Ventura College Academic Senate
Thursday, 17 November 2011     MCW-312

I.	Call to Order
This meeting was called to order at 1:38 p.m. The following Senate members were present:
Algiers, Kammy—Math and Sciences
Arquilevich, Gabe—English and Learning Resources
Beynon, Sharon—English and Learning Resources
Chen, Albert—Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities
Forde, Richard—Career and Technical Education
Fiumerodo, Gigi—Math and Sciences
Gardner, Ty—Math and Sciences
Guillen, Guadalupe—Student Services
Haines, Robbie—Senate Secretary
Hendricks, Bill—Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities
Lange, Cari—Senate Vice President
Mitchell, Nancy—Career and Technical Education
Morris, Terry—PE/Athletics, Communication Studies, Foreign Languages and ESL
Muñoz, Paula—Student Services
Parker, Jennifer—Career and Technical Education
Pauley, Mark—Senate Treasurer, Curriculum Co-chair
Sezzi, Peter—Senate President
The following guests were present:
Hall, Luke—Math and Sciences
Sanchez, Ramiro—EVP, Student Learning
Tovar, Antonio—Vice President, ASVC

II.	Public Comments
No public comments were made.

III.	Acknowledgement of Guests
No guests were acknowledged.

IV.	Approval of minutes
a.	Arquilevich moved to approve minutes from the 3 November 2011 meeting, Gardner seconded. Motion carried unanimously with Lange abstaining.
b.	Extension of Remarks by Trustee McKay on 20 October 2011 moved to next Senate meeting.

V.	Study Sessions
a.	General Education Student Learning Outcomes
Gardner noted that the SLO committee was not ready to discuss this yet, they’re currently examining Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs, formerly called Core Competencies here at VC) in order to link them better to pSLOs and SLOs. They’re also currently making a transition from being administration-led to being faculty-led. The committee’s goal is to demonstrate sustainability of the whole SLO paradigm for accreditation purposes and they’re looking at other examples of WASC-approved systems. Consensus was reached among Senators that this committee should do the work described and the Senate should review and approve this work once completed. The committee will report back to Senate as early as possible in Spring 2012 but no later than before Spring Break. 

b.	Unfunded FTES
Sezzi noted that we are funded primarily as a district, but not wholly, on how many Full Time Equivalent Students (FTES) we produce. He also noted that the size of each college within the District also matters in how we are funded. As a percentage, about 85% of district funding is based on size of FTES in the district, 9% on college size and rest from miscellaneous sources. As a District we are carried ~4% unfunded FTES, or a loss of about ~$5.3 million, at the close of last fiscal year. This sends a message to the state that we don’t need as much money per FTES as we currently get, which is about $4565 per FTES. Some unfunded cushion is probably good, it allows for acquisition of growth dollars (when they exist) but these dollars are divvied up across the entire statewide community college system. Sezzi passed out data on local and statewide unfunded FTES and how we are projected to have ~6% unfunded FTES this fiscal year. The Statewide Chancellor’s Office is lowering cap of how many students we should serve rather than reducing the amount we get paid per FTES. How should we respond? Muñoz opined that we should spend our reserves. Sezzi did the math; that strategy would last us about 1.5 years. Triggers for cuts go into effect in December, only 0.3% of state’s 4 billion projected state income that was used to build this year’s statewide budget has panned out. Going below recommended $5 million reserves would put us on warning, adversely affect our bond rating. Reserve money mostly comes in from funded FTES growth dollars but it is extremely unlike that growth dollars will be forthcoming to either the CCC system or our District anytime soon. The most recent addition to our reserves is probably last addition for a long time. It was noted that in our current allocation model, 6.64% of District monies fund the District office. Muñoz stated that we should not take a position on this, because too many cuts are being made already. No question in Sezzi’s mind that unfunded students in classrooms will directly result in sections being cut somewhere else in District. Discussion ensued about Program Review process. Some senators felt that an opportunity for ideas was lost by not asking faculty for ideas on how to save money, others thought that no faculty would have offered up anything from their discipline for cuts. Sezzi solicited ideas about what we should do about this matter. Senators agreed that whatever we decide should be clear and we should all be doing the same thing, so we all know what to do. Consensus was reached that this matter will be revisited as a future study session.

Pauley motioned to move Staffing Priorities Committee report to this point in the agenda, Gardner seconded, motion carried unanimously. (See below for notes.)

VI.	President’s Report
a.	Board of Trustees Meeting report
Activities related to program discontinuance will probably happen at January meetings. Sezzi opined that he believes that the BOT meetings between then and now will be long and interesting. 

b.	Administrative Council report
The dropping of waitlisted students for non-payment was discussed at this meeting. Sezzi mentioned some of the ideas that we had previously discussed at Senate on this topic at this Admin Council.

c.	DCSL, DTRW, DCAS, DCHR reports
DCSL: Our changes to the AP on Enrollment Priorities is going to other Senates for their approval. This matter was moved to the next Senate meeting. DTRW: Our changes to the AP for Program Discontinuance were made and approved. DCAS: The structural deficit model was discussed at this meeting. DCHR: FSA procedure discussed. Sezzi stated that he will not sign FSA forms in those spots requesting approval of process and “recommendation” of committee, because we think it should be “determination;” however, he will include a standard cover letter noting that his lack of signature does not indicate that the person in question is or is not qualified but rather his lack of signature merely means that his signature is not necessary because faculty alone “determine” if a fellow full-time faculty member meets the minimum qualifications via equivalency for the purposes of establishing an FSA. 

d.	Board Goals and Objectives Implementation Task Force (BGOITF) report
Sezzi and Pauley apprised the Senate of the working of BGOITF’s last meeting. In early December, BGOITF will meet once more. The consultant leading this task force will then develop a report that he plans to provide to the Chancellor on the task force’s work. Sezzi will provide senators with this group’s report when it is available. A extraordinary Senate meeting to evaluate this report may have to be scheduled before semester’s end.

e.	Statewide Academic Senate Fall Plenary Session report-out on resolutions
Sezzi requested that senators talk to him if they have questions about Statewide Senate resolutions, noting that he has already spoken to the most-affected department regarding the most important Resolutions relating to repeatability. Sezzi commented that a lot was done at the meeting—74/75 resolutions were voted on.

VII.	Senate Subcommittee reports
a.	Curriculum Committee report
Pauley noted that there is still time to work on Transfer Model Curricula for those departments/programs wishing to do so. Also, the curriculum update/revision deadlines will be staggered starting with this Spring so that way not everything (e.g., curriculum, program review, SLOs) will all be due on Oct 1 of each year. This will mean that some divisions will have a much earlier deadline to update and revise their courses than otherwise would have had.

b.	Staffing Priorities Committee (SPC) report 
Co-chair Hall presented this committee’s results to Senate. Co-Chair Sezzi passed out data on SPC presentations and findings. 

c.	Sabbatical Leaves Committee report
Sezzi noted that this year’s list of faculty will probably go to Districtwide Sabbatical Leaves Committee in December and to the Board for January’s BOT meeting. 

d.	Other Committees
No other reports were made.

VIII.	Action Items
a.	SPC Growth Faculty Prioritization Report
Hendricks moved to approve as presented, Gardner seconded, motion carried unanimously.

b.	Ventura College Resolution on Defining Student Success (First Reading)
A draft of this resolution was passed out. Lange motioned and Haines seconded to move this to a second reading and discussed in detail at next Senate meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 

c.	AP 5055 – Enrollment Priorities – [Revised] (Third Reading)
This item will be discussed and voted on our next Senate meeting.   

d.	Ventura College Resolution on Dropping Students for Non-Payment when Moved from a Wait List into a Class (First Reading)
A draft of this resolution was passed out. Lange motioned and Haines seconded to move this to a second reading and discussed in detail at next Senate meeting. Motion passed unanimously. 

e.	Report on Ventura College Faculty Service on Committees (First Reading)
This report was compiled and distributed by Sezzi. Algiers motioned to move it to second reading at next Senate meeting, Arquilevich seconded, motion carried unanimously. 

IX.	Information Items
There were no additional information items. 

X.	Adjournment
This meeting adjourned at 2:58 p.m.