CCCFE Faculty News Notes Feb 10, 2014

February 10, 2014

Welcome new faculty members, and welcome back those who taught in fall.

Good News (for a change):

            The District has withdrawn its application for exemption to the 50% law which requires all districts to spend minimally 50% of their adjusted expenditures on instruction.  Our District, which has a history of violating the 50% law and of asking for an exemption (and being granted an exemption by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges), has violated this law three of the past four years.

            There are several ways in which districts may meet the 50% law:

1.     Increasing class offerings  (increase of sections)

2.     Increasing the number of full-time faculty positions

3.     Increasing the number of part-time positions

4.     Increasing full time faculty salaries

5.     Increasing part-time faculty salaries

6.     Increasing the in-class tutorial support

The first two, increasing the number of class offerings and increasing the number of full-time positions, require enrollment growth;  unfortunately, we are currently in an enrollment decline due to other colleges’ restoration of their winter intersessions, coupled with our ill-conceived cancellation of winter intersession.   As other colleges offered a winter session this year, right as we had cancelled ours, the enrollment gains we had made as a result of the others’ cancellation reversed as students returned to their original campuses.

            The District had claimed 47% of the budget was spent on instruction;  the difference comes to approximately $500,000, which the District is required by law to pay to instruction.  The District has a two-year period to discharge this debt to instruction.

            Meeting the 50% law on a routine basis is essential to eligibility for accreditation as it illustrates fiscal stability and sustainability and a commitment to instruction. The District wants to spend $265,000 this year on instruction and to spend $300,000 next year by increasing the n umber of full-time faculty, this time by nine positions.  So far no retirements have been announced to justify this kind of increase, particularly as enrollment has been declining.

            The District finally reversed its position on the application for exemption after relentless urging from the Federation, Dr. Arthur Flemming, and the Academic Senate;  additionally, the Special Trustee had expressed his concern about the failure to meet its obligation at two separate Board meetings.  The District’s previous failure to listen to the faculty representatives could have resulted in serious embarrassment for the District at the Board of Governors’ meeting where the opposition to the District’s application would have been voiced;  it would have also been noted by the ACCJC that the District would have revealed itself unable to prove its fiscal sustainability.

IMPORTANT  UNION MEETING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, AT 1 P.M. IN THE E ROW.

            The agenda will be brief:  a discussion of compensation, now that some money has been put on the table.

            Delegates for the 2014 CFT convention March 14-16 in L.A. will be selected.

Budgetary Considerations affecting faculty:

            Pension Reform:  Currently, the State Teachers’ Retirement System takes 8% from faculty paychecks, and the District contributes 8.5% of the monthly salary amount to STRS.  To sustain the retirement system, STRS will need to increase the amount it collects from faculty and districts since its funds are being depleted due to better health and increased longevity of its members.  To date we do not know how much of our District’s reserve is being held for the inevitable increase which may be spread out over several years.

           

            Debt from the Cosmetology Program:  The Chancellor’s Office has determined that the District owes the state for FTES claimed for the Cosmetology Program that is no longer offered.  The state claims the amount owed for the time we did offer cosmetology to be $5 million;  the District disputes this amount, claiming that it is more like 1.4 million.  He amount of the total pay-back that the state claims it is owed is reflected in the college Reserve account.  The District is still trying to get the amount that it owes reduced from the $5 million.  Unfortunately, the matter will not be discussed with state representatives until March 4.

            Prop 30 Monies:  To those who are still unclear about the Prop 30 monies, please be advised that Proposition 30 provided money only to replace funding taken away during the height of the state’s fiscal crisis.  It is restorative money, not new dollars.  It restores money to programs such as EOPS and other categorically funded programs that suffered real hardship during the past few years.

            COLA:  The COLA was 1.57%, and growth was funded at 1.43%.  We did not qualify for growth money, but we do have the 1.57% COLA.  Most districts across the state have taken increases between 1.5% and 3% depending on whether they received growth funding from the state.  The estimate for COLA for this year is less than 1% (0.86% currently).

We will be returning to negotiations next week, and these are considerations to bear in mind as we return to the table.  The issues include Evaluation and Compensation.  The District wants this contract settled so that we can begin the 2013-16 contract negotiations. 

           

REMINDER:  UNION MEETING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, AT 1 P.M. IN THE E ROW.