Craig's “Instructional Coordinator”:
As you know, at the end of August, long-time faculty leader
Wendy Gabriella gave up the IVC Academic Senate Presidency, a position she held for many years, to become “Instructional Coordinator of Academic Programs, Office of Instruction, for the 2009-2010 academic year.” (See
Wendy’s new assignment, 8/27/09.) The position evidently entails 100% reassigned time.
As the Instructional Coordinator (IC), Wendy is essentially VPI
Craig Justice’s assistant and, evidently, his representative (she reportedly explains), which occasionally creates odd circumstances in which a member of faculty leads a gaggle of administrators.
There’s a certain amount of talk in the hallways about that. Some people don’t like it. Not a bit.
The “Dean of Academic Programs” (DAPS):
This circumstance has a peculiar history. As I explained in August,
It is no secret that VPI Justice … has been encumbered by startlingly numerous responsibilities since he came to IVC two or three years ago. That problem led to a proposal, last spring, to create a new IVC deanship—a Dean of Academic Programs, Student Learning, and Research [DAPS]. The proposal, however, was rejected by the SOCCCD board, perhaps owing in part to the need for frugality (or, anyway, its appearance) during this period of fiscal stress.
I first reported on the board’s rejection of the DAPS idea back in April (
Notes on last night’s board meeting). At the time, I noted a peculiar moment during the April board meeting:
Chancellor [Raghu] Mathur stated that he supported the [DAPS] proposal. Oddly, he even seemed to say that, if the position is approved and [IVC Prez] Glenn [Roquemore] sends up a candidate, he’ll support that recommendation too! … Sounds like Raghu has been in the woodshed.
Woodshed? Allow me to explain. At the time (and, I suspect, ever since), tensions existed between Wagner and Mathur. The story, at any rate, was that Mathur had angered Wagner by somehow undermining some elements on his agenda (as board President). Mathur, of course, is a long-time opponent of Wendy’s (for reasons that need not be explained for those familiar with this blog). But, owing to their work together on IVC’s accreditation task force, Don and Wendy (and IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore) had developed a good working relationship. They were pals, more or less.
And so: Mathur’s curious remark at the April board meeting suggested to some observers (to
me anyway) that, some time before the board meeting, Wagner had read Mathur the riot act about his interference with Roquemore and Justice’s plan to pursue this new deanship—and perhaps ultimately to give Wendy the job.
But then August came around and Wendy became “Instructional Coordinator,” i.e., Craig’s assistant. Many observers saw Wendy’s appointment to that position as either (
a) a way around the board’s decision to reject the new dean position—or (
b) a convenient transitional situation until the atmosphere becomes right to bring back the DAPS idea—or (
c) both (a) and (b).
Good freakin' grief!
Naturally, anyone who believes in fair and open hiring processes will cringe at the possibility that administrators would pursue a new position—such as a deanship—with a particular person in mind to fill that position. And, gosh, many of us who have battled the forces of slime and darkness since 1996 have regarded “fairness and openness” as, well, a big part of what we were fighting for.
About last night:
OK, so here’s the thing. In recent weeks, various people have been telling me to look for DAPS (that “new” dean position) to appear on the agenda for the board’s October meeting. That sounded pretty unlikely—why would Glenn/Craig recommend a position that, only six months ago, the board had rejected? Still, I looked for it when the agenda finally became available late last week.
But it was nowhere to be found. Thus, when, here on Dissent, I previewed issues for the October meeting, I made no reference to DAPS. I just figured that the people I talk to didn't know what they were talking about. It happens.
Except they did know what they were talking about.
Today, several people informed me that, at last night’s board meeting, during the closed session, Don Wagner was hopping mad (at Mathur?) that the DAPS item had been “pulled” from (or had not been placed on) the agenda.
Was this a replay of Mathur’s anti-Wendy and anti-Glenn/Craig shenanigans of April?
Who the hell knows. Not me, that's for sure.
And how does Wagner and Fuentes’ cozy relationship on the campaign trail figure into all this? It’s plain that Fuentes is pulling out all the stops to help Wagner get elected as Assemblyman for the 70th District. But Fuentes is not the kind of guy who just helps guys out. Strings are attached. And Fuentes’ has long been Raghu Mathur’s only strong supporter on the board (aside from
John Williams, who has become a cardboard figure).
You’d think that, if Fuentes gets what he wants from Wagner, he’s gonna get Wagner’s “hands off” of Mathur.
Good grief.
You figure it out. I'm goin' to the gym.
