EL CAMINO COLLEGE
MEMBERS PRESENT
Michael DeSanto – Campus Police
Alice Grigsby – Mgmt./Supervisors
Dipte Patel – Academic Affairs
Margaret Quinones-Perez, – ECCFT
Dawn Reid – Student & Community Adv.
Cheryl Shenefield – Administrative Svcs.
Rory Natividad – Chair (non-voting)
Derrick Moon – ASO
Gary Turner – ECCE
Lance Widman – Academic Senate
OTHERS ATTENDING: Francisco Arce, Linda Beam, Janice Ely, Mattie Eskridge, Connie
Fitzsimons, Irene Graff, Jo Ann Higdon, Jeanie Nishime, Emily Rader, John Wagstaff, Will Warren
Handouts: Planning and Budgeting Calendar, Accreditation Self-Study-2014, Planning and
Budgeting Committee/Responsibilities, El Camino College Follow-Up Report-Accrediting
Commission for Community and Junior Colleges Western Association of Schools and Colleges, El
Camino College District Comprehensive Master Plan, Five-Year Budget Projection
The meeting was called to order at 1:04 p.m.
Approval of August 23, 2012 Minutes
1.
Page 1, Others Attending – Add: Tom Fallo
2.
Page 3, 1B, After Based on financing, - Add: if the next bond issue passed.
3.
Page 3, 1E, Second sentence changed to read: For our new rating we maintained the AA but with a negative outlook (due to among other things, the fact they felt that “we will have less ability to back the bond over time”).
4.
Page 3, 1E, Correct – AA to read: Aa1 with a stable outlook.
5.
Page 4, 2E, Before commission Add: accrediting
6.
Page 4, 2E, Before finances Add: every college’s
It was noted that the PBC meetings will go back to meeting the first and third Thursday of every month after next week’s meeting.
Statement of Purpose
– R. Natividad
1.
The committee was asked to review the “The Statement of Purpose” listed at the top of the agenda in readiness to discuss it at next week’s meeting. Background information on how the document was created in 2010 was also included.
Budget/Planning Calendar – J. Nishime
1.
The budget/planning calendar was presented to the committee. It was pointed out beginning in September the budget will be going to the board.
2.
The committee will also need to conduct their annual evaluation which will be an agenda item for next week’s meeting. The goal for the fall is for the committee to focus on planning for programs coupled along with working the accreditation self-study which will be critical.
3.
The committee was asked to review and comment on the planning calendar. It was stressed that everyone will need to make sure to adhere to all the timelines. A comment was made to
1

make a correction to the timeline under activities for the month of January. The year should read 2012 not 2004.
4.
It was questioned if the timeline was correct for submitting prioritized program plans for the following fiscal year (showed the date of December 22 on the timeline). The possibility of moving the timeline was discussed but no implementation had been made.
Accreditation Self-Study Report – J. Nishime
1.
The follow up report (from our 2008 accreditation visit) will be sent to the board for the
September 4 meeting to ensure it gets approved before the deadline of October 15. The report is in rough draft form and will be going through consultation in September. It was suggested the committee revisit the report in a couple of weeks to resolve any issue that might arise.
2.
The areas needing the most improvement are the linking and planning with the budget, student learning outcomes, and fiscal recommendations. The commission made it very clear they view El Camino and Compton as one. This item will be added to the September 20 agenda for further discussion.
Self-Study Timeline – J. Nishime
1.
El Camino College is gearing up to begin the self-study report. It is expected that the full accreditation visitation will take place in fall 2014. This year will be spent drafting responses on how we are meeting the standards and selecting team members and chairs. Everyone is encouraged to serve on a team. Jean Shankweiler and Matt Cheung will be initiating the call for teams. Training will be provided for the teams – this is for the fall 2014 report. A recommendation was made to put a one-liner in the report as to what the footnotes are and then the link.
Comprehensive Master Plan – J. Nishime
1.
A copy of the master plan was provided for the committee. A link to the plan was also provided at the bottom of the agenda for those who wish to view it. The board has adapted the plan. The one criticism they had was that some of the program descriptions were not necessarily planning in scope or forecasting what kinds of programs we anticipate will grow in the future. They seemed to be more of a wish list. In the future this will be corrected.
2.
Also included should be programs and services that need to be added/deleted, because of the budget, we can no longer provide. None of these issues are really addressed in the comprehensive master plan. The plan should be more reflective of this kind of thinking. In the future links will be provided for the program review.
Five-Year Budget Calendar – J. Higdon
1.
The third phase of the five-year budget assumptions were distributed showing more specific documentation. Changes were only made to the front page. This reflects a five-year projection basically because the accrediting commission has required it. This top page shows the results of a projection accounting made (per percentages provided to them) and overlaid the projected amounts into the budget. If nothing else changes, this is what the view of our budget would look like through the year 2016/17.
2.
Then drawing attention to the bottom of the last column it references the projected reserve I
2016-17 as 3.70%. This report was presented in recommendation 6 which moves forward with the self-report document. It is the colleges plan to pull down our ending balance over the next four to five years. This will be the back-up documentation. More action would have to be taken if this situation should come to fruition. The PBC was asked to give their thoughts/suggestions as to these figures so a discussion item could ensure on how we would fix the 3.7% issue.
2

3.
There is nothing in the document allocated for budget take backs. Last year’s take backs were over $3 million dollars. This increase is not usually budgeted for but it is reflected under expenditure of budget ($4 million). It was asked as to what is the minimum our reserves are allowed to go down to. The state guideline rules state the reserves need to be at least 5%, however the commission has been trying to come up with a plan that 5% would be taken out of the budget and put into a special account which would never be touched. A rainy-day fund would also have to be secured on top of that. An accrediting group will not only look at the final percentage but also the relationship of where you were and where you are. Credit rating agencies look at this very carefully.
4.
It was also noted that because of the huge TRAN (Tax Revenue Anticipation Note) borrowing, even if the governor’s proposal passes, we will not get 40% of our state apportionment until June of next year. This means we have to borrow more out of the TRAN which is used for all cash flow. This will have to be looked at during a future meeting. It was asked if this item could be put on the agenda next week.
Adjournment
1.
The meeting adjourned at 1:47 p.m. The next meeting is scheduled for September 6, 2012 in
Library 202.
RKN/lmo
3