Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> Let me go ahead and convene the meeting.
Call to order.
We'll just go around the room.
There's Danny.
Hi, Danny.
How are you, sir?
>> Fine. Sorry I'm late.
>> That's okay.
We're actually just beginning.
So, let's start with introductions.
>> Cindy Schaminsie [assumed spelling]
of New [inaudible] Villa.
>> Keith Everlander, [inaudible] faculty.
>> Denise Albright [assumed spelling].
The OPNS Secretary, Classified Senate President.
>> Dave Krauss, Facilities Union Rep.
>> Ruben Smith, Facilities.
>> Danny Hammond, Community Education Center.
>> Kent Yamogee [assumed spelling], Special Services
and Management Association Representative.
>> Chelsea Glover-Odom, filling
in for Andrew Bott [assumed spelling], Vice President
of the Finance Committee.
>> And Bob Miller.
Business and College Services.
Okay. Let's move to Item Number Two, approval of minutes
for the January 31st meeting.
Do I hear a motion?
>> I'll move.
>> Moved by Dave.
Second?
>> I'll second.
>> By Denise.
Discussion?
All those in favor...
>> Aye.
>> [Multiple speakers] Aye.
>> [Inaudible] aye.
Opposed? Any abstentions?
Hearing none.
Okay. Members of the public.
Do we have anybody who -- any public comment today?
Okay. Hearing none.
[Laughter] Okay, so the next item
on the agenda is a deferred maintenance plan.
And Ruben Smith, who is our Executive Director of Facilities
and Construction Management, is here today to not only talk
about deferred maintenance,
but last night Ruben did a presentation to the Board
of Trustees at a study session and to the public who was there,
and there were some members of the public there,
regarding our Centennial Master Plan and phase planning,
and some of the activities that we're engaged in, so,
Ruben thought it would make some good sense to kind
of go through that today.
And, if you'll notice, the last bullet,
it talks about deferred maintenance
and so he will discuss that when we get down to it.
So, Ruben, thank you.
>> Yes. Thank you.
>> Is that in focus?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> Is that better?
>> To me it's not [laughter].
>> How's that?
>> [Inaudible].
>> Okay. Last night, like Bob said, we talked about the --
basically, a plan for the Centennial Master Plan,
and what that planning process is going to be involved with.
And the first few slides you will see demographics
and projections, then we'll talk
about the Master Planning process, talk about consultants,
space planning, Measure P, some of the fallouts of Measure P,
and some of the needs of the district,
and then finally finishing up with deferred maintenance.
This first slide is about the population projection
for the cities within our district.
You could see with Arcadia, Pasadena, and Temple City,
that growth is roughly between six and 14%.
Next slide.
And this is basically the enrollment
to graduation projections.
You see that the lines start to bifurcate around 2030,
and that's a trend that shows more adult learners opposed
to graduating high school seniors attending
two-year institutions.
>> So, hey, one second.
Can you go back to that one for a second?
>> Yeah.
>> All right.
So that's really an important point for us to realize,
is that the baby boomer situation is coming to an end.
We are going to have less high school students graduating,
so less, if you will, seniors coming here, which is going
to begin to move us back into the area of adults
who are either coming back to get retrained or coming back
and looking for occupations and jobs and what have you.
>> Exactly.
>> So, transfer is always going to be an important part
of who -- what we're about, but we may be heading into --
will be heading into an area of where certificates and training
and retraining are important.
>> Absolutely.
These are the enrollment projections of the --
I'm sorry -- employment projections
for the surrounding cities.
You can see Pasadena is about 11% with Pomona
and Alhambra hovering around six -- between six and 8%.
Fastest growing occupations requiring two-year associate
degrees, very similar to what Bob just talked about,
is you can see that the top third is primarily health
sciences driven.
>> Go back to that for a second, please.
So, again -- now, this data comes
out in every 10 year blocks, right?
And this is taking us through 2018.
But, again, basically, what this is saying is
that these are the top jobs in California.
So, as we, as a college, look at where we are going
to be focusing as far as employment readiness
for at least this period of time and going forward,
we have to decide which ones
of those occupations within what areas.
So, Salomon Davila, as the Dean of CTE and his faculty
and others that are involved in that, they are going
to be paying particular attention not only to this data,
but to a whole lot of other data that is really going
to be informing our current technological education area
as to the direction they want to go in, which in
and of itself will then inform our facilities master planning,
whether it's this campus, other campuses, what have you.
So that's really critical information.
Yes, Ken?
>> That is a really interesting slide.
It looks like, oh, say the top portion of that.
>> Yes.
>> We have a few, actually, currently, in --
historically have been around like...
>> Right, right.
>> Registered nurses, of course, dental hygienists.
>> [Inaudible].
>> Now, so this might lead --
help in discussions about where PCC might be in the future
in terms of planning some [inaudible].
>> Exactly.
>> Although this one has to do with all of California,
not just Southern [background talking] California.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. And we don't also [Background talking] know what
other colleges are offering yet either.
>> Yeah. If you look at our Educational Master Plan
and the environmental scan documents that were prepared
for that, it does drill down into San Gabriel Valley,
into the Southern California area, and the like,
but there's a lot of commonality there.
But as we go forward into our master planning --
our precision master planning concept,
one of the things we're going to have
to do is update the EMP two years later, if you will, and --
or almost three years later now, and kind of see where we are.
>> Exactly.
>> Thank you.
[ Silence ]
>> Now this is the master planning process.
Right now this is basically focusing
on the design architect.
So right now, we have this --
the first block that you see there is Evaluate Conceptual
Design and Preliminary Alternatives.
Right now, that's basically looking at what vision
that we've kind of developed thus far.
The gathering phase, shall we call it?
And we have some great work that we've already done
with AC Martin and PBWS.
So we'll re-review that work.
See what -- you know, what came out of that and what was --
what's going to go into the very next phase, which is the RFP;
that's the Request For Proposal.
So, with the Request for Proposal, we have a couple
of options there moving forward,
and how we go about a public bid.
Basically, an open bidding process for planning architects
and engineers to submit a proposal to us
to see what we need to do moving forward.
That is actually going through the shared government's process.
That's going through and gathering more information,
so it's taking what AC Martin and PBWS has already done,
and adding to that based on, you know, the --
what input we get from the community,
from the college, from the students.
And then the next phase would be --
so we'd go through the RFP process and then we'd go
through awarding a contract.
And then there is the collaboration phase.
And then we would review that and ultimately end
up with an approval and a Facility Master Plan
about 17, 18 months from now.
If you go to the next slide,
you'll see that this is the Facility Master Plan timeline.
Right now we're at -- at the top left where it says March
of 2013, and if we were to go out to bid roughly
around April -- it's a couple of months from now--
we would look to award sometime in July.
But that -- from July,
you'll see that the collaboration will take
at least six months or more, so we're looking at February
of next year; one year from right now.
That would ultimately lead
to a budget development probably next April or May of next year,
based on whatever design we come up with, with that.
So built on the Master Plan, we will be able
to add a budget to it.
And with that budget, that's what we'd have to consider of,
you know, possibly going after another bond.
That could be 2014, that can be 2016.
It really doesn't --
really won't know right now because the EIR is another phase
that comes around in August.
And the EIR is very critical.
It's what we can do.
It takes public comment.
It takes review.
So sometimes that could be more than three to four months.
Typically, it's about three, but it just depends on what we get
from the comments said out there.
>> And EIR is an Environmental Impact Report.
>> Environmental Impact Report.
I'm sorry.
So master planning, basically, this is the vision
that we're talking about and we're talking
about developing a process.
The framework for a goal -- goals and vision integration.
Highly collaborative.
I can't say that enough because we want PCC
to be the best community college in the world.
So, you look at it, you see the user groups
and the stakeholders are at the center.
And that collaboration runs all the way around from, you know,
from the program to planning, interior and exterior,
all of your infrastructure.
That's the mechanical, electrical, the interiors.
That's the furniture design.
How we want the campus to look and feel.
Are we going to keep the green space?
So you have landscaping.
What is the construction going to be?
Is there going to be renovation and, you know, what is our site?
So, again, like I said, based on the work from AC Martin
and PBWS, this is pretty much the mission
that has been developed to guide the upgrading, modernization,
and management of the college facilities
for the next 10 years.
I have to emphasize the management of this
because we can do a lot of upgrading and modernizing based
on innovation but we still need to manage that campus.
Dave is very familiar with what maintenance management is
and we want to make sure that the spaces work as intended,
not just for that first or second year
or that warranty period, but we want to make sure
that they're going to last 30 to 40 years.
We need to maintain the facilities as we should.
So -- but from that is functional
and programming requirements
to support the Educational Master Plan.
Again, we're going to have some minor updates
with the Educational Master Plan because it's
about three years old, so we're going to come back and look
at that and basically build a program from there.
We have some seismic upgrades that we're going to consider
and assess and address those.
Sustainability; PCC has done some really wonderful things
with our sustainability efforts, so we're going
to build on those things.
We have some -- some [inaudible] successes,
but a lot of the successes that we're experiencing
with sustainability are more or less driven by efficiency.
And we still want to -- we want to be more than just efficient.
We want to think about renewables.
We want to think about being really good stewards
for the community because we are a 54-acre site, so, then,
you know, there is a larger demand with us in our community,
so what can we do to be as efficient
and as responsible as possible.
And then evaluate the alternatives
for campus growth and expansion.
Just like the first three slides
where we discussed the demographics
and what the growth opportunities are,
what can PCC do to support that?
Is it for the adult learner?
What do we need to do?
Do we have satellite campuses?
Is it going to be considered [inaudible] something
for the online?
What's the future going to need
and what are those needs going to be?
Request for Proposal.
Again, it will be an open process.
What you'll see in the next few slides are some really talented
firms that have done great work; they're accomplished.
And so you'll see some of those.
It's just a sampling.
This is not a limited to these firms
but they will definitely be invited to bid on the process.
AC Martin/PBWS, we've done work with.
HGA Architects, Engineering, Planning, who's done great work.
GKK Works, you'll see a slide for them.
ATD Architects, WLC, HMC Cambridge West is also local.
Parsons and Jacobs.
You can see here that this is some
of the work that we have here.
You have Center for the Arts, and you have the ITB Building,
and you have some work done at USC
for their master planning work.
This is HDA, it's the College of the Desert.
I've actually spoken with Steve Renew [assumed spelling],
he's the director of facilities.
They're really, really happy with their plan
at their West Valley Campus and they --
what I really thought was great is they started
with an individual and then they basically started this four
scale approach and building campus community based in --
and it started with the individual,
so that's the number one stakeholder and they looked at
and they kept that premise with the design.
GKK Works has done some really great work
in South Orange County, Saddleback, you know,
University of San Diego and Irvine, really,
they do great interiors.
They've done a library.
They have this really wonderful layout that you see
at your lower right, right here, at South Orange County.
ATD Architects, very innovative, great spaces.
Again, same with WLC who also does seats -- CSUs and UCs.
This was some work at the LRC in one
of their quads at Cerritos College.
And this is actually a Dubai site, and then this is in Texas
for Parsons, doing great work.
Jacobs is talented because they do not only master planning,
they also do some engineering.
And I think it's critical to think about some of the things
that they've done as far as central plants,
as energy efficiency, reducing cost.
So they've done a lot of work, engineering work,
outside of just master planning.
So they're a [inaudible] firm that does great work.
But like I said, infrastructure is really critical.
We can come up with a really great plan
as a district that's really wonderful, but, you know,
the intricacies of supporting that is really critical.
And I think that some of the challenges
that we have is we have to make sure that we're building
out for the future and what would that mean to us.
Is that -- that is being conscious
as responsible stewards in the community,
as well as making sure that we're doing the best
and presenting the best atmosphere.
Is that more bike racks?
Is that a bike-friendly campus?
Is that more walking to and from, you know,
the campus from home and the surrounding services,
like your dry-cleaners, you know, your store,
your convenience stores, to lunch,
and things of that nature.
So infrastructure, this is what we're looking
at to make sure we achieve utility infrastructure
and renewable energy plans.
Well, there's wind, solar, geothermal, or, you know,
fuel cells which has been talked about here before.
But that's moving towards a net zero.
We were at Cal Tech last night
and it was really great being there because Cal Tech,
you know, they basically provide 80% of their own energy.
They're generating 3.8 megawatts of power;
so that's with their solar and with their fuel cell,
and they are really -- that's, I mean, that's almost
like being off the grid.
And that's really,
really providing something [inaudible] valuable resources
community is getting
that because they're only taking in 20%.
So that's reducing the carbon footprint and ensuring
that there is a great place for our grandchildren
and our children's grandchildren.
[Background church bells] Again.
You'll see some of the same firms repeated here,
but there's also a couple of additional firms
that do space planning and interiors.
Space planning and interior design, this is --
this is about some of the challenges and the needs
that we have right now, outside of master planning,
because the Master Plan is -- of course, is a 10-year process.
Even if we had -- if all things were to go perfectly right now,
we probably wouldn't be into that until about 2016, 2017,
o we still have some needs
within this next four to five years.
This is the Jorgensen laboratory,
renovation interiors by Neiman Studios.
This is actually a LEED Platinum building.
It's a phenomenal space if you ever get a chance
to go over and see it.
They have a really wonderful conference room,
lots of natural light.
It's a really great space.
The unique thing about this one is, you know,
with a lot of our upgrades here, we've done LED lighting.
But, they looked at LED lighting
and they actually cost-valued that, and they thought, okay,
LED lighting is a huge cost and the payback is rather large.
So where they could they actually mixed
in some compact fluorescents with LED
because it was basically more efficient for them to do that.
So they did a really good job of engineering that out.
Massbuild is another local firm that does design build
and they do great interior work.
Saint Poley [assumed spelling] is actually doing an amazing
renovation on a hotel, and who does great work;
and they visited as well last night.
Measure P. Just to give you a little bit of an update
on Measure P, these are the projects
that we've actually completed with Measure P. Very successful.
About $160 million worth of work with a balance
of about 16 -- 15 to $16 million.
But with those projects you see
that we've had a parking structure,
of course, the ITB Building.
The Campus Center renovation book is -- bookstore.
We had a couple of restroom upgrades.
We definitely did some infrastructure
because we have the [inaudible] plant, and we have the Center
for the Arts that is still on schedule as far as this morning.
As far as I know we're looking at 7/1 still.
And then we have the elevator upgrades
which is in the process.
You know, as Bob could attest, waiting for an elevator here
for three to four minutes is just really not convenient,
but we are working on that.
So those are...
>> [Sneeze].
>> ...things that we see...
>> Bless you.
>> ...that have been done...
But
>> Thank you.
>>> ...but we still have instructional space
that needs to be addressed.
So this is a list of the remaining projects that we have
and the completed projects.
Now you see the completed projects that are in red,
and those are the ones I just went through.
And then the remaining projects --
well, this is basically just a general location.
We didn't actually list the exact project on those,
but those are the areas that are projects that are still left
with Measure P that are actually on a moratorium.
Please change.
The moratorium projects are basically these classroom
conversions and these restroom upgrades.
Now I think that it's wise to have these projects
on moratoriums because we have some spaces here that we have
to consider on what we're going to do next.
Now with this Master Plan we're actually talking --
you know, we're looking for this planning architect
to tell us what's the best to do.
We don't want to be too granular with our design.
We want to say, these are our issues and our needs now,
but we want to give them to you from a 30,000-foot view
and let these innovators tell us what we need to do to be
as creative as they can, but give us something that works.
And so you -- please go back.
So you have to consider the R Building, the V Building, the W,
C, and E. These are all buildings
that we really don't know what the future
of those buildings are going to be.
>> Yeah. When you say moratorium,
do you mean don't do them?
>> Don't do them.
These projects are on hold.
So the moratorium is projects are on hold.
We're not spending any more money on the Measure P outside
of what's already been encumbered and approved.
And these are those --
these projects fall within that category.
So we're just on hold.
>> And that will become clearer in a second as to why.
>> Yes?
>> Just really quickly, before I leave.
I just had a couple of questions.
When you're talking about different companies
that you're looking to bring in, were you thinking
about involving any small businesses maybe?
>> Okay. Of course.
When we're talking about the companies that we've --
have some experience with, or we've seen
that have done great work...
>> Okay.
>> ...that's just a sampling.
We're actually not going to limit this.
This open bid process means that we're going to open it to any
of the small businesses, women-owned businesses, large --
it's going to be an open process, no limits at all.
>> Okay.
>> As long as you're qualified to bid.
>> All right.
And then the other question that I did have, with re-innovating,
I guess, the campus and the campus structure,
I know you said, like, those are the projected fields
that we're going to be moving into,
sort of like the veterinarians and medical fields
that were listed originally.
Are you...
>> Well, that was actually just a list for California.
>> Okay.
>> Those are the fastest growing job-placing markets
for fastest growing jobs for California,
not specific to this area.
>> Okay. So are we thinking about building facilities,
I guess, more facilities catered towards those careers?
>> I think what we're doing is we're talking
about once the academic programs in the future is determined
from the faculty, the deans, and the others
who make these decisions,
then we will complete the Facilities Master Plans
to support that.
For example, the Educational Master Plan is informed --
informs where the Facilities Master Plan goes and informs
where the Technology Master Plan goes.
>> Okay.
>> So you start the EMP and then from there the facilities
and the technology plans are mapped out.
>> Okay.
>> And that's kind of where we are right now.
So that's why our EMP needs to be updated...
>> Okay.
>> ...so that the vision over the next 20 years, say,
is sort of mapped out.
And then we would go about the task of working
with the Facilities Master Planner
to creating facilities both on this campus
and perhaps off campus, at other sites,
that would support the Educational Master Plan
of the college.
>> Okay.
>> Okay?
>> Yes.
>> Okay, thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> You're welcome.
>> Now, the repurpose space.
These are -- basically, with Measure P and we've done a lot
of work here and you look at the Center for the Arts as being one
of the last major projects
that we're completing right now that is on schedule.
We're going to have some space
around the campus that's still --
that's actually secondary space or repurposed space
that we need to do something.
These are more like swing space areas
where we have moved a lot of the vans.
You have in the R Building; we have some
of the C Building occupied; and so you have all of these spaces
where we're having instructional space now, office space now.
All of that's going to move to the Center for the Arts.
These will be vacated spaces, but they'll still need to be --
something needs to be done.
What are we going to identify those spaces as?
So this is repurposed space, and there's about 56,000 square feet
of that space; classroom, laboratories,
instructional space, students, or sports space.
The question is, what do we do with the $15.6 million?
There's some options there.
And we, you know, we basically had a discussion
with the Board last night, is, you know,
the option could be complete the remaining Master Plan
2010 projects.
But the problem that we would have is
if we complete those projects and then knowing we're going
to have a new centennial Master Plan, we may spend five
to six million dollars on a building that we may demo,
you know, demolish totally.
That's really not a good plan.
We may consider returning the money to the taxpayers.
It's always an option.
We have the 15, 16 million left; do we return that?
Yes?
>> Do we have a deadline on when we have
to decide what we're going to do with this money?
>> Not of as yet, no.
But we are not rushing the process,
but we know there's a decision needs to be made, so --
but it's not a rushed process.
We're actually going to go through this as methodical
as we can and make, you know,
and make the proper recommendation
at the right time.
And then, of course, it is a new bond.
Now this new bond -- this is just an estimate.
It's by no means a projection saying, "Hey, look,
we're going to go out and we're going
after 300 to $350 million."
Like I said before, we won't know what that budget is
until we develop a conceptual design that supports the EMP
and what the needs are of the campus.
So that's just an estimate.
But those are -- these are some of the decisions that we made
to make; to go from the Measure P,
which is one bond, to a new bond.
We don't even know what timeframe that bond will be.
Like I said, if it's a 2014, 2016, we don't know.
But these are projects under consideration.
These are need-now projects outside
of Measure P. We have the Student Welcome Center,
a front door design; Teaching and Learning Center;
a Professional Learning Center; Online Education Center;
International Education; Math and English and Skill Center;
and the CTE Reconfiguration,
Career and Technical Education, that ITE Building.
So, these are things that are pressing needs right now.
And then we have the C Building list of projects there
that are also pressing that were -- that are under consideration.
>> And so what's important to note there is that projects
under consideration district funds.
The notion at the moment, and it's subject to change,
but at the moment, is not to use Measure P funds for this,
but to use Fund 41 which is our Capital Outlay Budget...
>> Mm-hmm.
>> ...and other district funds that might become available,
including some State options
that Ruben's about to talk about.
>> Yes.
>> And why would that be?
>> Because...
>> You can Measure P funds.
>> Well, the primary reason why, and again,
no decisions have been made, is because we don't know if it's --
it might be better from a political point of view
to return the funds to the taxpayer as a down payment
on see what a great job we did and how efficient we were
with your monies in the first bond, that we were able
to return some of that money back to you.
So, would you please consider another bond
which is considerably more than the first, because --
but we're good stewards of your money.
That would be one reason to do that.
>> Okay.
>> Another reason might be we don't want
to spend taxpayer money and let the taxpayer find
out about it -- bond money on something
that we put a million dollars in
and two years later we take the building down.
>> Yeah.
>> And somebody says, well, wait a second.
Two years ago you just put a million dollars into this
and now you're taking it down.
It's a perception thing.
>> But you wouldn't want to use your own district money to do
that either, would you?
>> I don't know what you'd want to do.
I'm just saying that -- I'm just saying that these are all things
that have to be considered.
>> Okay.
>> And that they're all under consideration right now.
These are projects, particularly the ones that are
on the left-hand side there, that are pretty urgently needed
for our academic and CTE Programs right now.
And -- so the question is, what do you do there?
And the other question is, how far do you go?
Do you basically do, you know, go in an existing space
and you don't do major renovation as far
as walls and everything?
But you do carpeting; you do paint; you do this, you do that;
and you do, you know, relatively cost-effective upgrades,
as opposed to, you know, going in and gutting the space
and starting over again.
>> Right.
>> So there are a variety of ways
that you can approach these, and as Ruben pointed out,
we have 56,000 square feet...
>> Mm-hmm.
>> ...of vacated space.
And those are good spaces that, again, with some sprucing
up could be turned into something --
could be turned into one of those places.
So there are options.
That's what a space planner would help us look at.
>> So, [inaudible].
>> I was just going to say the --
I think you kind of addressed it.
So some of these things, perhaps on the left side,
can actually be used in the...
>> Vacated areas.
>> ...vacated areas that will be coming
on when the Arts Building...
>> Yes.
>> Exactly right.
Yes.
>> I'm going to ask the first one.
Student Welcome Center, is that the Student Center
over on the west side of campus?
>> It's...
>> No.
>> No. That would actually...
>> No. What they're talking about -- there's been --
there's kind of two front doors, if you will.
One is a physical welcome space where every student comes
on campus goes and they see counselors, they see -- they...
>> Actually start with Admissions.
>> They start with Admissions.
What I'm trying to say is that right now you come on campus;
you don't kind of know where to go.
You go to the Student Center
and it's a little confusing, what have you.
>> Okay.
>> You go to a Welcome Center where anything
and everything you need to know
about how you would approach this institution is there.
Doesn't have to be a giant space, but it's a space.
So they're talking about a physical Welcome Center
and then the Student Services folks
and then there's a virtual Welcome Center concept.
We're online.
So that's what that is.
That's what that notion is.
>> Okay. So are we talking about like L Building [inaudible]?
>> Right. But it wouldn't be the whole building now, you know.
There are -- people have talked
about everybody wants the Art Gallery.
You know, when the Art Gallery --
because it's right in the middle of the campus there.
And when the new Center for the Arts opens up,
the Art Gallery moves over to the Center.
So there's a prime quote unquote prime piece of real estate
that would be a perfect, in some people's minds, small building,
perfect in some people's minds as a Welcome Center
because it's right in the middle of the campus.
And people know exactly where to go and how to get there.
So people have designs on that space.
But I've heard like four or five people having ideas
for that space, so I'm not [inaudible].
>> Highly coveted.
>> So, if these projects down the left are fairly urgent,
what's the timeline for making the decision
as to whether you're going to use Measure P money,
or District money to do these things?
>> I would say that sometime in the next year or so we would try
to make some decisions about what we would do.
As Ruben is saying here, there's a planning process.
We're not spending any money on anything until we do some plans.
>> Some planning.
>> Yes. With a planning architect and some help
with what we're doing.
>> Yeah. The last one there with the IT Building.
Isn't that a brand new building?
We're going to reconfigure an office?
>> Well, what's happened is we've collapsed the CT Office
that was over here.
We've got some division offices now.
We've got some grants activity.
So we've moved a lot of people,
including the extension operation --
or wanting to move the extension operation into this new school,
the School of a C -- the school of...
>> Career and Technical Education.
>> Yeah, Career and Technical Education/Professional
Education.
So we need more space in that --
other than what was in the existing ENT office space now --
we need more space to build out enough space to make that --
to get everybody under the same roof to do the same work.
>> Hmm.
>> But it's -- but again, it's not major though.
We're not talking about major massive work.
We're talking about taking down a wall
and put some carpeting in.
You know, doing some stuff like that.
>> Okay. Deferred maintenance: With deferred maintenance,
it's actually a five-year scheduled maintenance plan
that we're looking at.
We projected about $28.8 million dollars worth
of deferred maintenance that we're asking
for support from the state with.
And so, basically, we have a 2014 to 2018 plan.
So this -- the first plan is to do something
with the mechanical...
>> So let me step in, sir.
So the total amount of deferred maintenance is how much?
Give me the total dollar amount, roughly.
>> It's over $50 million.
>> Over 50 million.
>> Yes.
>> And over a five-year period.
Okay. And...
>> Yes.
>> Go ahead.
Thank you.
>> So we're looking at -- for support with the $20.8 million.
For the first year we're looking at trying to upgrade --
mechanical upgrades, $8.4 million.
We're looking to get a 50% match from the state based on our --
the deferred maintenance five-year program.
We are waiting to determine if we're going to get approval
on that yet, but it does look pretty good for us.
They haven't identified the funds yet, but I think that --
we have all our paperwork in, it's on time, it was done well.
And so we're looking to get $4.1 million the first year.
And then we're looking to be supplied with $3.23 million
to do some exterior repairs.
We have roofing repairs that are desperately needed.
Utility upgrades outside of the mechanical HVAC work
that we're trying to do.
And then we have the painting, carpet, and window replacement.
Window replacement is critical for energy.
We have an issue here, just
in the C Building along this west side where we're just,
you know -- energy is coming in and going right
out of the building and, you know, we --
you know, we have so many complaints about being cold.
We have so many complaints in the W building
about being either hot or cold.
That's one building right now where you have two options,
you know, for the whole building.
Either you get cool air or you get heat.
It's one or the other.
So, you know, the problem is --
what I'm looking to do is I'm trying
to eliminate the space heaters in the office.
It's extremely inefficient; they get left on; they, you know,
they're just a huge demand.
And so if we can take care of some of these energy concerns,
we, you know, we not only keep the energy in the building,
we get rid of those heaters, as well.
And that's it.
Thank you.
>> Okay [applause].
>> Thank you.
>> You passed the test [laughter].
>> If RFP is -- I think the timeline's in April of this year
which is two months...
>> Yeah. And let me -- so, the --
we're working on a process that is going
to be a very inclusive process.
So the point being is that the Facilities Standing Subcommittee
of the College Council will be a significant part of this process
and will likely even have a sub-group, a sub-body,
that will be charged with working with the Ruben
and working with the architects and what have you going forward,
to create the Facilities Master Plan.
Now the timeline that Ruben suggested
up there is just an initial timeline.
What I mean by that is that this is not a marathon.
We're not running a race here.
We're going to take our time.
We're going to do it right because the end result is going
to be a campus that is rebuilt for the next 50 years.
You think about it.
The C Building, the D Building, the E Building, the R Building,
the W Building -- none of those buildings have been essentially
touched in decades.
>> Decades.
>> Right?
>> Yes.
>> So, when you think about, you know,
creating a 21st century college...
>> College.
>> ...that has got not only the facilities,
but the infrastructure and the environmental
and energy efficiencies that are needed, we're not there.
So, if we're going to take a major bond issue to the taxpayer
for what could be between 300 -- $300 million plus, then we have
to make sure that our planning process is done well.
Now, if we can get that done in 18 months, great.
If it goes beyond that, that's okay.
>> That's okay.
>> That's absolutely okay.
So we're not going to be in a rush to complete this.
>> Yeah.
>> We're also going to be as inclusive,
not only of our internal community,
but our external community, as well.
You know, the -- you know.
If you recall how we did the EMT, we had, you know,
significant focus groups internally.
We had significant town hall meetings, externally.
We have lots and lots of participation.
>> So -- okay, so, the Facilities Master Plan can be --
that's Assured Governance Committee?
>> Yes.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. And that's the committee that is --
and come up with a plan before we go to the RFP.
>> Yeah. But what -- for -- yeah.
So the process is going to be...
>> I mean, I like what you're saying, but...
>> Yeah.
>> ...with all due respect, this all-inclusiveness --
and I'm sure governments around here isn't shared governance,
nothing is really inclusive.
So I'm glad to hear you say you're going to take your time;
you're going to get everybody's input.
So -- but I'd like to just understand how
and when people are going to get their input.
>> Yeah, so...
>> That's all.
>>> I'm just going to look at some notes here
from a meeting that we were in.
Just want to see what we have over here.
Whoops.
[ Background Sounds ]
There we go.
So...
>> [Whispered voices]
>> ...the Facilities Standing Committee would be the
primary driver.
And working with that group would be maybe a Campus
Centennial Master Plan Task Force of something which be kind
of a spin-off of that group.
They would do their work.
They would then report out to the College Council.
The College Council would then do their thing.
It would then go to the Cabinet, you know,
the President's Cabinet.
And from there it would go to the Superintendent,
President and the Board.
And then we'd be off to the races.
So, from a shared governance point of view,
Facilities Standing Committee -- they'd have a spin-off group
that would create the plan through whatever taskforce,
whatever process they come up with.
It would go to College Council.
From there, the President's Cabinet.
From the President's Cabinet to the Superintendent President
and to the community at that point, probably.
Superintendent, President and to the community.
>> Yes.
>> And then from there to the Board of Trustees.
>> Yeah.
>> So in a very, very rough way, just looking at some notes
from a meeting here, that would be probably the direction
that we would begin to hit it.
But it would be -- but again, we're sort of at, you know,
the first blush of this was Ruben's presentation
to the Board last night to say,
here's where we are right now, folks.
You know we're finishing Measure P.
>> Mm-hmm.
>> We've got 15 to $16 million left.
We have a lot of work to do.
We've got all this deferred maintenance.
We've got some of these immediate plans.
Because even in the best scenario, right,
the best scenario would be two years
from now we have a Facilities Master Plan.
>> Right.
>> 18 months to -- at least three years, right?
>> Right.
>> Two years to have a Facilities Master Plan.
Then we've got to go find money.
Then it's either 2014, 2016,
whenever all the consultants tell us is the best time go
looking for that kind of money in terms of the --
get the electorate to be responsive
to that, positively so.
>> Right.
>> So by the time the first shovel
of dirt is pitched -- five years?
Six years?
>> All right.
>> At least four to five years.
>> Four to five years.
So what happens in-between?
Well, in-between, we have these immediate needs that we can --
that we're identifying right now.
We have 56,000 square feet of space
that we've got to do something with.
>> Right.
>> The state's not going to give us any more money unless we can
show them we're efficiently using
that which we already have.
>> Right, exactly.
>> And we've got deferred maintenance.
So the idea here is that all these things are sort of put
on the table to be thought about.
Those [inaudible] Facilities Committee,
they do the in-feed thing.
We get some help in here to begin
to put our process together.
>> Yes.
>> But my point has been, of late, is that, well,
we just stop for five years.
We have to do -- because there are things that need to be done.
>> And we still need to maintain the campus.
>> We still need to maintain the campus.
Danny's right.
We got 15 million.
Should we spend it?
Should we not spend it?
We've got to save some of that for --
might be residual expenses tied
to Measure P. Every building project had contingencies
and whatever we built into it, but...
>> Right.
>> ...we could get sued somewhere down the line.
And if we don't have some money sitting in Measure P,
then it has to come out of the district pocket, you know.
The insurance doesn't cover it all.
So we're going to have leave some of that money aside anyway.
So, you know, do I personally -- don't quote me courier.
Do I think the money's going to go back to the taxpayer?
Please don't quote me, courier.
>> Okay.
>> I don't think the money's going back to the taxpayer.
But that's -- but then again,
if somebody thinks it's a really smart thing to do to try
to curry the goodwill of the electorate to -- I don't know.
That's beyond me.
But...
>> Yeah. My problem is, you know, like you say, given...
>> Oh, turn the video tape.
Don't quote me video tape.
>> [Laughter]
>> So I screwed up on there.
Oh, well.
>> You know, giving it back, I agree.
I don't think it's going to go back because even if you --
when you go out to your Master Plan and so forth and --
just like this bond here.
It took almost eight years before the design was made
for the buildings and everything else.
Like you said, W Building --
something's got to be done with it
because you either heat the building or cool the building.
That's not good for the students.
>> Yeah.
>> So, eventually, even though W Building may come down,
you might have to bite the bullet and do something with it.
>> Absolutely.
>> Absolutely.
>> You know.
And that -- I mean, you're looking
out for the students' interest,
not necessarily the building's interest.
>> And I think Ruben's comment about these west windows --
anybody who's got an office on this side...
>> [Laughter]
>>... anybody who's sat, you know, in the winter
and felt -- and froze to death...
>> It's frigid.
>> ...as the heat's racing out the window.
I mean, there really is an issue here.
You now, the east side was done.
The north side...
>> Yeah, the north and the east...
>> Yeah. But we do really need to come back here
because we're throwing money away every day.
>> Every day.
>> Not only with the heat running out
but all these space heaters going crazy.
So these are things that have to be done at some point.
>> Right.
>> I wasn't suggesting that we don't.
>> I know that.
I know that.
>> Okay. But I'm just trying to understand the whole thing
because the -- and again, maybe I just don't understand the RFP,
but to suggest -- and I know this isn't like a hard deadline.
But to suggest within two months that we're going to go
out with an RFP -- I don't know how you go
out with an RFP unless you know what you're looking for...
>> Right.
>> ...in the RFP and as far as I know, I'm pretty connected,
but -- and I'm not on that committee, but I...
>> Yeah.
>> ...don't know anything about any of the plans yet.
So I was...
>> You know...
>> That just seemed quick to me, that's all.
>> Well...
>> Meaning, maybe everything isn't in place
when you do the RFP, I don't know.
>> Go ahead.
>> Well, let's talk about the RFP
because I think there's a misconception about the RFP.
We're actually looking for the RFP to bring in a planner
to help us with the process.
>> Yeah, a match.
>> So that planner will be a --
will become a part of that Facilities Committee.
>> Right.
>> So that's what the RFP is for is we need help.
So right now we can spin our wheels and talk about it
and talk about all of our complaints, and it's more
or less a gripe session and not moving forward.
So that's what the RFP is for -- to go out, secure a consultant
to help us with the process.
>> Right. And we might even -- that group might get together
and just say, you know what?
We need to hire somebody else
to help us get ready to create the RFP.
>> Right.
>> You know.
We need to hire someone like we did with the ENP to some degree,
but not the same level at this point, of a facilitator
who can come in and say, okay, they had experience working
with a campus community of this size and type,
to bring everybody together to begin to discuss things
that needed to be discussed, and then prepare the steps.
So I think the primary purpose of the presentation last night
to the Board, and then today, and Ruben will do the same thing
with the College Council next week, is to say it's time now
for us as a campus to begin to grapple with this, not only tied
to the immediate concerns, but tied to the next 20,
30, 40 years of concerns.
>> I have a question.
>> Mm-hmm.
>> It really is a concern.
If we're talking about spending money constantly, why do we have
to have somebody else from the outside come in again?
Why do we always have to have somebody --
don't we have an ENT?
Don't we have drafters or faculty that can help us
with a new plan of some type?
I'm just asking the question.
>> Well...
>> Because you know we're always throwing money away.
>> Yeah. I think my response
to that is I'm always afraid we don't know what we don't know.
>> Mm-hmm.
>> And when you're talking about stuff of this type,
you really do need to get people with a lot of experience
and knowledge in doing this kind of thing.
So that does not mean --
for example, Coleman Griffith is the co-chair of this Committee.
Knowing Coleman, knowing his architecture program,
Coleman will have a lot to contribute in this process.
Okay?
>> Mm-hmm.
>> There may be other faculty who will have a lot
to contribute in this process,
and along the way they may be used.
But I don't know of any entity that does something of this size
and scope that just depends purely
on its own internal resources.
>> It seems like we always go out for more consultants
and more consultants and there's more money that keeps going out
and keeps going out, okay?
That's just my personal opinion, woman's intuition,
but I'm just not [inaudible].
>> Okay.
>> That's my concern.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. The other thing I want to stress out is that, you know,
when we first did the Measure P funds, you know, we had a lot
of buildings that were, you know, beautifully designed,
you know, and so forth,
but in the process somebody called valued engineering those
buildings -- I'm hoping that doesn't happen in the future,
[background talking] because you have a beautiful building,
like IT should have been a three-story building.
It became a two-story.
And then we wouldn't have had to worry about redesigning things
because you would have had enough space.
>> Yep.
>> [Inaudible] taken.
>> Yes sir.
>> Denise brings up a quick point.
Can you give us a ballpark figure
of about how much this consultant firm's going
to cost us?
>> I really don't know.
And I'm not saying that we're going to do it or not do it.
Well, no, I take that back.
We are definitely going to be hiring a master planner.
>> Okay.
>> What a Master Plan --
what would cost depends on which one is selected...
>> Yes.
>> ...but for projects of this type it could be several hundred
thousand dollars at least, usually,
for this kind of a project.
But again, you're talking about someone who is going to be --
or some firm that is going to be basically laying out the design
of this campus for decades to come.
>> For decades to come.
And doing it in-house -- I'm not saying that we're not talented
and by all means we are a great campus,
but the challenge is the amount of time
that it takes to do that in-house.
>> Yeah.
>> Mm-hmm.
>> And you do accept a certain amount of liability.
So, you know, sometimes you want to basically reap the fruits
of the labor of the innovators
who have actually seen some things that we haven't seen,
and they've experienced the ups and the downs and they know some
of the pitfalls that we don't know.
And so we might have to go through those and so, you know,
a two-year process can turn into a 10-year process.
And then we're not going out for a, you know,
a bond until 2026 otherwise.
So that's kind of the impetus of hiring professionals to do it
>> Yep.
>> On another matter.
The long-range plans -- I don't remember
if it included the U Building --
discussions about the U Building, did it?
>> Let's give him an update
on the U Building if you would, please.
>> The U Building has actually been submitted
as an A3 Category -- that is a seismic retrofit,
needs repair -- with the state.
So the Chancellor's Office is we're actually in our --
you know, the third of three phases of this process
which is going to be submitted to the Board
of Governors next month for review and approval
of a $54 million replacement project for the U Building.
>> Funded entirely by the state.
>> Funded entirely by the state.
>> Now, the good news is that we are --
the highest priority is what's known as an A1.
And that literally means if you walk
into the building it will fall on your head, all right?
And there is, I think, one project that qualifies for that.
And actually that one project was funded, I think,
by existing 12/13 dollars, or pretty much funded.
>> Oh, that's right, yeah.
>> Then there -- then the next highest priority is the
[background talking] A3, the seismic upgrade.
And I don't know what number of projects there are there,
but I get the impression there's three to five,
somewhere in that range, from the conversations that we've had
with the Chancellor's Office.
Where we stand in terms of priority there is hard to know.
But normally the two defining attributes
for priority is the age of the building --
in our case, we will rank up there pretty good
because the U Building went up in late '70s?
>> 1971.
>> 1971. So it's a relatively old building.
So that weighs well in our favor.
>> Yes.
>> And the other one has to do with...
>> Age of the campus.
>> ...age of the campus.
And that weighs well in our favor as well,
because we're approaching 30 years old.
So that's good.
So that would put us a little higher up there.
And, of course, through relationships and working
with our elected officials, and what have you,
we could do the things that we could do.
However, the biggest drawback right now is that,
at least currently, at least as of a week and a half,
two weeks ago, there was no bond money available
for any new construction for community colleges
or maybe even CSUs and UCs.
>> Mm-hmm.
>> So the Chancellor's Office,
as well as the other two higher education entities, were looking
to get some trailer legislation, or whatever they call it,
specifically into the 2013/14 budget development process
to get some bond money going.
So that -- and perhaps the good news is,
is that because the economy is moving up...
>> Mm-hmm.
>> ...that the amount
of the additional bonded indebtedness the state might
take on is looking more promising
than it might have six months or a year ago.
>> So, good.
>> So Ruben and his team have been doing great work
in the last several months in dotting all the i's,
crossing all the t's, and as he said,
there's just one little piece -- it's called a SAM...
>> The SAM.
>> ...and I'm not sure what that stands for, but it's a SAM.
>> Yeah.
>> It's a narrative piece.
>> It's a narrative piece.
>> A narrative piece that goes with the FPP,
which is called the Final Project Plan,
for the U Building.
>> Yes.
>> Now, beneath A2 they have Category B, C, D...
>> B, C, D.
>> ...through F, I think.
Right?
>> Yeah.
>> And those are just your normal construction projects.
And there's a bunch of those.
But we're ahead of those.
>> So, the U Building...
>> Is not...
>> But take it down and build a new one.
>> Yes.
>> At the same square footage and everything.
>> Actually, no.
>> No?
>> It's going to be like-for-like
with the square footage but if we were to bring the U Building
to code compliance, it wouldn't be 81,000.
It would be closer to like 65,000.
So, the like-for-like replacement puts the building
around 65,000 square feet.
>> And that's because with all the ADA requirements...
>> Yes.
>> ...that it's going to cost more.
It costs more and also, more space is needed.
>> Laboratory space, yes.
>> A laboratory -- yeah, fits in.
>> That's separate, though,
from the proposed bond way in the future of...
>> Absolutely.
Yeah that is...
>> That is in there.
>> ...independent of Measure P...
>> Okay.
>> ...or the...
>> And at the same time, you're doing FPPs on -- right?
>> Yes, I'm actually going to -- we're actually in the process
of doing four more FPPs for the replacement
of potentially the W Building or a major renovation with also,
seismic retrofits for the C Building,
the D Building, and the E Building.
>> Yeah. So the point is we're going to approach this
from every angle we can to find money from anyplace that we can
to do what we need to do to -- for the campus.
>> Absolutely.
>> So the funding for the U Building --
you're requesting 54 million to all be paid --
it's not like a matching thing with 54 million...
>> There's no match.
That is so...
>> And by the way, talk about value engineering,
the state value engineered that up.
>> Originally it was $45 million.
They actually go back to the drawing board.
But when they asked us to do was -- the original estimate --
well, primarily they focus on construction estimate.
So those are the hard costs.
So when we're looking at the hard costs,
we look at the hard costs for construction of a new building
and a hard cost for repair.
So for the structural repairs,
we were looking at about $31 million.
And in our -- our construction for a new building came in at
about 32 -- a little more than $32 million.
And when you have the age of the building come into play,
from 1971, we've exhausted the life of that building.
Why would we spend that kind of money in repair?
So we justified the new construction --
or demolition and construction.
And then, with that, you have escalation.
This project, if approved, it is actually part
of the 2015/2016 budget.
So that's where the escalation comes in ending
with the 54 million we're...
>> [Inaudible].
>> So is it an all or nothing?
I mean, you get the 54 or you don't get anything?
Or could you get -- could they say, we're going to pay for 24
and you're going to have to match it?
>> You ask a good question.
I don't know the answer to that.
I believe it's an all or nothing at the moment.
But that doesn't mean -- I don't know the answer
to that question.
But what I do know is that we're pretty high priority.
Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> We're pretty -- we're up there.
So when the money -- when there's money,
it looks like we have a good shot at -- to getting funded...
>> So there's no specific deadline as to when you're going
to get a decision either.
>> No. I wish there was.
And I was a little disappointed if two, three weeks ago,
when I last talked to Susan Yeager, who's the...
>> Yes.
>> ...administrator of that fiscal --
construction unit, what that...
>> Facilities, yes.
>> ...Facilities unit up there.
Because we talked a lot to Fred Harris who's the Assistant Vice
Chancellor and so I talked to Susan and the --
I was just trying to find out if there was any money, okay?
But she said -- basically, she said, that it's really
about getting in line for the money
because the money will eventually be there.
>> I mean, did you just say something
about if we even did get the money, it would be for 15/16?
So in other words the money wouldn't be there --
we wouldn't start doing anything until 15/16 anyway, or...
>> Yes, because that -- when we submitted the FPP,
it was for the 15/16 year.
>> Yeah.
>> So, yes, that's -- so we have time.
>> Hey, one thing that we -- but we -- what we might do, though,
we might consider demolishing the building
and converting it into a green space...
>> Green space.
>> ...because it costs money just to sit there...
>> In the interval between now and 15/16 [inaudible].
>> Yeah, yeah.
Because it costs money just to sit there.
We're still...
>> Yeah, we're running air through it and...
>> Yeah.
>> ...we're maintaining the building now, so...
>> Why would we...
>> Well, that's a...
>> One way -- we would keep the air flowing through it.
We can't just shut it down.
>> You can't just shut it down now.
>> No. And then you have -- no one's using it, thought, right?
>> And the rats don't like that though.
>> Yeah. The rats will...
>> Well, I think also you end up with more problems, right?
Asbestos is really a problem.
Is there a mold problem?
>> And bringing in fresh air.
So we...
>> It just becomes even a bigger mess.
>> All right.
Thanks.
>> All right.
So, that's a lot of information.
But we wanted to -- we're going to try share and Ruben,
thank you for all of your work and the work
of all your folks and...
>> Thank you.
You're welcome.
>> ...and everything and stay tuned for more.
So I have just a series of just brief reports that I just wanted
to bring everybody's attention.
I will start this by saying
that we're still awaiting updated numbers
from the state regarding our [background talking] '12/'13
budget numbers.
And what I mean by that is, is that the state is still working
on providing us information on what Prop 30 really means to us
and when the cash is coming to us, and how much cash is coming
to us, and exactly what our FTES target is for 12/13, etc.,
and the impact of that.
So from an enrollment management point of view, Dr. Bell,
Dr. Ariano, others are working hard
to maximize the revenue that's coming in to the district
as a result of the FTS that we generate, and they're doing
so by adding sections.
There's a -- there will be some additional online sections
coming on online, no pun intended, in the --
I believe within the next 30 days or less.
And all of that is designed to maximize the income.
At the present time, and I believe this is going
to be what we're focusing on.
We're focusing on for the two summer sessions starting --
the first one's starting May 13, give or take.
Is that the date?
>> I think so.
>> Something like that.
>> I'm not certain you have the...
>> Somewhere between 700 and 800 sections...
>> Yeah, man.
>> ...that will be added and maybe sitting --
landing right around 750 to 800, somewhere in that range.
That's definitely the target.
And by doing that, the first session, the May 13th one,
would probably come out of the gate
with around 500 sections in it.
And the idea behind that is that that's the one that most
of our existing students would take advantage of.
And then the second session would be available
to our existing students, but then we might see a population
of maybe CSU and UC students who are trying
to either get a head start, or trying to catch up on some stuff
that they might need for their --
as they work through CSU and UC.
So, the enrollment management side
of the house is working on that.
And, of course, all that's very important in order
to hit our FTES target for 12/13 to be able
to generate not only all the revenue that's due us,
but even cash for some of that growth revenue that's due us
which is roughly a million, a million and a half dollars.
>> How is that looking now in terms
of our being able to reach it?
>> Right now it's looking good,
but that summer is important now.
That summer's important.
Spring was pretty healthy and enrolled well in most areas.
So I think we're doing -- I think we're heading there.
It's -- we're getting there.
>> So summer -- oh, I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
>> For the FTES -- are we already in the new census take
or is it still the second week of classes?
>> It's still the third week.
>> Third week.
>> The third Monday.
Now, in the summer though, it's the first Monday
after the session starts.
>> Okay.
>> Which is why we can capture both summer sessions,
if you will, in the 12/13.
Now there's a danger in doing this, though,
and I have to be really honest with you,
because what you're doing is you're borrowing
from 13/14 to make 12/13.
>> I wanted to have a winter inter session.
>> It could help.
>> But...
>> Or a healthy fall[Laughter].
>> That being said, the point is, is that we are borrowing
from 13/14 to make 12/13.
But then again, you know, theoretically you can keep doing
that for every spec. But right now we want to generate
as much revenue as we can so we can deal with everything
that we've got to deal with.
But, to answer your question again, Kent, we're on target
but those summer sections are going to be important.
>> So summer two is going to be significantly less
than summer one, though.
>> Yeah. Theoretically, right now...
>> About half.
>> ...they're talking about 450 to 500.
Summer two, if you go with that seven to 800, could be --
you know, it's going to roughly 200 to 250 sections probably.
Okay. And that's -- they're still working on finalizing.
That seems to be the plan right now.
>> So there's going to be two summer sessions.
There's not going to be like two six weeks,
an eight-week and a 12-week.
It's just going to be definitely two summer...
>> Well, there's a summer term.
>> Okay.
>> And within that summer term there could be all kinds of...
>> Okay. Depending on...
>> Yeah. There could be two sixes, there could be one 12,
there could be eights,
or it could be whatever the academic side
of the house determines they want
to offer [inaudible] the deans
and the faculty, and what have you.
>> Okay.
>> But they're -- at the moment, there's a calendar
with three terms in it.
>> Okay.
>> Okay?
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. So, and I shouldn't say at the moment, because there is.
That's what the Board adopted on August 29th in 2012.
They adopted the new calendar, so that's it.
>> They adopted a calendar for this year.
They haven't adopted next year's calendar.
>> They -- yeah, okay.
>> So there is no calendar for next year.
>> Yeah.
>> Adopted by the Board.
>> It's a matter of discussion.
>> But the Board has not approved next year's calendar...
>> No.
>> ...correct?
>> It's tentative.
>> The 13/14.
>> The tentative calendar.
>> The Board, to my knowledge, on August 29th in 2012?
>> 12.
>> I guess.
The Board adopted a new way of offering academic terms
to Pasadena City College.
>> Well, they approved calendars on an annual basis.
>> Yeah.
>> So there is no approved calendar for 13/14, correct?
>> It's my understanding that the Board approved
on August 29th, 2012, a new method of doing --
of offering academic terms to Pasadena City College.
It was a fall term, a spring term, and a summer term.
That's my understanding.
>> All right.
Well.
>> I understand.
And you can -- yeah.
>> They approve a calendar every year.
They approved this year's calendar that way.
But they haven't approved next year's calendar.
>> Okay.
>> So.
>> Okay. All right.
And I respectfully -- I hear you, Dan.
I heard you coming from.
Okay. So, okay.
So moving on.
Just some quick handouts here.
I just wanted to point out that there's good news
on the state front, in terms of the amount of revenue
that the state is collecting.
Total revenues for the first month
of the calendar year were 4.3 billion above -- or 39% --
estimates found
in the Governor's proposed 13/14 state budget.
Now that is absolutely great news.
But it's a little bit --
it doesn't quite tell the accurate story
because what happened is a lot of people who did this
to beat the increase in the Federal tax rates,
so a lot of people, basically, cashed in a lot
of their investments in order to pay a lower tax rate.
So this is kind of an artificial increase to some degree.
So even though it's good news, and even though everybody agrees
that the state's economy is on the upswing,
we should not be lulled into thinking that it's
that good of a picture.
It's a very good -- it's good,
but it's not exactly what this might have implied
if you weren't a little bit educated.
This next piece --
School Services of California is a great group.
You've heard me talk about them before.
This piece talks about the trailer of the language
that provides more clarity on the Governor's proposals.
So if you were to just read this, and I'm not going
to take the time to go through it,
it will give you a very good sense of where --
what the Governor's really talking about in relation
to the Board of Governor fee waivers for students
and how that might apply.
There's a lot of discussion about putting a cap
on the number of units
that students can have before they would be asked to go --
where their registration priority might be --
might be lower at that point.
And once they hit that cap --
or they might be asked
to pay additional fees or what have you.
>> Right.
>> This talks about exclusions -- excluding remedial courses,
advance placement, do enrollment -- those types of things.
Yes, Dave.
>> On that credit cap, do you know if they're talking
like they -- somebody has 90 credits here
and they cap it at 90.
What if they go to Glendale?
They have zero.
>> That's part of the challenge that they're working
on right now through the Student Success Task Force
and legislation -- is how do you deal with the swirling?
Students who finish up 90 here, or a hundred here,
and they just go, you know, over the hill to Glendale or east
to Citrus and start all over again.
Until there's a statewide system from an MIS point of view,
or Management and Information -- their computing --
to be able to track what everybody's doing,
if it -- it's a challenge.
So, but -- that's part of what this speaks to.
This notion of shifting apprenticeship programs
and adult Ed programs from K-12, to community colleges,
from $300 million, just talks specifically,
about the apprenticeship program and what that impact might be.
>> If I can.
>> Yeah.
>> The bill's going to pay fees.
>> Well, there's a -- what was once a $900 million K-12/adult
education regional occupational program,
over the years there have been budget cuts,
has now been cut to $300 million.
The principal drivers of that are K-12.
The Governor proposed that that be shifted
to community colleges.
That community colleges, because of their workforce emphasis
and what have you, would be better suited to do
that than high schools.
The problem that the system has with it, of course,
is that you're taking a $900 million program
and you shoved it into $300 million and you're taking it
out of K-12 and saying "Okay, here community colleges,
you deal with the $600 million problem,
and you deal with this."
So you can imagine there's some concern about that.
And an element of that is this apprenticeship program.
EPA. EPA in this case does not stand
for Environmental Protection Agency.
It stands for the Educational Protection Act.
And the EPA is really what Prop 30 is -- was -- or is.
And there's something --
RDA stands for Redevelopment Agencies, and there is a --
at one point, and you've heard me say this before,
I think the state expected to collect $1.8 billion
from Redevelopment Agencies.
It's collected maybe $500 million, or $600 million,
or $800 million, or what have you.
And there's a shortfall between what the community colleges were
going to get and what they will get.
>> Hmm.
>> And so there is back to a legislation that's in place
to hold the community colleges harmless
and to provide that backfill.
And all the CBOs up and down the state are really anxious
about that because it's a significant amount of money,
and we keep being told not to worry.
The money will be there.
The trouble is the money's not going to be there until May,
June, July, August, September.
So again, it's that old cash flow issue.
>> Right.
>> And we're working our way through that.
Okay. So that's what that report is.
The other thing I'm not going to go through,
the Legislative Analyst's Office, Hard Education Proposals
in -- this is their review and their opinion
on the Governor's budget.
It's interesting reading.
And between the Department of Finance,
Legislative Analyst's Office, and the Governor's Office,
somewhere in the midst of all that lies
where this will end up.
So it's just interesting reading about that.
Now, again, because it's hard,
I'm not going to go through this.
But this little PowerPoint thing is a very, very good overview
of the Governor's budget, and what he proposed.
At our next BRAC meeting, we should be able
to provide you an update
on where the state Prop 30 numbers finally landed us
for the balance of 12/13.
We're also working on a presentation
about how we might begin to go
about our budget development process here on campus.
And then we'll just do our best to keep you informed.
I do want to give you a little update on the $10 million TRAN,
the Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note.
It's a good thing we did that because we're using that cash
to finance all the additional sections that we've been adding.
And we'll use a big chunk of that cash to finance the 700,
800 sections that we've got to pay for because, again,
the state is continuing to defer money.
So, without that cash in the bank,
we'd be having a difficult time being able to commit to all
of the things that we are committing
to and doing right now.
So that TRAN turned to be a good thing and it --
and we were one of the lower TRANS.
10 million, believe it or not, is a lower TRAN.
There are -- there's a couple of school districts who took
out 26, $27 million TRANS.
I mean, you wouldn't want to be in the K-12 business right now
with -- remember that first chart that he showed
with the shrinking enrollments?
>> Yeah.
>> That's what's killing the school districts right now,
is their enrollments are dropping, the cost of their,
you know, their personnel costs are going up,
their facilities costs are going up.
Everything's going up and the ADA is going down.
It's a really bad place to be.
>> Bob, can I ask you about that demographic that we saw...
>> Sure.
>> ...in the first slide.
That's seems to fly in the face
of the student success initiative
where the emphasis was on academic transfer
and moving the students from high school all the through.
It looks like -- will there be --
going to be doing look at more adult education,
a little bit more training.
Can we...
>> Dan, you're right.
Okay. You're absolutely right.
And, you know, the -- because the emphasis
on the student success transfer is degrees,
transfer, and certificates.
>> Yeah.
>> What that data is telling us is that the certificate part
of it, the workforce -- the adult learner part of it...
>> Yeah.
>> ...the retraining, the second life -- I mean I can foresee,
personally, when we do the Facilities Master Plan,
somebody come back and said, "Okay,
you need a satellite center over here focusing on these three
or four career areas, like a health magnet...
>> Yeah.
>> ...with a significant English language learning component tied
to it that's contextualized.
So if you're going to teach health skills, you're going
to also have to teach English language, and that's going
to be a contextualized to the health professions."
And I can see things like that as we --
as we, as we as a college focus in on the Certificate Programs
that we're going to offer,
because our demographics are changing.
We're getting more second language learners in our area.
And we're going to have to begin to plan to deal with that.
>> Absolutely.
>> On the apprenticeship program that they want to shift
from K-12 to community colleges,
where do they think the community colleges are going
to put all these people?
>> Good question.
>> Good question.
>> Yeah. I think they're all --
I think they're thinking that what they'd
like is the community colleges to partner
with the school districts and just take the administration
of those programs away from the school districts
in community colleges.
But then you have to ask yourself,
why would we want to do that?
What, you know, what -- why would we take that on?
>> And then would we be responsible
for maintenance of the buildings?
>> Maybe.
>> So, I mean, you know, there's, you know,
a lot of questions that have not -- there would be an answer to.
>> I know...
>> Pass.
>> ...Chancellor Harris is not a fan of this idea at all.
As, and I think as a [inaudible].
And by the way, I think I mentioned last time,
if you haven't had a chance to see him in action,
he's a very impressive guy.
Because he's very -- he spent the last, I think,
14 years as the Superintendent -- or the Chancellor,
I guess, of Los Rios District.
So he's got a very, very hands-on,
in-the-weeds knowledge of this stuff.
He's not someone who comes as a theoretical --
with a theoretical base.
He comes with a really practical understanding
of the business, if you will.
I was very impressed with him.
Okay. That's all I've got.
You probably heard more than enough from me for one day.
Future agenda items or --
I mentioned we're going to bring back some information
about where we are in the current fiscal --
talk about our budgeting process and other things I'm sure.
When's our next meeting, Cindy?
Do you know offhand?
>> I'm panicked now.
I'm sorry.
>> I do, I do, I do.
Says March 28th.
>> March 28th?
Okay. So March 28th is our next meeting unless you
hear otherwise.
And next -- and we'll get it on the agenda for the next time.
That was my fault.
I neglected to put that on.
>> Okay. This is March 14th was cancel -- is cancelled.
>> Okay.
>> Could we -- adjusted the schedule.
>> Or the 20th.
>> Okay, so we'll work on that.
We'll get the information out.
Is there any other item that anybody wants
to bring to the group today?
>> Not at this time.
>> Not this time.
>> Yeah. [Laughter] All right.
Do I hear a motion...
>> Do you want to go home?
>> Do I hear a motion to adjourn?
>> I got a hearing for that tonight.
>> Dave moves to adjourn.
Denise says yes.
>> Sure, why not?
>> Thank you all very much.
Appreciate it.
>> We're sure not -- why not?
Thank you.
>> I'm done, Dan.
I think we've met.
>> Yes.
[ Silence ]