Faculty Welfare Committee
Academic Senate, Los Angeles Division
Minutes of Meeting
May 4, 2005
Present:
Susan French (Chair), Bill Go (UEPRRC Chair), Rose Maly, Clyde Spillenger, Avanidhar
Subrahmanyam
Absent:
Anne Coleman, Mirella Dapretto, Claudia Parodi-Lewin, Shane White, Valerie Cullen
(Graduate Student Rep), Morgan Inouye (Undergraduate Student Rep)
Staff:
Boni Mendez, Brandie Henderson
1.
Guests: Transportation Services - Renee Fortier, Director and Sam Corbett, Manager
of Planning & Analysis
Overview of Parking Programs
UCLA has over 22,000 parking spaces and about 65,000 people who come to the campus
everyday. The South Coast Air Quality Management District mandates that UCLA have 1.5
average riders per vehicle. Transportation Services has a measurement system that measures
trips coming to and from campus. They submit a survey to the Air Quality Management District
annually of all employees. They are required to show that UCLA is continuing to make efforts to
reach their target of limiting the number of trips to and from campus. We are currently at the
1.5 target.
They have mitigated the impact of vehicles on campus by having a very strong vanpool program.
There are currently 135 routes, and plans for more. The number of vans is growing more than
the number of participants due to a recent state law that mandated a change from 15-passenger
vans to 10-passenger vans because of the roll-over risk. There will be about 165 vans by the
time the change over is completed. The vanpool program is supported 50% by user fees and
50% by parking fees and parking citation fines (this does not include moving violations).
There is another subsidy program for the campus shuttle system. About 50% of these riders are
alternative transportation users meaning they did not drive to campus. They also have about
2000 participants in their carpool program. This is the most cost-effective of their incentives.
The BruinGo program started about 4 years ago, which provides discounted bus travel on the Big
Blue Bus; the Culver City bus was added about a year ago. The regular fare is .75 cents and the
discounted fare is .25 cents. Although the bus companies will not be increasing the base fare,
Santa Monica will be increasing UCLA’s rate, which was a special negotiated rate. Their City
Council is looking to increase revenues. UCLA is a big client of theirs and provides opportunity for
them to make more money.
Transportation Services has paid for road improvements that go with parking structures that
UCLA builds as mitigation measures. They also pay for a pedestrian safety program, which is
funded out of transportation reserves. Signals have been placed in places that they have
deemed risky. Parking is required to be included in privately funded construction projects. The
administration has been good about not siting state funded buildings on existing parking lots.
They have been successful in obtaining funds for projects that are paid for by state funds and
other sources such as grants or donations. Spaces are being taken out of the top of structure 9
for the CNSI building and Parking Services will be reimbursed for that. The new parking for
graduate student housing is being paid for by Parking Services. The replacement of existing
parking is being paid for by Housing.
FWC Minutes, 2-9-05
Page 2
Parking Operations generate $6,688,000 of unallocated revenue. They spend about 5,000,000 a
year in alternative transportation. They have a policy of keeping one year’s debt service in
reserve.
Proposed Metro Pass Program
The BruinGo Program began in 2000 as a pilot program, using the Big Blue Bus system.
Passengers swipe their BruinCard at the fare box. This past year the Culver City Bus was added.
A .25 cent passenger co-payment was added this year because the grant money ran out. Over
8,000 people use the program. The projected subsidy this year is $630k.
Parking Services has known all along that they have an equity issue being that BruinGo only
serves the Westside. Metro riders come from further distances compared to BBB/CCB riders.
Objectives for using a metro pass are that it provides regional access to those living outside of
the BBB/CCB area; it will be a recruitment and retention tool; it addresses quality of life and
affordability; and will help achieve TDM goals.
BruinGo consist of two fairly small bus companies compared to Metro. UCLA is a large client for
BBB/CCB so they were willing to make concessions; however UCLA is a very small part of Metro’s
overall service area. Another difference between Metro and BruinGo is the fare box readers.
Metro does not recommend the magnetic stripe on the BruinCard meaning users will have to opt
into the Metro Pass Program. Metro will charge UCLA about $86.00 a quarter for students and
$148 for faculty and staff. While BBB and CCB have a .75 cent base fare, Metro charges $1.25.
The Metro subsidy is currently budgeted at $500k for the first year. The subsidy is for the
academic year only, excluding holidays. They will be subsidizing 50%. Passes will likely be sold
at the Central Ticket Office. They are developing an on-line application. Based on survey data
they are estimating about 1,500 people will use the Metro program in the first year.
Initially they can not accommodate the Law School which begins five weeks early and ends five
weeks early since Metro is not being flexible but they are going to work on that. The program is
a two-year pilot program. Evaluation priorities include assessing subsidy growth, cost
effectiveness, and impacts on the BruinGo program.
2.
Guests: Donna Vredevoe, Vice Chancellor-Academic Personnel; Rosina Becerra,
Associate Vice Chancellor-Faculty Diversity; Susan Lee Drange, Director–Faculty
Diversity
Chair French began by summarizing the concern that has been brought to the committee about
the way slots are allocated in the infant childcare program. With 100 new spaces becoming
available at the Krieger Center, it’s an opportune time to discuss how priorities and oversight of
the childcare allocations should be administered.
Vice Chancellor Vredevoe said that Associate Vice Chancellor Rosina Becerra has taken on the
Family Friendly issues that are in the same category as childcare. Although Vice Chancellor
Vredevoe will be involved in the day-to-day policy decisions Vice Chancellor Becerra will be the
primary person to oversee the childcare slots. Vice Chancellor Becerra’s assistant Susan Lee
Drange will handle the follow-up.
The committee had met with Gay Macdonald, who presented the way slots are supposed to be
allocated. The committee has since learned that it doesn’t necessarily work that way and that
the Deans chose the priority. Family Friendly doesn’t seem to be all about recruitment and
retention, but should include development of faculty welfare. This should include those who are
already here and devoted to this institution. Examples were given of recruitment situations being
given childcare slots over those who are here and have been on the waitlist for some time now.
FWC Minutes, 2-9-05
Page 3
It was the situation of Professor Benjamin Schwartz and his wife Professor Sarah Tolbert that led
Vice Chancellor Vredevoe’s office to become involved and retrieve this area of responsibility.
Even though there was a system in place there have been many staff changes including deans
which has caused processes to breakdown. They are now looking at the process to put
something in place that will be clearer and transparent to faculty.
There have been preliminary discussions with Vice Chancellor Sam Moribito’s office about
allocating the new 100 slots. The new Krieger Center has been delayed a few times and is now
scheduled to open in the fall of 2006; however, due to an environmental concern over nesting
birds, it might be delayed until January 2007. They will either have to move the bird nests
before they can break ground or wait until August when the nesting is over.
Its not just a matter of determining how many slots should be allocated for each grouping such
as nursing mothers, but analyzing and projecting the demands and hiring trends. They are
considering what the childbearing age is of current faculty. UCLA is hiring more junior faculty.
They are looking at what the needs of the faculty are and how they can provide for those who
are already here.
Professor Subrahmanyam asked if there is an overriding policy used for retention and the
response was no. A unit could prioritize differently taking into consideration that a practitioner
has to be here around the clock. This was the original reason for allowing deans to make those
decisions. They are now working towards establishing a procedure, which will include
discussions with the deans and chairs.
Chair French asked why market rate is not currently being charged. Junior professors may not
be able to afford to it. It is priced at a rate that seems equitable. A subsidy was suggested as
part of the start of packages. Dr. Go mentioned having a tier system similar to our medical
insurance rates, which is based on salary. Chair French suggested starting with market rate then
consider subsidy for those who need it.
Associate Vice Chancellor Beccera is interested in looking at the questions the committee has and
research what can be done to accommodate them.
One concern Professor Subrahmanyam is that the waiting list is being allowed to grow with no
limit and there is a $50.00 charge to get on that list. His second concern is that the allocation
assignments are not consistent with the policies in the document that had been provided. His
third concern is that of nursing mothers.
Dr. Go brought up the concern of oversight such as Parking Services who has a Transportation
Services Advisory Board that includes three faculty, three staff etcetera. Vice Chancellor
Vredevoe said that the oversight policy comes from her office, which they sublet to the deans.
Now that we have Vice Chancellor Becerra she will be working with her to develop a policy that
includes oversight of what is being sublet. His other concern was expanding the childcare
facilities. Childcare on campus is not a highly visible service for security reasons, which is one
reason why fundraising efforts are more difficult. Units developing their own childcare program
similar to the Department of Psychology is another possibility that has been discussed.
Decentralization would be more costly taking into consideration staffing, eating facilities,
etcetera.
Dr. Maly brought up how numerous babies in the infant care were babies of mothers who are not
UCLA faculty. There are currently 4 babies of 12 who have mothers who are a UCLA faculty
member. She suggested preference be given to assistant professors who are in the ladder rank
FWC Minutes, 2-9-05
Page 4
who need to be on campus nursing. Vice Chancellor Vredevoe has a daughter who is a faculty
member on campus and has had to confront these issues as well.
Chair French will be Vice Chair/Chair Elect of UCFW next year. They have already indicated that
childcare will be a priority agenda item for them. Associate Vice Chancellor Becerra offered to
address the committee in the fall with an update.