Tuesday, August 8, 2017

The Larry Stevens years, 1982-1986, Part 3: the board really f*cked up, but faculty were no angels

Colonel Stevens
     IT'S 1985-86: Essentially, what happens at Coast happens again at Saddleback, too. Faculty hate the Chancellor, but trustees double down on their man, and so faculty target key trustees for recall. The recall fails, but the anti-establishmentarian momentum is enough to win key victories in the subsequent election. In each case, post election, new board majorities, favorable to the faculty union, emerge. According to conservatives, we’re seeing teachers’ unions “taking over the board of trustees.” According to progressives, knuckle-draggers are being removed from positions of authority, at colleges, where surely they do not belong.
     But it isn’t that simple.
     And do these unions really seek to “control” their boards, their districts? At Coast, lots of payback occurs when the New Majority arrives. Is that what happens at Saddleback, too?
     And what sorts of tactics are these teachers' unions willing to use to win?
     In the case of the Faculty Association at Saddleback, ruthless, win-at-any-price, realpolitik tactics are used—very much like the ones later used, in 1996, when homophobic fliers pander to local Repubs. In 1985, it appears that FA president Sharon MacMillan and her hubby, a local anti-tax, back-to-basics Republican, are behind the nasty tactics.
     And just how bad was Larry Stevens anyway? It’s clear that he should never have been hired, given his worrisome record at Tacoma Community College. That's f*ck-up #1. But he was smart and he was able to convince the board of his ideas, innovations, changes—including the bonehead move of scheduling more classes on Fridays. When the faculty balked, the board doubled down on backing Stevens. That's f*ck-up #2.
     Whatever might be said of Stevens' policies, the essence of the "Stevens problem," as many suggested, was his autocratic manner, which made it impossible for faculty to respect him. A wiser board would have seen that and corrected it; they would have cut their losses, for the district’s sake, and sent the Colonel packing.
     But no.
     The result? Three and a half years of discord, disunity, acrimony.
     Here are the gory details:

Sunday, August 6, 2017

The Larry Stevens years, 1982-1986, Part 2: a hatchet man "heavy on the decisive action and light on the open, free exchange”

"Decisive"
     Before we get back to a chronological presentation of news articles about the district from 1982 to 1986—i.e., the “Larry Stevens years”—I wanted to present a bit of history from immediately before that period, namely, Stevens' tenure as president of Tacoma Community College from 1975 to 1982.
     Luckily, I have found a website dedicated to the 50th Anniversary of Tacoma Community College in 2015, and it focuses on TCC history. Essentially, the site presents the contents of a book:

“The Open Door: a History of Tacoma Community College"—by Dale Coleman

     The entire book is reprinted on the website. It appears to be excellent....

Friday, August 4, 2017

The Larry Stevens years: 1982-1986, Part 1: looking for candidates with "good working relationships with instructors"

...being a set of newspaper clips chronicling the tenure of disastrously unpopular Saddleback Community College District chancellor Larry Stevens—ultimately taken out by the faculty union, via reconfiguration of the board of trustees....
     Much like the election of 1996.
     Was this a case of Good Guys vs. Bad Guys?
     Bad Guys vs. Bad Guys?
     Good Guys vs. Good Guys?
     "Read more...

Friday, July 28, 2017

The origins of our college district, Part 8c: twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious, Part C [end]

 
     IN THIS POST: with the March 8, 1977, election, charter trustee Pat Backus, who supported the grumbling Tustinites, suffers a major upset; he's OUT and newbies Watts, McKnight, and Price are IN. What emerges is a "new board majority" of Brandt-Taylor-McKnight-Price, two of whom were backed by the faculty union, which seeks to be the sole legal rep of faculty on contract issues, which are going badly.
     Amazingly, this crew immediately REOPENS the supposedly settled subject of site selection for the district's second campus. Tustinites have a cow. The board minority seethes. WTFs all around.
     But the Irvine Co. won't sell the Jeffrey property unless it is first "condemned," thereby relieving the company (and the district) of a big tax payout. Does the new board majority have the five votes necessary for the condemnation move? Seemingly not. (Uh-oh.) 
     Meanwhile, trustee Greinke thinks Child Care Centers are immoral and, over in Irvine, lots of residents are pulling a NIMBY, college-wise, and some begin to suspect dastardly Irvine Co. "tricks." Former trustee Bartholomew weighs in on the crazy site selection issue, bellowing that he expects the district soon to rename itself the "Irvine Company Community College District."
     In May, the Irvine Co. decides to allow Saddleback to purchase the Jeffrey property without condemnation procedures, and so the sale goes forward, ending the matter once and for all. Upshot: the Board Majority has bulldozed the minority and Tustinites are now permanently pissed people. 
     With that, the negotiations logjam concerning the faculty contract is suddenly cleared and faculty get a nice raise and impressive benefits. Greinke calls the contract "excessive." The conservatives seethe.
     What does it all mean? —RB

Thursday, July 27, 2017

The origins of our college district, Part 8b: twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious, Part B


Frank Greinke
     IN THIS POST: back in September, 1976, the Saddleback board chose the Irvine Co.'s Myford-Bryan site, on Tustin's border, for the district's 2nd campus.
     Now, in January, the Irvine Co. does a sudden and mysterious SWITCHEROO: "Why doncha build the new campus over here on Jeffrey and Irvine Center Drive, smack dab in the middle of Irvine, instead?" They're obviously desperate to retain the Myford site (for reasons unexpressed and obfuscated); they sweeten the Jeffrey deal bigtime. PLUS, they start a hard sell, warning about the stink of manure and the lack of roads over at the Myford bean fields.
     Trustee Marshall of Laguna Hills dies after a long illness. The board is down to five members!
     The Tustin News naturally turns up the heat against the Irvine Co. Meanwhile, the Tustin City Council acts like agents of developers (namely, um, the Irvine Co.), not citizens. To trustee Berry, the Irvine Co.'s switcheroo is mighty hinky. Bloviating trustee Frank Greinke openly accuses the Irvine Co. of boondogglin'. Tempers flare and Greinke calls Bartholomew(?) a "Judas," to which trustee Norrisa Brandt strongly objects, whereupon Greinke tells her to just "shut up."
     Brandt notes that "We have Irvine Co. in a bind," and urges the board to take the boffo deal they're offering for Jeffrey. Meanwhile, the March election is drawing near, and Saddleback faculty are backing candidates who prefer the Irvine/Jeffrey site, while Tustinites keep carpin' about the board's alleged "promise" to put a college in the Tustin area (e.g., @ Myford). Trustee Brandt urges the board to wait on the site selection till after the election, when the board will have seven members again. 
     Superintendent Lombardi just wants to flip a goddam coin and move on. Tustinites keep up their infernal yammerin' for the Myford site. Greinke thunders indecorously about "hogwash" and "suede shoes." Citizen Ursula Kennedy challenges the Tustin City Council to come clean about these weird land shenanigans with the Irvine Co., but, natch, to no avail. Finally, less than a week before the election, and despite the board's abject skeleton-crew-itude,  Greinke, Backus, and Berry (a majority of the five) vote in favor of the Myford site, and Tustin celebrates.
     The board thus defies the Irvine Co.—and, maybe, common sense, too.
     But then a new board emerges from the March 8 election. "The new board," says trustee Donna Berry, "is certainly not going to presume to come on and change the site!" 
     Plus the Saddleback faculty are gripin' about pay & bennies. The board is unmoved!
     NOW WHAT? —RB

Tuesday, July 25, 2017

The origins of our college district, Part 8: the twisty, unpredictable, curious and dubious episodes that led to the choice of the “north campus” site (part A)

 
     IN THIS POST: noting board disquietude, early in 1975, Norrisa Brandt of the Saddleback board of trustees calls for a discussion of the very idea of a community college—and of the longterm goals of the district. 
     Ten months later (January, 1976), new trustee Frank Greinke of Tustin senses board disunity concerning THE BIG ISSUE—namely, the district's second and northern campus. To get things moving, he proposes establishing a citizens advisory committee with two community members chosen by each trustee—a procedure guaranteeing strong representation for the City of Tustin. 
     The bumptuous Mr. Greinke approaches the Tustin City Council, asking them for a resolution “supporting the concept of a Tustin area campus of Saddleback College.” They provide it. Meanwhile, conservative trustee, Bob Bartholomew, carps brutishly about the faculty's proposed campus calendar, claiming that it reflects selfish faculty interests. Here and elsewhere, the board is divided between a conservative faction (Bartholomew, Berry, and perhaps Greinke) and a more progressive faction (Taylor, Brandt, Marshall). 
     In May, conservative trustee Donna Berry, seeking to reduce district costs, leads a successful effort to eliminate the "6 unit rule," a rule allowing Tustinites (and other Saddleback district residents) to transfer to other districts' colleges (e.g., Santa Ana College) without securing permission paperwork. The upshot is fewer transfers, lower "tuition" costs for Saddleback.
     Natch, Tustinite trustees (Greinke, Backus), aware of their constituencies' desire to attend Orange Coast and Santa Ana Colleges, fail to support Berry's cost-cutting move.
     Trustees confront a likely financial shortfall of about $3 million caused by new legislation. They pursue cost-cutting and new revenue more vigorously. They consider charging costs to students who take non-credit craft courses and the like. Discussion of this option brings out philosophical differences between trustees concerning the nature of "college." 
     In mid-May, the Citizens Advisory Committee provides its report concerning pursuit of a second, northern campus. It urges the board to buy land (for a 2nd campus) immediately. It highlights longterm complaints especially among Tustinites about the distance to Saddleback college.
     The college produces a document concerning "priorities," but some trustees carp that it does not sufficiently emphasize vocational and technical (even agricultural) instruction. Trustees feel pressure to increase taxes for maintenance, repair, construction, and (mostly uncompensated) growth while attempting to honor conservative anti-tax desiderata. Meanwhile, Saddleback faculty move to strengthen their union. Sparks fly.
     Philosophical differences again arise when Superintendent Lombardi reveals a document describing the kind of college the district is attempting to create. Lombardi's collegiate assumptions clash with local notions.
Greinke
     Pursuit of a second campus continues. By September (1976), three sites are under discussion: on Myford, east of the Santa Ana Freeway; on Culver, west of the freeway; and on Jeffrey @ the Santa Ana Freeway. The board is very divided, and worries about costs and taxes resurface. Greinke, of Tustin, insists that the Myford site (@ today's Tustin Marketplace) is ideal. Tustinites commence clamoring for the Myford site, feeling entitled to a campus in or near Tustin. On a 5-1 vote, Berry dissenting, the board chooses the Myford site. While Tustin celebrates, trustee Bartholomew carps about the immorality of Day Care Centers.
     In November, Bartholomew resigns and moves to Carpinteria. The board is down to six members.
     In January, the Irvine Co. upsets the applecart by attempting to withdraw its offer of the Myford site, recommending, instead, a new site at Jeffrey and Irvine Center Drive in Irvine. Its motives seem obscure. Meanwhile, the Tustin City Council behaves oddly with regard to the annexation and zoning of a 425 acre parcel owned by the Irvine Co—and including the Myford site.
     With the Irvine Co.'s withdrawal of Myford, SHIT HITS FAN. HORNSWOGGLERY SUSPECTED. —RB

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...