Accjc gone wild
San Francisco City Attorney files Law Suit August 22, 2013
Download 2.61 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- ACCJC Press Release of August 23, 2013 on SF Attorney Suit
- Trustee of Coast Community College District Support of Complaint August 20, 2013
San Francisco City Attorney files Law Suit August 22, 2013On August 22, 2013 San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed two civil lawsuits challenging the termination of City College of San Francisco’s accreditation. The first lawsuit was against the ACCJC for “unlawfully allowed its advocacy and political bias to prejudice its evaluation of college accreditation standards.” The second lawsuit was against the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges for impermissibly delegating “its statutory obligations to set standards and determine eligibility for public funding to a wholly unaccountable private entity in the ACCJC.” City Attorney Herrera's civil action alleges that the commission acted to withdraw accreditation "in retaliation for City College having embraced and advocated a different vision for California's community colleges than the ACCJC itself." The complaint was filed in San Francisco Superior Court. The complaint notes that “the accrediting commission's multiple conflicts of interest, improper evaluation process and politically motivated decision-making constitute unfair and unlawful business practices under California law.” Herrera noted that “"Nothing about the actions I've filed today should distract or delay City College from doing everything in its power to solve the problems threatening its survival," said Herrera. "But neither should these steps tempt accreditors to consider -- for even one moment -- retaliating against City College for legitimate challenges to their conduct and authority under the law." "The evidence is clear that the ACCJC ignored multiple conflicts of interest, flouted laws, and allowed its political advocacy to color public responsibilities it should frankly never have been given," Herrera continued. "For this, the State Board of Governors is also to blame for unlawfully ceding its public duties to a private entity wholly beyond the reach of public accountability. Though I seek to enjoin the ACCJC from improperly terminating City College's accreditation, the issues raised by both actions go far beyond any single college alone. This accreditation process has exposed bias, institutional flaws and illegalities in the oversight of the nation's largest higher education system. It potentially affects 72 community college districts, 112 community colleges, and more than 2 million students in California. The issues are serious, and they merit rigorous scrutiny." Herrera addressed what he considers ACCJC’s “extensive financial and political relationships with advocacy organizations and private foundations representing for-profit colleges and powerful student lender interests, with which the ACCJC has in recent years shared a policy agenda to significantly narrow community colleges' longstanding open access mission.” Included in the suit was information regarding the role of the Lumina Foundation for Education’s role in funding programs, such as those at ACCJC, “that call for public community colleges to narrow their offerings and focus on degree completion.” He points out how that agenda was directed toward CCSF’s long-time commitment to open access and culminating with a decision to remove accreditation. The law suit asks the Superior Court to:
The cases are: People of the State of California ex rel. Dennis Herrera v. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, et al., San Francisco Superior Court No. 13-533693, filed Aug. 22, 2013; and In re Legal Challenge and Petition for Rulemaking, Before the Board of Governors of California Community Colleges, filed Aug. 22, 2013. ACCJC Press Release of August 23, 2013 on SF Attorney SuitOn August 22, 2013 the ACCCJ placed on their website one of their typical replies to any complaint against the Commission as follows: “The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (“ACCJC”) was surprised to learn that today the City Attorney of San Francisco filed legal actions against the ACCJC and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. While the ACCJC has not had a chance to fully review the City Attorney’s allegations, these actions appear to be without merit and an attempt to politicize and interfere with the ongoing accreditation review process with respect to the City College of San Francisco. The ACCJC will respond to the City Attorney’s allegations in a court of law.” We will see if they are as dismissive concerning this complaint as they have been relative to each of other complaints that have been filed against them. Trustee of Coast Community College District Support of Complaint August 20, 2013As an individual member of the Coast Community College Board of Trustees, Trustee Jerry Patterson bravely sent a : “Letter of Support for Complaint Against Accrediting Commission of Community and Junior Colleges and Request for Review of Coast Community Colleges Accreditation Warning Status” to Kay Gilcher, Director of the Accreditation Division. Trustee Patterson wrote as a seventeen year member and former president of the Coast Community College Board of Trustees. He has been a part of multiple accreditations and has been following events at CCSF as well as the recent ACCJC visit to the Coast District. In his letter Trustee Patterson wrote that he has “become gravely concerned about how the ACCJC operates and functions.” Trustee Patterson noted that “In 2008, our board had made some significant changes to the governance structure of the District, given very serious instances of repeated wrongdoing that had occurred in our Administration. The Board created a new position, "Secretary of the Board" that would be filled by a District classified manager, hired a general counsel to bring our contracts, land development issues, and board governance process in full compliance with all established laws, and developed Board committees to ensure that all activities of the Board were kept open and transparent.” Patterson went on to describe some changes that were made based on some serious breaches that occurred in their administration. The breaches included: “a Warning Status notification from ACCJC in 2008, regarding Orange Coast College, was hidden from the governing board by the District's administration and the Board of Trustees was never advised nor the public given the information.” He then went on to explain how the Board has operated and how ACCJC responded: “highly irregular and very different from our previous Accreditation site visit in 2007, and giving cause for grave concern about the ACCJC's objectivity in this matter. I feel that ACCJC's actions with Coast Colleges, just as with the City College of San Francisco is unjust and that they require investigation. I am especially concerned that so many chief executives are involved in the Accreditation process. Why aren't more faculty, staff members and trustees involved in this important peer review exercise? Why do community college chief executives have such a dominant relationship with the ACCJC and yet they seem not to ever be selected for Improvement or warning of violations? How can trustees work to reform ACCJC to improve its objectivity, and to change its interpretation of the Accreditation standards it is charged with enforcing to be focused on transparency, compliance with the law, and on continuous self-improvement to accomplish our mission and guarantee student success?” He concluded his letter with “As a Trustee, maintaining the Accreditation of our three colleges is of highest priority, but I want to ensure that the process is completed in the most honest, open, transparent and legal way. Given what has been happening at San Francisco City College, and now at Coast Colleges, I am very concerned that the ACCJC has lost its way. The students we serve need to be assured that colleges in our community college system, as well as the Accrediting body, are keeping their best interests in mind.” At a Special Meeting of the Board of Trustees held on August 21, 2013, the Trustees voted 3 to 2 to send another letter to the Department of Education stating that the view of Patterson did not represent the view of the entire board. One of the Trustees who voted to reject the Patterson letter was Trustee Mary Hornbuckle. Hornbuckle was quoted as saying that “I think it is an incendiary letter, and I think it may very will blow up in our face.” Hornbuckle continued “If I were at the Department of Education and got this letter, I would think, ‘Wow, there’s a district in serious trouble, and I might send somebody out to here to investigate.” I guess she is so unaware of the process of accreditation that she does not understand that the Department of Education does not investigate colleges. Of course, her remarks also make clear the kind of fear that local governing board are operating under due to the ACCJC reign of terror. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 2.61 Mb. Share with your friends:
|