General Meeting Information

Date: June 18, 2020
Time: 3-4pm

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    3pm Guided Pathways Presentation - Metamajors A Kim Palmore / Lydia Hearn
    3:08pm Approve of Notes from January 23, 2020 A CC-Co-Chairs
    3:10pm Virtual Graduation Celebration - Time limitation / connectivity issues precluded presentation of this item I Spatafore

    IPBT Resources Allocations & Reports

    I/A IPBT Co-Chairs



    APBT Co-Chairs


    SSPBT Reports and Highlights

    Item postponed


    SSPBT Co-Chairs


    Shared Governance Discussion


     Espinosa-Pieb / Mae Lee

    Annual Governance Reflections Questions

    Item postponed


    Newell/CC Co-Chairs

    A = Action
    D = Discussion
    I = Information

  • Minutes [DRAFT]

    Meeting Notes

    Approve Notes from January 23, 2020 - Item was approved as presented

    Guided Pathways Presentation - Metamajors - Item was approved as presented

    Discussion: Hearn and Palmore displayed a short version of the presentation as many of the members had already seen the presentation in other meetings. Hearn clarified the members were not voting on the icons or which discipline goes under which meta-major. The item is to approve the six meta-majors and the verbs under them. She advised that the team started with the verbs that came up through the process but also have a process that if discipline experts in departments wish to be in a different category they can be. To address the concern that one word may apply to more than one area the team considered which one it fit to best in conjunction with the other verbs. They also ask the students for their input and they came up with the same combinations as the team. It is a combination of the three words in each set that captures the feel of that meta-major. The item was taken to other shared governance group for information but as an action item at Academic Senate because of the relevance to curriculum and it is programmatic-base. Faculty are being compensated for the work they are doing on this project. Chow extended her thanks to Palmore and Hearn stating they had done an amazing job with gathering the input remotely and it was a very welcoming and inclusive process. The members approved this item by consensus

     Virtual Graduation Celebration - Item was not presented due to connectivity issues and time limitations

     IPBT Resources Allocations & Reports - Resource allocations were approved as presented

    Disscussion: Ranck and Pape presented the IPBT resource allocation item. Allocations are primarily driven by program review requests which were reviewed in detail by the IPBT. This team allocates strong workforce dollars, instructional equipment dollars, perkins, and lottery dollars. The process, although disrupted by COVID-19, was positive and affirming and the team learned about the departments and their needs. Each department had their own requests and were asked to identify what is critical for the program. The COVID-19 crisis has restricted the amount of purchasing the departments have been able to make. As strong workforce funds must be spent by the end of December 2020 this is the most critical area to address. The IPBT requested approval to spend the workforce dollars as per the spreadsheet. The members approved the request.

    Perkins money is federal funding restricted primarily to CTE programs although it is a separate source of funding. These requests are tied to the program reviews and also encompasses Foothill because the federal funds are allocated per district. These funds have to be allocated and completed this week per the federal deadline. The IPBT requested approval of the perkins program requests as per the spreadsheet. The members approved the request.

      APBT - The three items were approved as presented

    Discussion: Grey started with a statement in which she warmly thanked Christina Espinosa-Pieb for her support of the administrative services division staff and for her acknowledgment and appreciation of the hard work of the staff. Grey spoke to the family or “Familia” in the administrative services area, stating the staff all know each other and are not only very supportive work colleagues but also good friends. They are the heart of what makes De Anza great.

    Dining Services
    Grey stated that is was with a heavy heart and with deep regret that after a thorough analysis of the dining services department it is apparent that with the arrival of COVID-19 and the consequences of having to close the college this department is in grave financial difficulty. These are unique times and difficult decisions need to be made. Gray brings forth the reluctant recommendation that seven dining services staff be laid off for lack of work/lack of funds as of September 2, 2020. Unfortunately, these are some of our lowest paid staff who have duties that cannot be performed remotely. The dining services area is self-sustaining, meaning they do not use any general fund money. Although the college could redirect general fund money to this area, it would result in the reduction of funding for instruction and/or student services. The cash on hand for dining services and the bookstore is $300,000. The monthly payroll costs, without other costs included, is approximately $685,000 for dining services. The September date allows the staff to be paid for their regular hours and also to receive medical benefits through the end of September. The hope is that in January the college will be open again and the dining services department will also be able to be open and the staff will be reemployed. As union staff they have to be given notice and they have a re-employment clause written in to their contract. However, the staff are so highly valued and experienced the department would most definitely want to welcome them back to the De Anza family as soon as possible. Grey was working with CSEA to see if there are any other placements available and guaranteed that all options would be exhausted. The staff will be eligible for unemployment benefits. By consensus, and with deep regret and great reluctance, the members approved this item.


    The bookstore has been experiencing a steep decline in revenue over the past 6 years. Conversations with the previous two bookstore managers have always bought up the significant challenges facing all bookstores, including the large ones like Barns & Noble and Boarders. Historically the textbook industry has ruled college bookstores by setting prices, which resulted in 80% of bookstore revenues being generated from textbooks sales. The move to Open Educational Resources (OER) textbooks and online booksellers has seriously impacted sales. Most colleges have outsourced bookstores to third party vendors. After much discussion, the recommendation from the APBT is to consider outsourcing the De Anza bookstore. The start of this process is to do a request for proposal (RFP) for outside vendors to essentially run the bookstore. Certain requests/requirements would be incorporated into the PFR such as requesting the vendor offer our staff first right of employment and continuing to offer student employment. There would be a working group of staff, faculty, students and procurement experts to work on the project. There would be no savings to the general fund because this department is also self- sustaining. However, based on the current fiscal status of the bookstore it is possible that the general fund may have to support this department until another plan is in place. The timeline is to start the RFP process as soon as possible because it takes about six-months. The decision at today’s meeting is to move forward with the RFP process and is not the final decision. The team discussed the ramifications of such a proposal, including opportunities to place staff in other positions across campus and the continuing practice of giving students book vouchers to use at the bookstore. By Consensus and with regret, the members agreed to the proposal.

    Child Development Center
    Gray explained that after the two previous presentations regarding self-sustaining departments in the administrative services area, it was important to make a statement of support for the child development center (CDC). The idea behind the request for college council to support the statement to reopen the CDC is driven by the desire to do everything possible to keep this department from having to face the same challenges that the bookstore and dining services are facing. There are 24 staff members employed at the CDC and they do great work on behalf of community parents and our student parents. The support they give to our student parents allows them to focus more closely on their educational goals. The CDC faculty and staff support the reopening of the center as soon as possible. By consensus, the members supported the statement.

    SSPBT Reports and Highlights - Item was postponed due to time limitations

    Shared Governance  - Members approved that college council is the body to open the process  for moving forward with conversations and discussions around restructuring the shared governance groups with a focus on inclusion and equity. Process will commence once incoming president, Dr. Lloyd Holmes, has officially  started his duties on July 1, 2020.

    Discussion: Espinosa-Pieb opened the shared governance conversation by stating that the request before the members was for approval of moving forward with conversations and discussions around restructuring the shared governance groups. She stated that the outcomes must be reflective of what we, as a campus, are saying our commitment is to equity and inclusion and is in alignment with the college mission.  The members approved the recommendation.

    Mae Lee was joined by some faculty colleagues and DASB representatives. The faculty included Bob Stockwell, Christine Chai, Wendy White, Cynthia Kaufman and Mari Tapia. A number of faculty wrote an open letter which was emailed to college council prior to the meeting. This letter has garnered over 70 signatures at this point. Lee explained that the presence of herself and her fellow faculty members was to continue the ongoing collegewide discussion sparked by chancellor Judy Miner and interim president Christina Espinosa-Pieb to reflect, as a community, on what the college can do better. She also stated that we need to self-reflect and ask ourselves hard questions so that we can move forward with purpose by addressing in a methodical and comprehensive way racial inequity and long-standing habits of exclusion on our campus. As an update, Lee stated that the open letter was presented to Academic Senate and IPBT & SSPBT and now is being presented to college council as it is the most representational shared governance group on campus, with the authority to move things along.  Lee stated that with college council already taking the earlier vote, they were making it easy because they were we’re going to ask for college council’s approval. Lee said as well as changing the governance structure, we also need to be changing people’s mindsets.

    In the dialogue that followed these comments/suggestions/statements were made: A horizontal approach to shared governance rather than a central top down approach; having either a department representative or an equity representative on teams to assist with strategizing and for an equity focus; everyone (faculty/administrators/classified) must engage in the self-reflection process; explore ways to hold employees that do harm to students responsible for their actions; include classified staff in discussions regarding shared governance as they often do not feel that they have a voice and also face barriers to participating due to heavy workloads and having to get permission from managers to put in for overtime or take time away from their regular duties; Espinosa-Pieb stated that she is committed to eliminating restrictions and barriers and had already reached out to HR to discuss options for compensation for classified to participate over the summer; FA have already reached a compensation agreement; fundamental changes do not happen overnight; institutional research has provided a lot of data over the last 20 years; does the college have the knowledge and tools to move forward; the intention of the authors of the faculty letter was to share specific ideas not to necessarily be the ones to drive a change or necessarily be centered in this change.

    In a conversation focused on what type of action should be taken to begin the process of restructuring a number of ideas were shared including: having a sub-group of college council study the issues and consider concrete actions; college council co-chairs working directly with the group who authored the letter; a representative taskforce that includes participation from all stakeholder’s and that mirrors the inclusivity and equity goals, college council facilitate the formation of a representative taskforce to re-examine the PBT’s and other shared governments groups; the current shared governance system although democratic, in that representatives are elected, can also be non-representative of the whole campus because some of the same individuals from the same departments serve year after year; we have very knowledgeable faculty and staff and they are a resource we should tapping into. The members agreed that college council is the body to open the process and Espinosa-Pieb and Chow supported holding zoom meetings with all the stakeholders over the summer. Espinosa-Pieb stated she had been discussing this topic with incoming president Dr. Holmes and had shared the letter with him.  Dr. Holmes was participating in this college council zoom meeting but could not speak as he had lost his voice. Espinosa-Pieb requested that the timeline for starting the shared governance restructuring discussions would be after July 1 as Dr. Holmes should be part of the process.

    2019/20 Student Trustee Kolar suggested DASB senate be considered a planning and budget team, although the funding source is different, they allocate and support many programs across campus and their perspective is important. Chow shared that the college has not been involved with the DASB as it is sensitive around DASB having control of their own budget and the college being aware of the impact power dynamics have on students’ comfort levels and did not want students to feel unduly influenced by the college.

     Annual Governance Reflections Questions -  Item was postponed due to time limitations

    Members: Booye, Sushini Chand (for Chacko) Chow, Espinosa-Pieb, Fayek, Gore, Grey, Kandula, King, LeBleu-Burns, Lee, Shelly Michael (DASB) Mieso, Norte, Pape, Ranck, Shively, Woodbury. Advisory: Holmes, Newell, Spatafore

Documents and Links

Back to Top