LosAngelesHarborCollege class scheduleOnline courses at Harbor College APPLY ONLINE REGISTER FOR CLASSES


  •   STUDENT SERVICES     INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS
  • COMMUNITY
  • LAHC FOUNDATION
  • FACULTY/STAFF       
  • Academic Departments
  • Achieving The Dream 
  • Accreditation
  • Admissions & Records
  • Counseling & Assessment
    Make a Counseling Appointment
  • Extension Program
  • Fees & Financial Aid
  • Governance & Planning
  • Library
  • Map / Directory
  • Sheriff / Emergency Info
  • Special Programs and Services
  • Student Services
  • Transfer Center
  • Search LAHC for

CPC Minutes

    LAHC > College Planning Council > Minutes

printer friendly iconprinter friendly

 

APPROVED MINUTES

COLLEGE PLANNING COUNCIL (CPC)

Monday, 8 September 2008

1:30 pm

ASO Senate Room

 

 

Presiding: B. McNeel

 

Members Present:

Co-Chair: J. Smith, B. McNeel

Administration: L. Rosas, A. Tomlinson, N. Malone, K. Blackburn (for D. Humphreys), A. Patterson, B. Richards,

Faculty: L. McKenzie

AFT: R. Oakes, J. Stanbery, S. McMurray

Senate: M. Wood, L. Lane, L. McKenzie

Classified: W. Gilliam, L. DeSilva

Students: K. Gulley, Jr.

 

Guests: S. Fasteau, J. Lee, B. Englert, B. Young

 

Absent: Administration: L. Spink; Classified: R. Nadler, I. Clark, C. Clark; Students: R. Richards, D. Castillo

Meeting was called to order at 1:30.

 

Acceptance of Agenda:

The Agenda was accepted as presented.

 

Acceptance of Minutes:

Minutes of 6/30 were accepted, with changes.

Minutes of 8/14 were accepted with changes.

 

Public Comment Time

The DAS Summit, to be held on 9/26, was discussed; we can send 14 people, students, etc. The topic this year is Sustainability. Contact: June Smith

 

Budget:

J. Stanbery, speaking for the Academic Affairs Cluster, urged the other clusters to present the proper documentation and data on which budget decisions are based.

 

President’s Cluster

J. Lee and B. Richards distributed and discussed the Three-year Comparison of President’s Cluster Expenses.

 

Discussion included:

      • No salaries and benefits listed specifically; position cuts are not in the scope of the committee.
      • Foundation Director salary: ramifications of this being borne by the foundation rather than the college, including reporting and financial accountability to the college.
      • 55,000 set aside from advertising, to be used only if necessary -- not really a budget cut. We have growth now, in spite of cutting classes, but if enrollment falls, we will need the funds to re-group and grow enrollment again.
      • Possibility of using advertising funds for schedule mailing costs. Increases in costs for paper and printing were discussed. In the past, the Extension dept. has provided funds for this purpose.

B. McNeel stated that the changes will be carried back to the Cluster.

 

Student Services:

A. Patterson distributed and discussed the Student Services Budget Deficit Plan.

 

Discussion included:

      • Total budget is 4.2 million.
      • A & R proposes a 40,000 cut in the area of sub & relief used in heavy registration periods; will reduce open hours and increase lines.
      • Athletics is making no additional cuts to those made last year (which included wiping out Women’s Basketball and cutting the Men’s Basketball budget in half); 50,000 is saved by not replacing R. Hoodye.
      • CDC proposes a cut of 92,000, which reduces numbers of students served and hours of service; plan to negotiate for a portion of 92,000 of Cal Works, which provides child care for students; CDC is not always able to repay program 100 for monies fronted them.
      • Counseling costs reduced by 14,000.
      • Transfer center is reduced by 50%, for a savings of 7,000.
      • EOP&S cannot be reduced because the director has to be paid by Program 100 so we can get EOP&S funding.
      • Financial Aid proposes a cut of 5,000; we have been paying back when students drop classes, so would require students to pay back funds.
      • Student Recruitment/Welcome Center proposes cut of 22,000; cut out CGCA’s and reduce presence in main feeder high schools.
      • Additional 150,000 from categoricals.
      • Total cut of 380,000.

 

Administration

B. Englert, A. Tomlinson distributed and discussed material for the Administrative Services Cluster.

 

Discussion included:

§ No possible cuts from the Business Office or Personnel; ASO helps the Business Office, but cannot do more than they are currently doing.

§ Planning to reduce administration costs by 6,100.

§ Cuts from InfoTech are license fees; we have changed to cheaper platforms.

§ Facilities: cut Sub & Relief and overtime; only purchasing those things that are critical in importance; trying to get other departments to fund repairs, etc., in their own area, rather than having Facilities pay.

§ Reprographics: planned cut of 10,000

§ Sheriffs: overtime charge for swap meet

§ A. Tomlinson discussed those expenses borne by her office (for example, copying) which should be paid for by the department involved.

Culinary Arts was discussed:

· It is covering its costs and more.

· Other campuses providing food services are running deficits or spending upwards of 50,000

· We had a 50,000 – 60,000 deficit in food services before Culinary Arts took it over

· They also generate revenue.

· It is an instructional program and should be considered and supported as such.

 

Academic Affairs:

 

L. Rosas discussed planned cuts by Academic Affairs, including:

§ 108 sections were to be cut originally; division chairs have had to add classes due to demand; total sections to be cut is 100.

§ Comes to approximately 900,000 a year.

§ Other additional cuts -- combining low enrollment classes, etc. -- take time.

§ Potential fines if additional faculty are not hired.

 

Additional discussion included:

· The budget problems the college is facing are not new, but go back to at last 2002-2003, when the Allocation Grant Task Force visited. Since then we have cut back tremendously, and are still 3 million in deficit.

· An additional meeting is necessary to formally submit these cuts for adoption. The cut of 55,000 to the President’s cluster budget should be removed.

 

Total of proposed cuts:

Administration 104,000

Student Services 380,000

Academic Affairs 900,000

President’s Cluster 74,974

 

1,404,078 (w/o 55,000)

1,459,078 (W/55,000)

Cuts accepted at 1,404,078.

 

Additional discussion included:

      • Impact on budget with new faculty hires.
      • Difficulty in hiring new faculty.
      • Change in the ratio of full time to hourly faculty; six years Harbor had the highest, now we have the lowest.

 

Accreditation:

 

J. Stanbery distributed and discussed:

1. Revised Draft of Accreditation Report

2. College Strategic Plan

3. Consolidated Planning Schedule

4. Revised Planning Manuals

5. Proposed CPC Statement on Adherence to the Planning Cycle

 

It was stressed that the documents be in line with accreditation team recommendations, and reflect that CPC is an actual planning body for the institution. Our agendas and reports should show that.

 

Discussion included:

      • The Academic Affairs and Student Services clusters meet regularly. The Administrative Services and President’s clusters meet irregularly; unit plans must be in line with master plan and resulting college plan, and must show what we can do realistically in terms of budget, not simply reflect what we would like to do in the future. Additionally, the cluster meetings should be attended by constituents of the entire college. There needs to be a college-wide understanding of what’s going on.
      • Once the CPC has merged the cluster plans into a college master plan, the budget committee implements those decisions; the link between budget and planning must be clear.
      • When the accrediting team was here in 2006, it was not clear that everyone had a clear understanding of how planning works and what the college goals were. The purpose of the CPC statement going out in the next week or so is to state how the clusters are supposed to be functioning, how CPC combines the cluster plans, how decisions are acted upon. At the beginning of each new planning cycle, CPC needs to evaluate how we did in the previous cycle.

Adoption of ISLOs:

 

J. Smith distributed and discussed the Institutional Student Learning Outcomes. Discussion included:

Measures for assessment need to be created and implemented.

 

ISLOs were officially adopted:

 

I. Effective Communication Skills

English Communication

Language Other Than English

ESL Skill Development

Artistic Expression

Library Training

Internet Training

 

II. Numeracy, Critical Thinking and Problem Solving

Transfer and Degree Completion

Certificate Completion

Mathematics

Physical Sciences

Behavioral Sciences

 

III. Cultural Diversity, Global Awareness, and Aesthetics

Arts, Humanities, and Drama Course Completion

Social and Behavioral Sciences course Completion

Languages, other than English, Course Completion

 

III. Personal, Professional and Civic Responsibility

Setting Personal Educational Goals

Developmental Skills to Reach College Level Courses

Lifelong Learning Understanding

Self-Development

Educational Goal completion (transfer, degree, certificate)

 

Meeting adjourned 3:30.
Los Angeles Harbor College - 1111 Figueroa Place, Wilmington, CA 90744 - Tel: 310.233.4000  WEB ADMINISTRATOR - Use of Computing Facilities- LACCD.edu  - Last Updated: 3/6/09