LBCCD – Board Meeting – April 24, 2019

– [Staff Member] Check one, two. Testing audio one, two, three. One, two, three. (attendees chattering) (gavel thwacking) – Good evening, welcome
to the April 24, 2019 board of trustees meeting. I’d like to call the meeting to order. Our first item will be
the Pledge of Allegiance. Trustee Baxter, can you lead us through the Pledge of Allegiance, please? – Be happy to.
– All rise. – [Virginia] In honor of Earth Day which was yesterday,
let us thank our country for its leadership in environmentalism. And say the pledge, repeat after me. Ready, begin. – [Attendees] I pledge
allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands. One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. – Thank you Trustee
Baxter for the preamble. That was wonderful. We will now move onto item 1.3 roll call. Madame Secretary, can
you please call the roll? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter? – [Virginia] Here. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu? – [Vivian] Here. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk? – [Uduak] Present. – [Jackie] Doug Otto? Sunny Zia? – [Sunny] Here. – [Jackie] Student Trustee Jones. – [Trustee Jones] Here. – Great, thank you Madame Secretary. Item 1.4, approval of
minutes of the March 27, 2019 regular board of trustees meeting. Do I have a motion? – [Uduak] So moved. – [Virginia] Second. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee Ntuk,
seconded by Trustee Baxter. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary
can you please call the roll? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. And Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – [Jackie] And Student Trustee Jones. – [Trustee Jones] Aye. – Thank you, we will
now move onto item 1.5, superintendent president report. Before I hand off the floor to Superintendent
President Dr. Romali, I’d like to take a minute
to announce that she, our very own Superintendent
President Dr. Romali has been honored with a series of awards recognizing her contributions
to higher education. And the communities, the
Long Beach City College, the Long Beach Community
College District serves. Congratulations to Dr. Romali on recently receiving the following. The California Community
Colleges Classified Senate selected her as the 2019 Excellence in Servant Leadership award, recipient for her support
of the involvement of classified professionals
in participatory governance. She was nominated by our Classified Senate President
Anne Engel, thank you Anne. Also, she was presented by
the Long Beach Branch NAACP. They presented her with an Inspiring and Phenomenal Woman Award, for serving as an outstanding
female role model. And at the Annual Mother
and Daughter Conference of the Khmer Parent Association,
she was awarded with the Indradevi Award for the
inspirational example she sets for females in education. Indradevi was queen of the Khmer Empire and was a professor of
three temple schools, where she regularly
educated female students. We are so thrilled that we have someone of Dr. Romali’s caliber leading
Long Beach City College. Congratulations, Dr. Romali. (audience applauds)
Well deserved. (audience applauds) I’m so proud of you Superintendent
President Dr. Romali. I would assert, submit that
that’s the general sentiment and the sentiment of the board. With that I’d like to give
you the floor for your report. – [Reagan] Thank you. I particularly like the title queen. (audience laughs) We might want to look at
that in my next contract. (laughs) I’m kidding. Thank you, thank you so much. Dario is going to put up a wonderful flyer that you can hear about CTE Night. It’s gonna be held on Friday,
May 17th, 4:00 to 8:00 over at PCC. You’re gonna see LBCC’s
robotics in action. You’re gonna see virtual
reality welding machines, our electrical programs,
real traffic signals, 3D printing from Advanced Manufacturing, auto-tech, a mini car show. So, really you do not want to miss this. Please mark your calendars. We also have our brand new
Campus Community Newsletter out. Do not hesitate to pick up a
copy on your way out the door. You’ll love all the happenings in there. Shout out to Joshua
Castellanos and his team for putting that together. Yesterday, I want to thank President Zia and Trustee Vivian Malauulu,
Vice President Malauulu and Trustee Dr. Virginia
Baxter for coming out to our press conference,
where we announced the grand opening of
the Center for Community and Industry Partnerships. Which pairs local businesses with students who want to gain, have
internship opportunities and future job opportunities. So students, if you are
looking for a internship or a job opportunity after you graduate, you’re gonna want to
make sure to get in touch with this center, so that we
can hook you up with that. Over 50 employers have already signed up. Not a single person said no. And we’re gonna make
sure that you have these. There’s tremendous names on this list. Phillips Steel, Assembly
Member Anthony Rendon and Patrick O’Donnell, Boeing, Tarzana Treatment Centers, Mathnasium, Lakewood Chamber of Commerce,
the City of Lakewood, the Port of Long Beach,
Englander, Knabe & Allen, City of Lakewood, College Medical Center, Boy Scouts of America. You don’t want to miss
it, these are gonna be great internships and
jobs for you students. So please note that we are
gonna get more information to you about that. That would be a fantastic news article. And while I’m on the
subject of news articles, in the public speaking
today is going to be Professor Pat McKean. He has brought his
student star board meeting to learn more about how to
cover government meetings. And perhaps now would be a time
to do that public speaking. Or would you like to wait
until after the report? – I think it may be more prudent. Unless Pat, if you guys are
under a time constraint. We were gonna hear under
non-agenda items, public. But if you’re on a time
constraint, I can reorder it. (Pat speaks off microphone) Okay, fantastic.
(Reagan laughs) I’m gonna try to get everybody
out before 9:00 tonight, just because I want to make sure this is as painless as possible
(laughs) of a meeting. So, that’s my commitment. – Thank you. – Thank you.
– Thank you, Pat. – Also, you heard about
the President’s Task Force on Race, Equity and Inclusion, that we’ll put together a team of faculty, staff and administrators to
discuss race and diversity, and how we diversify the
campus more from our hiring to our vendor selection,
to student success. It will operate as a task force, which means it will operate
on a short term basis. And then its recommendations
will fold into naturally into our
shared governance system. So far 73 people from
all walks of the campus have volunteered and told
very passionate stories. So, we’re gonna start
that in late September. My honorary co-chair is Dr. Mike Muñoz, head of student services. We are going to be doing
a survey, Trustee Ntuk with USC to try and do
a campus climate survey to try and identify what
some of the issues are. So I want to thank you Trustee
Ntuk for your suggestion that we look at them. That was a great suggestion. Also, Vice President Malauulu I know you’re going to love this. You have been very helpful
in keeping communications with our students at the front and center of what you would love to see. And you’ve been a tremendous
advocate for that. So every Monday we’ve been sending out a new type of message. It’s a text message
that’s kind of an offshoot from In The Loop, and it’s
called Student In The Loop. It’s a weekly newsletter that contains all of the happenings around campus. And we’ve been hearing
back from the students that you guys love that. I hope I’m right, right? So okay, I see some nodding
heads, that’s great. So, it’s a new way that
we’re communicating. We’ve also selected, the Campus Commencement
Speaking Committee has selected, and she has agreed, the
wonderful Veronica Miracle who is a general assignment reporter for ABC 7 Eyewitness News. And has served as a fill
in anchor and opt in as a lead news reporter for
the evening news broadcasts, has agreed to be our graduation speaker. She was born in Osaka, Japan. And so the students are gonna
find her very, very inspiring. If you’ll look over here
to this lovely display. I know you guys know that
Joshua Castellanos and his team do an amazing job. But that’s not just one award over there, that’s a whole bunch of
awards that they have won at the CC Pro Conference last week. They placed first place in the
manipulative photo category. First place for television
public service announcement. Second place for a series of brochures about academic programs. Third place for the December issue of Campus Community Newsletter. And third place for
social media management, and third place for the new
athletic Viking logo design! So we want to congratulate
the entire team. Now Mr. Husak, Dr. Husak,
we’re gonna call attention to your wonderful team. We’re gonna congratulate
the Vikings volleyball team. Our number three Long
Beach City College Vikings defeated the number six
Santiago Canyon Hawks, 3-1 in the first round of
the CCCAA Regional Playoffs for their 12th consecutive win. The Vikings are gonna return to the court, I sound like a sportswriter, don’t I? The Vikings are gonna return to the court in the State Championship Semi-Finals against number two El Camino,
tomorrow at Fullerton College. So go Vikings. I also want to call your attention. We have placed on each
board member’s dias, a copy of the ACCJC accrediting standards. We’ve gone through some training on that. And we will be going
through additional training. The SCEO of ACCJC, Dr. Richard
Wynn is gonna be coming to give us some wonderful
training on that. And, I also wanted to give
you, I believe we have a, do we have this Joshua for every seat? If not we can get it for you. We had talked to you back in the day about opening two welcome
centers on each campus, so that we could drive up the
applicant to conversion ratio. And Joshua and DeWayne
Sheaffer and his team have done just that. In one year, they have
driven up the clicking, we’ve got the click status, click stats. I know students you’re
gonna know what that is. From the students who click on CCC apply to a completed application. In January, they brought
it up from 32% to 43%. In February, they brought
it up from 31% last year to 38% this year. In March, they brought it up
from 31% to 38% this year. So huge growth in moving
from application to enrollee. So the strategies that the marketing team and DeWayne’s welcome
center team are working on, I knew that you’d be really
excited to hear that. And Madam President, that
completes my report, thank you. – Thank you Superintendent
President Dr. Romali. A fantastic report as usual. And congratulations Joshua
Castellanos and your team. You continue to impress
us and statistics we love, and you always exceed expectations. With that, item 1.6, the ASB
President Jan Paolo, welcome! – Thank you, thank you Madam Chair. For the ASB president
report to board trustees, Superintendent President Romali, the vice president, faculty and staff. Fellow students, good evening. For my report, the
Student Light celebrated the month of April with a
sexual assault awareness campaign, which is a
campaign to raise awareness about sexual violence. And educate communities
on how to prevent it. The events include The Consent Day, the Clothes On Project, Denim Day, and Take Back the Night March. The Student Light is continually involved with the Saves Training workshop series and will be recognizing May as AAPI month, or Asian Americans and
Pacific Islanders month as a cultural awareness campaign. The Student Light will be
hosting a 5K run and walk fundraiser for the Viking Closet, that will be available for students who are experiencing resource insecurity. This will be held at the
Veterans Stadium on May 4th, and will be starting at 10:00 a.m. The Vikings Activities
Council will present a music festival after the event. In the Viking Theaters Council, the Annual Spring Sing
concluded last 5th of April with seven acts by the students of LBCC showcasing their talents for the crowd. And upcoming event includes
the Annual Mini Grand Prix that is happening on April 27th in the Pacific Coast Campus,
that will start at 10:00 a.m. Eight of ASB cabinet
members went to Sacramento for the General Assembly
last April 5 to 7th, which was attended by 60 out
of 140 community colleges. Some of the resolutions that the Associate Student Body
supported are the following. The Overnight Parking Resolution in line with the AB302,
reached a unanimous decision from all the members of the colleges. There was also overwhelming support for housing insecurities,
student compensation, more credible approach
to cost of textbooks, and banning the access codes. The LEC and PCC clubs that are having their end of the semester
Student Live awards reception on May 23rd, and that ASB will be having their ASB banquet on May 31st at The Grand from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. And I just want to extend
invitation for everyone. Thank you, that concludes my report. – Thank you Jan Paolo. Item 1.7, student trustee’s report. Student Trustee Jones, the floor is yours. – Thank you. Once again thank you all for being here tonight and participating. I would like to start off just briefly. To discuss about a few of the things that I’ve been up to for the past month, since we last met, on
behalf of our students. Got a chance on the 30th of March to present the findings
of the research at UCLA. And I bring that up because at the General Assembly conference that our president just spoke about, one of the resolutions
that was passed actually, was on the same subject of my research. So I’m glad to know that
I wasn’t the only one interested in that topic of compensation for our student leadership in general. We’ll see where that goes as it goes, makes it’s way through legislation. Also on the 3rd of April I attended
the Viking Preview Day. We had a huge turnout, we had
a couple of radio stations come out and we welcomed high schools from the local area to
come out and check out what Long Beach City
College has available. Got a chance to be there and
work with the Amend booth. We got a chance to
interact with a lot of the students who expressed
interest in not only coming to Long Beach City
College, but finding out what other resources
Long Beach City College has available for African
American male students here. Also looking ahead. On the 4th through 7th as our
president explained already, I attended the General
Assembly for the Student Senate of California Community Colleges, to advocate on the behalf
of these resolutions. I did pass along a completed
list of all the resolutions, along with the position that we took, and the final result. If there’s any more, I
have a few extra copies if you guys would like to have these. Thank you. On the 16th I had the wonderful
opportunity and pleasure to be invited to Pat
McCain’s journalism class. I did a brief PowerPoint about the role of student trustee and how
my experience has been here. Hopefully I didn’t bore them too much with my presentation there. On the 26th and 27th coming up I will be advocating again for college affordability at our OER Conference that’s gonna be here on the 26th from 2:00
to 3:00 in the library. And on the 27th at Camp Rise at San Bernardino Community College. Myself and a few other
of our student leaders will be there to again, advocate for the College Affordability Act support. Senate Bill 291 and similar
legislation coming down. And that is the end of my report – Thank you Student Trustee Jones. I love this, by the way. I think it’s very effective. And I’d love to pick your brain on why some of these motions failed, and get the background story
perhaps at a different time. – [Donnell] The credit
for that goes to our ASB President Jan Paolo. – Oh, fantastic! I love how you guys work so well together. So item 1.8, we will
now move onto item 1.8, LBCCFA Bargaining
President, Kristen, welcome! – Thank you. Good evening Superintendent
President Dr. Romali, Board President Zia, and
distinguished board members. My report this evening is very brief. I just want to thank this
board for its support of the LGBTQ plus Safe Zone workshops, and Safe Zone Ally training for faculty in the larger campus community. It’s long overdue at this
campus, so thank you. I also want to extend a
thank you for the district’s ongoing commitment and efforts regarding campus and classroom safety. Faculty look forward to continued
support from the district, and opportunities to create
good working conditions for faculty and for our
students, so thank you. – Thank you Kristen. Item 1.9 AFT Bargaining
President’s report, Susan welcome. – Good evening. Good evening board,
President Zia, trustees, Superintendent Dr.
Romali, vice presidents, colleagues and community, and students. I want thank Dr. Romali
for the lunch meeting she held last March,
or last month in March with the classified staff. The staff appreciate being
able to meet with you, and share their concerns
and ideas with you. And they feel that
connection’s very important, and thank you very much. I also want to let you know
that we’re currently planning the Classified Employee
Recognition Luncheon that we have annually. And it will be held on May 24th at LAC. In May we also will
begin to start planning the Classified Professional
Development Day. And congratulations to you, Dr. Romali on those wonderful awards
for your leadership. You are definitely a role model for us. And thank you for the CTE Event Night. It’s so nice to hear the
trades are coming back. Thank you very much, good evening. – Thank you Susan. Item 1.10, CHI Bargaining
President’s report. I don’t see Karen Robertson in the room. Item 1.11, reordering of the agenda. I didn’t get any requests,
but do any trustees want to reorder? Okay item–
– Excuse me. Trustee Baxter, want to move up? – [Virginia] Yeah, that’d be fine. – [Uduak] Okay. – I believe Superintendent
President was going to make the remarks in her report. Yeah we’re gonna do it then. Thank you for bringing that up. Item 1.12, public
comments on agenda items. The public is allowed to address the board before or during the consideration of any item on the agenda. Total of three minutes will
be allotted to each speaker with a maximum of 20
minutes to each subject, unless extended by the board president. I didn’t get any cards on the
agenda items, public comments. So we will move onto item 1.13, opportunities for members of the public to comment on CHI LBCC’s
initial bargaining proposal to the district. This is the time set aside
for the public to express its views on CHI LBCC’s
initial bargaining proposal to the district for proposal item 6.1. Are there any members of the public who’d like to speak on this item? This is in accordance
with Government Code, Section 3547, the public has the opportunity to
comment on the proposal. I don’t hear anyone. I don’t see anyone wanting to speak. I now declare this public hearing closed. We will now move on to item 1.14. Opportunity for members
of the public to comment on the district’s initial
bargaining proposal to CHI LBCC. The district’s initial bargaining proposal to CHI LBCC with sunshine at
the board of trustees meeting on March 27, 2019, in
accordance with Government Code Section 3547. The public now has an opportunity to comment on the proposal. The proposal can be reviewed
on item 6.2 for the public. Are there any members of the public who’d like to speak on this item? Hearing no response, I now declare this public hearing closed. We will now move on to item 2.1, resolution of Classified
School Employee Week. The recommendation action,
this is an action item that the board of trustees
adopt Resolution number 042419A declaring the week of
May 19 through 25, 2019 as Classified School Employee Week. And is recognized by
the state of California through a bill signed
by the governor in 1986. The third week of May has been designated as Classified School Employee Week, and is a recognized by
the state of California through a bill signed
by the governor in 1986. Do I have a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – [Sunny] Is there a second? – [Uduak] Second. – Moved by Trustee Baxter,
seconded by Trustee Ntuk. Are there any questions,
comments, discussion? Hearing none, Secretary can
you please call for vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – And Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – Item 2.2, nomination of
Trustee Vivian Malauulu for the Equity Award through ACCT. It gives me great pleasure to nominate Vice President Malauulu. This is gonna be an action that we support the nomination of
Vice President Vivian Malauulu for the Equity Award
through ACCT as submitted, and as recommended by myself. It will be for this prestigious
award that ACCT has. With that I’d like to call for a motion. – So moved.
– So moved. – (sighs) I’d like to recuse
myself from the discussion if I can, although I
appreciate your enthusiasm. But I’m gonna step out. And I was just gonna
ask of there’s any way my name could be corrected on that. Just the spelling of the last name. But I’m gonna be in the back
for a few seconds, thank you. – Okay, so I believe Trustee
Baxter made the motion, and Trustee Ntuk seconded. Or was it Trustee Otto, I can’t remember it was like simultaneously. We’ll go with Trustee, you guys decide. – [Doug] It was a joint second. – [Sunny] It was a joint second. – [Jackie] I have Baxter and Ntuk. – Okay.
– Is that correct? – [Sunny] All right let’s
go ahead and take the vote. – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. Who’s going to abstain. – [Sunny] Who’s gonna abstain. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – And Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – All right, great the motion passes. Good luck to Vice President Malauulu. Item 2.3, revised board policy and administrative
regulation on board travel. This is the first reading on the Revised Board Policy Regulation 2001. The board travel was
presented for first reading at the board meeting
of September 12, 2018. And approval at the
October 23, 2018 meeting, but the motion failed. The reference board policy
and administration regulation have been reviewed and revised. And changes are being
recommended as a result of our ongoing review to ensure
compliance with legal codes and aligned with current practice. So with that, since this
is not an action item and a first reading, I’d like to open it up
to, well first of all, do staff want to speak
on this before I give the floor to members of the board? – [Jackie] Don’t I need to make a motion? – [Sunny] I believe
it’s not an action item, – On, it’s not?
– So it’s just first reading. – [Jackie] Oh sorry. – We don’t need, yeah that’s. Okay so since I hear
no need for comment, or input from staff, I’d like to open it up. This is something that Trustee Baxter had requested come back to the board. Does anyone have an questions, comments? – [Virginia] Trustee Zia, the
reason why I brought this up is because I believe that
the trustee should take a active role in modeling what the other
labor groups have done as far as reducing the
expenses of the college. And therefore, that’s
why I am resubmitting this for approval. – Thank you Trustee Baxter. And I think the changes
are the substantive changes for the benefit of the public is that, before we had a dollar threshold of, I believe it was set by Trustee Ntuk for $3,300 per trustee. It was about a 25% reduction, and instead the framing of this policy is more focused as a function of how many
conferences and meetings each trustee will go to. So does anybody have
an comments, questions, before we proceed? I’m not hearing any. Is everyone okay with this
for us to bring it back for a second reading? Does anybody have an objections? Okay, well with that we
will move on to item 2.5. Revised Board Policy and
Administrative Regulation 2014, board of trustees code of
ethics, standard of practice. – [Jackie] 2.4. – 2.4.
– 2.4. – Thank you. I must be seeing double. Item 2.4, this is the first
reading for the reference revised board policy and
administrative regulation of the board of trustees code of ethics, standard of practice. And it has been revised and
changes are being recommended as a result of our ongoing review to ensure compliance with legal codes and align with current practice. I believe we got the… It’s 2.4. – 2.4
– I see. Okay, thank you for my
fellow engineer here. It’s fantastic, I apologize. Item 2.4 I thought I said
item 2.14 and you guys corrected me on that. We will go on to item 2.4,
a revised board policy delegation of authority to
superintendent president. This is a public first reading. And it is a delegation of authority, superintendent president, the reference policy has
been reviewed and revised and changes are being
recommended as a result of our ongoing review to ensure compliance with legal codes and align
with current practice. Are there any questions, comments? Any requests for changes? Okay, now we will move on to item 2.5. And again, forgive me
for the error on my part. This is the revised board
policy on code of ethics and standards of practice. It is the first reading. And again, this revision has been made, the revisions and changes have been made as a result to make sure
we ensure with legal code compliance and align with practices. Are there any questions, comments? On this item? Trustee Otto? – No, I’m all right with this one. – Okay, and this was
something that Trustee Otto had requested, so I hope it meets your expectation, Trustee Otto. I have a question, (chuckles)
so I’ll just take a minute. So, I just want to make
sure that it’s clear. I really applaud staff for really taking a thoughtful
approach to this. It’s my understanding that you serve at other districts, correct? And how many, it was quite
an extensive search, right? Okay. So I just want to make sure I know we have our council here to opine and someone who teaches about ethics in the state. Just for the sake of, for my edification. On page, this is on the administrative
regulation piece. On page four the superintendent president/board
relationship 2014.5 item B. It states that promote a
healthy working relationship with the superintendent
president and his or her staff. So I just wanted to kind of
examine that and explore, make sure there’s a common
understanding amongst ourself, what we define as healthy
and what is acceptable, as far as working relationship goes. So, I wanted to see if
we can expand on this, or perhaps have examples provided. If I can ask Jack Lipton our council with Burke, Williams to come up to the podium. To give us some examples
of what would be considered healthy under this item. Welcome Jack. – Thank you. Thank you Trustee Zia, thank
you for having me here. Trustee Zia you were asking
about the provision there on page four under 2014.5 B? – [Sunny] Yes. – Okay, it says promote a
healthy working relationship with the superintendent
president and his or her staff. That could encompass a
wide scope of behaviors between the trustees and the
superintendent president. But it basically means
that the relationship has to be respectful in
everything that that encompasses. Respectful in a civility sense, and also respectful in
terms of not unnecessarily imposing on the time of the CEO, or of any other administrator
for that matter. So it’s a broad concept. Generally a code of ethics does not provide specific examples, but provides a general principle
for the trustees to cover. But that’s generally what
it’s intended to cover. To be respectful both in a civility sense, and also in terms of the time of the CEO. – Okay so. I just want to make sure
’cause this is something this is an area that I have heard our superintendent president express that we could, as board members,
perhaps we need to do better on being more mindful on how much we spend getting involved. Pretty much infringing on her time. And the time of staff. And what I’d like to
see is, what is common? And this is something that
the superintendent president has brought up on numerous occasions. So I want to be respectful to that and perhaps codify it here, or provide a little bit more
explanation so it’s not, because it’s in the eye of the beholder. It could be viewed as subjective. What is commonly viewed
as a healthy involvement or request on time of a
superintendent president? Is it something that we need to look into and perhaps expand? Based on your experience at the state and other districts that you work with? – Well frankly, this
is a common issue when I teach my ethics workshops at the CCLC. This is a type of question that frankly comes up frequently, both by
the CEOs and by the trustees. Ultimately, the board itself
will have to determine what is an appropriate
level of interchange between the individual trustees and the superintendent president. But I think in the general
sense trustees understand that the superintendent
president has a big job to do. And if there’s
disproportionate interaction by say one or two trustees on the superintendent president’s time. That is potentially harmful
to the college itself, because it takes away from other duties that she needs to do. So in a general sense it is an issue and it’s one that I frequently
hear about statewide. – So, superintendent
president, if I may ask, I know you’ve raised this before. How much time do you spend addressing board members, questions
on a weekly basis? And requests and information,
and just how much time are we taking from your time? On a average. – I’m thinking out loud. I would say easily 30 plus hours a week. But please don’t think I
work a 40 hour week. (laughs) – [Sunny] I know you work– – I would say easily over 30 hours a week. I recall, and that’s just
off of the top of my head, I recall we had talked
at at previous meeting about the balance. And we talked about being
a good superintendent versus being a good president,
and finding the balance. So I would say a little bit over 30 hours. That’s in addition to time
that the vice presidents spend, I’m gonna say 10 plus hours a
week for each of you roughly? If I had to make an
estimate, 10 plus hours a week for each of you. So that’s a rough estimate. And we balance the work
of the superintendent and the district office
functions with the work on the student success
side of the president’s side of the house. – So it’s taking away from your work on the student’s success. – It’s always a balance,
everything is a give and take. So there’s the superintendent work to do, and then there’s the president work to do. But the superintendent work is I would say 30 plus hours a week,
and 10 plus hours a week for the vice presidents, or so. – So is that considered disproportionate, or is that considered healthy, according to what you
see and what’s common? I mean you’re the expert on the ethics, and what you see with other districts. Is that excessive? Do we need to be more mindful
of that as board members? – Ultimately, that’s gonna be a decision for the board itself,
because the board establishes it’s own code of ethics and provisions. But frankly when I hear, you said Dr. Romali, 30 hours a week dealing with board issues. – [Reagan] Easily, yeah. – And that includes, or doesn’t include responding to requests from trustees? – [Reagan] No that includes
responding to requests. – I see. For a five member board
that strikes me as high. I guess I would have expected it to be maybe 1/3 of that or less. – Okay, so would you recommend that we, I mean at least it sounds
like we may need to just to help us as a
body better understand what the expectation is for us, and what we’re accountable to in supporting this relationship. If I can just ask we
add a provision that we either say, this is going to be for example, providing examples. Not infringing on
superintendent president’s time disproportionately,
something to that effect. If we can make that
enhancement that that way there’s a little bit more
clarity on this item, I would support that. And we can bring it back
for the second reading. Just so there’s no ambiguity
of, it’s healthy, it’s great. But it’s subjective. – [Uduak] I have a question. – Yes, Trustee Ntuk. – [Uduak] Is it a board policy, or administrative regulation? – This is on the
administrative regulation. Which we’re going to be,
because this is for board, we’re going to vote on it, when it comes back after
the second reading. – We didn’t amend their, make changes to their
administrative regulations. Sorry I got a cold. (laughs) – So the question Trustee
Ntuk, you want me to restate? – I was under the understanding
of our policy that we make changes to the board policy. But the superintendent
president makes changes to the regulator, the ARs,
administrative regulation. Is that correct? – Yes that was correct. However, we’ve gotten some
advice from Mr. Lipton that in the future what we
should do, which would be, I’m so sorry I’ll get
you some cough drops. – [Uduak] I got one. – Okay. – [Uduak] Can’t without it. – What he has made, and
I think it’s a really good recommendation, as
we continue to tighten up taking a look at everything
through here for accreditation. He’s recommending that when we
bring the admin regs forward the board cite, not approval per se, but concurrence that they adhere to the board
policy that you passed. So in other words you
passed a board policy, and then I’m using
administrative regulations that do concur and follow that policy. And I think that would be a good idea if we start to do that. – Yeah and especially since
it’s regarding our relationship. – [Uduak] That would be
two separate votes then. – No it’ll be in one vote under one item, right Mr. Lipton? – [Reagan] Maybe you can explain that better than me, Mr. Lipton? – I think the trustee is
correct that in most cases, not in the 2,000 series,
but for all the other policies and regulations,
it’s appropriate for the CEO, the superintendent
president to draft the administrative regulations. Although I think it’s
appropriate in those cases for the board to ratify them to ensure in the board’s opinion that
the administrative regulation is in fact consistent
with the board policy. On the other hand with respect
to the 2,000 series itself, such as the code of ethics, in my view, these are entirely within the jurisdiction of the board. And the board should vote on the policy and the administrative regulation, because it’s essentially
a document by the board to govern the board’s actions. – [Uduak] Just to clarify. – [Sunny] Trustee Ntuk. – [Uduak] So ratification is
a vote, not a concurrence. Is there a difference between a vote like a roll call vote versus a concurrence where there’s nothing
said and it’s assumed that everyone voted for it? – A couple aspects to that question. First of all there’s a difference between approval and ratification. I was saying that the
board policies generally should be approved by the board, meaning they’re the ones that are making the ultimate decision. I was also saying that
administrative regulations, except for the 2,000 series are ratified. That means that the
superintendent president has already taken the action to draft it. That would just be like a
superintendent president signs a contract and the board
subsequently ratifies it. You’re ratifying, or
consenting to the action taken by the superintendent president. In both cases, approval or ratification, is done by a vote. The board can only act by a vote. Every action that’s taken
has to be by a vote, and has to be by law,
recorded in the minutes. Whether it’s done by a
roll call vote, or by all in favor say, aye, kind of thing. It’s really up to you, but doesn’t have a legal significance. I hope I’ve answered that question. – Mr. Lipton I want to make
sure I have my notes right that I’m taking what the board desires so that I can reflect
it in the next agenda. Is that admin regs and board
policy in the 2,000 series since they’re owned by
the board get approved, both of them get approved by the board. And the 3,000, four and five onward, the board policy gets approved, the board admin regs get ratified. – Yes.
– As consistent with the board policy. – Yes, that’s exactly correct,
– Okay, okay. – that’s what I was saying. Thank you Dr. Romali. – So this will come back to us both your regulation and
the policy for approval subsequent to the second reading, correct? – President Zia, if I could
just get back to one point to comment on something you said earlier. And that was about disproportionate time that trustees may take. I guess that can take two
forms, in my experience. One is simply through regular contacts, phone calls, text messages, usual contacts that trustees in the course of your duties would neccessarily have with
the superintendent president. But there’s also requests
that actually go beyond the interaction that will
take some time for the staff. So I’m seeing that as
really part of the question. Not just the contact, but
follow up work or assignments that might result from the contacts that request that the trustees
make for certain information or reports, for example. – Okay, I got you. I know there’s reference that, I’m mean this is on, we got this training. It’s very consistent with
that we act as a body, that no one acts on their
own or directs staff. We can’t direct staff. So, when you see request and
then the repetition afterwards, are you suggesting that the request, we should be mindful that
it shouldn’t be repeated? As in the form of an inference being made that it’s directing staff? Is that what you’re touching on, or am I just going off on an different island here? For example when you say, I
want to know what’s proper and what’s not proper, just
so that we establish that. So let’s say a trustee makes a call, and the trustee’s like,
I need this information. And then that trustee’s
under that impression that, hey staff is gonna
get that information to me. Is that appropriate? Or is it bordering direction, or is it situational based on the nature of the request? So that’s one thing I want to clarify. And the second is, if the
trustee is making a request and saying, look this is a suggestion, but follows up repeatedly. Is that a reasonable
expectation for staff to have that that’s a direction
and there is an expectation on the trustee’s part that
they execute the request? Or be responding to the request outside of the body of the board
making that determination? – You raise some interesting and challenging issues, Trustee Zia. Trustees, to fulfill their
role as elected officials often need to obtain information, or they want to get information about the operations of the college. And they should have a right
to request certain information. Where it becomes potentially problematic, is that the gathering of the information becomes burdensome on the staff. There’s some types of
information where it’d be fairly simple to respond to, and others could take hours
or even weeks to respond to. And I think that’s an
important distinction for the board to consider. In terms of an individual
trustee making the request. If it’s the full board voting in open session
– I see. – to make a request, to me legally board can ask for–
– That’s a direction, yeah. – Board can ask for whatever it wants and the superintendent needs to comply. Requests for information
from individual trustees can be a bit tricky if
the requests require more than usual or minimal type of effort. And actually starts to impose or detract from the work of the administration. So I mean that could be
part of the policy, as well. – So okay, what is the measure? Does a staff member have to say, look this is just way? At what point, ’cause
these are all gray areas, and I want to make sure
that there’s no ambiguity when we’re looking at, is it a reasonable expectation
for staff to say, look, this is way too much of
an impact on my time? Because out of let’s say finite limit of timeline of 40 hours, I’m spending like `10 to 20 hours trying
to get to that request, and it’s taking away from my
student success initiatives that we’re working on. I just want to make sure that there’s no vagueness about this. Because some of this stuff is operating in the realm of the abstract. So, what is the red flag? Does a staff member say,
look this is way too much? Or is there a certain
number that is typical? Requests can be made and folks can differ to the board and say, look, if this comes from the
board, then we’ll act on it, the board as a body. What’s the line is what I’d like to? If you can – Yeah no thank you.
– give some examples. – I guess it gets back to
the point the basic principle and the ethics statement
that board acts only as a collective body,
that individual trustees don’t have legal authority
to direct operations of the college. So, in that sense though
where the balance has to occur is that individual trustees
often would like to have information that they’re interested in to support their constituents. Or just because they want
to know certain things about the operation of the college. I think where the line
is that the fulfillment of the request has any
sort of interference with a staff person’s work, that they’re not getting other work done, that it’s interfering with
the operations of the college. – [Sunny] Okay. – And I think ultimately
the superintendent president would be the best person
to make that judgment on an individual basis. I didn’t mean to put that
on you, but it seems like. – [Reagan] These are good questions because what we’ve been
trying to do is fine tune and make better and smooth this process. So I’m glad you brought
this up President Zia. Basically what we do, when
we had our accreditation training from Dr. Helen
Benjamin in September. My instruction was
basically, if it’s a minor, hey my parking pass needs, can
you RSVP me to this dinner. That’s fine, but if it’s
anything more than that it does need to come to the whole board for an action vote. And what I did is I created
a board request list that’s about 12 pages long of
the things that they wanted. And then the board then votes on whether they agree or disagree with that, so that they act as a whole. And I’m open to any
suggestions that you might have as to how I can do that
different or better. And then I provide them updates with where were are on their asks. – I see, in other words, a
procedure that you followed or proposing is that
when you get a request from an individual trustee you compile it and then it’s presented
to the board as a whole, and the board then votes on? – Which ones.
– which they. I guess that’s the
ultimate way of making sure that the board as a whole is in favor of your time and your staff’s time. – Let’s make one correction,
we don’t vote on that. It’s presented to us, it’s
also in the docket tonight. – [Reagan] Oh yes. – We don’t vote on it, but
if that’s what we should be doing and decide which
ones we should proceed with, because, I mean is 12 pages reasonable? As far as requests from what you’ve seen with other districts? – It’s not the number of
pages, it’s the amount of time that each request will
take, is what the issue is. And I don’t know if that’s
part of the information that you present when you have that list. – Yeah I do, and we’re
open to, we’ve been, Trustee Ntuk and I have
been working really hard to kind of fine tune this,
what it should look like, what it could look like, what the proper procedures should be. So I’m open to any suggestions
that you might have as to how I make it tighter. This work is what constitutes
the 30 plus hours a week. And what I do is I then provide them a bi-weekly report with updates on where we are on certain things. And if they’re material in nature, I’ll agendize it like I’ve
agendized some thing tonight. Just to give them a public update as to where we are in the major projects. – And I hope I’m not stepping on any toes, but my recommendation
in that regard would be, especially if this I on the agenda anyway, for the board to actually vote in whole or in part on that list. And if there’s any that
the board as whole feels are inappropriate, or just
shouldn’t be done for some reason then to me that’s appropriate
for the board to take a vote. It could be on the consent calendar, and a trustee can pull it
off the consent calendar if they want to discuss it individually. But that seems to be a potentially
very effective approach. – Okay, that’s fantastic. Well I don’t mean to… I think Trustee Ntuk wanted to, he raised his hands first, and Vice President Malauulu after. – Yeah I’d like the floor
to ask some questions, since we’re asking questions tonight. There was some reference
in the draft about a spokesperson for the campus. And I know that the media and journalism, we have some journalism
students here tonight, has been somewhat in a
decline in consolidations. You know it’s a really
important part of our democracy is having a free and open press. And there’s a section in there about who’s the spokesperson for the campus. Would a policy on who
the spokesperson would be for the campus, would that
infringe on a trustee’s First Amendment right
of freedom of speech? Would they be precluded
to talking to the media, or press, or a student
if they had a question, even though they’re not
the official spokesperson of the district? – I appreciate, understand
that question, trustee, that as elected officials you
have a First Amendment right that can’t be infringed,
to speak out about issues that affect the district. But if there’s an official
position that the college has to take having someone and most often it’s the
superintendent president. It could be a public information officer, it could be someone else, to be a single voice of the college. And that serves the purpose
of having a unified voice. If trustees want to speak on that issue they certainly can, but
in my view they need to make it clear that they’re speaking on behalf of them self, and
not on behalf of the college. But in that sense, in no
way are the First Amendment rights of trustees infringed upon. – So any policy wouldn’t stop
any trustee from talking, or opining, or sharing their opinion, even though the official
position of the college may be one way or the other on a policy, or a budget, or some item of discussion. Does that sound correct? – No thank you, I’m not
sure exactly what context you’re getting at, but
there’s also a provision in the ACCJC Standards of Accreditation that provides that, once
the board makes a decision, the trustees support the decision. In my view that doesn’t
mean that they can’t express disagreement about it, especially if you’re a trustee
that was in the minority and voted against it. But can’t be doing
anything to undermine it, because if a decision has been made, it has to be supported in the sense that that’s the decision. And you have a right to disagree, you have a right to speak
your mind on it, absolutely. But not to do anything to undermine the effectiveness of that decision. – [Doug] And I think the language– – [Sunny] Excuse me, Trustee Otto. Vice President Malauulu
was after Trustee Ntuk. I’ll call on you after her.
– I’ve got a few more questions still.
– After Trustee Ntuk is finished if you don’t mind. – [Uduak] If I have the floor
and if there’s something germane to what we’re talking about. – [Sunny] You have the
floor Trustee Ntuk go ahead. – Follow up on that too,
I got two more items I want to ask questions about. The question of policy. We’re a policy making group. And we’re talking about
comparable to other districts. What’s the process ethically,
of making a policy? Should the board propose
something, vote on it? Does it have to have a
first and second reading? Or, can something just be
brought up by one board member, or brought up by the superintendent and voted on at one time? Is there a process for enacting policy? Do we follow Robert’s Rules of Order? Is that part of the
accreditation standard, or it is something different as far as creating a new policy? Or changing a policy? – Again, there’s a number
of points to that question. Some policies, as a matter of law, require involvement of the
participatory governance system. So in that sense, as a matter of law, and to follow, and to respect the roles of the academic senates for
example, and student government, there are many policies
that have to be developed through that process. And then come to the board
for their final approval. On the other hand, policies
that deal specifically with the board, like in the 2,000 series, I don’t know what your procedure
is for developing those. Most commonly it’s the
superintendent president or chancellor that develops it. A draft, perhaps in consultation
with the board president. But, that can be done in different ways. That can be done by a
subcommittee of the board itself to develop policies in the 2,000 series to suggest revisions to
policies in the 2,000 series. And I’m focusing on the 2,000 series, because the other ones, in most cases, require involvement of the shared governance participatory
decision making process. In terms of your question
of first and second reading. It’s common and I believe
your own board policy requires a first and second reading. But in cases of urgent situations, the
first reading can be waived as long as it’s agendized
for actual action. And the board votes
that they’re dispensing with a first reading, if
something needs to get enacted right away. And that can be done as well. Just as an exception to your board policy. – So. I went to a training and there was, somebody brought up
the fact that sometimes there tries to be decisions
made prior to a discussion, or something coming to the board, that some other districts do. Versus having discussions
at a open session like this. Is there a recommended practice of when, when do board members make
amendments or suggestions, or additive or subtractive changes to a policy? Should it happen before the meeting? – It generally shouldn’t
happen before a meeting, because then we get into Brown Act issues, especially if there’s
a quorum of the board that are communicating with
the superintendent president on the same types of issues. So it really needs to
be done for that reason in an open board meeting. And that’s a main reason
why there’s a first reading. It allows, as what’s happening now, it allows the trustees to
have an open discussion about a policy and a regulation. And it gives the trustees an opportunity to suggest revisions and amendments. So that when it comes
back for a second reading those can be accommodated. And even at the time of second reading there can be further
revisions and discussion at that time, as well. – So even at the second
reading, if there’s a change, you don’t need to restart the process, and have another first reading. – Don’t need to, the board– – No matter the substance
or minor changes? That’s not a bright line, or a threshold. – There’s not a bright line. In the general sense if at second reading there are significant differences, and it’s gonna require some more extensive wordsmithing and drafting, it might make sense for the board to say, based on this discussion
let’s bring it back one more time for final approval. But even at that point
the board has a right to reconsider and discuss
possible revisions. These policies are a central role of the board of trustees. There shouldn’t be anything that detracts from the board’s decision
making with respect to approving policies. – [Uduak] And those changes are just on a simple majority vote. If there’s some disagreement with something somebody recommends, you can call for a vote to support or oppose the recommendation. That’s not a radical notion? – No, the board policies
are always approved by a majority vote. And let’s say this were
up for approval right now, which it’s not it’s first reading, and let’s say a trustee says, “I like this policy, but I
recommend the following changes.” So that would be like an
amendment to the motion, that will take a second. And then a majority of the
board votes on that amendment, then there’s a new motion on the floor. But any amendment or change
to the proposed policy requires a majority vote and approval of the policy itself
requires the majority vote. – We have an interesting
practice in our agenda, at the end if board members
want to add something to a future agenda item. The policy says by majority, but the board agenda says by consensus. What takes precedent, the
consensus, or the majority? And does there actually have to be a vote? – [Sunny] Can I just intervene here? – [John] Yeah, sure. – I think we’re veering
off from this item, the content of what this contemplates. And we’re getting into procedural matters, so I just want to be
mindful of the Brown Act. And of course you know better than I do, Mr. Lipton, I feel we’re
going off in a different path that this item contemplates. But, if you think otherwise please opine, as far as consensus versus
approval and all that. The procedural aspect of what we do. – [Uduak] Repeat my
question if you’d like. – Sure. – So the same question, but
from an ethical perspective, since this is an ethics policy. – In my view the term consensus
is somewhat ambiguous. That the board acts only by vote. And I think though when
the term consensus is used, it means by a majority vote. And a vote should be
taken either by roll call, or all those in favor. But it also can be done by
the board president saying, “Do we have a consensus on this?” Meaning, are we all in favor of that? But legally it has the same effect that it means that it’s by
a majority of the board. Either if you call it consensus, or you call it by board vote. In my own opinion it’s best practice to always have votes, so
it’s recorded in the minutes and not rely on a consensus. – I have one final question. We have a policy on board members adding items to the agenda. But sometimes it happens and
sometimes it doesn’t happen. If a board member’s suggest
to put something on agenda and it didn’t happen,
would that be a violation of the ethics policy? – I guess I’m not familiar
with that particular policy. That if there’s a policy
that board members can add items to the agenda, meaning at the board meeting itself? – Right, it says within
five days in advance and written notice to the
superintendent president, or the president of the board, an agency item can be added for discussion or action for a future discussion. – [Sunny] Is this in the ethics policy? Is that what you’re referring to? Can you refer to what– – [Uduak] Oh I can bring it up here, one second.
– The emergency criteria. – Remember, there’s three
– It’s not an emergency. – [Jackie] reasons why you can add– – Oh no, is it the board ethics? We’re veering off of this topic, folks. And I got to bring it back,
this train back on track. Because it doesn’t pertain
to this Trustee Ntuk, I would suggest that we bring
it up at a different time. – Just to close out, ’cause that was my last question.
– Unless you can tie to this. – I did. So, a violation of another policy we have would be a violation of the ethics. So if we have a policy that says something we try to do it, it doesn’t happen, then that becomes a– – [Sunny] I don’t see that
anywhere in this policy of ours, or administrative regulation. Can you show me where you’re referring to, that you’re on this ethics policy? Or the administrative
regulation, violation of, I could very well be missing it. Which is very likely. – [Uduak] Give me one second. – [Virginia] President
Zia, I’d like to hear what Trustee Otto has to say. ‘Cause I think he was trying to talk about 15 minutes ago. – Okay, yeah I think
Vice President Malauulu raised her hand, if that’s okay with you, Vice President Malauulu to ask. – [Vivian] Oh yes. (speaks off microphone) – [Sunny] Trustee Otto. – The point’s kind of lost
from a few minutes ago, but all I was gonna say
was I think the language about spokesman for the board says that the president of the board is the primary spokesman for the board. Which gives latitude for
the First Amendment rights of the board members. When I read that, that gave me comfort, because what it means
is that people can talk, they just have to understand that the way that the board works is
that works by voting. And that the president of the board is the spokesperson for the board, the primary spokesperson. If a reporter calls you up and says, “What do you think about that?” You have every right to tell
them what you think about that. But as you said, I thought eloquently, you can’t undermine a
position once a position is taken by the board, that’s all. On that subject there
was the only one I had. – Thank you Trustee Otto. I think the other point
you made Mr. Lipton was that we have to
preface that we’re speaking as a board member, not
on behalf of the board if we’re not the board president. Is that correct?
– Yes that’s correct. That’s best practice. – [Sunny] Vice President
Malauulu I apologize, you’ve been waiting patiently. – No problem. I have a couple of things to say. And I hate to belabor the
point, because we’re actually spending a lot of time talking about a lot of time being
wasted, so it’s a little. I could see the frustration here. First of all, thank you
for your information. I have two issues with some of what you’ve shared. And in no way, I hope that what I say does not come off as disrespectful. I have a lot of respect
for the work that is done on both sides of this dias. However, I think that, (sighs) and I don’t know when it
happened, this is my opinion. But in the last few months I feel that there has been
a shift in the culture, almost in leadership that has
gone in a very tyrannical, digression, I feel like we are being whipped for things that
we were elected to do. I ran on a platform of change, and making things
better for students and faculty. And if that means, and I know for a fact that this issue has nothing to do with me. I’m very confident that I’m not the one that this issue is about. I feel bad, because I have
an idea of the trustee who is probably the subject
of this conversation, and I don’t think it’s fair. But I’m gonna not speak for
anybody and allow that person to speak for him or herself. But I think that it’s
wrong to put a jacket on any trustee who is
attempting to do the work that he or she was elected to do, on the grounds that it’s overwhelming or overburdening staff. Not to sound disrespectful. And Dr. Romali you know
that I have a tremendous amount of respect for
you, and I appreciate everything that you do. But, it’s in the course of doing business, and it’s in the course of work. And, we as trustees are not
allowed to get in the weeds with the work, I’m not
allowed to call somebody and ask somebody to do something. We are prohibited from doing that. My job is to go to the gatekeeper, which is Dr. Romali and to say, “Hey, “we need better student communication.” What Dr. Romali does with
that request is up to her. I don’t micromanage her, it’s up to her. If she wants to delegate that
to a vice president, she will. If she wants to delegate it to a director, or a manager, she will. But the 10 or so hours that are being put on our backs, and that
we’re being accused for. 10 hours per vice president, per trustee. I’m sorry, I don’t think
any of you guys have spent 10 hours on any issue that
I’ve brought up this month, or last month. You may have spent an
hour or two on an issue. I think Dr. Muñoz had
assisted me with an issue that may have been maybe 10 hours over the course of a few weeks. But, it’s all for the good of the college. And Dr. Muñoz, we uncovered
some serious problems. So for you, and I say this respectfully, for you or for anybody to say that, you know the trustees
are just overwhelming the superintendent president
and it’s so much of her time is being spent answering to trustees. I mean I think we’ve wasted a lot of time on this discussion here at this meeting. I think this meeting, I
think the past 47 minutes of this discussion has been wasteful. I was elected to do a job. The people in Area 2, West Long Beach and the South Central part to the city, elected me to get on this
board and to make changes. And to call people out
and to ask people to do certain things that weren’t being done. As a result of that they got done. And if that means that whoever sits in the superintendent’s chair whether it’s Dr. Romali or somebody else, has to put in some time to make it happen. I’m sorry, and I’m not
trying to sound callous, I don’t want to sound insensitive, but that’s what she gets paid to do. And that’s what the staff gets paid to do. And I’m gonna say it one more time. I know that this
discussion is not about me. And I now that I’m not the person that’s causing this to come to the board. But I don’t think it’s fair that anybody should have to be told,
you know, “We’re spending “so many hours on board requests.” I’m sorry, that’s what we’re here for. And these long, drawn
out discussions, really? I’m sorry, but that’s not how I roll. Secondly, as far as a board spokesperson, I’m not comfortable with having a board spokesperson speak for me. Now if we make a motion and
if we pass an agenda item as a board, and there’s a
designated board spokesperson who’s gonna speak to that item that we’ve all agreed to, no problem. I understand how that works. But to have one designated person, no, because we are five separate individuals, from five different walks of life, with five different life experiences. And we’re not all going to agree, or see things eye to eye. So I don’t want somebody speaking for me. Unless I voted on something
and the board made a decision, I don’t think a board
spokesperson should do that. So again, I apologize,
it think staff you guys do a great job, I appreciate what you do. I hope that you being
overwhelmed and overburdened is not personal, and I hope you understand that it’s because we care
so much about this college and we want things to be better. And if we’re bringing items
up that need your attention that needs something to be done, it’s because it needs to happen. Who else if not us? Who else is gonna bring them up? – [Reagan] Respectfully,
I don’t think we ever said we were being burdened, we
simply answered a direct question as to how many hours we worked a week, and we do so happily. – Thank you Vice President Malauulu. Those are very valid points. And I think it goes along
with what this practice and this policy is trying to codify. And it’s exactly what you’re saying, that we’re supposed to act as one unit. Someone who’s completed the
Excellence in Trusteeship, I think you are one of the
first ones who did amongst us, this is one of the key
points they highlight. So I think it’s just emphasizing that, and no one’s accusing anyone. – [Reagan] No, I did not complain. – There’s quite a bit of
speculation and conjecture in what you were saying,
and I just want to be very careful that, being mindful of the language we use. Nobody’s accusing anybody. We’re just trying to make sure that we perfect our
policies and procedures. A lot of these also
pertain to yours truly. I want to make sure I manage my requests. If I need to scale back,
I need to do a better job, that’s on me, and that’s what’s part of the questionings that I have. And I do take umbrage with the fact that it’s been 47 minutes
of wasted effort and time. Because this is our job. It is important for us
to make sure there’s no ambiguity as policy makers. So that come tomorrow we’re not operating on a different understanding
and we’re all aligned. And that’s really simply the intent. And neither should anyone be in a position to explain themselves on why
they have certain questions, or how much time it took. I don’t think it’s a waste of time. With that, if there are no more questions. Trustee Otto, I’m sorry. – [Doug] This is very specific. – Oh, I’m sorry.
– Go ahead I’m sorry. (coughs) – I’ll let you cough.
– I’m sorry. Uduak gave it to me.
(Doug laughing) – I just wanted to say at no time did I or any vice president
complain about what we give to this institution. We do so happily and wonderfully. We love this institution. At no time did we say we were overwhelmed. We said we are very committed
to this institution. It is imperative that we
have these discussions, even if it’s in a disagreement form. We are heading into
accreditation next year, and if we disagree on things, that’s okay. That’s what we’re supposed
to do so that we can hammer it out and get it the way you want it. You are the policy making body. We will do it as you wish, in compliance with ACCJ standards. So I do think it’s
imperative that we talk about whatever the intricacies
are that we must talk about, so that we can get it right
for our accreditation report. Because the last thing
we want is a finding. We want to come through
with flying colors. Secondly, we’ve been doing
a lot of work lately. I’ve been working with
Trustee Ntuk to try and get how we sunshine things correctly. It’s very important that we
get it done right and properly. And I’m very interested
in what the legal opinion would be on that, so that we
don’t get in trouble later. That’s my clarification, thank you. – [Sunny] Thank you, Trustee Otto. – Okay, thank you. So I had one specific thing that, I unfortunately had not gone all through the lengthy regulation. Under 2014.8 on ethical behavior. B says, the president of
the board plays a key role in ensuring that the laws and
code of ethics are followed. I’d like to see a language
added to the following effect. If a violation of ethics is
filed against a board member, the president or superintendent president will confidentially inform all board members of the governing body of the district, and make available to the board members the complaint if any is filed. It seems to me that as a governing board, we need to know what’s going on. And it can be treated confidentially. But if we don’t do that then
decisions are being made without the governing board, which is the board for the
district making those decisions. – Can I just ask a question, Trustee Otto? So just to make sure I understand. So you’d like any matter that comes up against any member of
the board to be reported to the entire board. – Yes.
– Okay. Is there a confidential way of doing that? According to the Brown Act if
it goes to the entire board it’s gonna be public, correct? Or am I missing? – No I think are closed session rules where things can be kept. – Well let’s ask our
attorney here, our counsel. Is that something that would be a matter of public information? Or is that going to be considered confidential and
closed session eligible? – Issues regarding ethical
conduct of trustees is not a topic for closed session. It’s a matter for the public. But I understand Trustee Otto’s comment. And that certainly could
be made part of the policy that the full board is informed of any sort of ethical complaint. What the board should be aware
of is those communications, because they’re not subject
to being in closed session, they’re also potentially disclosable under the California Public Records Act. And that’s just the nature
of being public officials. They’re not considered employees for purposes of the Brown Act. There aren’t the same privacy issues that other employees would have. So if there’s a complaint
against a trustee, there could be aspects of that
that might be confidential if it pertains to an
employee, or to a student. But generally speaking that
material is not confidential. – Yeah for that reason I don’t
think that we should do that. I think the way we have it is sufficient, out of respect to board members. And we can manage board
relations much more delicately than having it be a matter
of public information. I think we have ways
to go in past practices in previous administration, there was quite of bit of
lessons learned in that regard. So, I would not agree with that change, Trustee Otto, respectfully
would disagree with adding that. – But how can a governing
board member function as a governing board member
on a topic such as that, which could be essential
to what’s going on at the institution, without
even knowing about it? Being kept in the dark about it? – It is addressed under 2014.8, under I believe, C. It goes to the board president. And if it’s the board president, then the vice president
will have to address it. So it’s already addressed Trustee Otto. And I think it’s– – [Douglas] Actually I disagree with you. – I’m sorry, but can I just-
– I don’t it’s actually been addressed because
all it does is refer to another member in the governing board, who in the end is responsible
won’t even know about it. – Well it seems like this was
back when you were elected. And I didn’t see any changes
made back in your tenure. So, I don’t understand why it’s
an issue now, Trustee Otto. I think it’s good as it is. And I would not recommend
any changes to staff. If any other board member
has a different viewpoint they can certainly express it. Trustee Ntuk? – [Uduak] I think we should have a roll call vote on the item. – Can we take a roll call vote on that? – [Douglas] Why not? – Specifically a roll call
vote on amending the policy? So when it comes back for second reading that’s gonna be part of it? – Yes.
– Is that what the question is? Yes, that would be appropriate for a vote. – Okay, ’cause this is not an action item. So how are we gonna do it? – That’s implied within the first reading that during the first reading, trustees have an opportunity to comment and to make suggestions, revisions. And it would appropriate
if a trustee wants to make a motion to amend it. Not to take effect now,
but to bring it back with that amendment. – Okay, so if we’re gonna do that, it would also include the
amendment that I’d like to see made on expanding on 2014. – [Douglas] I’m sorry what? – 2014.5 B, on bringing in an example. – Well we can only do one at a time. – Well I believe the vote
we’re taking is amending the policy with the changes. There are two changes we’re making. – [Douglas] That’s not my motion. My motion is on 2014.8 under B, or wherever appropriate, that you guys can wordsmith
it that we add language to the effect of what
my recommendation was. Which is just a sunshine to the board ethical accusations against board members. – And I would just add
a friendly amendment that it would be prospectively
going forward if that, I think that would be– – Let’s call for the question. I’ll call for the questions,
’cause we’re gonna vote. – So are we taking two vo– – [Uduak] For order, just
to clarify on what I heard. We should vote on items
like this, correct, even if it’s not listed as an action item, we can still take a vote. Is that correct?
– Yes that’s correct. Under the Brown Act, this
is still a first reading. The board is not taking
final action to approve or ratify the policy. But it’s just suggesting through a vote– – [Uduak] Just a point of order. – Yeah. – We have heard this before. If it’s not listed on
the agenda categorically as an action item, we somehow
couldn’t vote on them. Is that not true? Is that against what you’re recommending? – That’s right, well in
this particular case, it’s listed for first reading. There’s some situations where
an item is listed saying specifically it’s just a report. Then it’s not so clear where
the board can take action. But the purpose of a first
reading is to allow the board to listen and possibly make
recommendations for change. It’s inherent in what a first reading is. Sometimes I recommended when
there’s doubt about that to agendize every item as
reflecting potential action. And then if the need for action comes up, it’s already on the agenda. And that avoids the conflict that Trustee is suggesting right now. But in this particular case. – [Uduak] You’re talking
about Trustee Ntuk or a different trustee? – Excuse me? – You’re talking about Trustee
Ntuk, or a different trustee? – No, you Trustee Ntuk absolutely. – Okay I wasn’t sure. Okay.
– Thank you. – Okay, so we’re taking action
on Trustee Otto’s motion, is that right? And then for the change that I
raised is there a need for an action on that? I had had that change before Trustee Otto brought up his request. Do we need to take multiple actions here for the different motions? – Trustee Zia, from a
procedural perspective, there’s one motion on the floor now, and that was Trustee Otto’s. And I don’t recall if there was a second– – [Sunny] I don’t recall getting a second, but maybe Trustee Ntuk. – [Uduak] Okay, I’ll second it. – Okay. Is there any questions,
discussion on adding, if a board member, if there
is an unethical behavior by a board member, that
instead of just going to the president, it would
go to the entire board. Are there any questions? – [Virginia] It would go to what board? – [Sunny] The entire board, – Oh.
– Instead of the president handling it. – I’m okay with that. I would like to be aware if there is some ethics violation or
complaint on other board members. I would like the entire
board to be aware of that. – If I could just point out. There seems to be a bit of potential ambiguity from what I heard Trustee Otto’s motion is,
and how it was restated. Because I thought his
motion was simply that the rest of the board would be advised of the complaint and status. Not that the rest of the
board would be involved in the process. – Okay, I got you.
– Is that correct, Trustee Otto? – Yes, and here was the specific language that I suggested. I’ll provide it to the board secretary. If a violation of ethics is
filed against a board member the president or
superintendent president will confidentially inform all board members, all members of the governing
board of the district, and make available to the board members a complaint if any is filed. – So it’s just to inform, not to be involved in addressing the violation. – Well it’s, this is in the interest
of governing board members being treated as governing board members, and having the information
that they need to effectively execute their job. No, all you do is inform
and then whatever happens after that would be subject
to something subsequent, which may have limitations on it or not, depending on how it’s
framed, or what it said. – Okay, can you repeat that, I’m sorry. – It was a little fast for me. – What I’m saying is that, governing board members
need to be informed if an ethics violation is made against another board member. And they should be
informed confidentially, meaning that they’re not
to share that information. So that they can decide
how it is to handle that. That I think it frustrates the ability of
one to be a board member if they don’t have that
kind of information. – Okay, I think, are you
okay with that Trustee Ntuk? You seconded it, you
understand the motion, good. – [Uduak] Heard the same thing, yeah. – And then how are we, so we’re
gonna take a vote on this. And then staff is gonna
be incorporating it. Are there any more questions, comments? Go ahead Madame Secretary,
call for the vote. – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – Doug Otto. – Aye. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – Okay, so now I’d like to,
if we can make the motion. I’d like to make the
motion for item 2014 point, five B, that we expand on the promoting a healthy
working relationship with the superintendent
president and his or her staff, and not infringing on the time of the superintendent
president disproportionately. Is there a second? – [Doug] Could you
repeat the motion please? – Sure, the motion is to expand on the 2014.5 B provision, and add an example for
promoting a healthy working relationship with the
superintendent president. And not to infringe on
her time, on the time of the superintendent
president disproportionately. That’s the motion. – [Doug] Thank you. – [Sunny] Is there anyone
who’d like to second that? To add that provision. – [Virginia] Well I’ll
second it to get discussion. But personally, I’m not gonna vote for it. – Well I appreciate you
seconded it, Trustee Baxter, but I’d like to hear reasons why you wouldn’t support making sure our superintendent
president’s time is not– – Here’s my reason why
I would vote against it. You’re asking for something
that is not measurable. What’s an impingement on time? I mean to me, it’s undefinable, because
maybe somebody might think five minutes is an impingement. – I see, that’s a very good point. Well maybe you can help us
out with that, Mr. Lipton. Is it better for us to identify, if it’s more than 70% of her time, would be considered infringing,
or is disproportionate? Or 50%, what would you consider? – That’s challenging, but
I appreciate the comment, because as stated there
is some inherent ambiguity in the language that could lead to disputes and misunderstandings. One way to resolve that dispute, which may not be palatable to
the majority of the trustees is to say set specific time limits for each trustee. You now an allotment of
time for each trustee to deal with the superintendent president, and that certainly can be done. If that was the pleasure of
the board in that regard. – [Sunny] Superintendent
President Dr. Romali did you want to say something? I know this is very uncomfortable. – It’s extremely uncomfortable. And I think it’s extremely
awkward to be put in the middle of people’s
personal disputes, and I don’t appreciate it. Let me be very clear. I do not appreciate it. My job is to raise graduation rates, raise transfer rates, get people jobs, get people retained and to do so in a way that is financially effective in compliance with the
governance standards. It is not to be someone’s secretary. Or to be anybody’s secretary. We must, as I have said
at two meetings before, balance appropriately
the needs of the board, the needs of the students,
the needs of the faculty, administrators and staff. Quite frankly, I think I’ve
done a darn good job of that. Bringing home a record year last year. And bringing home what
you will be very excited to hear is a record year this year. I’ve done my job, and I
think that I should be able, according to accreditation standards, to continue doing so. Let me be clear I don’t appreciate being put in the middle of
all these disagreements. It is highly irregular. – [Sunny] Trustee Otto. – Sure, I’m not gonna vote
in favor of this either, but for different
reasons and that this is. The purpose of a policy is to say this is generally what we’re gonna do. The regulations say
how you’re gonna do it, and yet not with a great
deal of specificity. I think that this raises a single issue that quite frankly I
think could and should be resolved outside trying to embed it in the way we operate. And if it can’t, then
we’re in real trouble like I think Superintendent
Romali is saying. In the end it’s all about trust. And you can throw out all the regulations and all the policies. And I wouldn’t want to
put into the regulations or the policies on this
particular subject, especially in the context
of the section 200 policies, which have to do with the board, anything with this specificity. I think it can be worked out and I hope that it can
be worked out, because it would be very easy to
make all of our arrangements among one another. The kinds of relationships
where they’re legalistic, or harken back to regulations or policies, it won’t work and I
don’t want to introduce something brand new that is too specific. At the beginning of this discussion the president of the board
said, I want to talk about this because I think that this is an issue. And I don’t even know if it’s an issue. – [Sunny] Excuse me I
never said it was an issue. Just for the record, please don’t speak on my behalf, I
never said it was an issue. I said let’s discuss it. So please don’t make erroneous inferences, Trustee Otto, it’s inappropriate. – By asking that it be discussed you made it an issue.
– That’s an inference you’re making, Mr. Otto.
– You made it an issue. And I’m the one that has the floor now, unless you’re gonna interrupt me again. – You’re making false
accusations, Trustee Otto, and I take exception to it, and I’d like to correct it for the record. You can’t just throw
inferences that are incorrect. That maybe something that you
got out of the discussion, but that’s not what I said. – Then let me phrase it this way. The president of the board
brought up this issue and asked that we talk about it. And then made a motion
to see whether we would include it in the regulation. Based on that, I think
that it’s a fool’s errand to try and do regulations that way. You’d have to come up
with an infinite number of examples for each regulation. And it’s just not a good
way to do governance. That’s why I’m gonna vote against it. – Thank you Trustee Otto. Those are very valid points. And I appreciate you raising them. But, please understand that
I do not appreciate you accusing me of you or
any other board member, and inferences that are false. And I think that it is– – I didn’t accuse you of anything. – You did. You accused me of saying.
– I did not. – I take issue with it. I simply said, since we had a discussion, we need to discuss it. And for a clarity rather, this
an educational institution, folks we have to promote
critical thinking. And if we can’t be critical
as a governance body and disagree, and express
and discuss and resolve, then you know we may need
to consider other positions that are go along to get along. I think this is great. This is a fantastic
exercising of our democracy. With that Superintendent President, would you like to say a few words? – I think probably we could
all use some ice water and a chocolate chip cookie. I know I would love one. let me just, I think Trustee
Otto hit on a key point which was trust. Adults and professionals
know how to disagree, even vociferously, and still be able to respect the institution
and respect each other. And what is clear is
that this is happening because there is no trust. Or the trust is damaged in some way for a variety of different reasons. However, I want to encourage you, whether or not your trust
is broken is between you and it’s really quite
honestly none of my business. But, if I can make you feel
a little bit better, you as a board, all
five of you and Donnell, Student Trustee Jones, the faculty, the staff, the administrators and the students of this institution, before my day under Eloy
Oakley and Jan Keyhoe and Beverly O’Neill,
accomplished great things. We have accomplished great
things in the last two years. A 27% graduation increase, double digit walking across the stage
for students of color! I’m really proud of that
and all five of you, plus Student Trustee
Jones were a part of that. So just remember that
even though you disagree fundamentally on things, that’s okay. But you can be extremely proud, even if you trust each other,
don’t trust each other, that’s not my concern. What is my concern is
that we work together to get students across that stage. And you are doing that, be proud. Keep that in your hearts as you go through these disagreements. – Thank you, are there
any other board members that’d like to? I think Trustee Otto has
made great, valid points. I appreciate your
perspective, Trustee Otto. I think with that I would
withdraw the motion. It’s a sage council to not get too prescriptive. I agree with you, Trustee Otto. We don’t need to add that in. But I would just ask that as board members we be mindful of the
broad based accusations. I’ve heard quite a number of it, and it’s quite apropos that
it’s under a code of ethics. And I would just ask that we follow those procedures. Is there any thing I need to do on this? – [Uduak] Can I say something? – Sure, Trustee Ntuk. – I don’t know if I’m the
person or not responsible for work load, or if work
load’s really an issue. I didn’t ask for this agenda item. I didn’t invite the
attorney to come today. I’m the newest board member. I’m in my rookie season
still here, eight months in. But three things that
I’m on this board for is, one, changing the culture on campus. Two, addressing the achievement
gap or opportunity gap for students of color. And three is fiscal responsibility. I don’t think I’ve ever
asked anything of the board or the superintendent president that was outside that scope. And, I agree with Trustee Malauulu. I’m the first African American
on this board in 18 years. Even though we have students,
African American students are not performing well on this campus, have the lowest graduation rates, GPAs, the long laundry list that
we went through in February. And, that’s a problem. And I think that’s why I
got elected to this board. And I’m gonna continue
to advocate for that. I don’t know who the culprit
is or what the challenge is, but we got to figure out
a way to change policy and change what we’re doing to improve our process and procedures, so we can continue to get
double digit graduation rates, and get people across the stage. But, I don’t think this agenda
item is the way to do it. I didn’t support the
motion that got withdrawn. I’m not gonna stop being a trustee either. I’ve never directed
anybody to do anything. But I’ve brought up a lot of ideas. I probably have the
most items on the list. Those are all items
that came to the board. And nobody on the board opposed. And so it made it on the list. And if people don’t like
it and want to oppose it when it comes up, then oppose it. And let’s not talk about it, let’s not talk about
STEM, let’s not talk about preferred name policy. Let’s not talk about
women’s history month, or LGBT history month. Let’s not talk about any of that stuff if that’s not in the direction
of where we’re trying to go. And I welcome the board in a majority vote against all those items. And we take those off the table. But I don’t think that’s gonna happen. So, I’m welcome to look
for ways to optimize and improve and work together. I don’t know what the reason
for this really is tonight. – I’ll tell you what the
reason is Trustee Ntuk. I’m sorry, I wanted to just,
I thought you were finished. – [Uduak] Excuse me. – I apologize, I thought
you were finished. – [Uduak] Nah. – Can you tell me when you are? – Okay, well but I’m not yet. – ‘Cause I don’t want to
inadvertently interrupt you. – We should have public
conversation about this. – [Sunny] Yeah absolutely. – But if there’s public conversation, if we’re gonna put a time limit on things, then we should put a time limit on things. – Again forgive me, I really
thought you were finished. – Midsentence. So,I don’t how you thought
– Sorry, It’s the voice. – I was finished.
– It’s the voice and it’s probably me. – Yeah probably. I go back to what I was trying to say was, this is not my agenda item. I think ethics should be addressed, but I think we’ve gone
far too long on this. And I’ll yield the floor. – Thank you. Just to remind the board again, this was an item that
Trustee Otto had requested back in October, November,
I don’t know when it was. And as a board president I felt that it was important
to not dismiss it and bring it to, just like Trustee Baxter has asked for the travel policy. And it’s on the list of items that Superintendent President Romali, on her running list of agenda requests. So it’s not, I don’t know
why some board members are taking this personally. It’s merely trying to be
responsive to Trustee Otto’s request to bring back the board policy. When was it that Trustee
Otto had asked about this, Superintendent President Dr. Romali? – [Reagan] I think it was November. – November. – [Reagan] No I’m not aware that this is– – It’s what now it’s
April and it’s, I’m sorry? – [Reagan] No, I’m not
aware that this is directed at any trustee. – It isn’t it’s just a matter of, yeah. – [Reagan] Around that
time, around that time. – So I just want to
clarify that, if anything. I agree with board members. It wasn’t something I
was looking forward to agendizing precisely for this. But I think it’s healthy
discussion, you know? As I said it’s exercising a democracy. And if anybody has low tolerance for it, then we should resolve it
together and it’s healthy. And I certainly appreciate your feedback. So with that since we’ve
exhausted this item. Thank you Mr. Lipton for
your counsel and input. Let’s move on to item
2.6, revised board policy and administrative regulation
on board education. The reference board policy
and administrative regulation have been reviewed and revised. And changes are being
recommended as a result of our ongoing review to ensure compliance with legal codes and align
with current practices. This is a first reading. Is there any questions, comments? Yes, Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] I actually
had a couple of questions. And then I will follow with,
if the board will allow a couple of proposed amendments maybe to this current policy. The first one is, regarding the board
policy and the ongoing, the academic, I’m sorry, the
administrative regulation. My experience as a student
trustee I have received some education, however I’ve
not received continuous. So I would like this to see if possible to include language in
both the board policy and the administrative regulation to include the student trustee. Specifically in paragraph
two, sentence one of the board policy. And the academic regulation, sorry, administrative regulation 2017.3, point four and point five. – [Uduak] I’d like to make
a motion to that extent. – Okay. We have a motion then can you restate what the, or did you guys get that? The recommendation. If you could restate it. – So for the board policy. Paragraph two, sentence one
to just include language that says, including student trustee right after it says each board member. Maybe there we can insert the language, including the student
trustee, shall participate in ongoing education in
professional development. – Okay and then the
administrative regulation? – And for the administrative regulation. 2017.3, where it says all board members, to insert the language,
including student trustee. There, and same thing with point four, in order to educate newly elected and appointed
trustees and board officers. Maybe we can include the language there, the student trustee. I am aware that point six it does specifically outline additional things
that pertain specifically to the student trustee,
but none of these actually address the issues in
point three, four and five. – [Sunny] Is there a second? I’ll second the motion. – What, I’m so sorry that I’m confused. I’m confused as to what the motion is. Is the motion to edit
it and bring it back? – Correct.
– Okay. – Yeah to just include the
student trustee when it references of all trustees. – [Reagan] Okay, to
include the student trustee when we’re referencing all
board trustees, got it. – And this is something that
is inherent of the language that all trustees,
’cause you are a trustee, but perhaps we can crystallize it. Can you call for the
vote, Madam Secretary. – Is there a disc–
– You had a question, I’m sorry I thought– – No, no I should have been more vocal. – I have a problem with 2017.4. In it it talks about elected
and appointed officers. And no offense, but you will never be an officer of this body. So I don’t understand why
you would want that included. See it says arrange for newly
appointed board officers. Not board members. Trustee Jones, I can agree
with everything else, but I think 2017.4 is not appropriate for what you want to do. And I could be wrong. – No, I think you make
a really good point. And here’s what I would recommend. Now you may disagree
and that’s totally okay. You can make a recommendation
to put this in here, but we really need to research it, we need to look at Title V code. I believe you met with
Vice President Duran today. We need to look at Title
V, how it flows through the other pieces of the policy. Then if it works, then we
can bring it back to you guys for a suggestion, and then
you can edit it as you wish, – [Sunny] All right. Trustee Otto? – And when I looked at that
earlier, Trustee Baxter, I thought it was okay
because it says in order to educate newly elected
and appointed trustees, and our student trustee is elected. And so it seemed okay to me. And board officers,
these things will happen. So I just thought you were
adequately identified in that. But, I completely agree
that we should give it back to the superintendent
president to go through this and rewrite it based on what’s going on. And I don’t even know that we
have to say more than that. We’ve got a good feeling about that. – So, do we want to
look into the item first and then bring it back? I believe there is a motion and a second, so should we put subject to compliance with all regulations. With the regulations that was applicable. – Yeah I just need to make
sure that it flows through that it follows Title V
and then we can bring back a recommendation and
then you guys can edit it as you see fit.
– Trustee Ntuk. – [Uduak] As the maker of the motion I would adopt that to add in the changes that Trustee Jones suggested. Per, if they pass Title
V review and match up. So then when it comes back. Everything’s kosher.
– And I support that as a second. Are there any further questions, comments? Call for the vote. – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye, sorry. – I’m sorry. Sunny Zia. – Aye. – [Jackie] And Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – Item 2 point, we’ve already finished discussion Trustee Ntuk. – Well yeah.
– Did you want to add to that? – Yeah I had a separate
motion I’d like to introduce that was not Trustee Jones’ motion. – I see, okay. So you’d like to add– – I’d like to amend just the
board policy in two places. To add in… On sentence, paragraph two, sentence four. Each board member shall attend annual professional development opportunities. I wanted to be a little bit more specific, to say each board member
shall attend annual professional development trainings, continuing education
or university courses, that enhance the board member’s knowledge. Is A of my motion. B, is in that listing of
board member knowledge. Same sentence four, paragraph two, board member’s knowledge
of community college governance, finance, accreditation. I’d also like to add in
there, higher education, comma leadership, comma
policy in the itemized area of governance, finance, accreditation. And that would be B part of my motion if there’s a second. – [Doug] Second. – Everyone understand the
motion and the second? Are there any questions, comments? – [Uduak] I’ll just speak to it. I think it’s important to
add a little more clarity, because professional
development opportunities is very general. And I think there’s a
lot of different ways that we can find trainings and do things that we should be explicit
in saying what’s possible. It just seems too vague, professional development opportunities. And then I think it’s
important that we include leadership and policy,
and higher education in the areas that we’re focused on educating ourselves about. – Okay, so did you want to clarify it? ‘Cause I thought we just had a– – I wasn’t clarifying, I was just adding commentary to support. – [Sunny] Are you change,
so what did you change? – Didn’t make any
changes, I’m just speaking to the motion. – Okay, ’cause with just had
like Vice President Malauulu said that we had a very lengthy discussion on the previous item about how we’re not supposed to get too prescriptive. So let’s be mindful of that. Okay, call for the question. – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – Aye. – Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – Okay, item 2.7 revised
board policy 2021, evaluation of superintendent president. The reference board
policy has been revised and is presented for the first reading as a result of our ongoing
review to make sure we’re compliant with the legal codes and aligning with the current practices. Are there any questions, comments? – Since the only change is capitalizing the words board and policy, I don’t see any problem with this. – Item 3.1, update on
strategic enrollment plan, year two priorities. This is an information item. It’s been prepared and submitted
by Michelle Grahams Helman, Dr. Kathy Scott and Dr.
Heather Van Volkinburg. Is there any questions,
comments on this item? Hearing none, moving to
item 3.2 vision for success. We have received this
information in our docket and it was prepared and submitted by Dr. Heather Van Volkinburg, Dean of Institutional Effectiveness. Are there any questions, comments on this? – Just,
– Trustee Otto. – two sentences. This is our showing that we’re aligned with the state chancellor’s
vision for success. And, according to the
report we are, great. – Item 3.3, ACCJC guide to accreditation for governing boards. This is an information item. Superintendent President
will provide to the board the ACCJC guide to accreditation
for governing boards. Is there anything you’d like to add from what we’ve been given? Okay great. Thank you so much, Dr. Romali. Item 4.1, using data mining
to drive student success. This is an information item. Over the past two years, LBCC has shown significant
increase in completion and closed the equity gap. Superintendent President Dr. Romali will provide a presentation
on how the district has moved to a data mining philosophy that has guided decisions
that have increased degrees completion,
transfer and success rates. And before I hand it
off to you, Dr. Romali, I just wanted to really thank
you for getting this rigorous about what we’re doing. I’ve heard rave reviews
of this presentation that you’ve given to others. And I just wanted to also emphasize, you know, you are truly the crown jewel of this college district. And I just don’t want
anything that has been said previously to affect you or the staff here as criticism. You have my full support
and I will make sure that that’s continued. And I believe you are
doing a fantastic job. That sentiment has been
echoed by other trustees. But I wanted to emphasize that, that I hope you don’t feel
that the previous remarks were by any way disparaging. Although it may have
been seemingly been so. Thank you Superintendent President. – I appreciate it.
– The floor is yours. – No, I’m a professional
and I take it all in stride. And I always welcome
input, and I always take it very much to heart, because
I have tremendous respect for the people in this room, as well as the people in the
audience and our students. I don’t think you’re gonna find, I’ve been in this business 20 years. I honestly can say that I
don’t think you’re gonna find a harder working group of
faculty, staff, administrators, students and board members
than we find here at LBCC. So, I just feel very lucky to be here. You want to hear some good news? – Yes.
– Would anybody like to hear some good news! – Yes, we sure do.
– Let’s go for it! Let’s talk good stuff. All right. So I’m not sure, I’m gonna
take a 40 minute presentation and make it into 10, 15 minutes. So I’m gonna skip through some stuff and just hit some of the highlights. In any type of annual survey that we see about the best college
presidents in America, you’re gonna hear the name
Michael Crow come out. He’s the president of ASU. And a place where my former boss works. So I’m really excited about that. She’s really excited
to be working for him. Frankly, I think she’s one of the best, was one of the best
presidents in the nation. And seven years ago he
came out with the concept that you can use data mining
to understand student data in a predictive modeling manner. In which you can then use that data to unemotionally make decisions about how you want to guide your college. And it was really ground
breaking at the time. And I was inspired by it. And during my previous position, worked on that for six years. And it really, honestly
was a key indicator in being able to dramatically
drive student success. So, I brought it here
and had a wonderful time working with Heather Van Volkinburg and the rest of the research team on trying these kinds of concepts here, and having the courage to look at data, understand it from a
non-emotional standpoint. And I can not tell you
how quickly the faculty, and staff and administrators
jumped on this, and really took it to
heart and took it seriously as a way to increase student success. So, I really want to thank them. So this was a presentation
we made last week at a national conference
for very, very big names in research for colleges and universities. And the team came up to
me afterwards and said, this is the first college
in the United States that has heeded Michael Crow’s
stance to use data mining to drive student success. And this should be a national model. So I really, you have a lot to be proud of for the work that you have done. And I really want to commend you. Last year, as you know, there was a graduation increase in, I’m gonna move through
this very very quickly. We saw a 27% increase in ADTs awarded. But what is most important to me is that it has been equity achieved. 41% increase in ADTs for
African American students, 21% in the total awards for
African American students. 26% increase in ADTs
for Hispanic students. We’re not just moving
the dial 1/2 percent, one percent of the time,
these are dramatic jumps for students of color. LBCC is on the national
forefront of moving the dial for students of color. And I hope that you’re
really proud of that! That is so exciting to me! And when I’m sitting
there at the end of career and I look back as to what
my proudest moments were this slide is one of them. Because everybody must have a voice. And the only way you have
a voice is to be educated. So what we did is we
data mined to understand the problem with the awards. And how many problems there
were with so few students obtaining a degree within one year. We know that to be a problem. We had barriers, general
education barriers in math, science, critical thinking. Our IPEDs graduation rates
have been very variable all the time. These numbers are stinky folks. But we know that and
we’ve done so much better! The faculty have really caught onto this. I’m really excited with how much movement we’ve made in the last few years. We have the best faculty ever. So, the faculty and
staff, everybody came up with great solutions in ’17-’18. These are some of the solutions. We did targeted counseling, we did targeted counseling interventions. This is a ground breaking
method where you take students who have more than 45 credits, and you pattern code the classes that they need for graduation. And you customize a schedule for them. So that the students don’t have to wait to get those Capstone classes to graduate. What does it mean? Another million and a half revenue for us, and another 256 awards. And that’s what it means
at the end of the day. As I think it was Trustee
Otto who was saying, it’s about getting more,
and more and more students across the stage and doing so in a financially responsible manner, that’s what we’re talking about. Guess what else? It worked, big surprise. We did more things in ’18-’19. We did more targeted
counseling interventions. We hired two completion counselors. And we did counseling
plus registration days. So what you do with data
when you see that it works, you lean on it, like Cheryl Sandberg says. You find what works and you lean on it! And that’s exactly what we’ve done. Guess what? It works! We came up with a plan. The completion counselors
have contacted students in this plan, the persistence has gone up, seven percentage points. Spring full time persistence had gone up. Students with an educational plan, their persistence has gone up 13%. Unbelievable results. Easy, peasy, we can do this all day long. I’m gonna scoot past
this, this talks about who were are and that we
serve a diverse community. We’ve talked about this
at previous board meetings where we are improving
enrollment conversion using data. And we have been able to
improve our conversation rate from 20 to 28%, that’s
huge in the first year. I’m sorry I have to do a Trump reference, you love him or hate him
you got to say, huge, right? Come on you got to laugh.
(audience chuckles) It’s a heavy board meeting,
we got to laugh a little. Okay, so what that means is applicant to conversion enrollee. So the national average is
somewhere between 38 and 42%. So we’re gaining on the national average. We do not have an enrollment problem, we have a conversion problem. We have enough students
interested in coming to LBCC, we simply don’t convert them, okay? So we’re using data to
track trends in sections. In terms of the sections that we offer, so that we can do really
targeted marketing to try and find students who
might be interested in classes. We created multiple dashboards
and high level goals, so that the shared governance
bodies could use them at all levels of the
institution in their plans. We looked at improving equitable
and program enrollments by providing dashboards on head count in duplicate enrollments. And to understand your
problem, you have to be honest with where it comes from. We looked at our community
and decided and understood that the persistent rates
were declining in concert almost number for number
with the unemployment rates. Well that’s good information. Because if it means that students are going back to work that’s fantastic! What that means is you have
to pivot as an institution. If students are now back
at work, guess what? They’re not gonna be sitting
here in our classes all day. What does that mean? It means we have to change direction. Which means that we have to
think about going to employers and offering classes that
could advance their employees. When you have data, it
changes the way you think. We also made changes in financial aid, so that students can
persist and complete faster. We used enrollment call campaigns. And guess what? In our call campaigns
we were able to enroll from the 2,600 students called, we, uck twisted, the number enrolled was 14%. Is it worth it? You bet. We changed the registration dates. We also came up with a
section recommendation engine that has an iterative algorithm
that uses student behavior, their current schedule
and educational plan, to recommend the course sections. We pilot targeted 5,000 students
with less than 13 units. Guess what happened? We had a 6% increase in the fall term that led to more than 2.5
million dollars for the college. See how understanding
data, data tells a story. What story it tells you, you
can then make great decisions based on that. We also talked about providing
enrollment dashboards at the department level. We also came up with a ground breaking what will be a national
trend in Promise 2.0. Now Long Beach City College came up with the national trend of College Promise. And it was copied all over. It came with the great Eloy Oakley, the great F.King Alexander, and
the great Chris Steinhauser. And they came up with a way
to reduce barriers for access. And it solved the problem of access. However, what we did is
when we mined the data we found out that those Promise students did not lead to significant
differences in persistence, degree completion or transfer. So it got them in, but
it didn’t complete them. So what do you do? The data tells you that
you solved one problem, but another problem exists. So we created Promise 2.0
to partner with Promise 1.0. That partners student
success programming, degree transfer to the CSULB, and the wonderful Center
for Community Partnerships to get them jobs. So, by understanding data
you can take something that’s already great and make it better. How exciting is that? We improved the Promise program
and first year supports. Our faculty have done a yeoman’s job under the leadership of Paul Creason and Moises Guitierrez and Lee Douglas to bring about Assembly Bill 605, which is acceleration
of maths and English. And guess what? Our throughput rates are through the roof! Pre-their work, our
students were throughputting at 35% in English and 18% in math. Now we’re up to 50% and 27%. See how data help you understand the kinds of decisions you can make. With increased persistence
though Starfish Early Alert. Our goal was to get 25% of
full time faculty using it. The national average is around 27, 28%. We’ve got 50% of our faculty using it. So if that doesn’t tell you
how dedicated our faculty, I don’t know what is. We’ve diversified our dual enrollments by increasing our locations
and our offerings. And we’ve used a scheduling
planning dashboard to improve course supply,
to meet student demand. This is what students
have told us they want. We’ve done it for you and
we’re happy to do it for you. We’ve looked at heat maps in terms of optimal scheduling times, students. In terms of what courses do you need and when do you want them? So that we can provide a
customized course schedule for you, based on when you
want and need your classes. We’ve looked at denials
in certain classes, so that it helps the department chairs schedule the classes
that the students need. Kathy Scott, our EVP has
done a phenomenal job with her deans in this! Guess what else data shows you? It shows you a heat map of the frequency and the capacity of the denials. So that you understand
when the student demand for those denials is
need, so you understand when you need to schedule classes. You’re probably saying
to yourself, really? This is ground breaking? Yes, it is! How fantastic is it that
it’s happening at LBCC? We’re also looking at
course success rates. And faculty have been extremely courageous in this conversation. Because what we do is we did the bubbles of the courses and their
success rates to understand what courses students are
trouble getting through. What that helps us do is
design student supports for you and wrap around supports,
so that we can know exactly how to help you. But it’s not just that,
it equates to money. For example, I have a math course that has a success rate of 48%. Well that sounds about right, people struggle with math, right? Okay, but that means
that if 15,000 students are enrolled in it and we
have a 48% passage rate, 7,800 students are lost. That means 11.5 million
dollars of revenue loss. So see how everything
feeds into each other. Money, student success,
everything relates. I want that money so that
I can help my students get across that math stage better. So these are just some examples. We also measure by race and ethnicity. So that we can see where
there are differences in student achievement to design programs that are better suited for student needs. We also look at course
data on a faculty level. And there was an equity focused pilot where course success data was
used by a subset of faculty in the social science department. And they implemented an
equity focused framework. Guess what happened? Success rates went up 9%. Students, this is so exciting for you! Data is fun, data is interesting! I hope that this makes you
even more interested in math. Yes, Moises and Paul, that
was a call out for you, give you a shout out. Guess what happened with their pilot? 7% improvement for Latino students! 14% for black African American, 32% for Pacific Islander, very exciting. Now we’re looking to expand the pilot. But these aren’t only ways
that you can use data. You can use data to
understand your community. And look where, in your
community we’ve pulled data where there’s low educational attainment, low income attainment, high unemployment and communities of color. And when you overlay these
on top of each other, you can come up with a
plan for adult education, to provide free, increased free education to support those communities,
with short term STE programs, and ESL for work programs. For example, we’ll be
offering cake decorating, and flowering arranging at Centro CHA. But we wouldn’t understand
the needs of the community unless we pulled that kind of data. We’ve been able to see
triple, quadruple growth in these types of courses. Now that puts the community
in community college. We can get behind that. And we’ve been able to
increase the transfers, despite the fact that CSU is impacted. So that’s tremendous. We can also use labor
market data to understand where the jobs are in Long Beach, so that we can match
students and match curriculum with those jobs. So, we can leverage data from EMSI, present those hard and soft skills, talk to the faculty, and
we can look at job postings to understand the labor
market and where it’s going. To make sure that our students
are getting relevant degrees that are gonna get them top
notch, high paying jobs. Because if you can set your college apart on guaranteeing or highly recommending a job upon placement, that
is a retention method, that’s an enrollment method, and it’s a student success method. And it will raise your completion. So I hope that you guys are excited about all the incredibly intense work we’ve done in measuring data, and using
it to drive student success. And understanding that
while it seems so simple, this is truly ground breaking nation wide. And I think you can be tremendously proud that you’ve done this at Long
Beach City College, thank you. (audience applauds) – Thank you Superintendent
President Dr. Romali. Gosh, you are so amazing, you know. – [Reagan] Thank you. – We are lucky to have you as
the president of this college. This amazing staff of yours. Honestly I could say I have a contrast point
and I have to be mindful of not always comparing, but
man talk about night and day from the previous administration. I mean we would be lucky to get any data, let alone this magnitude. In two years you’ve
accomplished far more than anyone prior to you in their tenure. I applaud you for the
incredible work you’re doing. And your incredible enthusiasm, kindness, and empathic approach that is
very healing and much needed. I just want to open it up. Does anyone have an questions, comments? – [Vivian] I’ll comment. – [Sunny] Vice President Malauulu. – Dr. Romali I’d like to echo
President Zia’s remarks that I do believe that we are
very lucky to have you. And I’m very grateful for
the work that you’re doing, particularly with our students of color. I appreciate the data
that you’ve presented. I mean the numbers speak for
themselves, so you’re not just cheerleading, you’re actually producing, so I really appreciate that. And I think on behalf of
the student population who recognizes that they were
neglected for a long time, I think that they also appreciate
the work that you’re doing to make sure that they are recognized. And that they are being prepared equally
to non-students of color. So I appreciate that, thank you. – [Virginia] Trustee Zia. – [Sunny] Trustee Baxter. – I just want to echo what they said. But I also want to bring up a kind of totally different point. On Monday night I was
invited by the LBCCFA to a meeting. What impressed me so
much about the faculty, the data mining has to
do with the faculty. Because the faculty are
the ones who are in, you know with their boots on the ground. When I went to the, and I’m
gonna call it the meeting, I thought immediately
it would be a list of, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah. It wasn’t, it was all positive
and Trustee Ntuk was there. But this really kind of
happened before you got there. And it was all we want
the college to succeed, we want to do better, we
want to help the students. And it was all positive things. And I was going to tell you later, some of the things that they
said that were so right on. And I was really proud of
the fact that the faculty really was not concerned about money, or different issues and things like that, not that they shouldn’t be. But, that their main
concern was student success, and delivering and making
sure that the students got what they deserve to succeed. And I really want to laud
them for that, because I know it was totally, totally sincere. I don’t think it was
set up to be that way, it just came out that way. I’m just very, very proud of the faculty. And having been a former faculty member, so I can feel proud about that too. And then just a little side light. One of the faculty there, you
know she was introduced to me and you know how you don’t pay attention to somebody’s name, you now. She’s sitting next to
me and I said to her, “Is your last name Black?” And she said, “Yes.” And I said, “Were you a student in 1980?” This was one of my students in 1980. And I’m so proud that she
went from a student at LBCC to be teaching at LBCC. That’s my comment. – [Reagan] When the questions are complete I also have another item, Trustee Zia. – Thank you Superintendent
President Dr. Romali. Trustee Otto? – I can see the transformation
around the college with the faculty’s buy in,
enthusiasm and the work that they’re doing. They seem to really have
gotten on the student success boat and that’s an
incredible accomplishment at this college. When I went over this report, and I’m only gonna make a
couple of comments about it, that I’d like some clarification on. We show counts for each year
and that things are improving. But we don’t show rates. And the rates are, what percentage of people
are doing these things. Historically in community colleges, we had six year rates
and three year rates. And those were what we measured against. And that’s not here. And I’d love to get those,
’cause I think that that will– – [Reagan] Are you referring
to the IPEDS rates? – Pardon? – [Reagan] The IPEDS rates,
the federal IPEDS rates? – Nah, I worry about IPEDS,
I don’t know what they show. I see your chart in here about IPEDS compared with other things. And then on page four I
think it is, I don’t know, the one, the awards for all students. It says that are certificates in, went from in 2016, 426 down to 283, down again in ’18 to 238
and then they’re back up. I think that there’s a back story there. I think what we did with certificates was do a major triage to do that. But you don’t read that in there. And I think that if we’re gonna show this at San Francisco, that we’ve
got to be able to say that and do those things. And then, and this is
the last thing I’ll say, ’cause I know it’s a long meeting already. In the equity awards, I see achievements in equity,
but when I look down at the ADTs for, for white students from ’17 to ’18, they’re up 40% I think,
pretty close to 40%. – [Reagan] Yes. – And so, when we say that Hispanics are up 26%, I think we have to say
how we doing on equity if the whites are still achieving
more than the Hispanics? And I think there’s an answer to that. But at the same time, we’ve
still got a long way to go. I couldn’t agree with
Superintendent President Romali more than in anything she said is that, our problem is not getting
people in the door. Our problem is to get
people over the finish line. And that’s what our focus has to be. We need to focus on completion, not just because it’s
what we’re supposed to do, but because that will be one of the ways under the new funding
formula where we get paid. And it’s a very hard needle to
move, historically at least. We are very low on a statewide number, ranking of colleges. And we’re getting better and we’re putting a lot of resources into that. But we need to focus on
completion and not on getting them in the door. I see all the measures
that are being taken to accomplish that, to whether
it’s additional counselors, whether it’s you know, all the things that you mentioned. So let’s stay focused, and I didn’t say the last part of that
sentence and that is, get them across the
line, but get them across the line equitably. And that means that everybody is at the same rate doing that. And if we can keep saying
that and make that almost be our mantra, then this is important. What this study shows is
all the different ways we can look at all the different things that are going on. And it’s a great testimony to the college that we’re doing this work. – Thank you Trustee Otto for
those very prudent words, and spot on words. Any other trustees who would like to opine before I move onto to the consent agenda? – One moment. I’ so sorry President Zia. I have, if the comments
for this item are done, I have something very special that Trustee Ntuk would like
to do with Dr. Trustee Baxter. – Okay great, yeah I was
waiting for Trustee Ntuk to come back so that we could do that. But I’m glad that he did. So Trustee Ntuk did you want to present? – Yeah sure and we tried to
do that earlier in the agenda. Just in between agenda items here. We had a African America
scholarship fundraiser, two Saturdays back now, here on campus. Deb Peterson did a
wonderful job of organizing, got professional music players organized, supposed to come out,
it was here on campus. And part of the event was recognizing some of the great work that Ginny Baxter’s done over the years in her
role in the foundation, and as a professor on campus. And as a board member now. And so she was recognized, but
unfortunately her busy travel schedule had her out of
the country, I believe for that evening. But I did talk about some of her work and her priorities
around homeless students, and working to address homeless students. So that the funds that
were raised that night are going towards the African
American Scholarship Fund. But we also asked people to
make additional contributions towards her Homeless Student Fund. We estimate between five
and 10% of our students are homeless, or housing insecure. Who might be sleeping in
their car, or couch surfing. And so we shared that with the audience and asked for a second contribution. And so, tonight I’m just
gonna give her a check that’s gonna go, it’s from the
foundation to the foundation. From one fund to the other. They didn’t want to
get her another plaque, or a trophy or a key
chain, anything like that. But they thought making a contribution to the Homeless Student
Fund was an appropriate recognition of Dr. Baxter. Ginny, official the contribution is being handed over to you at the board meeting. So please give a round of applause. (everyone applauds) – Would you take a picture? – Do you want to say a few words? – Yeah. No let’s take the picture of
Trustee Ntuk and sit down. (Vivian laughs) Maybe Trustee Malaluulu.
(crosstalk) – I have a one hand, so
that might not be good. (people laughing) (crosstalk) – I’m learning from Trustee
Zia she always has the picture. I want this on Twitter. – Oh I’m sorry, Joshua. – We’re already done. Well thank you very much. It’s funny how my reputation proceeds me. They said she doesn’t
want a plaque, give money. So that’s wonderful. Trustee Zia and I are
very involved with helping the Homeless Student
Fund, so this is money from one student group to
help another student group. And I think that’s wonderful,
and I appreciate it. I want to give a shout out to counselors, Debra Peterson and DeWayne Sheaffer, who put this concert on. We had nationally recognized musicians performing on campus. It was a wonderful event, unfortunately they didn’t ask me if (chuckles)
I was gonna be in town. And so I asked Trustee
Ntuk to represent me and I appreciate that very much. But this also segways into
another idea that they have. Some of you may not know a long time ago I taught History of American Women. I started the class in 1972. And on May 2nd, the same group, the African American Scholarship Fund is bringing a nationally recognized figure and founder of the
Women’s Rights Movement. Her name is Dorothy Pitman Hughes. She along with Gloria
Steinem was the co-founder of Ms. Magazine. And a lot of young people don’t realize there was no such word
as Ms. 50 years ago. It was created by these two women to differentiate between you’re not a miss and you’re not a missus, you’re a Ms. And so Dorothy Pitman was a leading figure in the feminist movement. She is now in her 80s. She is coming on campus. And what’s great is she’s
speaking to our students and to the public. Trustee Ntuk has some flyers and Trustee Jones I’m gonna
give you a couple to take. – [Donnell] Cool. – And she’s speaking to two classes. And I think this wonderful,
talk about collaboration between a historical figure
and speaking with our students. She’s speaking to Rachel Hollenberg’s Introduction to Feminist Philosophy class. She’s speaking to Vanessa Crispin-Peralta’s
History of American Women class, a class that’s gone on all these years, since 1972 every semester. And then, at my insistence, we’re opening it up to the community. And that’s why I wanted
to talk about this. So, on May 2nd from 12:30 to 2:00 p.m., she will be available to talk about community talking circles topic, Intersectionality in the Third Wave of the Feminist Movement. This will be in The Bistro and the public is invited to attend. We’re going to ask for a donation. It is open to the public,
but if people want to give money, because I said
you can’t do this for nothing that would be great. But who is supporting
is is the foundation, the students, the Viking Student Council, and the African American
Students Scholarship Fund. So, I’m gonna put this on Twitter, I’m sure Trustee Ntuk is too. And I hope that she has a great turnout. And it’ll be real cool for
Long Beach City College to have someone of her rank
and reputation on campus. She happens to be African American. I think that’s also a plus. She’s really a figure nationally in the Women’s Rights Movement. So thank you very much. – Thank you Trustee Baxter
and congratulations. We will now move onto consent agenda. I did not get any requests
to pull any items. May I have a motion to
approve the consent agenda? – So moved.
– Moved. – Moved by Trustee Baxter,
seconded by Trustee Otto. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary, can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – [Jackie] Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Aye. – Item 6.1 CHI LBCC
initial bargaining proposal to district, full contract renewal. This is an action item
that the board of trustees acknowledge that CHI LBCC
initial bargaining proposal for reopening negotiations
for 2019-2020 as submitted. In accordance with applicable state laws and regulations it is
recommended that following public comment, the board of trustees accept the CHI bargaining proposal for reopening negotiations for 2019-2020 on a successor agreement with CHI LBCC on the issues that are
articulated in the board item. Is there a motion? – [Vivian] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Vice President Malauulu.
– Second. – Seconded by Trustee Ntuk. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary, can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – Aye. Item 6.2, district’s
initial bargaining proposal to CHI LBCC full contract renewal. This is also an action item
that the board of trustees adopt the district initial
bargaining proposal to CHI LBCC for new negotiations
for 2019-2020 as submitted. Is there a motion? – [Doug] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee Otto. Is there a second? – [Virginia] Second. – [Sunny] Seconded by Trustee Baxter. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary
can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. Item 6.3, employment contract with Margaret Antonio-Palomares,
assistant director of CalWORKs. This is the action, this is an action item that the board of trustees
approve the employment contract for Margaret Antonio-Palomares, assistant director CalWORKs as submitted. The employment contract provides
for a term of employment from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. The contract provides
for annual compensation of $120,000 along with
health, and welfare benefits and life insurance. If there a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee
Baxter, is there a second? – [Doug] Second. – [Sunny] Seconded by
Vice President Malauulu. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary
can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. Item 6.4, employment
contract with Gene Duran, vice president of human resources. This is an action item
that the board of trustees approve the employment
contract for Gene Duran vice president of human
resources as submitted. The employment contract provides a term of employment from April
25, 2019 to June 30, 2021. The contract provides
for annual compensation of $199,722 along with
health and welfare benefits, and life insurance. Do I have a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee Baxter, seconded by Vice President Malauulu. Are there any questions, comments? I’d like to comment and say
Gene, I’m very proud of you. I’ve seen you come to your
own and really embrace your position and really do great work. I’m very proud of you and I will cast my vote in favor
of this with pleasure. Madame Secretary, can
you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. Congratulations Gene. Item 6.5, employment
contract with Maria Ek Ewell, a director of disabled
student programs and services. It is an action item that
the board of trustees approve the employment
contract for Maria Ek Ewell, and I apologize if I’m
mispronouncing your name Maria, director of disabled students programs and services as submitted. The employment contract provides
for a term of employment from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. The contract provides
of annual compensation of $115,409 along with
health and welfare benefits, and life insurance. Do I have motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – Second.
– I love my left side is really fast, so we got Trustee Baxter as the maker of the motion, seconded by Vice President Malauulu. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. Item 6.6, employment
contract with Gabriel Rivera, director of track and field
cross country head coach. This is an action item
that the board of trustees approve the employment
contract for Gabriel Rivera, director of track and field, cross country head coach as submitted. The employment contract provides
for a term of employment from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2021. The contract provides
for annual compensation of $102,026, along with
health and welfare benefits, and life insurance. Do I have a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee
Baxter, is there a second? – [Vivian] Second. – [Sunny] Seconded by
(laughs) Vice President, I think, (laughs) they gave up. Vice President Malauulu seconded that. Is there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary
can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – Aye. Item 6.7, employment
contract with William Vega, director of Promise Pathways. This an action item that
the board of trustees approve the employment
contract for William Vega, director of Promise Pathways as submitted. The employment contract
provides for a term of employment from July
1, 2019 to June 30, 2020. The contract provides
for annual compensation of $105,086 along with
health and welfare benefits, and life insurance. Is there a motion? – [Vivian] So moved. – Moved by Vice President Malauulu, seconded by Trustee Baxter. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, Madame Secretary
can you please call the vote? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. Item 6.8, revised board
policy and administrative regulation 3005 continuation
of benefits for retirees. For benefits of retirees and survivors of employees or retirees. This is a first reading. And it is a revised board policy 3005, a continuation of benefits for retirees and survivors of employees or retirees. We have received the information. Are there any questions, comments. – [Doug] Yeah. – [Sunny] Trustee Otto? – This is a, was there a
financial analysis done with regard to this? Or does it not cost us anything? I couldn’t tell from the policy itself. – So on this policy,
this is just continuing what we do already. Really what this is is
cleaning it up a little bit. In the regulation what
you’ll see is it referred mostly to contractual
obligations with FA and AFT. Those are already
contained in the contract. So, to have just one
source document for that, we left them in the contract and took them out of the regulations,
it’s just a clean up. – It seems like with this
and with some other ones what we’re doing is we’re saying, it’s all in the contract. And yet we don’t see the contract. The contract’s not provided for us. Don’t get me wrong I’m
not saying that there’s a boogeyman here, I’m just saying that if the policy goes from an elaborate, policy regulations
go to how we’re doing this, I’d like to see what
it is that we’re doing, just so that I know. And by the way the reason I
wrote down in my notes here it says revised board policy
and administration regulations for continuance benefits for retirees, and survivors of employees or retirees. If the agreement’s already
reached, I’d like to see that is, or at least understand it. Because I worry that
this could create somehow a financial burden on the college, which, Vice President Drinkwine
could talk to us about. I don’t know whether we need it, but somebody needs to
make me feel comfortable that we don’t need it. – Yeah perhaps, (clears throat) sorry, perhaps it would be helpful,
that’s a good suggestion, Trustee Otto, perhaps it would be helpful to have a hyperlink in the policy to the various union contracts.
– We can do that, that’s easy. – That way you can go right to it and get some piece of mind there. – [Gene] That’s easy. – [Virginia] President
Zia, I have a question. Because first of I’m going
to abstain from voting, because I am a retiree. But I wanted to know the rationale for, it appears to me, that you’ve
eliminated the opportunity for retirees after their
benefits run out, to, you’ve disallowed them to continue the coverage by paying for it. What was the rationale? Now was this a union decision? Was this a college decision? Because if, and my retired
benefits haven’t run out yet, so I’m not worried about that. But, eventually they will
’cause I’m gonna live to be 100, what was the rationale about if I wanted to pay to continue? – So this regulation
does not change anything that the district is already doing now. – [Virginia] Oh. – Because what is stated in the regulation is already stated in faculty contracts, in classified contracts, and also in the management handbook. So when those particular items change, if they’re negotiated,
approved by the board, ratified by the bargaining unit, then that change will take effect there. And we don’t have a separate policy with conflicting language
hanging out there, which this had, – I understand, okay.
– because even some of the other contracts
that have changed a bit because it hadn’t been
updated in the regulation. So that’s all it’s doing. It is not a fundamental
shift or in any change to the benefits that are
already going on for retirees. – [Virginia] Okay, thank you. – [Sunny] Trustee Otto. – When I read the last sentence of the vice policy it says, the
policy is subject to change due to modification of the district paid medical benefits plan. I presume that’s in the agreement, but, I mean the collective
bargaining agreement, that it can be changed because of that. But not having the agreement
I’ll check that out. – [Gene] That’s correct. Anything that would be changed on benefits for any of the bargaining
units would be negotiated with the bargaining units and brought back to
the board for approval. – I just want to make sure that we have responsible financial oversight over how these things can
effect us going forward. I’m not sure that we do if we just say, oh it’s just what’s in the contract. We need to kind of understand it. Okay, that’s all. – And to that point,
if I may reassure you, it is at that point when we provide you with a revised agreement,
that we provide you with the financial implications of impact of that agreement. So when you go through
your process to approve any of those changes, we
will provide for you very, in a very detailed
manner, we will quantify the cost of any of those
changes, or the savings. – I have a very thick file on higher education pension benefits, community college pension benefits, and medical benefits, as well. And there’s no easier way to get out of, to get in trouble if you don’t do that. And so, when I get just a
piece of paper that says, it’s all dependent on
something that I haven’t seen. I’m not saying I could even
understand it if I look at, but you understand what I’m saying. – [Sunny] So we’re gonna
provide the link then for that in the future, thank you. Okay, item 6.9, revised board policy and administrative regulation on institutional code of ethics. This is also a first reading. And we have received the information. Are there any questions or comments? Hearing none, item 6.10. Revised board policy and
administrative regulation leaves of absence with pay. This is also a first reading
and informational item. And it is provided for our reference in the board docket. Are there any questions or comments? – [Virginia] Yes, Trustee
Zia, I have a question. – Trustee Baxter. – I understand the leave
of absence with pay. But, six months ago, or
however many months ago it was, came up about leave of
absence without pay. Has there been any activity
within the bargaining unit to come up with a policy of
leave of absence without pay? And you weren’t around then. – So within FA there is under leaves, the ability for the board
to grant leave without pay. Which similar they could do – Okay.
– with classified bargaining and with an administrator. The board does retain that right. – [Virginia] Okay, great. – [Sunny] Trustee Otto. – Sure. So basically what this does is take six pages I think of prior,
thought out regulations and say, you know what? We’re not gonna do any
of that stuff anymore. What we’re gonna do is basically say it’s all negotiated and
that’s all there is. That you just have to
look at the agreement. And when I looked at 3017.2, it says leaves of absence
with pay may be granted to academic and classified employees in accordance with the
district’s collective bargaining agreements with each of
the three different unions. It’s hard, the way this is presented, for there to be good
board oversight of this. It doesn’t say anything about how, that I hear, how these
leaves will be granted. Are there criteria and whatnot? Maybe it’s all in the
collective bargaining agreement at great length and I’ve studiously avoided
reading those agreements. – (laughs) It actually is contained there. And that would have the
most current and updated language that the board has agreed to with the bargaining units. So again, I think maybe
the hyperlink would assist. – [Doug] Great. – But again the idea was just to make sure that there was only one
current source document. And that when we do change the contracts going to bargaining that
it isn’t a duplicate, or there isn’t conflicting
language in a regulation. – I want to know how many,
what’s the extent of it? Does it have any impact on our ability to deliver classes and things like that? ‘Cause sometimes those things come up. And that, I think is our
oversight responsibility, is to ask those kinds of questions, which would not be contained in the collective bargaining document. Which as I presume what these other pages of former regulations which we’re voting to eliminate covered in many ways. You think? – I’m trying to understand the question. Because if there was
anything that this regulation would have covered, we would have gone to the contract first. Because that would contain
the most current agreement with the unit. – 3017.2 says, personal necessity leave, and it defines it all. Then it talks about at point three, eminent death leave, four
is bereavement leave, and five is discretionary
leave, jury duty leave, paternal leave, management
leave, confidential leave, short term military, all those things I guess are in the agreement. – [Gene] Correct. – So if we can just see how
it, not only what the rules are but how it’s manifesting itself, both financially and practically. So that we can say our
oversight responsibility is, now I understand this, this is great. – I understand. – Okay that’s it. – [Sunny] Trustee Ntuk. – Question for Vice President Duran. Can you share what the
shared governance policy process that these policies that relate to the collective bargaining
agreements went through? And what was the feedback you received from the different unions? – Sure. So this particular policy and regulation went through President’s
Leadership Council. Which is a shared governance body that has all representatives from
the bargaining units, as well as administrators. It was discussed with them one month. We were open to questions. And then it was brought
back the following month. In the intervening
period I actually did not receive any questions from any of the constituents on that body. – And is this related at all
to the upcoming negotiations? Or this is unrelated activity? – So not related to, so really
I think what they understood that the intent of this
was to make sure that the source document for how we operate with regard to this particular Policy, or these particular actions
is contained in the contract. – [Uduak] Okay, thank you. – [Sunny] Any other questions, comments? – I just wanted to add.
– Superintendent President Dr. Romali. – If it’s helpful, the
reason you’re seeing so many policy reviews tonight is at
the last accreditation report we got a finding that we had not updated our policies in a timely manner. And so we wanted to make
sure that we got that done before we started in on the writing of the report next year. – I understood that. – Thank you for that clarification, Superintendent President Dr. Romali. Item 6.11, revised board
policy and administrative regulation 2021, personnel files. This is also a first reading and we’ve gotten the information. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, item 6.12. Revised board policy and
administrative regulation on travel and professional
conference attendance. Again, this is the first reading and we’ve received the information. Are there any questions,
comments on this item? Hearing none, item 6.13, I’m sorry. – [Doug] Sorry had a question. – Trustee Otto. – Yes, I’m sure. So on 6.12. Is this a change in how we’ve
historically done things for travel and professional
conference attendance, Marlene? – Yes, thank you that one’s fine. This does not reflect
a change in the policy, or the admin regulation,
rather it cleans up some of the language to
have the correct references. The reductions we made related to the deficit reduction plan we did, so as guidelines, or to clarify what best practices are, we felt that it was
inappropriate to include that discussion in
administrative regulations or board policy. Because it was beyond
that greater guidance and really narrowed down things like, think about travel out of state, think about how many people you spend. So it wasn’t as restrictive or as a control that you would expect in a board policy or the admin reg. – I understand completely and this mirrors the discussion we had earlier about policies and regulations
and I think I was the one that said regulations
have to be general enough, so that they apply to lots of situations. And I understand that. Again, I feel like I’m just wearing this oversight hat tonight, which is, okay how much is this? What’s the trend with it? I guess I can ask those
kinds of questions offline, or not at this meeting. But I want to make sure
that the information there is very available. I see that the reg is
basically not changed at all, so this one gave me less
heartburn, if you will, than some other ones where
I couldn’t see anything. So thank you, that’s what I needed. – Thank you for your very
insightful comments, Trustee Otto. We will now move onto item 6.13, ah 6.14, excuse me. Revised board policy, we
just did 13, oh I’m sorry. The professional development leave. Thank you. We have received the information on this, this is also a first reading, are there any questions or comments on this front? – [Doug] Yes. – Trustee Otto. – So, this is a professional development, I can’t separate these pages here. This is professional development leave. The policy’s fine, when
I went to the regulations the entire three pages
of detailed regulations are eliminated in exchange
for the vice president of academic affairs will administer this, and it’s all according to the collective bargaining agreements. Is this a recent trend in
they way it’s being done at other colleges and whatnot? I hadn’t seen it before
and I get it at one level. I mean I don’t see any
reporting requirements about when they go off and they do this professional development leave. It don’t have to be to us, but to anybody. Is that, Gene? – It is again. I think you know just for the
sake of a clarity, so again. So that there’s simply one source document that contains the mechanics
of how this is done, the rules of how this is done. And since this particular
regulation really was focused just on, mostly on
faculty, Sabbatical leave. And that is fully
outlined in the contract, and any changes would
be done at the table. And again, approved by
the board and ratified by the bargaining unit. So that would have the
most current language. So instead of having to send people to two or three places, or
having old language sit out there again that is in conflict. Still board approved
language but old language that is in conflict. It’s easier just to
have one source document to send them to. – And don’t anybody
take this the wrong way, but I think that our
responsibility as a governing board is to understand what’s going on, and what the effects are on
other areas of the college that people may not be thinking about. Whether they’re financial or, ability to offer classes,
or whether we’re gonna get into any problems with student success. We could teach 25 English
classes, but we can’t now, because people have got off to do things. I’m not saying that I
think that this is true, but what I worry about
is, is this some kind of slippery slope that what happens is. It becomes harder for us
to get the information that we need in order to say that’s okay, or what about this? Just ask questions. – So as we do go through
negotiations or do change the source document,
certainly that information is provided to the board. We will provide any information
that any of the trustees would need in order to
make an informed decision on approving or disapproving
the particular item that was in front of them. Just as we did through negotiations, again, costing things out,
making sure we understood not only if it’s a full time faculty, but what full time faculty language is just a part time faculty. And may in fact do some
other groups, because, so we do our best to
provide that to the board at the time that those agreements are coming before the board. – I’ll try and say it
and then I’ll shut up, slightly differently
about all these things. I don’t want it to feel like governance by collective
bargaining agreement. So that, it’s being done out there end it makes it harder for us to get
access to information. I’m not suggesting we keep these things, and I understand that this is a trend, although I’m gonna look into the, how this grew up and whatnot. Because I think that it’s
important to do that. No problems with it, I’m just. – [Gene] I understand. – And Trustee Otto, please don’t feel like you have to abbreviate your comments. Don’t feel like you have to
abbreviate your comments, this is the forum for us
to have the discussion. And you bring some very insightful points. And we certainly appreciate
it, they’re very prudent. Item 6.14 the right item now. Reduce workload a
administrative regulation on reduce workload. This is also first reading. And we have received the information. Are there any questions, comments? Trustee Otto. – What a surprise. – [Sunny] No, this is great,
these are great points. – Is there a cost analysis
of this reduced work load? The way I read it real
quickly and once again we’ve gone from several
pages of regulations to just saying this is in accordance with the district collective bargaining agreements with
the full time faculty. So what I’m concerned about is do we know if all of a sudden
we’re reducing work load based on, are there stops on it? Can we say wait a minute, too many of our science instructors
are asking for this and that may impede our ability to offer all the classes we needed to get people into the nursing program,
or things like that. Is there way to do that and is there a way for us to know that? – We can certainly address
that as a separate issue. But I will say that the language that was previously contained in
the admin regs replicated the language that was in
the bargaining agreement. And I’m not sure when the last time that may have been
changed in your agreement. But any time we have a proposed
change in the agreement we do provide you, I’m certain we would have
at that point in the past, and certainly as we move forward, you would be provided
with an in depth analysis as to how it would affect the district, both financially and operationally. And so what we’re attempting to do here is have the focus on the
actual legal document that drives this activity,
versus in the board policy. You still retain all of your governance. But that governance we
recognize with collective bargaining issues is at that point when you are approving that
collective bargaining agreement rather than here. And yes, you will notice this is a trend. There are other documents that are the driving source that are not the board policy. An example will be you will be approving a contracts related policy. I’m not sure it’s
tonight, I believe it’s at the next meeting for instance, that reference is a bid limit. That bid limit’s contained in law. And so we would reference the law versus, in the dollar amount. And that’s an attempt to make sure that we are always accurate
and always up to date, by recognizing that there
are different points where the source document
is the driving force versus the board policy. We want to ensure that our board policies are always relevant and that there’s never a disagreement which could
cause us some legal heartburn. – Yeah. I just want to make sure that
the college has the ability outside the collective
bargaining agreement to say, too many of those,
we can’t do that, sorry. You have a right to reduce your work load, from either full time to part time, or as a pre-retirement option. But, we can’t let all of you do that. Do we have that control? Or is it just in the collective
bargaining agreement? – The controls would be listed in the collective bargaining. – Yeah.
– Yeah. – [Gene] It would, again,
be in the contract. If I understood the question. – Okay. So if I went to the collective
bargaining agreement and said, “I’m concerned
that we’re gonna lose “all of our anatomy professors, “because they’re near retirement age. “And if they all decided they wanted to go “to a reduce work load,
we won’t have the people.” I know we’ve got options,
hiring other people and whatnot. I’ll learn about how that works in a collective bargaining agreement. – [Gene] Correct, reduce
work load under yes, it’s listed in there. – Okay, okay. – [Sunny] Are there any
more questions, comments? Item 6.15, revised board
policy on resignations. This is an information
item and we have received the information, are there
any questions, comments? – [Doug] I want you to
know I have no questions. (board members giggle) – [Sunny] Hearing none, item 6.16. Revised board policy and
regulation on Sabbatical leave. This is also a first
reading and information. We’ve received the information
on our board docket. Are there any questions or comments? – Yeah. This one was a particularly
hard one because we had eligibility requirements, we had length of leave requirements. It was a Sabbatical leave
committee that voted on all of these things. And there were limitations
on the number of leaves. A technical section on
compensation and salary increases and other stuff, and that’s all gone. But I bet you’re gonna tell me it’s all in the collective
bargaining agreement, now and that’s where I have
to go find these things. And just out of curiosity,
in the negotiations, who proposed these? Did the union propose these, or did the college propose these changes in the collective bargaining agreements? – So these are items
that are in the contract and have been in the contract for years. It’s actually part of Ed
Code and then the district negotiates it with the bargaining unit. The idea to change this
was part of our sort of modernization of our regulations again, to ensure that there is
just one source document that contains the language that controls this action and this regulation. I know I sound like a broken record. – [Doug] No, I get it okay that’s all. – [Sunny] Anyone else have
any comments, questions? Hearing none, item 7.1. Neo-modified inactivated courses that board of trustees. This is a recommended
actions that we approve the neo-modified inactivated courses effective Fall 2020 as submitted. They have been created
and modified to meet the Title V requirements. So, does anyone from staff
want to provide input before I call it up for action? – [Doug] This disposing to
what I call the 10 plus one. This is the stuff that the
faculty gets control over unless there’s something
completely glaring. – [Kathleen] It’s the number
one of the 10 plus one. Just to be clear. Professor Keonig
– Executive vice president– – is here to answer any
questions about these three areas that are coming up. But this one about the courses is just exciting, because
we continue to add in more non-credit classes. Many of these are again, what
Central CHA had requested, including the family child
care management, for families that want to start child
care in their home. We’ve got another of the
library non-credit program. We’ve got the cake decorating
which was specifically requested, cake decorating,
part one and part two, along with a certificate. And I can let Professor
Koenig explain further. But, we’re very proud of these. And the Curriculum Committee
has worked diligently to get these courses on
the books for our students and our community. – [Sunny] Thank you. Would you like to say
a few words, Professor? – I’ll answer questions. – [Sunny] Okay, great. Trustee Ntuk did you
want to say something? – I did if I can speak. I think from bringing this forward I saw, I had talked to Dr. Scott
about trying to figure out a way to put a summary of each course in the description of the agenda items. So in the future when we’re
going back for searching, or sharing, we know what
this food science class came, then we can find it. It’s a lot of classes in one
document, but it’s welcome. But I saw particularly there
was a fire science class in there and I was, I didn’t
know if you could speak to how that aligns with the
CAL FIRE requirements for accreditation for
fire science programs. – This is actually a course
that’s already on the books. This was a part of the
routine review process where we look at courses every six years. And it was simply a modification
to the catalog description. And what they were trying to
correct was sort of errors that were in the description. So this is not a new course. But we will be bringing some fire stuff to you at some point. – [Uduak] Thank you. – [Sunny] Anyone else? Hearing none.
– President Zia. I did have a question. – [Sunny] Yes. – So regarding the inactivated courses.
– Let me, sorry. Trustee Jones, since you’re gonna be a voting member I think
we need to have a motion and a second so we can have discussion. – [Donnell] I apologize. – No it’s my fault, I should
have called for the motion. Is there a motion? – [Uduak] So it moves. – [Sunny] Thank you, the right side is beating the left side
in the motion making. Trustee Ntuk made the motion, seconded by Trustee Otto. Go ahead Trustee Jones for discussions. – So, the question I did
have regarding this is in the area of the inactivated courses. I guess the first question is was, I know that according to
the description in here that it said that these courses
hadn’t been offered lately. The Art, 11H and Art 12H. Was there any other
considerations that went into it outside of the courses
just not being offered? As to why we’re inactivating them? – Yeah these are actually my courses, so I can speak to that. What we’re trying to do
here, it’s no disrespect to the courses themselves. The actual regular sections still exist. So we have Art Four and
Art 11, it’s actually Art 11 on the books. The problem is that in order
to offer an honor section, because of open course requirements, you have to offer the
other section as well. And our concern is that
we’re aren’t gonna have enough enrollment to sort of
satisfy those two sections. And we also want to be honest and fair in our advertisements in our catalog. These have been in the catalog
and if someone’s looking for these as an option
in their honors program, they simply haven’t been offered. So we want to be, the
issue here is more about honesty in the catalog and cleaning it up. We would love to have
these as honor sections, and we will certainly
consider that in the future. It’s just based on enrollment. – Okay, and then I guess
kind of a follow up to that, I know that my experience
has been that typically when there’s lack of enrollment for an honors version of a course. There’s an option for a dual section for it to be taught in concurrence
with a regular section. Will these two courses possibly be offered as a combined section? – That would be a way to bring them back. That might be a good strategy
to sort of experiment with whether there’s enough interest. And I think that’s a great idea. At the current time these
are being inactivated, and so we have to have a discussion in the department about, do we feel there’s
enough interest in this? And there very well may be,
so I think that’s the way to bring them back to
life when the time comes. But I appreciate your input. Thank you.
– For sure. And then I’m just looking forward when those conversations do come back up. I would appreciate it if there’s consideration given to the fact that the honors course offering is already not extremely robust. There are a lot of courses offered. However, I feel that
especially with the two courses that are being inactivated, it kind of sends maybe
a negative view out. Because these are both
dealing with sections that could be marginalized communities. And could potentially
increase the interest in the honors program by giving people the opportunity to take a course that may be relevant to
them, or their history. – I appreciate that. I will take that information
to the department and hopefully we can
have a good conversation about bringing these back. – Thank you.
– Thank you. – [Sunny] Any other board members? Call for the vote, all those in favor? – [Jackie] Virginia Baxtor. – [Virginia] Aye. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu. – [Vivian] Aye. – [Jackie] Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – [Uduak] Aye. – [Jackie] Doug Otto. – [Doug] Aye. – [Jackie] Sunny Zia. – [Sunny] Aye. – [Jackie] Student Trustee Jones. – [Donnell] Nay. – So if it’s okay with
the rest of the board, I think maybe for just being mindful of time, is
it okay if we do voice votes instead of roll call votes going forward? Is that something that would work for the rest of the board? – [Uduak] I thought we had
a required for roll call. – No there’s no requirement apparently. Is there a requirement? – [Donnell] I do have a question. – [Virginia] I think you
were noted incorrectly in that last vote. If you look back didn’t it say Zia, nay. Did you say nay? – [Sunny] No I don’t. I believe Trustee Jones.
– Trustee Jones did. But if you look it said
Zia, nay, let’s go back. Or, I’m so tired I don’t
know how to read anymore. – [Sunny] No, you were an editor. Yeah you are absolutely
right with your eagle eye. – [Virginia] I edit books for a living. – [Sunny] So yes, thank you. – [Jackie] ‘Cause he’s not included, see. – [Sunny] Trustee Baxter. (Virginia laughs) – [Sunny] But if it’s
okay, if it’s the pleasure of the board I’m just
gonna call for voice votes. – [Jackie] You sure
can, but I’ll still have to put it in here because
it’s in Boarddocs. – That’s fine you can put
– And I have to show it. it in but just for the sake of– – [Jackie] But I can’t
move forward until I do it. You’ll have to wait for me. – [Sunny] Yeah, that’s fine. Okay item 7.2, new programs– – President Zia, I do have a question. How will the affect the recording of the student trustee advisory vote? If we’re doing a voice vote?
– You would also be able say, – Okay.
– I would say all those in favor say aye and
then all those opposed, and that’s how it’ll get reflected. Item 7.2, this is also an action item for the programs of
study, which were created to meet Title V. It is recommended that
the board of trustees approve the programs of study effective Fall 2020 as submitted. This is to respond to advisory
committee recommendations, and/or to facilitate transfer. The programs of study were
developed and approved by their respective college
departments in schools. Documentation has been
reviewed by the associated Degree General Education Subcommittee and approved by the Committee
on Curriculum and Instruction. Do have a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – [Sunny] Moved by Trustee
Baxter, is there a second? – [Uduak] Second. – [Sunny] Seconded by Trustee Ntuk. Are there any questions, comments? – [Uduak] I’d like to say something. just thank you.
– Trustee Ntuk. – on the ESL and the cake class here. I know prior to getting
on the board Centro CHA was wanting to have a better relationship with the college. And in the last year I think
we’ve gone in that direction. I know this was a priority item for them. So I’m really appreciative
to see that it made it through the process in here tonight. – [Sunny] Any other board
members have questions, comments? Hearing none, all those in favor? – Aye.
– Aye. – [Sunny] All those opposed? Okay we’ll wait until you record it. So it was 5-0, beautiful. I like this, item 7.3, area
of emphasis of degrees, this was an information item. We got the information
in our board docket. It was presented at the
previous board meeting. However Dr. Scott
requested that we resubmit background information on
area of emphasis degrees, including social justice
and global studies. Dr. Scott, did you want to
say anything on this item? – [Kathleen] Again I’m just very proud of the Curriculum Committee and the work that they have done. And I will defer to our curriculum chair. – Thank you Dr. Scott. Yeah I did want to say a
couple things about this. We’re really making good progress on the social justice studies, ADT, and the global studies at ADT. I actually have lists of
courses, we’re very, very close. So we’re excited about
bringing these forward. I think these are gonna
be a great opportunity for students who don’t
necessarily want to commit to a particular major,
but they have an idea of what they’re interested in. And so this is the beauty
of the area of emphasis. Is that it’s not just a
sort of catch all degree, but rather directs them
in a particular direction that will lead to a major ultimately. But it gives them a little more leeway. And these are also fairly low unit major, I mean you only have to
have 18 units for a major. So this is another
expedient way to sort of get to the end goal and
walk across that stage. We’re excited about it. – [Sunny] Thank you so much, thank you for mentioning that and for your hard work, that means a lot. I don’t believe we have
anything on this front to vote. Sure Trustee Ntuk. – Yeah thank you. I know the ADT is a
degree with a guarantee. And it’s great to see the social justice and the social work in global
studies coming through, and I know aligns with Long Beach State and the different program options there. I just had one questions on, I’ve noticed that Cerritos and El Camino have ADTs in computer science. And we don’t have an
ADT in computer science, even though we offer computer science. Is that somewhere in the pipeline coming, or there is a process to
initiate consideration of a computer science ADT? – That’s a very good question,
thank you for asking that. Yeah we’re also looking at the progress report on ADTs to see where we are. And we actually have a good
number of ADTs in comparison. However, that’s one of our
problem areas, computer science. The reason we don’t have
an ADT in that right now is because certain classes
when they have unit values that are over the recommended level, I’m not gonna point fingers
at any one in particular. But we have a couple
of areas where we have sort of high unit courses that actually prevent,
– Like psychics, maybe. – prevent us from creating
the ADT right now. We are working on that, we
are having conversations with the faculty members. ‘Cause this is an area
that faculty have to agree to these changes, and we look forward to getting a good compromise soon. So, it’s on our radar,
we’re talking to people, we will keep you posted, So yeah, thank you.
– All right, thank you. – Anyone else? I do want to remind our board members that it’s getting close to 9:00. And I promised these lovely young students that I would get them out in time. Just something to be mindful of. Item 8.1, emergency
resolution, public project. This is a recommended action that
the board of trustees adopt resolution number 042419B pertaining to the award of a contract without bidding and advertising in an emergency
situation, as submitted. Is there a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – So moved by Trustee Otto,
seconded by Trustee Baxter. Are there any questions, comments? Hearing none, all those in favor? – Aye.
– Aye. – All those opposed? The motion passes unanimously. Item 8.2, business service update. This is a report from vice president of our business services,
Marlene Drinkwine, who will give us an update to the board on current projects. We received the report. Marlene would you like
to expand on any items or further comment? – I believe I’ve given you a good update on those projects that we’re undertaking, many at the board’s request. I would like to share that we launched a student survey yesterday to support the bus pass pilot development. And we have already
gotten 2,000 responses. So I’m really looking forward
to get some great data. But I’m happy to answer questions on any of the other areas. – Thank you so much Vice
President Drinkwine. I know you and you’re staff and Dr. Romali have been diligently working on this and it’s a been a priority of yours, and Dr. Romali’s since she started. So we certainly appreciate that. Item 9.1, oh I’m sorry go ahead. – [Uduak] The update, sorry back to the, – Trustee Ntuk. – previous agenda item. On the bus pass pilot, just to clarify, we’re looking at partnering
with Long Beach Unified, Long Beach State, and
Long Beach City College on some type of model, right? – What we’re doing is
because all three agencies are very interested in finding
reduced cost opportunities, Long Beach Transit has shared
that they’re very interested in serving our needs in
the community better. So we’re partnering to find opportunities to achieve even lower costs
than are currently offered, even with the savings program. So I’m excited about that to arrive there. And Transit’s interested in identifying all three of our agency’s needs. They are reexamining all of the bus routes that are critical to our students, to make sure that they have the capacity. And that those bus routes have speed in serving our students. In so they’re doing that holistically with the other two agencies. So that by coming
together we’re increasing our purchasing power, and allowing Transit to better serve our needs specifically. ‘Cause it really pays for
them to be able to say that they’re serving our
educational communities. – Did we provide Long Beach Transit a schedule of classes or a time block that we have the most students on campus? – We have, we have shared
the time and ridership of our current Viking
Voyager Shuttle with them. We have shared with them the heat map that shows where our students reside. And so that they can identify the routes that are taken by
the routes that are taken by the most number of students enrolled. – And then I got a couple more questions. In the survey, did we ask what time of day do students prefer the
buses in the morning, midday or in the evening? – I’m sorry I can’t recall. I know that the survey was created to be a smart survey in that
depending on what options these student’s selected
it would guide them to the next level. But I can’t recall that. But I will say this, that
we are able to gather the data confidentially but by students so we can identify with, in participation with Heather Van Volkinburg,
that level of data. So that we’re not reliant
just upon the survey to be the soul source of this data by combining the data. And we created the questions purposely. So by combining the data with
the data we have elsewhere we can really get some robust data. – [Uduak] Yeah I guess I’m
looking for the temporal element of it, because I know that students have expressed an interest in on demand requests like Uber or Lyft to assist getting to school. But you know everybody
has different schedules and so it’s like, where’s
the bulk of people? Are they three o’clocks on
Wednesdays and Thursdays that the need is there? And I guess maybe in follow up assessments we can get a better idea. Maybe you can share,
did Long Beach Transit have any input on on demand
request or an app for connecting with Last Mile, Uber or Lyft, like the students are interested in? – [Marlene] They have not presented a proposal related to that. I will share though that
they are in the midst of a conversion to an
app for their bus passes which is exciting. And that with this pilot
program one of the elements is that we’re going to be
able to access ridership data. So I really look forward
to being able to come back to you at a future meeting
with loads of data. – [Uduak] And then on the student housing, when is the RFP gonna be released? Or has it already been
released that’s described in the report? Or is it still in development phase? – [Marlene] I’m so sorry the, which RFP? – The student housing.
– Sorry, for the student housing feasibility study. – Oh thank you, thank you. The student housing, we had developed a really complex RFP. And as part of that
development, sought expertise in the identification of homeless students and the wide range that that can be with housing insecurities. And we were able to identify an expert who lives
right here and services CalState Long Beach in our back yard. And what was exciting about
that is that we realized that we probably have access
already to a lot of data. And that with additional guidance we could refine that
data, so rather than just having one giant RFP,
we can develop an RFP that’s really specific. And so we’ve actually changed focus. We’re having a meeting
coming up with this expert. And forgive me while I
shuffle through my page to find her–
– Dr. Crutchfield. – Thank you. With Dr. Crutchfield. And that’s going to
influence as we move forward. That we now understand
that we needed to break up the RFP into really specific pieces. First, how do I identify our
students who are homeless, or with housing insecurities? And then once we understand that, what are the community wide solutions that we are accessing
that we could access? And then third, as part of the solution were the housing opportunities. So we have split that up now
into conception three ideas. But I expect more refinement. Because as complex as the issue is, I believe that solution
may be just as complex, but not presupposing that. But really trying to chunk that off into more achievable bites. – So once the RFP’s issued,
how long do you anticipate the report, or information to come back? – I think once we really get
going with Dr. Crutchfield, we would come back to you
with any recommendations for a contract, absolutely. And once we start that
process, I believe that we’ll get information back quickly. – [Uduak] I mean in the RFP
do we say 90 day report back? – [Marlene] If we move
forward with Dr. Crutchfield, because she is such a specific expert we would not necessarily
need to do an RFP, she is the sole source. – [Uduak] Even in the
contract are we identifying the time–
– Timeframe would be critical. – [Uduak] Do you know what it is? – [Marlene] That’s part of the
meeting with Dr. Crutchfield is for–
– To be determined, still. – [Marlene] To be determined. We want to make it as quickly as possible, particularly this step,
because so many other steps are dependent upon it. – And then once that contract’s done and we get the report back we will know should we have 2,500
units, or 5,000 units, and geographically where would be an ideal three or four options
to have such a facility? – Correct.
– That type of information? – For instance, if we have
a student who is homeless we need to be able to identify if that student is chronically homeless, or falls in and out of homeless. And how often are those
students enrolled with us in how many units? And all of that will impact what kind of housing decisions we can make for them. If a predominance of our homeless students have families, or children, or not? And it’s those kinds of
things that would have a direct impact on the identification of what kind of facility
would best serve their needs. And so we’re realizing
that we need to identify that information and right now we don’t. Right now our students
self identify as homeless, or not homeless and we
rely on greater statistics to identify a population. And this first step is
to have a far more finite and specific identification. – Great thank you. And on the North Long
Beach Feasibility Study, so we didn’t get any respondents, or responsible respondents for the RFP? – We had interest from
six different agencies. We received just one response. That one response we felt was not entirely responsive to their RFP. We are going to break up the RFP. That with North Long Beach it’s first looking at our data. And we recognize that
we have a lot more data in our conversations with
the City of Long Beach that we have more data. So we’d like to split
it up into a examination and analysis of that data. And then secondarily opportunities to have perhaps a joint use project
out in North Long Beach. – Do you think reissuing it would be in the next month, or next year or when? – I would say that re-issuance of an RFP would follow our next meeting
with the City of Long Beach to further define where we are. And that I would expect it within about 30 to 60 days following that. – Okay. Last item on the thresholds
for the community and student worker
participation agreement. You had LACCD and Cerritos Was there any threshold? One is very high and one is very low. – I will say that
interestingly this is a topic that we’re not just addressing, but at a recent regional CBO meeting it was a topic of discussion amongst all of my fellow CBOs. There is a huge range, LACCD
has the lowest threshold of any community college in the state. I am still gathering data. There’s a lot of discussion
on what is the level for other community colleges? When I examined our
projects, our projects were all eight million dollars and above. And so I will be able to
identify that better for you, and include in any future update. I will not wait for the next board meeting to share that information with you. I will share it with you I anticipate within the next two to three weeks. – And final question. I know at the Facility
Subcommittee meeting The Solis Group was
gonna provide thresholds. Did they ever provide that information? – They have not yet completed
their evaluation, as well. – [Uduak] Okay, thank you. – Thank you. – Is there anything else? Are there any other board members? Item 10 point, 9.1, annual approval for
student trustee to receive compensation for board meetings. This is a recommended action
that the board of trustees approve compensation
for the student trustee in the amount of 25% of
the monthly amount paid to publicly elected trustees, or $100 per month, as submitted. This is an action item. Is there a motion? – [Virginia] So moved. – Moved by Trustee Baxter. Seconded by Trustee Ntuk. Are there any questions, comments? – [Uduak] I have a question,
or Trustee Jones is first. He had his hand up. – [Sunny] Trustee Jones. – Thank you guys for
putting this on the agenda. I know I had requested to discuss these two items in general at the last board meeting on the 27th. And to speak to the policy
that we are looking at today, board policy 2005, there was a recommended change that I would like
to have included there. In paragraph two, sentence one, if the board would consider
allowing the student trustee the ability to make and second motions. Which would be in line
with Cerritos College. Sorry, not Cerritos College,
Rio Hondos College’s policy regarding the student trustee. And also within education code. It’s a privilege that the board does have the ability to grant. So if the board would choose I would love for you guys to consider
making that change. As well as to the coordinating
administrative regulation, 2005.2, sentence four
to make the same change to change the language
to include the ability to make and second motions
for the student trustee. And then also to speak
to board policy 20– – Trustee Jones it’s very
hard to understand you. You might want to slow down a little bit. So can you restate what you’re requesting. Thank you.
– I apologize. – No, no it’s kind of late.
– Not being very excited. – No, we want to make
sure we’re not missing any of your requests. – Of course. Again speaking back to board policy 2005, if the board would
consider making the change in paragraph two, sentence one. To include the language
that the student trustee would be allowed to
make and second motions. Again this is in line
with the education code that’s stated on their policy. As well as in line with other districts. Most closely is the Rio Hondo College. And then also making
the same change within the administrative regulation
2005.2, sentence four. – Thank you Trustee Jones. I believe that would
be handled separately. ‘Cause what we’re voting for
here is your compensation. And I’d like to defer
to Vice President Duran. – That’s correct and actually, Student Trustee Jones
and I actually met today, so I do have his concerns, comments and the changes that he wishes to make in that particular policy and regulation. And we will be working on seeing how that may or may not
be able to move forward. This particular item
before the board though is to simply authorize what’s already in our policy and regulation
regarding student compensation. – Okay. And then if you guys
would allow me to make another quick comment.
– What’s that? – May I make one more comment, as well? – [Sunny] Sure. – Also, I do apologize
if this was maybe not the right time, I did notice
here on the description that we were discussing
regulation 2005 and 2027, which discusses compensation. The compensation piece I would
like the board to consider would be again in
paragraph two, sentence one of board policy 2027, to increase the student
trustee’s compensation to equal that of 50% of the
board, to a total of $200. And again this is inline
with education code, which would allow the
student trustee to receive compensation up to that of a board member. And also again Rio
Hondo College which does currently have the student trustee at 50% of the board’s compensation,
as well, at $200. – [Sunny] So, let me
make sure I understand. The motion that we have before us it to go with 25% of the monthly
pay of $100 per month and we have a second. So we have to vote on
that, or would you like to make a substitute motion that we change this to 50%? Is that what you’re requesting versus 25%?
– Yes, if we could make a substitute motion or amend
the motion on the floor. – Can the student trustee vote
on this and make a motion? Because it is, I mean is this a conflict? Maybe we should ask our
counsel who is here. Mr. Lipton if you could. – [Reagan] Mr. Lipton. – My understanding is that
currently the board policy does not permit the student trustee to make or second
motions, is that correct? In that sense the student
trustee can not do so, but his comments can be
construed as a suggestion to other trustees to amend the motion, and another trustee could do that. – Okay, that makes sense, Mr. Lipton. Since the maker of the
motion would you like to amend the motion? – Sure and I had a question of
it was the appropriate time. My understanding right now
we’re taking the action that’s required in the existing policy. And I don’t know, do we
need to amend the policy to allow us to do 50% versus 25%? ‘Cause I have read the
Ed Code section that student trustees can be paid more. And are paid more at other institutions. But I don’t know if we can
make the change right now, or if it’s something we should agendize and bring it back.
– Well it sounds like, I’m so sorry. – And the only other question I had is, is this part of what you recommended for agenda items last month? – Correct.
– In the package of items, which we haven’t agendized yet. – Okay. – [Sunny] I think he did
bring up these two policies. – [Reagan] He brought them up. And they’ve been added to the list and we are researching them. – Okay so the suggestion is that we change the compensation
and that would mean that we would have to
amend the motion to 50%. Would you like to amend your motion? – [Uduak] I’m amenable to
amending the motion to 50%, I’m open to that, but I just know if we actually can do that. – Let me ah,
– Mr. Lipton. – apologize for interrupting,
but I understand Trustee Ntuk’s comment. And I hadn’t reviewed the
underlying board policy. But if the underlying
board policy essentially provides what is stated
here in the motion, and if that amendment
essentially is, would require a revision to the board policy, then that amendment would
not be appropriate now. It would need to come
back as a first reading to amend the board policy. Then the board could
decide whether they want the board policy amended. – [Uduak] And I agree,
I pulled up policy 2027 and it explicitly states 25%
amount to be paid to $100. – Right and from a Brown Act perspective the public does not have notice that the board is considering a revision to the board policy. So, in that sense also it
would not be appropriate to take on that amendment. – [Uduak] So I will decline
the suggested amendment. – Yeah.
– Yes I also think we need to be careful when a trustee by consensus asks a superintendent
to look into something and we are looking into it. To then bring it forward
before that has been look into, and be able to provide all of the accurate information to you, is a little preliminary. – Okay.
– Okay. Trustee Otto, did you
want to say something? – For all those reason
and because I don’t think we should do things, I’ll
give you a neologism, ad hoch-ally, we should bring it back at the appropriate time and then vote on it. We’re not expressing an
opinion one way or the other. I agree with what the gentleman said. – So should we continue
this and bring it back with the policy? Because it is tied to the policy. – Can I–
– Per Ed Code you will need to approve what is on what we
have for policy by May 15th. And this would be the last meeting you’d have.
– I see. – [Gene] Is that correct, Mr. Lipton? – Yes, I agree with Mr. Duran that this is an action that
the board needs to consider pursuant to the current
version of the board policy. This is something the
board needs to do annually. – Okay.
– Yeah. – [Donnell] President Zia. – Trustee Jones. – And I apologize if
this was inappropriate. From reading the agenda
here I believed that, I was under the impression that this was the agendization of the
item that I had requested. Because the two items that I requested were specifically cited here. I apologize for being preemptive. – I thank you, Trustee Jones. And no need to apologize. I want you to know that your input is very, very prudent and well regarded. So this is the forum for us to discuss and we welcome it. I will personally, when
this does come back, I will support the 50% increase. Just for the record I want
to put that out there. And I would put my vote behind that. But with that we can,
and that’s why I’m going to vote no for this, because I wanted a bigger
increase for the student trustee I think he works very hard and he deserves to get that increase. – If you vote no then there
would be and no compensation. (Donnell laughs) – [Reagan] Yeah we need to
vote for this in the meantime to get him paid.
– For those of you who don’t know if it doesn’t pass before May 15th, with the board they’ll be no
compensation going forward until a new policy is adopted, which would still take a bit of time. – That’s assuming it fails. – [Gene] Correct. – Right. Which I doubt it’ll fail, but
I just wanted to make sure. Mr. Lipton you might
want to be at the dias because you’re our counsel, because we may have
further questions for you. Please do feel free to be at the dias since that seat is open. Okay, if there are no
other questions, comments? Call for the vote, Madame Secretary. – [Jackie] You want me to call? – Yes.
– Voice vote. – Oh I’m sorry, yes
you’re right, thank you. All those in favor? – [Board Members] Aye. – [Sunny] For all those opposed? I’m sorry, Mr. Otto did you have? – I, I,
– Was that an aye? – I winced because I thought when you take a consensus vote and there’s gonna be one that’s not consensus I think it’s a burden–
– Yeah I’m gonna call for the opposed. – I’m recording.
– All those opposed. Nay. And I stated my reasons why. Item 10.1 academic senate
president’s report. – [Doug] But he’s not here. – The motion passed, yes. Item 10.1, academic
senate president’s report I don’t think we have an academic senate president present here. Item 10.2, classified senate president. – Yes thank you.
– Anne. – [Anne] I just wanted to congratulate again, President Reagan Romali for getting the Servant Leadership Award from CCCCS. It’s well deserved. You’ve been a true leader
in getting classified involved in shared governance, and getting us excited
about participating. So thank you very much. Thank you that’s it. – [Sunny] Thank you Classified
Senate President Engel. Item 10.3, board of trustees reports. I will start with Trustee Otto. – Thanks very much I was gonna ask if I could go first
because I can combine it with the next agenda item. Since all that remains
is comments from trustees and I think there’s one other request to speak. But I have a table at the women’s shelter fundraiser tonight with the congressman and Jim McDonnell, and the chief of police at my table. And I’ve been getting texts from my wife that if I leave now I’ll
still get to do something. So, here’s my report. I went at the early part of
this month to New York City and attended the National
Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining and
Higher Education Conference. There were two other members
of the Long Beach City College family that were there for this. I also went to this event last week. It’s a fascinating group that has done very little with community
colleges in the past. They usually deal with
four year institutions. I’ve gotten to know the
executive director real well. And I learned a lot, the key note speaker was economist Paul Krugman. And he gave a fascinating
talk, there was a lot of presentations on right
to work, because of the recent Supreme Court decision in Janice, United State’s Supreme
Court decision in Janice. And the conference is
entitled, Post Janice. And so there was a lot
that I think that I learned and bring back to my experience here. And that’s all I’ll say
in the interest of time. – [Sunny] Thank you for
mentioning the reason why we’re leaving, Trustee Otto. We know you have bigger
and better places to go. Trustee Ntuk, do you have a
report you’d like to give? – I got a new phone today. And so I don’t have my
calendar or my emails to talk about things I’ve
done in the last month. But I know I have done stuff. (board members laugh)
The only thing (laughs) I would say I did go to CCEJ training that was here on campus today, for LGBTQ allies implicit bias training, gender equity training. Which was very good, about 30
faculty members participated. I think it was a great
resolve off the partnership that we’ve been, or we have with CCEJ. You know talking about training, the opportunities on campus. To make sure the people
are getting the best and the latest and greatest information. And it was really great to
see so many people spend three or four hours of
their day in training. I stopped by just briefly earlier today and it was really well put together. But that’s all I have for today. – [Sunny] Vice President Malauulu, would you like to report on your? – Yes, first of all
I’m sorry that is 9:19, and the journalism students who I can see the right outside the door had to leave at 9:15. But I really wanted to welcome them here, and thank them and for
Pat McKean for always making an appearance each semester at our board meetings. I think it’s important
not only to our college operations, but also to their development as journalism students. So, maybe somebody can
tell him I said that. Couple of things on April the 6th, I attended an event in
my district hosted by Council Member Roberto Uranga, who’s seat I occupy. He was a former, former
trustee on this board, and he’s now council
member for my district. And also Rex Richardson, council member for the 9th district. It was called Everyone In Economic Summit. And it was really interesting
the data they presented regarding, and we all know this because we are in academia. But, to the access that people with college educations have to things like purchasing a home, and purchasing a car, and
where they live and travel. So they did have significant
data which really justified a lot of the work
that we do in the community. It was awesome to be there. On April the, sorry I skipped one, April 4th I attended the Building D ribbon cutting. And if you haven’t visited
the science building I recommend that you do. The visual tour of being
able to see the technology that is being implemented in
our classrooms is phenomenal. On April 13th I spoke at the Single Moms Empowerment Conference, which is an annual event. Robbie Butler is the
founder of Ms. Single Mom. And she lives in my district. And she always invites LBCC students, mostly single moms, students
who are single moms. Pat, you just missed me giving you guys a shout out there at 9:19, four minutes after you left, sorry. But anyway, so back to Robbie Butler. It was a great event, I
have supported her event for several years and
this year she asked me to be her morning speaker. The highlight for me was
seeing our LBCC EEOPS program in the lobby there set up with a table. I didn’t even know that
that was gonna happen, so when I walked in and I
saw that I was really happy to see the resources that are available. Also on, yesterday, I had the great
pleasure and privilege to attend the kickoff for
the Center for Community Industry Partnerships,
the inaugural members. We highlighted them, that was awesome. When I look at some of these
names on this great list of people who are partnering with us, so many of them are
small businesses that are owned by LBCC alumni, which is wonderful. Let’s see, I want to make sure
I don’t leave anything out. I’d like to commend our
great communications team on the awards that they won. I love what’s happening in this board room with all the different
photographs and awards. It really is perking up the room, so I really appreciate that. Kudos also to Superintendent
President Romali, you’ve really done really
well and gotten lots of accolades from the community lately. So, congratulations you deserve it. I don’t know what’s gonna happen with the student body elections
that are pending. But, to Trustee Jones, I
know that you have one more, Student Trustee Jones you
have one more meeting in May. But I won’t be here for the May meeting. And I don’t know, you know I don’t have a crystal ball, so I know you’re running to be our student trustee again next year. The May 22nd meeting, right, (chuckles) I know, I know, I know, I already know. So the May 22nd meeting when we, I don’t know if any of you know this, but we changed our meeting
dates from Tuesday to Wednesday. Of course our calendar was already set. I have missed one meeting before
because I was out of town, but I was able to teleconference in for the entire meeting and it was great. I will miss the May 22nd meeting. I will not be able to teleconference in, because my son is graduating that night. So I’m gonna be at a graduation. And I hate to miss next month’s meeting, but I just want to let you guys know. And to Student Trustee Jones, hopefully you’re
successful and you are able to be our student trustee next year. But if not, I want to
thank you for your service. It’s been a pleasure being
on this board with you. And I wish you luck on your endeavors, and certainly in the election. And I want to close with kind of a negative note. I don’t like to do that but
I am compelled to do that. I am a former part time
instructor on campus, and I was a very active member of CHI, the Certificated Hourly Instructors Union, which is you know part of the larger LBCCFA, the faculty association. And I’m just really disappointed
that we have not had a CHI report in several months. And that we haven’t had CHI
representation at the meeting. As a former CHI member it bothers me. I understand that people are busy, I understand that the leadership is busy. But if the president can’t attend, if the vice president can’t attend, there is an executive board. But I do think it’s important for CHI to be represented at the board meeting. So whoever sees this, if you guys can get the message out or let them know. I’m really discouraged
to not have CHI here, because that is my former union. And we do need to have that voice here. So I’m sorry to end on a
bit of a negative note, but I think it’s important. You know whatever needs to happen we do need to have CHI report. Watch CHI be here in May
and then I won’t be here. (Virginia laughs) Anyway, good luck to all of our students. I know we had a spring break
and I know we had midterms and as we round out I won’t be here in May to wish you luck on finals. But I’ll definitely be around. And I look forward to
all of these semester closing events and of
course my favorite day, which is commencement. So everybody have a great
end of the semester. I’ll be thinking of you on
May 22nd as my son graduates. – [Sunny] Trustee Baxter. – Yes I’ll try to be quick. Just a couple of shout outs. First of all, Art
Professor Colleen Sterritt, who received the 2019
Outstanding Educator Award from the International Sculpture Center. So this is a national award
that Colleen has received and she’s gotten googa-heims
and she’s done very, very well. Congratulations, again. Then I want to congratulate President Zia. She represented elected women in office at an AAUW conference. And I understand she
did an outstanding job. And I appreciate her doing that since I suggested her for a speaker. Then I want to congratulate
the five outstanding colleagues who will be
recognized on May 3rd. Emily Barrera, Tammy Clark, Lee Douglas, Samira Habash and Koleb Samuel. And that’s a really great honor, and I’m very, very proud of these. I also attended the
Community Partners event with President Zia and
Vice President Malauulu. And it was a fantastic event. I want to congratulate
all the people involved in putting that on. It was really a classy event. It was funny somebody said to me, “Thank god they have an awning here.” So that has to do with facilities. You know just little things like that mean a lot to the public. Because I have been at
events and I won’t say where, where we’re sitting out in the sun and you’re practically dying of the sun. So thank you very much to
facilities for all their work, and community relations
for setting that all up. As I mentioned I met with the LBCC FA. They were tremendous. We went to the foundation
breakfast last Thursday, and our homeless group
made a presentation. And Emily Barrera made a wonderful flyer with statistics on the number
of students we have served. Trustee Zia, I think I
gave you one, I hope I did. If I didn’t it’s down here. But as a result of that we got donations to our program, so that’s fantastic. And then lastly, no no I got, no I don’t. I have one last thing. And that is on May 16th, Vice President Malauulu
will be dinner co-chair of the CCEJ Humanitarian Award Dinner. And I hope that the public
will support us in this. And it’s a wonderful organization. I happen to be on the board. And they do great things in our city and I’m appreciative
of Vice President Malauulu to having agreed to serve as the co-chair. Oh, and I forgot, the
Seniors Luncheon is May 14th. Last month I invited you all to attend. I have invitations here. But you have to tell me if you’re coming because I’m not paying for a seat that you’re not sitting in. Okay, that’s it. – [Vivian] Say something sorry. – [Sunny] Sure. – I’m sorry I lied. I said I was gonna end on a negative note, and I actually skipped something. Let me end on a positive note. So last Monday, April 15th
I was at the last minute, invited to speak at the Rigley Area Neighborhood Alliance. Which is one of the
three neighborhood groups in my neighborhood, in my district. It was very last minute,
I went in to speak. But I just want to commend Dr. Romali and the communications team because I sent her a text and I said, hey they asked me to speak at the last minute. Do you have some material I can give? And, within just a few hours
materials were delivered to Silverado, I’m sorry
it was at Veteran’s Park. Veteran’s Park, great information. The Conservation Corps of
Long Beach happened to be co-speaking that night. And they took all the left over packets that the residents in
the district didn’t take. So it was a win-win. So yeah, I got to end
on something positive. Thank you for that and
I appreciate you guys mobilizing so quickly
to get the information and resources out, thank you. – Thank you Vice President Malauulu. I am, pleased to say that most of the items
already been reported on, so I won’t take too much time. You know it’s 9:30. But I just wanted to really, really echo Trustee Baxter’s remarks on the absolute impeccable job
that our staff did yesterday at our Community and Industry Partnership. We got these, if can borrow
this Vice President Malauulu. This great Chach-Keys and T Shirts. Everything was so executed so amazing. And it was with such excellence. I understand that I’m quite demanding and you know as you saw earlier I asked a lot of questions because I want to do a better job. I don’t think I’m out of line demanding, but if I am, please do tell me. But you guys just, there’s just not enough words can express my gratitude for how incredible you are. How incredible you are
Superintendent President Dr. Romali. I’ve seen what it’s like not
to be as incredible as you and I’m so grateful to God, and to you for just, we’re very lucky to have staff like this. Everything was just perfect. And I absolutely encourage
members of the public, and the community to
take advantage of this. This is a very important partnership. This has been a vision of mine since I’ve gotten elected. And I’m really glad,
you know ideas are free, but execution’s priceless. And you guys are the
ones who made it happen. To say just a few touch
points on what it represents is that it’s pretty much reaching
out to businesses we know and asking them to hire,
(coughs) excuse me, LBCC and our students. Give them an opportunity for internship. Or if they are feeling so
inclined to mentor our students, or provide scholarships to our students, so that they have a pathway
to success in their career. And we’re not just looking at making our students college
ready, but career ready. And that’s the intent. And the reciprocal
benefit for the businesses are that they’re gonna get
incredible media exposure. Not just through us. They’re gonna have access. And as one famous president, unfortunately wasn’t my favorite president who mentioned access is power. They’re gonna get access to us, to our partnering agencies. We have Port of Long
Beach, we have the airport, we have City of Lakewood,
we have many businesses. It’s our own little
public, private partnership for doing good for our students. And making sure that we’re
investing in them locally. And that we make sure that they study, live and work in Long Beach, so we don’t have a brain drain. So I really want to commend staff, I want to commend my colleagues and thank Vice President
Malauulu and Baxter for being there and taking time out of their busy days to attend
this press conference. And also shout out to
all the mayors who came, including Mayor Robert Garcia. I have great hopes for this program. This is my baby, and I plan
to take good care of it. I’m really thankful that we have such great support behind it. My goal and a challenge to us is that we have about 1,900 businesses
who do business with us. Imagine if each one of them hires in turn. We could really make a
difference for our students. I’m hopeful that we can put that challenge out to these businesses
who do business with us. And incent them to hire
our students such that, you know they will want to invest. Whoever has business with
us will have to consider seriously hiring our students. I also want to mention I hate saying this, because my culture you’re
not supposed to self promote. And it’s very self-effacing
but I was chastised for not bringing it up last time by many people in my community. And I was honored to be one
of the Iranian American, the only Iranian American public official honored at the House of
Representatives on March 26th. Along with other members
of the public sector, public service sector, but I was the only elected
official they honored. I had the great honor of having House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi and members of the house and senate come. And it was on House of
Representatives speaker, Nancy Pelosi’s birthday,
so it was quite special. And it was quite an honor to be there. And it is quite a privilege for me to be representing a community
that is being marginalized at this time and has been. But really to be able to contribute and serve this great country of ours. Come here and serve you and our students. With that I’d like to conclude my remarks. And move onto board travel. I don’t think we have anything to report. Item 10.5 trustee committees. I don’t believe we have
any committee reports on that end, as well. Item 11.1, trustees may request for items for future agenda items or reports. But, by consensus of the board. – [Uduak] I have one item. – I heard you, Trustee Ntuk. I will call on you in a moment. This is a procedural and concurrence item. So, it does require a
consensus of the board. Trustee Ntuk would you
like to add an item? – Yeah I know we’ve been
looking for a budget savings, looking at board travel. I’d like to request that we
agendize at a future meeting, policy 2002, health and
wellness benefits for trustees and personnel commissioners. So that we can identify
additional cost savings. And when we bring it up, I don’t think there
should be any more than a one page summary with a table of what is it, the eight of us? That are members and
how much we’re spending on health care plans
benefits for each individual. And that we can start the conversation on what’s the right amount? I don’t think it’s been revisited since, let me see here. Many years. Well I guess 2012. So it was last time members. – [Jackie] I’ll ask if
there’s consensus first, before I ask a question. So I make a motion to that effect, to that effect of agendizing policy 2002. – [Sunny] For next board meeting, right? – [Uduak] It’s doesn’t have to be next board meeting.
– I believe we might be able to do it for. – [Sunny] ‘Cause Vice
President Malauulu’s not here, should be put it for the June
board meeting when she’s here? – [Uduak] I didn’t say a time. – [Sunny] Okay, I thought
I heard next board meeting. – [Uduak] At a future meeting. – [Sunny] Okay. – [Reagan] I believe we can do it in June. I believe that – Okay.
– information exists. I remember seeing it, if
I’m wrong I’ll let you know. But I believe we do have
that information already. – [Sunny] Okay, so if we can add it. It seems like we have consensus? – [Uduak] I’d like to call
for a roll call vote on it. To the extent of the advice–
– A roll call or a voice call? – Whatever, go voice call.
– Yeah, uh. All those in favor? – Trustee.
– Yes. – [John] Just to be clear procedurally there was a motion, was
there a second to the motion as well?
– Oh thank you. – [Vivian] I didn’t
hear the motion clearly. – [Sunny] The motion is. – [Uduak] Sorry. Let me swallow some
spit, get my voice back. The request was to
agendize board policy 2002, to look for budget cost savings at a future board meeting. – [Sunny] Is there a second? – [Vivian] Yeah second. – Seconded by Vice President Malauulu. All those in favor? – Aye.
– Aye. – [Sunny] All those opposed? Passes unanimously, oh
and one absent, yes. Item 12.1, public comments
on non-agenda item. This is a total of three
minutes will be allotted to each speaker, we have one speaker. Pat McKean, thank you so much
for being so patient with us. I deeply regret not reordering the agenda. I should have known. And please a big mea culpa on my part. – The service of our students
for four hours tonight won’t show for class for tomorrow morning. (Pat speaks off microphone) – [Sunny] Oh boy. (Pat speaks off microphone) – My salary, you’ll approve it, right? Penny wanted to also thank
the board for their help and the other staff members here tonight. The administrators and
the other colleagues who are helping the
students with their stories that are due May 7th. So they’ll be contacting
you if they haven’t already in the coming days to get
some details on the meeting. Also Walter Hammerwold my great successor has continued a great Viking tradition of a lot of awards. And he gave me a list of
awards to present tonight. The Viking Newspaper last
fall, under his leadership, with Chris Fiolo, earned
general excellence again for a print newspaper. Also five individual awards. I’ll read the quick list. A team feature honorable
mention in Sacramento. Alexis Turner and Cassandra Rochel. Also mail in awards,
news photo first place for Sydney Frederick Selby. She also won second place,
Sydney Frederick Selby, for news photo. Each college can only enter two, so she dominated the contest
by winning all the awards in that category, first and second. Feature story, also a mail in award, Alissa Vega, third place. And sports game story honorable mention for Scotter Smith. I’m glad the record will
reflect those honored students. In the video they can see as well. Thank you for your time
tonight, I appreciate it. – Thank you so much, Pat,
really appreciate your patience with us. Item 13.1, second closed session is,
we don’t have any item, anything on that front. Item 14.1, we’re gonna go
ahead and adjourn this meeting Our next board meeting will be on May 22nd at the Liberal Arts Campus, building T, room 1100, this room. And closed session will be at 4:30. This meeting is now adjourned, thank you. (crowd chattering) (varied conversations crosstalk)

Paul Whisler

One Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *