gonna vote against this not because I don't agree with the program, I think it's been a successful program but because I want to assure that we people understand we need to find, identify the source of funds to pay for this and I'm looking forward to a true partnership with the students on this. >> Other comments or questions? Ready for the vote? Advisory vote? >> Aye. >> All in favor say, aye. >> Aye. >> All opposed? >> No. >> Okay, 6 to 1 it carries. The advisory vote, voting aye. I think that brings us basically to the end of our agenda, the future meeting dates, no meeting on August the 17th, Wednesday, September 7th, there will be a regular business meeting; Saturday September the 10th at 9 o'clock AM, there's a retreat for the board and also we'll be meeting on the 21st of September I believe if I'm doing the math correctly for our second [inaudible] board meeting in September and that's gonna be at a place in the South Pasadena--South Pasadena the board of education? >> Yeah. >> Okay, other future agenda items to be discussed? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> I'd like to for future discussion to put PCC public relations in marketing on the agenda that I was appreciated the President showing of the report and there's also a policy implication that we're no longer mailing to all the folks in the district so I want to get a better sense of our comprehensive plan and outreach on PRN marketing. >> Okay, other future agenda items? Okay, then I think we are prepared to adjourn. [ Inaudible Discussions ]