SOCCCD Trustee candidate Ryan Dack just sent me his opponent’s (James Wright’s) late filing of a 9-page “form 460” to which was attached a form 497 “contribution report.” Here’s that last document:
Filed today, it reveals that Wright received over $2,000 ($3982.78, precisely the cost of a 200-word campaign statement) from the union on August 4th.
As I explained yesterday, campaign laws require that a candidate file a 460 to reveal receipt of contributions of $2,000 or more. Wright had failed to do that—until today.
 |
| Click on graphic go enlarge |
For what it's worth, I think Dack is an attractive, energetic, and progressive candidate and, as such, a perfect replacement for James Wright and his tired and clueless ways. Tired and clueless: that could be said about most of the rest of the SOCCCD board of trustees.
It is time for a change.
31 comments:
The power of the blog! I loved how Glenn used to rail against it and had Diane O. to read it every day and report to him about it. Ha! (Did Diane EVER apologize for all the shit she did to everyone on behalf of him? Don't think bad thoughts! Don't be too gay!) Remember how Glenn used to threaten people - employees! - about the blog? Ha! The blog has outlived him.
Interesting that the only entity aside from himself that seems to support Wright is the union - and I get why they do, but that points to his weakness, yes? And even the union and teachers can't count on him to do what's right unless he is pushed to it. Time for a change. It might not happen next week, but next time.
Roy said that Anonymous bloggers are cowards. Too many cowards here!
pot kettle black anon 9:20! pot kettle black!
Thank you.
It’s time for change. We need thoughtful board members who realize they aren’t royalty. You can tell they expect everyone to kiss up to them.
Our board is out of step with the times. Do you really think they understand the concerns of our students?
They seem to still be living in a world where George Bush is President.
YES. I don’t get the sense that the board has the slightest interest in actual public service. They are in it for the “status” which is laughable.
I've made a Medium post about this if anyone is interested in reading more about Wright's failure to disclose his campaign finance information.
https://medium.com/@RyanDack/the-upsetting-reality-of-incumbent-trustee-james-r-wrights-campaign-finance-violations-a536edd480aa
Ryan Dack, you're a dirty politician. When you run for office, focus on what you will do for the district not on your opponent. Then you will get my vote.
4:38, I think you're jumping to conclusions rather quickly. Dack does have an educational agenda and is running on it but what is so wrong with pointing out an opponent's failure to follow the law? How does that make a candidate "dirty"? Does Wright also become "dirty" when he fails to disclose campaign donations?
8:40 please explain your statements with proof; no proof means fake news.
Yes, board members are not royalty but they still deserve respect. You don't lambast them publicly during the election period!
"You can tell they expect everyone to kiss up to them." Only your union-- as 9:20 stated "Interesting that the only entity aside from himself that seems to support Wright is the union - and I get why they do..."
"Our board is out of step with the times. Do you really think they understand the concerns of our students?" I guess so.. but do you, faculty?? "The pot calling the kettle black."
@8:40am are you talking about George Bush or Donald Trump---LMAO! You sound like-- you know. JOKE!
The election cycle is exactly when you call attention to problems.
Only a board member could write something so entitled.
Mr. Dack may bring different views to the BOT. Good but Jim Wright helped remove T. Burnett who never taught, had very little influence at the state level (which he keep saying he did), and had no college administrative experience. It took Gary (then Chancellor) and a few BOT members to get him off campus because of the damage being done. Jim was and is always available, will speak candidly and will entertain ideas other than his own.
The oversight of the $2K is but one thing and BOT member Wright can correct that. Given what is occurring at the colleges and how Covid is affecting everything around us, I still strongly support Jim with whom I worked over the decades--when he was Dean of MSE and then a BOT member.
Didn't Wright - along with the majority of the board - also see fit to install Burnett and keep him there for years and years? Nine years? I think we could have more responsive board leadership. Don't even get me started on how they looked past the many issues with Roquemore, for well over a decade. Their default is celebration and ceremony.
The problem with the board is their concern is only about impressing voters who don’t work within the district. They forget students and staff are voters too. They demand respect and yes,ass kissing, but don’t act that way themselves. They want the ceremony and celebration but don’t seem to really care about our true mission.
It’s time for new board members. A clean sweep is due.
I think it would be great if the board was moved OFF Saddleback's campus - perhaps that would help remind some of them that they need to be responsive to both colleges (and ATEP). Two of them consistently refer to Saddleback when talking about the district. It's like IVC doesn't exist or is not as important. Why not move district's offices to ATEP?
It would be good to see more of them around beyond photo ops.
Yes--a faculty member lambasting the board publicly--can't even do their own job right--doesn't respond to students email or takes forever to respond! Very unprofessional and mean! Before you attack the board ask yourselves--Do I serve my students well? You have more time on social media than focusing on your job or taking care of students. What a shame!
Please no. We don’t need to see more of the board. Not this board, anyway.
8:58am, "I don’t get the sense that the board has the slightest interest in actual public service. They are in it for the “status” which is laughable."
It is always convenient to judge without facts. Have you taken the time to attend the board meetings or watch the board meeting videos? If not, then don't judge.
Years ago, a debate raged about moving the BOT off Saddleback campus. Serious consideration was given to a site just down from Saddleback. It fell through. And having the BOT on the SC campus probably was a disservice to IVC. Why they decided not to (at least one reason given back then} was cost.
1:48 pm what if you get what you want and the next board is worse? How will you fight for faculty? All talk....
Bob please explain why it was a disservice to IVC having the BOT on the SC Campus????
I think there are many different ways of "fighting" for the faculty. Who is to say that a new board member (Dack) who is endorsed by a FA-endorsed candidate (Inmon) wouldn't ALSO be supportive of faculty concerns? Who is to say THIS board is as good as it gets for faculty, staff and students?
Voting out of fear can really be a problem. It has been worse. Some of the people on the board - and in the district - remember those days.
Our board could be better and more representative.
As individuals, they are nice people. As elected representatives...well.
I find the argument that we should just be grateful and shut up to be so discouraging coming from educators.
We are fortunate in the leadership of the chancellor but it couldn't have been easy for her.
Time for a change.
IVC faculty and staff felt that having the BOT offices on the SC campus made it easier for SC to have access and, perhaps, for the BOT and the Chancellor's office to feel closer to SC. I sat through dozens of meetings where this would come up in Chancellor's Cabinet, at IVC and Saddleback Senates' meeting and Presidents' sessions.
Very well said!
Of course, voting is about having hope for better. Trump proves that’s not always the case. It very well may be that a newly elected member turns out to be a disappointment. We could say the same about the current members.
It could also be said that this is something that elected officials should keep in mind. Their re-election is not a sure thing, so perhaps it is in their best interest to demonstrate that their values coincide with those of the electorate who aren’t Republicans and over the age of 65.
I like the Chancellor and the two presidents, but this board has been a problem for a long time, most recently manifested by their efforts to micromanage instructor invitations of guest speakers. This crew maintained support of really bad administrators—like Roquemore and Burnett—despite constant complaints about them from faculty and others. I'm sorry, but all they see is that cozy meeting room and their catering services, and that's all in one building, at Saddleback.
I'll never understand why it took them 17 years to figure out that Roquemore was a problem. (Things are much better now, thank you.)
I've attended lots of board meetings, and it's clear that there are some very weak trustees. Wright is a nice guy, I'm sure, but he's really very conservative (ex-military) and very set in his ways. It's true: he often speaks about the district as if it were Saddleback College. He's been doing that for years.
I still think Jemal is among the better trustees, but we can do a lot better than Wright and a few others—and I see nothing but positives about candidate Dack.
With regard to the issue of keeping the district at Saddleback College—you've got to talk to denizens of iVC to get a sense of how strongly they feel about this and why. It is impossible for an IVC person to hang around the board and not get the idea that, for them, Saddleback College is the main thing, and IVC is an afterthought, a college way off in the distance somewhere. Things may change with the new chancellor; hope so. But the district location at Saddleback doesn't help.
Bob is right. This issue has come up, even fairly recently, and the board shot down the proposal to move the district to El Toro Road owing to cost. They didn't spend any time or effort to justify their decision, which pissed off a lot of people at IVC. As usual.
They see the cozy meeting room, and student-centered events as campaign events. Watch them stumble all over themselves at graduation to shake the students’ hands first.
They aren’t on that stage for the students.
Maybe future trustees would act similarly self centered, but I’m willing to take that chance.
"IVC faculty and staff felt that having the BOT offices on the SC campus made it easier for SC to have access and, perhaps, for the BOT and the Chancellor's office to feel closer to SC."
I beg to disagree Bob. "IVC" FACULTY (ie humanities) have been in control of the faculty association for years, so.....
Please tell us what C. Inmon did for the faculty when she was a state faculty leader as shown in her CV. Any significant achievements?
Wow Trump campaign rallies are all over California! Peaceful and festive too!
As a faculty leader at Saddleback many of us would be happy to see the district move off of our campus for many reasons.
The convenience of dropping in on the chancellor is far outweighed by what a space hog and freeloading tenant they are.
Oh, and it isn't fair to IVC as well.
Post a Comment