Minutes Submitted by Wendy Palmer

Members in Attendance:  Elaine Joy, Antoine Kennedy, Craig Kolins, Jessica Morfin, Pamela Muir, Wendy Palmer, Mary Severson, Dee Wilson, and Paul Wolcott. 

Guests: Laurie Bales, Michael Dembrow, Barbara Eby, Mandy Ellerton, Patricia Rojas, and Elizabeth Worley 

Chair Mary Severson opened the meeting shortly after 9:00am.  The minutes were not available.

Item 1.  We welcomed two new members to the committee: Pamela Muir (or her designee) will represent Registration and Laurie Bales (or her designee) will represent the Bookstore.  We are still looking for members to represent the faculty.

Item 2.  Mary updated the group on the status of the Service Animal guidelines.  She, President Berger, Guy Sievert, Clark Hochstetler, and Wendy Palmer have met over the last two months and reworked some of the language involving the Assistance Animals portion of the guidelines.  Mary assured the group that none of the basic proposals had been changed so we did not need to review it.  Guy decided that the guidelines did not need to be approved by the EAC so it was presented as an informational item at the meeting last Wednesday (December 10).  Wendy answered general questions about the guidelines and reported that she and Clark will now be working with Ken Goodwin and Chris Els to educate the college community on this issue.

Item 3.  Patricia Rojas presented two ASPCC proposals involving a Student Bus Fee and Restructuring the Student Activities Fee.  Discussion points:  

• The library is willing to issue the bus IDs and provide the equipment; ASPCC will provide the Student Help employees.  The software system they already have in place can support this type of activity. 
• The ID may eventually replace the official PCC ID card but, for the time being, we will have two.
• The ABE/GED/ESL does not support the proposal because, up until now, their students have not paid fees and it would be a hardship for them.  Patricia pointed out that they would only be responsible for the bus pass fee.
• Concern: Columbia County and West Washington County students would be penalized because they do not have access to public transportation.
• Concern: There is a risk that non-students would see this as a very inexpensive park-and-ride option.  Patricia said that they were working on a solution to this problem.
• Concern: Distance Learning students would be penalized.  Patricia said that, although this current proposal would require them to pay the fee, ASPCC may get an opportunity to renegotiate this point at a later date.  Someone reminded the group that this would be the same case for them being required to pay the current fees.
• The definition of “student” is still being clarified. 
• ASPCC plans on holding forums to explain the fee structure and hope to list community sites that will offer PCC discounts.  Others suggested that it be in the student handbook and on the website. 
• Mandy Ellerton explained that PSU students currently pay $73/term in student activity fees and many local high school and middle school students pay $8-10 for annual membership cards. 
• Concern: The group would like to see specific wording in the contract requiring TriMet to promptly increase service when the number of riders increase.  We are concerned that this will not be done in a timely manner and that our riders will suffer.
• Patricia has received valuable input from another college offering this student service.  One important point was to specify the amount of time allowed before a fee increase is implemented.
• Suggestion: when developing the presentation to gain administration approval, they should include the fact that ASPCC accepted their share of responsibility for paying for their lobbying trip to Washington, D.C. by fund-raising.  They should also show how they evaluate program pieces to determine budget reductions in hard times.
• The group asked why these proposals were combined.  Mandy explained that Guy Sievert and Frost Johnson recommended this path for political reasons.
• ASPCC has had a difficult time starting a dialogue with administrators responsible for Parking and Transportation.  Craig Kolins said that the Deans of Student Development are in the process of working with Guy Sievert and Randy McEwen to get a representative from this area involved with the proposal.
• There is confusion as to who makes the final decision about this fee – the President or the Board.  This group should be a vital part because of our role in examining fees assessed at the college but we are not sure what role the EAC should have.
• Craig Kolins shared that the Board may be reluctant to support this fee increase because they are already exploring the idea of increasing tuition another $4/credit.
• Concern: The ASPCC survey only polled students’ interest in getting an inexpensive bus pass but did not mention the overall increase in activity fees.  It was recommended that they resurvey students with this added information because this may change their opinion.
• Concern: Many felt that this fee structure was unfair to students who only take three-to-four credits.  Instead of $3-4, they would have to pay $25.
• Patricia admitted that the numbers in the budget projections were estimates, not solid data.

Next steps: The group would like ASPCC to fine-tune the budget numbers and the definition of “student,” resurvey the students regarding the increased fees, and speak with Guy Sievert to determine the approval process.  We invited them to return to our January meeting.

Item 5.  Dee presented a status report on the service hours survey questions.  We developed demographic questions.  Pam Muir was added to this subcommittee so she can help with getting information from Banner.  Dee will prepare a draft, the subcommittee will meet at the end of January, and the draft will be presented at our February meeting before being presented at the Deans meeting on February 19^th.

Item 6.  Pam Muir gave an informal report on how registration was progressing.  She said that it was generally fine but there was confusion about the second-priority registration date.  There will be a four-day window and then the second group can start.  The group felt that registration dates must be better advertised now that schedules aren’t mailed out.  Suggestions: (1) Add a line on this term’s registration bill telling when registration for the next term will begin. (2) Send an e-mail to faculty approximately two weeks before registration asking them to make announcements to their classes.

Respectfully Submitted, Wendy Palmer