DISSENT the BLOG: civility

Showing posts with label civility. Show all posts

Sunday, February 5, 2012

Readers have lots to say about the "civility" initiative

[UPDATED--I neglected to include the 12 earliest comments! In brown below.]
Well, there’ve been lots of comments about our series on IVC’s “civility” initiative and the report draft that was distributed last week. Here they are (as of this moment):

Anonymous said...
I notice that "the blog" made the civility list of problems.
4:32 PM, February 02, 2012
Anonymous said...
Kudos for whoever had the courage to include this blog as a cause of incivility in this district. IT IS! It is simply a bully pulpit. [?] Hopefully, he'll cross the line with all the new cyber-bullying laws, be sued, fined, and shut down. This blog is a black eye on the district. Talk about fear of retaliation and retribution. Cross DtB and see what happens!
5:36 PM, February 02, 2012
Anonymous said...
Certain administrators should make the incivility list ..... And the incompetence list.
7:34 PM, February 02, 2012
Anonymous said...
To 5:36, bullying? a black-eye on the district? You're kidding, I hope. What about the First Amendment? Don't read this blog if you dont' like it. I respect your right to voice your opinion, however.
9:45 PM, February 02, 2012
Anonymous said...
I haven't finished reading the report but I wonder, during this time of cutbacks and belt-tightening, how much they paid the consultant Spevak to facilitate. He's from the College Brain Trust up in Sacto.
7:48 AM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
In response to certain administrators making the incivility list, one in particular, should make the no confidence list. Come on faculty, wake up. Maybe we'll all be more civil when we get the bull out of the china closet. We need a serious change in the senate leadership.
Anonymous said...
Dtb is a bully pulpit [?] for demonizing conservatives, of who make up probably a super majority of the community the colleges serve. Not good for PR to have a highly polemical community institution.
I wonder what would happen if some employees at the DMV or the unemployment office were doing something similar? Certainly something to ponder...
3:45 PM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
I do think the blog is something of an "community institution," I like how it talks about issues on and off campus. I like the t-shirt too. Where can I get one?
3:49 PM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
5:36, this blog is a "bully pulpit"? You might want to consult your dictionary. A bully pulpit is the use of one's office or position as a platform to express views and opinions. It is my understanding that neither the college nor the district has anything to do with the production of this blog. It is simply the freely expressed (and constitutionally guaranteed) views of a few faculty at IVC.
And I for one find it to be very informative; certainly more so than anything coming out of A100. I imagine that if you dislike what is expressed here you don't have to read it.
And regarding civility, if there is anything uncivil expressed in this blog, it comes from its steady stream of trolls and detractors, not from its authors. In fact, BvT regularly deletes the uncivil comments.
Thanks, DtB!
4:12 PM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
wooly bully! wooly bully!
4:18 PM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
Looks to me 3:45 meant bully pulpit in zeitgeist form rather than literally.
I also find dtb informative, but it only diminishes it's academic credibility when different points of view are routinely squelched, and ridiculed; it's just reduced to an echo chamber with a clear agenda.
5:16 PM, February 03, 2012
Anonymous said...
Different points of view "routinely squelched"? 5:16, you haven't a clue what you're talking about. I'd be hard-pressed indeed to find someone as open to others expressing opposing arguments and views as BvT. That doesn't mean he needs to publish racist, moronic, puerile comments that would, indeed, diminish the academic quality of this fine blog. --MAH
8:04 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
Respectfully, I think you are wrong and attempting to downplay the role of this blog in contributing to the problems remaining at IVC. Your posts about faculty and administrators are ill-informed and rude. Note the number of times you have posted a "story" and then had to correct it because you were wrong. Your erroneous posts create a culture of distrust. This blog is the primary reason the college is not moving on. You are stuck in 1997, replaying old tapes, and retaliating against faculty and administrators by smearing them all over the internet. I'm tired of it. I'm tired of watching you smear good folks because you are still mired in the '97 Big Sloppy. See a therapist. Get on meds. Move on. Retire! You obviously hate teaching and you hate the college. RETIRE!
8:22 PM, February 03, 2012

B. von Traven said...
Thanks for your input, brave, brave ANONYMOUS.
9:03 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
When I read the civility report, I thought the same thing. We all know who is vengeful and retaliates. We all know why there is fear and a lack of trust. We are all frustrated because top management won't acknowledge nor work on this problem. We've all seen the seemingly schizophrenic changes on campus without meaningful participation in the "open and transparent" decision making system we claim to have.
A civility committee sends me the message that we should shut up and be polite. Looks like your last anonymous poster agrees. At least with the blog, we have a place to post our opinions without fear of retribution. You retire, 8:22!
9:04 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
My, my, 8:22 needs to read the civility report for guidelines. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
Ahem. Most of the people I know understand the spirit of the blog and appreciate its wide coverage of issues -- even, really -- if they don't agree with all of it. How is this possible? How can they value something with which on occasion they disagree? Well, they work at a college and recognize discourse.
However the colleges they work at do have a long history and one that continues today (really it does -- not as bad as it was but there it is) where knowledge isn't shared and processes are not transparent -- that's why the blog is read and valued -- even yes, when people disagree with it.
Of course one reason the blog thrives is because there continues to be a lack of consistent communication and an absence of true exchange of ideas about programs and processes that impact the workplace and learning conditions of our students.
For example, the coverage a year or so ago about the situation at the Lutheran High School was eye-opening -- as is the continuing discussion about the Early College Program. As well as the planning processes about the new buildings on campus.
9:05 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
PS - people who don't like the blog shouldn't steal Roy's photos from it and use them to promote the college.
Everyone knows he takes great pics and makes the college look cool.
I find it odd, dispiriting even, that some people equate criticism with hatred.
9:11 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
I cringe sometimes at the comments I read in this blog, but I appreciate the forum.
As for the civility report, consider the source. The idiot probably can't begin to see he is the problem.
Never thought I'd be defending you, bvt. You are spot on on this one.
9:13 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
This topic will blow up the blog. Lack of transparency, retaliation, fear, MRC, Cafe . . . that about sums it up. Catch a clue, Rocky!
9:20 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
8:22, respectfully, the college can't move on in an atmosphere of distrust and fear. The blog didn't create the problem, it just reports on the problems.
9:23 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
I don't agree that this blog is so powerful that it has led to the current problems at the college. Nope! Lack of action on the part of the Prez, lack of integrity on the part of the VPrez, lack of manners and management skills by another ahole, and lack of loyalty (to faculty) on the part of the SenPrez. Nobody has the backs of the classified. Those are the problems. Tell me I'm wrong.
9:32 PM, February 03, 2012

Anonymous said...
Much ado about nothing excerpt people got to go to the Duck Club and have a nice lunch and some guy or guys were paid a lot of money to utter platitudes.
This is already covered in other policies.
Perhaps though this is supposed to gild Glen's lily so he can begin to position himself for Chancellor. He will knight himself as the one who restored civility to the colleges. Of course, it easy for him to be civil because he doesn't say much or have much to say.
8:07 AM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
I do think the issues this new Initiative is trying to cover are already covered in policies that have been on the books for awhile. Some of this stuff usually gets struck down in court.
3:17 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
When we need a consultant to tell us we lack transparency (at least as seen by some obtuse administrators and self serving one might add), we have a problem. Faculty and staff, after our last King Tut Mathur, not only found life at IVC and SC bearable but actually enjoyable. Faculty and staff at both colleges ARE civil in discourse. Both colleges have less than competent top leaders. One wonders where the talent really is and why we have so little of it.
5:48 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
I LIKE how issues are discussed on the blog, though I know some take issue with some language. At least on the blog issues are taken seriously, with robust debate. I think there is a healthy skepticism here that isn't present elsewhere (meetings and forums). If it was we wouldn't have had to deal with so many problem in recent (yes recent) years -- which comes from the leadership incompetence that others have spoken about and a knee-jerk response to protect people at the expense of the college and students.
Transparency might be asking too mush -- I'd start with some openness, some acknowlegement.
6:56 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
It's so typical of our administrators to initiate this exercise rather than confront the perpetrators. We know who the bullies are, we know who engages in passive-aggressive behavior, and we know the ones who aren't doing their fair share and get paid enormously more than those who are doing the work (usually female managers). I'm talking about administrators and managers and not faculty.
It will never stop unless the ones who are doing it are confronted. This exercise is pure bullshit and will solve nothing.
8:29 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
OMG, GR is the invisible man. Smile, look good, nod, never say anything, never do anything, and let Godzilla destroy this nice little college.
8:29 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
He's too busy with Astounding Inventions. What good that does the college I have yet to figure out.
8:31 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
Isn't this whole civility issue a result of the accreditation process? Isn't a distrust of the district what started this ball rolling? So, we'll do some workshops and declare ourselves cured. Seems the problems with top admin at IVC are deeper than the issues the accreds noted. I hope Edwards was at that Duck Stop.
9:55 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
Confront the uncivil ones? Are they f-ing serious? That puts the "complainer" under the district microscope, and gets the ball rolling to get rid of you for doing a formal complaint. It's org. security 101. This report is just a continuation of the status quo of absolving management of their responsibilities.
I thought this stuff had to be resolved before accred. was restored?
12:41 AM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
Accreditation isn't really restored yet. They dinged Glenn with another October 15 report, including recommendation 6, "communication." This time the faculty needs to speak up. The problem is simple--no "civility" focus group needed--and can be fully capsulized in one word: Justice, the vicious dictator who has poisoned all wells. The board needs to can the sob, period, and the ACCJC needs to hear that message loud and clear.
1:10 AM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
So the dist. basically wasted who knows how much cash (probably tons!) on that College Brain Trust firm and accomplished absolutely nothing. Where does one find out exactly how much was squandered?
6:18 AM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
12:41, I think you actually agree with 8:29, who was saying that the administrators should confront the bullies. I don't think they were saying that those who are being bullied should do the confronting.
11:53 AM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
You [BvT] are correct. The top admins are not taking ownership of the fact that they are guilty of incivility (threats, retaliation, discrinatory behavior, fear, lack of tranparency, poor communication), instead they are turning the tables so they can create a policy document with teeth so they can use to punish and thrwart their critics. They will start with this blog. This should be a very interesting first amendment fight. I hope you have your finger on the delete button so you can erase all possible IP addresses.
12:10 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I hope that civility report goes to the accreditation commission. It speaks volumes about the communication issues at IVC.
12:27 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
"Irvine Valley College supports a culture which encourages and sustains civility and mutual respect. Within its commitment to excellence and academic freedom, the college values the dignity of each person, frequent and accurate communication, transparent decision making, and the importance of treating all members of the college community with honesty and respect."
--Steaming pile of BS.
12:31 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I don't know anyone who yells. I was actually surprised to find that on the list. Perhaps it happens in other areas.
12:57 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
It is also interesting that of IVC's 705 employees, over half, 371, are adjunct faculty (see http://www.ivc.edu/about/pages/facts.aspx). Yet, from what I can tell, not a single adjunct was on the civility committee. That is a big chunk of the IVC population left out. Were adjuncts even approached about the possibility of participating?
5:36 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I don't see what good having a student on the task force does. It's always been about employee issues.
5:56 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
Oh, I think it's important to have students on the task force. There are real issues involving civility in the classroom.
I refer uncivil teachers - for the uncivil students we have a Code of Conduct.
Students often feel a distinct lack of support or response from administration when they complain about inappropriate remarks made (often of a racist or sexist nature) or poor treatment by instructors. I have had students tell me that they are told "There is nothing that can be done." We all know certain people have been "protected" for years - it is an "open secret."
6:16 PM, February 05, 2012

B. von Traven said...
[A response to 5:48, Feb. 4:] Burnett was hired, despite his lack of qualifications, because of his connections with the Governor. Roquemore crossed over into administrative ranks because he is the consumate opportunist, and, when Mathur became Prez of IVC in 1997, Glenn decided to "play ball" with him (he was working with IVC administration to get Mathur unseated as chair of his School until then; Roquemore was angered that Mathur maintained a stranglehold on that job). He was VPI when Mathur "ascended" to the Chancellorship in about 2002 or 2003. Roquemore then became IVC Prez, but he grew weary of the heavy thumb of Mathur, and he gradually aligned himself with the anti-Mathur (or suspicious of Mathur) trustees, especially Wagner. Glenn gained some support at IVC because he was the enemy of our enemy, Mathur. Glenn got lucky when, as it turns out, Wagner turned against Mathur and, in the subsequent Fuentes v. Wagner struggle, Wagner prevailed. Glenn is incompetent and Justice runs the college, though his ruthless style has caused much demoralization. The trustees can't get a clue about this to save their lives. I'm gonna try skywriting next. Pretty soon, Roquemore will be Chancellor. That's his goal.
6:42 PM, February 04, 2012

Anonymous said...
I've never heard anyone yell or scream at another person at the college. I hope that doesn't happen. Students should always be treated with the utmost respect, everyone really. But, that shouldn't inhibit free speech and one's right to express an opinion.
6:54 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
A former admin in A/R may be guilty, but I can't say for sure. I've been on the receiving end of horrendous emails from said person.
6:56 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
There's more to bullying than yelling and screaming. There's intimidation, demeaning behavior, passive-aggressive behavior, icing people out, etc. Happens all the time.
7:11 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I actually think faculty are pretty ignorant about the working conditions of others on campus.
7:18 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
OK, so why haven't concerned community members been showing up at board meetings in large numbers demanding that something be done about Mr. Justice like they did with Raghu? I see there has been a few confidence/no confidence polls done. Why not take this issue straight to the board?
7:18 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I heard the folks at HR once told an employee that bullying is perfectly legal (while smiling). This, I believe, is the root of the problem. Just because it's legal, doesn't make it acceptable, especially in an institution of higher learning.
7:29 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
I think that has to be paraphrased.
7:42 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...
7:11, I think the worst kind is from afar, i.e. someone who routinely makes the rounds planting their negative seeds & talking smack about others. The person being slandered doesn't even know it's happening until the damage is done. Their destruction of someone else's character is threefold; it satisfies their sadistic pleasures, backfills their utter lack of self esteme & enables them to get ahead on the job.
7:51 PM, February 05, 2012

Anonymous said...

Agreed, 7:51. In fact, I was trying to think of the word that encapsulates what you described.
8:24 PM, February 05, 2012

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

A civility policy? Arf!

Today, I was among the many who received an announcement from the IVC college President. It revealed the (huge!) membership of a new committee: “the IVC Civility Policy Workgroup.”
A civility policy?
That doesn’t sound good.

* * *

I recall a meeting of the IVC Academic Affairs committee some time in the late 90s. At the time, Kate Clark was the chair. The committee was charged with considering pursuit of some sort of “civility” or “ethics” code for faculty. Some in the room were well aware of the many tools—refusal to grant tenure, firing of noisy adjuncts, trumped-up charges of discrimination and violence—that had been employed to make life difficult for critics of the then-current regime (Raghu Mathur and the Board Majority: Steve Frogue, Dot Fortune, John Williams, et al.). Especially with that in mind, but also because of our independent regard of free speech, we agreed to eschew such codes. They could too easily be used as a bludgeon to punish or deter valid criticism, we reasoned.
Besides, as academics, don’t we seek to champion freedom rather than to limit it? Plus: do we really want to start policing the conduct of our colleagues? That's an ugly business. Is it really necessary?

* * *

I’ve been away on sabbatical, and so I don’t know the origins of this “civility policy” initiative, though I have some idea what’s going on here. Obviously, when interest in civility policies crops up, it is usually a reaction to alleged “incivility.”
I.e., somebody's been unpleasant.
On this blog—and its newsletter predecessor—we criticize and object. We’ve always tried to do that responsibly. I think we’ve succeeded. But I’ve learned that some people just don’t take criticism well. In their minds, any criticism, even implied or gentle or just criticism, is an assault.
Being a leader or some other public person demands a thick skin. I’ve certainly learned that lesson in the last dozen or so years, pursuing Brown Act lawsuits (two of them), highlighting administrative folly (e.g., banning faculty “war” talk), noting trustee cluelessness and unsavoriness (Fortune’s residence issues, Tom Fuentes’ nixation of the Santander “study abroad” program, etc.), and so on. You get some push-back. You get called things. It can get pretty rough, even dicey.
These days, top administration at IVC is arrogant and contemptuous of all who seek a place at the decision-making table. The key problem here is the VPI, a fellow with a well-deserved reputation for ruthlessness and vindictiveness. He’s the sort who, in the end, insists on running things. Everyone else needs to get the heck out of the way.
Faculty's job: to raise no questions, to cause no ripples.
Naturally, a guy like that will be all over a “civility” or “ethics” policy. I have no doubt that he views the preceding paragraph as an instance of incivility or unethicalness most foul—something that, if possible, should be stamped out, punished.

* * *

I recall the many lies and machinations that former administrator Raghu P. Mathur would deploy. Starting in 1997, I responded to this by stating the facts and then calling him a “liar” and a “schemer,” etc., in Dissent and The 'Vine. Lots of people seemed to reason that, ipso facto, I was engaged in “name-calling.” I.e., I was being uncivil.
Well, maybe, I said. But it’s true, isn’t it?—he is a liar and a schemer. Look at the evidence! And if it’s true, given Mathur's power and authority, it’s important to point it out and to understand it, no?

* * *

Back in the nineties, our newsletter (Dissent) engaged in criticisms of the powers that be. The push-back was ferocious. I had to go to federal court to defend myself against outrageous (and implausible) trumped-up charges—e.g., that I personally caused the colleges' accreditation woes!
In the end, Judge Gary Feess stated:

I understand that a lot of people would like to do business behind closed doors, that they would like to make decisions that they don’t have to explain, that they would like to come to conclusions and judgments and issue policy without having anyone present to listen and hear and to understand and therefore to make rational, powerful, criticisms of them. That’s just too bad under our system…And if people are afraid of going to meetings and speaking up because … they’re going to be the subject of criticism in a publication, that’s…just life under the First Amendment…. [My emphasis.]

Yeah. In our system, people in positions of power can be criticized. Nobody is immune from that.
Deal with it.

* * *

At one point—I believe it was in the May of 1998—Mathur was in a bad spot. The faculty had just recorded a stunning vote of “no confidence” in him. Mathur was furious.
He responded by accusing three faculty leaders, including me, of racism and “mail threats.” He offered no evidence. I recall John Williams shaking his head at me. Dot Fortune too. "You're bad," their bodies sneered.
There was nothing really that I could do about Mathur’s absurd charges. I had to live with them.
And I did.

* * *

Academia—colleges and universities—are associated with free speech. If you can’t speak freely and criticize authority at a college, so the saying goes, then where can you speak freely and criticize authority? Judge Gary Feess made that exact point in court. It was also made by several people back in 2003, when administration at IVC banned faculty comments about the war in the classroom. (Do you suppose Dennis "Moneybags" White and Glenn "Clueless" Roquemore are at long last ashamed? —Of course not.)
But some people don’t see it that way. Even in academia, there are some with a little bit of the Pious Puritan or Grand Inquisitor in ‘em.
Remember those speech codes at colleges, back in the 90s? Luckily, academics with a longer view of higher education and free speech pushed back against them, arguing that restrictions on speech are contrary to the very idea of higher education. Thus we have the American Association of University Professors’ famous policy concerning “Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes.” It's marvelous.
Some excerpts:

Freedom of thought and expression is essential to any institution of higher learning.
…
This mission guides learning outside the classroom quite as much as in class, and often inspires vigorous debate on those social, economic, and political issues that arouse the strongest passions. In the process, views will be expressed that may seem to many wrong, distasteful, or offensive. Such is the nature of freedom to sift and winnow ideas.
On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden.* No viewpoint or message may be deemed so hateful or disturbing that it may not be expressed.
…Most campuses have recently sought to become more diverse, and more reflective of the larger community, by attracting students, faculty, and staff from groups that were historically excluded or underrepresented.
…
Hostility or intolerance to persons who differ from the majority … may undermine the confidence of new members of the community….
…[S]ome campuses have felt it necessary to forbid the expression of racist, sexist, homophobic, or ethnically demeaning speech, along with conduct or behavior that harasses….
…But … rules that ban or punish speech based upon its content cannot be justified. An institution of higher learning fails to fulfill its mission if it asserts the power to proscribe ideas…. Indeed, by proscribing any ideas, a university sets an example that profoundly disserves its academic mission.
. . .
… A speech code unavoidably implies an institutional competence to distinguish permissible expression of hateful thought from what is proscribed as thoughtless hate. [My emphases.]

As near as I can tell, nobody’s accusing me or anybody else of “hate speech” at IVC. It’s a lesser charge, I suppose: some kind of loutishness, boorishness. —“Incivility.”
On the other hand, I suspect that that mean spirit that lets people assume that they and the “institution” are competent to distinguish permissible and impermissible speech—well, it's alive and well at IVC.
Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see. (I'm thinking of monitoring the proceedings of the IVC CPW, doin' a play-by-play.)

* * *

But what, exactly, are those who shout "incivility" referring to? That’s the funny thing. When you ask that question, often, the “victims” of allegedly obnoxious speech (or their terriers) seem unable to cite anything relevant.
Back in 1998, incensed by Dissent’s endless criticisms, administration accused me of “discriminating” (against Indians, I guess—I called Mathur “Mr. Goo”—and against Christians—I said something snarky about the Christian Coalition) and violating the “workplace violence” policy (I told Glenn Roquemore he was “going down” along with Mathur).
I recall challenging the Chancellor (Fredrick Sampson) over this anti-Christian blarney. I asked: where exactly did I exhibit hostility to Christians? In fact, I hadn’t. Not once. A certain speechifying member of IVC’s faculty evidently “believed” that I was anti-Christian because I had once criticized him (he had led his forensics students in prayer before tournaments). He complained to Mathur. That was it. I kid you not.
Even now, I am often accused (by commenting DtB readers) of being an anti-religious atheist. When I challenge them to show where I have evinced that perspective, they come up with nothing.
Poor readers, I guess. They oughta go to college.
It’s part of the blog (or newsletter) thing. Bloggers are routinely accused of anything anyone ever says in their blogs, including reader comments over which they have no control.

* * *

QUESTION: People need to ask themselves why a “civility code” is being pursued right now. What exactly has occasioned this? (The official "story" seems to be that it's demanded by the accreditors.)
My guess: as usual, people with power do not like to be criticized. They use their power to push-back against the critics, to portray them as hateful or uncouth or even sporting bad hair.
Again, I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

* * *

GOSH, since I’m going to be accused of saying loutish things in loutish ways, I may as well come right out and say them. Clearly. (In my view, of course, these things are not loutish; neither are they delivered loutishly!)
So:

• Just what are we to make of a faculty member who makes no secret of her administrative ambitions and who then attains the Presidency of the Academic Senate (the obvious faculty “step” toward an administrative career)?
Might there be some conflicts of interest in this scenario? My answer: in this case, I do think so. (Please note: I am not objecting to administrative ambitions per se.)
• What are we to make of a faculty leadership that must be goaded to take to task the bad initiatives (e.g., the infernal Early College program; the quietly mounted and initially disastrous Crean Lutheran set-up) of top administration? That steadfastly refuses to acknowledge a spirit inimical to "shared governance" in the latter? My answer: get straight, lady, or move aside.

There is nothing personal here. On the contrary, I have always liked LDA. We’ve been friends for years. I’ve even given her a pass for being a Texas Republican for chrissake. (I can be absurdly tolerant.)
But a whatchdog has got to do what a watchdog has got to do.
Arf. ~

*As I have explained previously, my adventures in "free speech" in the last dozen years have led me to reconsider positions I once took publicly. For instance, I no longer feel that the appropriate response to Mr. Frogue's planned "forum"—one that included participation by Holocaust deniers and members of an anti-semitic organization—was cancelation of the forum. A better response: the setting up of a corrective "forum" plus the deposit of a burning sack of shit on Mr. Frogue's doorstep.**
**Just kidding about the sack of shit. Fudge maybe. And those cool fake flames.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Goals and Values and Twaddle

blather: long-winded talk with no real substance*

The whole concept of MSLOs [measurable student learning outcomes] as the latest fad in education is somewhat akin to the now discredited fad of the '90's, Total Quality Management, or TQM. Essentially, the ACCJC adopted MSLOs as the overarching basis for accrediting community colleges based on their faith in the theoretical treatises of a movement.... After repeated requests for research showing that such use of MSLOs is effective, none has been forthcoming from the ACCJC [accreditors]. Prior to large scale imposition of such a requirement at all institutions, research should be provided to establish that continuous monitoring of MSLOs has resulted in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution. No such research is forthcoming because there is none….

—The Accountability Game…., Leon F. Marzillier (Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, October, 2002)

In the summer of ’13, I offered a critique of the awkward verbiage by which the district and colleges explain their values, goals, and objectives —aka SOCCCD'S G&V (goals and values) blather.
I wrote a post each for the district, Saddleback College, and Irvine Valley College efforts. (See the links below.)
This verbiage—stated in terms of “values,” “missions,” “goals,” “visions,” and whatnot—is often badly written. It is sometimes embarrassingly trite.
It occasionally communicates something worthwhile.
No doubt you are familiar with the usual objections to jargon. Higher education, too, has its jargon—an irony, given typical college-level instruction in writing, which urges jargon eschewery.

Sure enough, SOCCCD G&V blather is riddled with jargon and with terms misused and abused. For instance, in the case of the district’s dubious blather, the so-called “vision” is actually a purpose. Why didn't they just call it that?
As one slogs through this prattle, one finds that "visions" tend to be awfully similar to “missions,” with which they are distinguished. The latter in turn are awfully similar to “goals,” which must be distinguished from “objectives.” But aren't goals and objectives pretty much the same thing?
These perverse word games will surely perplex or annoy anyone armed with a command of the English language. In fact, readers will be perplexed to the degree that they are thus armed. Illiterates, of course, will be untroubled.

Here's a simple point: the district and colleges’ G&V blather tends to eschew good, plain English in favor of technical terms and trendy words and phrases (i.e., it tends to be bullshitty and vague). Thus, one encounters such trendy terminological turds as “dynamic,” “diversity,” “student success,” and “student-centered.” Even meretricious neologisms such as ISLOs and “persistence rates” pop up, unexplained, undefended.
Does anyone see a transparency problem with all of this? Shouldn't the public, or at least the well educated public, be able to comprehend statements of the colleges' goals and values?
In the case of the district, to its credit, all it really seems to want to say is that it wants to teach well and it wants students to succeed. Admirable!
So why all the ugly, common-sense defying, buzzword-encrusted claptrap?

• Districtular poppycock: our “vision” and our “mission” and our tolerance of twaddle - July 31, 2013

• THEY BUZZ: Saddleback College's "Mission, Vision, and Values" - August 4, 2013

• IVC’s vision, mission, and goals: nonsense on stilts - August 5, 2013

• THE IRVINE VALLEY CHRONICLES: no ideas, just clichés & buzzwords - Sep 30, 2013

*From my Apple laptop's dictionary

1975: Choosing the site for IVC

From of our "Wacky Origins" series

• The origins of our college district, Part 8: the twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious episodes that led to the choice of the “north campus” site (part A) [Click on link]

✩ IN THIS POST: noting board disquietude, early in 1975, Norrisa Brandt of the Saddleback board of trustees calls for a discussion of the very idea of a community college—and of the longterm goals of the district.

¶ Ten months later (January, 1976), new trustee Frank Greinke of Tustin senses board disunity concerning THE BIG ISSUE—namely, the district's second and northern campus. To get things moving, he proposes establishing a citizens advisory committee with two community members chosen by each trustee—a procedure guaranteeing strong representation for the City of Tustin.

¶ The bumptuous Mr. Greinke approaches the Tustin City Council, asking them for a resolution “supporting the concept of a Tustin area campus of Saddleback College.” They provide it. Meanwhile, conservative trustee, Bob Bartholomew, carps brutishly about the faculty's proposed campus calendar, claiming that it reflects selfish faculty interests. Here and elsewhere, the board is divided between a conservative faction (Bartholomew, Berry, and perhaps Greinke) and a more progressive faction (Taylor, Brandt, Marshall).

¶ In May, conservative trustee Donna Berry, seeking to reduce district costs, leads a successful effort to eliminate the "6 unit rule," a rule allowing Tustinites (and other Saddleback district residents) to transfer to other districts' colleges (e.g., Santa Ana College) without securing permission paperwork. The upshot is fewer transfers, lower "tuition" costs for Saddleback.

¶ Natch, Tustinite trustees (Greinke, Backus), aware of their constituencies' desire to attend Orange Coast and Santa Ana Colleges, fail to support Berry's cost-cutting move.

¶ Trustees confront a likely financial shortfall of about $3 million caused by new legislation. They pursue cost-cutting and new revenue more vigorously. They consider charging costs to students who take non-credit craft courses and the like. Discussion of this option brings out philosophical differences between trustees concerning the nature of "college."

¶ In mid-May, the Citizens Advisory Committee provides its report concerning pursuit of a second, northern campus. It urges the board to buy land (for a 2nd campus) immediately. It highlights longterm complaints especially among Tustinites about the distance to Saddleback college.

¶ The college produces a document concerning "priorities," but some trustees carp that it does not sufficiently emphasize vocational and technical (even agricultural) instruction. Trustees feel pressure to increase taxes for maintenance, repair, construction, and (mostly uncompensated) growth while attempting to honor conservative anti-tax desiderata. Meanwhile, Saddleback faculty move to strengthen their union. Sparks fly.

¶ Philosophical differences again arise when Superintendent Lombardi reveals a document describing the kind of college the district is attempting to create. Lombardi's collegiate assumptions clash with local notions.

¶ Pursuit of a second campus continues. By September (1976), three sites are under discussion: on Myford, east of the Santa Ana Freeway; on Culver, west of the freeway; and on Jeffrey @ the Santa Ana Freeway. The board is very divided, and worries about costs and taxes resurface. Greinke, of Tustin, insists that the Myford site (@ today's Tustin Marketplace) is ideal. Tustinites commence clamoring for the Myford site, feeling entitled to a campus in or near Tustin. On a 5-1 vote, Berry dissenting, the board chooses the Myford site. While Tustin celebrates, trustee Bartholomew carps about the immorality of Day Care Centers.

¶ In November, Bartholomew resigns and moves to Carpinteria. The board is down to six members.

¶ In January, the Irvine Co. upsets the applecart by attempting to withdraw its offer of the Myford site, recommending, instead, a new site at Jeffrey and Irvine Center Drive in Irvine. Its motives seem obscure. Meanwhile, the Tustin City Council behaves oddly with regard to the annexation and zoning of a 425 acre parcel owned by the Irvine Co—and including the Myford site.

¶ With the Irvine Co.'s withdrawal of Myford, SHIT HITS FAN. HORNSWOGGLERY SUSPECTED. —RB

¶ Go to Part 8

• The origins of our college district, Part 8b: twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious, Part B [Click on link]

✩ IN THIS POST: back in September, 1976, the Saddleback board chose the Irvine Co.'s Myford-Bryan site, on Tustin's border, for the district's 2nd campus.

¶ Now, in January, the Irvine Co. does a sudden and mysterious SWITCHEROO: "Why doncha build the new campus over here on Jeffrey and Irvine Center Drive, smack dab in the middle of Irvine, instead?" They're obviously desperate to retain the Myford site (for reasons unexpressed and obfuscated); they sweeten the Jeffrey deal bigtime. PLUS, they start a hard sell, warning about the stink of manure and the lack of roads over at the Myford bean fields.

¶ Trustee Marshall of Laguna Hills dies after a long illness. The board is down to five members!

The Tustin News naturally turns up the heat against the Irvine Co. Meanwhile, the Tustin City Council acts like agents of developers (namely, um, the Irvine Co.), not citizens. To trustee Berry, the Irvine Co.'s switcheroo is mighty hinky. Bloviating trustee Frank Greinke openly accuses the Irvine Co. of boondogglin'. Tempers flare and Greinke calls Bartholomew(?) a "Judas," to which trustee Norrisa Brandt strongly objects, whereupon Greinke tells her to just "shut up."

¶ Brandt notes that "We have Irvine Co. in a bind," and urges the board to take the boffo deal they're offering for Jeffrey. Meanwhile, the March election is drawing near, and Saddleback faculty are backing candidates who prefer the Irvine/Jeffrey site, while Tustinites keep carpin' about the board's alleged "promise" to put a college in the Tustin area (e.g., @ Myford). Trustee Brandt urges the board to wait on the site selection till after the election, when the board will have seven members again. Superintendent Lombardi just wants to flip a goddam coin and move on. Tustinites keep up their infernal yammerin' for the Myford site. Greinke thunders indecorously about "hogwash" and "suede shoes." Citizen Ursula Kennedy challenges the Tustin City Council to come clean about these weird land shenanigans with the Irvine Co., but, natch, to no avail. Finally, less than a week before the election, and despite the board's abject skeleton-crew-itude, Greinke, Backus, and Berry (a majority of the five) vote in favor of the Myford site, and Tustin celebrates.

¶ The board thus defies the Irvine Co.—and, maybe, common sense, too.

¶ But then a new board emerges from the March 8 election. "The new board," says trustee Donna Berry, "is certainly not going to presume to come on and change the site!"

¶ Plus the Saddleback faculty are gripin' about pay & bennies. The board is unmoved!

¶ NOW WHAT? —RB

¶ Go to Part 8b

• The origins of our college district, Part 8c: twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious, Part C [end] [Click on link]

✩ IN THIS POST: with the March 8, 1977, election, charter trustee Pat Backus, who supported the grumbling Tustinites, suffers a major upset; he's OUT and newbies Watts, McKnight, and Price are IN. What emerges is a "new board majority" of Brandt-Taylor-McKnight-Price, two of whom were backed by the faculty union, which seeks to be the sole legal rep of faculty on contract issues.

¶ Amazingly, this crew immediately REOPENS the supposedly settled subject of site selection for the district's second campus. Tustinites have a cow. The board minority seethes. WTFs all around.

¶ But the Irvine Co. won't sell the Jeffrey property unless it is first "condemned," thereby relieving the company (and the district) of a big tax payout. Does the new board majority have the five votes necessary for the condemnation move? Seemingly not. (Uh-oh.)

¶ Meanwhile, trustee Greinke thinks Child Care Centers are immoral and, over in Irvine, lots of residents are pulling a NIMBY, college-wise, and some begin to suspect dastardly Irvine Co. "tricks." Former trustee Bartholomew weighs in on the crazy site selection issue, bellowing that he expects the district soon to rename itself the "Irvine Company Community College District."

¶ In May, the Irvine Co. decides to allow Saddleback to purchase the Jeffrey property without condemnation procedures, and so the sale goes forward, ending the matter once and for all. Upshot: the Board Majority has bulldozed the minority and Tustinites are now permanently pissed people.

¶ With that, the negotiations logjam concerning the faculty contract is suddenly cleared and faculty get a nice raise and impressive benefits. Greinke calls the contract "excessive." The conservatives seethe.

¶ What does it all mean?

¶ Go to Part 8c

How our college district got started!

From our Origins series:

• The origins of our college district, Part 1: Hey, kids! Let's form our own JC district! [Click on link]

✩ IN THIS POST: this is the 1st in an 8-part series about the early days of the district.

¶ As communities grow, schools are built, and, naturally, communities seek to provide "junior" (later, "community") colleges for high school graduates not attending 4-year institutions. Normally, the creation of junior/community colleges is pursued by high school districts.

¶ Since the end of WW II, Orange County has been one of the growingest places in the country. But, until the 60s, most of the growing occurred in the north half of the county, leaving the entire South County area lightly populated and collegeless.

¶ By 1960, the largest town in "South County"—if one regards Tustin and Irvine as forming the northern border of that area—was the City of Tustin, with San Clemente, Laguna Beach, Mission Viejo (unincorporated), and San Juan Capistrano trailing behind.

¶ By the early 60s, Tustinites hoped to overcome the college-less-ness of their own community. In April of 1963, Tustin Union High School board members discussed creating a fourth college district—beyond Orange Coast, Santa Ana, and North OC—to serve Tustin Union, Laguna Beach, and Capistrano high school districts. This early group, at least in Tustin, tended to assume that this South County district's first college would be built in or near Tustin.

¶ By October of '63, three South County high school districts met and announced a plan to form a fourth junior college district; the group planned to hire a firm to explore feasibility. Participating in the meeting were the Tustin, Capo Union, and Laguna Beach districts. They were also considering the alternatives: joining the already-established Santa Ana or Orange Coast community college districts, just to the north. Larry Taylor of Laguna Beach was the chair of the "inter-district committee."

¶ A year later, officials of the Orange Coast and Santa Ana districts were considering an incompatible plan: uniting the two into a mega district, which would expand further by taking on all coast and South County high school districts, including Tustin, San Juan Capistrano, and Laguna Beach.

¶ By March of '65, Tustin, Laguna and Capistrano school districts were discouraging the notion of including them in a mega-college district. They wanted their own district. Meanwhile, the plan to unite the Orange Coast and Santa Ana junior college districts was still on.

¶ At the time, an agency called the "Orange County Committee on School District Organization" (OCCSDO) existed. That body sought to persuade the South County crowd to join the proposed northern super-district. To that end, OCCSDO invited reps from the southern school districts to its April 1 meeting. The Tustin-Laguna-Capistrano crowd were agreeable, but it was already clear that they wanted to explore setting up their own JC district, and they needed time to speak with the Capo people in particular about that plan.

¶ By May, Tustin Union authorized its superintendent to "explore further" the "cost and scope of studies regarding feasibility of the formation of a new junior college district."

By November, the Tustin school board gave the "Tustin/southern" proposal the green light, and, consequently, establishing the new junior college district "is in the active planning stages."

¶ The other southern boards—Laguna and Capo—had done likewise. They were on board.

¶ These school districts prepared for a Nov. 17 meeting of OCCSDO to seek formation of the 4th district. If OCCSDO was agreeable, the proposal would next go to the state. If the state would give its okey-dokey, next would come an election, in September or October of 1966. —RB

¶ Go to Part 1

Early Saddleback College history: "faculty wives club"

• “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.

Death by bow and arrow (the Fuentes file)

From The Fuentes file: Fred Harber & the ubiquity of violent death (June 2012)

¶ Recently, I suggested that we need to understand Mr. Tom Fuentes, his career and his significance, in relation to his formative years—namely, his four-or-so years working with and for Ronald Caspers, the Orange County Supervisor, fifth district, from 1971 until Caspers’ mysterious death in June of 1974. Fuentes was young back then: he turned 23 in 1971.

¶ Fuentes managed Caspers’ successful campaign for the post in 1970. Afterward, Fuentes was made a “consultant” to Caspers’ S&L; he was also made Caspers’ assistant down at the County (ultimately, Caspers, as Supervisor, hired two assistants, but Fuentes seemed to be the first and chief assistant).

¶ I have suggested that the 1970 campaign—especially efforts, involving various members of the “Coalition,” to damage the reputation of incumbent Alton Allen—was extremely sleazy, with no-holds-barred on Caspers’ side.

¶ Caspers spent nearly $90,000, much of it his own, to secure that job—a job that made less than $20,000 a year.

¶ At the time, many wondered what he was up to.

¶ According to the man who was the chairman of the OC GOP at the time, Tom Rogers, Caspers represented recognition of an opportunity to make huge sums of money by working with developers. After Caspers, the Board of Supes was about opportunities to support Supes who were happy to allow the special interests to develop the crap out of Orange County. The game was all about increasing density and maximizing profits: the Supervisors win, the developers win. Everybody's happy.

¶ And Tom Fuentes was “there” for the birth and rapid growth of this ugly new reality.

¶ My case for Caspers’ corruption relies somewhat on the notion, inspired by a 1978 lawsuit, which was settled out of court, that Caspers and his crony Fred Harber engaged in a “shakedown” of a developer, Richard Jordan—leading some to wonder whether this was a routine practice of theirs.

¶ Yesterday, I found a marvelous 1978 Times article that paints quite a picture of the Jordan affair. That piece referred to the apparent fact that, seventeen years earlier, when Harber was the City Manager of Cypress, he had participated in a bribery scheme that greatly resembled the one Jordan was approached with back in 1974 (namely, the bit about $2,000 a month). (See below.) At the time (1961), Harber secured immunity from prosecution by agreeing to testify that he and another man, Cypress City Councilman Job Denni, were receiving $2,000 a month in bribes.

¶ But get this: the case was dropped after Denni died in a plane crash.

¶ And that wasn’t the only plane crash that took out people involved in that case. (More soon.)

¶ Since I started to look into Caspers and the "Coalition," I've kept running into stories of peculiar violent deaths. I've already discussed the mysterious 1974 loss of Harber's "Shooting Star," which apparently took ten lives, including Harber, Caspers, and an assistant to Supervisor Clark. (Tom Fuentes and Lyle Overby were supposed to be on that trip. Fuentes never came aboard; Overby actually got off the boat before it headed up the coast.)

Arlene Hoffman

¶ Then there's Harber's secretary, Arlene Hoffman, who was killed with an arrow in 1994 (as she started work with yet another OC Supervisor). The case was never solved.

¶ Evidently, back in the early seventies, a "probate referee" connected to yet another member of the "Coalition" was mysteriously murdered (haven't found any details about that yet).

¶ Here's one I've not mentioned before: in the mid-50s, Caspers, an expert yachtsman, crashed his boat, which killed his first wife. Her body was never found.

¶ What does it all mean? Maybe nothing.

¶ Beyond that, the stuff is fascinating, to me at least....

1963: Dear Patriot...

From DtB, 6-19-17

No enjoyment

¶ James B. Utt … helped Orange County gain a national reputation as a hotbed of archconservatism…. "Utt the Nut," his enemies called him. He was elected to Congress in 1952 and handily won reelection until his death in 1970. Each year Utt introduced a bill to eliminate the federal income tax. He also tried to pass a constitutional amendment which would recognize Jesus Christ as America's authority figure. He opposed all civil rights legislation, but gained national fame, however, when he argued that rock 'n roll was a communist plot. — LA Times, December 27, 1999

¶ Back in 2008, on something called “Paleofuture,” blogger Matt Novak noted the existence of a “time capsule book,” named “2063 A.D.,” a copy of which was buried in the ground somewhere back in 1963.

¶ Novak informs us that the late California congressman James B. Utt—he of the “James B. Utt Library” at Saddleback College*—contributed the following remark for the book:

...The cost of escaping gravity will probably always curtail any commercial space travel, but the time will come when the scientists will be able to change the molecular body system and reduce the weight to zero and reconstruct the molecular system at any place and any time. Travel will then be as rapid as the mind can conceive. Personally, I do not look forward to this with any sense of enjoyment.

¶ Golly. Do you suppose Utt was a Trekkie?**

¶ In Congress, he was called “Utt the Nut” owing to his out-of-this-world ideas about Commies creeping under every rock. According to Wikipedia, “In 1963, he claimed that ‘a large contingent of barefooted Africans’ might be training in Georgia as part of a United Nations military exercise to take over the United States.” On another occasion, he warned about Chinese communists amassing at the California/Mexico border.

Utt: 1899-1970

¶ Utt, who mentored a young Tom Fuentes,*** promoted an organization you may have heard about: Liberty Lobby. No doubt that's where he got his best info!

¶ You’ll recall that Steve Frogue, the SOCCCD’s notorious Holocaust denying trustee, was a big fan of Liberty Lobby, the foremost racist/anti-Semitic publisher in the U.S. (it went bankrupt in 2001).

¶ It already had that reputation back in 1966, when well-known investigative journalist, Drew Pearson, reported that “Four Congressmen ... have accepted ‘Statesmen of the Republic’ awards from the Lobby for their right-wing activities.”

¶ Utt was among them. At one point, said Pearson, Utt mailed an appeal (“Dear Patriot”) in which he wrote: “Liberty Lobby…consistently works in the halls of Congress to oppose the international socialist takeover. …I strongly urge you to send in your subscription to Liberty lobby’s legislative report, ‘Liberty Letter,’ without delay.”

¶ Liberty Letter—and, later, The Spotlight—were the Breitbart.com of the pre-internet era. (See Spotlight Archives.)

¶ Essentially, nothing changes, it seems.

IHR was founded by Willis Carto, who founded and ran Liberty Lobby, 1955-2001. See Trustee Calls Recall Effort 'Witch Hunt'

¶ Here are mostly "conspiracist" titles you'll find on Breitbart at this very moment:

SOCIALIST GROUP UNDER POLICE INVESTIGATION AFTER CALLING FOR BEHEADING REPUBLICAN
SCOTUS STRIKES DOWN BAN ON ‘RACIALLY DISPARAGING’ TRADEMARKS
RUSH: SANDERS, WARREN, NANCY WROTE ‘SCRIPT’ FOR SCALISE’S SHOOTER
Caitlyn Jenner: ‘Liberals Can’t Even Shoot Straight’
Caddell: Anti-Trump Resistance Rhetoric Fueling ‘Raging Fever’ in Unbalanced People
BBC Targets Kids with Fake ‘Islam Means Peace’ Claim Following Finsbury Park Attack

¶ The President is an ardent Breitbart reader. He's also a fan of Alex Jones!

*The name was changed after the Library was significantly rebuilt and remodeled several years ago.

**Star Trek didn't debut until two or three years later.

***According to Fuentes himself.

The Pride of Trident U – 2/15/18

[Kiana and Glenn's nepotistic regime comes to a sudden end]

¶ This study found the overall quality of educational administration programs in the United States to be poor. The majority of programs range from inadequate to appalling, even at some of the country's leading universities. Collectively, school leadership programs are not successful on any of the nine quality criteria presented [in this report].

—From Educating School Leaders by Arthur Levine

¶ I'VE LEARNED a bit more about Chemistry Professor, Kiana Tabibzadeh, and her imminent transfer to Saddleback College—owing, evidently, to "nepotism" concerns.

¶ Tabibzadeh's husband is, of course, IVC President-for-Life Glenn Roquemore.

¶ Despite his corruption and incompetence, he's been IVC Prez for nearly 16 years.

* * *

¶ During this afternoon's meeting of the IVC Academic Senate, I asked about this matter. Here's what I learned:

Evidently, at some point, "junior faculty" complained about a circumstance related to Tabibzadeh's role as Chair of the School of Physical Sciences and Technologies. I haven't learned any details, but it is likely that the complaints concerned Tabibzadeh's conduct and difficulties addressing that conduct in view of her relationship with the college president.
[Tabibzadeh has long been notorious for her conduct as faculty and as chair and protection she enjoys (and routinely calls upon) as wife of the college president.
[It is interesting to note that, prior to his ascendancy to administration in 1997 at the start of then-President Mathur's notorious regime (at IVC), Roquemore had been working with administrator Pam Deegan to address Mathur's misconduct as chair of the School.]
Both faculty union (Faculty Association), and senate, officers were involved in this matter to some extent.
These complaints ultimately led to involvement of the recently hired Vice Chancellor of Human Resources, Cindy Vyskocil.
In the end, Tabibzadeh "volunteered" to transfer to Saddleback College.

* * *

¶ During the meeting, I read from the district's nepotism policy:

¶ The District does not prohibit the employment of relatives (or domestic partners as defined by Family Code) in the same department, or division/school, with the exception that they shall not be assigned to a regular position within the same department, division/school, or site that has an immediate family member who is in a position to recommend or influence personnel decisions.

¶ Roquemore has been Vice President or President at IVC since January of 2000. Tabibzadeh has been a full-time instructor at IVC since 1997. (Roquemore was on her search committee. Reportedly, he was dating her at the time.) Assuming that the district's "nepotism" policy has not changed substantially, and given that Roquemore and Tabibzadeh's relationship goes back at least to 2000, it is clear that the college has been in violation of its nepotism policy since that time—i.e., for 18 years.

¶ WTF.

¶ And it appears that the violation is not merely technical. If long-time reports are accurate, Roquemore has been providing cover for Tabibzadeh's excesses and abuses for that entire period.

¶ People have lost jobs, y'know.

* * *

Dr. Wenling Li

¶ Tabibzadeh has a surprisingly high salary. How come?

¶ Part of the answer is her doctorate, earned in 2015. I did a little checking and found her dissertation (here). It is entitled "Student Academic Achievement in College Chemistry" (it's a degree in "education leadership," not chemistry), and it was conferred by Trident University International, a tiny, new (2007) for-profit located in beauteous Cypress, CA.

¶ Trident has no campus, since all of its instruction is online.

¶ Tabibzadeh's dissertation committee is curious. Included among its three members are Sanjay Gupta and Brent Monte, both Math instructors at IVC. The committee chair is Dr. Wenling Li, "Doctoral Studies Director" of Trident's College of Education.

* * *

¶ So what kind of place is Trident (TUI)?

¶ I found a report (2012) on Trident by the "Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions." It paints a dismal picture:

On T's dissertation committee
¶ TUI spent $1,118 per student on instruction in 2009, compared to $494 per student on marketing and $2,056 per student on profit. The amount that privately held companies examined by the committee spend on instruction ranges from $1,118 (TUI) to $6,389 per student per year. In contrast, public and non-profit schools generally spend a higher amount per student on instruction. Other California-based colleges spent, on a per student basis, $15,039 at the University of California-Irvine, and $35,920 at the University of Southern California.
. . .
¶ In 2011, WASC called on TUI to show cause why its accreditation should not be terminated on March 30, 2012. WASC's Show Cause Order resulted from its finding that TUI failed to meet standards regarding defining and achieving educational objectives. On February 24, 2012, the order to show cause was lifted, but TUI was placed on probation by the accreditor for making progress towards, but still not meeting, the accreditor's standards.
Gupta: on T's dissertation committee
¶ The Order followed a March 2010 warning letter, expressing concern about TUI's Capacity and Preparatory Review (CPR) report, a key report in WASC's accreditation review process. WASC acknowledged that "considerable effort had been undertaken by a large number of people in support of the University's CPR report." Even with that effort, however, WASC also noted that its review team "found the report difficult to follow and lacking in reflection and supportive evidence beyond assertions."
¶ WASC accepted TUI's report, but noted several standards that the school needed to address before the next stage of accreditation review, the Educational Effectiveness Review (EER). WASC also rescheduled the EER to allow more time to address the lacking standards. WASC cautioned that Trident should address those standards "with analysis of evidence rather than the conclusionary approach present in the CPR report [sic]."
¶ The EER was rescheduled for the spring of 2011. On February 24, 2012, WASC lifted the order to show cause and placed the school on probation.

¶ Ed.D degrees are worthless even when conferred by reputable institutions. How low do you rate 'em when they're conferred by a place like Trident?

¶ No matter. Kiana got her salary bump.

P.S.

● How is Trident U ranked? I checked U.S. News and World Report. There, Trident is "unranked." Why? Because the "School refused to fill out U.S. News statistical survey."

¶ U.S. News did, however, have Trident "selectivity" data: the Fall 2016 acceptance rate was 96%.

¶ Selectivity: "least selective."

● A blast from the past: The Irvine Valley Chronicles, Feb. 6, 2013:

c. 2012 -Vacationing in Hawaii (?) with probie Scott

¶ Did you know that one of the current probies [Dan Scott] is a close personal friend of the college President? Gosh, I do hope everyone is on their best behavior. It will be interesting to learn who'll get tenure and who won't.

¶ —Well, maybe not "interesting."

¶ Note: Scott did receive tenure. Surprise!

● In her dissertation, Tabibzadeh thanks "Dr. Mary Scott." This would seem to be the wife of IVC business instructor Dan Scott, who, along with Mary (Provost at Concordia U), vacationed with the Roquemores despite Dan's probationary status. (See photo above.)

¶ Golly.

● Dan Scott is a Doctor of Business Administration (DBS), evidently. And where'd he get that degree? U of Phoenix, natch. (The institution is "unranked," of course, by U.S. News & WR. Why? "School refused to fill out U.S. News statistical survey.") As you know, Roquemore, inexplicably, has a high regard of UoP.

¶ Selectivity? "Least selective," natch.

Special relationship w/ Prez

● According to his LinkedIn page, Scott worked as an adjunct at Concordia U from 2004-2009. If he was married to Mary, Provost of Concordia (2006), at the time—BINGO! It's nepotism time once again.

¶ Evidently, Scott also worked for the ethically challenged ARAMARK corporation for 19 years.

* * *

. . .

Accreditation at Risk (Inside Higher Ed; July 15, 2011)

¶ Agency threatens to terminate approval of online for-profit college in California, citing its failure to reveal problems with certifying that students met degree requirements.

¶ An online for-profit college in California [Trident] that serves mostly military service members is on the verge of losing its regional accreditation, for failing to ensure that students transferring in had fulfilled their general education requirements and, more importantly, for failing to tell the accreditor about the problem.
. . .
¶ That wasn't the biggest problem, though, at least in the eyes of officials at WASC. The accrediting agency had a team visit Trident in the spring, but no mention was made of the problem, Ralph S. Wolff, the agency's president, said in an interview Thursday. And in fact, "at no point did they disclose this" to us, Wolff said, noting that Western officials had learned about the issue "from a third party." The agency's Standard 1.9, he said, requires that institutions engage in "honest, open communication with WASC" and "inform WASC of material matters."
. . .
¶ It is not at all clear whether those promises will satisfy the Western agency, which like other accreditors is under significant scrutiny to prove that it is rigorously ensuring that students at its institutions are getting a meaningful education. The agency said its officials would conduct a special visit this fall to "evaluate Trident's progress in addressing the commission's concerns." But based on the commission's action in June, Western will terminate the institution's accreditation in March, Wolff said, "unless [it] can demonstrate to us that it has restored academic and operational integrity."

Summer 2011: controversy facing trident university international (Degree Info, Jun 2, 2012)

¶ …In March of this year the accreditation of Trident University International was placed on probationary status after the university succeeded in avoiding the revocation of its accreditation following receipt of a "Show Cause" letter in the Summer of 2011.…
¶ The management of Trident (TUI) changed after it became a for-profit institution in 2007 and over the course of the following two to three years a number of managerial staff were hired in anticipation of the university's expansion. When the transcripts and institutional integrity crisis hit TUI in the Spring and Summer of 2011 and WASC issued them the severe reprimand of a letter demanding it show cause why its accreditation should not be revoked, many of these staff worked extremely hard to analyze systems, reassure students, effect changes and generally pull the institution through the crisis. Nonetheless new registrations dropped by 40% and almost immediately after WASC transferred TUI to probationary status fifteen of those staff were fired, including the remaining VP of Marketing and the VP of Student Services.
¶ Then in late May of this year it was announced that staff were to work a four day week, faculty pay would be reduced and faculty jobs were being reassessed with the likelihood that the employment of a number would be terminated. In addition the way faculty time is credited on the doctoral program has been changed. As the amount of time faculty needed to spend with doctoral students was greater than that with undergraduates or masters students in the past if a faculty member was assigned to teach a doctoral student this would count as equivalent to five other students. This then was reduced to three other students and now in May it was announced that this distinction is to be abolished and teaching a doctoral student will be regarded as equivalent to teaching an undergraduate.
¶ This sends a clear signal to faculty about the value being placed on the university's doctoral program, one which anyway the for-profit management had regarded ambivalently. On the one hand they accepted that having a doctoral program reflected well on the university but on the other they felt that it was not cost effective unless it could be "scaled up" somehow. This was not achieved prior to the transcripts and integrity scandal and so now it looks as though the future of TUI's doctoral program might be in question. This may not be a surprise given that the university's new President has past experience at Argosy University….

Boom! in 2005

“Spain has abandoned our fighting men and women, withdrawing their support. I see no reason to send the students of our colleges to Spain at this moment in history.”

—Tom "Big-Foot" Fuentes

February 28, 2005:

Board Meeting: on this night, the Board is asked to approve a summer “study abroad” program in Santander, Spain. Trustee Fuentes suggests that he will vote against the item in part because Spain has “abandoned our fighting men and women” by pulling out of Iraq.

Four other trustees follow Fuentes’ lead with regard to the item, though they cite a concern for students’ safety, not Spain's politics.

Student Trustee Poulton expresses concern about a “political precedent”—that is, rejecting a program owing to the politics of the host country.

Program approval is denied on a 2-5 vote. (Milchiker and Lang cast affirmative votes, joining student trustee Poulton, whose vote is advisory.)

Fuentes’ remarks are videotaped [by me —rb]. By the next morning, transcripts of the remarks are produced [again, by me]. Within a day or two, [with an assist from Rebel Girl] the transcripts and a DVD containing the video are provided to the Orange County Register’s Marla Jo Fisher.

A columnist for the OC Weekly also receives the transcripts.

Soon, Fuentes will find himself at the center of an embarrassing media firestorm.

March 4:

In the online edition of OC Weekly, Gustavo Arellano reminds readers of Fuentes’ controversial history as head of the local GOP. He reports that the “vindictive” Mr. Fuentes has now launched a “campaign against Spain.” According to Arellano:

Fuentes unveiled his new crusade at the Feb. 28 SOCCCD Board of Trustees meeting, when he requested a discussion on Item 10…The item would have allowed Saddleback College students to study abroad in Santander, Spain, during the summer. It wasn’t expected to generate much controversy; the SOCCCD board has allowed Saddleback students to learn Spanish in the Iberian country for the past 15 years.

But Fuentes shocked everyone in the audience when he began to assail his ancestral home. "One hundred ninety-five years ago, in 1810, my family arrived on this continent from Spain, so I have an affection for that land," Fuentes said. But he quickly dropped the amicable pretense, simultaneously attacking Saddleback College’s study abroad program as catering to "an elite" and as a death wish given the March 11, 2004, Madrid train bombings that left 193 dead.

Terror wasn’t what disturbed Fuentes the most, though. "Now: something more," he intoned sternly. "Many of our students in this college, and of its sister college Saddleback and Irvine, past and future today, fight on the battlefield of Iraq under the flag that is behind us. Spain has abandoned our fighting men and women, withdrawing their support. I see no reason to send the students of our colleges to Spain at this moment in history."

Arellano notes the strangeness of Fuentes’ reasoning:

For the 2004-2005 academic year, SOCCCD trustees have approved study abroad to Cambodia, China, New Zealand and Vietnam, all countries with administrations that oppose the U.S. Invasion of Iraq. And Fuentes & Co. also permitted district-funded student trips to Boston, New York City and Washington, D.C.; last year, each of these cities passed resolutions condemning the Iraq war (and on Sept. 11, 2001, each was as dangerous as Madrid was on March 11, 2004).

Indeed, notes Arellano, two months after the Madrid bombing, a group of Saddleback students visited Spain, and not one solitary squawk of concern was voiced by the Board, including Trustee Fuentes.

March 5:

On Saturday, an article concerning the “study abroad” decision appears in the OC Register:

"Spain has abandoned our fighting men and women, withdrawing their support," said trustee Tom Fuentes, who spearheaded the vote to end the 15-year-old program. "I see no reason to send the students of our colleges to Spain at this moment in history."

…UC Irvine professor Jacobo Sefami, who runs the University of California's program there, said Spain is still a U.S. ally.

"I strongly disagree with the use of politics as a motivating factor to disallow an academic program," he said in an e-mail from his Madrid office. Right now, 18 Saddleback College students are in Salamanca, Spain, on a spring semester abroad, Saddleback professor Carmenmara Hernandez-Bravo said. There are no plans to tell them to return. About 30 students had been planning to take the 37-day summer session to Santander in northern Spain to study Spanish civilization and language, Hernandez-Bravo said. The college is planning trips this year to Cambodia and Vietnam.

… Marcia Milchiker, a trustee who took the summer program to Spain last year, retorted that two students were pistol-whipped outside the University of Southern California recently and that terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center in New York.

"Why are you letting them dictate what we do?" Milchiker said. "Are you going to stay in your house in a bomb shelter all the time?"

In its online edition, the Register provides the video of Fuentes sternly explaining his vote against the program.

The Register article broaches the question of Fuentes’ possible hidden motives:

Several faculty members alleged in interviews afterward that the vote was intended to punish Hernandez-Bravo, the trip's organizer, for past criticism of the board, particularly Fuentes….

Fuentes said it was "absurd" to suggest he was trying to punish her.

Hernandez-Bravo said she didn't think the board's refusal to approve the annual trip was directed at her.

"No one would do that, disappoint the students, just to get back at one person," Hernandez-Bravo said.

In an article that appears in “Inside Higher Ed,” more light is shed on Fuentes' possible “punishment” motive:

[Some of Hernandez-Bravo’s colleagues believe] that Fuentes was punishing her for suggesting in a television interview last year that she would have flunked him for comments he made complaining about faculty members' light workload, "because before you speak in my class, you have to do your research."

No doubt, Hernandez-Bravo's "flunk" comment was a response to Fuentes’ remarks in a TV interview in 2004 in which he asserted, falsely, that SOCCCD faculty have a "36-hour work week" and that their average pay is $100,000 per year. (See Dissent ARCHIVES, October 28, 2005.)

The charming Ms. Hernandez-Bravo's criticism, made at a Board meeting in Fuentes' presence, was both strong and rhetorically winning. (She is a former diplomat.)

March 6:

On Sunday, the LA Times weighs in:

"Spain has abandoned our fighting men and women, withdrawing their support," said trustee Tom Fuentes…Fuentes, former head of the Republican Party in Orange County, said he also had concerns about student safety…When asked why students were allowed to go to Spain just three months after the Madrid bombings, Fuentes replied, "I think the terrorist situation is all the more prevalent and obvious today."

Professor Carmenmara Hernandez-Bravo, who runs the study-abroad program, said she was stunned by the board's decision. "I'm still in shock," she said. "I cannot believe a community college can put this much politics into academics."

…In deciding against sending students to Spain, board members also cited high program costs and potential liability to the school district.

"I think it's an affront to the working-student community who often utilizes the junior college system to propose a program of five weeks of study that is nearly $5,000," Fuentes said in a telephone interview Saturday.

The cost of the 37-day trip to Santander, Spain, is about $4,400 including meals, housing, transportation, books and airfare, Hernandez-Bravo said. But while rejecting the $119-per-day Spain trip, she said, the board approved a 14-day trip to Florence, Italy, costing $204 per day without airfare and some meals.

March 7:

On Monday, the Chronicle of Higher Education reports on the “Study abroad” matter:

[Hernandez-Bravo] said the students were safer in Spain than in parts of Los Angeles. "I feel a little more concerned," she said, "when I take my students to South Central LA when I take them to the Museum of Tolerance."…

And she said that the board had approved other trips at the same meeting that were more expensive and that included countries that have not sent troops to Iraq. "I'm confused," said Ms. Hernandez-Bravo. "I don't know the real reason" for the decision.

Mr. Fuentes could not be reached for comment on Sunday.

Ms. Hernandez-Bravo has sent an e-mail message to the college district's chancellor, Raghu P. Mathur, protesting the decision. She said she also plans to forward the message to Spanish and U.S. officials.

"Whatever Trustee Fuentes believes about Spain and its role as our ally, his personal political beliefs should have no part in determining the fate of a long-standing, successful, academic program," she wrote in the message. "It is irresponsible for a public official to make such remarks at a board meeting, because by doing so he is politicizing the educational process."

March 11:

On March 10, a columnist for USC’s “Daily Trojan” opines that Fuentes’ action and his reasoning are “inappropriately political.” (Dozens of articles and commentaries regarding the "study abroad" decision appear both in print and on TV; I am here providing a mere sample. As far as I know, no one defends Fuentes' reasoning.)

On the 11th, LA Times columnist Dana Parsons weighs in, emphasizing Fuentes’ controversial record as chair of the local Republican Party:

Leave it to Tom Fuentes to big-foot a situation. That was his calling card during the 20 years he ran the Orange County Republican Party, crushing enemies real and imagined.

If you want a handle on how Fuentes saw his job, picture Orange County as a house and Democrats as termites. Even peskier than Democrats, though, were Republicans who dared to challenge the party orthodoxy.

Fuentes' 20-year reign ended last year, and you'd think he might then have dropped from sight. Unfortunately, he's got the itch again, back as the apparent point man behind a decision to cancel a program that sends students to study in Spain.

…To state the obvious: Safety is an issue for the students and their parents to weigh. Fuentes' lament about the cost would make sense only if the district paid the bill. As for terrorists, the Basque separatists have been fighting the government for years and Islamic terrorists have shown they can strike any country in the world.

No, the only new factor is Spain's decision to pull its troops from Iraq and the year-old Socialist government's opposition to U.S. policy.

Parsons notes Fuentes’ effort to distance himself from his stated political motive:

I don't buy it for a minute.

This is Fuentes playing politics again with the same high-handedness he always has, couched in the same high-mindedness he developed into an art form. It was a tiresome act that eventually led many of the county's rank-and-file Republican leaders to want new party leadership.

Now he's taken his act to college.

Same old Tom Fuentes. Looking for enemies and finding them.

March 13:

The Register reports that Hernandez-Bravo has become something of a folk hero:

These days Carmenmara Hernandez-Bravo can't go anywhere on the Mission Viejo campus of Saddleback College without being stopped and cheered on.

"Are you going to Spain?" a dean asks.

"Of course I'm going to Spain," Hernandez-Bravo responds with a hint of humor and defiance in her voice.

Students, professors, support staff—everyone has an opinion.

"That's all we can do, be there for each other," a professor tells Hernandez-Bravo after a warm embrace. Another colleague blanketed her office walls with bright yellow fliers reading "bravíssima," a play on her last name and her courage. Students have inundated her with e-mails, and everyone from ABC to NPR is requesting interviews.

In the article, Fuentes stands by his decision while distancing himself from his political motives:

"I reserve the right, as I'm sure any citizen does, to comment," he says. "The decision to cancel the program was on the basis of cost, safety and liability risk. My concern for fighting men and women in the uniform of our land was not the reason the board voted 5 to 2."

So why bring it up? That's Hernandez-Bravo's question.

Fuentes joins other board members in emphasizing the “safety” issue, but the Register reporter is skeptical:

Hmmm. If safety comes first, why didn't Fuentes speak up last year when the summer study-abroad students arrived in Santander, Spain, just four months after the terrorist train bombings in Madrid?

Hernandez-Bravo says that trip went without incident, and she describes Santander as one of the safest cities in Europe.

Former Saddleback College student Brian E. Siedlecki said it best in his letter to Chancellor Mathur: "Having spent time in Santander, I can assure you it is as likely to be victimized by a terrorist attack as Modesto, California."

And what about Saddleback's study-abroad students who are in Salamanca, Spain, this semester, as in, right now. Isn't Fuentes concerned for their safety?

Fellow trustee Marcia Milchiker was quick to point out the holes in Fuentes' safety arguments, mainly that the U.S. is just as likely to be attacked, i.e. Sept. 11.

But Fuentes brushed off her concerns and told me: "I don't think that such comparisons without full information is worthy intellectually."

March 18:

In his “Diary of a Mad County” column in the OC Weekly, Steve Lowery connects the “study abroad” controversy to Orange County’s struggles to overcome its right-wing “wacko” image:

[On March 10,] Spaniards observe[d] a moment of silence for the 191 people who died in a terrorist train bombing last year. One of those not observing silence or even on the premises is frequent OC house guest and prime minister at the time of the attacks, Jose Maria Aznar, who was in Mexico at the time, perhaps looking for his soul. Spain eventually pulled its troops out of Iraq, which eventually led the South Orange County Community College District, under the equally soulless thumb of former local Republican jefe Tom Fuentes, to cancel its study abroad program in Spain. While this will have little to no effect on Spain, it is yet another humiliation for Orange County, which seemed to be emerging from the hick/wacko shadow of the likes of Bob Dornan, Bill Dannemeyer, John Schmitz, John Birch and Wally George. In fact, Orange County’s reputation has taken such a hit that the likes of Mississippi is looking down on us. Missif*ckingssippi! Prior to this, the only place Mississippi has been able to look down on is pre-wheel Mesopotamia….

March 22:

At its March meeting, many people, including at least one soldier, address the board, passionately urging trustees to reverse the February decision. Virtually no one speaks in defense of the action.

The board votes to rescind its decision of February and to approve the Santander trip--by a 5-2 vote with Fuentes and Wagner again casting negative votes. (Padberg, Williams, and Jay change their votes to approval, joining Lang and Milchiker.)

March 25:

The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that

A community college in California that canceled a study-abroad program to Spain this month for political and safety reasons has reversed its decision.

Trustees of the South Orange County Community College District initially voted three weeks ago to close the program...One board member...said it would be unpatriotic to send students to Spain after that country's decision to withdraw its troops from Iraq (The Chronicle, March 7).

But on Tuesday the trustees changed their minds. Worries about cost and liability were sorted out, according to the district's chancellor, Raghu P. Mathur. And the trustee who brought up Spain's position in Iraq subsequently dropped that issue, Mr. Mathur said, though news reports indicated that the trustee still voted against the program….

April 1:

OC Weekly’s Gustavo Arellano writes a mock letter to Fuentes:

It’s been a bit more than a year since you stepped down as chairman of Orange County’s Republican Party, a position you held for 20 years. Now you sit in the Siberia of politics known as the South Orange County Community College District (SOCCCD) Board of Trustees. What happened?

I’m reminded of the story of Pyrrhus…That’s been your political career, Tom. As you led the Orange County Republican Party to dominate a region in a way unseen in local government since the days of Tammany Hall, you also ensured your political doom. Petty fights, bizarre grudges, besmirchments: if you had avoided all of that, you’d still be the pontificus maximus of the county GOP. Instead you’ll spend the rest of your political days doodling on agendas through another stultifying SOCCCD board meeting and dreaming of the Balboa Bay Club.

Arellano then provides a bulleted summary of Fuentes’ remarkable political career, which ends with this item:

Feb. 28, 2005: You persuaded four colleagues on the Board of Trustees to cancel Saddleback College’s summer study-abroad program to Spain because the country had pulled its troops from Iraq. The decision drew national ridicule and outraged the locals; under heavy pressure, the SOCCCD board rescinded your decision on March 22 by a 5-2 vote. And, again, Latinos laughed at the GOP.

UPDATE:

October 24, 2005:

At it's October 2005 meeting, the Board votes to approve Saddleback College's study abroad program to Salamanca, Spain for Spring 2006. There was no discussion.

Fuentes and Wagner, offering no explanation, voted against the item. (See ARCHIVES, Oct. 25, 2005.)

HOWARD GENSLER 5-27-15

[From DtB, 5-27-15]

¶ A FEW WEEKS AGO, an old friend and colleague dropped off a flier, leaving it on my desk. It was campaign literature: Saddleback College Econ/Poli-Sci instructor Howard Gensler, it seemed, was running for Academic Senate President.

¶ My friend clearly thought this development worthy of a huge laugh. But I didn’t know what to make of it. I filed the dang flier away. It somehow annoyed me.

¶ But, today, someone sent me a perfect artifact of Howard’s long and painful career as a loon. —More about that in a minute.

¶ Howard is not fondly remembered here at Irvine Valley College, where he was the Dean of Humanities & Languages (among other things), starting in 1999 and until about 2002. Essentially, he was then-IVC President Raghu Mathur’s hatchet man (re Mathur critics, most of whom could be found in H&L), and, privately, he made no bones about that. Not to me, anyway.

¶ For those interested in the nature of Howard’s curious administrative rein—among other infamous deeds, he gave this Mathur critic an impossible teaching schedule; he fired adjuncts who dared criticize him or Mathur; he ruined building A300, turning it “inside out”; he declared that an innocuous painting that hung in the H&L office was sexually harassing him—be sure to read this post from Dissent 65 (September 30, 2001).

¶ Also curious was how Howard went from being a highly notorious administrator at IVC to being a highly notorious instructor (and colleague!) at Saddleback. That all happened back in 2002-2003. A few years after that, he was granted tenure.

¶ At IVC, many a jaw dropped. How, we asked, could the guy responsible for the astounding and stupendous HOWARD HILTON fiasco end up a tenured instructor in our district? What are they smokin' down there at Saddleback College?

When you consider the facts, well, it's mind-blowing!

* * *

¶ BUT FIRST, let’s see what kind of colleague and professional Howard has been, post-IVC, down there on Marguerite Parkway in beauteous Mission Viejo, CA.

They don't like me

¶ Well, there've been problems. Back in early 2006, according to the Saddleback College Lariat, Howard sued the district because "[the dean and the chair] didn't give me priority in the summer classes...The procedure is that full-time teachers get their classes before the part-time."

¶ According to Howard's petition (said the Lariat), his dean and his chair "simply do not like the petitioner (Gensler) and have ignored the rules to harass and to injure him."

¶ That Howard saw himself as being “harassed” via his teaching schedule was highly ironic, of course. (See.) The factoid inspired many smiles up at IVC, especially in H&L, where the chief Genslerian targets of, well, harassment could be found.

¶ I have no idea what became of that lawsuit. Don't really care. (The district can be a real ninny when confronted with potential litigation. Think of how Teddi Lorch got her job!)

¶ YEARS LATER (in early 2011), the Reb and I came across Howard’s curious online presence qua Saddleback College instructor. We found that Howard’s SC faculty page & bio included (and still includes) such curious remarks as

I received the Daughters of the American Revolution Medal for U.S. History in Fifth Grade. It was the first time a student from my Elementary School earned one.
I … believe that we should have fun in everything we do. [In my class,] We generally play a roll [sic] game rather than just take roll. I use humor liberally. The vast majority of students enjoy my sarcasm and wit.
[As an undergrad at UCI,] I gave the Honors Convocation Student Speech, which was published by the University. It was the second speech ever published by UCI. The first was Hazard Adams’ retirement speech. He was a founding faculty member and considered one of the most erudite professors ever to teach at UCI.
I … got hired as an attorney/adviser at the national headquarters of the IRS…. I was appointed to the newly created Special Task Force, which worked on anticipating tax problems. I was assigned the most difficult regulations project ever tackled by the IRS and completed the project in record time. The Associate Chief Counsel tried to hire me to work on a project to simplify the tax code, but he was blocked by the Commissioner of the IRS.
… I accepted a position at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology as a Business Law Instructor…. I met one of the most distinguished accounting professors in China and established a partnership to translate China’s tax laws. This resulted in … a monthly translation service. We translated and published … all of the tax laws, regulations and notices from the establishment of China in 1949 to the current time. ... We were invited to be the official translator for China’s tax laws, but the government was unable to agree to a publication cycle as fast as we could provide and insisted on total control of official and unofficial publication....
I was the world’s foremost authority on Chinese Tax laws during the mid- and late-1990’s.

¶ Golly. (You shoulda seen this page before Howard decided to tone it down!)

¶ Howard’s Saddleback info page included (and still includes) a list of his "activities":

Activities
8-ball Break
Backward Free-throws
Free-throws
Pool Shots

¶ The bullets are links to videos of Howard’s astounding feats.

He also provides lists of his favorite songs, restaurants, historical figures, etc. Check out his advice to students!

Howard was "sexually harassed" by this painting by an IVC adjunct

* * *

¶ But enough about Howard’s very special understanding of himself as the most unappreciated person in the history of humankind. Let’s focus on the fellow’s legitimate claim to eternal notoriety: the Howard Hilton.

¶ Here’s how I reported the “HOWARD HILTON” affair back in 2001:

Howard and Raghu’s “top secret plan”:

¶ About a year ago [i.e., c. 2000], faculty [at IVC] began hearing about a massive project that would provide facilities for Fine Arts (and fish). The word was that Howard was developing the project with the blessing and encouragement of his mentor, president (now chancellor) Mathur.

¶ Howard eventually provided Chancellor Mathur with a “report” concerning the project on May 23, 2002. According to my sources, then, in early June, Howard and Raghu met with three Board Majoritarians, including Wagner, to discuss the project. (Ask Dot.)

¶ That’s about when the L.A. Times caught wind of it [I called ‘em]. On June 15, the Times reported

Irvine Valley College officials are quietly trying to find investors for a private hotel, entertainment and office complex on campus that could cost as much as $800 million, officials confirmed this week…As described in recent meetings among campus officials, the project would include a hotel, a multistory parking structure, two 2,000-seat theaters, office buildings, a sound stage and a lake, replacing orange groves and an athletic field at the southern end of campus…The scope of the privately funded, for-profit project—whose cost estimates nearly double Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles—is believed to be unprecedented, not only for a community college, but for any public university in the state…The cost would be enough to build two community colleges, said Kirsten McIntyre, spokeswoman for the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, which was unaware of the proposal…The project is a long way from reality and would have to be approved by trustees for the South Orange County Community College District, which includes Irvine Valley and Saddleback colleges.

¶ According to the Times, some college employees had doubts about the project: “they don’t understand how the two-year college benefits from such a deal. ‘It would be a commercial enterprise that would not be a benefit to our students,’ said Jan Wyma, Irvine Valley’s choral director.”

¶ The Times reported that Dean Gensler was the man behind the plan and that Mathur was aware of it. Glenn Roquemore, president of IVC, however, said that he hadn’t yet received a proposal.

¶ The scope of the Gensler/Mathur venture was truly stunning:

The proposal has changed over the months, but the basic plan calls for construction on 25 to 35 acres…Several sources said Gensler was pitching the deal to investors as a 99-year lease, and that it would include a Hilton or Hyatt hotel with conference center facilities, restaurants, a four- or five-story parking structure, an office building of several stories, the theaters, an art museum, an observatory and a building with sound stages for TV and film…Also contemplated are a movie complex and soccer stadium.

Massive unbeknownstitude:

¶ City officials were miffed about all of this secret planning. The Times quoted an Irvine official who said: “Any construction not associated with the college’s educational mission must be approved by Irvine.” Nevertheless, “she had not heard of the proposal.”

¶ Three days later, the Register weighed in with a story that presented Howard’s project—now described as involving a paltry $463 million—in a less sympathetic light:

Board members interviewed said they were surprised at the planning that has gone into Gensler’s vision and that they should have been informed about it earlier…“Apparently this was really being pursued by just a few people unbeknownst to other members of the board,” said trustee Dave Lang…One instructor described the project as “absurd” in that it “flies in the face of the college’s long-term planning.”

¶ During the Board Meeting of June 24th, trustees decided to pull the plug on the whole business:

Irvine Valley College trustees got their first official look Monday night at a controversial proposal to develop a $463 million entertainment complex on campus–and decided they wanted no part of it… “The feeling was that the proposal that came to us did not sufficiently meet the needs of the college and the students,” said board president Don Wagner, who said trustees first learned of the project in the press…“It came to us as a take-it-or-leave-it proposal, and we are going to leave it.”…. (OC Register, June 25, 2002)

¶ On the 25th, the Times quoted Dorothy “Dot” Fortune, who carped that the Gensler/Mathur project would give “away half the land at IVC.”

¶ Howard, however, defended his project; it would, he said, make IVC “one of the most important cultural centers in Southern California.”

Nonagenarian takes plan elsewhere:

¶ The Times eventually reported the proposed project’s builder:

The complex was to be built by the Newport Financial Group of Newport Beach. One company figure is Charles Ross*, 91, of Laguna Woods, who proposed a similar project at UC Riverside, without success, Fortune said…Ross said Monday he would not discuss the plan, but that if the district turned it down, he would take it elsewhere. [See]

¶ In an article for the Irvine World News on the 27th, Wagner is again reported as saying that “trustees first learned of the project after the top secret plan was leaked to the press.” Well, no, according to my [reliable] sources, he and two other Board Majoritarians heard about the “top secret plan” two weeks before the Times report. C’mon Don!

¶ Some newspaper articles claimed that, on campus, the project was called “the Howard Hilton.” In truth, it had been dubbed “Howie World” by the Chevy Chase fans who have always dominated IVC.

“One has to wonder…”

¶ On the 30th, Times editorial writers offered a harshly critical perspective on “the Howard Hilton”:

The DeShazer connection
Irvine Valley College’s mission statement…[says that the] college exists to provide quality education for students…The document doesn’t say anything about leasing a huge chunk of the campus to a private developer for a $500 million entertainment and office complex…That’s why people were caught off-guard earlier this month when word surfaced that an IVC dean had been meeting with a developer who wanted to build a massive, for-profit venture. The trustees of the SOCCCD are to be commended for putting the educational purpose of the district first by rejecting the plan last week before it could gather more momentum…The proposal was out of sync with the city of Irvine’s general plan and existing zoning. The city envisioned the orange groves…as one day hosting recreational facilities and college-related construction—not hotels, parking garages and a Hollywood production lot. City officials hadn’t had a chance to review the proposal, and from what it suggested, many of the plan’s elements also clashed with zoning in the area…The proposal also was at odds with IVC’s own planning process. Community colleges are required to create a master plan that describe how they intend to grow. There’s nothing in IVC’s long-range planning that was even remotely close to the proposal that was submitted to the board by Howard Gensler…College deans have a lot of clout, but one has to wonder how this kind of major campus land-use negotiation got to the stage it did. It probably should have been handled in the first place at a higher level of administration….

¶ Hey, yeah! Then, on July 9, IVC issued an odd little press release. It announced plans to construct a modest “Performing Arts Building”:

Irvine Valley College submitted plans to the state…for the construction of a 400-seat Performing Arts Building… The…Building has been long in development as part of Irvine Valley’s Educational and Facilities Master Plan to unify campus services and to meet a growing demand by students and the community. The Educational and Facilities Master Plan and, in particular, the Performing Arts Building, is wholly separate from a recent $450 million proposal made by Irvine Valley Humanities Dean, Howard Gensler, who worked with a private investor to develop a possible alternative campus building project…

Yes, among his list of "accomplishments," Howard includes a book that he

self-published, an epic poem. This is one of its illustrations.

* * *

¶ Today, my blog partner sent me a document from that long-ago era of districtular and collegiate zaniness and corruption. It is a memo (a pdf), evidently sent to IVC Fine Arts faculty, dated, October 23, 2001.

¶ It is the “Fine Arts Village Draft.”

Emblazoned upon it, in large letters, is “NOTE: DRAFT ONLY AND CONFIDENTIAL.”

¶ We had often heard about it. For the first time, we could see it for ourselves.

¶ Wow.

¶ I've provided pics of the pages of that pdf throughout this post.

¶ Amazing, no?

* * *

¶ Recently, a colleague at IVC asked if Howard had prevailed in his bid to become SC Academic Senate President. I said that I didn't know.

¶ I added, "If they elect him, then they deserve him." (Well, actually, I offered the consequent sans the antecedent. Sorry.)

*I could find virtually no information about Mr. Ross. I did, however, find the website for the Newport Financial Group.

YAF brouhaha: righties flip out, leaving slime and worse

From The YAF brouhaha: righties flip out, leaving slime and worse (DtB, 9/10/16)

Lovett, addressing the board, 2008

☀︎ Perhaps you’ve already heard about the “story” concerning Saddleback College students who sought to start a “Young Americans for Freedom” club on campus and who further sought to arrange a 9-11 commemorative event on campus. Evidently, they never turned in the paperwork to become a club, and thus their event was cancelled. They had placed lurid "Never forget" posters all around campus, many of them not in the designated allowable places, and so, at one point, history professor Margo Lovett took some of the illegal posters down. These YAF kids filmed that, and the footage ended up on various right wing websites—and even on Fox News (See History professor rips down campus 9/11 ‘Never Forget’ posters (VIDEO) and College campus craziness with Hume and O'Reilly (FOX News)).

YAF poster

☀︎ I do hope you all remember that the district’s rules concerning free speech zones and postings are a product of successful litigation brought by students in the late 90s and early 2000s in response to SOCCCD’s unlawful and otherwise questionable restrictions of their 1st Amendment rights. (See Student sue district over 1st Amendment.) Attorney Carol Sobel (for the ACLU), Wendy Gabriella, and the students achieved the degree of freedom that students now enjoy—in terms of these rules.

☀︎ Saddleback College has issued a statement, shedding needed light on the case (see Saddleback College statement below).

☀︎ Predictably, we’ve already heard about ugly and disturbing comments about Margot on the Saddleback College Facebook page and in the right-wing blogosphere. (Sample: "That woman needs to be beaten"; "Kick her face off"; "Shoot that pig in the head.") Bill O’Reilly has already compared the action at Saddleback to actions by the Nazis and the Soviet Union in the 30s.

☀︎ He also threw the YAFer kids under the bus: this story is about "stupid college kids," he smirked along with pal Brit Hume. But, he added, college administrators are "even dumber," what with their freedom-hating, PC-enforcing ways, I guess.

☀︎ Good grief.

☀︎ We’ll keep you posted.

☀︎ Saddleback College officials have issued the following statement:

☀︎ Saddleback College supports student clubs and their right to organize and exercise their freedom of speech. At the beginning of each academic year, in order to organize meetings and hold events, student clubs must go through an activation process that includes an orientation, the establishment of a club constitution and by-laws, and the appointment of a faculty adviser.
☀︎ Young Americans for Freedom contacted the college’s student development office before fall semester classes began to state their intention to plan an event commemorating 9/11. The director made clear that the students would have to complete the club activation process before the event could be approved. As of today the students have not completed the requirements to form a club.
☀︎ On September 8th, the students posted stickers and flyers on several campus buildings, which is a violation of South Orange County Community College District policy. The students also did this without first seeking approval from college administration. However, flyers that were posted by the students in the designated free speech areas on campus have not been removed by college personnel.
☀︎ The director of student life has reached out to the students and invited them to meet and discuss the steps that can be taken to work collaboratively with the college in the future and in accordance with college and district policies and procedures.

Saddleback College supports and understands the students' desire to commemorate the events of September 11, 2001, but needs to ensure that the college and district policies and procedures are followed.

"Douse yourself in gasoline and set yourself on fire," he wrote

"Douse yourself in gasoline and set yourself on fire," he wrote (DtB, 12/27/16)

Cox

OCC Trumpsters/GOP

A professor called Trump’s election an ‘act of terrorism.’ Then she became the victim of terror. (Washington Post; Dec 27)

“Now, at 66, I’m paranoid,” [targeted instructor] Cox said. “It doesn’t feel good at all to be looking over my shoulder and wondering when an unfamiliar car pulls up across the street whether they’re going to take a picture of me or something worse — but that’s my life now. I feel like I’ve been attacked by a mob of people all across the country,” she added. “If they’re telling me over and over again that they want to shoot me in the face, how am I supposed to know if they’re going to do it or not?”

. . .

☀︎ Cox’s comments were recorded by a conservative student in her class who found her statements offensive and decided to share the video with the Orange Coast College Republicans, according to Joshua Recalde-Martinez, a political science major and president of the campus Republican group.

. . .

☀︎ “Go out in the middle of the football field, pull out a handgun, put it to your temple and shoot yourself,” Jim Ernst wrote [to Cox]. “Or better yet, douse yourself in gasoline and set yourself on fire.”

. . .

☀︎ The harassment crested when Cox received an email from a man named Tim White that showed her home address, phone number and salary and threatened to spread the information “everywhere.” The email referred to Cox as a “libtard, Marxist, hatemonger, nutcase.” It was then, Cox said, that she could no longer stand to be in her home and decided to flee.

The professor turned her final week of class this semester over to a substitute, but Cox said her ordeal continued after the controversial video appeared on the O’Reilly Factor. The host referred to her statements as “gibberish” and “slander” and labeled the professor part of “the totalitarian left.”

☀︎ “That woman needs a psychologist,” he said.

. . .

☀︎ The Orange Coast College Republicans have filed a formal complaint with the school and hired an attorney, said Shawn Steel, a former chairman of the California Republican Party.

☀︎ Steel told the Orange County Register that Cox is using her power as a grade-determining instructor to “basically scare and shame students.”

☀︎ “It’s alarming,” he said. “It’s scaremongering. It’s irrational. It’s a rant. And it doesn’t belong in the classroom.”

. . .

☀︎ [Cox's] name has been added to a controversial website called “Professor Watchlist,” which lists the names of about 200 academics across the country accused by a conservative group of advancing “leftist propaganda” and discriminating “against conservative students.”

☀︎ “This is a very carefully planned plot to attack college professors that they don’t like and disagree with,” she said. “This is being done all around the country. It’s not my fault, and I didn’t do anything wrong.”

☀︎ Rob Schneiderman, president of the Coast Federation of Educators/American Federation of Teachers Local 1911 that represents Cox, agrees that the problem is not what Cox said, but the fact that she was recorded, a violation of the student code of conduct that was expressly stated in the professor’s syllabus. Schneiderman said the short, edited clip fails to provide viewers with any context for Cox’s statements and could warrant punishment.

☀︎ “She’s known as an open teacher,” he said. “There’s a petition going around on campus to nominate her for teacher of the year. She’s very well respected on campus, and this was an absolute violation.”

☀︎ Schneiderman said the union plans to work with school officials to strengthen its free speech policies to keep students and professors safe from “Gestapo tactics.” Many professors on campus, he said, have vowed to resist any attempts by the campus Republicans to dictate classroom discourse.

. . .

☀︎ “My parents left Cuba so we would not have this kind of harassment and so we would have access to free education,” [Cox] said. “They made sacrifices to bring us here, and I’m proud to be an American.”

☀︎ “It’s just hard to believe that this is happening to me,” she added, “and if this is what America is turning into, we all need to be afraid.”

* * *

Demonstrators rally for and against OCC professor seen on video lamenting Trump victory (LA Times);

3 local professors are on website list of those who 'advance leftist propaganda' (LA Times)

OCC should fire bully professor (OC Register)

Don't Smile (You're on Camera) (Inside Higher Ed)

Orange Coast College Student Threatened With Expulsion After Recording Professor’s Anti-Trump Tirade (CBS/LA)

Steel

ATEP roundup, Dec 2011

A kind of "Filmmakers' Village" was once envisioned

for the SOCCCD's ATEP campus; after over a dozen years

and many millions of dollars spent, SOCCCD still doesn't know

what ATEP will be

As you know, in our district, the usual suspects are once again hard at work “envisioning” what ATEP—sixty-eight acres of the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station—will be. We've certainly heard that before. Lots of times.

Did you see the OC Reg article yesterday about the film complex that will be built at Chapman U (for the Dodge College of Film and Media Arts)? Looks impressive.

$100 million Filmmakers' Village announced

The Chapman "village" sounds a bit like the complex once envisioned for ATEP. Perhaps you'll recall that, for a while (c. 2006), district leaders were working on a plan to bring a film/TV/soundstage/studio complex to the Tustin property. That came to grief by mid-2008 but seemed to be revived soon thereafter (with different Money Men). But the economy soon tanked; then the revived Media Complex plan came to grief also. Sheesh.

I've pieced together some of our (and others') coverage of ATEP and the old "film complex" (Camelot) proposal since 2000. It's pretty revealing, I think. Not in a good way.

• The Fall “Opening Session”

Dissent 50, August 21, 2000

Ced [Chancellor Cedric Sampson] closed by promising, as he had done a year ago, that we will soon “convert” the Tustin Marine Corps Air Station. The political machinations of the Feds and other school districts have delayed conversion, he noted peevishly....

• "Cox channel 3 to air trustee forum"

The Lariat, October 5, 2000

Power, money and education came under discussion Tuesday night as candidates for the South Orange County Community College District, (SOCCCD) board of trustees gave views of their intentions for Saddleback and Irvine Valley College.

. . .

[Incumbent Tom Fuentes] said he opposed the El Toro airport and that, since the acquisition of the Tustin Air Base had to do with the “peace dividend” under president Ronald Reagan and that we have benefited under conservative leadership, a conservative leader should be involved in the process of developing the base.

“We could call it the Ronald Reagan Campus,” Fuentes said.

• From Dissent 54, October 23, 2000

The District Mailer

. . .

Have you seen the $50,000 district mailer, that proud monument to puffery, sophistry, incompetence, and illiteracy?

. . .

Page 4. Here, next to a silly photograph of El Ced [Chancellor Cedric Sampson] and a Marine, we find a description of the “Advanced Technology and Education Park of South Orange County.”….

Alas, the writing is less than lucid:

“ATEP will provide multiple career study opportunities. Special certification through graduate study will be offered to launch new ventures through a business incubator.”
“The ATEP will provide in residence and distance education train-the-trainer component for the foreign, non-physician health providers affiliated with this project.” [Huh?]

• A pitcher, no catchers March 9, 2007

... Chancellor [Mathur] explained the “Camelot” proposal. The Camelot Group proposes a film/TV/soundstage/studio complex with a radio and, possibly, a TV station. CSU Fullerton has a film (production?) program, and they, too, are very interested in using any studio/soundstage facilities we might have.

• It’s Camelot! February 2, 2007

THE BIG ATEP MEETING

Eventually, I made my way to Saddleback College for the special SOCCCD board of trustees meeting concerning the “Advanced Technology and Education Park” (ATEP) in beauteous Tustin, along lovely Ant Hill Boulevard. Tonight was the night for presentations of the “partnership” proposals submitted for use of our 68 acres, which are located just three or four blimp-lengths from one of those big Marine helicopter hangers.

. . .

After some folderol, Chancellor RAGHU P. MATHUR introduced the ATEP business. He explained about the 13 proposals that had been submitted. For tonight, he said, only three of the groups who had submitted proposals would be making presentations. CSU Fullerton would present two of them, some outfit called the SEIS Group would present a third, and then Camelot Entertainment Group would present the fourth.

. . .

The idea seemed to be that these four are the top of the heap.

According to whom? Mathur made a point of explaining the process whereby the use of ATEP was being determined. According to Mathur, the “governance groups”—faculty, et al.—are a part of the decision-making process! (Don't think so.) The 13 proposals, he said, were duly assessed by the Chancellor’s Executive Committee—a group that included no reps from the governance groups. The Committee, he insisted, “not only invited input” from the governance groups, but “their input is expected!”

Well, that’s bullshit. We stared at him.

. . .

Then came CAMELOT Entertainment, the 800 pound gorilla of the evening. Camelot hopes to spend $800 million on a studio complex with sound stages and back lots.

. . .

...Camelot...man, they were slick. Plus they were determined to WIN THIS THING.

. . .

The last proposal was called “Young Americans.” They’re patriotic and cheerful or something, and they used to be on Ed Sullivan….

• Do hemorrhoids dream of pineapple sheep? February 3, 2007

CAMELOT, DO A LOT?

As you know, the star of Thursday’s ATEP board meeting were the Camelot Group, a crew of business suits that showed up with a whiz-bang presentation complete with Star Wars music and slick visuals.

A friend writes

Thanks for the info on the ATEP proposals the other night. Camelot's website…sure doesn't have much—and you'd think that a film group…should have their website completed. Still can't find a single title of anything they've ever produced—though their proposal and their website is really eager to tell you all about "investments" and "portfolios" and "incentives.”

The friend quotes from Camelot’s webpage:

By combining the production efficiencies of the early studios with the creative advantages leveraged by today's independents, Camelot Films seeks to consistently combine financial success with artistic success.

My friend is unimpressed:

Efficiencies of the early 1900s?????...So...where's the education?

Yeah, what about that? No word yet on what the board made of Camelot and their presentation. Trustees did ask some good questions though. For instance, What happens if you guys miss a payment? And: will Camelot be producing pornography?....

• Board meeting February 27, 2007

Mathur seems determined to go with the "Camelot" project ….

• A skosh, a dollop, and a plague! April 22, 2007

Item 4.1 is “Approval of Exclusive Rights to Negotiate Agreement (ERNA) with Camelot Entertainment.” Maybe you know what this means. I don’t. Does it mean that the district is zeroing in on the Camelot deal?

Camelot, of course, is the investor group who proposed a super-duper studio complex to take up much of our ATEP acreage in Tustin. Some people worry that we’ll get fleeced by these guys. Could be.

Mathur seems to have taken over the ATEP project. He imagines, I think, that he can envision a success at ATEP so spectacular that his mug will eventually get blasted onto Mount Rushmore.

• Last week's board meeting: sandwiches described and machinations exposed April 30, 2007

5.1 The board approved the “Exclusive Right to Negotiate Agreement…with Camelot Entertainment.” It was unanimous, and there was no discussion….

• "Real cop donuts": the Saddleback College Trustees Forum May 14, 2007

There was another horrible lull, and so I stood up and asked about ATEP. Park Ranger Bob explained that construction is moving forward at the Tustin facility and they’ll be offering about 35 classes in the fall. There’s a big marketing campaign, too, and the “partnerships” are moving along. The Camelot people are working with the district on agreements and such. That Bob sure can be pithy….

• Monday’s board meeting: machination SNAFU August 28, 2007

After a brief break, Park Ranger Bob Kopecky and his crew made a presentation regarding the recent opening of ATEP in Tustin. Bob showed lovely pictures of the new facilities. He showed charts and graphs. He explained about the ongoing conversations with potential partners Camelot and the “Young Americans,” who, he said, are “spreading the American spirit around the world through song and dance.”….

• Did I miss an email? November 6, 2007

Plus I keep hearing that the city of Tustin is none too keen on Mathur’s BIG PLANS for ATEP—you know, Camelot and Young Republican Hoofers for Christ (or whatever they're called). The word is that the Tustin folks have been giving us the slow stink eye and, if they’re sufficiently unhappy with us, they’ll pull the plug….

• Get with the goddam program December 2, 2007

Everybody’s been pretty tight-lipped about the ATEP meeting, but there are numerous indications that it was way stormy and/or unhappy (if facial expressions & grumpitude are any indication). Could it be that things are not going well re Mathur’s grand plan to place his mug on Mt. Goomore via the "Camelot" deal? I keep hearing that there exist big tensions among the three concerned parties: (1) the City of Tustin, (2) the Camelot people, and (3) the District.

If the city is unhappy enough, they'll pull the plug on any BIG ATEP DEAL.

(NOTE: In my report for the September board meeting (see), I wrote

David Hunt (of gkkworks) presented the “short-range plan” for ATEP.... Our continued use of those 68 acres depends on the city’s confidence that we are making progress in its development. The “long-range plan” is the as-yet-undefined partnership now being negotiated with such entities as Camelot. The “short-range plan” is what we’ll be doing with the property in the interim, which, I gather, will be a period of years. ¶ The short plan’s chief element appears to be demolition of buildings, the projected cost of which is about $7 million. The projected cost of the entire plan, not including some as-yet-to-be-determined elements (e.g., maintenance), is $9,231,610. ¶ Hunt opined that this plan should be enough to satisfy the City of Tustin.

At the time, I wondered: where's all this money gonna come from?)

We’ll let you know as soon as we hear anything definite.

• The further adventures of a world-class f*ck-up: board meeting December 8, 2007

The discussion of the 50% Law fiasco is scheduled for the end of the meeting. That could be interesting. It is no secret that Mathur’s failure to understand that law whilst spending BIG on ATEP has put us between a rock and a hard place. Meanwhile, there are indications that negotiations between SOCCCD, Camelot, and the City of Tustin are going badly. It is conceivable that the plug will be pulled on the Deluxe Edition of ATEP. (If that happens, it will be because Mathur is incompetent, not because ATEP was a bad idea.) But who knows….

• The board meeting: faculty address the board re the contract & Nancy carps about a seal March 24, 2008

Decisions were made about ATEP, but no effort was made to explain them to the public. Curiously, trustees Milchiker and Fuentes voted "no" on item 6.5: "reimbursement agreement: Camelot Development Tustin" ($786,100).

• Will ATEP be home to the "Young Americans"? May 18, 2008

I have a secret plan

One of these days—within a few months, I think—faculty will suddenly be “informed” that they must start developing an impressive range of programs and courses, as per the SECRET PLAN that will at long last be revealed. Naturally, everything will happen in a big rush, like the recent attempt to hire 38 new faculty (caused by the Chancellor's failure to attend to the 50% Law). Judging by the latter effort, the ATEP whatchamacallit curricular/programatic initiative will be a rush-job, a fiasco.

No doubt, someone will be inspired to intone, "This is no way to develop programs and curricula."

—True, faculty are not entirely sans clue. We do know that “Camelot Entertainment” is in the entertainment industry: lights, cameras, action....

• Tiny newsberries June 17, 2008

Speaking of ATEP (i.e., the Advanced Technology and Education Park, in Tustin), I keep hearing that things are FUBAR with the ATEP confabs. Is Camelot a buttnugget? If so, plan B will look nothing like plan A, and SOCCCD will look like SHIT once again P.D.Q. (The Young Americans want to put up their tents and park their clown cars at ATEP. Is that part of plan B?)

As you know, some of our trustees (and trustee Tom Fuentes in particular, who has philosophical misgivings) are unhappy with Big ATEP. When, a few months ago, things got rocky Big-ATEPwise, the board was barely able to scrape up a green light for continued efforts.

• Tonight’s board meeting July 28, 2008

During group reports, IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore thanked the various participants of the IVC Accred Focus Group. Of the report they have drafted, he said, “I think it hits the mark.” Glenn also reported that ATEP enrollments have been very high (about 600 this summer). He indicated that Chapman U, CSU Fullerton, and even UCI are “excited” about working with us at ATEP. (I got confirmation tonight that “Camelot” is out of the picture. One source told me that other groups [with big money, I assume], though, “have been standing in line” to get involved.)

• Williams' last term? Hope so December 12, 2008

ATEP FUBAR. Yesterday, at IVC's Academic Senate meeting, President Glenn Roquemore updated faculty on developments at the district's ATEP facility in Tustin. The Camelot group is long gone, we were told, but two new groups seek to take their place, and a decision about that will be made soon.

Glenn was very upbeat, but I've been reading documents and letters regarding negotiations between the district and the City of Tustin, and it seems clear that, come April, the city will declare that SOCCCD's progress and planning regarding ATEP is unacceptable to them.

Expect litigation. Lots of it....

• What if they gave a democracy and nobody came? Board meeting notes, part 2 March 27, 2009

ATEP 2.0 was once supposed to be a center for “Homeland Security” training. Then, I think, it was supposed to be a center for the study of gizmology (well no) and Young Republican Hoofers 'n' Crooners (yes, sorta). Anyway, in recent years, efforts have been made to work with Money Men (and Money Women I guess, though I never seem to spot any of those) to create a film and TV pre- and post-production complex and underwater basket-weaving appreciation module.

For a while, the “Camelot” people seemed likely to put this thing together, but they turned out to be Money Men sans Money. Nowadays, there are two bigtime developers in the running (they seem to be avec money), and they’re still talking about that Film and TV studio, which, I'm told, is desperately needed in OC. One wonders why these Money People need us, cuz leasing property has got to be cheap in OC by now—I mean, what with the country hitting the skids and all.

In the meantime, the City of Tustin is essentially a crew of hayseeds who keep falling off of a turnip wagon—and those people are pissed because, way back in the 60s or 70s, they were slated to get their very own community college right there where the Tustin Marketplace now stands, but then that wily old Irvine Company arranged one of its slick deals to avoid paying taxes by giving away that orange grove upon which IVC now sits.

• ATEP bushwackery? A tiff over turf April 14, 2011

It's a money pit

…Contemporaneous with Dixie’s Accredular adventures, the SOCCCD board of trustees had about reached their limit with regard to ATEP, a project that, despite many years of district effort and expense, never seemed to really get off the ground. After all of these years of struggle, the trustees just felt worn down.

They were about to pull the plug.

Meanwhile, trustee Fuentes, who has never liked the idea of ATEP (his libertarian ideals produce occasional spasms of bilious spewage; he projectile vomited last summer), had reached the conclusion that ATEP was a “black hole,” a money pit. He said so publicly, noisily. He demanded action…. [END]

Finally....

Fuentes did not prevail. Somehow, the pro-ATEP (i.e., pro-BigATEP) contingent on the board won the day.

As I recall, the decision to embrace ATEP occurred some time during the summer of 2010. That was about when Raghu Mathur was run out of Dodge--during Dixie B's brief tenure as temp Chancellor. Wagner and Williams were still on the board, but they were short-timers.

Recently, Fuentes--seemingly with his last breath--alluded to a fateful wrong direction taken by the district that places us on a precipice, etc. Perhaps he was referring to the Big-ATEP decision. Not sure.

--Ironically, a fair number of faculty critics of the board and of Fuentes in particular--including me--have come to agree that ATEP is a money pit, that we should cut our losses to the extent possible. But it looks like the board has made its decision, and that's that.

I do hope that we don't lose sight of the central faculty issue concerning the ATEP saga: that, despite faculty's authority over program development (etc.), from the beginning, the board and Chancellor have developed ATEP unilaterally. The big decision I mean, not the details.

I certainly understand that faculty could not pilot that ship. But the pilot should have allowed faculty to sit nearby, advising. That never happened.

The notorious ten minute tour of ATEP

ATEP opens Oct 19 2007

I TEACH on Friday mornings, and so I was unable to get to ATEP (the Advanced Technology and Education Park, in Tustin) until a quarter to 1, by which time lunch had been served and the cavalcade of speechifyin' and photo-opery was about to begin.

But I was ready. Forgot my pen, though.

Wow! Everybody who was anybody in OC politics—each a Republican—was either there or had sent a rep or a plaque or a doctor's note. There were lots of ladies in dresses (very GOP), lots of men in business suits (even GOPer), lots of mixing and yammering and wandering.

Plus the weather was great. It was a perfect day.

Naturally, I stood out. Mostly, I was treated as though I were a Democrat or worse, but that's OK. I am worse.

SOMEONE TOLD ME that Trustee Don Wagner had been the "MC" during the lunch festivities, and, reputedly, he was "hilarious."

"You mean peevish. Snarky maybe."

"Nope, he was funny. Real funny."

Actually, I'm not surprised. Don reminds me of Sam Kinison. You know, kinda outa control, but not really.

That's funny stuff!

Don oughta let loose with his zingers more often. That board of ours could use a few yucks. Just look at 'em!

Another funny man is ATEP's Provost, Bob Kopecky, who made the rounds, grippin' and grinnin', being cute.

Almost everybody likes Bob, 'ceptin' Steve, but I'm working on him.

At one point, Bob donned a "park ranger" hat. —You know: "Park Ranger" Kopecky, which is the Reb's coinage.

District PIO Tracy D was there, of course, zipping around like she does, and, bless her heart, she treated me like just one of the paparazzi, or whatever we were. Every one of us had a black Nikon. We all clicked in the same key.

Tracy borrowed my D70 for a second. She's got a Canon, poor thing.

"Fancy camera," she said, chirpily. You gotta like Tracy.

The presentations went pretty smoothly. Mostly, they were brief, and everyone was grateful.

HIGHLIGHT. My favorite part was when Don had to bend over and reach down to pull the mike up to his chin. Feigning annoyance, he immediately blamed the predicament on Chancellor Mathur, who, as everyone knows, is vertically challenged.

Raghu smiled and laughed, but I know him. Later tonight, he'll construct a Dandy Don Voodoo Doll and poke the crap out of it.

After all the presentations, plaques, prizes, and ribbons, we called it quits. I wandered around with everybody to check out ATEP's high-tech facilities. Lasers and such.

People were pretty impressed, I think.

Well, I sure hope Bob is happy. Seems to me the event couldn't have gone any better.

Plus the PA system held up pretty well, except when Mathur spoke, for some reason. You couldn't tell what he was saying half the time.

That was just gravy.

ATEP looks pretty sharp. Nice palm trees. Cool equipment. Plus those huge hangers are just around the corner.

And there's an old white chapel, ensconsed in pepper trees, just a stone's throw away.

Come on down and check it out!

Sunny says "hey."

2007 - GOP plan contra ACTIVE SHOOTER: throw books and shoes

Mr. Knoblockhead

During the September 24, 2007 meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees, San Clemente City Councilman Steve Knoblock addressed the trustees concerning the specter of school violence with its “burgeoning body count." The Republican politico ridiculed the nation’s feeble efforts in addressing violent outbreaks (he mentioned reliance on "sensitivity training," among other things).

☢︎ Knoblock's recommendation: reject the “strategy of duck and cover” in favor of a strategy of “self defense."

☢︎ Said he,

Tod Burnett's personal arsenal
☢︎ "We may see less school slaughter if students are trained and encouraged to protect themselves. On hand in every classroom and on every school campus there are innumerable books, chairs, backpacks, laptop computers, shoes, etc., that can be used at a moment’s notice as defensive projectile weapons against armed assassins…."

☢︎ Afterward, trustee Tom Fuentes, former chair of the local Republican Party, noted that Mr. Knoblock is an “esteemed” member of the community (i.e., he's a Republican).

☢︎ You can view Knoblock’s comment here: streaming video.

☢︎ Jump to section 2.5 (public comments).

☢︎ And, no, I'm not making any of this up.

☢︎ SEE The September meeting of the board of trustees - DtB, Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Past post: "several large bowels of pasta"

"Several large bowels of pasta"
January 30, 2010

Yesterday, the NYT’s “Schott’s Vocab” zeroed in on malapropisms. Having been raised in an immigrant family, I own a brain that is hard-wired with dozens of malapropistic configuroons. I think I even got some of ‘em through the umbiblical “chord,” though, really, that’s a mute point at this stench in time.

First, the malapropism upon which much of my parents’ fame rests:

“He died because of a blood cloth.”

Sometimes, I will look right at them and say, “There is no such thing as a ‘blood cloth.’ You mean a ‘blood clot.’”

Always, they look right back at me with immediate and utter incredulity.

Here are some examples offered by Schott’s readers:

HE'S VERY EGOTESTICLE

• Someone I know is a genius at this. She spoke of a woman who had her hair up in a buffoon; saw my new shoes and said, "My, aren't you the fashion plague"; and recently spoke of a man who is very egotesticle.

• my favorite poem is "allergy in a church graveyard".

• My aunt always said, "I can't have anymore children because I've had my utopian tubes tied.”

• My father, noting the first hint of fall in the air, sighed and said: "Soon it will be time to fart stars in the fireplace.” [This seems to be something of a Spoonerism.]

• A busy woman: "Sometimes I get so stressed out I have to go to my room and decompose for an hour."

YOU DRIVE MY NUTS!

• A co-worker's little son announced that "you drive my nuts!" My daughter once wrote that our cat Butter Boy jumped on Frenzy when she was "least expectant." My grandfather deliberately invented examples like astosbestos for asbestos and nutneg for nutmeg. Another relative admired the singing of Ethel Murmur and the talents of Shirley Dimple. This becomes a way of life. It's dangerous to be exposed to it when young! [God, this sounds like my upbringing. Pretty whackitudinal!]

• i cannot decide which music i like better, R&B or flip flop

• "lead us snots into temptation...."

• My grandmother was famous for her malaprops; when asked if she would like to take a flight in her friend's new airplane, she gasped "Absolutely not, I like it right here on Terra Cotta";

• At a restaurant: Clams on the half shelf and a cup of chino.

• ". . . government takeover and mandation of healthcare . . ." --Sarah Palin

• Here are selected favorites from my wife:

1. This is the tip of the ice cube.

2. Security in schools has been tighter since 7-11.

3. The right foot doesn't know what the left foot is doing.

4. The swine flu has reached the pandemonium stage.

LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TURTLE

• At work, our team had been working on a project that had been progressing at snail’s pace with no end remotely in sight. One day, we had a breakthrough, and one of my colleagues excitedly announced at our weekly meeting, “There’s light at the end of the turtle.”

• Our church secretary always refers to the annual report to the denomination as the Sadistical Report.

• A friend with a medical condition consulted a doctor at "Cedars Cyanide"

• "I am impressed by the enormity of the universe."

• I've been tracking these at work:

Someone who is frustrated: "I've been pulling my head out over this one!"

Working through a problem: "I'm just talking out loud here."

Suggesting something: "I don't mean to speak out of tongue, but..."

Rehashing: "I feel like I'm beating this with a dead horse."

Feeling a little disoriented: "At this point, we're running by the fly of our pants."

Is in a bad mood: "He's got a craw up his butt."

• "This is a bare-bones specification, let's flush out the details later".

• After a staff party at which pasta was served, we were reminded that several large bowels of pasta were left over in the refrigerator. None of us went near the fridge as a result.

HAD HIS KITCHEN FLOOR POLYURINATED

• A few years back my father, who is now nearing one hundred, proudly announced that he had recently had his kitchen floor polyurinated.

• The late Bruce King, governor of New Mexico for many years, was famous for having said of a legislative proposal that it would "open a whole box of Pandoras."

• One of my son's college roommates, an ROTC cadet, dropped out of the program just as the Iraq war was starting. "This is not a good time," he opined, "to be thinking about joining the Army corpse."

• "Be sure and put some of those neutrons on it." –While ordering a salad.

COULDA KNOCKED ME OVER WITH A FENDER

• "You could have knocked me over with a fender."

• "We cannot let terrorists and rogue nations hold this country hostile or hold our allies hostile." –George W. Bush

• Explaining lethal injection: "First, they give 'em a needle to seduce 'em; then they give the legal injection"

• Friend referring to his relationship with his wife, "...like two ships that go bump in the night."

• "Those kids were able to Flea-Bargain their way to a lesser punishment."

The many monikers of the SOCCCD

The many monikers of the SOCCCD

1. South Coast Junior College District

(during planning; district founded February 14, 1967)

Problems, real or imagined: "Um, what about inland? Ever hear of El Toro, Tustin, places like that?"

2. Saddleback Junior College District

(renamed during board meeting, March 13, 1967)

Problems, real or imagined: "They're not called 'junior' colleges anymore, cuz they do more than that."

3. Saddleback Community College District

(1970)

Problems, real or imagined: in 1979, the "north campus" is built in Irvine. By 1985 it becomes an independent college: Irvine Valley, and it's denizens take themselves awfully seriously. SCCD is now a two-college district.

So: "How come the district's named 'Saddleback' when only one college has that name?"

4. South Orange County Community College District

(1997)

Problems, real or imagined: "SOCCCD? Really? Maybe we should add some more Cs."

"Looks like this half-county ain't big enough for the both of us."

5. South Orange County Community College District

and

South Orange County Community College District North

(2020)

Problems, real or imagined: "El Toro Rd. is, and always has been, the borderline. Nowadays, students who wander across it must contend with lasar-armed drones and Del Taco rubbish cyclones."

Replication?

Scientists are baffled by the education community and their methods

Failure to Replicate (Inside Higher Ed)

…[P]sychologists are not the worst offenders when it comes to replication, it turns out. That distinction might belong to education researchers, according to an article published today in the journal Educational Researcher.

. . .

Only 0.13 percent [i.e., one tenth of one percent] of education articles published in the field’s top 100 journals are replications, write Matthew Makel, a gifted-education research specialist at Duke University, and Jonathan Plucker, a professor of educational psychology and cognitive science at Indiana University….

Makel and Plucker … found that 221 of 164,589 total articles replicated a previous study….

What’s more, 48.2 percent of the replications were performed by the same research team that had produced the original study….

More colorful "research"

Replications are an essential part of validating scientific knowledge. They control for sampling errors and weed out fraud. A replication might show, for instance, that an educational intervention’s effects are less pronounced than a previous study contended.

So why do so few replications appear in education journals? The article, “Facts Are More Important Than Novelty: Replication in the Education Sciences,” argues that education journals routinely prize studies that yield novel and exciting results over studies that corroborate – or disconfirm – previous findings. Conducting replications, the researchers write, “is largely viewed in the social science research community as lacking prestige, originality, or excitement.”

. . . .

Makel and Plucker, however, say that replication matters greatly. What’s at stake, they say, is education’s standing as a discipline. Dismissing replication, they write, “indicates a value of novelty over truth … and a serious misunderstanding of both science and creativity.”….

. . . .

“When I talk to my friends in the natural sciences, they’re just baffled by how this is even a question or a controversy in psychology and education,” Makel said. “Replication is such a normal part of the process for them.”....

DISSENT the BLOG

Pages

Sunday, February 5, 2012

Readers have lots to say about the "civility" initiative

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

A civility policy? Arf!

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

Check out our PAGES

Search This Blog