Board of Trustees Report
District Office
July 20, 2011
Institutional Effectiveness Committee
New trustee Steve Veres was selected by Trustee President Miguel Santiago to chair
this committee, and today was his first meeting. He was joined my long-time committee
member Mona Field and by Santiago, an alternate member the past few years. The
lengthy meeting began with reports from the seaside colleges on their accreditation selfstudy progress. All have full team visits next spring, and must complete their self studies
by this December. West began, led by Fran Leonard, who continues as accreditation
faculty chair. She reviewed the progress West has made since the 2000 report, which
cited "malaise and inertia" at the college. More recently, they had a focused mid-term
report in 2009. Senate president Adrienne Foster cited the large number of faculty
working on the study. Reference was made to the bond costs overrun and how it has
been successfully dealt with under outgoing Interim President Rose Marie Joyce.
Southwest was next, led by Dan Walden, the Dean of Research. It was removed from
probation by ACCJC in 2009, though the college has remained vigilant about the issues
involved. They're on track to complete their self study in the fall. After their report their
new mission statement was approved by the committee without comment.
Harbor followed. Jim Stanberry and Ellen Joiner, faculty accreditation co-chairs, led the
presentation. They said the process there was much better than six years ago, with
much more faculty and staff participation. They are following the new ACCJC manual for
their “self-evaluation”(to use the new manual’s language). As with the other two, Harbor
stressed the need to reach the proficiency level with SLO's by fall of 2012.
This led to questions from Veres as to the time and energy required to complete SLO's.
He also wondered how they were done, and whether classes had to be reassessed each
semester. Joiner responded, describing the benefits that can follow from SLO work. I
added that while they were demanding, done well they could be very helpful. It was
suggested that a fuller discussion take place at a later meeting.
Santiago asked whether we'd be ready for the upcoming visits. Yasmin Delahoussaye
said she saw no red flags, and Chancellor LaVista concurred that all parties were doing
what was asked of them and meeting the recommendations. Barring any surprises, the
colleges should be ready.
Deborah Kaye, the district accreditation liaison officer, reviewed the ACCJC
recommendations regarding district policies and practices and how they've been dealt
with. They have to do with the budget allocation model, organizational efficiency, and
unfunded retiree health benefits. Steps have been taken in all three areas, and they
should suffice to meet the ACCJC's concerns.
The second portion of the meeting consisted of reports on the initial work done by the
valleyside colleges in preparation for their accreditation visits in 2013. Kaye presented
an overview of their work. Each had kick offs this past spring. President Sue Carleo
followed, citing the changes in planning at Valley, as a result of their self-evaluations.
Carol Kozeracki, dean of academic affairs, mentioned the work done at Pierce on IT and
distance education issues (to cite just two), and Pat Flood and Angela Echeverri, faculty
co-chairs at Mission, were enthusiastic about progress there, but also cited areas of
concern. Field asked whether new faculty were given orientations about the need to
serve on committees.
The meeting concluded with East LA, led by Karen Daar, dean of academic affairs,
requesting a substantive change request for ten additional degrees (due to more online
courses). This was approved without comment. Finally, Ryan Cornner, dean of IE, led a
ten- minute presentation regarding East's new strategic plan for 2011-2017. He
managed to cover student success data, college strengths, weaknesses, and new
outcome indicators. Veres responded that he had enjoyed reading the report the night
before. The plan was approved without further discussion.
Open Session/Capital Construction
Committee
A tribute to Rose Marie Joyce marked the start of the session. Abel Rodriguez, the SEIU
representative, thanked her for her service as interim president at West the past year.
Next the chancellor presented her with flowers and thanked her, citing her work restoring
the governance process, repairing the bond program, and improving community
relations. Joyce, in turn, thanked West, her presidential colleagues, and the district office
staff. Nabil Abu-Ghazaleh begins as president next week.
A decision to make a payment to a contractor for the child development center at Valley
was reported out of Closed Session. The amount was around $160,000, and the vote
was 6-1 (Steve Svonkin dissenting). No other details were provided.
Veres gave a brief summary of the IE meeting in the morning (see above). Svonkin
mentioned that the Finance and Audit meeting following the Open Session would be
brief. It was intended to set goals for the committee. He added that he would make
"every effort possible” to save money for the district. He asked for ideas toward that end.
The Consent Calendar (a very short one) was approved without discussion.
At this point the Board recessed into a Capital Construction Committee. Santiago
announced that Veres would chair, but he thanked Tina Park for working on upcoming
committees of the whole. Agendas for those are still being worked on.
City's modernization of Da Vinci Hall was the first item on the Capital Construction
agenda. Chris Dodd, City's CPM, led the presentation. It's the fourth major renovation at
City, and will update its fine arts studios, classrooms, and gallery space. LaVista asked
whether attention was being given to new arts programs, Svonkin stressed that cost
overruns should be avoided, and Nancy Pearlman raised a number of issues, in
particular, complaining about the furniture's lack of bag and purse storage. Dodd and the
architect had ready responses for all the points raised, and the Board unanimously
approved the design.
Trade-Tech's campus-wide ADA improvements were briefly reviewed and approved
without discussion.
The status of Mission's energy plan was summarized briefly by Tom Hall. Due to recent
DWP incentive changes, the financial terms of the plan have changed, requiring a
greater payout by the district. Some trustees wondered whether they may want to scale
back the plans as a result. I suggested that the Energy Oversight Committee members
be brought into the discussion, as it has worked on this issue in recent months. Santiago
decried the "pie in the sky" energy proposals presented in recent years to the Board, and
said the trustees needed to look very closely at this latest one. Hall will bring back a plan
within the next few months.
A presentation from one of our bond lawyers on contract accountability followed. He
reviewed the various steps that can be taken to deal with sub-standard performances,
either before or after completion of the project, or before a subsequent project. He
acknowledged that public agencies are hamstrung due to competitive bidding
requirements, but suggested that the focus should be on the prequalification process.
That way the district would not be forced to work again with unsatisfactory firms just
because they had submitted the lowest bid. In this case, they wouldn't be on the list at
all. Santiago asked as to the district practice. While there is a board rule that allows for a
prequalification process, it hasn't had used one. According to Camille Goulet, such a
process would make it hard for emerging firms to bid, due to greater expenses. While
there is prequalification with design-build projects, there isn’t with design-bid-build, which
still makes up 40% of bond projects. Santiago and Svonkin both strongly urged that the
Board put together a prequalification process as soon as possible, and there seemed to
be a consensus to do so.
The final item was a report from Christine Marez, the Inspector General. She made a
number of assertions:





The bond program has an unusual organizational structure, with the local CPM's
too independent of BuildLACCD (URS). Build has no direct line of oversight. She
questioned the wisdom of that CPM autonomy.
There should be more efficiency and accountability with the CPM's.
Conflict of interest has been a problem, but measures have been taken to control
for that.
BuildLACCD guidelines are inadequate. More information needs to get to the
bond staff. Roles and responsibilities need to be clarified.
32 whistleblower complaints have been received to date, a high number given
the time frame.
The chancellor said the Independent Review Panel report is coming soon, as is a short
preliminary study for the project manager contract (URS's five-year contract expires next
spring.) Of the eight IG reports presented to the chancellor to date, only two have gone
on to the Board so far. Svonkin asked whether the CFO has direct access to information
on bond costs at the colleges. He was concerned to learn that she doesn't. Svonkin and
Santiago both cited the need for an Ethics Office in order to increase accountability, with
the latter even suggesting that it may be necessary to slow down some projects until
proper controls are in place. Park would like to see the BuildLACCD general ledger.
Candaele suggested that maybe the PM needs to be a district employee, if CPM's are
going to report to him.
Velma Butler complained that "there was no shared governance" (presumably she was
talking about the bond program and classified representation, but I’m not sure) and the
student representative from City challenged the effectiveness of the District Citizens
Oversight Committee. Ernie Moreno sharply disputed Marez's assessment that the
CPM's do not report to Build. He cited East as an example, where there is constant Build
oversight. He said her claim made "no rational sense." Marez did not respond.
The chancellor replied that the comments from Butler and the student were "just plain
wrong," and that Marez was referring to the lack of reporting, not that Build did not
supervise the CPM's. He suggested the Board use the upcoming COW meetings to look
at the organizational structures of the bond program.
Veres asked that "the greatest risks to the district" (in terms of the bond program) be
made known to the Board as soon as possible. Svonkin said controls needed to be in
place before big projects could be approved.
Finance and Audit Committee
Scott Svonkin was named the new chair by Miguel Santiago. Steve Veres and Tina Park
are also members. This short meeting, following the Open Session, was meant to lay out
some goals for the committee. Svonkin, describing himself as "not a traditional" sort of
person, and "not a traditional trustee," raised a number of questions that he would like
staff to answer as soon as possible:








What processes are in place for the issuance of bonds? Who sits on the
committee? What are its policies? How do they compare to those of other public
agencies?
What steps has the district taken to look at greater organizational efficiency?
What has been done and when?
What major contracts, RFP's, et al, are coming up in the next three months?
How do colleges generate outside revenue (if at all)? What are the best practices
in the district?
Is there a building naming policy in the district?
Do we have local hiring prerogatives?
Do we have a local buying policy?
Do we have a green buying policy?
He asked that the committee meet again in two weeks, and that at least a few of these
questions be addressed at that time. Colleagues had no additional items to add, but
suggested that Svonkin's list be dealt with first. Jeanette Gordon pointed out that she will
be on vacation next week, and so would not be able to deal with the finance items in two
weeks. The chancellor suggested some additional conversation with the trustees about
the time line, given current demands on staff time. Svonkin was receptive, but reiterated
his eagerness to move as quickly as possible, saying "I have only four years" to get
things accomplished.
Comments
The minutes speak for themselves, I think. It’s as if we have a brand new Board. The two
new trustees are strongly asserting themselves, as is Santiago and even Park. You have
the strong impression that bond and budget matters, at the least, are going to be dealt
with much differently than in the past.
I found it amazing to learn that we still had no prequalification practice in place after all
these years, given all the complaints about being forced to reemploy sub-standard
contractors.
David
David Beaulieu
District Academic Senate President
Los Angeles Community College District
(213) 891-2294
dbeaulieu@email.laccd.edu