Staff Present:
Mr. Alan Tomiyama, Acting Business Manager, Business Services Division
Ms. Beth Louargand, General Manager, Facilities Services Branch
Ms. Janalyn Glymph, Acting Deputy Branch Director, Business Services Division
Mr. Marty Varon, Director, Budget Services and Financial Planning Division
Ms. Susie Wong, Branch Director, Purchasing Branch
Mr. Howard Friedman, Assistant General Counsel, Legal Services

Others Present: See attached list.

The Committee approved Budget Services and Financial Planning Division Communication No. 1 for transmittal to the Board of Education on January 12, 1999.

At the request of Ms. Fields, Mr. Friedman reported on the status of a contract with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Pacific Gas and Electric Energy Services for the air conditioning program. He reviewed the chronology since the Board's action in July when the Board authorized staff to enter into a contract that would accomplish multiple tasks, not only insulation of air conditioning, but to enter into two discounted utility contracts. One with the
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power for the municipality area of Los Angeles, and the other with the Pacific Gas and Electric Energy Services in the geographical areas served by the District within LAUSD boundaries that is outside the boundaries of the City of Los Angeles. At that time the Board was advised that the contract was completed and staff indicated that there were some additional items to complete. All the parties involved understood that there would be a legal
action related to this public validation preceding that would assure all the parties involved in the contract is legal. The contract is very innovative and has been reviewed by the Proposition BB Steering Committee who are very supportive of the contract. Mr. Friedman explained the procedure.

FULLER CONSULTING BUDGET PROJECT

Mr. Leonard Fuller, Fuller Consulting Company updated the committee regarding the study on the District's budget process and implementation plan. He introduced Colin Goldman and Cy Fontaine who are working on this project. Mr. Fuller reiterated the purpose of his contract, and commented on a few of the findings. Currently, his firm is still in the process of reviewing the District's budget process and have not formalized any findings or made definite recommendations. Mr. Fuller reviewed some of the objectives and made a few interim suggestions.

CLASSIFIED DISCIPLINARY PROCESS

As a result of some high profile personnel cases a few months ago, Board Members requested a report on the disciplinary process within the District. Because there is a difference between the Certificated and Classified systems, staff separated the Certificated from the Classified. Using the Business Services Division as an example, Dr. Glymph presented an overview on the Classified disciplinary process and how it works. She stated that operating at optimum conditions is always the goal when things are working properly which involves management, labor, and employees. But sometimes intervention becomes necessary, and Progressive Discipline is that tool of intervention. Dr. Glymph discussed the goal, the steps, the extenuating factors, and the exceptions to Progressive Discipline. Mr. Campbell discussed the appeal process and the basis for an employee to appeal.

Speakers

Connie Moreno, California School Employees Association (CSEA) felt that the schools need substantial work dealing with employee discipline. She felt that there is very uneven standards and uneven training of management and supervisors at the schools. Employees are suffering from retaliation using discipline as a retaliatory measure rather than a corrective measure. The unions could deal with the straight forwardness in the Business Services Division, but there are weaknesses in other parts of the District.

Jim Woodbury, CSEA concurred with Ms. Moreno regarding weaknesses in the District, and felt that the District does not provide enough training on how to supervise.

Patty Mohawk Davis, Teamsters Local 572 felt that the Operations Branch should follow the Business Services Division's policy on Progressive Discipline. It appears to her that every division has their own standards.

Dmitri Tatum, Local 99 felt that there is no explanation in the pamphlet differentiating the same disciplinary offense and the actions taken in different divisions. He commented on his employment while working for the City of Los Angeles where each employee was given a set of guidelines and a list of consequences for each offense.

Margaret Villegas, Teamsters Local 572 concurred with Ms. Moreno that the disciplinary process should be universal throughout the District.

Rory Berryman, CSEA commented on subjective behavior and opinions. He felt that training is very important and that Progressive Discipline should be up-front and fair. He stated that in order for the District to move forward, the District must be able to clearly defined where we're going and how we are going to get there, and if people are going to be discipline, the policy must be clear.

Terry Lairson, Plumbers Local 78, Building Trades had many concerns on the issue, but was not prepared to make a statement at this time. He suggested that Mr. Tomiyama meet with various groups in the Operations Branch to review Progressive Discipline.

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

Because of time constraints Mr. Tomiyama advised that this item is being postponed to a later date.