BROWN ACT UPDATE. You’ll recall that we issued a “Brown Act” alert on September 27th (see). That the board violated the Brown Act seemed clear; that anyone would formally call them on it was less clear.Well, it now appears that our lawless board will be served with a “demand to cure and correct” re its violation of the Brown Act in connection with it’s “retreat”/meeting at the Dana Point Marriott in mid-September.
The Ralph M. Brown Act requires that boards post agendas and prior notice of their meetings. Further, the Brown Act permits “closed session” discussions of the board only with regard to a narrow range of topics: personnel actions, pending litigation, labor negotiations, etc. The idea, of course, is to limit government secrecy as much as possible.
The agenda for the Sept. 13 Dana Point closed session lists only one item: “Public Employee Evaluation of Performance…Chancellor.” However, we have it on good authority that the board did not discuss that topic but that, instead, it discussed issues highlighted by the accreditation agency (ACCJC) in its recent dismal evaluation of the two colleges.
You’ll recall that, owing to administrative chaos & incompetence and trustee micromanagement, each college was "awarded" the lowest of reaccreditation categories--essentially, a D-. Naturally, Lang and Mathur issued a press release (2/2/05) implying that the colleges passed with flying colors. Lang is quoted as saying, “We are gratified with the validation from the accrediting commission of the excellence of our institutions..." "The District is very proud," wrote Mathur.
At the September meeting, the Board violated the Brown Act in that (a) it discussed an item that was not agendized—thereby robbing the public its opportunity to address the board concerning that item prior to its discussion, and (b) it discussed topics not included among those permitted in closed session. (For an explanation of the Brown Act, click on the link on the top right of this webpage.)
Probably, Chancellor Mathur will be handed the document tomorrow.
SHOUTING MATCH? We’ve been told that, recently, at the end of an otherwise fruitful meeting of the “faculty hiring policy” group, Saddleback College Academic Senate President Claire C got into a brief shouting match with Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur. Evidently, the conflict was sparked by a difference of opinion concerning the above “special meeting”—and whether Mathur was being entirely honest with faculty, or with her, about what occurred there. I’m told that Mathur fell into an old habit, for, in the course of his Imperious squawkage, he pointed his nasty little finger at Claire.
THE “P” IS FOR “POINTAGE.” Denizens of IVC and fans of irony everywhere will be amused. You see, while President of Irvine Valley College, Mathur had a favorite saying, which he repeated almost daily, producing an endless chain of ironic fun. It is this:
“Every time you point a finger at someone, there are 3 fingers pointing back at you.”
Well, maybe so. But it is hard to find a person more inclined to point a finger of blame than Raghu P. Mathur.
In May of 1998, 74% of IVC full-time faculty voted “no confidence” in then-President Mathur. 87% of those eligible to vote voted. (Judging by the results of subsequent votes, it is clear that, in '98, Raghu had achieved the peak of his popularity.) Mathur responded to the vote, not with humility or grace, but with finger-pointing. At the May 21 board meeting, he said:
… I’d like to respond to the vote of no confidence…This vote of no confidence was politically motivated…I want to share with you something about the people who are at the very core…of this vote of no confidence. They want a weak president that they can control like they have done before a few times...The people of the core have already disliked me whenever I have stood up for fair and equitable distribution of financial resources, be it for supplies or equipment, staffing resources all across the board, for various educational programs and services….
[S]ome of the people here in the core have had many sweet deals in the form of reassigned (time) and other areas, which this board has cut out, and they are angry. The fact of the matter is that these faculty members were hired to teach. Instead, some of them, they just don’t want to teach and want to either perform administrative functions or have a lot of free time or both….
…Within days of my appointment as interim president, academic Senate president Kate Clark told me personally that she was going to work toward shutting down Irvine Valley College (Clark interrupts: “I never said that”). …I stand by my statement in front of God.…
This is an unAmerican way to treat anyone not to give people a chance. This is an unAmerican way to treat anyone, leave alone the first generation American immigrant like myself, and now a US citizen. And I’m proud to be so.
… [F]irst they stand in the way and then they say “He’s ineffective.” Well, I’d like to ask, respectfully, Where is their sense of responsibility? Where is their sense of integrity before they cast stones at others?
We should not condone anyone who embraces hate and bigotry. People have come here to speak against hate and bigotry at this board meeting many a times. None of these people have spoke against hate and bigotry implied in someone holding a bottle of [Ragu] Spaghetti sauce with my Indian name misspelled. Or hate in crimes explicitly evident in publications of professor Roy Bauer, who claims to be a professor of logic and ethics.
… People in this core in the past have sent me mail threats saying, “Go back to your country.” These threats have come from some of these people, I am confident of it….
[T]hey use shared governance as a smoke screen. They really don’t want shared governance. They want total control and power period, pure and simple.…
They’re bullies, and they want to have their way at any cost. They do not understand something that my parents taught me a long time ago that no amount of newspaper coverage, lawsuits, running to state agencies will ever solve our problems. It is us who have to solve our problems ourselves, through open, honest, and respectful communication, and [the] sooner we learn this and engage in this [the] sooner we can accelerate the healing process.
…With 31 years in education, I have shed blood, sweat, and tears for the students, and I’m honored to do so. I have taught at high school, community college, and the university levels…I have served as president of the board of trustees in the Saddleback Valley Unified School District for five out of nine years of my service. I have served as chair for the school of physical sciences and technology at IVC for about ten years, and now serving as President of Irvine Valley College.
I’m a first generation immigrant who came to American shores some 31 years ago with eight dollars in my pocket with a dream with a strong belief in the American dream that you work hard and you will, you can achieve anything. But some people want to take that away. I have dedicated my life to service for the students, and I will continue to do so till the last breath in my body.
Let’s focus on serving the best interests of the students rather than our egos or our pocket books. Let’s get back to the business at hand and stop playing politics. Thank you.”
--Pocket books? Before Raghu became IVC’s interim president in 1997, he was, according to district records, the second highest paid faculty member in the entire district, making about $124,000 a year.
Sweet deals? For many years, Raghu received 80% reassigned time. I do believe that, at IVC, he was the all-time “reassigned time” champ.
He also received money as the “Tech Prep” coordinator, a program that, during his involvement, failed miserably. At the same time, he invariably did overload to the max.
On Sept. 28, 1999, Raghu was deposed in connection with my successful 1st Amendment lawsuit against the district. In the course of the deposition, Raghu acknowledged that, despite repeatedly claiming to have received threatening e-mail, voice mail, and letters, he had not kept or printed the alleged e-mails, he had not preserved the alleged voice mail, and he had not kept the alleged letters. He had ZIP.
Those threats? He just made ‘em up.
Most of Raghu’s prominent critics have never sought administrative positions. Meanwhile, from the very beginning of his career at IVC in ‘79, Raghu repeatedly sought administrative positions.
And when he did not secure them, he immediately played the race card.
For instance, when, in 1989, he failed to secure a deanship, which went to Clella Wood, he wrote a letter to Chancellor Sneed. He said: “I am the best qualified to do the job 100 times better than Clella Wood or any other dean in this position at IVC on any day of any week, month, or year…I, as a past candidate for the dean position, cannot help but honestly feel that [Clella Wood] was hired for the position not because she is knowledgeable and competent but because she is white.” As always, Raghu offered no support for his accusation. --CW
UPDATE (10/13/05): MATHUR WAS INDEED SERVED WITH PAPERS (RE THE BOARD'S BROWN ACT VIOLATION) ON THURSDAY, THE 13TH. NO WORD YET ON WHETHER HE POINTED AT ANYBODY. --CW
