Four Days: "it is the duty of every citizen to think"

In October of 1860, the editor of the Atlantic, James Russell Lowell endorsed Abraham Lincoln for president. The Atlantic has taken this opportunity to reprint his endorsement.

Rebel Girl has pulled out some interesting passages below, but you can click "The Election in November" to read the rest—a facinating window in the the country we were then and the one we are now.

"...The true danger to popular forms of government begins when public opinion ceases because the people are incompetent or unwilling to think. In a democracy it is the duty of every citizen to think; but unless the thinking result in a definite opinion, and the opinion lead to considerate action, they are nothing.

...We are persuaded that the election of Mr. Lincoln will do more than anything else to appease the excitement of the country. He has proved both his ability and his integrity; he has had experience enough in public affairs to make him a statesman, and not enough to make him a politician. That he has not had more will be no objection to him in the eyes of those who have seen the administration of the experienced public functionary whose term of office is just drawing to a close. He represents a party who know that true policy is gradual in its advances, that it is conditional and not absolute, that it must deal with fact and not with sentiments, but who know also that it is wiser to stamp out evil in the spark than to wait till there is no help but in fighting fire with fire. They are the only conservative party, because they are the only one based on an enduring principle, the only one that is not willing to pawn tomorrow for the means to gamble with today. They have no hostility to the South, but a determined one to doctrines of whose ruinous tendency every day more and more convinces them.

The encroachments of Slavery upon our national policy have been like those of a glacier in a Swiss valley. Inch by inch, the huge dragon with his glittering scales and crests of ice coils itself onward, an anachronism of summer, the relic of a bygone world where such monsters swarmed. But it has its limit, the kindlier forces of Nature work against it, and the silent arrows of the sun are still, as of old, fatal to the frosty Python. Geology tells us that such enormous devastators once covered the face of the earth, but the benignant sunlight of heaven touched them, and they faded silently, leaving no trace but here and there the scratches of their talons, and the gnawed boulders scattered where they made their lair. We have entire faith in the benignant influence of Truth, the sunlight of the moral world, and believe that slavery, like other worn-out systems, will melt gradually before it. 'All the earth cries out upon Truth, and the heaven blesseth it; ill works shake and tremble at it, and with it is no unrighteous thing.'"

McCain & Palin's "assault on intellectual life"

From this morning’s Inside Higher Ed:

Will Khalidi Displace Ayers as McCain’s Favorite Prof?:

For a while, it seemed as if no professor could get more attention from the McCain campaign than William Ayers, the Weather Underground leader who became an education scholar at the University of Illinois at Chicago and whose brief associations with Sen. Barack Obama have been repeatedly discussed by Republicans this fall. But with the campaign winding down, it may be that Ayers has been replaced by Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies and director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University.

Prior to joining Columbia’s faculty, Khalidi taught at the University of Chicago — at the same time Obama taught there. Their children attended the same school. Khalidi helped raise some funds for Obama’s early campaigns. The two faculty colleagues and their wives apparently dined out together, and Obama spoke at a farewell party for Khalidi.

While Khalidi has no role at all in the Obama campaign, he was the focus of attention Tuesday and Wednesday from both Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin. McCain demanded that the Los Angeles Times release a video it obtained of Khalidi’s farewell party at the University of Chicago. McCain accused the Los Angeles paper of “intentionally suppressing” the videotape, even though it was a Times article that revealed its existence. (The newspaper said it obtained the tape on the condition that it not be released, and the newspaper is honoring its agreement.)

Then Wednesday, Palin focused on Khalidi in a speech in Ohio. “It seems that there is yet another radical professor from the neighborhood who spent a lot of time with Barack Obama going back several years,” Palin said. “This is important because his associate, Rashid Khalidi ... in addition to being a political ally of Barack Obama, he’s a former spokesperson for the Palestinian Liberation Organization.” A CNN “Fact Check” on the Palin speech declared it “misleading,” noting that Khalidi has had minimal contact with Obama for years, that the two men disagree strongly on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that Khalidi plans absolutely no role in the campaign, and there is considerable dispute over whether Khalidi ever worked for the PLO. (It is not disputed that Khalidi is a strong advocate for the Palestinian cause and a harsh critic of Israel.)
…
Some experts on academic freedom have been viewing the increasing use of professors by the GOP campaign with alarm. While anti-intellectualism is no stranger to American campaigns, the specific and repeated targeting of professors in such a prominent way is worrisome to them, and fallout is already taking place….
…
One irony of the attack on Khalidi is that McCain himself has ties to him. As The Huffington Post noted, McCain led a Republican institute that in the 1990s sent several grants to a Palestinian research center founded by Khalidi. “Of course, there’s seemingly nothing objectionable with McCain’s organization helping a Palestinian group conduct research in the West Bank or Gaza. But it does suggest that McCain could have some of his own explaining to do as he tries to make hay out of Khalidi’s ties to Obama,” the blog said.

Zachary Lockman, a professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies at New York University and a member of the Academic Freedom Committee of the Middle East Studies Association, also said he was troubled by the attacks. Khalidi is “a very distinguished scholar” who is both “passionate for the Palestinian cause” and “a moderate who talks to a wide range of people.” To imply that he is a terrorist, Lockman said, attacks and distorts his ideas.

“This reflects a certain kind of anti-intellectualism; rather than engaging with people and having a serious discussion, people are caricatured and reduced to labels and accused of being anti-American,” he said. “It’s dangerous. It’s an assault on scholarly life and intellectual life and rational discussion.”….

A Little Night Music

Hat tip to Crooks and Liars and Blonde Sense.

A little about Monday's board meeting: Mathur as village idiot

JUST A QUICK NOTE about my absence and about Monday's board meeting. I seem to have come down with food poisoning, or so the doctor thinks. It started late Monday, when I tried to do the ol' treadmill, but, after 15 minutes, it was no use. I thought about going to the board meeting, but there was no way.

Last night, I finally started improving, but I haven't even read my emails until just now, so I'm way out of the loop.

Friends have given me reports of Monday's meeting, however. One friend wrote that, oddly, the Faculty Hiring Priority List for both colleges had been pulled from the agenda, and no explanation had been given.

This meant that the matter could not even be discussed by the board.

But senate presidents can ask questions, can't they? At the part of the meeting (at the end) when the various governance groups give reports, IVC Senate President Wendy G asked why the priority lists had been pulled. Despite the late hour, Wendy's question sparked a great amount of debate and discussion.

Evidently, the unilateral pulling of the Faculty Hiring Priority Lists from the BOT agenda violates board policy 4011.1, which states that the Faculty Hiring Lists are to be submitted to the Board in October. (See board policies. And see excerpt below.)

According to my source, in the course of the discussion, it was revealed that Mathur had unilaterally pulled the item. Why? Because there were some "questions" from "some trustees." That's so typical. Mathur and his trustee partners—Fuentes, et al.—run the show by themselves and they freeze out the likes of Padberg. They're corrupt bastards, they are.

Padberg wanted specifics: who raised questions?

Controversy continued as different reports were given by the different groups. But faculty remained united. Mathur looked like the "village idiot," I'm told.

Naturally, this Mathur-caused delay will make it difficult getting things together by the time of the January job announcements.

Gotta go.

For October BOT meeting highlights, go to Board Meeting Highlights.

The relevant part of BP 4011.1 is section 11:

...By October of each academic year, following approval by the Chancellor, each College President will submit to the Board of Trustees a ranked list of recommended full-time faculty positions for the subsequent year, classified according to Item 2 above, and compiled by an internal process developed by the Academic Senate and the President, and approved by the President....

Video for the Oct. 27 meeting will eventually become available on the district website.

Six Days

In the new issue of The New York Review of Books, the editors gathered together the usual suspects to sound off about the imminent election.

Joan Didion is at her best. Here's the conclusion:

"We could argue over whether "intelligent design" should be taught in our schools as an alternative to evolution, and overlook the fact that the rankings of American schools have already dropped to twenty-first in the world in the teaching of science and twenty-fifth in the world in the teaching of math. We could argue over whether or not the McCain campaign had sufficiently vetted its candidate for vice-president, but take at face value the campaign's description of that vetting as "an exhaustive process" including a "seventy-question survey." Most people in those countries where they still teach math and science would not consider seventy questions a particularly taxing assignment, but we could forget this. Amnesia was our preferred state. In what had become our national coma we could forget about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch and AIG and Washington Mutual and the 81,000 jobs a month and the fact that the national debt had been approaching $10.6 trillion even before Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke mentioned the imperative need to spend, which is to say to borrow, $700 billion for securities backed by bad mortgages, a maneuver likely to raise the debt another trillion dollars. ("We need this to be clean and quick," Paulson told ABC.)

We could forget the 70 percent of American eighth graders who do not now and never will read at eighth-grade levels, meaning they will never qualify to hold one of those jobs we no longer have. We could forget that we ourselves induced the coma, by indulging the government in its fantasy of absolute power, wielded absolutely. So general is this fantasy by now that we approach this election with no clear idea where bottom is: what damage has been done, what alliances have been formed and broken, what concealed reefs lie ahead. Whoever we elect president is about to find some of that out."

To read the rest (you really should), click here.

Sucker

It's Red Ribbon Week here in public education land. This means collecting pennies (pennies!) for in-class drug awareness education, wearing red ribbons (or, in the case of our son's school, a red, white and blue rubber bracelets) and, these red suckers, three of which made it home yesterday. Our first-grader confessed that had already eaten two at school. Two!

If you look carefully, you can see that the red sucker is imprinted with the phrase: RESPECT YOURSELF - DON'T DO DRUGS.

Our son's name (misspelled) is written on a label that is attached to the lollipop stick.

Rebel Girl is all for responsible age-appropriate education about drug use, addiction, etc. After all, she can count the addicts in her own immediate family on two hands - two!

But this ain't it. And don't get Rebel Girl started on the sugar-junk food angle. Health education? Suck on this, kid.

What started in 1988 with Nancy's Reagan's Just Say No campaign has mushroomed in an industry where our children are not taught as much as they are bought and sold - yes, just google "red ribbon week products" and see what you can buy to celebrate this week: plush toys! frisbees! tattoos! yo-yos! cell phone charms! Lip service is paid but the real causes and the real solutions, well. Our children deserve more, better.

Meanwhile, in nearby Tijuana, children go to school only to find the real cost of the drug war bleeding in the street. Over 150 people have been killed in the last month. 150! Students arrive at school walking past decapitated bodies. The Los Angeles Times covered this recently in For Tijuana children, drug war gore is part of their school day. Click on the title and read it and weep - or better yet, get angry. These children deserve better, more.

Yes, Rebel Girl is a bit all over the place today. Forgive her. It's the sugar and platitudes on one side of the border, the blood on the other, children in the middle. Something has to give somewhere.

She sure asks for a lot, doesn't she?

But as the line in the Leonard Cohen song goes, "Why not ask for more?"

Indeed.

Tom Fuentes' racist brilliance, etc.

I’ve been busy, so I’ve missed some nasty little stories. Here are three from Friday:

• TOM FUENTES' "RACIST BRILLIANCE." I came across this posting by OC Weekly’s Gustavo Arellano (OC GOP GOES BACK TO ITS MEXICAN-BASHING ROOTS IN FULLERTON CITY COUNCIL RACE):

In my latest book, I devote a chapter to the many sins of the Orange County Republican Party but also hinted that they were finally evolving from the slimeball campaigns of the past when it came to scoring easy points off of demonizing Mexicans. Specifically, I pointed to the 2006 Tan Nguyen affair, where GOP chair Scott Baugh fully repudiated Nguyen and only the farthest extremes of party activists (i.e., the CCIR [California Coalition for Immigration Reform] crowd) stood by their Tan.

So much for that goodwill. As noted by OC Blog, the OC GOP recently mailed out a hit piece on Fullerton City Council hopeful Karen Haluza, whose day job is planning manager for SanTana. Over pictures of apartment slums and the proposed One Broadway Plaza Freudian tower are these ominous words: "Stop Urban Planner Karen Haluza from Turning Fullerton Into Another Santa Ana!" (underlined in the original). If you still don't get it, the flier retells the same point on the other side: Will Karen Haluza Turn Fullerton into Another Santa Ana?"

The OC GOP plays its hand against Haluza with a racist brilliance not seen since the days of Tom Fuentes and his poll guards….

—An' don't forget: Tom was Tan Nguyen's chief advisor!

• SCAMMING TIPS. I may as well mention Jubal’s recent post on Red County/OC Blog (Greed And Sloth At Orange Coast College) about Orange Coast College political science instructor Patrick Coaty and the Coast Community College District trustee Armando Ruiz:

…[T]he student newspaper at Orange Coast College uncovered a real case of [greed] in the august halls of academia (H/T to R. Scott Moxley of OC Weekly).

The scam was perpetrated by OCC Associate Political Science Professor Patrick Coaty. Here's how it worked:

Coaty required the 500-some he has each semester to buy the textbooks he wrote, which together cost $162.59.

Then, he required his students to rip out the homework pages in the books, which rendered them worthless for re-sale to the college bookstore, and forced Coaty's next crop of students to shell out for Coaty's books.

Nice. Sort of a robber-baron-as-college-professor.

A student raised a ruckus, and now that attention was drawn to his scam, Coaty "revised" his book policy.

What ought to be revised is his employment at Orange Coast College—as in, fire him. The again, OCC is part of the Coast Community College District, of which the infamous Armando Ruiz is a Trustee. Ruiz would probably rather get some scamming tips from Coaty, rather than fire him.

I found this Ratemyprofessors.com site. It's interesting to read the student comments about Coaty. According to his students, Coaty is an easy "A," although they don't like the fact that her never returns their homework, so it's a little tough to know if you are learning the material. Who wants to wager Coaty never actually grades it?

—Do you suppose Tom will mention Coaty's scam during tomorrow night's discussion of high textbook costs? I'm bettin' that somebody will.

• OBAMA AIN'T A REAL AMERICAN, SAY STUPID PEOPLE IN OC. On Friday, the OC Reg's Martin Wisckol wrote about another daffy GOP rumor about Barack Obama (O.C. suspicions over Obama's citizenship continue):

Even some supporters of John McCain are dismayed with fellow Orange County Republicans who think Barack Obama was born outside of the U.S. and does not meet the requirements to be president.

An OC Political Pulse poll found that a third of responding Republicans thought Obama was born outside of the 50 United States....

Twenty-six miles across the sea...

And now, for a mid-semester, pre-election break: assorted pics from a weekend on Santa Catalina Island.

Ronnie gets a trustee room; district gets more lawyers; students get cheaper books?

There’s a meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees Monday night. You can download the entire agenda, a pdf file, at the district website. Looks like the board might make some decisions re ATEP in closed session. Hard to say. The “Janez Group” is listed as a participant in negotiations.

As you know, the board has scheduled a special ATEP meeting for Nov. 3. The open session is set to start at 7:00. Up first: board resolutions concerning the “professors of the year.” Scintillatin'! October's discussion item is “strategies” for “enrollment management” for the three campuses. It'll be a total snoozefest. The IVC student government budget is coming back for a second review. Things could get exciting for student government tomorrow, what with this and the trustees’ interest in lowering book prices (student government gets its money from booksales). The Ronald Reagan Board of Trustees Room

Item 6.3 is approval naming the Health Sciences Building, Room 145, as the Ronald Reagan Board of Trustees Room.  The “status” of this item is (awkwardly) described as follows: Ronald Reagan, 40th President of the United States of America, who dedicated Saddleback College forty years ago, and in recognizing that no greater national leader has ever had a role in the history of our community college district, the Chancellor was authorized by the Board of Trustees to send a letter to Mrs. Ronald Reagan, seeking her permission in dedicating the Health Sciences and District Services Building, Room 145, Saddleback College to the memory of her husband, President Ronald Reagan, and naming the room the Ronald Reagan Board of Trustees Room. Mrs. Reagan responded to the letter graciously giving her permission to allow Room 145 to carry President Ronald Reagan's name. Yeah. Ronald Reagan is the hero who gave us deregulation. That's turned out swell. It might be too soon to tell how great a role Ronnie has had in our history. Oddly enough, the next item is revision of various board policies, including BP-1500, Naming of College Facilities. Near as I can tell, the only changes to this policy being proposed are the addition of ATEP as among the district’s campuses and the addition of this line: “The District reserves the right to change the name of college facilities at any time.”

LAWYERING UP RE INVOCATIONS:

Item 6.9 is curious: “Approve retainer agreement for legal counsel to assist in matters involving invocation at Board meetings and College/District functions.” The full item is the following: 

 BACKGROUND

Our District was founded in 1967. For every year except one in the ensuing more than 40 years, the Board has opened its meetings with invocations. Trustees have offered these invocations and used the opportunity to do so for traditional prayers, moments of silence, and words of inspiration. STATUS

The legal propriety of continued invocations has been challenged by some faculty members. The District has consulted with several legal counsels in this regard and believes that we need to employ a legal counsel to further advise us in this matter on a continuing basis. It is recommended that the Board of Trustees employ John Eastman as our legal counsel for the aforementioned purpose. Mr. Eastman currently serves as the Dean of Law School at Chapman University.

TEXTBOOK COST SHOWDOWN?

Among reports are 7.1, “Information on plans for reducing textbook costs for Saddleback College and lrvine Valley College students.” I predict that some trustees will be displeased by this report. They’ll press for more aggressive action to lower textbook costs to students. And they’d be right. Bramucci, Plano, and Telson will be presenting a report on the colleges’ “strategic plans” for reducing textbook costs. Saddleback College’s “recommendations for the future” are the following: 1. The Saddleback College ASG and Foundation will be asked to consider contributing anually to the "Emergenw Book Loan Program," thus building reserves in the Library and accounting for edition changes.

2. The Saddleback College Bookstore is instituting a Book Rental Program, to be in place no later than the Fall of 2009. If feasible, program expansion should be supported as recommended by the Bookstore Committee.

3. Faculty will commit, whenever possible, to use any edition for as long as pedagogically possible.

4. Reminders of the importance of timely book adoptions will be sent to faculty more often. In addition, department chairs will be encouraged to commit to enforcing departmental early adoption policies.

5. Course readings should be encouraged wherever pedagogically possible.

6. Within five years, a CSU-led effort called the "Digital Marketplace," which will offer online resources such as an open-source digital library, should be available. For some reason, IVC’s report seems to highlight a document from student government.  I doubt that the board will be impressed by these reports. In the past, some trustees have seized upon the circumstance that bookstore textbook prices are artificially raised to fund student government (I think the figure is 10%; I could be wrong).  THE 50% LAW: Item 7.2 is a report regarding 50% Law compliance. It’s “status” is explained as follows: There has been no year when the District has been out of compliance with the 50% Law. The calculation for fiscal vear 2006-2007 was 50.03% and the calculation for this past fiscal year, 2007-2008, is 51.65%. No consultant has ever been hired to assist with compliance for the 50% Law. As required by the State Chancellor's Office the District’s independent auditing firm of Vicenti, Lloyd, and Stutzman examines and verifies the details of the calculation as part of the annual financial audit.

As you know, the Chancellor ignored this law for several years, a fact that was detected about a year ago. It soon became clear that radical steps would be necessary to increase "instructional" spending. Thus the massive and hurried hiring of 38 faculty last Spring.

The battle over Proposition 8

Tiger Ann, a celebrity and a fierce opponent of Proposition 8, has agreed to appear in today's blog as, um, eye candy. I asked her if she is gay and she just gave me the stink eye. Then she stretched.

Prop. 8 opponents take lead in money race

A tsunami of new money has poured into the campaign to defeat Proposition 8, as Hollywood celebrities, deep-pocketed donors and thousands of people from across the country wrote checks to block the proposed ban on same-sex marriage in California….


Proposition 8 proponents and foes raise $60 million—Contributors on both sides are motivated by personal beliefs

Sara Havranek quit working five years ago after the birth of her first child. Since then, she said, she and her husband have had to be frugal. "Every cent we spend is carefully considered." ¶ But the Aliso Viejo couple consider Proposition 8 so important that they have donated $1,100 to support the initiative to ban same-sex marriage. ¶ "Our faith is completely centered around the family. We believe the family is a divine institution," Havranek said to explain the contribution. ¶ Larry Maiman feels just as strongly that Proposition 8 is wrong for California. ¶ "I'm a gay man who has been in a relationship for 19 years who got married [six] weeks ago," he said, "and we'd like to stay married."….


Mormon church pulls plug on pro-Prop. 8 calls from Utah:

The Mormon church, whose members have emerged as the leading backers of a ballot measure to end same-sex marriage in California, is scaling back its Utah campaign operation but will continue to support the initiative. ¶ Church members will no longer be making phone calls from Utah to California voters, Kim Farah, a spokeswoman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said in a prepared statement Friday. ¶ At the request of the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign, church members in Utah had been enlisted to make calls on behalf of the measure. ¶ "However, the church has since determined that such phone calls are best handled by those who are registered California voters," Farah said. … ¶ The Courage Campaign, a liberal advocacy group, plans to deliver a petition to a Mormon church in Los Angeles next week demanding the church stop funding the Yes on 8 campaign….

Churches take sides over gay-marriage ban:

The Rev. Rick Mixon, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Palo Alto, considers himself an evangelical, but opposes a ban on same-sex marriage. Speaking of his fellow evangelicals, Mixon said: "It baffles me that they come down on the wrong side of this issue." ¶ San Jose evangelical lay leader Larry Pegram has a very different take on that "watershed issue." He declares that "pastors all around the valley are preaching on this issue, that the Biblical truth comes down on marriage as being between a man and a woman." ¶ Catholic, Mormon and evangelical leaders such as Pegram have been influential supporters of efforts to ban gay marriage in California. But Mixon is among a smaller group of clergy, including two dozen ministers and rabbis who spoke recently against Proposition 8 for the Council of Churches-Santa Clara County, which publicly supports same-sex unions….

PLUS!

TIGER ANN says, "Vote YES on Proposition 2!"

The OC: last refuge of scoundrels

1. MORE ON ARMANDO "BOOTS" RUIZ

Yesterday, the Reg’s Frank Mickadeit once again spanked Armando Ruiz, who is known for being Raghu Mathur’s one-time monkey boy, an incompetent Coast Community College District trustee, a Junketeer extraordinaire (like our own John Williams!), and an all around asshole from hell. Here's what the Mick had to say:

'Jamming Armando?' No problem:

Serial public-perk abuser and Coast Community College District Board candidate Armando Ruiz finally defended his conduct Thursday afternoon. … Give Ruiz … credit for showing up. Credit should end right about there, though. I wandered into the Orange Coast College Student Center shortly after 1 p.m. for a candidates forum and found Ruiz at the far right end of a dais populated by the other candidates – including the two who are on the ballot opposing him in Area 3, Lorraine Prinsky and Don Apodaca.

During his six-minute opening statement, Apodaca … swung his support to Prinsky and said he wasn't going to campaign. He left the room. Ruiz got up and asked the moderator archly, "Am I going to have 12 minutes then?" With a nod toward Prinsky, he added, "I just ask because his speech was for her." Whiner!

"A lot of people are saying things about me that are unfair and untrue," he continued. He said he was part of a reform board when he took office in 1983….

Great, as Prinsky noted later, but what have you done for us lately? Besides spend tens of thousands of dollars on cross-country junkets, keep the district's accreditation problem under the radar and, most egregiously, engineer a phony double retirement so he can soak the taxpayers for about $50,000 a year more than he deserves and continue to sit on the college board.

On Thursday, Ruiz's total defense for his 2004 retirement scheme … was this: "It was a retirement I have and I took advantage of it."

We've waited four years for him to utter that? Take advantage of us, is more like it.

As for the excessive travel – he's heading off to Manhattan for another junket next week – Ruiz noted that all travel is approved by the board majority.

True. However: Other trustees travel about half what Ruiz does. And when they do get travel approved, they don't always follow through with the trip, especially in light of one of the worst budget crises in memory and with scores of classes potentially being cut. Jerry Patterson canceled his trip to the New York conference.

On the accreditation issue, Ruiz denied that two fellow trustees were kept out of the loop, as they have charged. A copy of the warning letter was put in their mailboxes and they were told to check them. "They didn't read their mail," Ruiz asserted.

And then sounding like a whiny NBA center, he invoked the third person: "This is another way of jamming Armando."

Patterson denied he was notified. The first he heard about it, he said, was at a meeting a month after the warning was issued – and only then from a teacher.

Amazingly, Prinsky charged, the issue of accreditation was not brought up by the board until Oct. 1 – at 11:45 p.m., when it could be conveniently buried.

As for the accreditation problems themselves, Ruiz blamed the faculty for not embracing a policy of laying out specific learning objectives for every course.

This was but one of several issues for which the Western Association of Schools and Colleges cited the district, but it was the only one Ruiz addressed. One of the others, significantly, is that the lines of authority between the district and colleges are not clear.

Which brings up Ruiz's excuse about how it came to pass — without public discussion by the board – that scores of courses could be canceled this spring. Those decisions are left to the three individual colleges, Ruiz said. "I'm not the expert to say, 'You should cut this,' " he said.

Wait a minute. This is a crisis. You have been on the board 25 freaking years! In your real job, you worked in college counseling and administration. You're not the expert?

It's the faculty's fault. It's other trustees' fault. It's somebody else's job. You're picking on me.

Maybe come Nov. 4, it will be somebody else's job.

2. NOT NOTIFYING THE PRESS?

A local reporter has written us about SOCCCD public information. Evidently, he notified the district in writing that he wanted to receive notices of special SOCCCD meetings, but this yielded an email response, saying that there is no system in place for providing such notices. Our reporter friend insists that, by law, districts are required to notify every general circulation newspaper that has requested notification at least 24 hours in advance. This includes any emergency meetings, he adds.

3. TO THE MOON, ARIES!

Bob Park reports that India has launched its first spacecraft to the moon. According to Bob, “Astrologers among the astronomers in the Indian Space Research Organization declared 22 Oct 08 to be an auspicious day for the launch….” Oh good.

4. ASSHOLES ON A TEAR

I’ve been told that Chancellor Mathur is on another one of his tears, getting in underlings’ faces, causing tears, the gnashing of teeth, and much irregularity.

Meanwhile, his pal and patron Tom Fuentes is sending robocalls to South County residents, taking credit for balanced budgets, high transfer rates, good weather, and I don’t know what else.

He's a lyin' sack o' shit. You can quote me.

5. MY NIGHTMARE

I had a nightmare last night: in November, the whole country will swing to the left, ridding itself of numerous Republicans.

The nightmare? Everyone everywhere rids themselves of Neanderthals, except for us in South Orange County.

The last refuge of scoundrels.

Pictured left: my dad's latest clay creation. A closeup. Above: El Toro Rd., near Cook's. Live Oak Canyon Rd., as seen from my Chrysler 300.

Big trouble for the Accreds re SLOs

Last night, someone sent me an email, dated Oct. 13, from Marty Hittleman, the President of the California Federation of Teachers, to Barbara Beno, who heads the Accrediting Commission (ACCJC). Evidently, the CFT is taking on the Accreds over its mandate that SLOs be incorporated in course outlines, a clear violation of Title 5.

Will our own union (CTA) join the CFT? Here's the email, edited for length:

Re: Amendment of ACCJC Standards III.A.1.c. and II.A.6.

Dear President Beno, Chair Gaines, and Commissioners of the ACCJC:

...One of the most important rights faculty have is to negotiate with their employer over evaluation procedures, criteria and standards. … In addition, pursuant to the EERA, academic freedom policies are negotiated at community colleges.

In recent years, considerable controversy has existed within the community colleges over the issue of Student Learning Outcomes or SLOs. It is an understatement to say that many within the college community, faculty and administrators alike, feel the ACCJC has gone too far in its demands regarding SLOs, especially when they intrude on negotiable evaluation criteria and violate principles of academic freedom.

Not long ago, the CFT invited comment from its faculty unions about SLOs, and their impact on their local colleges. Of particular concern to CFT is the propensity with which accreditation teams from the ACCJC have indicated to the colleges that they should “develop and implement policies and procedures to incorporate student learning outcomes into evaluation of those with direct responsibility for student learning.” This directive is based on ACCJC Accreditation Standard III.A.1.c., which states,

“Faculty and others directly responsible for student programs toward achieving stated student learning outcomes have, as a component of their evaluation, effectiveness in producing those student learning outcomes.” (ACCJC Accreditation Standard III.A.1.c.)

Another standard has been used by accreditation teams to justify changes in faculty work such as syllabi….

This standard, which has interfered in faculty’s academic freedom rights, states:

“The institution assures that students and prospective students receive clear and accurate information ... In every class section students receive a course syllabus that specifies learning objectives consistent with those in the institution’s officially approved course outline.” (ACCJC Accreditation Standard II.A.6.)

We believe both of these standards, as written and as applied, intrude on matters left to collective bargaining by the Legislature. For a time, we recognized that the ACCJC’s inclusion of these standards might have been considered to be mandated by the regulations and approach of the U.S. Department of Education.

Now, however, with the recently re-enacted Higher Education Act, the Federal mandate for the SLO component has been eliminated for community colleges and other institutions of higher education. I’m sure you are aware that Congress passed, and the President signed, legislation amending 20 U.S.C. 1099 (b), to provide that the Secretary of Education may not “establish any criteria that specifies, defines, or prescribes the standards that accrediting agencies or associations shall use to assess any institution’s success with respect to student achievement.” [See Higher Education Act, S. 1642 (110th Congress, 1st Session, at p. 380)]

Given this amendment, it is CFT’s position that the ACCJC has no statutory mandate which prescribes inclusion of the above-referenced standards dealing with faculty evaluations, and syllabi.
...
Accordingly, the CFT wishes to inquire as to what actions ACCJC intends to take to conform its regulations to the requirements of State law, and to recognize that the adoption of any local provisions which include faculty effectiveness in producing student learning outcomes, should be entirely a matter of collective bargaining negotiations. And, similarly, that the ACCJC cannot mandate inclusion of information in syllabi which faculty, by reason of academic freedom and tradition, are entitled to determine using their own best academic judgment, or through the negotiations process. Of course, in negotiations over evaluation, the law also provides that faculty organizations shall consult with local academic senates before negotiating over these matters.

While ACCJC is free to encourage colleges and their faculty organizations to negotiate over this topic, it is not free to mandate or coerce the adoption of such standards by sanctioning colleges which do not adopt standards that ACCJC would prefer in these areas. Given its state function, ACCJC must respect the negotiations process mandated by state law, and academic freedom rights adopted by contract or policy.

California’s public community colleges are an extraordinary public resource, and the Legislature has seen fit to decree that when it comes to faculty evaluation, that process shall be subject to collective bargaining. With the adoption of the landmark bill A.B. 1725 almost 20 years ago, the Legislature came down squarely on the side of faculty determining, with their employers, the method and content of their evaluations. This system has worked exceptionally well for almost 35 years.

Given the change in Federal law, the CFT calls upon ACCJC to take prompt and appropriate action to amend its standards to respect the boundaries established by the Legislature and not purport to regulate the methods by which faculty are evaluated or determine their course work such as syllabi.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Marty Hittelman, President, CFT

Tom Fuentes: morality on holiday

You've gotta hand it to these "moral" right-wing Republicans. Most of the time, you can find 'em praying and moralizing and condemning the unrighteous.

—Yeah but, when election time rolls around, for this dark crew, morality goes totally on holiday. 

Consider Mr. Tom Fuentes' campaign for reelection as trustee on the SOCCCD Board of Trustees. He calls his opponent, Bob Bliss, a liberal unionist. In fact, Bliss is a conservative Republican. 

Fuentes takes credit for our colleges' high transfer rates (of students to 4-year institutions). In fact, he has absolutely nothing to do with that achievement, which, in truth, is accomplished by the very people he routinely contemns and demonizes (those lazy faculty featherbedders, et al.).

Tom bases his claim to being a frugal "friend to the taxpayer" on the fact that the SOCCCD has not pursued bonds. But he neglects to mention that our district is swimming in taxpayer dough thanks to its unusual "basic aid" funding, which obviates bonds.

I asked an expert to explain how much tax money this district spends, thanks to its "basic aid" gravy train. "A total shitload," he said.

Tom crows about our "balanced budget," but he neglects to point out that he doggedly supports a hated Chancellor who, for years, has driven our district ever closer to disastrous noncompliance with the "50% Law," which requires that most expenditures be devoted to instruction, not buildings and administrator salaries.

Plus Tom doesn't mention some important truths--e.g., that he shares much of the responsibility for our two colleges' coming as close as they've ever come to losing their accreditation.

Thanks, Tom, for the trustee micromanagement and the plague of despair!

Check out the Tomster's latest mailer (see graphics). 

Then, like Tom, contemplate morality and virtue and piety. Make sure your eyes are rollin' into the back of your head.

And think of the Lord thinking about Tom thinking about his campaign. 

I do hope there is a Lord, just so Tom can finally meet him. I wanna be there for that.

VP: "In charge of the U.S. Senate"?

Wrong again.
Palin does, however, look nifty in red.

About this time last year

Wasilla: It's Worse Than You Thought

Just pay attention to the interview with the current mayor.

The latest on "public-pension hog" Armando Ruiz

Somehow, I managed to miss Frank Mickadeit’s latest spankage (yesterday) of former Mathurian Armando Ruiz (currently, Coast CC trustee and uber-junketeer):

'Coach' drops out, gives anti-Ruiz effort a boost:

The potential spoiler in the Coast Community College board race involving public-pension hog Armando Ruiz decided over the weekend to abandon his own humble ambitions for the greater good. Don "Coach" Apodaca told me that based on my recent columns, he's ending his campaign and supporting Ruiz's main challenger, Lorraine Prinsky.

Before we measure Prinsky's car for her trustee parking space, however, let's consider the mitigating factors to this most welcome development. My impressive journalism was about two months late. Apodaca would have had to drop his candidacy sometime in August to have his name removed from the ballot.

That means he's still going to draw some votes. But that doesn't mean Apodaca's decision on Saturday can't make a difference. Perhaps the difference. First, a little background:

Ruiz is the longtime part-time trustee in Area 3 of the college district, which takes in the northwest corner of the county. For years, he was also a full-time administrator in the South County Community College District. As a trustee, he got a small monthly stipend.

Shortly before the 2004 election, he engineered a smarmy deal in which he got to "retire" from the Coast district's board as if that job had been a full-time job paying exactly what he made at his real South County job. Then he ran for election to the Coast district board anyway. So he gets a pension upward of $108,000 a year, instead of what he really worked for—which might be a little more than half that—and he still gets to sit on the Coast board. Your tax dollars at work.
…
These events were known to the district faculty and a few others, including me, and Ruiz did have his reputation sullied. For the 2008 election, the faculty got behind Prinsky, a Ph.D., and a tenured sociology professor at Cal State Fullerton.


But fortune again smiled on the rapscallion Ruiz: Out of nowhere last summer emerged a third candidate: Apodaca, an optometrist and part-time high school wrestling coach.

He had the backing of some in the coaching community, but he was a very dark horse. He didn't even pay for a ballot statement. Nonetheless, conventional political wisdom holds that entry of a minor third candidate would benefit Ruiz by splitting whatever anti-incumbent bloc was out there. I even heard speculation that Ruiz had asked Apodaca to run.

Not so, Apodaca told me. In fact, he had never met Ruiz and had no idea about his double-dipping. (Ruiz has never returned one of my calls for comment.)

In the days after my columns ran, Apodaca considered his options. He sent me a message saying he was considering dropping out but, he said, "I need to be assured it will not be a meaningless gesture."

He talked to independent sources and he looked into Prinsky's background. Friday night, he and his campaign manager, David Finch, met with Prinsky and her husband at the Starbucks at Goldenwest and Delaware in H.B. What was going to be a 15-minute chat stretched into a two-hour conversation.

Apodaca said it confirmed a few things: One, as he e-mailed me Sunday: that Prinsky is "an honest, hardworking, dedicated lady who does have the temperament and background to straighten out this mess and return our local colleges to the level they once were as the crown jewels of our local communities."

And two, as he said in an interview Saturday night: Prinsky agreed she would look after the issues that made him want to run, chiefly, his desire that community colleges "use athletics as a way to draw in kids who are at risk."

(Had the money spent on Ruiz's nationwide junketing over the years been sent to Golden West and Orange Coast colleges, you'd have been able to spare a sports program or two.)

So Apodaca says he will do what he can to help Prinsky. What that is and how Prinsky hopes to capitalize I will update you on in coming days. But this morning, let's muse for a moment about the civic mindedness of Coach Apodaca and hope he continues to help our youth.

Above graphic from New York Times

McCain's stupid people now killing bear cubs

From this morning's LA Times:

• Sarah Palin's college years left no lasting impression:

What can we learn about our political stars from impressions they made in college?

Sen. John McCain is remembered as a passionate contrarian who won the hearts of his classmates at the Naval Academy. Sen. Barack Obama, who attended Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School, is remembered as a daunting scholar and calming influence. Sen. Joe Biden, who had a brush with plagiarism at Syracuse University College of Law, is remembered fondly by professors who found him charming.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, however, is barely remembered at all….

• From CSUF’s Daily Titan, yesterday:

Congressman criticizes Powell's endorsement: Ed Royce meets CSUF students to discuss his backing of Sarah Palin as VP pick:

Congressman Ed Royce (R–Fullerton) said Colin Powell "did not think it through" when he endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president.

Royce met with a small group of Cal State Fullerton students and professors in the Titan Student Union Monday. In addition to his own political career, Royce talked about his role in advising Sen. John McCain to pick Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate....

In this morning’s Inside Higher Ed:

• [MCCAIN'S STUPID PEOPLE ARE KILLING BEAR CUBS.] Authorities are investigating a bizarre incident in which a 75-pound bear cub was shot and left at the campus of Western Carolina University, draped in Obama campaign posters, The Asheville Citizen-Times reported. University officials said that they couldn’t determine the motive for the incident, but were troubled by it.

• [CRACKER JACK DEGREE.] Education doctorates are becoming a popular topic for review. On Monday, the American Educational Research Association and the National Academy of Education announced a joint review of education research doctoral programs. Although more than 1,800 such doctorates are awarded each year, a joint announcement by the two groups said that there has never been a comprehensive review of these programs. Last year, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching announced a three-year project to re-invigorate Ed.D. programs.

• From this morning's New York Times:

Fresh face on cable, Sharp rise in ratings:

Rachel Maddow, a woman who does not own a television set, has done something that is virtually unheard of: she has doubled the audience for a cable news channel’s 9 p.m. hour in a matter of days....

Education Alliance trustees showing their true colors at CUSD

As you know, several of our trustees (on the SOCCCD board) are associated with Tustin’s right-wing Education Alliance, a “back to basics” organization that is hostile to unions.

SOCCCD board president Don Wagner is on EA’s board.

Not long ago, EA helped seat the five-member “board majority” that now runs the Capistrano Unified School District. These new board members say they stand for openness and transparency and decency.

Sure they do.

Another open-meeting law violation for Capistrano trustees? (Today)

Capistrano Unified trustees tonight will consider admitting to a "highly technical" violation of the state's Brown Act open-meeting law in September.....

In a legal complaint filed last month, the district's teachers union said the school board had created an illegal quorum when two "reform" trustees, board President Ellen Addonizio and Sue Palazzo, attended the school board's Sept. 16 facilities subcommittee meeting as audience members.
…
The Capistrano Unified School District has been blasted four times in the past year by the Orange County District Attorney's Office for its repeated violations of the Brown Act, a law designed to offer transparency in meetings involving elected officials.

The five "reform" trustees on the school board, including Addonizio and Palazzo, campaigned on the premise of restoring transparency and accountability to the board's activities, including stopping the Brown Act violations....

Capistrano district at crossroads with Nov. 4 school board election (Saturday)

November's election was supposed to end three years of political bloodletting in the Capistrano Unified School District, an unequivocal validation of a parent-driven "reform" movement that has replaced five of seven trustees tainted by scandals and criminal complaints.

Instead it is heating up into a bitter political fight as two former allies–the "reform"-minded parents group and the teachers union–go to war over whether the five replacement trustees are as committed to overhauls as they promised or whether they, too, are tainted by their actions and associations.
…
Capistrano Unified's "reform" movement was started in 2005 by a group of parents weary of what they viewed as poor planning and fiscal mismanagement by district administrators and the school board.
…
Galvanized and popularly received, the CUSD Recall Committee, as it became known, replaced three trustees in November 2006 with candidates Ellen Addonizio, Anna Bryson and Larry Christensen and two more in a June 2008 recall with Ken Maddox and Sue Palazzo.

Collectively, the "reform" trustees secured a five-person majority.

But division had already been brewing. Shortly after the November 2006 election, the Recall Committee lost the support of a strong ally–the financially influential, 2,400-member teachers union. The union had endorsed Addonizio and Christensen and spent $85,394 on their campaigns, but later learned they had been funded in part by the anti-union Education Alliance, based in Tustin.

The self-described "back-to-basics" group opposes health clinics and bilingual education in schools, advocates for school voucher programs, and believes teachers unions wield too much power and influence.

The teachers union has slammed the Education Alliance as a right-wing, special-interest group intent on buying influence in the district through the Recall Committee. Union leaders say they feel betrayed and have expressed grave doubts about the "reform" trustees' leadership.
…
The teachers union doesn't deny the new majority's accomplishments, but says their overall track record has been, at best, "disappointing"–including a purported open-meeting law violation in August, unannounced entry into the superintendent's private office on a day when district offices were closed, and a growing perception the trustees aren't as transparent as promised....

SCHOOL BOARD AWARDED...FOR VIOLATING THE LAW!:

Posted by Daffodil J. Altan (OC Weekly)
October 20


The Capistrano Unified School Board was honored with a coveted "Darkness Award" by the California First Amendment Coalition this past weekend. Winners who earn the award usually, among other things, lie, thwart freedom of speech and subvert the public's right to know. The Capo board had it nailed in at least two of those categories and the First Amendment Coalition agreed, citing their continued inability to abide by open meeting laws. Violations were documented in the not-so-shining report issued by the DA's office in 2007, where egregious violations of the state's open meeting laws were detailed, including a handful of secret meetings used to discuss everything from building contracts to how to manage the fussy press and public opinion.

The DA issued another report last month finding more violations committed earlier this year, when the board debated the superintendent's raise in private session (and where recalled, former board member Marlene Draper said, on tape, "It's not about them..." referring to constituents who might object to the raise). No word on whether any of the recalled former board members, or perhaps indicted former Superintendent James Fleming, were on hand to receive the award.

Congratulations are in order, all around.

SEE ALSO:

• Board president Ellen Addonizio wants Spencer Covert's advice
• Capistrano trustees found looking through superintendent's desk
• New Capo trustees pledge openness
• School elections show incumbents' power (1998)

Pictured: Tiger-Ann, Cat

Tustin vs. the SOCCCD: "a significantly different project"

For many years now, the district—i.e., Chancellor Raghu Mathur—has pursued a grand plan for ATEP, the proposed technological education/business complex to be built upon 68 acres of the former Marine helicopter station in Tustin.

They do this alone. As you know, the Chancellor, with the support of the board of trustees, has pursued development of ATEP without consulting faculty, despite the key role that faculty must ultimately have (by law) in developing programs and courses for the campus. In fact, the whole ATEP project has proceeded pretty much behind closed doors, hidden from the public. Nobody really knows what’s going on.

We’ve long heard rumors that tensions persist between the City of Tustin and the district, which is easy to imagine, given the Chancellor's notorious penchant for deviousness and connivery. If the rumors are true, that can’t be good, for the district must satisfy the city before it can proceed with big plans for the property. The deadline for "satisfaction" is rapidly approaching.

* * * *

Last Thursday, Dissent the Blog observed that a “notice of public” hearing for November 3 had been posted. The meeting (of the board) concerns the “Long Range” plans for ATEP. It appears that the board will be meeting to decide whether to approve or disapprove of this plan.

At the district’s website, one finds a link to the announcement of the special Nov. 3 meeting. Further, one finds a link to documents concerning the ATEP “long range academic plan,” or LRP. The latter, in turn, provides various pdf documents concerning the LRP.

Tustin’s July 23 (08) letter:

I recommend perusing these documents. I skimmed through the lengthiest of them, where I found a letter from the City Manager of Tustin, William A. Huston, to Chancellor Raghu Mathur, dated July 23, 2008.

In it, Huston writes:

Dear Dr. Mathur:

Thank you for the opportunity provided to the City of Tustin to review and comment on the Preliminary Draft Long Range Academic and Long Range Facilities Plans for the Advanced Technology Education Campus dated June 26, 2008…. City operating departments have been briefed on the documents, reviewed the documents and provided specific technical review comments…. In addition, we received and reviewed the District’s updated schedule provided by your counsel…. However, …given the lateness of receipt of the drafts from the District, City staff has not yet been able to agendize and receive specific direction and concurrence on any of our comments from the City Council.
…
Section 4.3.1 of the Conveyance Agreement requires SOCCCD to consult with the City in preparation of the Long Range Academic and Long Range Facilities Plans, share the preliminary plans with the city for review and comment prior their release to the public, and also requires SOCCCD to give consideration to all comments received from the City on such plans. Unlike the Short Range Plan, where SOCCCD did not positively respond to specific corrections and issues raised by the City and moved forward on adoption of the Short Range Plan despite remaining city issues and concerns, the City would strongly encourage the District to address the issues that have been raised by the City on the Draft Long Range Academic and Long Range Facilities Plans prior to any Board action on the Long Range Academic and Long Range Facilities Plans.

…[F]ailure to address issues raised in this letter may result in potential future conflicts and delays in the ability of the City to make conforming determinations and be in a position to take positive action ….

Tustin’s August 8 letter:

Two weeks later (August 8), Huston writes again:

Dear Dr. Mathur:

Thank you for providing the City of Tustin with an opportunity to review the Initial Study for the ATEP Long Range Academic and Facility Plans (LRP). As a “responsible agency” on ATEP, the SOCCCD has a legal obligation under the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] to consult with the City and obtain the City’s recommendations on the scope of environmental review for ATEP. To date, this consultation has not occurred even though the City must approve various components of the LRP….

The City received the Initial Study on July 17, 2008 with a request [for] comments [to]…be provided by August 4, 2008. The City requested from the SOCCCD an extension…until August 8 to permit the City Council’s review of the comment letter…. We believe our request for more time was reasonable, but we have not received a response from the district….

…[T]he City believes that the District is improperly tiering off of the Final Joint Program EIS/EIR for the Disposal and Reuse of the former MCAS Tustin…because ATEP is a significantly different project than the one that was contemplated for the site in the FEIS/EIR. On July 23, 2008, I sent you a letter identifying numerous significant issues and corrections relating to LRP, which is incorporated herein for reference…. Until the issues discussed in the June 23, 2008 letter are resolved, the City strongly advises the District’s Board of Directors [sic] not make any CEQA obligation and consult with the City on the scope of environmental review of ATEP.

In addition, the city has identified numerous flaws in the Initial Study’s analysis, data and findings for the reasons set forth in the attached documents….

The City again urges the district to consult with the City on its CEQA determination and the requirements of the applicable regulatory documents affecting build-out of this site….

The DISTRICT later responded, somewhat testily. See p. 352 of the large pdf document, where one finds an elaborate response to each of the City’s points. (See at end of this post for a sample.)

Tustin’s Sept. 24 letter:

In a letter dated September 24, 2008, Tustin’s Assistant City Manager, Christine Shingleton, writes Vice Chancellor Gary Poertner (see p. 460):

The City appreciated the opportunity to meet with representatives from the District on September 17, 2008 and September 24, 2008 to discuss the status of the ATEP project. As requested by the City Manager, I think it is important that the City clarify a number of issues as a result of discussions held at these meetings.

At the Sept. 17 meeting, City staff were informed that the District intended to bring forward on October 27, 2008 the Long Range Plan as well as a proposed Addendum…for final approval of its Board of Trustees. The District indicated that it would not provide responses to original City comments on the ATEP Long Range Academic and Facilities Plan dated August 5…and on the Initial Study for the ATEP Long Range Academic and Facilities Plan dated August 8, 2008 until October 16, 2008. City staff voiced concern… [--Is it] the District’s intent to move forward with the City in a cooperative spirit to resolve issues….
…
Given the non-substantive review of major issues to development of the ATEP campus at our meetings on September 17 and September 24, the city would request that the District cooperate in allowing adequate time for City review of any redrafted ATEP Long Range Plan or environmental document.

I haven’t had time to explore the entire pdf document. Who knows what else is in there. But this much is clear: things have not been going smoothly in the district’s dealings with the City of Tustin.

From the district’s response to city comments:

19. ATEP planning process, Page 18, paragraph 2. It is stated that the vision for ATEP was formulated with input received from government. Unfortunately, as these comments indicate much of the input previously provided by the City to the District has been rejected or ignored.

SOCCCD’s Response:

This paragraph in the LRP describes the recent visioning session, surveying and discussions with community, business and civic leaders to help shape the ATEP Campus. The District serves many communities in addition to the City of Tustin, such as Lake Forest [et al.]…The input of all of these communities are important to the District. The city of Tustin was one of several government entities invited to attend and provide input; however, whether representatives of the City attended and provided meaningful input that was integrated into the vision and goals for the ATEP Campus is unknown since the outreach meetings and stakeholder discussions occurred in 2005-2006 and the originators of the ideas presented at these meetings were not recorded.

Since these meetings, the City has also been thoroughly involved for the last several years while the District has been planning the ATEP Campus. The City’s specific involvement has been well documented in letters from the District and District’s Counsel to the City and City’s Special Counsel. Furthermore, all City comments on the SRP, LRP and ATEP Campus have been fully considered and responded to, and incorporated where appropriate, pursuant to the Conveyance Agreement.

The District has consulted with the City regarding the CEQA documentation and the LRP were discussed at the following ATEP meetings between the District and City staff:

[The district next bullets dates and times of meetings starting in December of 2002 through late September, 2008]....