So-called "conservative" SOCCCD trustees

1. Greed is Good, just not tonight

You'll recall that Chancellor Raghu Mathur got spanked at the last board meeting for recommending that he receive a hefty raise, some of it retroactive. So annoyed was the board by this self-serving "recommendation" that it quietly deleted the item from the agenda.

Raghu responded by stewing and putrefying. It was ghastly.

Insiders now tell me that, what made matters worse, as it turns out, was Raghu's timing. Faculty senate leadership chose last meeting to make a strong and public (i.e., televised) plea for increased reassigned time for the senates. Evidently, compared to officers in other districts, our academic senate leaders are poorly supported in their endeavors, a situation made worse by increased inclusion of the senates in district governance in recent years (some of it compelled by legal decisions going against the district).

More importantly, as everyone knows who hangs with senate presidents, those people spend 40+ hours a week doing senate business, but they're paid for a mere fraction of that time. They work like dogs, and they've gotta teach their load and run their private lives to boot.

Well, just in case somebody didn't know--for instance, those Seizure World geezers who watch the BOT on Friday cable mighta been outa the loop--the two senate presidents spelled it out in gruesome detail, using charts and stuff.

Uh-oh. "Thank God we didn't throw more money at Raghu!" thought some trustees, I guess. "It woulda looked bad, real bad!"

I've got a question for you guys. How come you don't believe in PAYING PEOPLE (or, anyway, people who happen to be faculty senate officers) FOR THEIR WORK? You don't mind paying a worthless sycophantic load like Mathur a quarter million dollars. But faculty senate officers? Well, let's just scr** those guys!

You call yourselves "conservatives." Do conservatives favor making people work too much--so much that it cuts way into their family lives--and without compensation? --Um, nope.

I DON'T GET IT.

(I've been told that reassigned time HAS now been increased for the senates, but not by much. Not by nearly enough. How are these people supposed to have family lives?)

2. Old news, but still:

I ran across an old Community College Week article that many of us missed. It reports the Academic Senates' big win over the district--in the Court of Appeals--concerning the district's illegal unilateral imposition of a faculty hiring policy: Academic Senates Get Big Win in California Appeals Court.

An excerpt:

[T]he Court of Appeal...[noted] that the legislature gave specific responsibilities to academic senates. For example, the legislature directed that hiring criteria, policies and procedures for new faculty members “shall be developed and agreed upon jointly” by the trustees and academic senate.

“The faculty has an inherent professional responsibility in the development and implementation of policies and procedures governing the hiring process,” Justice Eileen Moore wrote for the court.

The court rejected the district’s assertion that allowing the senates a “veto” would enable them to frustrate and obstruct the process of revising hiring policies, and it found no evidence that the two senates were acting maliciously or intended to obstruct the process.

Chancellor Mathur is quoted as saying, "...we are keeping our options open in terms of appeals.”

That went nowhere, of course. The district lost the case simpliciter and finito.

I've been told by informed attorneys that our victory will have (perhaps already has had) significant ramifications throughout the system. It's a huge step toward finally satisfying the intent of the late 80s AB1725 legislation.

So I've got another question for you trustees. How come you don't care about OBEYING THE LAW? Tell me that! And I'm not even counting your earlier incarnation's "persistent and defiant" violation of the Brown Act!

What kinda conservative thinks he gets to cheat and and spin and wriggle his way out of obeying THE GODDAM LAW?

I DON'T GET IT.

The return of a nice bedtime story

The New York Times reports this morning that the see-saw battle between anti-science and pro-science forces on the Kansas State Board of Education has again tilted toward science. (Evolution Opponents Lose Kansas Board Majority.) Ralph Blumenthal reports:

Kansas voters on Tuesday handed power back to moderates on the State Board of Education, setting the stage for a return of science teaching that broadly accepts the theory of evolution, according to preliminary election results.

With just 6 districts of 1,990 yet to report as of 8 a.m. Central time today, two conservatives — including incumbent Connie Morris, a former west Kansas teacher and author who had described evolution as “a nice bedtime story” — appear to have been defeated decisively by two moderates in the Republican primary elections. One moderate incumbent, Janet Waugh from the Kansas City area, held on to her seat in the Democratic primary… If her fellow moderates prevailed, Ms. Waugh said last week, “we need to revisit the minutes and every decision that was 6-4, re-vote.”
…..
The results seem likely to give the moderates a 6-4 edge on the 10-member board when it takes over in January…Both moderate Republican winners face Democratic opponents in November, but the Democrats are moderates as well, favoring a return to the traditional science standards that prevailed before a conservative majority elected in 2004 passed new rules for teaching science. Those rules, enacted last November, called for classroom critiques of Darwin’s theory….The changes in the science standards, favored by advocates of intelligent design who believe life is too complex to be have been created by natural events, put Kansas at the vanguard of efforts by religious advocates critical explanations of the origin of life that do not include a creator …The curriculum changes, coming after years of see-sawing power struggles between moderates and conservatives, drew widespread ridicule and, critics complained, threatened Kansas’s high standing in national education circles….

What, you may ask, has any of this to do with the South Orange County Community College District?

Well, dear reader, at least one, and perhaps some, trustees on the SOCCCD board seem to be sitting out there on the benighted anti-science end of the see-saw.

The clearest case, perhaps, is Mr. Tom Fuentes, who has numerous ties to radical anti-science Christian leaders, a group that includes his pal Howard Ahmanson, the chief funder of the anti-evolution movement (see Discovery Institute). (See archives.)

Well, Fuentes has a finger in lots of wacky Neanderthal pies. Here's one of my favorites: the fellow is a director of Eagle Publishing, which publishes "Regnery" books.

If one goes to the Regnery website (Regnery Publishing), one will find the publisher's catalog. (Catalog.) As we explained ten months ago, anti-evolution books can be found listed there, including:

Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?, … "Jonathan Wells has news for you. Everything you were taught about evolution is wrong. Icons of Evolution will light the fires of controversy and provide a brutally honest report of who what we've truly discovered about evolution in recent years"

As we noted back in November, other books in Regnery's catalog are also kinda special. Here are some typical Regnery titles:

God, Guns & Rock and Roll, … "Rock and Roll legend, Ted Nugent, contends that a lot of what is wrong with this country could be remedied by a simple, but controversial concept, gun ownership….

The Millennium Bug: How to Survive the Coming Chaos, Michael S. Hyatt…“Hyatt explains the depth or the millennium crisis in layman’s terms, and discusses how the upcoming situation will affect all of us—and what you can do to protect yourself”

Inventing the AIDS Virus, Peter Duesberg, 1996, “Peter Duesberg, M.D., an eminent scientist anda pioneer in the discovery of retroviruses (such as HIV), challenges the widely accepted belief that HIV is the cause of AIDS”

The Bible Is History, Ian Wilson, … "Ian Wilson looks at the latest findings of eminent Biblical archeologists and scholars in order to provide physical and scientific evidence of some of the greatest stories in the Bible"

The Myth of Heterosexual Aids, Michael Fumento, ... “Fumento exposes one of the disease’s most damaging rumors: that AIDS is no longer anchored to the high risk groups of homosexual men and intravenous drug abusers but is spreading from heterosexual to heterosexual through intercourse at epidemic speeds”

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, Tom Bethell, 2005,... "Part of the runaway bestselling series, this guide takes on the controversies of science, spanning evolution, cloning, AIDS, abortion, stem cell research, global warming, and more." [Bethell attempts to disprove global warming, evolution, etc.]

--Pretty scientific, eh?

Brown Act kickoff at Capo

In the latest chapter in the ongoing Capistrano Unified School District story, a citizen has, according to one paper, “sued” the district over its alleged Brown Act violations.

As a former petitioner in two Brown Act lawsuits, I have some familiarity with these cases. Normally, one who detects a Brown Act violation begins by, not suing, but rather issuing a “demand of cure and correct.” Accordingly, the CUSD board would be asked to fix its error by holding open sessions, redoing what it did (and should not have done) in closed session. If they fail to do that, or if they fail to do it adequately, a lawsuit comes next.

Evidently, Martin Wisckol of the Register has made the same point, but he now assures us that the petitioner in this case (represented by attorney Jim Lacy) has indeed filed a lawsuit. (See Total Buzz: lawsuit against CUSD.)

According to this morning’s LA Times (Capistrano Unified is Sued for Alleged Violation of Open-Meetings Law):

An outspoken retired teacher sued the Capistrano Unified School District on Monday, accusing its trustees and superintendent of conspiring to curtail his ability to speak at public school board meetings.

Ron Lackey… attends every board meeting and regularly speaks on agenda items related to district spending.

In the suit, filed in Orange County Superior Court in Santa Ana, Lackey alleges that the district violated the state's open-meetings law by discussing inappropriate matters — including how to silence him — during a closed-session meeting. He is seeking a declaration that the trustees violated the Brown Act, wants an order requiring the board to videotape future closed meetings, and wants to be reimbursed for his attorney's fees.
…..
The state's Brown Act allows elected officials to meet in closed-session in strictly limited circumstances, such as employee evaluations and labor negotiations.

A July 30, 2005, meeting was held to discuss Fleming's performance evaluation. But a document summarizing the meeting lists topics such as the school-year calendar, parental fundraising and advertising on school buses.

The first item on the minutes, labeled "School Board Meeting Conduct Protocol," notes "In general board members want to start to limit Ron Lackey and the amount of items he can address. Suggest that the board go back to only allowing members of the public to address two items as stated in board policy."

Fleming said the items listed were potential topics of his plan for the upcoming school year, and as such are allowed to be discussed in closed session because they could form the basis for his next evaluation.

Trustee Duane E. Stiff said he had never witnessed any Brown Act violations. "I have no idea what [Lackey] is talking about," Stiff said….

• Stiff’s “no idea” guff is pretty darned familiar. We got similar guff from John Williams and his pals during our successful Brown Act lawsuits against the SOCCCD back in 1997-98. When we asked them to "cure and correct," they totally blew us off.
• I do believe that our own (SOCCCD) board of trustees was the first to be required by a court to “tape” its closed sessions, owing to trustees’ “persistent and defiant” misconduct, as the judge put it. The taping order was a result of the second of our Brown Act lawsuits. (Those cases concerned, among other things, the appointment of Raghu Mathur as interim, then permanent, Irvine Valley College President.)
• Guess what? Our board (which, by then, included attorney Don "sue us!" Wagner) defied the order! Our side chose not to pursue the matter.
• Evidently, the CUSD’s attorney is none other than Dave Larsen. He was the high-priced lawyer (of the firm Rutan and Tucker) who defended the SOCCCD during my successful 1st Amendment lawsuit against Chancellor Sampson. (Sampson and the district had illegally sought to silence a "vigorous critic,” namely, Dissent’s Chunk Wheeler.)

Wagner, Padberg, and Milchiker file for reelection

From this morning's Irvine World News (SOCCCD, p. 8):

Three board of trustees incumbents for the South Orange County Community College District have filed for re-election: President [sic] Donald Wagner, Vice President Nancy Padberg and board member Marcia Milchiker.

Wagner represents area two, which includes parts of Tustin, Santa Ana and Irvine. He has been on the board since 1998 and served as board president from 2002 through 2004. Padberg represents area four, which includes San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Coto de Caza, Los Flores and Talega. She also has been on the board since 1998, serving as president for two years and vice president for five. Milchiker represents area five, which includes Laguna Woods, Laguna Niguel and parts of Laguna Hills. She has been on the board since 1985, serving as president, vice president and clerk.

Milchiker is the only candidate who has completed all the paper work necessary to run in the Nov. 7 election. Candidates have until Aug. 11 to file.

July, 1996

STATEMENT OF CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNING BOARD MEMBER
SADDLEBACK COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

TRUSTEE AREA 3

DOROTHY FORTUNE
AGE 56

OCCUPATION: RETIRED COLLEGE ENGLISH AND HISTORY TEACHER

The Saddleback Community College District must prioritize its resources and restructure its budget to accommodate a growing enrollment. Increased class offerings and improved community service can only be achieved through budget restructuring.

Students cannot get into required classes to complete their programs. Redirecting funds will increase the number of basic courses transferable to state universities and offer additional job-skill classes.

Only 35% of Saddleback District's $70 million annual budget is spent on classroom instruction compared to grade and high school allocations averaging 65%. The District makes huge expenditures on a hierarchy of administrators, consultants and attorneys, but no proper cost accounting is made available to the public.

A majority of' District 'Trustees must be willing to force the administration to become student centered. Some current Trustees recognize this and will join my efforts to slash bureaucratic spending and establish prudent objectives

I support community outreach through satellite centers offering basic and Emeritus courses. I favor college activities promoting traditional values and responsibility.

Saddleback and Irvine Valley Colleges must focus on student needs and fiscal accountability. I promise to work for those goals. Thirty years [sic] experience in higher education and private business has prepared me for the position of Trustee.

(Signed by Dorothy Fortune, July 16, 1996)

SOCCCD's Kinsler pipes up

The OC Register reports today on the Capo district’s alleged Brown Act violations during closed board sessions:

Closed CUSD meeting draws criticism
Worst example of meeting-law violation in 25 years, attorney says.

According to the counsel for Californians Aware, Terry Francke, the Capo board’s violations are egregious. (The Reg calls Francke, who has in the past opined on SOCCCD issues, "One of the state's foremost experts on open-meetings law.")

In the relevant instances, the Capo trustees were supposedly discussing "criteria for evaluation" of the district Superintendent. But it's very hard to see how that is so.

But guess who’s on hand to defend Superintendent James Fleming and CUSD trustees’ broad interpretation of Brown Act provisions? Why, that would be SOCCCD’s own Warren Kinsler, the fellow who represented the district regarding its—illegal, as it turns out—imposition of a faculty hiring policy over Academic Senate objections.

According to Kinsler, you definitely get to go with a "broad" interpretation of "criteria of evaluation." So there.

The Register spoke with Francke and Peter Scheer, exec director of the California First Amendment Coalition. According to those two, CUSC meeting notes indicate that, in closed session, trustees discussed such items as:

•which school calendar to adopt,

•whether to advertise on school buses,

•a presentation on No Child Left Behind

According to Scheer: "Any reasonable person looking at these minutes would be unlikely to come away thinking he had just observed a performance evaluation…He'd come away thinking he'd just seen what most people would call a school board meeting."

Francke is calling on the district attorney to file charges.

Our district attorney? Don't hold your breath.

Well compensated South Orange County Community College District Chancellor asks for raise and is rebuffed by trustees

At last night’s meeting of the South Orange County Community College District board of trustees, the board acted to reject Chancellor Raghu Mathur’s recommendation that he be granted a $20,000 raise and a retroactive cost of living adjustment.

A year ago, many in the district were surprised when the board voted to give Mathur—who has received three faculty votes of “no confidence” during his career as an administrator within the district, including a 93.5% vote just two years ago—a salary increase that amounted to over a quarter of a million dollars, when medical benefits and perks are included.

The unpopular Mathur, whose actions have instigated expensive litigation against the district over the years, and who once sued the district, is among the highest paid CEOs in the California community college system.

Item 28 on last night’s agenda was “Academic Personnel Actions,” recommended by the Chancellor, which included “additional compensation” for the Chancellor.

An attached exhibit described the recommended “compensation revision” as follows:

(1) Dr. Mathur will receive a cost of living adjustment…to his base salary for the fiscal year 2006/07, based on the State of California 2006/07 budget as approved by the Governor;

(2) the District will pay Dr. Mathur for all his accrued but unused vacation days above 48 days; and

(3) Dr. Mathur will receive a salary equity adjustment of $20,000 for 2004-05, with all of these items effective July 1, 2006

When trustees emerged from the closed session that precedes the open board session, rumors flew that trustees was angered by Mathur’s “compensation” request. Then, when item 28 came up during the open meeting, board president David Lang announced that parts of section H of 28—the section dealing with Mathur’s “compensation”—would be “pulled.”

Specifically, items (1) and (3) of Mathur’s compensation recommendation were pulled, leaving only (2), which concerns paying Mathur for his unused vacation days.

Apparently, the board had decided not even to consider Mathur’s proposed raise.

Even Mathur’s remaining “unused vacation days” request proved controversial. Trustee Nancy Padberg argued that the district should be consistent in observing an “if you don’t use it, you lose it" policy.

Nancy Padberg and Marcia Milchiker were the sole trustees to vote against Mathur’s requested payment for unused vacation days.

Last night’s board meeting: "no blue mountains"

By 7:00, the board had not yet emerged from its closed session and we in the auditorium waited and complained about the heat.

A rumor flew that Mathur had requested a raise. The nerve of the fellow!

I spoke with a Saddleback College employee who opined that the public sector is so “forgiving.” It’s not like the private sector, he said.

“Mathur couldn’t manage a Taco Bell,” he declared.

Another rumor circulated that Bob King, the new VC of HR, was being suggested for the role of in-house legal counsel. When, less than a year ago, King was hired, many speculated that King would likely end up doing legal work for the district. It was all very conspiratorial.

Obviously, King is not qualified to serve as general counsel for a community college district. He has little experience in the relevant law. What would motivate Mathur to make King general counsel?

Bob sure is interesting though. Did you know that King and his wife run a business called “Legally Nanny”? (Legally Nanny)

At their website, one learns that “At Legally Nanny, we are committed to helping you hire your nanny legally, maximizing your tax savings, and providing you with more time to spend with your family.”

One of the sections of the website is called “getting caught.” Check it out.

Park Ranger Bob Kopecky joked about the “rustic conditions” over at ATEP. He entertained us with stories of his wrestling with unruly air conditioning units and such.`

After a while, the trustees wandered into the hall and, as usual, when they were all seated, a strange tomb-like silence fell upon the room.

Williams launched into a prayer: “Oh Heavenly Father…Give us wisdom…to do what is right….”

Claire was treated to a big fancy “resolution” in praise of her efforts as Saddleback College Academic Senate President. It appears that she is well liked and respected even by administration. She’s “passionate,” said Lang. She’s “a delight to work with,” said Rich McCullough.


During board reports there were lots of references to the national championship recently won by Saddleback College’s surf team. “It’s about time,” said one trustee.

During board report requests, Williams asked for a report on installing “security cameras” all over the place. Fuentes didn’t seem to like the idea.

Bill Jay wanted a report on the possibility of a Saddleback soccer team. He suggested adding artificial turf somewhere for the football team, which would free up the old football practice field for soccer.

He mentioned all the excitement about the World Cup competition and the fact that the U.S. team was “eliminated by Chad of all places!” We all cringed.

Luckily, there were no Chadsters in the room.

Lang, wearing his Accreditation watchdog hat, reminded the board that there exists a process for establishing programs and priorities of this sort, and we don’t want to ignore or circumvent that. Williams countered by saying, I think, that the board gets to add its two cents anyway, cuz it represents the taxpayers. Thousands of 'em.

It's democratic!

Fuentes, seeking to poke a pin in the big blue soccer balloon, joked that the remaining discussion should be carried out in Italian.

In the end, all but Lang supported Jay’s request.

Item 25 concerned approval of “board policy revisions.” Among these was a hard-fought new policy re “employment procedures for chancellor” (BP 4011.6).

Nancy thought the policy was too long. ("There are too many notes in this song.") Lang spanked Nancy for not presenting her points earlier. Williams said that the policy represented “best practices.” Wendy and Gary reminded everyone that the Accreds dinged us for not having a chancellor hiring policy, and governance groups were hoping to cite board approval of a policy during the next round of Accredulosity. Delaying approval of 4011.6 would mess that up.

In the end, the board voted unanimously to approve 4011.6.

There was some discussion of a 120-page report designed to shed light on the organizations proposed for “institutional memberships.” You’ll recall that, last time around, trustee Wagner advocated removing the American Library Association from the list of memberships, owing to that organization’s being a bunch of “liberal busybodies.” Ultimately, Wagner got his way. He's been pleased as punch ever since.

For this round, Wagner wanted more info concerning “4Faculty," an organization that the Saddleback Academic Senate seeks to join. Nobody in the room seemed to know anything aboutt 4Faculty (Ac. Senate Prez Bob C had stepped out of the room.)

In the end, the board unanimously approved the list of memberships. (Still, I don’t get it. If the ALA is a problem, why isn’t the MLA a problem, too? The MLA bodies are pretty busy, too. Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Item 28 concerned “personnel actions” recommended by the Chancellor, including a $20,000 raise for Mr. Goo. Evidently, the board was not pleased by that recommendation, and so it was essentially “pulled” before discussion. (See blog above.)

Also pulled was section G, the “change of title” for Bob King, currently the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources. The recommendation was that King’s title would be changed to "VC of Human Resources and General Counsel.” Obviously, the change would involve new duties and a bump in pay.

Well, evidently, the board didn’t like that suggestion either, so they pulled the item.

Don’t worry, Bob, you’ve still got that "Nanny” gig.

The board separately discussed 28F, which recommended approval of a paid leave of absence for Bill Hewitt—so that he can serve as President of the FACCC.

Evidently, trustee Fuentes’ “conscience” required that he abstain from voting on that item, for, he said, he opposed using taxpayer money to support a “private organization.” Approving this item, he said, amounted to a “gift of public funds.”

Others disagreed. The item was approved.

Item 31 was informational only. It concerned “basic aid.”

Williams took the opportunity to suggest that the district should abandon its existing funding model, according to which the two colleges are funded as though the district were on “program based funding.” (Basic aid funding provides us with much more than what would be provided by program based funding, since the former is keyed to local property taxes, and property values in OC are very high.)

Williams asserted that we are a “wealthy district” and yet the colleges are being forced to make painful cuts. We’re here to “support the colleges,” he said. And yet we’re “scrimping.”

Lang defended the existing model. He argued that, in the end, the district needs to make difficult judgments about balancing “infrastructure” and “current operating needs” with “other” needs (new construction, etc.). “We’ve done a pretty good job doing that,” he said.

Jay chimed in to agree with Williams. “IVC is really hurting,” he said.

After a while, Fuentes, a staunch supporter of the current model, joined the discussion, saying, nastily, that, evidently, when the temperature is over 100 degrees outside, it’s “Christmas in July.” He then seemed to say that our district’s current affluence depends on real estate prices, and, right now, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the fate of OC real estate prices. (Maybe i misunderstood.) I think Fuentes was saying that it is a great and perilous error to count on the basic aid gravy train.


Lang skipped ahead to item 40, which concerned “updating” the current district logo. Tracy Daly had taken the board’s suggestions and developed a somewhat modified and colorized version of the old logo. (See.)

She explained that “we’ve moved the sun to the correct side.” The update has a “dynamic” feel, she said. The trustees had the new logo before them.


Padberg didn’t like it. “There’s a tremendous value in tradition,” she said, implying that tradition means never having to say "it's updated." Evidently, in Nancy's mind, Tracy was supposed to add color and leave everything else the same. Even that wayward sun.

Marcia liked the new logo. She said so.

Padberg countered by saying, “I’ve never seen mountains that are blue.”

Marcia responded by saying, “mountains could look bluish. That’s a possibility.”

During his report, SC Academic Senate President Bob C presented a study concerning reassigned time compensation for senate officers around the state. The upshot: especially in comparison with other large districts, compensation for academic senate officers in our district is extremely low.

In the course of the discussion, Bob (and Wendy) noted that these senate officer positions are getting harder to fill, for they are utterly unattractive.

Wendy noted that she and Claire reckoned that they worked about 45 hours a week on senate business alone. That’s on top of teaching and raising a family.

Wendy also noted that, as the district has moved to more inclusive governance, the work of the senate president has grown. In the meantime, compensation for senate presidents has not.

That was about it.

(See also Tracy's Board meeting highlights.)