ࡱ> JLI` "bjbjss 42```` $ 8     8 8 8 8 8 8 8$x9h;18  18``  F8^^^4`8  8^ 8^^o24  P͎: @3" 8\8083l<`l<D4l<4 r^\] 1818B 8h dh `````` Ӱɴý Academic Senate Draft Minutes 12-11-06 Room 222 3:00-5 p.m. Present: Alex Sample, Bill Fracisco, Mark Lewis, Brendan Brown, Brad Nash, Cindy McGrath, Michael Norris, Andy Ochoa, Phil Gottlieb, Erich Holtmann, Estelle Davi, Scott Cabral, Richard Villegas, Ginny Buttermore. II. Public Comment No report. III. Senate Announcements SGC: No report. TAG: Voted to recommend that the college augment the technology budget. TAG also voted against blocking myspace. DGC: Discussed the problems concerning web advisor. FSCC: Revised the key goals and strategies for budget development. The main change is that there is a number 6, which is about maintaining the quality of student learning. Compressed calendar: No report. Enrollment Management: No report. Student Services: No report. Distance Ed. Committee: No report. IV. Minutes Approved Quorum not present. V. Agenda Approved Quorum not present. VI. Agenda Items College budget process, including technology budget: TAG came up with the idea of altering the process by taking money off the top for technology. Bruce Cutler is here to explain how the budget process works. In 05-06, the FTES goal was 7, 438, that had been the goal for quite a few years and that goal was never actually obtained. The actual FTES for last year was 6,809. The budget was based on 7,438, which is broken down between Administration, Student Services, and Instruction for a total of 1.2 million dollars. This year, 06-07, Ӱɴý finally took the FTES goal to something more reasonable: 6,716. As the FTES goal is lowered, the FTES allocation increases per FTES. The allocation reduced from about 1.2 million to about 1.1 million, a reduction of about 80,000 dollars. What happened was that the bulk of that was taken out of the presidents contingency which pretty much funded the loss in our allocating allocation. On a year to year basis Ӱɴý is not getting more money, and we are not allocating money to departments. There has not been a college wide process for the allocation of the operating fund for about ten years. To take money from the top to fund a specific project or program would mean that there would have to be an assessment of where, which department, that money would come from. The behavioral science department has never received any allocation since counseling was divided, they have been trying to get some type of ongoing funding to meet the needs of the department. The budget for behavioral sciences is 1,065, while the social science budget is 2,585? Im not saying it is equitable across some departments. Some departments grow and as they grow, they are not getting more funds. If you look at the liberal arts and sciences area as a total it has exceeded its budget in the last few fiscal years because it is not adequately budgeted, which leads to additional problems if money is to be taken off the top for additional programs. The 80,000 dollars the college receives from the state for the block grant if money that is used for software and equipment that is directly serving students. TAG has not made a formal recommendation to SGC. Does the Senate want the budget process to run its course? The four percent that TAG requested off the top is pretty muck dead in the water. The Academic Senate should focus more on the objective. The financial piece is immature. A funding recommendation apart from a plan just gets distracting; it has no context. The budget issue is still real. Does the Academic Senate want to wait a year for a cohesive plan to be built to address this problem that is happening right now? Consent Calendar: District Equal Opportunity and Diversity Committee Appointment: This is an appointment to the Equal Opportunity and Diversity Committee. This committee will be charged with making Ӱɴýs equal opportunity and diversity plan. This is a follow up from the equity report two years ago. Quorum not present. Designation of Ӱɴý committee for professional development funds (126,000 for district): The district has received $126,000 dollars from the state as a one time professional development fund. Each college needs to have an active professional development committee to recommend how to spend that money. The committee has to be in place by February 1st. Quorum not present. Motion for emergency phones throughout campus: Quorum not present. Compressed calendar survey process: The state amendment that was made was that they were going to make people vote on whether they like plan or that plan, but no where did it say that they are going to have people vote on whether or not they wanted a compressed calendar. The intent was for one of the options to be no change. Compressed calendars are notoriously bad for sciences. Students felt it was easier to get through things using shorter sessions. Quorum not present. Senate review and evaluation: There hasnt been much feedback. Is this survey going to be sufficient to help us with accreditation? The italicized part and everything that is in parenthesis has been taking out. We can put the ten academic and professional matters on the review. The date will have to change. Is there a question that is missing from this: do you know what the Academic Senate does or is the Academic Senate doing what they are supposed to be doing? Senate funding of translation of website and enrollment material: There is an expected increase in Latino student enrollment. There is a student that is willing to do the translation and is asking for $500-$1000. Is this for the purpose of recruiting students that do not speak English well? Is this an ongoing fund? Why would this be coming from the Academic Senate? Why not Admissions, Registration, Scheduling? We should recommend this to the appropriate place. Nancy has been knocking on a lot of doors. The other groups turned her down. Is there something we dont know? The web designer supports the concept. She couldnt give a specific budget. We should ask for specifics, and then maybe endorse this, but not put any money behind it. Is this just enrollment or the whole web site? Nancy should come up with a proposal for SGC. Uniform enforcement of student code of conduct: Tabled for next semester. VII. Possible agenda items for January 6th Relation of Curriculum committee, Brentwood division/NDFG, and Pittsburg-based departments Campus policy on auditing State Senate support for Minimum Grade Requirement for Associate Degree Courses Hiring of secretary Learning communities Faculty evaluation documents Code of ethics for faculty Senate of the whole vs. representative senate Report on outreach to k-12 and 4-years Equivalency policy: requirements and committee membership, voting Meeting adjourned at 4:44 p.m. $2457:ACEFHQXYZgv   $ % & 8 9 C D ^ »ˆwlh1h15>*\h1h#D\h; h#D\htv8h#D\h6Ch5:* hKhKhKhAh%|h(h "h=hoE h y|h#Dh#Dh h#D5h h#D5>* hIlaJ hEkaJ hm+yaJ h#DaJ h#D5>*h#D5>*aJ (Q& 9 D ^ n   # F [ o &j & FgdGpgdoi & F ^gdIl & F ^ & F ^gd cgd1 & Fgd1""^ a c m n q s          X Y i   ! " # : E F Z [ n o < B H t :aļȨh1 h:Mh Fh.Gh,!h9;h?hH, hoihoihoi h#D\h&h#D\h(zh#Dh]/hH8]h chh~C,hm+yhwhVhXshQ 2hLh(h(C7ab#%&78wVij&IJL&( %&( : ; i j l ر豭蝙蝍h"/lh?hI4h9th!h`whs3hXah+h'h+S h+Sh+Sh*h chBhOVhOVH*hfVthOVhh;jGhGphH,h=hLh h:Mh1 5j' ; !'!w!!!!!"-"o"""""""""" & Fgd? & Fgd3  -!w!!!!""""""""" h#D\h ^h}h#Dh('h;shph?h\h\5>*\h#D5>*\21h:p [/ =!"#`$`% @@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH :@: Heading 1$@&5>*DAD Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k@(No List HH ~[ Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJ2B@2 1 Body Textx2Q&9D^n#F[o&j' ; 'w-o000 0&0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0&00F00o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000000000000000Q&9D^n#Fo;000 0D0D 0|D 0|D 0|D 0|D 0|D 0|D 0 |D 0 000 0 0ۊ00,^ a "j""8@0(  B S  ? 8/lGe8/4r8/$r8/,He8/Ge8/r8/Tr8/,Ge8/r8/r8/$r       8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType= *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName9 *urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace>*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName $    BH[n<{/ 7 333ZZ%%BH %wi&L&(:lrBHoyb^,~2˜BLK G؇ܫQɠ$U~rTnY؇ܫ&;\^b^p+exMtAKf~rTdp~rTkSx؇ܫf}b^,&~rTh^`B*o(phwhhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h^`.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.808^8`0o(.^`.pLp^p`L.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h^`o(whhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h^`.h$ $ ^$ `.^`o(.@ @ ^@ `.^`.L^`L.^`.^`.PLP^P`L.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.h^`o(whhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h^`B*o(phwhhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h^`.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.h^`o(whhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h^`B*o(phwhhH.h^`.hpLp^p`L.h@ @ ^@ `.h^`.hL^`L.h^`.h^`.hPLP^P`L.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.Q&;\^2p+e$UdpAKf,&,kSxLK GnYf}oyp          Q               5                 *YaU  3 n \ ya 0oKO(*?+<%|@^D9)1 ! "_<"V#L%&('S9)5:*H,\,~C,%e,T.g/]/e/101e1Q 26D4}5:`7tv8;&;9;V;< Bq(BSBD#DULD{DoEG.G;jGs|G$I$7I:M2APT8QR+S/kV@WW yZ~[H8]>0^lb` aXata pb cLvcfQfxgoi1k"/lIlpGprpr)sXsfVttvm+ygyzmzY{Z6{ y|3}=/h F [F5{YEk01Na70M(z<O4;Ly?:Br!$,!B ( =d.'z cm:s`ws3I4iI;se?ZvL SHPE0OVVn\`[} ^6\~P7V%>3 txp}/KwdgG&ZsH; q9t{6C!@Y(C ?T'A 2 k&EjA.1@HH HH@{P@UnknownG: Times New Roman5Symbol3& : Arial5& zaTahoma"1hFًf:{ 0 0!`4d 2QHX ? y|2Los Medanos CollegevbuttermInformation TechnologyD         Oh+'0 (4 T ` l xӰɴý vbutterm Normal.dotInformation Technology7Microsoft Office Word@.@F2@ #@.:՜.+,0  hp  Ӱɴý0  Ӱɴý Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./012345678:;<=>?@BCDEFGHKRoot Entry F@͎:M1Table<WordDocument42SummaryInformation(9DocumentSummaryInformation8ACompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q