CERRITOS COMMUNITY COLLEGE

MINUTES OF

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS COMMITTEE

FRIDAY MAY 9, 2008

9:00 A.M. -10:15 A.M. – BOARD ROOM

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:    Lucinda Aborn, Dean Mellas, Bernie Negrete, Patrick O’Donnell, Harry Riegert, Bernice Watson, Lee Krichmar

 

MEMBERS ABSENT:  Lamont Freeman, John McGinnis, Deb Moore, Mario Morales, Lamar Mills, Wes Nance,

 

The meeting of May 9, 2008 was brought to order at 9:07 a.m.

 

MINUTES OF MARCH 28, 2008

 

It was moved by Harry Riegert, and seconded by Lucinda Aborn, to approve the Minutes of March 28 as presented.  The minutes were approved with one abstention (Lucinda). There were no corrections or discussion.

 

OUTSTANDING IT STANDARDS ISSUES

 

MONITOR STANDARD - L1910

 

Lee reported that our 19” standard analog monitor was discontinued as of two weeks ago.  Its replacement is the L1910 (as circled on the sheet distributed at the meeting), with the same specifications as the former model, except that the stand was changed.  She also reported that Hewlett Packard would allow us to keep the price at $199, which is our current pricing.  Lee suggested that we immediately replace the prior model with the L1910 so we don’t hold up any orders at the end of our fiscal year.  Bernie Negrete asked about any disadvantages to this model, and Lee said she saw none.  In fact, she liked the change in the stand.  The group agreed to adopt the L1910 as the new standard. 

 

Dean Mellas asked, based on the expected life span of this model, how soon we might need digital input or to go to a wide screen monitor.  Lee explained that we have the 1965 19” digital alternative, and also the 2065 20” digital, so if anyone wants them, they can purchase them now.  Hewlett Packard on this DC7800 model of PC does not have any digital video ports available.  Until they change to digital on the PC, we would have put in an alternative digital card to take advantage of this.  Until HP makes the video port change, Lee thinks we should standardize on analog, with digital alternatives of course.

 

Harry Riegert asked if any alternates are wide screen.   Lee replied, no, but if someone wants a monitor outside of our standards, we would have no problem working with them to understand their needs.  Lee added that from a support standpoint as long as we recommend HP monitors, we can use the same vendor to deal any HP model for repairs.  But if it is another vendor, it becomes more of a challenge and we begin to waste staff time.  Patrick added the widescreen will eventually replace the standard monitor. 

 

Harry asked if someone could be directed to research HP widescreen alternatives.  Lee was in agreement with that option and said they could look for a 20” alternative.   Bernie Negrete requested that the 22” also be brought forward as an alternative to the next meeting so both could be reviewed.  Lee said she would add the 20” and 22” widescreen model alternatives and pricing to the next agenda.

 

TECHNOLOGY MASTER PLAN

 

Patrick is on the Technology Based Learning Committee.  Lee requested that Patrick distribute the IT Master Plan to that committee and solicit feedback.  It was placed on the agenda for their May 1st meeting, but the committee meeting never took place.  There will not be a meeting during the summer, so they are not expected to get back together until August.  Lee put a .pdf file on the Intranet and forwarded the link to Angela Nagao, and she distributed the plan via email to their committee members to see if we can get feedback.  Lee got one E-mail back from Cynthia Alexander, but nothing yet from the other members of that committee.

 

Lucinda asked if we are planning to launch the Master Plan to other groups such as Academic Deans Counsel.  Lee responded that she has presented it to the Faculty Senate, Management Leadership Counsel, and the Coordinating Committee and it still probably needs to go to Planning and Budget .   Lucinda agreed that it will likely be covered from being presented to these areas.  Lee mentioned that she intends to distribute an electronic link to "all staff" once we finish getting feedback from the Technology Based Learning Committee and Planning & Budget.  Eventually people will know where they can go online to get the latest copy of the Information Technology Master Plan.  Lee also placed a link to the .pdf on the IT web page.

 

Lee began reviewing the latest copy of the IT Master Plan with the committee.  She reported she has added one appendix to the plan, “Appendix B,” based on some statistics per Dean's request of accounts and email.  Lee reported that we are growing at a phenomenal rate in all our areas on campus.  We have had to make some accommodations for that growth, but we are on top of it.   Dean Mellas, referring to Appendix “B,” asked if the statistics for TalonNet server could be obtained.  Patrick said there is currently no tool, and we do not know how many active classes there are, so right now we can’t determine that.  Later we hope to have tools to use for that purpose.

Lee referred to another area on page 32 concerning fiber infrastructure improvements on bandwidth.  She provided an update on our GigaMan connection for bandwidth (which is 22 times faster than DS3).  AT&T met with her to do a site surveyThe proposal now is to bring the new fiber into the Science Building (rather than the LA building).  The LA Building closet is the current location, but since the building is planned to be demolished, she wants to avoid a future move.  AT&T will have to pull permits with both the city of Cerritos and Norwalk to put fiber down Studebaker to get to the manhole to be brought across into the Science Building.  A map showing this diagram was distributed.  GigaMan is a fiber-optic link that will provide our Internet connection.

Cables tend to want to twist together and AT&T has a policy that they do not allow their fiber to reside in a conduit with other cables.  That could make it expensive for us if we had to run new conduit.   Mario presented an alternative to AT&T:  A product called Max-cell  --  a sleeve with pouches, preventing co-mingling with other cables.  AT&T agreed to this alternative and Lee said she was pleased that they were open to this idea.  We have already had the product installed and now we are waiting for AT&T.  Lee continued that whenever we think about these kinds of plans, it is always good to be thinking of an alternate path.  We have new building plans going on for the front of the campus.  Because Alondra Boulevard is where the AT&T fiber is already installed, we plan to install conduit whenever the construction occurs in the future at the front of the campus.  This alternate path was reviewed on the provided map with the committee. 

 

Harry asked if it would be difficult, when we meet, to provide highlights of new changes incorporated into the document, from the previous one, so that it would be easier to see the differences.  Lee said she would work on the possibility of providing changes between updates for the committee to see but for now she would provide a verbal review.  Lucinda added that it might be beneficial to track those changes, in case anyone should question us on how the changes came about.

 

Lee reported that the committee has completed agenda items a, b, d, and e, with c being on-going.  Section “f” (Review Area Plans) still needs to be done, but we do not actually have those available to review yet.  She said she believes this to be a very important step.   Usually there is already an updated educational master plan in place before embarking on a IT Master Plan.  We are also in the process of embarking on a new strategic plan too.  It is difficult to build an IT Master plan without these 2 documents, because those are the kind of goals we should be trying to meet in the Information Technology Master Plan.  As a result, we really need to dissect the three area plans as strategies for integrating into the IT Master Plan and do the same when the new strategic plan is adopted. 

 

Lee reported that she presented the Information Technology Master Plan to the Management Leadership Council Meeting on April 7 and said she is scheduled to update the Coordinating Committee again in May.

 

OTHER ITEMS

 

Lee provided a review of new software programs that Edison has endorsed to help save electricity.   They have rebates available on three different software products.  One is called PowerSave (by Faronics).  Currently, we are using another product by Faronics called Deep Freeze.  In the future PowerSave will help us become more aware of what is occurring with Deep Freeze.  Deep Freeze allows us to lock in an image on the desktop so that if a student makes any kind of a change, downloads or installs some software, at the next re-boot, all of it is undone.   Within that, we know we have to do updates and Deep Freeze has a built-in maintenance mode that allows us to create a block of time for updates to occur.  We can un-freeze it to allow updates to occur, and then freeze it back.   PowerSave works well with that.  It allows us to save electricity by putting it into standby mode.  The product is being evaluated by Harry and Patrick.  The cost is around $22,000, which Edison will reimburse us if we meet their requirements.  It is a product that can be maintained from a central location.  It works on several platforms, including PC,  Macintosh, and Linux.  We have a variety of network cards that make it a challenge to implement any software.  We have 30 days to get the product installed and to have a follow up visit by SCE to determine if we are using the product in the way they want us to in order for us to qualify for the reimbursement.

 

The implementation is touchy because we could power down more often, but we do not want to make it inconvenient for students, faculty, and staff.   We are, therefore, talking about two approaches to the energy saver:  One is to power down all computers at 11 p.m. and all on again at 7 a.m., Monday through Friday and more over the weekends and during the summer.  A second option would be to place in stand-by mode.  An email would have to go out to the campus community informing everyone of our intent to do this. 

 

Harry is evaluating PowerSave on the main Library floor.  He reported that today, in fact, he pushed out part of the “agent”.  Perhaps agents can be installed and built into a Ghost Image.  You can also segregate different computers.  Harry will be doing more evaluation on these.  The group discussed this product and its impact on our campus.

 

V-PRO

 

V-pro technology is a way to electronically manage devices.  It’s a hardware chip set change on the mother board.  Up until now we haven’t purchased it because you need to buy another product in order to see all that V-pro makes visible.  HP thinks they can get the pricing down from around $40 to possibly under $10.  HP has a free product that gives us the capability to see some of what V-pro makes visible.  We need to evaluate this product to see if it is worth the extra money.  Lee will ask HP will come out again to present new technologies so our committee can remain current on new trends for the upcoming year.

 

NEXT MEETING

 

Lee asked that the committee allow her to continue making changes on the IT Technology Master Plan during the summer.  She added a link to the IT Master Plan on the IT web page and anyone can review it at anytime.  Lee will work with Purchasing and HP to re-negotiate pricing at the end of June in preparation for the July purchases. 

 

It was the consensus of the committee that the next meeting be held in August.

 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 a.m.

 

 

Submitted By:    Patricia Childress     Administrative Secretary