Let Trustees Do Their Work

Assemblyman Tony Cardenas and state Sen. Richard Alarcon, both Sylmar Democrats, went to considerable trouble to see that $4.7 million allocated to Mission College--and then forfeited through administrative bungling--was recovered and included in Gov. Gray Davis’ 1999-2000 budget.

Mission’s president chose to retire following the funding fiasco, and it’s no surprise that the two legislators would have an interest in who will take his place. The Sylmar community college plays an important role in their district, and they want to make sure their efforts on its behalf don’t go to waste.

But when it comes to the selection of a new Mission president, their advocacy threatens to turn into interference.

Cardenas and Alarcon are angry at the Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees for reopening the search for a new president after rejecting three finalists--including one the legislators favored. They’re not the only ones who are angry. Students, faculty and community members who made up the search committee are frustrated that their advice was rejected.

But a search committee’s role is just that, advisory. As disappointing as the delay may be, the decision to prolong the search and, eventually, to choose a new president, is up to the trustees, not the search committee--and not legislators.

Given the community college system’s troubled history, can the trustees be counted on to make a good choice? After all, they oversee a system known for chronic under-funding, a bloated bureaucracy, excessive union influence and administrative instability. Skepticism is understandable.

But the troubled district last year began a series of reforms that would give individual college presidents more authority and hold them more accountable. Three of the seven trustees were newly elected in April on promises to continue the reforms, and a fourth was elected for the first time after being appointed.

The trustees appear to have done a good job in selecting Rocky Young, a former vice president at the well-respected Santa Monica College, to head Pierce College in Woodland Hills. They need to be given a chance to see what they can do for Mission College.

Would the community college board be more representative--and more responsive to area concerns--if trustees were elected by geographic districts rather than at-large? That is a legitimate question for the legislators to raise. What is not appropriate is Alarcon and Cardenas’ continued insistence that the trustees appoint rejected finalist Saeed Ali, an aide to state Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and a liaison for the Legislative Latino Caucus in Sacramento. Ali, who previously worked for Glendale Community College, may well have been a good choice, but legislators need to be sensitive to even the appearance of ethical conflicts. As Assemblywoman Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles), a former community college trustee, pointed out, “Eyebrows should be raised when legislators carry bills for colleges and then turn around and expect their staff members to be given cushy jobs.”

Presiding over Mission College is not exactly a cushy job--challenging is more like it. The newest and smallest of Los Angeles’ community colleges, Mission has seen its share of enrollment and funding problems. But last year it posted a 12% increase in enrollment, with more increases projected.

No one denies the importance of Mission College in preparing residents of the northeast San Fernando Valley, one of the city’s poorest areas, for jobs and for transferring to four-year universities. The college deserves the best president the trustees can find--and the united support of its boosters.