When solicitations are threats (and, as always, Tom Fuentes was there)

     An Orange County developer, actively seeking County Planning commission approval of a rezoning project, claims he was once approached following a public hearing by an appointed county official.
     The official, who has since resigned his position, suggested that one developer might want to buy two tickets to a high-priced political dinner for a local officeholer.
     “I told him to go to hell and walked away,” the developer said in a recent interview. “The next week, our deal was turned down by the commission.
     “I could never prove that the two things were related but there was sure a damn strong inference that they were.”

—LA Times, 1974

Dorothy Fortune

     THE SETTING: OLD GUARD SANS UNION: By some time in 1998,* control over the union was back in the hands of decent faculty, but the new leadership soon found union coffers to be empty. Attempts at locating and acquiring Old Guard financial records were brazenly thwarted. As I recall (and here my memory is hazy), we never really got a clear accounting of where all the money went and who exactly controlled it. (I’ve been told by union insiders that CTA/CCA failed to aggressively assess Old Guard leadership because Sherry Miller-White, the union front-person, was African-American.)
     Though the Old Guard no longer controlled the union, it wasn’t quite dead. During the election of 1998, they managed to help elect two new right-wingers: Don Wagner and Nancy Padberg. (The "board majority" grew to five.)
     By the election of 2000, these rogue unionists were still somewhat organized. One wonders if the resourceful Mr. Tom Fuentes—for he had just arrived on the scene—did not take steps to enhance their viability. They had money—one wonders where it came from—and they backed the “slate” of Don Davis (against Lang), Dorothy Fortune (against William Shane), Tom Fuentes (against Bob Loeffler), and John Williams (against Bill Hochmuth). 
     Lang/Shane/Loeffler/Hochmuth billed themselves as the “Clean Slate.”
     Of the Clean Slate, only Lang prevailed. Unsurprisingly, all of the winners of the 2000 election, Lang included, went into it with the powerful “incumbent” advantage.
     Fuentes, the long-time chairman of the Orange County GOP, had been appointed to the board only four months earlier (in July) when the Holocaust-denying trustee Steve Frogue announced his intention of resigning.
     At the time, observers smelled a rat. They smelled accurately.

* * *

     KOPFSTEIN'S CURIOUS LETTER. I’ve come across an old LA Times article (“South O.C. Seats Have 10 Trading Hostilities,” October 31, 2000) from just before the election of 2000. It was written by our old pal Jeff Gottlieb, who has since made a name for himself (Pulitzer!) covering such stories as the Bell scandal. 
     Jeff reported:

Jeff Gottlieb

     …[T]here have been nonstop battles between the administration and the faculty, with disputes often ending up in court and the district typically being ordered to back off and pay its opponents' legal fees.
     This history sets the stage for the current contentious campaign.
     For example, four single-page anonymous fliers are circulating, filled with misinformation and inflammatory language that portray the Clean candidates as supporting domestic-partner benefits and a gay and lesbian studies program.
     These have been sent out with no return address, stuffed in mailboxes and even faxed to some people. It is difficult to tell how widely they have been distributed.
     The candidates named in the mailers said the subject is not even an issue in the campaign. Board President Padberg, who is part of the board majority, agreed. "I have no knowledge this [domestic partners] is going to be coming to the board," she said, adding it won't be up for discussion for at least two years, when a new contract is negotiated with teachers.
. . .
     Another flier, from a group identifying itself as "Conservative Americans for College Excellence," was mailed to residents of Laguna Woods. The flier endorses "true conservative American candidates" Davis, Williams, Fortune and Fuentes. "Don't let your education tax dollars be diverted from [classes for seniors] to pay for Same-Sex Domestic Partner Benefits," the flier states.
     This is not the first time that fliers with references to gay issues have become part of a campaign in the college district.
     In 1996, the teachers' union spent nearly $40,000 on a slick campaign piece that attacked first-time candidate Lang and his slate of candidates for using "your education tax dollars to pay for seminars and conferences to educate participants about the Gay & Lesbian Lifestyle." A more liberal leadership took over the union in 1998, and the organization's endorsements changed accordingly.
     Hostility between conservatives and liberals within the union continues.
     After the change in leadership, the California Teachers Assn. sent a team to investigate a number of allegations, including that money raised by the union to support political candidates had been mismanaged.
     The leader of the audit team, David Lebow, said the continuing probe centers on what happened to money collected for the union's political action committee at the rate of $15,000 to $30,000 a year. When the union leadership changed, the departing officers said there was no money left in the account and closed it down. Most of the former union presidents who controlled the fund have refused to cooperate or to turn over records, Lebow said, adding that the issue may be taken to court.
     One former union president, Robert Kopfstein, did provide investigators with the information he had available, Lebow said.
     Kopfstein, a professor at Saddleback, has since become treasurer of the South Orange County Taxpayers for Quality Education, and is backing incumbent trustees Fortune, Fuentes and Williams.

     What comes next really caught my eye:

Mr. Kopfstein

     On invitations for a Sept. 29 fund-raiser, Kopfstein added a handwritten note to 20 vendors who had done business with the district. "We hope that you can help support the campaigns of these incumbent trustees who, in the past, have shown support for your business," he wrote.
     District Chancellor Cedric Sampson said one vendor complained the note was inappropriate, but Sampson said he [did] not think there was anything illegal about it.
     Kopfstein defended the note. "What I'm saying here is this is someone with a connection with Saddleback College and they should be concerned about the trustees who are elected," he said. "If they're doing business, there's a vested interest in the school."

     Presumably, the vendor judged the solicitation to be inappropriate because it could easily be viewed as a threat: pay up or we’ll give the contract to somebody else.
     Such veiled threats are familiar in politics—where the citizenry are clueless and the regulations are lax. Like in OC.

* * *

     1974: WORRIES ABOUT SPECIAL INTERESTS. Back in 1974, just months before the general election (in Orange County), the LA Times’ Don Smith wrote a lengthy piece about fund raising (“Fund Raising: A Basic Necessity of Political Life,” Aug 11, 1974) and the unseemly actions that campaign finance pressures yielded. It started with the story that heads this post: an OC developer tells of being approached by a county official who suggested the developer might want to buy tickets for a certain office holder's political fund-raiser. The developer refused.  The next week the developer's plan was rejected by the county.
     Smith marveled at the amounts that some incumbent candidates for non-partisan offices had collected for the recent June primary. For instance, incumbent supervisor Caspers had collected $196,264—for a job that made only $15K a year.
     Smith quotes a visitor from Chicago, a town notorious for corruption:

     “In Chicago,” she explained, “you know who you have to pay and how much to get something done. Here, there is no price tag. They hit you for anything they can get.”

     One campaign contributor whom Smith interviewed said,

     “You give,” he snorted, “because you know there is a contract coming up. If you don’t, you might not be considered. We don’t want all of it but we do expect to get our fair share. Contributions are one way to make sure the guy remembers your name.”

     At the time, Tom Fuentes was an aide to Ron Caspers, who had just disappeared in a boating incident off the coast of Baja.
     Fuentes explained Team Caspers' reliance on $1,000-a-plate or $500-a-plate testimonial dinners:

     “We used some very special invitations for those,” Fuentes explained. “One time, we sent a dozen roses to each person on the list with the invitation included in the gift card. Another time, we used a special parchment invitation with a red ribbon around it.”
     The key attraction for such events is a gourmet meal in a high-quality restaurant.
     For example, Caspers’ last such affair, which drew 21 guests, was held in the Westgate Plaza Hotel in San Diego. Guests were flown there on a chartered jet from Orange County.

     Smith spoke with one contributor who was asked to sell ten tickets for an expensive affair. By that time, everyone had already written a check or two, and so he only sold a few. He purchased the rest out of his own pocket:

     Asked what would have happened if he had simply returned [the tickets] unsold, he simply shrugged.
     “Probably nothing,” he replied. “We had contributed to all the other supervisors also, so one vote might not have hurt us. On the other hand, if the guy got mad at us, he could have blocked us from getting a contract in this district. So I ate the $500 and let it go.”

     Once again, our old friend Frank Michelena, a powerful OC lobbyist, popped up. According to Smith, he donated $1,000 to each of the incumbent supervisors (on behalf of a client). And he personally “tossed in a total of $7,000 to Caspers’ campaign and another $1,000 to Supervisor Ralph Clark.” (Caspers and Clark, of course, were in Richard O’Neill and Louis Cella’s stable.)
     Why did he do that?

     “In my business, it means a lot—as well as a lot of money for some of my clients—to be able to pick up the phone and get right through. ¶ “Someone who isn’t so well-known will also get through but it may take a little time to do it. With the costs involved in developing and building today, that quick access can save a lot of money for my clients.”

     Evidently, the OC Grand Jury was concerned about then-current campaign practices:

     In its farewell report, the jury contended that potential contributors are often harassed and claimed that at least one large contributor actually leaves the county before an election to avoid solicitations.
     The report called on county officials to stop soliciting funds from firms doing business with the county….

     Those solicitations, of course, could be viewed as veiled threats. No doubt, often, that’s just what they were.

* * *

     BENTS' ALLEGATIONS OF "STRONG-ARMING." Less than three months before the above article, Smith reported a curious press conference held by one of Supervisor Ron Caspers’ Republican challengers for the upcoming primary (“Fund-Raising Tactics by Caspers Criticized,” May 31, 1974):

     …[S]upervisorial candidate Marcia Bents charged Thursday that Supervisor Ronald Caspers has “strong-armed” firms into contributing to his campaign.
     Mrs. Bents, referring to Caspers’ latest financial report showing more than $222,000 in contributions, said the firms made contributions “because they were afraid not to give.” These firms are doing business with the county or seeking county permits, she said.

     Naturally, Team Caspers was there to rebut Bents’ charges. As usual, Team Caspers meant, not Caspers himself, but Tom Fuentes. (As we’ve seen, Tom seemed to be much more than an executive aide.) According to Smith, Fuentes asserted that Bents’ charges had “no element of truth.”

     “They are only an indication of her own floundering campaign,” Fuentes said, “and are unsupported by facts. [Evidently, he did not provide any facts.] The people and firms who contribute to Ron do so because they support what he is doing.”
     At a courthouse press-room conference, Mrs. Bents handed newsmen a list of 26 firms and individuals who have donated or pledged $1,000 or more to Caspers’ campaign. All of these donors are involved in subdivisions, zone changes, variance use permits, tracts, special projects or contracts with the county.
     “…some of these firms have expressed to me, privately, that they felt they were being forced into making substantial contributions to Caspers’ campaign.”

     Bents also presented a written signed statement by former Caspers aide H. Ronald Jones in which the latter states that “he had worked on county time to address and stuff envelopes for a Caspers’ testimonial dinner….”
     Further, “Jones charged that he had also used county time and a county car to drive to Los Angeles County to pick up materials for Fuentes’ campaign for the County Republican Central Committee.”
     –Evidently, the latter is contrary to county policy.

* * *

     TOM FUENTES, BULLY: As Orange County GOP chairman, Fuentes had become notorious for strongly discouraging challenges to Republican incumbents, no matter how odious. Some of these people reported that Fuentes had actually threatened them:

     "He said my business would be ruined, and that my husband's business would be ruined," said [former Superior Court Judge Judith] Ryan, a challenger to U.S. Rep. Robert K. Dornan for his seat in 1992. "I was taken aback." (Guiding With an Iron Hand, Times, July 11, 1996)

     The more you look at it the more the fabric that is Orange County Republican politics—where it concerns the late Tom Fuentes—is surprisingly homogeneous.

~ ~ ~

     *BACKGROUND: During the SOCCCD trustees campaign of 1996, a group of phenomenally unprincipled and secretive faculty—I dubbed them the "Old Guard"—controlled the faculty union and its substantial PAC money. These union leaders (Sherry Miller-White, Sharon MacMillan, and the guys for whom they fronted: Mike Runyan, Tom Carroll, et al.) supported the trustee candidacies of “fiscal conservatives” John Williams, Steven Frogue, Dorothy Fortune, and Don Davis. They printed and mailed a homophobic and stunningly deceptive flier to persuade local Republicans to defeat the slate of benign non-union (P.I.E.) candidates, including Dave Lang. (Confused? Lang “switched sides” in about 2005.)
     The Old Guard’s crew of Neanderthals (except for Davis) prevailed, and thus it was that, starting in December of 1996, the district was thrust into the “board majority” era, a period of incompetence, decline, venality, and embarrassment.
     Through the majority’s first years, union leadership steadfastly supported “their” board members, even as the latter brought the district to near fiscal disaster (we were placed on the "watch" list), endless accreditation difficulties, 1st Amendment lawsuits, and very unflattering news stories.
     (Motive? The Old Guard trustees wanted help paying for their campaigns, and, as near as anyone could tell, the Old Guard had struck a “quid pro quo” deal with these trustees to secure faculty contracts that benefited some at the expense of others.)
     Gradually (by 1998), horrified rank and file faculty took back control of their union, despite the hapless CTA/CCA.

"Unseemly" May meeting of the SOCCCD BOT: board will appoint Fuentes' replacement!

One of Tom's "relatives" is interested
in the vacancy. But which one?

     • [Be sure to check out Tere's Board Meeting Highlights; for streaming video, go here.]

     • [You may wish to skip down to the account of the "special" meeting that followed this regular meeting. It concerned whether to pursue an appointment of a replacement for Fuentes.]

     6:05 p.m.  - WOW, I just entered the Ronnie Reagan meeting room and I am struck by the New Age piano tinklings. What's that all about? Then I see the endless loop of tender pics of the late Tom Fuentes displayed on the screen. Here's Tom with that rat bastard John Williams. Here's Tom standing before that fake picture of that fake lake in Lake Forest. Here's Tom with Ronald Reagan's head; here's Tom holding forth at the Balboa Bay Club; etc.
     Good grief.
     Will this be the tone of the evening? Our beloved Tomster is dead. How will we ever go on?
     Meanwhile, the room is nearly full. Something's up, and it can't just be the death of Tom Fuentes. Somebody is gonna get a prize for something, that's fer sher.
     Back in a minute.
     6:09 - Here we go!
     Nancy Padberg: "We've lost one of our members, Saturday evening." (Well, no. Friday evening.) She identifies the location of the funeral or something. She doesn't spend much time on this Fuentes thing. Sheesh!
     Padberg corrects a misreported action last month as Marcia stares into space.
     Marcia Milchiker reports actions taken in closed session (but not before she has trouble with her mike): Another unpaid leave with benefits. Another unpaid leave with benefits approved. Another. All part-time classified. Finally, rejected claim filed by student against district.

Jay: some words & a mo-
ment of silence for Tom

     Invocation by Bill Jay: "Tom Fuentes deserves a little time, so sit down." (OK.)
     Says Jay: [Tom was] a straight-shooter. Telling it like it was. Not average politician, who tries to be forceful, but is benign if he might offend a constituency. Tom never hesitated. He was a terrific board member. For 12 years. Not many hang around that long. [Marcia winces.] Before that, he was Mr. Politician in OC. He was Mr. Republican. If you wanted to run for anything [and you were a Republican], Tom was right in there working on it. Lots of local offices. People sought his help. He'd been a politician very early. Admired Nixon tremendously. He managed to secure non-partisan Supervisorial seats. While on the board, he was the clerk for at least five years. (Jay seems to be running out of positive things to say. Clerk for five years? Who cares?) He was sort of the spokesman for the board, often MCing. He did a fine job. He was a seminarian for a while, after graduating from Chapman College. [Jay skips over the Caspers years.] Whenever anything reverential or sacred happened, we always had Tom do it. "A very righteous guy." I learned (he smiles) that he was always right. He was also terribly loyal. Always had your back. Also loyal to students, employees, the community. (Lang smiles. How come? Does he remember that midnight down at the crossroads with Tom?) Always a very frugal board member. Loyalty was his number 1 aim. You can't ask for much more than that. [Sure you can.] Finally, more than that, he was a friend. When you really got to know him, he was a friend. [Yeah, unless you were his enemy.] To all concerned. Shock and sorrow: we say goodbye to Tom. He's been a wonderful influence on this board and community.
     (A moment of silence. I type. The distinct sound of chicklets fills the hall.)

     Lang leads the pledge. What will he do without his special friend? Maybe he's moved on to TJ?
     They swear in new trustee Heather Park. Cute kid. Doesn't say much. I like her already.

Board Prez Nancy P

     Next: RESOLUTIONS
     Saddleback College "employee of the year." Valerie Senior. She says that she really enjoys her job.
     (As this goes on, I see that Fuentes' visage is still displayed on the screen above and before us. But at least they turned off that damned piano noodling.)
     IVC employee of year, Barry Miller. Barry gets parking certificate. American Express freebie.
     (Tom is still smiling down at us.)
     (TJ Prendergast carps that he was the only trustee not to get an iPod. Laughter.)
     Next: district employee of the year. Patty Houghton(?). Teddi Lorch comes up with her, holding posies. Colorful ones. The trustees do roll call vote (as before). Photo op, again. She says: wonderful co-workers. I'm a very lucky person. (Bugay puts in a plug for her.)
     Next: IVC Model UN -- 2012 National Champs. The whole team comes up--maybe 7 people. Marcia reads resolution. Applause. Roll call vote. Photo op.
     6:30 - Stu Frame introduces the MUN students. He's been advisor for last 14 years. Another advisor, from UCR, took the students to New York for this competition. He's teaching tonight. (Nancy tries to push things along, but Stu ain't pickin' up her vibe.) Each student briefly speaks. A kid named Eric Hanson distinguishes himself with humility, saying, "I won the most awards this year." (Smiles and giggles.)

     Final Resolution: IVC Speech and debate team, national champions. Gary Ribald (um, Rybold) comes up with 12 of the team. Marcia reads the res. Roll call vote. Photo op. Gary speaks: "This team was just a joy to work with." New facilities in BSTIC building was a big help. Thanks ASIVC. Administration. Facilities. (Wow, I've never heard anyone thank a building before!)

Public comments:
     1. Prez Tod Burnett: recognizes three students. Has them come up. Also invites two coaches. Champion hammer throwers. Liz displays her sexy lock tats (and 4.0 gpa). Former Marine. (Yes, yes—once a Marine, always a Marine.) Remy, like Liz, never threw a hammer until he arrived at Saddleback, and coach spotted his talent. Liz speaks briefly and well. Remy too, who, owing to his success, will be going to his "dream school."
     2. Burnett continues: recognizing Joseph Trejo.... Another success in Model UN. Marine vet. Will go to Drexel U. Lee Haggerty is advisor. Joe speaks briefly, well. That's it.
     3. Patti Weeks: asks Burnet and Jim Wright to come up. Her facility assists 5000 Saddleback students with tutoring. Some tutors are volunteers. Wants to recognize those who volunteered 100 hours or more. She has them stand. Photo op. They get "hearty hand clasps" from Burnett and Wright as their reward. I'd check my wallet.
     4. Paula Jacobs: recently became Prez of Faculty Association (union). Extends condolences to Fuentes family.

Board reports (6:50 p.m.):
     Bill Jay: I've said enough. (Laughter.)
     Frank Meldau: attended my first ever fashion show. Gwen Plano's retirement party. Nurses pinning. Attended both commencements, outstanding events. IVC Speech and debate team banquet: "those people know how to party." (Christian spin-the-bottle?) Looking forward to KSBR birthday bash.
     Marcia Milchiker: wonderful time of year. Attended commencements. Newly tenured faculty celebration. Fish BBQ, Plano's retirement party, etc. (Quite a list. You know Marcia. Tom Fuentes' image continues to menace the building.) Rat a tat tat go the Marciaisms. Prayers to Fuentes family. Trustee for 12 years. Service much appreciated.
     TJ Prendergast: attended School Board association event with Scott Lay as speaker. Attended nurses pinning. "I love nurses and they love me." Went to my second commencement. Tom got sick soon after I came aboard. Too bad; sounds like he was someone good to know.
     Nancy Padberg: attended scholarship award ceremonies. Anonymous person started a scholarship "in my name." Also in Don Rickner's name. Commencements. All great. May is a busy time. Condolences to Tom Fuentes' family. Knew him for many years. He will be greatly missed. (Once again, Nancy manages to say as little as possible in praise of the F-man. Hell hath no fury like a Nancy scorned.)
     Dave Lang: attended nurses pinnings, commencements. All outstanding. Terribly saddened by loss of our colleague, Tom Fuentes. (I'll bet.) Such an iconic individual, who graduated to his next level. (Huh?) Want to add to the biographical record: he was a thoughtful trustee. I appreciated his unique insights and perspectives. I'll miss his "wisdom, passion, and polish."
     Chancellor's report (Gary Poertner): Commencements were joyful events. We have some new old faces at the table here. New rep for SC Ac Senate, Bob Cosgrove. IVC Ac Senate President Kathy Schmeidler. Paula as prez of FA. (All familiar faces.) Passes on his condolensces to Fuentes family. Enjoyed knowing him. Very unique individual. Great integrity to his own views, beliefs.

The late Tom Fuentes with Jolene, c. mid-80s

(we're pulling item 6.8.)

Discussion item: Basic Aid allocations. Fitzsimmons presents.
     Will outline recommendations for Basic Aid for various projects. Groundbreaking: based on district-wide planning efforts, etc. Transparency, interactive communication.
     Accreditation recommendation 2: transparency and inclusive process, etc. After the teams came and gave recommendation, a committee was formed. Addressed this rec. They helped develop board policy. Then Administrative regulation. Approved in Feb. Few Basic Aid projects were authorized. Waited for BP and AR implemented. So we've got two years of basic aid funding.
     BARK was formed. Basic Aid process. Planning must drive our budget process. The tentative budget comes to you (board) next month.
     --It gets a bit tedious, no fault of Fitzsimmons'. Freakin' basic aid.
     (Fuentes slide replaced with slides concerning Basic Aid. At last!)
     Shows slide: amount available for allocation: $74,337,592. Gosh.
     Capital Projects: $48,858, 230.
     District-wide technology projects: $10,177,855
     Etc.
     Fitzsimmons goes through pages of report that we cannot see. The trustees seem to follow. (See link above.)

Jolene Fuentes, c. 1986

     Prendergast: we don't use basic aid funding for long-term expenses. But this is going to salaries, right?
     F: groundskeeper, maintenance worker, et al.--a district expense at ATEP. Why should IVC have to pay for this? That was the reasoning.
     Lang: we always funded ATEP out of basic aid. We've been criticized for doing so. But now more transparent. Will be self-sustaining in the future. This is a terrific report. Very transparent way of allocating these dollars. Commending the BARK committee. Very fair. Only minor criticism: some jargon in here like "dude" and "fusion." (Laughter.) F: everything will be coming back to you, etc.

Consent calendar:
     Pull 5.5, 5.6. Move. Unanimous approval.

Item 5.5/5.6:
     These things pass unanimously.

     6.1 -- consolidating elections for boards. It reduces the cost. Roll call vote: unanimous.
     6.2 -- Board Policy revisions. Technical. Approved unanimously.
     6.3 -- Board Policy revisions. Inst'l memberships, etc. For review and study.
     6.4 -- Richard White's request to rescind sabbatical. OK
     6.5 -- New salaries, I think, for managers and administrators. Nancy alludes to the length of the period in which this has been discussed. Passes unanimously. See below:

Someone left this document under my door this morning (May 22). It is entitled Exhibit A, but it does not match the exhibit A for item 6.5 last night

     6.6 -- Academic Personnel Actions. New faculty members.
     6.7 -- Classified personnel. Approved unanimously.
     6.8 -- pulled.

     7.1 Board report requested by TJ Prendergast re purchasing pool.
     7.2 Accred reports (two colleges). Burnett: our annual report, given each year. "We're all pretty familiar with it," says Nancy. Roquemore: same old thing.
     7.3 Mission statements, annual review. Burnett: no change to our vision or mission statement. Same for IVC/Roquemore. Peebles: no change, blah blah blah.
     7.4 Saddleback College speakers.
     7.5 Basic Aid report. No changes. Fitzsimmons explains some issue from last month.
     7.6 Facilities plan status report.
     7.7 Monthly financial status report. (Oddly, screen goes blank.)
     7.8 Etc.

Jolene Fuentes, c. 2009

Constituent groups:
     Saddleback College Senate: Cosgrove: 31 faculty left in one year. We are looking forward to replacements. Setting up seminar to aid these new employees. Led by Alannah Rosenberg.
     Next: Faculty Association: no report.
     IVC Ac. Senate: no report
     IVC/Roquemore: blah, blah, blah. Welcomes new leadership, especially Kathy Schmeidler. Mentions Joann Chen's award, use of technology in teaching. $260K handed out at Scholarship award ceremony. Four faculty honored at UCI.
     Burnett/Saddleback: condolences to Fuentes family. Congrats to .... blah blah blah. Commencement: the best year ever! Banner year: $400K given out in scholarships. More than 200 students. Burnett notes that it's now summer. Wow.
     Bramucci: no report
     Bugay: congrats to Bob and Kathy and Paula, et al. Refers to hiring going on. Job fair at Camp Pendleton.
     Etc.

7:44 - they adjourn. Close meeting in honor of memory of Tom Fuentes.

Monsignor John Sammon, Bishop Michael Driscoll, Bishop Norman McFarland, Fuentes, 1997

Next: SPECIAL MEETING to address whether the board will appoint someone to fill the vacancy left by the passing of trustee Fuentes.

Poertner: board has option of waiting until general election in Nov--or advertise for an opening, then interview and appoint. That's the decision the board needs to make.
Padberg: we're very close to the election--so, one might ask, what would be the purpose of appointing a replacement for the next five months? But Fuentes has been absent for a year. Once or twice we've barely made a quorum. We've been vulnerable to quorum problems. We should go ahead and appoint. Thats' the responsible thing to do.
Lang: I have a different view. I need to say, this is unseemly; we've not even had the funeral yet, and here we are talking about appointment of a replacement. Disrespectful. Not pleased about that situation. This close to the election, it would be irresponsible not to let the voters decide who will replace TF. We have functioned effectively until now, and we'll continue to do so. Frankly, the appointment at this point in time would give the person appointed an unfair advantage [incumbents almost always win]. Not the right thing to do. The right thing is to keep the seat vacant.
Padberg: thank you for your opinion. We neglected to ask for public comments. (The one person who asked to address the board comes up to the podium.)

Lake Forest resident, Dennis Walsh: you should appoint someone. Will give the person 5 or 6 months jump on learning curve. Somebody qualified, would fit in with other board members. Several people on board were appointed [Fuentes, Meldau]. I would like to know how to apply. (He sits down.)
Padberg returns to the discussion: The public notice: all defined by ed code. Notice in newspaper. Deadline for application. Will schedule special meeting for interviews, etc.
Prendergast: I agree with trustee Lang on a couple of points. Taken aback that we are already addressing this issue of replacing TF. We kind of have to, I suppose. Unseemly as it seems, it is a necessity. Strange timing. I'm a civics instructor. Voters have a right to choose. Track record of incumbents [they almost always win]. They get an unfair advantage. Meldau was a great choice--nothing against him, but that process wasn't good though. Taken aback by it. Wasn't remotely democratic. Nothing against Frank Meldau, I voted for him anyway. But there was an unfairness. I would only support an appointing process if we were to do it a different way.
Padberg: all defined by code. Can't do much differently. Spell out your concerns!
Prendergast: how we voted. A motion to approve Meldau as appointment, and that was it. There are other ways. For instance, ranking, etc. Discounted three other candidates in the first motion! At the time, we thought that was the way to do it, but there are "other and better ways."
Padberg: can be controlled by emotion (?). (Not sure what she said, but she alluded to someone's emotions during last appointment process.)
Jay: wouldn't be right to do it tonight. There's no rush.
Kathy Fields comes up (attorney with Addelson, et al.): timing is controlled strictly by ed code. The specific process is not defined. You have to do it within 60 days. May 18 to July 18. You have two options. Make an appointment, or call for an election. If you call for an election, it would be November. Can't have a special election. Any person who is appointed would only serve until election. The person you appoint doesn't have to be in Fuentes' area—they can be from anywhere in district.
Padberg: I've never heard that before.
Fields: no, they have to be 18 years old, a registered voter. That's it. (Until November election.)

Tom's eldest son, TJ,  recently
became an alternate on the OC GOP
Central Committee

Padberg: unseemly? I asked the Chancellor about putting this on the agenda tonight. One of trustee Fuentes' family members is interested in applying [TJ? Jolene?], and they were not upset about this.
Milchiker: seems unseemly....

     (I'm only speculating, but it sounds like Nancy P is trying to avoid an inevitable TJ Fuentes [or Jolene?] victory in November by doing the appointment now, in a process in which TJ's of Jolene's prevailing would be less likely)

     (Marcia seeks to understand what trustee Prendergast has against the last process.) She says:
     I would look for someone honest, cares about the district, cares about the students, be ethical, have integrity.... If we could find someone like that, that would be my preference. (So she seems to favor moving ahead with the appointment process.)
Jay: another factor. Tremendous resources go into election. It offends me as a frugal person. We shouldn't appoint this evening.... (I'm not following his logic. Didn't the lawyer just say that a special election wouldn't happen? And Nancy wasn't suggesting that the appointment be made tonight. Am I wrong?)
Padberg interrupts: we can't appoint this evening.
Jay continues....
Padberg: you're saying we should have a special meeting in a week or so to decide this (not tonight)? Yes, says Jay.
Jay motions: have a special meeting within reasonable length of time. Make this decision at that later date.
Padberg: I haven't heard a second to Jay's motion.

Michelle Fuentes is in a
doctoral program in Alabama
(Political Science)

Marcia asks: what's the motion? (A: Time to think about it before discussing. Have a meeting in a week or so.)
Jay: shocked that we're discsussing this (whether to replace Fuentes) tonight.
Padberg: agreeable to that [waiting]. Let's find a date. Monday is a holiday next week. Maybe next Tuesday.
Prendergast: a very busy time for lots of people. We're here now.
They vote: Milchiker, Prendergast and Lang vote against. Meldau abstains. They continue to discuss.
Prendergast: I move that we take no action, let it go to election in November. Prendergast and Lang vote yes. Three nos, Meldau abstains. Motion fails.
Motion: that we appoint. Jay seconds.  Jay, Milchiker and Padberg vote yes. Is that a majority? It's a majority, says attorney. It's a majority of members present. Motion carries.  Prendergast and Lang vote no. [Meldau abstains?]
Padberg declares: the motion carries. We will proceed with appointment process. Any comments out there? "I see some frowns." (Prendergast seems to agree that they counted they interpreted the voting correctly. The motion carries.)
That's it.

Note: recently, Tom Fuentes' son, "TJ" Fuentes, was made an alternate on the OC Republican Central Committee. (See A recent Fuentes sighting.) There's been speculation that TJ would attempt to replace his father on the SOCCCD board. TJ is twenty-five or twenty-six years old.

Tom with the Duke (c. mid-70s)

The December board meeting: ATEP of the mind

 

     6:06 p.m. – The meeting starts!
     Nancy Padberg's invocation begins, "Dear heavenly father, we honor this blessed season tonight in recognition of the birth of Jesus Christ." She throws something in there, too, about Hanukkah.
     Marcia Milchiker reads out actions taken in closed session: (1) a full-time student was expelled.

Yearly organizational meeting (upshot: they roll over the existing leadership team):

• TJ Prendergast nominates incumbent Nancy Padberg for board Prez. Unanimous (with Tom Fuentes and Bill Jay absent; Jay was absent for the last two meetings, I believe. Fuentes has appeared only once since last March).
• Marcia nominates incumbent TJ Prendergast for VP. Unanimous.
• Frank Meldau nominates incumbent Marcia M for clerk. Unanimous.
• Etc. Things proceed agreeably. No "no" votes on anything. [Dave Lang did not mess with the ducks, so carefully placed in a row.]

Special meeting of the Board of Directors, etc.
. . .

[ATEP LAND EXCHANGE]
     6.1, 6.2, 6.3 advanced: public hearing, change of properties with County of Orange, at ATEP.
     Andy Bernstein, our counsel, speaks, presents "land exchange agreement." It concerns two ten-acre parcels. The County land is actually owned by the Navy. According to this plan, the Navy would give the ten acre parcel to the City of Tustin; and Tustin would give it to the district. Then the district would bury it with a bone.
     Various steps must be completed. One has occurred. We have a period of time to complete other conditions.This exchange would benefit both the district and the County, says Andy. (It appears that the current district 10 acres is adjacent to the Rancho Santiago CCD parcel of 15 acres. Maybe we just don't wanna be near those guys. Could be.)
     Dave Lang mentions that members of the public, too, can ask questions. Jeremy Something-or-other now discusses details of the exchange. Blah, blah, blah about environmental this and that. "Impacts" for the two parcels are the same!
     TRUSTEE QUESTIONS?: None. They're obviously really on top of it.
     Nancy opens the "public hearing." No one wants to speak. (Well, the public didn't show.) She closes the public hearing.
     They move on to 6.2, a "resolution" concerning this land exchange. Trustees vote. Unanimous.
     6.3, another resolution re land exchange. Unanimous.

     They advance 6.4 (district annual audit report)
     A suit walks up, presents. Says: counted those beans, and it's all good. The audit followed the usual standards. No restrictions placed on us; we could get anything we asked for. We're giving an unqualified opinion. We're external auditors: examining analysis provided by management.
     With regard to medical: no unfunded liability. Good.
     We found some items that should be corrected and management agreed. Not material to financial statement. Hunky dory.
     LAB ISSUE. State compliance finding (special areas examined based on state requirements): [Note: a "finding" appears to be a finding of fault or noncompliance.]
     Only one. TBA hours. Where a student has taken a lab, attached to a course. The existing tracking system didn't meet state requirements, in our opinion. Management has reviewed that, agreed to that finding.
     Yammers about earlier findings and corrections.
     Any questions? No.
     Motion to accept (for review?) Unanimous.

     Foundation audit: Sounds good. No identified weaknesses in two foundation audits.
     Lang motions to accept: unanimous.

RESOLUTION: Saddleback College Student Winners, College Broadcasters, Inc., National Student Production Awards. (October) — One member of the team has a blazing pink Mohawk. The others are relatively subdued. (Some leather.)
     Marcia offers a long preface to the resolution (Nancy is quietly peeved). Then she reads it. In Orlando, F'L, blah, blah, blah.... "From Bullets to Bubbles." Disabled veterans, scuba diving. Jazz radio program.
     Trustees do a roll call vote. —It's the usual: these kids are getting a prize for getting a prize. Later, they'll get a prize for getting that last prize for getting a prize. Repeat.
     Mohawk Girl comes up to speak. She's a good speaker. Excellent earrings. Has to run to her radio show, she says. She's actually landed a real job owing to all this! "You can tell that I'm the DJ," she says.

Public comments: none

Board Reports:

     Frank Meldau: no report, but wishes everybody happy holidays. (I hear a single cricket chirp.)
     Marcia Milchiker: draws attention to holiday programs at the colleges. She Marcia-izes awhile about all of the "wonderfulness" she has experienced at the colleges. What would that woman do without the word "wonderful"? She's like Lawrence Welk.
     TJ Prendergast: he says he went to a dance event at IVC. Especially liked the "dancing turtles." Thanks for rating my "mo," he says.
     Nancy Padberg: wishes everyone a wonderful holiday season.
     Dave Lang: wanted to "announce" those public schools that did so well on test scores (see the papers). Wished everyone happy holidays.
     Student trustee Jordan Larson: got accepted to CSU Fullerton. Took a bow. Happy holidays.
Chancellor's report [Gary Poertner]: mentions upcoming presentation of proposed programs, etc., for ATEP. Etc.
     Says he has a plaque for Nancy Padberg—honoring her service as President. He reads the plaque. "I suspect you'll be getting another one of these," he says. Laughter.
     Nancy: "hey, the last one I got had a gavel!"
     "These are difficult financial times...," says Gary. Laughter.

     Board requests for reports: Prendergast asks, can we plant a tree to replace all the paper we use for these dang meetings? Nancy notes that he'll have to ask for a report about the cost, which will entail grindin' up that very tree. Laughter.

PROPOSALS FOR ATEP:

[Upshot: IVC will focus on emerging technologies; Saddleback will focus on health care.]

     1. Craig Justice (IVC VPI) comes up to present proposals for ATEP [for IRVINE VALLEY COLLEGE]. Nancy stares at him for a moment and then says something like, "Who are you?"
     Craig introduces himself. He discusses "emerging technologies and a "world class workforce." That's IVC's focus for ATEP.
     He throws out the usual buzz words re ATEP. Pretty old stuff, old promises and plans. It's like he ate one of those ten-year-old pamphlets.
     Mentions ATEP's proximity to other areas in the County. A significant advantage to be so central. "We don't make any decisions without data at Irvine Valley College," he announces, without irony. (Some tittering. Just in my head, I guess.) He's joined by Lisa Davis Allen (IVC Ac. Sen. Prez) and Dr. Werle.
     LDA: happy to be part of this. Mentions "multimedia green technology" and something-or-other.
Talks about using "anchors." Yammers about digital media and 3D animation. "A good anchor as we spread to ATEP," she says. These people like their buzzwords, man. What's the matter with 'em?
     Good numbers in OC for projected openings in multimedia arts jobs/needs.
     Recording technology and entertainment businesses. Simulation and gaming design. These areas are hot.

Justice

     Partnerships: mentioned Boeing, Raytheon, Blizzard. Pipe dreams?
     Werle: 2nd anchor area: Alternative energy systems." Will "burgeon" in the future.
     As the economy gets stronger, green technology will explode in terms of jobs. Solar. Zero waste management. Green is profitable. Toyota, Edison, US DoL looking for energy efficiency, partnership opportunities. Synergies. (That word should be banned.)
     Applied technology is another "hub area." Biomedical, etc. Product development.
     Justice: re facilities: 30K square feet facility (to be built).
We were invited to stare at these words: Flexibility. Innovation. Exhibition. Not sure why. [Kill me now.]
     Gives a "virtual tour" of the "space." Welcoming area. Administration, reception, conference room. Discusses future state-of-the-art media labs with computers. Multimedia labs: students working with instructors on computers. (They shoulda put a cam on some kid's head—or maybe on an ATEP rat—for a day and then showed it at X10 speed. Show some imagination, man!)
     A 30K square foot building will have 16-17K square foot classroom space, says Craig. We'll be able to schedule efficiently. Projected yield: 650-700 FTES. A large auditorium, 75 seats. We've got a room like that at BSTIC, very flexible, etc.
     We anticipate 4-6 state of art computer labs. Discusses outdoor solar lab.
     Mentions government agencies that have an interest in partnering with us. (Dept. of Synergy, etc.)
     And so IVC is poised and ready to "deliver the goods," says Craig, proudly. We want to be that workforce training hub. Our Academic Senate has endorsed it with a "position paper." Happy about that. That closes our presentation.
     QUESTIONS: None.

     2. SADDLEBACK'S presentation: she [the woman didn't identify herself] refers to a handout that trustees will get later, when they can go through it slowly. IVC has focused on emerging technologies. We've chosen to focus on an old area:health care. We'd like to share vision for a center for innovation blah, blah, blah.
     Uses example of Capt. Sullenberger landing that plane in the drink—he had only done that before on a simulator. [Ooooh.]
     Vision: to establish a regional simulated healthcare center. She shows a picture with all of the elements pointing to the middle. So Cal is in need of this facility. Mentions: medical records, wellness center, training center, emergency dept. Patient care. Labs. Patient services.
     Blah, blah, blah.... This gal is really into the dynamics of pausing and getting hushed, and then building up to something dramatic. You know, it's a kind of rhetoric, a style. I think she would have done as well discussing peanuts and gravel. I guess that's good. I hated it. She was really selling this thing, relying greatly on Saddleback nursing's established shiny reputation and morgue of old pics. (It's the old, "We're Saddleback nursing. Nuff said. So genuflect and step out of the way, fool!")
     Turns it over to Tammy Rice: she says they'll focus on three areas of training: allied health students, health care professionals, community participants. (Huh?) Blah, blah, blah. I guess she's discussing "revenue and funding opportunities."
     QUESTIONS?: Prendergast: any plan re epidemics, that sort of thing? Yes, through EMS.
     Diane Pestolesi now jumps up to discuss the "simulation idea." DP cheerleads the heck out of this thing. Now, she gravely discusses medical errors and resulting tens of thousands of deaths per year. "This center addresses that," she says. Blah, blah, blah. "We can contribute to positive outcomes in our community," she says, passing the baton to yet another gal, but shorter.
     That gal briefly discusses the simulated environment. Lots of industry partners excited about this. She's done.
     Larry [Grihalva?] now comes up: he seems very excited. Reminds me of Chris Farley. I was afraid he'd launch himself at me, destroying the chairs and tables, and me. I guess he really cares. I have no idea what he's talking about, but I'm damned sure he's excited about it. (He's discussing EMS, paramedics, etc.)
     He's got a joke: What do you call it when you're caught in a hurricane and tornado at the same time? It's a wind-wind situation.
     He's very excited. He's led away to his chair.
     This stuff will be up for approval next time. Gosh, it's so good that faculty were consulted.
     There's a five minute break.

Watch IVC and Saddleback reports: proposed use of ATEP

     7:59: now to consent calendar
     Lang pulls 5.1, 5.5, 5.6. Nancy pulls 5.12. (5.14-5.18 must be included.) That's it. The rest is approved. Unanimous.

     5.1 Lang corrects some points on meeting minutes. He's pickin' nits again.
     5.5 Lang: says he's in support of those IT projects we're pulling. Blah, blah, blah.... Lang says something, Padberg repeats it, but she's somehow annoyed. I don't care. Nancy is plainly annoyed to have to stop and think about motions and seconds and blah, blah, blah. I know how she feels. Get out the rubber stamp!
     What would this district be like without peevitude? Unrecognizable, is what.
     Burnett now launches into something, chattering like he does. It's like he gets paid by the word (per second). He's into style, too. It all sounds very reassuring, whatever it is, even if he's actually talking about beans and lint and, who knows. Nancy nods. All is well.
     Fitzsimmons says something with her usual pithy competence. TJ says something too, but it wasn't funny. I stopped listening, started just sensingstyle. I think the trustees are happy now.

Congrats Brandye!

     Glenn speaks. "Blah, blah, blah," he says. "I have only a superficial understanding of this, or anything else, but all is well," he seems to say (I mean the sound of his voice, like a babbling brook, said that; not his actual words).
     I'm growing weary. Prendergast points at somebody. LDA now speaks. She says soccer fields are dangerous. Huh? I have no idea what they're talking about. This discussion is a metaphor for lives of quiet desperation in fucking OC.
     Lang now murmurs. "Policy and regulations" he says. I do wish he'd shut up. I bet this item is about linoleum or nits. He's peevish about something. Wow! He actually says "pet peeve!" Nancy peeves back.
     OK, this is about basic aid and the board's old rule that BA money should go to one-time expenses for "unforeseen maintenance issues." I guess there's been some fudging about that. Too bad Fuentes isn't here to grumble and guffaw and make disturbingly ugly faces to lend to this topic the correct staunchular gravity. He's the master.
     Suddenly, everybody seems lost. Meldau says something, then Gary does. Gary looks like he's gonna clear everything up, i.e., shut everybody up. Says the state forces terminology on us but that's just BS. Something like that. The semantics of "deferred maintenance." Fitzsimmons jumps in.
     They vote: Lang votes no, but it is approved.
     Strike out the automatic trigger: that's how they change it. --I don't care what that means. (Something about the trustees retaining their right to approve something or other. They're makin' a power play.)
     5.12 — Trustee requests for conference moola. Nancy says she's interested, and so is Marcia. They vote on the item: unanimous yessireebob.
     5.14 — New software. Lang says let's approve all of these IT things. Unanimous.

     Next: general action items:

Administrator/manager

     6.6 Something about "reorganization" and administrative salary schedules. Blah, blah, blah. David Bugay yammers for a while. I'm sure it's terribly important. Something about salary schedules (for administrators and classified managers).
     Nancy: how come our consultant isn't here? It comes out that there hasn't been a change in the salary structure since 2007. ( I guess these people aren't getting raises.) Lang asks for the ultimate fiscal impact. They turn to Fitzsimmons. Doesn't feel comfortable providing draft info. Nancy asks for the "ballpark." Fitz: $20K per month.
     Lang: what's the urgency?
     Poertner: this has been planned for a long time. Blah, blah, blah. He's trying to get the trustees off this thing.
     Prendergast: just because other districts are doing this, that's why we should? I guess I don't know the context. Nancy asks for College Prezes to weigh in.
     Roquemore refers to a confidential matter that has delayed "it." Mentions two positions.
     —Looks like I just can't pay attention to this stuff any more. I oughta go home and watch House.
     Burnett weighs in. He too seems to say, come on, we've waited long enough. Let's move forward. I stopped listening to words. I'm going by the babble of each brook. He must've babbled effectively.
     —Well, no. Lang says we're putting the cart before the horse. Don't know what these changes are going to be. We've already waited a year and half, so let's get these answers.
     Poertner: we do know what these positions will cost. 8K per months per position, says Fitz. Fitz's babble is euphonious. Lang is actually nodding to her music. "Blah, blah, blah." Very pleasant. Hell, I'd vote for it, whatever it is.
     Prendergast mentions the consternation that recent faculty salary increases produced among trustees. Gosh, he says, we'll want to move slowly with these $25 k raises! Nancy yammers. Bugay looks pained. I guess they're waiting for a study to get done. Turns out if they approve this thing it will only affect these four people.
     Any motion to approve? Prendergast makes the motion. Any second? After long seconds, Marcia seconds. They vote: Meldau and Lang vote no. They needed four votes. Thus isn't approved.
     8:38 – OK, I'm goin' home, goddamit.

(Agenda here. Tere's board highlights here.)

Williams speaks of ivory castles; The great "armed cops" debate; Accreditation reports; Frogueian lecture; Lee Walker

Dave Lang sharing the spotlight with convicted felon Mike Carona

From the ‘Vine (#7), 9/16/98
It is possible that this is the penultimate draft, not the draft ultimately published.

BOARD MEETING, SEPT. 14

by Chunk Wheeler

When I arrived at 6:55, about thirty-five people were waiting for Library 105’s door to open, a number that grew somewhat during the next 50 minutes. As I waited, I spoke with reporters and friends, but I kept noticing Lee Walker skulking in the background. At one point, the Walk Man’s face suddenly appeared from afar through an opening in the crowd; he seemed to be studying my face, I knew not why. Did I mention that he looks like a cross between Sleepy and Grumpy, two of the seven dwarfs? If there is a dwarf named “Incredibly Stupid,” he looks like that one, too.

Someone told me that state law requires that board meetings start on time. In fact, as I recall, the last two meetings started more than an hour late. On this night, the meeting started about 50 minutes late. But what’s a little law-breaking to a guy like John “let’s make a deal” Williams? Nuttin’.

At long last, the door opened, and we rushed in. Leaders of the classified union were immediately informed (on the sly) that their contract had been approved. Good news! (Next, the contract must be ratified by classified union members. That is expected to occur.) This means, among other things, that some senior classified employees will soon be leaving us, opting for the ol’ golden handshake. We’ll lose some more good people, but you can’t blame them for wanting to jump the unhappy Ship of Goo.

Lang and God:

The meeting opened with the usual rituals. Trustee Lang led the prayer, a rite that, in recent months, has become an occasion for political point-making. You’ll recall that, some months ago, Frogue, stinging from Joan Hueter’s then-recent critical remarks in the press concerning the odious talent-repelling board majority, noted in his “prayer” that people with beams in their eyes should not point out the motes in others’ eyes. He didn’t explain to God what Joan’s “beam” was supposed to be.

In Lang’s prayer, he told God that he hoped that board members would listen to the advice of their advisors—a signal that, once again, board members were about to ignore the advice of their advisors.

The board announced their closed session decisions. Don Busche was made VP of Instruction at Saddleback. The decision was unanimous. The CSEA “tentative” agreement was approved, again, unanimously. Etc.

Accreditation reports:

The accreditation reports were presented. Since Ray Chandos teaches (six students!) on Monday nights, Raghu was compelled to present IVC’s report. Goo mentioned that it includes minority reports for standards 5 and 10. The accreditation team, said Goo, will be visiting both campuses on the 27th, 28th, and 30th of October.

During the immediately subsequent “public comments,” Bob Cosgrove explained that he had asked for a copy of IVC’s accreditation report, but was told that no copies were available. They have not been made available to IVC faculty either, he said. The crafty Goo chose that moment to walk up to the podium and hand Bob a copy of the report. Very funny. (It must be acknowledged that Mr. Goo has a sense of humor of sorts.) What Goo did not explain amid the laughter, however, is that the copy he handed Cosgrove did not include the minority reports. (Copies circulated among standards chairs the next day sported the same deficit.)

Enrollment lies: [in the hard copy of this ‘Vine, the word “distortions” is used]

An early agenda item was the presentation of the “SOCCCD Census Enrollment Report.” Chancellor Sampson explained that this information is very important. Then the board majoritarians launched into an effort to cast the best possible light on IVC’s curious drop in enrollments. (Saddleback’s enrollments are up. See chart.) Their gambit: to attribute the IVC enrollments drop simply to the transfer of the Emeritus program from IVC to Saddleback.

This ploy was effectively ruined, however, by Dave Lang and Rich Zucker’s questions and comments. Thanks to Lang and Zucker, it was revealed that, even apart from the Emeritus program transfer, our enrollments at IVC are down, though only very slightly--about half a percentage point. As Raghu put it, enrollments are “flat,” more or less. But, given that we budgeted for a 3% increase in enrollments--an increase that did not occur--we’re in the hole. Again, it took some doing to bring these facts to light, for the board majority seemed determined to leave a very different impression of the situation.

Subtle tensions between the two presidents seemed evident during the discussion of the Emeritus Institute transfer. President Bullock suggested that the transfer “helped the district; it didn’t hurt IVC.” Raghu took the opposing view.

Dorothy Fortune, being a complete idiot, demanded an opportunity to inspect “the waiting lists.” “Why won’t you people show us the waiting lists!” she seemed to say.

The board discussed its “goals and objectives.” Everyone seemed to agree that the board should have some and that its members should meet to discuss the matter.

Frogue exhibits paranoia:

Frogue had a beef about the lack of “communication” between the Trustees and administration, which seemed to stem from his receipt of the meeting’s agenda on Friday rather than earlier in the week. In these and other comments during the evening, the Froguester rehearsed his favorite paranoid themes: the duplicity of bureaucrats, the untrustworthiness of the press, etc.

Anyone who attended the December 7, 1997, board meeting knows that Frogue considers himself an expert on information flow—or, rather, non-flow—within bureaucracies. During that meeting, which was devoted to discussing possible further tweakage of the district’s administrative structure, Frogue lectured his colleagues. He said:

Information that’s inconvenient; information that’s uncomfortable; information that might be embarrassing—can suddenly disappear...New information can also be created at any step of the way—to cover up things. And then, by the time it gets here to the board, which is this filter, it has to make decisions. I mean, that’s why...we make decisions that people don’t like, that people are uncomfortable with, unfamiliar with—because we’re trying to operate within this system, and sometimes we get information and we check it out and it’s not right. It’s not right...It’s like attacking a 500 pound blob of jello with a scalpel.

Frogue ended his remarkably inane lecture by saying, “Is it reliable? Is it truthful?...That’s the problem with everything...believing the daily newspaper and dealing with the information you get...My God, we’d better all be aware of it because it’s applicable in so many ways. I’ll sit down.”

Give us our new guns:

The “gun” issue emerged once again. At the last board meeting, campus police chiefs Parmer and Romas asked for money to replace the police forces’ old and relatively unsafe 38s with au courant 9mm weapons. Their presentation established that, if campus cops are going to have guns, then they should be new 9mm jobs, not the old 38s. Trustee Fortune--who, before she decided to call herself a “fiscal conservative,” was active in the Democratic party--emerged that night as a strong proponent of defanging campus cops. (It turns out that most community college cops are gunless; indeed, ours is the only district in OC that arms its cops.) As I recall, then-Chancellor Hodge and Dave Lang agreed with Fortune, which must have been painful for them. In the end, the cops went home without their new guns, but they managed to keep their old ones.

Surprisingly, the issue was back on the agenda on the 14th. Fortune once again spoke to the issue. In her remarks, she demonstrated her uncanny knack for really pissing people off, for, in effect, she called Parmer and Romas liars. You see, after the October board meeting, she called up the Orange County Sheriff’s Dept. and talked to a “fellow” there. She asked him about the safety of 38s.”They’re safe weapons,” said the fellow. (Of course, Parmer and Romas didn’t exactly say that 38s are unsafe; they said that 9mms are relatively safe.) The Fortunate One concluded that she had been lied to or misled by Parmer and Romas. “That’s what you get when you only listen to people with a special interest,” she added. “Let’s spend the money on students, not on guns,” concluded Dot.

In response, chief Romas acknowledged that 38s are not unsafe; but the district’s 38s are old, he said. Lang jumped in to express both his respect for Romas/Parmer and his inclination to disarm them. “Why are we the exception among community college districts in the area?” asked Lang. Frogue opined that it is unwise to leave cops unarmed. Williams, finally finding a topic he cares about, stated that it is a “travesty” to suggest not arming police officers. Apparently addressing Mr. Lang, he said, “Get real.” “Stop living in an ivory castle.” (Yes, an ivory castle.)

Lorch noted that the presence of guns is a deterrent. Fortune shot back by suggesting that the worst thing that happens on our campuses is the theft of car radios (well, not quite), so the cops don’t need guns. “Even the radicals [i.e., Frogue’s racist friends and their equally polite JDL adversaries] who sometimes come to our board meetings aren’t that bad,” she said. At that moment, I felt Dave Lang’s pain.

Student trustee Marie Hill noted that she has seen men removing their shirts and revealing tatoos on campus. “Gang members,” she said. So cops gotta have guns.

Frogue explained that, if only people knew the details--details, he implied, that were suppressed by the press!--of the Lorches’ fabled encounter with violence (?), they would understand the need to arm campus cops. (Huh?) Idiotically, Lorch explained that only someone who has experienced what she experienced knows whether campus cops should have guns. “You don’t know until you’ve experienced this yourself,” she said, thereby marking the nadir of the evening.

And so on.

Toxic waste:

After a break, we heard about a lawsuit against the district filed by Casmalia Resources Site. Evidently, the firm took our hazardous waste and buried it at its site. Then the EPA showed up and told Casmalia that they’ll have to spend a million bucks cleaning up. Naturally, Casmalia is now trying to get the money from its clients, including us. Frogue said something, but it was stupifying, and so I have no clear memory of it.

Trustee misconduct?

There was some delightful tension in the air during the trustees’ discussion of “mileage reimbursement”--money to defray travelling costs to conferences and the like. Lang alluded to Dot’s going places she shouldn’t oughta go to. Evidently, the district’s director of public information (DPI), Pam “Same Sex” Zanelli, has also been going to forbidden zones. No details were mentioned. Williams made a big show of support for Zanelli, who, he declared, is doing a good job. The DPI should be “everywhere,” he said, and that’s just where she is.

In the course of Fortune’s cryptic and defensive remarks, she asserted that “You get your money’s worth with me,” which produced audible groans throughout the room.

At some point, Dot and Marcia seemed to be shouting at each other, but I couldn’t make out what they were saying. Marie Hill, who kept looking at Frogue for reassurance or cues, put in her two cents, which, as usual, turned out to be worth two cents. (She’s one of those people who talks just to hear herself talk. Also, she has perfected an “evil eye.” Very impressive.)

Lariat bombshell:

During the second round of public comments, Christian Barrera, former editor in chief (and current assistant editor in chief) of the Lariat, read a statement in which, evidently on behalf of his colleagues at the paper, he requested Lee Walker’s removal as advisor. As advisor, Walker has continually overstepped his bounds and violated first Amendment rights, said Barrera, an assessment, he added, that is shared by the last five editors in chief, including the current one. Barrera pleaded with the board to “open their ears” and take action. Specific details, he said, would soon be forwarded.

You will recall that Walker, the croniest of union cronies, became the Lariat’s advisor starting in the summer of ’97. At the time, the paper had been very critical of the faculty union’s tactics, especially during the ’96 election season. Few had any doubts about his motives when Walker sought to bump then-advisor Kathleen Dorantes from her position, which she had held successfully for two years. Dorantes’ then-dean, Dan Rivas, would not participate in Dorantes’ removal, and so, under pressure from the board, then-president Doffoney did the dirty work.

In October of 1997, the Saddleback College Lariette, an underground internet “newspaper” put out by a former Lariat staffer, explained that

Lariat staff members are quite certain the appointment of Walker as the new adviser is [not] coincidental, for he is a member of the Faculty Association and has represented it at board meetings. His political ties with the Faculty Association and Board of Trustees are strong, and he has been an outspoken advocate for them on a number of occasions. For a person so closely tied to the board and the Faculty Association to be appointed the new adviser of its most immediate and threatening critic is most definitely a conflict of interest. Certainly the issues of prior restraint and censorship become immediate factors, for Walker knows the content of the paper before it is published. Should news topics arise targeting the Faculty Association, the Board of Trustees or Walker himself, he would be privileged to the information two weeks before public release. Walker has already proven he cannot separate his politics from his profession. He has interfered with the gathering of news by Lariat reporters when he interrupted an interview conducted by the Lariat campus editor, so he could spout his own personal opinions after the Sept. 8 board meeting. He has made an effort to suppress news, an issue of prior restraint, by attempting to convince current Editor in Chief Ted Martin not to run a story about Dorantes’ dismissal. He requested his picture be removed from the article about himself and Dorantes, an issue of prior review, for he found it unflattering and did not want his image published with the article. However, under any other circumstance, the subject of a story does not personally determine the accompanying photograph, most notably exemplified in our previous coverage of a sexual harassment suit filed against a professor on campus....

Reports:

The trustees’ reports were largely unremarkable. Naturally, everyone made a point of welcoming chancellor Sampson.

Frogue remarked that “There’s nothing like the start of a new school year.” It’s going to be another interesting year, he said. You bet, Recall Boy.

Lorch, borrowing one of Frogue’s themes, read a statement in which she yammered about the trustees’ lack of adequate information. Gotta measure performance; gotta get info; etc.

Dot Fortune addressed proponents of the Recall, reminding them of the potential cost to the district. But, as I said earlier, she’s an idiot.

John “College Boy” Williams praised the Lariat for its “welcome back” issue. Have you seen it? It’s an embarrassment. In the course of 43 pages, it refers to not one issue. The “article” on page 9 is typical: “Saddleback: People Who Care.” Perhaps it’s one of those joke issues.

ASIVC announced that the students are pressing for more recycling on campus and a unified grade-posting policy. Wow. Maybe they should be running things.

The Saddleback Academic Senate read a resolution to the effect that Richard McCullough did a great job as president and is a great guy.

Rich Zucker of the IVC Academic Senate announced that there is at long last a nominee for senate president. (He wisely refrained from identifying the fellow.) Further, Jan Horn and Priscilla Ross have agreed to co-chair the Committee on Courses, and so, again, at long last, the curriculum process can go forward. Rich invited Chancellor Sampson to meet with senate officers and then, ultimately, with the senate. Sampson seemed agreeable.

The Faculty Association had no report (and no one to give it, it seemed).

During his report, Mr. Goo flashed a soccer trophy. I hope he doesn’t think it’s his. Do you suppose he’ll put it in that stupid trophy box?

The new chancellor steps out:

Eventually, a discussion ensued concerning the replacements of Nick Kremer, Bob Loeffler, and others. Chancellor Sampson, noting that the board seemed to be down-grading some positions-e.g., Loeffler’s—for the sake of economy, seemed to express discomfort with the board’s haphazard and case-by-case approach to individual administrative positions. He seemed to say that it would be better to make adjustments in positions (and salaries, etc.) in a systematic way that reflected some particular philosophy and goal. Accordingly, many changes should be made at one time.

One shouldn’t study administrative positions one at a time, he said. Rather, one should study them in relation to each other. He repeated that he advocated making adjustments to the management structure all at once based on an overview and a particular philosophy or set of principles.

Such talk inspired defensiveness in the board majority. Frogue asserted that, faced with massive bureaucratic inefficiency, the board was forced to take the
esting year, he said. You bet, Recall Boy.

Lorch, borrowing one of Frogue’s themes, read a statement in which she yammered about the trustees’ lack of adequate information. Gotta measure performance; gotta get info; etc.

Dot Fortune addressed proponents of the Recall, reminding them of the potential cost to the district. But, as I said earlier, she’s an idiot.

John “College Boy” Williams praised the Lariat for its “welcome back” issue. Have you seen it? It’s an embarrassment. In the course of 43 pages, it refers to not one issue. The “article” on page 9 is typical: “Saddleback: People Who Care.” Perhaps it’s one of those joke issues.

ASIVC announced that the students are pressing for more recycling on campus and a unified grade-posting policy. Wow. Maybe they should be running things.

The Saddleback Academic Senate read a resolution to the effect that Richard McCullough did a great job as president and is a great guy.

Rich Zucker of the IVC Academic Senate announced that there is at long last a nominee for senate president. (He wisely refrained from identifying the fellow.) Further, said Rich, Jan Horn and Priscilla Ross have agreed to co-chair the Committee on Courses, and so, again, at long last, the curriculum process can go forward. Rich invited Chancellor Sampson to meet with senate officers and then, ultimately, with the senate. Sampson seemed agreeable.

The Faculty Association had no report (and no one to give it, it seemed).

During his report, Mr. Goo flashed a soccer trophy. I hope he doesn’t think it’s his. --CW