Institutional Planning and Budget Council
Meeting Notes
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Present: Melinda Matsuda, Laurie O'Connor, Sally Jahnke, Kathleen Schaefer, Ken Grace, Gene Groppetti,
Barbara Lawrence, Brenda Carr, Joe Kuwabara, Kari McAllister, Debbie Budd, Rachel LePell, Vanessa
Cormier, Bob Curry, Patricia Shannon, Tom DeWit, Gerald Shimada, Clara McLean, Steven Small, Ron
Taylor, Denise Noldon, Chad Mark Glen, Marge Maloney, Joseph Trujillo, Norma Ambriz, Carolyn Arnold
(note taker)
1. Review of September 8, 2004 Minutes
Melinda Matsuda called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. She asked IPBC representatives to review the minutes
from September 8, 2004. There were no revisions, and they were approved as written.
2. Introductions and Role of Representatives
The representatives went around the table and introduced themselves. There were 4 new representatives as of
this meeting. Carolyn Arnold passed around a list of members and their divisions/areas, and pointed out that the
Council now had faculty representatives from all divisions, and the required number of student, classified, and
administrative representatives, and that everyone was present today. On September 21, the 4 new
representatives had been given a briefing/training by Carolyn Arnold on all the IPBC introductory material that
was presented at the September 8th meeting.
Rachel LePell gave a preview of the retreat by talking about the difference between the theoretical and
visionary level of college plans about where we want the college to go, versus the reality of day-to-day work we
do to keep the college going, and how those are often very separate. However, there is creative tension between
the two, and it is that area where the reps will be working, for the role of representatives is to be both visionaries
and leaders who will help others articulate how we get from where we are to where we want to be.
3. Setting Council Norms
Norma Ambriz led the group in a brainstorming exercise to set norms, or expectations for the representatives on
IPBC. A good list was produced, and Norma will bring it back for review at the next meeting.
4. Election of Chair(s)
According to the Chabot College governance document, each group must elect their chair or chairs at the
beginning of each academic year. Chad Mark Glen, Academic Senate President, led this part of the meeting by
explaining the election requirement, and asking if anyone wanted to nominate or self-nominate. No one was
nominated, and Carolyn Arnold and Melinda Matsuda both said they were interested in continuing. It was
moved, seconded and passed that Carolyn and Melinda continue as co-chairs, with all ayes, and one abstention.
5. Committee Updates
a) Budget Committee - Bob Curry gave an update on the status of the college 2004-05 budget. He passed out a
one-page overview of the budget, and a cover letter with a table showing that Chabot has a $1.8 million deficit,
even after equalization funds from the state are received. He reported that the District has hired a consultant to
analyze the budget of the District and the two colleges, to find out why there is has been an ongoing deficit at
Chabot and current deficits at the District and LPC. There were many questions of clarification. In answer to
questions, there was no action to be taken on this information, and there was no immediate crisis to report. The
results of the analysis will be shared with all.
b) Distance Education Study Task Force Proposal - Ron Taylor passed out a proposal to start a Distance
Education Taskforce this Fall to begin to analyze our current DE students and offerings and suggest a future for
our Distance Education offerings. This is a college objective that is in the Strategic Plan, but was not chosen as
a priority objective for this year. He was asking for IPBC to add it to the list of priority objectives. In the
interests of time, he suggested that representatives read the proposal and be prepared to discuss and vote on it at
the October 13th meeting. However, he also spoke to the urgency of addressing this issue in order to reach more
students and bring in more revenue through DE courses. Therefore, Tom DeWit suggested approving the
formation of the taskforce and discussing the details of the proposal next meeting, so he would not lose any
time. Patricia Shannon questioned that idea because it might draw staff members away from the other major
projects that faculty and staff are working on this semester – program review, college-wide learning goals, and
strategic planning. She suggested making it a priority for Spring 2005. Ken Grace and others suggested that
distance education programming was a priority, that the people on this task force would not take away energy
from other projects, and that this was a type of program review. The consensus was that Ron would think about
whether this really needed to be started this Fall, and if so, could go ahead and see if he could pull together a
taskforce before the next meeting, and that we would discuss the proposal further then.
c) Student Equity Plan Taskforce - Gerald Shimada passed out a summary of the state requirements for a
Student Equity Plan, which is due in January, 2005, and addresses the College’s strategies to provide equal
opportunity for students by ethnicity, gender, and disability. He also included a summary of Chabot’s level of
student equity based on five required success indicators. He pointed out that we are not writing a student equity
plan because the state requires it—student equity was one of the themes of the Strategic Plan, and we are
already addressing current inequities through various activities across campus. He reported that he will be
contacting staff members involved in these various efforts and asking them to work with him on a taskforce to
organize and write up this plan. He asked if any IPBC members were interested and there were several
volunteers.
6. Process for College-wide Development of Student Learning Goals
Denise Nolden and Patricia Shannon passed out a proposal for a campus-wide process to develop college-wide
learning goals. See handout. They proposed starting a steering committee composed of faculty and staff who
had attended workshops on student learning outcomes, and developing a schedule of college-hour presentations
and cross-functional discussions during October, after handing out a two-page handout explaining the context
and announcing the meetings and groups to division meetings and Councils and Senates. The group liked their
proposal, but wanted them to cross out the mention of student learning outcomes at the course, program, and
service level, so as to keep the focus on college-level learning goals during the Spring. The steering committee
could then pursue other levels of student learning outcomes in Spring 2005. They asked that the lists of
attendees at those workshops be sent to them for recruiting the steering committee, and Carolyn Arnold agreed
to do so.
7. Review of PFE Initiatives and their Institutionalization: workgroup
Melinda Matsuda asked for a workgroup to develop and carry out a process for the following tasks related to
the19 strategic initiatives that IPBC funded with PFE funds last Fall:
1. A deadline needs to be set to ask for either a final report (if completed since the progress reports last
Spring) or an interim report if they had continued into Fall 2004. These reports need to be evaluated in
terms of whether the projects have met or are meeting their objectives and whether any of their funds
will be left over (to see if we have any funds left over to use for other projects).
2. In those reports from last Spring, the projects spoke to whether or not they thought they should be
institutionalized. The workgroup needs to identify which ones recommended institutionalization,
identify the resources needed for that, and come up with a process to determine which ones, if any, can
be institutionalized. IPBC would like to hear what process the group comes up with, but would like the
workgroup to carry out that task. A workgroup of Clara McLean, Tom DeWit, Kathleen Schaefer, and
Debbie Budd was formed, and they will report back to IPBC on the process they develop.
8. Preparation/Homework for Strategic Planning Retreat
Rachel LePell and Carolyn Arnold passed out an outline of the arrangements and purposes of the IPBC retreat
on October 8, 2004, and a schedule of the preparation before and follow-up after the retreat. The taskgroup of
Rachel, Carolyn, Kari McAllister, Brenda Carr, and Laurie O’Connor will continue to refine these plans and
will send out information for IPBC representatives to review before the retreat.
9. Other Business
Carolyn Arnold read an Email received from Irene Plunkett that suggested adding a statement to the values
statements of the College vision/mission/values statements that addressed academic freedom. Carolyn asked
how IPBC wanted to respond, since we do not have a process for revising these statements frequently, as we
had assumed this would be done every several years. It was acknowledged that the faculty felt that academic
freedom was being threatened and that it was important to put this in the values. However, it was pointed out
that other values had also b been offered by other groups after the process had been completed last Spring, and
were told it was too late to add statements. In addition, some thought that academic freedom was in the values,
expressed in other words. It was decided that we would wait for input from Academic Senate and College
Council, who were addressing this issue in the next 2 weeks. In addition, we would develop a process for
revising or reviewing the vision/mission/values more frequently.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:20 pm.
Respectfully submitted by Carolyn Arnold.