District Academic Senate

Unapproved Minutes

Tuesday, December 1, 2005

 

   I.       Organizational Matters

 

   I.1     Call to Order/Roll Call

            The meeting was called to order at 2:12 p.m. by Co-Chair Alex Braun and Angelica Buendia-Bangle.

Senators

   A

   P

Senators

   A

   P

Beggs      (MC)  AAS

   

   X

Mingione (WVC) AF/Bus

 

   X

Berlani     (WVC) Science

    

   X

Moles     (MC)  ESL

 

   X

Braun     (MC) Pres/Technology

 

   X

Nash     (WVC) Student Services

 

   X

Brichko    (MC)  CATA

   

   X

Ostrander (MC) Student Services

 

   X

Brueckner  (WVC)  Fine Arts

 

   X

Pape       (WVC)  English

 

   X

Bangle (WVC) StudtServices

    

   X

Perlas      (MC)  Student Dev.

 

   X

Burzynski  (WVC)  Math

     X

 

Rascov    (WVC) Business

   X

 

Cogswell  (MC)  AAS

 

   X

Rounds    (MC)Communications

 

   X

Cox   (MC)  Commercial Serv.

   

   X

Rudy       (WVC) PE

   X

 

Hannigan (WVC) Language Arts  

 

   X

Shue       (WVC)  AAS

   X

 

Juncker    (MC) Communications

 

   X

Smebye   (MC)  Comm’l Serv.

 

   X

Kashima  (MC)  ESL

 

   X

Szabados  (MC) CATA

 

   X

Kelly      (WVC) Social Science

   

   X

Ting        (MC)  Math

   X

 

Laird       (MC)  Social Science

 

   X

Other: J.Henderson (WVCAS )

 

   X

Lavallo    (MC)  Math

    X

 

 

 

  

Guests:  L.Francis, J.Mahrt, 

 

 

G.Mendoza, J.VanTassel

   

   X

 

  I.2      Order of the Agenda

            It was agreed (M/S/U – Mancini/Cox)) that Item II.3 will be the first item of business to accommodate guests.

 

  I.3      Announcements & Information

            1.  Angelica advised that she and Alex have reviewed a draft of the Full-Time Faculty Hiring Selection and Procedures Manual document with Sandi Dillon.  The document was reviewed line by line to ensure that it is in compliance with the District’s Full-Time Faculty Hiring Policy as adopted by the District Academic Senate and the Board of Trustees.  There are some amendments that must be made, and when the final version is received, it will be reviewed line by line.  If it appears to be complete, the final version will then be forwarded to the Senate members by e-mail.

           

II.        Business

 

II.3      Consider Approval of New BAMS Concept Paper

Alex welcomed Jack Mahrt, Vice Chancellor of Finance, Linda Francis, Director of Fiscal Services, and Graciano Mendoza, Budget Manager, to today’s meeting.  Alex explained that today’s guests are here to report on a concept being considered by the Budget Allocation Model (BAM) Subcommittee of DBAC.  He turned the meeting over to the Vice Chancellor.

 

              Vice Chancellor Mahrt explained that the intent of the proposed model is an attempt to allocate resources in a fair and honest manner.  The Senate is the first of the constituent groups that will review the proposal.  Today’s presentation is meant to initiate comments, concerns, and questions, which will be brought back to the subcommittee for consideration.  Each Senator received a hard copy of the Power Point presentation to be made and a paper outlining the historical overview of the BAM, the purpose of the BAM Subcommittee, the committee’s process, membership, and recommendation.

 

              Linda explained that discussions on revising the Budget Allocation Model began in 2003, and in March 2004, as part of its budget priorities, the Board of Trustees identified the need for a new allocation model. The subcommittee was formed and charged to revisit the BAM in an attempt to develop sound fiscal practices and provide objectivity, equity, and stability to the operations of the District. The District will implement a model that includes a formula for establishing the level of FTE of classified, administrators, counselors, and librarians needed to support the District’s operations and to achieve the 75% full-time/part-time faculty threshold through a carefully selected variety of methods.

 

              Linda advised that the subcommittee has looked at other two-college community college districts to determine how they allocate funds.  The Los Rios, San Jose-Evergreen, and Contra Costa Districts all have similar areas for distribution of funds.  She stated that the majority of the colleges allocate funds using FTES.

 

              Approximately one year ago, the subcommittee listed and identified various components to be developed in a new model.  The thought process is to explain the concept, work out the mechanics, and then train those who participate in the process development.  It is intended that the BAM be used as a planning tool, with both colleges linking the budget process to their individual E&FMP and Strategic Plans in order to attain their goals.

 

              The basic difference between the old model and the proposed model was explained.  Currently, when revenue is received by the District from the State, the District dollars are taken from the revenue first and the remaining amount is allocated to each college based on FTES.  The allotment to the District includes mandatory expenses.  The new model is intended to make the allocation of funds more equitable and to allocate funds to better meet students’ needs.  The two colleges would receive revenue prior to the District’s cut and administrative costs will be charged back to the colleges.  In essence, the new model reverses the current process. Budget decisions will be made at the college level, the allocation of undesignated resources will be determined by FTES split, and District-wide fixed costs and administrative services costs charged back to the colleges by FTES split. The Senators reviewed the outstanding issues, what is required in order for the change to be successful, and the next steps.

 

              The process starts with the Strategic Plan, and curriculum should be aligned with the Strategic Plan.  Each college can then make a conscientious decision about the level of support needed.  It was emphasized that this is not a model intended to fund programs.  The intent of the process is to provide a fair and equitable amount to each college to be used as determined by the college community.  Under the current system, the budget is rolled over.  The new model will provide a linkage of the budget to Performance Goals. This model will allow for informed decisions, particularly considering the impact on students.

 

              It was noted during discussion that under the current BAM, the District receives 18% of the State’s revenue first.  The Vice Chancellor was asked if there is any documentation that identifies how the District spends its money.  It was stated that compared to other community colleges, this District has less administrative costs than most others, but it was emphasized that this figure is dependent on how money is allocated in the other colleges, as well as how the particular district operates.

 

During discussion it was noted that nothing in the model indicates who will make decisions about what the District’s priorities are, such as the unfunded retirement account.  This is a District Concern, not a college concern, and it should be addressed at the District level.  Concern was also expressed that the issue relative to Librarians and Counselors is not addressed in the model.  Linda advised that this matter is beyond the BAM and is being addressed at the state level by SB 6361, hopefully by 2006/07.   Another area that does not appear to be covered is salary negotiations and collective bargaining issues.  Linda explained that these items are on the agenda for discussion.

 

Graciano explained that issues such as the retirement liability impact the budget directly and cannot be ignored.  Those components will have to be tied into the process.  There are a number of outstanding issues that must be addressed as they will have a direct impact on the amount of operational funds.  It was also noted that there are certain mandatory costs that will come off the top, and that fact needs to be stated clearly.  Concern was also expressed relative to adopting a business model in education.  There are areas in which such a model will not serve in education. 

 

Angelica advised that she and Alex both serve on this committee, and she urged the Senate members to continue to provide input to any member of the committee, so that those concerns can be addressed.  She thanked the guests for their presentation. 

 

The order of the agenda was resumed.

 

II.1      Develop Standards & Criteria for Feasibility Study on Kuwait

            Angelica and Alex reported that the Chancellor has been waiting for the Senate’s Subcommittee for direction.  The Chancellor has offered to hire a consultant, using money received from Kuwait, to help the District Academic Senate’s Subcommittee to develop the standards and criteria relative to the feasibility study, if the Senate feels it would be beneficial. Six Senators have been selected from each college Academic Senate for the purpose of developing the standards and criteria for a feasibility study.  The next step is for the committee to start the process. 

 

            Discussion ensued, and a Senator stated that the Chancellor had promised to work with the Academic Senate at the September 15th meeting of the District Academic Senate (DAS).  It was expected, therefore, that the Chancellor would keep the Senate apprised and updated by e-mail, even if there was nothing to report. There has been conflicting information from various sources.  In response, it was stated that the Chancellor has been relying on the Senate Presidents for indications to move forward. Although the DAS has not met since the September meeting, the point is well taken.

 

            Discussion veered to the issue of a consultant.  Some expressed support for using a consultant to assist the committee. Others indicated concern as to who would select the consultant, the possibility of a conflict of interest, and, in general, misgivings about the project.  The question of the legality of this project was raised, and it was stated that at this point, the question is not one of legality.  The District will have to submit a Substantive Change Proposal to WASC, who will determine the legality of the project.  WASC can authorize a California community college to open another campus.  This step has not been taken to date.

 

            As discussion continued, it was stated that since the DAS has opted to proceed with a subcommittee to develop the parameters for a feasibility study, it is appropriate to charge the committee to develop the standards for the feasibility study and report back to the DAS.  If the committee determines it requires outside assistance, then a decision on the consultant issue can be made. 

 

            The following motion was made (M/S – Hannigan/Szabados):

 

            “that the District Academic Senate Subcommittee established for defining deliverables for a feasibility study meet twice in February and bring back its recommendation to the District Academic Senate at its next meeting.”

 

            The above motion was discussed further.  It was stated that the twelve members should have enough breadth of experience to come up with the salient points and have the option of calling in outsiders if there is a need for additional information.  The points should consider what value the Kuwait project will bring to the institutions, consider the legalities of the project, and develop the criteria that can be used in the feasibility study to determine whether or not to proceed with the proposal.

 

            A motion to amend the above motion was made (M/S – Cox/Nash):

 

            “that the committee meet at least twice by the end of February.”

 

            A call for the question passed (M/S/P – Hannigan/Mancini) and the above motion to amend the main motion carried unanimously. The following main motion was passed unanimously as amended.

 

            “that the District Academic Senate Subcommittee established for defining deliverables for a feasibility study meet at least twice by the end of February and bring back its recommendation to the District Academic Senate at its next meeting.”

 

            Discussion continued.  It was agreed that President Braun would coordinate the first meeting and that the committee would then select its own chair.  It was reiterated that the purpose of this committee is to determine the criteria and standards for a feasibility study that will determine whether or not the project should move forward.  The Chancellor should be advised that the committee will determine whether or not a consultant is required.  It was also emphasized that a broader flow of communication is critical.  The Senate must be part of the information loop.

 

II.2      Consider Approval of District Mission Statement

            Angelica distributed a document with the current version and the latest version of the statement.  She advised that she and Alex were asked to develop a District Mission Statement, which was also provided, dated November 10, 2005.  Angelica brought that version to the WVC Academic Senate for review and discussion.  The documents distributed to the Senators today provided with that version as well.  Angelica advised that the WVCAS has discussed this statement for at least two months.   

 

            Discussion ensued as to the purpose of a District Mission Statement, how the District is defined, and over the term “collegiality” and its definition and purpose.  It was noted that the term is stated in the Ed Code as a requirement and that WVC has a policy on shared governance that mentions “collegiality.”  It was strongly suggested that the word be deleted since it cannot be defined to everyone’s satisfaction.  A motion calling for a meeting to be held with the District Academic Senate and the District and College administrators to enhance communication was deemed to not be germane to the agenda item. 

 

            A motion to extend discussion for another ten minutes passed (M/S/P – Cox/Cogswell), and Angelica advised that feedback will be reported to the District Council’s task force on this matter and brought to other constituent groups for discussion.  If the MC Academic Senate needs more time to review the statement, it is acceptable to the WVC Academic Senate to postpone making a decision today.

 

            As discussion continued, it was stated that the college is governed by the College’s Mission Statement.  The District’s Mission Statement has to support the mission of the District.  Ultimately, it was determined that no action will be taken on this item at today’s meeting.    

 

III.             Future Agenda Items

            No new items were introduced at today’s meeting.

 

IV.     Adjournment

            The meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m. (M/S/U – Cogswell/Hannigan).  These minutes are respectfully submitted by Grace Hazan, Academic Senate Secretary.