The Board of Trustees’ rushed vote to eliminate winter session despite the urgent protestations of multiple groups makes us wonder whether shared governance is still part of the college’s decision making process.
When the proposal to eliminate winter was originally floated in 2010, the reason cited was lack of money. At an Aug. 28 emergency meeting, the Faculty Association heard a presentation by Community Education Center Instructor Daniel Hamman, which seemed to demonstrate that the college was no longer in a fiscal crisis. The numbers came from the California Community College’s Chancellor’s Office Quarterly Financial Status Report.
Since the original rationale has proven to be unsupportable (the college has over $20 million in reserves), the reason to eliminate winter changed suddenly over the summer to “it’s good for students.â€
The Board heard its first public presentation of the new rationale for the suddenly renamed “student†calendar during its Aug. 29  meeting.
While the presentation, led by Vice President of Instruction Robert Bell, asserted a three-semester calendar would offer more flexibility, others were not given any opportunity to evaluate this. Both the Academic Senate and the Faculty Association asked for a delay in the vote. They were ignored.
At the same meeting, Board President Geoffrey Baum said trustees were eager to hear public comment. “[This meeting] will give an opportunity to extend and receive additional comment from the public,†he said.
A few minutes later, the Board was confronted with heartbroken protesters and concerned faculty members, all urging it to keep a winter intersession. The Board did not respond to any of the pleas.
Faculty Association Representative Julie Kiotas said the existing calendar was a product of a year of meetings. “[The new calendar] is a violation of shared governance, it is an unfair labor practice, and it is a significant loss of institutional credibility,†she said.
While the so-called “student†calendar is identical in almost every respect to the “academic†calendar, the only difference is semantics. The FA may have solid grounds for a legal action based on this change of wording.
Academic Senate President Dustin Hanvey said the Senate had no position other than the current calendar.
Previously in March, the Associated Students Executive Board unanimously voted to support the necessity of a winter intersession. The AS resolution noted that “every survey, opinion poll, public comment and town hall comment performed or received by the ASPCC in the last few years has shown overwhelming and near universal support for a winter intersession on campus.â€
AS President Simon Fraser said at the Board meeting that a ‘student’ calendar is of vital importance to students, but the AS was not consulted.â€
Hanvey pointed out discussion of a three-semester calendar occurred while most of the faculty (and students) were away on vacation. “It is important the faculty can express their views on [the calendar],†he said.
Why the rush? The college’s budget situation is unknown due to Proposition 30 on the November ballot. If Proposition 30 passes, the college may get $6 million in additional funding.
But the real issue is why remove winter intersession when it is no longer a budgetary necessity? The college has enough money to fund a session which costs about $750,000.
Due to the hasty vote, none of the shared governance groups were able to participate in any meaningful way before a decision was made.
The lesson the Board and administration seem to be sending with how they handled such an enormous issue – which affects every single person at the college – is that participation in shared governance is pointless. Why should anyone bother? Their input will just be ignored.
- EDITORIAL: Apologize about the real problem - April 23, 2014
- STATEMENT: District apologizes to Oscar winning alum - April 21, 2014
- EDITORIAL: The Forgotten Students - March 26, 2014
Concerned voter, I’m a concerned voter too, and I would be very angry if PCC didn’t eliminate winter intersession and 600 classes. Calif. is in serious financial trouble, and my big tax bill sucks. No economic recovery is coming. If PCC really has $20 million in the bank (I think all that new construction is going to cost a lot more than that) then the college better save it because more budget cuts are coming, and those $100K a year instructors are probably not going to agree to a pay cut.
Does Christian even attend PCC? Your ignorance is astonishing. You may have a point about the students not having a say so in “decision making” but it is within the rights of the Faculty to have a say so. The board minus Trustee Brown, are acting like a privatized corporation and not as a public community college. And for one to place so much confidence in Rocha before knowing the facts about him and his poor history as a President at other colleges, only speaks further of your ignorance on PCC matters.
Christian you should read this article about how any new taxes we vote for in Nov. will only go to pensions. Teachers and educators condemn Wall Street excess, but CalSTRS and CalPERS are heavily invested in the stock market. CalSTRS just lost $19 million on Facebook stock. Most public pension funds assume a Bernie Madoff 8% annual growth on their stock market portfolios, which is a joke. Most PCC students probably have never had the experience of what it’s like to pay a property tax bill. Someday they will and then they won’t be protesting cuts to education.
https://www.bloomberg.com/tosv2.html?vid=&uuid=eb5fd880-a1c0-11e8-a6e2-292d05988b87&url=L3ZpZXcvYXJ0aWNsZXMvMjAxMi0wNC0yMy9uZXctY2FsaWZvcm5pYS10YXhlcy1wYXktZm9yLXBlbnNpb25zLW5vdC1zY2hvb2xz
Make that September 12.
The proposed Associated Students budget is $110,000; it can be found in the September 11 Executive Board Meeting Packet (item A). This money is about .1 per cent of the college’s budget, and less than several teachers’ annual salaries. There is no Executive Director of the Associated Students; the ASPCC President, Vice Presidents, and Chief Justice all receive stipends around $200 a month. To put it into perspective, an ASPCC Officer would receive approximately $2.50 per hour if they did the standard 10 hours in office and 10 hours out of office per week. For the record, I also never claimed a stipend. There are no “deferred benefits” or “other” compensations. Period.
I hope this has helped; the Associated Students of Pasadena City College prides itself on its transparency and accountability.
John – You are an awesome student leader and it is very big of you to not draw a stipend. Good for you, such a contrast to the greed displayed by faculty. It would be awesome for Board members to follow suit.
I am interested to know what is student governments’ take on the issue of faculty’s misuse of over $4 million dollars by spiking their own salaries in 2011?
Do you all (AS) see the connection between faculty’s greed and current budget shortfalls resulting in, well, not only class shortages but the likely canceling of winter intersession as well? Has there been a push to chop from the top and use more adjunct faculty? Can you provide any links of townhalls featured on youtube? What mandates has leadership put in place?
Christian: The Associated Students Executive Board has neither discussed nor taken any positions on this topic, so I unfortunately must reserve my own opinion to maintain the integrity of the organization.
@John Fraser: ARE YOU F-ING KIDDING ME????????????????
Associated Students “neither discussed nor taken any positions on this topic” of the faculty’s misuse of $4 million by greedily spiking their own salaries which led directly to a $4 million budget shortfall and the cutting of 600 classes and most likely the loss of winter intersession???????????????????????
So just what do you guys do, then? Is the general student body aware of this or do you student officers keep this hidden? I am shocked!
I am also shocked that you feel you must be silenced and not speak up for the students you represent in order to “maintain the integrity of the organization.” It appears that integrity has ALREADY been compromised by your own and fellow officer’s acquiescence. Pulllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeze!
Excellent article and spot on final conclusions drawn. Here is just one simple example of the flawed logic the admniistration is using in support of the new calendar – the “flexibility” it will provide in recording our FTES (apparently one of their stronger and more important arguments since they spent 20 minutes emphasizing it at the last two board meetings). The Administration stated that the new calendar would allow “flexibility” in recording our FTES because if summer session starts before June 30 (end of fiscal year) and ends after July 1 (beginning of next fiscal) we can count the FTES towards either fiscal year. That is accurate. They just forgot to mention that our current calendar has summer intersession starting before June 30 and ending after July 1 so we already have that flexibility. This new calendar does nothing to increase flexibility!
What Christine Michaels and “Concerned Voter” fail to understand is that shared governance is not the same as shared DECISION MAKING. While student input can be considered, the students are not the final say. I support VPI Robert Bell and President Mark Rocha. Can you imagine what a mess the school would be if students implement their every whim? YIKES!
Christian – Are you sure your initials aren’t M.R.? Or G.C.? Or R.B.? Or R.M.? C’mon – fess up!!
Hey “Anonymous” –
Do you mean am I Rocha or Bell posting under an alias? Nope, c’mon, they wouldn’t do that! I’m a real person and Christian is my real name. I do, however, have a great deal of respect for the leadership at PCC. You guys have it pretty darn nice right now…
So you think other than the 5 votes in favor, the rest of the community would oppose this decision? Tough decisions must be made. Wait until November; only teachers (union) and cops (union) will vote for Jerry Brown’s attempt at extortion, where he is holding education hostage and sayin’ pay up or else. You think things are brutal now, huge cuts are on the way.
As for shared governance, really the only power student government has is within its own context. Most students could care less as it’s not very effective, although students CAN learn excellent leadership skills if the A.S. executive director and the VP of Student Affairs provide strong leadership. The Board may consider student input, but often decisions are made in advance of meetings, like when politicians chat on the golf course…
From the article: “…[E]very survey, opinion poll, public comment, and town hall comment performed or received by the ASPCC in the last few years has shown overwhelming and near universal support for a winter intersession on campus.†Yet the leaders did what they felt best. That’s the reality.
I see it as better to provide three sessions that include awesome student services rather than four sessions with class offerings butchered to pieces. You PCC students really have it pretty darn good. Go to LACC or LAVC to compare public higher ed if ya think I’m bluffin’.
Again, shared governance is not synonymous with shared decision making.
Christian,
You’ve clearly not been involved in this issue, and your blind support for the calendar change is based on only a lack of trust in the shared governance process, which IS shared decision making. Perhaps you meant participatory governance, an entirely separate concept.
Further, the shared governance process, as Julie Kyotis mentioned, is not based on a “whim”, but rather a long process of research to ensure pedagogical and institutional validity in a plan. Administration implementing its “whims” is the real issue here. You would know that if you had participated in any of the opportunities to gather information before forming an opinion.
John Fraser – It appears the student representatives are not doing the job they are paid to do. The reps should be out gathering student opinions and bringing these ideas to their meetings for discussion. Instead, anarchists show up to the Board of Trustee’s meeting and ruin opportunity for discussion. Clearly, this is not the case. Students should be angry at their student government.
By the way, shared governance IS NOT the same as shared decision making. The final say goes to the trustees; you are delusional. The trustees can get input from the Academic Senate, from the student government, from the community, and consider it. But the final say goes to the seven on the Board. They are the one’s who must do what is best, in their minds, for the institution. It is up to the Trustees.
Again, shared governance is NOT shared decision making. Student government input can be absolutely ignored; it is a process that must take place, but in the end, the Trustees get to have the decision.
I admire the decision made. Sure, a long, costly process of research can take place, when time is aplenty, but sometimes in leadership people must make tough decisions.
If I was Mark Rocha, I would get rid of the football team.
Your knowledge on this issue is frighteningly mistaken, Christian. Had you been to a single Associated Students meeting or town hall (next one is on Thursday), you would understand what was going on. Unfortunately, you’ve decided you should be angry at your student government for not doing things we’ve done every week on Wednesday at noon, the very same reaction you admonish student protesters for having, calling them “anarchists”; whatever meaning you’ve given that term, I can assure you as a Political Science major, is incorrect.
Am I truly delusional? I have 3 years of Associated Students experience, and currently act as President for Region VII of the Student Senate for California Community Colleges, the largest regional student constituency in the state which also represents the Los Angeles City and Valley Colleges, and am Vice President for External Affairs within the ASPCC. I think I may know a little bit better how things work than you might think you do, and I would recommend having your opinion without attempting to explain processes I’ve spent the last 3 years of my life following.
You are correct in saying that shared governance is not shared decision-making, but only because you’ve redefined shared decision-making to mean what you’d like it to mean in this context. Shared governance is the process by which constituent groups evaluate proposals and have a weighted say in their implementation at the college, NOT where students implement their every whim, and NOT where students and faculty undergo a year-long process to develop an inclusive academic calendar which will be the best for everyone on campus only to be subverted by a recommendation from the Executive Committee, many of whom have LESS experience in shared governance than some student representatives.
Student government input CAN ABSOLUTELY NOT be ignored; please refer to AB 1725. Yes, decisions can be made that are not those of the shared governance process, but their lack of consideration entirely is the travesty this well-written editorial details.
A long, costly process of research could surely take place; or, the volunteers and people already paid to do this type of research could be allowed to do their jobs. This is a principle I like to call “look before you leap”, which allows people time to evaluate a decision before throwing study abroad students under the bus (notice that the Winter Study Abroad programs go 4 weeks into Spring), students who need to make up a class who will be unable to do so in order to transfer this year, international students who will now need to pay more money to avoid deportation, out-of-district students who will now need to register for more classes in order to maintain their ITAP, and more.
You can admire whatever decision you would like, and you have every right to do so, but try to maintain academic honesty by understanding the facts before posting a comment attacking an organization like the Associated Students for not doing their job.
Time WAS aplenty for the shared governance process to investigate this tentative STUDENT calendar, as Trustee Thompson pointed out during the failed motion to postpone this item (It failed 3-4. Student Trustee Hanna Israel voted in favor, but her vote is only advisory). The date of operational necessity is in early October, months from when the decision was made.
If decisions are made in advance of meetings, that is illegal. It’s called “serial communication”. I recommend you read the Brown Act, the open meetings law which doesn’t allow this type of thing to occur without input from the public. It is also written that officials are not supposed to decide what is for the public to know and not to know, so your entire line of reasoning on this is mistaken.
Finally, if you are a Pasadena City College student, I would like to extend an offer to you to apply for one of our Associated Students committees to see how things really work at the college. You can find them on our Associated Students website, which also would be one of many places you could have contributed your own opinion of the trimester for your student government’s consideration: as.pasadena.edu. I look forward to seeing your application, and hope that the resources provided on several of the concepts you’ve discussed prove helpful.
You are right and thanks for the invite.
However, you are not familiar with my extensive committee work/ leadership experience.
What is Associated Students annual budget? I couldn’t find the amount on your website.
John Fraser — One more thing: How much did Associated Students’ Executive Director earn in 2011, including “deferred benefits” and “other” compensations???
What a slap in the face not only to everyone who works at PCC, but all the voters in the community college district.
Does the board feel it unnecessary to consult its constituents when they make decisions affecting every one of the members of the PCC community? Do they not remember they will soon face the angry voters when they run for reelection?
There clearly is enough money for winter classes. The only conclusion every voter can draw from this botched decision was that board members do not care about community participation.
Shame on them!