Board of Trustees Report

District Office

July 13, 2011

Oath of Office Ceremony

This was the annual Organizational meeting of the Board, at which newly elected trustees are sworn in and Board officers are elected. Miguel Santiago, as out-going First Vice President, presided. After he was sworn in himself by the chancellor, and his pastor, Father Alden Sison, offered a short prayer, he introduced John Chiang, the California State Controller. Chiang then swore in Scott Svonkin and Steve Veres, the two new trustees. Both took the moment to praise Chiang profusely for his courageous leadership in Sacramento. Mona Field was then sworn in by the chancellor.

In his concluding remarks, Santiago talked about his sense of urgency to accomplish as much as possible for the district. He reviewed the Board’s focus on the budget and the relatively strong financial condition of the district, as well as the problems with the bond program and the improvements made in it over the past year and a half. He would like the focus going forward to be on student success and workforce education.

Nancy Pearlman and Tina Park each welcomed the new trustees.

Steve Veres said being on the Board was very meaningful to him, given his family’s ties to the district. He introduced his mother and wife, Trade and Valley graduates respectively, and noted that his recently deceased father was also a Trade graduate. He said the district was one of “the most important institutions” in the state.

Scott Svonkin mentioned that there will be a public swearing in ceremony at East LA College on Sunday afternoon, in order to emphasize that the business of the district is the students. He said his experience at PCC turned his life around (he had dropped out of high school). For him, reform of the bond program is the first task ahead. He cited the need to regain the public trust if the district is going to be able to further improve its facilities (with an additional bond, I assume). He said we must bring transparency to the bond program and “stand up to the fraud, waste, and abuse” in the program. He also insisted, however, that the recent bond problems were not representative of the district, and he talked about its “proud history.”

There were then words of congratulations from those of us at the Resource Table. Chancellor LaVista added brief comments about how he finds the ritual of Board meetings inspirational.

Open Session (Regular Meeting)

The meeting began with the election of officers. Santiago was elected president on a unanimous vote. (Just before the election, a public speaker, John Walsh from the Hollywood Highlands organization, urged the Board to vote for “anyone but Scott Svonkin.”) For the First Vice President position there were two candidates: Nancy Pearlman, who nominated herself, and Tina Park, nominated by Veres. Pearlman complained sharply about the standard Board practice of rotating officer terms being discontinued seven years ago. She said she had never been given the opportunity to serve as president or first vice president, adding “my voice is equal to all others.” The vote was four to three in favor of Park, with Santiago, Park, Veres, and Svonkin making up the majority. Kelly Candaele and Mona Field supported Pearlman (as did Amber Barrero, the student trustee, with her advisory vote). Park thanked her colleagues for their support and said she sought “the most ethical and transparent district.”

A unanimous vote was then taken to retain the second vice president position, which was just created two years ago. Pearlman agreed with some reluctance to run for reelection, and she was unopposed and unanimously elected.

Santiago reiterated his desire to focus on student success. He said the Board should allow room for different ideas, that they had come through a difficult year, and that there was a need to get beyond ego clashes and work together. He added there was a need to build public trust again. He suggested the Board hold a retreat at the start of the academic year rather than wait until the second semester.

Public speakers followed. Miki Jackson from the Atwater Coalition returned and complained about the bond program. She urged new trustees to look deeper into it and to read through the material provided by her organization. She claimed that all of her group’s predictions had come true. John Walsh also spoke again. His speech can only be described as a rant, and ended in a shouting reference to Third Reich censorship. Had it continued much longer, I believe he would have been escorted out of the room by one of the sheriffs.

Parke Blaire, representing a company called GeoSource, warned the trustees not to abandon their commitment to sustainability and renewable energy in light of the LA Times’ articles. He urged them to partner with his firm and avoid financial risk.

Three faculty members from City College addressed the Board: Jayesh Bhakta, Alfredo Herrera, and Roger Wolf. All of them criticized the City administration for putting Meryll Eastcott, a long-time dean, on administrative leave last week. They strongly defended Eastcott, praising him as a man of integrity and competence. Herrera also suggested a double standard at work, alluding to an investigation into improprieties in the English Department that have not resulted in administrative leave for anyone.

The trustees had no comments in response to any of the speakers.

Out of Closed Session it was reported that the trustees had decided to cease taking further legal action in a case. No details were provided.

Svonkin and Pearlman were both approved to serve as Board representatives on local educational committees.

In his report to the Board, LaVista talked about his hope for the future. He said the diverse experience of the new trustees would be helpful. He then reviewed the past year. While the budget crisis put great pressure on higher education in California, he felt the cooperation between its sectors was a very positive development. He also cited the close cooperation within the district, especially with the unions, to control costs.

He listed a number of improvements in the bond program: better communication with the Board, the establishment of an Inspector General office, the change in the multiplier rate for contractors, and especially the work of the independent review panel, from which he expects a great deal of assistance.

In terms of student success, he reminded the Board of our work on the Math Summit as well as on Achieving the Dream. Over 40 from the district attended the recent Kick Off for AtD in Seattle. The challenge will be to take student success ideas and put them into practice.

He also noted all the leadership changes in the district in recent months, in the Senate, Faculty Guild, as well as administration and Board. He believes participatory governance is moving forward.

Susan Aminoff made a brief presentation of the annual JLMBC report. I will leave the details to the Guild, but she claimed that our health benefit bill would have been $90 million this year if we hadn’t moved to CalPERS, rather than $62.6 million. She added that there was “a firewall” between health benefits and pension plans, and that we will remain with CalPERS barring any (unexpected) recommendation to the contrary from JLMBC. Veres asked her why the costs had gone up 2.5% (which was lower than the average 10% increase for comparable plans).

In Consent Calendar discussion, changes to bond program approvals were noted. Change orders over 10% are no longer going to be tolerated, and some contracts were terminated at the meeting as a result. This had never happened before. There were questions about the availability of ASL interpreters in the district, about management of community services programs, and about how we track grant success, among other items. With the facilities section removed, the consent calendar was approved.

The facilities section was then discussed. There were questions about the move toward a district access card system and about particular change orders at Pierce. The section was then approved.

Comments

The awkward election of Tina Park as First Vice President indicates that the new trustees, along with Santiago and Park, are determined to make a clear statement that the Board is now going to be run by new people with new ideas. I believe this is largely in reaction to the damaging LA Times’ revelations about the bond program. Admittedly, this is speculative, but Svonkin’s comments about the need for reform would seem to support my interpretation.

David

David Beaulieu

District Academic Senate President

Los Angeles Community College District

(213) 891-2294