DEFIANCE: A brief report on tonight's wild board meeting

This’ll have to be fast. Gotta get some sleep. More tomorrow.

It was quite a meeting tonight. It was a horror movie, and Raghu and trustee Tom were the monsters. More on that in a moment.

During public comments, IVC Academic Senate Prez Wendy, on behalf of senators, noted that the district planning process is illegitimate, given that it was developed without Academic Senate input. She explained that failure to include faculty violated Title V and BP 2100.1. Hence the Academic Senate decided to pursue a “minimum conditions” complaint with the State Chancellor’s Office.

During trustee reports, Lang used his time to express his “disappointment” in Wendy’s remarks, which he rejected as erroneous. No, he said patronizingly, the district gets to pursue planning. Planning is not just the faculty’s purview.

Of course, she (i.e., the IVC senate) never said that. Rather, the point was that, according to Title V and 2100.1, the district is to rely primarily on the academic Senates regarding the development of a planning process.

Nancy Padberg indicated that she would have to leave early for some reason, and this got me to worryin’, since she was the 4th vote for “reinstatement” of the American Library Association to the approved district membership list. Sheesh.

During her report, Nancy expressed gratitude for last month’s staff report on trustee traveling expenses in the last year. I’m told that the report makes John Williams look pretty bad.

Well, on this night, Nancy requested that the report now be extended to “five years” in order to see whether the pattern of the last year was just an aberration.

Guess what? Williams, Fuentes, Wagner, and (I think) Lang voted that down!

Luckily, the public has a right to this info, so we’ll work on getting it for you.

There was some carping about item 31, “budget development discussion,” which requested the authorization of two guidelines. Trustee Fuentes used the occasion to complain that, in effect, the board was failing to follow its chosen policy according to which “basic aid” money would not be used for “ongoing expenses,” but, rather, only for “one-time expenses.” But, asserted Tom, each year, we permit these “one-time expenses.”

Near as I can tell, Mr. Poertner responded by saying that the colleges are $15 million in the hole, and they can’t operate without some help, so you better help them. I think he prevailed.

Mathur and the college presidents gave a slide show concerning responses to the Accred’s recommendations. That went on for a while. It seemed clear that Mathur and Co. are stuffing "Accreditation" items into board meetings because that leaves an impressions that they're serious about the Accred's recommendations, which, plainly, they are not.

At some point, Raghu stopped the whole show to read a lengthy statement regarding the Accreditation issue. In his mind, evidently, he was stepping up to the plate to provide some “leadership.”

I’ll have lots more, including audio files, maybe tomorrow. I'll just say for now that Raghu’s “leadership” took the particular form of his asserting that certain people are trying to tear down the district’s reputation, and that the real problem in the district is that a few faculty leaders are trying to run the whole show. Naturally, this message presupposes that the Accreds' recommendations are crap.

Plus, said Raghu, some of these people who want to control the district are indecorous and disrespectful (I think that last one was about me, though I’m not a “leader.”)

This went on and on and it was so obnoxious that the faculty union president and the two senate presidents got up and left in protest. Later in the evening, Mathur referred to that exodus as evidence that the problem is with faculty.

I think it was item 28—a resolution to affirm board and district commitment to address the Accreditation Teams’ recommendations—when Mr. Fuentes insisted that he wasn’t about to affirm any such thing. No, he would only affirm a statement that included mention of faculty “macromanagement.”

More than once, Fuentes asserted that the problem with the district isn’t board “micromanagement.” OK, maybe two trustees engaged in some micromanagement, but so what? Somebody’s gotta control these pesky over-reaching faculty leaders! There’s your problem!

Student Trustee Ho tried to mediate. He expressed the worry that Fuentes’ defiance might lead to our Accreditation ticket bein’ pulled. Fuentes then advised Ho not to buy into the nonsense that trustee actions threaten accreditation. Paul backed off immediately.

At some point, Nancy disappeared, and then item 29, “reinstatement of ALA to approved district membership list” came up. For some reason (graciousness? Nah), Fuentes moved to table the item, but that failed. (I think Marcia and Bill need to talk. They need to find a clue.)

And so the inevitable occurred: the vote was 3 to 3, and thus the reinstatement of ALA failed. It seems unlikely that the board will again agendize this issue.

Within minutes of that vote, Nancy returned to the meeting. D’oh!!!! Too late!

I noticed just after I got home that union president Lewis L sent faculty an email responding to Mathur’s obnoxious remarks. Check it out.

More later.

Heads up: tonight’s board meeting

DEAR GABACHO:

Is anything interesting liable to happen at tonight's meeting of the Board of Trustees? Inquiring minds wanna know. And so do I. --Inquiring Mind

Dear INQUIRING MIND:

As usual, the closed session items are potentially interesting, what with discussion of, e.g., the Mora v. Mathur (aka Raghu v. women) litigation. That should be going to trial soon. Will the district settle?

But these items seldom live up to their potential.

During board reports, maybe John Williams will describe his expensive and wasteful trip to Orlando. Yeah, that should be good. Nancy will smile slyly.


The open session items are another story. There are bound to be some sparks aflyin’.

Item 26 is for “information/discussion,” not action: SC/IVC ACCRED TEAM REC’S. There’s a chance that Trustee Tom will turn red and pop. Or Wagner will at long last peeve himself into a tiny dot on the floor. But seriously, folks, Tom’s liable to say something memorable, like “let’s put out a contract on those pesky unelected Accreds.”

Item 27 is, I believe, the “proposed” follow-up (4/24/06) to the February technical assistance meeting, involving the Academic Senate of CA and that silly trustees organization. (See the series of three blogs starting with Hammering out differences.)

You remember. No? Anyway, I think the board is supposed to say, “Yeah, let’s show up for that.” If they’re smart, they’ll tell Trustee Fuentes to stay home. Last time, he yammered about love while shooting wicked looks.

Item 28 is a “resolution” re the Accred rec’s. Evidently, Raghu is recommending that the board affirm its commitment to addressing the Accred’s rec’s. Maybe the Accreds heard about Trustee Tom’s mad sputterings and so this is damage-control. Could be. Don’t know.

Item 29 is the American Library Association issue. Last I heard, we’ve got four votes for reversing the January decision to discontinue the college libraries’ memberships in ALA. Still, Fuentes and Wagner will want to bloviate against the ALA, cuz it keeps the right-wingers happy.

Let’s hope some Librarians actually show up to speak up this time. If they don’t, then it’s open season on ‘em, satire-wise.

I do hope that Glenn will correct item 46, which is erroneous. (Left out one of the Teachers of the Year.)

During public remarks, IVC Academic Prez Wendy will make a few nasty remarks about Raghu and the Board on behalf of the IVC Academic Senate. She didn’t want to, but the Senators insisted.

St. Thomas Akimbo

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that Tom and his pals are featured in the new Universal Studios motion picture "Slither."

No vulture

Check out Peggy Lowe's interview of Sheriff Mike Carona in this morning's OC Register (Carona responds to his doubters).

Here's my favorite part:

Carona: I've never defined myself politically. So when all this stuff came up, we'd sit down and talk about it, but I've just never defined myself as political. My job is political. To be able to become sheriff I had to run and become political. But once I've gotten over that hurdle, what I do is operational. What I love about this job, what I studied for, what I've trained for is the operational side. The politics – I'm not so sure I could sit in a room and be one of 40 votes or 50 votes.

It's why God didn't make me a vulture. I have to kill something. I got to go out and hunt it down. I can't wait around for it to die.

The dead and the pious

1. GOOD-BYE BUCKEROO. Buck Owens has died. He was 76. I hated “Hee Haw” but I loved this man’s best songs. Check 'em out.

2. RELIGIOUS RADICALS’ FINANCIERS. About a year ago (Feb., 2005), Time Magazine ran a front-page story on the 25 most influential Evangelicals in the country (Most influential evangelicals).

Number 1 on the list was Rick Warren, “America’s New People’s Pastor.” Warren pastors a little church down the street from my house. Saddleback Church has 22,000 members, and it’s hard for me not to think that those people are confusing religion with football. I wonder if they show up wearin’ that stupid make-up and doin’ the Wave.

Number 2 is—you guessed it!—Orange County’s own Howard and Roberta Ahmanson. Near as I can tell, Howard is one of Tom Fuentes’ pals. (Also: he provided the seed money for the organization that brought us Don Wagner and Nancy Padberg.)

Here’s what Time had to say about the Ahmansons:

The Financiers: Money makes the Word go round, and this wealthy, conservative Republican couple takes a dizzyingly ecclectic approach to funding evangelism. The projects that savings-and-loan multimillionaires Howard and Roberta Ahmanson have paid for over the years through Fieldstead & Co., a private philanthropy in Irvine, Calif., form a cornucopia of faith-based activism, including an institute linked to the antievolution intelligent-design movement and a study of social endeavors by Third World Pentecostal churches. The couple have been accused over the years of having an extremist agenda, mostly because a onetime pet charity, the Chalcedon Foundation, advocates the Christian reconstructionist branch of theology that says gays and other biblical lawbreakers should be stoned. Howard distanced himself from those views and resigned from the foundation board years ago.

The couple, both 55, now are warning powerful conservative Christians about the pitfalls of hubris in the aftermath of their victories over liberals last November. Says Roberta: "Christlike humility and [improving] the lives of human beings should be the goals."

OK, so Howard and Roberta have backed off of the “stoning” idea. Maybe. But saying that somebody used to be on the board of Chalcedon is a bit like saying that they used to be Devil Worshippers. Check out Chalcedon and the rest of the Ahmansons’ “Christian Reconstructionist” crowd. It’ll curl your hair.

While you’re at it, check out the Claremont Institute (one of Fuentes’ haunts), the Discovery Institute (the Earth is 6,000 years old!), and other organizations that the Ahmansons still fund.

And don’t be thinkin’ that Howard gave up his wild talk long ago. According to Americans United for Separation of Church and State, in 1992, Howard explained that “My purpose is total integration of biblical law into our lives.”

Thank you, Howard, for the marvelously succinct statement of the Chalcedon project, aka Christian Reconstructionism.

This guy scares the shit out o' me. One of these days, I'll wake up and find out that I'm in deep doo-doo cuz I didn't go to the stupid church-mall down the road.

3. JARAMILLO POINTS TO CARONA. Did you see Peggy Lowe’s article in today’s Register about “Hometown Hero” and Fuentes star Mike Carona’s former assistant, George Jaramillo? Check it out. As I’m sure you know, Mike Carona is a devout Christian—you know, like Tom Fuentes.

Jaramillo says ex-boss Carona should be facing same charges
Outside court, fired assistant says sheriff misused department's copter.

SANTA ANA – Waving a manila envelope filled with what he said was evidence, fired Assistant Sheriff George Jaramillo said Friday that Sheriff Mike Carona should be prosecuted for the same charges he is facing.

Jaramillo held court outside the courtroom after a routine hearing on the newest round of charges he faces, including perjury and misusing public resources. A grand jury found Jaramillo improperly used the Sheriff's Department helicopter for a ride to the airport with his wife in 2003.

Taking copies of Orange County Sheriff's Department logs from the envelope, Jaramillo accused Carona of using the helicopter up to 32 times for trips to an award ceremony, a ride to attend his son's soccer game and another trip with his "longtime mistress."

An Orange County Register investigation showed that the county's helicopters were used at least 16 times in 2002 to take Carona and others to award ceremonies, television interviews, the airport and a Lake Arrowhead retreat, costing taxpayers $26,000.

…Sheriff's officials have denied all of Jaramillo's claims as "outrageous lies."

Jaramillo has pleaded not guilty to all the charges he faces, which also include bribery and conflict of interest. His trial is set for September.

Why is it that the worst people I know are also the most pious? Explain that one to me, will you?

The Lyin' King

At the March 2 IVC Academic Senate meeting, senators discussed Chancellor Mathur’s curious new “planning process,” which pretty much leaves faculty out of planning. No surprise there. The new process had been authored by the corrupt little fellow. He had not solicited senate input.

That is illegal, for Title 5 and BP 2100.1 require that the district rely primarily on the Academic Senate(s) for the development of processes for institutional planning and budget development. It's as plain as the nose on your face.

Academic Senate Prez Wendy then explained that, during a meeting with the Chancellor that very day, after lengthy discussion with the two senate presidents (Claire and Wendy), Mathur acknowledged that he made a mistake when he developed the District Planning Process without consulting the Senates. He even apologized for the error and promised that he would not commit it again.

That was welcome news. Still, senators were unhappy. Some, including yours truly, pressed for clarification regarding the standing of the illegal planning process. Is it dead or no?

We know our Raghu. It would be just like him to acknowledge that he was in error and even to promise not to commit the error again—and then to set about implementing the erroneous action. That’s just standard Mathurian operating procedure.

According to the published minutes for the March 2 meeting, “Senators pointed out that despite the admission of wrongdoing, the apology, and the assurance of non-interference, the District Planning Process remains in place and will continue to create confusion among deans and faculty until it is withdrawn.”

Thus the senators took action. They requested “that the Chancellor immediately discontinue implementation of the illegitimate District Planning Process or the Academic Senate will consider filing a Minimum Conditions Complaint with the office of the State Chancellor.” (From minutes.)

During a subsequent meeting, the fellow clarified matters to Wendy in the way desired. He agreed that the new process should be (or already was?) discontinued. How could he do otherwise?

Wendy then wrote IVC faculty, delivering the good news.

But, in a kind of “switcheroo” that will be familiar to long-time Mathur observers, Mr. Goo then cried foul and denied that he had agreed to discontinue the process. Evidently, despite acknowledging the impropriety of his unilateral development of the process, he persists in viewing the process as valid.

Stunning. —But no. It’s just Raghu bein’ Raghu. The New Raghu that we've heard so much about (from Dopey Dave) is just the Old Raghu sayin’ he’s New. Woo-hoo.


And so, on the 23rd (yesterday), the "planning process" issue returned to the IVC Academic Senate. Clearly, Wendy was disinclined to pursue this matter through the existing legal channels, namely, filing a complaint with the State Chancellor. That’s slow and tedious, bigtime. I think maybe she’s had her fill of this kind of legal work for a while.

But senators were adamant: we cannot threaten to go to the State Chance if Mathur does not fly right, and then not go to the State Chance when, in fact, Mathur keeps flyin’ wrong. We said we’d turn to the State Chance, and so now we've got to keep our word.

A motion was made to that effect.

Wendy groaned. She suggested that we change the motion so that it speaks of “exploring” this avenue. But senators would not hear of it. Said one senator: “If you tell your kid that if he does that again, then there’ll be consequences, then, when he goes and does it again, you can’t say, ‘we will now explore consequences.’”

We’ve got some funny senators, boy.

The motion passed unanimously. The IVC senate will now file a Minimum Conditions Complaint.

Soon, the Saddleback College (or, as one of our favorite administrators spells it, “Saddle Back College”) Academic Senate will meet to discuss the planning process. Don’t be surprised if they take a similar action.

And can you blame 'em? We faculty are supposed to have a role, and these people--Mathur and his board patrons--keep taking it away. We can't let that happen.

Naturally, the Accreds will hear about this. We might wanna start looking for new jobs.

A setback for the Fuenteans--PLUS: Is our Nancy a “crazy aunt”?

A MAJOR DEFEAT FOR THE FUENTESISTAS. The OC right-wing blogosphere has been atwitter this week over the failure, Monday night, of the county GOP to endorse Mike Carona for Sheriff. As you know, Carona is a star in Fuentes World, aka the Neanderthal Political Machine.

A couple of years ago, owing to its Fuenteans, IVC’s Foundation anointed Carona its “Hometown Hero,” a fact made ironic—among the civilized—by the subsequent train of Carona scandalosity. Between Carona and Cave co-star Tony Rackaucus (our embattled county DA), these local Neanderthals have more than matched the Bush Administration, corruption-wise. And that's sayin' something.

Recently, the OC Register reported that key denizens of the Fuentesphere—namely, Mike Shroeder (Fuentes' close pal and GOP backer of the Frogue Recall), John Fleischman, and Adam Probolsky (Fleischman and Probolsky are on the IVC Foundation board)—were caught engineering an effort by a “citizen” to challenge the campaign statement of a Carona challenger, Republican Bill Hunt. Hunt had referred to the “scandals” and the “failure” of the Carona administration. “Unfair,” cried the citizen, who turned out to be very connected to the Fuentes crowd (mostly through his wife).

It seems clear (given their emails, which, somehow, Fleischman accidentally sent to the Register) that the Cave People seek to use the threat of expensive litigation over this matter to motivate Hunt to soften his campaign rhetoric. That Hunt’s language--especially his use of the word “scandal”--is manifestly accurate is beside the point.

Trustee John "Brownie" Williams has weighed in on this issue in a letter to the Register (yesterday). Naturally, he sides with his pals and against Hunt. (See Williams questions Hunt's competence)

THERE’S ALWAYS A BIG “BUT.” OK, the local GOP has come to its senses and has not endorsed the corrupt Carona. Still, there's bad news, for it is clear that Carona has lots of cash for his campaign, and money is everything. You may as well get that tatooed on your butt.

According to OCBlog.net, Carona is “miles ahead of opponents in fundraising." They got the following from the OC Registrar of Voters:

Mike Carona 
Cash-on-hand: $618K 
Debt: $28K

Bill Hunt 
COH: $6K 
Debt: $26K

Bob Alcaraz
COH: $76K 
Debt: $100

Ralph Martin 
COH: $80K 
Debt: $3K

Evidently, in the last three and a half months, Carona’s campaign has amassed over half a million dollars. When all is said and done, Carona will have spent over a million dollars on this campaign, or so crows Mike Schroeder. Compare that figure to the puny war chest of a guy like Hunt: $6,000 (and 26K in debt).

TRASHING OUR NANCY. We recently reported that trustee Nancy Padberg is running for Judge. On Tuesday (the 21st), “Roscoe” of OCblog.net reported that there are three candidates for the #4 spot on the OC Superior Court:

Sheila Hanson, Deputy District Attorney - DEMOCRAT

Nancy Padberg, Attorney/College Trustee - REPUBLICAN

Lyle J. Robertson, Commissioner, Superior Court - REPUBLICAN

Roscoe goes on to explain:

Hanson already has the support of her boss DA Rackauckas, neither Padberg or Robertson paid for a candidate statement so we don't know a lot about their campaigns.

We do know Nancy Padberg from her time on the South OC College District. She is kind of like your crazy aunt you keep in touch with just in the hope that she might leave you something in her will.

Robertson has run before and lost.

With three candidates in the race there will probably be a run off in November. Robertson and Hanson will most likely be in it unless Padberg does something crazy like spend $200,000.

“Crazy aunt”? I bet Nancy didn’t like that a bit. Not a bit.

A Mr. Mark Brainard responded to Roscoe’s blog by writing “I disagree with your characterization of Nancy. She would make a terrific judge.”

Another reader said that he “met Nancy at the Central Committee meeting [on Monday]…and I support her.”

Yet another reader—this one calls him/herself “Redwine"—wrote:

I recommend asking around a little before disparaging someone you obviously don't know, like Nancy Padberg. She's a dedicated Republican activist who has assisted MANY campaigns over MANY years. She is an elected Trustee for the SOCCCD and, until her resignation last night [presumably, from the Central Committee, not from the Board] because of her campaign for judge, she was an elected member of the Central Committee.

Nancy should be supported by the Republican Party Central Committee and every elected Republican (including Rackauckas, who you say has already endorsed the Dem).

Redwine’s remark provoked “OCSD Investigator” to write:

Redwine, are you kidding me? We should vote for Nancy because she is a Republican. Is that your argument? Do you vote everything straight down the party line? Hanson is a very experienced trial lawyer. She has had her hand in putting away some very dangerous child molesters and numerous other criminals. I have presented many cases to her and found her to be very dedicated to her craft. When it comes to being a judge in the county where I work and live, I could care less about party lines. I do not mean to discredit the other two choices. I just find your comments offensive.

At this point, someone (not me, but someone called “Investigator”) suggested that readers check out DISSENT the BLOG and its account of Nancy’s recent activities on the SOCCCD board (Closing in on Junket Abuse), whereupon Redwine wrote: “OCSD Investigator—My God, a voice of sanity on this issue. Thank you.”

“Jim” then wrote to say, “I know Ms. Padberg, and I have appeared many times before Commissioner Robertson. Both would make fine judges.”

For what it’s worth, here’s Hanson’s campaign statement. We’ll post Nancy’s, too, as soon as it becomes available:

SHEILA HANSON
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, OFFICE NO.4

Occupation: Senior Deputy District Attorney

Police, prosecutors and crime victims overwhelmingly support me because they know I will be a fair, no-nonsense Judge who supports law and order for Orange County.

I am honored to have spent sixteen years as a prosecutor in the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. Currently, I lead a team that prosecutes crimes including drunk driving homicides, kidnapping, and robbery.
While assigned to the elite Sexual Assault Unit, I prosecuted sexual predators, child molesters and rapists.

In the prestigious GangUnit, I prosecuted criminal gang members for carjacking, drug-dealing, and drive-by shootings.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) honored me for my dedicated work with crime victims.

Because of m ysupport for Victims’ Rights, the death penalty and Three Strikes, I am endorsed by:

District Attorney Tony Rackauckas
Santa Ana Police Chief Paul Walters
California Coalition of Law Enforcement Associations
Orange County Coalition of Police and Sheriffs
Police Associations representing; Anaheim, Santa Ana, Fullerton, Westminster, La Palma, Placentia,
Garden Grove,Brea, LosAlamitos
Citizens for Law and Order
Doris Tate Crime Victims Bureau

I am most proud of my family and my volunteer work with Assistance League, Girl Scouts, Laurel House, AYSO and in my Parish.

I would be honored with your vote.

I should mention that, according to her district bio, “Nancy serves as a Temporary Judge for the Superior Court of Orange County.”