.....Sorry to be so late with this, but, what with cat boxes and such, well, I’ve got my priorities......The meeting was supposed to start at 7:00, but the board seemed to be struggling with something intense in closed session, and so we waited. All indications are that the hot topic on the 3rd floor was ATEP.
.....Some time after 8:00, the trustees finally appeared.
.....No actions were announced, which surprised me.
.....Wagner’s invocation focused on the recent violence at Northern IU. During his board report, Williams, too, laid it on thick like he does: we’ve got to get off the dime and step up security on the campuses, he said.
.....Hysteria. Red meat tossage.
.....Wagner moved up the mysterious “Public Hearing” re ATEP. The Board is requesting “a waiver from the Board of Governors” of Education Codes. They made a resolution to that effect.
.....Naturally, these heroes of democracy made no effort whatsoever to explain what that all meant. Gosh, thanks. You’re doing a hell of a job. I considered raising my hand, but they had a cop up there, and I didn’t wanna get shot.
.....Then they turned to the night’s “discussion item”: technical education programs at the three campuses. Serban, Vurdien, and Justice did a good job with this, I suppose, given the “I’d rather be home watching Mythbusters” spirit that enveloped the building. Or just me. (Nope, not just me.) Rajen explained about rapid prototyping and some soldier’s skull. Briefly, we were riveted.
.....Sparks fly when trustees pull items from the consent calendar, but not so much this night. Mostly, Padberg (and Wagner) pulled items regarding expenses at ATEP.
.....One item concerned approval of “$226,00.00” (note the typo) for some consultants. Trustee FUENTES was very perturbed by this expense. He said:It is a pathetic thing that local government has come to a point where one agency of local government…are put in a position…[when] this level of money has to be spent for consultants…to advocate a position to another element of government…there is something wrong with our system…this is an example of it…example of the trough at which consults feed… why we have the growth of government even at the local level….”Somehow, one got the feeling that this discussion about consultants had everything to do with the discussion that had just occurred during closed session. The item passed. According to Fuentes, our “team” (i.e., Mathur and co.) needed the approval.
.....Later, during discussion of revised board policies, Padberg and others complained that, what with 15 or twenty policies passing under the noses per meeting, there was a danger of rubber-stamping. That was sorta interesting, I guess.
.....More later. Gotta go teach!
12 comments:
Any discussion of item 7.1 from the previous blog about hiring relatives? Was the report presented?
The report was acknowledged but not "presented"--nothing about it was said. No one commented. No gestures either. They merely acknowleged the report's existence and moved on. In part, this might have reflected trustees' manifest desire to go home.
Thanks for the info. Are these 'reports' public information? (excuse the lack or "rules" knowledge)
Yes, I'm sure that you can secure a copy of the report. But Williams' asking for the report in the first place was pure politics, intended to embarrass someone somewhere.
oh - good to know. So this report has been around for a while? hmm. Thanks for all the good info.
Go ahead - raise your hand - make my day! :>)
"Nepotism" has been a political football in the district for at least ten years, but there doesn't seem to be much of a there there.
Naturally, people who work together get to know one another, and nature sometimes takes its course. As long as there's no conflict of interest, it's no big deal, now is it? So it is important to distinguish between the "nepotism" that arises in that way--and in which there is no conflict--from the kind of nepotism in which relatives and spouses are imported and given jobs. Upon making such a distinction, I don't think we've got much of a nepotism problem at the old SOCCCD.
Williams and his crowd are just scoring cheap points over nothing.
Cronyism--well, that's a different story. Start with Fuentes and work outward.
When this board majority came into power nepotism was indeed rampant in SOCCCD. Ever since they have tried to completely eliminate the practice only to replace it with their own version of cronyism. Just another example of poli-(many) tics-(blood suckers) using public funds to achieve an agenda of ideology that serves no one but respective special interests.
Will John Williams take advantage of every tragedy to push for those cameras?
The man has no shame. He has probably already spent his consultant fee.
A better solution to the illegal alien student problem at UT Brownsville would be to build the border fence NORTH of the campus, ceding all of it to Mexico. The Mexican students would then be legal and not bear any stigma or loss of self esteem. Let Americans sneak into Mexico thru a hole we leave in the fence to get their education. Mexico should get a taste of their own medicine! That'll learn 'em!
Post a Comment