(Gavel banging) – Good evening, welcome
to the Wednesday July 24th Board of Trustees meeting. We’d like to start with item
1.2, Pledge of Allegiance. Trustee Baxter can you please us through our nation’s pledge? – Happy to.
– Please stand. – [Virginia] Place your hand
over your heart, ready begin. – [All] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. – Thank you Trustee Baxter. Roll call please Madam secretary? – Virginia Baxter?
– Here. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Here. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk? Doug Otto?
– Here. – Sunny Zia?
– Here. Item 1.4, public comment on agenda items, we did not receive any
public comments notice. Item 1.5 approval of the minutes of the June 26th, 2019
Board of Trustees meeting, do I have a motion? – So move. – Moved by Trustee Baxter, seconded by Trustee Malauulu. Are there any questions, comments? All in favor say aye. – [Board] Aye. – All opposed? Item 1.6 reordering of the agenda. I did not receive any
requests for any reordering. Item 1.7, superintendent
president’s report, Superintendent President Dr. Romali? – Good evening Madam President and Board of Trustees, I wanted to welcome to the dais two very very special to me, people who are very special to me and dear to my heart, our new Academic Senate
president Jeri Florence who is fantastic and is replacing the outgoing Jorge Ochoa, equally as fantastic. So they’re here to support her. (audience applauding) And her lovely husband
is in the audience too, another LBCC fan-fav, C. C. Sadler is joining us as the president of our Classified Senate another just tremendous leader who follows in the huge
footsteps of Annie Engel and I know she’s gonna do Annie proud and take care of our classified staff. We had a wonderful, oh, so there we go. (audience applauding) we had a wonderful State
of the College last week, it was a very unique event, it had a very elegant dinner party theme and everybody did a wonderful job, it was so great to see everybody come out. I would like to call your attention, please pick up our
community education guide it’s absolutely stunning,
you’re gonna love it please pick up a copy. Please also do come and see the Sisters of the City exhibition that’s put on in our T Building lobby here by photographer Duke Givens, the women who make LBCC work, starting with our own Beverly O’Neil. So it’s a wonderful exhibition. Now, please also the
trades are back, right? Okay we even have a funny video that we remember from that. The trades are back,
learn all about it here. We are gonna blast this everywhere to give these great
opportunities to our students and also please do pick up a phenomenal campus community newsletter and learn all the great happenings that are happening here. That completes my report
Madam President, thank you. – Thank you Superintendent
President Dr. Romali. Item 1.8 ASV President’s report? Oh hi, welcome. – Hi everyone. I wasn’t actually planning on coming by to say report, I wanted
to show you guys pictures from what we’ve been up to. – [Sunny] Can you please
introduce yourself? – Oh yeah, I’m sorry. So my name is Alyssa Tenessa Jones, and I am the new incoming ASV president. – [Sunny] Welcome. – Yeah can’t wait to, looking forward to
working with all of you. So I was originally gonna come by and show you guys some pictures from the Viking Summer Voyage that a lot of the ASV students were actually working with, but I am still getting a little acclimated to the new kind of busy that I am now, so I didn’t get a chance to load it up. So it’s a super short report from me, a lot of our ASV as well as student life have been a chance to work
with the Viking Summer Voyage which is our bridge program. We’ve been able to kind of
help our new incoming freshmen get acclimated to our campus and learn about our resources. So yeah, end of report. – Thank you Alyssa. Item 1.9, student trustee report. I don’t believe we have one. Item 1.10, LBCC FA bargaining
president’s report. Welcome Diana. – Hello.
– Your first meeting. – [Diana] Yes, yes, oh the pressure. (laughing) So hello everybody I’m Diane Ogimachi, incoming FA president, and I’d like to thank you all for giving me this time to speak. I would like to report that during the summer, FA is busy trying to
have a smooth transition from one president to another. I just returned from a four
day president’s conference, that CTA, California Teacher’s Association sponsored in San Jose, and next week, we’ll
be sending four to five of our executive board members to attend the UCLA
summer institute training where representatives will spend one week learning the skills they need to meet the challenges
of the upcoming year. So an example of the strands or the tracks that will
be presented at UCLA will be on communications, understanding college finance,
membership engagement, bargaining, and social justice. So next month our E-board will be busy applying what we’ve all
learned in the summer toward identifying and defining FA goals for the upcoming year. So in closing, I would
like to thank board members and administrators for
your open communications with FA and offer a special thank you to outgoing president
board president Sunny Zia for your support and
advocacy toward our faculty and faculty concern, thank you very much. – Thank you Diana, much appreciated. Item 1.11, AFT bargaining
president’s report. If you could be so kind
to introduce yourself. Thank you, welcome. – I am Robert Remeta,
the new FTA president and incoming. I’m honored to work with you, I’m looking forward to
the next three years being an enjoyable experience. I appreciate all you’ve
done for us in the past and look forward to working
with you in the future. And as for a report, right
now in the last 24 days, nothing I can really report that, but nice meeting you.
– Welcome. – Thank you. – Item 1.12, CHI bargaining
president report. I don’t see Karen in the audience. All right, item 2.1,
recognition of 2018-2019 president of the Long Beach
Community College District Board of Trustees. – Thank you Madam President, we would like to on behalf of
the whole Board of Trustees, present you with a thank you gift to honor your year term as president and the many accomplishments
that you’ve had this year. There’re too many to count, but the Maritime Center of Excellence, the Center for Community
and Industry Partnerships, all of the work that you
did with the homeless and the hungry and the Port of Long Beach, we’re very very honored to present you this wonderful gavel here and would you guys like to take a picture? – Yep.
– Thank you. (people murmuring softly) (people laughing) – That’s right. – President Zia may I talk for a moment? – Sure, let me just get situated. Thank you so much, the chair
recognizes Trustee Baxter. – President Zia, I was in
the grocery store today and I saw these beautiful sunflowers and I thought, who deserves sunflowers, but our Sunny. Now you have to know that
I never give people flowers unless they’re in a vase ’cause they die before you get home. So this vase does not fit the flowers, I’m sorry about that, but thank you very much for your service and we appreciate it. – Thank you, that’s lovely. (audience applauding) – You can throw the vase out, it’s from the 99 cent store. – Thank you Trustee Baxter, both for the flowers and
the extra added information about the vase, and I’ll keep it, because it’s served with love no matter what the cost is, it’s priceless coming from you. Thank you so much, I really appreciate it and am humbled. And there’s just no words
to express my gratitude and I really appreciate
this beautiful plaque and the gavel, it’s much
too kind, thank you. I’d like to move on to item 2.2, annual organization of
the Board of Trustees, nomination for president will be first and then vice president. So I will yield to our
Superintendent President Dr. Romali to do the honors. – Thank you Madam President, we’re gonna do it slightly
different this year, we’re all gonna stay in our seats and then we will wait
until everybody is done and then we will do the
shuffle of the seats, we’ve got your seat assignments, and we also take a moment to put your new name tags in place. So pursuant to board
policy regulation 2015.1, at the annual organizational meeting, the Board of Trustees shall elect officers for the succeeding year. I hereby open the floor for nominations for president of the board for 2019-2020. Are there any nominations? – I hereby nominate Vivian
Malauulu as president. – I second yes. – Are there any other nominations? Then I declare the nominations closed, all in favor say aye? – [Board] Aye. – Congratulations President Malauulu. – Thank you.
(audience applauding) – Item 2.3, annual organization
of the Board of Trustees nominations for vice
president of the board. – Pursuant to board
policy regulation 2015.1, at the annual organization meeting the Board of Trustees shall elect officers for the succeeding year. I hereby open the floor for nominations for vice president of
the board for 2019-2020. Are there any nominations? – Yes, I move to modify
the order of nominations and nominate Uduak-Joe Ntuk as
vice president of the board. – And are there any seconds? – I’m sorry, I didn’t
understand, Trustee Otto, I didn’t understand what you said. – Can you speak to the mic. – I nominate Uduak-Joe Ntuk explain it. – We were talking about the way the administrative regulations are set, if you want to nominate someone, you have to say you modify the order. In the administrative regs it says the board has the prerogative to modify, amend, or adjust the order. So in talking with Dr. Romali, the recommendation is for the motion should
say to modify the order. – Question, so does that mean that my nomination is
null and should be redone? – No yours is fine
because yours is in order, however if we pick a vice president that is out of the order,
then we need the motion to amend the regulation to be
able to take it out of order. – Got it, thank you. – I do have a first from Trustee Otto, do I have a second? – [Virginia] Second. – Okay are there any other nominations? Okay seeing none, then I
declare the nominations closed, all those in favor for Uduak-Joe Ntuk for vice president say aye. – [Board] Aye. – Congratulations Vice President Ntuk. (audience applauding) – Okay now what we will do is we will assign you your new seating and get your signs situated. – Vice President Malauulu, I didn’t want you to feel left out. – Thank you, thank you. Is this from the 99 cent store too? – No, actually that one cost more. (women laughing) – I’ll change it while
you stick your new seat. (people murmuring softly) – Oh thank you. – There’s stickers on this. – Oh no worries, it’s all good, it’s okay. – Do you need a different chair? – No I’m good. It’s fine, it’s fine,
don’t worry it’s fine. We’ll change it later. – You need help Jim? You okay, thank you. – Guys all set? – Thank you everyone, I
appreciate the opportunity to serve, we are going to
continue with the agenda. There are some procedural items assignments that we have to make to various agencies. Item 2.4 on the agenda, we must designate a representative to the Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization. I need a motion and a second
for a nomination please. – I’ll nominate Trustee Baxter. – Can I get a second for Trustee Baxter? – Second. – It has been moved and seconded that Trustee Baxter would
represent the district at the Los Angeles County Committee on School District Organization,
all those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 2.5, we need a representative to the Los Angeles County
School Trustees Association, I need a motion and a second for a nomination please. – I nominate Uduak-Joe Ntuk. – Can I second?
– Second? – Second. – It has been moved and seconded that Trustee Ntuk be the district’s representative to the Los Angeles County
School Trustees Association. All those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? Item 2.6, the motion carries. Item 2.6, appointment of
additional board member to the audit subcommittee. I need a motion and a second. Are there any trustees who are interested in this appointment? We haven’t had discussion about it. – I think Jackie’s, point of order, Jackie was trying to say something. – That I need to nominate? – You need to appoint. – I heard you thank you Jackie. And Trustee Otto you’d
like the appointment? – Yes. – Would anybody else like to be appointed to the audit subcommittee,
there’s two Jackie? – President and an additional member. – Got it so at this time I have a second, a nomination for Trustee Otto, is there anybody else who
would like that position? – [Jackie] Who made the motion? – There’s no motion on that one, I’ll just appoint him,
he expressed an interest. So Trustee Otto is our
board appointment to serve on the audit subcommittee. Any opposition to that? So I don’t think since it’s a motion, I don’t think we need to vote, right, it’s just an appointment. – Could we go ahead for the record. – Okay.
– Thank you. – All those in favor. – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? – Point of order?
– I need a motion. – But there was no motion Jackie. – I need a motion and second. – We need a motion on that. – I’ll make a motion to
appointment Trustee Otto to the audit committee. – Second please?
– Second. – It has been moved and seconded, accordingly to appoint Trustee Otto to the audit subcommittee. All those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? Motion carries. And now we will move on to item 2.7. Madam Secretary of the Board, do you have the additional, I have my regular agenda, do you have the one that
you had notations on, I don’t have that. Okay 2.7
– Okay so this. – Got it thank you. All right item 2.7, schedule
the budget study session, this is a discussion and
possible action item. And the recommended action is that the Board of Trustees may request that we’re scheduling a study session to discuss and ask questions about the district’s current
and upcoming budget details. – I have a question President Malauulu? My question is, should this study session not be before our September board meeting which I think is September
11, 12th, something like that. – Yes.
– So it has to be before then. – Correct, so Madam
Superintendent President, do we have somebody that’s
doing that presentation, or is that just a
discussion up to the board? – It’s a discussion item for the board, if you are interested in doing so, if you determine that you are interested in having a study session, then we will have Jackie
poll for possible dates and Marlene and her team
will prepare a presentation. – Got it, whatever is
the pleasure of the board at this time for that item. – Sounds good.
– Yes. – So I need a motion to
make that an agenda item and to have that be
brought back to the board. – I move that we work
on the setting of a date for a study session for
the upcoming final budget for academic year 2019-2020. – Second. – It has been moved and seconded that we move forward with
scheduling a budget study session for the 2019-2020 budget. Do we need a specific timeframe on that? – We will be polling, but you will want it to be
before the meeting in September where you approve the adopted budget, and with plenty of time
to make any changes that might be necessary. – So should the motion be amended to say by August? – [Jackie] I’ll put it in the language, it’ll be before the September
11th board adoption. – Got it. All right we have a motion on the floor, it has been seconded, all those in favor, any discussion on that? All those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – I’m sorry?
– I got a second from Baxter. – Got it, any opposed? Motion carries. Item 2.8, health and welfare benefits for members of the Board of Trustees and personnel commission
per board policy 2002. This is another possible
discussion action item that the board whatever is
the pleasure of the board can make recommendations and add additional requests of
the Superintendent President for this item. Any discussion on that? – I’m confused.
– Motion. – Should we have a motion to bring that item up for discussion. – Well the question is what’s the item? I think you have to have, I mean I don’t know why
this is on the agenda because it doesn’t suggest an action, it doesn’t suggest what we should do, and I have a question of our counsel about this because I note that in the, and I think I’m on, there’s
no suggested action at all and so I don’t have a motion that I wanna make, I think
I’ve raised a question offline about what we’re doing. – Yes, individual trustees and/or groups of trustees may request to place items on the agenda at any time, and we have received a request to place this on for discussion, just a general discussion, and whichever trustees are interested may have whichever
discussion they would like about that particular item. – I guess what threw me was it says discussion action, and I don’t see how we
could take an action if we didn’t have something that that the public was put on notice about. – Yes, you are correct, we left the action in there in case you choose to take action based upon your discussion, it allows us to do so, but you do not necessarily
need to, it’s up to you. – So I’m, let’s go ahead, Trustee Ntuk? – Yeah thanks, I read
through the attachments and the policy, and I know we’re always looking for opportunities to reduce expenses and I’m not sure how prevalent
other districts do it for trustees and commissioners
for the healthcare and then also I looked at the majority of us don’t get, we opt out, we waive it, which is a cost-savings
for the institution, but some people get a benefit and other people don’t get a benefit and I’m not sure, and it
didn’t look like anyone, I think the person I don’t
have the handout in front of me but the personnel commission no one on there seemed to waive it and so I know this was a discussion item I was interested in talking about and I think there was some
additional information that Dr. Romali was going to get from I think it was
first agendized in May? – Yes it was first agendized in May, and then it was requested to move it over so that we could add
some information to it and we did, I’m just
looking for that here. 2.9 okay. – While we do that Superintendent, Dr. Romali I was just wondering if perhaps Trustee Ntuk
could just let us know do you have a particular goal in mind by bringing that policy up or is there some action that
you would like to have happen? I’m just as unclear, but I’d like to know what the purpose of having it agendized it. – Yeah I was hoping to have
an opportunity to discuss changes to it, but I think what’s most appropriate would probably be a report back from staff on what other districts do and what options do they have. – Dr. Romali while you’re looking at that may I ask a question? – Sure. – Trustee Ntuk I receive benefits okay. So the amount is taken out
of my district paycheck. When you waive your benefits, do you get the whole amount? Are you willing to answer that? In other words there isn’t a cost savings if I’m paying into it, I don’t understand how
that saves money unless? – Well on an individualized basis, I don’t get it, so I don’t know how much, I think there’s a quarterly. – [Virginia] $170 I know,
$170.17 a month for 10 months. – If that’s just the
individual contribution, the institution I believe it’s on there, is what 25 or $26,000? – Yes the institution
in your backup materials for item 2.9, you’ll see a
listing of each board member and each personnel commissioner and how much the district
annual premium is for each. Ranging from roughly $16,000 up to approximately $26,000, and it indicates the type of insurance, board secretary Jackie
Hann did find a survey from the league that indicated that the bulk over 70% of the boards across California do receive
these medical benefits and we have also attached a little bit of a historical perspective
from former board members so you can see those as well and we have attached for you information in case you want to make
any suggested changes we have got the admin reg
and the policy present in case you want to make any suggestions or make any inquiries. The leagues did not include anything but the personnel commissions, just the boards. – I’m sorry Jackie, I didn’t hear you because the personnel commission? – The league did not include
the personnel commission ’cause they don’t survey
on personnel commissions and there were very few
personnel commissions with community colleges. – Thank you.
– So they don’t track that. That’s an internal thing. – Any additional discussion on this item? Would you like to take action on it? – Yeah, I guess what I thought when they report back and I don’t have my iPad with me today where I usually have all my attachments. I didn’t get a chance to
look at the league’s report. – We can pull that up for you.
– Yeah we can pull that up. – Yeah I was looking for a report back on what our options we have to change or amend it. – Okay if you Drinkwine? – Would you like to defer
this to the next meeting and continue it as an agenda
item at the next meeting? – I can address alternate
uses of those funds, thank you. The savings from waivement of any benefits is actually not available
for another purpose. The government code
allows specifically health and welfare benefits to
be provided to trustees, however an alternate use would have to be to serve the interests of the district or it would be considered
cash compensation. And because currently our trustees are compensated at the limit allowable by the ed code, there’s not an opportunity to increase that by any
of the amounts saved when you waive the health
and welfare benefits. – So for example just for
the benefit of the public, Vice President Drinkwine, I don’t get benefits from the district, so hypothetically speaking, would changes to this perhaps allow me to in lieu of benefits maybe
turn it into scholarship funds or a donation or something? Is that something that’s possible or? – So when we go beyond looking
at increasing compensation and I would also love to hear from Vice President Durand on this, I think it’s important to consider that no person is eligible for benefits within Long Beach City College has the opportunity to use the
value of the waived benefits for something else. This would commonly be
called a cafeteria plan when you’re provided a certain amount and you can allocate it as you wish. Instead, our health benefit program is structured to consider that some people will waive it and it actually helps structure our rates that we receive from
our healthcare providers that they assume that a certain level will be waived. But there is no opportunity
for any individual who waives a benefit to
reallocate that savings to another use, does that answer? – So where we are now is that the trustees may waive benefits, however, and the leagues
does not have information on the personnel commissioners, however they do have information that approximately over 70% of the boards do receive medical benefits, if the board chooses to
waive these benefits, they’re not able to use them
for another particular use. – Correct.
– Okay. – Madam Chair? – Yes. – I’m just trying to understand, our purview over personnel commission. Are we going to get into, I just don’t understand if
we even have jurisdiction over the personnel commission, or whether or not we can
waive their benefits. I understand for our benefits, but is that even a
viable arena to explore? – We would have to look at the code, but I believe in the ed code it is the authority of the governing board that they may provide benefits to the Board of Trustees in addition to the personnel commission. I don’t have the slide in front of me, I can get that for you, but I believe it is
the board of governors, the governing board excuse me that has that authority to offer those. – [Sunny] Okay I got you. – So they may, it’s not required. – So is the intent here to make a decision or a determination about the benefits of the personnel commission as well whether or not we continue this item, personnel commission members? – Trustee Ntuk? – I think it’s all in
the same board policy so it could be considered. – Right okay. But is that what you’d like to do is to explore that? – I was interested to hear
what the options were. – In the confines of saving cost, is that what you’re trying to do? But it sounds like we can’t, it’s not really considered
savings costs right? – You have a couple of options. You can continue to take the
medical benefits as stated, or you can waive them, the only disadvantage with that is you can’t reuse them
for something else. – Right but would it be
savings to the district if we waive that. – Savings to the district in the form of the annual premium amount. – We just can’t– – The board totals are
approximately $53,000 and the personnel commission totals are approximately $51,000. – Okay thank you. – So those are the choices that you have. – Is there any additional
discussion on the item? – Yeah I would like to talk about this a little bit, and I must
say I’m somewhat taken aback because the way that I take this is that without a staff report, without anything other than a
listing of who gets benefits, I think you’re talking about taking away the possibilities of taking away my medical benefits, which
I’ve had for quite some time, and it would be very difficult to replace given my medical history. And to learn about it at a board meeting without a staff report
as a possible action item is very concerning to me. You want to present information, you want to change your policies, you want to do things, that’s fine, but this feels like
Nicodemus and the knight and somebody coming down and saying wait a minute, and I’m stunned that this is the first
I’ve heard about this, because I think that
this could specifically affect me directly. And of course I’d like
some more information, I would like to, I mean I think
it’s gonna get kicked over, I would hope that it would be kicked over, because I don’t see how you could vote on something like that without notice to the public about it. – Those are very valid
points Trustee Otto, it is not the position of the staff to represent the opinions of the trustees, so for us to say what a trustee wants or doesn’t want wouldn’t
be appropriate for us, it was provided as a report in May and then kicked over to July now. – But I think the same information, it was kicked over for
additional information and what we got was exactly
the same information. Except for now what’s been done orally. – [Reagan] What additional
information would you like? – Well you’ve mentioned a report that CCLC did that we don’t have, it would have been nice
to have that attached. – I believe, I’ll double check to make sure it wasn’t attached in May. (phone ringing)
– Oops sorry. – Trustee Otto if I may, while I personally am not involved or in favor or necessarily
against this item, I’m kind of indifferent
to this agenda item, I do think that it’s fair that any trustee would bring up any item for whatever the interest is. And of course we can ask, which I did, what the objective is, what the goal purpose is, but I think that we have a right and I’m going to take a shot in the dark that it was Trustee Ntuk who agendized this item. There could be various reasons why this reason might have been agendized. I know that I’ve agendized items because members of the faculty and staff have had
discussion about something and I felt that it was a good item to agendize and to have
an open discussion about. So I don’t think we should discourage board members from agendizing items, and I don’t think that we
should discredit their intent because it might affect us personally. I think we do have a right to be able to have that discussion. I just want to know what, if there’s a specific objective in mind, I appreciate Vice President Drinkwine clarifying that the funds can
not be used for something else that’s actually a great question, I never considered, I’m not getting benefits
from the district, could those funds be
used for something else to benefit the college, it never occurred to me to ask that, but now I know the answer is no. So I don’t think there’s anything wrong with asking or agendizing, I just really want to know, and I asked if you had a
particular idea in mind and other than that, I don’t wanna continue. – Yeah I think that’s well said. I don’t think it’s appropriate for staff to interpret what a board member may or may not want to discuss, it’s really up to you guys
to speak with your own voice, and it’s up to us to
provide the information to allow you the opportunity to speak with some very valid points
that you’re binging up. – May I respond?
– Sure. – Okay so I’m not objecting
to the right of anybody to agendize an item in an appropriate way. I’m not suggesting that there should be a particular, I’m not saying that this
is a personal thing, all I’m saying that this is agendized as the Board of Trustees, may, the recommended action, we may make recommendations and additional request to
the Superintendent President that’s all it says. And I would, we learned a lot, I mean I knew the information that Vice President Drinkwine would says about compensation because I know what the
law is in that area, if this was an issue that
was gonna be discussed I’m surprised we don’t have a staff report that says those kinds of things about what the rules
are with regard to this and the use of any monies
that are made available. – That is noted, I think
that that’s also valid, so maybe in the future,
if there is an agenda item that has that kind of information, we should probably have a staff report other than just attachments. So that’s valid, Trustee Otto. And additional discussion on the item? Sure, Trustee Zia. – I agree with you Madam Chair, I think any board member, in fact any member of the
public should have the right, this is the people’s college district, to agendize an item. So I think this is very good to look at, if we’re going to bring this back, I don’t know whether or
not that motion was made, I’d like to see an analysis, not just of what other districts do, but if we were to look at eliminating, if that’s the case, if
that’s the objective, how much savings, I’d like to
see a cost benefit analysis of what is the actual fiscal impact. Having said that, I don’t receive benefits from the district. At the same time, I don’t
want to be in a position to not allow that option
to other trustees, I think it would be unfair, and frankly, it’s a little bit, I don’t know if it’s the
realm of conflict of interest if we’re making decisions about benefits to our own pockets financial
interests. (laughing) So I’m a little bit conflicted about this, but I just wanna put that out there, that I don’t wanna deny any trustee the ability to draw upon
the option of health and welfare benefits. But I’d like to understand what the fiscal impact would be and savings if that is the objective so we’re talking apples to apples and not just talking what
are other districts doing. I’d like to see savings if
that’s what you’re getting at in hard dollars and cents. And if it’s negligible, then
we’ll have to examine that. – That’s also noted, thank you. Any additional discussion, do you want to talk to it? – Sure, I did bring this item forward, but I didn’t bring it forward with any malice or an intent to take anyone’s personal
benefits away on the board. I think there’s been
a very good discussion of what is there, I did not, I was not aware of the inability
to repurpose the dollars, it’s good to hear there’s savings, and just to clarify, we do have a tangible fiscal savings when we waive the right,
right the benefit right? – Yes it’s approximately
53,000 for the board this year and 51,000 for the personnel commission, if you were to save, so
that’s approximately 104,000 in hard dollars. And then it would go up by of course the multiplier
each year, the increase. – Great, yeah I would be interested in a report back of options and the fiscal analysis
over a three year period. – Over perhaps a three year period, okay. – To see what it is. I know in the scope of things, I know it’s probably a fairly
small of a total budget. – But you could also,
you have another option that we can present to you if you want to, for maybe to address
Trustee Otto’s concern is to grandfather people in and out according to terms, so that’s something you could do. You could think about that as an option. – May I ask a question? – Sure. – My question is, are you proposing that we change the current situation? Is that what this board action would do? – I think yeah that’s a possibility but it would have to
be a majority decision. – Okay because this sounds crazy, but I waived my retiree benefits when I got elected. So you’re gonna pay the same to me, poor Trustee Otto didn’t work here, so you’re not gonna save, the college isn’t gonna
save any money from me, or with me, because I’ll just say, “Ope, now I want my retiree benefits.” Which I have for I think 10 years. – Sure. – And I think you also need to consider the message that is sent in terms of who your candidates, your public officials would be and it’s not speculation, but it’s certainly something to consider because there would be a number of people who are not in positions that don’t have these kinds of benefits that would ever consider, or I won’t say ever, but
would consider doing this, that may concern because of it. And I’m not talking about myself at all, I’m talking about somebody’s
gonna run for office and it is an enormous commitment of time, and energy to be a member
of a board like this. At least that’s the way I perceive it, and the way I work it, and you might discourage
members of the public from seeking these positions
if some of the benefits are available for anybody and everybody on the board if they are
elected if you do that. So it’s just another factor
to take into consideration. And the analysis which we’re doing here, as opposed to with all the information that could have been provided. – Okay I have one question, and this is probably for
Vice President Drinkwine, the only question that I asked when I first got elected to the board and had to sit through with the benefits which even when I taught
here, I declined benefits because I have benefits through my job, but I asked them when
I started teaching here and I asked the same question
when I got on the board to see if there was a difference, if the benefits could be parceled out and I was told no. So for example I said, “I
don’t need medical or dental, “but can I just have a vision benefit,” and they said, “No it’s all or none.” So that was the only question that I’ve asked of HR twice, and I don’t know if that’s just something that applies across the
board for every medical plan or is it just ours or how that works, but you know, I don’t know if
that would make a difference if it were to happen if
benefits could be parceled out if somebody could just
maybe get the dental or Vice President Durand? – That’s a very interesting question that I had confessed no one
has ever asked me before. Generally when these plans
come through brokers, they’re packaged together
as a package deal, but I certainly can inquire and provide information as part of the continuing discussion to see what options may be available. There are some considerations
on benefit administration process and that that we need to consider, but we can certainly get back to the board on that particular point. And thank you for being the first person to ever ask me that question. Well this will be the third time that I asked the same question (laughing) so the first two times, the answer was no, so let’s see what happens a third time. All right, any additional
discussion on this item? All right, so do we need a motion to have staff report back? – Yes.
– All right. – So moved. – Is there a second to
have the staff report back? – Second. – It has been moved and seconded to have a health and
welfare benefit report by staff at the next board meeting. Any discussion? All in favor? – [Board] Aye. – All opposed? All right motion carries. Item 2.9 on the agenda is
the revised board policy and administrative regulation 2015 annual organization meeting and board officers. This is a first reading of this item and it is submitted for discussion on the board policy so
I’d like to open the floor for any discussion on this item. – Do we need a motion? – I don’t, do we need
a motion to discuss it? No, yeah it’s a first reading. – Could I, I have a legal question, I think I know the answer to it, but I think it’s important, and that is that
historically we’ve been told that regulations are the
purview of the district, and we don’t have any real say, we can offer suggestions, but that we policies we
set, regulations we don’t. Not so sure that that’s correct but that’s what we’ve always been told, and so now we’re being
asked to amend a regulation, and I’d like to hear from
legal counsel about that. – Yeah absolutely, we’ll defer to Jack, we have been told that in the past that
was the way it happened, however Jack Lipton is recommending that the board also confirm that the regulation adheres to the policy, but I’ll let him tell you a
little bit more detail, Jack? – Thank you Dr. Romali. In response to Trustee Otto’s question, in my view, it’s good practice for the Board of Trustees to vote on, to ratify any changes or new
administrative regulations as being consistent with board policy. In that regard, the board policy regarding policies and regulations would probably need to be amended to encompass that practice. In addition to that though, with respect to the regulations in the chapter two series
of the board policies, I think those are very
different types of regulations because they deal directly
with the Board of Trustees and in my view, those should be voted on and approved by the board itself, because it deals directly
with the Board of Trustees. – Trustee Ntuk? – Yeah, I just wanna clarify. It looks like in the proposed regulation, that the moving of the assignment of the foundation liaison, is that the only change to it or is there other changes? – Yes that is the only change. – For the benefit of the public, is there any way that regulation 2015 could be read into the record, does anybody have access to it? – Jackie is having Daria
bring up that regulation. – Okay. I am unable to pull up that attachment. – So I’ve got it. – So I don’t want to read the whole thing to everybody, but if the
public is interested, it is an attachment, and basically it’s got A through E, election of officers and it’s got a rotation, terms of office, it talks about appointments to different organizations, and I think it was just brought up strictly for foundation? – Yes it was brought up, we had in the past had the practice whereas the vice president
served as the liaison to the foundation executive committee, and this changes that to
be at your discretion, it doesn’t necessarily need
to be the vice president. – So since this is the first reading and there is no action on it, would we just defer it to the next meeting and bring it back as an
action item to change it? – If this is your first reading, you would then bring, if you are okay with that, you don’t want to make any changes, or recommend any changes, then we will bring it back
at the next board meeting for your vote and approval, and then you can make
that assignment to someone at the foundation at that time. – Whatever is the pleasure of the board with regard to this regulation. Trustee Otto? – Yeah, just to keep us clean
in my somewhat muddled mind about how these things work. The first point is that it has to be, any regulation has to be
supportive of the policy. And the second point which
we hadn’t heard before but I concur, I mean I think that these are policies that
affect the board directly and that gives a reason that we would be more involved
in the passage of those. But the entire policy says, “It shall be the policy of the district “to hold an annual organizational
meeting of the board “generally on the 4th Tuesday of July “as the annual organizational meeting. “The board shall elect from
its members a president “and vice president of the board. “Officer terms shall be one year. “The Superintendent President shall act “as secretary of the board.” So I don’t think there’s any argument that what’s being proposed
is inconsistent with that. It doesn’t deal with it directly at all, so it really falls to the idea of we’re involved in this because it directly
affects how we do business, so I think that’s a good
way to think about this. And it’s a little bit. I’m agnostic as to this change, but we’re kind of
plowing a new furrow here because we’ve never talked
about the importance of our more extensive control over those things that
affect the way we govern. And so I just wanted, I hope that’s not too much in the weeds. (laughing) – Trustee Otto I don’t know
what you’re exactly getting at, but just from a historical point of view, for the first 20 years of the foundation, Ruth Todd was the sole representative for the board to the foundation board. And when she left office, then this other policy came up. So that’s a kind of
history of the situation. – I’ve got no dog in this race, like I said I see it, but I think it’s important to understand what we do and why it is that we do it and what we’re doing is we’re saying that something that we
historically didn’t look at we’re gonna look at it now and the reason it was given by our council was that because this has to
do with the way we function as a board, and not just
as a board for the school. It’s a way we function ourselves, and so I just wanted to make that clear, I don’t have a position
about whether it’s better in the discretion of the president or the way that it is now, so don’t read into, I’m
not gonna do anything. – In relation to the policy, the board policy is very broad and then there’s a lot of
detailed with administrative reg and then hearing the
board policy right now, and thinking about the structural changes that’ll happen, since
2012 was the last time this policy was amended, but there was a state law
passed about two years ago requiring off cycle
elections to consolidate. Next year in Long Beach, it’s the first time there’s
gonna be consolidated local and national elections, and the dates have moved. So there’s no longer an April election, and our elections are in November now, and we’re gonna have
to revisit this policy because it doesn’t match for next summer, there’s gonna be nobody
newly elected people to reorg the board, so we need to revisit, separate item from what’s being considered here, but related to that specific policy, it’s something that we
need to also consider. But maybe also it’s a good time to revisit maybe if you
take out the appointments in a separate policy from the reorg policy and make
that a little bit different, there’s opportunities to
amend and restructure it. – I’d just like to say that
the previous appointments and the election of the board president and the vice president, their terms are extended
until December of 2020 when our new annual organization
meeting takes place, after the November election. So that’s already been
cleared up with the county that that will change, and next July we will have to
do one of our certification of signatures just as a
procedural for the year because this one you’re
going to adopt tonight only goes until next July, but everything else, the
terms have been extended til the second Friday in December. – [Uduak-Joe] But not in our policy though it doesn’t reflect that. – No and that’s why, and
I did point that out, that has to be updated yes. – Is there any additional
discussion on this item? All right is there a
motion regarding this item? – So moved.
– What is it that you’d like the motion to say. – First reading, actually
we don’t need a motion. The second reading we’ll vote on it. – Do we just automatically place it on the next agenda then or do we make that request? – Are you changing? – Would it automatically come back? – Are you changing the amendment or you’re coming back? Then it’s a first reading, we
will bring it back for action. – Got it, thank you very much. So agenda item 2.9, will return at next month’s meeting as an action item. Item 2.10 community and student
workforce project agreement, this is also discussion action, and I understand that
we have a presentation, Vice President Drinkwine. – Thank you. I’m happy to bring this item to you per your request. An in depth presentation on our community and student workforce project agreement. In this presentation we’re going to cover project labor agreement
definitions in general, what our specific PLA looks like, what had been proposed at the last Board of Trustees meetings, options for your consideration, and then talking about
where do we go from here. So really simple way to look
at a project labor agreement, is it’s a contract between us and a set of labor unions to
establish work site conditions, protocol to resolve labor disputes, and most importantly for us, many of these PLA’s reflect goals for employing community residents. In our current PLA, we which we don’t call a PLA, we have to make it a little
bit more complicated, our CSWPA stands for our community and student workforce project agreement, and that reflects our emphasis on community and students. The board had approved our CSWPA in 2016, and regarding the priority of hiring, the board determined that tier one, which are the residents with
the highest level of priority for hiring by the unions
for use on our projects are those residents within the
Long Beach Community College district boundaries as well as veterans regardless of their residence. And we track the residence
by specific zip code. Tier two are what we
call any gateway cities. So these are the neighbors, the easiest way to think about it. You can think about it as
an ever-expanding circle. And then tier three is
any LA County resident. We establish goals, our goal is to have 40% of
all construction workers be from any one of those three tiers. Our second goal is to have
15% of all those workers from the first tier,
and again the first tier is the Long Beach City College boundaries plus veterans regardless of residence. And this is an example from our May 2019 Labor Compliance Report from Solis Group, and we determined that we are
in excess of that 40% goal which is fantastic. Meaning that our total local workers from tiers one through three, on our building P which
was recently completed is 59.8%, and in building J it is 64.2%. You’ll also note that we
are a little bit behind our tier one goals that we
have in building P, 9.8% with tier one, and 10% for tier one. Our current– – Excuse me Vice President, sorry to interrupt, Dario, this half of our monitors just went off, I don’t know if there’s
some technical issue. Sorry for the interruption. – [Marlene] Not at all, not at all. I don’t mind pausing. – Somebody on this side kicked something. (laughing) Turned everything off, yours works? – Yeah my works. – Or somebody here. – Mine does not work, so it looks like from my monitor down. (people murmuring quietly) Yeah I think it’d be a little helpful if you were able to follow
along with the presentation. The slides do contain a
great amount of detail. – Did we pay the bill? – We forgot to pay the bills? – Which trustees don’t
have paper printouts? Perhaps we can get them for you. – No we have them. – Oh okay good. – So since we do have them, shouLd we just move on. – Okay great. – But as long as they’re able to see that, is there somebody there manning this so that they can get to the next slide. – Oh I can control the advancement, but please audience let
us know if this goes out, because we’ll all be looking at our paper, we want to make sure we’re all
on the same page literally. – Thank you. – Thank you, so going back to slide seven, our current CWSPA does require a Project Labor Coordinator, this coordinator’s responsible
for a few critical tasks, the first is to monitor compliance, and then the second is to
assist the district, us, with the development and
implementation of the programs, and to provide us additional services. And so what I’d like to do
is dive a little bit deeper into our Project Labor Coordinator, and first talk a little
bit about how we decided on our current Project Labor Coordinator, the Solis Group. We did do an RFQ in April 2016 following the approval of the agreement by the board at that time. We had several primary
criteria including of course first competitive pricing, but truly a demonstration of experience with community colleges, with working with labor
markets and PLA agreements, that was incredibly important to us as we made that decision. The involvement of our
Project Labor Coordinator begins at the very
beginning of the process, meaning before the
project has even started. So they’re with us doing
outreach to contractors, they’re with us at the pre-bid meeting, and they’re with us at
pre-construction kick off meetings. So they are there before we break ground, before we award the bid to ensure that we are in
compliance with the agreement and to assist us in making sure that we have all the available workers from our priority areas and that the trades union are
working with those workers. Now when we’re in the middle of a project, our Project Labor
Coordinator’s responsible for that compliance reporting. We do share those
compliance reports with you on a quarterly basis where we
see them on a monthly basis, they track every single project that is under the agreement. They also work on any
compliance violations and resolve those according to
the agreement specifications and mediate any grievances or disputes. Anything that is identified is reflected in those monthly reports from the Solis Group. And then lastly, and
this is really critical, and it’s almost an invisible event for most of us, but it is not
invisible to our community and to our contractors
within our community and that’s the outreach. This is the third year that we’ve partnered
with Long Beach Unified to have an annual joint
construction outreach event. And at this event, which is also attended by the Solis Group, we
reach out to those firms within the community and talk
about our upcoming projects, talk about what’s the
process to get on the rolls for our projects, talk
about our agreement. I will also say that our current
Project Labor Coordinator does coordinate with
other agencies in our area including the city because we are looking
at the same labor market, so we necessarily have
conversations with them. When we look at what’s included
in our current agreement, this is list that is reflected
in the agreement itself. I want to point out a
couple of things on here, that since we establish these projects in the 2041 master plan, some
of the names have changed, so when you look at security systems, we commonly refer to that now
as our surveillance system. When you look at projects four and five, we’ve actually merged those and merged the budgets
into a singular project we called Kinesiology
Lab and Aquatic Center or KLAC for short, because
it’s a lot easier to say. And I will come back to this point, but when you look at the estimated cost, those specifically are the
construction costs portion of the budget. It’s not the entire budget because we have planning costs, we have design costs, we
have administration costs, so these reflect the construction costs and those estimates were
as of April 2016, sure. – So I can be clear, I think I know, but I’m not sure about this project list, I think that one, two,
and three are completed, those are all done, then we’re combining four and five. Six, the building MM is
at the state architect at this point is that right? – Yeah and to your point Trustee Otto, I actually will have a slide in a few that shows the current
status of each of those, but you’re absolutely right. That this agreement it’s
intent was to be for five years beginning in 2016. So obviously we haven’t
gotten to all of them, and I’m also gonna talk a little bit about one project that has
been delayed beyond that point to accommodate projects
that receive state funding. So it’s important your point to note, that when we established
this project list, it is with the best of our ability to look forward into the future, but obviously things happen, priorities change, and
I’ll talk a little bit about how costs can escalate. – [Douglas] Okay thanks, that’s helpful. – So on slide 13, the duration
of our current agreement is an intent for five years. When you read the language
talking about the term normally when we see a contract, we see a very easy to
read, it starts this date ends this date. What this language boils down to, is that it is for a five year period beginning at the award
of the first project. So if we do have a project that for some reason has been rescheduled and falls outside that five year, it would not be covered under the PLA because it falls outside
of that five year term. Also reflective in our current agreement is union support of our training programs, and obviously this was
very important to us because we do have those programs. And the trades unions agreed that we do have excellent programs and you can see here the wording is the explicit understanding to use the opportunities
provided by this work to have training for
our district residents and students in the construction industry. So that’s the commitment
from the trades unions to providing those opportunities. It further talks about the importance of the apprenticeship programs, and then lastly talks about their support of our
specific training programs. So although our current agreement does not give priority
hiring to our students, it absolutely recognizes the importance of training our community as well as the excellent
programs that we provide. Separate from the agreement, I do want to mention that we have entered into an MOU with the trade councils
apprenticeship readiness fund, and this was done through
our workforce development and this MOU specifically
allowed us assistance in developing our current
MC3 instruction curriculum and it allowed us to work with
those trade unions directly to develop our trades programs and that is currently happening as well so we do have an MOU specifically to support those unions by providing the relevant training that they require for
their pre-apprentices and apprenticeship programs. Next I’d like to talk and clarify a little bit
about what had been proposed to the board at the last meeting. And to clarify a little
bit about the error that was made so that we can
be on the same page for that as you move forward with
your considerations. The first critical amendment was to include the employment
of district residents that as defined here,
as student graduates, and we do recognize that the use of the term student graduates is different when we talk
about them academically, but for purposes of the agreement and the proposed definition a student graduate is a student who has a received a
certificate or a degree or has completed and received
a completion certificate from our apprenticeship or pre-apprenticeship
preparation programs. So that means they have completed the relevant training we offer. So that is a student graduate, so that could range from a
certificate of completion to a degree. (woman coughing)
Pardon me. The second component of
that proposed agreement was to extend the
duration of the agreement. The current agreement done in 21, however, our constructions projects do take a lot of time to plan, and it is easier to plan when we know if they’re
going to be subject to this agreement or not, it does change our approach a little bit as I described the involvement of the Project Labor Coordinator comes in at the front end, and so when we can identify those, those are easier. As well as cost within that ten year. And as you all pointed out, we did have errors in the listing in that proposed amendment, and you can see here that
we’ve made the two corrections that what we had identified as project 10 and project 13, Buildings MM and OO, those two buildings were
actually already included in the original project list and they were inadvertently repeated here. So those would be removed. – Sorry the question was, did that end up inflating the number and bringing it back down when
we had the different versions of the list, and that’s why
the numbers were changing? – Correct thank you yes, that because they were
essentially duplicated in the list, it overstated
the value in total of those projects because
they were duplicated. Part of the cause of the error is that when we first
identified the project, we identified with the general title and as we get into it, then we’re assigning project numbers, so at first glance, we didn’t realize that we had already reflected it, but as the correction, we would be, if I had brought back
this same exact agreement to you now, and I’m
going to presenting you with very many options
for your consideration, but if you had settled on this, we would actually not be
adding eight projects, instead we would have
been adding six projects. – Madam Chair?
– Sure. – So but you had corrected that in the list you gave us
last time is that right? – That’s correct. – So it wasn’t duplicated, it wasn’t overinflated
as was suggested, okay. – And I would say that
because the projects were duplicated, it
would not have affected our obligation to have those projects under the labor agreement, they would just reflected twice, but the same projects would
have been subject to it. But it absolutely caused some, a great deal of confusion. So that covered what we
currently have in place and as well as what was proposed in June. And now I’d like to go
through some options. This list of options is certainly not everything in the world that’s possible for your consideration, but what we did try and do is capture the most likely
options to be considered. And I will also remind you that this is not a unilateral agreement, that we do need to negotiate
with the trades council but certainly it is our goal that at the conclusion of this discussion, that we get some negotiating parameters to start that conversation. So obviously your first
option is to do nothing. And if you do nothing, the current agreement continues for an additional two years, and you can certainly take action at some future point to have an extension, there is no provision for
an automatic extension of the agreement. The second option is to
adopt the June proposal with those corrections, so again that would
include a 10 year extension with the list of specified
and defined projects, as well as adding student
graduates to tier one priority. A third option is to
consider alternate lengths. For instance you can consider a five year versus a 10 year, and that five year extension would then decrease the amount of projects because we’d look at
the next five year plan and include only those
specified defined projects. Another option is to move from a defined project list approach to a threshold approach. The threshold approach has some positives and negatives and we’ll talk about those a little bit more in depth in a moment, but basically any project
funded by the bond over that threshold would be subject to the agreement during the time period. So you would establish both a threshold as well as a length of
extension of the agreement be it five years, 10 years, through the completion of the 2041. And again, each of these items we’ll be gonna go into in a
lot more depth in a moment. Another option is to consider
your student graduate options those are not mutually exclusive, this is almost like a menu where you pick and choose. Mutually exclusive items are terms of length, you have to pick one, and whether you go
project list or threshold, but these other ideas that you
can certainly have out there as preferences. So there’s student graduate options, there’s stipulations that
trade unions actually advocate for our training programs, options to consider how
we define our tier three. Right now tier three is
the entirety of LA County, and we’re gonna show you a map about how close Orange County is, and perhaps with more
competitive labor markets that might be valuable. Option eight are
considering different ways to approach the use of our
Project Labor Coordinator, and some of these are
really interesting ideas, and nine is how do we work with other agencies in our community that also have PLAs? So option one, no amendment. The last project is building OO, I mentioned we did delay this project, we now estimate construction
to start in 23-24, it was delayed to
accommodate other projects that receive state funding, and as a reminder, when
the state awards us money, which I love because it’s free money, we have as a stipulation
of accepting that money, a requirement to complete that
project within three years. And so in order to actually
have some buildings where we could hold classes, we have to delay the project. And that’s exactly what
happened with this building. So it was delayed without an extension to this amendment at some point, prior to the expiration in 2021, that building would then
not be subject to the PLA. The other thing I want to mention to you is that in April we estimated
the construction cost to be about $156 and a half million, we currently estimate
that to be closer to $164 and a half million. We do indeed project out what
they call escalation costs. So when we developed the plan we said okay we think we’re
gonna start this project 10 years from now, and we use an escalation cost multiplier that is commonly used at that time. What we now know is that
a great many educational and public agencies were very successful with their bond issuances, everybody has a bond program. That means labor is higher in demand and becomes more expensive. At the same time, the supply
of the raw materials we used, steel from China has its own issues and costs have been rising. And so that’s why you
see the current estimate so far above the estimate in 2016 because escalation costs have tripled in that time period. And then we’re also gonna talk about a Project Labor Coordinator, and their cost estimates. Those are estimates, I will say that there is basically a level when you have a project
that you have a fixed cost with the coordinator, there are certain things they have to do regardless of the size of the project, they have to be on the job walk, they have to do initial work there, and they have to do some
level of compliance. But then as the project grows in size, that level of work grows, so you’ll see that there’s
kind of like a baseline and then it goes up with
the size of the project. So when we look at no amendment, what I’ve done for you here is reflected the status of the projects, so Trustee Otto, this is where you can see the status of those projects as well as what the actual
Project Labor Coordinator or PLC cost and the estimated PLC cost. So projects one and two are complete. Building J as you know is in progress, that’s our auditorium, and I’m really looking to that opening for classes for fall, a year from now, but we anticipate being able to have those year end activities in
the auditorium next spring. The items in four and
five, again combined, they’re our KLAC, the
kinesiology and aquatic center, those are in planning. We are waiting for DSA approval in August and then we will do a bid project. We anticipate doing a
traditional methodology with this one which is
the design bid build. Buildings M and M, we have two phases, the first is in planning, the second has not yet started. And those are the trades buildings, so you commonly hear them talked about as trades one and trades two. Item number seven, that is
the PCC parking structure, the first parking structure to
ever beautify a neighborhood because it’s gonna be awesome. That is done with the
design build methodology, we have already awarded the contract because it is design build the process is a little bit reversed, as you saw with the KLAC we have to get DSA approval first then planning and then we go out to bid for the construction. The parking structure
because it is design build was altogether, makes it
a little bit more quicker, it’s great for projects
that have a really specific and easy to do design
that’s really combined. That contract was awarded and we expect construction to
follow DSA approval shortly. And then lastly, the classroom building, that’s the one that I
mentioned has been delayed. So another option was to
adopt the essential components from the June proposal. It would add on six projects, with an estimated construction cost of $127.8 million, and again, that is a
portion of the total cost, so it does not include the planning, the design, the
administration, all of that. That is literally the construction cost. If we looked at the same approach, but instead of an extension of 10 years if we looked at an
extension of five years, adding on those projects
within those five years, it would be the addition of four projects instead of six projects, and I’ll remind you that also means that that classroom building OO would be included in either extension because it would fall
within those timeframes. But instead of having an additional six, you’d end up with an additional four. So that’s with extensions including a specified design project list. As I mentioned an alternate option is to look at a threshold. The threshold means that
any bond funded project above that amount would
be subject to the PLA. It is important to note as we look at that that means if we in the future identified a specific project that’s not currently defined, it would automatically
be subject to the PLA if construction started within
the term of the agreement of course all that takes
a lot of consideration and we’ve kind of listed those
out here for your reference, but any project above that threshold funded by the bond would be included. And as a disclaimer, as
we look at these lists, these projects we identified are those specified identified projects. There’s a great many projects in the 2041 master plan
funded by bond projects on programs, excuse me that are
not specifically identified. And those come up throughout the year, we will have 25,000 and $50,000 projects. Those projects go through the facilities advisory committee process, and are approved, they fall under a general umbrella project in the master plan. And those ones are where a threshold with a very low threshold
can be problematic because those might pop up and be very simple. But if they’re above the threshold, we immediately have to bring
a Project Labor Coordinator and have it comply with everything else. And those ones are not listed. So what’s listed for you
are the specified projects in the program. But that might not include for instance adding a shade structure over at our child development center at PCC, it may not include what we intend to do and convert some of the
former smoking areas to student gathering areas. It may not include the
update of the student union here at our building E, and all those projects
fall under about $100,000 to $200,000, but they are not listed but if you went with a low threshold, they would be subject to the PLA. So this is what it would look like if you went $250,000 through 2041, again, not an all inclusive list, anything above that threshold would be included. And then when we we move to five million and then 10 million. I will say that with the original PLA, all projects were above eight million, and if we wanted to zip back to what was included in the June proposal, those ones included demolition of a building of only 1.5 million, but the remaining are all over 15 million. Buildings are expensive. The other option to consider is how do we address
our student graduates? I reflected here again the
exact we language we used in the amendment, that
language had no errors. And really this just says we want our student graduates to have the same priority as those folks who live within our district
boundaries and veterans. Then secondly, we can consider
asking the trades unions to grant our student
graduates preferential entry into their apprenticeship programs, meaning that if our student graduates have completed the training, and if they have passed
the union apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship
eligibility requirements, then they’d be given preferential entry. A second option there, and again we wanted to
make this really broad was that you could say all students, however, a student who receives a degree in accounting
may not be best suited for one of these construction trades, so I would consider that as
you consider your options. Option six, is asking the trade unions to advocate for us,, I will say that other PLAs in the area including the city and the ports PLA do reference our training
programs, already. But we can certainly
ask the trades council to specify that we have
industry recognized programs. I wanna make sure. Ah, option seven, this
is what I talked about, expanding our tier three
from Los Angeles County residents to Los Angeles
and Orange County residents. I will first say that nearly all the PLAs for agencies in our areas combines them. LA County and Orange County residents, the reason for this is two-fold. When we’re serving our community, communities such as Seal
Beach and Los Alamitos are right next door and certainly
are part of our community. And while when we talk about
adding student graduates, those students can live anywhere as long as they graduate
they’ll get tier one. Veterans can live anywhere,
they still are tier one. Here we’re talking about
expanding tier three and including those. The second benefit is because we do have a
very tight labor market, and although we currently
are well in excess of our goal for employment
of tier three residents, this allows us flexibility in the future as that labor market potentially gets even more tight to
still be in compliance but have a broader reach. So that’s a consideration for you. The next few options talk about our Project Labor Coordinator that although our current
Project Labor Coordinator does indeed have
coordination with other PLAs, we can certainly specify that in our PLA as the definition for our
Project Labor Coordinator and specify what that looks like. Option 8B is to consider
exploring partnerships with the city to share the
Project Labor Coordinator. What I will say is that it
would be my recommendation that if you choose to do this
it be separate intent language and not combined in the
project labor agreement itself, our agreement is with the trades union and so if we wanted to consider an MOU an agreement with another third party, having that as a separate agreement is likely the preferred
way to approach it. Also considering the
engaging a jobs coordinator in addition to a Project Labor Coordinator is an option, you should know that this would increase
the cost of administration of the program because it
is an additional service, the City of Long Beach
currently does that, although my understanding
is that they are currently in the process of defining
how that looks for them. We do have representatives by the way in our audience, thank you so much, so when you do have questions, I won’t have to speak to their expertise, they’ll be able to do so themselves. And then another option is we understand that Long Beach Unified is considering adopting a PLA themselves, and so again you would have
separate intent language that the board would consider after there’s actually a PLA that Long Beach has adopted if we in some way or another
want to partner with them. As I mentioned earlier,
we certainly do partner in the annual event that’s
advertising our opportunities to local community firms. And so our next steps, we would like to follow
the direction of the board in both when we resume
negotiations with other parties and what the board parameters
would be for negotiation. This contract unlike the other contracts the district engages in, is policy, and so therefore it does
fall within your scope to determine what those parameters are. If we could accomplish this quickly and if it’s the board’s desire, we could certainly try and bring it back to August, assuming that the parameters are ones that both parties agree to. But again, I am happy to
follow your direction. – Thank you Vice President Drinkwine. I’d like to just open up the discussion by briefly thanking you and Dr. Romali and the rest of the staff who really listened, I know we had one meeting
last week I believe it was, and we went over almost line by line with some of the corrections, some of the minor corrections that needed to be made and I’d also like to thank the members of the building trades who did reach out to us
and offered suggestions and I’m very happy to see that some of those
stipulations were also included in the options. So that’s great. There are some things that we discussed and then some things that we didn’t, so I’m very grateful for that. I know that some of us here have questions so I’d like
to open it up for discussion, Trustee Ntuk, Trustee Zia. – Do we need a motion a second to have a discussion? – No, not yet. – Mr. Lipton? – Not on the report right, to address the report? – [Sunny] As discussion/action,
that’s why I’m asking? – Is that necessary? – Not yet. – I think we can have a
discussion on the staff report and make comments and then we can open up for if there’s a motion on the floor. – I’m just asking, I’d
like our legal counsel to opine if that’s okay, whether or not we need a motion and a second to have discussions since it’s categorized
as discussion/action. – The board can have a discussion prior to any motion being made and then once the motion is made, the discussion should
focus on that motion, once the motion is made and it’s seconded. But there certainly could
be discussion on the report prior to a motion being made. – Thank you. Trustee Ntuk? – Thank you President Malauulu. Thank you so much for bringing this back, I can’t stress enough how important it is for us as a board to have this information to be able to give input to really understand what the options are. I don’t think until
today we really had that. We did have a subcommittee meeting where two of us had a
chance to talk about it, but as a larger body, it’s great to get this, all this meat and this details, this level
of detail is really good. And I just wanted to say that
I’m a very strong supporter of project labor agreements, it’s different, like I’m a union member, I pay dues, but my institution
provides my healthcare, my retirement. When you’re a member
of the building trades, or you’re a private sector union, your employer doesn’t provide healthcare and retirement, you’re reliant
on your union to provide that and why it’s so important
to have these agreements is it gives certainty, it gives relevance and opportunity of people to know that jobs are gonna be
available for 10 years or five years or 20 years, and you can count on that
for your contributions and when you’re trying to calculate your retirement time. As a public institution, we’re using taxpayer dollars, it should have a direct community benefit and policies like this do that. Also I did look at the numbers and I saw that since our community
student workforce agreement has been put in place, our labor violations have been reduced, which has been another benefit. And it’s wonderful to see
that we’re at nearly 60% local hire achievement. That’s I think outstanding, it
sets a record in Long Beach, I know the city has had some struggles with getting to their numbers, but I think it sets an example for other institutions
like the school district to say it’s happening here in Long Beach, it’s possible that we can help make sure people get a living wage and
build our public institutions. I know that there are a number
of people from my district that were public speakers
at the last meeting, you really think about
the sentimental value that I helped rebuild my alma mater, I helped build that building that I drive by on Carson every day, helps build a stronger sense of community and then times when we need to go back out for a vote for another issue or bond or something in the future, the community continues to have confidence because they know that we’re not, we’re looking out for them beyond providing an outstanding,
excellent education. I know we also are already
required by the state to pay prevailing wage, so we are already paying the rate that would be recognized under the community student
workforce agreement, that’s already required by state law, and so just to recognize that. Couple of things I want to say, two things that I’m interested in seeing, in the negotiations, I’m
not gonna make a motion yet ’cause I wanna hear what
other trustees have to say, but I’m glad to recognize this is not a professional
service contract that we do have a voice in this process, but for me I’m interested
in a longer term. If it’s to me, it’s any
funded by measure LB is on the table, I think it should include
a clause for state funding that we shouldn’t have
the project gets delayed so it doesn’t get included
type of situations or scenarios happening, we should have language
in there that covers when we get the opportunity
for additional state funding or some other matching
funding were possible. I know there’s sometimes challenges when you get funding
from the federal level in agreements like this, but at least for our locally
and state funded projects, if we’re gonna go with a threshold amount, I think it should go to at least 2041. I don’t see there’s a benefit or a cost significance from five years to 10 years to 20 years. I do like to see additional coordination with the city whether that’s through
the city’s job coordinator or our coordinator or
joint hosted training or we look at some of the
workforce development training that’s happening through the city through workforce
innovation opportunity funds that can maybe supplement an
additional pre-apprenticeship training looking at how we can synchronize and better coordinate with
the city is important to me. It’s great to hear that we
already have the MC3 designation and it’s recognized. But adding that advocacy language I think is an advantage. I do like the student graduate and the additional
clarification on the definition. One thing I would like to see called out is a dual enrollment, continue to see if Long Beach Unified students come here dual enroll, they’re now
eligible for job opportunities I think is another selling point that we can go back to the community and say hey, if you
take a three unit class when you’re in high school, take the pre-apprenticeship program, there’s already they call them
small learning communities there’s a construction
one at Jordan High School, I know there’s one at Cabrillo High School that if we can have those linked up, it just gives, makes sure that when you’re a student graduate of Long Beach City College, you’re eligible for those
priority ranking on the list. Lastly, two things, I would like to see, I did hear back from the carpenters and IBW laborers that were
not necessarily lined up with their training program that there’s some synchronization that we can make changes. I know Rancho Santiago has
a special training program with the carpenter’s
union which is separate, it’s not necessarily a signatory member of the Orange County LA building trades, but would like to see that exploration or maybe that’s a side letter agreement about looking to synchronize our programs. So in the sense of I know for IBW, it’s math, if you don’t
know electrician’s math, you’re gonna electrocute
yourself. (laughing) You’re not gonna pass the test, and so if there’s a way we can make sure that we’re offering
math for union members, or math for electricians, there’s not necessarily
math 140 college algebra, I think is a great
partnership opportunity, and then finally, any
way we can coordinate with Long Beach Unified further. Let them know that we’re here as a partner that we have training programs and we don’t have a SAT/ACT requirement for students to come here and get a job. I think I would be supportive of that. I did have a couple questions for the city and I’m not sure if Marlene or John knows. So I understand the city’s gonna do an RFP for their job coordinator position, would we as an institution be able to apply for that
or bid on that proposal? And is that what’s gonna be happening in the way the city’s gonna be addressing the job coordinator role? – John would you mind? I’d like to introduce John Kaiser who is the director of
economic development for the City of Long Beach. – Welcome. – Hi good evening trustees and thank you, it’s always
nice to sit on this side in the audience and
hear other organizations go through their. I’m absolutely we’re working
our way through our PLAs, and we’re actually
finishing up the fifth year this spring of a five year PLA, so we’re tracking a very similar schedule and calendar as the city college. We’re also, we’ve had some discussions with our city council about exploring the use of an
independent jobs coordinator for the first time this past spring and because we’re in the
last year of our agreement with the trades, when
we spoke with the trades about the options similar to the process you’re going through, they
declined to open up the agreement to make any substantial changes, but they did allow as part
of our joint administration of the agreement for us to actually run a
pilot in this last year. And so we are in the process right now of writing the specifications for our request for proposal. We will be only able to focus on the final
two construction projects of our current PLA term, so there will only be two projects that we’ll apply this pilot to. And we’re likely gonna see our RFP go out toward the end of this summer so that we can over the
next six to nine months try working with an
independent jobs coordinator to supplement the work that the trades are
doing for job outreach, the work that we already do as a Pacific Gateway which is the federal
workforce innovation network that’s covering this area, and we would be more than happy once we’ve completed our process to share not only the RFP, the specifications, the
scope of work et cetera, but oftentimes what we find is as government agency to government agency, we’ve piggybacked on the contract awards or the terms and conditions that we’re able to negotiate
with the contractor that we ultimately choose
to help us with this pilot. So more than happy to
work with your staff, our executive director for Pacific Gateway who is managing this work as well as implementing
the project labor agreement for the city Nick Schultz, he wasn’t able to make it tonight, he is aware of this discussion and will be more than happy to follow up with staff and see where we can partner. – Thank you very much, Vice President Drinkwine
is there anything else you’d like to add before we continue in response to that or? – No I would say that as we move forward, either with the city
or Long Beach Unified, it is difficult because
everything hasn’t been fully baked for those agencies to say to what extent can we have that partnership. And that’s what’s driving
some of the suggested language that we can certainly have the board vote on intent to explore those partnerships so you’re able to say yes,
we absolutely wanna partner, we absolutely want to take advantage of serving the same community with the same citizens
and with the same result but acknowledging at the same time, we don’t have enough
information at this time to have an actual agreement because we just simply don’t know enough about where it would end up. – Got it, Trustee Ntuk, were you done, or did you have more? – I had one last thing. I had one last thing, I just would say I’m not supportive of
expanding to Orange County, I think we’re doing a great job with LA, our demographics more match LA County than they do Orange County and I think if the pressure and the cost escalation,
we have no control over, but if there’s additional
tightening of the labor market, that continues to make
us focus on Long Beach and LA versus being
expansive to Orange County, and I would just, that was my
only last comment, thank you. – Trustee Zia? – Thank you, thank you
John for being here, for your time. So I am a little bit confused, and bear with me. I’m looking at so this jobs coordinator will be in addition to what we already have as our
project labor administrator project labor agreement administrator is that correct? Am I understanding that correctly? – That is the option. We can continue our current structure that has a singular
Project Labor Coordinator, or alternately, we can separate out a jobs coordinator from the
Project Labor Coordinator. I provide on slide 36 a simple definition that this the designated person that would facilitate the
local hire referral process with the city, the unions,
and other organizations, so rather than having the
entirety of the responsibility for the monitoring of the compliance for the job walk all that, this person or agency would focus on that specific item. Again, this is an option, we currently have a
Project Labor Coordinator but it is something
for your consideration. – Does the Project Labor Coordinator do these types of efforts or is it different, oh they do? – If I can, we have Joe
Carol in the audience, he is representing the Solis Group, and he works specifically for us. We had one of his
colleagues present in June, he wasn’t able to be with us but he can talk
specifically to what he does that fulfills this role, thank you. – Good evening trustees. My name is Joe Carol,
my name is Joe Carol, I’m with the Solis Group, and I’m our project manager
for this particular agreement. And some of the jobs
coordinator activities that I’ve taken and that we’ve taken related to this project would include coordination with our MC3 with our apprenticeship readiness program. I’ve spoken to the students and given them information about projects that are coming up in their area and in other areas. I’ve introduced them to contractors and I collected some resumes. I have one worker who
called me just recently shopping around ’cause
we’re also doing a contract with the Port of Long Beach and she just got into the, she’s a Marine Corps veteran, Long Beach resident, and she just got into the iron worker local 433 apprentice program. It was a fast process. One day she called me and said, “Hey I’m interested in
getting into the trades,” and I gave her some ideas. Two weeks later she said,
“Okay, I took the test, “and I’m into 433 now, what can I do?” So in any case, you like to
see that kind of initiative so I looked up the projects that we have currently only one active project but finishing up and building J that also are coming up. Find out who’s using iron
worker on the project contacted those workers, hey I’ve got a good candidate for you, here’s information, told her, this is who I gave your information for, here’s their phone number
you can call them too. So that kind of coordination
happens pretty regularly. In addition there’s the just the tracking. You saw some of the numbers, Novices at Building J
is doing pretty well, I think we presented at
a 10% district graduates two months ago and keep pushing it up, we’re now at 12, and I still
I think we might get to the 15 by the time the project ends. But in any case, we’ll
give them a breakdown by subcontractor so they can know who’s ahead of the game
and who’s falling behind we’re monitoring the look ahead, so the contractors will present here’s the work we have
coming up in upcoming weeks so that we can say oh look, there’s a finishing
contractor about to come on, let’s give them a call and say, “You’re about to get a crew on, “you do remember you have
a local hire requirement “don’t you? “Please think about who you’re gonna use, “if you need recommendations please ask us “we have people we can refer. “Also make sure to know that
you can talk to your union “that’s actually the easiest way to do it “is to turn in a craft request form “to the local union hiring hall “and say, ‘hey please,
this agreement requires us “‘to give priority to
district residents first, “‘please send us one of
those if you have them, “‘and if not let us know and
we can see if we can find one “‘somewhere else or we can
go down to the next tier.'” So it’s both through that
kind of retail on the ground talking to individuals basis but also on the keeping track of numbers and making sure everybody knows
where they stand on a basis. We have the option if we need to, if someone is out of compliance, we are giving recommendations
to our construction managers every month and so we can tell them, we’re not seeing any efforts here. Not only are they not meeting our targets, but we’re not even seeing
them showing any efforts that they’re trying to or they’re doing enough to try to. – Okay.
– Sorry. – I really appreciate your very
comprehensive response there I just wanna understand if this is a distinction
without a difference. If you’re providing the outreach, this is where I get a little confused, why would we need an
additional jobs coordinator if that’s the option we’re looking at. I mean if someone can distill
that for my simple mind, I’ll really appreciate it, especially when you have about up to .8% additional project costs, I just did a rough math. We have about $36 million, so that would be over
quarter million dollars of additional expenditure
for something we already do and it seems duplicative,
or am I missing something? Can someone help me? – My understanding is that there was interest in identifying somebody who’s only responsibility is this rather than all of them, but that is certainly up
for your consideration. – Right but I’m a little dumbfounded if we are already, if Solis Group is already providing that, why the need to expend
the additional dollars, I mean we could spend that on students, and homeless students for that matter that we have over 4000
of in this institution. So I’m just scratching
my head a little bit. And then I don’t
understand why we have to, as far as the coordination, I don’t think we have to, but coordinating with the city and Long Beach Unified, is our PLA even compatible, can we even legally incorporate langrage that is based on something
that is not even there, does Long Beach Unified have a PLA? And then is the city’s PLA aligned with us and are we getting
ourselves into a pickle, can’t we just have our own PLA and then subsequently amend it once they get theirs
or perhaps have an MOU with these entities to be better aligned? I don’t understand the need to incorporate language in this agreement as one of the options to do so. What are we proposing to achieve? Again I’m dumbfounded here, but perhaps someone can
help me see the light. Anybody? – Yeah do you have a response for that? – The only comment I would make to that would be that I can see
value in making sure, we’ve already had some
meetings in the past between the labor agreement coordinators at the Port, the City, and the college, there’s some advantage to be hand like this worker I was telling you about, we happen to have a contract with the port so I was able to kind of
shop her to both places, but if we have have a pool for example of graduates we can be
talking to each other about we have a great painter
who just came off a job here, there isn’t any more work
there but you have some. So I don’t necessarily think
that it needs to be done as part of the agreement, but I can be something that we can, we can talk about a working group. – And if I can add that
it’s important to remember that this agreement is
with the trades unions and what should be
addressed in that agreement is those things that
affect our relationship. Some of these options
for your consideration would be intent to establish
separate agreements from the PLA because it is specifically with the trades unions. So for instance, in the agreement, we specify having a
Project Labor Coordinator. We can certainly, when we retain our
Project Labor Coordinator in our contract with them and in our RFQ specify that we want to add coordination with other community PLA coordinators. That requirement doesn’t
need to be in our PLA, that would be in the contract we have with the Project Labor Coordinator. The extent to which we coordinate
with other agencies PLA, I would recommend if you choose to do so would be through a separate MOU between us and them. And if their PLAs are in
some level of transition or creation, then that’s when we talk about the intent language to consider to do that once
we have enough specificity that we can actually construct an MOU. But absolutely I think remembering that this agreement is with
us and the trades union and any other agreement should, my recommendation be in a separate MOU with that specific agency. – So the amendment that was
brought before us on June 26th would have been sufficient. And there would be no need, as is to add language to coordinate with other cities
in the PLA itself, correct? Is that a yes, I see you
head nodding your head. – The agreement would as presented not require us to have that consideration in the future as always,
there’s an opportunity to have the board adopt intent language to have that consideration. I will add that both the city and the Port PLAs do recognize
our student graduates and our programs. – Okay I think I understand, but I think it’s not a
good business practice for us to have vague
language in our contracts assuming our dancing partners, the building trades will
even be amenable to it. Have we asked them if
they would be amenable to coordination with the
city having the language as Trustee Ntuk suggested
earlier in the PLA to coordinate and whether or not they would be amenable or
is that even a viable option for us to even examine
or explore unilaterally? – I don’t want to speak on
behalf of the trades unions, Ron Miller could not be here tonight, but I believe Chris is in the audience and perhaps you’d like
to address the inclusion of an agreement with another
agency in the amendment? I also wanna be careful too that we don’t try to negotiate
the contract in public at this stage and so I
am wanna make it clear that I’m not asking you to try and negotiate your contract
with us at this stage, but if you could provide just
a little bit of feedback. – [Vivian] Welcome Chris. – Good evening honorable board
president, vice president, congratulations on your
election this evening. Trustees, staff, as far as
and my name is Chris Hannon, I’m a representative for the
Los Angeles Orange County building and construction trades council, as far as having coordination between the community college, the local school district and the city, there’s not a problem with it, but an agreement between
the building trades council our affiliates and the college doesn’t seem like the most
appropriate place for it. I think one thing that
isn’t being recognized, sometimes it’s recognized,
and sometimes it’s not, many of these things we’re already doing. The Port and the city have
both been multiple times to your campus, your
students are going to work on their projects the coordinator Solis Group, as well as the
coordinator for the city, the previous coordinator Parsons, and Pacific Gateways, they’re
drawing from your students right now, you’ve gotta substantial amount of students in
the pipeline right now compared to the amount of work. We set up the program and
approached the college in partnership with for the
city project labor agreement so that the community can have a place to get ready to take advantage of these job opportunities. When we reviewed the agreement recently with the city, we were
looking at four years and about 435,000 hours, give or take, amount of hours worked on these projects. When you look at the amount of graduates from the pre-apprenticeship program here as well as adding in WINTER, women in non-traditional employment roles, which is a local Long Beach program, getting women to the trades, we have 80 placements. The amount of hours it
takes to keep them busy on a conservative estimate is about 544,000 hours over four years. We can’t have every worker on a job being a new apprentice. We need an appropriate mix
of experienced craftspeople, we want them to all be local, but this college and the city, the recent elected both at the college and the city are really
the first agreements that put preference on hiring local about growing our community here before recent times, it wasn’t a priority of the board of the city council to do that. Long Beach Unified School District still hasn’t come on board yet, although we’re working with them, so in the amount of time
that you’ve had an agreement, the city’s had an agreement, we’re getting a substantial
number of local men and women into the trades, we wanna prioritize your students, and I think the language that
we’re adding is doing that. We sit on, we work with Long
Beach Unified all the time, I’m a board member on their nonprofit Long Beach Call, and
we’re looking for ways to get Long Beach Unified
students over here to the college to take the
pre-apprenticeship class. We’re working to
institutionalize the class, it’s gonna be a for-credit
class this fall. So it’s gonna get nine
units of college credit. This summer we’re bringing students, disadvantaged students
from around the state from a military academy around the state to Long Beach City College to your PCH campus to
take the MC3 program, so we’re doing a lot of neat things. There is a lot of coordination, but as far as it being in this agreement, we wanna be able to firmly tell you, there are no cost increases
in this agreement, it’s requiring the highest
trained, skilled labor for your construction,
there are no cost increases. When you add in hiring a jobs coordinator, which we’ve already done
through our non-profit to assist your students, there is something that you can point to that has a cost increase and then you need to look
at economies of scale, is it appropriate to have somebody, a coordinator working on this amount really you need a lot of opportunities, so I think it’s a good idea to continue to coordinate with the city. If the school district
is able to coordinate, I think that’s great, but I think it’s outside this agreement. – [Sunny] Thank you. – And this, would you like me to comment on any other questions,
or would you like me to, I’m available for whatever you need, I know this is a public comment, so I don’t want to take
liberties on anything, but if there’s anything else, there are a few other items that you raised earlier, I could comment on those if you like. – Sure don’t go far, Trustee
Ntuk has another question. – I wasn’t finished. – Oh I apologize. – I also have questions on the thresholds that was presented. So the $250,000, how is that determined? Is this based on a
survey of other agencies we’ve done, what do other
community college districts do in the majority of them, and is the $250,000 prudent, is that, I’m just trying
to better understand the threshold options that was presented? I forget which option it was. – We did examine PLAs of our neighboring
community college districts, as well as for the city and the Port. I can share that LA
Community College district has the lowest threshold, general construction projects over 225,000 with specialty projects over 25,000. Again when you get to lower cost projects, you do have higher costs with
the Project Labor Coordinator because simply there is
a baseline of involvement and work they have to do. And so it will increase the cost. It also anecdotally, I don’t
have empirical evidence for it, but would extend
the length of time it takes just because you have more steps. So if I identify one of
those lower cost projects you have to make sure you involve these additional steps and so
it could lengthen the process. Then we looked at other agencies, so Cerritos, so again LACCD, lowest. Cerritos College has a project list, so much like our current
one, no threshold, it’s $10 million. Rio Hondo interestingly their PLA expired and they extended it
for one single project of $29 million. So there’s is a little bit of an anomaly. I will say that Rancho Santiago has a project list. So for community colleges,
it seems like our neighbors lean towards the project list. The four projects on
their list are $10 million and then Coast Community College has the single project
agreement which is $20 million. We are different from those colleges in that we have a program that’s in excess of a billion dollars so we are incredibly privileged
to have a bond program the size of ours. When I look at the city, I believe that they have
a threshold of $500,000 but as you’ve heard theirs is expiring and they’re looking at their extension and the Harbor of the Port PLA has a project list, again for five years. I will also add that with the exception of
the single project extension and the single project PLA, those PLAs that have a term are all five year terms. One of them interestingly enough has two year automatic extension unless the board takes action. But really the baseline
appears to be a five year term, so we did look at other agencies. So we identified the 250 threshold as being something similar to LACCD, again I’m not having a
specific recommendation for that, only that I do recognize that there are challenges going that low. We then identified the
five and the 10 million as areas where you could
start seeing some definition, but truly most of our major projects are well over $10 million. – So the previous amendment on June 26th, was that a threshold? – It was about $10 million with one exception for a— – 1 1/2 million. – Demolition project,
Mr. Miller really wanted to be able to include
that demolition project, but again that’s up to— – Which was how much, is that 1.5 million? – Yes, so on slide 25, this would the corrected
list from that June proposal and you can see that all of these projects are over 50 million with the exclusion of the
demolition of building FF, which is about 1 1/2 million. So if you went with a $5 million threshold that would be excluded. – [Sunny] Okay. – And again when you’re
looking at thresholds, you can consider a five year term or a longer term, I would. – But with the amendment
you brought before us, was for 10 year term that we agreed to, that the building trades agreed to, and it was for a total of, well it’s for the projects
that you had listed. – Correct with the revised
estimated construction costs of nearly $130 million. – Okay I gotcha. I don’t have any more questions, but I do wanna get to the
bottom of the jobs coordinator, I’m not opposed to it,
I think it’s fantastic to coordinate but it sounds
like we already have someone providing that service. I also don’t think it’s prudent for us to pass on that cost to the contractor, the contractor already
has enough business costs and it’s gonna end up costing us more if we’re gonna pass the buck to them nearly over a quarter million dollars. I don’t think that’s a wise
business decision for us and also it would not send a good message to the business community. – Thank you. You had one more question still right, or are you done? – I did for Chris, but I can wait. – Okay Trustee Otto? – Excuse me. So what we’re having to, my sense of this is a discussion to inform
upcoming negotiations we may take a vote on this at the end as to what our priorities are, so that everybody’s clear, but we are not negotiating a contract, we are not doing anything
other than vetting ideas at this point based on our opportunity to review these things, with this additional information that we’ve been given since the last time. So with that said, I’m gonna try and simplify this ’cause this could take forever to even have this discussion because there’s so many moving parts to it and things to take into consideration. So my three main considerations here are first, we’re looking
out for our students, that’s what we do here and we’ve got agreements and we’re gonna try to do it
to the best of our ability help our students out with
regard to these things so that’s what we do all the time. My second concern is how to do you measure
a lot of these things. There are a lot of things
in these agreements that talk about best efforts, they talk about all kinds,
and I’ll give some examples, but the language is really soft, but some of it is obviously undefinable or unmeasurable and yet I
think it’s incumbent upon us to at least recommend language that would help us know
so that we don’t just wind up with something that
we don’t know what it is that we did. It’s like the old saw about well, what’s your goal? We’re gonna have meetings. Great, how many meetings did you have? Well we had 10. Well did you get anything done? I don’t know, that
doesn’t tell us very much in terms of measuring what
it is that we’re doing. And finally, the most important question in some ways is how long should this
agreement be for and why? And for organizing purposes, what I’d like to do is
just relatively rapidly go down the options and
give you my points of view on the options ’cause I think
it’ll make it a lot shorter than it would be to talk about everything. Option number one, no amendment to the existing proposed
project labor agreement. I don’t support that, I don’t
think it’s gonna happen, we’re already talking
about a lot of things that are different, so I’m not gonna devote
any more time to that. Number two, adopt the June 26th proposals with corrections to the project list and then extend by an additional 10 years with a list of specified defined projects and add student graduates to tier one. I’m not worried about the project list, I think we’ve done a great
job of cleaning that up, I see some that go beyond,
although I think all the projects oughta whatever we decide the duration is be allowed to be completed
with this agreement we’re not gonna cut it off at the end of any
arbitrary period of time. Extend for 10 years, I got
some heartburn on that. And the reason is just this, we have a five year agreement, we’re three years into the agreement, we’re taking about extending it to 10, 31, I’m watching what’s going on
at the Port of Los Angeles right now and they’re saying, “Hey we’re automating everything “and that’s what the future is.” Just like I had a
conversation with somebody about community colleges today and they say, “Your big
problem is you’ve got “all this online learning coming on “and that’s gonna change
the way we do things.” And so who knows what labor’s
gonna look like in 10 31, and I’m uncomfortable about saying in 2019 yeah we should do this because this’ll be great, we could wind up with contracts for
particular kinds of labor at a reasonably high cost that
we don’t really need anymore or that we need to reconfigure, so my recommendation for what it’s worth is that we oughta have points
where we can reconsider what we’re doing. I don’t mean throughout the agreements, I’m not even offended with 10 years as an extensions so long as periodically during that period of
time we can say timeout, let’s look at this and let’s see if it needs to be modified and how is it that we could do that. And then the third point under option two is add Long Beach City
College student graduates to tier one. If what we mean by that
is we’re gonna include graduates that are appropriate
graduates, I’m for it. When I say appropriate graduates, I don’t want all graduates, I don’t want yeah I wanted to be a nurse, but now I wanna be a crane operator. I think the likelihood
of those things happening is very small and we
oughta incentive people to go into these programs ’cause they know there are jobs at the end of them and those people we can help identify if they do their
pre-apprenticeship programs that we pay for, then I think that they oughta be added to tier one regardless of where it is that they live. Number three is consider
alternative extension lengths of five years, I kinda said that, that we oughta have an
opportunity to look at it, we can talk about what the
best way to do that is. Number four consider establish an estimated construction cost threshold, rather than a project list with alternate term limits. I don’t like the idea of thresholds and the reason I don’t
like the idea of thresholds is because our project labor agreement now seems to be working out pretty well and to put a limit on it I think just confuses it
and adds a lot more work and you don’t know what. I had some questions too
about the demolition contract. Who do you need to demolition? And I think I’ll ask Chris before I’m done to tell me what his
thoughts are about that. But my sense is if you’re
building a building and you’re doing a bunch
of complicated stuff, you need sophisticated
people to be doing this, but if you’re tearing down a building, if you fail, the building
doesn’t go back up, it’s just coming down, but at the same time, I’m not
in the construction industry and I’d like some more input about that. So I don’t like the idea about thresholds, I don’t think that they’re necessary. Then onto number five, Long Beach City College
students graduate options add Long Beach City
College student graduates to tier one, I’ve talked
about that I think that we are looking out
for ours students first and foremost so that’s a good thing to do. B, request that the trade unions to provide Long Beach
student college graduates preferential entry into
apprenticeships programs. I like that idea, I like anything that we can say to our
students, you come here, you go through this
pre-apprenticeship program you do what it is that we say, you’re working towards your future, there are students the agreements with us I wanna make sure that we
get everything out of us that we can for our students, so I think that’s a good idea. Six, add a stipulation that trade unions advocate the LBCC training programs when negotiating PLAs with other agencies. It sounds good, but I
think it’s unmeasurable or very difficult to measure. Why just the other day I
was talking to somebody about this and does this count? And do I have to fill out
a form that says that? I think that what goes on now is pretty good in this area. I think that we, and it goes to the Project
Labor Coordinator question, I think what’s going
on is that informally, we’re talking to Long Beach Unified, informally we’re talking to the port, informally we’re talking to other areas and we’re getting a lot
of benefits from that. I think if you formalize that, if you make it into a more stylized, doing right now realizing I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth. On the one hand I’m saying
you can’t measure it and on the other hand, I’m
saying don’t worry about it. But really, there has to be some faith, there always has to be some faith, and in anything that you do and when I see what Solis is doing, what I see the results of
the coordination informally, am I worried that maybe Long Beach Unified will have a huge project
at exactly the same time we are and that there’s
not enough labor out there to satisfy the need for
workers at that time? I don’t think that if
you have a requirement that we talk to each other that’s gonna be solved. I think that’s gonna be solved anyway, I think that coordination will exist and will go on and so
I’m not a fan of saying that you need to increase the coordination or formalize the coordination, require meetings with these groups. I think that it goes on now, and I think that it’s adequate. Then six, no that’s the
one I just talked about. Seven, expand tier three
to include both Los Angeles and Orange counties. It seems logical to me to do that, especially if you’re worried
about getting enough laborers from time to time although
that happens over time and why not I’m not worried
about they’re different, they may trump us, but before I would answer that question, I would like to know how
many students we have in Orange County, and I’d like to know how that would be done, I’d like to know what we think the demand issues will be with a list of projects
that we’re gonna do because I would need that information and believe me I’m not
trying to manage this program but I’m just telling you the way that I would think about
it in terms of the question about whether we should add Orange County to the tiers. And make them be tier
three, but by the way, if they were students,
they could be in tier one if they are students or veterans. The Project Labor Coordinator, and it says “A specify that
the Project Labor Coordinator “duties include alignment with PLAs “at other Long Beach agencies.” It’s what I said before,
one it’s hard to measure, I mean how are you gonna say whether they’re doing a good job? Two I think my sense
now is it’s not broken. And that if it’s not broken,
you don’t have to fix it. That what’s going on is
that it’s working out reasonably well and I’m
happy to take evidence to the contrary, but
it’s just as Sunny said, an additional cost and
not an insignificant cost. By the way, I look at all of this stuff and my estimate it’s about
a million dollars cost to do this over the course
of all these projects and that’s a lot of money. And I don’t say leave the
construction trades alone to do everything, and just trust them, but trust and verify is the way I think that it should be done. That’s the way I think it is being done pretty much right now. I think that the trades have
been pretty good about that, in fact, one of my
suggestions that I floated was you know, we pay for this
pre-apprenticeship program, we, Long Beach City College, pays for it, and then what happens
is they go to the unions and the union says it’s $500, it’s $600 to do it, and by the way
you gotta get all your tools and all of a sudden we’ve
paid for all that stuff and the unions aren’t. So I have suggested that the unions waive participate with us, or coordinate somehow to pay those fees, initiation fees or to buy tools, but I understand that and
I’d like to hear about this that there are programs out there now that help address that to some extent but I don’t know to what extent. All I know is first I’m
looking out for our students, and our students are less likely if we’re 70% below the poverty line to be able to pay those initiation fees and be able to buy their tools and so what we oughta be doing is saying you’ve gone through all this, we paid for everything else, hey trades, step up or help us out, figure out a way to get this done because that would be to
the benefit of our students. Then B is adopt separate intent language to explore partnerships
with the City of Long Beach, to have a shared Project
Labor Coordinator, kinda talked about that, you’ve gotta make a better case to me that that’s necessary. Right now, the way that all this works seems to be pretty successful and I haven’t heard many
horror stories about the work’s not getting done. I think that if you have a structure that’s set up that says hey,
this is what we’re looking for we’ve got the numbers we want 15% or we want 40% of all three tiers that if it’s not meeting
that then what you say to Solis or somebody else is what up? You’re not doing it, how
are you gonna do this? And sometimes they’re gonna say, “Well we’re at a phase of the project “where by the end of the
project we’ll be there.” And we’ll say, “Yeah but
that’s not what we thought, “we thought it should
have been there earlier.” But those are conversations
that Boards of Trustees should not be directing you to do, we should just be saying
this is what we want, these are our goals, these are not rigid to the extent that we’re
gonna put on a green eyeshade at the end of every month and say how we doing? But at the same time,
we need to develop ways to measure things. Let me go back to a couple
of slides that I said, I’m almost done. When I say the difficulty
of measuring things, I’ll give you a couple of examples. Union support for training programs section 15.1, importance of training. The parties will facilitate, encourage, and assist local residents to commence and progress in apprenticeship programs. I think we need to develop some metrics. I think we need to say okay, how many, how are they doing, and
we need to add those to the kinds of information
that is being given to us by Solis so that we have an ability to say how our students are doing
and it’s more refined data than just well they’re here, they seem to be doing okay as
we have learned over the years about our students, the things
that make them not succeed have very little to do
with the cost of tuition or anything else. It’s that there’s a car
accident or somebody has a baby or their car breaks down. We’re hypersensitive and very smart about how to make people succeed or what it takes to make people succeed. And the reason that we can do that is because we’ve done a thing or two and we know what to look at and how to do interventions and to see what’s going on and I’d like to see that
same kind of thinking applied to these programs, these pre-apprenticeship programs. And remember they are
pre-apprenticeship programs, these are not apprenticeship programs. They get to then go into
an apprenticeship program, and you don’t want us to pay
for a lot of getting ready to go and then have them
based on their inabilities to do things not get into the programs that we have been training them for. It’d be like saying, “Well
you’ve done everything “to get to graduation, but
you’re not gonna graduate.” ‘Cause graduation here is having a job, getting into an apprentice
program or something else. That was, two other quick examples. Article 22, work opportunities programs participate in, pardon?
– No. – Participate in district based job fairs, career days and outreach events. I think we do that now, and I think we do that
in a pretty good way could it be enhanced? I suppose but I’d also like to know if the people that attend those things how many of them wind up with jobs and what’s the path to
winding up at a job? You don’t sit at a lecture
and hear them say things and then walk out and get a job and so we’re an educational institution, we know where the momentum points are, we know where the places are where can say we need a little nudge here, we need to look out for our students, we need to figure out what
it is that they’re gonna do. Likewise it says, “Assist
district residents “in contacting the apprenticeships
training committee,” okay, but what’s the takeaway? How do we know whether we’re? There are dozens of these here and it’s not a problem that’s limited to this at all. Then the ninth one is adopt separate intent language to explore aligning with LBUSD if and when they have a PLA, and also coordinate with other ones. And I’ve kind of covered that already, and it’s like I think
we do a pretty good job of informal coordination. Should we be able to
monitor that in some way? Yeah at some level, but I
don’t wanna spend the money to do that. I want the good efforts
that are going on now to be routinized a little bit and to be used but I’m
encouraged when I hear Joe tell us that I’m yeah at this fair, I met this girl now she’s at the, I think that’s the way things get done in this particular world, the trades world and so I feel good about that and Chris you could
address a couple of things that I’ve raised, I’d appreciate it. – Okay I didn’t take notes, so if I miss something please stop me, but I’m gonna address a couple issues at the same time. The way that we create a
preference for your students is we’re gonna create demand for them. Most certainly we could
amend the standards of a program to give some
kind of special treatment for your student but
we’ve done that really for veterans across the board but we have 20 pages of programs that serve this area so it
would be very very expensive to have every program amend their program. And then imagine if some of the neighboring
school districts did the same thing. And then all of a sudden you get something that’s unmanageable so what we do is we create
demand and the local unions that are tasked with
manning the projects here they know that they
have to meet these goals in Long Beach otherwise the trustees aren’t gonna be agreeable to continuing to renew agreements continue partnerships with us so by having a
longer agreement here it gives our trades confidence that we’re gonna need
to supply skilled labor in Long Beach for years to come so we need to take in
more Long Beach residents we need to take in more graduates of your pre-apprenticeship
program from this community. Remember other communities
same thing the trustees and the school board members and the council members you know when we do a
development agreement on a football stadium in a neighboring community
that’s $3 billion and they want to see
the residents work on it so other communities are doing that so by doing a longer agreement
it creates more demand here where we know we have to
meet these requirements. But on the flip side, what happens if things change? Right now in article 20, the amendment would keep many provisions of the existing agreement, it would just amend where stated, so in article 20 amendments: The provisions of this
CSWPA can be renegotiated supplemented, rescinded
or otherwise altered only by mutual agreement in writing hereafter signed by the parties. So that means that anytime during the life of the agreement if we’re both agreeable to amending something most
certainly we can do it at any time. We don’t do it often, but we do do it. We just did it, we do
it from time to time, this is a partnership,
we wanna be successful. So we can most certainly
do it at any time. For your partnership
and then for your cost of the pre-apprenticeship program, we actually partnered for
the new round of funding for your pre-apprenticeship
program with the college with your workforce development department we partnered our grant together and we were successful in
getting a chancellor’s CIA grant of $500,000 which is funding that program. I can’t tell you for certain that it only happened because
you partnered with us, but I can tell you many
people wrote great proposals and we partnered with two colleges and both colleges got
them on consecutive cycles because it brings a stronger partnership. We have 92% of all our opportunities for construction and apprenticeship, we’re your partner on there
it makes for a better proposal when you have the industry
leading in apprenticeship, so we’re already doing that. As far as somebody needing
to pay initiation fees or needing hand tools
to get into a program and if that cost is ever something that they couldn’t afford, that’s why we partnered with
the city’s Pacific Gateways, they have funds, we all have funds and other funds that can
take away those barriers, they can buy somebody their
first set of hand tools they can pay an initiation fee, if getting transportation was a barrier, they can even provide a card for gas so that they can get to
work their first little bit to get some paychecks and
then move on their own. These are careers, they’re
started as apprentices so average starting pay
right around 19 $20 an hour, when they finish their apprenticeships they’re gonna be making anywhere
between 30 to $60 an hour on the paycheck without
even considering benefits. When you consider the benefits, you’re taking about 40 on up
to just shy of $100 an hour so these are great career opportunities. For your demolition job, you’re on existing campuses, whether it be this campus or your Pacific Coast Highway Campus, you already have to pay prevailing wage, you want somebody going in there with precision and only demoing
what needs to be demoed, we need to be careful of utilities, we need to be careful
of students and faculty and the community so you
wanna have the best people you can working out here. You’re already paying for
the top quality wage rates prevailing wage requires that, you might as well have the best trained, because there is precision involved when you’re going in between two buildings and you’re only wanting
to demo certain aspects, not to mention you get your local hire. So you get a provision when that company calls
down to the union hall, they’re first priority is
to send a district resident, a veteran, a student, as
defined by this agreement, so you get the opportunity
to get more students, more community on the job. So it’s nothing but a benefit, the labor rates are all the same. I could be missing a few things, but I think overall, many
things are already happening. The threshold, the more projects that we get a chance to work on, the more opportunities there are to sponsor that apprentice. The more opportunities there are to get that dispatch. I would require them on every project here because you’re already
paying the top wage rates. If you brought in any
other form of services to the district you want the best and even more important is you’re hoping that your students get opportunities, you want them to have
the best opportunities, so I would make it as broad as possible, but hey I’m supposed to say that, but really it makes sense, when you’re paying the top rates you might as well require
the top level of training. Even better benefit to
get a local resident, to get a veteran, to get a student, that opportunity. Orange County, there’s already an ability to get an Orange
County resident on the project we have a 40% goal. If we’re meeting 40%, right
now we’re exceeding it, right around 60%, there’s still provisions for a dispatch from Orange County. The first dispatch is gonna
come from your first tier, if there wasn’t a first tier available there’s the second tier,
there’s the third tier if those aren’t available, there’s still the provision
for an Orange County resident to work on the project. Really your first priority
is your first tier and then it goes out from there. You know are we able to negotiate on that? Absolutely, this isn’t
the proper place for it but there’s already provisions, but if it’s something that’s
very important for you, bring it up in negotiations, it’s not 100% unreasonable
to ask for something like that but there’s
already provisions for it. – [Douglas] The only question you missed was the one about what do we
do about the Dodgers bullpen? (laughing) – If I knew the answers to that, maybe I’d be in a different line of work, I can help you on construction though. – Trustee Otto do you have anything else? Thank you so much Chris. – [Chris] You’re welcome. – Trustee Baxter? – First of all I wanna thank Joe, who I know very well and Chris for coming
tonight and sitting there and listening to all our questions. And in particular, Chris,
I think you clarified a lot of things in my mind, because my major
objection was the 15 years because as Trustee Otto says, you don’t know what’s gonna happen, the world could end in 12 years. So I appreciate what you’re saying and that makes me feel more comfortable in making a decision, so thank
you very much for coming. – [Chris] You’re welcome. – Thank you. And I do have some questions, but I’m also very cognitive of the time, and I just want first of all, thank you all three of you guys for being here also,
I’d like to echo that. I agree with what Trustee Otto said when he first began his questioning, that this is a conversation
that will certainly take hours and hours and a lot more discussion. I’m happy that we’ve touched upon a lot of these specific questions, I love the options. So rather than go through my questions, which I don’t even know if some of them have already been asked, a lot of them have already been discussed, but what is the pleasure of the board in terms of what direction
you wanna go from here. Because it is an action
discussion/action item, I know that I do have a request in to have the facility subcommittee meet, but with the reorganization of the board, do we need to reappoint people to the facilities subcommittee, and then have them a stipulation that they meet prior
to the August meeting? I’m sorry, it would be the August meeting so they can come back for
an additional action item? So what is the staff
recommendation on that, and do any trustees
wanna weigh in on that. I mean I could go through
additional questioning, but I think. – [Chris] I’ll talk all
night about our trades. – Sure, and you know what
it’s actually very interesting and it is a great education and I love talking about opportunities to improve what we already
offer to our students. But what is the recommendation of staff in terms of the meeting, Dr. Romali? – If it’s the pleasure of the board to have a facilities subcommittee, and you want to do it prior
to us bringing it back at August you can do so. You can bring a resolution
to nominate two people to that committee and add
those people to the committee. – Okay and then as far as, is it required, and
this might be for legal, it is required that I
voice some of my questions and concerns now in a public setting, or is it something that can be done in the facilities subcommittee meeting, or just addressed by staff? I know I was able to ask some questions at a meeting earlier in the week, but what is the best route to take? – From a Brown Act perspective, it depends on whether or not you’re a member of that subcommittee. If you are you can
express your views then. If you’re not, and there’s
two other members of the board on that subcommittee, then
it would be a violation of the Brown Act unless that subcommittee had its meeting agendized
as a public meeting. So from a Brown Act perspective, it would be best if you’re
not on the subcommittee to address your views here
at the public meeting. – Okay and I think that
we are going to reorganize since we did reorganize the board, I think we will reassign trustees to the subcommittee meeting. – If I may add, if you intend to have a facilities subcommittee meeting, the two members assigned to that would have to have an
opportunity to come back and present their recommendation
to the board in full so that the board could
then express a position on that recommendation
that I could then take and negotiate. So I think it would be reasonable to anticipate bringing back a PLA for your approval in
September rather than August to allow for that facilities
subcommittee to meet to then bring back a recommendation for the Board of Trustees to
consider that recommendation and give me board direction that I then could move foreword and then look at September. – And okay that just full disclosure that that is part of the discussion that we had with Dr. Romali and Vice President Drinkwine last week where we did mention that having a facilities
subcommittee meeting report back to the board in August, obviously they would have
not been able to meet and report back today, but I would like to move on the agenda, so in the interest of time, should the action item be the reassignment of a new facilities
subcommittee meeting now or do we wait until we
get the trustee reports and trustee committees? – Mr. Lipton? If it is the wish of the board to assign people to the
facilities committee but it is not on the agenda, how would they do so? – With trustee committees
toward the end of the agenda? – It could be done then, or it could be done as
part of this agenda item because it relates directly
to the agenda item. And I also could point out that another option is to appoint a special
ad hoc subcommittee, and that’s sort of what I was thinking you wanted to do initially, rather than assign it to the
existing standing subcommittee, which would be subject to the Brown Act. Having a separate one
time ad hoc committee to look into this issue and report back to the board would be another possibility. – [Vivian] Trustee Zia? – Thank you Madam Chair. One, I do serve on the
facilities subcommittee, and I’d like to continue serving. Two, I don’t understand why
we need to delay this further until the facilities subcommittee meets. Why don’t you provide your input since the item is agendized
so that we can give direction to staff now rather than
delaying it til September? I’m not clear on why we can’t do that. – Trustee Otto? – We either quite frankly, I think most of what anybody, all the views have been expressed, it’s just a question
of relatively quickly, not if you take a lot of time saying these are the things that
we recommend going forward. – Okay Trustee Ntuk? – Thank you, yeah I’d
like to make a motion to direct staff to move
forward on the process and I tried to keep track of
what I heard from everybody, agreeable options, so
I’d like to make a motion to move forward on 4B, 5A. – Whoa whoa whoa, you
gotta say what those are. – Okay I’ll start again. – It’s like what are the baseball scores. (laughing)
– Sure well 4B would be a $5 million threshold of 2041. 5A would be defining student residents. Six would be–
– Two what? – I had 5A in the presentation, amend district residents to
include student graduates was on the slide. Option six, the stipulation to advocate for Long Beach City
College training programs with other agencies. 8A was coordinate with a
Project Labor Coordinator duties to coordinate with PLAs
at other Long Beach agencies. Nine was an intent language
with Long Beach Unified and then also I heard, I
think it was Trustee Otto, wanted a five year timeline
check-in to reassess, and I’d like to add on
an annual written report to the Board of Trustees with prearranged measurements, hire rates, and annual achievements as my motion. – I’m sorry, can I just
make a point of order. I don’t understand why
we can’t direct staff to explore all options
amenable to both the trades and us and have them bring back what is the recommendation
based on their exploration of all these options. Why do we have to get surgical
with the different options and pick and choose? – If the question’s for me, I think it’s important
for us to tell staff our intention, but of
course, it’s a negotiation, there’s not guarantee that all the things that we list are gonna come back in the next drafted version, but also that’s the intent of this agenda item is
to give staff input, items to negotiate. So that was my motion. – I would make a friendly amendment to explore all options two through nine and have staff come back to us in August and not delay this item out of good faith since we promised last board meeting that we would have this done in August, and not delay the item til September. – Okay I understand, there is a motion on the floor, so in order for us to discuss it, there does need to be a second. – Second. – It has been moved and seconded, and I’m not even gonna attempt to repeat what the motion is because I know it was very extensive. – I can restate it. – And I might be out of line here, but I think pretty much everything that I wanted to ask was brought up, I do have one question though, and it was regarding the
Building B renovation project, is that included in this amendment? Did I miss that? So this is regarding, it was
approved on the June 26th BOT meeting, it was called
a Building B renovation, it was $22 million. It showed construction starting in 2023, but I don’t see it on this amendment. – It is not on the list
of the proposed amendment. I am forwarding to the larger list, to see where that lands. So Building B is listed on this table as– – Item 16.
– Item 16 to begin in 2034-2035. These examples were constructed directly from the 2041 plan, so if we had moved that up, we can certainly ensure that we look at whether we can include that or not. However I will say that if we started the design process or the bid process and we’d missed the opportunity
to include that building because we would have already
done it without the benefit of the PLA. – No I do understand that, but the reason why I highlighted that is because I believe it was part of the five year construction plan and that IPP that we had approved. – [Marlene] Oh thank you. – So it was part of the IPP, and it was actually it
was moved up to 2023, but I don’t see it on the amendment, so I think. And then the other one that I didn’t see was, it was in the facilities master plan, it was Building X, the central plan and I think that that was also part of, it should have been a
part of the amendment. – So to your first point for Building B, it is on the five year plan, it’s one of the projects we thought had the best opportunity
to receive state funding and that’s why if it were
approved it would be moved up. We can certainly add language to ensure that Building B if and when, not if, but
when it is constructed that it be included since it’s still early enough, we can certainly do that and make sure that
Building B is on any list in either way. – So that’s contingent,
sorry to interrupt, that’s contingent upon state funding. – Correct, it’s one of those programs that we always make an evaluation annually with that five year plan, which of our programs is
most likely to qualify. And truthfully, we think we’re reaching the end of our ability to be
eligible for state funding but they are shuffling
some of those criteria so we wanna keep our options open. So if it did receive it,
we would shift it up, if it didn’t, we would
leave it where it is. For the central plant however, the expansion of that
has already been planned and had already begun. So it was excluded from the list in the original amendment,
but it is necessary because it does support the expansion of construction throughout the campus, but since it was not included
on the original agreement then it was not subject to the PLA. – Okay all right, I appreciate that. Yeah I would like to
have the new amendment include language that’ll
address that contingency in the even that we are
granted state funding that those projects be included because I don’t want anybody in the public to question why we’re working on a project that wasn’t included but at
least we have that safeguard to say that it was contingent
upon state funding. – Can I raise a point of order? I’m not sure, I know we have a motion and a second on the floor. – We did, and I admitted
that I might be out of order, but I didn’t have an
opportunity to ask my questions. – But then there was an effort to make a friendly
amendment, did that just die or what happened because
I’m not unsympathetic to what Sunny proposed. – I think it wasn’t even entertained, by the chair so I kinda gave up. But I’m happy to make, I made the friendly amendment. – I apologize Trustee Zia, I didn’t even hear it. – Yeah I tried to make an amendment to explore options, be less micromanaging with our motions and try to
be a little bit more flexible and allow staff to negotiate all options except option one which is no amendment. And then report back to the board on their negotiation opportunities and conclusions with the building trades. – Okay I apologize, I’m
sorry that got past me. Trustee Ntuk your motion does have a friendly
amendment on the floor so it’s up to you to
determine how you want to amend your motion? – Yeah it’s too broad,
I wouldn’t accept it. – Okay we’ve got a motion
and a second on the floor with specific stipulations
for the options. Would you like to take a shot at reading the different options or how do you wanna do
that madam secretary? – Are we not including
the friendly amendment at this moment?
– Correct. – Okay Trustee Ntuk
motioned to move forward with options 4B, 5A 6, 8C, 9, and a five year timeline
with annual reports to the board and bring back
for approval in September. – Correction, I did not
say 8C, 8A as in apple. – You did not say 8C. – No, 8A. – Oh you were speaking about engaging in the jobs coordinator I thought. – On my printout, 8A is specify the Project Labor Coordinator duties, include coordination of PLAs and other Long Beach agencies. – 8A?
– That’s 8A on my printout. – [Jackie] I’ll correct that okay 8A. – I’m sorry can you just for the benefit of the public, not gonna know what 4B is, 4A is, 5A is, can we just
read out those options since you seem to think my
amendment was way too broad I’d like to have a spirit of transparency, have the public understand
what we’re voting on. – I would add those to the recommendation. – Can you read what they are? – I can’t see all the pages here, so the motion to move forward with options 4B, which is to establish an estimated construction cost threshold, in short, B is five
million is that correct? 5A to add LBCC student
graduates to tier one, is that correct? 6 add stipulations that trade unions advocate for LBCC training programs when negotiating PLAs with
other agencies, correct? 8A, specify that Project
Labor Coordinator duties include alignment with PLAs at other Long Beach agencies, that is under the Project
Labor Coordinator, correct? 9, adopt separate intent language to explore aligning with LBUSD if and when they have a PLA, currently LBUSD does not have a PLA, and add the five year timeline with annual reports to the board to bring back for
approval at the September. – Sorry to clarify, it would be every five
years, reassessment. – I’m sorry what? – Every five years, a reassessment. – Reassessment with annual reports? – And separately there
would be an annual report to the board reporting on achievements, hiring rates, and
prearranged measurements. – You’re losing me. Okay every five years reassessment, I’m ending that there, continue. – After that the next one would be an annual written report to the board. – [Jackie] And annual
written reports to the board. – Highlighting achievements, hiring rates, and prearranged measurements. – [Jackie] Highlighting
achievements, highlighting, I’m sorry, achievements? – Prearranged measurements? – Prearranged?
– Yeah. So we would agree what we’re
gonna put in the report that’s measurable. – Prearranged measurements. – Did you wanna do? – I don’t want prearranged measures means? – Well agreed upon measurements maybe. – Yeah agreed upon measurements. – Agreed upon measurements. – Then president may I ask a question? – Absolutely. – I don’t agree with
all that was presented, so would I not vote no? That’s a double negative. – The answer is yes you wouldn’t. – So I would vote no because I don’t agree with all of them. – Correct you could vote no. – Point of order, if you had something that you wanted to change, I think now is the time to say what you’re not agreeable to. – Well I don’t need to
make a friendly amendment, can I explain why?
– Yeah. – Well I’m against 4B because of the $5 million seems too low. Okay I’m against 8A because, why should we have a
Project Labor Coordinator doing things in alignment with other PLAs, and I’m against option 9 which is adopt a separate intent langrage and again it has to do
with the Long Beach Unified does not have a PLA, so why
are we even bothering with this because it seems to me that that’s something we
could do in the future if indeed that happened. So those are my concerns. The other ones I’m in favor of. – I have the same concerns and that’s why I was trying to make it a little bit more flexible. I don’t think we should have a minimum
of $5 million threshold. That $1 1/2 million project
that you were opposed too, Trustee Otto and with
your motion Trustee Ntuk of five million, those are laborers jobs you’re gonna take away. Those are good union jobs, $1 1/2 million is our
very own laborers here Trustee Ntuk and Trustee
Otto, I wouldn’t support that and why would you even
not want to entertain option two where it would
include that project? And I don’t understand
why we’re not looking at giving preferential hiring to students, why are we excluding 5B? I mean it just doesn’t make sense for us to micromanaging, this is what I’m a little bit upset about is it even within our purview, are we now getting into negotiating and getting too prescriptive, Madam Secretary, I can’t hear myself, would you mind I can’t hear myself. I don’t think we should
like Trustee Baxter says, and the remarks I made, I don’t think we should
have intent language and then of the jobs coordinator piece, who’s going to be paying this person? I mean what is this motion? What are we trying to
have staff incorporate these options specifically in totality and why are we excluding
some of these good options? I really don’t understand
it doesn’t make sense to me. And to also rule out the
lower thresholds as well. – So if I can address what
Trustee Zia just said, I actually agree with both Trustee Zia and Trustee Baxter’s proposed changes and the notion that it is a
little bit too restrictive, and that just speaks to my request to have a facilities subcommittee meeting actually meet with staff to iron this out. I mean we’re going beyond the second hour of discussion on this item, and I get that at the June meeting we said that we would take the time and bring back in August
or whenever in the future a better agreement that was inclusive of all of our concerns, and that would be the opportunity. I stand by what I said a month ago, I don’t understand what the rush is. We’re not running out of time, I feel like we’ve talked
about this for two hours which is fine, but we all
have different concerns, we all have different issues, I agree with pretty much
all the different arguments that have happened in
the last couple of hours, that’s all the more reason why we should have a facilities
subcommittee meeting, sit down, iron this out, meet with staff weigh the options and let this happen in a
three hour meeting there, and let everybody state their opinion, go back and forth, let
the appropriate partners give input and see what can happen and then if we have to have
a report back in August, great, we agree on that then we vote on it we say yeah we like that we don’t like it and then we come back in September. Are we required to have
it come back in August for a vote, can that be amended? – That’s what we said last time. That’s what we voted on last
time when the item came on and then Madam Chair, I did try to schedule
a facilities committee in July, Trustee Ntuk
didn’t want to meet in July he wanted to defer til November. I don’t think that’s okay. I have it in writing. – So Trustee Otto and then Trustee Ntuk, I just, and again we
could sit here all night, we can, but I don’t think it’s necessary to drag things out like this, I think that’s there a time and place and a forum and perhaps my understanding
of board meetings is different than other
people’s understanding of board meetings, and I think that there’s
an efficiency factor that I would like to have happen during my board meetings during my term as president, that I think a lot of this discussion and negotiating should happen during appropriate times
and meetings outside of it and that the board meeting from my experience, board
meetings that I’ve attended tend to move a little faster, the information is there, if the public wants to
click on an attachment and read it, if they
wanna make public comment if staff wants to be involved, that’s my understanding, but to have two and three hour discussions this way where we’re basically
negotiating a contract is really what we’re doing, I just don’t think that’s appropriate, and perhaps that speaks to
my leadership philosophy, but I don’t think that
this it the time and place. And 40 minutes ago when I suggested that we have a facilities
subcommittee meeting, so perhaps in June when we said we might
be able to bring it back or we should bring it back in August, whatever the language was, look at how many options, we didn’t have nine options to consider. Staff didn’t spend hours
preparing nine options at the time. I still have a question
regarding a mathematical question that I have with the amendment that was presented. So that to me is, I’d like to, I know we have a motion and a second, I know we’re discussing that emotion but at this point, I’m
inclined to vote nay on that motion and
speak against the motion and to have this board consider just moving forward with the
facilities subcommittee meeting having them do this, having them iron it out and perhaps we should, we
have reorganized the board so get some fresh blood in that room and get some fresh blood
to give perspective in that meeting and then have that meeting
report back in August, have an actual amendment perhaps, or have a recommendation
from the committee with an amendment that
is being recommended and then determine if we like that or if we wanna send it back to them. And I believe if I’m not mistaken with legal, I believe
that that can be done, is that something that we can do, and I’m sorry to keep calling you back up but I wanna do things right. – Yes that’s correct. There could be a motion
to defer this matter to the facilities subcommittee and report back to the board under this agenda item. – One more question,
I’m sorry Trustee Otto, I’ll get back to you in just one second. One more question, if we vote
this particular motion down because I do think it is too restrictive, I really do, if we send make a motion and send it back to the facilities subcommittee meeting and ask them to iron this out, which I think is the right thing to do and when that facilities
subcommittee comes back with a recommended agreement, can it be decided on that day, or will it just be an information item report back from the committee? – That’s really up to the board in how it’s agendized. If it’s agendized as
approval of the amendment, then certainly the board
has the option at least of approving the amendment, it’s not required to,
but if it’s agendized as approval of an amendment for this project labor agreement, then that’s something the board could do if it there was a motion, a second and a majority vote. – Okay so indulge me for one moment more, let’s just say in this imaginary world we have the facilities
subcommittee meeting meets tomorrow morning. Okay we know that’s not gonna happen and they meet for however long they meet and they come up with actual agreement that both parties like
and everybody’s happy and questions are addressed and answered, and the board gets a copy, we email it, we can find any typos or errors, can we at that time say yes or no agendize
this as an action item and have that be brought
back at the August meeting for a vote and approval at that time? Or does the facilities
subcommittee meeting have to report in August if we don’t require them to in the motion? – I think I understand the question, the subcommittee does
not need to report back to the board or its
report can be in the form of discussing it when the amendment itself comes to the board, but that doesn’t have
to be a separate item for the subcommittee
to report to the board, if I understood and answered
your question correctly. Of course all of this presumes that there’s gonna be an agreement with the other side with the contractor. ‘Cause even though the board
could approve the amendment, it’s not a valid amendment unless it’s also agreed
to by the other side. – Trustee Otto, thank
you thank you Mr. Lipton. – Let me make a couple of observations about where we are and what we’re doing. There’s a motion on the floor that looks to me based on what people have said is gonna go down to defeat and you haven’t even heard
what I’m gonna say about it. And so what you’re talking about is doing a substitute thing which is to send it to
the facilities committee of the board but that as I understand it, is a committee that is limited in terms of who can participate because it is a, I think it’s a general committee but it only has two members and I think we would be
in pardon the expression, deep doo-doo if somebody
from the board showed up to talk at that meeting about what it was that they wanted which would be the best way
to work out these things together, but if you
made it a noticed meeting and therefore that
anybody could participate, I’m not saying that they will, but it might avoid an eventuality which is this discussion again in August. I want to get this done
as quickly as possible but I agree that there’s
too many moving part, there are too many things that people disagree about and that was why the idea
of sending it back to staff to have staff come up with a
more refined version of this after taking into consideration everything that happened tonight, wasn’t a bad idea. All I’m saying if you wanna, it looks like it’s going down to defeat and if you wanna get the
best idea of consensus I don’t think you can have two people whoever they are, ’cause I understand that they’re not appointed at this point, make a decision ’cause the
decisions are made already. But thinking about it is
pretty much all over the map. – Madam Chair, I don’t understand why you can’t ask your questions now, we have a board meeting, we’ve spent the past 15 minutes talking about process, I mean let’s talk about your questions, and if need be, let’s
give direction to staff or have an ad hoc committee
comprised of two people to negotiate on this PLA. I mean if that’s the desire of the board, but I don’t think my friendly amendment was contrary to the amendment that was on the floor, it just made it a little more flexible and I’m still open to putting it up since it sounds like the
motion on the floor will fail, I mean we can call to vote it if you like, but I’m just presenting
you with some options, I’d like to hear what your questions are. – Yeah thanks. Couple things, thank you for the feedback on the motion everybody. I just wanted to say I understand, my understanding of this agenda item was the opportunity to give staff input and direction on parameters
to go and negotiate. This is not a professional
service contract, this is not a collective
bargaining agreement with our employees, this is a hybrid in the middle, and these things are
negotiated at the board, discussed at the board,
the board can have input. This is the opportunity for
the board to have input, I tried to take bits and pieces of what I was listening and
hearing from different people to incorporate into one direction. And just to step through, I recommended 4B because
I think we could go for the longer time frame, we head that that’s better for workers to have certainty. That the super low threshold of 250,000 that LACCD has would be difficult for us and potentially more
expensive on smaller projects I don’t think 5A is
mutually exclusive of 5B, 5A had new language, 5B was
the already existing language is that correct Marlene, the
difference between 5A and 5B? – We have language
currently in the agreement that does reference using our programs, so it may not be worded exactly like this, but there are some considerations. – 5B wold be new language, or is that already
existing in the agreement? – We have something that gets
us much of the way there, and I guess it’s up to
your collective decision whether you believe we
need to document activities that already occur in the agreement. – Okay so I think it’s important for us to document
what’s already happening, well people say well how’s it’s doing? Like we don’t know. Like I didn’t know we’re
already working with the Port or that if people are
the story you heard today about the woman doing the iron worker. Those are good stories
that we should document and report back, that we can point to and say yeah, here’s the examples of how it’s working for us, I think that’s important. That’s also why I put
the annual report back. On the 8A, we already, and Joe’s here just to clarify, you’re the Project
Labor Coordinator right? We’re already paying for you? You already exist?
– That’s right. – That’s not somebody different, that’s not the jobs coordinator. You’re not a jobs coordinator, you’re a Project Labor
Coordinator, correct? So we wouldn’t actually
be spending more money you would just be adding to the duties of the existing entity
that we already have asking them to formally work
with the other agencies, that’s my understanding of 8A. 9 is nonbinding, it’s an intent to work with the school district I think we should try to reach out to our other public agencies and say hey we’re
willing to work with you, I don’t think there’s anything wrong, it could come back in a side agreement, it doesn’t have to be included but it’s an option. But I just wanted to also thank you Joe, talk about the appropriateness
of I think five inputs are better than two. I think the most appropriate place for us to have these discussions is here at the dais with the full board. And I was gonna ask Mr. Lipton, is there an alternative place that you can get more input that’s more appropriate
than a board meeting? – [Douglas] I don’t
think that’s in the regs. – I think I understand the question, and was hoping to have an opportunity to maybe outline for the board what the possible options are to deal with this situation because it seems like the board is in a situation where
sometime in the future where sometime in August
or at some later date, some amendment is gonna come back for the board to consider approving, and now is a process that’s taking place for the individual trustees
to give their input on what that amendment might look like. So in my view, there are about
four different possible ways that this can be done. One way is as you’re doing now, have the board discuss each of the nine, or maybe even more options and vote on them
collectively or separately and then give direction to staff based on that discussion as to how the amendment would look like. Option number two would be
appointing an ad hoc committee of two board members
specifically for this purpose to come back and deliberate
regarding what this amendment might look like and then
bringing back an amendment or reporting back to the board at a future meeting. Option three would be to
delegate this assignment to the existing facilities committee, and that would be two board members. Other board members under the Brown Act can attend a meeting of
a standing committee, but they cannot participate. They can participate only as observers. And a fourth option would be to have another special
meeting of the board if this doesn’t continue get resolved here specifically for the purpose
of the five board members in open session developing the parameters and suppose a fifth option would be the board to
delegate this authority to staff based on hearing this discussion and developing an amendment and coming back to the
board for that discussion at a later board meeting. So I think in a conceptual sense, those are the different options for the board to consider
in terms of the methodology and how to deal with this. I hope I’ve answered your
question Trustee Ntuk. – Yes, thank you it
sounded like the full board is the place, the most input and decision, I mean the ultimate decision is gonna come before the full board. I’d just like to say, I’m amendable to amendments
or substitute a motion to direct staff on some alternatives. I’m not amenable to some of the options that were there, I don’t think we should do a five year, I think we can do better than 10 year, but those are, it also
it is to be negotiated. But I would like to have
the best option possible negotiated for this length of time. – There’s what I call Occam’s
Razor way of doing this, the simple way. Let’s vote it down and
then after voting it down, agree to send it to staff to come up with a report and then at our next meeting in August we can have a discussion
where we can do what we did, I think we did a good job of tonight, and that is teasing out issues, seeing what it was that we preferred and what not, but have a leaner document or more thinking about it, and then we can arrive at decisions. I think it’s preferable to other options. – Okay is there any additional
discussion on this motion? – Call the question? – He called for the question, you have a staff question? – I did. – Trustee Otto would
you yield Trustee Ntuk would ask the staff question. – He gets one. – And you get 10 seconds. – After all we’ve heard Dr. Romali, what is your input on
the process going forward from a staff perspective of time and ability and preference? – I just thought of another option that we could do, we
could make a quick grid, and do yes, no, yes, no,
yes, no on each option and count the votes. – [Sunny] That’s a good idea. – So we vote on virtually
every single option yes, no, yes, no, that could work. It’s an option. – I would support that.
– Tonight? – I’ll support that too. – Yeah tonight. – So we just go down from option one and roll call vote every single one. – Yeah let’s do that. – And see what makes sense. – Okay I’m willing to remove my motion and someone can make that motion. – Well I think you already
called for the motion vote. – But I called for the question, Roberts Rules of Order. – He can withdraw his motion,
he can withdraw his motion. So is anybody opposed to the
withdrawal of the motion? – [Sunny] No it was going to fail anyway. (laughing) – I think just for fun, some
people like to antagonize and some of us don’t. So the motion has been withdrawn. So at this point. – [Sunny] Yeah Madam
Chair, you should talk. – Excuse me? – I don’t know what you’re talking about when you say some people
would like to antagonize, but that is not an
appropriate comment to make. I was merely commenting on the vote. – Trustee Zia, I’m sorry, I’m
not going to engage the way you have engaged and if you’d like to talk about inappropriate comments at the dais, we can certainly agendize that. And I won’t do that, excuse me I’m not gonna act like you do. – You just–
– So at this time, Vice President Drinkwine?
– You just said that some people like to
me antagonized comments, what do you mean by that Madam Chair? – Point of order?
– President Drinkwine? Please to the public, I have no intention of being that type of president that you may have been accustomed to in the last few months. You will not get that from me, so I have a little bit more maturity and decorum than to behave that way. So Vice President Drinkwine would you like to go through the grid? – Certainly, I wanna make sure that we have a motion that I believe that the motion would be to go through all options and
have the board vote on each, but please. – And would Jackie would, Mr. Lipton, Jackie would be the one
taking the roll call vote on each of these? Is that the way we wanna do
that procedurally Marlene? We can start with number one and she can roll call each
one right down the list? – Madam President just to point out that just for sake of efficiency, a roll call vote is not necessarily, it can be done simply
by all those in favor by a voice vote and I’m presuming that what the motion is when you go through each of the options is that’s providing essentially parameters or direction to staff
in terms of negotiating the amendment with the labor council, that’s the overall structure
of what this motion is. And each of the options could be voted on by the board through a simple voice vote. – Sounds good, thank you. – Rule of order, and then at the end go through the options
and see what had the most options, received the most votes. – Yeah if we just do it were you say okay, option one all those in
favor aye, all those opposed. And count. Option 2A, all those in
favor all those opposed, option 3B. – I’d like to make a motion
to that extent so moved. – Would that suffice for you?
– Yeah to do that process. – Motion one and two
and three that has many numbers that contains the whole option? – No each one, each
individual, 2A, 2B, 4A, 4B, 4C. – Yeah.
– Yeah. – So let’s have the motion. – Trustee Ntuk motion to record. – Roll call vote on each on each. – Take roll call vote on. – Excuse me, so the motion
is to do a roll call vote as opposed to a voice vote? – Yes, that way she
can track who voted yes or no for each item. – Okay do we have a second on that, do we need a second now and then we’ll. – We do need a second.
– Second. – All right we have a motion on the floor to do a roll call vote on each option, is there any discussion on that motion? – Just to be clear,
each option as proposed by Trustee Ntuk. – No, negative, this is all the motions that staff presented to
us in this presentation. – So one through nine. – Correct.
– Right. – All those in favor of this motion? – [Virginia] Aye. – You gotta read through each one. – No, this is just the
motion to have this vote. So all those in favor of the motion. – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? Motion carries and at this point, so do you want Vice President
Drinkwine to read it or Jackie do you want to read each option? I think you’re gonna be
busy recording the votes, so Drinkwine since she
presented it, have her read it. Is that okay?
– Certainly, certainly. Option one, no amendment
to the existing CSWPA. – And you’re including
all of those bullet points as one option. – No option one is just one. – If I can refer you to slide 21, you can see that each
of the proposed options is listed individually.
– Thank you. – [Jackie] This printout
is different, that’s why. – So it’s easier to work off slide 21, so option one, the issue at vote right now is no amendment to the existing CSWPA. – [Jackie] All in favor? – We’re doing a roll call vote. The motion was for a roll
call vote on each item. – I thought we decided. – I thought we did just the opposite. – I thought she was gonna
record who voted yes and no. – Yeah the motion was
to have a roll call vote on each option item, so
we need a roll call vote on option one. – Okay Virginia Baxter?
– Nay, no. – It’s gonna get complicated here. Okay Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– No. – Option 2A, forgive me, I’m going to just have option two as one general option. Adopt the June 26th proposal with corrections to the project list. – Virginia Baxter?
– Yes. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yes. – Option three, was related
to the adopting the June 26th proposal with corrections
to the project list for a length of five years. – Virginia Baxter?
– No. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – And Sunny Zia?
– No. – Option 4 all establish
construction cost thresholds, with a term to be determined. Option 4A is a threshold of $250,000. – This is one option?
– Correct. – Virginia Baxter?
– No. – [Jackie] Vivian Malauulu? – No if it’s just the one option. – The option we’re considering is a construction cost
threshold of $250,000. – No. – Uduak Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yes. – Option 4B is construction
cost threshold of $5 million. – Virginia Baxter?
– No. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak Ntuk?
– Yes. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yes. – Option 4C is the
construction threshold cost of $10 million. – Virginia Baxter?
– No. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Yes. – Uduak Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yes. – Related to option 4, although not expressly listed, I will consider as option 4D, a length of five years. We need to establish a length of term. – Isn’t that in the other options? – It’s written under the option, but I see what you’re saying
about asking for a term as D, so I’m okay with that because the language of option 4 does include five, 10 years, so. – I think if you don’t select it, that would leave it up to
the negotiation process to deliver you an agreement
with one of those lengths of terms based on the
feedback I’ve heard thus far. – I’m okay with making that 4D, and either voting on five or 10 years if it’s up to the pleasure
of the board though. – I’m sorry I’m not understanding. What we just voted on was
without regard to term. – Correct. – So now what are we voting on since we didn’t agree
on any of those options? What is on the table? – The on the table would be an option of a five year term length,
a 10 year term length, or through the conclusion
of the bond project. Since we didn’t anticipate this approach to the vote, those were listed with in the text of option
4, and were not delineated as sub-options. But in the absence of that direction, that means that I would negotiate a term and then bring it back
to you as an amendment. – [Sunny] A term for what,
for a list of projects? – Correct, when you have
a threshold approach, you do have to have a
term associated with it. So for instance if we went
with the $5 million threshold, it’d be $5 million for
construction projects that were started within
the specific term. – Right and the absence of the threshold then it could be all our projects is what we’re voting on right now for five years is all our projects that are currently on the PLA? – I did not have the term
as a separate option, it was embedded in either
a project list option or the threshold option and so since we’re going
with this approach, we need to add three options so that we can get length of term. – Point of order?
– Yes. – I thought and in my tracking, and Jackie correct me if I’m wrong, I have option one didn’t pass, no options in two passed,
three didn’t pass, but 4B it didn’t pass as well, right. So we have no minimum
threshold approved okay. – Now we’re voting on a project list with a term of five years correct? Is that what we’re about to vote on? – The option three that received five no’s would have been a project
list of five years. – [Sunny] Okay so what
are we voting on 10 years? – So related to option four, so option three was five
years with the project list, option four is a threshold and then a term of
length for the threshold was undefined. And if I may ask for a
little bit of guidance here from a standpoint since
we are in the middle of an option for a vote that in lieu of any passage
of any specific item, I would take the votes into consideration as I move forward in negotiating
these individual items. – Am I correct in understanding that none of the 4A, 4B, or 4C passed? – Well point of order, I’m sorry, I thought we
were voting for like 4A, 4B, as were itemized in the slides where there was a threshold and a date, threshold and a date, but then we ended up voting on thresholds with no dates, and so I don’t think we’re voting on what Dr. Romali suggested. I thought we were voting on the options that were presented in this slides not on the text only and
the text of slide 22. – And forgive me I didn’t
anticipate this approach, the listing of the options for instance when we looked at 4A, the threshold when we
listed those projects for efficiency of presentation, we listed what all the projects would have been through 2041, and so that was for
efficiency of presentation. However when we defined the option on slide 21, we said within the text that you would consider, option four would consider establishing an estimated construction cost threshold rather than a project list
with alternate term lengths, parenthesis five years, 10 years through the conclusion
of the bond projects. So indicating that you would
determine first the threshold and then the length of the term when we looked at the detail slide, we presented the data as if it would go through the conclusion of the bond projects so we didn’t repeat that same
list three separate times with the five years, a 10 year, and a conclusion of the 2041 program. – So was there, I think I got I maybe. (laughing) I think did I hear there was
agreement on the $10 million. Which was the only option
that passed, 5 million? – [Board] None of them passed. – Although there was more agreement, there was equal agreement, to adopting the proposal
as delivered on June 26th as there were for $5 million threshold and a $10 million threshold, so what we’re seeing is that there’s not an across
the board agreement, but we certainly are getting
very specific feedback on what options have more
agreement than others. – Okay so if neither A,
B and C are in agreement, can they vote individually
on we want all projects through a five year term, through a 10 year term and through the conclusion as presented on the chart? Did I understand that? – I guess my understanding, I thought that was your recommendation, and I thought we were gonna
be able to do the thresholds with the year, I didn’t
know it was separated, and I didn’t know if anybody else had that understanding either when we all voted to do it this way. – So it was the understanding
by all the trustees that the threshold selection would continue through the
conclusion of the bond program so there would be no five year period for? – Personally that’s what I thought. – I mean I’m not in agreement that the bond program should, I mean there are different charts that list different periods, and one goes to 2041, and I’m
not in agreement with that, and another one says
five years and 10 years, and that’s pretty complicated in terms of. I mean saving grace is that
we’re just giving information with regard to negotiations and it doesn’t have to be
Waterloos on any of these things I think however, I think we
should just finish this voting real quickly because we have a really detailed consent calendar where I intend to remove
almost every item. – Thank you, I certainly
am getting the feedback that we wanted. So then let’s move to. – Excuse me if I could just maybe, just help out a bit, I
apologize for interrupting, but it seems like maybe
the board needs to vote on whether there should be a threshold because one question is, should there be a
threshold in the contract or should there just
be a list of projects? Those are the two basic ways of doing that and I think it’s not clear the board’s direction in terms of which of those two alternatives if any, the board approved. – Thank you, so let’s ask this question, and I think the vote would
either one way or the other. Should there be a project list? – Point of order? I think we need to finish
the votes we’re doing, and then we’ll have another vote. – Well that’s what we’re
trying to figure out, what are we voting on. Is your suggestion Marlene to have a project list for five years, that would be the next
one we’re voting on? – I would–
– And then following that would be a project list
with 10 year duration? – I would take Jack’s direction, I believe that the first decision is project list or threshold. If it is threshold, then
it’s dollar amount threshold and then it’s length of term. If it is project list,
then it is length of term. So it’s almost like a
decision tree approach rather than the grid. I don’t know if we have
to alter the motion to go in an decision tree model or not? – I think we do have to alter ’cause we all took direction already. – Can we expand on option four, it sounds like there’s consensus that there’s no threshold agreement. So can we vote on a project list with the term of five years, that would be one vote, and then the other one
would be project list with the term of 10 years. Is that something that we could do? – Yeah, and then the third
one would be term agreement. – After we finish moving through those. – I think we’re all in
agreement to add a threshold time frame on there but I do believe. – No no weren’t not in
agreement with threshold. – I think we should follow the protocol and continue the votes on hand and then come back and
do what you suggested to vote on whether or not we’re
going to have the threshold. And then the term, if we vote yes. – I don’t think you’re
understanding me correctly. Madam Chair, I’m saying that we just voted on these thresholds and
we didn’t have agreement. I think what I’m hearing is that the next step would be that we vote on a project list that is going to be the
staff’s recommendation on our– – No sorry.
– Excuse me, I’m trying to say what
I’m trying to make sure you don’t misunderstand
what I’m trying to say. – [Vivian] You’re not understanding. – No I have the floor Madam Chair, you’re abusing your power.
– Actually you don’t because I didn’t call on you. – I do! – [Vivian] No and I haven’t called on you but I’ve been kind and I’ve
been allowing you to speak out of turn. – Oh you’re very kind, you’re
a good Christian Madam Chair, you’re a good Christian. – [Vivian] I am, I
haven’t called on you yet. – Well take the beam out of your own eye before you get the speck
out of your brother’s eye. – [Uduak-Joe] Point of order. – I was trying to move this along. – I’ll call on you in just a second, I’ll call on you in just a second. – I had a question for staff which was not answered, but that’s fine. – Just to make sure, Mr. Lipton, we’re voting on a timeframe
and a project list or I want some clarity on what we’re gonna be
voting on just to be sure because we still have to
continue with the voting that motion passed, so the motion carried, so we’re interrupting the motion that we should be continuing to vote on to make this decision. – No I think that’s
correct Madam President that the board did vote to have a separate vote
on each of the options, and unless there’s a change in that, that’s the current motion and the current procedure. I think though that the fact that each of the votes
on the threshold failed, creates some ambiguity legally because it’s not clear whether that means that the board doesn’t
want to have any threshold or does it simply mean that
they were unable to agree on any one specific threshold? And that might be something that would be good for the board to provide clarity to staff. – Okay so thank you for that. So let’s continue with
the voting of the options and we can table the
threshold time project list discussion, let’s get through the rest of the options and then
we can come back to that, and I’m okay with Dr.
Romali’s recommendation for the threshold, just
to move on the agenda. And in case anybody’s wondering, this is still early in the agenda, and it’s 9:17 and I’m looking
at our brand new additions to the board here, and
I’m sure you’re wondering what you signed up for
’cause we’re not even halfway through the agenda yet, so okay. – But we’ve gone as late as midnight if that makes you feel better. – We can postpone that. – Option 5A, add LBCC student graduates, as previously defined, to tier one. – Virginia Baxter?
– Aye. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Yes. – Uduak Ntuk?
– Yes. – Doug Otto?
– You said all graduates? – This is the student graduates previously defined as
completing those related courses to the construction trades. – Aye. – Sunny Zia?
– Aye. – 5B request the trades unions to provide LBCC student graduates preferential entry into
apprenticeship programs. – Virginia Baxter?
– Aye. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Aye. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– Aye. – Doug Otto?
– Aye. – Sunny Zia?
– Aye. – Option six, add stipulations that trade unions advocate
for LBCC training program when negotiating PLAs with other agencies. – Virginia Baxter?
– Aye. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Aye. – Uduak Ntuk?
– Aye. – Doug Otto?
– Aye. – Sunny Zia?
– Aye. – Option seven, expand tier three to include both Los Angeles
and Orange counties. – Virginia Baxter?
– Nay. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yes. – [Uduak-Joe] That was it. – [Marlene] Option 8A, specify that Project Labor Coordinator duties include alignment with PLAs
at other Long Beach agencies. – This is 8A?
– 8A. – Thank you, Virginia Baxter?
– Nay. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– Yes. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– No. – [Marlene] 8B adopt
separate intent language to explore partnership
with the city of Long Beach to have a shared Project
Labor Coordinator. – Virginia Baxter?
– Nay. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Yes. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– Yes. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– No. – [Marlene] 8C, engage a jobs coordinator in addition to the
Project Labor Coordinator. – Virginia Baxter?
– Nay. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – And Sunny Zia?
– No. – [Marlene] Option nine, adopt separate intent language to explore aligning with Long
Beach Unified School District if and when they have a PLA. – Virginia Baxter?
– Nay. – Vivian Malauulu?
– No. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– Yes. – Excuse me, Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– No. – So now Madam Secretary, if you can report back how
each one of those options fared before we return to
option five I believe it was, and then I’d like to take
Dr. Romali’s recommendation with option five and have a vote on that. Do we need a separate motion for that or do we just amend the current motion to have that particular item? Is a new motion in order? – It’d be best to have a new motion, separately on this question because the first motion
was already finished and disposed of, so this
would be a new issue. – Okay thank you. Madam Secretary, whenever you’re ready. – I’m sorry, what’s the motion? We don’t have a motion on the floor. – No Madam Secretary is gonna read out the results of the voting
to see which option fared, how each one fared. – Option one failed. Option two failed. Option three fail. Option 4A fail, and that
is threshold correct? – Yes.
– 4B threshold fail. 4C threshold fail. 5A motion carried. 5B motion carried. Option six motion carried. Option seven, motion failed. Option 8A motion failed. Option 8B motion failed. 8C motion failed. Nine motion failed. – Okay so now thank you Madam Secretary, so now I’d like to entertain a motion to return to it was actually option four, and Dr. Romali would you
like to give direction? – Four Mr. Lipton I believe
if I have this correctly, the three options would
be do we agree with, assuming there is no threshold, do we agree with all
projects for five years, do we agree with all
projects for 10 years, and do we agree with all projects through the conclusion
of the bond project. Are those the three options
that they’re voting on? – Again if there’s no threshold, then it’s just a list of projects and there doesn’t need to be a timeframe because it’s whenever the
projects are finished. So the duration becomes irrelevant when there’s a project list, it’s whenever the project finishes. – If I may, I believe we need to determine whether the board would
rather have threshold or project list that that
is the question at hand. – Okay so the first
vote is would the board like to have a threshold
or a project list, what is that vote by a roll call vote? – Do we have a motion on
the floor Madam Chair? – No there’s no motion,
it’s pending a motion. – I’m thinking so we have
threshold of projects, projects technically doesn’t
matter the timeframe, to get the input, it seems like thresholds kinda failed, there was some consensus between five and 10 years, do we just wanna say thresholds in general or do we wanna say up or down thresholds or up and down project
list as the options, is that what you’re
recommending Dr. Romali and then you want a separate and then do a third one
of years, five 10, and 20? – My understanding is that
I think the first one is you’re either A, for a threshold or you’re for a project list. Then if you are for a project list, is that a five year project list a 10, or through the conclusion,
did I get that right Joe? – And if you were a threshold, it would be at what level of threshold. So it’s a decision tree. If you have three votes for
threshold then we go down that decision tree to level of
threshold term of threshold. If we have three votes for project list, then we it is for, then we go to the term. – Okay wouldn’t it just
be simpler to vote first whether you want a project list or not and if you want a project list then the rest of it becomes moot? – I think that makes more sense. – Thank you Trustee Otto, would you like to make that motion. – Yes.
– Second. – Whatever he just said right. – Could you make a motion
for the secretary please? – You want me to second my own motion. – No I’d like you to state your motion. – Let’s vote whether to
have a project list or not. – Do we have a second?
– Yes. – Yes I think Mr. Lipton
has a comment on that. – Well just to clarify the motion, I think the motion will be clear if the motion were for example a motion to have a
project list for example could be a clear motion
to make and then seconded and then voted on. – Isn’t that what I said?
– You said threshold. – I said threshold?
– No, he said list. – That’s what I said.
– He said list. It’s late and everybody’s tired and we’re all imagining things, but he did say project list. – A motion to have a project
list in the amendment to the PLA. – Correct because we might
not even need to discuss threshold if this motion passes. – Right, we just have to
discuss each and every project. – [Jackie] And Ntuk was the second? – Yes. – Okay all those in favor? – Just a second, so we’ve got a motion and a second on the floor
to vote on whether or not we should have a project
list, any discussion on that? (laughing) I don’t think anybody
wants any more discussion for the rest of the night. All those in favor?
– [Board] Aye. – All those opposed? All right that motion carries, so we don’t need to discuss a threshold. All right, so earlier,
about a couple hours ago, I heard a request to move on the agenda is that something we can do now or we have exhausted
discussion on this amendment or is there anything
else we need to address? – [Sunny] I think we
need to address the term. – We need to address the term. So I think the question at hand, and you can either make the motion to say a five year term or a 10 year term and that’s what I need to know. – I’d like to make a motion
that we vote on a 10 year term. – Second. – There’s a motion on the floor to extend this amendment
to a 10 year term, any discussion on that? – I’m not supportive of that, I was hoping to get the options to vote five, 10, and I
was gonna suggest 15 and 20 so that way we had a true
gauge of all the options. – You can’t do all that in one motion. – Any other discussion, yes, Mr. Lipton? – If there’s a list of projects to be included in the PLA, then as I said before, it may not make sense to have a term because the PLA will continue until those identified
projects are completed. – The problem with that is then we have to talk about
which projects are included and that’ll take us until September. – Well that’s right,
Trustee Otto’s correct because the next question logically if there’s gonna be a project list is to determine which
projects are on the list. – Then probably a threshold so if that you were remodeling
a bathroom or something like that whether that
would be on the list or not on the list. That gets us back to threshold. – I’m hoping you’re meaning that you’re talking about that in jest, but I think let’s just my motion
was to vote on all projects on our bonds that would go
for 10 years, no threshold just 10 years of bond
projects that we have. Would you be, does that
make sense Trustee Baxter since you seconded? – Yes and that’s what I agreed to. – And I’d like to call for the vote. – Any additional
discussion on this motion? – I’ve already called for the vote. – Do we have a second? – Yes.
– Let’s just do that. – I seconded. – All those in favor?
– Aye. – Oh I just lost my whole page. – I’m sorry Jackie say that again, I didn’t hear you. – Lost her place. – It was unbeatable. – I will call the roll. Virginia Baxter?
– Aye. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Nay. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– No. – Doug Otto?
– No. – Sunny Zia?
– Yea. – So at this point
since the motion failed, I’ll entertain an additional motion another motion actually
for a different term. – I’d like to make a motion to consider five, 10, 15, and
20, as four voting options. – I don’t–
– Just like we did before. – That’s too vague.
– We’ve already done 10. – Okay and five’s not. So I guess– – Five we’ve already voted down. – We voted down on five. – What do you want 20 years, is that what you’re requesting? How do you know it’s 20 years? – I would say 15 or 20 then. – How do you know, do you
know what our projects go til, the terms Marlene? – [Vivian] Did the five fail? – No five’s already been voted down. – We already voted that down and 10 years you guys voted it down. – If I may, I believe when we voted down the extension of five years, that was discussing the June 26th proposal with the length of five years. I don’t believe you’ve
yet voted specifically on a five year term only
with the project list. – Correct, it was my understanding that the alternate extension
length of five years was on the previously proposed amendment, but this newly proposed that we’ve hammered out tonight we haven’t considered a
five year term to that and I think that, well there’s
no motion on the floor, but I’ll entertain a
motion for another term. – Well I started making a motion. Another term do you wanna do five and 20? – Pick one.
– 20. (laughing) – There’s no second on that motion, so I’ll entertain a different motion for a different length of time. – How about for 15? – I just think we’re getting ourselves into unknown territory. I don’t know what I don’t know. Can we just let staff go back
to our negotiating partners and then come up with a recommended term? Can we have that much trust in our staff I mean they’re pretty capable, and then we can look at the specifics when it comes back to the board. – Okay there’s no second on that motion. – That was not a motion,
I’m just asking a question. – Trustee Ntuk made a motion
and there was no second on his motion. So I’ll entertain any motion that anybody wants to make. – I’ll move that we move on to 3.1. – But we do need a term, we do have to, somebody has to make some kind of motion. So either to direct staff or five years. – Is it your pleasure to go through the conclusion
of the bond projects? – Yes. – Somebody needs to make a motion – I’ll make the motion to have our community
student workforce agreement go until the completion
of all our bond projects. – Second.
– You mean 2041? – Yes, whatever the term is that will complete our bond projects that we have a project labor agreement that includes all our bond projects going forward and the ones
that we have remaining. That could be until 2041, yes. Did you second that?
– I did. – We have a motion on the floor to extend this amendment the newly proposed amendment
to the length of the projects each individual project it has been moved and seconded, any discussion on the item? – My question is, is this
what we’re telling staff, or is this what we’re voting on. – Telling staff.
– Okay just wanna make sure because it sounded like when
you talked it was a decision which it’s not a decision okay, yeah yeah. – Any discussion? – Yeah so my understanding of this motion, this gives staff maximum latitude from one year to the 2041, and so they can, we’ll see
what they come back with, so I’m supportive of that. – Any additional discussion? – I would just say I’m
not in support of the idea of recommending that what we do is write all of these
projects forever into it however I’m gonna vote for it, and mostly based primarily on exhaustion, but beyond that we’re like okay okay, but with an understanding that the idea of the
length of the agreement is still under negotiation and that nobody’s gonna come back and say nope you said 41, and you’re 41. So I just want people to understand. – No it think your point
is well made Trustee Otto and I think we are all
in agreement with it and I don’t think anybody thinks that we’re voting on something for 41 years. I think that we’ve got a
great window of negotiation with each individual project. All right so we’ve got
the motion on the floor, all those in favor, or actually I’m doing your job, (laughing) now I’m calling for the vote. So Madam Secretary? (laughing) Pretty soon we’ll be switching
chairs up here, go ahead. – Listening to this over and over. Oh you want me to call the roll. Virginia Baxter?
– Aye. – Vivian Malauulu?
– Aye. – Uduak-Joe Ntuk?
– Aye. – Doug Otto?
– Aye. – And Sunny Zia?
– Aye. – All right, so we are
going to move on the agenda, thank you everybody those of you that are stakeholders in this for your patience and I do apologize that you do have to witness
some unfortunate incidents, have a good night,
thank you for being here and moving on the agenda, I think we are on item 3.1, which is the report on the
2018-2019 athletic season. And we have our new athletic director here and I believe this is your
first time reporting to– – First time.
– The board, welcome and you know normally you wouldn’t have had to stay this late. So thank you for staying. – Thank you and congratulations to all of you who are switching seats on the Board of Trustees
and taking new roles. Thank you for inviting athletics to come and give this presentation. I am mercifully gonna be quick and I am also mercifully gonna ask the people who have been
sitting here for four hours please stand for the five minutes that I am gonna be
speaking if you so wish, and everyone here at the table as well. Again thank you. And if I can learn how to. – Not to interrupt you, but they misunderstood
your invitation to stand for an invitation to stretch. – That’s good, they can stand and stretch. – Maybe that’s what he meant. – This is athletics live.
– That’s right. – All right there you go. – Our goal here in the
athletics department is to really be champions
in everything that we do and we’re talking about four Cs here, we’re talking about competition, we’re talking about being
champions in the classroom, we’re certainly talking about trying to develop character in a championship fashion, and also understanding
that we have great gifts and talents as student athletes and as coaches and as people who are involved in our athletics program that we wanna share
that with the community. So let’s talk just a
bit about competition, our highlights for this year we had a CCCAA state
championship in men’s volleyball, we had an All-State Men’s
Volleyball performer in Kyle Anema. We had six CCCAA state appearances, seven South Coast
Conference championships, we have five South Coast
Conference coach of the year awards excuse me, coach of the year awards, six South Coast Conference
Most Valuable Player awards, six All-American athletes. We are now at 37 and counting signed
national letters of intent, just about all of those
are receiving scholarships or financial aid. We’re champions in the classroom, by the way all of you have a booklet that goes into a little bit greater detail in all of this. Our student athletes are
fairly representative of our general student body in terms of ethnic breakdown, also in terms of academics, you can see that in order
to compete athletically, they need to be full time athletes, or full time students rather, so 81% of our student athletes
are full time students, those who are not are typically at the
tail end of their studies and don’t need to be full time students to complete a degree, or they’re doing something
called gray-shirting which means they come in,
they’re not taking 12 units because that triggers their NCAA clock, they take 11 units or less, they don’t play, they can still practice, they can still workout
but they don’t play. And those are numbers
here are in comparison to the general student body. You can see there are GPAs are 2.64, compared to the GPA of
the student body of 1.87, so we’re successful in the classroom compared to the students in the university that we represent. We had last year, two years
ago, 363 unique student athletes this year I beg your pardon, this year we had 363,
last year we had 379, we’re down about 13 student athletes, that will change this coming year, our recruiting is very very good. Cumulative GPA is 2.67. You can see that one of the things that I’m proud of, on the one hand is that we
have an 87% completion rate of units that we’ve attempted, I’m a little disappointed in the number of units we’ve attempted, we I think can do better
than average of 13 units. We have some very good
academic achievements, those are listed there, let me also just add that we
did win the scholar athlete for our women’s volleyball
Kristen Peterson from the women’s volleyball team did win the Mackenzie
Scholarship from the CCCAA. We wanna be champions in character, team impact was something
that was highlighted last year this is an organization where teams adopt young kids with life threatening illnesses and they get involved in
our athletics programs, softball has done this for two years, this past year football
has also contributed. We work in the community, we volunteer, here’s a list of four
examples of what we do in the community in terms of volunteering. I just wanna add that great
programs do embody excellence and in five areas, that’s they have great people, they’re able to hire great coaches, those coaches are able to
attract great student athletes. They have great facilities, they have budgets that
allow those great people to do their work and do it well. They have a history of
philanthropic giving and I put this in the broadest category, these are people that
come from the community and buy a ticket to the game all the way to those that are
remembering an institution or an organization or a
team or an athletics program in their wills, in their planned giving, and finally if you have those four things to some degree, you will
end up with a tradition and a tradition that you can be proud of. And these feed off of one
another, they’re symbiotic. When one is not there,
the rest will suffer and so great programs always pay attention to these five things and I just want you to know that I wanna focus on just
a couple of these areas here and one is facilitate. You’ve seen these facilities already demonstrated to
you in previous meetings, we are later in the fall semester going to start construction on the KLAC and for athletics what that means is a new aquatics center, pool area that will be just absolutely tremendous. Southern California is in need of water for their kids, for their swim teams, for their swim programs. We will have six new tennis courts. We will have a new softball field that will be moved out to near where the baseball field is. We will also have soccer fields
and sand volleyball courts. I also wanna highlight tradition. We have currently 16
national championships, 93 state championships, we’re in the 50s for state runner ups, and it’s not 100 plus
conference championships, it’s well over that, in
fact we can’t count them. We have probably somewhere in the area of about 130 professional athletes, we have 25 plus probably
closer to 30 Olympic athletes and coaches. A great tradition at
Long Beach City College and it’s one that we certainly intend to go ahead and keep going and grow on, but as I said in my little
preview in your notebooks there are other schools
knocking on the door who want our position, and they are really knocking on the door, so we’re gonna try to fend them off as best we can. I wanna invite you to
our first football game, September 14th, it’s against Mt. Sac, be there we are having
five football games, every game will have a theme, the first one is welcome
back Long Beach City College so everyone associated, faculty, staff, students, Board of Trustees for Long Beach City College we invite you to come back and join us
for what promises to be a very exciting football season. Coach Brett Peabody thinks
he has an outstanding team, I’ve watched them practice,
they are outstanding, and so come back and get excited. I will entertain questions if you so desire. – Thank you very very much Dr. Hozek, that was an excellent report, and I really appreciate the thoroughness and detail of it. I’m sure other trustees
will comment as well. There’s one thing that
really stood out to me when you listed the player’s cities where they come from, I
noticed how many of them actually do not live in our district, which says a lot not only
about our athletic program and students from around our district or outside of our district
wanting to play for us but also our college that we have students who want to be here when they have an option and I know that they can attend any community college, but the fact that they’ve chosen us and they’ve chosen to compete for us and put on the jersey, that says a lot and thank you very much. And I don’t think that that component of your project, or your report excuse me, was highlighted enough. So I think that definitely let’s highlight how many students aren’t even from here, from our district and
they’re playing for us. – And the interesting thing is, we’re increasing numbers from students who aren’t even from this country. – [Vivian] Oh I love that. – So we’re getting international
students here as well. – That’s outstanding, and that also falls in line with a previous conversation that we had with administration about that with some of our international students and being able to support them, so outstanding, bravo, great first report, and I’d like to open up the floor to any other trustee? – Just gonna keep it brief, thank you so much, we were
both at the mail summit about a month ago, just want to, we’re incredibly privileged to have you here, you’re able to share and articulate your experience in coaching and athletics and LMU and
it was really powerful I think for I think we had
500 students there that day, there was a student athlete panel that coach was on and so
it was really well received and I look forward to getting
our lunch together soon. – Thank you, and I was
only trying to match your comments at that panel, ’cause it was a special
afternoon for sure. – Thank you.
– Trustee Otto? – Great, thanks for staying, I guess you didn’t have much of an option, but could you give us
an abbreviated version of your background and how you got here from Cal State and other things, I know it’s a long meeting, but I think a lot of people don’t know. – Sure real quick I graduated from State University of New
York college of Cortland, taught elementary school for three years, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade, coached varsity football,
basketball, and golf, did graduate work for four years at Texas A&M, took a
job at Long Beach State, became professor and chair
of their physical education kinesiology department for 14 years then moved for five
years over to athletics as a senior associate athletics director, had the opportunity to go to
Loyola Marymount University as their athletics director, spent 20 years there,
thought I was retired, I flunked retirement I’m
now going back to school so that when I retake it, I’ll try to pass it next time. – [Doug] Great thank you,
appreciate it, welcome. – [Vivian] Trustee Zia? – Hi Bill, thank you so
much for your patience. I wanna apologize to you for some of the behavior you saw tonight, I’m looking at your slides, you’re training our students
to be champions in character, I was recently at an event at the Jewish Federation and I met a fellow member of my community and he had such great
great words about you, Bernie Salmonson, and I’m just honored that you’re coaching our students and I’m again, incredibly grateful to you and embarrassed that
you had to see some less than champions in character conduct by people who claim
they’re holier than thou, they resort to name
calling their colleagues, they resort to scuffing and laughing at their colleagues and I
don’t think that’s up to par with good Christian behavior. Or good trustee behavior, so I wanna apologize to you that I had to see that, and I wanna apologize to all the members that were here and who
are watching tonight that is not becoming of
the conduct of this board and I truly thank you for the service that you’re doing to our students and this institution, thank you so much. – Thank you, and I’m glad you
didn’t hear the conversation that Jeff Wood and I were having because we apologize for that too. – Thank you.
(laughing) – Trustee Baxter? – Bill welcome you and I have had some
wonderful talks together and I’m so pleased you’re here at Long Beach City College, I’m pleased we dragged
you out of retirement, I think you’re enjoying it. – [Bill] I’m having a ball. – And I really appreciate all you’ve done for our athletic program and I just wanna point out one thing that maybe many of you are not aware of, but it was called to my attention that many of the student athletes use our showering facilities because they are homeless and with Bill’s permission
I put out a call for people to donate
towels and soap and shampoo and we were overwhelmed with donations and the two locker room attendants, Susanna Mendes and Jimmy Flowers, they were so appreciative of all the items that were donated and it’s
what I like about that is we’re all working
together to help students and Susanna was so cute because she said, “I’m
only gonna give them “a little bit because I
don’t wanna give them a lot, “they gotta come back.” And so they know the
students who are in need, and I just appreciate your
support in this effort to help our students. – Well thank you, and I
hope I wasn’t too verbose as opposed to that letter that I sent out and which you
gave me some good criticism. Thank you very much. – Thank you very mch. – Thank you for your
support, and go Vikings! – Go Vikings thank you. All right moving on the agenda. (audience applauding) Certainly, that was a great first report. Item 4.1, we’re gonna
into the consent agenda, any item may be removed
from the consent agenda and considered separately if a member of the board of trustees so requests. – Move approval of the consent agenda. – Second. – It has been moved and seconded to move on the consent agenda to vote on it, any discussion? All right, Madam Secretary? Got it, so all in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? All right, is that for
everything under item four, is it that just 4.1? – Everything under four.
– Everything. – Got it. So we are moving on to–
– 5.1 – Academic affairs 5.1. – Academic affairs, item 5.1, revised board policy and
administrative regulations 4010 open courses, pre-requisite, co-requisites and advisories. – Move approval.
– Second. – It has been moved and seconded to approve item 5.1, any discussion? All those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 5.2, are we, itemizing 5.2? – [Uduak-Joe] Mm-hmm – Item 5.2 revised board policy and administrative regulation 4014, study abroad residency courses. This is a first reading. It is an information item only. – May I make a comment?
– Sure, certainly. – President Malauulu, I just wanna salute the college for bringing back
the study abroad program, I think this is essential for any higher educational institution, I am a recipient of study aborad, I believe it really teaches
people more about the world and an understanding
of different countries, but also of our own country, so I want to salute the
college for doing that. – I concur, any additional discussion? – I agree, I went to central
China in study abroad in college and it was a great experience. – Awesome experience. All right so we are going
to move on the agenda since that is a first reading. Will that return to us next
month as an action item? – [Board] Yes. – All right good deal. Moving onto item six,
administrative services. Item 6.1, is a resolution to utilize design build process for the energy efficiency measure 2B, photo-voltaic project at the liberal arts and Pacific Coast campuses. This is an action item,
so I need a motion. – Approval. – It’s not an action item, it’s an information item. – Yeah we’re talking 6.1. – Oh, am I on the wrong one? – So I need a motion to
move on that item please? – I make a motion. – I’ll make the motion. – Okay Trustee Otto has made the motion. – I’ll second. – Trustee Zia just seconded. All those in favor?
– Aye. – I’m sorry, I meant
to call for discussion I was distracted. – No problem, I wanted to
speak against this item, I’m concerned that one, I
do support the expansion of solar-voltaic on campus and think that design
build is a good strategy, however this approval will
basically take off the map a portion of the Vet Stadium footprint for the next 15 to 20 years. And if we’re gonna do any
thing different there, we’re gonna be restricted, or we’re gonna have the same problem we had at PCC campus
where we put something in and then we gotta come back and put ADA and spend more money fixing
what should already been done in the past and I don’t want
us to spend money twice, and I know it’s on the
facilities master plan in the subcommittee we talked about, that we do have the
power to change the list, I think strongly urge us not
to eliminate the footprint by putting photo-voltaic
in the parking lot at the LAC campus. And I don’t know if there’s a way for us to split it off or if we
ask for it to come back as just the PCC campus
and not the LAC campus, but I think that we are
putting our foot in our mouth if we take this forward. And maybe Vice President Drinkwine, you can tell us what the spacing was, I know there was an email that went out that talked about the spacing and a picture of exactly
how much would be lost from the parking lot? – So the project would
affect both LAC and PCC. It would erect solar panels on carports or canopies throughout the parking areas, the flat parking areas. So when we look at PCC we’re
talking about parking lots one and two, when we’re looking at LAC, we’re talking about parking lot M, which is that stadium
largely to the right. The canopies would be
designed to be tall enough to accommodate trucks
for both the swap meets as well as the other
utilization of the space. The project is designed to have two phases at each campus, so that it
wouldn’t happen all at once we would have available
parking in the parking lot for each construction phase. It is one of the primary initiatives of the integrated energy master plan and so it definitely is a component of us being able to be a zero
net energy usage by 2050. – Okay so.
– I have a question. – Why don’t you ask your question first and then I’ll respond to the motion. – Okay thank you. Have you run this plan
through the antique market? And the reason I ask is that this is a very big source of income for us annually and it’s
also a community event. And many people know
Long Beach City College and they even think the
antique market has something to do with us but it’s
not, they’re tenants, but have you received input
from them regarding this? – We had a lot of
conversation with the Mogers, specifically right now because
we have the kinesiology lab and aquatic center coming up and it will have an impact on them. This project will not prohibit them from having the swap meet. It actually will provide shelter for their vendors. So we are taking into
consideration the use of that stadium parking lot for the swap meet so that the canopies will be high enough to accommodate the trucks
that come in there. Yes we will have a scheduling issue, we will have to make sure that’s one of the reasons
it’s in two different phases, that we minimize the
impact to the swap meet, because it is really critical for them that they be able to have
their once a month events. As you mentioned the
community depends on it I know that people travel
state wide to attend the antique swap meet as well
as the motorcycle swap meet so that it is a consideration for us and we have informed them that we intend to place
the solar panels there and they are aware. We have not shared exact timing. What this resolution does is it allows us to move forward as a design build versus a design bid build. With approval of this resolution, we then move forward
with the design build, we would anticipate coming back to you with a contract award in
about 18 months or so. So you’re not approving
the contract at this point, you’re proving the methodology for it. – Okay thank you. – So I just wanted to
reiterate the question that Trustee Ntuk asked, if there’s a way that we can parcel out, I know that it’s agendized
as one single item for both campuses, but
I think there is merit in parceling out the
two different campuses, is that something that can
legally be done right now because it’s agendized as one, but can we amend that
and just split it up? – I believe that you can. I would like to point out
in the email I sent out I identified the potential energy savings on an annual basis for each campus, and so the PCC estimated savings would range from 310 to $440,000 annually and the project at LAC,
because it is larger would provide between 610 and $850,000 in annual cost savings. Our current energy costs annually range about 1.7 million. So combined, both
campuses, the total savings would be between about
920 to $1.3 million, so we’re looking if we did both campuses, a range of about 800,000 to 500,000 would be our eventual cost so we’d save substantial
amounts with both. If we only did the PCC, it would reduce our savings from 610 to $850,000 a year. I will also add that the
construction of this project is made from bond funds, the savings affect our general fund because it is our
unrestricted general fund that pays those energy bills. So as we delay the project,
or reconfigure the project yes you would be dedicating that space to that savings, but those are savings that would we achieve
immediately upon completion of the solar project. – Okay thank you for that clarification, that was gonna be my next question is for you to break it down financially, so I appreciate you anticipating that. Trustee Otto? – Yeah I saw this, looked at it, and reached the conclusion that I supported it for
the following reasons. First of all, the energy
savings are stupendous when completed, secondly
we’re always looking for ways to save money and a million dollars a
year is not loose change. And that savings enables us
to do more for our students. But the thing that really tipped it for me although the savings might have done it in and of itself, is what
we’re doing right now is saying design build, this
just gives us the approval to do that, it doesn’t
mean everything’s designed it means that we can go down that path. But secondly, it is a major part of our integrated energy plan which is not only really really good, but receives statewide and
even national recognition as one of the first of its kind and I’m so proud of that plan and the work that our
construction management people did that I think they know what they’re doing I asked the same question
of our vice president about what about the swap meet and what I was told was they know about it the trucks can get under
what they wanna do, what they wanna construct and so it won’t be disruptive except maybe for a short period of time and of course it’s a
source of money for us that we wanna maintain. But what I’ve heard in opposition is we shouldn’t do this because
we might find something else that we could do that we
don’t wanna take this off and I don’t think that’s a good reason unless there’s a really specific use that would generate, would
be a better investment or a better thing to do. So I’m in favor of taking this first step in this process and we’ll
have plenty of opportunities in the future to evaluate what the ultimate design looks like. – [Vivian] Okay any additional
discussion, Trustee Ntuk? – Yeah I’m just, what’s the cost estimate of the design build process going forward? – The design build process saves us both on length of time as well
as defining the process in a much more defined way that prevents change orders. So length of time means
that once we move forward on a design build, we
contract with the firm who absorbs all costs and will design and oversee the build. – Pardon me, I understand design build, but moving forward with this resolution are we committed to a
specific dollar spend? Or is this just to begin the process of soliciting contracts that you said would
come back in 18 months. There’s not an actual financial attachment to this resolution, commitment? – We will be incurring
costs for the development of the preliminary plans that would then result in the issuance of a request for bid and that process. So moving forward means
that we start that process. Your next opportunity for approval will be when we present
you with the contract as a result of that process. So if at that point you
decided not to move forward say at both campuses, then that would be a lost investment if you moved forward at one campus it would be only be the costs related to one of the campuses. – Lost investment, that’s a lost investment
in energy efficiency or the cost of construction? – Cost of construction. It would be the initial design. Again in a design build, the primary design comes
after we award the contract. – What is our cost estimate
on the initial design build for this? – We have not identified
the entire cost estimate for this, one of the steps we have to do is complete working with
Southern California Edison, they do have input onto the final size and placement, but that
is part of the process as we get into design. This process does apply
only to those projects that are in excess of $2 1/2 million so we believe that it
is going to be in excess of $2 1/2 million. – Last question I got is so if we hypothetically put
student housing over there, would we be able to
raise these solar panels and put it on top of the facility building and repurpose them, or is that space not
available for any structures after this is installed? – I’m unsure of the answer to that, I will say that at the LAC campus, our architectural design does not allow for solar
panels on the roofs because of the Spanish
missionary roof styles, so that’s why you don’t see
the panels on every roof you see them on the
parking structures here. PCC they’re much more
easy to place on the roofs so a lot of it would depend on the design of whatever potential structures would be erected there. – [Uduak-Joe] Thank you. – All right any additional discussion on this item? All right–
– Madam President? – We do have a motion and a second, oh I’m sorry, Mr. Lipton, I don’t think we need to parcel it out, sorry I asked the question
and then it was answered. – Well in response to that question I was looking at the resolution and noting that the
eighth whereas paragraph defines the project specifically
as the Pacific campus but not mentioning the other. – [Uduak-Joe] If you wanted
to bifurcate it you could is what you’re saying? – Well the resolution
from my reading of it pertains to the Pacific Campus although the agenda item itself, the title refers to both, so I was gonna point that out. – Oh that’s interesting
I did not notice that. – Was that staff’s intention? – Vice President Drinkwine? – I am disappointed to
see that that is an error so as written if you approved
this specific resolution as written, you would be approving it for solely the Pacific Coast Campus. In general terms when we
refer to the energy efficiency measure 2B, that refers to the project at both LAC and PCC. But it does appear as
though in the resolution we have specific reference to only PCC. – That is a great observation Mr. Lipton, I had not noticed that. So thank you for bringing that up. At this point because
it is a flawed motion, I’d like to entertain a withdrawal of it, so whoever made that? – [Sunny] I’m sorry, I’m not
finding where in the resolution it’s exclusive to Pacific Coast Campus. – Page one.
– What paragraph? – [Uduak-Joe] It’s the
eighth whereas paragraph in the resolution. – Can’t we just. I’d like to make a
suggestion that we amend it to PCC and LAC on fourth
whereas from the bottom and vote on it tonight. – [Doug] Can we do that? – Would you accept that Mr. Otto since you made the motion
and I made the second? – [Doug] If it’s legal? – Is that legal? – [Doug] I would be happy to. – I think that was the intent. – The question is not what the intent is, the question is was the public on notice, do we have to come back to this, I mean I’m happy to amend
it if we can legally do that without violating anything. – Trustee Otto my view
is it would be legal to amend the resolution, particularly in light of the fact that the title of the agenda item itself expressly refers to both campuses. – So then I would be in agreement with a friendly amendment
to change the language of the eighth whereas paragraph from district staff has
identified a district work of improvement commonly described as the energy efficiency
measures photo-voltaic project at PCC and LAC as being suitable for the design build process. So it’s just adding the words and LAC. – [Sunny] Yes, can we call for the vote? – I have a question.
– I do too. – Trustee Ntuk sorry. – Is the 2.5 million for both campuses or only the PCC campus that’s
listed in the two sections the first and the ninth, or sorry the second and the ninth whereas? – The 2.5 million was intended to refer as a minimum amount for both campuses. – [Uduak-Joe] Both campuses okay. – We refer to the project as a singular project
located at two campuses. – Is the LAC 2A and PCC
2B, or they’re both 2B? – The energy efficiency measure is 2B which contains the solar
project at both campuses. – [Vivian] Trustee Baxter? – I guess I’m having a hard time with voting for this because in your resolution you only, as Mr. Lipton pointed out, you’re only discussing
Pacific Coast Campus, and I have to tell you, and
you can do that legally, without having it in the
resolution, amend it. – [Doug] That’s what we just said. – I believe what counsel said was because the action item
references both campuses a motion to amend that
paragraph of the resolution to include both campuses. – And I heard, sorry I did hear that. My question is, you’d have to
change this whole resolution. – You have to add two words to it. You have to add two words to it. – And it’s 2,500,000 for both? – Yes.
– Okay. – Call for the vote. – All right, we have an amended motion, are we going with the amendment? We have an amended motion and it has been moved and seconded. So at this time we’d like
to call all those in favor? – [Board] Aye. – Nay.
– Any opposed? – Nay. – So it looks like, I say nay also. Sorry I say nay. I understand Mr. Lipton what you said but I would feel more comfortable if it were worded as such especially because you’re talking
about two different campuses and a very large budget item. – Can I ask a question?
– Sure. – So if it was changed and brought back at the next meeting
you’d be in favor of it. – I would.
– Okay. – Plus it also gives an opportunity to include the cost savings in, I know that the ones
that we have right now they’re broken down so we could have just a little bit more information. All right so we’re gonna
move on to item 6.2, I’m sorry, the motion failed. Item 6.2, student–
– 6.1. – There were three no votes. – And you were nay? – Yes I was a nay. – Oh I did not get that, hold on. I knew the first time, but I thought you changed it, okay. – That was 6.1 – Yeah, okay.
– There you go. – We’re on 6.2.
– Oh I’m sorry, you’re right. – Correct, item 6.2, student
transportation update, this is an information item only. Is there any discussion? And Vice President Drinkwine you have a presentation for us dare I say, you’ve got an update? – It is at your preference, you may either accept the
update in written form or I can give you a quick rundown on it, it’s up to you.
– How quick? – Two seconds.
– All right let’s do it. – We are ready to go for fall. We are finalized the
contract with transit, we have the plans for how
we’re gonna roll it out and identify the specific
students who are eligible we are just gonna place a sticker on the eligible students’ ID cards so we are ready to roll
this pilot out for fall. Simultaneously we will be looking at an ongoing sustainable model that may or may not include student fees, so we’re examining all those options as we move forward and get ridership data. – [Vivian] That’s an excellent report, anybody have any comment on that? – Just one question, can
you speak a little bit to the city, Mayor Garcia’s
interest in the program, I think there was an update in there. – Well we know interestingly enough that LA Community College district has had a lot of activity and I’ll be representing
you with some more in depth information it’s very much in flux but we know that LA Mayor Garcetti has arranged for free transportation on local bus routes to
all of their students. You said Garcia?
– Yeah yeah, sorry. – Ever so sorry, thank you. – But I said Garcia.
– Oh oh. – I heard Garcetti I’m so sorry. – Yeah I know LA they’re paying for it and they’re doing a
big program with LACCD. – Forgive me I didn’t want to
talk longer than necessary. – Sorry Long Beach Mayor
Robert Garcia, not the LA. – Even better news.
– Do we have to vote on that? (laughing) – But we’re entering that
phase of delirium right now. – I’m getting punchy sorry. – Even better news,
Long Beach Mayor Garcia recently informed Superintendent
President Dr. Romali of his commitment to establish a budget to support transportation
for Cal State Long Beach and Long Beach City College. While the amount is still in development, the details are depending
upon the convening of the working group, we’re super excited because collectively all three
of our educational agencies have been working with the city to try and find another solution to this. Because sustainable ongoing solution will have all these different components, so that’s really exciting. – Thank you very much. All right we’re gonna move on to item 6.3, also an information item, the North Long Beach update. Vice President Drinkwine, can you give us a brief update on that. – Again we’re moving forward on this one, we presented a scalable options approach to the city to John Kaiser
who was here earlier that went from what we could
do immediately this fall to what we could do if they
gave us some free facilities. So what’s happened so far is Pat Adeniya director of the small
business development center has met with John, they’ve looked at Michelle Obama Library, so they’re identifying the space we can do some ongoing workshops. Simultaneously adult education under Dr. Scott’s guidance has been working to also expand locations and services within North Long Beach. We anticipate that by next month we’ll be able to bring you a schedule, calendar, and some flyers that were distributed to the community. – That’s excellent,
any discussion on that? – I just wanna say we
had a really good meeting in May with the city and Dr. Romali and Marlene and myself, and Nick, and John from the city. I think we have a good package ready to go that meets the community’s needs. – Excellent and I also
wanna thank you guys because I know that you’ve
been meeting about that and the transportation issue and I know that staff
has had a lot of input so even though we are kind of
breezing through these items that your work is not going unnoticed and we certainly appreciate it and the amount of research that it takes to be able to make both
of these items happen, 6.2 and 6.3 is tremendous. So just because we’re going fast doesn’t mean we don’t appreciate it a lot, so thank you. All right moving on to item 6.4, students with housing
and food insecurities, another information item, and once again, Vice President Drinkwine? – Lots of great progress there as well, largely as a result of the dedication to Dr. Munoz, Vice President
Dr. Munoz’s efforts with his staff. That we realized collectively as we started looking
at exploring housing, that we needed to do a better job in understand our population of students that are facing housing insecurities and providing them with direct services and so he’s created the
office of basic needs. And I don’t wanna steal his thunder, but I will tell you it
will be at both campuses, it will be an umbrella office that will provide direct services with disadvantaged students in a way that’s very respectful. And provide them with immediate access to community agencies, the food bank, and a plethora of services. It will also collect
the data we need to have better to find these students. Because it is our intent
to restructure the RFQ for a feasibility study
for student housing. We wanna start that process in September, we know that whoever gets that job will take a long time to come back to us with a really robust response. What we learned was that our last RFQ was far too broad, but because we are
establishing this office, we’ll have better information
about our students and we’ll have a far more
feasible and relevant plan for potential solutions moving forward. – That’s great, it this also, have we officially called this
the office of basic needs, or is this separate independent of that? – This is the office of basic needs. – That’s awesome, so I’m excited about rolling that out full force. The one thing that I
would like to ask of staff if it’s possible is I’d like to make sure that there’s something in writing and posted that speaks to
the privacy of students seeking these services, and I know how difficult it is when a student is homeless or hungry or experiencing a basic need for them to take the first
step to ask is a big deal but then they need to
feel as if their privacy is being protected and respected and a lot of students need things but they feel like they’ll be outed or ridiculed or their
need will be publicized, so I’d like to make sure that the college community
is receptive to that and that we understand
that students’ privacy with these matters really
needs to be respected. Anybody else?
– Yes please. President Malauulu I have two questions. Regarding that we’re doing
some of that vetting right now, and we cannot, and I’m
not talking about me, the person who vets the students cannot look at anybody’s
record or talk to them until we get their written permission. So those kind of things are being done. But my question is what kind of person are you looking at to operate
this basic needs center? What kind of background are
you looking at a counselor are you looking at a social worker, what kind of person? – Do you recall her background? I know she worked under
Rashita Crutchfield at Cal State Long Beach, but I don’t recall her background. – Off the top of my head, and I’m sorry at 10:25, I don’t remember. – You don’t know.
– I don’t recall. – But if somebody’s gonna
do this pretty quick I assume you’re gonna hire somebody as an interim or LTE
or something like that? – Correct, Vice President Munoz does have someone that
he feels confident in that he has already identified who is able to step into the role. – You have identified somebody? – On an interim basis correct. – Okay all right, thank you. – Those are good points. All right anything else on those items? Trustee Ntuk? – Yeah thank you, I’m excited
to see this move forward and when Dr. Munoz is back
and hearing more details. I live in the 90805 zip
code which is adjacent to Compton College and I get Instagram and Facebook ads about
their basic needs program that I can sign up for CalFresh, that they have housing vouchers, I hope as we’re going forward that we can carve out some
of our marketing budget to make sure the students on campus and across the community
know what’s there. When I was here I was a teen parent and yeah you’re kinda struggling and you’re in and out real quick and you’re kinda overloaded. And so anyway that we can make sure that we’re getting it out in a format that’s digestible to the students. I’ve seen people who all
they do with their company, young people is Instagram marketing, and they’re like flooded with
demand for their business, so hopefully we’re thinking about that when we move forward with this in letting people know
what services are available at both campuses. – And I think that also speaks to the fact that there are students who
might not have a place to live they might not have food to eat, but they have a cell phone, and they can communicate, and they can receive those ads that pop up based on your geography and your location there’s a lot to be said about that and that’s unfortunately
how a lot of our students are recruited to things we don’t want them to be recruited to. So let’s have them be recruited to this. So thank you very much, I appreciate the work that
you’re doing with that. One other thing, and I’m not
sure if this is something for maybe for Vice President Dr. Munoz, but I was reading something that actually was Michelle Obama, you talked about her library, where she talked about
the garden that she grew and how I might not have the number right, but a bazillion pounds
of vegetables were grown and given directly back
to the communities, so I don’t know what it would take for our college to explore
something like that but if we can grow food and be able to feed our students, I’m sure we might not grow a bazillion, but if we can get close to that. If we can provide a daily snack, something to students or a salad. – Could I respond to that?
– Absolutely. – Right now at the Pacific Coast Campus, Food Finders is delivering
food to our students that goes to the child
development center first, and then it goes to the
college center second. Also I was at Rotary today and Holly Carpenter spoke
about the Carmelito’s Garden. And so in North Long Beach, there is an opportunity for
people to get fresh vegetables and this was actually a project that was started at
Long Beach City College, our horticulture department trained people at Carmelitos to grow the vegetables. Unfortunately the grant ran out and it kinda ran by the wayside, but now the city is involved in it and I think it’s a wonderful program where they have a farmer’s market, they have the residents growing things and learning and the
young people at Carmelitos and in the neighborhood learning about gardening and what it takes to put food on the people. Healthy food on the table. – Those are all great points. All right moving on to item 7.1, Academic Senate president,
welcome, Jeri Florence. You’ve had an incredible first meeting. (laughing) So thanks for hanging in. I just want you to write this down and hopefully we can beat this, but it’s 10:28 when you
give your first report. – Something to aspire to. – Thank you.
– In the morning. – Long Beach City College should be proud of the fact that we have one
of the oldest Academic Senates in the state. Since 1965, faculty have
stepped up to take the lead in curriculum, professional development student success, and campus governance. Faculty who are elected
to serve as senators represent either the Liberal Arts or the Pacific Coast campuses. As a whole we do not represent
the individual departments in which we work or teach. In a moment I will share with you the membership cards that
are distributed to faculty when they begin their tenure
at Long Beach City College. As you will see, statewide, Academic Senate is rooted in Title V. Our primary function is
to make recommendations with respect to academic
and professional matters. Inside of the brochure, you will find the membership card that lists what is commonly referred to as the 10 plus 1. While the Senate participates
in all of these activities across the campus, at
Long Beach City College the institution has made the decisions to rely primarily on faculty through the Senate for the following, curriculum including
establishing prerequisites and placing courses within disciplines. Degree and certificate requirements, grading policies, standards or policies regarding student preparation and success, and finally policies for faculty professional
development activities. This is the charge that we take seriously and we appreciate you
giving us the responsibility to monitor all of those. I’ve reached out to Diane Ogimachi, the LBCC FA president, Robert Rameta, the FAFT president, C.C. Sadler the Classified
Senate president. All of us are committed
to working together as a leadership team to ensure that the constituents that we serve are informed, included,
and celebrated for the work that we do. We agree that we are stronger together and that our students
will be better served. I would like to acknowledge
and warmly thank the outgoing Academic Senate
president Jorge Ochoa, he completed his two
year term as president but he will remain with us on the senate as an active PCC senator. The senate considers itself fortunate to have the ongoing support of the Superintendent
President Dr. Reagan Romali, you are a champion of faculty and you are a champion
of the Academic Senate and we thank you. The Senate also enjoys a
strong working relationship with Dr. Kathy Scott, our
executive Vice President of Academic Affairs, her experience as a former classroom instructor and as an Academic Senate member is incredibly invaluable to us. She and I have worked closely on faculty professional development, and I am looking forward to continuing our collaboration as I take on the role of the Senate President. A talented group of faculty leaders will be serving as members
of the Senate exec committee. Shawna Hagman will be assistant president, Christina Moorehead secretary treasurer, Carlos Ramos will serve
as legislative liaison, Dr. Wendy Koenig will
continue as curriculum chair, John Downy and Dr. Colin
Williams as the LAC reps, and Julie Schneider as the PCC rep. Rounding out our team is
somebody we could not be without, and we have appreciated her talent, she is the senior administrative assistant to the Academic Senate, and she works also very closely with curriculum and that’s the incredible
Fabiola Guerrero. It’s been an honor for me to represent the Pacific Coast
campuses as a PCC Senator for the last five years. And I am truly humbled and honored to be able to now take on the role and represent the entire Senate, all of the Senate as their president. So I look forward to
working with all of you, thank you for having me, and
thank you for welcoming me to tonight’s meeting, thank you. (audience applauding) – That was an outstanding report. Jeri we’re so used to the fabulous work that you do with the new faculty that we expected no less
in your first report. Question will you still be
working with the new faculty? – Always, but the role of
the faculty professional development coordinator we will fly that when the semester begins, we were talking about doing, I work very closely
with Dr. Scott this summer we were gonna do it in the summer, and we thought you know, we really wanna make sure that all faculty have the opportunity to apply, some are not here in the summer, some are not responding to emails, that’s hard to imagine,
but they take time off, and so we wanna fly it and give everybody an
opportunity to do it. So yes I’ve stepped in, I’ll run the new faculty
orientation in August, and we’ll kick off the
college culture Fridays, the senate exec is all pitching in so it’ll be a very smooth transition, but I’m looking forward to letting somebody else have the joy that I’ve had for the last five years as faculty professional development. – Thank you, thank you very much. Sure Trustee Ntuk? – Just wanna say
congratulations, welcome aboard, excited to have you. I was not able to make it to
an Academic Senate meeting in my first year, and I would love to come to one of your future meetings. – [Jeri] Are you looking
for an invitation? – But I don’t wanna surprise you, so whenever you wanna send an invitation and it’s appropriate, you let me know and I’d love to come and say hello and see a meeting, hopefully
it’s four or five hours long. (laughing) – [Jeri] That’s just my
report, that’s just my report, and then other things sure. – Well thank you, thank
you, welcome aboard. – Good deal, thank you very much. Okay our Classified Senate president, welcome C.C., we’re happy to have you, and have you be a part of this great fun that we’re having. – Thank you, but I attended
pretty much every board meeting over the last
year, so I’m old hand. So I really liked something
that you said earlier this evening Trustee Malauulu, you said thank you for
the opportunity to serve, and I wrote it down because
I’m gonna really remember that that’s a really good comment. And I’d like to thank the
entire college community for supporting us in the last two years. Administration, trustees,
and the Academic Senate especially has been incredibly supportive and helpful to us. And our former president Anne Engel is gonna be a tough act for me to follow and I don’t know if you know this but she’s it’s in the consent agenda, but she’s starting a new role as senior network administrator and I really wanna
congratulate her for that. And coming up in about two weeks we have our second annual retreat which will include the
Classified Senate council and we also always
include the representative the classified who represent us on participatory governance committees and we’re gonna be hearing from LBCC’s new student
equity manager, Navone Watson, about transformational equity and we’re gonna have some time to have some longer conversations that we don’t normally able to have, and brainstorming and goal setting so we’re kinda setting aside a whole day which is gonna be really great. And the last thing is I
really want to make sure everyone takes some time
to look at our website because it describes the
purpose of Classified Senates in the state of California
and we’re still having people coming up and saying
what do Classified Senates do and what’s their purpose. And it also has our meeting schedule and a list of the members of our council so for members of the public you go to the LBCC homepage and then the about tab, and then college leaderships and just one final
thing, we have a new web and social media coordinator
which was my position, her name is Alexis
Garriet and she’s from LAR and she’s hit the ground running with our social media and everything else and she’s gonna take it to a higher level than I ever had time to do. So Trustee Ntuk you can still continue to like all our tweets
and include us and tag us which has actually upped our profile a lot so that’s been really great. So thank you very much. – Outstanding, we expect no less from both of you and I just wanna say, and I know we said this last year when Annie joined us, but it’s so nice to have you guys be a part of the table. And I hate as an English teacher, I hate saying you guys, I hate that, I get mad at people when
they say you guys, or gals, I hate that too, but it’s so nice to have, the Academic Senate has
been a part of this dais, but to have the Classified Senate have a seat at this table
is just really refreshing and I know that we’re already two years in but thank you. Thank you very much. All right let’s go with trustee reports, who’d like to start us off? – I’ll start us off.
– Trustee Baxter. – Okay I’ll start off. First of all, another
thing you could call Jeri and C.C. are LBCC alumni who went through the student affairs program and are outstanding
examples of that situation. Okay that opportunity. All right these are things that I’ve done since the last meeting. On July 4th I sold fireworks at the Lakewood Pan-American
Scholarship booth. And had a lot of fun, we
raised money for scholarships and several of the recipients this year are coming to Long Beach City College. They have to be a resident of Lakewood in order to qualify for the scholarship. Then on July 13th, I participated in the Meals on Wheels 5K walk and I wanna salute the
college first of all, we walked all through the campus, the campus looked beautiful,
I should look this way, it looked beautiful, very welcoming. I thought we’d just go
around Vet’s Stadium but we actually walked
all the way up to Carson and all the way around the
parking structure and everything. and so thank you Long Beach City College for sponsoring that. Then on July 18th, a
fabulous state of the college took place and one of
the guests as my table thanked me for inviting him and said how impressed he was and I was impressed and I was so proud of our institution and I
think everybody left there feeling very very excited
about the coming year and the things that are
going on at the college. Then on July 19th, I attended the CCEJ which is California Conference
for Equality and Justice audit committee, always very interesting to sit on other non-profits
and see how they operate. And then I wanted to call three things to your attention and also the community because I know you’re all staying up late to watch this wonderful meeting. On September 13th, the life sciences areas of the college department of the college is going to have a memorial
for Joan Zuckerman. Last month we learned
that Professor Zuckerman passed away and so the
department is planing something and they wanted me to let the public know, and then on September 10th,
the LA County job fair will take place at Vet’s Stadium, and again I wanna salute the college and our wonderful programs there over 100 employers will be there. So people who are looking for jobs go to Vet’s Stadium on September 10th. And then lastly there was an article in “Inside Higher Education” today about online classes and financial aid, and I would like sometime
to maybe have someone investigate the situation what it is is California is one of the few states that doesn’t have some
kind of an agreement and so students may not be
able to use financial aid to take online classes. So it’s this week’s
“Inside Higher Education.” I’m lonely and desperate
and read these things. (laughing) Well because it said financial aid, that’s why I was interested. But anyway, congratulations
President Malauulu and Vice President Ntuk and
it’s gonna be a great year. If we can end sooner. – Thank you very much, Trustee Otto do you have a report? – No.
– Trustee Ntuk? Oh I’m sorry you do you changed your mind. – I just had one question I wanted to ask Superintendent President Romali, what time is it? (laughing) – I’m not quite sure
what I’m saying, 11:42. – 10:42.
– 10:42. (laughing) – Who’s counting and with that
I would conclude my report. – All right Trustee Ntuk. – One thing I wanna report oh man, I got accepted to this program at USC’s Sol Price School of Public Policy it’s a local leaders academy, it’s funded through the
California community foundation and it’s for newly
elected and local leaders on navigating complex policy challenges, positively advocating for supports, public policy framework and asserting and being self
aware in different roles, so it’s once a month
for the next four months but I’m looking forward to learning from the Public Policy School and seeing what we can apply
here at Long Beach City College so that’s all I have today. – Well congratulations for that. I have a very lengthy report. (laughing) Just kidding, I have
three items to report on. So on Saturday June 29th, I was invited by the Democratic Women’s Study Group to serve on a panel for
people who were interested in either running for office
or working on campaigns or committees or serving as staff members and it was a great experience and I’ll tell you why, Dario is gonna cue up
the first photograph. There were some students there, a couple of them were LBCC students and there were high school students and I love the opportunity
to interact with students and I really miss that,
not being in the classroom. So of course I always kinda gravitate toward the young people and
ask them what they’re doing and then I get really excited when they say they’re LBCC students. Hopefully you’ll see them
running for something or running somebody’s something. On July 15th, kind of a
little bit of a double whammy, you’re gonna see a masked young man there, this is on our PCC campus at building II, and I saw an advertisement
in the weekly bulletin a few weeks ago talking
about the nuts, bolts, and thingamajigs one week conference. It was from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m. Monday through Friday of last week, and that young man you can go to the next
slide, is my oldest son. And he was taking the class so he learned a lot, he
made a lot of things, he made his own tool
box, made a paperweight, just all kinds of things of his name, so he learned a lot he took a field trip and it was free. So I’d like to thank as a parent now, of somebody who took a class here at LBCC, I’d like to thank everybody who has a role in providing
these free opportunities for their community and
I’d like to make sure that we highlight that even more because what a tremendous opportunity. And then last week and this week, my two boys are taking a
swim class here on campus, techniques in swimming, and I can’t walk past a golf cart without seizing the moment, so we took a photo. But I actually didn’t drive the golf cart, I just saw it sat there and told the boys they
were fresh out of the water so it was a good time. And I just love that again
the public has opportunities to use our campus whether it’s the pool or a class, I love that. And the last thing is I just wanna commend Dr. Romali and the rest of the staff with the state of the
college last Thursday which was fantastic, I loved the changed, I loved how it became
a dinner party flavor and I love the intimacy of the event. We had it for so many years at the gym and it was huge and gigantic, but it just didn’t feel as intimate and I love the change, so kudos to you and kudos to the staff for making it happen. I am looking forward to seeing
kind of state of the college part two when we incorporate the staff and do something similar for them. Other than that, C.C.,
thank you for highlighting that comment that I made, but I am grateful for
the opportunity to serve as chair, I always tell
me kids to wait your turn to not be in a hurry to not rush things that everything does happen in due time, and I spent the first couple of years as trustee absorbing,
learning, listening, watching, I had great examples with Trustee Kellogg and Trustee Otto and Trustee
Baxter in the leadership roles that they served. And I hope to be able to incorporate some of their leadership styles into mine, and with that I hope to
run more efficient meetings and to be appreciative of your time. Let tonight not be the example of what the rest of the meetings will be. I promise my commission and
my other board meetings, I run a pretty quick meeting, so tonight is just you know practice. So thank you guys very
much, I’m really excited I hope you’re enjoying your summer and we look forward to
seeing you guys back next month, now we’re not done yet, but we have to hurry ’cause
the lights are gonna cut off. – Does that mean none of
the votes counted tonight? (laughing) – We might have to revisit. So I did get passed a note that literally the lights will turn off, so we’re gonna be quick because we have staff here. So moving on board
travel, nothing to report on board travel item 7.4. Item 7.5 any trustee committee reports or formation, moving on, are
there any public comments on non-agenda items item 8.1? Item 9.1, there is no
closed session necessary, and by the way I’m not the type of person who needs to read everything on the paper so if I’m going too fast for you stop me. Item 10.1, is the adjournment, we are adjourning. The next regular meeting
of the Board of Trustees will be held August 28th right here. Closed session at 4:30 if necessary, open session at 5:30. This meeting is hereby
adjourned at 10:48 p.m. (audience applauding) (people murmuring quietly)

Tagged : # #

Dennis Veasley

2 thoughts on “LBCC Board Meeting, July 24, 2019”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *