By Mitra Moassessi

Q: Are colleges required to hire full-time faculty every year?

A:  Yes and No! The California Code of Regulations, Title 5, requires community college districts that are below 75 percent standard to increase their base number of full-time faculty over the prior year in proportion to the amount of growth funds received for credit FTES. If a District reported full-time faculty as of fall of each year is less than it’s obligation for the succeeding fall, then the District is obligated to hire full-time faculty.
 

Q:  Did SMC hire any full time faculty for Fall 2002?

A:  Yes, SMC hired five full-time faculty who were replacement for the full-time faculty who retired.  SMC reported full-time faculty level for Fall 2001 was 366.5 and it’s projected obligation for Fall 2002 was 374.4, SMC felt short of it’s obligation by 7.9.
 

Q:  Did SMC hire any full time faculty for Fall 2003?

A:  No.  SMC reported full-time faculty level for Fall 2002 was 364.5 and it’s projected obligation for Fall 2003 was 389.4, SMC felt short of it’s obligation by 24.9.
 

Q:  Did SMC have permission not to make it’s full-time faculty obligation for Fall 2002?

A: Yes.  According to a memo dated June 17, 2002 from the Chancellor’s office, if a district was on the Board of Governors fiscal stability monitoring “Watch List” then the district was eligible to request a waiver from the Full-Time Faculty   Obligation   for   Fall  2002.   Two   districts received approval for waiver, Santa Monica and Glendale. (There are 72 districts statewide)
 

Q:  Did SMC have permission not to make it’s full-time faculty obligation for Fall 2003?

A: Yes.  According to the same memo dated June 17, 2002; upon approval of the waiver, the district waiver will continue until the district is off the “Watch list”. SMC was the only district for which the Fall 2002 waiver was extended to Fall 2003.


Q:  What does it take to be on the “Watch List”?

A:  To be on the “Watch List” the ending balance of the District’s General Fund must be less than 3% of the total actual General Fund expenditure.


Q:  What was SMC’s ending balance and expenditure for fiscal year 2001-2002?

A:  According to the board meeting agenda dated September 9, 2002, General Fund ending balance was $1,415,218, which is 1.2% of the total expenditure of  $122,038,663.


Q:  Was there any income for fiscal year 2001-2002 that was not counted for in the ending balance of 2001-2002?

A:  Yes, according to the budget documents distributed at the budget committee meeting (document dated 4/4/2003, “Amended Budget for 02/03”), there was an increase of $1,918,526 in the combined total of federal and state restricted income, this increase was due to the carryover incomes from fiscal year 2001-2002.  If this increase were added to the ending balance of 2001-2002, the ending balance would increase to $3,333,744, which is 2.7% of the total expenditure.


Q:  What was SMC’s ending balance and expenditure for fiscal year 2002-2003?

A:  According to the board meeting agenda dated September 15, 2003; General Fund ending balance was $1,862,057, which is 1.6% of the total expenditure of $119,801,619.


Q:  Was there any income for fiscal year 2002-2003 that was not counted for in the ending balance of 2002-2003?

A: Yes, according to the board agenda dated September 15, 2003; there is a total carryover of $2,269,657 from restricted income of 2002-2003 to the fiscal year 2003-2004.  If this carryover is added to the ending balance of 2002-2003, the ending balance would increase to $4,131,714, which is 3.45% of the total expenditure and would remove the District from the “Watch List”.
 

Q:  What are the benefits of showing a low ending balance and staying on the “Watch List”?

A:  Justification for cost cutting items like not hiring full-time faculty, laying off classified staff, laying off part-time faculty, …….