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.)
