Jody/Board meet

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

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

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

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

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

Thursday's board meeting:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pictured: TigerAnn, cat, this afternoon

A “pick-up” for Don’s competitor; Uncle Fester carps and bleats

The always uninspired Matt Cunningham reports that Don Wagner’s Republican competitor in the 70th Assembly race, Jerry Amante, has been endorsed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association. (See.)

Naturally, Amante, who declares that he “is the leading candidate in the 70th Assembly district,” is making the most of the endorsement.

Opines the always mediocre Cunningham, “This is a great pick-up for Jerry Amante, and helps secure his right-flank vis-a-vis primary opponent Don Wagner.”

Meanwhile, Don, who not long ago amputated an inflamed and fetid chunk of his own right flank--and who has yet to send me a thank-you note for my positive-negative endorsement (used in his campaign statement)--declares on his campaign website that “we need more faith in public life.”

Still included under “Latest News” on Don's website is a press release entitled Fuentes Endorses Wagner For 70th Assembly District.

Oh yeah? At the SOCCCD board’s meeting two days ago, Fuentes noted the “strained relationship” between the two factions of the board (Fuentes is now in the minority; Wagner leads the majority; hatred and snipery fill the room) that has been “festered and fostered” with “rash decisions” such as the decision to move forward to replace the resigning and universally reviled and illiterate and corrupt and increasingly silent Raghu Mathur (in June).

As I recall, Marcia responded to Fuentes’ unpleasant remark by saying that she was unaware of any festering. She looked around her. Nope. No festering.

But it should be acknowledged that her view of Tom’s plainly festering face was blocked by an enormous red, white, and blue pumpkin lolling atop board president Don Wagner’s besplintered gavel.

Following Marcia’s lead (sort of), I shall henceforth call Tom “Uncle Fester.”


Fester is the handsome fellow in the middle.

John Williams' empty, spinning head

As you know, several faculty and students—including atheists, agnostics, and believers—are challenging the SOCCCD's embrace of prayers and religious messages during public occasions such as “opening sessions” and commencement ceremonies. It is, we believe, a violation of the principle of separation of Church and State.

The 2009 Fall “Chancellor’s opening session” (for video, see end of this post), which occurred in August, is cited in the case for at least two reasons.

First, after trustee John Williams was introduced as one who will offer the invocation, he paused to tell a "Biblical" joke-story:

Before the invocation, I thought I’d tell a little Biblical story. Today’s story is about Jonah. In grade school one day, a little girl spoke to her teacher about Jonah and how he was swallowed by a whale. The teacher said it was physically impossible for a whale to swallow a human because even though they’re a large mammal they have very small throats. The little girl said, “But how can that be? Jonah was swallowed by a whale, and the Bible says so.” Again the teacher said it’s physically impossible for a whale to swallow a human. Undaunted, the little girl said, “When I get to heaven, I will ask Jonah.” To this the teacher replied, “What if Jonah has gone to hell?” The little girl replied, “Then you can ask him.”

Second, at the end of the session, the Chancellor played a video that showed numerous patriotic images to the sappy country song, “God Bless the U.S.A.” Toward the end of this video (or slide show), some such words as these are displayed:

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you—Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Well, all of this came up in my recent depo. Here are some excerpts.

The questioner is the district’s attorney, Mr. V. Naturally, I am answering the questions. Occasionally, I’m referred to as the “witness.”

DID TRUSTEE WILLIAMS WRITE HIS LITTLE JOKE?

Q …Do you know who wrote this joke? Do you know if Trustee Williams actually wrote this joke?
. . .
A I would be very surprised if he could string two sentences together without screwing them up. So, no, I don't think he wrote it.

Q … When did you begin holding that belief?
. . .
A Well, I was joking when I said that, but he, I don't think, is a person I would ever expect to be able to produce this paragraph.

Q Okay. So you understood at the time that Trustee Williams was not the author?

A That is my belief.
. . .
Q When did you hold the belief – when did you form the belief that Trustee Williams was incapable of producing a paragraph such as this?

A I have seen much of his writing. … I remember looking at his writing during the suit of 1998 and he's a very poor writer and he often engages in malapropism during meetings. You know, “don't stay in your ivory castle,” … things like that. And so I have a pretty good idea of what he's capable of.

… I would just say that this is so much the kind of joke that is said in those settings [church] and when I combine that fact with the, oh, lack of imagination with this particular fellow, I'm guessing he found this on some Christian site. … Or maybe he heard it at his own church.
. . .
Q Okay. Is there anything that John Williams could say to you that would affect your religious beliefs, Professor?

A Well, I will acknowledge that he is not an authority for me, so I don't know exactly what you're asking.

Q You think John Williams is an idiot?

A Well, only in the loose sense of idiot….

Q So do you believe an idiot could affect your religious views, Professor?

A It's unlikely.

Q Probably would be impossible, right?

A If his head started spinning I'd be interested.

Q Okay. Short of that?

A No. … But, you know, the situation is that I'm sitting in this room where suddenly we're all told to stand without any sensitivity to the possibility that there are people who do not wish to invoke the Lord, but nevertheless he does that, and I find that offensive even though it is unlikely that anything he says will change my mind about the issues of religion.

THE “GOD BLESS THE U.S.A.” VIDEO:

Q … Okay, let's go to the video, the “God Bless the U.S.A.” video. … Have you ever heard -- well, you saw the video; right, you were there [for the opening session]?

A I did see it.

Q And what was the song that the video was -- the slideshow was set to?

A I believe it is a song by a well-known country singer. I don't know who that is but I think the song is called “God Bless the U.S.A.”
. . .
Q In fact, you've heard that song at, you know, Republican or Democratic Conventions?

[Yes]

Q Now, and the slideshow was largely patriotic?

A Yes.

Q But then you get to the – your problem is with the last slide?
. . .
THE WITNESS: If I had the opportunity to do a critique of the video, it would not restrict itself to the last slide but with regard to issues of religion and prayer pretty much it was the last slide.
. . .
Q And were you offended by any of the other slides when you saw them?

A I don't know if “offense” is the right word. I don't – I feel uncomfortable with the kind of sappy patriotic display involved in that kind of video.

Q Let me ask you this: Would you be objecting to this slideshow in this case if it wasn't for the final slide in this presentation?

A Probably not. … Except to say they have very bad taste in music.
. . .
Q Do you know how the district got a copy of the “God Bless the U.S.A.” slideshow?

A I have no idea.

Q Do you know who the author of the slideshow was, who actually prepared the slides?

A I do not.

Q Do you know who the speaker of the slideshow – who do you view the speaker to be of the slideshow?

A Do slideshows have speakers?

Q That's my question, do you view the district itself to be the speaker or one of my clients?
. . .

THE “OOPS” THEORY:

[The district’s attorney begins to push the idea that the video had not been previewed, and so the “Jesus” message was inadvertent.]

A I'm aware that these opening sessions are taken very, very seriously by the chancellor and some members of the board and that they are usually very careful about how they choreograph it and what they do in it. So my guess is they were involved in – at least one or two trustees and the chancellor were involved in choosing the elements, including the video.

Q Do you – have you ever been involved in the planning of a chancellor's opening session?

A No.

Q Have you ever attended meetings where a chancellor's opening session was planned?

A Never been invited.
. . .
Q Do you know if any of my clients watched the slideshow before it was played? … Do you have any factual basis to say “yes, I know that this person watched it before it was played”?
. . .
A I don't – I don't know that. I do know that they are very careful usually about what they present and so it would surprise me if they hadn't viewed it.

Q Do you know if – let's leave Chancellor Mathur aside, do you know if any of the other defendants in this case besides Chancellor Mathur, had seen even a second of the slideshow before it was played? …

You don't know how my clients got a copy of the slideshow?

A I do not.

Q Okay. Any basis, in fact, to say they got it – someone from the community, Orange County community sent it to a whole bunch of people including Chancellor Mathur on the Fourth of July?

A I did not know that.

Q Okay. And do you know if the e-mail that was sent to Chancellor Mathur and 25 other people said "A fitting video for the Fourth of July"?
. . .
THE WITNESS: I'm not aware of any of these facts.
. . .
Q …Do you know what day Fourth of July was in 2009? Do you know if it fell on a workday or on a weekend?

A I don't recall.
. . .

Q Do you know what he did, assuming Chancellor Mathur got an e-mail that was sent to him and 25 other people on a Saturday, the Fourth of July with a subject line, "A fitting video for the Fourth of July," and it had the attachment “God Bless the U.S.A.,” assuming all of those facts to be true; right, do you know what Chancellor Mathur did at that point? … Do you know if Chancellor Mathur ever viewed the entire “God Bless the U.S.A.” slideshow?

A No, I don't know that. I know that he's historically, obviously, very very careful about what he presents during these opening sessions and, of course, it's possible that he slipped up once.

Q All right. Do you know what religion Raghu Mathur is?

A I – I think he is – I'm sure he is religious. I couldn't tell you what religion it is.

Q Do you know if he's Hindu?

A I don't know that.

Q Do you know if – do you know if Raghu Mathur believes that Jesus Christ died for his soul or anybody else's soul?

A I don't – I really don't know. I mean, I have some factoids available to me about his religiousness but they don't paint a very clear picture. I know he is religious but I couldn't tell you anything beyond that.

Q Okay. But my question is do you believe that Chancellor Mathur believed that Jesus Christ died for his soul or anybody else's?
. . .
THE WITNESS: I have no idea.
. . .

BAUER’S CASE AGAINST THE “OOPS” THEORY

Q Were you ever informed that the showing of that slide, the final slide of the “God Bless the U.S.A.” presentation was unintentional?

A I have heard the claim made, but at the board meeting immediately after the August opening session there was reference made to the video. And as I recall it was discussed and praised, and there was an opportunity to explain if it was a mistake and no one took [that opportunity]. All of the board members were there, Raghu was there, and as I recall people expressed the idea that it was very good opening session, and they had only praise.

And when they made those comments they had already heard from, I think, Karla Westphal and possibly Margot who had objected to that video. That's right, that's what happened. They had already objected to the video and that “Jesus” line in particular and after that when the board discussed the opening session, they had an opportunity to explain any error that might have been made. They did not say anything about failing to preview the video. They didn't say they made a mistake. They heaped praise on the session and that was it. So at that point I believed that they were endorsing that video.

Q And they didn't do anything else…after the board meeting?

A Yes, at some point after that board meeting. mysteriously, we hear about a mistake, an honest mistake made. Well, the problem with that is they were at a board meeting in which explicitly Karla and Margot, who are very articulate people, explained the objection to that very video and that very slide. And if ever there was a time to say “sorry we screwed up,” it was just a few minutes later when the board did its reports and Mathur does his report. And they did bring up the opening session, but all they had to say was praise. If there had been a mistake, why didn't they say it then?

So, yes, I did hear about a claim that it was some kind of honest mistake. It does not in my mind fit with the fact they had an opportunity to explain their mistake and, if ever there was an opportunity, that was it and they did not take it. On the contrary they only praised the opening session.

Q Do you know how resolutions are passed by the Board of Trustees?

A I think so. … I think that they have to be agendized.
. . .
Q In fact, … a resolution was agendized [as it turns out, for a subsequent board meeting] and passed concerning that video?

A Yeah.

Q Do you still want an apology or is the resolution not good enough?

[Note: I don’t recall ever asking for an apology. It is possible that, at the aforementioned board meeting, Karla or Margot had demanded an apology.]
. . .
THE WITNESS: I honestly don't remember when the resolution was. My memory was it was the next meeting or the meeting after, but, you know, it would be typical of me to conflate these. [No, my memory was correct.]

But I do remember that the meeting right after that opening session they had just heard very clear, very strong objections to that video during the opening session and I believe they objected to Williams' comments too. … They had just heard these objections, and if you have something to say in response like, well, “we can understand your – that you're upset but we are here to assure you that it was only an honest mistake,” that's when you would say it, but they did not say it….
. . .
…So, you know, in my memory it was a later date that, you know, “we need to come up with an excuse for what happened” and then there's this claim that it was an honest mistake.

Q Do you know when the wheels got rolling on generating a resolution addressing that video?

A I have no idea.

. . . I have every reason to believe that what happened is they showed this video, then very soon after, they had a board meeting where vociferous objections were made to what happened during the opening session. And a few minutes after that, the board gave its reports and Mathur gave his report and they did comment on the opening session. And they said nothing about a mistake and seemed to be uninterested in saying anything but positive things [about the opening session]. And you can watch the video yourself and see for yourself. And at that point I had absolutely no reason to think that these people had made a mistake. On the contrary, they must have thought – they felt pretty good about how it went and what happened.
. . .
Now, I know how the situation works. It probably became clear to them thereafter that they were in trouble now, because if they're going to come up with some kind of excuse after-the-fact it's not going to look too good and that's exactly what happened.
. . .

Q Do you know what religion Marcia Milchiker is?

A I do.

Q What is she?

A I believe she's Jewish.

Q How about Trustee Lang?

A I believe he's Jewish.

Q You believe that Trustees Lang and Milchiker believe that Jesus Christ died for anybody's souls?

A I'm confident that they do not believe that.
. . .


Q …When you saw the “God Bless the U.S.A.” video did you for a second believe that Jesus Christ died for your soul?

A That's a very very odd picture. You're asking me if I had this moment of belief that Jesus Christ died for my soul?

Q Yes.

A I did not.

To see video of the Chancellor’s Opening Session (August 2009), click here.

Williams’ “Jonah” story/invocation: go to 07:20. (video)

The “God Bless the U.S.A” video: go to 2:47:20. (video)

The message about Jesus Christ: go to 2:50:10. (video)

Don, having just seen the video, betrays no indication that anything is amiss with the video:   2:50:31. (video)

Colleen Callahan for Public Administrator

Even me

Last night, while we waited for the start of the March meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees, a friend hipped me to the fact that Board President Don Wagner, who is running for state assembly, mentions little ol’ me in his campaign statement!

No way! I said.

Yes way, she said.

She showed me. If you go to the OC Registrar of Voters site, you’ll find info about the Republicans running for the 70th Assembly District, including the Wagster. Click on the link to Don’s campaign statement and up comes, well, his campaign statement, where he informs us that “We deserve better from government. I oppose reckless spending, job killing regulations, and ever more taxes and bonds.”

He goes on to quote Ken Mettler, of the California Republican Assembly, Larry Smith of Family Action PAC, and State Senator Mark Wyland. He mentions some endorsements, including “radio host Hugh Hewitt, columnists Michelle Malkin and Star Parker.”

Then he writes:

Even my long time adversary, liberal college professor Roy Bauer, knows I threaten his leftist ideology. He’s written that I’m “an anti-union, liberal-bashing, prayer-making right-winger. But he’s smart.”

Leaders you trust, and the radical left, know that I’m the proven conservative for Assembly.

OK, Don. Send your thank-you note—and, if you’d like more of my special “support,” a fabulous cash prize—to Roy Bauer, School of Humanities and Languages, Irvine Valley College.

P.S.: my niece Sarah likes Gumby and Pokey.

Jody Hoy

Jody Hoy - professor emeritus of Irvine Valley College, writer, photographer, activist, friend - died yesterday, March 25, 2010, at her home in Laguna Beach.




from The Power to Dream: Interviews with Women in the Creative Arts by Jody Hoy:

"There was a theme that was being played out on a daily basis in the lives of practically every woman I knew (not to mention my own): how can a woman satisfy the demands of the creative will and still preserve an intimate life? All the women I interviewed were driven in one direction or another by the fierce imperative of the creative will - whether to art, literature, psychology, or music. And all of them refused to sacrifice the private dimension of their lives: all were unwilling to give up the intimate and sexual rewards of a woman's life...These interviews document the joys and difficulties of being a productive human being in the shape of a woman."

More later.

(All photographs by Jody Hoy)

What happened at tonight’s board meeting, mostly

Sheesh. The board is thoroughly settled into a savage Four-to-Three-itude. The New Majority listens to the New Minority carp. Then they wait a beat. Then they do what they wanna.

I’ll have more details tomorrow (or when I get around to it). I’ll just report the big issue tonight: the hire of a consulting firm to help with the Chancellor hire.

VC Bugay contacted 32 consulting firms, got ten responses, and, in the end, five could show for tonight’s board meeting with a presentation.

Board President Don Wagner brought the item (dead last on the agenda) to the front, and so, first thing, we all sat through five—count ‘em, five!—presentations, each taking about twenty minutes, including Q & A.

First at bat was Community College Search Services (CCSS), represented by a fellow named Don (John?) Romo. He sounded like he knew what he was doing. CCSS evidently helped with the hire of the State Chancellor. Sounds like CCSS does the first interviews. They do all the reference checking. They usually help with a “public forum.”

Trustee Fuentes wanted to know if CCSS would be able to find candidates in the private sector and at four-year colleges. Well, said Don, we’ll advertise in the Chronicle, and, dang, everybody reads that. Yeah, said Fuentes, but are we rushing things? Well, no, said Don, there are always great candidates out there. This thing is “doable.”

Fuentes snorted.

Next up was McNaughton and Associates. Mr. Sperry McNaughton (aka Sharp McSlick) was sharp. And slick. After Riverside CCD went out a couple of times and got nowhere, Sharp swooped in and got the job done. He’s into the new technology—two-way live, long-distance interviews. No need to fly everybody around and waste money. Plus streaming video. Would have this thing done by September.

Fuentes asked again about soliciting candidates from the “private sector.” “That is a challenge,” said McSlick. More Fuentean snortage. McSlick seemed to imply that the search committee would work up the brochure/website, and that got Don Wagner worried. This guy was toast, despite his fine suit, expensive shoes, and smooth ways.

Next up was PPL. The only thing I remember about the name is that the “L” is for “leasing.” Mr. Don Averill (aka Mr. Bland Rumple) was as slick as rusty barbed wire, and not nearly as charming. I bet Fuentes brought ‘im in. He opined that quality candidates are not willing to leave their jobs in mid-term, so you’ve pretty much got to aim for a hire for August (maybe no-can-do) or for January. Fuentes purred. [UPDATE: a friend assures me that Mr. Averill, though unslick, has a considerable reputation for integrity. A really good guy, she says.]

Dr. Gary Owens of Academic Search was kinda slick, kinda not. His firm has 32 consultants, and they’re all ready to put in their 2 cents, which adds up to about 64 cents, and I don’t think anybody liked this guy. He reminded me of that guy who played "dirt" on those commercials twenty years ago.

At long last the ACCT gal got up there--I think her name was Judith Breadwine--and presented what that organization does. Gosh, did I hear her say that, usually, you’ve got two trustees on the search committee? Yep. “We’ve got the biggest ‘black book,’” she said. There’re ways of getting around the calendar problem, she said. Gosh, said Don, according to your schedule, we’re not even rushed to hire somebody by August!

I heard yet another snort.

I’ve gotta go, so let’s just say that Fuentes, Lang, and Williams did their predictable “slow down, you move to fast” routine while Padberg, Jay, and Milchiker did a pretty good, “Gosh, let’s get moving!”

Nancy liked CCSS. They’re a California firm. They hired the State Chancellor. Tom didn't like 'em. What else do you need to know!

Bill noted that, quite possibly, by the Fall, we’ll have three new trustees. So let's get moving!

“I call the question!” barked Nancy.

Boom! They hired CCSS.

Fuentes didn’t even bother to snort.

* * * * *
Tonight, a friend sent this:

Underdog candidate for county office takes on OC political machine (Orange County Local News Network)

Colleen Callahan is not a professional politician. By her account, she’s barely even a novice at the game.

But as a candidate for the obscure county office of public administrator, she finds herself taking on an incumbent who Callahan says is part of Orange County’s fabled political machine.
. . .
Callahan and two others – deputy public guardian Kevin Vann and former Orange school board member Steve Rocco – are running in the June 8 primary against incumbent John Williams, a former cop and longtime public official who has connections to many of OC’s top politicians.
. . .
Callahan worked her way up in the agency, eventually being promoted to oversee a clerical unit that handles the legal paperwork necessary to administer estates.

But she said the department took a turn for the worse when Williams was elected and took over in 2003. Williams, who also serves as a board member of the South Orange County Community College District, was often absent from the office and handed off day-to-day management to his deputy, Callahan said.

“I watched the agency deteriorate,” she said. “The way he reorganized the agency and doubled the management, which wasn’t needed … trickled down to where it started affecting the (staff). They had higher caseloads (so) they couldn’t go out into the field and see the mentally ill.”….

Yeah, like I said, only louder

Ah, the news business. I was telling a friend earlier today that, on a particularly slow news day—a glacial day—local reporters will sometimes pick up on some of our fine reporting here at DtB and then run like hell with it.

We laughed. I then briefly checked out the OC Weekly’s crew of bloggers. And waddyouknow. Not for the first time, our old pal Matt Coker did exactly that!

College District Board's Battle Cry: Send Lawyers, Hired Guns and Money

​The South Orange County Community College District … board votes tonight on whether to pay a private lawyer $25,000 in taxpayer funds for helping negotiate what the district calls the "Mathur settlement." Why the district must settle anything with Raghu Mathur, who in January was fired/didn't have his contract renewed/was lovingly told it's time to tackle new career challenges (depending on who is doing the spinning), is unclear. Why it's paying someone other than the lawyers it already pays to handle labor matters is equally murky. What is known is the lawyer in line to get the dough has more skeletons in his closet than a college anatomy department.

He's Phillip Greer, Orange County Republican politicians' attorney of choice.
. . .
Many GOP movers and snakers hire Greer at the recommendation of John Lewis, who is—how did Moxley put it? Oh yes—an "oily" Republican insider from disgraced, possibly prison-bound ex-Sheriff Mike Carona's old camp.

Greer also represents county Treasurer Chriss Street, who a federal judge earlier this month ruled had breached his fiduciary duty when he attempted to build an empire instead of protecting the assets of a trust he was hired to liquidate.

Street was ordered to pay more than $7 million in damages to the End of the Road Trust.
. . .
Irvine Valley College (IVC) philosophy professor and tenacious SOCCCD board critic Roy Bauer is … succinct in his summation of Greer on his Dissent the Blog:

Greer is the OC Republican mafia's consigliere. He's a total creep.
. . .
Your education tax dollars are at work, South County!