General Meeting Information
Date: February 17,
Time: 3:30 p.m - 5:00 p.m.
Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader 3:30 p.m. - 3:35 p.m Approve Notes from January 20, 2022 A Holmes/ Chand 3:35 p.m. - 3:45 p.m. SSPBT Faculty Position Recommendations A Mieso/Mandy 3:45 p.m. - 3:50 p.m
IPBT Strong Workforce Resource Allocation
A Pape 3:50 p.m. - 4:05 p.m Budget Task Force: De Anza Carryforward Deficit A Grey/Budget Task Force Members 4:05 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Presentation of an analysis of online education needs and a recommendation from the Technology Committee for full funding, staffing and support of the Online Education Center. https://www.deanza.edu/gov/techcommittee/
A Spatafore, Pape, Harrell, Hearn 4:30 p.m. - 4:50 p.m.
Shared Governance Task Force
I/D Shared Governance Task Force Members 4:50 p.m. - 4:55 p.m Report-outs from Governance Teams D Member Representatives 4:55 p.m. - 5:00 p.m
A = Action
D = Discussion
I = Information
Notes from January 20, 2022
SSPBT noted the process for the Faculty Position Recommendations list. On February 3,2022 submissions were reviewed to determined which positions would move forward. College Council members expressed the need and understanding for counselors, specific to the counselor coordinator positions, expressing inequity concerns such as lack of opportunities for classified staff to apply, hiring process, tasks, responsibilities, and growth opportunity. SSPBT member highlighted that because faculty positions are strictly for faculty, the counselor coordinator position is not a new position or classification, and funds are strictly for such.
Members approved the SSPBT Faculty Position Recommendation, all documents are available to everyone for review.
IPBT Strong Workforce Resource Allocation
In consultation with deans to give and submit, the compiled draft presented today for local and regional share was unanimously recommended by CTE members at their quarterly advisory meeting to move to IPBT for CC recommendation and approval. IPBT members presented in detail the documents attached to the agenda item, noting that College Council had previously approved the Perkins IC 2021/22 and seeking approval for Local and Regional allocations funds at this meeting.
The IPBT Strong Workforce Resources Allocation was approved.
CC tri-chair noted that CC meeting should rarely be having first reads and asked members to submit agenda items at least one week ahead of time and copy tri-chairs, to give members time to discuss with their constituency groups prior to voting.
Jaeger- Balm noted questions of Additional classified hires, IPBT member highlighted that it is in the works for IPBT when funding available and will be discuss next week.
Budget Task Force: De Anza Carryforward Deficit
Grey noted background history on carryforward, highlighting the May 13 College Council meeting, in which concerns, and status of carryforward was expressed. Carryforward is a one-time funds/expenses, but ongoing positions have been attached to carryforward. When presenting the Carryforward deficit, Holmes expressed concerns, and after discussions new budget taskforce was developed. Grey mentioned the money received from the state for new faculty hiring, which was for Student Services and Instruction hires. Noting that the money DA has is for full time hiring and SPR money (early resignation/ retirement incentive from 3 years ago), the district returned some funds early in two allocations- one for this fiscal year and one for next fiscal year. Grey shared document and explain in detail, noting the FY 22/23 showing a deficit. The Recommendation is Scenario 5, which would allow to almost fully fund position on carryforward. Fully fund unfunded positions
Holmes asked for confirmation on whether this recommendation had been discussed at the budget taskforce, and who were the groups represented, Grey noted that every bargaining group including teamsters, ACE, CSEA, Management, Student Services, Instruction, Students and three recognized Affinity groups. Membership link was shared. This group has recommended Scenario 5. Grey highlighted that the Budget taskforce members are looking at the college as a whole, not only at their bargaining units. Members questioned if DA had Classified SRP funds, Grey noted no, and positions were replaced or eliminated for those who retired. Holmes expressed concern on already operating on not having the funds to support the need of positions, the importance of the budget taskforce and Institutional priorities. Jeaeger- Balm highlighted the importance of permanent positions not being funded through carryforward.
Approval to move forward with Scenario 5 passed.
Presentation of an analysis of online education
Mmembers was noted that plans are underway to hire an Instructional Designer, and a faculty coordinator on equity in online education, mentioning that before the pandemic 20% of classes were online and now roughly 78%. Highlighting that online education requires an enormous amount, noting pre-pandemic it was making sure all was working, but now it’s above and beyond, including doing duties that are not on their job description and that staff is needed so faculty and students are supported. Spatafore noted the recommendation from tri-chairs is directly to Holmes and shared “Recommendation for College Council” posted on their website to make clear the specific ask that is on the agenda for action. Hearn shared presentation on Analysis of Online Education in detail, such as enrollment increase, staffing required and effects of not being fully staffed.
Given the request that the recommendation be made to Holmes, Jaeger-Balm was asked to lead discussion.
When member asked about comparison on the support at Foothill for online education, Hearn noted that independently, increase enrollment requires additional staffing. Jaeger-Balm asked for clarification on the ask for motion, as the one posted on the Technology committee website was more of a philosophical recommendation, to fully fund staff and support a robust, functioning online ed center or if to approve those two positions presented. Spatafore noted that online ed is inadequately understaffedand the body can be as specific or narrow, asking for full and robust funding. Members expressed concerns of where the funding would come from, if it has gone through IPBT, and if it would be from a one-time money. Espinosa-Pieb noted that ongoing conversations at their next meeting regarding the 8 faculty positions at IPBT, and if to move down the list of 4 positions and use the funds for the other 4 positions, to continue down the list or use that money for these positions. The need is great, request for college council ask the president of the college to find that funding.
Hearn expressed urgency for concrete next steps to discuss funds of those positions and asked to approve those two positions Highlighting that some services would have to be stopped due to being understaffed. Members expressed concerns on approving positions without going through the right process.
Approval to recommend to Holmes the text/content as stated in the technology committee website passed.
Holmes highlighted the need for next steps and do what is most appropiate to address Hearns' comment on services.
Shared Governance Task Force
Members noted the Townhall on Feb 16 and feedback gathered. Members continue to put the proposal together, accept feedback and will present final proposal at the March meeting. Member shared document, noting surveys, suggestions for tri-chairs, lack of transparency- PAC, more communication across campus, tri-chairs making the agendas, more student voices, and importance of training for the campus as a whole. Jaeger-Balm questioned if SGTF members would be reaching out to CC members for feedback or if members should reach out to the taskforce, members asked that it be both ways.
Holmes noted SGTF has met with some groups, and recommends Senior Team meet with the group, minus Holmes, noting SGTF has not met with Holmes and believes those meetings should happen prior to the March meeting. SGTF will reach out directly to Senior Staff and Holmes to set up those meetings.
Report-outs from Governance Teams
IPBT noted the approved 4 positions mentioned earlier, more information available on the report-outs document.
Please read the reports at the link provided.
Holmes expressed gratitude for the hard work, and willingness to hear what is being presented. After IPBT meets, if an additional meeting is needed, a meeting invite will be sent out.
College Council Meeting Start Time / End Time
3:26:59 PM 4:59:04 PM
Name (Original Name)
Adam Contreras 1 Adam Contreras 88 Alex Harrell (he/him) 1 Alex Harrell (he/him) 74 Alicia Cortez 1 Alicia Cortez 86 Cheryl Jaeger Balm 75 Chesa C (she/they) 1 Chesa C (she/they) 89 Christina G. Espinosa-Pieb (she#her# ella) 1 Christina G. Espinosa-Pieb (she#her# ella) 89 Daniel Smith 1 Daniel Smith 6 Erik Woodbury 1 Erik Woodbury 55 Iman Seale (she/her) 1 Iman Seale (she/her) 7 Iman Seale (she/her) 1 Iman Seale (she/her) 80 Jennifer Mahato 1 Jennifer Mahato 89 jim nguyen 1 jim nguyen 89 Keri Kirkpatrick 1 Keri Kirkpatrick 86 Lloyd Holmes 90 Lydia Hearn 3 Lydia Hearn 80 Marisa Spatafore 2 Marisa Spatafore 89 Mary Pape 1 Mary Pape 89 Melissa Maturino 1 Melissa Maturino 88 Michele LeBleu-Burns 1 Michele LeBleu-Burns 68 Moaty Fayek 1 Moaty Fayek 89 Monica Ganesh 1 Monica Ganesh 68 Nathaly Aguilar (She/Her/Hers) 93 Nazy Galoyan 1 Nazy Galoyan 18 Pam Grey 1 Pam Grey 89 Randy Bryant 1 Randy Bryant 89 Rob Mieso 3 Rob Mieso 89 Sam Bliss - De Anza 1 Sam Bliss - De Anza 89 Sarah Wallace 1 Sarah Wallace 7 Sarah Wallace 1 Sarah Wallace 61 Scott Olsen 3 Scott Olsen 89 Sushini Chand 87 Thomas Ray (he# him) 1 Thomas Ray (he# him) 40 Thomas Ray (he# him) 1 Thomas Ray (he# him) 46 Vins Chacko 1 Vins Chacko 32 Vins Chacko 44 Vins Chacko 11