 |
| Dave Lang sharing the spotlight with convicted felon Mike Carona |
From the ‘Vine (#7), 9/16/98
It is possible that this is the penultimate draft, not the draft ultimately published.
BOARD MEETING, SEPT. 14
by Chunk Wheeler
When I arrived at 6:55, about thirty-five people were waiting for Library 105’s door to open, a number that grew somewhat during the next 50 minutes. As I waited, I spoke with reporters and friends, but I kept noticing Lee Walker skulking in the background. At one point, the Walk Man’s face suddenly appeared from afar through an opening in the crowd; he seemed to be studying my face, I knew not why. Did I mention that he looks like a cross between Sleepy and Grumpy, two of the seven dwarfs? If there is a dwarf named “Incredibly Stupid,” he looks like that one, too.
Someone told me that state law requires that board meetings start on time. In fact, as I recall, the last two meetings started more than an hour late. On this night, the meeting started about 50 minutes late. But what’s a little law-breaking to a guy like John “let’s make a deal” Williams? Nuttin’.
At long last, the door opened, and we rushed in. Leaders of the classified union were immediately informed (on the sly) that their contract had been approved. Good news! (Next, the contract must be ratified by classified union members. That is expected to occur.) This means, among other things, that some senior classified employees will soon be leaving us, opting for the ol’ golden handshake. We’ll lose some more good people, but you can’t blame them for wanting to jump the unhappy Ship of Goo.
Lang and God:
The meeting opened with the usual rituals. Trustee Lang led the prayer, a rite that, in recent months, has become an occasion for political point-making. You’ll recall that, some months ago, Frogue, stinging from Joan Hueter’s then-recent critical remarks in the press concerning the odious talent-repelling board majority, noted in his “prayer” that people with beams in their eyes should not point out the motes in others’ eyes. He didn’t explain to God what Joan’s “beam” was supposed to be.
In Lang’s prayer, he told God that he hoped that board members would listen to the advice of their advisors—a signal that, once again, board members were about to ignore the advice of their advisors.
The board announced their closed session decisions. Don Busche was made VP of Instruction at Saddleback. The decision was unanimous. The CSEA “tentative” agreement was approved, again, unanimously. Etc.
Accreditation reports:
The accreditation reports were presented. Since Ray Chandos teaches (six students!) on Monday nights, Raghu was compelled to present IVC’s report. Goo mentioned that it includes minority reports for standards 5 and 10. The accreditation team, said Goo, will be visiting both campuses on the 27th, 28th, and 30th of October.
During the immediately subsequent “public comments,” Bob Cosgrove explained that he had asked for a copy of IVC’s accreditation report, but was told that no copies were available. They have not been made available to IVC faculty either, he said. The crafty Goo chose that moment to walk up to the podium and hand Bob a copy of the report. Very funny. (It must be acknowledged that Mr. Goo has a sense of humor of sorts.) What Goo did not explain amid the laughter, however, is that the copy he handed Cosgrove did not include the minority reports. (Copies circulated among standards chairs the next day sported the same deficit.)
Enrollment lies: [in the hard copy of this ‘Vine, the word “distortions” is used]
An early agenda item was the presentation of the “SOCCCD Census Enrollment Report.” Chancellor Sampson explained that this information is very important. Then the board majoritarians launched into an effort to cast the best possible light on IVC’s curious drop in enrollments. (Saddleback’s enrollments are up. See chart.) Their gambit: to attribute the IVC enrollments drop simply to the transfer of the Emeritus program from IVC to Saddleback.
This ploy was effectively ruined, however, by Dave Lang and Rich Zucker’s questions and comments. Thanks to Lang and Zucker, it was revealed that, even apart from the Emeritus program transfer, our enrollments at IVC are down, though only very slightly--about half a percentage point. As Raghu put it, enrollments are “flat,” more or less. But, given that we budgeted for a 3% increase in enrollments--an increase that did not occur--we’re in the hole. Again, it took some doing to bring these facts to light, for the board majority seemed determined to leave a very different impression of the situation.
Subtle tensions between the two presidents seemed evident during the discussion of the Emeritus Institute transfer. President Bullock suggested that the transfer “helped the district; it didn’t hurt IVC.” Raghu took the opposing view.
Dorothy Fortune, being a complete idiot, demanded an opportunity to inspect “the waiting lists.” “Why won’t you people show us the waiting lists!” she seemed to say.
The board discussed its “goals and objectives.” Everyone seemed to agree that the board should have some and that its members should meet to discuss the matter.
Frogue exhibits paranoia:
Frogue had a beef about the lack of “communication” between the Trustees and administration, which seemed to stem from his receipt of the meeting’s agenda on Friday rather than earlier in the week. In these and other comments during the evening, the Froguester rehearsed his favorite paranoid themes: the duplicity of bureaucrats, the untrustworthiness of the press, etc.
Anyone who attended the December 7, 1997, board meeting knows that Frogue considers himself an expert on information flow—or, rather, non-flow—within bureaucracies. During that meeting, which was devoted to discussing possible further tweakage of the district’s administrative structure, Frogue lectured his colleagues. He said:
Information that’s inconvenient; information that’s uncomfortable; information that might be embarrassing—can suddenly disappear...New information can also be created at any step of the way—to cover up things. And then, by the time it gets here to the board, which is this filter, it has to make decisions. I mean, that’s why...we make decisions that people don’t like, that people are uncomfortable with, unfamiliar with—because we’re trying to operate within this system, and sometimes we get information and we check it out and it’s not right. It’s not right...It’s like attacking a 500 pound blob of jello with a scalpel.
Frogue ended his remarkably inane lecture by saying, “Is it reliable? Is it truthful?...That’s the problem with everything...believing the daily newspaper and dealing with the information you get...My God, we’d better all be aware of it because it’s applicable in so many ways. I’ll sit down.”
Give us our new guns:
The “gun” issue emerged once again. At the last board meeting, campus police chiefs Parmer and Romas asked for money to replace the police forces’ old and relatively unsafe 38s with au courant 9mm weapons. Their presentation established that, if campus cops are going to have guns, then they should be new 9mm jobs, not the old 38s. Trustee Fortune--who, before she decided to call herself a “fiscal conservative,” was active in the Democratic party--emerged that night as a strong proponent of defanging campus cops. (It turns out that most community college cops are gunless; indeed, ours is the only district in OC that arms its cops.) As I recall, then-Chancellor Hodge and Dave Lang agreed with Fortune, which must have been painful for them. In the end, the cops went home without their new guns, but they managed to keep their old ones.
Surprisingly, the issue was back on the agenda on the 14th. Fortune once again spoke to the issue. In her remarks, she demonstrated her uncanny knack for really pissing people off, for, in effect, she called Parmer and Romas liars. You see, after the October board meeting, she called up the Orange County Sheriff’s Dept. and talked to a “fellow” there. She asked him about the safety of 38s.”They’re safe weapons,” said the fellow. (Of course, Parmer and Romas didn’t exactly say that 38s are unsafe; they said that 9mms are relatively safe.) The Fortunate One concluded that she had been lied to or misled by Parmer and Romas. “That’s what you get when you only listen to people with a special interest,” she added. “Let’s spend the money on students, not on guns,” concluded Dot.
In response, chief Romas acknowledged that 38s are not unsafe; but the district’s 38s are old, he said. Lang jumped in to express both his respect for Romas/Parmer and his inclination to disarm them. “Why are we the exception among community college districts in the area?” asked Lang. Frogue opined that it is unwise to leave cops unarmed. Williams, finally finding a topic he cares about, stated that it is a “travesty” to suggest not arming police officers. Apparently addressing Mr. Lang, he said, “Get real.” “Stop living in an ivory castle.” (Yes, an ivory castle.)
Lorch noted that the presence of guns is a deterrent. Fortune shot back by suggesting that the worst thing that happens on our campuses is the theft of car radios (well, not quite), so the cops don’t need guns. “Even the radicals [i.e., Frogue’s racist friends and their equally polite JDL adversaries] who sometimes come to our board meetings aren’t that bad,” she said. At that moment, I felt Dave Lang’s pain.
Student trustee Marie Hill noted that she has seen men removing their shirts and revealing tatoos on campus. “Gang members,” she said. So cops gotta have guns.
Frogue explained that, if only people knew the details--details, he implied, that were suppressed by the press!--of the Lorches’ fabled encounter with violence (?), they would understand the need to arm campus cops. (Huh?) Idiotically, Lorch explained that only someone who has experienced what she experienced knows whether campus cops should have guns. “You don’t know until you’ve experienced this yourself,” she said, thereby marking the nadir of the evening.
And so on.
Toxic waste:
After a break, we heard about a lawsuit against the district filed by Casmalia Resources Site. Evidently, the firm took our hazardous waste and buried it at its site. Then the EPA showed up and told Casmalia that they’ll have to spend a million bucks cleaning up. Naturally, Casmalia is now trying to get the money from its clients, including us. Frogue said something, but it was stupifying, and so I have no clear memory of it.
Trustee misconduct?
There was some delightful tension in the air during the trustees’ discussion of “mileage reimbursement”--money to defray travelling costs to conferences and the like. Lang alluded to Dot’s going places she shouldn’t oughta go to. Evidently, the district’s director of public information (DPI), Pam “Same Sex” Zanelli, has also been going to forbidden zones. No details were mentioned. Williams made a big show of support for Zanelli, who, he declared, is doing a good job. The DPI should be “everywhere,” he said, and that’s just where she is.
In the course of Fortune’s cryptic and defensive remarks, she asserted that “You get your money’s worth with me,” which produced audible groans throughout the room.
At some point, Dot and Marcia seemed to be shouting at each other, but I couldn’t make out what they were saying. Marie Hill, who kept looking at Frogue for reassurance or cues, put in her two cents, which, as usual, turned out to be worth two cents. (She’s one of those people who talks just to hear herself talk. Also, she has perfected an “evil eye.” Very impressive.)
Lariat bombshell:
During the second round of public comments, Christian Barrera, former editor in chief (and current assistant editor in chief) of the Lariat, read a statement in which, evidently on behalf of his colleagues at the paper, he requested Lee Walker’s removal as advisor. As advisor, Walker has continually overstepped his bounds and violated first Amendment rights, said Barrera, an assessment, he added, that is shared by the last five editors in chief, including the current one. Barrera pleaded with the board to “open their ears” and take action. Specific details, he said, would soon be forwarded.
You will recall that Walker, the croniest of union cronies, became the Lariat’s advisor starting in the summer of ’97. At the time, the paper had been very critical of the faculty union’s tactics, especially during the ’96 election season. Few had any doubts about his motives when Walker sought to bump then-advisor Kathleen Dorantes from her position, which she had held successfully for two years. Dorantes’ then-dean, Dan Rivas, would not participate in Dorantes’ removal, and so, under pressure from the board, then-president Doffoney did the dirty work.
In October of 1997, the Saddleback College Lariette, an underground internet “newspaper” put out by a former Lariat staffer, explained that
Lariat staff members are quite certain the appointment of Walker as the new adviser is [not] coincidental, for he is a member of the Faculty Association and has represented it at board meetings. His political ties with the Faculty Association and Board of Trustees are strong, and he has been an outspoken advocate for them on a number of occasions. For a person so closely tied to the board and the Faculty Association to be appointed the new adviser of its most immediate and threatening critic is most definitely a conflict of interest. Certainly the issues of prior restraint and censorship become immediate factors, for Walker knows the content of the paper before it is published. Should news topics arise targeting the Faculty Association, the Board of Trustees or Walker himself, he would be privileged to the information two weeks before public release. Walker has already proven he cannot separate his politics from his profession. He has interfered with the gathering of news by Lariat reporters when he interrupted an interview conducted by the Lariat campus editor, so he could spout his own personal opinions after the Sept. 8 board meeting. He has made an effort to suppress news, an issue of prior restraint, by attempting to convince current Editor in Chief Ted Martin not to run a story about Dorantes’ dismissal. He requested his picture be removed from the article about himself and Dorantes, an issue of prior review, for he found it unflattering and did not want his image published with the article. However, under any other circumstance, the subject of a story does not personally determine the accompanying photograph, most notably exemplified in our previous coverage of a sexual harassment suit filed against a professor on campus....
Reports:
The trustees’ reports were largely unremarkable. Naturally, everyone made a point of welcoming chancellor Sampson.
Frogue remarked that “There’s nothing like the start of a new school year.” It’s going to be another interesting year, he said. You bet, Recall Boy.
Lorch, borrowing one of Frogue’s themes, read a statement in which she yammered about the trustees’ lack of adequate information. Gotta measure performance; gotta get info; etc.
Dot Fortune addressed proponents of the Recall, reminding them of the potential cost to the district. But, as I said earlier, she’s an idiot.
John “College Boy” Williams praised the Lariat for its “welcome back” issue. Have you seen it? It’s an embarrassment. In the course of 43 pages, it refers to not one issue. The “article” on page 9 is typical: “Saddleback: People Who Care.” Perhaps it’s one of those joke issues.
ASIVC announced that the students are pressing for more recycling on campus and a unified grade-posting policy. Wow. Maybe they should be running things.
The Saddleback Academic Senate read a resolution to the effect that Richard McCullough did a great job as president and is a great guy.
Rich Zucker of the IVC Academic Senate announced that there is at long last a nominee for senate president. (He wisely refrained from identifying the fellow.) Further, Jan Horn and Priscilla Ross have agreed to co-chair the Committee on Courses, and so, again, at long last, the curriculum process can go forward. Rich invited Chancellor Sampson to meet with senate officers and then, ultimately, with the senate. Sampson seemed agreeable.
The Faculty Association had no report (and no one to give it, it seemed).
During his report, Mr. Goo flashed a soccer trophy. I hope he doesn’t think it’s his. Do you suppose he’ll put it in that stupid trophy box?
Eventually, a discussion ensued concerning the replacements of Nick Kremer, Bob Loeffler, and others. Chancellor Sampson, noting that the board seemed to be down-grading some positions-e.g., Loeffler’s—for the sake of economy, seemed to express discomfort with the board’s haphazard and case-by-case approach to individual administrative positions. He seemed to say that it would be better to make adjustments in positions (and salaries, etc.) in a systematic way that reflected some particular philosophy and goal. Accordingly, many changes should be made at one time.
One shouldn’t study administrative positions one at a time, he said. Rather, one should study them in relation to each other. He repeated that he advocated making adjustments to the management structure all at once based on an overview and a particular philosophy or set of principles.
Such talk inspired defensiveness in the board majority. Frogue asserted that, faced with massive bureaucratic inefficiency, the board was forced to take the
esting year, he said. You bet, Recall Boy.
Lorch, borrowing one of Frogue’s themes, read a statement in which she yammered about the trustees’ lack of adequate information. Gotta measure performance; gotta get info; etc.
Dot Fortune addressed proponents of the Recall, reminding them of the potential cost to the district. But, as I said earlier, she’s an idiot.
John “College Boy” Williams praised the Lariat for its “welcome back” issue. Have you seen it? It’s an embarrassment. In the course of 43 pages, it refers to not one issue. The “article” on page 9 is typical: “Saddleback: People Who Care.” Perhaps it’s one of those joke issues.
ASIVC announced that the students are pressing for more recycling on campus and a unified grade-posting policy. Wow. Maybe they should be running things.
The Saddleback Academic Senate read a resolution to the effect that Richard McCullough did a great job as president and is a great guy.
Rich Zucker of the IVC Academic Senate announced that there is at long last a nominee for senate president. (He wisely refrained from identifying the fellow.) Further, said Rich, Jan Horn and Priscilla Ross have agreed to co-chair the Committee on Courses, and so, again, at long last, the curriculum process can go forward. Rich invited Chancellor Sampson to meet with senate officers and then, ultimately, with the senate. Sampson seemed agreeable.
The Faculty Association had no report (and no one to give it, it seemed).
During his report, Mr. Goo flashed a soccer trophy. I hope he doesn’t think it’s his. --CW
