October 7, 2025

RAPP Meeting Minutes

MLC 255/Hybrid Mtg.

Tuesday Wed. Oct. 7, 2025

Meeting summary

The meeting focused on reviewing proposed changes to the decision-making flow chart for program reviews and requests, including the establishment of new committees to evaluate and prioritize different types of requests. (New committees include the following: Faculty Prioritization Committee, Program Sustainability Committee, Senior Leadership Team, Campus Facilities, and Campus Budget Committee.) RAPP participants discussed the roles and processes of various committees, including their decision-making authority and the need for transparent reporting on faculty positions and budget allocation. The conversation ended with discussions on faculty hiring processes, proposed membership for a new Faculty Prioritization Committee, and the structure of Program Review and Sustainability Committee, including RAPP's role in the proposed Program Sustainability Committee.

Next steps

· All committee members to review and provide feedback on the proposed Faculty Prioritization Committee structure and membership.

· Felisa Vilaubi to verify with FA about tenure process for faculty hired mid-year or out of syn with tenure process timeline.

· Farhad Sabit to prepare information about faculty positions and budget allocations.

· Farhad Sabit to prepare a presentation on CA 50% law, ed code 84362, for future meeting.

· Simon Kang’a to present how A.I. might be used to review faculty positions at the next meeting.

· Committee to continue training for reviewing faculty position requests at the next meeting.

· Vice President of Instruction, Ram Subramaniam, to update the FPC document to clarify emergency hiring process.

· Committee to clarify the criteria for when programs without full-time faculty should be referred to the Program Sustainability Committee.

Program Review Committee Structure Changes

The meeting focused on reviewing proposed changes to the decision-making flow chart for program reviews and requests. Ram presented a summary of the changes, which included the establishment of four new committees: the Faculty Prioritization Committee (FPC), Program Sustainability Committee, Senior Leadership Team, Campus Facilities, and Campus Budget Committee. These committees will evaluate and prioritize different types of requests, including personnel, resources, and facilities, before sending their recommendations back to RAPP, then to College Council and ultimately the president; the latter of whom will have the final decision. The Program Sustainability

Committee was also introduced as a new entity that will review certain cases before they reach President Torres.

Committee Roles and Decision-Making

The meeting discussed the roles and processes of various committees, including the Campus Budget Committee and the Program Sustainability Committee. The Campus Budget Committee was clarified to be advisory to the College Council, which in turn advises the president. The Program Sustainability Committee evaluates programs that are thriving, struggling, or proposed for sustainability, and makes recommendations to the College Council. Dean of Intercultural Students, Debbie Lee raised questions about the decision-making authority of these committees and the process for evaluating struggling programs. RAPP participants also discussed the need for transparent reporting on faculty and instructional positions, as well as compliance with the CA 50% law regarding budget allocation between instructional and non-instructional areas.

RAPP Structure and Review Process

RAPP participants discussed the process for reviewing faculty requests and funding allocations, emphasizing the need for transparency as well as a holistic approach. They debated whether to maintain the current structure of RAPP or create new subcommittees, with concerns raised about capacity and the potential loss of big-picture conversations which include multiple perspectives. Simon suggested leveraging technology to improve efficiency, while preserving the representation aspect of RAPP. The conversation ended with a review of the Faculty Prioritization Committee's mission and charge, including its role in reviewing faculty requests and program review summaries.

Faculty Hiring Committee Operations

The meeting focused on the structure and operation of a faculty hiring committee, discussing its role in reviewing and recommending full-time faculty positions. The group debated the timeline for position requests, with a proposed schedule of reviewing new and replacement positions in fall and making recommendations by December 2025. They also discussed the criteria for emergency hires and the implications of tenure track hiring processes. RAPP participants considered whether to keep emergency requests with the RAPP committee or transfer them to the faculty committee, ultimately deciding that RAPP could initially review emergency requests before referring them to the faculty committee if needed.

Faculty Prioritization Committee Membership Debate

The group discussed proposed membership for a new Faculty Prioritization Committee, with debate over the balance between faculty and administrative representation. Some participants strongly advocated to increase faculty representation to 8 members while maintaining 3 administrative members, though questions remained about student representation and committee overlap with RAPP. The discussion highlighted concerns about College Council's role in the process and whether

to maintain the current practice of converting faculty state designated funds to administrative/classified positions, with some participants suggesting this practice should be limited to exceptional cases.

Program Review and Sustainability Committee

The meeting focused on the Program Review and Sustainability Committee structures, with discussions about RAP's role in program reviews and the proposed Program Sustainability Committee (PSC). The group agreed that RAP would move beyond providing summaries to making specific recommendations about program focus areas, while PSC would handle new program reviews and existing program evaluations. They also discussed criteria for referring programs without full-time faculty to PSC, though this was noted as potentially inefficient and might be revised to occur every three years rather than annually.

Participants: Ram Subramaniam, Mallory Newell, Veronica Acevedo Avila, Farhad Sabit, Sam Bliss, Nazy Galoyan, Augustin Espino Diaz, Erick Aragon, Adrienne Hypolite, Eric Mendoza, Michelle Hernandez, Felisa Vilaubi, Simon Kang’a, Christina Wright, Alicia De Toro, James Nguyen, Zander Blackman, Erik Woodbury