Friday, May 2, 2014

English dept. [CORRECTION]

     At a colleague’s request, I viewed the streaming video of the April 28 meeting of the SOCCCD Board of Trustees, and I noted the “closed session actions” read out, at the start of the open session, by board Clerk, Marcia Milchiker:
“On a 7 to 0 vote, the board voted to rescind the board’s decision to non-renew a probationary faculty member’s contract and in lieu except the faculty member’s resignation.” [See here and here (Feb. 24) for original decision.]
     The faculty member in question is (I believe) a member of IVC’s English Department. (In February, the board voted not to renew the contract of a SC and an IVC probationary faculty.) We wish him well. NOPE, GOT THIS WRONG. IT WAS THE SC INSTRUCTOR.
     Very recently, the IVC English Department hired two new full-time faculty.

Saddleback's Burnett seeks Riverside Chancellor gig

Three finalists named for chancellor job (The Press-Enterprise, May 1)

     The presidents of three colleges are finalists for chancellor of Riverside Community College District after a national search, officials said Thursday, May 1.
     Saddleback College President Tod A. Burnett, Sacramento City College President Kathryn E. Jeffery and Milwaukee Area Technical College President Michael L. Burke have been invited to speak in public forums and candidate interviews in the district, which includes Riverside City, Moreno Valley and Norco colleges.
. . .
     Burnett, an Irvine resident, has been president of Saddleback College in Mission Viejo since 2008. He was previously vice chancellor for California Community Colleges. His experience includes an appointment in 2003 as deputy appointments secretary for the governor and work with the Environmental Protection Agency. He has a doctorate in education....

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Successful Trustee "Listening Sessions"!

Only Prendergast and Wright were unable to attend
Our readers weigh in:

Batch 3:

Anonymous - 9:08 AM, May 02, 2014
     I hope the trustees understand just how unresponsive the college president has been to the complaints we made at IVC. Glenn knows what's going on but refuses to address it in a real way.

Anonymous - 9:36 AM, May 02, 2014
     I encourage everyone who attended and those who wanted to but could not to write a brief email of thanks to the trustees in attendance. Take the time to remind them of your issue(s) that concern you -and invite them back again. Let's keep the momentum going.

Nancy Padberg: npadberg@socccd.edu
Tim Jemal: tjemal@socccd.edu
Marcia Milchiker: mmilchiker@socccd.edu
Bill Jay : no email
David Lang: dlang@socccd.edu

And pass the word to your colleagues who might not read this on the blog. This is easy. Let's do it.

Anonymous - 9:42 AM, May 02, 2014
     Fantastic Idea..I will do it today.

Anonymous - 10:10 AM, May 02, 2014
     The CSEA [local] President just sent an email to the entire board requesting a listening session for classfied only. I am classified (we were copyied on the email) and I am dissapointed and sad. I am greatful for my CSEA team and I support my CSEA President; however, I strongly do not agree with this. I feel our session with faculty particpation was collegial, uplifting, productive and effective. Together faculty and staff share a vision of a world class IVC. I feel supported by faculty. I dont want the BOT be put in a postion where these turn into complaining sessions. These are busy people and they only have so much time.This is not a bargining table. I don't want them to dread these sessions. I dont want the "home run" format to change. Faculty and staff work togather for a better college. I dont want this postive direction to go south. But I am afraid the horse is out of the gate. They have received the email. Hopefully my concerns are unfounded.

Anonymous - 10:19 AM, May 02, 2014
     I too thought the united front of faculty and classified was powerful. I don't know if that is risked by the request for the a Classified-only session. Perhaps a classified-only session could emphasize the Classified perspective -- it doesn't mean faculty "bashing." I would like one for faculty only as well -- not to "bash" classified, but to highlight issues that affect faculty primarily. Does that make sense? Let's stay together.

Anonymous - 10:45 AM, May 02, 2014
     Thanks 10:19am. I feel better. I appreciate your reassuring words. Yes, no matter the format, lets stay together.

Anonymous - 10:51 AM, May 02, 2014
     I think people are feeling good about the show of respect and concern -- so refreshing! I wish our own managers and administrators would treat us the way the trustees did! Let's stay together -- like the great old Al Green song.

Anonymous - 10:56 AM, May 02, 2014
     100% Agree. Great comment.

Anonymous - 12:34 PM, May 02, 2014
     What IVC folks may not realize is that at the Saddleback session, classified were only recognized to speak in the last 15 minutes out of 1 1/2 hours. Splitting the meetings will give everyone a chance to be heard equally. The BOT obviously found a better way to balance the flow of comments by the time they got to IVC.

Anonymous - 2:59 PM, May 02, 2014
     Thanks for the clarification 12:34. We didn't know that. How did that happen -- only 15 minutes out of 1.5 hours? Who made that call?

Anonymous - 3:38 PM, May 02, 2014
     12:34 we appreciate the clarification and had no idea this occurred. It seemed to work out in the second session at IVC Classified even spoke out on behalf faculty regarding changes that will positively impact students.

Anonymous - 5:18 PM, May 02, 2014
     Now we get why the CSEA Pres sent the email to the BOT. Of course classified would like air time too. I think we just got lucky at IVC that it happened to work out. Folks left wanting to say more but time was up.

Batch 2:

Anonymous - 11:12 AM, May 01, 2014
     I wish I could have attended but I teach at that time. I hear there was a pad of paper that they passed around for people to write out their concerns. Perhaps those of us who could not attend could forward our concerns to the trustees in some manner?

Anonymous - 11:42 AM, May 01, 2014
     Wow! This is the first really positive thing to happen on this campus for years. Let's hope for follow-through.

Anonymous - 2:00 p.m. May 01, 2014
     Yesterday’s forum brought back to me the Golden Days at IVC, days when dissent was not only tolerated, but prized. The atmosphere of trust, respect, and intellectual inquiry that characterized the session was a refreshing change from the painstaking silence that has characterized previous forums. I was honored to be in the room.
     I hope the Trustees know how much it means to us to be able to speak honestly; how much we love our college; how hard we work to make things go here, despite the difficulties we face; and how much we appreciate their support, their time, and their obvious involvement in the discussion.
     You might want to change "painstaking" to "painful." Or another adjective of your choice.

Chancellor's ears not to scale
Anonymous - 8:37 PM, May 01, 2014
     I was there. It was great. As a classified I had a very strong feeling that if I experienced any retailation for sharing my feelings, I could go to the board, tell them and they be on top of it. I cannot express enough how much I felt their interest and respect. It felt like the way real discourse about making things even better should be. We all wanted to be sure they also felt our appreciation for all they do to make IVC better. Now maybe they can get the real story at our college and I super excited that maybe these will continue. This college could really reach new heights with the BOT getting the real information! If you missed it, be sure to attend the next time. I hope there is another session. Very collegial.

Anonymous - 12:03 AM, May 02, 2014
     I started at IVC after the Golden Days. Yesterdays meeting was the best in my 16 year Career. Who idea was it to do these meetings without administrators/fear? More please with the same atmosphere.

Batch 1:

Anonymous - 5:31 AM, May 01, 2014
     Saddleback's Listening session was quite frank without finger pointing: topics included additional FT faculty, Calendar Issues, Nursing start dates and a request to offer a BS degree, issues concerning Veterans, on-line programs.

Anonymous - 6:29 AM, May 01, 2014
     IVC's was standing room only and could have probably gone on for another hour. Nancy said it was the "best session ever." People were blunt -- but not everything was covered still. I was pleased to see people speak up, especially classified. I thought it was funny how the trustees acknowledged the "school boy pissing contest" between the two college presidents -- though why they put up with any of it, I don't know.

Anonymous - 7:04 AM, May 01, 2014
     As usual, classified were willing to speak up about issues, but only a few (where are all those brave, tenured faculty who write so eloquently here about problems on campus?) faculty aired concerns. It could have gone another hour for sure. Seriously, is that the best room we can offer on campus for an open discussion? What would have been done if 20-25 more people showed up?

[I'm told that, early Wednesday, the Chancellor discovered that the listening session was scheduled to occur in the admin building, and so he scrambled to make other arrangements--not a smaller room, but a room away from administrators and managers. The only available room happened to be rather small. --RB]

Anonymous - 7:30 AM, May 01, 2014
     They seemed to be listening -- though I was shocked at what they did not seem to know despite their good intentions, especially about hiring.

Anonymous - 8:17 AM, May 01, 2014
     Full-time to part-time ratios both faculty and classified, review of administrators from staff, safety video cameras in common areas, respect, budget allocation model, college service areas, bonds, we're some of the subjects at IVC. Many people did thank the Board for the opportunity to speak and said they cared about the students and loved working at IVC.

Anonymous - 9:46 AM, May 01, 2014
     The glacial pace of committee process and structure was also addressed. And yes, the childish behavior of both college presidents was acknowledged in public (!). And the money pit that is ATEP was at least admitted ("sordid history" indeed.) ATEP -- a monument to Raghu's lack of vision.
     Yes, the room was problematic. Perhaps they were not counting on a successful turn-out? Part of me wished it had been set not only in a bigger space but one that is more like where I teach most of the time -- dirty and charmless with poor air quality. Maybe next time.


Anonymous - 10:26 AM, May 01, 2014
     I am feeling optimistic that they heard us, especially about poor treatment and poor leadership.

Anonymous - 10:30 AM, May 01, 2014
     I think the point was well made that the traditional allocation of resources -- 2/3rd to Saddleback, 1/3 to IVC -- needed to be adjusted for growth and reality. They seemed to be listening.

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

     Earlier today, first at Saddleback College and then at IVC, the SOCCCD BOT held a "Trustee Listening Session." 


I was unable to attend any of these sessions, but I have heard reports of IVC's meeting. Evidently, many faculty and classified spoke and had much criticism of college administration/managers to offer.
More tomorrow.

More on Mikel...


mikel-anthony-williams_maw-family.jpg

Over at the OC Weekly, Matt Coker has the latest on the Mikel Anthony Williams case:

excerpt:
The second of two men charged in the murder of a popular Irvine Valley College student pleaded guilty Friday not to murder but, under a deal with a court, voluntary manslaughter. Heriberto Erick Vergara Calvillo, 27, is expected to be sentenced to 22 years in state prison on June 27....

To read the rest, click here

And here's the OC Register's coverage:  Man pleads guilty to manslaughter

*

Monday, April 28, 2014

April meeting of the SOCCCD BOT

     Sorry, there'll be no coverage of the board meeting tonight. I'm at home sick with a cold.
     Check out Tere's Board Meeting Highlights
     Streaming video of the April meeting can be found here

Saturday, April 26, 2014

Shit happens (@ SOCCCD)




     The low turnout for the recently concluded faculty union election suggests that faculty are once again dropping the ball, failing to monitor this powerful voice, the Faculty Association. Colleagues, it is important to remember just how bad things can get when the wrong people control that  organization. That happened back in the 90s, when Sharon Macmillan—reportedly now mentoring some active members of the FA—and her friends (Raghu Mathur, et al.) placed Teddi Lorch, John Williams, Dorothy Fortune, Steve Frogue—and, by 2000, Don Wagner and Tom Fuentes—on the board. We have yet to fully recover, as you know. (Don’t forget that one Mathur protégé, the incompetent and unpopular Glenn Roquemore, remains President of IVC after a dozen years. The board seems determined to keep him there, despite his manifest failings.)
     Here are two brief videos that provide some sense of how dark our days can become when we fail to keep vigil.



This is how the MacMillan-Woodward-Mathur-Runyan FA got their slate of trustee candidates elected in 1996: such tactics as the infamous homophobic flier, sent to Republican households

An entry from THE DISSENTER’S DICTIONARY (c. 1999)

FACULTY ASSOCIATION (aka the "union")
     The SOCCCD faculty union, the legal representative of faculty concerning contractual matters; a chapter of the California Teachers Association (and of its division, the Community College Association [CCA]).
     By the mid-90s, the FA was controlled by a small group of faculty—the OLD GUARD—that utterly disregarded rules, laws, common practice, and democratic principles. Starting in about '96, for over a year, union members sought unsuccessfully to secure (among other things) a copy of the chapter's bylaws—an effort that increased in intensity during and after the infamous ’96 trustees race, in which many tens of thousands of union dollars were used to finance the notorious homophobic "SAME-SEX" flier. Faced with this pressure, president Sherry Miller-White (and vice president Sharon MacMillan) asserted that the bylaws would become available once a mysterious "clean up" process was completed. (We were told that "typos" needed to be corrected.) Eventually, owing to pressure brought by the CTA, Miller-White produced a copy of "the bylaws," but it was soon determined to be a version that had been registered with CTA many years before and, according to CTA guidelines, was no longer valid, since it had not subsequently been submitted for review and registration. In about December of '96, reform members discovered that, not only had the chapter's leadership failed to keep valid bylaws on file with CTA but they had even failed properly to register the chapter with CTA. When reformers then applied for a CTA charter, CTA officials, fearing litigation, insisted that the old chapter, despite its failure to be chartered, was indeed a chapter of CTA. ("If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.")
     Owing to the chapter's egregious election conduct and its undemocratic ways, a lengthy letter of complaint, signed by 109 tenured faculty, was sent to the CCA president in December of '96. Ultimately, this yielded the formation of a CTA "leadership team," which visited the district in April (?) of '97 and later issued a report, according to which the chapter had indeed failed to keep minutes or proper PAC records and had engaged in unacceptable campaign tactics. (See LEADERSHIP TEAM REPORT)
     During this period, Miller-White and her Old Guard cronies continued to run the chapter as though it were their private club. Invariably, Representative Council meetings would be held without a quorum (the issue was never raised). When reformers complained about this, Miller-White invariably became hostile and even beligerent. During one meeting in '97, Rep Council members agreed, contra Miller-White, that an effort should be made to determine the existence of a quorum, but it soon became clear that the members present could not agree what constituted a quorum. Indeed, it became clear that there was disagreement regarding who was and who was not a member of the Rep Council!
     During the spring of '98, the Old Guard finally permitted an internal election of officers and Rep Council members, but when it yielded many Reform-candidate victories, Miller-White and her group simply declared the entire election null and void, citing their own error with regard to egligibility requirements for one office. In subsequent months, the Old Guard spent tens of thousands of dollars promoting the candidacies of two avowedly anti-teachers union candidates—Padberg and Wagner, friends of the Board Majority. When union members asked whether this was true, Miller-White and her cronies simply refused to answer. Thanks to fliers and ads that implied, falsely, that Padberg and Wagner could help stop the El Toro airport, the two were elected in November of '98, and the Board Majority expanded to 5 members.
     In the spring of '99, owing to the involvement of CTA, new internal elections were held, and the reformers won, though MacMillan (formerly president-elect) now presided, despite being on sabbatical. (Naturally, the Old Guard contested the election.) The PAC committee, however, comprised former chapter presidents, and thus was dominated by the Old Guard. Thus, the reformers initiated the arduous task of gaining membership control of the PAC.
     Toward the end of her tenure as president, Miller-White, without proper authorization from the Rep Council, made a "verbal" request to the Chancellor to cut withholdings from members' paychecks, and he readily complied. This meant that no monies would be collected for the union PAC—money that could eventually be used to defeat Fortune, Williams, and Frogue in 2000. When the new Rep Council decided to restore the withholdings, Sampson was notified, but refused to restore them. (At one point, he cited the fact that the request had merely been "verbal.") Eventually, CTA lawyers demanded the change, but Sampson still refused to make it. This has resulted in PERB complaint which may soon be ruled upon....
OTHER VIDEOS:

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...