Jody/Board meet

The last couple of days, I’ve been remembering Jody Hoy. I recall “repairing” her Mac computer (a simple fix that, she insisted, proved my expertise), enduring her advocacy of alternative medicine (she browbeat me until I took her homeopathic goop), working with her to try to recall trustee Frogue (we wrote a letter together and clashed over the spelling of “anti-Semitic”), and a hundred other things. We were utterly different people, but somehow we always laughed a lot together (her laugh was somewhat lusty) and we always fought on the same side of every serious battle, and there were many. She was a great person.

I Googled her name and came upon her photographic website. There, one finds this biography:

Jody Hoy grew up on the east coast and came to California in 1968. She has a doctorate in Romance Languages and Literature and recently retired as a professor of French at a college in Orange County. For four years she worked as a lecturer in Provence for the Smithsonian Museum International Tours. She is also the author of a book of interviews (in English) entitled The Power to Dream: Interviews with Women in the Creative Arts. Two things drew her to photography: the beauty of the light in Southern California and the birth of her son, whom she photographed with endless pleasure. She studied photography with Jerry McGrath and Jeff Minton.

It is plain that many people greatly valued her book of interviews of strong women. I came across many references to it, including this review (from 1996) in the LA Times:

A Revealing Private Eye: Book review: Interviews with creative famous women offer memorable looks at personal lives. (Cathy Curtis)

Thursday's board meeting:

I’ve got some notes from Thursday’s board meeting. Nothing much.

Don Wagner did the invocation, and he seemed to lay it on pretty thick. “Dear Heavenly Father,” he said, we’re standing here in this “Land dedicated to liberty”; and our blessings aren’t the product of mere mortals, nope, he said. They “come from You, our Creator.”

During public comments, there was considerable talk of teapots. Somebody said that Michael Shermer had been invited to talk about “Why Darwin Matters.” Bob Cosgrove said something about ATEP, accreditation, and the leadership of President Burnett (did I hear that right?). A woman who described herself as a “perpetual student since 1984” asked a series of mostly reasonable clarificatory questions about the board agenda. It was a like a scene from an old Frank Capra movie.

Trustees prepared for a long meeting, what with the five presentations from consulting firms who seek to help with the Chancellor hire. Some gave no reports, and the rest gave brief ones.

References were made to Burnett’s illness which kept him away—don’t know any details. Tom Fuentes referred to Saddleback College’s veterans’ memorial and once again thanked veterans. Dave Lang noted that the “tea party” was in fact a ceramics display, which he personally eyeballed. Ms. Baily didn’t have anything really to say, though she was very fetching saying it.

A passionless Chancellor Mathur, who spent the entire night doing a fine impression of a dead toad, noted the enrollment and FTES increases and the full-time faculty hires of the last three years. He quoted numbers, they seemed meaningless.

The board roared through the consent calendar, pulling only trustee travel requests, including a pricey trip to Washington. One can go to that sort of thing “locally,” said Nancy Padberg, who offered the sole vote against it. “Bing.”

Next came the consultant presentations, which I described here Thursday night. Surprisingly, the presentations weren’t tedious. In fact, listening to these consultants was kinda fun. It was clear that, whether or not they can help us hire a chancellor, they sure can sell themselves.

These consultant firms were apples and oranges. The slickest one comprised two natty guys and their love of whiz-bang technology. Another comprised over thirty consultants strewn across the country. Some emphasized their vast contacts and their network of people-who-know-people (some transparency). Others emphasized their skill wheedling on the telephone. One guy wore a shitty suit and tried to bland us to death. (I think Fuentes planted him.) Others were snappy dressers, including one fop who resembled Mr. Dirt (Mobil detergent gasoline commercials, 1970s). Some would spend weeks living at the colleges, while others would do their work from Texas or worse. An older lady noted her organization’s credibility. Somebody else said his company gave discounts.

Throughout these presentations, I kept wondering about the fit—or lack thereof—between these organizations and ours. The SOCCCD has a detailed Chancellor hiring policy—essentially set in concrete—and a stated commitment to do things thoroughly, professionally, and on the up-and-up.

But these firms (all of ‘em?) come with their own ways of doing things that don't obviously match our procedures and principles. One firm was accustomed to handling just about everything up to finalist interviews. The woman from ACCT spoke of trustees on the search committee(!). One consultant said that having a cool webpage (“pretty, attractive pictures”) is the key; others were all about the brochure—that they wanna help write. (Ours is already signed, sealed, and delivered.)

Fuentes, who seems committed to some sort of “running out the clock” strategy, kept asking, So, are we rushing things? These consultants did not converge on a single answer. Some seemed more comfortable with slow processes, but others said that finishing the process by fall was doable. Some conceived of hires in relation to August and January only while others seemed perfectly happy to pull somebody out of the middle of their semester somewhere.

Is there a Chancellor hiring season? Yes. And no.

Well, Padberg motioned to hire one of ‘em and that’s what they did, 4 to 3.

Pictured: TigerAnn, cat, this afternoon