Give Yoneji, Community Colleges a Chance : Education: The chancellor’s contract is being canceled before he’s had time to implement sorely needed changes.

I have always viewed the front end of the public education continuum as starting with pre-K through grade 14. I know traditionally it is viewed as ending in the 12th grade. To me, the overlap between the Los Angeles Unified School District and the Los Angeles Community College District should be looked at as a partnership where continuing education, adult schools, occupational and skills centers and special high school programs come together.

In the past decade, the issue of training and retraining displaced workers has been of paramount importance. More recently, the shutting down of affirmative action programs at the University of California and the potential elimination of remedial classes in the California State University system make the role of the community college system an even more important conduit for students moving from high school to post-secondary education.

In either case, with young and older students trying to cope and succeed, the question of whether the community college system is up to the task has been raised.

Until recently, the community college district’s educational programs and services had failed to keep up with the challenges, its services were out of touch with the changing needs of the community, and by 1994, enrollments on once-thriving campuses had declined to levels not seen since 1970. Many of the district’s students fled to neighboring community colleges that offered more attractive and relevant educational programs at better and safer facilities.

In mid-1994, the district’s seven elected trustees responded to the crisis by hiring its then-vice chancellor for business services, Neil Yoneji, as its chancellor on a two-year contract. Yoneji moved firmly and openly to establish a new direction for the nine-campus system. He focused on three themes: student access and success, community and economic development and a strong role for the system in enhancing Los Angeles’ community and cultural life. Yoneji emphasized cooperation with the K-12 and university systems to create a seamless elementary school through workplace educational program. He created collaborations and partnerships with community organizations, business and industry, government agencies and others to renew the district’s educational programs.

Most important, he came up with a plan to fund the changes: He formulated an early retirement incentive program for the district’s employees that resulted in net annual savings of $8 million, almost enough to finance the changes needed.

The board responded positively to Yoneji’s initiatives, and by June 1995, it seemed possible that substantive, positive change could come to the district.

Then, the elected trustees got cold feet. By a 4-3 vote, the board voted to terminate Yoneji’s contract, the deciding vote being cast by the newest member, Gloria Romero, who had been sworn in just 60 days before. Board members initially gave few reasons for the vote. However, they agreed that the issue is the most divisive they have faced.

When pressed, trustees Lindsay Conner and Althea Baker praised Yoneji and acknowledged that there were no differences with him on the district’s new direction. Conner, however, claims that the board lacked “trust” in the chancellor and that there was a “lack of educational leadership.” Other board members have openly disagreed. Beth Garfield, a Yoneji supporter, upset at Conner’s characterizations, remarked that Yoneji has brought change to the district and has had the “guts” to follow through. The board has not provided any written evaluation of Yoneji’s performance.

Los Angeles needs a community college system that can take on the challenge of the year 2000. To get there, the district must change. Yoneji has offered a practical plan and found the funds to get the job started. He has provided strong, decisive leadership in just the first year of his stewardship. The trustees should give Yoneji the opportunity to succeed. To do otherwise, is to turn away not just from the chancellor they hired only a year ago but also from the district’s future.