Home

Present: Chip Chandler, John Kirk, Katharine Harer,  George Goth, Rick Hough, Romy Thiele, Karen Olesen, Eric Brenner, Annie Nichols, John Searle, Teeka James,  Dan Kaplan, Ernie Rodriguez, Bob Hasson, Bernard Gershenson

The meeting began at 3.15 pm.

There was a wide ranging discussion of the meetings the Chancellor has been holding at the colleges to discuss the budget crisis. It was generally agreed that the 'golden handshake' offer proposed was insufficient.

Katharine Harer stated that the Chancellor, at the CSM meeting, stated that any such offers would have to be negotiated.

Katharine Harer and Bernard Gershenson reported on a meeting they had gone to which discussed alternative budget cutting and/or monitoring proposals. These included:

 a. wait for the P1 budget, due in a few weeks

 b. administrators may get March 15 notices

 c. play administrators on one week unpaid furloughs

 d. freeze supply purchases (emergencies handled by a committee)

 e. increase parking fees, use to fund security, maintenance and landscaping

 f. look at board related expenses

 g. look at the line item budget for the past three years

The members then offered additional proposals, specific to our district. These included:

 a. combine the three presidencies into one

 b. have common discipline deans

 c. consolidate programs

 d. improve communication with chancellor

 e. get a list of administrators, particularly those not directly engaged in teaching

 f. consider closing a college

 g. encourage donations to the Foundation, use the monies to fund programs

 h. sell KCSM, or, at the very least, do not fund it but have a relationship with it like SF Unified has with KCSM

The methods by which the various campus having been dealing with budget cuts was discussed.

 At CSM the Budget Committee now has additional faculty members but its deliberations are secret. It was felt that the faculty was being provided insufficient information and were being used as a rubber stamp.

At Skyline, SAIF, an ad hoc committee with large faculty and staff representation, was given information by various administrators and recommended cuts. Katharine Harer felt that it was also a rubber stamp while George Goth found it a more positive experience.

At Canada faculty involvement is only just starting. At least they are being given the agenda beforehand.

Possible actions were discussed. These included:

 a. contacting local legistlators and inviting them to rallys to be held on each campus.

 b. participating in the FACCC rally in Sacramento on March 17

 c. involving the students more as they seem to be unaware of the impact this will have

 d. participating in CLL's rally in Sacramento on March 4 (this will, apparently, be a student initiated event)

 e. initiating an e-mail campaign that would i) inform our e-mail correspondents of the situation; ii) provide them with sample letters they could e-mail to their legislators and the governor; iii) ask them to forward the e-mail to other interested parties

 f.  producing at least two fliers. One to explain the situation; the other to part-timers explaining their rights

 g. getting a general history of previous budget cuts and lay offs; analyzing what worked and what did not

 h. holding Exec meetings every two weeks

 Dan Kaplan provided copies of an e-mail from Kate Motoyama calling for the establishment of a committee with representattives from all interested parties (AFT, AFSCME, CSEA, Senates) to address matters pertaining to the district and college budget cuts. The aim of this committee would be to work collaboratively with the chancellor and the presidents on the budget. It was the sense of the body to support this proposal. Dan Kaplan and Teeka James will see if anything comes of it.

Top of Page
AFT 1493 Home