DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
District Academic Senate Executive Meeting
October 13, 2011
1:30-3:30 pm
District Office
Attendance: David Beaulieu, Don Gauthier, Kathleen Bimber, Angela Echeverri,
Alex Immerblum, Lourdes Brent, Susan McMurray, John Freitas, Adrienne Foster,
Alfred Reed, Josh Miller
1. Call to Order and Approval of Agenda: Meeting was called to order by DAS President
Beaulieu at 1:38 pm. Agenda was approved (Gauthier/Brent MSU). A 3:00 pm stop time was
stipulated to discuss items 13 & 14 (ASCCC resolutions and Student Success Task Force
recommendations).
2. Approval of Minutes DAS Executive Meetings of 9/22/11: Minutes for 9/2/11 meeting were
approved with a few corrections (Gauthier/Brent MSU).
3. Public Speakers: None
4. Budget Update: Beaulieu reported that the District Budget Executive Committee members are
working on the LACCD allocation model and expect to have a proposal by the end of the
semester. Chancellor LaVista accepted the District Budget Committee (DBC) recommendation
that any mid-year cuts imposed by the state would not be taken from the colleges. Board
Finance Committee members Veres and Svonkin wanted to know at what point the Board
becomes part of this decision; they will meet with the DBC Exec committee. Freitas inquired
about the magnitude of the expected cuts. Beaulieu replied he believed they would be around
5%, but we probably won’t know what next year’s budget will look like until December. He
added that there is a good likelihood of fee increases. Miller announced Valley will be offering
a Winter intersession and they welcome all students from other colleges with priority
registration. Bimber reported that faculty at City lost SAP on their computers; she was told by
Vice President Paul Carlson that the LACCD removed access because they don’t want faculty
accessing the information. Beaulieu replied that this is more of a union issue, but we can
discuss it with AFT President Joanne Waddell.
5. By-Laws Change Proposal: Gauthier explained that current DAS by-laws have language
spelling out succession of the president by the vice president. The problem is that we have two
vice presidents and the language does not specify which one would take over. At some point
there has to be a special election; Gauthier would like to add language that states the
president has the authority to call a special election. Currently any change in an officer (other
than the president) calls for an election. We can notice proposed by-laws changes 72 hours
before the December DAS meeting, even though we usually notice action items at the
previous meeting. Gauthier said we have to amend both the constitution and bylaws. We have
to address the succession issue in the bylaws first. Beaulieu suggested naming the two vice
presidents the Executive and Curriculum & Educational Planning vice presidents to distinguish
them.
1
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
6. Districtwide Priority Enrollment Dispute: This issue is on our next consultation agenda. We
recently found a Board rule that seems to suggest enrollment priority was meant to be a
college decision exclusively. The Board Rule was updated in January 2007, the last semester
Chancellor Rocky Young was here. Bimber remembered John Clerx coming to the DAS in
2005 to discuss it, thought she didn’t recall the particulars. The Legal Department is
investigating the issue today. We should know more on Monday and take it up then.
Immerblum distributed a document from the East Senate titled “Revised Motion Regarding
District-Wide Priority Enrollment” dated 10/10/11 which states the following:
The DAS urges the Chancellor to immediately revoke its current practice of district-wide
priority enrollment and reinstitute our previous process that allows each college its
decentralized right and responsibility to establish priority enrollment guidelines.
Beaulieu replied it might be helpful to wait until the district legal department finishes its
interpretation of the Board Rule language.
Immerblum/Gauthier moved to accept the revised motion. Miller said he would prefer to
consult with his local senate before voting,as this seemed to be a policy decision. Beaulieu
said that was true, and people might want to abstain until they vet it with the local senates.
After clarification by Immerblum that he only wanted the Exec to agree to substitute this motion
for the earlier one, Beaulieu agreed this is just a process motion and therefore would not
require going back to the college senates. Foster reported that West Vice President Betsy
Regalado informed her there was another Board Rule that supported the LACCD action on
priority registration, but did not have the language yet. Miller said that someone pointed out
that the percentage of outside students enrolled at East last summer did not change from
previous years. Beaulieu replied the percentage did not change, but the total numbers did.
Motion was approved (Immerblum/Gauthier MSU).
Beaulieu will send this out to the DAS members right away. Immerblum said he might
approach the Board on this issue because he feels strongly that the chancellor should act
quickly on the existing Board Rule. Beaulieu asked Immerblum to make it clear he is speaking
for East and not the DAS.
7. Senate Reassigned Time: Gauthier distributed a handout titled “Academic Senate Release
Time” dated 10/13/11. The paper provides background information and proposes minimum
release time allotments for senate officers at the nine LACCD colleges as follows:

Campus Senate President 1.0 D-Basis

Campus Curriculum Chairs: 0.6 D-Basis

Other Campus Senate Officers (combined): 1.0 C Basis
A few corrections for current reassigned times for Southwest, Valley, and West were identified.
Beaulieu said they would make corrections to the current reassigned time information and
present the document to the chancellor at Monday’s consultation meeting. Freitas asked about
2
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
the process for updating a Board Rule. Immerblum said the 2007 Board Rule addresses
decentralization and gives colleges the authority for decentralization of enrollment
management. If a Board Rule is out of sync with current practice, it takes a while to change it.
Beaulieu replied that another Board Rule (#10404) that is out of sync with practice has been
identified (dating from1985, before AB 1725). He said the difference is that there is no adverse
effect in one case and there is in the other. Bimber replied the constituent groups have to be
involved in the process; it is the job of the vice chancellor over the area to move the changes
through. Beaulieu recalled there was an issue (sexual harassment) that was spearheaded by
Camille Goulet. Sometimes five to seven different groups have to sign off on the revised
language. Bimber will send out a flowchart detailing the process that she obtained from Bobbie
Kimble.
8. Ed Code/Article 33 Dispute: Beaulieu reported that there was a breakthrough in which
Deputy Chancellor Barrera and LACCD General Counsel Camille Goulet agreed with the DAS
position on Article 33. They have not heard back since from the union or the administration.
Beaulieu did send the chancellor the latest e-mail from Trade about their problems with Article
33. They are running out of time because they have to make a decision about mid-year hiring.
Brent reported that there was an open forum at Trade, in which there was an “open season”
on the senate. Trade President Chapdelaine put a faculty hiring list together that was
incongruent with the Faculty Hiring Prioritization Committee (FHPC) list, without writing an
explanation. Chapdelaine asked the union to put a hiring list together; he wants an agreed
upon process for faculty replacement that is congruent with Article 33 by November. They
want the senate and union to come together to agree on a list, saying that there should be an
agreed upon process between the three parties. Brent said the FHPC cannot be ignored and
this is incongruent with Board Rules. She added that Trade Acting Vice President of Workforce
Development Leticia Barajas asked Brent why she cared if the process was in violation of
Board Rules. Gauthier said this is a recurring problem when the union encroaches on senate
issues. Immerblum added we have complained in the past that Barrera does not follow up on
issues. Beaulieu replied we need to be patient; we can go to the Board and pursue legal
action. However, we want to avoid an unnecessary fight; it is preferable for them to concede
that we are legally right and give them a chance to fix things. The advantage of the Trade
problem is that it forces the issue.
9. CFM Contract (Subodh Kumor): Beaulieu, Echeverri, and others have been asking
questions about the nature and scope of this contract since January of 2008. Beaulieu
reported that Mr. Kumor’s hourly rate is in sync with that of other consultants; however his total
compensation is $390,000 a year. Beaulieu has had subsequent meetings with Jorge Mata on
this issue. He asked Mata to come to the DAS and speak about it. However, Barrera took
issue with the DAS Executive discussing a contract. She did not object to the Bond Steering
Committee (BSC) discussing it. There are concerns about the quality of the work and the
number of hours the LACCD is being billed. Immerblum said the smart classroom guidelines
came in pretty late. McMurray said the bulbs in their projectors in their latest smart classrooms
are starting to go and they cost $400 each to replace. She added that faculty have not had a
chance to provide input into some of these decisions. Foster asked what recourse we have at
3
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT
this point and whether the contract could be terminated. Gauthier said Kumor is working on
different issues today than he was earlier. Gauthier added that the smart classroom project is
more recent. Kumor’s wife is also getting paid. McMurray asked if we can use the moratorium
to reexamine the contract. Beaulieu replied we could take this up in BSC.
10. International Students: Former East President Moreno wants to talk to the DAS about
International Students. Moreno retired in August of 2011 and will be working for the LACCD as
a consultant for international student recruitment. Echeverri said colleges need to do a better
job of providing adequate course offerings for these students; Mission faculty have been
reporting problems with forged add slips by international students.
11. Viability Review/Discontinuance: John Freitas said that there had been discussion at
City regarding an official process for viability review. Bimber sent out Board Rules and other
information; she added that a viability review could be performed on a viable program, but
discontinuance is another, later process. McMurray asked about the suspension of viable
programs. Bimber replied that a college can suspend a program for three years and then
needs to either restart it or eliminate it. City suspended Athletics over three years ago and they
are in violation at this point.
12. Administrator Evaluations: Freitas asked about the process used for administrator
evaluations. Miller replied that Valley uses an extensive form for administrator evaluations,
which then gets submitted to the college president. Beaulieu replied the LACCD has a long
history of presidential evaluations. Former LACCD Chancellor Drummond evaluated President
Moreno at East with an outside evaluator and focus groups. Subsequently Chancellor Rocky
Young implemented a different approach, using written evaluations. When Drummond came
back as chancellor for a second time, he did not use focus groups but rather written
evaluations. LaVista appears not to want to follow the former processes and has been quiet
about his plans. However, he did agree we need to follow up on the issue. Beaulieu added that
vice president evaluations are a different story; several few years ago we found out they were
not being evaluated, with the exception of Pierce. We then established a procedure. There is
now a process for vice president evaluations, which calls for many people to be involved.
However the evaluations don’t appear to go anywhere beyond the president. Beaulieu added
that we ran into an obstacle with the evaluation of deans because of their contract.
13. 30 Unit Limit: Beaulieu reported that ESL should never have been included in the 30-unit
basic skills limit. We have been talking to former ASCCC President Mark Wade Lieu who is
currently working at the State Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO). Unfortunately, a legal opinion said
that ESL belonged with basic skills. They are working legislatively to exempt ESL from the
limit. Currently as long as a student is taking ESL, they are okay; however, once they stop
taking ESL it counts towards the limit.
14. Area C Resolutions: DAS members discussed several of the ASCCC Executive
Committee resolutions for discussion at Area Meetings.

5.01 Oppose Student Success Task Force Recommendations on Basic Skills Funding.
4
DRAFT
DRAFT
DRAFT

6.03 Assign Responsibility for Adult Education to California Community Colleges: It
would take funds from LAUSD, but they are not getting enough money for Adult
Education as it is.

6.04 Limit Taxpayer-funded, Need-Based Financial Aid to Public and Private Nonprofit
Colleges Only

6.05 Allow Community Colleges to Subsidize Credit Instruction with Not-For-Credit
Class Fees

7.01 Revisit Mission of California Community Colleges

7.02 Modification to the requirements of the Board of Governor’s (BOG) Fee Waiver

9.01 Encourage Local Flexibility and Innovation in Revision of Basic Skills Delivery

9.03 & 9.04: Recommendations Regarding Repeatability

13.07 Implementation of the Student Success Task Force Recommendations

13.08 Responding to the Student Success Task Force (SSTF) Recommendations:
They want to approve the recommendations in a couple of months. Immerblum said
this resolution has no dates, which is odd.
15. Student Success Task Force (SSTF) Recommendations: Beaulieu said he is hearing a
lot of hostility against some of the SSTF recommendations. McMurray said she is concerned
about the recommendation for a common assessment instrument and how that would be
implemented. Additionally, aligning course offerings to meet student needs is a very big job.
She added that many of these are great ideas but implementation will take a long time. The
recommendations do not appear to be prioritized on the list. McMurray stated this is an effort
to standardize us in ways that she doesn’t think will be helpful. She expressed concerned that
we will wind up “teaching to the test”. Beaulieu said a lot of these recommendations are things
we have wanted to do in the district for some time, but state law did not allow us to do so (e.g.:
recommendations 2.4, 2.2, and 2.5). The question is how much of this should be required of
every district, as opposed to optional. Beaulieu replied that it seems the legislature has lost
patience and wants to do something.
16. Adjourn: Meeting adjourned at 3:48 pm.
Minutes respectfully submitted by DAS Secretary Angela Echeverri
5