> Home > Shared_governance > Committees > Resources > Minutes_view

Resource and Allocation Committee

Print View Resource and Allocation Committee Minutes
Hartnell College - 411 Central Avenue, CAB-112 - Salinas, CA
March 28, 2012 at 3:00PM

Phoebe K. Helm
Ann Wright


Eric Price, CSEA
Nancy Schur Beymer, Academic Senate
Ismael Ramirez, L-39
Melissa Stave, Academic Senate, alternate
Francisco Estrada, ASHC

David Beymer, Faculty Hiring Committee
Demetrio Pruneda, HC Trustee
Al Munoz, Administration

Laura Warren

4:51 p.m.

Agenda #1

Topic:Approval of Minutes - 2/8/2012 meeting
Presenter:Ann Wright
Summary of Agenda Item:Minutes unanimously approved; no changes required.
Action(s) required:n/a

Agenda #2

Topic:Announcements/Public Comments
Presenter:Ann Wright
Summary of Agenda Item:Ann welcomed Trustee Pruneda to the meeting and provided him with an overview of RAC and its responsibilities.
Action(s) required:n/a

Agenda #3

Topic:Unfinished Business
Presenter:Phoebe Helm
Summary of Agenda Item:Phoebe and Ann are collaborating on the shared governance survey and will continue their work on it. Ann stated she would be working on it over Spring Break.

Phoebe then spoke about the duties she accepted responsibility for at the prior meeting, one item of which was to speak with the attorney to see if RAC is one of those committees that falls under the Brown Act. According to the attorney, it does not. RAC has the responsibility of reporting to one individual, who in turn reports to the Board.

Additionally, Phoebe reminded those present that at the prior meeting she was requested to set up training for the student senate with regard to the Brown Act. That training has not yet been set up.
Action(s) required:1. Brown Act training for members of student senate.
2. Finish Draft Survey.
Responsibilites:1. Phoebe
2. Ann and Phoebe
Deadline(s):none stated

Agenda #4

Presenter:Ann Wright
Summary of Agenda Item:Ann reminded the committee that RAC's objective is to make recommendations regarding resource allocations for the upcoming year and that input is needed from the various committees whose responsibility has been to take information about resource requests, analyze and prioritize that data, and take that to FIS so that FIS can analyze the availability of resources. Finally, it is RAC's responsibility to assess goals and to put that information into what will be the final budget. Discussion followed with regard to the timeline of the budget process: Tentative budget must be approved by the Board in June and the final budget is approved in September or October.

Ann reported that Matt Coombs has presented (by proxy) at FIS his 8 year plan with needs and justification. He was asked to communicate his plan with the other interested groups (such as Distance Ed) so decisions can be made regarding what the real needs are. Ann further stated that this isn't a backdrop of budget cuts but rather of institutional goals. Priorities must be set. As an example, Al brought up that in Suzanne's presentation she had a lot of IT information. It was imperative to find out if those needs were vetted through IT and how those needs fit into Matt's plan. It was found that Suzanne's reported needs were not incorporated into IT's global picture. Al further pointed out that has been discussed with Suzanne. Al used this example to illustrate that there must be a connect between areas.

Phoebe added that the issue of institutional priorities have to fall within goals set by the Board of Trustees.

Al then asked if it would be advantageous to ask chairs/co-chairs of the shared governance committees to attend RAC meetings. Discussions followed. Consensus was that representatives of other SG committees should attend when there is an item related to their committee on the agenda.

The subject of the upcoming RAC meeting schedule came up and dates were discussed. It was decided that RAC should meet every two weeks with the next meeting being April 18. Al then said he can have a tentative, rough draft budget by April 18.

Ann then began discussion with regard to the college's reserves. Much discussion ensued.
Action(s) required:1. Rough draft budget for preliminary review by RAC.

Agenda #5

Topic:Full Time Faculty Hiring Committee presentation
Presenter:David Beymer
Summary of Agenda Item:David outlined the request for eleven hires as well as provided detailed information with regard to the FON. Discussion followed.

David stated the need for three faculty hires and Phoebe stated that there is a search underway for four faculty. FIS will look at the availability of funds. Phoebe explained there are many things impacting the college not just budget contractions. Phoebe asked what the college's FTES goal is and if there is a number at which the college should attempt to stabilize.
Action(s) required:1. FTES goal.

Agenda #6

Topic:Timelines - scheduling future reports, making resource recommendations
Presenter:Phoebe Helm
Summary of Agenda Item:1. Bring back where we are with deans and vice presidents to begin the finance piece.
2. With regard to David Beymer's presentation, come back with an understanding of what the state comes back with.
3. Look into feasibility of faculty hires.
4. Predicted plan for 2012-13 and 2013-14 related to 50%; have a perspective by 4/18 meeting.
5. Discuss priorities at next FIS meeting.
Action(s) required:as above