EL CAMINO COLLEGE
Planning & Budgeting Committee
September 18, 2003
MEMBERS AND ALTERNATES PRESENT:
Miriam Alario-Wolski
Susan Taylor
Carolee Casper
David Vakil
Mohammad El Shorafa
Bobbi Villalobos - Chair
Bo Morton
Lance Widman
Cheryl Shenefield
ALSO ATTENDING: Patricia Caldwell, Pam Fees, Victor Hanson, Bernie Rang
Julia Stewart
Handouts: List of Scheduled PBC Meetings for 2003/2004
Planning and Budgeting Committee Evaluation Form
Revised Decision-Making Matrix for Determining Budget Changes
Bobbie Villalobos called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m.
Introductions
Dawn Reid was introduced as the new management representative for Student and
Community Advancement replacing Bo Morton. Appreciation was expressed to Bo
Morton for her contributions to the PBC. Mohammad El Orafa was introduced as the
Associated Student Government representative to PBC.
Approval of Minutes
The Minutes of September 4, 2003 will be reviewed and approved at the October 2, 2003.
Budget Update – Vic Hanson
Vic Hanson reported that the Board of Trustees at their meeting on September 8, 2003
adopted a balanced budget for 2003-2004. There may be changes to the budget in
January 2004 when we hear about changes from the state. In addition, there are still
some corrections to be made in the Appendix pages to make sure we reflect funded
positions versus de-funded positions. These corrections could not be made prior to the
printing of the budget. The Budget approved by the Board will be filed with the
Chancellor’s Office before the end of September 2003. With respect to the 50% law,
there is no reason to indicate we did not comply.
In response to a question regarding an update concerning enrollment and whether we will
meet cap, Vic Hanson stated the projected update regarding enrollment would be ready
by Census Week. Rosters are still being processed and sent to Admissions & Records.
Adjustments will be put into the system and then we will have much more reliable
information on which to project. As of now, we will be at or above cap for the whole
year.
1
Vic Hanson referred the committee to page 28 of the Budget Book, Basic Revenue,
which set forth 2003-04 Revenue Limit Calculation for 2003-04. He stated the Base
Revenue for Credit and Non-Credit is identified based on 18,297 Credit FTES and 195
non-Credit FTES. This is broken down as follows: 2,000 was estimated to be for
summer school 2003; 405 for Affiliate Programs run by I &T (Paramedic, and Fire
Training); about 8,100 for the fall; and 7,800 for spring. These are projected numbers
and are included as information in the Budget Book. A comparison will be made at the
end of next week to determine how summer 2003 compares to summer 2002. We are
still trying to determine, as best we can at this time, whether or not we will reach our cap
of the 366 allowed. Dr. Fallo has indicated we can grow to 3% above our cap which
would be a growth number of 708. If there is only 70% funding, this will average out to
about 250 Credit FTES.
Lance Widman asked a question regarding the difference in projected FTES growth from
1895 on a previous projection report to 1803 on the current report. Vic Hanson pointed
out that the projected 1895 was projected before the student enrollment fee was
confirmed at $18 per unit. The budget had to be revised down and now that we have the
correct student fee, a revision will be made. Vic Hanson also clarified the following:
 Deficit funding only on growth.
 Projected 2000 FTES for summer 2003 may change when we get the number for
Positive Attendance.
 The number for fall 2003 may change.
 We want to avoid using 2004 summer school FTES in 2003-2004.
 We have to manage the current course offerings and make sure we not exceed cap
by more than 3%.
 Cap is based on a moving target from the funding level.
 He believes we are in a very good position.
David Vakil expressed concern about the projected savings and the cuts that are being
made to realize the savings. He is concerned about the number of classes being cut. At
least 100 classes were cut during spring 2003. We are losing students. Pat Caldwell
clarified that if we make cap, there will be no need to summer 2004 FTES.
Winter Session
The following questions and comments were asked regarding the Winter Session:
Susan Taylor: 1) Will we have a Winter Session, 2) Will this be based on whether we
make Cap, 3) Will funding for the Winter Session come from fall and spring? 4) What is
the impact on the Library if we have a Winter Session? Victor Hanson responded as
follows: 1) The decision regarding Winter Session will be made by October 1. 2) The
ability to make cap was considered and current projections for credit FTES indicate CAP
will be exceeded even if the Winter Session is canceled. 3) The 2002 Winter Session
funding was provided by shifting Fall and Spring sections to the winter. The 2003-04
budget assumed the same schedule to be developed to fund the 2003 Winter Session. 4) A
decision is still pending as to whether there will be a Winter Session.
2









Marian Alario-Wolski stated that if the Winter Session is fiscally neutral, it
should be done. It is attractive for students who need the extra classes and it
provides a service and accessibility for students.
In response to the different course offerings, Mohammad El Shorafa responded
the classes were ok, but that he could find no advanced courses. Major courses
are not available to students during the Winter Session.
Bernie Rang pointed out the only way to make fiscal sense is if there are new
classes. Simply moving classes around is not enough.
Dawn Reid stated for student benefit, she did not believe the Winter Session
should be eliminated. There are a lot of students who need general education
classes and these can be taken during Winter Session, which would make for one
less class in the spring. She did not support taking money from the Reserve.
David Vakil stated it is worthwhile even if it costs more than anticipated. If it is
attractive to students, we should offer it.
There are no specialized classes offered in Winter Session.
Lance Widman stated general education classes are offered but no hardcore
classes.
There is concern about cost.
Not enough information to make an informed decision.
Pat Caldwell explained the target date for determining the Winter Session is October 1,
2003.
Planning Update
Pat Caldwell reported Humanities Division completed their Unit Planning Outlines for
the Educational Master Plan during the Flex Day activity. Representatives from
Humanities Division will meet with the architects from Maas Company to plan and
design their building. Information has been provided regarding trends for various plans,
what programs will grow for that time frame, what kinds of specialized needs are evident
as a result of the trends. Bobbi Villalobos is scheduling meetings for Wednesday and
Thursday next week with the consultants. The consultants will review the information
received from these meetings and develop recommended square footage for lecture labs
and other space needs in the building. Other divisions will begin their meetings with the
architects in spring 2004. Pat Caldwell stated she would be meeting with the academic
deans on September 23, 2003 to review the planning process with them. She will also
meet with staff from Administrative Services and Student and Community Advancement.
The aim is to make sure all deans and directors are fully trained as to what is expected of
them to write an action plan, objectives and success indicators. The focus this semester
will be on developing action plans for new strategic goals.
The focus in the spring will be on the development of the Educational Master Plan. The
Action plans divisions are required to complete will reflect anticipated budgetary needs.
This information will be entered into Q-Builder. If a project is funded, it can be tracked
as to what is allocated and who is responsible. This will show linkage to the Master Plan.
Pat Caldwell further explained the program meetings that all divisions will have with the
architect are designed around planning.
3
It was explained that a building may be a higher priority but we have to schedule another
building first because of the logistics. Julie Stewart stated concerns about the planning
for the Chemistry Building. There are problems with the size for the new building. The
space is not adequate.
In response to a question as to what will happen if it turns out that there are insufficient
funds after the Humanities Building plans are done will there be a re-evaluation of the
need? Pat Caldwell explained Facilities and the architects know what the estimated costs
should be. A lot of planning has been done to make sure there is linkage to the budget.
The question was asked how the projected costs were determined for each project, what
are the priorities. As a result of this discussion, Vic Hanson said he would make
available to the PBC the Bond Report, which is provided to the Board to keep them upto-date regarding projects and expenditures. Also, the Facilities Steering Committee
meets to review projects to make sure there is compliance with project Bond
expenditures. The reports will be made available to the PBC and Bond Implementation
Update will be placed on the next agenda.
1% Pool – General Fund
Susan Taylor raised a question about the 1% pool from each vice president’s budget. Pat
Caldwell explained that the 1% of the General Fund is a part of the money set aside for
the establishment of a fund for augmentation or enhancement for departments/programs.
If there is no other way to fund a program and it has been determined the plan is worthy
of implementation, these funds can be petitioned to fund that program. We now have
7.8% in our Reserve (2.8% above the 5% set by the District; state requirement 3%). A
part of this is for concurrent enrollment (if a payback is required) and potential mid-year
budget cuts. If these expenditures do not materialize, the 1% from the General Fund will
then potentially be available for vice presidents to use. The 1% will not be taken from
the existing budget. PBC members expressed the following comments regarding the 1%
pool and the District’s Reserves:
 A plan to spend 1% monies is not in writing
 The District’s 5% reserve is untouchable.
 Taking 1% out of the General Fund will hurt other programs.
 Taking it out of reserves (2.8% above the 5%) should not be done until and unless
programs that were cut, such as Puente and others, get their budgets restored.
 Suggestion is to spend down the reserves for concurrent enrollment and mid-year
budget cuts and then restore it over the next 2-3 years.
 The 5% is a bone of contention for this PBC Committee.
 Suggest the Board to change its mind about requiring a 5% reserve.
 It is understood that the state requires a 3% reserve, but the District established a
safer level of 5%.
 General Fund should be reduced by 1% and the monies set aside.
Opposition against spending Reserves:
 If you spend down the 5% reserves and something happens, where do you get the
funds to replace the 5% reserves? You will have to restore the funds the
following year, not over the next two or three years. You would have to
implement cuts again. It is unwise to spend down the reserves.
4
Management Appointments to PBC
Pat Caldwell explained management has three appointees as representatives to PBC.
Appointments will be by rotation to regulate terms. There will be one- two- and threeyear terms.
 Bo Morton is rotating off the committee and will be replaced by Dawn Reid.
 Mike D’Amico will rotate off the committee and will be replaced by Harold
Tyler.
 Tom Jackson will remain as the third management representative on the
committee.
Evaluation of PBC
Bobbi Villalobos presented the PBC Self-Evaluation Survey. The form is to be
completed, with comments if necessary, and returned to Mattie Eskridge by Thursday,
September 25.
Decision-Making Matrix
Bo Morton presented the revised Decision-Making Matrix for Determining Budget
Changes. Following discussion, it was moved by Cheryl Shenefield, and seconded by
Lance Widman, that the PBC adopt the presented Decision-Making Matrix for
Determining Budget Changes. Motion carried. Julie Stewart will present the matrix at
the next Academic Senate meeting.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
Agenda for October 2, 2003
Approval of Minutes September 4 and 18, 2003
Bond Implementation Update
Results of PBC Evaluation Survey
Other Issues
Approved by Planning and Budgeting Committee October 2, 2003.
5