Public vs. for-profit colleges: Who does better job? (OC Reg)

July BOT meeting, live and direct! (The dreary, Sisyphean era of "student success" lumbers forward)

     Good Lord, they're starting on time! Only trustee Prendergast is absent—although he participated via technology in the earlier special meeting. (Please also read Tere's Board Meeting Highlights.)
     No actions reported from closed session.

     First thing: swearing in James Wright as trustee, who replaces the late Tom Fuentes.
     He swears about the Constitution and such; it's official.
     Wright speaks, introduces his family. Short but sweet speech.

     No resolutions tonight. Some commendations: Chancellor Poertner presents a small group of four concerning the "Sherpa project," which helps students to reach their "summit." It gives recommendations to students: courses to take, etc. An uncommon service; it is being recognized across the country. (Applause.)
     Burnett introduces new managers and administrators. Four shiny new people. They sound pretty impressive, I guess. Dave Anderson included (now head of Emeritus, or something; didn't pay attention). Photo op, applause, repeat.
     Public comments? No one wishes to speak, natch. Summer, man.

Trustee reports:

     Bill Jay: Jim Wright has been here for years. A terrific gentleman, an intellectual, etc. Welcome!
     Frank "Mike" Meldau: also welcomes Wright to the board.
     Marcia Milchiker: yammers about Wright's achievements, qualifications. Addresses Wright: "I'm really big on trustee education, but you already know everything!" said Marcia. Laughter. She attended this and that and on and on.
     Nancy Padberg: no report aside from welcoming Jim Wright. "Ecstatic" to have him.
     James R. Wright: thanks for your kind comments, much appreciated. Attended the bridge re-opening at Saddleback. Applauds Marcia for her comments at that event.
     Dave Lang: wants to echo others' sentiments; wishes Wright all the best.

Chancellor Gary Poertner: he proceeds to the discussion item, namely,

COLLEGE COMPLETION:
     This is the sort of thing that must make administrative work hell, at least for intelligent and straight-forward people. "Student success taskforce," blah blah blah. Nothing too sensible allowed. Everything a bit off, uglified, delogicalized, jargonized, fucked-up. But you can discern some pluses in it, I guess.
     Gary discusses California's master plan for public education and its deserved reputation, a thing of the past. Our dominance is waning, etc. Shows chart comparing countries. We used to be #1. Now Korea is #1 with regard to percentage of pop. that has attained "tertiary" education. ("Tertiary"? Who comes up with this stuff?) Now we're ranked in the middle of the nations that we compete with.
     Babyboomers are retiring. We've educated large numbers of them, but we don't have the people to replace them--teaching, among professional ranks, etc. In 2009, the College Board took on a plan or goal to raise college completion rate by 2020. The path we're on now won't get us there. Pres. Obama has pledged support for a national effort. To meet his goal, each CA college will have to double amount of degrees and certificates awarded by 2020. "Rather ambitious." (Translation: no frickin' way, College Boy.)

     Mentions various entities that have done studies and arrived at similar findings, goals. Everyone's on the same track with regard to goals.
     Returns to the "master plan" (of 1960). Kerr and Co. came up with a three-tiered system. UC would do research: targeting the top 12.5% of high school. CSU, top 33%. CCs: instruction for anyone who would benefit from instruction. Golly, that even includes cats and dogs.
     For many years, no tuition at community colleges. Then we were charged with remedial instruction, workforce training, etc. We can't possibly accomplish all of these missions we've been given. So we're being asked to focus (by legislators).
     Need to address Latino students, the fastest growing group, etc. Tough challenge. Meanwhile, every tier is cutting back. It's all very dicey. Imagine the funding we would have lost were we not on basic aid? About $12 million per year, is what. And we're now taking many of the students who can no longer go elsewhere.
     In 2010, Bill 1143 passed. Requires...adoption of plan to improve student completion. So student success task force was formed (good grief). We've adopted the concept, "student success." Just different terminology. We're all part of the same movement, nationwide. The task force came up with 8 recommendations in a final report. (See Advancing Student Success: Recommendations.) Endorsed by DoE. SB1456. Will finally pass this stuff within next month. It focuses on "student success" and will implement the change. Students will be given priority if they have an educational plan.
     Presentations over coming next months will explain the bloody details. Boils down to orientation, campus student support, incentives, increased transparency, etc.
     The majority of college students are in our (CC) system. The problem is that a large number of students start who never make it over the finish line. We'll work on that specifically. We have 43,000 students: we couldn't possibly hire enough counselors for them all. So technology is an important part of the plan.
     This will be our top priority "for the rest of our careers." (Gulp.)
     Any comments or questions?
     Gary turns it over to O'Connor and Werle.

     Kevin O'Connor presents first four recommendations.

     1. Increase college and career readiness:
     1.1 Collaborate with K-12....develop common standards....etc.
     2. Strengthen support for entering students
     Students will be "required" to do things. Participation in diagnostics, etc. Students sometimes don't use services available to them. Students must declare a program of study early on.
     3. Incentivize successful student behaviors [jargon]
     Give priority to some groups, require students to begin addressing deficiencies.... Provide students opportunity to attend full time.
     4. Align course offerings to meet student needs

     Kathy Werle presents the last 4

     5. Improve the education of basic skills students
     Comprehensive strategy...
     6. Revitalize and re-envision professional development
     More financial support? Sharing best practices, improving basic skills instruction, etc.
     7. Enable efficient statewide leadership and increase coordination among colleges
     System offices and what they can do. Setting goals, etc. Report cards.
     8. Align resources with student success recommendations
   
     Of course, we will only be required to do what will be funded. But funding will be pretty limited. (Golly, this sounds unpromising.)
     Comments? Questions?

Meldau: Glad we're meeting this head on. It will be a difficult row to hoe. There are so many new jobs and careers developing. Students will have motives to change along the way. (He also asks about common standards.) Werle explains that we have experts among us in this regard, etc.
Jay: Have read astounding figures recently--about unemployment, people working below skill levels. Saw this on O'Reilly too. (Yes, some people say he's a bit "bombastic," acknowledges Jay.) I think he said those in Math and Science too have high rates of unemployment. Need more Bachelors degrees.
Wright: thanks Poertner, O'Connor, and Werle for the "excellent presentation." It was indeed pretty good, I think.

[Warning: the rest is pretty routine. I wouldn't bother. Maybe read governance groups reports.]

Consent calendar. A few things pulled: 5.3, 5.4, 5.9 5.11, 5.15

Starts with 5.3: increasing contract for IVC Life Sciences Bldg construction (McCarthy Building Company). Brandye comes up to explain. Bankruptcy involved, I think. Surety process. Lang has question, as does Wright. Item is approved unanimously.
5.4: Construction question. Passes unanimously.
5.9: Lang asks about a particular grant for the nursing program. Grant that allows us to go from 44 to 60 students (nursing?). Passes unanimously.
5.11: payment for absent trustee. Passes unanimously.
5.15: Something about budget transfers. Passes unanimously.

Not

Action items:

6.1: Neudesic LLC for software development. Matter carries unanimously.
6.2: Blackboard contracts. Bramucci explains. He is asked to explain "what Blackboard is." Passes.
6.3: board policy revisions. Lang:  BP3300, exhibit E: would like to see this come back with additional language that speaks to eval of costs associated with gifts the district accepts. (He's thinking of the "bones" issue of the last meeting.) Marcia has query re student member of board. Question answered. Passes.
6.4: BPs for review and study. Approved as such.
6.5: IVC "management reorganization."
     Roquemore: no cost, minor changes. Shifting of responsibilities. Most of the deans are keeping most of what they're doing. A shifting of responsibilities. Lang: Presidents should be allowed to manage to resources that they have. Move for approval. Passes.
6.6: Academic Personnel Actions. A minor correction. Move approval. Approved.
6.7:  Classified Personnel Actions. Approved.
6.8: Agreement for special services with law firm (Atkinson, A, L R & R). A minor increase in billing? Approved.

7.1: college speakers. Info item only.
7.2: Student trustee nominations.
7.3: Basic Aid report.
7.4: facilities master plan.
7.5: retiree trust fund report.

(Wow, this meeting is moving fast!)

Reports from governance groups:

Saddleback College Academic Senate (Cosgrove): Bob notes that this is the first time we're not hiring new full-time faculty. Task Force recommendations put more work on the faculty.
Faculty Association (Jacobs): invitation. Flex week events: luncheon and program at IVC. Tuesday, Aug. 14. Also on 17th at Saddleback for new faculty. Picnic lunch.
IVC Academic Senate (Schmeidler): echoes what colleagues have said. Commends their work on pamphlets for new faculty.
IVC/Pres. Roquemore: congrats to James Wright. Reminds of "Pres' opening" during inservice. Introduces new IVC student pres.
Saddleback College/Burnett: refers to bridge dedication. Faculty inservice starts soon. Academic Senate does a great job. Classes start soon. Opening of Library and Resources Center, underway. We'll "just make it." There'll be a BBQ.
VC Bramacci: nada
VC Bugay: blah, blah, blah
. . .
Saddleback Classified Senate: excited about Wright. Classified retreat. Reviewed Roberts 'Rules of Order. A "fund-raising opportunity" through Macy's. I dunno what he's talkin' about.
Blah, blah, blah

That's it.

CSU Fullerton limits spring 2013 applicants (OC Reg)

SOCCCD's first superintendent: clashed with trustees; bailed fast

x

     The SOCCCD has a history of rogue boards and it is clear that the phenomenon, for us, started with our first board, way back in the sixties. Back then, while other districts concerned themselves with, oh, instruction, the original SOCCCD trustees occupied themselves with male students' hair length and with fears that Saddleback College’s new library might not be defendable against imagined student protesters (who never materialized).
     One possible chapter in that story concerns the district’s first Superintendent/President, a man named Jack Roper. In a Times article (“Saddleback College Chief Rejects Offer of 3-Year Contract”) from June 26, 1968, we learn that, a few months before the college’s opening, Saddleback College’s new (and first) superintendent, Roper, declined to sign a new contract:

     Roper, in a letter submitted to trustees at the close of an executive session Monday, indicated his reason for leaving is the failure of trustees to accept “certain key recommendations made by me and my staff.”
     In an interview Tuesday he said there was not any one reason for his decision but mainly “general displeasure with the job itself.”
. . .
     He said the board’s action on the budget—increasing reserves and cutting out staff-recommended positions—may have been a culminating factor in his decision because there were “negatives” but were not the main reason….
     Roper said he has not definitely decided on his next position, but he may return to the Orange County schools office where he had been serving as a deputy superintendent prior to going to Saddleback last September.
     Board President Hans Vogel also discounted any disagreement between Roper and the trustees as a major factor in Roper’s decision.
     Vogel said Roper was questioning four months ago whether to stay in junior college administration and that he had urged Roper to give the work a full trial.
     However, Vogel said, Roper’s rejection of a new $25,00-a-year contract came as a “shock” to the board Monday night. “But it left us no choice but to accept his resignation—with sincere regrets,” he said.

     The Times article explained that, at a meeting the next Monday, the board would “set criteria for Roper’s replacement and may actually make an appointment.” It appeared then that the job would go to Dr. Fred Bremer, recently named VP of the college.
     That is indeed what happened. (Bremer had been president of a community college in Nebraska and then a dean at Santa Ana College. He was chairman of the education division at Chapman before arriving at Saddleback in October.)

The "GOP" community college district, c. 1968

     When Roper accepted his 10-month contract at Saddleback, he “had taken a year’s leave of absence from the County Schools office.” While secretary to the OC Committee on School Organization, Roper had assisted in developing plans for Saddleback College. After Saddleback trustees interviewed 57 (evidently unsatisfactory) applicants, they asked Roper to make himself available for the job. (It appears that Roper was involved in hearings concerning a possible south county district starting in 1966.)
     The Times quotes Roper’s letter:

     “It is with regret and long thought that I must decline the new three-year contract…. There have been many rewarding successes this last year to be sure, but certain key recommendations made by me and my staff have not found approval by the representatives of this school community.
     “Because I am deeply committed to the concept of the true community college spirit, I feel it would be in the best interests of the school district and the young students whom it serves if I would step down as superintendent and president.
     “To move forward rapidly to meet emerging deadlines and crises, a new district must have an administration and school board with congruent goals and philosophies. I sincerely hope that the board will find such a man as my successor.”

     According to the Times,

     Roper said he was concerned because the board had not approved proposals on staff organization and felt financing for the start of the new college was not flexible enough.
He confirmed he was also disturbed because the proposed 1968-69 budget had been pared by the board to provide more than $200,000 in reserves, the extended-day program was curtailed and limited to the campus and several new positions recommended by the staff were dropped.

     Sounds like “micromanagement” to me.
     A minimum in “reserves” for community college districts is required by the state. Indeed, the SOCCCD was placed on warning by the state for falling below the minimum in 1997 or 1998. It sounds as though, back in Roper's day, the board insisted on exceeding that minimum by quite a bit.
     It appears that Mr. Roper went back to his old job at the county after his brief community college episode.
     As we reported recently, the initial board took some unusual actions, including "resigning" from a state "board of trustees" organization on the grounds that such a private organization should not receive taxpayer funds.
     According to some readers, Roper's replacement, Bremer, met a bad end at the district. Is that true? Does anyone know the details? Any documents?

P.S.:

[12-17-20]

Near as I can tell, by the new millennium, Roper was residing in Dana Point and was running Roper Mailing Service, or he seemed to do so up to at least 2014. I believe that he was born in 1932, and so, if he is still with us, he's 88 years old.

For-profits, for garsh sake (further evidence that Republicans are Satan's spawn)

Results Are In: Harkin releases critical report on for-profits (Inside Higher Ed)

GOP defends 'em—no crackdown

     A U.S. Senate committee released an unflattering report on the for-profit college sector on Sunday, concluding a two-year investigation led by Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat. While the report is ambitious in scope, and scathingly critical on many points, it appears unlikely to lead to a substantial legislative crackdown on the industry—at least not during this election year.
     …It questions whether federal investment through aid and loans is worthwhile in many of the examined colleges.
     The investigation found that large numbers of students at for-profits fail to earn credentials, citing a 64 percent dropout rate in associate degree programs, for example. It also links those high dropout rates to the relatively small amount of money for-profits spend on instruction.
     For-profits “devote tremendous amounts of resources to non-education related spending,” the report said, with the sector spending more revenue on both marketing and profit-sharing than on instruction….
. . .
     Republican staff members also contributed a dissent to the report, saying it is “indisputable that significant problems exist” at some for-profits, but that the investigation was not conducted in a bipartisan manner….
. . .
     In the absence of “significant reforms,” the report said the “sector will continue to turn out hundreds of thousands of students with debt but no degree.”
. . .
     The enclosed profiles of for-profit companies detail problems the investigation uncovered in areas such as student recruiting, substandard academic offerings, high tuition and executive compensation, low student retention rates and the issuance of credentials of questionable value…. (See Results Are In: Harkin releases critical report on for-profits)

SEE ALSO End of the Beginning (Inside Higher Ed)

"Sen. Tom Harkin’s two-year investigation of for-profit higher education has ended, and was capped with a four-tome final report that many -- at least critics of the industry -- see as definitive. The for-profit policy battle is far from over, however, although it probably won’t fire up again until 2013."

Drakodaidis' letter

     Source: OC Reg
     History: after the Bustamante arrest occurrs, heads start to roll down at the County; perhaps Drakodaidis senses that she will be next; Drakodaidis goes on leave and then (reports the Voice of OC) she sends her letter, a claim, which is reported to be politically explosive; the County does not reveal the letter despite its being of such a nature (i.e., a legal claim) that it should be made public; the Voice of OC sues (basis: violation of Brown Act) to correct; meanwhile, anticipating his termination, Mauk resigns as County CEO [i.e., Mauk and the Supes make a deal]; County now coughs up a redacted version of D's letter, below.
     (The politically explosive stuff is mostly on page 2.)
     Orange County government has long been prone to scandal—going back to the seventies, the era of Louis Cella, Ronald Caspers, et al. Despite occasional litigation—resulting in the resignations, convictions, and prison terms for numerous supervisors and other government officials—the board has continued to preside over a County government in which cronyism, a spoils system, patronage, incompetence, and opacity prevails.
     Will the Drakodaidis letter finally set off a chain of events that will expose the dark nature of County government and lead to an era of reform?
     Not likely. OC voters are brain dead.

PAGE 1:

PAGE 2:

Note: Probolsky is on the Saddleback College Foundation's Advisory Council. Williams, of course, is a former SOCCCD trustee who was assisted in his political ambitions by the late Tom Fuentes, who was also on the SOCCCD board. Fuentes is a close friend of DA Rackaukas, whose girlfriend Williams made his second in command, despite her utter lack of qualifications. I could go on, but let's stop there.

PAGE 3:

     Note: Voice of OC specialist asserts that at least some of the redactions are in violation of the Brown Act. Thus, it would seem, the Brown Act suit goes forward. See County Releases Redacted Version, Voice of OC. It is likely that, ultimately, the entire letter will be revealed.

County on the Verge of Releasing Drakodaidis Letter (Voice of OC)

UPDATE:
County releases accusatory letter from deputy CEO’s lawyer (OC Reg)

This is the link to the redacted letter that the Reg provides. They acknowledge that they are having trouble with it:
LINK

County Releases Redacted Version of Drakodaidis Claim (Voice of OC)

IVC: the birth of a college with a daffy name

Saddleback North: New Name and a New Valley (LA Times) - May 15, 1985

     After a short search that yielded suggestions such as Gumby College and El Torito College--Home of the Nachos, the Saddleback Community College District board has voted to rename Saddleback College's north campus Irvine Valley Community College.
. . .
     Two of the other names offered by students, teachers and administrators were Rancho Irvine College and Modjeska Community College. Modjeska had a nice ring, [spokeswoman Susan Clark] said, but it presented technical difficulties. "There was a lot of trouble with the spelling, and we couldn't fit it into a fight song."….

     WHAT VALLEY? Some of the wise guys here at Irvine Valley College can be depended upon to note that, despite the college’s name, there is no valley here. According to experts, they say, the college sits upon an “elongated plane” not a valley.
     I came across an old article about the “dedication” of our fair college that sheds a little light on the situation. In “Irvine Gets a ‘Valley’ at College Dedication” (Oct. 23, 1985), reporter Bill Billiter explained that the “5,200-student institution had been the northern branch of the Mission-Viejo based Saddleback College.” Now, he said, it was a “newly independent college.”
     The main speaker for the dedication was State Chancellor Joshua L. Smith, who joked about the college’s name:

Smith

     Smith … noted wryly that “Irvine Valley” created a valley “where none existed before,” adding: “Irvine Valley! ‘What valley?’ we all have been asked. Let’s face it, folks, Irvine Elongated Plane College just doesn’t have the same ring to it.
     “I’m told geologists have argued against the college’s name by pointing out that it is not located in a depressed plane. I say good. I’m delighted this college is not located in a depressed anything.
     “If the ‘sun’ can have a valley; if ‘dolls’ can have a valley; if even ‘the shadow of death’ can have a valley, then surely geologists cannot deny Irvine its own valley,” he observed.

     The audience laughed, we’re told. It was a hot, sunny day. Not a negative word was heard from the people passing by.
     The article goes on to explain:

     [“]Irvine Valley[”] was selected earlier this year as the new name for what had formerly been North Campus of Saddleback College. The name was a way of using Irvine, to please that city, while attempting not to offend Laguna Beach and Tustin, the other communities the college serves, according to officials familiar with the situation.

     OFFENDING TUSTIN.* The decision to build a north campus had been made by trustees in the early 70s. The way I heard it, the people of Tustin were very excited about the possibility of a campus in their city, and, at some point, land in the vicinity of what became the Tustin Marketplace was selected for that purpose. But then (according to the story), the Irvine Company decided to give away some land for the purpose of a community college right here on Irvine Center Drive (and Jeffrey), so the decision was made to build the campus there instead, a couple of miles to the south.
     The City of Tustin has been pissed ever since. It’s like Mayberry over there, so you can’t reason with ‘em.
     That’s the story. Don’t know how much of it is true, but surely some of it is (I got it from a reliable sort).

* * *

     I looked for an article that tells the story of the first appearance of the Irvine “campus.” I found “North Saddleback Campus: It’s Small, Has No Name, but a New College It Is” (LA Times, January 15, 1979), by Tom Fortune. It says

     It will start out the size of a junior high school. And it’s a long way from getting a name of its own.
     But students will begin taking classes next Monday at Orange County’s newest community college, known as the north campus of Saddleback College.
     College officials say they expect to enroll about 1,500 persons at the outset, many of them taking courses both at the new campus … and at Saddleback College (14 miles south in Mission Viejo).
     For a few years, the new school will be merely a satellite campus. No attendance boundaries will be drawn to separate it from Saddleback College. It will not have its own name or a football team.
. . .
     The plan is to develop the campus in 20-acre increments. Each new cluster is to have its own educational theme and central architectural focus.
. . .
     Only two of the three academic buildings in the first cluster will be ready for the start of classes next Monday. A late start on the science building … will delay its availability by a couple of months....
     During a press preview last week, the campus was still very much a construction site. The raw buildings were surrounded by mud. A workman was painting a door through which visitors entered.
     Campus administrator Ed Hart had his full-time faculty there for introduction—all 11 of them.
. . .
     The buildings are of brick with mostly flat roofs. A clock tower is the focus of the central plaza. Lots of outside windows are intended to show off a business machines center and a reading and language lab and entice students inside.
. . .
     Greater things are ahead, promised District Supt. Robert Lombardi. He said the new campus probably will be one of the last community colleges built in the state….

     Eventually, of course, “attendance boundaries” were established. I do believe that El Toro Road is used to divide the district neatly in half.
     And, in 1985, the college did become independent and was indeed named—an unfortunate name, for a college, if you ask me. (“Not really correct, but close enough!” said the politician.)
     I’m not sure what Fortune meant by “educational themes” and “architectural focus” distinguishing the college’s “clusters.” It all looks kinda random to me. The campus does look good, however, and so I don’t mean to complain about its appearance.
     Those buildings were not made of brick, dude. The brick is veneer, like the fake wood on a Walmart office desk. Oh, how shitty it is to tear open the veneer and to behold the particle board beneath!
     Our leader, Pres. Glenn Roquemore (a protégé of Raghu F.U. Mathur), tore out the clock tower about ten years ago—supposedly cuz he and his predecessor (Mathur) had let it become rotten. (The Reb and I deftly liberated the hands of the clock. We occasionally break ‘em out and do performance art.) So the “central plaza” no longer has a focus, unless it’s that goofy sculpture smack dab in the middle.

     The science building? Well, that will soon be gutted and transformed into the new Humanities & Languages/Social & Behavioral Sciences building.
     Twenty years ago, owing to the high percentage of IVC instruction that occurs in that School, H&L was slated to get its own building. But then the odious Raghu Mathur happened (1997). Since his chief critics were among H&L faculty, Mathur, a petty sort, continually contrived to prevent the School from getting new facilities. Luckily, he finally got booted a couple of years ago cuz he had really pissed off trustee Don Wagner. (The initial story was that Mathur had deviously written to the Accred maven, Babs Beno, in an effort to get her to pressure the district not to create Accred committees that mixed faculty and trustees. Mathur had long presented trustees with a negative caricature of faculty and did not want his distortions refuted by trustees' exposure to reality.)
     In recent years, we’ve been promised a temporary “new” building. It is the remodel of the old “science” building (A400). "Gosh thanks," said H&L faculty, warily.
     For months, our School has been meeting with administration and architects to plan the building. At first, the plans looked pretty impressive. Gradually, they've been whittled down.
     By now, we just call it the “incredible shrinking building.” Cynicism and skepticism reigns supreme.

Smith (contemp pic)

*In late 1973, Tustin residents sought to move Tustin out of the Saddleback District and into the Santa Ana District—on the grounds that the distance to Saddleback College was too great for residents. The matter was taken to the Saddleback District trustees, who rejected the proposal. Tustin residents then sought the “petition” route: enough signatures were collected, and then the matter was taken up by the state. (See “Petition Asking District Shift Nears Goal,” LA Times, Nov 25, 1973.) The only other article about the matter I have found (“Tustin Bid for College Shift Suffers Setback,” LA Times, April 18, 1974) states that “The Orange County Committee on School District Organization has Recommended that Tustin remain in the Saddleback College attendance area and not be switched to the Santa Ana....” At present, parts of Tustin continue to be in the SOCCCD.

SEE ALSO
 New College Born: Irvine Valley Becomes Official, Independent Entity (LA Times, July 2, 1985)

Irvine Valley President Plans to Retire Nov. 1 (LA Times, Aug. 26, 1986)

Agenda for Monday's regular BOT meeting

Tom is now a ghost

     AGENDA for Monday's regular meeting available here (a large pdf)
     I just gave it a quick once-over. Obvious points of interest:

2.4 Resolutions/Commendations
     Swearing In: Trustee James R. Wright

4.1 SOCCCD: College Completion [Discussion item:]
     Chancellor Gary Poertner, Saddleback College President Tod Burnett and Irvine Valley College President Glenn Roquemore will provide an overview of the College Completion Agenda and how the colleges are addressing the Student Success Task Force recommendations that are part of this agenda

6.5 Irvine Valley College: Management Reorganization
     Approve the proposed Irvine Valley College management reorganization. The proposed reorganization realigns workloads and managerial responsibilities of four deans in the instructional services division, as follows: 1) Dean, Online Education and Learning Resources; 2) Dean, Fine Arts and Business Sciences; 3) Dean, Liberal Arts; and, 4) Dean, Academic Programs. This proposed reorganization does not create any new positions and there is no fiscal impact.

Special BOT meeting Monday: Chancellor eval

AGENDA for Monday's regular meeting available here (a large pdf)

Early Saddleback College history: dress codes, censorship, faculty wives clubs, and more!

SOME STRAY FACTOIDS culled from LA Times headlines:

“Saddleback College Bonds Approved by Wide Margin,” LA Times, Apr. 10, 1968:
—“Midway returns in the Saddleback Junior College District showed voters were approving a $9.5 million bond issue Tuesday night.” 

“Architects Get the Go-Ahead at Saddleback,” LA Times, May 17, 1968:
—“Trustees of Saddleback Junior College District have authorized architects to proceed with specifications for temporary classroom buildings for Saddleback College.” 

“Saddleback's Campus Construction Starts,” LA Times, May 25, 1968:
—“The brand of Saddleback College was added to those dating back to the area's ranching days when ground for the college's interim campus was broken by trustees in a ceremony...” 

“'Instant Campus' Takes Shape for Saddleback College,” June 21, 1968:
—“Transformation of a graded field into a college campus started Thursday with the assembling of the first steel classrooms for Saddleback College.” 

“Saddleback College Chief Rejects Offer of 3-Year Contract: College Head to Leave Post at Saddleback,” LA Times, June 26, 1968

“Saddleback JC Picks New Superintendent,” LA Times, July 3, 1968:
—“Dr. Fred H. Bremer, 45, dean of instruction and vice president of Saddleback College, will become district superintendent and college president on Aug. 1.” 

“Saddleback Trustees Reject Bid for Delay on Dress Code,” LA Times, Oct. 15, 1968:
—“A student request that the dress code, particularly as it pertains to boys' long hair, be suspended until the new Saddleback College has a chance to form an Associated Student Body was turned down Monday night by the Board of Trustees.” 

“Reagan Dedicates Saddleback, Cites Need for Viewpoint,” LA Times, Oct. 16, 1968:
—“Gov. Reagan told students at the dedication of Saddleback College Tuesday, ‘You are brighter than we were at your age, you are better informed and even healthier’ and ‘we owe you the right to want a purpose, a cause, a banner to follow.’” 

“Long Hair Ban Sets Tone: No-Nonsense Image Marks Saddleback JC’s First Year,” LA Times, Dec. 1, 1968:
—“Saddleback College is only two months old but already it has a reputation as a nononsense campus.” 

“Saddleback to Have More Than 1 Campus,” LA Times, Jan. 22, 1969:
—“Saddleback Junior College District eventually will have a second campus, trustees have decided, but the site won't be selected for three to five years.” 

“Saddleback Adopts highest JC Salary Schedule in State,” LA Times, April 16, 1969:
—“Saddleback College District has adopted a teachers' salary schedule which makes it the highest paying district in the state, at least $5,000—at top of scale—above any other junior college schedule in the county.” 

“Wives Plan Fantasy for Funds,” LA Times, May 23, 1969:
—“Astrologers are predicting good fortune for Saddleback College Faculty Wives as they plan their first major fund-raising event Saturday at the Revere House. 

“Permanent campus to open,” LA Times, June 27, 1969:
—“Saddleback College is on the move again—for the third time since its inception.” 

“College Trustees Slate Meeting,” LA Times, June 30, 1969:
— New trustee officers to be elected “Wednesday.” The meeting was in Crown Valley School. Since last July, Collins had been board pres., Backus had been VP, and Brannon had been clerk. 

“Dress Code Amended: Hair Below Eyebrows is Out at Saddleback College,” LA Times, July 4, 1969:
—“Saddleback College, the only junior college in Orange County with a dress code, is amending its regulations on men's hair styles to make them more specific.” 

“Tea Will Greet Faculty Wives,” LA Times, Aug. 28, 1969 

“College Adopts Speaker Policy,” LA Times, Sep. 17, 1969:
— According to the trustees’ new policy, programs open to the public must get pre-approval from the Board. Programs limited to student units (departments, classes, etc.) must get prior approval of the superintendent. 

“Trustees Maintain Dress Code, Say Economics Dictate Move,” LA Times, Oct. 29, 1969:
—“Saddleback College's no-nonsense image will continue, partly as a matter of economics.” 

“Student Editors Stir Concern—and Reaction,” LA Times, Dec. 7, 1969:
—Tells of new policy by Saddleback College board that governs the student paper, Lariat. The faculty advisor (who is also head of campus PR) is supposed to delete anything he judges not to be in good taste. Students cry "censorship." 

Math/Science 1970

“Avoid Complacency, Chancellor Urges,” LA Times, July 1, 1970:
— The chancellor of the CA Community Colleges warned during a speech to Saddleback College graduates that “complacency and lack of consideration of student rights” could lead to disorder on campus. He was alluding to the trustees’ restrictive dress code for students, which forbade long hair on men. The trustees also acted to deny students a “free speech area” on campus.

The 1967-9 board: the "immorality" of district membership in the School Boards Association

     CONSERVATIVE SLATE. It turns out that the SOCCCD got its start in life with a dollop of arguably inappropriate partisan politics. Essentially, local Repubs took an opportunity to pack the BOT.
     A Feb. 16, 1967, LA Times article (“Last-Minute Push Elects 5 in New JC District”) explains that all five of the men who received the most votes—and who were by that fact elected to the board—during the Feb 1967 special election were part of a slate endorsed by the “conservative” Committee to Elect Competent Trustees (CECT).
     The CECT, said the Times, engaged in “a last-minute, house-to-house distribution of a pamphlet in populous areas throughout the huge district.”
     Looks like it worked.
     Thirty-four people had filed petitions for candidacy by late December, 1966. (See LA Times, Dec. 31, 1966.)
     Among the 29 losing candidates were a chemist, a library administrator, a surgeon, a writer, a carpenter, an actor, and a woman (LA Times, Dec. 31, 1966).
     But those people never had a chance.
     The five anointed ones were:

Louis J. Zitnik: he’s described as a financial analyst for a stockbrokerage firm. He’d been on the Laguna Beach city council (1952-56). Did some teaching. 

Alyn M. Brannon: he’s described as the “owner of the friendly Quality Dairy in Tustin.” He was a past president of the OC Young Republicans. (Later in life, it appears, Mr. Brannon became a convicted tax-evader.)

Michael T. Collins: he’s described as an attorney with Kindel and Anderson in Santa Ana. Also involved in GOP politics. 

Hans Williams Vogel: he’s described as the “publisher-editor of the Orange County Republican Observer.” He was up to his red, white and blue eyeballs in the local GOP. 

Patrick John Backus: He’s described as a counselor in the Huntington Beach Union High School District and an unsuccessful candidate for the OC Board of Supervisors in 1966. (The "Coordinating Republican Assembly" had endorsed him for Supe.)

     Zitnik, the big vote-getter, claimed that he had not been consulted about his inclusion on the slate, though he did not “object” to the group’s support.
     Brannon, Collins, and Vogel, reported the Times, were members of the California Republican Assembly, but they denied that CECT was “promoted” by the CRA. (Among CECT's members were former OC GOP chairman Tom Rogers and other local Republican regulars.)

* * *

     THE SIX THOUSAND. You’ll be surprised to learn that only 27% of 45,000 eligible voters (in the south county area) voted.
     It gets worse (er, more surprising): “The final, unofficial tabulation of votes showed 6,280 favored forming the district and 3,027 opposed.”
     Wow. A meager six thousand voters brought about the SOCCCD!
     Of course, it wasn’t called that then; it was temporarily called the "South Coast Community College District." The district’s name ("Saddleback") would be decided during the board’s organizational meeting in March.
     Taxes? You bet!

     The district will go on the tax rolls July 1, 1968, with a 35-cent tax rate. Whether bonds will be sought or a pay-as-you-go plan will be adopted for construction purposes is one of the questions to be decided.

* * *

     ILLEGAL, IMMORAL, AND FATTENING. In the past, we've found indications—e.g., Vogel and company's peculiarly last-minute, protest-minded modifications of the design of Saddleback College's first building, the library—that the board often acted in a fashion that reflected its degree and kind of staunch and primitive "conservatism."
     Another example: naming the new library after a Republican Congressman (James Utt).
     Another case in point: according to an August 27, 1969, Times article (“Saddleback Trustees Quit Statewide Group”), the board acted to “resign” from the California School Boards Association (CSBA).
     How come? Well, the trustees “questioned the ‘legality and morality’” of using taxpayer money for membership in this "private" group. 
     Commies, I guess. Maybe they had pink erasers at the ends of their #2 pencils.
     Evidently, Mr. Vogel led the charge, and got unanimous support from the other trustees in attendance. Further, the trustees

adopted a resolution asking that the Legislature and the governor “make a full investigation of the legality and morality of using tax monies to further the interests of a private corporation which is controlled by an unrepresentative and small group of individuals which is not responsible or responsive to the electorate which must supply the tax monies.”

     I wonder if the Legislature responded to our heroes' request? Doubt it. This sort of thing, of course, explains Orange County's enduring reputation as a haven for and generator of right-wing loons.
     You’ll recall that, several years ago, then-trustee (and right-wing loon) Don Wagner acted to cease our Libraries’ membership in the American Library Association—essentially, on the same grounds (see video below). Don didn't like the ALA's stance on the Patriot Act and such.
     At the time, he was supported by a majority of trustees. The decision has not been reversed.
     In the 1969 article, the Times noted that

     Virtually every Orange County school board of trustees belongs to the statewide organization [CSBA] which operates on a voluntary basis. The organization is authorized by state legislation to enable a district to utilize tax funds for membership.

     I’ve been unable to determine whether our district is currently a member of the CSBA. However, a perusal of old agendas shows that it is a member of the Orange County School Boards Association, which is affiliated with the CSBA (see here).

Times, Aug. 27, 1969

* * *

     For more about the inaugural board of trustees, see

• Charter trustees: the curious Mr. Alyn Brannon 

• Did right-wing loons establish the SOCCCD? 

• A weird windowless library, alleged marauding flag-swiping Hippies, the protean name, and other district mysteries—Solved!

“We have a DA where law takes a backseat to politics.”

Drakodaidis Attorney Levels More Charges Against Supervisors (Voice of OC)

     Tuesday, moments before the Orange County Board of Supervisors entered closed session to consider the fate of CEO Tom Mauk, an attorney representing Deputy CEO Alisa Drakodaidis unleashed a new set of allegations against supervisors and District Attorney Tony Rackauckas.
     It was the latest dramatic turn in what is increasingly becoming a housecleaning at the county administration building in the wake of charges by Rackauckas this month that Santa Ana Councilman Carlos Bustamante committed multiple sex crimes against women who worked for him while he was an executive at OC Public Works.
     In a three-page letter that was made public during the meeting, Attorney Joel Baruch took issue with the recent release of the county’s scathing report on the operations of the OC Public Works department, which was one of the departments Drakodaidis oversaw.
. . .

How 'bout a big paper clip?

     In his letter, Baruch alleged a pattern of harassment against female workers and executives at the county. The letter took direct aim at the public works internal investigation saying it was a character assassination on Drakodaidis.
     “The political and disparaging attacks made against Alisa are examples of why witnesses, women, and other members of protected classes in the County of Orange workforce were and continue to be fearful to come forward,” read the letter.
     In addition, Baruch took direct aim at the Board of Supervisors, saying their penchant for placing friends and colleagues in top jobs triggered Drakodaidis’ whistle blowing complaint.
     “Your organization’s incompetency and disregard in following Equal Employment Opportunity laws has enabled rampant cronyism to permeate the work environment of Orange County,” read the letter.
. . .
     The letter goes on to say that a state investigation is warranted. “It is obvious that a truly independent review of the county’s compliance with Equal Employment Opportunity law is needed,” the letter read.
     Outside the hearing room, Baruch intensified his attacks against supervisors and Rackauckas.
     “Here’s the problem in this county,” Baruch said. “We have a DA where law takes a backseat to politics. And that’s what happened here.”….

Voice of OC sues the county (and the county will lose!)

Voice of OC Files Open Records Suit Against County (Voice of OC)

     Voice of OC has filed an open records lawsuit against Orange County, seeking access to a letter sent by Deputy CEO Alisa Drakodaidis that alleges a host of improper dealings among supervisors and other county officials.
     According to sources that have seen the letter, Drakodaidis goes so far as to accuse members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors of outright corruption involving contracts, hiring and promotions within OC Public Works, and potentially elsewhere in the county bureaucracy.
. . .
     Drakodaidis' letter … comes as a recent internal investigation by OC Public Works, which was obtained by Voice of OC, found that “past OC Public Works executive leadership has created cultures of favoritism, poor communication, organizational manipulation, and discrimination that have spawned low morale, distrust, and fear within OCPW.”
     County supervisors and other officials have acknowledged the existence of Drakodaidis' missive, but have refused to release it on grounds that it includes private medical information and would violate her privacy.
     Voice of OC and the open government advocacy group Californians Aware, which has joined Voice of OC in the lawsuit, assert that the letter represents a claim by Drakodaidis against the county and therefore must be released under the California Public Records Act.
     “I understand that county supervisors are worried about releasing a letter that makes what they consider to be baseless allegations against supervisors and staffers,” said Voice of OC Editor-in-Chief Norberto Santana. “However, embarrassment is not an exemption under the law in California regarding public records."….

A "culture of dysfunction" at OC Public Works!

     Norberto Santana Jr. of the Voice of OC posted a blockbuster today:

Probe of OC Public Works Finds Culture of Dysfunction (Voice of OC, July 20, 2012)

     A long-awaited internal probe into Orange County Public Works department reveals a dysfunctional organization plagued with meddling from county supervisors’ offices and CEO Tom Mauk on contracts for influential contractors as well as on property improvements for select constituents.
     The report, obtained by Voice of OC, found that “past OC Public Works executive leadership has created cultures of favoritism, poor communication, organizational manipulation, and discrimination that have spawned low morale, distrust, and fear within OCPW.” (continued….)

Report finds culture of distrust at Bustamante’s former agency (OC Reg)

Rebel Girl's Poetry Corner: "guns that are good for nothing"

In the Loop
~by Bob Hicok

I heard from people after the shootings. People
I knew well or barely or not at all. Largely
the same message: how horrible it was, how little
there was to say about how horrible it was.
People wrote, called, mostly e-mailed
because they know I teach at Virginia Tech,
to say, there’s nothing to say. Eventually
I answered these messages: there’s nothing
to say back except of course there’s nothing
to say, thank you for your willingness

to say it. Because this was about nothing.
A boy who felt that he was nothing,
who erased and entered that erasure, and guns
that are good for nothing, and talk of guns
that is good for nothing, and spring
that is good for flowers, and Jesus for some,
and scotch for others, and “and” for me
in this poem, “and” that is good
for sewing the minutes together, which otherwise
go about going away, bereft of us and us
of them. Like a scarf left on a train and nothing
like a scarf left on a train. As if the train,
empty of everything but a scarf, still opens
its doors at every stop, because this
is what a train does, this is what a man does
with his hand on a lever, because otherwise,
why the lever, why the hand, and then it was over,
and then it had just begun.

*

Writing OC history: the Bold and the Ruthless

     IT'S BECOMING CLEAR—to me, a slow learner, I guess—that, at least in our benighted county, the phenomenon, in politics, of brazenly deceptive but highly effective “smear” campaign tactics—including last minute (i.e., impossible to counter) attack mailers—was seized upon and perfected by the one-time consulting firm of Butcher-Forde—and by Butcher and Forde considered independently, both before and after that firm. That is, insofar as one dons one’s historian’s cap and approaches the last half-century of OC political campaigning, asking: How did we get here?—well, that answer, more or less, is these guys, William Butcher (now William Lord-Butcher) and Arnold Forde.
     A crucial aspect of Butcher-Forde’s “success,” it seems, was an early embrace of computer technologies—technologies that are not in themselves dubious, but, in the hands of Butcher-Forde, powerfully magnified their clients’ efforts to gain control of government and to shape it for the sake of their dubious and anti-democratic ends.
     But this kind of campaigning, to be effective in transforming the landscape, takes sustained money. Starting around 1970, developers provided that key ingredient. The combo of big developer money and no-holds-barred campaigning was the new animal that metamorphosed Orange County into the hyper-developed and politically nasty place that it is.

     And again, donning one’s historian’s cap in hopes of identifying a meaningful narrative, with beginning, middle, and end—it appears that one will not go too far wrong in starting with the 1969-1970 campaign of Ron Caspers to challenge and replace 5th District Supervisor and Republican Alton Allen. At least as far as the Republican establishment was concerned, Caspers seemed to come from out of nowhere. But he had money. More specifically, he had “Dick and Doc” money. And he had the talents (the ruthless and clever methods) of Arnold Forde (and later Butcher-Forde) plus the uncommon energy and ambition of young Tom Fuentes. Most importantly—and here, I believe, Fred Harber is the crucial figure—Caspers had a vision of how county government should operate. That vision was actualized after his 1970 election, when “Caspers made the contacts and set the ground rules for developer participation in the grand scheme of patronage carried to an exponential degree” (Tom Rogers).
     I’m sure there are many people who understand what I do not: the complex or convoluted sense in which this scheme or these schemes were masterminded. Richard O’Neill (the “Dick” of “Dick and Doc”) was a rich landowner interested in development; but he was also a Democrat who sought to further the success of his party and its philosophies. I have trouble seeing him as intent on establishing a “grand scheme of patronage” unless it was, in his mind, ultimately in the service of Democratic ends. [A friend who has long worked for Democratic candidates seems to disagree; he insists that O'Neill was not at all idealogical; he was simply pro-development.]
     His partner, Louis Cella, was a Republican, but, like Caspers, Cella didn’t seem particularly interested in furthering any particular political philosophy. He was a kind of grifter who got in over his head. Many, of course, have wondered if there were people behind Cella and all that money he controlled. The mob? Who knows.
     What was Fred Harber’s role in all of this? There’s plenty of evidence that he was the brains behind two or three or more supervisors, pulling the strings. He was brilliant, we’re told—certainly Cella thought so—but it seems clear that, like Cella, he was also dirty. I’ve traced Harber’s history back into the late fifties, and, though he seemed always to have an interest in Democratic politics, he was pretty consistently near or in settings of graft and corruption. He’s the one person in this saga who seemed to view himself as some sort of “mastermind,” and he evidently welcomed being seen as such. (See Puppets and Puppeteers.)

     Lobbyists, we know, have a bad reputation; it is such that they would seem to fit right into this world of schemes and quid pro quo deals. Whatever the fate of the grand schemes mentioned above, it seems clear that several persons involved in the early days of our saga—Fuentes, Lyle Overby, Frank Michelena, et al.—went on to engage in lobbying most foul.
     I started my inquiries into this saga because I was intrigued by Tom Fuentes, a trustee in our district. He was a ruthless man who once wielded great power in our county as chairman of the OC GOP. Tom was a guy who always seemed to keep his eye on the larger chess game of local politics and who thus endlessly involved himself in machinations and schemes relative to the remnants of a spoils system he long ago constructed. In my opinion, starting with his chairmanship of the OC GOP in the mid-80s, Tom maintained the grand scheme of patronage initiated by his mentor in the early 1970s. But he did so on behalf of the Republican Party, and especially its right wing. (See What is a Repuglican?)

     But, like O’Neill (at least, as I understand him), Tom was also, in some sense, a true believer in his particular political philosophy. That’s a big part of what made him fascinating. For much of his history, especially his early history, seemed to stand in stark contrast with that philosophy. He was a profoundly contradictory figure.
     Tom noisily stood for principles such as, “Thou shalt not speak ill of other Republicans.” Accordingly, he stood by Republican incumbents. But his start in politics was his substantial part in an effort to defeat an incumbent Republican, Alton Allen—a Republican that Caspers and company spoke seriously “ill of.”
     Fuentes could not abide rogue Republicans: consider his treatment of Republicans who sought to challenge incumbent Republican office holders (see Guiding with an iron hand). But the whole Caspers emergence of 1969-1970 was a rogue project, relative to the party. It utterly bewildered and confounded the Republican establishment of that time.
     Fuentes was known for his intolerance of Democrats—even of “moderate” Republicans, whom he dismissed as “RINOs” or worse. But, between 1970 and 1974, he was a key player in Team Caspers, which included card-carrying Democrats (e.g., Fred Harber) and was linked to efforts to promote and elect Democratic office holders (such as Ralph Clark and Robert Battin).

* * *

     I recently came across some old news articles that help fill out our story.

Wenke

     1. PLEASURES OF THE HARBER. In “Wenke Says He May Sue Over Letter” (LA Times, June 22, 1972), Republican supervisorial candidate William Wenke expressed his intention to sue Robert Battin’s campaign manager of the 1972 primary campaign. Battin’s manager was Fred Harber.
     That’s because Wenke had been “the target of a last-minute primary campaign letter linking him to school busing in Santa Ana….” Wenke, said the Times, “was accused of helping to get pro-busing candidates elected to the Santa Ana school board.”
     According to the Times, “The letter was linked to … Harber, campaign manager for Supervisor Battin, by two former aides to Battin….” (See Puppets and Puppeteers.)
     Wenke had decided that a lawsuit was his only recourse. But he didn’t want money:

“…I make this proposal,” he added. “If you (Harber) will corroborate the statements … that you, in fact, were behind the school busing smear letter, you may consider this a release from any action against you.”

     Harber responded with utter confidence and defiance: “If he wants to file a lawsuit, let him go ahead.” He added:

Quite frankly, I don’t see where school busing is an issue in this campaign since the board of Supervisors doesn’t have anything to do with that….”

     Well, yeah. That's what makes this smear particularly foul!

Segerstrom

     2. THE BOLD & THE RUTHLESS. In “Redistricting Eliminates 4 Potential Battin Foes” (Oct. 29, 1971), the Times reports “redistricting” actions that turn out to be highly convenient for a certain supervisor:

     All of next year’s known potential election opponents of Board of Supervisors Chairman Robert Battin were eliminated by this week’s supervisorial redistricting, detailed maps of the new boundaries showed Thursday.
     The maps … showed that three rumored candidates … were wiped out by shifts of territory from Battin’s 1st District to Supervisor Ralph Clark’s 4th District.
     The residence of a fourth possible opponent … was transferred from the 1st District to Supervisor Ronald Caspers’ 5th District.
     …[That fourth opponent’s] transfer was made public Wednesday when [he] appeared before the board to plead for revision to restore all of his city … to the 1st District.
     That effort failed when Battin, Caspers and Supervisor William Phillips approved the redistricting map as submitted.
. . .
     But it was not until detailed maps of the changes became available that it was known that the population shifts also had eliminated both attorney William Wenke and rancher Henry Segerstrom, both of whom live in the north Santa Ana area.
     Their census tract … was shifted to the 4th District as a finger jutting into the 1st District.
     The change appeared to be politically fortunate for the board’s chairman, but Battin’s executive aide said no thought was given to the residences of potential candidates when the revised district lines were drawn.
. . .
     The change also affected the district residence of two other influential persons connected with county government. Both Dr. Louis Cella Jr. and Fred Harber, close associates of Battin since his election in 1968, live in the area and are now within Clark’s district.

Butcher/Forde, c. 1982