FREMONT-NEWARK COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
43600 Mission Boulevard, Fremont, CA
Minutes of Citizens’ Oversight Committee
November 4, 2002
Page 1 of 3 Pages UNADOPTED
MEMBERS PRESENT: Pat Danielson, Ken Ballard, James Griffin, Dan Chang, Emily Sawyer, Jim Laub
MEMBERS ABSENT: Louis Willett, Yelena Abubekerova, John Copley, Leo Hinkel, George Mathiesen, Christopher Gray
PRESENT: Dr. Floyd Hogue, President/Superintendent
Deanna Walston, Vice President, Business Services/Deputy Superintendent
OPEN MEETING: The meeting was called to order by Pat Danielson at 6:30 p.m.
The pledge of allegiance was led by Emily Sawyer.
from the Audience None
1. Approval of minutes from the October 7, 2002 Meeting
Typing errors were notes in item #4 and #5 – for correction: “Change” to “Chang” and “requied” to “required.” Minutes approved. Emily Sawyer requested that all meetings be recorded.
2. Approval of the Agenda
3. Oversight Committee Membership Review
Dr. Hogue stated that since John Copley no longer is a member of the Newark Chamber of Commerce, he no longer represents the “business organization” category. Whereas Pat is a member of the Newark Chamber, she fulfills that requirement. He also noted that Christopher Gray now formally replaces Mr. Arthur Geen as the representative of the Taxpayers Association. It was suggested that at the next meeting, an agenda item should be the selection of a vice chair for this committee.
4. Update of Architect Selection Process as approved by the Board of Trustees
The committee reviewed the revised calendar for the selection process. They were informed that the Board of Trustees wanted to include Clay Colbin to the selection committee to provide input from the City, and the Newark Unified School District wanted Dave Goldin to participate.
On January 8, 2003, the Board of Trustees will review the plan for scoring (selection process) at a workshop for this purpose. Deanna described the required RFP meeting for those interested in participating in the architectural selection process. She noted that questions can be submitted to the District via e-mail prior to the submittal date, and that the District will attempt to update all interested firms on these questions and answers. It was also noted that the process this time (reference to project management firm selection) should go more smoothly. Deanna mentioned the list of ten criteria that will be the basis for initial consideration. (A copy is included, for your information).
Deanna responded to a question regarding earthquake standards. She stated that the Dept. of State Architects would require the same standards as is required for K-12. Reference was also made to the preference of a local firm as opposed to out-of-state. She reminded the committee that the RFP does require the response including a logistical strategy if the selected firm is not local. There was also a discussion of “green” buildings. It is believed that, where possible due to budget constraints, green buildings can significantly offset the higher cost of the building by consistent lower utility bills. The Leeds process for full certification is costly, however.
5. Bond Tax Levy Status Report for Measure A
Staff reported that our Bond Financial Advisor had reported the tax information to the county, but that he failed to require proof of delivery. Dr. Hogue also noted that the bond sale had taken place very close to the deadline for reporting to the county tax office and the information had to be passed on to the county treasurer’s office for the approval and setting of the levy. A solution has been reached, whereby the county will use funds out of current tax proceeds, and, at most, a 5% increase in assessment is projected over the life of the bond.
6. Update on the Oversight Committee Web Page
The Web Page is now available to the Public, and an e-mail address is identified for citizens wishing to communicate with the committee.
7. Suggestions for the next agenda
Deanna stated that the committee members would receive bond fund account information from the District’s First Quarter Financial Report as soon as it is prepared.
a. Web Site – Reports to be published and in what depth
b. Audit Information
c. Report on Architectural Selection Process
Deanna advised that staff would not have the information needed for the committee agenda planned until late in December, and, therefore, she suggested that the next meeting be held January 6, 2003. The Committee agreed and approved Jan. 6th as the next meeting date.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 P.M.