College of San Mateo College Council Annual Report, 2008‐09 According to Appendix D4 of the Charter and Bylaws of College of San Mateo’s College Council, an annual report on the activities of College Council will be prepared for distribution to the college community at the end of each academic year. It will serve as a communication tool for creating an awareness of the accomplishments of shared governance and will become part of the historical record of the college’s participation in the shared governance process. {Beginning in 09‐10, this report will also provide a means for College Council to assessing the effectiveness toward meeting its annual goals.} This report is arranged by topic and includes summaries of agenda items as they were recorded and the date of the meeting when the topics were discussed. Complete meeting summaries are posted on CSM Internal, under the committee section, or by using the following link: Strategic Plan Update ` Jennifer Hughes reported on the results from the summer work conducted by the EMP/Institutional Planning Committee that she and Andreas Wolf co‐chaired. The committee focused on two major tasks: a) Develop an institutional planning calendar which shows how plans are integrated and the sequence of annual planning. A draft of the calendar was shared with the other summer work groups for input. A narrative to accompany the calendar was also drafted to provide clarification. (copies distributed to College Council) b) Draft a new strategic plan comprised of overarching goals, broad objectives and suggested strategies for meeting the objectives. It was explained that the goals from 06‐08 were carried over with little change except that a new goal focusing on communication was added. The next steps involve developing measureable and time bound outcomes for each objective and the drafting of a template for work plans that will be used by divisions. (copies distributed to College Council) Mike Claire emphasized that there were many people, representing all constituent groups, involved in the development of the current iterations of these documents and that the shared governance process will continue to be followed as changes continue to be made. Drafts of the strategic plan, planning calendar and narrative will serve as important documentation for the accreditation follow up report. Given the time constraint based on the October 15 deadline, the Committee requested Council’s approval of the drafts which will continue to be refined. Following discussion, Council, by consensus, gave its support to the committee to continue to move forward with the drafts of the strategic plan and planning calendar. Jennifer also explained that the Strategic Planning Committee and the Educational Master Plan Committee have merged to form the Institutional Planning Committee; this committee reports to College Council and has oversight responsibility for the planning process, assessing the planning calendar and ensuring that planning is formalized, transparent and conducted in a timely manner. (8/20/09) Educational Master Plan Update ` Susan Estes explained that Maas Inc. provided information and assistance in drafting the report, especially in the facilities area as well as the overall format and the overview of the master planning process. The EMP will include qualitative and quantitative data that will be measureable and will be used to develop a series of planning assumptions. The plan will be a dynamic document that is designed to foster discussion and the development of informed decision making. A draft of the EMP will be reviewed by the following groups: Governing Council on 8/26, Academic Senate Executive Committee on 9/2, College Council on 9/3 and the Student Senate on 9/8. It will be posted online on 9/3. An all‐college meeting will be held on 9/4. Council members had a number of questions about the process. (8/20/08) ` A draft of the Educational Master Plan (EMP) was distributed. Jennifer Hughes indicated that there would be opportunity for input; it would be posted on the internal website and there will be an all‐college meeting on 9/4 to seek comment and input by the deadline of 9/12. Council members were encouraged to share the plan with constituency groups. She provided an overview of the contents of the plan and asked Council to pay close attention to the planning assumptions as they will form the basis for important future discussions. She reminded Council that one of the accreditation recommendations is to complete the EMP by the October 15 deadline. Although its development has been an accelerated process, the draft is open for discussion, and after revisions and additional information has been included and analyzed, a second version will be produced. An oral report of the EMP will be presented to the Board on 9/10 and submitted with the Accreditation Follow Up Report. Regarding the division work plans, Andreas Wolf reported that they are not ready for review but would be brought to the 9/17 meeting. He reminded Council that division work plans are the outgrowth of the strategic plan and that each division will develop an annual plan and identify action items that address the strategic plan. (9/3/08) ` Jennifer Hughes reported that the EMP has been posted on the website and that the college community had opportunities for feedback through an online survey and a college forum that held on 9/4. An overview of the plan, its contents and how it was developed was presented to the Board on 9/10. She reminded Council that the EMP is an evolving document and there are still some elements of the plan that need to be written, including an executive summary and a staffing plan. (9/17/09) Institutional Planning‐Level Committees ` Mike Claire explained that the new strategic plan, EMP and program review model comprise a foundation that will provide direction to the college. The resources and the associated committees (Budget Planning, Technology, Facilities, Human Resources and Enrollment Management) need a structure and goals that support planning. He also explained that the chairs of the five committees will also serve on the Institutional 2 Planning Committee. The initial step that needs to be accomplished very soon is to populate the committees, establish a mission and list of tasks for each, using the college’s planning documents as resources. Most committees will have five members, but there can be exceptions, as with the Budget Planning Committee. College Council charged Mike with taking the lead in drafting mission statements and the task lists. He will bring the draft to Council for its review and approval. (11/18/08) ` Diana reported that all members of the committees have been confirmed and orientation meetings are scheduled with each committee. The chair of each committee also serves as a member of the Institutional Planning Committee. (3/4/09) Institutional Planning Committee (IPC) ` Jennifer reported that in response to ACCJC’s Standard 1, the IPC has been formed. The committee structure of IPC subcommittees and members is in place; she shared a model of the committees and reporting structure. She also explained that the IPC is comprised of chairs of each of the six institutional committees along with other members. The IPC has identified some very broad institutional priorities for 2008‐2011, currently in draft form. The next step is to develop a series of measurable strategies that will be implemented to achieve each priority. These strategies will be presented to Council for a decision at the 5/20 next meeting. In a related matter, College Council members were alerted that summer meetings may be called to allow the planning process to move forward. (5/4/09) Institutional Priorities ` Jennifer reminded Council that she presented a draft of five institutional priorities at the previous meeting and reported that objectives and strategies used to accomplish the priorities are currently being developed and finalized by the Institutional Planning Committee. The completed document will be brought to Council in summer or early fall. The final step is to develop indicators which will measure the effectiveness of objectives. (5/20/09) Accreditation ` Susan Estes presented a draft of the Accreditation Follow Up Report that addresses the accreditation recommendations due the commission by October 15. She encouraged council members to share this draft with their respective constituents but emphasized that it was not ready for public release. She reviewed key elements of the document and went over the timeline that was established in order to meet the Oct. 15 deadline. She requested that comments be sent directly to her. It was pointed out that the report not only includes how the college is addressing the four recommendations that need to be reported on in the 2008 follow up report but also reports on progress of two additional recommendations that are to be included in the October 2009 Follow Up Report. (9/3/09) ` Susan Estes told Council that she presented an oral report of the Accreditation Follow Up Report to the Board on 9/10. Jeremy Ball, Diana Bennett and Jennifer Hughes also presented information about specific parts of the report. It has since been reformatted and posted on the college website. She announced that 3 the follow up visit will take place on 11/3 and will be conducted by two members from last year’s team: Marie Smith and Andreea Serban. They plan to meet with the Accreditation Oversight Committee, College Council and representatives of committees that have been instrumental in addressing the recommendations for the 2008 Follow Up Report. The final version of the report will be formally submitted to the Board for its approval at the 9/24 meeting. Mike Claire thanked Susan for the leadership she has provided to this extensive effort. (9/17/09) ` Susan Estes reported that the Board approved the Follow Up Report at its meeting on 9/24. The report is now ready to be printed. The EMP is in the proofreading stage. She indicated that the college has completed addressing the accreditation recommendations due on 10/15/2008. (10/1/08) ` Susan Estes reported that the college received good news from ACCJC: CSM is officially off warning status and accreditation has been fully reaffirmed. She explained that our work continues with a follow up report due in October 2009, a mid‐term report in Oct. 2010, and shortly thereafter, we will begin planning for the next self study. The Accreditation Oversight Committee continues to meet to address remaining recommendations. In October 2009, the follow report will focus on a) the comprehensive evaluation of labs and centers, an effort being led by Linda Avelar and b) complete implementation of the college’s integrated plan. We are currently in the final stages of confirming committee membership of the various institutional planning committees. As the committees form, each will undergo an orientation, select a chair and recorder and draft a mission statement and tasks. Mike Claire commended Susan for her efforts in the accreditation and planning activities. (2/18/09) ` Susan Estes reported that a comprehensive evaluation of labs and centers is underway. It includes a student survey that will be sent out next week. The program review document for labs and centers will be completed over the summer so that it will be included in the fall report to ACCJC. Currently, we are working on an Annual Report to the Commission which is due 6/30/09. (5/6/09) Facilities Update ` Mike Claire reported that the ground breaking ceremony for Buildings 5 and 10 will be held on March 5. Buildings 2, 4, 14 and 16 have been renovated and reopened for classes, although some minor work continues. There is concern about the aesthetics of the lobby areas and the need for additional seating. He also informed Council that the decision making process with the contractors needs to be improved, especially when it is necessary to accelerate decision making. He shared good news that Buildings 5 and 10 are 6‐8 months ahead of schedule and it is anticipated that the move in dates will be January 2010 for 5 and January 20ll for 10. Cabinet has asked that the budget for various project be made public. There are some proposed projects that will not be funded by the current bonds; remodel of the upper floor of Building 12, Buildings 19, 20 and the Gym. The District may place a third bond measure on a future ballot to fund these projects. (3/4/09) 4 Update on Bldgs 15, 17, 10N ` A President’s Task Force assigned to work on space issues related to Buildings 15, 17 and 10N, comprised of Susan Estes, Jennifer Hughes, Fauzi Hamadeh, Aaron Schaefer, Laura Skaff, Bob Hasson, James Carranza, Dan Kaplan, Madeleine Murphy, Steffi Santana and Alex Quintana, has met several times during the semester. The tasks of the committee are: a) identify stakeholders (those without permanent locations yet); b) identify the needs of the stakeholders (accomplished by written summaries, presentations and surveys of the stakeholders); and c) formulate recommendations for space allocations to present to the president who will make final decision. Groups that have not yet been assigned a permanent space include Student Activities, faculty in 15/17, Community Ed, AFT, Academic Senate, CTL, Health Center and Middle College. Jennifer Hughes reported that the task force met with CPD to obtain information regarding any construction limitations that would impact the options for permanent space for certain stakeholders that have been suggested. The group was originally scheduled to have its work completed by mid‐April. Due to some minor delays, the work will be completed in the next couple of weeks (end of April). The recommendations will be submitted to the president with a written report. Diana indicated it would be nice to inform the campus community about the decision before the end of the semester. (4/15/09) Division Plan (Annual Work Plan) ` Andreas Wolf and Jennifer presented a draft of the division work plan and explained how it fits in with other planning documents: EMP, Strategic Plan and Program Review. They described that divisions will review the college goals and objectives and determine which they can address by developing action steps. Once all work plans have been submitted, they will be combined into annual college work plans for instruction, student services and institutional support. It was also reported that the planning calendar will soon have electronic links to describe each activity. It was suggested that the work plan also be electronically supported in this way. (9/17/09) ` Jennifer Hughes presented the latest draft of the Work Plan which includes changes that were proposed at the previous College Council meeting. She pointed out that in the narrative on the first page, the connection between the division work plans and program review has been strengthened. An updated version of the planning calendar was also distributed and a few minor changes were suggested. By a show of consensus, Council gave its approval to these documents. (10/1/08) Program Review & PIV ` Diana Bennett informed Council that the three‐year rotation cycle for the comprehensive program review process has been developed. While one‐third of the programs undergo the full review, the remaining programs will have an annual short version due in October which focuses on faculty and equipment requests. She also reported that in creating the rotation, programs have been placed into 15 clusters so to encourage effective dialogue among related disciplines. Mike complimented the Senate for providing the leadership in this area. (9/17/09) 5 ` Diana Bennett explained that the PIV reports will be presented to the Committee on Instruction on 12/11. This will be followed by a special meeting of Governing Council on 12/16 during which the reports will be presented, reviewed and acted upon. The programs undergoing the PIV process are German, library studies, media group, welding, drafting and manufacturing technologies. (12/10/08) ` Diana Bennett reported that the first cycle of program review was completed using the new template. The Academic Senate will ask the Program Review Committee to reconvene to review and improve template where necessary. Access to data for program review is limited and having CurricuNet would be very beneficial. She also reported that the PIV process was completed for German, digital media, welding and drafting; library studies is scheduled for May. The committees worked hard on the process but were unsure of the ‘charge.’ Members are asking what the next steps would be once the approved recommendations were submitted to the Office of Instruction. Both Academic Senate and PIV Committee discovered other issues that affect the viability of a program and will revise forms to include this information. The Academic Senate will ask the PIV Committee to reconvene to review the process and improve the template (4.15.09) College Council Assessment ` Valerie Anderson explained that establishing annual College Council goals and an identifying a method of assessment was preliminarily discussed in May 2008 and resulted in an ad hoc committee which met in summer to begin the process. This group began its work by reviewing College Council by‐laws which were written in 1993; it was determined that the document needed to be updated. The group will reconvene to complete this task, draft goals and discuss assessment, all of which would be presented to Council for discussion and approval. Jennifer, Susan, Jeremy, Fauzi and Val are on the committee, additional volunteers were requested and Kathy McEachron indicated she will participate if her schedule permits. Valerie also distributed a report of last year’s College Council activity. (9/17/09) ` Susan Estes reported that the committee met and is continuing to review and update College Council’s bylaws. When this process is completed, the original document and revisions will be presented to Council; members will be asked to share the documents with their constituencies and return to Council with the feedback they receive. (11/5/08) ` Susan Estes announced that the college received good news from ACCJC: CSM is officially off warning status and accreditation has been fully reaffirmed. She explained that our work continues with a follow up report due in October 2009, a mid‐term report in Oct. 2010, and shortly thereafter, we will begin planning for the next self study. The Accreditation Oversight Committee continues to meet to address remaining recommendations. In October 2009, the follow report will focus on a) the comprehensive evaluation of labs and centers, an effort being led by Linda Avelar and b) complete implementation of the college’s integrated plan. We are currently in the final stages of confirming committee membership of the various institutional planning committees. As the committees form, each will undergo an orientation, select a chair and recorder and draft a mission statement and tasks. Mike Claire commended Susan for her efforts in the accreditation and planning activities. (2/18/09) 6 College Hour ` Roger Nishimoto explained that the Student Senate is discussing the reinstatement of College Hour which would allow students to attend academic events and activities. He presented the pros and cons of offering College Hour on Tuesdays and Thursdays from 12‐1pm. Members raised concerns that scheduling fewer classes to accommodate College Hour could have an adverse affect on enrollment. Suggestions were offered, including the possibility that College Hour occur during flex days or on Fridays if the college made the change to a compressed calendar. Council formed a sub group to review options and data. Roger, Andreas and Maria volunteered to work on the issue; a faculty member needs to participate in the discussions. (9/17/09) ` Roger Nishimoto presented a packet of information and articles about various colleges’ College Hour. Before going continuing, the committee intends to survey students, faculty and staff to determine the level of interest in offering college hour at CSM. Results of the survey will be presented at the 5/20 College Council meeting. (5/6/09) ` Roger Nishimoto reported that the College Hour survey has not been sent out and at this point, the committee will wait until the fall to do so. If the survey indicates that there is adequate interest in implementing College Hour, a draft proposal will be submitted to College Council, the Student Senate and the Academic Senate. According to his research, Thursdays between 12 and 1 pm. is the optimum time to offer College Hour with minimum impact on the instructional program. (5/20/09) CSM Committee Structure ` Mike Claire distributed a list of institutional committees for 07‐08 and explained that the list needs to be reviewed to determine which committees are inactive, missing or no longer relevant. Standing shared governance committees should have a mission statement, goals, an assessment mechanism, terms of service and a reporting structure. He proposed that a task force of College Council be formed to undertake this review. Jeremy, Andreas, Fauzi, Diana and Jennifer volunteered to serve. (10/1/08) SLOs & Assessment ` Jeremy Ball described the college’s model for SLOs and assessment. He shared documents from the 9/12 Assessment Committee meeting which shows the college has made significant progress over the past two years. He explained the four levels of SLOs as general education, program, course and instructional support and student support services; and the five stages of SLO development. (10/1/08) ` Jeremy Ball explained the significance of SLOs, levels of assessment (course, program, general, instructional support) and the five stages of SLOs (define SLO’s, define assessment, asses SLO’s, analyze results, plan and implement changes. By January 2010, all community colleges should be at Stage 4 (assessment). SLO’s need to be developed that tie courses to programs and vice versa. It may be necessary to develop new courses or add to existing courses to tie them together. Jeremy described that the program review process is tied specifically to SLOs. There is a new template being used for program review which requires dialogue about 7 assessment. Faculty and staff have been asked to submit a “summative narrative,” and in doing so, led to the discovery that some SLO’s were not clearly defined or specific enough to obtain the information necessary for the assessment. He also reported that the assessment of labs and centers will be conducted once the development of SLOs for those areas is completed. (4/15/09) Report on Smoking Policy ` Jennifer Hughes presented feedback she and others have received about the revised smoking policy that was implemented a year ago. Due to construction, some of the nine original smoking zones had to be relocated and these changes are reflected in the college map on the web site. She reported there are ongoing concerns regarding enforcement, especially in areas near Drip Coffee, the corridor that runs from Bldgs. 14, 16 and 18, near Bldg. 27 and cosmetology. Additional signage has been posted and security officers are deployed when called to issue warnings. Taking disciplinary action is challenging since repeat offenders have been difficult to identify. Council suggested the task force reconvene to consider making further changes in the policy which might include increasing enforcement, limiting smoking to parking lots and providing additional signage. (11/5/08) ` Diana Bennett reported that Governing Council expressed concern that the task force is made of up non smokers and needs a smoking representative who can add a different perspective; it appointed Jim Robertson, a faculty member and smoker. The task force is reevaluating the current zones and discussing a possible change to parking lots. It will provide an update to College Council later in the spring semester. (2/18/09) ` Jennifer Hughes reported that the Smoking Policy Task Force, comprised of Jim Robertson, Teeka James, Fauzi Hamadeh, Diane Martinez, Megan Claire, reconvened to review and make recommendations for revising the policy. She explained the progress of the committee to date: Enforcement is a major challenge. The policy is clearly stated in college documents and points out that failure to comply is a violation of the student code of conduct. While violators are given warnings, the vice presidents of student services at the three colleges are exploring with county counsel whether it is possible for security officers to issue citations for repeat offenders. The committee is considering limiting smoking areas to parking lots. John Wells and Diane Martinez walked the campus to determine a) if these spots were accessible from classrooms/offices in a reasonable amount of time and b) to determine if locating the zones in parking lots pose any safety issues. The Task Force determined that all buildings, with the exception of Building 12 and Building 9 are located near a parking lot. There is also consideration being given to having one zone that might be covered, to provide shelters for those who smoke. The cost of installing ‘bus stop’ type shelters would be prohibitive; but it may be possible to place an awning in the area. Another survey of the campus community (faculty, staff and students) will be sent out to receive feedback about revising the policy. 8 It has been suggested that the smoking policies for all three colleges be aligned. Skyline will be restricting smoking to parking lots only, effective, Fall 2009; Canada’s policy is still the same as it has been (restricting smoking within 20 feet of buildings.). The committee will be working to develop additional signage that directs smokers to the smoking areas. A formal recommendation from the task force will be made at the May meeting. In order to provide time for communicating any potential change in the policy to faculty, staff and students, any proposed change would be recommended for implementation in Spring 2010. (4/15/09) ` Jennifer Hughes provided the results of the smoking survey. She indicated that the Smoking Task Force will meet to review the results and discuss a recommendation which will be brought to College Council at its second meeting in the fall. The plan is to run a communication campaign in the fall and implement the revised policy in Spring 2010. Regardless of the policy, it was agreed, the biggest challenge will be enforcement. (5/20/09) Basic Skills Coordinator Position ` Jennifer Hughes provided some background about the Basic Skills Initiative (BSI) Committee and introduced James Carranza, co‐chair of the committee. The committee is recommending that a BSI coordinator position be funded, using reassigned time with 40% of the funding from the BSI grant and 60% from the college’s general fund, to pay for a substitute. James referred Council members to the BSI website which has the matrix of all proposed activities and is the basis on which the committee determined the need for a coordinator position. The committee will send out a request for applications and is looking at different options that include one position (100%) or three positions (1‐60% and 2 – 20%, one from student services and one from instruction). Council suggested that the co‐chairs discuss the position and process with Management Council, CSEA and the Associated Students. Mike thanked James and Danita Scott (the other co‐chair) for their work on this committee. (11/5/08) ` Jennifer Hughes asked members if they had received any feedback from constituents about the position. Both the Student Senate and Academic Senate supported the position; the classified group did not receive any response. She said that this information would be passed on to the Budget Planning Committee at its Nov. 24 meeting. Although the committee already authorized nine FLCs of reassigned time to support the position, it might want to reconsider its request. (11/18/08) ` This position is still under discussion with the Budget Planning Committee and will be considered as part of the balanced budget framework. (12/3/08) 9 Budget Update ` Mike Claire reported that the state budget has finally been approved and we can anticipate a tough financial year ahead. He encouraged Council to view the PowerPoint budget presentation that was made at the Board meeting and posted on the district website. The Budget Review Committee will meet again on Monday, 10/6, and among items to be discussed will be a change in procedures for the committee. The group will select a chair, it will be modeled after other campus shared governance committees and activities will include forecasting expenses for the next year and discussing how to engage the campus in budget discussions. (10/1/08) ` Diana Bennett reported that she heard Kathy Blackwood speak about the budget from the district perspective at a recent District Shared Governance Committee meeting. She felt that the campus could benefit from hearing a similar presentation and suggested that the college hold a campus wide budget meeting. Council agreed it would be a good idea. Mike announced that such a presentation has been scheduled for Monday, November 17 at 1:15 and it will be followed by a college budget planning workshop at 2:15pm. (11/5/08) ` Virgil Stanford reported that most of the $4 million from the general fund that was invested in Lehmann Brothers will be recouped from a variety of sources (backfill left from summer, one‐time funds and not contributing to the post retirement fund this year). The remaining investment was bond money and the district may be able to recover some of the funds eventually. The state budget shortfall of $11 billion represents a much greater problem. Currently there is a budget stalemate in the legislature. Our district is looking at a potential midyear cut of $6.6 million which translates to $1.5‐.16 million for CSM. The state is projecting a $26‐27 billion shortfall for 09‐10. He reported that is some possible good news in that we may become a basic aid district if the $6 million cut occurs and the state doesn’t take property tax dollars. If this scenario plays out, it could protect us from further cuts in the future and change our appropriation to rely on a more predictable revenue source. (11/19/08) ` Mike Claire reported that the Budget Planning Committee has been meeting regularly and that there has been several email messages about the budget sent to all CSM employees. He explained that there are four budget reduction scenarios that will be developed to deal with mid‐ year cuts. The committee is looking at areas where funds have not yet been spent or committed. The three college presidents are sharing information and that budget reduction strategies will be similar among the colleges. Since its likely we won’t know the extent of the mid‐year cuts until January, we need a plan in place that can be enacted quickly. The committee is looking at adjunct faculty, full time faculty overload, supplies, student assistants and classified overtime as possible areas of budget reduction. He stressed that at this time, the goal is to minimize the impact on the classroom as much as possible. The district is also going to implement early retirement incentives and managed hiring may also be used. The committee will meet on 12/8 to finalize a Balanced Budget Framework; College Council will need to hold a special meeting to review and act on the framework. (12/3/08) 10 ` In related business, Susan Estes presented Guidelines for Cancelling Sections recommended by the Budget Planning Committee on 11/24 which is consistent with District Rules and Regulations on Small Class Size, (6.08); it has been a long standing operating procedure, although it had not been in writing, and it hasn’t been uniformly implemented The guidelines call for sections with fewer than 20 students to be cancelled and when possible, merged with another section. She indicated that in order to meet a portion of the 3% reduction, the college can no longer support small classes and that she has asked the deans to begin canceling under enrolled sections, according to the policy, beginning tomorrow. She explained that affected students will receive a letter with options, tailored to their needs. After a minor modification was made, College Council approved forwarding the recommendation on to the college president. (12/3/08) ` Susan Estes introduced Rick Ambrose, the chair of the Budget Planning Committee (BPC), to explain the various budget contingency plans ranging from 3‐10%. None of the plans have been implemented as we are waiting for the state budget stalemate to be resolved. One action that has been undertaken is the elimination of class sections with fewer than 20 students. Despite this cut, enrollment for spring continues to grow and CSM’s load is up (which means there are fuller classes) which is beneficial for CSM’s budget. Rick presented the recommendations from the BPC and explained that the framework was developed as way of balancing the budget. It was based on a directive from the district office that we develop four possible budget reduction scenarios for midyear cuts: 3%, 5%, 7% and 10%. He explained each item in the list of reductions: 4000 and 5000 budget accounts (50% cuts were in non instructional areas and 30% in instructional areas); six areas of reassigned time; faculty release time; student assistant and temporary classified employees; ITS; hiring freeze on a nursing faculty position; evening supervision, and shifting Fund 1 salary to Fund 3. The reductions were developed through a careful and thoughtful process that examined the college in a global way. In cutting the sections with fewer than 20 enrollments, instructional deans did so while preserving the core and gateway courses and courses essential to the transfer program. Council was reminded that BPC developed a framework that would minimize the impact on the instructional program. Rick thanked the members of the BPC for its hard work over the course of the semester. The contingency plans recommendation was accepted by a consensus of Council; it will be forwarded to the college president. (12/10/08) ` Rick Ambrose, the chair of the Budget Planning Committee (BPC), provided an update on district budget discussions taking place despite not having a state budget for 08‐09 and 09‐10. The district is currently facing a $2 million shortfall due to lower property tax revenues and student fees. While the current budget year probably won’t be significantly impacted by the final state budget, the concern remains for 2009‐10. Susan reminded Council that the college met its goal of cutting current year expenses by cancelling sections with less than 20 students. Classes are generally full and our load, the measure of full classes, is also up. The fall schedule will be the same size as the current semester so that the college won’t have to make substantial cuts later. Rich suggested that Council invite Kathy Blackwood to an upcoming meeting to discuss some possible cost‐cutting measures, which include changing the manner in which post retirement benefits are charged. (2/18/09) 11 ` Rick Ambrose, the chair of the Budget Planning Committee (BPC), reported that Kathy Blackwood attended the committee’s meeting earlier this week. She explained that for the current year’s budget, the district lost COLA and there is concern that the state is deferring cash payments to districts which results in additional lost income. Additional bad news: we are not at the funding cap and will face a growth cut for the year; the County overestimated property taxes by $1.2 million; and there is the loss of the district investment funds resulting from the collapse of Lehman Brothers. For 2009‐10, in spite of no COLA and more deferred payments, the community colleges fared well in the first round of state budget actions. Looking ahead, there will be six propositions on the upcoming ballot which can help the 09‐10 budget if they all pass. In addition, the Governor’s May revise will likely include changes. The uncertainty of these events makes it difficult for us to prepare a financial plan. However, the best case scenario for the district would be a $4 million cut, of which, CSM would be reduced by $2 million (about 7%). Kathy explained how changing how medical benefits for retirees is charged could save the district money and it is likely that this change will be implemented beginning in July 2009. (3/4/09) ` Mike Claire told Council that the district is facing the most serious budget situation since Prop. 13 in 1978. We will have more information after the 5/19 election, however, it is likely that most of the propositions will not pass. In addition, the state has overestimated revenue. At this point, it appears that the district will face a 10% reduction. He outlined his priorities: leave as much of the resources in the classroom and in direct services to students; continue to respond to accreditation standards; and build capacity through marketing and recruiting. The college will work with the other units in the district to identify cost saving measures and strategies for sharing resources. (5/6/09) ` Rick Ambrose explained that the Budget Planning Committee proposed establishing a college policy that sets the minimum average Load at 570. The college has achieved this goal which is an important benchmark to help maintain fiscal stability (it is an indication that classes are at or near capacity). To maintain this level, the college will discontinue running smaller classes. The fall schedule was developed based on a Load of 570. The proposed policy was presented and approved by the IPC. College Council was asked to accept the recommendation; it did so by consensus. The budget for 09‐10, based on the district’s allocation model, has a deficit of $2.7 million which the College needs to further reduce until it is balanced. After receiving $1 million from the district and making class reductions in the spring, we still face a $1.5 million deficit. Since the state propositions did not pass, we will need to make additional cuts which will include implementing the managed hiring process. Mike said that we will work as a district to consider additional ways to save, including consolidating services. (5/20/09) Naming College Buildings, Roadways & Parking Lots ` Mike Claire informed Council that a plan to name campus roadways was currently underway and that we need to work with the City of San Mateo to get it implemented. He shared a map of the college with proposed roadway names and indicated the names are intended to be descriptive so to expedite the 12 response by public safety officials. Similarly, he mentioned the need to name parking lots so they are descriptive of their placement on campus rather using the current numbering system. It was mentioned that since the students have been discussing names for parking lots, they should continue this effort with a framework provided by President’s Council and report to Council before the end of the spring semester. Finally, Mike explained that campus buildings all have names and numbers, but would like to change the emphasis to using building names rather than numbers. Since we have two new buildings being constructed, it would be a good time to review the names of existing campus buildings to determine if they are still appropriate, and to develop names for Buildings 5N and 10N. College Council formed a task force to work on building names: Andreas, Fauzi, Kathy, Roger and Mike will serve. The completed list will be submitted to College Council before the end of the spring semester. Names of new buildings and changes to existing buildings will be presented to the board for approval. (2/18/09) ` Jennifer Hughes distributed a proposal for naming parking lots that was developed by the Student Senate and submitted to Cabinet. The plan identifies lots by names that are associated with disciplines taught in nearby buildings and each name has a corresponding icon. Efforts were made to compress adjacent lots with one name. The students were commended for their creative and scholarly approach to their charge. Council discussed the proposal and provided some feedback to Dave McLain regarding the icons. Although the proposal is still a draft, Council gave its consensus to the concept. The next step is to share the proposal with a team of wayfinding experts. (5/6/09) ` Mike Claire reported that the Subcommittee is still working a final list of building names. He reminded Council that the Board has a policy for naming buildings and it is based on sizeable donations. However, because Julio Bortolazzo had such an impact on CSM, Mike suggested that Building 1 be named for the former president. This would need to be approved by the Board. (5/20/09) ` Jennifer Hughes reported that the committee reviewing signage met and made some revisions to the proposed parking lot names and icons. In addition to names and icons, the lots will be assigned new numbers. CPD will provide expertise as the process moves forward. There was further discussion among Council to rethink some of the names. If Council members have any further suggestions, they should ` Jennifer Hughes reported that the committee reviewing signage met and made some revisions to the proposed parking lot names and icons. In addition to names and icons, the lots will be assigned new numbers. CPD will provide expertise as the process moves forward. There was further discussion among Council to rethink some of the names. If Council members have any further suggestions, they should forward them to Jennifer who will present the final list to President’s Council. (5/20/09) 13 Proposed Process for Evaluating Delineation of Functions ` Andreas presented a document, “Proposed Process for Evaluating Delineation,” drafted by a district accreditation committee in response to an ACCJC policy directive. It recommends that the colleges and district review the Delineation of Functions Agreement every three years and that a committee be established to coordinate the districtwide delineation of function review efforts. It also recommends a process be adopted by College Council and District Shared Governance Council that includes a timeline for the process. College Council reviewed the draft and by consensus, gave its approval. (9/3/08) Community College Survey of Student Engagement ` Jeremy Ball presented information about Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE), an organization that assists community colleges assess their educational practices so they can improve student outcomes. The Assessment Committee is recommending that the college become a member of CCSSE. CCSSE provides important benchmarks in a number of critical areas and the feedback we would receive from the survey would assist our assessment of GE SLOs and provide a window on how the college is faring in many areas. The data would also address accreditation needs in the area of SLOs and assessment. (9/3/08) College Communication ` Mike Claire expressed the need for the college to enhance its internal communication and reminded Council that the college adopted a new institutional goal on communication. To address this goal, in part, he is planning to create a task force to assess current communication practices and make recommendations for a comprehensive redesign. He will work with the constituent groups to identify faculty, staff and students to serve on this committee, which will include those with communication expertise. (10/1/08) Modification of College Typeface/Logo ` Bev Madden told Council that a committee, led by a consultant, has been discussing changing the visual identity of the college. She shared some sample graphics that include proposed changes in the typeface and college logo. She indicated that the document on visual identity will be available on the website. Discussions about the college logo will continue. (5/20/09) 14