OHLONE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

Video Conference Room / Fremont Campus

43600 Mission Boulevard, Fremont, CA94539

 

 

 

College Council Meeting Minutes

May 12, 2006 ADOPTED

 

MEMBERS PRESENT: Doug Treadway Dennis Keller

Kathleen Johnson Barbara Tull

Wayne Takakuwa Claire Ellis (for Tom Holcomb this semester)

Deanna Walston Dave Schurtz

Walt Birkedahl Marge Segraves (for Richard Grotegut)

Heta Desai Linda Evers

Gweneth Murphy (for Jimmy Dempsey)

 

MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Silva

Jim Wright

Cheryl Lambert

Debbie Trigg

Roxanna Guide

 

OPEN MEETING:

 

1. Approval of Council Minutes (04/28/06)
   
   

·       Motion: Moved/Tull; Second/Takakuwa; Passedto approve the April 28, 2006 College Council minutes, as amended (correction to College Council retreat times / changed from 9:00 – 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 – 1:00 p.m.).

 

2. TBP Architects’ Presentation

 

·       Gary Frye of TBP Architects presented a “color boards” review of the proposed Student Services Building and proposed Fremont campus exterior color scheme. Key points of his presentation included:

• Costs/Value engineering will go to the Board July 12 then to “DSA”.
• Student Services Building could be under construction the first part of 2007. Floorplan the same as has been reviewed by Council in the past. A couple issues with only minor changes.
• On track and on schedule.
• Fremont Campus Exterior Color: Tasked to come up with color schemes for exterior of buildings. Unifying concept with colors that will bring all of the buildings of the campus together. Color combinations unify older and newer buildings. Added a little color for "excitement". Color boards reviewed and color chips presented. Proposing the base color as a canvas along waterway to introduce graphics (Ohlone Indians, world cultures, whatever is deemed appropriate). Graphics won't be part of initial work, but done later after input from campus/community. Poster boards representing example of concept. Will help with orientation. Also, banners and signage to assist with building identification (number/name).
• Comment: Capital campaign underway for naming of buildings which will need to be coordinated with signage project. Also considering opening some of the walls on campus (not currently proposed, but future planning at this stage).
• Colorization project underway. Going out to bid in the next few weeks and project will begin this summer.
• Swallows? Dept of Fish & Game will not allow work during nesting period (Feb - Sept).
• Doing a mock-up, sand and water blasting in the next few weeks, prior to contract being awarded. Will give us a sense and feel of what will take place re noise, dust. Bldg. 9 is recommended building for test. Contractors will also have sense and feel of difficulty so we'll get accurate bids.
• Project will be phased: 1, 8, 9 in first package. Bldg 9 does not have swallows. Suggestion that Bldg 2 be included in first phase. With budget we have, cannot complete on all buildings. Being prioritized and can be modified (1, 2, 9). Discussion regarding selection of first buildings. Trying to "package" buildings to fit within budget.
• Colors not significantly different from what we have now, which is a benefit with regard to this scheme. Will certainly look cleaner, fresher, but not the kind of contrast you'd see with a red or a blue, for example. Estimated 60 working days to complete one building.
• Policy question: We thought we could do the whole building with $5 million, but it's now more than that due to stucco damage. Is there some other priority that could be set aside so we could do the whole campus? We need a Facilities Committee to be addressing these important topics.
• Consideration of campus as a whole, feeling of community. Buildings clustered, tile roofs... Maybe if we can't paint all of the buildings, at least pressure wash the others for now. President's guidance is to do the entire campus. You don't paint half of a house, and what would it cost five years from now. A lot of stucco work needs to be done (removed & replaced). Also some wall repair and wood repair that need to be done first, then colorant applied.
• Strategic goal related to facilities and activation of facilities committee. When Newark and Student Services Building occupied, also need to attend to vacated spaces. Need focused, intentional planning process.
• Bids coming in in 3-4 weeks. Bids will be for all of the buildings, but we'll structure the phasing.
• Best case, work will start in late June, early July. Dennis asking for 8, 1, 2 to be done first, during summer. Response: With repairs, timing not that quick.
• Smith Center being repainted? Not as part of this package. Later.
• Comment: Summer school: June 19 - end of July. Not in session on Fridays. No classes on Fri/Sat/Sun and most of the month of August no classes. Response: Working on Saturdays is time and 1/2, working on Sundays is double time. Expensive and time consuming proposal.
• Ohlone has made request to State for additional $11M for additional sub-surface problems on campus. Could have approval by end of 2006/early 2007.
• Recommendation requested: Color? Colors have been approved by ASOC. Consensus
  
  
• Motion: Moved/Evers; Second/Tull; Passed to approve color palate as presented.
• Motion: Moved/Tull; Second/Birkedahl; Passed to recommend Buildings 1, 2, and 8 as initial phase of work, and to add Building 9 if funding allows.
  
  
• Meeting needed to communicate process; next 4-5 years will be a construction zone. $200M worth of work is going to be going on; we need proactive, conscious effort to help with scheduling, with sensitivity, but need to accept and manage process. Accept that there will be inconvenience -- but also excitement. Campaign to get ahead of the curve: "Pardon our Dust". We want these projects to be done, and as soon as possible.

 

3. Community Service Task Force Update
   
   

• This agenda item rescheduled to June 14 meeting.

 

4. Goal 8 Update

 

• Draft Goal 8 statement distributed. First reading, will come back to Council retreat for approval. Send suggestions to Dennis Keller prior to retreat. New language more distinct from Goal 6. Okay to send to Board for first reading.
• Motion: Moved/Evers; Second/Johnson; Passed to approve sending draft Goal 8 language to Board for first reading.

 

5. Campus Security Update

 

• Fremont PD Proposal for Ohlone College District Public Safety Department Study distributed.
• Not replacing any district personnel with city personnel. Administration chosing not to fill position of police chief for one year period, during which a study would be conducted. Proposal to place officer here to conduct a joint study. Existing personnel would perform supervisory duties. Because of budget and hiring cycles, findings would have to come forward by early Spring next year. Preliminary findings would be made in Jan/Feb ‘07. Met with SEIU to discuss that this proposal does not involve current personne – current personnel would be part of advisory committee working with Fremont PD to conduct study. Possible bargaining impacts once the study is concluded.
• Proposal to use Bldg 20 as Fremont PD sub-station, providing loop and good working relationship with Fremont PD. Nice to see physical presence on campus as deterrent. Important for students to have interactions with campus security. Need
• Female students, particularly at night, don't feel safe. May need to look at how we open/lock facilities, so that staff is more available when students are here.
• Clarification: Staffing number is incorrect in memo/proposal. One vacancy currently, but not sure if that position will be replaced. Currently down two positions (chief and one security position).
• People concerned about the presence of armed officers, especially given the consensus was 2:1 against having guns on campus. Is this officer going to leave his weapon at home? Reply: Fremont PD have to have their weapons or they would not work here. As police officer, they have to be able to respond as a police officer.
• Patrol? We are in Zone 3 of their zones. We are in the Fremont PD jurisdiction. We think it's a deterrent to be more visible on campus. Ancillary to study. Trying to send message that PD are around here from time to time.
• As a reminder, this item is information item only. In meeting with Chief Steckler, realization that we need training and updating re: emergency preparedness. They will bring in resources from Fremont Fire Dept to address our emergency readiness. Another aspect to consider.
• Point of information: Chabot uses Hayward police officer.
• Question: What happens with this document next? Board would approve any agreement we make with Fremont PD. Board has sub-committee to study proposal.
• This topic on Board agenda on May 24 for direction, not agreement. Back to Council for vote before it goes to Board for vote.
• How would presence of Fremont PD impact previous agreement we have?
• Treadway comments: All high schools have Fremont PD, improved security environment. This is a test of if we are fully prepared to handle any situation. We only consider this in abstract, and this is more of a reality test of actual experience. Current staff will interview whomever is selected. Arguing that we be more open minded, in the spirit of benefit to campus. Concept of study, concerns well based regarding armed officers of any kind, but we should still consider.
• Most work is preventive -- campus community effort.
• Committee of the Board will report to the Board and we'll ask for a recommendation from the Council at the retreat. Process last year was related to arming campus security officers. We cannot take arms away from Fremont PD. This is not in opposition to previous survey.

1) We want to send a message that we have partnership with police dept.

2) Reluctant to keep same model of hiring another chief

3) Worried about response time and wan

4) Don't need to make fast decision. Want to pursue in orderly manner.

• Comment: Every safety officer goes through post-accredited training. Have arrest authority.
• Question: What if collaborative agreement cannot be reached. Will there be equal input? If campus security does not agree with Fremont PD recommendations, how will it be handled. Reply: Would try to reach consensus. Intention to reach consensus on all points. Some aspects might have differing opinions. findings will go through shared governance, if shared governance matters. Personnel, programs would be included.
• Comment: Between 11 p.m. - 6 a.m., important to have drive throughs on campus.
• Question: Does it have to be an active officer? Maybe a retired officer instead? Reply: Limits to how much a retired officer can work and earn. Would need 2-3 people to work full time. Would be confusing.

 

6. Enrollment Update / Strategies for 16-Week Schedule

 

• P-2 figures reported to the State in April:
• Impact on next year
• Need 3,400 this Fall to stay on track. Already have 25% of total anticipated.
• Bottom line, we will make our targets for this year.
• Strategies for 16-week calendar, to capitalize on advantages of shorter calendar:

• More time to register, more time to react to student needs, assess, advise
• Computerized assessment addresses compliance, provides rolling assessment, turnaround time much quicker, can register more quickly. More accurate, will result in less need for students to move.
• Outreach: Mass e-mails, in addition to specific e-mails to target groups, personalized.

• Running into a number of students running into course conflicts due to compressed calendar. Can't get matched, workable schedule. Can we survey those students now to see where the conflicts are and make adjustments? Especially in sciences. Good idea.
• Wright comment: will take a look at schedule to see if conflicts can be reduced. High demand area and limited facilities. May be even more limited over next few years, resulting in enrollment challenges. Science labs expensive. Facilities issue.
• Suggestion: Create learning community for sciences? Great idea. Doing study right now.
• Claire: In schedule, when course is part of learning community cohort, can we communicate as note when student can't register because it's part of the cohort. Reply: Currently put out lists in schedule and provide to counselors, but hope to improve communication with next version.
• English 101 "LC" tag to identify as learning community.

 

7. Council By-Laws Amendment

• Proposed amendment regarding Council term of office. Will bring to Council retreat.

 

8. Board Meeting Update

• Due to length of meeting, skipping this item.

 

9. Fall Meeting Time for College Council

• 3:00 seems to the natural break in the new afternoon schedule for fall.
• We can vote at Council retreat.
• Comment: It will be hard to get new faculty to serve if we don't agree on time / day now.
• Motion: Moved/Murphy; Second/Ellis; Passed to approve College Council meetings for Fall 2006 on Monday afternoons, 3:00 - 4:30 p.m., 2nd/4th Mondays of the month

 

10. Communications:

 

• Keller: Important to hear from all constituencies on Fremont PD proposal.
• Retreat clarification: Wednesday, 5/31, 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. (not 9:00 - 11:00 a.m.)

 

11. Council Schedule
    
    

·       Council retreat dates: May 31 and August 24 (9:00 – 1:00 p.m. / Wente Vineyards, Livermore).

·       Council summer schedule: 3:00 – 4:30 p.m. days when Board meets (6/14, 7/12, & 8/9)

 

Adjournment: Meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m.