Thursday, December 14, 2006

Good news: we're not Stockton


In this morning’s Stockton Record: Stockton ranks dead last in literacy:
You might be the only person reading this story. Or anything else, for that matter.

For the second year in a row, Stockton ranks last in a study of literacy in the nation's largest 70 cities.

Seattle ranks first overall. El Paso, Texas, finished second to last in the study, published this week by Central Connecticut State University.

…"It breaks my heart," said Michelle Lonero, a teacher at Rio Calaveras Elementary School….

…"It is disconcerting," Mayor Ed Chavez said. "There's no way to sugar-coat it."

Wednesday, December 13, 2006

Chunk's photo backlog

ACCRED TEAMS MEET WITH CHANCELLOR'S CABINET (11/30):

This was the scene up in the snazzy district offices as the trustees' meeting with the Accreds ended:
That's trustee Fuentes moving toward Debra Blue. The SC Accred team is to the right (with Lang).

Above: Chancellor Mathur lingered as Chancellor's Cabinet prepared to meet with the Accreds. Mathur did not attend these meetings. I asked him if I was welcome, and he said "Yes."

Above: just before the Chancellor's Cabinet Accred meeting. I left the meeting early, sensing that my presence might discourage frank discussion.

Above: a few hours earlier, the IVC Accred team met with the IVC Academic Senate.

VISITING THE DISTRICT OFFICES (late November):

It's a different world, up on the third floor. Looks like corporate offices. Taco Bell maybe.

Outside the Chancellor's office:


OUR NEW BOARD OFFICERS

With apologies to Tracy Daly:

At Monday's board meeting, Nancy Padberg was replaced by Don Wagner. Nancy's the Majority's least favorite trustee.

Above: all too often, the board votes look like this.

Vice Chancellor Andreea Serban

What Happens When You Go Away


Don't even ask what the past week has been like. Suffice to say, Rebel Girl has not finished grading her various paper sets, has not finished staffing all the classes for the next semester, has not finished writing letters of recommendation, has not even begun to do faculty evaluations let alone holiday shopping and sister calling and instead has been composing a 2000 word essay titled "Pedagogy of the Deceased." It's too long and dreadful to post here but if you want a copy just let her know and she'll be happy to share the pain.

Instead, a poem, from the wonderful Muriel Sparks:

The Three Kings

Where do we go from here?
We left our country,
Bore gifts,
Followed a star.
We were questioned.
We answered.
We reached our objective.
We enjoyed the trip.
Then we came back by a different way.
And now the people are demonstrating in the streets.
They say they don't need the Kings any more.
They did very well in our absence.
Everything was all right without us.
They are out on the streets with placards:
Wise Men? What's wise about them?
There are plenty of Wise Men,
And who needs them? --and so on.

Perhaps they will be better off without us,
But where do we go from here?

~RG

Owen & Dennis?

Site Meter

● We keep hearing that the fates of IVC Police Chief Owen Kreza and his Deputy, Dennis Duncan, have been decided. (Both were mysteriously placed on administrative leave over two months ago. Their computers were seized.) As near as I can tell, nothing was announced about them after the closed session of the Board of Trustees Monday night. See Tracy’s Board meeting highlights.

On the other hand, I’ve been told that the closed session item regarding “Resignation.Retirement/Conclusion of Employment” [sic] referred to the resolution of the Owen/Dennis situation.

According to my sources, Owen Kreza will retire, and Dennis will resign. We'll try to get confirmation.


● The LA Times had a great story yesterday (and another today) about my Congressman, Gary Miller. He’s another corrupt local Republican, bigtime. See Ex-aids allege abuse of power. We’ll have more about Miller at a later date. See also Gary Miller can always get what he wants in today’s Times.

* In this morning’s Times: Passion fills O.C. court in trial over student rights:
Two high schoolers are caught kissing on campus.

Ordinarily, such an incident would garner little attention. But for Charlene Nguon, a smattering of kisses and hugs stolen after school and in between classes led to detention, suspensions, a transfer and a lawsuit.

The reason? That's what a federal judge in Santa Ana will soon decide.

Nguon says it's because she was kissing a girl. Ben Wolf, who was then principal of Garden Grove's Santiago High School, says that's not the case at all….
The article ends:
On the plaintiff's side, one focus of [the girl’s attorney’s] closing argument was school policy. He said that when Wolf told Nguon's mother her daughter had been kissing a girl, he was revealing her sexual orientation. Would it not be sufficient to say she was caught making out? He said school officials testified that they would never use a student's race or ethnicity as an identifier.

[The defendant’s attorney] warned that siding with the plaintiff on that point would force "a lot of school districts throughout this state to change the way they communicate."

To which the judge replied, "What's wrong with that?"
● If you want to read about how our state is unprepared for a disaster, check out State lags in health readiness surve in this morning’s San Francisco Chronicle. It ain’t pretty. Compared to other states, we’re near the bottom. Joining us there: Iowa, Maryland and New Jersey.

Monday, December 11, 2006

"Merry holidays," he said, charmingly


Just got back from the South Orange County Community College District meeting of the BOARD OF TRUSTEES—or, as one participant of tonight’s meeting would have it, the meeting of the Board and not of anybody else--i.e., not of riffraff like college Presidents and Academic Senate Presidents, who need to remain silent and respectful down in the pit. That was John Williams, looking staunch and red as per usual. I think Chancellor Mathur said something like, “It is a public meeting but it is not a meeting of the public.” Raghu's a sucker for clever sayings.

Tonight's report will have to be quick, cuz The Cat is peevish again, and so I’ve got to feed her really soon. I’ll have more tomorrow. More of a report, I mean. Same amount of cat.

During the readout of actions after the super-secret “closed session,” we learned that stuff happened to lots of people, but no names were mentioned. No doubt I’ll learn more tomorrow. Somebody important got canned, I think.

A retired judge—a Judge "Frazee," I think, although he looked pretty normal—showed up to swear in Padberg, Milchiker, and Wagner, who were reelected by default. They looked pretty proud. They swore to support and defend the Constitution and to shoot on sight all enemies, foreign and domestic. I crouched low in my seat.

There was only one public comment, and that came from IVC Senate Prez Wendy G, who dispensed some Warm and Fuzzies, declaring that IVC’s Holiday Party was “wonderful,” what with all the dancing and joking and having a good time. It was like a real college plus togetherness. We sang Kumbaya. Wendy came close to blaming me for the whole thing. (She blamed Julie too.)

In truth, it was a great event just like the Wendster said.

The board went straight into its yearly “Organizational Meeting,” which brought out some petty trustee snipage. One faction of the board seemed to want to roll over the same three officers for the next year, but the more ruthless faction favored doing likewise--except they wanted to replace Nancy Padberg, who has been VP, with Don Wagner. Well, that’s just what happened. I don’t have to tell you how these people voted. It was all utterly predictable.


After Mathur threw a plaque at Lang, the board discussed the Chancellor’s recommendations for changes in the board meeting format—supposedly for the sake of “efficiency.” I think one of the recommendations was that the college Presidents should just turn in written reports instead of squawking. Another was moving Personnel Actions to the consent calendar (which pretty much guarantees rubber-stampitude). Another was replacing the “invocation” with an “inspirational moment.” It was a pretty superficial change, I think.

Naturally, Don Wagner hated that last idea, arguing, evidently, that invocations of the Lord are traditional and common, so back off. Padberg didn’t like the business about moving Personnel Actions to the consent calendar--I think she called it "irresponsible"--nor did she warm to the notion that the Presidents should be relegated to lowly riffraffery. Wagner agreed with Nancy P about the consent calendar, but he didn’t have a problem with the riffraffery. Mathur got defensive and prickly (some might say "unprofessional") about Nancy’s criticisms of his recommendations, and that caused her to roll her eyes, which is always great. Eye-rollery is within the bounds of professionalism, I think. I oughta write a book about trustee etiquette.

In the end, they went with Mathur’s suggestions, except the part about changing "invocation" to “inspirational moment.” These people do have their priorities. It was a tiny victory for Red-Staters in the Culture War. Somebody brought out a Confederate flag and planted it in my foot.

During reports, the trustees seemed determined to say “Happy Holidays” and the like. Bill Jay spoke of “Merry Holidays,” I think, but at least he apologized for scrambling his words. Hey, that’s his charm! He can be funny when he's self-effacing. Make a note, Don.

At one point, Wagner sang the praises of IVC’s Adopt-a-Family program, which, he said, features jolly “Bill Jay” as Santa Claus. Bill looked more bewildered than usual. Turns out it’s Bill Hewitt, not Bill Jay, behind the whiskers and funny red suit. Ho ho ho. Somehow, Wagner’s error inspired endless mirth, but I didn’t get it. I think I’m goin’ deaf or something. Somebody get the phone.

Wagner got all worked up over something about the Dean of PE and Athletics (I think that was it). He seemed to say that the process whereby this person was hired was irregular and just plain stinky. Plus he seemed to want to eliminate the position. I wasn’t paying much attention, so don’t ask me. (Luckily, I got most of this discussion on tape.) In the end, nobody seemed to agree with Wagner, judging by the vote. It was a rare moment of Wagnerian solitude. Heard some Valkyries.

The discussion of the “fix” of the disastrous “$50 Zillion” liability insurance decision for Study Abroad programs was interesting. Chancellor Mathur made a point of indicating that the disastrous action was originally recommended by Bill Jay over there. I detected snickering in the audience. Padberg seemed to draw attention to the presentation given by VC Serban last month regarding how much insurance is really appropriate (namely, 5-10 million). Maybe Nancy was saying, “don’t give Mathur any credit for fixing this thing.” (Not sure.) Jay expressed something like regret about the 50 Zillion SNAFU, which really messed things up, although why didn't Ragu step in or mention what was happening? Good for Bill. Mathur accepted no responsibility whatsoever.

Fuentes engaged in some spectacular historical revisionism about how this whole STUDY ABROAD FUBARITUDE got started. More about that tomorrow.

The trustees referred to all the dying that’s been going on lately at the colleges. Four kids have died in the last month or so. I’m told that one student died the other day when he fell from the Saddleback College Library.

The meeting was adjourned in honor of those poor kids.

More tomorrow. Gotta feed that cat.

Despite the EAC


▲ For a preview of tonight's SOCCCD Board Meeting, go to

Board Meeting. See also
Chunk's open letter to the Chancellor &
IVC's holiday party a success &
Official IVC Holiday Party Photos

▲▲ The editorial in this morning’s New York Times—The Road to Reliable Elections—concerns desperately needed electronic voting reform. As you know, Trustee Tom Fuentes is on the Elections Assistance Commission (EAC), the body that was supposed to fix what is broken (post-2000 election fiasco) but that has refused to do that. Gee, I wonder why?

Turns out that’s OK because individual states are gradually making the fixes themselves. Plus Dianne Feinstein and her pals are riding to the rescue:
…The Election Assistance Commission, whose role is merely advisory, long ago missed the chance to take the lead on electronic voting reform. The states that adopted paper requirements have done that. And it now looks as if Congress may finally resolve the matter for the whole nation.

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, plan to introduce legislation to require voter-verified paper records. That legislation has a good chance of passing. If any members of Congress are uncertain why such a law is needed, the [new] NIST report makes the case convincingly.

Sunday, December 10, 2006

Chunk's open letter to the Chancellor

Cook: I was against it, you know.
Moore: Against what?
Cook: The Second World War.
Moore: Well, I think everyone was against the Second World War.
Cook: Yes, but I wrote a letter!
Someone’s imperfect recollection of a famous Peter Cook/Dudley Moore sketch. Those guys had their moments!

AS YOU KNOW, some VIPs of the South Orange County Community College District are in the habit of making decisions on behalf (they proclaim) of the long-suffering "taxpayer."

Taxpayers do have it bad. For instance, it's hard for them to get reliable information about what goes on in the SOCCCD, what with unscrupulous politicians claiming that our faculty have "36 hour work weeks" or that they make on average 100 grand a year. I've met South County taxpayers who seem to think that SOCCCD faculty spend their days "teaching" the "gay and lesbian lifestyle." That's what they tell me, anyway.

Part of the problem is that the system makes it hard for citizens to monitor how decisions are made in the good ol' SOCCCD. As you know, in our district, the trustees "are the decider." Even when they're not supposed to be the decider, they're still the decider. OK. So how is the poor taxpayer to keep track of all this trustee decidery?

It ain't easy. Consider our board meeting agendas--composed, I assume, by Chancellor Mathur. The typical taxpayer must have trouble reading them. (They are readily available here, though the district makes no effort advertising that fact.)

I'm not saying that they're terrible. They're not. It's just that no effort is made to make them intelligible to the taxpayer, who likely has no idea what a "governance group" is or what "basic aid" is about. I can just see him or her asking himself, "Why is there a 'closed' session in the middle of this 'open' session?" "What on earth is 'reassigned time'?" "What are all these different 'senates' they keep referring to? Shouldn't there be just one?"

People who bother to get ahold of our agendas must get frustrated. After a while, I'll bet, they just give up trying to figure out what the next meeting is about.

Imagine if, instead, we made it easy for 'em!

So I've decided to write a letter:

Dear Chancellor MATHUR:

If you need help writing a taxpayer-friendly agenda, I am available to assit you. You know where I am.

Here's an example of my work. On the agenda for tomorrow's board meeting, regarding item 26, YOU wrote:
26. SADDLEBACK COLLEGE: ACADEMIC STIPENDS – SPRING 2007 - Approval of extra-contractual faculty assignments [sic] for Spring 2007.
Now, me, a guy who likes to look out for his fellow citizen, I would have written something like this:
26. WE'RE PAYING FOR SPECIAL WORK. Some Saddleback College faculty have agreed to do work next semester beyond their regular teaching duties—for instance, hiring and evaluating part-time instructors. This item informs the trustees about that [or it informs the trustees that these instructors will be paid for this work].
No doubt you can whip up a mean beaker of weird green chemicals. But let's face it, Raghu—you're no writer. Please note the obvious flaws of your own verbiage:

● The agenda says that item 26 is "information only"—that is, the trustees are not being asked to approve anything. And yet the above verbiage "informs" the board of "approval" of "assignments." That's confusing.

● Item 26's description indicates, in capital letters, that it concerns "stipends." And yet the verbiage that follows refers to "assignments." Aren't those two different things? Again, this is confusing, even to an insider! I think you're confused, dude, and when a writer is confused, his reader is even confuseder.

● Item 26 refers to "Academic" stipends. As opposed to what? Isn't everything at a college "academic"? —'Ceptin' for mowing the lawn, I guess.

—In general, taxpayers must find it hard to understand our agendas as they are now organized and written. It wouldn't take much to make them UTTERLY INTELLIGIBLE. Why not do that? I MEAN, DO WE CARE ABOUT THE TAXPAYER OR NOT?

Raghu, let me know if I can help. You won't even have to give me a stipend. I'll do it for free. Honest. But don't you be goin' to the board taking the credit, or insisting on being paid for MY WORK!

I know you, dude. I've got your number. Bigtime.
Yours truly,

CHUNK

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

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...