Board Meeting: June 9, 2011


Uploaded by SBCCBoardofTrustees on 14.06.2011

Transcript:
[ Silence ]
>> You take something out of order.
We'll be taking item 31J before the hearing of citizens, Andreea.
>> Does the classified career increments [inaudible] introduce this item?
 
>> Good afternoon members of the board, Dr. Serban, it's my pleasure to assist
in recognizing two classified employees for career increments.
First, I'm going to invite Mike Bishop, Grounds and Maintenance Supervisor, to come up
and to speak about Mike's career at the college is Julie Hendricks,
Director of Facilities and Campus Development.
 
[ Applause ]
[ Silence ]
[ Inaudible Remarks ]
>> Well first let me say, let me introduce you to Mike Bishop.
Mike is somebody that's one of those unsung heroes who does not step
out into the spotlight very often to receive such accolades.
So when I received my email from Stella and Mike actually agreed to accept this award,
it put a great big smile on my face.
Mike is one of the more fun people in my department to work with for sure.
When I was hired say 10 years ago my primary charge was to oversee the three supervisors
and facilities - grounds, Mike and the custodial maintenance supervisor.
But Mike was the one that came to me with stories.
They were just interesting stories that I had heard about Mike.
So rather than coming at it from an authoritarian point of view I thought well,
I'm gonna get to know Mike and see what this is all about.
Now, what I quickly realize is that Mike is an extremely competent and experienced supervisor
in the grounds department and that I can always rely on Mike for responsiveness,
thoroughness and the oversight of his staff.
Mike is the person every morning when I arrive who's left me a voice message at 6:30
in the morning telling me exactly the state of the campus.
Mike is the person that after we have the storms and the rains and the winds and we all worry
that everything will be in disarray, he and his staff have arrived at 6
and they put everything back in place.
And everybody is able to drive on campus and not use their lifeboats and Mike is the person
that if I have a contractor that comes to me and has some strange request about irrigation
or something else I know I can pick up the phone and call him, he's always very reliable.
And finally, Mike is a person that I know will always work cooperatively
with all the other groups on campus primarily groups like security and custodial
to do amazing things like at the top of the level the graduation ceremonies
and how beautiful they always look, and at the bottom of the scale,
removing all the homeless counts out of our restoration areas.
So he really takes it from one end to the next.
I think though what impresses me the most about Mike is his pride in his crew.
I think if you know Mike, his statement that he makes the most, his mantra is it's a great crew.
And he is really, really proud of them.
And every year at Christmas time I receive a photograph of he and all of his crew
that I can update and put on my office wall.
So when again was notified of this great honor I put a big smile on my face and felt very honored
to present Mike with his 20-year longevity award.
[ Applause ]
[ Silence ]
[ Inaudible Remarks ]
>> Thank you, thank you Mike.
[ Applause ]
>> And now it's my pleasure to invite Patricia Frank,
theater stage craft specialist to come forward.
[ Applause ]
>> And Katie Laris, Chair of Theater Arts, is going to talk with us about Patricia.
Patricia is getting to be a regular.
>> It is my sublime pleasure to be able to talk a little bit
about the incredible work Patricia Louise Frank, who we always refer to as Pat Frank,
has done for all of us over the course of her 25 years of work at this college.
She is our technical director.
What that means is she is solely responsible in many ways for bringing the conception
of the set designer to total fruition in the theater.
That involves taking care of plumbing, electricity, construction, painting,
every aspect of bringing to life a piece of theater to the stage.
She began working here in-- well full time-- she started working for a temporary
or part-time technical director in February of 1985
and became a full time technical director in May of 1985.
What the technical director has to do is to work and instruct students
and Pat estimates she has worked with about 3500 students over the course of her 25 years here.
That means making sure that nobody cuts an arm off, nobody loses an eye.
And that she has had an extraordinary track record with all of us both--
in every way in terms of safety, in terms of executing just gorgeous sets.
Certainly, anybody who's been to the Garvin or the Jurkowitz Theatre
over the past 25 years has seen what it takes to make the vision of a set designer a reality.
Some of the things that she has had to do includes just really complicated shows
like Sweeny Todd where there is a 40-foot bridge that was 8 feet wide and 11 feet tall flying in
and landing on two 9-foot towers.
I mean you can imagine the engineering skill that this requires.
The real thing was a production that used a 24-foot diameter revolve so the entire set had
to be able to spin around and reveal different aspects of the production.
Or the Kentucky Cycle which people who had the pleasure of seeing that still talk about it
with this mammoth production hours and hours
of time spent watching the development of a family in Kentucky.
And for that she had to have a rate platform filled with sand and ended up with a 2-story set
on wheels that was 30 feet wide and 6 foot deep.
I had the pleasure of beginning to work with Pat from the time I began here in 2003.
And both as a technical director and set designer I can say that this is somebody
that you trust the actors' lives with and you trust your own life with.
You sort of move around on the set and there's nobody I'd rather trust my life with
and my actors' life with than Pat Frank.
She is so tremendously dedicated, she will stay 'til 2 or 3
or 4 in the morning working away making sure every prop is there,
every design element is there, and we are so, so thrilled that at the end of this spring
as we said tearfully goodbye to our beloved Tom Garey we are saying hello to Pat
as our new director of design and technology taking over from Tom Garey
and it couldn't be to a better person.
So I'm thrilled to have her recognized in this way and thank you so much Pat
for everything you've done for the college.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you very much, Katie.
That was very generous of you.
I just was gonna take a little trip down memory lane.
When I started out here at City College in 1985, there was only 1 building on West Campus
and at 2 in the morning, if I was there at 2 in the morning it was my responsibility to go
through the entire building and make sure every door was locked
because there was no security around at that time.
We didn't go into 24 hours security until a little bit later.
Now of course we have this beautiful West Campus with 4 wonderful buildings, beautiful fountains,
lovely sculptures and fortunately, a parking structure, additional parking.
There were only 2 rows of parking when I started there.
In my capacity as the TD for the theater arts department I've had the opportunity
to do something different everyday and as Katie mentioned, some days I'm a plumber,
some days I'm electrician, many days I'm a painter and what I've--
my opportunity as the TD has been to work with students and watch them start
with what's a paintbrush and where do I wash it to you wanted to do a quarter inch line there
or did you wanna do a whole kind of different type of spatter technique.
And many of our students now are working in the industry
and are very successful in the industry.
So thank you very much for all those nice words, Katie.
And I also like to thank my partner who's been my biggest fan, Pat, thank you.
[ Applause ]
[ Silence ]
[ Inaudible Remark ]
[ Applause ]
[ Noise ]
>> Okay, we move on to hearings of citizens.
We have 10 requests today, we have 20 minutes to do that, you do the math, 2 minutes each
and try as best you can to hang on to those 2 minutes
or slightly less would be actually appreciated.
Steven Lewis is first and Eleanor Larson will be second.
 
Steve, welcome.
 
>> Mr. President and members of the board, I am pleased to be here.
I wish I knew all of you personally.
I know some of you personally.
It's been my pleasure to work for the college for 20 years
and recently retired, a great place.
It's wonderful to be here to have heard the accolades of our phenomenal employees
and we're fortunate to have them.
And I'm here today to as a resent retiree to voice my strong support
for Dr. Serban as superintended president.
In this challenging times dealing with budget issues, community issues,
I think Dr. Serban has been phenomenal in her capacity to forecast, predict and react
and respond to the budget vagaries that come to us from Sacramento
and from our very tax structures that is.
And I believe that the board's responsibility is to maintain, retain,
attract the very best possible leadership.
You have that leadership now in Dr. Serban, thank you.
[ Applause and Cheers ]
>> Thank you.
>> If we can do something about the applause I think it'd be helpful, just comment, yes.
>> I'm Eleanor Burns-Larson, one of the co-presidents of ACES.
First of all, I would like to hand an additional set of signatures on our petition.
I added to the close to 1500 that we gave you at the last meeting.
We want to talk to you about the budget.
One of our members has written this and want to have it heard in this meeting.
Ken Trompetrini wrote the following.
A review of the tentative budget for 2011-2012 proposed by the administration is disappointing.
Given the economic conditions of the state and the likelihood
that apportionment funding will be reduced by 5.8 million next year.
One would expect an austerity budget with significantly reduced expenditures.
On the contrary, instead of a budget reflecting reductions in enrollment and classes,
we have a budget that says SBCC is on a tremendous growth mode.
Increased spending for academic and nonacademic salaries and benefits of whapping 15 percent
for benefits as well as a 14 percent increase in supplies and materials.
Where are the 1.553 million of cost reductions associated with credit and noncredit,
nonenhanced FTES reductions that have been presented to support scenario 5.
A 4.45 million increase for equipment replacement
to 6 million versus this year's 1.6 million.
2.47 million increase for the construction fund to 3.75 million versus this year's 1.28 million.
Where will this extra spending come from?
The administration wants to spend down the reserves at the same time that academic programs
for credit and noncredit are being reduced.
Whose interests are being served by this budget?
Certainly not the student body of SBCC who will see classes eliminated
and tuitions increased or the community at large.
Is this the type of leadership that the board of trustees feel that SBCC needs to deal
with the future's financial and educational uncertainties?
Now, I know Cathy should be next, she has the second part.
>> Cathy, you are next.
And following Cathy is Doug Hersh.
>> Good afternoon.
As Eleanor said I'm doing the second half of Dr. Trompetrini's paper here.
Publicly available data currently indicates the following conclusions.
The current administrative leadership is dedicated to continuing
to downsize the enhanced noncredit category of continued education.
So that cumulatively since 07-08 the number
of student enrollment opportunities will have been reduced by more than 50 percent.
SBCC is faced with many years of budget cuts and increased focus
on improving the educational statistics of degrees, certificates awarded
and a reduced number of dropouts.
With these challenges the administrative leaderships focus on only one part
of continued education seems too narrow and short sighted.
Conversion of noncredit, nonenhanced classes to community service classes may lead to a loss
of center status for Wake and Schott and a further loss
of state revenues that support these facilities.
More time is needed to develop a rational strategy and a plan for the degree, certificate,
skill training and lifelong continued education programs.
As part of this plan, the capabilities required of the educational and administrative workforce,
the necessary facilities, infrastructure improvements or modifications and the timing
for technology upgrade implementations should be identified.
The plan should be based on a realistic appraisal of the financial environment
over the next 3 to 5 years with regards to both state and federal funding.
No cost reduction should be taken off the table prematurely.
Equipment replacement and construction projects should be delayed where possible until financial
and enrollment conditions improve.
A good start would be to freeze the budgets for these funds at the current year's actual levels.
The total reserve balances in the general fund, the equipment fund, the construction fund
and the GPA fund are approximately 44,000 dollars as of the end of June 2011.
The situation provides a financial cushion to undertake a comprehensive review
over the next fiscal year to determine the impacts that the combination
of state funding reductions and potentially declining the California resident enrollments,
all the effect these will have on SBCC in the future.
Will it remain a local community institution or will it move to a more of a private school model
with continued increases in nonresident enrollments.
Now, more than ever, SBCC's leadership should be reaching out to the community for input
and guidance so that it can chart a course for the future.
We think it's very important that the multi-faceted lifelong learning,
educational mission is continued in years ahead.
The proposed 2011-12 tentative budget is really just not a satisfactory first step
to SBC's future and needs to the drastically altered and then--
and needs to be drastically altered to reflect reality, thank you very much.
>> Thank you Cathy.
Doug Hersh and following Doug is Ray O'Connor.
 
>> President Superintendent Serban, President Haslund, esteemed members of the board,
thank you for this opportunity to speak with you again.
I'm here in support of Dr. Andreea Serban and I'd like to start by saying
that she is greatly esteemed at the college and in the community
because she articulates a clear vision.
>> And she engages an ongoing dialog with the college community.
 
She is deeply engaged in the community and at the national and state level.
And she has developed very effective relationships.
In fact, she was named as one of the top 50 businesswomen in the Tri Counties.
 
Jeffrey Angler, the president-elect of the SBC Student Senate says,
"With President Serban's open lunch hours for discussion and her attendance of student events
and activities, she allows students to openly voice their opinions and concerns.
Dr. Serban is fiscally savvy.
She has ended the 2010-2011 year with strong reserves.
She ensures support for numerous student success activities.
Working with President Serban we navigated 3 difficult years with no layoffs or furloughs
of regular employees with solid reserves and no need for borrowing.
Rosette Strandberg says, "I commend and respect the decisions you have made.
You have a difficult job ahead of you encountering those
who display their frustrations and harbor unrealistic expectations.
And so I wish you energy, strength and support."
President Serban is a transformational leader.
She prepared the college for an extremely positive ACCJC accreditation visit
with 9 commendations praising the college and the administration.
She supports the development of new programs for workplace training.
In fact, this academic year our diagnostic medical sonography program received its
initial accreditation.
President Serban provided the leadership for Measure V, our fist issuance of bonds.
Linda [inaudible] writes, "You've done so much for this college.
Thank you for remaining our president."
And President Serban has focused on student success and the SBCC mission.
In fact, the awards, recognitions and grants we received
in 2010-11 are the strongest the college has ever had.
For the first time in its history, this academic year SBCC was recognized as one of the 101 "Best
for Vet" colleges and universities in the United States.
And Dr. Serban is recognized at the national level and was appointed
to the US National Committee for UNESCO by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
She was recognized as well by the board of directors of the National Association
of Professional Women as the 2011-12 professional woman of the year.
Dr. Serban is resolute and trustworthy.
Liz Auchincloss writes that Andreea is trusted by the classified staff because she has proven
over the last 3 years as president superintendent that she understands
and respects the important role which we play in the operation of the college.
Dean Nevins, SBCC Faculty Senate president-elect writes that,
"Dr. Serban successfully transition the college's department level funding process away
from the previous fund 41 model to one which provides much greater transparency and reflects
to a larger degree the actual costs of running the college.
President Serban showed her trustworthiness by living up to every promise made
with regard to funding departments.
President Serban has many supporters within SBCC, within the community,
throughout the state and at the national level.
As Abraham Lincoln said, a house divided against itself cannot stand
and therefore I ask you esteemed members of the board, all of you,
to please be agents of unity, not division.
To work cooperatively and collegially with our president, to stand behind her
through good times and bad, to give Dr. Serban the unequivocally positive evaluation
that she has earned, to add the traditional year to her contract and finally,
for the sake of the college, please do your part to put this destructive chapter behind us.
Thank you very much for listening.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Ray.
[ Applause ]
[ Noise ]
>> I might take back that olive branch I offered you yesterday.
 
I asked to speak today so that my comments will become part of the public record.
 
I'd given each of you some of the pertinent information that I hope to cover and I'm going
to try to do it in 2 minutes, Peter.
I believe that the board is in violation of both its own board policy 21,
oh 2315 and the California Government Code section 54957.1.
Why? A closed session was held yesterday for the announced purpose of conducting an evaluation
of the performance of the superintendent president
in accordance with the terms of her contract.
The board reconvened after that session and the board president announced that the evaluation
of Dr. Serban had been completed but failed to provide the result of action taken or the votes
of the individual members on this issue as required by both the board's own policy
and the government code section 5497.
 
I vehemently protest what I and many others view as a strategy
to avoid revealing your vote on the matter.
And in anticipation that you will claim that such action is not required in this case,
I have prepared a short list of citations from government codes and board policy.
I think the first thing is to lay to rest what is meant by action taken.
And I quote from section 54952.6 of the government code.
As used in this chapter, action taken means a collective decision made by majority
of the members of a legislative body which by the way City College is.
A collective commitment or a promise by a majority of the members of a legislative body
to make a positive or a negative decision.
Or an actual vote by a majority of the members of a legislative body when sitting as a body
or entity upon a motion, proposal, resolution order or ordinance.
How can you possibly deny that you have taken action
when you conducted an evaluation and arrived at a conclusion?
Now, here is what the government code says about action taken in a close session.
What does it say?
It says it provides, "the legislative body
of any local agency shall publically report any action taken in close session.
And the vote or abstention of every member present as follows.
Action taken to appoint, employ, dismiss, accept the resignation of,
or otherwise affect the employment status of a public employee
in closed session shall be reported at the public meeting during
which the closed session is held.
 
Finally, here is the language from the board policy.
After any closed session, the board shall reconvene an open session before adjourning
and shall consistent with law announce any actions taken in closed session and the vote
of every individual board member present.
 
And should you question whether the provisions that I've cited apply to City College?
I included a clarification of what it means to be a legislative body or in a local district.
Now the thing that concerns me and many others who have addressed this board previously is
that it appears that from the very start,
the majority of the board members have had their own agenda.
 
Why else would on the very first meeting after you were sworn
in would there be a single topic selected for that meeting
which was the evaluation of Dr. Serban.
And why would it take the form of hiring an outside attorney to advise you how
to accomplish your goals when the college has and pays an attorney for her advice.
I just have difficulty believing that your actions are going to contribute to the survival
of this college in a meaningful way much as you might think they are.
You have created unrest and mistrust among the members of the college community.
When you fail to announce the results of your deliberations after concluding the evaluation,
that was just another brick in the load that you bring.
And I really hope that you will consider wisely before you make this action official.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Thank you.
Ana Fagan [phonetic].
 
Following Ana Fagan is Dano Pagenkopf.
 
>> Right.
>> It's you.
Okay.
>> My name is Ana Fagan.
I am alumni and recent graduate of SBCC class of 2011.
I am transferring to a 4-year school,
San Francisco Art Institute, to get my BSA in Print Making.
I have taken classes through both SBCC for my degree
and last year started taking adult ed classes for fun.
By taking classes from each, I have seen both sides
in the last couple of weeks in my adult ed classes.
In my adult ed wire wrapping class, the topic of budget has come up.
When I try to voice my opinion, I always get shushed by the older
and more traditional adult ed students.
A couple of students I have had or a couple of times I've had to leave the room
because I can't stand listening to them go off on the fact
that classes may cost more or get canceled.
I am tired of constant Dr. Serban bashing that occurs in my classes.
If I try to voice my opinion, I am ignored
or told I don't know the facts because I'm too young.
At least I gather information with an open mind and try to make an informed opinion.
The funding should be put towards classes that are for credit.
I have had credit-based classes canceled due to budget cuts.
Then I have to scramble to get into another class that is full already.
I enjoy adult ed classes and find them relaxing after a long week of school.
But I think credit classes should take priority over the people that are--
classes over people who take them to keep busy.
Credit classes are helping students get a degree and able
to keep up with the ever changing world.
I am working towards a degree to better myself and my future so that I can make a difference.
I think that that takes priority over wire wrapping, book binding and drawing
in nature adult classes that I have taken in my free time to pass my free time.
Thank you.
>> Thank you very much.
[ Applause ]
>> Dano is to be followed by Judy Meyer.
>> Good afternoon.
My name is Dano Pagenkopf.
I'm troubled by something that I'm seeing and things I'm ready
in the newspaper lately about what's going on here.
It seems there is a lack of representation on the part of credit-based students.
And I also note the absence of the student trustee on this board
and that's because it's summer vacation.
But these are very important things that are happening right now,
and the student voice does need to be heard.
I respectfully support Dr. Serban.
She is an amazing person and has done a great deal for this school.
I transferred from Santa Barbara City College into the chemical engineering program
at University of California, Santa Barbara.
Part of that being an average student in the engineering sense of the word,
I think a big part of me getting into that school was Dr. Serban wrote a letter
of recommendation and helped me increase my chances of getting there.
I am forever grateful but it shows how much she cares about students
and our success, credit-based students.
I'd also like to speak on priorities.
Does credit-based education take priority over adult education?
I'd like to say that without a credit-based university,
there would be no accreditation for the school.
And with that, there would be no adult education program.
Adult education is basically the icing on the cake of the school.
It is not extremely common to have an adult ed program associated
with the community college in the state of California.
It just goes to show the success that the school has due
to the outstanding past leadership that this school has had.
The school seems divided on the lines of adult education
and in underrepresented credit-based education.
I appeal to the common sense of the adult ed constituency and I ask that we all begin
to show Dr. Serban a little more gratitude and a lot less attitude.
Thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Judy.
>> Thank you, Peter.
Good afternoon President Serban, President Peter and members of the board.
I'm Dr. Judith Evans Meyer, Professor of Medical Microbiology.
Yesterday was a pivotal day in the 100-year history
of Santa Barbara City College, one of which I am not proud of.
The third evaluation meeting was scheduled by the board of trustees at 4 o'clock
with a public session followed by a closed session.
The room was full of supporters, many more than are here today.
And many of them were here to speak on behalf of Dr. Serban.
They joined other community members, staff, and students from prior meetings
who also expressed their heart warming support for her leadership as president of this college.
There were 16 speakers, Len Jarrott, Stephen Wright, Marla Arnoldi, Leatrice Luria,
Doug Hersh, Dr. Richard Fulton, Frank Schipper, Liz Auchincloss, Dr. Nick Vincent,
Mark McIntire, Ray O'Connor [phonetic], Joyce McTiether [phonetic], Jose Negronie [phonetic],
a veteran student who has enjoyed this college after having a bad experience at two others.
Oscar Carona [phonetic], another student who has enjoyed the pleasures of this college
after having been turned away from others.
Joann Fenari [phonetic] and all of us know our beloved Silvio Di Loreto.
 
They all spoke eloquently and graciously in support of the extraordinary positive tenure
of Dr. Serban here in her 3 years at Santa Barbara City College.
Numerous accolades were repeated again and again with the same thing concluding by asking
that this board be given a satisfactory evaluation
and a 1 year extension of Dr. Serban's contract.
It was a feel good session.
We all felt that after such vote of confidence from such a diverse representation
of the community that the board of trustee would finally listen and do the right thing.
Many of us waited the 2 hours for the results hoping for the best.
They returned from the closed session, concluded that they reconvened the open session.
It was apparent the board had been coached on this evaluation process.
They looked at us.
We weren't even in the room.
Peter reported that the evaluation process had been completed
and adjourned the meeting immediately.
They stood up and left.
The air was thick and sad.
 
Well, we have not been officially informed and may never be
because the closed session is confidential, that the body language was loud and clear.
 
It was the impression of everybody in that room that the board had not performed as requested
by the numerous speakers and the 750 signatures.
And more, we get these signatures in just one day.
And on the letter support, we feel they did not give her a satisfactory evaluation
and they did not extend her contract.
To the board, I've been a teacher at this college for 36 years,
always proud of my 5 presidents that I work with, always proud of my board of trustees
and of my faculty that I work with and of the staff and then my dean
and then my wonderful EVP who's always there for us and particularly for our students.
Today, I stand here ashamed of the behavior of this board
and the perpetuation of a divided college.
>> You are supposed to be part of the solution that's why we elected you, not the problem.
We are in this together, continue education and credit.
We stand united.
It has never been them and us, not until this happened.
So, let's please start this healing process.
And please, listen to the speakers and do what they are asking you to do.
I thank you.
[ Applause ]
>> Dr. Mendelson.
 
Yes. You are next.
 
And then Atty Garfinkel is following Dr. Mendelson.
[ Noise ]
>> Dr. Serban, President Haslund, just for everybody's information, a little history.
I am a retired professor of medicine at UCSF and had been involved
with lifelong learning at various institutes.
Last being Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
I'm here to ask that the board consider any lifelong learning institute here be the moneys
come and be allocated to the university that the entire function
of how the institute is run is done by people in the community.
To give you an example, when I first got here moving here from the San Luis Obispo area,
I was aware that that the Osher Institute was giving out grants for 100,000 dollars
for 4 years, 3 years and then at the end of the 3 years of their up and running,
there would be a grant of a million dollars.
We applied for that through the study group in the San Luis area.
And we're given the grant, the money came to Dean Parks but all the work was done by members
of the community not existing faculty at the university.
And if you look nationwide, there are about 500 of these lifelong learning institutes going
on currently funded in various ways that I'm aware of.
And the most successful ones are done where the community achieved its peer thought [phonetic]
as opposed to-- so that it doesn't detract from the university,
but in fact having people involved there and the community involved increases the amount
of donations and interest of the senior population as relates to the university
and doesn't distract because of space or parking.
So when I moved here, I talked to President Romo and told him about these.
And he asked me if I would serve on the advisory boards for the adult end which I have done.
And what I am concerned about is that in spite of being very gracious to me,
I met with President Serban and offered this information and this context and told her
that I was in touch with the person who is head of the Osher Institute in San Luis,
I mean in San Francisco, that I was aware that the UCSB had gotten the money
and had not really provided much coursework at all compared to what we did at Cal Poly.
I spoke with her I think at that meeting with the head
of the foundation at that time and another member.
And I knew that she was new on the job and have many other responsibilities.
And then I followed up on that and that I think another time,
there was a planned vacation which is understandable.
But what I'm asking this board to consider is that there is plenty of data available
through existing continuing lifelong education for people in retirement that adds
to the university as opposed to distracting from it.
And I'll be happy to provide that at a later time should you want my input.
Thank you, and thank you for letting me come directly from the hospital looking like a bum.
Thank you.
[ Laughter ]
>> Thank you Dr. Mendelson.
Atty?
 
>> Good afternoon members of the board, President Serban, President Haslund.
I didn't quite expect to be back talking to you at this podium again under these circumstances.
I'm not here to talk to you about the budget but about priorities and about unity.
Unity as in being a cohesive unit, the amount of time spent on their view
of one employee's contract was not only excessive but unfair to the employee,
the students, yourselves, and the community of constituents.
We all know it takes work to be a unit so I ask you
to put personal preconceived notions aside and to work together.
The board of governors and the chancellor's office has given you directives
for the priorities of this college.
In those directives, it has specifically said credit side.
It has specifically said things along the lines of vocational education and degree completion.
That comes from the state.
I ask that you keep SBCC the jewel of the system, that you follow the directives
that were already given to you as a unit.
Please make your decisions about what you think is best for the students first,
thinking about what is best for the students first.
And if you aren't sure what's best for the students,
please ask us because we are always more than ready to tell you.
And like so as everybody else.
Right now, I think we have to move on as directed
by the chancellor's office but in unity.
In conclusion, I am also very curious about what the results of yesterday's evaluation were
and it is within the purview of the board to respond to public comment if they so choose.
>> Okay. I think I can offer a word.
It was as a consequence of legal counsel that has advised us that a closed session evaluation
of the superintendent president like closed session evaluation
of anybody is a confidential matter.
And we were advised further that the Brown Act provisions relating
to reporting closed session actions do not apply to anything that occurred in connection
with this evaluation and hence nothing was required to be
or should be reported out of closed session.
Okay. We move on to the agenda.
Thank you all for participating.
[ Inaudible Remarks ]
>> Yeah.
>> That's what you did.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Okay. But you didn't ask to speak at 2.4.
You ask to speak at this regular section.
But we will remember.
We move on to item 1.5 which is the approval of the minutes of the regular meetings,
March 24th and April 28th and May 26th.
Shall we do them one at a time or do you want to--
>> One at a time.
>> One at a time, okay.
Can we approve, can I have a motion to approve the minutes of March 24th?
>> So moved.
>> Second?
>> Second.
>> Discussion.
>> Yeah. There were two-- this is on, I think.
There were two corrections that I put in and they weren't made to the minutes.
We've seen these minutes before.
One was on page-- it was page 4 to change can into can't.
It's a silly little one but I had already made that and it didn't happen.
On page 8 I wanted my abstention to be noted and i wasn't on there.
>> Angie [phonetic] went back and listened to the recording
and there was no voicing of an abstention.
>> You are kidding me.
>> Angie went back and listened, I didn't listen.
>> I'm telling you, I did abstain and I had a microphone.
Maybe it wasn't on.
I don't know.
>> But you know, that's okay.
It doesn't matter to me.
I'm not gonna argue about it.
The other thing is on page 14 there too.
There's-- I circled a couple of words because I think it would be more fitting.
I'm trying to get to page 14 here, more fitting to take those words out and they are.
 
I'm sorry I can't quite get to 14.
There it is.
After Trustee Livingston asked the cost for Mr. Price.
Mr. Price noted to the extent that it's a concern of the board.
He won't charge anything.
And then you added Trustee Villega said so moved and I don't think that was a motion.
I think he just said that because well, he'll have to tell us why
but I don't think it was a real motion.
It wasn't seconded.
There wasn't anything there so I think those words should be taken out of there.
But the two things and, you know, if you don't want me to have said I abstained.
I know I did and I don't really care.
>> You know, it's okay.
Angie didn't hear it, and Angie went on purpose to verify.
I would also like to suggest it would be very helpful if President Haslund
when motions are made, it helps us with the minutes to point out who voted yes,
no and abstentions that will make it easier for the very correct reporting on the minutes.
>> Okay.
 
>> So I take these as corrections to the minutes of March 24th.
Are there others?
 
Are we ready to vote on the minutes of March 24th?
All in favor say aye?
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed, nay.
Motion?
>> I suppose you need a role call.
It's that-- what we'll need to do is role call?
>> Well, when everybody's yes, it's clear but when we have divided votes,
this one will be helpful to make sure we record.
>> My understanding of this motion is that there's unanimous consent to approve these, no?
>> I'm abstaining.
>> Okay.
>> I'm abstaining.
>> Abstentions?
Okay, I'm sorry.
I should have called for abstentions.
1, 2, 3 abstentions.
Okay, with that vote the minutes are not approved.
We will move onto the minutes of April 28th.
>> Move approval of minutes on April 28th.
>> Your moves to approve.
Is there a second?
>> Second.
>> Luis, second.
Discussion of the minutes of April 28th, yes?
>> I'd like to say that I'm pleased that these are shorter.
And I have a correction on page 4 under 1.5.
The second paragraph it says because there was not a quorum
on this item the minutes were not approved.
I don't think quorum is the word.
I think it's majority so that should be corrected.
>> Yeah, majority is correct.
>> Okay, so that correction being taken into account.
Is there further discussion, Luis?
>> I think it might be helpful if maybe not a role call but a show
of hands so that we're absolutely clear--
>> Right.
>> On who's voting which way.
And maybe hold it at least a few seconds so that Angie can accurately capture who's voting how.
>> We move on to approval of the minutes as corrected of April 28th.
All in favor please raise your hand.
Abstentions.
And rejections of this motion.
Nobody. Okay, one abstention.
We move on to the final, May 26th.
Is there a motion to approve the minutes of May 26th?
>> So move.
>> So move.
>> Luis moves and--
>> Second.
>> Lisa seconds.
Discussion of the minutes of May 26, yes?
>> I just have a question.
I note that the minutes on page 11 say that there would not be a need for a court reporter
and that we all much enjoy the presence of our co-reporter.
I think we talked several times about eliminating that expense
so I'm wondering where we are on that?
>> As I explained several times the issue is for us to be able to also reduce the number
of meetings and length of meetings such that Angie can handle the minutes on her own.
So I'm hoping that as we work on the schedule for meetings for the next 6 months
of this calendar year by reducing the number of meetings and by maybe having a priority of items
to discuss that will help us to not need these assistants.
The assistance right now is needed for us to keep up and because it's--
Angie cannot by herself at this point keep up with that.
We need this help.
As we discussed last time the desire is not--
if there are issues that really require the committees to meet absolutely but I think
as you recall we discussed last time, we currently have 4 committees of the board.
If each committee meets every time plus the study session plus the board meeting we are
at 6 board meetings per month.
And that has created the need for additional assistants to keep up with the meetings.
So that's really the issue.
Whether a co-reporter here is not we'll need some way to have transcription
that helps getting the minutes done 'cause Angie really can't listen to this recording
so many times so many hours to get the minutes done.
It's just too much volume of listening.
So really the issue is we need a solution to this
and that was a solution we found to be able to keep up.
>> Motion before is just to approve the minutes of--
>> Right.
>> May 26.
I hear no amendments to the-- or corrections to the minutes so we'll take a vote.
All in favor, please raise your hand.
One, two, three, four.
Opposed. One opposed.
Abstentions.
Two.
>> Abstention because I wasn't present since--
>> Okay.
>> Abstentions are happening for various reasons I want to make it clear simply
because my presence was not at that meeting.
So therefore, I'm abstaining on that ground.
>> Thank you for that clarification.
1.6 communications report from the Academic Senate, Dean Nevins, are you here?
There you are.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Board President Haslund, board members, Superintendent President Serban,
this is my first appearance before the board as the Academic Senate president and I would
like to thank the Vice President of the Academic Senate Kenley Neufeld for doing
such a good job the last board meeting report.
I dashed out a report on my iPhone from Germany and Kenley had translated that gibberish
into something approximating a really good speech, so I'm very thankful to Kenley.
In the intervening several weeks since the senate has not met,
so currently I have nothing to report.
I don't get use to this.
It's gonna be much longer in the future I'm sure.
The Academic Senate looks forward to working with the board and the superintendent president
through SBCC's processes to address the merit
of difficult decisions that we face as an institution.
By working together, I believe that we can surmount these issues and emerge
as a much stronger and more vibrant institution, thank you.
>> Thank you, Dean.
There's no report from the Associated Students.
Report on Classified Employees, Liz Auchincloss.
 
>> Good afternoon members of the board, Mr. President.
Our consultation group hasn't met since the last meeting, so I won't report from them
but I do wanna report on our classified end services [phonetic] that we're having tomorrow.
I thank the district for providing this time for us.
Tomorrow, there are several topics that people can choose from.
There is one called coming up for air, stress management.
[Inaudible] retirement formulas, service credit, retirement payment options, evacuation
and standard emergency management system, work as a team, play as a team
and triage and disaster first aide.
People can pick three out of those.
Most of them are morning, one of them continues on into the afternoon
and there is lunch starting at 11:45 in the Campus Center.
Staff have the choice of [inaudible] chicken or lasagna.
Our president will be speaking to us and so I wanna just thank everyone and remind everybody
that the end service is tomorrow.
And as far as other things, I have requested to speak at item 2.1, so I'll be back.
>> Thank you.
Report from our PIO, Joan Galvan.
 
>> Good afternoon President Haslund, President Serban and members of the board.
In terms of major media coverage in the last three weeks,
the May 26th board meeting was covered by the Santa Barbara independent and KEYT-TV Channel 3.
Commencement followup coverage was featured in the May 27th ad we had in Noozhawk,
the June 1st Santa Barbara Independent and the June 3rd Santa Ynez Valley News.
Dr. Ofelia Arellanos, editorial with the continuing education update run
in the May 29th Santa Barbara News Press.
Softball pitcher Kylie Snyder signing with Colorado State University was covered
on June 2nd by KSBY TV Channel 6, the Santa Barbara News Press and the Santa Maria Times.
Contraction delays at SBCC due to lack of state funding was reported
in the June 6th Santa Barbara Independent online.
Dr. Andreea Serban was interviewed in a June 6th Noozhawk article regarding the US Supreme Court
ruling upholding California Assembly Bill 540 which allows children of illegal immigrants
to pay instate college tuition fees.
The foundation for SBCC student fundraising campaign was featured in the June 8th Noozhawk.
The associate degree nursing program graduation was covered in the June 8th Edhat
and the Students in Free Enterprise club is project
to help a Carpinteria realty company improve its sustainability practices was featured
in the June 9th Noozhawk.
Are there any questions?
Thank you.
>> No questions.
Thank you, Joan.
Andreea, you are next.
>> Good afternoon members of the board, colleagues, members of the community.
First I would like to acknowledge and thank all faculty staff, students,
donors and community members who have so eloquently
and positively articulated their support for me and for the college over the last few weeks.
As Ms. Lee Luria, a long time friend and major donor to the college, said yesterday,
it is particularly important in this challenging times to look at the whole picture,
consider the entire mission of the college and do what is best for our students.
And we'll need to remember that we are here for our students and their success
and that has been the hallmark of what has made SBCC that premiere college that it is
and I hope we will continue to focus on that and remember what is truly important.
I would like to welcome Dr. Dean Nevins as the president of the Academic Senate.
I too look forward to working with you Dean and I'm glad that Ignacio continues to come
because I will miss Ignacio, so I'm glad he's here.
Our credit summer session will start on Monday, June 13 and unlike many other community colleges
around the state which have reduced significantly
or completely eliminated the summer sessions, because we are in the excellent fiscal shape
that we are and we can afford to take a phased approach
to implementing what we believe to be upcoming cuts.
We are able to offer this summer the same number of classes on the credit side as last summer.
Students are very much aware of the need to register as early as they can and they do.
This time head count enrollment for summer is up by 3 percent at the similar point
in time last summer and cumulative unit enrollment is up by 5.6 percent.
I would like to thank again all faculty who are actually taking more students
in their sections than the normal limits.
That's how we're able to accommodate more students even though the number
of sections has remained the same as last summer.
We are still waiting to hear from Sacramento regarding the state budget and personally,
I'm not holding my breath because if it's going to be as last year, we'll have to wait
until the end of September to really know what the final rendering of the budget is.
Meanwhile, I would like to continue to encourage all employees, students,
committee members to please e-mail us at budget@sbcc.edu, budget@sbcc.edu with your ideas
about generating new revenues or reducing expenditures.
We have received a number of pages already which we are collating and we are going
to highlight them for the board for our upcoming study session on June 23rd.
Do not worry.
Those of you who have had some really controversial ones, no names are given.
All suggestions are anonymous.
June 1st, the foundation for SBCC officially launched the campaign for student success.
A fun fundraising campaign aiming to raise 500,000 dollars for our students and programs
and the Winslow Maxwell Charitable Trust is offering a match of 50 cents on every dollar
for every donation made now through June 30th.
The offer lends a sense of urgency and scale to the campaign for student success
as 250,000 dollars must be raised at a minimum to receive the match.
So I really want to extend my thanks to all foundation staff who are really great
to work with, to the numerous volunteers who have signed up, who really believe
in the mission of SBCC and the success of our students, thank you for helping us.
On June 3rd, tomorrow, approximately 60 students are expected to participate
in the Adult High School GED Graduation hosted by SBCC Continuing Education at 6 p.m.
in the student services plaza and this is a very important moment
and I appreciate Dr. Haslund agreeing to hand the diplomas
with our vice president of continuing education.
I know that the students will appreciate having you there
and I also appreciate other board members who RSVP'd.
They really appreciate your presence.
I would like to congratulate Ignacio Ponce in the American Sign Language Program
and our Veterans Affairs Program coordinated by Magdalena Torres for winning the Rice Diversity
and Equity Award from the California committee college's board of governors.
Ignacio received the award as an individual recipient
and the Veterans Support Program was the program award recipient.
We submitted nominations for two of three possible categories and both won.
And I would like to mention that Ignacio is our first full time American Sign Language faculty
in the College School of Modern Languages and he has been responsible for expanding the program
from about 100 students to 200 students in the American Sign Language.
The SBCC Veterans Student Program is continuing to do a fabulous job
because of Magdalena's thoughtful leadership and novel ideas and relentless pursuit
of doing everything possible for our veteran students.
So I want to thank both Ignacio and Magdalena for the great job you are doing for SBCC.
We will be honored in Sacramento on July 11 by the board of governors and other dignitaries
on hand, even the governor was invited, whether he will show up or not remains to be seen.
I will also like to congratulate SBCC theater group for winning three awards
in this year's independent theater awards competition.
Once again, our theater arts department is doing a great job.
And I will also like, last but not the least, to congratulate the employees
who have reached benchmark years of service this month, Mike Bishop was here earlier 20 years,
Emma Cruz 10 years, Patricia Frank 25 years, Thomas Harbeson 10 years,
Ricky Hunter 15 years and Jose Rodriguez 10 years.
It's a pleasure to have staff that have this dedication for our college
and we owe them a great deal for all the work they do so thank you
so much on behalf of all of us at SBCC.
Thank you.
>> Thank you.
We move on to item 2 and the first item on our agenda--
>> I think you--
>> Did I miss something?
Oh, I apologize.
>> Report from members of the board?
Yeah, one, two--
>> I was just going to ask Dr. Serban to place a discussion of the question of pay rates
for employees who are hourly workers paid on grants which was raised
at our May 12th board meeting in public comment by Senator Padilla, I think, [inaudible].
And I was asking if we could put that on our next fiscal subcommittee meeting for discussion.
 
>> Sure.
>> Okay. Luis?
>> Yeah, first I would like to thank everyone that addressed the board this evening
and actually-- but I'm very concerned with Mr. O'Connor's remarks
and with the document that was handed to us.
So as a member of the governing body, I would like to ask Dr. Haslund
to seek a second legal opinion on how our reporting was handled because I'm very concerned
after reading this document and if you could report back to us on that second legal opinion.
>> Be glad too.
Other comments?
Okay, now we move on to item 2 and 2.1 is a public hearing but first the adoption
of a resolution that moves us into a committee of the whole to focus on the budget.
>> Dr. Haslund.
>> Yeah.
>> Before doing that, can I make just some summary comments on this?
>> Okay.
>> Very briefly.
I think it's important to do so because actually we can also briefly respond to a number
of the comments made under hearing of citizens that I think the public deserves an answer
and we have the information and we can do it very quickly.
>> But I would like to first make a general statement that a tentative budget is exactly
that tentative and the word is used on purpose by the statutes
that governed California Community Colleges.
We have a tentative budget that needs to be approved by June 15 that is simply a first stake
or a first cut and then that allows us to pay bills starting July 1st
as opposed to the state of California.
We cannot issue IOUs or any of that.
We actually need to have a budget pass.
And then there is an adaptive budget that obviously--
it's worked through between now and September and then you are presented for discussion,
review and approval on adaptive budget in September.
 
We worked through an iterative process of this college.
And every year between the tentative budget and the adaptive budget there are always changes.
So I want to make it clear and I made it clear to prior meetings but I like to rate,
rate that this is the first stake to the budget.
And the adaptive budget as I mentioned to you and I know you have looked,
every year you can verify yourself there are changes made.
So, it's also an issue of the information that's available from the state.
And actually right now we don't know what the state budget is going to be.
Based on various changes between the January 1st presentation from Governor Jerry Brown
through the May revise on May 16, many different verses and the information came from the state.
The way we work is to take the best piece of information we have with any one point in time
and try to come up with a proposal for a budget.
I want to recognize and acknowledge again the work that trustees Macker and Croninger did
and looking at the various pieces of information that were--
we presented to you through the various fiscal and study sessions.
And I want to reiterate again which I mentioned before; projections that we presented
for years out are constantly refined.
Those projections I mentioned that they are work in progress because the assumptions need
to change based on the information we have.
They also need to change based on the direction we receive from you as the board.
And obviously, we welcome and need your direction as to
where your vision of the budget is.
So I want to be very clear about that.
We already engaged actually in a refinement work and more work with the college community.
So this is just that, a tentative budget.
It's not the adaptive budget and there is much more word
that we know and we already engaged in doing.
And because questions were raised about the construction and the equivalent funds,
I would like Leslie Griffin, our controller to very briefly speak to that very briefly.
And Paul Bishop also, even more briefly, to address very quickly a question
from the comments under [inaudible] relative to the replacement
of equipment in the technology area.
>> Good afternoon.
I'd like to direct you to two pages appendixes that we put into this budget presentation
which allows us to present more information about the utilization of funds
within the equipment fund and in the construction fund, and these appendixes pages 15
and 16 of the budget presentation.
If I may just go to those pages and highlight some
of the information you're going to see there.
For the equipment fund on page 15, we have provided under the expenditure area a detail,
more detail as to what the funds are being utilized for.
Just to quickly go down the page, we're showing you that we replaced the copiers on campus.
We have for our IT division we have the refresh of the computer systems here on campus.
Excuse me.
We have a number of program and review request that came from our program and review process
and this is our chance as managers who are working on a goals of the college
and the mission of the college to express,
articulate what are our needs in order to get our jobs done.
These requests are forwarded, prioritized and then incorporated into the budget.
And here you can see what kinds of expenses were incorporated in the budget for this current year
and going forward for next years.
For the next page, it's page 16.
This is the construction fund.
You're going to find here more information on the projects that we have already set
up for this current year and what the projects will be going forward into the next year.
So you can see for instance we had remodeling, upgrading, replacement, that kind of thing going
on on campus so you can see the actual projects that we have active
and then plan for the coming year.
So I'm hoping that provides you with more detail.
There's a lot more detail under all of these numbers of course but it would give you an idea
of the activity that is being funded through our budget process.
>> I just want to say thank you to Dr. Serban
and the business services for this additional detail.
I think it answers a lot of people's questions.
And as we move into the final documents for the proposed adopted budget, a little more detail
on the 3.1 million program review projects would be great.
I know that you haven't fine tuned that yet but this is excellent, I really appreciate it.
Thank you for your work.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you.
[ Pause ]
>> Well, first I'd like to say thank you
for letting the camera see my face for the first time.
You know, the back of my head has been in every video.
I'm gonna address, you know, the issue of the 1.4 million
that is in the computer refresh budget.
This is inc-- you know, some people-- as people have mentioned,
this seems to be this capricious increase over the last year.
However, this budget isn't just-- we don't sort of just pick a number.
You know, it's all based on our inventory and the age of the inventory and we actually do it
in a fairly logical way, any piece of equipment that reaches the age
of now 5 years before December 30th of the next budget year is included
in that year for being replaced.
And we're very specific about what equipment actually gets on that list.
It's not just any piece of equipment.
It's ones that we've approved that are dedicated to faculty staff,
our other administrative purposes.
Sometimes people get older equipment that they need to have
around just for testing or other things.
Those aren't on that refresh cycle.
Now next year we-- you know, our budget comes up to about 1.4 million.
This is-- this is like the perfect storm in a way because we move from a 3-year cycle
to a 4-year cycle to a 5-year cycle.
We're finding-- you know, they now all have their peaks.
We've had a couple of low years last year, was a bit of a peak.
Next year is going to be a bigger peak.
You know just to give you an idea why, there were apparently 5 years ago we replaced a lot
of the large student labs with new equipment and they're all coming due.
In this case our school of media arts with about 244 computers that will be placed across all
of their labs, the learning resource center with 144 computers in their [inaudible] labs
and out in their general use areas,
modern languages with almost 100 computers being replaced in the next year or so.
This is all about-- you know, the biggest part of this is about replacing lab computers.
And the problem is we can't really put them on a 6-year cycle because we're already getting lots
of complaints that because of equipment failures in the fifth year,
more and more machines are down for repair.
Students can't use those seats and it's impacting the ability to use those labs.
So you know, I don't think a 6-year, you know, cycle would be reasonable or beneficial
to our student in the programs that used that equipment.
Any questions?
>> Thank you.
>> And just to add one more to this equipment fund.
We deliberately in 2008-'09 and in 2009-'10 we have actually stopped spending almost literally.
That was the measure we took in the face of great fiscal uncertainty.
However-- and it's also the year when we decided to move from the refresh cycle of computers
from 3 years to 5 years so now time is catching up with us.
We also made an effort actually to reduce spending significantly over these last 3 years
by keeping positions that became vacant, open as long as we could, eliminating positions.
>> We have eliminated 3 dean's positions doing credit, one a noncredit.
We have kept-- the director of diversity position for example has been vacant
since August and we are not planning on filling that position.
Every single position that becomes vacant, scrutinized.
We don't automatically replace positions.
On the contrary, we have been extremely judicious.
We have tried for example in the learning resource center there was a media
technician position.
When that became vacant, we kept it unfilled for a while then we try to work
with the 50 percent feel of that.
After about 6 months of that, Jack Friedlander brought to my attention that after trying
for 6 months, it's just simply not possible for the learning resource center
to serve our students so we move that position back to 100 percent.
So the reason we are able to increase the reserves by 13.6 million
over the last 3 years is because we have been extremely careful
and no expenditure is made likely.
This is not a college that's spent on the contrary.
We are extremely careful.
The other question raised during the citizen's comments that the peers--
that there is a large increase in benefits and other areas.
As we explain to the board before, we budget positions
as if they are fully filled for a year.
However, there is a certain vacancy factor
that occurs throughout the year and that's part of the budget.
What actually get spent will be less than what's budgeted.
However, we don't know who is going to retire or resign and when but there is a vacancy factor.
And actually what Leslie Griffin, Joe and others are working is you express the desire
or some of your express the desire to have a budget that actually comes with projections
that are closer reflecting the more likely level of expenditure
of what we think is going to happen.
So what we are going to bring in the next iteration of projections is certain projections
that will include a vacancy factor, for example, rather than budgeting fully all positions
as if they were all full the entire year,
which again we know every year we have a certain vacancy factor happening.
So I want to bring this up because, again, there is a constant refinement happening here.
And we've done so well fiscally at this college because we are very careful.
This is not a college that spends.
And we are very lean operation and as Liz mentioned many times we cannot fill
with hourlies positions that become vacant
from the classified staff that-- and we don't do that.
So I want to reiterate that aspect.
Thank you.
>> Dr. Haslund.
>> Yeah.
>> I had some prepared comments on the budget.
Just I thought it might be helpful for the public and then also a motion to make.
I don't--
>> And I'm not at all certain why we need to go into committee of the whole.
Is there-- ?
>> You need to provide for a hearing opportunity for the public.
>> Okay. And that's the stimulus for the motion?
>> Yes.
>> Okay. So do you-- would you like to use your time first or shall we go into a committee
of the whole and then have you talk about it?
Do you have any feelings for it?
>> It's up to you.
Either one.
>> It doesn't matter to me.
>> Okay. Then for the sake of good order, let's have a motion to go into the committee
of the whole for the purpose of hearing or conducting hearing about the budget.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
Discussion?
Hearing none, all in favor say aye.
>> Aye.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Yes.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> That will be the citizens, yeah.
>> Yes, you do.
I have it right here.
Okay, I take that the motion was carried unanimously.
Objections?
Okay. In which case, the floor is yours.
>> Well, now you'll have to let the citizen speak because now is the hearing.
You moved into the hearing part.
That's what just happened.
>> Alright, then can you hold on?
>> I can hold on.
>> Okay. We have one speaker for the public hearing part of this and that is Liz.
[ Pause ]
>> Good afternoon again.
This time I'm speaking as the president of the CSEA chapter 289 for Santa Barbara City College.
I wanna do this specifically as my presidency of CSEA
because CSEA is what's called the exclusive representative for the classified staff.
It's not really shared governance.
And in your draft proposal that you had, I was concerned because you talked
about stakeholder shared governance.
Now as your exclusive representative, there's a scope of bargaining
that we are interested in, that we have the legal right to.
That includes workload, job descriptions which are ours, reorganizations, furloughs,
hours reductions, hours and it goes on.
But those are kind of some other things that are referred to in your document.
I'm concerned that our-- and I have said this before but I'm not sure I'm heard.
We're very particular as the union-- as our rights as exclusive representative.
If you go and start doing reorganizations and job changes
to our job descriptions, we're not gonna be too happy.
We're very kind of protective of our rights in certain areas.
We fought for them over many decades, I should say,
and we used a lot of force to enforce those.
I mean that it's our right to deal with the items plus many more items.
And over the years, we developed a very good working relationship with the district.
It has taken a while, you know, I've been doing this for quite a while and started out,
you know, I dealt with a very kind of hostile board and we had unfair labor practices
and some grievances and we've worked beyond that 'cause the district has recognized
that we have our job to do, we have our rights.
You may be new, some of you, and you may not understand that.
You need to understand that 'cause it's very important to us and we'll enforce
that to the extent of the law that we can.
So when you get-- talking about stakeholder shared governance, that's us.
You can't just go and decide let's have a committee
and let's redo all the job descriptions.
You can't do anything to the job descriptions.
You can't meet directly with employees to ask for reduction of hours or furloughs.
We have to negotiate with exclusive representative.
Just what means exclusive.
That's us.
So I really wanted to reiterate that because I would like to continue
with the good working relationship between CSEA and the board and HR.
But you need to understand that we're very serious about this and we expect you
to understand our rights in this issue.
Any questions?
Do I need to explain it?
>> No, thank you for your comment, Liz.
I believe we understood in the last couple of times you brought it and I just want if I--
I mean not last thing I think any member of this board wants to do is to get
in into job descriptions and we would rely on the president to facilitate anything that's
in that budget discussion document and we've reiterated that a couple of times.
So, rest assured we don't want to infringe on the rights of your union.
>> You-- I hear that but I wanna make sure.
>> Okay, well, I'm on TV [inaudible].
>> Because we-- 'cause we fought with that a long time
and sometimes I hear other things and I just wanna reiterate it.
It's very important, especially in this type of discussions where you seem
to have targeted the stuff right now as far as the cuts.
And so when that happens, we need to have a role.
Thank you.
>> Okay. Presentation of the budget or is it-- would you like to speak at this point?
>> We can't-- you need to move out of the hearing part.
>> Alright.
>> Motion to move out of the hearing.
>> Second.
>> Discussion.
All in favor say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed, nay?
I'll figure it out eventually.
I take that the motion carried.
We're now back into regular session.
 
>> Dr. Serban, did you have a planned presentation through the budget?
I just had some comments [inaudible].
>> No. Normally we don't do this presentation that's why I would do it at the study session.
>> I was hoping that was the case.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay, well, I do-- we do have some prepared comments about the budget
that I just wanted to share in the public forum.
But first I'm just gonna wing it with some comments that will probably--
I'll probably end up tripping over myself.
But in response to people that are expressing concerns about the division of the school
and unity, between credit and noncredit, I just--
I just wanna assure you that I feel very unify--
a lot of unity on this board and we hear more coming from the public towards us,
then I think we are talking about it amongst ourselves.
>> And so, I would just encourage everyone to listen to each of us more at the board meetings
because I feel we're pretty unified on wanting to work together to come
up with a budget that's gonna best serve all of our students.
And to the extent that speakers could speak in a positive and unifying--
in positive and unifying terms, I think it would just help the whole community.
You know, everyone wants to lobby for their specific agendas,
whether it's credit or noncredit.
But if that can be done in a positive like speaking of the community as a whole,
I think it would be less of a distraction to all of us in working through this.
We have to be into this together?
We have huge cuts in front of us.
And to the extent that some of you could put your worries aside on fractiousness,
between the members of the board, it would be great.
So Dr. Serban already covered some of the items about the budget.
We understand it's a tentative budget and it's got a long ways to go
between where it is right now and where the final adopted budget will go.
I just wanted to give just a little iteration of what's going on in the last few months in terms
of the boards receiving information and our feelings and statements
as a board about the budget process.
So this budget before us assumes that the state funding
for the college will be reduced 6.8 million next year and the following years
and anticipates using the existing reserves to face in the impact of these cuts over 3 years.
A reduction of 6.8 million currently appears
to be the most likely scenario but it's not certain.
As Dr. Serban said, cuts could be higher or lower.
So we've had to do the last 3 or 4 months.
I know as it's gone through its iterative process, we've had to be aware of that
as we will have to be until the final state budget is adopted.
So board members have been reviewing budget information and proposed recommendations
from the superintendent president since the February 23rd board study session.
At the board fiscal subcommittee meeting on March 7th,
committee members reached a consensus on 3 recommendations.
And the members of that committee are trustee Livingston, my self, and trustee Croninger.
And the 3 recommendations were 6, 7 and 8 on the list of recommendations that were included
as attachment 3 to the agenda for that March 7th meeting.
So this consensus was reached in part to communicate to the total board
that the individual committee members were recommending, number 1,
that the college not be placed in a position where we need
to borrow in the foreseeable future.
So that's a strong recommendation from the fiscal committee and I won't--
I can't speak for other board members but we've spoken about it in board meetings
and I addressed there along with this on that.
That number 2, the recommendation was that we wanted to preserve general fund reserves
in the amount of approximately 19 million to meet state requirements
and assure sufficient cash flow with a main revise
that number might change just a little bit because of changes
in deferred payments we're gonna expect.
But as of March 7th, that fiscal committee recommended--
accepted that recommendation from the president.
And number 3 was that we agreed with the annual transfers
to construction and equipment funds as proposed.
So these were three very strong recommendations put before us
and since March 7th it's been our understanding that that's the direction we wanna go
with this budget and I believe it still is.
In regard to the 3-year phase approach to state budget cuts
since the February 23rd board study session up through May 12,
budget documents have stated that, and I'm quoting here,
the reserves we currently have are serving us extremely well and will allow us
to implement this phase approach.
So we've heard that up through May 12th as a board in the documents we received.
But what we have before us is a tentative budget that projects only 14.4 million
in general fund reserves by the end of next year.
This budget also proposes to increase spending for equipment and construction over last year
and we were just given some details on that.
I mean we've had the details but there is a presentation made.
These expenditures are gonna deplete sources of discretionary cash
if needed for payroll and other expenses.
Overall, this budget is projected to reduce total reserves on the order
of 25 million over the 3 year phase in.
So if you all remember from the graphs that trustee Croninger and I prepared,
with the 44 million in reserves we currently have including the 8 million in JPA's funding.
This tentative budget shows that we would spend 25 million of that.
Phase in information presented to the board for the 6.8 million dollar cut
which we discussed February 23rd indicated a use of about 7.6 million in reserves as opposed
to this 25 million that's in the tentative budget.
The tentative budget first presented as part
of the May 12th agenda does not reflect the recommendations
of the board fiscal subcommittee nor stated goals of state-- the board members.
Materials presented to us indicate that this phase
in follows a fiscally conservative approach that even after the board member is asked
to remove 6 million in proposed construction spending on May 16th,
the projections for this tentative budget do not allow us to maintain the reserves
that we need for fiscal stability.
The budget will need significant additional work by shared governance groups prior
to presentation for final adoption.
Given this new information on the impact on reserves,
it's important to look at many alternatives.
Some of which were suggested in the draft budget guideline discussion document presented
to the board May 12.
However, it is time again given the anticipated impact on reserves of 25 million,
I would like to suggest implementing a hiring chill effective immediately.
A hiring chill is an alternative to employee layoffs.
It will allow the college to consider consolidating employees
or to restructure departments.
Another component of a hiring chill is to put vacated positions on hold
if they are not deemed essential to providing services vital to the mission of the college.
In the event that a budget can be developed by September,
that does not unduly impact reserves, a hiring chill could be lifted.
Imposing it now maintains flexibility and reduces the probably of layoffs in the future.
>> Thank you.
Comments? Marsha?
>> I just like to add that I concur with trustee Macker's concerns.
I appreciate the fact that this is a tentative budget.
It seems to me to be perhaps more tentative than many years because of the difficulties
that we are facing to getting to what I would consider more realistic budget
that will enable us to maintain sufficient reserves and our fiscal stability.
When we look at the budget on May 12th and May 16th, we were looking at a reduction in one year
of basically 20 million dollars from our reserves.
That's almost all of our general fund reserves.
There are some discretionary cashes we know and equipment construction in JPA.
But that's a huge bite and that's why the trustee said take out the 6 million that was
in there for drama music and place it back in measure V. But that alone
as trustee Macker has indicated, I agree, is not enough.
We need to work together, shared governance, Liz, the union reps,
all of us to come to a more realistic budget before we get to the final in the fall.
And what I think a hiring chill now would do for us is give us flexibility because if when we get
to it in September, we find that we don't need that kind of chill.
We can certainly lift it.
But in the meantime, we are rather rapidly proposing
to fill positions that we will have to live with.
And I realize it's kind of a natural human response if you see this kind of a proposal
to say, gosh, I wanna get my position that I know is coming up vacant in ahead of a chill
because I don't want it to be impacted.
But we're trying to work together here.
We're trying to bring us all together to make the best decisions for the college as a whole.
And if we don't maintain that flexibility, then we'll be forced
into very unfortunate decisions perhaps like layoffs and we don't wanna go there.
We wanna prevent that.
So the flexibility here that we're trying to preserve by imposing a chill and making it--
making us really think hard about whether we need to fill all of those vacancies
and how we can deal with bringing our cost down in line with the reduction
that we're looking at is just very important.
>> Okay, Dr. Serban.
>> I like to make a few comments.
First of all as I mentioned earlier, we don't just fill positions.
We have never just filled positions just because they became vacant.
I gave examples of specific positions that were eliminated once vacancies occurred.
I gave examples of positions that were kept vacant for a long time.
That's how we saved and increased the reserves by 13.6 million in 3 years.
So this is something that our management also works with the CSEA and classified staff.
This is not a shared governance issue.
Vacancies are not up for debate for the shared governance process.
Again, this is not purview of shared governance as Liz explained earlier.
We have been very effective in doing this, so to say that, you know, it's human nature just
to try to fill that-- that's not how we function.
And so, basically is we are already doing this, we have done this,
artificially imposing something that we have been very effective of managing,
I'm not entirely sure what we'll accomplish at this point.
Having the board review and approve whether a replacement should occur seems, you know,
again are necessary because we have proven that that's not how we function.
We are very careful with our positions.
And so, you know, I want to make that point again because I don't think,
I mean even though we mentioned this before,
I don't think I feel it's been acknowledged how effective we have been in doing so.
Second of all, we are also engaging in an analysis of our hourly short-term workers
and student workers because as I mentioned before,
you can't say that we are not filling positions when we have hourly workers
and short term workers available.
It's different scopes of work but gather point that I think it's important
to bring back is what the agreement was after the 2-day marathon study session on budget,
May 12 and 16 and I appreciate really the thoughtful approach all of you have taken.
I think that's very important and I appreciate your discussion and level
of engagement was very good and that's what we need to do, I agree.
We all need to look at everything together.
But the agreement reached on May 16 and was the consensus of the board is that the proposals
from trustee Macker and Croninger, the document you provided will go
through a consultation process first that will bring, you know, the result or the input
through that governance process and then to the best of our abilities and, you know,
what's reasonable will be incorporated in the adopted budget.
I think it's important to allow for that consultation rather
than taking one particular measure from that at least and imposing it at this point.
I believe strongly in our consultative process.
This is another hallmark of what has made us busy,
so you're one of the best colleges in the state and in the nation.
This input is necessary.
You yourselves mentioned many times how important it is
to allow for consultative processes.
So the agreement was that this document with all those various elements will go
through the consultative process.
I have called a special meeting of the college planning counsel
on June 17 for that specific purpose.
Normally, we don't meet during the summer.
I appreciate all the faculty who instead
of enjoying their summer break will be there discussing this document.
So I think it's important to fulfill the agreements that we make together.
>> Joan.
>> At the last facilities committee, meaning we did discuss
if we took the 6 million dollars away from the [inaudible]
and there are significant cascading events as a result of that.
It isn't just simply a standalone, it cascades.
So I'm assuming that fuller discussion will be coming before the board
so that we don't necessarily look at we just save 6 million dollars because we save it
and we pay heavily in other areas.
So that needs to be given a little more sensitivity than just looking
at this blind item to take our budget.
>> Okay, [inaudible].
>> Yeah, and I would like to underline some of the comments made by Dr. Serban
and it was my understanding that at the study session when trustee Macker
and Croninger presented their document that it was agreed as Dr. Serban had--
has just indicated that it would be taken under consideration
and through the consultative process.
So I would like to suspend any more discussion on the document and let's have it go
through the process that has worked so well over the years.
>> Okay. Marsha.
>> I think we all appreciate the importance of the governance process
and I hope I emphasized it already in my comments.
I am uncomfortable with being asked to adopt the tentative budget here.
And I'm uncomfortable in that this budget among other things proposes 450,000 dollars
in actual savings against a 6.8 million dollar reduction in revenue for next year.
For a number of other reasons that we've talked about earlier, the math is not comforting here.
It is not good for me to feel comfortable adopting a tentative budget
which as trustee Livingston has pointed out,
if you are using reserves, you need a 2/3 vote to adopt.
Among other things, we did have a presentation on equipment and construction.
We are in this tentative budget proposing to increase our spending on construction
and equipment by 6.7 million over last year.
That's as much as the reduction on top of the 6.8 million reduction.
And then we're proposing that we'll cut it again by 5.8 million for the two following years.
I need more information to understand, is that realistic, are we planning realistically
for those two following years or are we digging a bigger hole than we seem to have now
when we're already reducing our reserves by 3.8-- 13.8 million next year alone.
So this is why the idea of a hiring chill, a higher standard,
a more thoughtful and I agree that I'm confident.
We've already gone through some thoughtful process as we hire.
But I'm seeing a lot of hiring come through.
I am seeing a lot of openings come through on the emails.
I'm seeing when I looked at the hourly employee list and the placeholder list in the agenda
for today, I looked at what we were proposing last year
and there's 34 percent more full year hourly positions
on the credit side alone than last year.
That's kind of a big jump in a year when we're looking toward cutting expenses.
And I recognize that all of those are up for filling and that we will adjust as we go along.
But it's uncomfortable to get all of these upfront when we haven't yet dealt
with how do we get to a realistic budget.
I feel like we're cutting off our flexibility and we need that flexibility.
>> Okay.
>> Regarding the hourly comment, I did receive an email from trustee Croninger about 2:30 p.m.
and I responded as quickly as I could 3:55 p.m. as I was coming up.
So I appreciate you may not have had the chance to read the answer.
But now that you posed the question, I would like to address it
because I think it's important for the public to understand how this works.
Hourly workers need to be authorized by the board on a fiscal year basis,
and this work must be authorized by the board before it is performed.
Of all of the board meetings during the year,
the June board meeting traditionally includes the largest number of hourlies to be authorized
to work in the upcoming fiscal year.
There are not, there are not more names including
on this June 2011 board agenda than on previous years.
And hopefully there are actually fewer over the prior years.
The June 24, 2010 agenda last year included 179 hourly names to be approved.
>> On the credit side, the agenda today includes 143 names.
It's fewer names than last year.
You can anticipate the search in the number of student workers being hired,
processed on the upcoming august and September agendas and again in January
because student workers are hired by semester not by fiscal year.
These hourly workers to be approved are not doing work that previously belonged
to bargaining [inaudible] positions.
This is not bargaining unit work.
These names do not represent an increased commitment to hire.
The very real restraints on our employment continue to be there are rules.
These people cannot work more than a certain number of hours per week and the total numbers
of hours cumulated for a fiscal year.
So there are rules we follow and the authorization to--
you would give for them to work doesn't mean-- doesn't commit the college to the work,
it's just an authorization for us to be able to use them if we need them.
We process these individuals so that we can use this--
use them if and when they are needed during the upcoming fiscal year.
We have also reduced the expenditures
on the hourly side quite significantly actually over this last 3 years.
So, we are not spending more.
On the contrary, we are spending less and the names,
the number of names are fewer names than last year.
So I just want to clarify this because I think it's important.
>> Okay, thanks.
>> Yeah, I just want to remind the board that again this is a tentative budget
and I think there are a lot of concerns that trustee Croninger has raised are valid
and I appreciate the work that trustee Macker and Croninger did.
But again, I wanna get that work in the process
of the consultative process and see where we come out.
I think administration has been flexible to incorporate that, your work into it which is,
you know, significant amount of work.
So, I would like to remind us it is a tentative budget
and let's see how those numbers [inaudible] as it goes through the process.
>> Okay, if we can have a-- maybe 1 or 2 more comments
and let's see if we can't enact a budget.
Oh, [inaudible].
>> Just-- I wanted to thank the folks that have been working on this, it's a lot of work.
I understand.
And it looks like a good budget because I'm very impressed with the--
there must be some kind of an acknowledgement throughout the college
that we shouldn't be spending money because the more money they spent,
the expenditures is below budget and it's-- so that's good.
I appreciate that, we are in tough times.
My biggest concern on this budget, and I waited to hear the discussion, my biggest concern,
I understand about the hiring, also as a union president for 4 years
or 2 years I understand what that means.
But my biggest concern is the use of the reserves.
And I have not seen and I think you will be discussing this probably
at the planning council, I don't know, at the academic senate which is gonna meet in August 2.
I'm just not sure but the use, the reserves troubles me because in a couple of years
when we're down to one million in reserves, I'm not--
I'm just not clear, maybe I'm not clairvoyant enough but usually I can--
usually I'm kind of a Pollyanna and say, well,
in 2 years we'll be much better off in the state.
I don't see that happening.
I really think we've got some problems ahead of us in the state
and consequently here at the school.
So, I would like to save a lot more in reserves than we're talking about here.
And so I guess-- I guess that the budget using a certain amount of reserves this year
and next year, also next year and the year after, really troubles me
so I need to have that discussion.
>> Okay, anybody else?
>> Just a minor clarification or maybe not.
The names-- number of names may be the same but I'm referring to the number of--
including the number of placeholder positions and those seem to have increased
from 522 last year to 732 this year.
So that's really where a lot of the numbers increase is,
there's a lot more placeholders with no people attached to them.
And that's something that, you know, I was--
>> So, would you like to clarify, can you come to the microphone please.
[ Pause ]
>> Thank you, I appreciate the opportunity to try to clarify this.
And I appreciate that it's confusing.
That is a daunting list of both names and placeholders.
It is likely that there are names on that list who will never perform any work for the college.
Placeholders are there because individuals cannot necessarily be readily found
so we give people an opportunity when they do find an individual and they do need
to have some work done, if the placeholder is approved by the board, they have the opportunity
to bring someone in to do the work.
But many times, course schedules, classes, individual needs mean
that we have many more placeholders and many individuals approved than actually work.
And even if an individual on this list works, it doesn't mean they're working the full 19
and half hours a week times 175 days for the year.
The limit is the budgetary amount that is allocated for the work,
not the number of names, not the number of placeholders.
I appreciate that it seems counterintuitive but it's the budget that is controlling this
and there is nothing about approving these individuals or these placeholders
that prevents us in any way as the year goes
on as a final budget is adopted to add additional restraints.
>> I appreciate that, I'm interested in us getting to that budget number obviously.
And you know what is our actual expectation of expenditure next year.
But I'm also still confused why such an increase for over last year?
>> I think Dr. Jack Friedlander can help for-- to clarify this question.
>> I'll try.
>> Well--
>> Well, don't come all the way here if you can't explain it.
[ Laughter ]
>> Nice one.
>> This is Paul Bishop got on camera, I want to have my turn.
[ Laughter ]
>> Okay, I'm finished.
So, DM-- there's two possible explanations.
One is that each unit, major unit of the college like the credit, noncredit so forth,
we have very large aggressive targets we have to meet in reducing our hourly accounts, you know,
student worker accounts and short-term hourly
which we have not implemented but they're for this year.
And the reason why is by the time we got to knowing what those targets are
and increasing them, the faculty were gone, you know, for the summer and so we need to be--
wait for them to come back to engage in that consultation process.
Probably a fast consultation process and we'll be doing a work over the summer
to prepare our recommendations to them because that's money can have this year's budget
at the hourly, you know, budgets.
Second thing is we did last year's [inaudible] money for, you know, tutors and readers
and so this year the faculty, the department submitted placeholders, you know,
for those positions which is a lot of individuals who are doing 10 hours here,
5 hours there, 6 hours there for that.
Again, how much of that-- our priority is to keep the tutors and readers and reduce elsewhere
but we haven't taken that out of the budget yet.
So although that's a very large list, long list with the cuts replant and make-- it will not--
as Sue said, many of those positions will remain as placeholders and not filled.
So it's one thing I want to add if there's a clarification.
>> Thank you.
>> So is that worth the trip?
>> Absolutely.
>> Thanks.
>> We understand that you needed the exercise after such a long meeting.
I believe we're at the point where we can introduce a motion
to adopt the tentative budget.
 
>> I'd like to follow up on Marty's question about the reserves.
I don't think that was addressed that he would
like to reiterate your question and we can put that into dialog.
I think that kind of keeps coming up so it needs to be addressed.
And if you'd like to reiterate your question, Marty.
>> Oh, I'm just concerned about the use of the reserves and it looks like we're gonna be
down to 1 million dollars after 2 or 3 years, I guess 3 years.
>> Yes, I mentioned that it-- that was the working progress projection
and that I mentioned earlier in my comments we are working on refining those projections.
We work hard to have these reserves.
It is this college who worked hard to have the 44 million that we are ending the year with.
It is not our intention to spend reserves easily or for reasons that don't serve the college.
And that recommendation, the 19 million came from us, the college, so this target we wan
to be able to achieve through the refinements we will be working on.
>> And so we will be looking also for as clearer direction from you as possible
and through the next study sessions that we will be having before we arrived
to the adopted budgets, I will be seeking additional clarification
to fully understand your desired position.
But I personally feel very strongly about our reserves.
We have made a lot of sacrifices to have this money.
So I want to assure you that we feel very strongly about preserving reserves
and the fiscal stability of the college.
>> Well, it sounds like both the board and the college are on the same, you know--
on the same-- well, at least that we agree on this.
But the budget itself doesn't agree with us.
So that--
>> Well, as I mentioned before, we only know so much and only have so much time
and we need the tentative budget to pay bills July 1.
And so what we are working towards is we will go
through the adopted budget process is a refinement of what you are seeing
because I feel very strongly about the physical stability of this college as well as you do.
>> Good, thank you.
And if it's any point of history I remember many, many times,
through many college presidents, we reached the same impasse or handed a budget
that we can't believe in at various points as it's going through it's formulation.
And so we just always adopted them because we're up against the deadline
and I think you are president at the time when we were just laughing our way
through a bad budget because it was such a delay which was misinterpreted by the public
that we weren't serious about it.
But it was just because there was such a long delay and because we have this deadline we--
you know, we could have passed to New York Times as the budget
because the numbers just simply weren't there.
So it did give the impression that we were treating this less than seriously.
But it's just one of the ongoing complications of dealing with money coming from Sacramento,
budgets coming from Sacramento, deadlines, a lot of these just simply don't coordinate, however,
the comfort is we have a history as an institution.
Peter, you've been with the institution for a long time.
You know that budgets have been fought over and when there's plenty of money,
it's a happy time that people want to share and this is going
to be a different challenge because it's going to be lower.
But it's always something that's a rolling ongoing resolution.
But we've never failed the college, we've never failed the college.
I've been on-- [inaudible] has been on for 17 years and we've been through difficult times,
we've been through changes of the budget.
After the budget is approved we've been through times when we've allocated money and we've tried
to do it as prudently as we can that we don't commit to ongoing expenses that we can't meet.
And so sometimes some of these artificial deadlines we have to meet we just have
to take a little bit on trust and appreciation for a long track record
that Santa Barbara City College is not going to throw away.
And there are plenty of times as this moves forward that when we see something that is
out of sync, we are responsive and we're responsible and I'm sorry that's in question.
I don't think it's healthy for the community debate to be faced with that sort of perception.
But it's also difficult 'cause when you look at the process, the process is erratic
and so I only make it a defense for who we've been in the past, who we want to be
and there is obviously no one anywhere who doesn't want us
to retain the position that we have.
And sometimes we have to stumble through some of these deadlines that we don't impose
and if they have a deadline, we wish we had a deadline that they give us the money
or the budget at the same time so we could do a little more precision in our planning.
So, history context--
>> Thank you.
>> -- and appreciation for the frustration.
And if you go back in the minutes, I remember having to run in 2004, I believe,
and I had run on the idea that I had an unbalanced budget
and I was begging, please tell me.
Please tell me this is going to come out okay.
It's gonna come up okay.
And it did, but I remember I'm gonna have to go out and face the public with the budget
that isn't supportable, so if it's that's any comfort, we've done it.
Kay, went through the same thing.
This last one that she was uncomfortable with where we had to be but we ended up okay.
>> But I think there's an emerging comfort level in that everybody seems
to be saying the same thing which is kind of unusual for this group.
[Laughter] But what I'm hearing is that there's genuine concern about the retention of reserves
in a significant proportion to the rest of the budget.
I hear that one of the areas of concern has to do
with a possible limitation how ever we wanna phrase
that limitation on how many people we hire.
I hear the president saying, "This is in fact what we're doing."
So I sense a good deal of both harmony of interest as well as a sense of concern
that somehow we're gonna model through and we'll be alright.
But we're gonna-- I think you're also hearing that we're looking at it very carefully.
We're taking this responsibility seriously and I wanna thank Lisa--
in particular Lisa and Marsha for actually digging in and finding numbers
that I frankly would have difficulty understanding.
So I appreciate that effort-- extra effort.
We've prepared to introduce a motion to adopt the budget.
>> I'll move.
>> I'll introduce the motion.
I do have a motion prepared that includes the hiring chair
and I'm not sure where we're at on that.
I could include it and see how it goes.
>> Go ahead.
>> So my motion is to approve the tentative budget provided it's understood,
it'll need substantial revisions to reduce the impact
of reserves before it becomes a final budget in the fall.
In addition, a hiring chair will be imposed effective this day with the following conditions
of hiring chair as imposes of June 9th to 11, 2011.
Faculty positions already approved by academic senate as of this date for rehire based
on retirement or resignations are exempted.
And all other proposed replacement or new higher positions not hired
as of June 9th will be reevaluated and newer replacement hires.
Propose will be brought first to the board fiscal committee with the member--
with a memo addressing the proposed hire based on relevant factors including job description,
alternatives considered, and recommendations
of shared governance groups and affected departments.
The board fiscal committee will provide a recommendation
for consideration of the full board.
That's my motion.
>> I was gonna say point of order on that if it was a motion that isn't on the agenda.
I don't think that we can--
>> But this is not a motion on the agenda.
>> And so--
>> So you can't pass the motion that was not on the agenda.
The public didn't know about it.
>> And I think it's an advisory information.
It's appropriate to put in to your comments but there's no way that we could hold on.
>> I think point of order that you can-- the motion is to adopt the tentative budget
with a condition and I don't think that it's inappropriate
to impose a condition with that adoption.
I mean it's part of the discretion you have in considering whether to move forward or not.
>> Okay, so--
>> No, I mean, I'm sorry, no.
What is being proposed to something that we would need to have comment
on if it's going to be incorporated.
I really have no problem with this being advisory, so it gets out into the public debate.
But to just throw something with as much specific detail onto a motion
without having any public notice that this is going to require it, it compromises my ability
to vote for it 'cause I might not agree with this and now I'm being forced
to maybe withhold approval for something that were just--
>> You know what, I'm going to withdraw my motion if I may.
And I don't--
>> Keep the first part of it
[ Laughter ]
>> Keep the first strongly worded part of it.
>> And we'll leave the advisory part in that--
and I've been hiring that pretty consistently anyway.
So if the motion is to approve the tentative budget, is there a second to the motion?
>> Second.
>> Motion is made and seconded.
Discussion about the motion?
>> At least just clarification on the motion is to move on the tentative budget as presented?
>> Yes.
 
>> Okay.
>> Could we reread that provisos with that?
>> Yes.
>> Because I'm wanting to be clear that everyone understands what those are.
>> And once again I understand that tentative budget has been very different
than the adopted budget over prior years but in this particular case, it's very,
very different than the end product we hope to see in September.
For that reason, I wrote the motion this way
to approve the tentative budget provided that it's understood.
It will need substantial revisions to reduce the impact
on reserves before it becomes a final budget in the fall.
>> Okay, I think we're ready to vote.
All in favor, say aye?
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed nay?
Abstentions?
>> Abstain.
>> Okay, the motion passes.
>> So we have-- just for the minutes.
We have 2 abstention, Trustees Villegas and Croninger and we have we positive votes,
Livingston, Macker, Blum and Haslund, okay, just to make sure we get to divide this one.
>> Okay. We move on to--
>> Dr. Haslund?
>> Yes.
>> I apologize that I'm going to have to leave due to a commitment I mentioned
to you earlier today that-- but I wanted-- before leaving, I wanted to make my comments
in reference to item 2.4 which I do not understand why this item is on the agenda.
I believe it was clarified when the agenda--
when the item was asked to be placed on this agenda per the minutes of May 26th,
my motion to table this topic to the next study session was approved.
Those minutes were approved this evening so I'd
like to ask the 2.4 be deleted from the agenda tonight.
And be placed on the next study session where all board members are present
and this topic can be discussed and vetted thoroughly.
 
So if you would like that in a form of motion, I so move.
>> Have we moved to--
>> We haven't--
>> No, I said.
I said I would like because--
>> He's needing to leave.
>> Right. But I mean have we officially moved or are we're just making preliminary comments.
Have we-- are we discussing 2.4 now?
>> I think you're just making a suggestion for--
>> The board.
>> Yeah.
>> That this item be removed.
>> Yeah.
>> And if you would like it-- if the board so wishes to have it in a motion,
I so move prior to my departure unfortunately.
>> Well, I wasn't prepared to take a motion because it's really out of order.
Well I guess it can be out of order if we approve--
>> We can agree to take it out of order.
>> Yeah, is that okay with everybody that we take this out of order?
>> I move that we take item 2.4 out of order.
>> Second.
>> The discussion of 2.4 out of order.
>> Okay, I don't think we need a motion so I'll just consent
and in which case your motion is in order.
It's moved to remove item 2.4 from the agenda.
Is there second to the motion?
>> I would move-- or I would also ask consideration since the motion is on the floor.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Second.
>> First, yeah.
>> Okay.
>> No second, the motion dies?
>> I would just like to use the wording, I would like to postpone item 2.4
to the next study session as a time certain.
So it's-- I think there might have been some controversy over whether one table of the motion
or whether one postpone the motion.
So I am moving that we postpone this to the next study session.
>> Well, it was originally tabled to the next study session.
>> Right. And there were some question as to whether the motion itself was appropriate
because the motion to table is requiring that out in front, there's something else
that we have to take and therefore this item has put aside and then it's returned immediately
after that item has been taken care of.
>> Okay.
>> So--
>> Postpone work better?
>> According to my reading of my Robert's rules, a postponement--
and particularly to a time certain.
A device can be postponed indefinitely and if no attention of doing this because I would
like to say I think it's a valuable topic.
>> Yeah. My real concern is the fact that it appeared on tonight's agenda and well,
I think we need to be consistent with parliamentary procedure.
>> Okay, in which case you have no objection to substituting John's motion to postpone
to a time certain for the next study session.
>> Correct.
>> Is there a second?
>> Or date certain.
>> We have-- yeah, there's a problem with that in that you've indicated 2 things.
You'd like it to be on a study session which is I think appropriate.
But the second thing-- and that we can't vote there but we can talk.
But the other thing is we've also indicated you wanted a time when all 7 of those are in there
and we won't be until about October.
I don't think-- I think we got various people on various vacations.
>> July 14 study session according to current schedules,
all board members are present at the July 14 study session.
>> So I don't mind since I'm the only one missing that's coming in study session,
if you go ahead and talk about it because I understand the issue and I've talked
to Trustee Croninger about it and I'm fine with it.
I mean I understand everything about it so I don't need to talk about it and not vote.
So I'd be happy to have that if we can postpone it to the study session on the 20?
>> 23rd.
>> 23rd, it's fine with me.
I won't be there but that's okay.
>> Okay.
>> So would it then be on for a decision in July and are well all there then?
>> Well, we have to talk about it first and figure that out.
>> The July board meeting?
>> Yes. I mean, you know, July 28 board meeting again according
to your schedules, everybody's here.
>> Okay.
>> That sounds good.
>> And in the discussion where I was looking at and again I want to make clear the substance
of it is timely wonderful and supported.
I am concerned about the process and I'm concerned
about the format of this particular resolutions.
So when we go into discussion of this item and study session,
I would like to have some reference to Board Policy 2341, Board Policy 2715,
Board Policy 2220, Board Policy 2715, Board Policy 2430, 2410--
2410, because this is gonna be my thing.
Let's do this but let's do it in a governance process where we're in conformance
with how we do business as we've set out.
So I wanted to go forward but I wanted to go forward with the recognition
that there is policy development guidelines within our own written documents
that I believe should be taken into consideration.
So it's not meant to distort it but just to refine it and make it a better product
and make sure that we're all in the same page
and discuss the scope of what the intent is here.
>> Okay, now we have a--
>> Can you repeat the motion to make sure that you know what the motion is?
[ Laughter ]
>> I'm in doubt as to-- the motion was to postpone.
>> To June 23rd study session.
>> June 23rd.
>> Okay.
>> Information on--
>> Okay. Too much information.
Yes?
>> Then I would like to amend the motion to postpone discussion to June 23rd,
and decision at the following board meeting.
>> Okay. I was gonna say--
>> So that we don't keep getting this delayed because somebody at the last minute can't come.
I mean the criteria here is we've gotta be able to do business when we're not all here.
>> Right.
>> Or we won't get any business done.
>> Okay, the motion is--
>> Let me remind you that if properly amended, we need a second for the amendment.
Were you going to do that?
>> No.
>> Do I have to--
>> No.
>> I have no role in accepting amendment.
I would object to it.
>> Would-- is there second to the amendment?
>> Tell me what the amendment is, I'm sorry.
>> The second-- the amendment is to bring it up for a vote at this subsequent board meeting.
So the discussion takes place on June 23rd meeting
and the amendment says we will decide on the subsequent.
>> How can we do that without even having discussed it?
>> Yeah, I mean basically that's what the study session is for so I would not
like to put a specific date and time because the study session is to discuss things.
If there is a consensus of the board to move it forward to a board meeting for approval,
it is decided at that study session not tonight.
>> Well then we have an issue with the Trustee Blum being not present
at the next study session because--
>> Well, she's indicated that it doesn't matter to her.
>> No, 23 is fine.
>> Yeah, but without everyone present, then how are we going to move it forward
to the next meeting for decision if there is--
>>We work on consensus at study session.
>> Right.
>> We don't vote.
>> Things forward.
>> I'm not worried about that.
>> Alright.
>> Okay. Do I hear that the amendment is withdrawn?
[Pause] Since it didn't get a second, maybe it is.
>> I don't think it matters.
>> Okay. Alright, so we're back to the original motion which is
to postpone this resolution until the June 23rd session.
>> It's not a resolution, it's a discussion item, so it's critical.
>> I'm sorry.
You call it.
>> 2.4 just agenda item at 2.4
>> You call it as a resolution?
>> Okay, all in favor of the motion, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed, nay?
Are there abstentions?
>> I'm abstaining.
>> One abstention.
>> My apology, senator.
>> Okay.
>> That's good.
>> Okay, we refer to item 2.3 discussion proposal.
>> 2.2
>> 2.2.
>> I'm sorry, 2.2.
>> We need to vote on 2.2.
>> Okay, who's going to speak to that?
>> We don't need to speak to it unless you have questions.
>> No.
>> Does this require action?
>> Yes.
 
>> Okay. Is there a motion to approve the modification to help benefits allocation?
>> Second.
>> It's a second?
Marty, seconds?
>> Yes.
>> We're quickly losing both out trustees and our audience but we'll manage to model through.
The motion is made and seconded, discussion.
Questions?
Hearing none.
We move to a vote.
All in favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed nay?
Abstentions?
Okay, the motion is carried.
Item 2.3. Is there a motion to--
>> This is not-- this is for discussion Trustee Macker on the behalf
of the community relations committee.
There's no recommendation here so, Lisa, do you wanna talk to this.
>> We all have the sheet in front of us, item 2.3.
The community relations committee has met a couple times discussing our charge and--
which has not been finalized but we are recommending to the board
that the board have a community budget forum, 1 or 2 beginning with the first one this summer.
It would be hosted by the Board of Trustees.
The proposed outcomes of the forums would be to-- there's quite outcomes, generate attention
for the college and reintroduce the college and outline its broader community mission.
Number 2, provide an overview of or in part understanding of the relationship
between the college and state funding.
You know, how the cuts in the budget,
state budgets are affecting our community college locally.
We wanna be able to clearly communicate the impact
of the current budget situation on services which SBCC provides.
Again, in the context of the greater community, it would be an opportunity for the trustees
to engage with members of the public and share what's going on with the budget.
Number 4, to define communicate what is needed from the community.
Number 5, this would also provide encouragement to the public and facility for participation
in budget discussion and solutions over the following weeks and into the future.
So we're hoping that these forums will invite members of the community to engage
with the college and as has already been started with our suggestion box and website
so that the greater goal of this budget forum is just to engage with the community
and provide opportunity to further explore the relationship with the community.
>> Do you have dates for this?
>> Not yet.
>> You know, we're looking at the last part of July or first week in August
and I know everybody's calendars are very busy and would it work
that we could just circulate e-mails and come up with a date.
>> Sure, I think that would be best.
>> Yes.
>> July 28 is the date of the board meeting so that would be a date that would--
>> Yeah, I just heard that.
We might aim for that date.
>> So this is for discussion.
Is there any?
>> It's for discussion.
Yeah. So then it-- if it's something that we would want to add as an action item
at the board, study sections since everything is all flipped around or do you want to wait
until the next board meeting then we're into-- I mean, I would assume we'd want to put it
on as an action item at the next study session.
>> Yeah.
>> Well--
>> Does it require--
>> You can just reach consensus if you want, I mean--
but the next study session if it's to be a vote, then we have to schedule a regular meeting
in conjunction with the study session is that you can actually have action times
to take a vote on which we can do.
It's not a problem.
We can have a regular meeting in conjunction with the study session.
[ Simultaneous Talking ]
>> Huge amount of controversy over having a community forum, so I will know that.
>> Sorry.
>> I don't sense any controversy over this issue.
>> Again, just processes and format when something comes before the board
as the discussion item rather than an action item.
You know, if we take liberty, I don't know if we can take liberty
with the discussion item and turn it into an action item.
I don't know.
>> We could have a regular portion on June 23 that allows for vote and then you'd move
into the study session which is only discussion without the vote and if you like,
you can have decide them to take action on.
>> Yeah, let's do that.
>> Yeah, I think time is important given the constraints of the summer
so if we could that, if that works with the trustees.
>> Just fine with me.
I just really don't think we should get into the informality of something being noticed
as a discussion item and then it becomes a commitment
of the college and you know resources and--
>> Okay.
>> Everything else.
So, I mean it could have come as an action item.
So just as we discipline ourselves for what our intent is if--
that could have come as an action item as an agenda item.
>> Okay. I'm gonna ask that we move on to item 3 which is human resources.
Legal affairs would Sue early before she expires sitting there waiting for us to--
>> Oh, a retirement or a--
[ Laughter ]
>> Looks like I'm conspiring.
>> They can see.
>> They can see.
We don't have to feel.
>> I have one item for which I need to add some detail.
It is 3.1A.
I'm pleased to tell you that the position of director
of athletics will be filled by Ryan Byrne, that's B-Y-R-N-E.
The rate will be 156/1.
The actual start date will be July 5th, not July 1st.
I think July 1st was printed on your agenda.
I have no other modifications to the agenda.
I submit it for your approval.
>> Yes.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Excuse me, we're gonna have to--
>> You have to read position.
>> I don't any information for that one at this time.
So we're gonna have to pull that one.
Thank you.
>> I'm sorry, which one were you pulling, 3.1G.
>> Okay.
>> Okay?
>> Okay, is there a motion to approve the report of the HRLA?
>> Move approval of the 3.1 consent items.
>> Right.
>> Is there such a motion?
>> There is.
>> I just.
>> Oh, you did, okay.
>> I'll second.
>> Motion is made in second.
>> And that includes Ryan Byrne then.
>> Right, that--
>> Thank you.
>> Includes Ryan Byrne and he excludes 3.1G.
>> Yes.
>> Okay, are we ready to take a vote?
All in favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed nay?
Abstentions.
Unanimous be carried.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you very much.
We will run to the next agenda item which is--
>> Page 10.
>> Yeah.
[ Noise ]
>> Okay.
 
>> I'm here to present the business services items for you.
There are an umber of consent items.
Normally, you take those as a whole body clad,
answer any questions you might have on them before you take action.
>> Thank you, Leslie.
I think we've looked at this.
Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda on item 6.1?
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Marty moves.
Is there second?
>> Second.
>> Moved and seconded, discussion?
Questions for Leslie?
 
>> If we say, editorial about who's responsible for the increases in healthcare cost
and they said, we are because we're the purchasers
and we're just somehow not getting a good enough deal and it was--
I mean everything as well as the doctor's cost or this cost or it's your liability cost
but somebody said no, it's you people who were big purchasers of large health insurance like--
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> Yeah, and I thought, well you know, we've never really quite looked at it that way.
I mean, it always seems like it's a one-sided deal when they hand down these things.
I'm just throwing that out into the cosmos because I think it's something
that maybe collectively we'll have to start.
You know, I mean just speaking very collectively that we as the consumers of the--
somehow have to get a message across that you just can't keep raising fees and if we--
I don't know what we can do about it but right now, with the help of the sense
of it is unfortunate but you know, at least it's in the dialogue.
>> I don't think you suppose to--
>> Well, we're not alone in trying to strategize how
to find affordable health insurance for our employees.
>> All governments were in the same boat and there had been a number
of strategies that we had been pursuing.
We've been offering different insurance plans to our employees to let them pick and choose.
Do you wanna larger deductible and then the premium will be less.
Also, for our prescription drugs,
you have generics versus the formularies, you know, the cheaper costs.
So we are trying to be aggressive in finding alternatives for employees
but it's just the fact of the economics that premiums are going up.
They go up every year.
>> I think it's the other thing, you know, I pursued it but those of us on Medicare.
It's a shame that we cannot qualify as if we were retired employees
that would reduce district costs.
I mean, it was explained to me.
It's not even on the table but as one of our prides
of the institutions is how many people lived
or how many people continue working well past Medicare age and it might be a significant--
>> Some people did choose to, yes they do chose and some of our instructors enjoyed teaching
into the years where others might have already tired so that is a challenge for us.
And we try to manage this best through our benefits committee where we have representatives
from all of the employee groups and we work with professionals that we engage
to help us find the best insurance and we also belong to a collective system
of handling the medical insurance needs for school districts.
So, we're trying to find the best strategy we can and getting, you know,
that critical health insurance to keep all of our employees and their family's healthy.
>> Okay. Thank you very much.
We take a vote on item 6.1.
All in favor, say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Opposed nay?
Carries abstentions, I should've ask.
Okay, there are none.
It carries unanimously.
We will run to 6.2
[ Noise ]
>> Right, there are 2 of business action items.
The first is authorizing routine internal budget transfers.
>> That's item 6.2A.
>> Correct and I'll be glad to answer your questions
on that item if you have any questions sir?
>> Is there a motion to adopt resolution number 43?
Lisa moves.
>> Marty seconds.
Okay.
>> Sometimes we take this together if it's appropriate.
>> Yeah. You can't take them together.
>> This 2 could be take together.
>> Yeah.
>> Is there objection?
>> Okay.
>> So--
>> So--
>> So let's assume that the motion includes both resolution 43 and 44 and that's seconded.
Do you have anything that needs to be said about this?
>> Oh, no.
It's just we had some restricted money coming from donors through the foundation
and so we're budgeting both the revenue and the expenditures for that restricted funding.
>> Okay, if we could call the roll, all in favor, please so indicate when roll is called.
>> Trustee Blum?
>> I.
>> Trustee Croninger?
>> I.
>> Trustee Haslund?
>> I.
>> Trustee Livingston?
>> I.
[ Inaudible Remark ]
>> I.
>> Okay. I think the vote is unanimous once again.
Okay we go to item 9 which is the one that you've all been waiting for which is to adjourn.
Motion is made and seconded faster than I can even say that.
All in favor say aye.
>> Aye.
>> Oppose?
Oh, good. I'm so glad.
We are adjourned.
[ Noise ]