Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> I'd like to call the order, the meeting of the Board
of Trustees, the Pasadena Community College District.
Meeting number 23.
And as Ms. Thompson who spells her name incorrectly
to please call the roll.
[ Laughter ]
>> Mr. Thompson.
>> I am here.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Here.
>> Ms. Brown.
>> Here.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Present.
>> Mr. Martin.
>> Here.
>> Good. Okay.
Is there anybody who wishes to address the board with respect
to closed session items?
We will be addressing government code section 54957.6,
Labor Negotiations with Dean Engeldinger.
Government Code Section 54957.6, Negotiations
with Unrepresented Employees, management association,
Mr. Engeldinger again.
Government Code Section 54957.6,
Negotiation with Unrepresented Employee, vice president
and our negotiator was Dr. Rocha.
Government Code Section 54957,
Public Employee Appointment, vice president.
And Government Code Section 54956.9(b) Conference
with Legal Accounts Regarding Anticipated Litigation,
two separate matters.
Anybody who wishes to address this on any
of the closed section items?
If not, we will be in recess to the close session.
[ Pause ]
[ Inaudible Discussion ]
>> Okay, the Board of Trustees are back in session.
There are no reportable items
from our closed session discussions.
So let's go back to the agenda.
And the first item on here is the Pledge of Allegiance.
Let's see, Dr. Sugimoto would you lead us the Pledge
of Allegiance?
>> It'd be my pleasure.
Please stand.
I pledge allegiance--
>> To the flag of the flag of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[ Noise ]
[ Inaudible Discussion ]
>> Is there any public comment on none agenda items?
By wishing to address the board on something
that is not on our agenda?
Okay. Introductions and announcements, Ms. Brown,
any introductions or announcements?
>> No.
>> Dr. Mann?
>> I don't have any introductions
but I do have an announcement.
I've been invited to serve on the site visit
for the accreditation Moore Park College on October 11
through the 14th, and have accepted this invitation,
thinking, going, and learning more
about the process will be helpful.
And because of that, I will also go to training
on the accreditation process on September the 8th
which is not a board meeting night, so neither one
of this involvement is [inaudible]
>> Okay. Mr. Baum?
>> My only announcement actually is related to my other half
that University of Southern California welcomed a new
president this week, Dr. Max Nikias.
And so I look forward to brining him to PCC
and show him all the great things that--
>> Rumor has it that, USC they also got a football coach
and football team.
Any truth of that rumor?
>> Absolutely.
>> Mr. Martin?
>> None, thank you.
>> Mr. Pack?
>> Just one introduction.
We have Ashley Jackson, Vice President
for Cultural Diversity sitting in Jamie's slot just for today
because Jamie is away for the week, and so she's joining us
for the meeting today.
>> I have no announcements or introductions, so Dr. Rocha?
>> No report, I'll save it for my formal report.
>> Okay. Anybody else have their announcement
or introduction on what to make?
Okay.
>> Now let's move to election to fill Board
of Trustees officer vacancies, discussion with possible action.
Ms. Dowell, do you have anything to comment
on with respect to this?
>> There is a vacancy in the office of president of the board
that was created by the resignation
after the last meeting of Dr. Bradbury-Huang
who not only left the board but left the office
of the president of the board.
The board needs to fill that vacancy and if in the course
of filling that vacancy, another vacancy in an office
of the board opens up.
Then the board should move
to a second action item to fill that vacancy.
Should that vacancy create another vacancy then the board
should move again.
So the board has before the potential
of three action items tonight and a minimum
of 1 on this agenda item.
I do want it to be clear
that this is not an organizational meeting
of the board.
The board's organizational meeting occurs in December
of each year and that is the only organizational meeting
that it has.
Rather the board is simply acting as it must under the code
and under its own bylaws to fill the existing vacancy
and any vacancies that are created by the domino effect.
>> Any questions of council or discussion?
Mr. Baum?
>> I'd like to move to nominate Mr. Thompson to be the President
of the Board of Trustees to fill the vacancy left
by Dr. Brad Barry ***.
>> Is there a second to that motion?
>> Second.
>> Second.
>> Any discussion, shall I leave the room and--
>> We'll put our heads down.
[ Laughter ]
>> Any, all in favor of the nomination please say "aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> All opposed?
Motion carries, thank you very much.
I am delighted to be able to serve in this position
and look forward to working with all of you
for the betterment of PCC.
So thank you.
Any other motions?
Dr. Mann?
>> President Thompson you now need to make--
somebody needs to make another motion
because you have another vacancy.
>> Okay, my hands out.
>> Dr. Mann.
>> Yes. I would like to move to nominate Mr. Baum
for Vice President of the Board.
>> Is there a second to that nomination?
>> Second.
>> Is there any other denominations?
Okay. All in favor of the nomination please say "aye."
>> Aye.
>> All opposed?
Motion carries.
We got one more domino effect here so we need
to fill the position of clerk of the board.
Dr. Mann?
>> I would like to move to nominate John Martin
for the position of clerk of the board.
>> Is there a second to that motion?
>> I'll second that.
>> Okay, then move in second, any other nominations?
Okay. All in favor of the motion to elect Mr. Martin as clerk
of the board please say "aye."
>> Aye.
>> All opposed?
Congratulations, thank you very much.
Okay.
>> I have one point, too.
I just asked the administrations customary to put
out an announcement of the new officers of the board and I hope
that that will be done to the public.
>> Just to remember our student advisory vote
as [inaudible] to the meeting.
>> I'm sorry, you're right.
I promised only to do better.
>> Now that you're a real president.
>> Yeah, right.
My apologies, I totally forgot about that so--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> You wanna report--
>> I assume you-- do you wanna approve your advisory votes?
>> [Inaudible] all retroactively cast three yes advisory votes.
[ Laughter ]
>> Thank you.
>> I will move next my chair.
>> Okay. The next item is the appointment process
for the trustee for area 5.
>> Mr. Thompson.
>> Yes.
>> I have another point on this.
It is our custom-- [inaudible] we took this up last time.
It is our custom to actually elect the secretary
of the board.
Do we do that?
We did not do that the last meeting either.
>> Our bylaws actually--
although they stay in there in one place that the president
of the college is the board secretary.
It also indicates, I think, that we elect the secretary
and we have always done that.
So as the chair or the policy part of that committee,
I'd be glad to make our policy consistent.
But I think it might be a good idea until we do
that to go ahead and elect the secretary
because we do no have the elected secretary.
>> [Inaudible] first that I made, please get advice
of council and then we can address that issue.
>> Mr. Thompson, members of the board, Dr. Rocha,
as I advised you last time, I do believe that by virtue
of the board's bylaws and the contract
that Dr. Rocha assumes the office of secretary
but there are certainly no impediment
to the board having a vote to affirm that.
And as I understand it has been your practice
in your organizational meetings to do so.
You do now have a new secretary of the board
and there will certainly--
you want in my view do any legal violence to anything by having
such an affirming vote.
>> Okay.
>> Well, I'd like to move that we elect Dr. Rocha--
Mark Rocha as Secretary of the Board.
>> Is there a second to that motion?
>> I'll second that.
>> Any discussion?
>> I just say I like the ceremonial and ritual aspect
of that so that the board makes another affirmative vote
in support of Dr. Rocha's service to the district.
So I am pleased to do that even though it is not necessarily
legally required.
>> The advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor say-- please say "aye."
>> Aye.
>> All opposed?
Motion carries.
Now let's move the appointment process for the trustee area 5,
discussion with possible actions is the vacancy created
by the resignation of Dr. Hilary Bradbury-Huang.
Dr. Rocha, as you were [inaudible] I'll have--
>> We have a presentation from general counsel.
>> Excellent.
[ Noise ]
>> May I request I little technical assistance.
I think there's one more button that has to be hit.
Members of the board, thank you.
Members of the board, President Thompson, President Rocha,
at your board meeting last--
the board reached the conclusion, thank you.
I know what I need to do, [inaudible].
Are we on?
At the board meeting last, the board concluded that rather
than calling an election that it would go
through an appointment process to appoint a trustee
to fill the vacancy left
by trustee Bradbury-Huang's departure.
At that board meeting also, the board concluded or discussed
at least that the selection process
that would follow would probably
or should probably track the recommendations
from the California Community College League.
So what I have done then is to take the language
of the community college league's paper
which is explanatory and which I believe was available
at the last board meeting, and turn it into a procedure that is
in its-- then directorate
but it's essentially the same process.
We-- Probably because of my own travel schedule I was only able
to get this to Dr. Rocha on Monday.
What I'm proposing to do tonight is that you have it
up on the screen here
and I believe copies have been made available
to members of the board.
And I wanna go through with you what I have developed.
In a couple of places, the board will need
to exercise some discretion about how the procedure is going
to work and you'll know when we've gotten to those spots
because they will be highlighted in yellow on the screen.
I have my computer here in front of me
and I will make the corrections as we go so that by the end
of our time together this evening we will have a finished
document which then I would--
which would then be before the board for an action item.
I don't know Mr. Thompson whether you have any members
of the public who wish to speak to this item.
But if there are, I would like to ask them to wait
until I made my presentation
so that they can both have an opportunity here too
and then they can make whatever suggestions or advocacy
to you that they wish.
So if there are no questions, before I begin let me begin
by explaining to you what you have before you on the screen.
Any questions from members of the board?
>> No, I think you may proceed.
>> Okay. The first paragraph here is an introductory
paragraph and it is a combination of some language
from the league and the very first sentence which is derived
from your board bylaw-- your board bylaw 1024.
I thought that it was important for this process to begin
with the board's own language as it existed in your bylaw.
The-- we will-- I have two documents I'm gonna be flipping
back and forth between them
because there I proposed some appendices that are the forms
of documents that need to be used.
And one of my appendices is appendix 6
which is the proposed schedule.
And so what we have here simply is a requirement
that the process adhere to the schedule set out in appendix 6
and then we will go through that schedule
and the board could make such changes as it may be necessary.
>> Do we have the appendix 6?
>> [Inaudible] but I've lost it.
>> This ends with appendix 5.
>> Does end with appendix 5, there should be an appendix 6.
>> I got 6.
>> You got 6?
Okay, [inaudible] 6 will be on the screen so we'll be able--
we'll have 6 to look at.
>> Although some of us-- the way we're sitting cannot see
the screen.
>> Can't see the screen?
Can you see it over this way?
>> Well, from your place you can,
but there're certain places you can't.
But that's neither here nor there.
>> Oh, here it is.
You know what is this-- and mine is in the middle.
>> Is it-- did it get--
>> Just like page 3, it's just not stapled correctly.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> Okay.
>> At the offset of this process--
the busiest office on campus will actually be the office
of the president of a college which will be charged
with the preliminary steps in beginning this process,
that the first thing that will happen is the legally required
posting of the vacancy in three places in the district.
I added the word "prominent" to make it clear
where these will be posted
in very public places throughout the district so that members
of the public can become informed
about the possibility of the vacancy.
The law also requires that a notice be published
at least once in a newspaper
of general circulation in the district.
The announcement will be in the form of appendix 1.
So I switched to appendix 1.
The text that I have included here is the text
of the proposed announcement that the league has created.
There are a couple of matters that will need to be customized.
For example the date of the first board meeting
that the trustee will serve out, the size of the district--
I didn't have that information.
But the information about the vacancy
that is included here is information
that has been recommended by the league.
I didn't do any editorializing up here.
>> So should we just-- should we read this appendix 1
since the first time--
>> Sure.
>> So we-- to make sure we're all [inaudible].
>> And I particularly want--
okay, I've put on the screen particularly the qualifications
that you should include in your announcements
so that people will understand that role of a trustee.
[ Noise ]
>> While people are reading, I'm just gonna ask the staff
when they post the announcement in three places in the district
that those three places not only be in the district
but be in trustee area 5.
>> In trustee area 5.
>> That's a little bit commonsense there but--
so I don't think we have to change anything.
>> That's a good point Mr. Martin.
With the law simply says three places in the district,
but it sends trustees
in the Pasadena area community college district are elected
by trustee area.
It makes most sense for them to be in trustee area 5.
>> And in fairness we know that trustee area 5 is comprised
of several different cities.
And so again, spread them out, right?
>> Yeah.
>> The cities that it's [inaudible].
>> And that it would be important to think about that
in the context of the newspaper journal circulation
as well, [inaudible].
>> So can we change that then?
Let me just ask, are there only three municipalities
in district 5?
I mean I know it's Temple City, South Pasadena, and San Marino.
Are there any other municipalities in that district?
>> It might be an incorporated area.
>> Well, Dr. Mann, I'm confident that we don't really need
to change any writings or I think the staff is
on top of it and they'll--
>> I can do it.
>> Okay. The only thing I was gonna suggest,
we just say at least three places rather than three.
So if there somewhere else and we just go ahead and do it.
>> And then I just wanna put on the table whether we,
it says at least one newspaper
of general circulation given the makeup of the district,
should we also direct in addition say to one paper,
should we suggest that it also be listed in papers
that serve various ethnic communities whether the
African-American community, the Asian-American community
or the Latino community as well.
I just wanted to put that out there.
>> Mr. Thompson?
>> Yes, right.
>> The English professor would like to just make a couple
of grammatical changes here.
If we say the presidential votes--
notices the vacancy to be published in newspapers,
not in any newspaper or general circulation in the district,
including those serving ethnic communities.
And then the other one can say in at least three places.
I think this would-- this would make it a much
stronger announcement.
>> We got at least three places.
We can-- What the law says is a newspaper
of general circulation.
>> Right.
>> If we change it to newspapers,
we suddenly loop in a lot of news.
There could be a lot of newspapers, so [inaudible].
>> I don't think we need to change.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So as long as we know we're going to go beyond this?
>> I just--
>> I don't know that we have to debate this topic to that level.
I think we've set it as board members
and with concurrence kind of and I'm sure the staff gets it
and I'm sure they're gonna do it.
So I don't know that we have to hit with a sledgehammer.
I think we can let it go and keep it
to whatever the law says and it will be done.
>> Well, and some of those issues--
or some of those concerns may also be addressed in section 2,
which is recruitment of candidates
and information for candidates.
>> Okay.
>> And that directs the college president
to recruit qualified candidates to apply for the vacancy
by doing all of the following
and that includes sending announcements to people
who might know, might be or know a good potential board member,
solicit names of good potential candidates
from community leaders and college organizations.
So the president's office should actively be sending information
out into the community to let potential candidates know
of the availability of the vacancy.
>> Can I just ask?
Does the president have a plan to actually do that?
>> Yeah. We're awaiting the presentation, you know,
to make sure that it was
out since there are some other decision points we have to make.
And I will be completing the operationalizing
of this tomorrow with staff.
And we'll send the proposed operation plan
to the officers tomorrow.
>> Okay.
>> Could you send the proposed operational plan
to all the board members?
>> Be happy to.
>> One of the-- Now I'm looking at appendix 2
and this includes the text of a letter, a cover letter
to be sent to any person who expresses an interest
to the president's office explaining the process
in closing the schedule and providing the information
about what needs to be provided by any person interested
in applying for the position.
>> Is Dr. Rocha to be the person to be contacted
if there are questions?
>> Yes. We've only received nine resumes.
I've instructed Mary Thompson to keep a confidential file.
We've received nine resumes and a number of recommendations,
so Mary is keeping those in a confidential file
until the deadline and we hand 'em over to [inaudible].
>> The one other item I would recommend be included is
that office of public affairs has a nice one-page fact sheet
about the district and I think that would be helpful
so that people have basic facts about the district.
>> And the other thing that we--
the league recommends and that I have included here is
that that information would also include information
about the role of being a board member.
So if people understand what in fact is the role
of a board member and how it is different from being an employee
or being community advocate for a particular point of view.
>> That's a very good idea and there is a brochure
that the league-- they sent--
when you're talking about that league provides a
preprinted brochure?
>> Yeah, look at the 4th--
>> 4th page, she's got it up.
>> Okay.
>> Okay, any questions about the letter?
Other questions you should say?
Okay. Please continue on.
>> Okay. So then we get to the information that we need to get
from the applicants and this is set out in the letter
and this would be what we are asking the applicants
to provide a letter of entrance,
to cover letter, letter of entrance.
The application form at appendix 3 which we'll look
at in a minute, a resume including all community service
and leadership because these are the kinds of qualities
that you will be looking for in making a determination
who to best serve the board,
and a questionnaire that's contained in appendix 4.
So that [inaudible] switch over here.
And appendix 3 is the application form.
This is a-- This is my version
of the form that's recommended by the league.
We would ask for name, home, address, occupation,
business contact, education information, employment history,
public, and community service.
We need to know whether we are applicants,
our employees currently employs at the district or not.
We'll talk about that in a minute but that is information
that you need to have as you're going forward.
And the other eligibility requirements and--
>> Any questions with respect to the application form?
>> Just one point of clarification.
>> Yeah.
>> As someone who's been through the ambiguity of this process,
when it says that you must be a resident and a registered voter,
is it implied that you must be a registered voter
in that district?
>> Yes.
>> Or the-- So, because right now, interest rates--
>> Because you have to be--
and the reason for that is because you have
to be resident of the district.
If you are-- or say a registered voter
in Torrance then the circumstantial evidenced would
suggest to me that you reside in Torrance.
>> Right. Should it then--
you must be a resident and registered voter in the district
as opposed to just a resident and also a registered voter?
>> It could be.
I think the requirement
that they'd be a resident is really the requirement
that we're getting at.
Certainly, we would look at somebody who appeared
to be a registered voter at Torrance.
>> Sure.
>> And say, "Wait a minute, you know, where do you live?"
And indeed, as other members of the board are aware, I--
one of the most common political challenges
that face public agencies are allegations that arise sometimes
that a person who is serving
in [inaudible] capacity doesn't really live in the area.
They don't live in the city or they don't live--
>> That's a very timely comment in today's news.
>> Okay, yeah.
It does come up a lot.
>> Should it be assumed that anybody
who submits an application
for the president is submitting it for public review?
>> Yes.
>> Yes, [inaudible].
>> Yes. This is not like an application for employment.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you for asking me
that because I intended to remind you of it.
It startles peoples sometimes and it is important for people
to understand that as people who run for office, you know,
that all of the information
that you submitted was public information when you submitted
for purposes of the ballot and campaigning
and every campaign statements and everything.
And the same is true here.
There-- This is not like somebody applying for a job.
>> Thank you.
>> Are there question with respect to the application form?
If not, let's move on then to the next.
>> I wanna pause for a moment on the questionnaire.
These are a series of questions that the league recommends
that applicants for the position respond
to in filing their application.
And I want the board members to have an opportunity to look
at them if you have concerns about any of them,
questions about any of them,
if there's something else you wanna ask on the questionnaire.
This would be the time to have that conversation.
[ Noise ]
>> Is there a minimum number of letters of reference
or that's just up to the applicant?
>> No, that's up to the applicant.
>> Other questions of [inaudible].
>> I did accept the league's recommendation
that the maximum amount of material that be submitted
as 10 pages because otherwise it gets to be a lot to go through.
>> Thank you.
>> Right.
>> So that's the reason for that.
>> Okay, let's--
>> And I would suggest we put a number of letters of reference.
>> Oh, but you said the maximum amount of material--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Try to keep it down to a manageable amount of--
>> Yeah, could we go back for a minute to this thing
about being a registered voter?
>> Sure.
>> You know, when you filed or run for an office,
you go down to the registrar's office
where you file, and then they check.
Someone down there checks to see if you're a registered voter.
What happens if a person says they are registered voter,
we select them and then come to find
out they aren't a registered voter?
>> Is there any way we can ask the registrar
to check their status rather than ask, you know,
Mrs. Thompson or the president to check their status?
>> I think that's probably a question
that the president's office should post
to the registrar's office.
>> Okay.
>> In a minute, I wanna talk
about the initial screening process
and I think this germane to that.
But I believe that we need to find
out from the registrar's office if they're willing to assist us
in that and I assume that they would be
because it is a condition of holding the office.
>> Okay.
>> It's-- It's a minimum condition.
>> Right, because I think the point that no one brought
out is really very--
particularly if you're a student.
A lot of students might live in the district
but they might still be registered,
you know, in Minnesota.
>> Right.
>> And they are registered voter, so I--
>> And where you registered is an indicia of residency.
It's not an instrument-- I mean it's not an irrebuttable indicia
but it's pretty strong.
If you're not registered to vote where you would say you live,
there's a very strong assumption that you [inaudible].
>> Okay, that will bring up later then, okay?
>> Maybe the simplest thing is just to change the wording
of the application, say must be a resident
and registered voter in the district.
>> Right.
>> I think that one make it much clearer.
>> Agreed.
>> Other questions with respect to the questionnaire?
Okay, please continue.
>> Sorry, one thing on the questionnaire.
I don't know how final the draft this is, but the fourth one
down described by the community involvement,
that just strikes me as something
that shouldn't have a question mark at the end.
>> Pardon me.
>> Yes.
>> What did he say?
>> On the fourth one it should be a period 'cause it says
"describe" and there's a question mark there.
>> Oh, okay.
>> Sorry about that.
>> It's okay.
It's okay.
>> No, this is--
>> Good reading.
>> This is-- this is what this-- This is an opportunity to do.
Thank you, okay.
Now--
>> And I would--
>> Here is-- This is gonna go to I think
to Dr. Mann's most recent question.
The applications will then be reviewed
by the college president or his designee to determine
which applicants meet the legal requirements
for membership on the board.
And I included here what the legal requirements
for membership on the board are so that anybody--
in case there are any questions, first candidates must be
and this come from the education code.
So that's why I decided Education Code Section 72103.
Candidates must be at least 18 years old.
They must be citizens of the United States
and of the state of California.
And that goes to the person who is a resident of Minnesota.
That person is not a citizen of California.
They must be residents of trustee area 5
and we're gonna be verifying addresses.
In part because-- and I suspect this may be one
of the most significant screens
that the president's office will have to do
because it's entirely possible that you will have very earnest,
sincere candidates who don't necessarily know what the
boundary areas of trustee area 5 or don't know--
or miss the fact that they have to live in trustee area 5
and that is a requirement for this.
They must not be disqualified from holding office
by any provision of the constitution
or laws of California.
>> This doesn't say they have to be a registered voter.
>> But we could still make that a--
>> I can add that, which is-- yeah-- no.
>> But it's not in here.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> She's right, it's not in here.
>> Yes, it needs to be added.
>> We can add it.
Not a problem.
[ Noise ]
>> Of the district, yeah.
>> Of the trustee area of the district.
>> Yeah. The trustee area, you must be a registered voter
in trustee area 5 probably I should say.
>> One issue we have to decide is how we wanna have
this reviewed.
>> That's coming.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Yes, okay.
>> On the second bullet point, you're only--
states don't have citizens.
You're a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the state of California.
>> I think that's an awful wording, too, Mr. Baum, I agree.
That's how it's in the code,
so that's why I picked it up that way.
>> Oh, that's interesting, okay.
And now Texas would like to have its own citizenship.
>> Yeah, I'm sure they do.
They do. I believe it is the legislature's way
of saying you must be a resident of California.
>> And is this the same on bullet 4,
provision of the constitution or law of California
or that seemed awkward like the law of California.
>> Well, what that it goes to as whether you have
for any reason been disenfranchised
under the constitution or the laws of California.
>> Okay, it should be laws of California or law of California?
>> It can be laws if you like.
Again, the code says law.
>> Oh, it does?
So this match is exact--
[ Simultaneous Talking]
>> Okay.
>> But I'm not--
>> Now, if it matches the code.
>> If it matches the code as you--
>> Now, the last-- the last--
>> Other questions?
>> I'm sorry.
I want-- put up the last--
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> -- the last bullet point to you.
And I did expand this one
or I rewrote the statute here a little bit
because I wanted people to be sure to understand it.
Counties who are sworn--
or current district employees must resign before being sworn
into office.
If the employee does not resign,
the employment will automatically terminate
when the person is sworn into office.
So far so good, okay?
Everybody understands that one.
What follows is what I tried to recast into more plain English.
The only exception is
for a person whose usual occupation is other
than teaching and who is currently teaching no more
than one course in the subject matter of his or her occupation,
such a person may complete that course
but no future employment will be possible.
>> It's for an adjunct faculty member.
>> Right. If you have an adjunct faculty member who runs for
or seeks appointment to the board and is appointed
to the board and it's the middle of the semester,
the legislature has concluded they can finish the course
so that the students are not damaged
by the loss of their professor.
But once that employment is over,
any new employment is a new contract of employment.
And as members of the board know, there can be no contract
between the district and a board member.
Okay. I wanted to be very clear to members of the board,
members of the public.
That screening that will be done
by the president's office is proposed only to screen
for these basic legal requirements.
The president's office is not going to be screening
for good candidates or not good candidates.
Not qualitative screening and it is not going
to be serving the discretion of the board
in that respect at all.
It's only going to be widowing out anyone who has applied
who could not as a matter of lobby point.
>> They're just making certain they meet the
legal requirements--
>> Correct.
>> -- for holding the office.
>> Correct.
Then we get to the criteria and this is
where the board will come in and this is--
this is the first substantive decision
that will be before the board.
Applicants who have met the legal requirement will then,
their applications will then be reviewed and you have a choice.
You can either appoint an Ad Hoc Committee of the board to go
through this what would really be the initial qualitative
screening, the second screening to determine
which candidate should be forwarded to the board
to make a public presentation.
Or the board sitting as a Committee
of the Whole could do it.
The league doesn't recommend any particular choice to you
and as a practical matter, neither do I.
There are pros and cons to proceeding in either fashion.
The Committee of the Whole may be more efficient--
I mean Ad Hoc Committee may be more efficient.
It may be easier to coordinate the schedules of three members
of the board than six members of the board.
But it would mean that not all six members
of the board would be seeing every application,
whereas if you operate as a Committee of the Whole,
all six members will see every application.
>> One question for you.
Would the Ad Hoc Committee be governed by the Brown Act
and be public meetings?
>> No.
>> Okay.
>> That's if we only put three people.
But if we put four people on they would--
>> If you put-- If you make it a committee of a quorum
of the board, then it would, yes.
But as you can see, I've got three little blanks
for three little trustee names.
>> Right.
>> And so it would be an Ad Hoc Committee of less than a quorum
of the board which under the Brown Act is not required
to comply with Brown Act.
>> Mr. Baum?
>> So in the interest of transparency, I would recommend
that we review the applications during a board meeting
as a Committee of the Whole.
>> I think if you're going to do that, I think you're gonna--
kinda have some special meeting, I think.
We will be-- Let's assume, if we already have nine applications
or nine people [inaudible].
So let's assume we get 15 or 20 total
and they all meet the legal requirements,
I think we're probably not gonna be able to do
that on regular board meeting.
But we're gonna decide that as we go down the road
but that's a one factor.
Other questions or comments or?
Dr. Mann?
>> Well, I would-- you know, as an alternative,
we could have an Ad Hoc Committee
and we could still have open meetings.
Could we not?
Nothing says an Ad Hoc Committee cannot have an open meeting?
>> That's true.
>> And the other board members could attend if they wanted to?
>> Yes.
>> Right.
>> That they could do that, but then you wouldn't have
to schedule the whole--
>> Yeah.
>> You wouldn't have to schedule the whole board.
>> Right.
>> Pack, any comments or thoughts?
John Martin?
>> Well, you don't have to make this decision right now
but you'll need to make it before you adopt these
procedures tonight.
So we could come back to it once--
from a parliamentary standpoint, we can come back to this
when there's a motion on the floor.
>> I have a question that I think I'd like to add
to the questionnaire if we can retro.
I would like to ask all the candidates
if they're interested-- if their current plans include running
for the position again when the seat is open,
when it's an elected position.
And the reason I'd like to add that question
to the questionnaire is 'cause at the moment I can foresee
and then-- well, maybe I'd better not say why 'cause
that would tip the hat, so.
>> Well, we can certainly ask
that question in a public meeting.
>> You can ask that question in a public meeting.
It's probably information that members
of the public would be interested in having.
May I explain to you what my initial concern is about putting
in the questionnaire particularly
as you're screening through.
The members of the public have a right to--
have constitutional right.
They're recognized constitutional right to elect
such candidates as they choose.
And it is-- I think problematic if you ask someone
to make them to state--
>> Exactly.
>> -- that they're going to be a candidate or not be a candidate
or promise not to be a candidate for something.
At least in the initial screening I just have a
visceral concern.
>> Okay, I can withdraw, okay.
>> Okay.
>> Please proceed then Mary.
>> Okay.
>> One question I do have on that.
Do you have to publish the interview questions before
the interviews?
>> The recommendation from the league is that you do so.
And so when we get to the end of your questions,
we'll talk about that.
The final--
>> So now I'm back on your question.
And the only advantage I can see
to a smaller committee is I'm thinking of the people
that have submitted these applications and it seems
like the more public it is, you're making it difficult
to talk about different characteristics
of different people.
You know, I think I'd be a little more-- I'm trying not to.
I don't wanna embarrassed somebody.
So by saying this or that about somebody based
on the resumes would there create a discomfort,
or maybe works better the way?
I'm just trying to think through that as opposed to, you know,
generally personal issues are-- just try to show a great deal
of respect for the individuals.
>> Again, it's important to remember,
this is not a personal decision.
>> It's not a personal decision.
>> No.
>> It's not a personal decision
but there's obviously personal involved here.
So, okay, well--
>> I think I've been through this experience
on the city council here in Pasadena and--
>> Okay, so what's your wisdom?
>> We actually put the final two candidates
through public presentation, asking questions
and gave him kind of scenario to addressed and provide answers
to and things like that.
So, my feeling and my experience certainly is
that if you're willing to apply for public office,
then you're open to the public and you gotta be ready
to answer whatever questions you could ask, so.
>> Okay.
>> But-- I'm sorry go ahead.
>> That's a good lead into the next part.
Once-- And the board will need to decide later on this evening
if not now, when you have this before you as proper motion,
whether you're going to have a screening done
by an Ad Hoc Committee, if it's gonna be a committee
that discomposed of a quorum or if you gonna sit
as Committee of the Whole.
But the selection of the final candidate will include
consideration and when I say the selection of final candidate
to be reviewed that is to be forwarded clearly
to the entire board for final action.
She'll include consideration following criteria.
And again, these are criteria recommended by the league.
I've not exercise any editorial
or political discretion over this.
But these are the kind of qualities
that the league-recommendations suggest
that the board members screen the candidates for.
>> Which bullet point are you on?
>> I'm on the bullet points generally that appear on page 4.
>> Under item 5?
>> Page 4.
>> Okay. Quick question for verification.
Just procedurally, when we write the selection
of final candidates for review here
by the board shall include the following criteria is
that to say these are the only criteria that we're looking out
or should we say like at minimum will include this criteria?
>> Well, that's an interesting linguistic question.
Should we say, she'll include but not be limited to.
It's a lot of qualities.
>> Yeah.
>> Lot of qualities.
>> I just worry, if something were to fall outside
of this realm we-- I don't know
that it would limit us necessarily.
>> If they're so well inclusive, it's hard for me to understand
and to see anything that might fall outside of them
but even someone with stellar qualities that fall outside,
what is represented here.
What the board needs to decide is do you agree
that these are qualities that you want to be screened for.
>> Yeah, the wording here would not exclude considering other
criteria, shall include--
>> It doesn't exclude nontraditional persons,
but it does emphasize the need for any person who wants to fill
such an important public role to demonstrate top qualities.
>> Thompson?
>> Yes.
>> I have almost the other concern.
If you look at all these qualities
and they were limiting the people to 10 patients including
to three letters of recommendation,
I think it's gonna be difficult for any candidate
to demonstrate all these that they meet all this criteria
which I assume is what a person will do
in our letter unless they have really strong writing skills
and they've [inaudible].
So that's the underlying-- I mean that-- these are--
there're an awful lot of things.
Although I know this is based on best practice,
it's still an awful lot.
>> There's no question that it's a public service wish list.
>> Certainly is.
>> But as I look at it, there wasn't anything that I felt--
>> It could come out.
>> I would want to take off.
>> I don't mean, this is gonna be a pub--
well, maybe not a public process
but it certainly gonna be an oral process, a verbal process.
And so people can addressed issues,
I supposed during the screening interviews that they fill
that they haven't had a chance, adequately explain
in the 10 pages they give, but John raises a very good point.
I mean, it's not--
>> Well.
>> But I would hate to double the number of pages
because then we're just gonna--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> No, no.
>> Add more and more to this.
>> That sort of leads then to the next point
where you see the yellow highlighting here.
Whether you appointed an Ad Hoc Committee or Committee
of the Whole, the board will have--
received recommendations from that committee,
the Ad Hoc Committee or Committee of the Whole.
They will go to the board itself to consider
and the board may wish to establish a minimum
or maximum number of candidates that will be forwarded to it.
If you wined up with 25 candidates,
who meet the minimum legal requirements,
then the committee will review those 25 candidates.
Does the board want all 25 candidates
to come before itself?
>> No.
>> If not, do-- would the board prefer to have minimum number?
That's hard to establish
when you don't know how many applicants you're gonna get.
Do you wanna establish a maximum number?
I had an experience-- I mean, like Mr. Thompson and Dr. Rocha,
I have gone through this too, and I remember a board one time
that really couldn't reach agreement
on how many we're gonna come forward
and they interviewed everybody.
It took three full days.
The board members having to give up their entire time to go
through the interviews.
>> They interviewed something
like 50 people and it burns you out.
But it's at the discretion of the board.
You could-- I mean I'll throw out a number
that I think is manageable but you can go upper down from it.
That would be nine.
>> Nine?
>> Nine, which would be bad as many
as you could probably listen to and keep straight in your head.
But you can have a lower number.
You could have a higher number.
>> Geoff?
>> I just think to give us maximum flexibility
and I think we can talk about this
when the committee recommends, or we talk about the Committee
of the Whole but I would just say
at least two candidates shall be forwarded
by the committee, the entire board--
>> I mean, that's the way to do it.
Say at least two and the committee itself could recommend
10 or 15 or 20.
>> Right. And they will trust the committee.
We'll select the number that is a manageable number.
>> Or at least two days, three, something like that.
>> Why we just say two?
>> Okay, at least two and that gives us the maximum--
>> I think if we require ourselves just like nine,
it's gonna be a long process.
>> Right.
>> Other questions or comments on this?
>> Well--
[ Noise ]
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Yeah, again, I would say two, I didn't say two to three.
>> Oh, two to three?
>> Okay, well--
>> That's my point of it.
>> I kinda like three, myself.
>> You know, right, right.
>> Why didn't you say at least three?
>> Three is good.
>> That's the same.
>> Okay.
>> Okay.
>> Okay?
>> Okay.
>> Continuing on.
>> Alright.
>> That it's true, that's a good point.
>> So then we require-- then we would require that each member
of the board would receive and review the applications
and background information of those three
or more final candidates recommended by the committee.
Now, I included the next because it was part
of the league recommendation.
Frankly, I'm not sure you need to have this step.
It may be more disruptive to the flow
of the process than anything else.
But they recommended a that a public meeting,
the board would meet
to determine whether they interview all the eligible
candidates that the committee had already screened
to interview all of the candidates recommended
by the committee or to interview even fewer than the number
of candidates recommended by the committee.
>> Well, I think if you gonna have a committee.
I mean, I think we should interview people
that they recommend.
>> Yeah, I would cut that whole paragraph.
Just trust the committee so we--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> We just do the second bullet point,
just interview all the candidates recommended
by the committee.
>> Well that point, you don't even need to say?
>> You don't need it if that's what you're going to do
and if you ultimately conclude to act
as Committee of the Whole--
>> Doesn't matter anyway?
>> -- then you will be doing politics.
>> Okay.
>> I'm gonna take out the next paragraph
because it [inaudible].
>> The next paragraph goes also.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
>> So then we get to the interviews
of the final candidates, which will occur in a public meeting
of the board and the board can, if it chooses,
sit as a Committee of the Whole to conduct those--
to conduct those interviews or it gets it as a board.
Entirely up to you.
It's really a parliamentary distinction,
sometimes in my experience towards-- feel a little--
the discussion that within a Committee
of the Whole is a little more free willing
because no action clearly is going to occur
because it is a committee.
But it's not required.
So I gave that to you as an option.
Candidates shall be interviewed.
We're gonna set an order.
We could do them in alphabetical order, we could do them
in an order to be determined by lot and-- but we need--
the candidates need to know how that's going to happen.
I would recommend that you do it by lot so that it's truly random
and no one has an advantage.
>> I agree with that.
>> Yeah.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> And someone whose maiden name was Williams,
I would definitely agree with that.
[ Laughter ]
>> And then the administration seems
to have had have a good methodology
for determining random orders of things.
I think Crystal's-- can help us with that or the president.
>> Okay. So we're doing out by lot, is that--
>> Yeah, let's do it by lot.
>> -- consensus, okay.
>> That's pretty easy.
>> Now the next-- the next thing for the board members to decide,
what I'm recommending to you and it's right here.
I should have highlighted it.
Is that the candidates be limited to--
in their presentations to three minutes.
And then that members of the board ask questions
of the candidate and that they be limited in their responds
to your questions to one minute.
That's still going to be
at least 10 minutes per presentation, or about a half
that is because there're only six board members.
One thing that the board should consider given your time
constraints, do you wanna limit each board member
to one question, wanna permit board members to ask--
each ask more than one question?
These are at your discretion.
>> One thing I'd like to ask the administration,
one of the things we've asked about is maybe this will
at least prompt us to get a programmable timer
since that time we're only-- translates to five minutes
and it would be good to have something that--
like a visible timer for the folks to do.
>> Is this something we have to decide this evening as to--
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Mr. Thompson, I would suggest that we--
that we limit that we say they can make a presentation
of five minutes.
I think 10 minutes is not really much time.
This is a very important decision.
Five minutes is not that long and then I'm not in favor
of limiting the time they have to answer the question
or either the number of questions.
If it takes 15 or 20 minutes, that's fine with me.
This is a very important decision that we're making
and if we have three-- we have three candidates each one takes
20 minutes, it's an hour.
I mean, if we have five candidates
and each one takes 20 minutes, well,
it's an hour and forty minutes.
I don't think that much time to invest in selecting someone
to represent that district.
So, I based these short time limits rather enough.
We're gonna interview 50 but--
>> Or even 10.
>> Or even-- okay.
So we interview ten and each one takes ten minutes.
>> Yeah.
>> What I'm getting at, Trustee Mann, with the number
of questions to be post by each trustee,
is really essentially how many--
how many sequences you're gonna go through because I'm assuming
that each board member will wish to post the same number
of questions as every other board member.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> And then you have the whole point of followup questions.
I mean sometimes someone says something and you don't--
I mean, I've gone through thousands of interviews
and you don't understand it, can you then ask for clarification?
>> In my view, the answer to that question is yes.
[ Laughter ]
>> And so then you're going down another track.
>> Precisely because this is not an employment interview.
>> It's not an employment.
We don't have to ask everyone the same questions limited
to the same amount of time.
>> Ms. Brown?
>> Well I think we should allow each board member a question.
And really focus question
because sometimes we can take 10 minutes just posing
the question.
So we may want to be conscientious of the time
after the person gave their presentation maybe each one
of us should have maybe 3 minutes with the individuals
so we all could get an opportunity.
That would be my take in that.
>> Mr. Martin?
>> I would suggest scratching the last sentence all together
question shall be drawn from the list each board member last two
sentences post one question.
My experience with this board in the superintendent search,
we work very hard to coordinate together.
I think we all have a mutual respect
for what we're trying to do.
If any given candidate says something, I think any member
of the board ought to be able to respond to it.
I think in general, the list of--
you know, we've got a good list of questions
that probably identify for us in the back, their intentions
and goals, and if they'll be a good trustee.
But if something comes up that isn't on list 5,
I don't think we should be limited and can't raise it
because it's not on 5.
I think we're trying to over prescribe in that whole--
in those two sections, so--
>> Well this-- the appendix 5 which I've put up part out here
so that you can see it, goes to the question
that Trustee Baum asked a few minuets ago whether the
questions that would be posed in the interview would be published
and provided to the candidates ahead
of time so they can prepare.
And that is the reason behind the least recommendation
that these questions be provided to the candidates ahead of time
so that they do have a fair opportunity to prepare.
>> In my view, as I've said it is not an employment interview
and the board members should certainly not be constrained
with followup questions that maybe suggested by the responses
that you get from the candidates.
I truly-- I'm comfortable with that.
But I also understand the reason
for publishing the base questions
at least that will be asked.
>> Yeah, my comments really had nothing to do
with appendix 5 other than to compliment them
for being a good base of questions
that I would forward to the candidates.
>> I do want to invite the board members to add to this list.
If you look at it and you see something
that you know you're gonna want
to ask people and you don't see it.
>> But I just don't want my hands tied
that if it's not on 5 I can't ask it.
>> Definitely.
>> When we get there that night and something comes up,
I think we have to have the freedom
to be able to ask that question.
>> I would imagine that the most likely situation
which that will occur would be a followup question.
>> In a followup question, right.
>> It's-- I guess I'm not--
Although these strike me as being far too many questions.
But if we want to--
>> Again, these are the ones that the league had suggested.
There's not-- And I don't--
One of the things I would not recommend, Mr. Martin,
is that each board member has to pick a question
and that's the only question they get to ask and they have
to ask that of every candidate.
I think that after you heard the candidate's presentations,
any member of the board should--
if they feel the question has been answered
by the presentation then be able to ask any of the questions
that the candidates knew were likely to come.
And you might ask a 3rd question of one candidate
and the 6th question of another candidate, because they know
to be prepared for all of them.
>> So what-- as I understand, if we have these, we don't have
to ask these questions and the candidates will have seen these
questions and they might address much of this
in their presentation if they can get their
thoughts organized.
>> Yeah.
>> So then depending on what one candidate says,
we may ask a question that's not on here but it's appropriate
as a followup from their-- from something that they have said.
>> Yes.
>> So there's a lot more flexibility here
than in an employment, right?
>> Let's make some changes here.
So that everybody will know what the rules are.
>> Right.
>> Questions maybe drawn from the list on Appendix 5.
>> Right.
>> Or may arise from the presentations.
>> From the presentation, right.
>> Made by each candidate.
And then they know what to expect may occur.
>> Right. And then takeoff each board member may post
one question.
>> Or the last sentence.
>> But I do wanna clarify something that I--
my expectations is for the chair and to speak
to Ms. Brown's point is that I think every and I don't--
every Board Member should be afforded the opportunity
to ask a question.
>> Certainly.
>> And I don't want that limited by, okay, the 10 minutes is up,
too bad Ms. Brown, we don't have time for you
to actually ask a question.
So how do we ensure that flexibility?
>> I don't think we should be a time limit
on the time for each person.
I mean, we can maybe say approximately 10 minutes
or something like that, but I think your point is well taken
that if there's an interesting discussion going
on that's relevant to the decision
and some board members not a chance to ask their question,
they should not be prevented from doing it.
>> I do wanna recommend that you keep a time limit
on the presentations.
>> Oh, yeah, right that part.
>> On the presentation.
>> Yes, I agree.
I'd say no more than 5 minutes.
>> But not on the answers to the question.
I think that's what his referring, right?
>> Okay.
>> But it will be manage in such a way
that we don't spend 5 minutes with one presentation
and 30 minutes with [inaudible].
>> No, I think the presentations we should put no more
than a 5-minute limit on the presentation.
The question part of it may go on for five--
or may go on for 10 or whatever but--
>> Mary, excuse me.
When you say the presentation, are you--
am I understanding correct the candidate
for presentation and questioning?
>> No, just the presentation.
>> Okay, okay.
>> They'll stand here at the podium like I am doing
and they'll make a presentation.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, make the presentation.
>> Yeah.
>> And then when they're done, you will ask them questions.
>> So it's okay to keep them as long as you need
up there, that's my question.
>> Yeah, that's-- I'm sensing that's what the board wants
to do.
>> We can say the offset that the aim is
to have each candidate take approximately 10 minutes
or 15 whatever number we come up with, but make it clear
that we're not necessarily gonna be limited by that number.
But the presentation, yes, we'll have the lights going
on over there and when the red light--
>> Maybe we could add-- Maybe we could add at this point change--
>> That should be changed to 5.
>> Interview-- should be ex-- no, that's [inaudible].
>> Expected to last 15 minutes.
>> That's what I was gonna say.
Do you think that's [inaudible] expected to ask approximate.
>> Yeah, 15 minutes.
>> 15 minutes.
That would be 5 minutes for presentation,
10 minutes for questions.
>> Right.
>> Right.
>> But that's approximately.
>> Yeah, that's what she's says.
>> Yeah, I know she's got it.
>> Great.
>> Then it's 5 minutes break.
>> And change the 3 to 5.
[ Noise ]
>> You wanna make that 5?
>> Yes.
>> Yes, right.
>> Okay.
>> Now we got a 5 minute timer, I mean--
>> That's right.
>> Well, we're getting a new timer.
I think Dr. van Pelt is gonna arrange for that.
>> We won't have to have them.
We're all set to go.
>> But my question is do we wanna limit the length
of responses?
>> No.
>> No.
>> Yeah.
>> For the chair, we'll have a big responsibility.
>> The chair will make sure that everyone gets to ask a question.
I don't think we need to put that in our process.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> That will happen.
We'll also [inaudible] the brevity is--
will be appreciated.
>> Yeah. It's a quality to get merit.
And then we've reached the voting on the final candidate.
The probational appointment must be made by a majority
of public vote of the board members at a public meeting
that each trustee's vote is to be a matter of public record,
no secret ballots are allowed.
And I realized that this becomes a little bit
of a challenge just operationally
if you have several candidates.
And what I have seen done--
I don't know what Mr. Thompson experienced
with the city council was.
But what I have seen done is--
and what I've discussed with Dr. Rocha is
that board members will be issue paper ballots
that contained the names of the candidates.
And you-- But they will also contain your own names
and you will vote on them and pass them forward
to the secretary who will read each trustee's vote,
and you will keep balloting and--
you know, it's similar
to nominating process at a convention.
You'll keep balloting until somebody has four votes.
At least four votes.
>> That's so much more efficient way of doing it
than the other way, right?
>> I think because-- I mean,
unless you only have two candidates and even
if you do only have two candidates you may have to go
through more than one ballot before you reach your
final candidate.
>> Well it has to be a public process, I mean [inaudible].
>> And it has to-- Yeah, it has to be a public process in there.
But the thing, they sometimes makes it--
that makes it a little cumbersome is that each vote has
to be public so that you can't drop them
in a hat and then read them.
>> But just by doing it on paper does not make it nonpublic.
>> Right. No, because the announcement will be made
of each trustee's vote.
>> Right.
>> And then the rest
of the language here is now again directory
to the college president once the successful candidate has
been determined, college president must then post the
fact of that selection including certain information and notice
that appointment has to be sent
to county superintendent school's office.
I included the provision relating
to the length of the appointment.
>> Excuse me.
>> To the length of the appointment again
so that any body who is reading these procedures will be
on notice that the successful appointee will be in office
until the next board election.
That's different from serving
out the entire term of the vacant office.
>> President Thompson.
>> Yes.
>> Question, Mary, when as were getting
down to the final process of, say, you know,
voting after the interviews before the voting,
is it possible for, you know, at the voter's discretion
to have an opportunity
for a background check of the candidates?
>> I don't think so, Dr. Rocha.
The background check such as it is will occur
when you're office does the initial screening.
And unless it turns out that a person is disenfranchised
by operation of law from holding office, the background
of this person is irrelevant.
>> Okay.
>> What about the references?
Each person is gonna be citing three references,
whatever number.
>> Whatever number they choose to give you.
They may choose not to give you any.
>> Well, if-- assuming that they give us two or three,
do we have an opportunity to actually talk to those?
>> I think that would probably be a process undertaken
by the screening committee before you get to them.
By the time you get to the night where the members are voting
on the final candidates--
>> I agree that should be-- should precede that.
>> Any considerations like that should be done.
>> Okay. Then the timeline let's may we may take a look
at that and--
>> So let's look at the timeline.
I tried to be as realistic given where we are,
starting with today and going forward.
>> We certainly wanna back
up from the September 15th board meeting because that's
when we really should be making the appointment
and that's gonna have a special meeting.
>> Yes, September 15th is the final date there.
>> That's the date we have to select
and appoint the trustee, right?
>> I beg your pardon.
>> September 15th is the date when we have
to select and appoint--
>> September 21st is the date you have to have done it by.
>> Okay, the 15th--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> But you have a regularly scheduled meeting
on September 15th and that's the date I picked as--
and so then I put the process
between today's date and September 15th.
>> Are there any dates here that anybody seems troubled by,
we're talking basically August 4th through the 10th
which is we're already in 4th as it is.
Publication of vacancies required by a law,
at least two days for August 11 through 25, publicized for this
to recruit candidates, receive applications,
August 25th found deadline for receive
of applications in the CEO's office.
August 25 through 31 announcement of names
of applicants, distribution of materials to board members
for review, informational meetings with the candidates,
organized by the college president and staff.
Week 6, September 1 through 7, Ad Hoc Committee
or Board Committee of the Whole being the screen applications is
like finalist September 8th special Board meeting
to screen applications, select finalists.
September 8, Special Board meeting
to approve the finalists.
Would we also be interviewing them at that meeting?
>> No.
>> No, that would be-- once you have accepted the final--
once the board-- the board of office accepted the finalist
from the committee, so you've established the universe
of the people you-- and I think it's important for the board
to establish the universe of people who will be interviewed.
>> Right.
>> Then I put September 13th through 15th
in case the board wants to schedule a special meeting
to conduct interviews before the selection,
the voting on the 15th.
I assumed that the 15th is the date to vote
because you have regularly scheduled meeting that date
but you could vote at an earlier time.
>> I think voting at an earlier time is probably not realistic
>> And you can do the interviews
on September 15th that's why I saw the 13th to the 15th,
that's the Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday there.
>> So the question is we want to try to do everything on the 15th
of September or have a special board meeting either
to do the interviewing or [inaudible].
>> And that's-- And you don't have to decide that tonight.
That's-- We've got a schedule that provides
for you the flexibility to set meetings
as needed going forward.
>> Okay.
>> Why do need to have a board meeting on 8th just
to approve the finalists?
>> You need to have-- I believe the Board needs
to accept the finalists from the committee and because
of the tightness of the timeline,
assuming the committee is gonna be doing its screening the
previous week.
I can't-- I couldn't set it on the first
which is I believe the day of a regular meeting.
>> Do we have a meeting during the first week of September?
>> Yes, September 1st.
>> I believe it's the 1st.
>> September 1st.
>> The problem too is Labor Day is-- that Labor Day weekend.
>> Labor Day is the 6th.
>> Yeah.
>> And again, the one challenge is on the 15th
which will be [inaudible]--
that's also a possible date
for a presidential reception celebrating the new
president [inaudible].
>> Yeah, we're gonna have a busy, busy day.
>> Be a good day to do it.
>> I have-- My own personal view is that we're gonna have
to move this week six back a bit
because September 1st is a Wednesday and we're right
into Labor Day weekend at that point
and the 7th is the Tuesday after it, I think.
>> The question is, is it possible in the meeting
of September 1st to actually to--
as a board selects the finalists that will be interviewed?
>> That would require the board members to--
I mean the Committee of the Whole or the committee,
whichever, to meet between August 25th and September 1st.
>> Do it at the September 1st meeting or--
>> Oh, I see what you said.
Have the Board--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Especially if the board is gonna act as a Committee
of the Whole, do it on September 1st.
>> I think we may as well just realize we have
to have some special meetings at that time.
I just don't think it's practical
to think we're getting sure with all the--
>> And this schedule would allow you to cease that if you wish to
and do it on September 1st if you conclude that you want to--
>> Well, take us through than what we actually have
to decide this evening.
>> Okay.
>> In terms of the timeline.
>> In terms of-- The timeline that I created
for you has enough flexibility in it.
If you adopt this timeline, then you can do things
on different dates if you choose to do so without--
and September-- for September 8th, I'll put possible.
>> But the August-- if we-- but date--
final dates of receive applications has
to be decided tonight [inaudible].
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Yeah, that should be decided tonight and I felt
like I had really pushed that out as far as I could
and I realized it's relatively early.
But you will not have time to do what you need to if it's later.
>> Right. I would recommend
to be the day before our board meetings so there's time
to process it so we can actually have those names
at the board meeting on the 25th.
So it'd be the 24th so that we actually can be in--
>> Mr. Baum, if you try to have a board meeting on the 25th,
the president's office is not gonna have an opportunity
to screen them all.
>> No, but we'd have the list of names of applicant.
No?
>> The president's office-- - I mean, it may be easy, you know,
maybe you'll have no applicants who are disqualified
and maybe it'll be manageable group.
>> Hey, about the Friday the 4th?
>> The president's office will need to that [inaudible].
>> I think you're moving it up too far,
I think whether we have them on the 25th
or not is not that important.
I would even say, make the final deadline that Friday the 27th
of August would be my take on it and we can move from there.
>> And I would just argue, since we already have nine expressions
of interest that-- and we have been announcing it publicly
for two weeks already, we can move this up to the 20th,
therefore that would give us the scheduled meeting of the 25th
to actually be able to do something
as part of that process.
>> I disagree.
I think we wanna have-- let the public have as much time
as it needs or possibly can to be able to apply and I think
if there's gonna be some squeezing it must on us.
>> Right.
>> So.
>> So would you like me to make the 25th, the 27th?
>> Let's make that 27th.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> I just go on the [inaudible], and I'm with Geoff that it seems
to me the 20th or the 25th, the 20th gives ample public notice.
We've been saying it for two weeks.
The more we can align things to natural board meetings,
the better board attendance we will have.
If you call special meeting,
it's gonna be difficult to get a full board.
And if it's really an important decision,
you want as many board members
in each step as you possibly can.
And I think five days under the circumstances
of the announcements, we've obviously been announcing that
or something is happening, we've got nine, which is more than ran
when it came from an election in that area last time.
So I think the more we can accommodate the regular board
meetings, the better the process will be.
So I'd go on with Geoff,
but if the majority decides differently I'm--
we'll make every effort to make the special meetings.
>> Well, I think I heard three people in favor of the 27th
as the deadline and then we can attest the other dates
from that.
Did I hear it correctly,
advisory person you haven't spoken up yet?
>> I'm fine with either.
I'm willing to work with the schedule regardless.
>> Okay.
>> I think that it's-- I mean I am personally--
we're going through the same thing
with the associated students.
We're opening the application to fill a position
that was just created and we've extended it because we want
to give the student body in the fall semester the opportunity
to apply, I think the public, the more time they have to apply
for the position the better.
>> Okay.
>> What's the first day of classes?
>> 30th.
>> 30?
>> The 30th.
>> Okay, can we agree on a final deadline for applications,
I think the three of us have the 27th, is that--
am I counting properly?
>> I said the 27th.
>> Okay then--
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> It's not a majority of the Board.
>> Well, but it's the majority,
what we have here this evening we have
to make decisions, so let's--
>> But the board only acts as a majority four.
>> Well, I mean we can play that game we want.
But let's try to move things forward.
>> There're three for the 27th and you need a fourth vote,
I'll go along with the consensus of the group.
>> Thank you.
>> Despite the fact that I think the 20th is a better day.
[ Laughter ]
>> Okay.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay.
>> Okay what else do we have decide on in terms
of the timeline, any thing else this evening?
>> If rather than having week 6, taking that whole week to--
as a time when you could set a special meeting,
if you want to estab--
if you wanna say that the board is gonna do
that on September 1st, then you would be able to at the end
of that meeting act to certi-- essentially certify your list
and you do have-- that that is natural board meeting date.
Now you'll have an agenda for that night
that includes other things.
And this could be a quick process
or it could be lengthy depending on the number
of applications you have.
I think you're gonna have enough
that you should dedicate some fairly intensive time
to reviewing the applications, particularly
if it's the entire Board that will be involved in the process.
And that's all the decision that you need to make as well,
it's whether the entire board--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> We had a flexibility with it.
It says September 1, day 7 does that give us the flexibility is
that what you're suggesting?
>> Yes, you could-- you can decide this as you get closer
and you see how many applicants you have
because that's why I gave it,
I specifically included a board meeting date.
>> Okay.
>> We'll alleviate this, just a possible special board meeting.
>> Okay.
>> Mary is there any reason, for example,
if the deadline is the 27th that the-- if the Ad Hoc committee
or the Committee of the Whole met
on September 1st was a regular board meeting,
before the board meeting, right?
>> That would work
>> In the afternoon, it would still be a regular day
and then report up its recommendation
to open session that night.
>> Yes, that could be done.
>> Do that.
>> Yeah.
>> I have a question [inaudible].
If we have set the 27th as the day which is the big welcome day
and the entire campus communities engaged with that
and we have classes beginning
that following Monday does the administration have the
resources necessary to go through
and verify all the legal requirements at first week
of classes for a possible meeting
on September 1st of the committee?
>> Well--
>> We don't have to wait till
that they can do 'em as they come in.
>> Sure.
>> Yeah.
>> I'm just asking-- I'm asking the administration
and if they say that they--
they taught they can do it, it's fine.
>> Yeah, well I think we could and would be prepared to have
if they came on that Friday and to have the applications ready
for the committee by September 1st.
I think that would be--
>> That's fine.
>> Okay.
>> Okay, is there anything else on the timeline that we have
to decide this evening?
>> No.
>> Nope.
>> Fellows, can we take us back then
to the issues we do need to decide?
>> The one issue that I would like the board
to determine is whether it is going to--
>> Yeah, the Board or the-- is acting as maybe the whole or--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Do the screening, acting by appointing an Ad Hoc Board--
or acting as a Committee of the Whole.
I have a sense that the board prefers to act as a Committee
of the Whole rather than that appointing an Ad Hoc Committee.
But that's-- that I think is a decision that you should make.
>> And I agree.
>> The other possibility was-- what should that suggest,
we'll just have an Ad Hoc Committee
that would be a public committee
and then more Board members wanted
to attend they can certainly do it.
>> But the committee, if it's gonna that--
if you're gonna that, you do need to identify the members
of the Ad Hoc Committee where they're gonna be.
>> And I don't object to Dr. Mann's suggestion if it's long
as a public meeting that other board members can attend.
>> Mr. Martin any comments on that?
>> No, I don't.
>> Mr. Pack?
>> I'll be on it.
>> Okay, then so we have to site the members now?
>> I think you should.
Yeah.
>> Any volunteers?
>> I'm available.
>Well, Berlinda is available.
>> Ms. Brown has volunteered.
>> Another-- I mean, another possibility is
that the three members will be appointed by the president
of the board at some future time.
We can just to say to be appointed by the president
of the board and then you can appointment them.
>> I'll appoint Miss-- by the Board present according
to the board's bylaws has to be approved by the board.
So we-- that would not work unless we do it tonight.
>> Unless you were to suspend that bylaw.
>> Right.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay, we have one volunteer.
>> Do you want to me to add
that the Ad Hoc Committee shall conducts its meetings in public?
>> Yes, I think that's the--
>> Well, I'll do it also.
>> Yeah, so--
>> Thank you.
>> I was recommend too given
that my schedule is kinda fluid right now
and if the board president were willing to serve
that the Board President Dr. Mann and Ms. Brown--
>> That's fine with me and it's public meetings so if you
or Dr. Fellow or Mr. Martin want to attend, Mr. Pack you're more
than welcome to be there.
Is that okay that myself, Jeanette and Ms. Brown?
>> Now, do you understand that members of the board who attend
to watch are there to watch, they wouldn't be able
to then join the preceding?
>> Well, at the time they can be appointed--
>> Well, they can participate, they just couldn't vote, right?
>> Right, they can speak as members
of the public but they [inaudible].
>> Sure.
>> Okay, one last thing.
>> Yes.
>> I would hope Mr. Pack participates.
>> Yes.
>> I'm sorry, I-- is board members [inaudible].
>> I know.
>> My hope is Mr. Pack would participate actively
in the process.
>> I was actually just gonna ask that.
I realized that I don't count for quorum
or have an official vote on the board but I just
as a formality I would request
that I'd be added to the committee.
>> Sure, that would be great.
>> Absolutely, now we would encourage that.
You represent the students
who are gonna be probably most affected by this,
so we encourage you do that.
So, okay. So it okay then that Dr. Mann, Ms. Brown
and myself are the official committee
but they will be public meetings and anyone can attend
and ask questions et cetera?
Okay, moving on to the next issue we need to address.
>> I think that pretty much takes care of it.
>> This is a truly technical and that's
when you do your interviews do you wanna sit as a Committee
of the Whole, I recommend that, too.
>> Sorry, say what?
>> When you the interviews do you wanna sit as a Committee
of the Whole and then rise to become the board again
for purposes of taking the vote.
It's kind of a parliamentary distinction.
>> What's the pleasure of the board?
>> What was the question again?
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> When you do interviews do you wanna sit as a Committee
of the Whole and then rise to the board?
>> Right. Would there be any problem just acting
as the board conducting the interviews
and then voting at then end of that?
>> As long as you don't start taking action?
[ Laughter ]
>> Oh, we couldn't take action after?
>> You'd have to rise to go back to being a board.
When you're a Committee of the Whole you're a committee,
so you're not taking any action.
>> Alright, can we just interview as a board then
that can make it easier.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> That's my question.
>> Oh, let's just do that.
>> Yeah, let's do that then we wont have to worry
about we can and can't do?
>> Okay, so we take that out.
>> Do we need a motion-- is there--
to approve these procedures?
>> You do and before you do that I don't know whether any member
of the public wanted to speak to it.
I want to be sure that it's for anybody--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Oh, that's right to-- thank you, reminding me.
>> If anybody wanted to speak
to it then they'd have an opportunity to do that.
>> Does anyone in the public wish
to address this mesentery conversation we've been having?
I don't see anybody rushing to the podiums so I think we're--
[ Laughter ]
>> Well before we vote on, I just like to point
out that the whole issue of given the interview questions
to candidates and really, it's kinda mote because first
of all it's gonna be on, you know, we're audio cast
and we're video cast so they can just watch this and see it.
>> Mary puts up very nicely, so.
>> I'm hoping the audio cast is working,
hearing some noise in the PA system.
So I hope that we're able to record this appropriately.
>> Okay, other questions or comments,
are we ready for a motion?
>> I move we adopt the procedures as discussed.
>> I second the motion.
>> Any further discussion, advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor of the motion please say "aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed, motion carries.
Thank you very much Ms. Dowell.
We really appreciate your assistance and--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Your very welcome, but it's my pleasure
and I'm gonna now take down the screen and close off here.
>> While she's doing that perhaps we could to reports,
Board of Trustees and Ms. Brown any reports?
>> Yes, let's see.
This past Saturday, I attended an early intervention community
youth participation summit held
over at the Flintridge Retreat Center and it was sponsored
by Parent and Youth Advocate Group, was a quite good summit
where we were focusing in troubled youth.
Also on July 22nd, I attended the 1st African-American
California Community College Trustee Summit
in Compton, California.
This I guess African-American Community Trustee entity was
established on the 30th during the last conference we had
down at Long Beach.
The focus of the summit was to introduce best practices
for retaining and graduating community college
African-American males.
And it was a well-rounded summit and I learned and was able
to meet several key, you know,
leaders that have an understanding of what to do
and how to attempt to help our males or African-Americans.
So I hope we will be having more
and it was quite-- that's my report.
>> Thank you very much.
Mr. Baum?
>> I was expect-- When Dr. Mann comes back,
she's probably also mention this
but it was a magnificent celebration a couple
of weekends ago when the college dedicated the Chihuahuita
Monument on the campus of the community education center.
Had great representation from the board
and the community including our congressman and it was a--
and our new police chief who has participated in this.
Dr. Mann, I'm just starting
to talk Chihuahuita Memorial Dedication.
>> Okay.
>> And so I was very delighted to be a part of that
and I expect President Rocha might have a word
to say about that as well.
>> Okay. Dr. Mann, the reports or comments on that?
>> No.
>> Doctor-- Mr.
Martin?
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Mr. Pack?
>> I attended Measure P Oversight Committee meeting
last week.
We've got a lot of interesting information about the plan
for the new center for the arts.
It's very exciting how that's coming along and I look forward
into seeing how that develops.
Also, I'll be attending the Student Trustee Workshop this
coming week in Newport Beach.
>> Good. I also attended the Measure P Oversight Committee
and it was well organized and we bid farewell to a number of--
the members of the committee.
Thank you for their service
and very encouraging and uplifting affair.
Dr. Rocha?
>> Yes, thank you.
President Thompson, we have report of superintendent
and staff you will under the circumstances not be
disappointed we have to know
that I'm going to strike item one.
I spoke with Patrick McCallum today and he was
at the Sacramento Airport and his plane had been canceled.
And I had asked Patrick to give us an inside report
on where the state budget negotiations are or aren't
and to give us a legislative affairs report
and I will ask Patrick to return on the 18th-- August 18th, yeah.
>> August 25th.
>> August 25th, okay.
And next, well, one event that we had this past week I wanted
to thank Vice President Sugimoto for setting up a meeting
with Supervisor Antonovich and I thank Trustee Baum
and Trustee Thompson were also there
and we had a wonderful lunch for him and presented
to him the campaign for the Center for the Arts.
And we had excellent discussion with him and we will--
I had a nice note from the supervisor today
and we will return to the supervisor to continue
to seek his support financial and otherwise
for the Center for the Arts.
And he was very gracious in wanting to continue that.
And actually also shout out to the--
our team, our internal team, our PR team,
the videographer 'cause one of the things
that Supervisor Antonovich asked
after we made the presentation he said, "Well,
who do you have do this for you?"
He thought it was an outside company and it was us.
So good job everybody.
I have a brief report just to introduce Vice President Jacobs.
We've been working real hard.
I sent a message today to the college
and about our fall enrollment.
And on one hand, our enrollment is booming, so it's a good thing
that people want to come
to Pasadena City College and get going here.
On the other hand, given the budget and other challenges,
you know, and then talking with Trustee Pack and I had a meeting
with ASO President last week, the one thing
that students are saying over and over again is
"I can't get my classes."
So thanks to Vice Presidents Jacob's leadership I think I
though I saw Dean Sabah back there.
They were able to round up for us and that thanks
to all the deans and faculty who participated
in what I would call an extraordinary session last
Friday to see where we are and to see what we could do
on the short term to address the needs of our students
for the fall and then to open up a larger project in terms
of what we can do for a better class scheduling
for our students.
So-- But very briefly I turn
over to Vice President Jacobs for a brief summary.
>> Thank you, President Rocha.
Actually at our meeting, president gave us the challenge
and told us about opportunities and got us all excited.
[Laughter] He mentioned that he wanted us to increase access
and success for more students and we for that.
Immediately we got people together
and we started dialoging as to what we can do.
We've just gonna mention two things
and I'm gonna have Dr. Alquaddoomi to mention one part
and I will mention the other.
But we are-- it's all good new.
Actually, we are in high demand and we are four weeks
from the beginning of the semester
and we are 103 percent enrolled with what we have in terms
of our regular schedule.
But the other good news is we have a group of deans and group
of students, faculty as well as staff and they are working
on a solution as to how we can in spite
of that have more access for students
and keeping the finances in a prudence state.
So we-- we're looking forward to that.
And one of the ways that I'll mention briefly
and then well just give you a few numbers is
that we are looking at increasing the limits in some
of our classes and so Dr. Alquaddoomi will
that it was his brainchild
and so he's gonna tell you exactly how we're gonna that
and we proposed it, we've talked to people about it,
and we will continue to work on that.
The other part that the president mentioned that we're
so excited about is that we will have an opportunity
to do a little research.
And as we do this research we will be able
to enroll more students and the research will be basically
devising cohorts of students or blocks of courses that students
who don't have anything to take-- I mean, you know,
new students coming in it's nothing highly love
for them to enroll in.
So we're saying that-- and some of them can enroll in the ones
that Alquaddoomi would talk about the limits.
But we're looking around our basic skills devising some
cohorts and having students take these remedial
or the developmental courses they need whether it's English
or Math, but they would have like guidance and other courses
so that they will have a load.
And we're thinking in some cases, splitting the division--
splitting the semester so they would take so many for 8 weeks
and then the next 8 weeks.
>> So-- And that would be following the Math Path
that I see Dr. Lynn [phonetic] is here and some of the people
from our TLC have been doing over the years.
So deans got excited about that.
And the English dean came to me today and she has worked
out two versions of these cohorts that we can have.
So we will tell you more about that later.
But we're excited and we're going to try these cohorts
and see how well our students do so we will be able
to really look at this.
And as we do the research, it's gonna provide more classes
for students, our 8 to 10000, who Stuart say has been
through with nothing to take, so we're excited about.
Will you just mention that we made--
how we're doing the limits, maybe you should use
that so we can hear you.
[ Inaudible Remarks ]
>> Thank you, Dr. Jacobs.
>> Sure.
>> Good Evening honorable Trustees and Mr. President,
and ladies and gentlemen.
The situation--
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> The purpose of our broadcast,
you just please tell us who you are?
>> Yes. My name is Sabah Alquaddoomi
and I'm the Associate Dean of Enrollment Management on campus.
>> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, sir.
The-- As we came onboard trying to see where--
what's happening with the college, you know,
we find that-- we found out about three weeks ago
that our enrollment was going at a faster rate,
the number of seats that we have available.
Two weeks ago under the direction of Dr. Rocha
and Dr. Jacobs, we started to look at the crisis
that we're gonna be facing
and we certainly are facing a very difficult time today.
The colleges at 103 percent full,
most of our division is running at-- above 96 percent,
the only division that has some space is health sciences.
So we're impacted.
We have only registered 22,900--
22,900 students so far in the credit area.
So an action plan was need and Dr. Rocha said
to us two weeks ago, "Let's start thinking about this."
He met with the deans with the enrollment management
advisory grouped.
We got working on this and the plan that we came
up with will increase the number of seats available
on campus utilizing the resources that we have
but without increasing the FDFs.
We realized that we were working with a tight budget
but we wanted to make seats available for our students.
So what we looked at is, can we take the existing sections
with in the existing classrooms and make some adjustments
to those limits that are in some cases way too low?
This would create equity between the faculty in terms
of their teaching loads, but also it will help us
to optimize the utilization of our resources.
When we looked at this we realized
that there is a good number of seats available.
We shared that with the deans today and with other--
with Ed, and other individuals, other guests.
We wanted to make this plan of action transparent.
We wanted to make sure that everyone who is--
has say and has an interest in it informed.
So we're not doing anything behind close doors.
We're being thoroughly open.
We feel that this would provide seats for many thousand
of students that would be coming to our doors soon
and they are following that right now.
The deans have become real champions in taking the lead
on this and the leadership in making those adjustments.
So I think we have a plan in place.
Well, just-- it's a-- We're hoping that by the end
of this week, we'll put those seats into the system,
we would announce it to the public, to the community,
to our students, so that they all know
that there are seats available.
>> Are there any questions?
>> I do have a question.
>> Yes.
>> I applaud you guys for this innovative way approaching the
crisis because it is a crisis that were having
with all these students that are coming to PCC.
We're happy that people want to be here.
But I am concerned about the in-district students.
I ran for that purpose because students our complaining
that they don't have classes, cannot get classes,
though they live in-district.
I know earlier in this spring, we had Super Sunday
which was sort of a campaign to promote early enrollment
for students that are coming from high school to college.
I am hopeful that registration went well
and they are ready to go but.
One thing I discovered as I was interacting with students
that were not coming from high school,
they were returning students.
Some of them-- Some of them would approach me and ask me
about their classes and I naively sent them to register.
However, they were told
that they did not have priority registration.
>> Right.
>> So, I really-- what I'm really trying is
if returning students
from in-district do not have priority registration
and we have this large amount of students, I really would
like to see that something is done for in-district students
because as quiet as it's kept, we pay the taxes.
>> Yes, I think Dr. Wilcox has-- yes.
>> Wilcox.
>> I may have part an answer for you.
>> Please.
>> Some confusion may have been
on when the same priority registration.
The order that we register students
in is we first do the continuing students get first chance
because, you know, they already got some classes
and they have fewer options, what they need in order
to finish their degree.
Then we turn to all to all of the new and returning students,
you know, so returning students being those who've had a gap
in their enrollment.
And we do separate all of these new returning students
into two groups, those who live within the district and those
who live outside the district.
And those who live within the district get
to register first before anybody outside the district.
Now what does sometimes happen is we assign all these times
to the in-district residents, they register, then we start the
out of district people, and then somebody who lives
in the district some in and, you know,
they've missed their opportunity--
their priority opportunity
but they still could then register immediate
because their time will have passed.
So we do put in-district residents first when they're new
and returning students.
The laws do not allow us for continuing students
to give preference based upon their residence of living
in the district so we kind of--
we pushed the law as much we can.
We're legal but we're real close on it.
>> Okay, I'm not following you.
So basically what you tell me is that in-district students,
legally you can not give them priority?
>> When if they are a continuing,
all continuing students have the same kind of priority
in terms of residency.
There's no distinction.
But when they're new and returning, then if they live
with in the district, they get to register before the students
who live outside the district
because they're technically not a student
until they've registered.
So we can make that separation at that time.
>>Okay, I think I still lost you.
I'll get you later.
>> Okay.
[ Laughter ]
>> I have a question.
Are we projecting to enroll more students this fall
than last fall?
>> Yes.
>> So we will have higher levels of enrollment this fall--
>> Exactly.
>> -- than last fall?
>> Exactly.
>> And then-- And I wanna applaud the innovation
and the work of the administration to accommodate
as many students as possible because we are all
about access and success.
But I also have to ask the hard question,
how much over CAP are we planning to--
are we looking at enrolling,
how many enrollments would you suggest?
>> If we compare this coming fall to last fall--
>> No, what we're funded for from the state.
>> I think we're gonna be very much within-- what is--
what we're funded for, plus the 2 or 2-1/2 percent growth.
I don't think we're gonna be way above in terms of the FDFs.
>> Right. 'Cause I'm concerned
that we are making accommodations
for enrollments that--
for we which we will realize the revenue
because financially it will be very hard for the district
to that because with each additional enrollment
that we expanded enrollments we're also incurring financial
obligations to the faculty when we pay overloads and things
like that, and I just wanna make sure that we have the resources
to accommodate the increased enrollment.
>> Well, I think what the dean is trying to do
and the deans are trying to do on the short term is to increase
that what I would call the cost effectiveness
of the current class schedule on the short term to accommodate
as many people as possible.
It is true.
It is absolutely true that we can't just widely exceed our
portion in CAP and our portion at funding.
>> The-- As I eluded.
This is the first step towards the revised model.
We will be doing the Ed Master plan and the dean is working
on a revised model that we'll be bringing to you, you know,
in due time that will cause us to make some decision
about our mission and some priority decisions.
So first things first, we're trying
to accommodate every human being that we can
for fall while we develop a longer term model that will--
based on the Ed Master plan have to say, well,
some things come before other things.
So-- But I can assure you that we are--
the instructions are to stay
within our current dollar base, so.
>> Thank you.
Yes, Mr. Martin?
>> I wanted to commend you 'cause obviously more classes
has been a theme of mine for several years
and I appreciate the creative thinking and just kinda flowed
out a warning that I'm sure we're on top of, more students
in a given class means you need more textbooks for that class
in the bookstore and several other supporting operations need
to ramp up along with it.
It has a big part of students' success are these supporting
services that allow a student to succeed.
It doesn't do any good to finally make it into class.
>> Exactly.
>> You can't get to textbook and your lost by test one and drop.
>> You're absolutely right
and when we discussed the plan this morning,
supporting services came into play, you know, the availability
of the library, the bookstore having enough textbooks,
parking, facilities for the students, you know,
the eating areas, and, you know, we even went down to, you know,
bathrooms having enough tissue paper.
[Laughter] So we're looking at all the details.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Hearing that here on top of those kinds of issues 'cause
that too is a big part in the success.
>> Yes.
>> But it doesn't do any good if we don't the classes
and some more classes are certainly better.
>> And like Dr. Rocha mentioned, even though we're gonna try
to increase but we wanna increase within reason,
we wanna be able to make more sits available to our students
but we don't wanna, you know, break the back in the process.
>> Dr. Mann?
>> Yes, I do have a question and a comment and I know you've been
on leave, so this is really address more to, I guess,
Dr. Jacobs and people who've been here.
But the first question, comments for you,
I hope that we are also canceling the low
enrollment classes.
It's my understanding that many of these classes continue on
and that seems to be the second half of putting more students
in certain class is, and early cancelation
of this low enrollment classes.
And the second point I would like to make is
in the last November, Chancellor Scott, you know,
made this very strong statement, you need to start prioritizing
and down scaling your curriculum and focusing
on these basic classes.
I think it's great, we're doing it now
but I think we lost several months here.
>> Yes.
>> And I don't think we have to wait
for the Educational Master Plan to know the guidances
that was given to us in our--
by the legislature and basic skills transfer
and technical incur education.
So I hope we can really, really focus on that.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> In creating these fall schedules,
the deans were quite aware of transfer,
the Korean technical courses and the basic skills,
so they were given priority as we look at what would be offered
to get out students through.
So-- And even in looking
at these cohorts we're talking about, we have students
at the top who we need to get out of here and they can't get
that last Math so we intend to look at putting a cohort there
for the Math so they can move so others can come up.
So we are keeping inline with that.
And I would just like to say the research part that we're talking
about would-- we just didn't want to add sections,
period [inaudible] all over, but we wanted
to make them meaningful and to help the students
to prepare them to take other courses.
So we are looking into the funds that we talked about, you know,
for innovation and we can think of anything
that would be more innovative than what we have proposed.
So we are proposing that as a research so it wouldn't be--
even though for one year, our FTREs would go up
but it wouldn't be that much because this is a research,
we see how it goes and then we would be putting
into our regular program.
>> Just one other comment I would like to make,
is that the joint meeting of the accreditation
and Educational Master Plan Committee,
I heard of a high level administrator of the college,
say, we had page after page after page and this catalogue
of very low enrollment classes and I hope those are now being,
you know, canceled and those faculty are being reassigned.
>> Actually, now if you look at our classes,
we don't have any low enroll.
We have one area of music that we might would say, now,
but that's the only one because they take a little longer
with the portfolios and having to audition.
But that's why we said a 103-- we-- percent enrolled,
we've really don't have any low.
But usually and we have been working on that
where we had low enroll classes, we would wait
until the last week, and then we would try to--
we will close them and sometimes we couldn't add other courses.
But that we corrected and we had said, we will close all courses
at least two weeks before the deadline, before the beginning
of the semester so students can get into other classes.
Where we are now, we don't have anything to close.
>> Okay, that's good news.
>> Yes.
[ Laughter ]
>> Yeah, we'd begun to look at the low enrolled classes,
Dr. Mann, and so far, it looks really good.
It seems like everything--
but we would continue to monitor that, those low enrolled classes
and we are in continuant--
you know, we're always doubling looking with the deans
that are concerned in this process.
So if anything goes down, sometimes it up
and then students, you know, drop and change, you know,
priorities based on more seats being added.
So when we see something dropped down,
we would let the deans know so they either push it up
or they will reassign the faculty
and let the students know.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Okay, thank you.
>> In a timely fashion, thank you.
>> I'm very pleased to hear all of us say.
>> Thank you.
>> Mr. Pack, do you have any questions
or anything you wanna add in this conversation?
>> No, just a brief comment to say,
I'd like to extend my deepest most sincere thanks
to all those involved, to Dr. Rocha for posing this challenge
to work within the budget, also to Dr. Jacobs and all the deans
who are making this work.
That is a struggle that every student has had getting classes
particularly this year.
And so I'm a thrilled that I get to report to the Associated
of Students when I meet with them next that we are working
on it and that we have a wonderful innovative solution
to make accessibility and success of priority.
So necessity is indeed the mother of invention, I guess.
>> Yes. Thank you.
Dr. Rocha?
>> Yeah, I think we're good.
Thank you--
>> Thank you.
>> -- dean and thank you vice president.
Again, what we wanna do in turning to brief report
by Vice President Wilcox, one of the things that's clear
in enroll in management as we've taken a look at it
that the hidden tax on the budget is that we have
to fund five sections of classes for every two sections
of students we complete,
especially at the basic skills level.
So one of the things that we will be bringing you is how
to save real money and you were referring to the things that go
to retention where you really save the money
and provide more seats for students is
on the retention side and we're working with the senate
and other faculty leaders on doing just that.
So we'll be bringing back a comprehensive enrollment
management plan for you shortly after the faculty returned
and we can have some good conversations with them.
I did briefly want to turn to Vice President Wilcox.
I had ask him to give the board just kind of a one-sheeter,
so that as you go around and about, there's a lot of talk
about veterans affairs and we wanted to be responsive
to our veterans and others who ask about this,
just to give you kind of a fact sheet on veterans at PCC.
So, Vice-President.
>> Thank you, Dr. Rocha.
Just while the board was in closed session,
I took the liberty to drop off that one page fact sheet at each
of you chairs, so hopefully you can find it.
If not, I've got some extras that could [inaudible].
>> I got it.
>> You know, I certainly don't need to read the sheet to you
but I would like to hit just a couple of the highlights
or a particular interest to various groups.
One of the questions that often comes up is how much,
in terms of resources does a college donate
or contribute towards serving veterans.
And we have one and a half staff that are dedicated
to just serving veterans.
>> One is a full time clerk who is in the admission's office
and deals with helping veterans get their benefits
and answering their questions and we've a counselor
who has been assigned half time to serve the veterans.
Over the last few months you periodically have also heard
request or questions about,
could we get a veterans resource center?
I'm happy to tell you that yes, one is coming.
It's going to be in the L Building.
It's targeted to be opening the first week of school.
>> W Building.
>> I'm sorry, W Building, my ear.
Yeah, in the W Building and targeted
to open the first week of the fall term.
In terms of the kinds of support that we provide for veterans,
one of the things that's very important because it came
up as registration priority,
that is something the veterans receive.
They register before all other students, so we actually start
with the veterans first then go into the continuing students.
So they get first chance to look at every course
that we have scheduled.
We also provide priority counseling for veterans
that if they just show-- when they show up, they just have
to make themselves known as a veteran, they're taking
in to get counseling at that time, we don't have
to make an appointment stand in line.
We also, in the nursing programs,
if we have qualified veterans, they get preferential admission
to the nursing program.
And the last thing I'd like to point
out is just a little hint for the future.
We've just recently submitted a three-year 400,000 dollar grant
to be able to expand our Veteran Center that we're going
to be opening this fall.
So that gives you a little hint of kind of the resources
and the services that are provide in a fact sheet format.
>> I think what you mean
as you submitted the application for their grant.
>> Correct.
Sorry.
>> I have a question.
>> Ms. Brown?
>> Just for my clarification, that center, how big is it?
The center, how big is it?
>> It's about 825 square feet.
>> 825 square feet?
>> Yeah.
>> And we have how many--
>> Veterans?
>> I think you said 725-- 775 individuals?
>> Yeah. In spring of 2010, we had 775 individuals
who were a veteran at sometime.
They do range in age from their early 20's up to pushing 80.
>> Uh-hmm.
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you.
>> It's true.
He's right.
>> Geoff.
>> A couple of question, also just a point too, some of this,
it's great to be able to have discussion on these issues.
Some of them we might agendizes discussion issues as opposed
to trying to these all
under president's report just for planning.
But I-- the one thing that struck at me
to the Veteran Center that we're applying for, we--
that required a minimum of 400 square feet.
>> Correct.
>> Now you found a space doubled that minimum requirement
and that should be a sizable space, so that's perfect.
>> You're correct.
>> One of the things that you say is not all veterans are
receiving benefits because they maybe they've exhausted their
benefits, the time limit for their use expired.
They have chosen not to use their benefits.
But I was struck that only 240--
243 out of 775, there is also something I am concerned
about that I expect there's also a portion of them
that don't know how to access their benefits that--
I just wanna make sure that we're conducting enough outreach
to them if they identify that each one,
that we're conducting individual outreach to them but--
>> As part of the process on the application, there's a question
about are they veteran?
And if they marked that, it automatically prints
for the message that says, there's a veteran's office
which is actually located--
>> I-- So there's a form they fill out
and there's a computer thing that tells them that?
>> Correct.
>> But at the same time, we know,
in addition to the computer when they're do--
going in computer process, I just--
it would be reassuring to me too to know that they were also--
a human being actually made an effort
to connect with them, too.
That's just my personal suggestion as well.
>> Dr. Mann?
>> Yes, W Building, is that's the Women's Gym.
Used to be called the Women's Gym, right?
>> Correct.
>> And I understand the Men's Gym which we tore
down was the oldest and the most decrepit building
in the whole California Community College System,
what does the space actually like in the Women's Gym?
Is it-- Maybe Dr. van Pelt you can, give us any answer?
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> [Inaudible] Dr. van Pelt for moment it's
in the process of getting remodeled.
>> Dr. van Pelt, what will it be like when it's done?
>> It's going to have two offices,
brand new ceiling, brand new carpeting.
It's essentially what was intended
to be a classroom that's now being converted
into a Veteran Center.
>> And is it okay?
>> Yeah, it will be very nice.
>> Alright.
>> I might also add that last Friday,
we arranged for a tour of the facility.
We've taken the President of Veterans Club, the counselor,
Patty D'Orange-Martin for the veterans and well
as Cameron White, the gentleman who spoke last week
to taking the tour of the new facilities
and seek their input and ideas.
>> Great that's wonderful.
What did they say?
Did they think it was going to be adequate space?
>> The feedback I got is that they were okay with it.
They, you know, had some suggestions.
They did ask well, you know, will there be carpet?
And the answer was yes, and things like that.
Would there be handrails?
Yes, there would be.
>> Is it next to the gym?
[Laughter] Is there still a gym there?
No?
>> Yes, but it's on the opposite side.
It's on the southern side.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> So they won't have to work with having
to put up with that noise?
>> No, no.
>> Okay.
>> Mr. Pack?
>> This is a simple question.
The existing Veteran Center in the campus center
of this building, will that continue
to exist once this new center opens
or does everything transfer there?
>> It would make sense to move there
and it's really just a room just dedicated here.
So now that we have in much larger space
with some private offices in the new facility,
it would make sense to move it.
>> Right, I was just curious, thank you.
>> Other questions?
Good. Thank you very much.
Let's now go to the Shared Governance Representatives
and the reports.
Dr. Douglass?
>> We have no report to that.
>> Mr. Martinez?
>> Just very quickly, the senate has been in attendance
at these campus wide meetings with the president
and the administration on these enrollment management issues
and we've also been involved in active consultation
on the letter that Dr. Rocha sent out to the faculty
on these issues of acces.
So there's an education campaign that has taken place
with the faculty and I think we're off
to a good start with that.
And then secondly, I just want to let you know that we continue
to work with the office of educational services and IPR
on the formation
of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee
including an IEC startup initiative
and I'm sure you'll be hearing more
about that in the near future.
Thank you.
>> What is an IEC?
>> The IEC, the Institutional Effectiveness Committee.
>> Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Smith?
>> Hi, Classified Senate met today
and had an election of officers.
Gary Potts was elected as the president;
Diana Ashkenasy is the vice president;
Julio Huerta the parliamentarian;
Denise Albright, secretary; Monica Palacios, the treasurer;
and I was elected as representative to the board.
We will be scheduling a Classified Senate Retreat
to develop new goals and objectives to--
in 2010-'11 and those arrangements are
yet to be determined.
>> Good. Thank you very much.
Any others?
Then let's move on to approval of the minutes for meeting
of July 21st, we have revised minutes
that I think have been handed out some correction--
>> Approval of the minutes has revised.
>> Is there a second?
>> I second the motion.
>> The correction appears in item M. Okay, any questions
or comments with respect to revised minutes?
>> I need to just change one word on page 4 under my report
that the PCC was videotaping the board meetings instead
of videoing the board meeting.
[ Laughter ]
>> Good one.
>> And the first bullet, okay.
Any other comments
or corrections, case, advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor say "Aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Alright, motion carries.
Approval of consent items.
>> Move approval of consent items.
>> Second.
>> Any questions?
Anything to be taken separately?
I apologize to this, I do have a question with respect
to item 4-I and that simply is-- I had trouble understanding.
It says the expenses not to exceed 12,000 dollars each
for a total of 48,000 dollars
and then it appears they were paying--
are we paying 24,000 dollars for Glendale?
Is that what we're doing here?
>> 24,000-- In terms of these stipends,
you're saying 24,000 for-- yes.
For Glendale, you know, this is the partnership that we have,
the grant that we have together.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Do they reimburse us or are we paying
from the grant money for them?
>> It's a collaborative.
So they are partners with us.
>> Okay.
>> So we're just the physical agent.
>> Okay.
>> But they have their part of the grant also so that's what--
>> We get a check-- we write a check to Glendale?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> Yes.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay.
>> Any other questions?
>> I was just gonna comment on 21-P.
First off is to acknowledge the 21 years of service
for our retiring carpenter Mr. McNeil.
And so to convey appreciation of the board for his service
to the district and also a shout
out to our foreign student trustee who also work
for the district, Nick Szamet
who I understand is taking a big job with the Mayor of the City
of Los Angeles and so we're very proud of Nick.
>> Any other comments or questions on the consent items?
Your motion approved.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> I think we have a motion, I beg your pardon.
Advisory of vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor of the motion say "Aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> All opposed, motion carries.
Okay, budget update presentation and discussion.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Okay.
>> van Pelt?
>> Thank you.
After about a month of not much occurring in Sacramento,
the legislators are back in the session.
There is a democratic plan that is moving its way through.
One of the component is that reasonably complex process
where what they're intending to do is
to lower the state sales tax,
however raise the income tax levels
and then raise the vehicle taxes.
The reason being that tax payers can then deduct those
on the federal taxes at which point what will occur is
to shift some of the load on to the Federal Government.
So that's one of the methods that they intend to use.
They estimate that with close 1.8 billion dollars worth
of the problem.
There's another one too which is to suspend Proposition 98,
however, in this case, the league
and the chancellors office are in favor of it
because through this, again, complex process,
they intend to raise 3 billion dollars more
than what the governor proposed in his budget.
The majority of that money by far would go to the K through 12
in order to cover cuts that were previously imposed.
There's still strong support for 2.21 percent growth systemwide
as well as the elimination of the negative COLA.
And one of the ways they do intend
to garner Republican support is to address 380 million dollars
in accumulated unfunded mandates.
Non-funded mandate is something
that the state requires us to do.
However, they don't provide us the funding to do them.
And the idea is to set up a joint powers authority
and to be able to borrow against the future revenues stream
in order to try to bridge that gap.
Typically, if the model would hold PCC's portion
of that would be on the order of 6 or 7 million dollars.
There is a great deal of optimism that this
at least will form the framework
for a future agreement on a budget.
Now that has to be tempered with still a very soft economy.
The unemployment is still 12.4 percent.
The state revenues came in significantly above expectations
for the year, almost a third of a billion dollars.
The median house prices in May were up to 6 percent from April,
and 23 percent from May on May from the previous year,
and the new home permits were up 22 percent
for the first five months of the year compared
to the first five months of last year.
Bear in mind that, you know, any increase is base
on a horrific last year so, you know,
a percentage increase while it's good isn't necessarily
significant enough to be able to get out of the budget morass.
In terms of the budget development on the campus,
the total comp model, the guiding principles,
and the directions as well
as the budget options have been post on a PCC website
under the Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee Section.
Last I said that the 16 million dollars
of deferred apportionment was in the mail.
We did in fact receive that.
Now what that means is that we have enough cash on hand
to get us through November.
So, you know, hopefully it's not gonna take nearly that long,
however, we are positioned as well
as we could possibly be positioned nor
to be able to handle the storm.
And if I can just touch on the Measure P budget,
we did have the quarterly meeting last week.
We did go through the budget.
The budget is very sound and in order as we expect it would be.
We do have the funds in place to move forward
with the Center for the Arts.
The capital campaign of course goes on
but the capital campaign is intended to cover issues
of what they called FF&E,
Furniture Fixtures and Equipment.
But the construction budget has been set aside.
We are on Friday doing the Job Walk.
There's extraordinary interest in the project.
So far we have 65 companies that have expressed interest
in being at the Job Walk.
Now we haven't been able to separate those
into prime contractors and subcontractors, but nonetheless,
65 contractors is an extraordinary number.
We are hoping for 30.
So we are already having to scale it up.
We'll do it in this room because there will be
so many people involved.
So, that's a brief update.
>> Are there questions of Dr. van Pelt?
Okay, then let's move on to the next item.
J, Appointment of Measure P Citizens' Oversight Committee:
Discussion with the possible action.
Is there a motion to approve?
>> So move.
>> Move, second.
>> Okay, been moved and approved--
or moved and seconded.
>> This is just for the appointment of Mr. King
to the committee, correct?
>> No, it's the appointment
of the entire group as I understand.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> It is for Mr. Bradford King.
>> Oh, is that just the C?
Okay. Alright.
The advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor say "Aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> All opposed, all motion carries.
Public hearing regarding bargaining--
initial bargaining proposal
from the Pasadena City College Faculty Association,
the Pasadena Community College District, item K. Dr. Rocha,
any comments before we open the hearing?
>> No. We receive the proposal and set
out a process for the bargaining.
>> Okay, the public hearing is now open.
Is there anybody in the audience who wishes to address the board
with respect to this item?
Okay, rush to the podium.
[Laughter] So we can then--
now declare that the public hearing is closed.
What is the action that we're ask to take?
Just hold the hearing?
>> Just close it.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Close the hearing.
>> Alright, we have opened and closed the hearing
and I guess we now move on to the next item on the agenda.
>> Correct.
>> Yup.
>> Okay. Back to here.
The Academic Calendar, Effect on Student Success:
Discussion for approval of staff time with the possible action.
Mr. Martin is the author of this potential staff items.
So do you care to explain it John?
>> Well last time, the calendar came up.
There was some discussion and I think there was some comment
by some of the deans, if I remembered correctly,
that were wondering if this new calendar that we're
on is really benefiting in our students.
And the fact that the deans were raising the question or some
of the staffs were raising the question, it seemed to me,
it might be worth a look into if we can isolate the variable
and find out what is the impact on students success.
So I don't know what the--
your feeling is your [inaudible] be new to that
or if you have had experience with that where you came from.
>> Yeah, and I'm relatively old to that too.
>> Relatively old to that.
>> But well, thank you Trustee Martin for putting this
on the agenda because what we did today knowing it was
on the agenda, I met with the executive committee
to discuss the issue to see where we are
and where we're going.
And what I'd like to report is that we would
like to be fully responsive.
And so, I charged research and planning to begin to consult
with the deans and to try and get a-- some data.
First of all, we need to define what we mean by students success
which will do through consultation and then
to have research come up with a very,
very kind of brief commonsense data set and then
to bring back a complete report for you
that should be properly folded
into this comprehensive enrollment management report.
So, you know, we would be happy to discuss it at further lengths
but I would request more time for the report.
>> I'm really comfortable with that that you're on top
of that whole process and would be delighted to give you
as much time as you need to get through that.
>> So we'll be back with you shortly.
>> Mr. Baum?
>> So the way we have it phrased here so that
to give the administration the author--
that we agree as a board so that the administration isn't running
to every comment without the benefit
of the board's direction.
>> So this is to approve--
approval of stuff time with possible action
so then I would move approval of the board
to direct the administration to explore this
so that you will have clear direction
that this is what an area we'd
like the administration to focus.
>> Second.
>> Okay, moved and seconded.
Are there any discussion?
Advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All in favor say "Aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> All opposed, motion carries.
Next item, Board Meeting Calendar:
Discussion for approval of staff time with possible action.
Mr. Baum?
>> And I'm gonna withdraw that because we are going
to be having a board retreat and I don't--
and I think we'll be discussing policies and procedures
of the board at that time so I don't think it's necessary
for us to discuss it and take up staff time with that right now.
>> Future-- the Board Meeting dates,
August 25th is the next meeting,
Saturday the 28th is the Board Retreat, and then Wednesday,
September the 1st is the Regular Board Meeting at 6:00 p.m.
>> Mr. Thompson, I don't think the board has actually approved
that August 28th for the board retreat, did we?
Couldn't we just do that through--
>> E-mail.
>> -- e-mail?
I think we have to take a formal action to approve
that we also need to approve a time.
>> And location problem.
>> And a location.
>> Well I don't-- do we have to approve the location or is
that just something it's not--
>> Well, we have to approve the time, certainly.
>> Yeah, okay.
My recommendation would be,
we start around 9:30 in the morning.
It's a Saturday morning.
>> Oh my God.
>> Is that okay?
>> Sure.
>> Alright, is there a motion to approved retreat on Saturday,
August 28th starting at 9:30 in the morning
and the place to be announced?
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>> Okay, moved and seconded.
Advisory vote?
>> Aye.
>> All opposed--
>> Before we vote-- alright, I see our counsel is here.
I'd like to find out, do we have
to have the place approved before we do this, Ms. Dowell?
>> Dr. Mann, I'm not aware of anything in the law
that would require you to have approved the place before you
set the date as you're doing now.
>> Okay.
>> It must be identified on the agenda that is posted.
>> Alright, thanks.
Okay.
>> So that members of the public are aware
where the meeting is gonna occur,
when the agenda is posted.
>> Okay.
>> We also have another meeting before then?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Alright.
>> All in favor of the motion please say "Aye."
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Okay. And we will announce the place well before the August
25th meeting.
So Future Agenda Items.
Dr. Mann?
>> Yes, I have a future agenda item, I would like for the board
to discuss in light of all the interest among the public
in the compensation for board members and executives,
I would like to have the board discuss the posting
of the compensation for the board and for our executives.
And just for the benefit of those who don't know,
the chancellor apparently--
I'm sorry, the controller apparently has issued a
directive to all sitting county governments
to post this information
and I think it's something we ought to talk about.
>> So, okay, other thoughts on that?
Anybody object to having a future agenda item?
Dr. Rocha?
>> But certainly not an objection.
But I would say that we definitely should agendized it
and proceed with the advise of counsel
on exactly what constitutes proper disclosure and how to do
that to make sure it's consistent
with also employee rights and laws and rules and regulations.
So we'll bring-- we'll certainly bring that back.
>> Future-- Any other future agenda items?
>> And I'd like this-- maybe sooner rather than later
because if you look at our list here,
we've got future agenda items that have been here
on the list for over a year.
>> Okay.
>> So I would like-- I think this is kind
of a timely subjects.
So I don't want-- I hate to see this on here next year
that we're still waiting to discuss this.
>> Okay, good, good, good suggestion.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Any other future agenda items?
Before we adjourn this, I wanted to thank again Mary Dowell
for being with us this evening both
in the close session and the open session.
Your input I think has been extraordinary valuable
and one thing that we've talked about in
which we're gonna do more
of is have counsel present at our meetings.
So, thank you very much.
>> Very welcome.
I'm pleased to be here.
>> Anything else become before us?
We are adjourned.
Thank you.
[ Silence ]