Board of Trustees Report

District Office

May 12, 2010

Infrastructure Committee

The renovation and expansion of Trade’s 1926 auditorium was the first item. The work will be done by Behr Browers, who did the Chinese Grauman’s restoration. Besides carefully preserving the ceiling and other historical features, space (for back of house storage, et al) will be added to the rear and side, doubling the current size and improving the street appearance. It will become a prominent venue for a wide range of community events. December, 2012, is the projected completion date.

Larry Eisenberg reviewed the recently developed evaluation process for the college project managers. Up to now an evaluation has only been done every four years, when the firms’ contracts are about to expire. Mona Field said that more needs to be done, and annual reviews were discussed. Miguel Santiago called for a common, transparent process district-wide. Nancy Pearlman called for a list of expectations. Eisenberg said that the college president would collect input from his senior staff, as well as from the college’s Facilities Committee. I said I was concerned that faculty opinion be included, given the complaints faculty have had with CPM performance at some colleges. Santiago supported that request. He added that the evaluation should focus on key issues. This topic will be put back on the agenda for the next IC meeting.

There was a short discussion about employing small, emerging, and/or minority-owned firms. Field cited the progress made (“we kept the promise we made”), while noting that some activities can no longer occur due to the recent legal clarification re Prop. 39.

Eisenberg reported that titanium dioxide is being sprayed on district buildings (one million square feet have been treated to date) in order to keep them clean. As a result of extensive discussion in Bond Steering about safety concerns, an expert from UCLA has been asked to do an objective assessment. I noted that the study was not being ordered due to the insistence of one or two faculty members alone. Rather, the entire committee wants to get some questions answered. Field wondered whether it wasn’t too late, given the amount of work done already. I replied that the applications needed to be reapplied every five years or so, so it would be an ongoing issue.

There was a brief discussion of the current Dept. of State Architect Office timelines. Budget cutbacks are slowing things down.

Planning and Student Success Committee

West and Southwest presented their strategic plan updates. Mark Rocha introduced the team from West, and Fran Leonard led the presentation. After a year of hard work, they have written a new mission statement and updated all their master plans. The Southwest team was introduced by Jack Daniels. Allison Moore led the presentation. As with West, their goals follow those of the state and district strategic plans, but they’ve added one regarding CTE goal. Their twenty-seven objectives will be reassessed, with a planning retreat scheduled for this summer.

Both presentations were lucid and persuasive, and the Board response was very positive.

I did mention the importance of categorical funding, in particular given the emphasis on student success in both plans. Field took issue to the use of the word “categorical.” It was a bit unclear as to what she meant, but she seemed to refer to the need for colleges to be more flexible in the delivery of student support services in the future.

Gary Colombo reviewed the reports on the recent City-side college accreditation visits. His report was upbeat, but we’ll have to wait till early July for ACCJC’s final word.

Open Session

In order to accommodate some of our financial consultants, the financing of the solar projects at East, Southwest, Harbor, and Pierce were moved to the top of the agenda. Given that these projects have been exhaustively reported on earlier (March 24 report, www.laccd.edu/das), I won’t go into detail here. The Board was presented again with arguments for the “lease purchase” agreements with Edison and DWP. They had heard a version of this presentation earlier, and the Energy Oversight Committee has gone over it in detail twice. The only new information was that the federal grant may be less that had been anticipated. If that is the case, the savings will be significantly diminished, in which case it may be better to go back to an outright purchase. We’ll know in ten days or so.

A long discussion ensued, with the Board finally approving the agreements unanimously so the process could move forward. It was made clear that they could get out of the deals at a later date, if they so chose. Miguel Santiago was particularly persistent with his questions, and he asked for confirmation that the Energy Oversight Committee thought the financing plan was a good idea. Given that the chair, Ernie Moreno, was absent, I affirmed that that was the case.

Linda Tong, ASO president at City, complained about the recent student trustee election. The winning candidate (not identified) did not campaign, she alleged, while two others had. She suggested that his victory had to do with his name being at the top of the ballot at all colleges and suggested that in the future the names should be listed in various orders. She also argued that there should be three student trustees, given the size of the district. John Clerx noted that a formal complaint has been filed, and an investigation is in process.

Allison Jones introduced the City Theater Department cast and crew of “Anton’s Uncles,” a rewriting of Chekhov done by Tina Kronis. The troupe were a big hit at the Kennedy Center in Washington, where they recently performed, and they’ve been selected to participate in the upcoming program celebrating the Centennial of California Community Colleges, along with Valley’s Jazz Vocal Ensemble. Only eight others were selected for this program, and “Anton’s Uncles” will be the grand finale.

Three speakers, including Armida Ornelas, AFT Chapter President at East, decried the recent Arizona immigration legislation as “racist” and “not what America is about.” They urged the Board to approve the resolution before them that opposes the bill (see below). The Board did so later in the meeting, voting unanimously. It calls for the district to “cooperate” with the city and state as they take “appropriate measures” in response.

The Van de Kamp Coalition trio spoke again. Micki Jackson said she was sorry that the DAS president’s “aristocratic sensibilities” had been offended. The “peasants will still complain,” she insisted. There was general puzzlement as to what she was getting at, but this scribe knew very well (see below). More seriously, John Walsh said “indictments are coming,” as the alteration of the classrooms at the Center for alternative uses is “a criminal matter” (though he added that the Board members were not guilty themselves, just misled).

One item was reported out of Closed Session. There was a unanimous vote to approve a settlement with KOA. No details were provided.

Resolutions in support of LGBT Pride Month and National Safety Month were passed without discussion. West Los Angeles’s revised Mission Statement was approved.

Lisa Winter presented a short report on the success Project Match interns have had in obtaining work as college instructors. Her extensive research has revealed that almost 50% of our PM graduates have been employed by the district. Artina McIntosh, a recent intern, described it as “a wonderful program.”

A motion to suspend a classified worker in the District Office for three days was tabled, after a strong protest from Velma Butler that the union leadership was not notified of the increase in the discipline meted out).

Kris Kimble from Green Hive again complained about it losing its space in 811 Wilshire (see the last board report).

The district earned two more bond program awards. Details were not provided.

The meeting was adjourned in the memory of the late Professor Mary Fairfax Ware, who taught at Southwest for thirty-two years.

Comment

Don Gauthier raised the questions about the titanium dioxide spraying initially. The study will hopefully show that there is no risk. We just want to be sure, as there have been some questions raised by environmental groups and others.

I knew “sturm und drang” could be trouble. You have to watch the foreign phrases. Start throwing them around and you’re likely to get called an “aristocrat.” But really, it was only the once! I promise I don’t really speak German, though I do work at French a little.

All the best,

David