Um, at least Saddleback College comes off well

Saddleback College "finishers"

2 in 3 community college students in O.C. don't finish (OC Reg)

     Two of three Orange County community college students intending to earn a degree either dropped out or did not graduate within six years, according to a study that examines how elusive college success remains for many local students.
     Just one in four O.C. community college students transferred to a four-year university during the six-year period studied, and Latino students were less than half as likely as their white counterparts to transfer.
     The study, released this week by the Campaign for College Opportunity coalition and the Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy at Sacramento State University, mirrors trends observed statewide and nationally.
. . .
     Orange County fared only slightly better than California as a whole.
     After six years, 70 percent of students statewide didn't complete a degree or dropped out, according to the study.
     Community college officials emphasized that their challenges are immense. Unlike K-12 education, college students are free to drop out and re-enroll at any time. And yet like K-12 education, community colleges must allow almost anyone who walks through the doors to enroll.
. . .
     "It's very hard when a community college student comes to us three or four grades below college level and we have to bring them up," [Rancho Santiago Community College District Chancellor Raúl] Rodríguez said. "They are playing catch-up all the time, and they get discouraged. A lot of them give up."
     While community college graduation rates remain low across Orange County and California, they are relatively high compared to most other states.
     California ranks 16th among U.S. states for its three-year graduation rate….
     At Saddleback College in Mission Viejo, the six-year graduation rate is 62 percent, nearly double the countywide average of 32 percent, said college spokeswoman Amy Wheeler. Even so, Saddleback officials say they aren't satisfied and have been working to improve that rate, Wheeler said.
. . .
     "There's a history to community colleges having open access, but with the impact of the state budget crisis, our state chancellor has asked us to focus on the primary objectives of transfer and basic technical and career skills," [Coast Community College District spokeswoman Martha] Parham said. "We're trying to balance access with success, and find out where we can be the most successful in helping our students."

SEE ALSO Four-year diploma? Try five, maybe six (David Whiting; OC Reg)

ATEP bushwackery? A tiff over turf

Tustin plan for Navy property (once upon a time)

     RHUBARB? For quite some time now, I’ve been hearing about friction—even rhubarbarity!—between IVC’s Prez, Glenn Roquemore, and Saddleback’s Prez, Tod Burnett. The word is that the existing hubbub concerns ATEP, the district’s eternally fledglingesque patch o’ dirt over in Tustin—68 acres of the former Marine Corps Air Station.
     Essentially, it’s a tiff over turf.
     A few days ago, Roquemore showed up to the IVC Academic Senate (Rep Council meeting) with Stetson in hand. He was all hangdog. He wanted something.
     Glenn wants IVC oversight of ATEP and he thinks somebody's swipin' it from 'im. He asked the senate to help compose a white paper about that, something for the board to read.
     I missed the meeting, but friends tell me that Glenn presented the history of oversight and boundaries between the two colleges of the district. --Something about El Toro Road being the invisible barbed wire fence: the college sittin’ on that side of the fence has had "right of first refusal" with regard to oversight of whatever happens there.
     Nothing formal you understand.
     Glenn reminded everyone that, from the start, faculty have been frozen out of development of the Tustin property—contrary to Accreditation standards, among other standards! (That was rich coming from Glenn, who is well-known for foisting the always faculty-unpopular “Early College” program on the college.) So we'd better insist on our seat at the table, I guess.
     When Dixie Bullock came in as temp Chancellor, she tried to address these problems. Under her watch, an understanding developed that IVC would pretty much own ATEP, which made sense, since Tustin is, well, a spit away from IVC while it's about a zillion cow-pie-tosses from Saddleback.
     Now, the story we hear goes like this: Saddleback has never seemed to want anything to do with that godforsaken, north-County ATEP, and so the Bullockian nod to IVC seemed to go down real peaceful like. (See Brave New ATEP: Tiny Tin and Big WL (10/13/10))
     But now (we’re told), Saddleback has had a change of heart. Burnett and the senate down there are eyeing our back forty!
     Hence the Roquemore/Burnett brouhahahaha.
     This stand-off is coming to a head right quick, cuz, soon, the board will decide whether ATEP will be a two-college center!
     Oh, the humanity! Oh, the accredular nightmare! Oh, the abject bushwackery!

     Well, whatever. I mean, it sure does look like a money pit. We're fightin' over that?
     For those of you who need some background on this whole ATEP deal, I provide the following:

     THE NAVY HANDS OVER THE KEYS. The Marine Corps Air Station officially closed a dozen years ago—in 1999. According to Wikipedia,

Of the approximately 1,600 acres …, some 1,294 acres (now known collectively as "Tustin Legacy") have been conveyed to the City of Tustin, private developers and public institutions for a combination of residential, commercial, educational, and public recreational and open-space uses. The remaining 300-plus acres will be conveyed to other federal agencies, the City of Tustin and public institutions for the same uses once environmental clean-up operations have been concluded.

     THE PROPERTY'S WACKY HISTORY. Well, we really oughta back way up to 1942. Here’s a history of the Former Marine Corps Air Station provided by the OC Register:

March 1942: Navy selects unincorporated farmland near Santa Ana as the site for "Southern California Lighter-Than-Air Station.'' Owner James Irvine refuses to sell, so Navy condemns land under the Second War Powers Act.
1978: Tustin annexes the land.
1991: Marine Corps says it will close the Tustin base.
July 1994: The U.S. Department of Education approves Santa Ana Unified School District's application to receive 75 acres.
February 1995: Government approves an application from a coalition including Rancho Santiago Community College District, South Orange County Community College District, Orange County Department of Education and Santa Ana Unified School District for 116 acres.
July 1999: The last Marines depart.
Jan. 16, 2001: Tustin City Council unanimously approves a general-plan amendment clearing the way to develop homes, schools, a homeless shelter, a golf course and businesses. The plan does not identify land for Santa Ana Unified.
Feb. 22, 2001: Santa Ana Unified and Rancho Santiago Community College districts sue Tustin, alleging the environmental study for the base reuse plan does not address affordable housing and the crowding it would cause for Santa Ana.
April 12, 2001: Santa Ana Unified turns down Tustin's offer of a land and cash package valued at $72 million. The deal would have included 22 acres for Santa Ana Unified, 15 acres for Rancho Santiago Community College District and $35 million-plus in cash.
April 16, 2001: The Santa Ana school districts sue Tustin, alleging the base redevelopment plan is racially biased because it does not include their largely Hispanic districts.
June 12, 2001: Federal mediation fails.
June 27, 2001: Two busloads of Santa Ana parents ride to Sacramento to urge Gov. Gray Davis to support legislation to force Tustin to give the two districts 100 acres.
July 30, 2001: Davis supports the districts by signing Assembly Bill 212.
Feb. 12, 2002: The Navy gives Tustin until Feb. 28 to settle the dispute with Santa Ana Unified or it will sell the land. Feb. 20: Tustin files a federal lawsuit challenging AB212.
March 1, 2002: The Navy and Tustin reach an agreement allowing the city to develop at the base.
March 5, 2002: Rancho Santiago strikes a deal with Tustin, walks away with 15 acres.

Park Ranger Kopecky

May 9, 2002: Tustin and Santa Ana Unified reach a settlement and agree on a package that includes 22 acres of base land and $38 million to buy a high school site. The deal includes a letter of credit, or an insurance policy that guarantees Tustin will pay the school district $22 million if the land is found to be too contaminated to build a school
May 11, 2002: A groundbreaking ceremony is held at the Tustin base for Village of Hope, a homeless shelter and the first project to get off the ground at the base.
May 14, 2002: The Navy deeds the base to Tustin.
July 18, 2002: Online auction of three Navy-owned parcels begins.
Sept. 23, 2002: Tustin City Council votes to drop letter of credit.
Sept. 26, 2002: Online auction ends after three parcels totaling 235 acres sell for $208.5 million.
Dec. 2002: Tustin agrees to give Santa Ana Unified School District $60 million to buy land for new schools.
May 2003: Trucks begin moving earth for the first element of what is called Tustin Legacy, the re-use of the base.
October 2006: Demolition of the helicopter parking and old roads begins at the base.
July 2007: The District at Tustin Legacy, a million-square-foot shopping center, opens at Barranca Parkway and Jamboree Road….

     Sheesh.

     THEN, ATEP: According to the Tustin Legacy website,

     In 2007, the SOCCCD opened Phase I of its Advanced Technology Education Campus (ATEP) at the northeast corner of Red Hill and Valencia. This initial site is a portion of what will be a 68 acre site to be developed by the SOCCCD within a portion of the Education Village. Fee-based workforce development courses are offered in advanced technologies, organizational development, lean manufacturing, and environmental design and compliance.
     In Summer 2010, ATEP received approvals for a number of future activities: (1) demolition of former military buildings on their site that is well underway; and (2) approval of its Phase 3A Concept Plan for a 28-acre portion of the site which would permit development of up to 305,000 square feet of educational space.

     --Not sure how current that is.
     Well, let’s skip to modern times, shall we?

     MATHUR IS A VARMINT. Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur evidently always acted like, well, Raghu P. Mathur in his dealings with the City of Tustin. Just imagine. And so, when he was taken out last year (by Dandy Don Wagner), SOCCCD/Tustin relations seriously improved, but not before the economy tanked, screwing a world of pooches. Can't blame that on Mathur, I guess.
     SOCCCD trustees have clung to the hope that ATEP would somehow flower into something beyond a MONEY PIT (leaving aside that acre of shiny tin: nice but small). But one trustee has always hated ATEP—the libertarianesque Tom Fuentes. He's always grumbled about it. Meanwhile, we keep spending money out there.
     Evidently, Tom’s patience with ATEP reached its limit last year and he said some seriously negatory things about the dang thing during summer 2010 board meetings (including one doozy I missed). But it now appears that, Tom’s skepticism to the contrary notwithstanding, the board still wants to develop ATEP. This newfangled Dante Alighieri "new market tax credit" thingy—connected to redevelopment dollars, I think—has tipped the balance in favor of our Black Hole in Tustin. ($11 million in free money, we're told.) (I'm told that Mathur was always a big "Dante" booster. If a finance issue came up, Raghu'd exclaim, "Let's call Dante!")
     Tom’s last stand against the forces of ATEPery occurred at the March board meeting. He got bushwacked. Left for dead. Buzzards.
     SOCCCD’s development of the Tustin property has occurred during the Mathur/Neanderthalic years, which started (essentially) in 1997 and (arguably) ended toward the end of 2010. What with the exit of Don Wagner (who was replaced in November by TJ Prendergast) and John Williams (who was replaced by Frank Meldau), Tom “Black Bart” Fuentes lost his whole posse, ‘ceptin’ for Dave “Quisling” Lang, who's worthless anyway.
     From the faculty perspective, what characterized the Mathurian/Neanderthalian years (1997-2010) was faculty’s systematic disenfranchisement, and this certainly included the development of ATEP.
     We’re all hoping that those days are finally over. So far so good.

Babs Beno

     MEANWHILE, THE ACCREDS! The board insisted on controlling ATEP—and leaving everybody else out—and that got everybody in Dutch with the Accreds, who have this notion that something like ATEP--even if it is a "park"--is supposed to be developed by a college, not a district.
     Is the district fixin' to backslide on its determination to do right by ATEP, accred-wise? (Actually, my notes--see below--don't entirely harmonize with Roquemore's version of history. Could be I just got it wrong. I remember asking Glenn if IVC's ownership of ATEP included only the acre of tin--or the whole 68 acres? His answer lacked clarity. Maybe he couldn't be sure. That's the way I remember it, anyway. Feel free to weigh in.)

THE OCTOBER ALL-COLLEGE MEETING

From Brave New ATEP: Tiny Tin and Big WL (October 13, 2010)

     MORE INFORMATION has become available about recent changes with regard to ATEP—or, anyway, with regard to that 68 acres of former Navy/Marine property out there in Tustin, along Redhill.
     At a recent all-college meeting here at Irvine Valley College, Chancellor Dixie Bullock explained her role in these changes. As soon as she took over from Raghu Mathur in July, she learned of those nasty letters that the Accreditors (ACCJC/WASC) had sent to our colleges. Good Lord! And so she got on the horn with head Accred honcho "Babs" Beno and one other Accred official. The problem, it seemed, concerned ACCJC’s puzzlement over the spectacle of ATEP people reporting to the district and not to a college. As far as the Accreds were concerned, ATEP needed to be owned by a particular college. (Some faculty—e.g., IVC's recently retired Kate Clark—have long insisted that the Accreds would spit back anything not tied to a particular college. But this crew doesn't listen to faculty.)

     Dixie seemed uncomfortable, or unsure, about her account of these conversations, as though she has never been clear about the Accred’s beef. It’s as though those ACCJC people handed her tea leaves or goat entrails. Or maybe they’re just messin’ with the Dixter. Dunno.
     And so, motivated by the notion that the Accreds were organizing a war party to go after us, Dixie commenced a discussion with Glenn R of IVC and Todd B of SC and, after a couple of months, it was agreed that ATEP—not the whole 68 acres, but the one and a half acres of tin parked at the Redhill entrance—would be IVC’s facility. Eventually, this facility would be funded out of IVC’s budget (in a manner, I guess, that will not threaten existing funding). Thus requireth the Accreds.
     To avoid confusion, you’ve gotta distinguish tiny (1 and ½ acre) Tin ATEP from complementary (67 remaining acres) dirt/derelict ATEP. But since the name “ATEP” will likely change—it will become inappropriate—we really oughta start talking about the tiny IVC Tustin facility versus the big “what’s left” Tustin acreage: little IVCT and big WL.
     ATEP Provost Randy Peebles came to the all-college meeting to describe recent changes in management/administration. He called ‘em “positive and encouraging.” I do hope he’s not just blowin’ smoke. Seems like an honest guy.

     Peebles is now in charge of Big WL, not Little IVCT, and so he’ll be working with the city of Tustin and potential commercial/educational partners. Evidently, only 49% of the property can be commercial. These commercial entities would generate revenue to help pay for buildings and maintenance. The city was not happy allowing the commercial element on the property, but, it seems, they’ve recently become more accommodating.
     IVC President Glenn Roquemore was there, too. He explained that there is a real possibility of pursuing partnerships with local educational institutions—UCI and CSUF were mentioned. Was he talking about Little IVCT or Big WL? Not sure. Maybe both.
     It sounded like the next step for Little IVCT would be the construction of a structure about the size of IVC’s new BST (“Biztik”)—which is about five- or six thousand square feet. Naturally, that would reduce Big WL by a couple of acres.
     With some trepidation (I suppose), Roquemore emphasized that, in these developments, we will have “a two way conversation for the first time.” Undoubtedly, this was an allusion to the long-standing ATEP status quo: faculty (among others) have not been invited to the planning table, despite their authority re program development.
     Glenn explained that ATEP—er, Little IVCT—will now be developed as a “Center.” But much work must be done, he said, and it must be done quickly, if the facility is to attain center status. Upon achieving that status, the facility can be developed further. So we have a clear goal.

     Owing to existing restrictions, there’s no possibility of turning IVCT or WL into a college. The chief obstacle to that: the proximity of IVC, which is only five miles away. (For years, we’ve heard that Tustin dreamed of having it’s own community college; when IVC was built in the late 70s, the original site was in Tustin—where the Marketplace stands—but the Irvine Co. gave up some land, in Irvine, to solve a tax problem, and so everything changed. Tustinites have been steamed ever since.)

     In the course of the discussion (the meeting was well attended and many joined in the conversation), someone mentioned the notion of constructing a “conference center” for Saddleback College’s Culinary Arts Program. Glenn seemed to think that that would be an ideal project for the property (naturally, it would be something for Saddleback College, not IVC, to pursue).
     So it appears that the recent ACCJC letters—which have been described ominously as a “strong and helpful warning”—are the chief reason for recent changes in the ATEP project (if it can still be called that).
     But it might not be the only reason. Contemporaneous with Dixie’s Accredular adventures, the SOCCCD board of trustees had about reached their limit with regard to ATEP, a project that, despite many years of district effort and expense, never seemed to really get off the ground. After all of these years of struggle, the trustees just felt worn down.

     They were about to pull the plug.
     Meanwhile, trustee Fuentes, who has never liked the idea of ATEP (his libertarian ideals produce occasional spasms of bilious spewage; he projectile vomited last summer), had reached the conclusion that ATEP was a “black hole,” a money pit. He said so publicly, noisily. He demanded action.
     Just what was the problem, anyway? No doubt thanks to a certain person’s reports, the trustees were under the impression that the City of Tustin was the problem. They were being difficult, impossible.
     After Mathur’s exodus, Bullock sent Randy Peebles to try to work with the city. And guess what? All of a sudden, things turned around. Whatever the problem was, it went away.
     Insiders tell me that they have no doubt what needed to go away. ‘Twas Mathur. The bastard was doing what he does, using people, manipulating them, and all the while playing the Grand Poobah.
     The Tustin people hated him.
     And so the new ATEP status quo—in part propelled by the factoid that Mathur was screwing the pooch by being an asshole—represents, really, a Fuentean defeat.
     Tom must be hopping mad.
     But at least it can be said that things have changed with regard to the ATEP project. Whether these changes are enough to avoid further descent into that Fuentean BLACK HOLE remains to be seen.

Years ago, the "Camelot" group came up with this "studio" plan.

The existing facility is that small cluster of grey buildings at top right.

"Can you hear us now?"

$25,000 a year tuition for a UC education? (OC Reg)

     Students attending the University of California system could eventually pay up to $25,000 in annual tuition, Gov. Jerry Brown warned during a recent effort to solicit support for his proposed tax extensions.
     Currently, tuition for UC campuses is around $10,000 to $11,000 annually….
. . .
     But Brown said that tuition for the nation's most prestigious public university system could eventually double with a state budget balanced on only spending cuts.
. . .
     "I want to do everything I can not to kill the California dream but to keep it alive and keep it growing," said Brown in a news report from the San Francisco Chronicle. "If we go to an all-cuts budget, (UC tuition) could be $20,000-$25,000 for the whole year."
. . .
     For months, Brown has been working to send to the ballot a measure that would allow voters to extend taxes that could help bridge a $15 billion budget deficit.
. . .
     Republican lawmakers have said that continuing tax extensions will slow or reverse the recovering economy. Some have also said they may support the extensions only if the governor attaches pension reforms to the initiative.

Thousands rally at Cal State campuses against higher education cuts (LA Times)

     Decrying what they called an assault on higher education, thousands of faculty and students at California State University campuses across the state rallied, marched and held teach-ins Wednesday to protest steep funding cuts and rising tuition.
     Dubbed the Day of Class Action, events were held on all 23 Cal State campuses, featuring speakers, workshops, gospel singers, guerrilla theater and, on one campus, a New Orleans-style "funeral" march.
     The protests were largely peaceful and there were no reports of disruptions, although student groups staged sit-ins in hallways outside the offices of presidents Jolene Koester at Cal State Northridge and James M. Rosser at Cal State L.A.
     No arrests were made, and students left the buildings by the end of the day. Peaceful sit-ins were also held at campuses in Pomona, San Francisco and the East Bay.
     With education funding at risk and higher tuition possible in many states, students and faculty at public universities elsewhere also held rallies and teach-ins Wednesday, including at Portland State in Oregon, Rutgers University in New Jersey and the University of Massachusetts' Boston campus.
     The goal, organizers said, was to raise public awareness of the consequences of continued disinvestment in higher education and to give faculty and students a greater voice in policy decisions.
     Public colleges in California, including Cal State, the University of California and the community colleges, have been under particular pressure. Gov. Jerry Brown has proposed cutting $1.4 billion from the state's higher education budget, potentially leading to enrollment cuts, tuition hikes and pared course offerings. The numbers could grow if a budget stalemate is not overcome.
     Cal State is set to lose $500 million in state funding, and annual tuition will increase by 10% in the fall.
. . .
     A concert and rally organized by UCLA students is scheduled for midday Thursday near the state office building downtown.
     The event, titled "Can You Hear Us Now," is expected to attract busloads of students from UCLA and other UC campuses.

Language and International-Studies Programs Face 'Devastating' Cuts Under Budget Deal (Chronicle of Higher Education)

     The federal budget plan expected to be approved by Congress this week would make sharp cuts in foreign-language and international academic programs, with some university officials saying they could result in staff layoffs.
     International-education advocates are raising objections to reductions in programs authorized under two federal laws, Title VI of the Higher Education Act and the Fulbright-Hays Act. The budget deal, which would finance federal agencies until the end of September, would slash funds for these Department of Education programs by 40 percent, or $50-million, reducing their allocation to $76-million.
     "A cut of that magnitude to such small programs really has a huge impact," says Miriam A. Kazanjian, a consultant with the Coalition for International Education. "It would be devastating."….

Coast Community College District trustee corruption--now it's Grant

     Not sure what to make of this story that appeared today on the OJ Blog. It concerns Coast Community College District trustee Dave Grant. According to the writer, the CCCD is pretty bad. Heck, maybe it even rivals the Mathur-era SOCCCD for Rot at the Top!

Hinky Coastline Trustee Dave Grant laughs off FPPC fine, offers “no comment” for news story (OJ Blog)

CORRUPTION CONTINUES ON DAIS AT COAST COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

David A. Grant

     Running on a mantra of “How does this decision benefit students” newly elected Trustee David A. Grant was elected to the Board of Trustees in November 2010. Since that time, it has been learned that Trustee Grant has been fined for failing to disclose properly the contributions that he has received as a candidate.
     How could this be? Trustee Grant is a retired college president, someone who is supposed to be a pillar of his community and one that holds the highest ethical standards? Why then, can’t Trustee Grant properly list his contributions with the Fair Political Practices Commission? Does he have something to hide? Is he afraid to show that many of his contributors are vendors of the District, some of whom like the law firm Rutan and Tucker,* are enraged that Trustees have shunned their services for other attorneys?
     Since joining the Board of Trustees, Mr. Grant has chastised anyone on the dais that has raised questions of the district’s executives, probed, or tried to find the truth in governance matters. He has repeatedly criticized his peers for “micromanaging” and for “outrageous” behavior. He has made veiled threats, and acted in a hostile manner toward his fellow Trustees in public. He has desperately tried in vain, through his connections with the Coast Report (a student newspaper at Orange Coast College) to show a conflict of interest between one trustee and a district lawyer.

Corrupt: Armando Ruiz**

     Trustee Grant’s ethical breach is one of many sad stories of lapses that have prevailed on the board at Coast over the last two decades. Former trustee Armando Ruiz double-dipped on his pension and developed a too cozy relationship with top executives, putting a friend, the now deceased Ed Dornan, in a senior management position at the district. Former trustee Walter Howald spent over $20,000 in travel in some years, even in the midst of the current budget crisis, and abused his power to force district administrators to help him get a community college job, so he could get a “PERS Retirement,” and numerous sources have commented that Mr. Howald did not actually live in the district for a number of years.
. . .
     Since 2007, reformist Trustees Lorraine Prinsky, Jim Moreno, and Jerry Patterson have brought many badly needed changes to the dais at Coast: they have brought forward a code of ethics, reduced bloated executive salaries, sharply reduced executive and trustee travel, reinforced Brown Act compliance and directed a complete review of all district policies to ensure compliance with accreditation and regulatory standards. For all of their hard work and dedication to the students of the district, they have been wrongly accused by the likes of Mr. Grant and the corrupt district bureaucrats that support him as “micromanagers” when in fact, these three trustees have set policy direction that protected the interests of taxpayers and students.

Interested in trustee gig? 

      If Mr. Grant has his way, the hard work of these individuals will be undone, and the Coast District will return to a culture of “if you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” – a culture that promotes croynism, nepotism, corruption, and a flagrant disregard for the needs of students. Mr. Grant’s sanction by the Fair Political Practices Commission is a reminder of the corrupt ways of the past, and a wake-up call that he must be stopped!

*Note: the SOCCCD has often used the services of Rutan and Tucker (e.g., the firm defended the district in my 1st Amendment lawsuit).
**Ruiz was a Saddleback College counselor recruited by Raghu Mathur to become an administrator at Irvine Valley College. He was Dean of Orange Groves or something. When he didn't get the VPI gig--that went to Glenn R--he was pissed and so he retired, pulling his notorious gambit that landed him some serious bucks.

Cal State Fullerton rally

CSUF students rally for college funding (OC Reg)

     Hundreds of students and faculty gathered at Cal State Fullerton Wednesday, giving testimony, signing postcards and making phone calls to the chancellor's office demanding that CSU leaders fight to stop cuts to higher education.
     Shelly Arsneault, a political science professor and a member of California Faculty Association, said protesters who gathered in the quad want to see the Legislature put a tax-extension package before voters. They also want students to become aware of the severity of the cuts so they can speak against them.
. . .
     Similar events were held on Wednesday throughout the 23 CSU campuses and other states as part of a day of action protesting cuts to education.
     The Legislature has already approved cutting $500 million from the CSU system. If voters don't approve a tax extension package, the university system could see even more cuts, said Erik Fallis a CSU spokesman. The Legislature has not yet approved a special election.
     "The $500 million in cuts, that's the best-case scenario," Arsneault said. "We've done our share; it's time for others to step it up….

SEE ALSO Cal State Fullerton Activists to Protest Fee Increases by Serving Top Ramen to Starving Students (Stick a Fork in it [OC Weekly])

OC Register readers offer these comments...

     4/12/11
     I’m not sure what to say, now that I’ve read comments left by OC Register readers to this afternoon’s story about the settlement of “Westphal v. Wagner,” the lawsuit challenging prayers at the South Orange County Community College District.
     Read ‘em yourself. Be amazed.

BOBOOROZCO
   We must worship Jesus continuously 24/7 lest HE, with HIS love for us, send us to hel. This includes worshiping HIM in all public tax-supported institutions also. Non-Christian members of the public need to shut up and love their freedom to worhsip Jesus also, even if they're not Christian, and continue to pay taxes to support the Christian-American government.
   Amen

CASECLOSED
   Let us all pray for everyone that was involved with this lawsuit settlement.

OCSLEEPERLIVES
   And what exactly is wrong with having a moment of silence as compared to having a prayer said over the intercom? Why can't it be good enough for each individual to sit there in a moment of silence to reflect their thoughts or silently say a prayer to themselves? Why must you need to yell it out loud to say hey look i'm praying?
   A good buddy of mine is a devout Christian. We fly on family vacation together. Each time before a flight, he sits there and silently say a prayer to himself. He doesn't need to Flight Attendant to go on intercomm to lead a prayer session so everyone can hear. Why can't most of you be like that when it comes to your religion?

REGENT
   Dan Wagner [sic] is a HERO. That's why I voted for him in the primary and the general election.
   The wimpering cowards who would use litigation to deny others the ability to honor the Creator of the universe, are indeed pitiable.

OCSURVIVOR
   A slide show during a faculty training session for a public college:..images were superimposed with the message, "Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ and the American G.I. ... One died for your soul, the other died for your freedom."
   ----I think I would have had to walk out to go throw up.

REGENT
   I will continue to pray and speak boldly about the GOOD NEWS of the Lord God, His Son and our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit.
   Jesus offers the one path to salvation. Nothing on this Earth compares.
   Pass your puny laws. You CANNOT stifle the CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE.

REGENT
   Ignore Jesus Christ at your peril. You may meet Him someday.

45YROCNATIVE
   Tim, that surprises me that you said that... It affects all of us. This is just the beginning, pretty soon we won't be able to pray in church!

LOUFCA
   This is in reply to a blatant lie by OC4Ever. To quote, "According to FBI statistics, there was more violence in society and schools in the late 1800s and early 1900s when school prayer was in full force and religion was unabashedly all over society."
   The FBI wasn't formed until 1908. Don't believe every thing that is posted.

LOUFCA
   Ah, the tyranny of the few and politically correct continue to denude us of symbols that have always meant something to this country.
   I wonder if those who brought the suit and the ACLU have ever looked at the doors to the Supreme Court, Senate and other areas. If they did, they would find things like the 10 commandments. Hmmmm, better burn down the doors to the Supreme Court before an ACLU member is turned into a rock by its look.
   Typcial college professors. Nothing better to do than try and screw up 18 and 19 year olds. I hope they don't have tenure.

GREATG
   Perhaps more discretion in who is hired as a "Professor"
   What are they professor of?

TIMSCAVO
   OK, so prayers are being discontinued at the local colleges.
   So what?
   Doesn't affect me, and it shouldn't affect anybody.

SILVERFOX54
   If you want to have prayers from the Quran being invoked every day, I suggest that you find another country to live in. I am 57 years old, born and raised in the USA, as were my parents and there parents and ther parents. Bet you can't say that. While growing up in this country, not once was the question of one's religion brought up when prayers were said in school. We were proud to be AMERICANS and proud of what this country stands for and equally proud of any type of prayer that was read aloud during a graduation ceremony. We did not question it as to it's meaning towards people that might not have the same faith. The funny thing about the country you obviously came from, is that if someone from the USA was there and bitched about the reading of the Quran in schools, would anyone listen ? I think not !!!!! They would most likely be found dead. Come to America to be American. Don't come to America and expect America to change for you. No like AMERICA........go home and read Quran

ABBEYA
   THis is America... Settled by Puritians...ie: Christians ...Founding Fathers Christians....% of Americans who ARE Christians 76% accordingly to Wikipedia. As for the Koran...IF Muslims had settled here ...NO one would tell them, sue them, call the ACLU on them. They would just Cut-off the discussion if you understand my meaning.

GREYLOX
   **Would all of you people who are so determined to have Christian prayers said at all school events have the same opinion about prayer in schools if it was prayers from the Quran being invoked on a daily basis? Be honest.

ALANRRT
   If there is no God to answer prayer, then prayer is just empty words. So the fact that atheists get so worked up just hearing someone pray tells me that even they can't buy thier own rhetoric.

NEWPORTBOB
   The prayer, I pray that I pass this darn test, should never be omitted from college campuses.

BADMONKEY411
   Religion Kills!

THOM234
   GOUSCOC....I don't get what you said. I only see one Jewish sounding name in the plaintiff group.

XPATRIOT
   And we just keep moving further away from any type of fundamentals in school. I find it humorous that folks keep nagging about the separation of church and state, but yet " in God we trust" can not only be found on our money, it is also above the speaker of the houses seat in the capitol in two foot letters. Sure keep thinking there is no correlation between the lack of fundamental teaching in our schools and the current state of our education in America, kids today are simply not learning any type of discipline. The lack of morals and respect continues to decline in our schools and America only produces more and more corrupt and selfish citizens. Do kids in school even recite the pledge of allegiance anymore? I am sure it violates someones right not to be Amrican in America.

OC4EVER
   Gatordon: While I am a person of faith, your statement is historically inaccurate. According to FBI statistics, there was more violence in society and schools in the late 1800s and early 1900s when school prayer was in full force and religion was unabashedly all over society--not that it was caused by the prayer, but we were simply a more violent society back then--things were settled with guns, and the court system was not as fully developed. So it is not true that prayer in schools means no or less violence.

DOGSTAR
   Maybe one of the draft dodgers that pose as editor for the OCR had a had in this. How about in Whiting?

BLACKJESUZ
   wasnt God there when little children were being molested by men of the cloth?
   or when the white man massacred millions in the name of christ?
   what retarded nonsense to preach Gatordon.
   kick out religion from all of our institutions so we can go back to a sane society.

GOUSCOC
   The federal lawsuit, Westphal v. Wagner, was filed in November 2009 by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of Saddleback College professors Karla Westphal, Alannah Rosenberg, Margot Lovett and Claire Cesaero-Silva, Irvine Valley College professor Roy Bauer, Saddleback College graduate Ashley Mockett and two anonymous Saddleback College students.
   Looks like Christians have more to worry about being attacked by jews then muslims.

GATORDON
   And then when there are killings in our schools, Parents and people ask why wasn't God there to protect our children? Very simple... You kicked him out.

RIXTAR99
   ...and where in what constitution does it say "separation of church and state"? [The 1st Amendment prohibits laws respecting establishment of religion.]

ISTHATHER
   Interesting...

NAPTOWN
   ...and the tail wags the dog

More on the "Westphal v. Wagner" (prayer lawsuit) settlement

Don Wagner: dramatization of his unconstitutional scholarship rant

Plaintiffs'
Ayesha N. Khan

Colleges agree to discontinue some prayers (OC Register)

MISSION VIEJO – Saddleback and Irvine Valley Colleges have agreed to discontinue the use of invocations at scholarship ceremonies and faculty training sessions like the Chancellor's Opening Ceremony as part of a lawsuit settlement with a group seeking to prohibit prayers at college events.
     According to the settlement, the colleges may continue to hold a nonsectarian prayer or moment of silence during graduation ceremonies if the event's planning committee chooses to do so.
     The federal lawsuit, Westphal v. Wagner, was filed in November 2009 by Americans United for Separation of Church and State on behalf of Saddleback College professors Karla Westphal, Alannah Rosenberg, Margot Lovett and Claire Cesaero-Silva, Irvine Valley College professor Roy Bauer, Saddleback College graduate Ashley Mockett and two anonymous Saddleback College students.
     The lawsuit named as defendants the district's trustees, former South Orange County Community College District Chancellor Raghu Mathur and Saddleback President Tod A. Burnett.
     Lawyers for both sides said they were pleased with the settlement.
     "Our hope was to have all of the prayers discontinued, but we recognized that we stood on stronger legal ground with respect to some events than other events," said Ayesha Khan, the plaintiffs' attorney.
     "I think this was a fair compromise."
     Legal counsel for the defendants said the district got "exactly what it wanted."
     "The main goal in the litigation from the defense side was to preserve the ability of the district to have invocations at college graduations. This settlement does exactly that," said attorney John Vogt from Jones Day.

Mathur: showed a patriotic slide
show with a "Jesus saves" message

     Americans United challenged the use of prayer and other religious content at all college-sponsored events, claiming it is a violation of the First Amendment rights of those in attendance. The plaintiffs named several instances where they thought religious content was inappropriately used at college events.
     In February, U.S. District Court Judge R. Gary Klausner determined that nonsectarian invocations at events like graduation and scholarship ceremonies do not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which enforces the separation of church and state. The judge denied the plaintiffs' request to prohibit invocations because they could not show irreparable damage would result from continuation of the tradition.
     However, Klausner also determined two incidents named by the plaintiffs – one involving Mathur and another involving former SOCCCD trustee Donald Wagner – did violate the Establishment Clause.
     The incident related to Mathur occurred during the Chancellor's Opening Session in August 2009. A slide show of patriotic images set to "God Bless the USA" was played during a faculty training session, ending with two slides picturing flag-draped coffins of U.S. soldiers.
     According to the court order, the images were superimposed with the message, "Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you. Jesus Christ and the American G.I. ... One died for your soul, the other died for your freedom."

Defendants'
John A. Vogt Jr.

     The slide show had been approved by Mathur. The defendants contended Mathur had only seen the first few slides before approving the presentation.
     The incident related to Wagner occurred at a May 2009 scholarship ceremony, which Wagner opened with an invocation.
     In the invocation, Wagner mocked "the special interest group that has contacted this college to pursue its agenda of driving God from public square" by calling out the group's efforts and reminding the audience that "America's founders invoked the name of God, and encouraged and participated in religious ceremonies in government facilities."
     Both parties were required to meet for a settlement conference after Klausner issued the order in February. Vogt said the settlement was reached on March 31, eliminating the need for Klausner to issue a final judgment in the case. Before the settlement agreement, Khan had previously said the plaintiffs had planned to appeal to the state Supreme Court the portion of Klausner's ruling against them.
     Though a settlement has been reached, Vogt pointed out a potential loophole.
     Language in the settlement prohibits the colleges from holding invocations at scholarship ceremonies, but it's possible for the tradition to continue if the colleges' foundations – private, nonprofit entities who were not party to the lawsuit – resumed planning the events, Vogt said, since "nothing in the settlement would preclude the foundations." Vogt said the foundations historically planned the ceremonies until 2008.
     Khan disagreed with Vogt's interpretation of the settlement agreement.
     "Neither the South Orange County Community College District, nor its colleges ... shall include an invocation on the program at any future scholarship ceremonies," Khan said, reading from the agreement. "I think they'd be skating on really thin legal ice."

     In a recent post, DtB calculated the amount of money the district has paid Jones Day thus far. See A point of information.
     The amount: $1,041,150.00
     In the settlement, the district agrees to pay Americans United for Separation of Church and State $250,000 (plaintiffs’ attorney fees). (See.)

Judge Klausner: actually, Don, we need a bit less than you're providing