Facilities Committee Meeting 2012 - 06 - 13

>> You know, I suppose for today I'm playing the role of co-chair. >> Right. >> And so, anyway, now [inaudible], good to see you [inaudible]. [Inaudible Remark] All right. I think I know everybody. I can see you off. Okay, great. Well, first of all thank you to all of you for the work that you've been doing heretofore. And thanks to Coleman for everything, for giving me the agenda so that I have the opportunity to come and kind of, you know, sit down and discuss. What we want to discuss today is where we are and where we're going. Okay. So that's what we're here to discuss. And clearly there will need to be some time of review and assessment of where we are so that we can get a better sense of together where we want to go, okay. So with that, if you'd like me to, you know, I can just kind of walk through some of these things and then we can have an open discussion and then kind of put down some, you know, next steps points, okay. So first of all, just that you could-- let me know what your-- what was your common regular meeting schedule? >> The monthly meetings. >> Okay, so you're having a regular monthly meeting. >> Right. And we discussed the possibility of meeting over the summer. >> Okay. >> And so forth and, you know, and so this were-- that's kind of basically the way it's worked. >> Yeah, okay. So we're good. One thing we'll need is a bigger room. So you know, so we can get the-- get the visuals and so on. Okay, a couple of things. We are-- we're going to move forward, all right. But we're going to have to move forward under, you know, some change circumstances. So as far as the facilities planning committee is concerned, your activity, the charge of the committee and your activity has not changed. Okay, that will go forward. And what we'll discuss today and what you will inform me of better today is what were the-- what are the things that you have on your map of things to do when-- and how are you moving through that. And then we'll-- we won't make any final decisions today. But we'll, you know, make some preliminary kinds of decisions about, okay, how do we look at this? How do we take that in someone? As I've been going through and, you know, I've spent some time with the facilities team and so on. And we've done the same thing, where we just kind of stop, pause, put everything on the wall so that I am aware of it, okay, and to provide the answers that everybody needs, you know, to a lot of questions and members that, you know, some of them we have answers, some of them you know, we don't have answers and we'll go looking for them and some things. We'll need to be adjusted as far as the priority is concerned. Okay. One thing that I would like to say is that I think you all agree with me that the absolute goal of the committee is that we must do everything out in the sunlight with 100 percent transparency, okay, which is not to say that this committee has not been doing that. But as I have been moving through this really extraordinary situation, I am learning more and more that I had not been informed of, and I want to be frank with you about that, okay. So that's a difficulty. And that the board has not been informed of, okay. So all of you understand process and our partners that have worked with us for many years are process engineers, okay. So, what we want to do is our first task is to make sure that first of all we want to determine, you know, whether it's the centennial plan or anything else. What are the outcomes? What-- you know, what are the things that we have on our agenda of things that we want to accomplish, all right? And then to work backward from that, not to start doing them but to-- and I-- you know, and I know that you had a process and I don't want to disrespect it, disrespect it, but that process will necessarily have to be re-mapped now, okay. So, no one is going to going anywhere and no one, you know, we're all going to do that together. But the cost-- what I see that we ought to do now is to engineer a process, okay. And I do want to express the concern has not the responsibility of anybody in this room, I do want to express that the concern is actually with the centennial master plan, that that process was moving along too quickly for me, okay, and too quickly for the board. I do have to say though that the-- the way it started was brilliant. I love the way you started it. You know, you can't-- that's just absolutely masterful, it's wonderful. And I want to be frank about, you know, the aftermath of that. So my understanding, maybe my misunderstanding, that that was the beginning of the process, and not close to the end of it. And I was, you know, been informed and learned that we were rolling up to a product in the fall. That's impossible to think that we could do a master plan for the next 12 years for the centennial in-- with one meeting that you have in the spring and then you bring back a draft and sold to America, okay. And I think if I may, and gain, this has-- this is my responsibility, okay? This is no criticism of anybody. But I think that's part and parcel of what, you know, in some sense is, you know, in terms of our shared governance, we needed to fix for quite some time. Okay. This is wonderful, and first of all, I want to say that I'm so heartened by this because at this time in the college, the centennial master plan-- let's just take that as your major project 'cause, you know, the centennial master plan, especially it's the way you got us started. So I'm not here to say oh no start-- just do a do over and start all over again, okay? So I think what we have so far is okay. We just need to reboot the process from here, okay. But I think that process is so important because for any college at any time, and especially for our college at this time, this process is about engaging our energy in imagining the future, okay. 'Cause we're obviously all, you know, deeply, you know, shocked about, you know, about the past. And this is the project that may give everyone in the college an opportunity to say there's a future out here, okay? And we're all going to be part of creating it. So you know where I'm going, okay. So one thing, I'm not here to stop the centennial master plan. We may give it a due title, I don't know, you know-- and so on so forth. But I want to credit and own what you've started with, but I do think that we should take some time as we move to the summary here, and relieve ourselves and be relieved of any pressure of a deadline. There is none, okay. Because what the board and I want to make sure of is that, you know, the entire process, at least of a final master plan, that everyone in the college has inputted to, has signed on to, faculty, staff, and students and is the plan that we all know and that we're ready to go out to the community and support. So without being anymore detailed in that, at least my experience is that kind of process takes at least to four year, okay. So, from where we sit now, I'd say it's a loose goal to have something this time next year, okay. And that's in 13 because at that point and with, you know, a little clear engineering at the process of how it goes through the groups and on up to the board and so on and so forth. And then finally-- and then once you have that, and it's like, wow, this is-- this is what we have, then as you're moving through that, then the next step is how to secure funding for it. And clearly one of the ways that we would secure funding for it is by going out to the community and-- and seeking a bond. And in order to do that, we need to have our act together, we need to, you know, be able to demonstrate to the community that we know what we're doing and that we've had an open process and, you know, and so on and so forth And I'm fully confident we can do that, so. So that was the-- the main thing that I wanted to say and so I think whether we kind of-- I'm not saying that we don't have to meet anymore this summer but what I would like to do is that have this discussion and then have some time to meet with all the, you know, the partners and members of the committee and just kind of you know upload everything. And so that together out in the open on a-- you know, on a board, we can make a new map, okay. And then other-- other projects that are on your agenda, okay. These that are say, you know, less comprehensive than the-- than the master plan project. Obviously the-- the ongoing sustainability project with-- that we're all supportive of, that will go forward. There's no plan to scuttle it. But it needs a review, it needs a review and it needs a-- and again a time to do a thorough independent review, you know, that we're all involved in so that again we can reboot, you know, what is for example a sustainability. You work back from the outcome. Now I am to understand that the outcome was meeting the president's global climate initiative. Okay. Is that it? Could be. Okay, but it's usually within sustainability start from, okay, what is it that we're trying to accomplish by when. Okay, that's a common one and I've heard it spoken off on campus, but I want to make sure that's the one. And then once we have that, you work back from the outcome to engineer a process to move to that, okay? I think actually this is an opportunity that it actually for the centennial plan, the sustainability, it could be better. And I'm sure that there are added projects that you're concerned about or that you had going. So, some of the questions I've received on all fronts but especially facilities, we were doing this. Should we-- should we go or stop. Okay, so that we'll have to look at that. And then if you haven't started the project, then we have to look at it and then begin to look at what the priorities are and then clearly, obviously look at what the funding is-- potential funding. So those were the general comments I wanted to make and so we can-- my time is yours so we can take it from there. As I've said I've spent some comprehensive remapping sessions and we've gotten quite a bit far down the field with some of the facilities. And we are remapping business and physical services. I just came from a meeting with our accounting team. So, we're-- we're making good progress but now we're here together. So if you want to take some time with this today, I'm yours. [Inaudible Remark] >> I-- was it [inaudible] where with full understanding and support, I can guess a committee-- everybody can completely understand. And I just wanted to share with you perhaps some of the process because we're bringing you up to speed that we've been through and so forth just so that you get an idea of how we've been working and so forth. And some things that, you know, you might want to consider and thinking about the future sort of direction of the committee. On the master plan, which is a separate entity, it's one entity that we-- that we deal with and it's kind of our biggest, obviously it's our biggest focus at this time. We broke into-- basically we've had the visioning session and so forth and then we've broken into different subgroup categories of working such as sustainability [inaudible] the accessibility-- pardon me, thank you. As well as specific concerns for specific buildings and so forth. And so we've had some-- some good meeting that I think that we'll be able to kind of provide you with quant-- >> Sure. >> I mean with information on that you can read and so forth, and so you can see. And regardless of what we do, if we pick up and go forward in the process, I think a lot of the work we've done is still good work, it's information and so forth. Then I think that the architects would-- would say that it's-- it was good information and so forth. But, regarding the process and things like that, this is you know, in setting the goals, I think that those priorities will then begin to shape the way we even process that information, right? >> Sure. >> And put it into new scenarios and so forth. And I think that that's one thing that I think that we all-- I think that you know, we're all comfortable with the basic principles you're talking about. Because I think that again, I just want to assure everybody, I don't think that any of the information and hard work you've done will be lost. I think that it will be-- it will be used and so forth. The other thing that I want to say that I think is an important part of the committee which is ongoing is just simply an awareness of what is happening on the campus both for informations that we disseminated to the college community about what construction is going on in the campus but also for input, because this is the one place where we can do it. And so Jack has been an important part of that, kind of updating us on projects and so forth and I hope today that we-- we get that update just because of myself as an architect on what was interesting-- you know, what's going on and so forth. But I think that that's kind of a, you know, a special piece of what happens in these regular meetings and so forth. And we-- we update each other on that. And then I think that the other projects that you mentioned that have different priorities come up and so forth. And you know, it-- it's also kind of nice to imagine that maybe the way we do things in the future might be different. We could even have for example a meeting where we talked about it's the same employee [inaudible] [laughter] you know, just to be able to-- I mean to address those issues and kind of rate certain things. But I think that you'll have to do what the priority said. So, that's just background and I don't want to-- I want to leave the-- I think it's important that everybody here at the table has a say. >> Sure. >> So. >> So, how can I help, or how can I be helpful to, you know, kind of move this forward to see where we are, to see how we're going, you know, and next steps. >> I don't want to speak, I'm sort of [inaudible] here. But I do want to say that-- that I'm really glad to hear your comments and the fact that you're going to be more involved. In our experience, and we were a little disappointed that there wasn't-- that it was kind of subtracted out, I think it was for dollar reasons. There weren't more outreach meetings like the visioning session where we had sort of a plan and then just budgeting reasons [inaudible] out. >> Sure. >> But the one thing that I will say is that our most successful master plans for campuses have been ones in which the president has been involved. And so I know you have limits on your time but the more-- more that you could give up your time to this process, I think the results will be better. And I think we could frankly use your leadership to be able to move things forward as we go along. And I don't know how to-- I mean I'm asking for your time when I know that it's a rare thing. >> Yeah, not at all, no I understand. >> But I think that we would welcome that and I think at the end of the day the campus and the community would benefit from-- from that [inaudible] approach. And at the end of the day ultimately you have to engage this as your actions as well, so it's important I think that we at least have the time to make sure we understand what that is and we can incorporate and make sure that's a part of the-- the plan. >> Yeah. >> You know, I couldn't agree more. And again-- and I not only already willing to do that and obviously going to-- to structure my own practice and time moving forward so that I can do that. And also, that would include of course the board. >> Of course. >> Because you know, because what-- you know-- I mean I have my thoughts and ideas, you know and I've, you know, completed master, campus master plans in the past. But you know, we have, you know, I'm an agent of trying to get this, you know, the board's goals forward. So for example, which is to me a fun project but, you know, so if we were spending time and somewhat, I've-- you know, you would not find me so well, now I like that, and I like the way, you know, that's not what-- but you know we have a [inaudible] proud past global future. So how is like the-- what the board and I want to know, how is the idea of global future expressed in the plan. How is that communicated? Both in terms of use, you know, the-- and other you know elements of [inaudible]. So-- and I think you know, I should say that I want to be clear that if and-- you know I don't [inaudible] words. So if I though that there was something to scuttle or change or that there was a serious course correction, I would say it today, okay? I do think that everything that you've done heretofore is spot on, okay? But I think these two issues which is not just to the facilities committee, okay? It's to all the committees. You know, I'm often still, you know, frankly flummoxed by the fact that you know, you do these committees, you go out, you plan out and so on. We have-- I spend most of my life in shared governance meetings and meeting after meeting after meeting you get you through the email, on the website, and so on. And then when you get to the moment of truth, when you get to the decision point, you say, "Well, I don't know. What happened?" Okay? The recent restructuring thing say could you. It goes through that for the year and you know what, we have an engineering process in which is, you know, everybody's-- you know everybody's in, there's nothing, there's nothing left out, there's no dark corners. Everybody-- you know, everybody has to contribute and so on. So that's what I would hope for here and then yeah, and that may take some more, some time and expenses. If that's a priority for us, then we're going to have to move some other expense out of the way. And that leads me to my other point. The title of this committee is Facilities Planning, okay? If you don't have a budget, there is no planning, okay? So I-- when I chair a committee, I ask for the budget. Now, it's there somewhere and I'm still looking for it, okay? But you know, we have to be clear that look, you know that's one of the things of the mapping. We have-- we're going to have way more things that we want to do than we have funds available, okay? And some of this issue that many people have raised about the, you know, the Fund 41, the capital outlay, okay. Well, that's a common fund say while you're hiding money. Okay, because you could be using that for core sections. Well, this committee and I have to decide together, well, you know, and I'm not used to having a separate Fund 41, it should be built into your budget and it should be going to the middle of the table for facilities planning. And then you may-- and say, you make the recommendations rather than just say, well, we sweep it in and then as we have projects through the year, we'll just kind of do this and this and this, okay? And what we should be doing at this, especially at this part of the year, and that's why I want to spend the summer with you saying, "Okay, what are our projects, we should get them on the map." This is obvious-- you know not this-- that this is a 10-year master plan at this, okay. What are our available funds? That's planning. And then you would look at both, and you'd say, okay. And usually my preference is that you make recommendations that fully fund at the level of excellence, a whole thing, rather than thin out the gruel, the soup and do-- some things are going to have to get knocked off the bottom of the priority list. That's the hard work of planning when you've got need and budget and the budget doesn't cover the whole name, as it will now. So one of the things I want to do and which we always ought to do in the interest of transparency is know how much money you're working with. And if that's clear to you, it's not clear to me. >> It's not. >> Okay, so-- >> And so, I mean what you just said is clear but I just want to say that that-- I could see that structurally that is an entirely different discussion that we're having now. >> We can fix that fast. >> And that would be-- I think that that would be nice, and I think the committee would like that. >> Right. >> And then I think also it means that we worked in with the budget committee, you know or perhaps we would have a deeper interface with other committees. And so I think that that is something and that we would all-- I think that that would be-- I mean it's a new responsibility for us, and so forth but I think it's an appropriate one, you know, and what it does is it will-- I mean for all of us on the committee it's going to mean that we have this additional responsibility, and so forth. And I think that that's-- but I think that that's a good thing. I mean it's a shared responsibility. So-- >> Yeah, I think that would be a-- I mean that's the common approach to transparency is, you know-- and planning. You know, 'cause if you don't, you always know what you want to do but if you don't know how much money you're working with, then you're not-- you just not have everything you need to make the best recommendations. So we can get there-- I-- you know, so what-- so-- well so first of all is there any-- as I've been going through each stop in the college, all right. This is not so much an operational meeting as it is, you know, a planning shared governance meeting. You know, so the first thing that I want to do is make sure that I have everyone's input and everybody's voice in. Is there some concern, okay? So is something flapping in the bridge, if there's something that I need to hear so that we can get you an answer, yes or no, you're worried about something. Something is coming up in the next 30 or 60 days, okay, 'cause what we're trying to do is to kind of get that scene too, so that we can buy some time to do this, this work that I'm talking about through the summer and the fall or anything else that's a concern that, you know, do you want to make sure that you have in my mind as we're, you know, moving forward. >> I have a question. >> Sure. >> You mentioned working with the board of trustees and the college. With this committee, how would that work? Because I know that we make reports sometimes to the board of trustees on the facilities master plan. So I'm just wondering, is there anything different that this board would be doing now to present our information that we've put together and spend so much time on to the board to make sure that there's a really good communication between the two entities? >> Sure. That's a great question. And I think our architect partners could tell you that there's a, you know, pretty much a best practice you know kind of model for how you do, you know, master planning. One common best practice is that you do many boards and have some kind of a subcommittee. Or you know, so that they would have a budget facilities and technology committee and so on. And so that might be one recommendation that I've made to the board so that as you're working on the plans, you're interfacing regularly with the committee of the board. Whereas the process is now, you do what you do and then one night, we go like this for 40 minutes. That's difficult, okay? And then of course when you get there, the board's hearing it for the first time. Right? And then the other members of the community haven't heard as you're going, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a second, wait a second." Well, I haven't heard this and I don't like it. So now I'm coming to the board, and so what the board is hearing and I'm saying in this particular [inaudible] what the board is hearing. Although we had some [inaudible] is if you will-- the plan and the recommendation and then people coming in to say why was some part of it, I don't like this part of it, I don't and so on and so forth. So one way to do that would be to-- you know, this committee is intact, it's not going anywhere. Okay, but to figure out what are the input points to this committee and kind of in a hub and spoke iteration thing and then, you know, how would we, you know, circulate what we're doing. So that by the time you make a final recommendation you've met with the constituents and so on. Sometimes there is a hearing process, you know, and it talked, you know, and I think getting your-- that first meeting, that first input meeting and getting that, you know, scaling that, you know, so that-- but on a-- you did that on a mass scale one day but now I say you need to go into the villages, okay, and get, you know. And then-- because as good as that was if you went into one of the villages, the first thing they going to say is "Oh, that's nice, it's the first I've ever seen" all right? That's great-- that's a great idea, Wen did you do that? Okay, and you can say, right, in a process, right, and sometimes you guys, you know, rightfully challenge me for, you can say, "Oh well, but we sent the e-mail and we called the meeting and we did that in the open, but you still didn't know and that's-- that's in us responsibility not a, you know, constituent responsibility. So that would be an example. I do think that their needs to be some interface point with the board away from the [inaudible] that enables to get, you know, kind of dispassionate kind of input. And that's helpful too because, you know, board members have minds of their own and if they have, you know, some hard buttons or anything like that we should get those on the table sooner or have them later to get all the way the process. And then you put me in the position of having fight for something then you're recommending when we already have 2 or 3 votes against it, you know. And this is something that you want to go 701, right? You can't go to a bond unless we go 70 ANS, the truth-- you know, everybody goes wherein. So it's not [inaudible] until we have that. >> That could be [inaudible] and I am really glad to hear you say this because one of the things that we've been little worried about is that the time to get this kind of input is when we, you know, we've done a lot of this sub meetings and going to the villages and have some of those discussion, got a lot of it feedback. >> Oh, great. >> And I try now to craft alternatives and it's the sharing of those alternatives is where we need the feedback and where we need more to come to the tables so that we hear what the views are on the different ones and out of that it may not be one individual and maybe some composite, but that's where you get the consensus in the buy in if they feel like they've been a part of the process. And I welcome that, we really-- I think that's our normally way of doing things so we're really happy to hear it. I think it will make everything much more successful and I was glad to hear you say that this could actually be a part of the healing process for the campus. In our experience people like to talk about a hopeful future for the place where they really have found feelings and they're getting educational support and all that. And so I really feel like it's a way that can help bring the community together again and focus on a positive future. >> Right. [Inaudible Discussion] >> We've gone out to the villages and as you say and all of those meetings had been very well documented, we've got all the notation from all of that and as Fisher [phonetic] said now we're putting together this alternatives and it's exactly the point at which we are now. So it's a good [inaudible]. >> And, you know, it was a speedy process, I mean you didn't even mention that in our vision accession. And I'm sure I was quite familiar with the reasons why it was so short but, you know, in our experience they have been going at least a year, sometimes even longer. And it allows, I mean in the shared governance process communication takes more time, but you have to allow for it. I mean the results at the end of the day or that much better because I want to thank you, get the buy and the consensus you need. >> Yeah, 'cause you can do all the planning, you know, even go to building design and have everybody behind in fact-- and without putting yourself under any deadline pressure 'cause, you know, we're in June of 12, you know. That puts us out to June 13, you know, over about this time next year we should be, you know, have enough, you know, product, you know. And then we start to look at the, you know, the bonding aspect. So, you know, we may not be going out for a bond until, you know, June or whatever the most, you know, the best data is, March, June, November 14, okay. So we have, you know, a lot of work to do but that should just play out. So you never want to go to the community unless you're absolutely ready and, you know, and the community is supported that's another piece. Tonight we have measure P oversight committee, okay. They obviously should be an input point to this because they've have the, you know, the expertise and the oversight over the previous bond. We have a community neighbors meeting, you know, and I don't know how it is done back in 2000 and 2001 but we have a regular community neighbors meeting. They should have an input point and then obviously our constituents out in the community, our advisory groups, our business advisory groups, our foundation, you know, there's a lot of input points that we need to gather both because, you know, the-- the communal, you know, the process makes the product better but also helps to guarantee the success of, you know, of the bond. And I need to say I am convinced it will be a big, big part of the healing process, Jim [inaudible]. >> Well, I think we're poised to have some really effective and collaborative ideas, sessions coming up and as you know if you've been in any meeting and you go with nothing and you say, "Okay, we need to create this whatever [inaudible] this, but the many, you bring something-- >> Right. >> Right. >> That medial way it creates other ideas that elicits reactions all that. So I think, you know, we've gone through that first step and I can-- just looking at this we're all kind of trying not to look at this as we're engaged in-- [Inaudible Discussion] >> And I-- you know, and I'd love to-- you know, and I will look for-- I love to hear this, you know. >> And so immediately already I have my 10 things I want to say but it's become there's something to react too. And so I think, you know, if we can get through the summer and be ready call out to the campus community was several ideas that evoke that part kind of participation I think that will happen very easy. >> Yeah. >> And if I can just simply say something to Jim, I think that also go what we have to kind of hear President Brook just saying to us is that even some of the assumptions we made initially that generated this response by the architects are assumptions that he wants us to read, you know, to consider. And so it's not necessarily that we're focused just on this-- at the product and they can speak to that. I think that we, you know, he really wants us to-- you know, he wants us to be able kind of be getting the reset the goals of what we're actually going to focus on and what we're going to, you know. You can't-- if a process like this should be reactive, it should be proactive and then it becomes [inaudible], you know, then becomes the discussion and so forth. And so I think that that's really what he's-- so we don't, you know, and yeah. >> Yeah? >> I heard you say 12 years for the project, is that what you said? >> Well, if you-- at least on the centennial master plan, the centennial, the college is the year 2024. >> Okay. >> So, that's 12 years from now. >> Okay. >> And, so-- >> And then I just wanted to say, you know, AS put students on all the sub committees because we value student participations, part of shared governance, we really value share governance as we are a very large constituent on this campus, but speaking as a member of this committee, as a whole, we weren't given a budget, an operating budget for this plan. As far as I am concerned there wasn't a [inaudible] for the visioning process for the FMP 100 although, you know, easy money be [inaudible] very impressive. I was there and do the presentation. I feel the process was rush between the initial adoption of the plan for us to create enough FMP 100 as a committee. And then to bring outside firms on board to consult with us. We-- so, and then I don't know that PBWS and AC Martin cost 400,000 dollars for the visioning. So, we're going to be extending the process of the FMP 100. How much will that cost for just a planning to continue to work with-- with AC Martin PBWS. >> That's the question I'm supposed to ask. [Laughter] Yeah, you know, Hanna [phonetic] I think you're points are all excellent and you should have answers to them, and that's exactly what I'm saying is that let's give all of us including me a little time to reboot this and get the answers to your question, you know, 'cause we need to move through with our-- our partners, we need to, you know, move through so that once we, you know, throw the switch to phase 2, we're-- you know, we're all in agreement. They'll also should have to say which is-- you know, again the-- you know, share we talked about shared governance. But ultimately there is one decision maker. Your task is to make recommendations to me and to the board and I make the final recommendation and the board makes the final decision. So, what I-- we will never have a recommendation. In the history of mankind especially one as, you know, as broad as this in which everybody is going to agree. In fact, if you cannot make unanimity of the requirement for make forwarding a recommendation, okay? But, having said that you don't want to move forward unless there's a-- you know, a really strong consensus, you know, about the, you know, the core, you know, the core object to something. So, yeah, no, but this is exactly what I'm here to do, Hannah is to-- you say, okay, what is it that we want to get done, how much is we going to cost and, you know, and make a process that will make that happen. So, you know. >> Hi, I [inaudible] the thing and the conversation and a lot of the questions that were brought up seems similar. And I thought maybe I could provide a tool, and it's called logic models, has anybody heard of them? They provide a what if model of a [inaudible] and both for which you're planning and protecting to do and then the outcomes based upon it. And it's one of those more visual tools, I don't have the paper work. I can have it here by tomorrow 'cause its at home and I have to re-bring it to someone if they are interested in the idea, I'm going to work with it and then they could copy it and they could have both an example of how to use it and a possibility of incorporating with in this community and helping everybody out. It would also help in the recommendation process both for you and the board. So, that's really what I want to contribute. >> I am always open to better ways. So bring it forward, but I say is one way if you're familiar with that model, you know, and many of us at the table have, you know, many models that we're familiar with, then you can take the raw material that we're dealing with would be very helpful to committee, take the raw material yourself that we're dealing with, import to your model and see what comes up. >> I don't know anything abut the committee. [Laughter] >> Well, that's I'm saying is that we are to be talking about the real deal, so that you have the-- >> Well, I think what you said earlier is something really a foundational thing and that is, let's go back and decide what-- what our outcomes to be that sure we're all still on the same page with that. And then based on that we can see what we have to do to adjust the process and move forward and-- >> Yeah. >> And but just kind of a confirmation that we all want to go to the same place 'cause I think we-- and say to some politic way I think the-- there was some push that happened about how the outcomes were established. And I think there was some discussions and some disagreements about that and for us it's important to make sure that that-- >> Right. >> Those are still the ones that we will follow through with and then we can understand what the pathway pretty good. >> I think if you-- sometimes if you, you know, slow is the new fast, if you go slower you actually kind of speed up, and measure twice cut once. >> Right. >> You know. >> Uh-hmm. >> 'Cause if you rush things, okay, you have to back fill so much that explain to people what you did, why you did it a 150 times. People don't like it because you decided and, you know, it just makes things longer. Here's the only goal that the-- that I want to be clear about, okay? Whatever we, you know, name the project, this is centennial of the college and the goal is to develop a master plan and execute and building for the fall of 2012-- 24, is 12 years from now. Okay, so we need to now work back from that, that's my parameter, okay? So, if you do that, then you're taking a year out for planning, right? Probably another year out for preliminary design and footprinting and so on so that you can prepare for the bond program. You know, maybe another year in, you know, in moving through the bond and, and so on, determining what your, you know, swing space needs are going to be in order to do it and what your plan of attack are going to be. And that gives you, you know, maybe 8 years, you know, 8 years, 9 maximum of construction, you know. So, it can be done, but I think you can only-- even that is an aggressive plan, okay. So, you can only meet that by kind of paradoxically taking more time now. So, we're good. What else have I-- any other things that are on our mind before we-- I know you had some, you know, business that you want to do and that like here we-- this is good, 'cause this is, this is talking about the most important thing of process, you know, what is the way that we're going to work together and lead to a product we all feel good about. So-- >> Another question about scheduling because we do need once every month, and so going forward I know you're extremely busy with so many tasks here on the college, but what's going to work best for us to get together. It's once a month, I want to get a general feeling for what the committee feels like if once a month is an okay meeting-- scheduling for the summer and, you know, what kind of the summer plans so that I know. >> I'm not sure what everybody feels but I think that also little bit of what I'm hearing from the president and this is that maybe we take even a little bit of space right now before our next meeting. So, I might just propose in depending upon the feeling that the committee that maybe we recess our next-- wait for our next meeting maybe until closer to the beginning of the fall semester, just so we have some time to regroup. Maybe Rocha has some time to kind of meet for process some of this stuff and to establish goals and things like that, so that we can actually kind of know where to go. The difficult thing that happens during the summers that a lot of people start moving around and, and so our regular schedules are not normal, and so if we're not really on a severe march, it's probably better to take advantage of that space in that way and try to just use it as a time to kind of set up. But maybe one thing that would be kind of, I mean nice is if we-- and maybe what I can do is if I can perhaps meet with you, we could maybe set forward some thoughts for people again to kind of establish some ideas that I'm-- to establish these goals and-- >> Right. >> -- and maybe what some of those things are and then maybe what I do is disseminate it through Andre and to the committee and then-- and then that way everybody can be working and thinking towards that first meeting that we have so it can be print up-- I'll print up to the meeting, and so forth. I think that obviously they're going to be things that the president want to speak with the architects about, you know, and so forth which, you know, will happen, you know and so forth, and-- but I-- like I said, we will-- I think that that might be a productive use of time. How does that sound? >> How familiar are you with what the architects have in place already? >> Only generally, I don't know. >> Okay. >> So. >> So, it takes anything, I think that maybe Dr. Rocha needs to be brought up to speed on that [inaudible]. >> Oh I think so. >> And then keep the meetings going, not such as an-- as a rush to paces we've been doing, but continue the meetings because the work that you guys have put in to this should not just be thrown by the wayside. And we've gotten this far, let's keep going. We can gather more information, we can keep the website going and keep the feedbacks coming. We can look at the alternatives, we don't have to rush on that part but to completely-- it almost sounds as if we're going to take a break and then we're going to start this over again, when all that really needs to happen is start [inaudible] to be brought up to speed by Susan and by the architects on what we have done, because you guys have done a tremendous amount of work. Our goals have been defined, our goals were defined not by one person but by the committee, all together and their subcommittees. So let's not throw all of that out the window, let's just bring Dr. Rocha to speed, these were our goals, this is what we were looking for. These were the outcomes we wanted. These were some of the examples that we're presenting. And we know it's not sustainable for you to be at every single meeting but just to get you on board so that we have some direction as to where you want to go. >> My sense is that, you know, if we have a chance to sort of get you more up to speed on this thing, that the reconstructing of this will have more to do with on our reach out program to the rest of the campus. That was kind of X'd out of the program for budget reasons and I think that's a serious issue that we need to come back and revisit, and that I think will help to get this dialogue going and, you know, the information that we've collected and gathered to this point is fuel for that and share that and get the inputs when we need to move forward. And that may mean the schedule does in fact extend out and all that. But we have an opportunity to share that with you, we can sort of make some proposals about how that schedule might stretch out with some specific dates and semesters and so far to it, and then come back at some point and be able to share that and say, it just seem to work okay and have your input so forth before we go ahead. So, I think there is some stuff that needs to be done and nothing here. You're right, it needs to involve you again. >> Something surely to be said from all that and just what you're talking about. >> Yeah, yeah sure. >> Let's see what we have here. >> I just like to add that I really appreciate the fact that we can slow down because the pace was fever pitch and just to get meetings set up. >> I know. >> You know, the trouble we've had just to the meetings going and have people show up-- >> True. >> -- has been difficult. You did a great timeline. >> Yeah really. [Inaudible Remark] [Laughter] I want to say that there was-- >> But it was at marathon pace, so to slow down, I agree with Coleman in the fact that to probably catch you up to speed doesn't necessarily involve all of us during the summer, it's going to involve a lot of individual people and I agree with you but I don't know that the summer we have to meet as regularly. Only because we're going to the 4/10 and some of us were in departments where the people are [inaudible] employees and they're gone leaving very few of us in our departments, making it harder for us to leave. So we're doing the [inaudible] to the works, so we've got more work, fewer people. So the less that I'm-- I'm just not available as much during the summer which a lot of you are in the same boat. So the more that the few can get caught up and then we start back to the process. >> It doesn't mean throwing everything away. >> I don't think they're throwing everything-- [Simultaneous Talking] >> No. >> I don't-- I know but I hope I didn't-- I didn't [inaudible]. >> It's [inaudible] right. It's bringing in without destroying what we've already established or what we have-- the point that we've already come to. And the summer absolutely but we did agree upon as a committee that we would meet those two dates, so if we're not going to meet those two dates, you need to make some [inaudible]. >> So we have-- >> Because July 11th then August I think. >> So you guys were trying to like [simultaneous talking]. We were on the [inaudible]. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well, you know, I had to-- I'd say, you know, without moving the past, I had expressed these concerns about the speed of the process. >> In major [simultaneous talking]. >> And, you know, it was, you know, difficult to get my hand on the brake. So I'm not stopping-- you know, what I would suggest is this. You've got a schedule, whatever your regular schedule is. I'd say, you know, you made a good point about the 4/10s, okay. And I think those and whatever they are, August 18th or 15th or something like that. So, when we go back to regular schedule, I suggest that maybe our next meeting would be whatever your normal period would be in August, and just before the start. Then that would give us 60 days to-- for me to work with you and work with the architects and so on and so forth and reboot-- you know, a lot of the questions will be, well you know, what are we changing, but how are we moving forward in the new academic year. Okay. And in the meantime, before we leave today, if there're any decision points, you know, that we're at in the next 60 days, then let me know where they are so that I can work those through the operations, so [inaudible]. [Inaudible Remark] >> Thanks. So, I'm very pleased to hear that outreach is going to be emphasized because again having to get to the majority of students is all near impossible, especially on the-- at the pace we were going. I just want to reiterate, I'm not so confident in us not meeting over the summer only because unless I know how much goal as a member of this committee, how much the estimated cost is of extending the contract, so if you can get back to I guess this committee with the estimated cost, that will really-- that will be-- I guess that will really help the student opinion on where this project is heading, so. >> Sure, that's why I think you know, it take a little bit of time to actually you know what, of I need [inaudible] to come to speed on that, you know, the brave new world, you know, because you-- my opinion is set next to yours. You know, it's not any more valid or important than I do to actually try and get my arms around it operationally so that we can tee up the decisions that we need to make to plan the next year, you know, so that's exactly what we're going to do, so. >> I've heard a lot and I'm [inaudible], I think that slowing down is always a good idea, especially when someone like this happens. So, obviously taking the time considering-- sort of regroup and is always beneficial. On the other hand, I think that coming to that big of a stop over the summer might cause some trust issues to continue to expect. One of the things that I've heard from students is why are we spending money on construction and not classes. And obviously there are some valid reasons for what we're doing and you guys talked about them. But students, all 30,000 at the [inaudible] getting to see 217, and as much I'd like to force them in. So we need-- I think it would help for us to actually be able to over the summer be getting information [inaudible] says that now that one of the leaders of the group has gone, that doesn't mean that the rest of the committee is still invested and still working on the project. I think that even if it's just some basic checking discussion that you guys have and those two dates sound perfect to me for that, at least it shows for the students that the committee, the whole is still invested in the process, see some value to it no matter how we end up going where it takes. And then the slowing down and bringing the whole committee back in for a bigger visioning session and all that will go a long way I think to help you get your [inaudible]. What's going on [inaudible]? I go back and I say, well, they're recessing for the entire summer after all this. I'm not sure that having [inaudible] that that will create the committee unity behind the project as such. >> I don't know, if I could maybe speak to Simon's point, I think that-- I think that I actually hear what you're saying. The student concerns that, you know, maybe we're building buildings instead of offering classes is big and I think that a lot of faculty, you share the same concerns, in fact a lot. However, I'm going to say this that the-- the time that we're talking about of the-- of waiting until August is just simply so that we don't do just what the concern is. We don't just start building just to build and I think that that's what-- that's what we're all-- we're just trying to stop and realize where we are before we start something that will involve resources of the college. And so, I think that this is-- this time between now and August is to assess. I think that one of the very first things that has to happen on August the 11th, did we say? Was that the meeting time, is that the time you said? >> I don't-- I don't have that [inaudible]. >> Okay, well, we will get that out but it would be to answer the question that Hannah post. And I think that we need to kind of have an idea of where those things are and hopefully we'll know that by then. And then I would hope in the mean time that just as I will do with the faculty, I hope that you guys can also send the word to the students that we are indeed concerned. We share the concern of the committee and that's precisely why President Rocha has asked us to do what he's asking us to do right now. He is-- that is exactly what he wants to do. He wants to get it on and he wants to instead of moving head on, head long into something. >> Yeah. >> Just let's kind of see what is we're going into. >> Maybe-- >> We-- and that, you know, let's say, and I-- and I think that will work. We-- you know, you deserve answers, everyone deserves answers to those questions. One of the things that I asked you to work on over this summer is how has the bill become law. You speak with the students, but one of the things that you talked about engineering the process. You know who I am, you know who the board is, you know the faculty it is, so on and so forth. But how has the bill become law, you know, in other words, how do you communicate to all the students so that you're sure that you have the input you need, okay? Because I can tell you the board is not sure, okay? And you need to have some discussions, you know, with the board on that 'cause the board is not sure, 'cause in here there's many conflicting views among the students, depending on what kind of students, so on and so forth. So those questions deserve an answer, I mean, so-- but the answer to, you know, why you're building a building for the arts, you know, would be a probably not much of a question for students in VAMS, okay. But for students in another area that are not, you know, a building that, you know, seems kind of okay, you know, it's like what you're doing that for. So, I do think this needs to kind of-- we need to get down to the foundation, so to speak, you said metaphorically, so. Yeah, I mean I think it would work. I mean I think the other thing that I'm concerned about, again my experience in governance, both student and the faculty is that the summaries-- and I'm gravely concerned to hear some of these things, okay. The summary of the time that-- there's not many students here, there's not many faculty here. And one of the consistent things with the administration, you know, always gets head for is what did you do over the summer while nobody was here? You know, so you know, that's a-- you know, a concern that I think the board would have, so-- but anyway, so what, you know, I will be guided by whatever you want to do as a group. And-- 'cause I'm here, you know, and it. But what else did we want to accomplish today in addition to setting a meeting? >> We should-- >> We just make a decision to vote on the meeting, would that be a good-- what would be a good procedure to follow on folks? >> Yeah. >> Would we like to do that? >> I think setting a date would be-- >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I think so too. >> Community. If you stay with the-- second Wednesdays of every month, the next meeting would be August 8th, that's still on your summer. So, do you want to move it until September? I mean you pick the second Tuesday in Sep-- the second Wednesday in September. >> A preference. I think if we go with August, we're skipping just one meeting. >> Yeah. That's-- >> Yeah >> We're not stopping the process-- >> Yeah. >> -- sort of thing. >> That's good. >> We're skipping one meeting and it's-- and it's a tight time for a-- >> Yeah. >> lot of people and other people would be-- >> You're still on the 4/10s [simultaneous talking]. >> And also, we could also-- if you guys-- if you guys want and people are having vacations or whatever, we can move it like to the 15th or to the 22nd. To me, whether it's a second or not, getting into a regular like getting-- when we get into the record of the year, I think it should be in a pattern that we can all remember and so forth. >> Correct. >> Is there-- yeah. >> There would be. [Laughter] [Simultaneous Talking] All of us too. >> It might be good to look at the15th. We're back on regular calendar then, people are kind of [inaudible] to come back to campus 'cause they're preparing anyway. >> Good. >> And it's almost the second Wednesday 'cause the first is a Wednesday so, and then we could get back to our second Wednesday if that's better. >> Okay. >> In addition to just-- can we put some sort of a statement out to kind of, you know, tie in to the fact that we are canceling one of our meetings and that with schedule, would that be somethings that this board will want to do? >> I think that that would be good. And what we can do, but I think we want to kind of make our votes one at a time and so forth, but-- >> Sure. >> But I think that putting out a statement just to say that the facility's committee is happy-- well is-- I think it is good, you know, so we want to make this a good news thing, right? To announce that we are taking some time to consider the master plan and the goals and objectives and master plan, and that we won't be meeting again in August. And I think that that is a perfect way, I think that that's a very good thing. And I think that we need to work together to disseminate the information as we have with everything else and just simply say that that is what we're doing. It-- you know, as you guys remember, those of you who are here, it was a whole discussion whether we should do it or not meeting in the summer anyway because typically the committee didn't meet in the summer. [Laughs] So I think-- I don't think this is-- won't be so unusual for people and I think we'll all be good so-- >> Yeah. >> -- and I think that that's what everybody's goal is here. So if I could maybe ask if somebody would put forward the motion that we need to-- would somebody like to do that? >> [Inaudible] will we meet on August 15 from 2 to 3 p.m.? >> Okay. Who would like to second? >> Second. >> Okay. Those in favor, please say aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Those opposed say nay. >> Nay. >> Okay. All right, so we will do that and then-- >> And we didn't even have a-- not everyone voted. >> Okay. [Simultaneous Talking] >> I'm sorry, some of us-- that yeah. They're [inaudible]-- >> Do we-- then do we have a quorum? >> Since we only have seven people, we don't have the quorum to [inaudible]. >> So we can't even have a vote on that 'cause we don't have the quorum, so. >> So I'll be sending out a-- >> Is that something that really needs to be voted on? >> Yes, it does. >> So I could cancel the June-- July [inaudible] meeting. >> I-- I'm-- boy this is really-- >> I'm not clear on the issue. >> They-- I guess the issue was whether we had the-- to have a vote to change our meeting schedule. [Inaudible Remark] >> Well I thought you just voted to have it on August 15th. >> There's no quorum. [Simultaneous Talking] >> We don't have a quorum. >> [Inaudible] we don't have a quorum of the members today. >> We don't have a quorum of the members today? >> No. >> Okay. Alright, that's all the more the problem is in the summer, you won't have a quorum the next meeting. [Simultaneous talking] And by the way, that's the problem with shared governance, okay? 'Cause, you know, you have so many meetings that the-- they didn't tell you, you know, that a lot of meeting that go in, you know, we spent 15 minutes talking about a meeting, okay, we don't have a quorum. If we have a meeting in July and August, I guarantee you, there'll be chunks of people missing here than you think, you know, you may even be out. Who knows? And then you say, well, I wasn't there and you just go through that prerogative drill which instead of actually getting to the work, okay, it's not the meeting, it's the work. So you can have a meeting, lots of meetings but, you know, you actually have to get this work done so the committee have something to look at and make recommendations to me. So, yeah. >> Well I am a student and I understand that this campus is not [inaudible] during the summer but I'm not taking a summer class and I'm still committing to come to these meetings because it is my position and because I was appointed to this committee. So if there are members of this committee who aren't able to make it, I would put forth a recommendation that we find representatives who can make these summer meetings because after all that's happened and because there is the possibility that this project can cost a lot more than we had intended for it to be. We owe it to this college to make the summer meetings. That is my opinion and direct [inaudible]. [ Noise ] [ Inaudible Remark ] >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> And just full students, we have actually in anticipation that some of the shared governance committees will still need to meet over the summer. We have made-- or we're about to make appointments to fill the student seats through the summer. >> Okay. >> I think one of the problems is is the people that aren't here today are the faculty and most faculty are the ones that will be going. Most of the other people here are the ones that are here during the summer. So you're probably preaching to the choir right now. >> Oh-- >> So I don't how we get the faculty to replace the faculty-- >> Well you-- that's the point. Okay, there's the shared governance, okay, 'cause everyone-- the faculty, you won't have a quorum in July, you won't have a quorum in August, okay? People will be on their vacations. Faculty, if they're not on assignment, are not paid to be here, they won't be here. So, you know, it's, you know, I think, you know, the thing that you decided it's fine, you know, to set the, you know, August 15th meeting, but even that will be a possibility of an ineffectual meeting 'cause the faculty aren't here, you know. Even this meeting itself, all right? The faculty aren't here so we're going to go through this and this will be a nice conversation and then a lot of the key governance members will not have seen it. So then what are we going to do? We're going to have another meeting for them so they can see you, because if they don't see you, we can't move forward, right? >> They'll see it on YouTube. >> So this is-- this is what I'm talking about. The problem is not meetings, the problem is what process are you going to engineer to have everybody in, okay? And then to have kind of, you know, shared governance doesn't produce anything and have a shared governance meeting to discuss your governance meetings instead of facing the reality. Just if the students were gone entirely, okay, we were just going to continue through with the meeting even though you guys were gone, okay. You would cause on that, okay? So, to not have the faculty which you are the most important enduring institution in the college, okay, the faculty will be here long after you graduate, okay? And they have the biggest responsibility and the biggest, actually, weight of the decision on all of these things and just say, well we're going to have a meeting if they-- if, you know, even though they're not here, it doesn't make this meeting very productive and not a productive use of everybody's time. So I do think that, you know, kind of-- you know, kind of taking a break until, you know, you decided August 15th. If not then, you know, I don't know, you're kind of stuck there. I don't know. What do you-- what do you think from that? >> Well, we did schedule this meeting during finals week and the students and the faculty who are at that meeting agreed to be here. So if faculty members aren't coming to these meetings, then we simply need to replace them. That's the protocol for [inaudible]. >> We simply need to what? >> Replace them with other faculty members. >> Well that's not-- how do you do that, okay? Who has the power to just replace faculty in a shared governance meeting? I don't. >> Faculty, though. >> Yeah they're [inaudible]. >> Okay, and that would take three months. [Simultaneous Talking] [Laughter] We will have to go to the senate, okay, okay. Shared governance, okay? Policy 2000, all right. Just like you guys appoint representatives to the committees, only the senate appoints faculty in the committee. Not Coleman [phonetic], not me, not the Board of Trustees can just say, "You're not coming to the meeting, so you come with me." Okay, so, so that would mean if you would propose doing that, and I wouldn't, that we'd have to go to the senate, which is not in session right now, okay, and then ask them to put new members who themselves would say, "Well, I'm not going to be here for the summer." Okay, so, you know, if we can just kind of like move towards, you know, an outcome here because again-- because no matter what we do, you don't have a quorum today so you can't conduct business, there you go. If you're not going to have a quorum in July, no matter what you insist on doing, you're not going to have a quorum. No matter what you insist on doing, you're not going to have quorum in August. So, it seems to me that for us to be respectful of you, if we knew that, then we shouldn't have just keep going with meetings when we know that, you know, all of our colleagues are not going to be there. And that's just me, okay? Because then if you did, how would you conduct business, and then I would say, "Well, what are your minutes going to say? Never mind?" You know, you did-- you have these guys were paying a lot of money, too, all right? They bill us hourly against their contract. What are we going to say today, never mind? That they're going to present all these stuff and-- this is what I'm saying, okay guys? You know, we have to figure out how to-- how to do that so no one, least of all me, is going to command faculty to the next meetings. >> Then how are we going to have shared governance meetings? >> I think that you would yield to the majority in the room and just say, "Can we lay this over until August 15th so that we can figure this out." And then maybe Coleman can use his relationships and the influence with his colleagues and say, "Can you do me a favor, unless you're out of town, can you please be there on the 15th?" >> And I will work on that. But it does take a little bit of time. >> So-- >> And you know-- and the-- I think we're all interested in the same, to be honest with you. I can't trust-- you know I-- please I mean-- >> I do, I was [inaudible]. >> Yeah. And I think that I would like to try to do that because one of the difficult things is, is that I've had trouble keeping, even during the school here as you probably know-- I don't know if you've taken account but Andre [phonetic] will tell you but I often-- I am the only faculty member here and so I have to get other people, you know, in the committee and so forth and so on, so we just do the best we can. It's hard but-- but I will work on that and I'll work on that before I leave this summer. I have a-- just-- I will be out of town in the middle of July, out of the country actually. And so, but I will be back at the-- towards the middle of July and so I hope before I leave that I've got an idea, but I'll have to reconfirm with people that they will come to that meeting, but I will-- so as my goal, and you listen, you're hearing me now, I will come and it's going to just bite me, but I know. But I will get you, I will get you your two faculty [inaudible]. Is it two more than I-- ? >> We have to look at that as well. >> Yeah. I think it's two-- >> 'Cause then you make the seats-- I don't-- we need to fill. >> But I will-- I will look for people who will come to our meetings and support [inaudible] and so forth. It's the best-- >> We appreciate that effort too because I mean like-- >> Thank you. >> Like President Rocha is saying, we can't move forward. Until we have this quorum, we can't conduct any business. And so, you know, even if my self as a student has to go, you know-- >> Yeah. >> These professors and, you know-- >> Yeah. >> -- part of the academic senate, they're interested I'm sure. >> Right. >> And maybe even the popularity with the community could even help that in-- >> Yeah. >> Well, and it's like he said, it's my job to go to the senate to do it in the proper way. So I will do that. And so, it's the only the senate can approve. We can do that. But I would also suggest that we-- so that we don't waste the time of the architects and spend the money, we wait until we contact and say we're ready to have that present-- I want to confirm that we have the fact that we have a core and we have a committee ready to meet on August 15. >> Well, I'm confident we will because we'll be doing a lot of work-- >> Okay. >> And, you know, I think that every member that-- >> Well, I'm going to-- [Simultaneous Talking] >> Every member of the committee will-- >> All together, but I want a confirmation-- >> Who want to be there. >> -- so we can get-- so we can get that, so we can have a proper meeting and so forth and do it. But I think that-- I think that that's-- that would be good. >> Good. >> Okay. Can I ask for one thing, and I know that we're really running over our time, but Jack, if you could please give us a summary of what's going on in case with some of the different projects on campus as this. >> We'll start with the course bill, the largest being the Center for the Arts. As we've told you before, that the Center for the Arts was scheduled for completion December 16th 2012 this year. The completion date that was agreed to with some of the events of then discovered work out on the old abandoned sewer beneath it, and we've reported that before, and along the north side of the GM Building, we lost some time in the number with-- so the contractors do that time. And there's been some other changes, but-- and nonetheless, the bottom line is the fair end date now that we've tentatively agreed to is March 3rd, 2013. Edge Development is in the process of being taken over by a bind company or their bind company and is going to send out our piece this Friday for contractors to take over the project, still under the guidelines and purview and direction of the bind company, buying into that March 3rd date. That March 3rd date also has continued that we don't have any more additions on the district side and or unforeseen events which are always possible. If they do, then the contractors are on the hook for like what they did to damages after that time. That said, the project is moving along very well even though they're in the process of the bind company taking over. The workmanship we are still having no issues with. The crews have increased in size and in contractor showing up. One, because there's more risk for the [inaudible], but two there were some-- step back all of it. There were some issues because of the bind company taking over with Edge falling behind in their payments to the subs. That has been resolved and we are absolutely current with them up through April. Their May pay-up which was probably due last week, I'll get tomorrow, so it's only a week late. So as far as billing, they are current. [ Pause ] So that is one of the reasons that the subs had also stuffed up because now, of course like anybody else, it won't be paid. There's just so much work going on and lucky for me I get to go down and I get to wander around and see all of it and we've made that offer to you guys if you want it, just give me a call. I'd be happy to take anybody who wants to see, but it's incredible. It's going to be an absolutely incredible building and everybody-- I took the oversight committee. They were able to make it on the last scheduled meeting because it rained and we did a little side trip today, voted on that date. And unfortunately, they all went there but the people wouldn't get through. Just that it takes your breath away. Every floor I go up, every time I do it for [inaudible], it takes your breath away. It's going to be an incredible building and you don't get to see how big it is until you've walked inside. The little theater is-- can't be blocked and they were waiting for-- because it is such a congested site they were waiting for certain activities to occur so that they can put all their forces on the [inaudible] and you're going to see that happen. The outs and the exterior studs. Once that goes up, that's when you're going to see it, now you've got a building 'cause right now it looks just like levels, but-- and all that is going to occur real rapidly. They are trying to meet-- better that March 30. That's the date that we mutually agreed to. That doesn't mean they're not trying to better that date, and they are. And we get updated every single week at our construction meetings with schedule. Their schedule is now-- scheduler is now on site through the week. So I'm excited, I mean, you know, we were kind of slow getting out of the gate, but I think if we keep this momentum up, we stand a good chance to either make it up for our big date so I'm hopeful for that. But I don't see any problems with the bind company taking over or the general-- or whoever the general contractor will be. This bind company had been working with them a little bit in the last 3 weeks and they're really on the spot. >> I've got a question. Didn't-- if the bond company, again these RFP for general contractors? >> Yes. >> Then what happened in [noise]-- does this mean that the subcontractors-- >> Subcontractors are bound. >> Are already bound to-- ? >> Through the bind company, through the-- in general. >> Okay. >> In the agreement. >> Okay. >> As well, are they too our terms and conditions with the specifications? >> Okay. >> And they're bound to everything the Edge is bound to. >> Okay. And so then the general contractor then will assume, I mean, the subcontractors perhaps if any flaws and work and things like that, will they-- >> The bind company is on hook. >> Is on hook. Yeah. >> The bind company is on the hook for everything. That was not changed. >> Okay, okay. >> The only thing is, is Edge self performs a lot of their own mason and concrete work. >> So whether the bind company through the new general decides to keep those specific people on or bring in a masonry company, subcontractor if you will or a contract-- a concrete contractor is up to the bind company. But either way, we're not going to be hurt. >> I think it would sure be nice if they could bring-- if it's a [simultaneous talking]. >> And they are trying to do that. >> They are very, very skilled [simultaneous talking]. >> And they're trying to do that. >> Yeah. >> All right. So anyway, that's the arts. Our building restroom project, it was gorgeous. They just finished setting the tile. It's gorgeous, it is absolutely gorgeous. And remember the first one complete will be the women's restroom side-- it's just they're setting the-- the plumbing fixtures today, the 12th. The tiles are all done. The lobbies we'll say 75 percent done. We're getting ready to put the tile in the lobby floor in the foyer. So that project is probably 3 weeks out for completion and we need that because remember, the restroom unit that we're using at the cell site as a temporary measure is the last unit that actually gets set and should fall right into place with the science village. The elevator project-- elevator upgrade project is out to bid and we gave the contractors more time. We only had one bidder last time and their response is where they needed more time, so we gave them another I think 3 weeks. So by the end of July, the bids are due and hopefully we'll have our contractor on board to start that project. And that's the R, C and E elevators. That's pretty much for measure. The C building handicap access, I informed Dr. Rocha that our architects, NTD, had taken a plan to DSA and they had few issues with since slopes right at the entrance-- or actually right to my left. We worked that out in the DSA group-- - and DSA approved-ata-- , then all of a sudden they decided that we're in the process of closing out the ITB and Campus Center with DSA. And those were some issues that we had with the inspectors. So literally, you're holding up a closeout for headings. I don't mean it money wise but I mean as an example of how-- how close we are. But because of that, they decided to not review the plans or not to approve the plans until the ITB and Campus Center are approved. Would you call that holding lasted? Now, [inaudible] I would. But you need [inaudible] say that because DSA, DSA does what DSA wants. And we've had issues with DSA for quite some time, it makes that pretty clear. So as soon as we can figure out what we're going to do, they have a new director that they brought up from the San Diego office. And I was supposed to meet with him and Dr. Van Pelt, so I'm going to-- my direction is to keep going forward with that, so instead of that meeting to see if I can't find out what this holdup is about, but that's really with the other measured P project that we have in line. And if you're wondering if [inaudible] anything else. >> That's good, I'm-- for myself, I think that that's-- >> Were there any questions? >> Oh, I don't have any questions if anybody else have some questions. My only concerns had to do with the contract then held that acquisitions would affect the [noise] contractors agreements with-- >> And Mr. [inaudible] has been involved the whole way, the whole process. >> Yeah. So yeah, typically, just so everybody-- so I can explain too to those of you who don't know. But typically, all of the subcontractors would be tied contractually through the general contractor. And so if the company-- if you're kind of replacing the general contract and then you kind of-- you're kind of messing with everybody's contracts and so forth but it sounds to me like a clean-- a clean deal and so forth. So that's the only thing I was just curious about is, you know, just to see. I wonder, it's-if you guys were going to talk-- >> I mean, I'd love to and I-- but I know everybody were really late and what I could do is-- and the purpose of this was to kind of summarize some of the things we've been hearing and put forward some options for everybody start thinking about. So, I'll try to do this rapidly and it's kind of food for thought for the summer. So we'll obviously be coming back to revisit this and then may have changed and then may change. But I think it's kind of a way of kind of pulling together some of the thinking that's been going on and I can probably do it in 5 minutes. >> Okay. >> [Inaudible] if it's okay, I'll do that. I actually did put a chip in there, what do you call them-- thumb drive. And so can I-- can this-- does this work? [Simultaneous Talking] >> Oh great, okay. I didn't have a pointer somewhere. >> We dim the lights then? >> Probably a little bit, yeah. [ Noise ] [ Simultaneous Talking ] As you guys recalled, you know, we did in a kind of number of meetings with various villages, I like that term, and have had some discussions about, you know, the various components of the master plan that, well-- that were at least a part of our original objectives. And as you recall, it were broken down into kind of three categories, there's modernization, there's seismic upgrade, and then there's sustainability. And those three things are kind of, in a way, set by the findings of what's-- what the needs are for modernization, what the needs are for seismic, and the goals that they've set for sustainability. Over and above that, there have been a number of all the things that have been on the table for discussion as needs at the campus, one of which was the innovation center, what do we do with Sexson Hall, what do we do with W Building, a series of other things that all kind of remind everybody about, but it's-- something didn't work. How do we get-- >> Is it turned off? >> I didn't turn it off. >> There it is. >> I don't see a switch here. >> I think it might be on now, the laser is [inaudible]. >> Oh, there we go, yeah, okay. Where is it? Start. Yeah, there we go. I've got to-- maybe I'll find it here. >> Maybe under My Computer. >> My Computer [inaudible]. >> Yeah, all right. [ Pause ] >> There should be-- it must be it fell back to you. >> Yeah. [Laughter] Yeah. And well I-- >> I think we're having all these issues I've asked-- >> And I am [inaudible] all of them. I appreciate the offer. So, yeah, I got to-- going to switch that here. [Simultaneous Talking] >> Yeah, there we go. [ Pause ] So what I-- what I did and it's a quick summary of some of the early stuff and our goals, objectives and then I kind of get right to these alternatives, so we'll be-- [ Pause ] Okay. [ Pause ] All right, there we go. [ Pause ] So we may have to come back and revisit this name at the end of the day. But I do have your quote in there passed-- [inaudible] passed [laughter] global future which I think is actually very-- it's perfect for this kind of master plan because it does, you know, kind of focus us on the things that are important from our past and moving forward to build one of those into the future. So these were those three categories. And as you recall, under the modernization category, it's renovating and upgrading mostly the buildings that are kind of in the academic core, C, D, E, R that have, you know, not reached the end of their life cycle but certainly needs some tender love and care to bring them back up to their function as they should be. And that would include the functional program requirements in terms of as things, for example, move in to the Center for the Arts, then what backfills in other places and all those kinds of things. It opened up a whole series of options around the campus. And then, of course, reviewing how the campus works from a pedestrian place-making point of view. And then trying to envision as we've talked about in the visioning session, what other facilities that we'll need in the future continue to the work and any new programs and so forth that are envisioned. And then from a seismic point of view, it's-- these have been identified clearly by a series of engineering studies. And so they become a part of the implementation in the master plan and ultimately for the funding that would be required. Sustainability, there's a series of categories we've talked about. And as I thought at some point, it would be a good idea to have a full session just on sustainability and there's a lot of issues in there that are underway and we have to I think really come to a collective decision about the goals for the campus that we want to move toward because they can be very broad, they can be very restrictive on the one hand or they can be a lot looser and still achieve certain kinds of-- or levels of sustainability. So-- and these are what I call other master plan components, and it's-- they're very specific things that have come up. As you know, for example, there's some serious seismic issues with the U Building and so that is planned to be replaced with what's called stem center. This new innovation center I've mentioned, remodeling and reuse of the bill-- of R. Looking at Sexson Auditorium, do we remodel that or do we build a new theater? We've had those discussions. And if so, where does that go? Looking at the remodel of D and E Building and of course the rest of C around Sexson. And then a couple of other things that have come up during the course of our discussions here and from the discussions in the visioning session and that was a welcome center could be combined with the conference center or a standalone conference center. The university center which is envisioned as a 4-year institution on the campus. It may be 10 or 20 classrooms that's occupied either by another university or of for profit style or it could be another CSU campus or what, I'm not sure, it's not well-defined yet. And then the notion of looking at distributed locations for learning centers so that they're not all just in the library or-- or elsewhere. This was the process and we're sort of in this kind of process here of defining the overall and precinct planning and defining specific projects and developing alternatives to look at and discuss to eventually move forward to some consensus master plan. Let me go through this very quickly just to, you know, this is kind of the various buildings that are on the plan, how the campus is organized functionally at the moment. And there are certain buildings that are exclusive to certain functions, obviously the new arts center will be focused on arts and music, performing arts as well. Athletics obviously the library facilities, industrial technology, student center, student services, all have specialized focuses and won't change in all likelihood. So then we're focusing on the core of academic buildings that are sort of identified here and without saying what happens to them. We know we're going to retrofit or at least remodel and upgrade D, E and C and R and looking towards a replacement of the existing science Building U and because of its condition and a number of other issues, these are related to W building, a replacement, it becomes essentially a site for one of the subject projects that may come into master plan. Let's discover a 3D view of that. And then these are the alternatives and the key I think is keep your eye on the theater because we can-- the first alternative really should have been just leaving section where it is and remodeling and we have a plan that I'll show you in a second. But discussions have come up for four different locations. This one down on the parking lot P5 has some advantages. It's a little out of the sort of the mainstream of the campus but it does have outside presence. It's nearby parking excess so you could loop buses and drop off and so forth around so that community access would be easy and so forth. So that's one location and this particular alternative, the STEM center would basically go back on to the new site after the U Building has been demolished. The innovation center would go into the old section auditorium space and I'll show you some sketches on that. And then there is a nee for-- if the building W goes away, there is still a need for pool equipment, lockers, other kinds of things for the pool. So in this scenario there's a new open space plan at a pool building that would accommodate those facilities. Our building would be remodeled for business and computer tech in this model. There's probably around 75, 80,000 square feet [inaudible] footage in that space. We have a plan that it-- could actually increase that floor plan size by 10 percent and I'll show you how that would work and it would change radically, the scope and quality and character of that building. Now, the theater in this case that we suggested perhaps, it replaces the W building. And the advantages are that it's fairly near parking. Here, you can almost make a direct access. You might have a bridge across the roadway here so you come directly into a lobby area. The ground floor or the basement area could be for the pool equipment. You could also have a wing that would have performing arts classrooms and perhaps backgrounds and other things associated with it, and a small plaza up near the book store. In this scenario, we were suggesting that the innovation center along with business and computer technology could go into the-- in the university center into the R building in that remodel. The new computer center would go in to the old section space in this case, the study center, learning center, STEM center which still remain where it's located. In this case, we looked at remodeling the theater and the idea would be reduced the amount of seats, you'd create a second-- where the existing balcony is would become a small slope for lecture hall about a 150 to 200. The ground floor would be a thousand to 1200 seats. So, and then of course you'd remodel the rest of the facilities which needs it pretty desperately. In this case, we move the STEM center to the W Building site and it would be as you recall, the plans that were done previously call for three phases of it so that the first phase is a one to one replacement that would utilize state funds which I think have request in for at the moment. And then there would be a phase 2 and 3 which would complete the need that's been identified for math and science and other kinds of components. And so the STEM project phase 1 would be on the W site and then phase 2 and 3 would go into the R Building along with the business and computer technology. And then over on the old U Building site, since it's such a prominent entry point to the campus, this would be a place where we would think that maybe the university center, a welcome center, a cafe that faces out under the [inaudible] innovation center, might go with that location along with maybe a deck of parking as well. So it creates an entry to the campus at that point. The last alternative is not radical I don't think, but it puts the theater out along with the university center at that front door so that you've got the real presence to the community for the theater. It's got its back on house cafe facing-- and lobby facing out on to the arts mall and the university center. The configurations are these are not buildings, these are diagrams. They represent what we think is the appropriate square footage but not necessarily a plan that's finalized at this point. Although I think PBWS did a nice little job in creating a plaza here at the STEM Building and a potential connection to phase 2 in the R Building. So those are the broad alternatives in addition to modernization, seismic operation and so forth. And then we looked at a couple of these things one more specifically because we needed to understand really what an innovation center was and what is the idea with this. And we've studied some other models in other campuses, one at Stanford, one at Harvard and they are-- they basically are experimental classrooms that might have, you know, folding doors across. They all share some kind of experimental work place in the center where new furniture types could be tested out. They can have removal petitions and create situations where they experiment with different pedagogues and so forth methods and that there would be a storage and their office associated with each one of those classrooms. The idea being that there are perhaps 8 to 15 faculty members in resident in the program at one per semesters, and then they may rotate out. They were there for semester or a year to test out their programs and then they go back and put those back into practice with the rest of the campus, and new faculty come in to do additional experimentation. We looked at a couple of different alternatives and how we might fit that into the section auditorium space. As you know, it's a very high volume so we were able to get two schemes here. One on the left, gets us two floors with a big open space and, you know, sky lights and glazing to the courtyards on both sides. And the third one, the first one doesn't excavate the basement basically. The one to the right looks at basically excavating below the slop [inaudible] floors so that you have a space there and come in from the alley or you come in off the front portions of the building. And then you have two floors above that. You don't get that much more square footage and the cost of doing that seems to us like it may not be cost benefit to the campus. We get about 10 stations in the example to the left, maybe get 14 or 15 and we'll put 1 to the right. Looking at this kind of one floor at a time, this is the one without the excavation so you have an opportunity for some classrooms on those floor level that would be accessed in this case off the main corridor and then from the back, the stair up to the second floor which is the main kind of experimental workforce base with the classrooms kind of facing around that. And then up on the second floor, there's a big open space with the stair down into that large experimental workspace and everything, sort of surrounds that with glazing and the sky light so that it's a real kind of a lively exciting space. This is kind of a section looking through that. This is what you would call the 2nd floor of the main building. This is the alley in the back. This is the front steps coming up the main hallway here. So you'd enter and these classrooms are sort of framing or around that large open space, 2nd floor there kind of have a balcony that overlooks that. It exposed the trusses and gets some sky lights and [inaudible]. This one is where we excavate the lower level and it just adds that one level, the two levels above that are quite similar and it gets 4, 5 more stations. And that's how this would work. So, you basically have a ground floor work experiment area surrounded by classrooms and then you have-- we cut a hole out of this floor but you still do have workspace around that so there's two levels of kind of this experimental teaching area along with the classrooms then the third floor is similar to the other one with just balconies. >> Richard, can you go back and just-- >> Sure. >> Can I see a plan view? >> We didn't bring one but-- >> Or just back to the-- to the-- yeah, and so the C Building currently is in-- instead of the gray, to shade it gray-- >> That's the front portion of it, it actually goes around and there are two wings and there's a courtyard in between on either side of section. I'm sorry. >> So this-- but I think that what folks need to kind of see and understand the reason I asked these questions is because this is-- is this really going out but for your end in the building that-- >> Oh yeah. >> We're-- because there's a portion that there's a gap that I have where this is-- this is really going on top of the [inaudible]. >> Oh no, no, no, we're not moving outside the envelop of the existing building. >> This is where-- >> This is the-- >> No, I-- >> This is the proscenium right here and that is the alley, were not moving out beyond that. >> Okay, because I was looking at those two wings there. >> This is the front. This is the north. This is the south. >> Got it. >> So, it-- >> In my-- >> They just didn't filled out the east and west wing. >> Okay. >> Chop it up. >> Oh-- >> Within the [inaudible]-- >> So, we just cut the X in the metric so you could see a little bit better. Sorry about that. >> If you are-- >> Okay, okay. >> All right. [Inaudible Remark] >> So here's a plan of the floor. This is the whole C Building. So as you recall there are two little courtyards on both sides, we actually cut that other model here. So, we didn't show the 2 wing. >> Got it. >> So, I'm sorry if it's a little refusing. >> We have too much of argument. >> No, that's okay. I'm sorry. These are little two architectural for that special but we needed to do something over this investigation to you able to talk about it in terms of is it feasible so that we can get what our cost estimate and say, you know, maybe this is something that's outside the box in terms of what we need to spend to get an innovation center or is it and put it on the table or some, you know, reasonable surety we got some information that's factual for you. This is the remodel of section that we looked at and that is the ground floor. We actually would put restrooms or lobby off the main entrance and reduce the seating to about 1200 in here. The stage area remains the same. On the second floor, we'd actually build walls to the section so we'd actually build a wall here so that this is now an enclose slope floor classroom 150 to 200 hundred people and that's sort of that remodel scheme for section. And, you know, I mean one of the things that we didn't have some discussion about it, I have this-- I did have this discussion with Rick and he seemed to pay attention but section auditorium remodel is probably 15 to 16 million dollars, new theater is 45 to 50 million dollars and I think that discussion is to be way up front on the table so that you don't go down the road that is not going to be accepted by the board and may not be feasible in terms if a public bond measure, you know, and how does the community feel about that. This is our idea for major remodel to our building and what it suggest is that we're pushing right now these are partial sheer walls along where you have the doors to the classroom and the outdoor balcony. And we're suggesting that we push that structure out with an exoskeleton and then move the walls out so you have actual natural lighting in the classrooms on every floor both north and south. And if you've been up on the fifth floor balconies out there painters love it because it's got these great views of the mountains, it's a great place. You've got-- the draw back is there would be some columns in some of the classrooms but it could be accomplish I think in the context of a major remodel and it would get about 5 to 7 percent more square footage which it could be a real benefit. This is just how-- this is the outdoor balconies structure will move now out to that edge and that would allow these to be removed and these to be glazed walls so that you have natural light into every classroom. This is a concept for whatever you put the innovation center into-- there are several floors of the R Building and this is two different ways of doing that. One where you kind of still circulate through the center of the open space and these classrooms all exit out through that open space and they have their central sort of experimental workstation. There are columns in that. There would be actually columns in the space too, its not shown but this is another alternative way you actually leave the quarter on the south side, push the wall out here and these people all exit out towards this southern exit, gives a bigger space and actually increases the square footage, but-- so those are thoughts and ideas that are food for the thought-- for thought for everybody, nothing is fixed and nothing-- I mean its meant to be able to inform the discussion from here. So, that's sort of where we-- where we are at the moment. Obviously, there's a lot of data and a lot of-- you know, is someone else mention minutes from the meetings and discussions we've had. >> That's true, that's great. >> I remember you said before, I'm concerned [inaudible] >> Well, there's a specific reason for that. Pick an alternative and you would want to do something different from the-- and for example if section remains where it is, we're going to have to deal with some [inaudible] shops and other things in the B Building. If the theater goes somewhere else you would want to incorporate those components along with theater in that location. It changes the nature of what might be in the B Building. I think the feeling is that they're going to want all the arch related to some extent because one, with the reduction when we-- as we recall when the height of the inflationary periods of construction, the estimate for the Art Center was 46 million and maybe that of 43, we ended up getting if for 27 or 8 but that was a simple fact that that moment in time and the market gave them a break. And I think the fact that [inaudible] is no longer in business is an indication of what the difficulties or it will cost for many contractors in that situation. But the point is that a lot of program got cut out and it was intended to either go in the B Building or somewhere nearby and-- but it's never been quite resolved as to where it goes and how it goes and so forth. And, so, we have a list of what the program items are that we're in there but depending on what the final consensus plan is that might change that dramatically. By now we have 10 pounds of stuff that wants to go on a [inaudible] bag so, you know, either we find another locations for it or we, I think we can talk about maybe in fact we have given a proposal to Rick at one point to do a feasibility study on the-- whether we could add two floors to the building to be able to culminate that other 5 pounds of stuff that needs to go somewhere. But it all depends on what else happens on the campus as to what the impact is in terms of space means in B. But it's not off the table at all. >> Okay. I've never heard that explanation that makes a lot of sense but it denies of it's at least mention that that still [inaudible]-- >> That's-- we'll go back into that-- >> And-- >> I agree. >> Jim you can rest assure that-- I don't think I'm being coached here of the committee but I will see that it does because [laughs] my current classrooms are in that building. [Laughter] >> Well, it's not [inaudible], believe me. [Inaudible Remark] >> I guess I get concern for the [inaudible]. >> I understand. >> Which are the end of the [inaudible] or beginning of the other-- >> I know, and I think it was originally a part of the previous [inaudible] and last I heard there was because of this deduction in terms of the final date amount for the Art Center or Center for the Arts that the thought was that money can then be used to remodel D and I think it is still in limbo 'cause we try to wait and see what happens with, you know, the Center for the Arts [inaudible]. >> Appreciate it. >> That was good. >> I think-- [Inaudible Remark] >> We really had a good point here. >> Yeah, okay. >> Good. >> And I have some copies here, I didn't make enough but if you'd like to go-- with anybody. [Inaudible Discussion] >> And I think that-- what we'll do is we will-- I think there'll be some communications with the committee prior to the 15th just to confirm our meeting and the agenda. >> Okay. >> Suzanne will be providing some notes. And so forth to me-- >> And we have the [inaudible] all of the work group meetings are all written up now and they can be-- I'm going to discuss it and hoping he can pass to lunch. >> Right. And so we can sit down and we can talk about that stuff and so forth. I thik you can-- you can see and so forth what's been done and so forth. So, but this is good and, you know, we looked, you know, we'll-- I think that by the 15th, the president and everybody will kind of have their heads better around the thing. >> Sure. >> We do need since we do have, you know, since the one, the big elephants not in the [inaudible] and we don't have Rick here to-- I don't, you know, people have [inaudible] but he, you know, certainly he encompassed much of the vision. And so, so we just need to kind of fill in that massive void that we have and move forward. And I think that with the president, you know, coming in to this and getting basically the background that you'll need to be able to be-- to play that critical role or to designate who you wish to play that-- that role will be important for us. And so I wrote the president just so you guys know some days ago just to say, look, this is an important thing that we got to do. And we want to maintain this. And so, he's got-- we're giving him a whole lot of stuff that he has [inaudible]-- >> Oh, that's good, you know, we needed to do this anyway. So its opportunity, so-- well, this is great. So we'll do our work, you know, off stage and have a good working meeting on the 15th. >> Thank you. >> Okay, great. >> Thanks everybody very much. And sorry for the-- [Inaudible Remark] >> 4 o'clock. >> [Inaudible] meeting as you need. [Inaudible Remark] [Laughter] >> It's good to see you. >> Nice to see you. We look forward at it. [ Inaudible Discussion ]