District board risks it all

Hailed by higher education pundits as a ‘flagship’ for community college systems across the country, the Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) is currently sailing under the command of Governing Board members found unfit, unfocused, unruly and considerably inexperienced, according to a lengthy report issued by a five-member independent consulting team. 

The report comes on the coattails of a letter that was submitted anonymously to the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), stating, “we (Maricopa employees) believe (our) Governing Board is overstepping their role. They are acting as the chief operating officer and ignoring the shared governance structure.”

Shared governance structure is an official understanding between employees of the district that key decisions and processes be made transparent and that those affected have a voice. 

Between Sept. 20-23, the five-member team investigated the anonymous complaint by interviewing the board members, employees and faculty as well as reviewing recorded video footage of board meetings. On Oct. 10 the team submitted their report to Chancellor Rufus Glasper, the responsible party for sending the results to the HLC.

“The recommendations speak for themselves,” Glasper stated in his letter to the HLC.

The HLC, part of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, gives accreditation to the MCCCD; without accreditation, credits would not transfer to universities. It is within the power of the HLC to remove accreditation from all of the MCCCD, which has an estimated student body of nearly 300,000.

Board member Randolph Lumm remains confident that the district will not lose its accreditation.

“I am committed to working with my fellow trustees to work more as a team. We need to respect each other even when we disagree. I want to assure people that we will not lose our accreditation; we will take all action necessary to keep our accreditation”, Lumm said, adding, “Not all the information in the report is accurate, they got their information by interviewing staff; there was little fact checking.”

The anonymous letter that sparked the investigation cited allegations of the Governing Board's attempt to micromanage and meddle in affairs outside of the responsibilities allotted to them per their roles as governing board members.

Those allegations came back valid, along with a plethora of shocking evidence tying board members to instances of, “attempting to control and censor student newspaper content, threatening to fire employees, making religious comments at Board meetings, uttering inappropriate and offensive comments about race, ethnicity, religion and gender preference, harassing and intimidating students and employees, and creating a climate that is chilling and an environment that is hostile,” among 27 other pages of findings.
Glasper’s next move involved hiring a facilitator to help establish an action plan to address the issues outlined in the report.

The board is set to officially review the report and explore future steps at a board retreat, scheduled for Nov. 6.

One of the most relevant findings is the report’s view on the recent board decision to hire Alvarez & Marsal (A&M), a third-party consulting firm, at the cost of $1.14 million to assess and provide recommendations on how to better serve students.

The initiative to hire A&M was spearheaded by Board President Colleen Clark, who made up one-third of the narrowly approved 3-2 vote.

A&M, who recently completed Phase I of III, which focused on student opinion and response, issued its findings during an opening meeting held on Sept. 30 in a large meeting hall packed with concerned and curious faculty, staff and community members.
After the findings were presented, nearly a dozen people, including college administrators, teachers and community leaders voiced extensive concerns regarding A&M’s advisement, research method, concluding data and lack of details.

As Phase I has drawn to a close and A&M enters into the halfway point of the 90-day project, the controversy seems to be lessening according to Faculty Association President Jim Simpson. 

“The perceptions are improving. They (A&M) have acknowledged many fine things about Maricopa. I don’t think we can fairly judge the value or effectiveness until they complete their work. Again, we should give them the benefit of the doubt,” Simpson said.

On top of the criticisms pertaining to A&M, Clark has also dealt with a DUI charge near the same time A&M was hired. She confessed to the charge in September during a board meeting nearly two months after the incident occurred.

According to police reports, Clark was found to have a BAC of .204, just under extreme DUI.

Following Clark’s confession, board member Debra Pearson demanded that Clark resign as board president because of the DUI charge.

The report sent to the HLC also states that one board member has cost the district $23,000 in legal fees due to complaints and subsequent investigations. While the report is careful not to name any board member in relation to any one of the hundreds of criticisms, the $23,000 burden pertains to board member Jerry Walker.

In February, a student filed a complaint against Walker, claiming that she was verbally attacked and abused during a college trip to Washington, D.C, when she expressed a differing opinion that enraged Walker to the point he followed her down a hallway, shouting that she was wrong.

In a memorandum written by investigating party Michael Rooney, dated April 9, testimony from multiple eyewitnesses, detail Walker’s behavior and actions.

The memorandum stated, “It is evident that Mr. Jerry Walker, serving in his official capacity as a governing board member, made several grievous errors in judgment, protocol and decorum. The student stated in her written complaint and in the subsequent interview I conducted, that Mr. Walker had become angry and rude toward her, that he had demeaned and attacked her in a public setting and that he had lied to others by accusing her of being rude and disrespectful toward him.” 

In his defense, Walker described the entire ordeal as being orchestrated by liberal administrations and staff in order to embarrass him in Washington, D.C.

Walker could produce no evidence that supported his statement. Elected to the governing board in 2004, Walker oversees SCC and Mesa Community College and will be up for reelection in 2010.

At the time of printing, all members of the Governing Board excluding Randolp Lumm, did not respond to interview attempts.

To view the full report click here