OCT 18 MEETING – ROY’S NOTES:
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Senator Ben and others suggested that the senate take some action in response to Pres. Roquemore’s overstepping his authority (curriculum) this summer.
Ben also mentioned that he witnessed a student writing a swastika on an IVC bathroom door. Discussion of need for coherent response to these kinds of events (senators seemed to be alluding to other security issues on campus of late)
Brittany notes the recent and inadequate “campus forum” re campus safety. There is no coherent response offered by the President to these security issues (including recent student knife-wielding incident; the disturbing letters recently sent to two faculty, etc.
We need to send a coherent message of “intolerance of intolerance.”
Exec report: be sure to complete “pathways” survey.
Art Building getting built
Jeff (VP): some accountability issues concerning stipends, which are not rolled over at end of year.
Dan (Ac Affairs): please respond to flex-week survey
Boone (Curric): Issues concerning split of AAs and ASs. Been getting feedback.
BPs and ARs (review process):
June pulls “code of conduct” policies (I and others objected mightily to this policy, owing to its vagueness and its potential use to silence critics)
Discussion of “safe haven” resolution—to be provided by senate in support of students. June will confab with students.
CAMPUS SAFETY CONCERNS:
VPSS Linda F was very “defensive” at recent forum on security issues. Some reported tone of that forum went “downhill” after a while.
Discussion of an atmosphere of “fear or retaliation” across campus: faculty and staff. June opined she is very concerned. Senators expressed worries about access to our emails by college officials. We want answers.
Kurt (of the union) spoke. Referred to recent “open forum” re security issues. He’s spoken with administrators with issue of “unsecured classrooms and other spaces” (e.g., Liberal Arts building). June has asked questions, gets no answers. Discussion of recent “flier” incidents (defaced). Swastikas. Disruptive student behavior. Some such students are quietly allowed to return. What’s up with that? Seems unacceptable.
Reference made to two disturbing letters sent to faculty by troubled former student (oddly, administration treated this as an occasion to investigate student’s charges; no recognition of threat to faculty). The union’s grievance committee met and discussed the situation (--I should not, to relevant faculty’s dissatisfaction).
Request: that faculty be involved “at the get go” in developing policies about such incidents (?). Faculty must be vigilant and monitor actions taken. Also, there must be “meaningful follow-up” in the case of these threats to faculty, et al.
“Failure of communication” attributed to administration.
Complaint that Roquemore’s OCT 10 letter and forum “inadequate.” The “letter” episode is symptomatic of lack of communication and adequate faculty-involved processes.
Dan D: campuses all over state are developing policies and practices to deal with threats. Not us. Objected to lack of “participatory governance” on campus: the people in A100 only talk to people in A100.
Perhaps we need to hire outside professionals to help us.
Complaint that we forever form “workgroups” and then nothing happens. Reference to how things are done elsewhere—e.g., Santa Barbara. Bringing lawyers and other professionals together with faculty….
“There’s no info on this campus,” said someone.
“We’re not experts; let’s hire them,” said another.
Kathy S mentioned that we have a “police blotter,” but it seems to exclude some events of concern. We need to emphasize the importance of these security issues and the inadequacy of status quo.
There’s something hinky about that police blotter, said another.
Melanie has recently done some research, seen a PBS documentary: there’s quite a history of White Supremacy in the OC. “They’re here,” she said, alluding to hate groups and their use of swastikas.
Some wondered if Roquemore is even aware of all these recent incidents. And what has been done about the swastikas? No info. Just silence.
Elsewhere, said Brittany, it’s a “huge deal” when this sort of thing happens [the swastika incident]. A non-response on our part is a de facto “statement of support” of these people.
On this campus, there’s so much disinformation floating around and no communication from the Pres.
Dan and others mentioned our “need of informative journalism” at IVC.
FACULTY HIRING:
The number of hires appears to be 14. Complaints expressed about the number. (Longstanding complaints about difference between IVC and Saddleback on this score; these decisions are up to the individual colleges, their discretion.)
Kurt (of the union) mentioned that the district (negotiation team) is playing hardball. Lowball offers. It would be great, he said, for faculty to be a presence at board meetings. [Note: very recently (late Oct meet), things have taken a positive turn.] The district team is simply rejecting reasonable offers. I pressed the matter: Dave Lang, beancounter, is perhaps the key figure behind this recalcitrance. Mention was made of district desire to “own” intellectual property created by faculty. Egads! The unreasonableness!
STUDENT CLUBS: NEW AND TROUBLESOME REQUIREMENTS
Ilkner went on about her troubles and consternation re seemingly whimsical requirements placed on student clubs. Causing chaos, she says. There’s a “communication breakdown.” Students are getting discouraged, she said. [Good God, does nothing work around here?!]
“We’re not [haggling] in a Turkish carpet store,” she said, to everyone’s amusement and/or horror.
Anca weighed in with similar horror stories: lots of bureaucracy, micromanagement. Her French club is takin’ hits, man. Crazy demands by ASIVC. Student Services is understaffed, overworked…. Then club is made to face “Draconian measures” and unreasonable demands.
“They” say all these new requirements are coming from the district, “but that’s not so.”
Devin spoke up. She’s been working with clubs for a dozen years, mostly ignoring and avoiding silly requirements. But now there’s an effort to follows rules; it’s impossible, frustrating. No communication. “There’s no one-size-fits-all solutions” of the kinds they are imposing.
Ben noted that ASIVC seems willing to intimidate faculty. Students are treated as though they’re in “middle school.” The new physical requirements for the Math club are unreasonable. “I must physically be there all the time!” Compelled to do “illegal” things.
Someone mentioned the “priority registration” mechanism. Stories of amazing unfairness caused by this aspect.
Brittany noted that, with Helen (Locke) ran SS, students ran amuck. No monitor, nothing. No forms to file. Money spent on snackage. Now we’ve gone too far in the other direction.
[At this point in my notes, I find this: “DOES NO ONE RUN THIS COLLEGE?”]
[end]
