Trustee oblivion: moving the district to the geographical middle

On the "plight of part-time faculty"

Glad to work here; but can't
afford to live here

     Check out video of public comments—by faculty union members—at Monday’s meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees.
     Just click here, then wait three or four seconds. Voila!

     OBLIVION. Also recommended (located at 1:30:20), is the discussion of item 6.7, 2015-2016 five-year construction plan (order of priorities).
     Just click here (wait for a few seconds).

Paid office hours for adjuncts

     Look in particular for the discussion of a proposed District Services building “relocation” [“closer to the center” between SC and IVC].
     “Both of the colleges have asked that we begin to consider potential funding sources….”
     That discussion begins about eight minutes in (about 1:38).
     Trustees seem surprised by the proposal/priority, which has support at both colleges and which is by no means a new idea. 
     (See also February Board Meeting.)

Too much of nothing
Can make a man a liar
It can cause some men to sleep on nails
Other men to eat fire
Ev’rybody’s doin’ somethin’
I heard it in a dream
But when there’s too much of nothing
It just makes a fella mean 

Say hello to Valerie
Say hello to Vivian
Send them all my salary
On the waters of oblivion

The traditional "half way" mark

Part-timers make noise

Day of Protest (Inside Higher Ed)

By Colleen Flaherty and Kaitlin Mulhere

     It started as a simple question on social media: What would happen if adjuncts across the country walked out on the same day, at the same time?
     That question got answered Wednesday -- sort of -- on the first-ever National Adjunct Walkout Day. There were some big walkouts at a few institutions but, for a variety of reasons, adjuncts at many more colleges and universities staged alternative protests, such as teach-ins, rallies and talks. Still, the movement led to unprecedented levels of conversation on many campuses, in the media and elsewhere about the working conditions of the majority of college faculty (those off the tenure track). And as a result, adjunct activists declared the day a success -- while wondering what comes next….
. . .
     Recurring themes resonate with adjuncts’ concerns nationwide: a desire for better pay, job security and respect that’s not afforded them in the current faculty “caste” system, [Robert Porter, a longtime non-tenure-track instructor of African-American, African and diaspora studies] said….

February meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees: "this one is giving me heartburn"

     (Please read Tere's Board Meeting Highlights.)
     OK, it's 6:27, and the Ronnie Reagan room is pretty full. Things are hoppin' what with lots of union presence. No sign of the trustees just yet.
     Been reminiscin' with Tere about some of the good old days, like the time the mouse lady appeared. I mentioned the night Fuentes invaded Spain and held students hostage. And Don's blitzkrieg on librarians--that was pretty special too. Ah, the memories.
     6:32 -- I see that Dave Lang has entered. It's just a matter of minutes, then.
     6:34 -- Jemal and Poertner have entered. Now Prendergast.
     The Faculty Association (union) is planning a big presence tonight. No doubt they will make use of "public comments" near the start of the meeting.
     As always, the meeting will start with a "reading out" of actions in the closed session, occurring just prior to this open session. Then the Sacrifice of the First Born. Then the Invocation and Ritual Dance of the Young Pumpkin. Then comments.
     6:37 - Marcia just showed up. Jim Wright is here. Where's Nancy? (Jay and Padberg not present. Oddly, Padberg's absence is not explained. Jay is absent owing to illness apparently.)

THE OPEN SESSION BEGINS: big faculty union presence

     6:38 They start. Wright: 5/0 Pad and Jay absent. Settlement agreement classified manager, IVC. That's it.
     Invocation: Marcia. Moment of silence. Then pledge.
     No resolutions. A commendation, however. Tod Burnett comes up to podium. "Absolutely thrilled and elated" to issue commendations to blah blah blah. "Come on up you guys." They come up: People in Financial Aid at Saddleback College. There's about ten of 'em. Burnett yammers like he does, spouting factoids of wondrous achievements. Something about waivers. "21 million dollars in one year," he says. Weak applause. "959 students a year ago." "3700 students last year got money. More financial aid recipients." He goes through individual names. Each gets a round of applause.
     I'm in hell.
     On it goes. He's still reciting names, and the audience applauds. OK. Christian Alvarado gets a big whoop. Now Tere takes the inevitable pic. Big smiles. Lotsa teeth.
     Next: public comments.

     Seven people have requested to speak. Keep to 2 minutes please.

     Blake Stevens: Green T with white long-sleeve underneath. A fashion statement? "re contract negotions. It's the best of times and the worst of times. How come? Even with Prop 13, taxable base of OC leaping upwards. He goes "on and on and on" about prices of property. Bad news: attracting faculty to South OC means the need to get in housing. Prices of homes is higher than faculty salaries will support. Talks about rental rates. $300 per square foot per month. Consider that as you negotiate the faculty contract, the real cost of housing. (Refers to "Saddleback College" as though IVC is not part of district. D'oh!)
     Bob Cosgrove: Bob refers to colorful handout. Plight of part-time faculty. Low salaries, few benefits, cost of living. "Roadblock to student success." No office space for part-timers. Typical adjunct earns 20K for same work, no benefits. Refers to actions taken at CSU. Call for more tenure track faculty, et al. to speed up graduation. Gets applause.
     Jeanne Egasse: Says something funny about Bob's wonky ways. Advocates for salaries of our adjunct faculty and new faculty, very low on salary scale. Warm applause.
     Christina D: new faculty in history dept. Here in support of contract proposal. As new faculty, experiencing brunt of problems with housing costs. A challenge. $800K for 3-bedroom home in this area. Many financial products that existed five years ago no longer exist. It is important that CC faculty be members of the community. (Warm applause.)
     Beth Clary: been in district since '88. Reads comment from another part-timer. Volunteered to read for him/her. Reads: tip of the week recently publicized. Take advantage of faculty office hours, an avaliable resource. But 50% of classes are taught by part-timers who are not compensated and have no office space for office hours. Students can't meet with them, contra student success. (Gets an especially warm response from crowd.)
     Melissa Knoll. My story is really representative. Five years as part-timer, now full-timer. I'm happy. When I was part-time, I was a freeway flier. I couldn't continue the commute when I became full-time. I moved up here 3 months ago. I was amazed at the cost of living. There's no chance I can buy here. I considered renting. Decided against it. Can't save if I rent. But really happy to be here. --(Excellent speech. Very positive response.)
     Ken Woodward: Professor of Econ at Saddleback College. Wants to echo points made by previous speakers. Many of our thoughts are with Trustee Jay tonight; we wish him a speedy recovery. Bill Jay has been involved on both sides of the contract issue. His philosophy was always: we're a community. To attract the best faculty, we should have a salary schedule to allow faculty to live here. Faculty salaries have not increased in 4 years. The cost of having a house has soared. Please keep that in mind. We must be able to attract the best faculty--so we need to be able to compensate them so that they can be part of our community.
     No further comments.

Board Reports:

     Trustee Dave Lang: notes the "good crowd" in the Ronnie Reagan room Attended coach Hartman's funeral. Many influenced by him in his career. Attended OC School Board Ass. meeting with other trustees.
     Trustee TJ Prendergast: attended Presidents' Cup. Mentioned the "PACE" program, efficiency of energy. Contact your city, etc. Attended "Poets and Romantics" at IVC. Very entertaining.
     Trustee Tim Jemal: we certainly wish Trustee Jay a speedy recovery. I'm the newest on the board. It was a joy to sit next to him during my first year. Very funny man with a rich history with the district, college. Fair minded. I miss him. Attended AACC(?) event. Excellent conference. Speaker from Princeton Review: advice to high school students, when to take tests, detailed strategy. Jemal seemed critical of that advice. Keeps his advice simple: study, etc.
     Trustee Jim Wright: another comment about Bill Jay. New sciences building: will be a "magnificent building." Political Action group that Jemal and others attended (about tests for high school students). Basketball game, fought Fullerton. (As always, Wright proceeds as though IVC does not exist. Saddleback IS the SOCCCD, SOCCCD IS Saddleback.) City College of San Francisco. Legal events that might...
     Trustee Marcia Milchiker: echoes comments about BIll Jay. Attended Legislative Taskforce meeting. (It's great to see so many new faces at tonight's meeting.) Back to task force. I was one of the founders. IVC Pres Glenn Roquemore is member of OC business council. They'll be meeting every month to bring businesses in, partner with community colleges. STEAM instead of STEM. (Arts) New facilities bond measure, 2016. 9 billion dollars...etc.
     Student Trustee Keefe Carrillo: Bill Jay "is in my prayers." Attended Emeritus Institute. Don Wagner lecture series. His role as Assembly member. I'm very happy for him as former trustee. He's moving up. Running for State Senate is not easy. (Young Keefe is rather full of himself.) Hope the best for him. Welcome new substitute advisor at IVC.
     Chancellor's (Gary Poertner's) report: last spring, started trustee listening sessions. Concerns of faculty, staff expressed. Since that time, we've had discussion item to get information out about topic under discussion (at future listening session?). A report on DRAC (district resources allocation) tonight. Will have some sessions coming up. I look forward to them. I would remind all faculty and staff: next round coming up on April 22nd, a Wednesday. Please attend. Talk directly to the board.
     IVC President's report: nothing to add (said VPI Craig Justice on behalf of Roquemore, who is elsewhere.)
     SC President's report: Tod Burnett commences yammering. Two major events coming up: (a) economic report lunch.... [This sounds like an attempt to do what Jim Doti does every year from Chapman U.] (b) Foundation Gala. New alumnus of year. Lost two dear people: Prof Richie White. Ceramics instructor. Designed and built veterans memorial. Lost also George Hartmann. Started here in 1968.
     Student government reports, etc.

THE MANUFACTURE--OR NON-MANUFACTURE--OF CONSENT

First discussion item: Process for development of academic calendar:

     Kathie Schmeidler and Dan Walsh (Academic Senate Presidents, IVC, SC).
     Walsh: Explains membership of "district ac. calendar committee." At Saddleback College, we have a calendar committee, lots of representation. We draft a calendar in view of state requirements, holidays, etc.
     Schmeidler: discusses the IVC calendar committee. Reaching campus-wide accord before meeting with other college committee, district. (The two colleges approach arriving at a proposed draft differently.)
     Calendar parameters: we are very concerned with balancing number of class days, Fall and Spring.  Etc. Discusses some details.
     Walsh: there's more to it still. Other needs: programs, faculty prep time, etc. It's impossible to make everyone happy [C. nurses]. Later start dates, earlier state dates, considered, discussed. The committee provides a draft sent to Academic Senate. Everyone has chance for input. Finally forwarded to district committee.
     Kathie: "we can get along even though we are disperate in height," she says, jokingly (referring to she and Walsh). Discusses IVC-specific concerns.
     Questions?

     Jemal: thanks for presentation. Kathie, you mentioned that calendar is arrived at by consent at IVC. No dissenting vote? Same at Saddleback College? Walsh: no. We vote. Kathie explains what "consensus" means in the IVC process. Sure, there's some dissent. Nobody, though, feels strongly enough opposed to block the consensus. Then we move forward. [As a senator, I can say that this corectly characterizes what occurs at least at the Ac. Senate level.]

Whaddya mean SNAFU?

DRAC - ULA

Next:
4.2 Reviewing DRAC funding model

     Deb Fitzsimmons comes up, presents. Understanding the district resources allocation council (DRAC) model. [Obviously, this is about money and how it is allocated to the two colleges, etc.]
     Davit K (of IVC): DRAC--process established in 1997. DRAC council makes recommendations to Chancellor. Chancellor in turn recommends to trustees.
     Each entity within district (IVC, SC, District Services, etc.) has own committee.
     Shows "snapshot" of DRAC model. The main principle: SB 361 apportionment model is starting point. [The upshot: our starting point is the money we would receive from the state were we to use the most common state-funded model. But we don't use that model, since the amount of revenue produced by local property taxes exceeds what we'd get via state allocation. And thus a "surplus" is produced, and that must be divied up.] When amount (from basic aid) exceeds 361 amount: extra. We follow a conservative approach (namely, giving money as if using state apportionment; using extra money only for one-time projects, etc.). Basic Aid gravy used for large capitol projects. This is what BARC deals with, etc. (BARC is the Basic Aid committee.)
     DRAC: revenue allocation (amount allocated per college). Allocation is another process. A decentralized model. Etc. Each college decides how to use its money.
     DRAC model has five areas. SC, IVC, Contingency Reserve, General expenditures, and District services.
     Turns it over to Carol Hilton:
     FTES, blah blah blah. Revenue adjustment. (I lapse into a coma.... [You know me and fiscal stuff.])
     Credit funding rate, blah blah blah. (My coma deepens....) Is discussing components of "the SB 361d model." SC is a "large" college and IVC is a "medium." That will be changing. Both will be medium by next year. Has impact on all this.
     Growth rate... New way of measuring. Using that, we don't get 3% growth rate in the district for next year. Blah blah blah.
     Back to Deb F: Beyond 361. Board philosophy (guidelines). Excess revenue allocated for one-time purposes, etc. Not to be used for ongoing expenses. Conservative philosophy.
     Etc.
     Reminders about "basic aid." 72 districts. Each gets revenue entitlements. If revenues received are lower, if higher, etc. We happen to be in the enviable position of getting mucho property tax money, exceeding what we would get from state allocation. So we opt for "basic aid" approach, providing much gravy. [The state of affairs produces much animosity towards us across the state. Other districts occasionally make moves on our "extra" money. But this effort is poorly organized, never seems to get anywhere.]
     A basic aid district does not receive state support, but there is a qualifier (exception). She explained that. Categorical support, etc. We have to watch our enrollment growth. Could drop out of basic aid if we don't grow enough.
     Thirteen voting members of DRAC explained.
     Questions?

     Prendergast: raises questions about flexibility in model, blah blah blah.
 

Writing instructors, IVC

Next: consent calendar. Any that trustees wishe to pull? 5.4, 5.8, 5.5, 5.15. That's it.
   
   They vote on the rest. Unanimous yes votes.

     5.4 - hiring of a construction manager. Brandye D is asked to come up and explain. Blah blah blah.
     Motion to approve. Vote: unanimous.

     5.5 - Lang: would college presidents please tell us about CTE grants for their institutions?
     Burnett: hands off to Kathy Werle. Asks about something called "Sim-baby"? [I guess it sounds pretty goofy.] Kathy Werle explains: simulation infant. Also: Pop-Up shop. She doesn't know what that is: equipment grant of some kind. Blah blah blah. "It's all good for education, right" says Prendergast. --Guess so.
     Passes unanimously.

     5.8 - SC revised laboratory fees. Wright has a concern: "Adidas team clothes." What's that mean? Burnett's got nothing. "Usually" that stuff "is all furnished," says Wright. "I don't want to speculate," says Burnett. Motion to approve with amendment. Nope. Let's look it up right now. Move on to others in meantime....

     5.15 - Flip side of other one (grants?). Mostly equipment in biotechnologies. We don't have health programs at IVC, says Justice. Mostly equipment. Deb F suggests an amendment. It's complex. Concerns Rancho Santiago. They vote: unanimous.

     Returning to 5.8 - explains fee for supplemental gear that students can keep. This satisfies Wright. Motion, approval. Unanimous.
   
     6.1 - Marion Burgeson Award Nomination. Nobody's got anything. Nobody "wishes to be nominated." They move on.

. . . .

     6.3 - as usual, they agree to allow pay for absent trustee (Padberg, previous meeting)

     6.4 - Differential funding for high cost career technical education programs. Poertner: state looking more and more to CCs to provide techncial programs. Skills gap in populous, etc. Community college should provide that instruction, but it's expensive. So CCs have banded together and have drawn up a resolution re greater allocation for CET. Should we support?
     Jemal: yes, support this. How are we bridging this funding grap currently?
     Poertner: fewer resources for other programs, that's how. Funny. [I.e., there's no bridging of gaps possible right now, just robbing Peter to pay Paul.]
     Vote: unanimous.

. . . .

     6.6 - Saddlback College Technology and Applied Science (TAS) Swing space project.... Resolution. Passes unanimously.

Women of Humanities

MOVING THE DISTRICT TO A LOCATION BETWEEN THE TWO COLLEGE: TRUSTEES SMELL A RAT (WHERE THERE AIN'T NO RAT)

     6.7 - 5 year construction plan.
     The return of Brandye. IVC Life Sciences was on first spot last year. Will be removed this year. ATEP building project has been updated. Fine Arts at IVC--something. A200 building remodel, blah blah blah
     IVC health center concession project, blah blah blah. Permanent building at ATEP. Under design right now. Student Services Annex Project. Moved together with concession bleachers bathroom project. (I'm back in a coma.) Brandye rattles this all off as though it were intelligible. No doubt it is.
     ....some building is in "desperate need of renovation...." (Wright)
     District Services Relocation. A kind of "to be determined" project. Should start looking for potential funders.  --Moving district to closer to middle between IVC and SC.
     Jemal: Saddleback College ATEP building?
     Brandye: IVC's building at ATEP first. Programming for that -- she turns over to Craig Justice. Laser technology, engineering classes, pre-engineering, STEM curricula, etc. Electronics and Laser to be allied. Blah blah blah. "Terrific list of programs" that will be out there. Fitz chimes in about squarte footage and programs info from past available to trustees.
     Jemal: when break ground for Saddleback ATEP? Brandye: don't know that yet. [I've heard that they've lost their funding source, so they're currently behind the 8 ball.]
     Wright: Science/Math building needs renovating. Adamant about that, evidently.
     Lang: first time we're seeing district relocation item here. [i.e., "What gives?"] Fitz: goal: move district services to "more centralized" location. Blah blah blah. Lang: unknown location, right? Yes. "A different site" than existing ones. Yes. Fitz: needs to be part of plan before we can discuss locations.
     Jemal: trying to understand rational for district services in between. Four different campuses, then? (SC, IVC, ATEP, District.) I'm having a hard time understanding rationale for this. Fitz hands off to Justice and Burnett.
    "Thank you, Deb," says Justice, funnily. (Doesn't want this hot spud.) Equity issue. Freeing up space for Saddleback too. Has long been discussed. Strong backing. Burnett: it started with IVC "for understandable reasons." They've got to come all the way down here. Saddleback: are both pros and cons of having district here. Both colleges agreed, yeah, the time is right. But Burnett notes: look where this is on the list. (Way down in exigency and contingency territory.)  They want it recognized as a project. (Burnett laughingly mentions desire for more parking: thus yes, want district moved away.)
     Milchiker: discusses high cost of properties. Not excited about looking for a new building. "That's where I'm coming from, thank you."
     Prendergast: I don't see the pool[on this list] (he says, jokingly). [P has been associated with swimming competitions in the past, in his high school incarnation.] Seems to have dropped off list! (He's only kidding.)
     Lang: I'm having similar problem (as others). It appears for first time, and seems to have high priority. Plans not very fleshed out. "This one is giving me heartburn."

     (COMMENT: this looks to be another instance of the board ignoring PROCESS. We've been discussing the desirability of this move for many years. But owing to their general cluelessness, the board reacts as though somebody is trying to pull a fast one.)

     Walsh chimes in: hey, was in strategic plan. (I.e., pay attention.) Has been out there before. 
     Schmeidler: the item had fallen to the wayside, and that surprised us. So we brought it back, an old issue.
     Aproval: unanimous

Tommy

. . . .

     6.10 ATEP land exchange demolition project. Unanimous.
     6.11 Board Policy revision. Nursing Program. Public Safety camera system.
     Jemal: camera systems policy? New? Fitz: yes. Partly owing to current events, shootings.
     Jemal: significant costs attached to this. Any estimation? Carol Hilton: another $200K. The cost has really come down. Cost effective.
     Vote: unanimous.

     6.12 Academic Personnel Actions.
     One change.
     Vote: unanimous

     6.13 Classified personnel actions
     One change.
     Vote: unanimous

     6.14 Probationary faculty, first year.
     Vote: unanimous

     6.15 Probationary 2-year contract...
     Vote: unanimous

     6.16 Probationary 4-year
     Vote: unanimous

     7.1 IVC and SC speakers
     7.2 Third year....
     7.3 Basic aid report
     7.4 Facilities Plan
     7.5, 7.6, 7.7 -- Fitz chimed in with some warm and fuzzies.

Reports from governance groups:

Dan Walsh of SC Academic Senate ... blah blah blah
Faculty Association: Claire: hope for speedy recovery, Bill Jay, makes further plea - salary to cover cost of living in OC, housing, etc. Blah blah blah
Kathy Schmeidler of IVC Ac Senate: Echoes remarks of my colleagues. Congrats to faculty retained, tenured, etc. Mark calendars, April 17, Student Success Summit

---I'm outa here. (About 8:39)

Young Teddy

Darkness on the Edge of Parking Lot 1

Last car in the IVC staff parking lot. Thursday night.

These things have been on Rebel Girl's mind:

* A familiar axe to grind: the absence of evening oversight continues. The new lighting (in some areas) does not make up for the utter absence of any administrator presence during the long dark evening hours when classes are full, students have questions, faculty have resource needs, etc. Rebel Girl observes that students tend to go to the well-lit coffee cart to ask their questions. Don't get her started about evening classes dismissing early or the numbers of people she observes on their knees in inky drifts of toner in front of the decrepit copiers in A-200 ...As faculty no longer have access to a printer to even print out copies to copy elsewhere or project with document cameras, she has also observed frustration and tears. Once her own.

* Another axe: Professors of English such as Rebel Girl all too often moan about the diminishment of the language. She caught herself doing just that during the week when she advertised the recently extended deadline of the IVC Foundation scholarship program to her WR 201 classes. It was, she announced, an opportunity for them to apply and for Rebel Girl to write more recommendation letters. Rebel Girl can speak passionately and persuasively about scholarships (and grants) because she cobbled together her own higher education with plenty of them (CAL, Pell, Regent's, Assistance League, etc.). She turned on the projector, pulled up the website and began to guide her students through the process. 

The students noticed before Rebel Girl did because she had her back to the screen. 

The misspelling. The erratic capitalization. The comma splices. The class had just reviewed these issues in their own work.

Here's just one example:

Sigh. It was a teaching moment. So, Rebel Girl taught — about the application process (spelled elsewhere on the website "APPLICAITON") as well as the need to proofread with care in case one's authority and message was lost, diminished. It was a good discussion which also covered the point that the message was indeed not lost despite the many errors and yet, the class acknowledged, it was unfortunate. After the initial titters, everyone seemed vaguely embarrassed.

SOCCCD dismal truism #2

The miracle of hot air

From the SOCCCD "master plan"

SOCCCD dismal truism #2: to the consternation of thinking people everywhere, the district embraces the illiterate and dunderheaded evaluative architectonic of the Accreditors (and, more generally, of the "education"* crowd), thus busying administrators and faculty with endless committee work that produces mostly nonsense that, ahem, "guides" the district and its planners.

Am I too harsh? Consider our district’s “goals,” which inform our district’s “strategic plan”:

District-wide Goal 1. SOCCCD will create a district-wide culture which is characterized by mutual respect and collaboration and which celebrates the uniqueness of each institution. [Utter bullshit. And how do you create Lollipop Land when bullies are afoot? Here's a goal: no bullies and tyrants.]

District-wide Goal 2. SOCCCD will support innovations that result in quantifiable improvement in student preparedness and success and will facilitate the institutionalization of those innovations across the district. [“Facilitate the institutionalization of … innovations”? Who writes this crap? And why must our efforts be “innovations”? What if something tried and true will do the job? Buzz, buzz, buzz. Here's a goal: hire competent managers and deans.]

District-wide Goal 3. SOCCCD will maintain its technological leadership and will make future advancements which enhance student access and success. [Techno “advancements which enhance…success.” Vague buzzwordian horseshit.]

District-wide Goal 4. SOCCCD will increase the effective use of all resources by developing and implementing a cycle of integrated district-wide planning. [Yeah, we should plan. Say that. Note the assumption: that resources will be used effectively if we adopt a labyrinthine planning process. Don’t think so.]

District-wide Goal 5. SOCCCD will develop, document and implement data-driven district-wide decision-making processes that are collaborative, transparent, efficient and effective. [Utterly promiscuous and shameless buzzworditude. Note the assumption: data-driven is good! Yeah, but what about the quality of the data?]

District-wide Goal 6. SOCCCD will assess the educational needs of the communities within the district boundaries and will pursue joint venture partnerships with educational institutions and business/industry. [I got nothin'. Fair enough, I guess.]

*Those with Ed.D. degrees.

Essentially, the ACCJC adopted MSLOs [measurable student learning outcomes] 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)

SOCCCD dismal truism #1

First in a series.

SOCCCD dismal truism #1: from board micromanagement to board inaction

Owing to its history of overreach and loutishness (a failing largely overcome in recent years), the board is particularly concerned that it not be accused of “micromanagement.” Unfortunately, the board has settled into a routine of erring in the other extreme—inveterately refusing to investigate or address complaints and objections about officials' conduct and policies.

This has been particularly disastrous for Irvine Valley College, which has suffered under Glenn Roquemore’s embarrassing, anti-intellectualist, sub-collegiate leadership—poor hires, poor management, general obliviousness, failure to communicate or to sustain community, tolerance of incompetence and worse—for over a dozen years, allowing the institution to sink ever further into mediocrity and its employees ever deeper into resigned acquiescence.

(We invite your reactions and commentary.)

Disaster 3 awaits

      [UPDATE: one of our readers reports: "It appears that the hiring committee for the permanent Foundation Director is being formed. The faculty Association has appointed Bill Hewitt to be their representative on the committee, so he is not applying to be the Director." I have not yet confirmed this.]
    Former Counselor and Director of Support Services, Bill Hewitt, is now retired, but it's hard to tell, 'cause you still see him around so much.
     He has long been associated with the IVC Foundation, where, currently, he holds a leadership position. (As you know, Richard Morley, IVC's wildly unpopular recent Foundation Exec Director, vacated the office late in 2014, leaving the Foundation in lousy shape.)

     I do believe Bill is a part-time counselor nowadays, too. At any rate, that's how he's listed on IVC's Directory.

Not very presentable

     Over the years, we've heard endless rumblings to the effect that various former faculty and administrators covet a spot on the SOCCCD board. The two names that, in my experience, come up most often in this regard are Raghu P. Mathur, who (thankfully) seems to have dropped off the face of the Earth, and, well, Bill Hewitt, who has not. I do believe that those two reside in Marcia Milchiker's corner of the district, but Marcia, who's now in her 23rd year as trustee, has exhibited no interest in retiring from the board.
     Bill Hewitt has also kept an oar in the water, or at least his nose in the affairs, of the faculty union (Faculty Association), evidently having been instrumental in persuading Nancy Padberg to run for reelection last November, despite her recent injury and convalescence. (As you know, she sailed to victory, unopposed. She now attends board meeting regularly, but will she remain there? She seems a mere shadow of her former assertive and opinionated self.)
     Persistent inquiring minds wanna know: Does Bill now have his sights set on the IVC Foundation Executive Director spot, now filled, on an interim basis, by the estimable Dennis Gordon?

      The last two IVC Foundation Directors have been full-on disasters. Al Tello, a fellow who once suggested holding a "book-burning" fundraiser, hung onto his job for years only, it seems, because he was Trustee Tom Fuentes' boy. I still don't know how Richard Morley kept his job as long as he did. The man was about as presentable as the fat, green Mucinex spokesbooger ("Mr. Mucus"), only less charming.
     The subject of finding a new Executive Director came up at a recent Academic Senate meeting. I made a suggestion: given President Roquemore's dismal history with these hires (some of which involved "worrisome irregularities," I added), shouldn't the college take especially great care in this case?
     Everyone seemed to agree. Administrators in the room said nothing, of course.
     I'm waiting for Disaster 3.

"Value" performance and "economy"!

P.S.: I took a look at the Foundation website, and I happened to notice the organization's "mission" and "vision" and such. Here's its vision:

To be a preeminent community college foundation reflecting the value and economy of our community and greater Orange County, California.

     I get the first part: we envision being a "preeminent cc foundation." OK.
     It's the last part that I don't get. We envision "reflecting the value and economy of our community...."
     The value? Not the values? What's the community's "value"?
     Value and economy? This vision sounds like a TV ad selling bathroom tissue—or maybe mucus reduction spray.
     Just sayin'.