As you know, Tom Fuentes, former OC GOP chair, and his pals have worked hard over the years to place their corrupt friends in office. County Sheriff Mike Corona was one of those friends. He’s headed to the pokey.
Chriss W. Street, OC Treasurer-Tax Collector, is another. He showed up on Monday to report the trend in taxes collected. As we’ve reported previously, and as Street’s handout made clear, tax bucks have steadily increased in recent years, but that trend is now over. For 2008-09, $4,782,292,446 was collected. For 2009-10, the number is $4,724,904,937. That’s a 1% decrease. No biggie.
So far, this is old news, but Street did offer a “personal prediction.” In the year following this one, the amount, he predicted, will be down 4-5%.
Since we’re a basic aid district, this matters.
Faculty spoke during “public comments.” Claire Cesareo-Silva read a letter by Carmenmara Hernandez Bravo concerning the trustees’ habit of offering Christian prayers at events. It is not very Christian, she said, to impose your religious beliefs on others. Reference was made to the Chancellor’s August 17 “opening session” and his video that ended with a statement about Jesus Christ dying to save our souls.
Ronnie Lebauer was next. She zeroed in on the message that Jesus Christ died for our souls. It is offensive, she said, for a public institution to make specific religious appeals. We need to be “inclusive,” she said. As it is, the community deserves an “apology.”
Finally, math instructor (and inveterate district public prayer foe) Karla Westphal spoke. She noted that, in the past, trustees have defended their prayers by noting that they are “non-sectarian.” It is “impossible to believe,” she said, that the district abides by this notion in view of the Chancellor’s video, which ended with the statement:
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you—Jesus Christ and the American G. I. One died for your soul; the other for your freedom.
This sentiment, she said, is “explicitly Christian.” It is rude and it is unconstitutional, she added. Since the board insists on this course, it has been forced to hire legal representation, which is expensive. Such expenses are entirely unnecessary and are thus “fiscally irresponsible.”
Saddleback College Academic Senate Prez Bob Cosgrove also spoke. He distributed a pamphlet that introduced the 15 new faculty at the college. He thanked the board for these hires and for deciding to pay for much-needed maintenance of facilities and whatnot.
It was about now that the Chancellor made his peculiar “statement” that guest speaker Michael Drake was “not offended” by the video. Knowing Mathur, he was reporting the fact that Drake offered no comment at all while implying that Drake said “hey, I’m not offended by that.” Maybe somebody should ask Drake. [UPDATE: see comments. I suspect that one reader is correct that Mathur was referring not to Drake but to himself as the "diverse Chancellor." That, of course, does nothing to vindicate his reasoning.]
Bill Jay was back (he’s been ill), but he didn’t look strong. “I’m back,” he said. He soon collapsed back into his chair, silent.
Fuentes heaped praise on board Prez Don Wagner for his MC duties (at the Chancellor’s opening session). He had heard only “magnificent comments” about Don’s efforts and the “successful” opening session. He yammered a bit about the upcoming 9-11 events at the campuses.
John Williams, who is struggling these days to deal with that nasty Grand Jury report about his efforts as Public Guardian/Administrator, gave no report at all.
Wagner heaped more praise on the Chancellor’s opening session and a “great and informative presentation” he had just witnessed concerning ATEP. He made a joke, alluding to Gary Poertner’s vacation in Hawaii.
Marcia Milchiker said something about her participation in flex week activities. She learned, she said, all about “super-charging your computer.”
Dave Lang said something, but I remember none of it. So did student trustee Bi’Anca J. Bailey, who was mostly pretty chirpy.
In his report, Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur noted that headcount is up by 7% and FTES is up nearly 10%. He sounded terribly staunch. He displayed a large piece of plexiglass given to him by the OC Board of Supervisors upon which was written a resolution.
Tom Fuentes did indeed request yet another report on faculty salaries, only this time one that compares our faculty’s salaries with those elsewhere in the county.
Glenn and Tod and Randy came up to give their presentation on “strategic planning.” The former was brief and efficient. Tod offered a bit more whizzbangery and flash. Nice light grey suit. I want one.
As he spoke, Herr Peebles of ATEP seemed to settle into a deep sleep. Somebody showed a chart with many boxes and numerous arrows promiscuously directed. Everyone lapsed into a coma.
During the presentation of the district’s final budget, Mathur again repeated his new talking point, that “we operate within our means.” Meanwhile, he said once again, the state has tended to adopt “smoke and mirrors” type budgets. That’s been true, he said, for “13 to 20 years.”
Maybe I heard that wrong. 13 to 20?
Mathur was really saying, “see, I’m talking about state finances, and I’m offering nasty and knowledgeable commentary, and so I’m a big man.”
There is, he said, a serious “efficiency review” going on at the three campuses. The state, however, ain’t doing that, he said.
Beth Mueller made the actual presentation, and that seemed good. In the course of the discussion that followed, Marcia opined that “it coulda been worse,” and Bob C fretted about the loss of matriculation dollars. He said something, too, about such “disastrous” cost-cutting ideas as student self-placement in basic ed courses, etc.
Next item: the basic aid priority list (i.e., recommendations concerning how to divvy up the money):
MY NOTES:
WAGNER: Saddleback College gets $8 million and IVC gets less than $1 million? These priorities seem "wildly unbalanced."
Question: Is this item (rec to accept these priorities) time-sensitive?
Answer: only the IT part. The others can wait a month.
LANG: I'm unsure whether all of these expenditures adhere to our guidelines (namely, basic aid should be restricted to "one-time only" expenses). Need time to think about this.
WILLIAMS: didn't this go through DRAC (i.e., the district resources allocation committee, which includes representation from both colleges)?
Answer: no, basic aid money distribution does not go through DRAC.
Action: money for IT approved. Decision re rest of money to be decided after more "historical" data is made available concerning pattern of these expenses.
The two Associated Student Government budgets were presented and approved without a hitch. The board was impressed that a relatively large proportion of student funds would be devoted to scholarships and other things of clear benefit to students. Dave Lang seemed to have some minor issues, but, in the end, these kids got a pat on the head. (In recent years, the board, or at least some trustees, have expressed displeasure at the way these funds are distributed--essentially, they want students, who pay fees, to clearly benefit--and student leaders have essentially yielded to this perspective.)
33 comments:
Wasn't Carmen Hernandez Bravo the professor whose study abroad program Fuentes went after?
Jesus didn't die for our souls?
Whether or not Jesus did or did not die for our souls - I think the point is that it is an inappropriate subject matter for a public institute of higher education.
Roy's rightly taken a lot of flack lately for generally being wrong and lacking perspective. Here's a great example: the unoffended diverse chancellor is not Drake but ... wait for it ... Mathur. Chunk, perhaps you've noticed there's something, well, diverse, about Mathur.
9:42, is there a coherent point you are trying to make that demonstrates any sort of brain power besides motor function?
What on earth does Mathur's "diversity" have to do with, in any way, offering ideological religious statements at secular public events? (besides catering to the religious folks who then segue into paroxysms of adoration about the connection of Jesus with patriotism.)
Think carefully, if you can, and try again.
Something diverse? I'll leave that one alone.
The point here isn't about culture, ethnicity or national origin - it's about faith and separation of church and state - as a public institution, we are part of the "state" - we need to be separate from the "church."
P.S.: Chunk's writing is up there with the best of them.
I appreciate the faculty who have continued to speak out on this issue. It's a hard thing to do. Many of us support them.
Thanks for your coverage of the issues about the presence of the Christian prayers.
9:42, you may well be correct in your interpretation of Mathur's statement. If so, that in no way vindicates Mathur's reasoning. Mathur is "diverse" (what a silly use of that word) and unoffended by the video. So what? What we need to determine is how many members of the "diverse" groups of our community are offended by these specifically Christian messages. Well, we don't really know, though we can guess. The only reasonable thing to do under the circumstances is to err on the side of caution. --Roy
My "coherent point," 10:42? Seriously, you missed it? Bauer thinks Mathur means Drake when Mathur talks about a "diverse chancellor." But Mathur means Mathur when he talks about a "diverse chancellor." My point has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the reference to Christ, only to the cluelessness with which Bauer reports on the board meetings. He misses patently obvious things and can't be trusted.
Now do you get it? Again, the lack of self-awareness is stunning for you to accuse me of lacking brain power in your lame post. Are you really stupid, or do you just play an idiot on this blog?
My, My. Someone is off their meds.
Whether Mathur meant Drake of himself, his point goes nowhere. You do not establish that a group is unoffended by noting that one member of that group is unoffended. Good grief.
Re: "diverse": Part of the problem here is also Mathur's own incoherence. Even his backers must admit the guy has problems with expression, especially so when he is speaking unscripted.
Also, there is a problem here about the ability to measure "offense" - can't you see that?
(I am glad Cosgrove addressed the poorly thought-out cost cutting ideas that are popping up - we need to be on the lookout.)
Mathur is saying that he is "diverse"? My dictionary (unsurprisingly) says that "diverse" means "differing from one another." In the context of discussing groups with discrete members, "diversity" has meaning. Calling oneself "diverse" is just illiterate. That's some Chancellor, that Chancellor Goo.
11:22, please, focus. The point I am making, a pretty clear one, has to do with Bauer, his perception of events around him, and his reporting on those events. He flatly misunderstood Mathur; he often misunderstands what happens at board meetings, and this is but another example. My point had NOTHING to do with the appropriateness of the reference to Christ or whether anyone was or was not offended. That is a separate issue. My point is just that Bauer AGAIN misunderstood or reported falsely. That's all. Good grief, indeed. Focus.
11:25, you're scrapping the bottom of the barrel here. Is this the best you can do?
Ok, let's work through it: Mathur is Hindu; he belongs to a group that is "differs" from the group of presumably Christian folks who were behind the slide. So his point is literate and appropriate. Perhaps it proves little; perhaps it is nothing but a plea for the tolerance that Westphal and company refuse to extend to others. But it is hardly complicated, illiterate, or somehow out of place. Bauer just got this one wrong.
"that is 'differs' from." Ooops. That'll draw a perceptive comment or two. How about "that differs from"
11:15, the reportage was that Mathur mangled some language, and you then mangled the manglitude with your overly taxed medulla oblongata. Are you a faculty member? In what, intro to remedial bootlicking?
Come on. Roy's been reporting on the board for years and does a fine job. He makes the otherwise tedious proceedings lively using the writer's tools of satire. He's fairly accurate. In the past, when he has made mistakes or oversights, he's also posted those.
Soon the video of the meeting will be posted an ya'll can look at it and see if you want.
Now 11:40, you're just lying. The "reportage" was... well, let's quote it rather than tendentiously paraphrase:
"It was about now that the Chancellor made his peculiar “statement” that guest speaker Michael Drake was “not offended” by the video. Knowing Mathur, he was reporting the fact that Drake offered no comment at all while implying that Drake said “hey, I’m not offended by that.” Maybe somebody should ask Drake."
This was flat out inaccurate "reportage." Mathur never said Drake wasn't offended. We can't trust Bauer's "reportage." That's all. Why do you folks have to lie to protect him?
Point of Claification:
I've noticed through the years that Mathur often speaks of himself in a third person (I'll let the psych profs tell you what that may mean).
It could be that this was just one instance of that. Most people don't do that - it is confusing.
In terms of using this small moment to discredit the history of someone who has done what no one else has cared to do - faithfully communciate the actions of the board to the college community for over a decade - well, it's not enough for me.
11:49, what is your problem? When Roy makes a mistake, he acknowledge it. In fact, if you look at today's Dissent post, he has already included an update in which he corrects the error.
Some people are calling Roy rude, a lout, uncouth, and so on. Nobody who knows him or who reads this publication would ever say that.
On the other hand, this "are you stupid?" guy who has been leaving so many comments is manifestly uncouth. Can't you just make your points? Why the crudity, the insults? The cherry-picking?
And anyone who defends "I am diverse" as literate is a few bricks shy of a full load, educationwise.
In his original post, Roy reported Mathur's statement about "a diverse chancellor." He expressed bewilderment. He then said, "I think he was referring to Opening Session guest speaker Michael Drake...."
Bauer was offering an interpretation of an unclear remark. (Educated people do not call themselves "diverse." What on earth is that supposed to mean?) So this is at worst an instance of incorrect interpretation of an obscure remark, not "bad reporting."
"Bad reporting" is when someone keeps saying that Bauer offers inacurate reports but then provides no instances.
In fact, Bauer repeatedly solicits corrections and has amply demonstrated a willingness to correct any errors, which in his case, seem rare.
Meanwhile, his critics hide behind anonymity.
You know who died for me? Lots of of Maccabees. They also, by the way, died for Jesus.
Without them there would have been no temple court for the 12-year-old to study in (without bothering to tell his parents where he was - typical tween!). Luke 2:46
Also, a few firefighters are dying for people right now. Then there's the police, search and rescue . . . .
and yes, I am extremely angry that missionary work is being done during employee meetings (and that my taxes help pay for it!).
raghu really knows how to push your buttons. i bet he's lovin this.
More office romance udpates please!
At least some kind of family affair tree or soemthing.
I think that is a lot of what is fueling this fire anyway. A scorned lover who often loves them then heaves the under the bus.
General George Patton suggested to his GI's that they make the damn Nazi's die for THEIR country.
BTW, When is Goo going to die for his college? You guys could name a building after him then.
Soldiers don't enlist to die. Whoever came up with that nonsensical saying is an idiot. Goo just doesn't get it.
Wendy does throw them under the bus, doesn't she? Love them then run them over. Ouch.
This blog can't cover everything but it does a good job. For instance with Wayne Ward and other issues that most people don't know about. What might seem small to you is big to other people.
They also cover the good stuff. They post lots of pictures of the campus and the people, especially the special events and the parties.
And it's funny.
I liked how Roy covered that crazy guy who was dean in PE - no one else said ANYTHING about him. Didn't they give him some kind of prize? What was his name?
His name was Poindexter.
And yes a very good example of the service the blog provides.
Amid the early chaos of the Poindexter regime, Mathur (who involves himself in local Republican politics) got his little pal (the student government president and a member of the "Young Republicans") to arrange for Poindexter's selection as "Administrator of the Year" by students. The students, of course, had no idea who Poindexter was. That's how the system works: it exploits the hidden corners and shadows, such as prizes that nobody knows even exist.
Not long after, Poindexter was accused of abusing a classified employee and eventually got into physical shoving contests with faculty. He was plainly lacking in the mental health and stability department and was eventually escorted off campus by campus police. There were lawsuits, legal expenses, etc.
As we learned during the Cely Mora trial a couple of years ago, Mathur cooked the books to get Poindexter hired over plainly more qualified (and mentally healthy) candidates. When Mora's attorney sought to zero in on the details of Poindexter's hire, Mathur even claimed that a crucial document concerning reference checks somehow got lost.
It wasn't the first time he had to resort to that claim.
The jury was beyond belief. They would comment on the blog, revealing that they were, among other things, illiterate and appallingly ignorant.
The reporting on Howard Gensler and Owen Krezza ws good too.
Dissent posts on: (1) Howard Gensler: The Howard Hilton (2) Owen Kreza: A little background on Owen Kreza and the Irvine PD (3) Rodney Poindexter: MATHUR VS. WOMEN
Post a Comment