One of four emails sent to the Rio Hondo College website to Board Members on Monday, April 6, 2020 1:36 PM
"Recently, Dr. Arturo Reyes, President of Rio Hondo College in Whittier, California, made the decision to open the library on Monday, April 5, 2020 and keep it open throughout the semester to students for, as the Library website states, “checkout [of] Chromebooks and to provide wireless Internet access, study spaces, wireless printing, and copying.” Last week, from Monday March 30 through Friday April 3 a small team of the classified staff (and the Library Dean) passed out Chromebooks to students and were present to assist students in their use of the library as a study space.
The President’s concern, although ostensibly for all Rio Hondo College students, in this case focuses on the greater vulnerabilities of those students identified by the college as at risk due to their need for increased equity. As educators, education staff, and/or concerned residents of California and the nation, we empathize with the plight of such students in their struggles to succeed in their higher education endeavors. THIS IS WHY we call on President Reyes and the Board of Trustees of Rio Hondo College to rescind the decision to keep the library open.
Precisely these students are those who should not be led to believe they will be entering a safe environment when they enter the Rio Hondo College Library under these extraordinarily unusual and dire circumstances. The reasons for the risk are:
• Library Classified Staff are NOT supported throughout the day by Housekeeping Staff and must themselves disinfect the many and varied surfaces in which students come in contact. Housekeeping (presumably) arrive after hours to disinfect; however, unclear is which surfaces they have been cleaning and will clean in the future since the students are not confined to a small space and will need to spread out throughout the library in order to comply with the safe “social distancing” policy currently implemented at the state and county levels of California.
• Library Classified Staff have been sanitizing any surfaces they notice students using. The college supplied Staff with latex gloves and disinfectant. However, the Staff have been using masks they brought out of Library Archives for use when they engage directly with students since the college did NOT supply Staff with this necessary Personal Protection Equipment (PPE).
• Socially and economically vulnerable students are whole persons; they are singularly disadvantaged in the sense that they lack funds for purchase of technology, whether electronic devices or Internet access, but they are also family members, and their families also lack access to many resources. A primary example is healthcare, and the example of inequity following is for the undocumented student population and their families. As Kaiser Health News noted in its Disparities Policy (2019), “Among the total nonelderly population, 45% of undocumented immigrants were uninsured compared to about one in four (23%) lawfully present immigrants and less than one in ten citizens (8%) as of 2017” (Artiga and Diaz). Entering the library, which does not comply with the recommendations to “shelter in place” asserted by epidemiologists and other health care experts, puts these medically vulnerable families at risk.
• Of course, once anyone in a family contracts the virus, they cannot contribute to the financial support of the family, a devastating consequence for low income families of which the vulnerable students of Rio Hondo clearly are members. Also, as the New York Times pointed out in March (Fisher and Bubola), in addition to the two factors contributing to a higher mortality rate (older age and preexisting health conditions), “a body of research points to a third: low socioeconomic status.” Thus, for any group of economically and resource disadvantaged peoples, exposure to potential vectors of the virus need to be eliminated. This truly becomes a matter of life and death.
• Additionally, “each low-income family [is] forced to accept a higher risk of exposure” as a consequence of inequality. THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH OFFERING THE LIBRARY AS A RESOURCE DURING THE PANDEMIC. Rather than more creatively addressing the needs of these students so that they can comply with the shelter at home policy and remain safe with their families as more privileged students do, the President has decided to place these students, because of their status, in a situation that jeopardizes them and their families by opening the Library as a study space.
In addition to our concerns for vulnerable students and their families, we are addressing our concerns for the Rio Hondo College Library Staff. Many of these valuable college employees know well and empathize with the targeted students since they also were those very students in their youth. Rio Hondo Library Staff are the children of immigrant farm workers and other blue collar workers in varying fields. Several are immigrants themselves. Some did pursue a college degree in their youth and had these plans disintegrate because of the difficulties associated with poverty, frankly. They understand well the desire to improve one’s life and to attend an institution of higher education. And, on a daily basis they support Rio Hondo College students in their individual efforts to reach these goals.
However, they also are proud and dedicated employees of Rio Hondo College, and it grieves them to suspect that the college is not returning the spirit of dedication in requiring them to continue to work in the Library with students despite the danger that the Covid-19 pandemic has engendered.
Recently, President Reyes quoted revered American, Cesar Chavez in a message to the college community. We want to remind President Reyes that Chavez, as well as his compadre, another revered American, Dolores Huerta, were labor organizers who spent their lives fighting for the rights of workers, especially the right to a safe workplace environment. Since the Rio Hondo College Library staff is mostly comprised of women, in honor of Huerta, we offer her words about workers, the atmosphere in which they work, and their courage in risking their work status in asserting their rights for protection as workers:
“When they know they can have some type of security, some kind of protection, then they’ll come forth. But, it takes a lot. It takes a lot.”
Unfortunately, due to President Reyes’s decision to open the Library without consultation with the very people who will be required to work under these extraordinarily unusual and, in fact, dangerous conditions, the Library Staff does not feel “security [or] protection,” but with their own and the students’ well-being on the line, they are coming forth, nonetheless.
As a concerned community member, I call upon President Arturo Reyes and the Rio Hondo College District Board of Trustees to rescind the decision to open the Rio Hondo Library to students and to require the physical presence of Rio Hondo Library Staff in the Library until California Governor Gavin Newsom calls an end to the “shelter in place” mandate."
Monday, April 6, 2020
Friday, March 20, 2020
Rio Hondo College's Emergency Resolution Adopted in Closed Session
It has been a bit confusing but in the end resolved, sort of. On Monday March 16, 2020 at 5:40 pm, I received three emails related to an emergency meeting notice for the Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees.
One email was the the agenda (attached) which listed a Closed Session item titled "A. Threat to Public Services or Facilities". Second email was the emergency resolution which was NOT posted with our agenda and stamped "Confidential-Attorney Client-Privilege". The third email was a listed of phone numbers, links and teleconference passwords. It took me eight minutes to finally call in after no-connection with phone numbers and a Skype link that keep me waiting for a response. Once connected, the board was talking about the Emergency Resolution which I just received fifteen minutes ago and understandable taken its an emergency.
What I did not realize at the time was that we were in Closed Session discussing the resolution. We discussed and voted on the resolution. I moved to adjourn and was told we needed to report out. Now it dawned on me that we were in closed session voting on an emergency resolution. I checked and confirmed that ALL other local community colleges adopted and voted on their emergency resolution in an open public meeting in full view of the public. Cerritos College, Mt. SAC, Citrus, and I watched Pasadena City college on line adopt their resolution. ALL other local school districts and cities adopted their resolution publicly. SO why would Rio Hondo College adopted their Emergency Resolution in closed session and not post the resolution online with the agenda? It is my understanding, If an item is considered in closed session is it confidential and not open to inspection? It was a bit confusing. After talking to legal counsel "it was not the intent to keep it secret". Ok, so here it is then. Rio Hondo's Emergency Resolution adopted on Monday March 16, 2020 at an Emergency Meeting in Closed Session.
Resolution:
Agenda
One email was the the agenda (attached) which listed a Closed Session item titled "A. Threat to Public Services or Facilities". Second email was the emergency resolution which was NOT posted with our agenda and stamped "Confidential-Attorney Client-Privilege". The third email was a listed of phone numbers, links and teleconference passwords. It took me eight minutes to finally call in after no-connection with phone numbers and a Skype link that keep me waiting for a response. Once connected, the board was talking about the Emergency Resolution which I just received fifteen minutes ago and understandable taken its an emergency.
What I did not realize at the time was that we were in Closed Session discussing the resolution. We discussed and voted on the resolution. I moved to adjourn and was told we needed to report out. Now it dawned on me that we were in closed session voting on an emergency resolution. I checked and confirmed that ALL other local community colleges adopted and voted on their emergency resolution in an open public meeting in full view of the public. Cerritos College, Mt. SAC, Citrus, and I watched Pasadena City college on line adopt their resolution. ALL other local school districts and cities adopted their resolution publicly. SO why would Rio Hondo College adopted their Emergency Resolution in closed session and not post the resolution online with the agenda? It is my understanding, If an item is considered in closed session is it confidential and not open to inspection? It was a bit confusing. After talking to legal counsel "it was not the intent to keep it secret". Ok, so here it is then. Rio Hondo's Emergency Resolution adopted on Monday March 16, 2020 at an Emergency Meeting in Closed Session.
Resolution:
Agenda
Thursday, March 19, 2020
Coronavirus Rio Hondo College: Employees with Compromised Immune Systems
Superintendent/President, Dr. Arturo Reyes;
I am asking you to please take action, under your extraordinary emergency authority granted to you by the Board of Trustees, to allow employees with compromised immune systems at Rio Hondo College to work from home immediately. Please rescind the use of sick leave and vacation time used by this population to protect themselves. Rio Hondo College should be seriously concerned for the most vulnerable of our employees. We should not wait for the State to compel us to take such action. Instead Rio Hondo College should do what’s right, now. The most vulnerable in our society, under these circumstances, are the aged over 65 and those with compromised immune systems.
Dr. Reyes, it would be in the best interest of our employees and the community that the most vulnerable employees be allowed to voluntarily choose to work from home immediately and not have to use their sick leave or vacation time to protect themselves.
As always is a pleasure and privilege to serve,
Gary Mendez
Governing Board Member
I am asking you to please take action, under your extraordinary emergency authority granted to you by the Board of Trustees, to allow employees with compromised immune systems at Rio Hondo College to work from home immediately. Please rescind the use of sick leave and vacation time used by this population to protect themselves. Rio Hondo College should be seriously concerned for the most vulnerable of our employees. We should not wait for the State to compel us to take such action. Instead Rio Hondo College should do what’s right, now. The most vulnerable in our society, under these circumstances, are the aged over 65 and those with compromised immune systems.
Dr. Reyes, it would be in the best interest of our employees and the community that the most vulnerable employees be allowed to voluntarily choose to work from home immediately and not have to use their sick leave or vacation time to protect themselves.
As always is a pleasure and privilege to serve,
Gary Mendez
Governing Board Member
Wednesday, March 18, 2020
Rio Hondo College's Emergency Resolution on Coronavirus NOT public
Emergency Resolution on Coronavirus
I am concerned that the Emergency Resolution considered by the Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees on Monday, March 16, 2020 at 6:00pm was considered, discussed and voted-on in closed session out of public view. The draft is titled “Confidential: Attorney Client Privilege”. Is this Resolution confidential? As you can see on the Agenda of March 16 that the Emergency Resolution was Not Agendized for the public to view. Surrounding community colleges Agendized their emergency resolutions on the public agenda and considered and voted on their resolution in open session.
Why did Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees adopt an Emergency Resolution in closed session and not report it out? Is that legal? Is that ethical and transparent?
This must be corrected by the following:
1. Call an Emergency Meeting
2. Agendized the Emergency Resolution
3. Board of Trustees shall consider, discuss and vote on resolution in an open session with open communication from the public and campus community.
4. Must be done by Thursday, March 19, 2020.
I am concerned that the Emergency Resolution considered by the Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees on Monday, March 16, 2020 at 6:00pm was considered, discussed and voted-on in closed session out of public view. The draft is titled “Confidential: Attorney Client Privilege”. Is this Resolution confidential? As you can see on the Agenda of March 16 that the Emergency Resolution was Not Agendized for the public to view. Surrounding community colleges Agendized their emergency resolutions on the public agenda and considered and voted on their resolution in open session.
Why did Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees adopt an Emergency Resolution in closed session and not report it out? Is that legal? Is that ethical and transparent?
This must be corrected by the following:
1. Call an Emergency Meeting
2. Agendized the Emergency Resolution
3. Board of Trustees shall consider, discuss and vote on resolution in an open session with open communication from the public and campus community.
4. Must be done by Thursday, March 19, 2020.
Tuesday, January 7, 2020
Greenleaf Guardian Got It All Wrong
The Greenleaf Guardian, a new political blog, wrote a blog post titled "College trustee Gary Mendez fined by state ethics agency" and got it all wrong. Old Issue resolved!
Way back in 2015-16, Gary was late on filing paperwork, that was eventually filed for a campaign that never started and zero dollars raised. No campaign, zero dollars with nothing to report. Like any hit piece Eric Pierce wrote the blog post without full facts that the cannons of good journalism requires. It was a hit job.
The second thing Eric Pierce wrote about is a re hacking of a 2010 article written by the Whittier Daily News with incomplete facts but "sold newspapers". It is about when Gary was accused of "carrying a switchblade" by a Whittier PD officer who is the son of a city councilman. This occurred in 2010, after having diner at a restaurant and just after getting off work as a campground ranger (half in his uniform). Gary paid his bill and said farewell to his diner friends and walked to his car in the restaurant parking lot. After getting in his car he was rushed by the city councilman's son-police officer. Gary voluntarily acknowledged and surrendered his utility knife to the officer. Gary had saved lives with his utility knife as a ranger and was critical to his job. As the blog suggest, there was never any altercation nor any report of one but served as an excuse for councilman's police son to pull Gary out of his car while parked in the lot. Car keys not even in the ignition. Councilman's police son was waiting for him. Conveniently, the next day the Whittier Daily News wrote a scathing article describing Gary as a switchblade carrying ese. Soon after, but never reported by the Whittier Daily News and ignored by this political blog attack, Gary was vindicated with the court judged and prosecutor immediately dismissing the case and admonishing the Whittier PD and the Councilman's police son for "misinterpreting state law and for being suspiciously political".
The councilman's retaliation came as a result of Gary and his child safety parent group exposing the councilman's relationship with a two time convicted child molester that turned out to be his financial supporter and who he awarded a landscaping city contract to with the councilman knowing of his trespasses against children. Just before this time, the child safety parents and Gary produced a map of all molesters names and addresses for the "safe route to school" map with the councilman's molester friend on it. At the time, the child safety group was unaware of the councilman-molester relationship. The map was part of child safety training and given to local parents for children to avoid. Just after at a community event, the councilman approached Gary with scathing remarks about the "attack on a prominent family" (molester-city contractor) and spat on Gary's face. Gary was use to molesters on Megan's List making threats as a result of his child safety training. But a city councilman was a surprise that rose suspicion.
The issue snowballed when the Councilman awarded the child molester the opportunity to host the "Santa Sleigh" in the city which is an event primarily for children. The child safety parent group and Gary informed the city and the Whittier PD of the potential danger children would be in to no avail. Gary and the parent group attended the event and took pictures of the molester greeting and making physical contact with children. Tragically, it turned out he molested another child related to the event and which could have been prevented but the city and the councilman looked the other way. Another child violated. Gary has been conducting child safety training in the area for over thirty-five years and will continue regardless of political opposition or nasty misconstrued blog attacks. The incident and with pressure, the city was forced to legislate city ordinances requiring background checks on city vendors and Santa's Sleigh host homes for crimes against children. None of which the Whittier Daily News or the Greenleaf Guardian reported on.
The Greanleaf Gurardian and Eric Pierce wrote the political hit piece without looking into any actual facts. The intent of Eric Pierce is to portray Gary in a bad light during a campaign with old (2010) misconstrued information. Gary was judged for his politics, his endeavors to protect children and in exposing politicians that protect molesters. "I will not be deterred from protecting and empowering children and parents from bullies and child sex offenders. I'm sorry that Eric Pierce choose the later, said Sensei Gary Mendez".
(Gary Mendez: Still the Champion and Protector of Children)
Way back in 2015-16, Gary was late on filing paperwork, that was eventually filed for a campaign that never started and zero dollars raised. No campaign, zero dollars with nothing to report. Like any hit piece Eric Pierce wrote the blog post without full facts that the cannons of good journalism requires. It was a hit job.
The second thing Eric Pierce wrote about is a re hacking of a 2010 article written by the Whittier Daily News with incomplete facts but "sold newspapers". It is about when Gary was accused of "carrying a switchblade" by a Whittier PD officer who is the son of a city councilman. This occurred in 2010, after having diner at a restaurant and just after getting off work as a campground ranger (half in his uniform). Gary paid his bill and said farewell to his diner friends and walked to his car in the restaurant parking lot. After getting in his car he was rushed by the city councilman's son-police officer. Gary voluntarily acknowledged and surrendered his utility knife to the officer. Gary had saved lives with his utility knife as a ranger and was critical to his job. As the blog suggest, there was never any altercation nor any report of one but served as an excuse for councilman's police son to pull Gary out of his car while parked in the lot. Car keys not even in the ignition. Councilman's police son was waiting for him. Conveniently, the next day the Whittier Daily News wrote a scathing article describing Gary as a switchblade carrying ese. Soon after, but never reported by the Whittier Daily News and ignored by this political blog attack, Gary was vindicated with the court judged and prosecutor immediately dismissing the case and admonishing the Whittier PD and the Councilman's police son for "misinterpreting state law and for being suspiciously political".
The councilman's retaliation came as a result of Gary and his child safety parent group exposing the councilman's relationship with a two time convicted child molester that turned out to be his financial supporter and who he awarded a landscaping city contract to with the councilman knowing of his trespasses against children. Just before this time, the child safety parents and Gary produced a map of all molesters names and addresses for the "safe route to school" map with the councilman's molester friend on it. At the time, the child safety group was unaware of the councilman-molester relationship. The map was part of child safety training and given to local parents for children to avoid. Just after at a community event, the councilman approached Gary with scathing remarks about the "attack on a prominent family" (molester-city contractor) and spat on Gary's face. Gary was use to molesters on Megan's List making threats as a result of his child safety training. But a city councilman was a surprise that rose suspicion.
The issue snowballed when the Councilman awarded the child molester the opportunity to host the "Santa Sleigh" in the city which is an event primarily for children. The child safety parent group and Gary informed the city and the Whittier PD of the potential danger children would be in to no avail. Gary and the parent group attended the event and took pictures of the molester greeting and making physical contact with children. Tragically, it turned out he molested another child related to the event and which could have been prevented but the city and the councilman looked the other way. Another child violated. Gary has been conducting child safety training in the area for over thirty-five years and will continue regardless of political opposition or nasty misconstrued blog attacks. The incident and with pressure, the city was forced to legislate city ordinances requiring background checks on city vendors and Santa's Sleigh host homes for crimes against children. None of which the Whittier Daily News or the Greenleaf Guardian reported on.
The Greanleaf Gurardian and Eric Pierce wrote the political hit piece without looking into any actual facts. The intent of Eric Pierce is to portray Gary in a bad light during a campaign with old (2010) misconstrued information. Gary was judged for his politics, his endeavors to protect children and in exposing politicians that protect molesters. "I will not be deterred from protecting and empowering children and parents from bullies and child sex offenders. I'm sorry that Eric Pierce choose the later, said Sensei Gary Mendez".
Friday, July 12, 2019
Board Takes Action to"Postpones All Employment Hiring" at June 12, 2019 Board Meeting
"A lack of transparency results in distrust and a deep sense of insecurity." -Dalai Lama
(Caveat: Sausage making is not for the faint at heart)
Regardless of board politics, we have a fiduciary responsibility prescribed by state statute to be transparent in our process which should be taken with gravity.
On June 12, 2019 at the Regular Board Meeting of the Rio Hondo College, in closed session, the board took action to "postpone all employment hiring till the August 14th Regular Board Meeting". You may not know this because the motion and the vote was not adequately reported out and recorded in the minutes. The minutes did say that each of the four hiring was "tabled" which was not accurate. There is a difference between table and postponement (Robert's Rules). Since then, I have "noticed reconsideration" to bring back the minutes for clerical correction to remedy the violation. The hires postponed are:
Full-Time, Tenure-Track, Sociology Instructor
Full-Time, Tenure-Track, Chicana/o Studies Instructor
Dean, Behavioral and Social Sciences
Interim Grant Manager, Outreach and Concurrent/Dual Enrollment
Nevertheless, the motion and vote is as follows (which is public information and the Board has a statutory responsibility to report out)
It was moved by Trustee Valladares and seconded by Trustee Lomeli to "postpone all employment hiring till the August `4th, 2019 Regular Board meeting".
Votes:
Valladares: Yes
Lomeli: Yes
Santana: Yes
Garcia: Yes
Mendez: No
My reasoning for my "no" vote is that any delay in the hiring of faculty for the Fall semester would have a negative impact on students as the respective faculty member needs time to prepare for Fall classes. In addition, the postponed Dean position should not be delayed since the District is experiencing an issue with the failed new centralized method of scheduling and must revert back to the old method led by each department. This large error will cost the college millions in lost, miscalculated, FTES. Each department is scrambling to correct the error to prevent any further hemorrhaging in FTES/funds. Delaying the hiring of a Dean is detrimental to the respective department, faculty, staff and students. We can not afford any delay in the appointment of a dean which the superintendent was ready to recommend in June. A postponement is shortsighted.
Squirrelly Process
Nonetheless, the positions were officially "postponed til August. However, an odd thing occurred at the July 10, 2019 regular meeting of the Board of Trustees, two of the four positions postponed appeared on the closed session agenda for hiring. Ok, so the board postponed and then unpostponed? Not really, after the board took action to postpone only the board (as a whole) can undue that action (reconsideration) not any single board member. So it occurred despite any basic (legislative-Rules) process.
The peculiar thing is why only the two were unpostponed and hired? Why leave out the Dean position and the grant manager? I don't know. I could speculate but i'd rather not get into any board members mens-rae.
There it is in full transparency.
Agenda for June 12, 2019
(Caveat: Sausage making is not for the faint at heart)
Regardless of board politics, we have a fiduciary responsibility prescribed by state statute to be transparent in our process which should be taken with gravity.
On June 12, 2019 at the Regular Board Meeting of the Rio Hondo College, in closed session, the board took action to "postpone all employment hiring till the August 14th Regular Board Meeting". You may not know this because the motion and the vote was not adequately reported out and recorded in the minutes. The minutes did say that each of the four hiring was "tabled" which was not accurate. There is a difference between table and postponement (Robert's Rules). Since then, I have "noticed reconsideration" to bring back the minutes for clerical correction to remedy the violation. The hires postponed are:
Full-Time, Tenure-Track, Sociology Instructor
Full-Time, Tenure-Track, Chicana/o Studies Instructor
Dean, Behavioral and Social Sciences
Interim Grant Manager, Outreach and Concurrent/Dual Enrollment
Nevertheless, the motion and vote is as follows (which is public information and the Board has a statutory responsibility to report out)
It was moved by Trustee Valladares and seconded by Trustee Lomeli to "postpone all employment hiring till the August `4th, 2019 Regular Board meeting".
Votes:
Valladares: Yes
Lomeli: Yes
Santana: Yes
Garcia: Yes
Mendez: No
My reasoning for my "no" vote is that any delay in the hiring of faculty for the Fall semester would have a negative impact on students as the respective faculty member needs time to prepare for Fall classes. In addition, the postponed Dean position should not be delayed since the District is experiencing an issue with the failed new centralized method of scheduling and must revert back to the old method led by each department. This large error will cost the college millions in lost, miscalculated, FTES. Each department is scrambling to correct the error to prevent any further hemorrhaging in FTES/funds. Delaying the hiring of a Dean is detrimental to the respective department, faculty, staff and students. We can not afford any delay in the appointment of a dean which the superintendent was ready to recommend in June. A postponement is shortsighted.
Squirrelly Process
Nonetheless, the positions were officially "postponed til August. However, an odd thing occurred at the July 10, 2019 regular meeting of the Board of Trustees, two of the four positions postponed appeared on the closed session agenda for hiring. Ok, so the board postponed and then unpostponed? Not really, after the board took action to postpone only the board (as a whole) can undue that action (reconsideration) not any single board member. So it occurred despite any basic (legislative-Rules) process.
The peculiar thing is why only the two were unpostponed and hired? Why leave out the Dean position and the grant manager? I don't know. I could speculate but i'd rather not get into any board members mens-rae.
There it is in full transparency.
Agenda for June 12, 2019
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
Why I Resigned as Board President on 6/12/19
Don't you recognize a selfless act when you see one?
I resigned as Board President of the Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees at a regular meeting on Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Admittedly, it felt good to resign and I feel accomplished. For full transparency, i will tell you why. Instead of being constantly attacked by a board member and checking her undue influence on the Superintendent, I choose to step aside and let others lead hoping the mean spirited vindictiveness will cease.
In sum, I met my main objective which was to assure that Rio Hondo College hired a good and unbiased Superintendent/President. This was not an easy task. It was filled with skirmishes, clandestine chicanery and pitch battles. It was known a year out that two board members, possibly four before the change in the board, and a group of employees that they had predetermined who they were going to hire as the next superintendent/president. The votes and structure was all in place before November. The champagne bottles were poping. However, the group was careless in who they brought into the scheme not realizing that leaks will always occur when a sinister plan is in play. People like to talk. The gang talked about stacking the search committee but with twenty-three members they were unable to acquire a majority. Mistake one.
The remaining two conspiring board members proceeded with their end of the scheme. First, was the development of questions from the board. The process agreed by the board was that the development of the interview questions was to occur in closed session, as normal usual, free from any employees and administered by the Search Firm only. The first move by the conspirators was to bias the questions with a movida to change from questions to requiring the candidates to make a presentation on "equity". First hint on who they were helping by skipping questions and just asking for a presentation. Defeated. The two board members tried to force it on the board twice to only be defeated. After the board agreed on its questions, it was understood that the search firm would type it up for the board to review and make any changes, and print on the day of interviews. It was agreed that the search firm would would walk over to HR and copy them for the board.
So on the day of interviews the search consultant copied the interview questions and a dean walked into our closed session and handed them out. Some found it odd that a dean would be handing us our confidential questions. Members of the board noticed that the interview questions now included a rubric scale one to five with specially designated boxes for notes. What's this I asked? The dean said, "this is how we do it at Rio Hondo". I said, excuse me but I've been here for over twenty years and we have never done it this way. Besides, the board agreed on the instrument of interview questions and finalized them this morning. Who gave you authority to change our instrument? His reply, "I did". Who are you and what gives you the right? Dean you need to leave right now. Cease and desist! He replied, I have to be here, im the EEOO. I said, no you are not, the consultant is by contract. I went to the Superintendent/president to inform her that I asked the dean to leave and you need to make sure he does. Superintendent/President replied, "oh..i didn't know he was in the room or what he was doing there". Nice try but no. He never came back.
So, the interview questions were heavy on equity due to two board members. We knew why but so be it. At the end of all interviews came the accolades for the predetermined candidate of the conspiring board members. The truth was that their candidate bombed and bombed big. The two highlighted the smallest positive attributes. The selection phase came and the two were dumbfounded that their candidate came in close to last. It was straight forward objective on who were the best candidates and theirs wasn't. So the two continued to fight to place their chosen candidate on the top ranking and it failed each and every time. The two continued to put obstacles up throughout the process and came up short.
Then the board discovered that staff had the interview questions in their possession the day after we developed them. Why would staff want a copy of the interview questions? You may have guessed. It turned out that the search firm had forwarded the draft interview questions to staff without the board knowing and staff explained that "that's how we do it here". Very suspicious, right?
It gets more intriguing. The board also found out that after our interviews, and before the board made any determination of candidates, staff had scanned all its interview notes. It was caught by a board member who noticed that the questionnaire paper was unstapled and restapled. Did someone unstapled the instrument, made copies and restapled? Perhaps the intention was accidental and "that how we do it here"? You got to think.
The chicanery didn't stop there. They continued to the last day.
Now, I resigned because I did what i needed to do for my college. I kept the process as objective as possible. We hired a good decent Superintendent/President who will start after July 10th, 2019. Oh..one more thing. The current superintendent/president will be retiring on June 30, 2019 and I thank her for all her years of service. I'm grateful for her contribution to Rio Hondo College, truly. However, voted four to one that the Vice President of Academic Services will assuming the duties as superintendent/president till the New superintendent/President assumes the position. I know she will serve us well.
It's back to farming for me. Transparency, right?
I resigned as Board President of the Rio Hondo College Board of Trustees at a regular meeting on Wednesday, June 12, 2019. Admittedly, it felt good to resign and I feel accomplished. For full transparency, i will tell you why. Instead of being constantly attacked by a board member and checking her undue influence on the Superintendent, I choose to step aside and let others lead hoping the mean spirited vindictiveness will cease.
In sum, I met my main objective which was to assure that Rio Hondo College hired a good and unbiased Superintendent/President. This was not an easy task. It was filled with skirmishes, clandestine chicanery and pitch battles. It was known a year out that two board members, possibly four before the change in the board, and a group of employees that they had predetermined who they were going to hire as the next superintendent/president. The votes and structure was all in place before November. The champagne bottles were poping. However, the group was careless in who they brought into the scheme not realizing that leaks will always occur when a sinister plan is in play. People like to talk. The gang talked about stacking the search committee but with twenty-three members they were unable to acquire a majority. Mistake one.
The remaining two conspiring board members proceeded with their end of the scheme. First, was the development of questions from the board. The process agreed by the board was that the development of the interview questions was to occur in closed session, as normal usual, free from any employees and administered by the Search Firm only. The first move by the conspirators was to bias the questions with a movida to change from questions to requiring the candidates to make a presentation on "equity". First hint on who they were helping by skipping questions and just asking for a presentation. Defeated. The two board members tried to force it on the board twice to only be defeated. After the board agreed on its questions, it was understood that the search firm would type it up for the board to review and make any changes, and print on the day of interviews. It was agreed that the search firm would would walk over to HR and copy them for the board.
So on the day of interviews the search consultant copied the interview questions and a dean walked into our closed session and handed them out. Some found it odd that a dean would be handing us our confidential questions. Members of the board noticed that the interview questions now included a rubric scale one to five with specially designated boxes for notes. What's this I asked? The dean said, "this is how we do it at Rio Hondo". I said, excuse me but I've been here for over twenty years and we have never done it this way. Besides, the board agreed on the instrument of interview questions and finalized them this morning. Who gave you authority to change our instrument? His reply, "I did". Who are you and what gives you the right? Dean you need to leave right now. Cease and desist! He replied, I have to be here, im the EEOO. I said, no you are not, the consultant is by contract. I went to the Superintendent/president to inform her that I asked the dean to leave and you need to make sure he does. Superintendent/President replied, "oh..i didn't know he was in the room or what he was doing there". Nice try but no. He never came back.
So, the interview questions were heavy on equity due to two board members. We knew why but so be it. At the end of all interviews came the accolades for the predetermined candidate of the conspiring board members. The truth was that their candidate bombed and bombed big. The two highlighted the smallest positive attributes. The selection phase came and the two were dumbfounded that their candidate came in close to last. It was straight forward objective on who were the best candidates and theirs wasn't. So the two continued to fight to place their chosen candidate on the top ranking and it failed each and every time. The two continued to put obstacles up throughout the process and came up short.
Then the board discovered that staff had the interview questions in their possession the day after we developed them. Why would staff want a copy of the interview questions? You may have guessed. It turned out that the search firm had forwarded the draft interview questions to staff without the board knowing and staff explained that "that's how we do it here". Very suspicious, right?
It gets more intriguing. The board also found out that after our interviews, and before the board made any determination of candidates, staff had scanned all its interview notes. It was caught by a board member who noticed that the questionnaire paper was unstapled and restapled. Did someone unstapled the instrument, made copies and restapled? Perhaps the intention was accidental and "that how we do it here"? You got to think.
The chicanery didn't stop there. They continued to the last day.
Now, I resigned because I did what i needed to do for my college. I kept the process as objective as possible. We hired a good decent Superintendent/President who will start after July 10th, 2019. Oh..one more thing. The current superintendent/president will be retiring on June 30, 2019 and I thank her for all her years of service. I'm grateful for her contribution to Rio Hondo College, truly. However, voted four to one that the Vice President of Academic Services will assuming the duties as superintendent/president till the New superintendent/President assumes the position. I know she will serve us well.
It's back to farming for me. Transparency, right?
Monday, June 24, 2019
Safety & Security at Rio Hondo Delayed
In January 2019, the Board of Trustees initiated a Safety & Security Assessment by contracting a former police chief and former arson investigator to perform an independent assessment of Rio Hondo College. This was primarily in response to the gun incident at Rio Hondo College that occurred months before and which left many wondering if the college was safe. This coincided with a change in the board composition where new board members were calling for an intensive review of safety and where incumbents board members wished just to put that in the past without any further inquiry.
The superintendent was reluctant against any safety assessment where the gun incident might be investigated. The gun carrying dean claimed that the superintendent allowed him to carry the gun on campus without notifying the board of trustees. The superintendent made herself clear to the board president that she was adamantly against any inquiry related to the gun incident and that she would strike out any focus from the scope of services. However, the board directed the superintendent to allow the assessment firm to do a full comprehensive review of safety and security at Rio Hondo College without any interference. In private, however, the superintendent demanded that the safety and security assessment occur only after she leaves which was counter to the board’s wishes and directive. The safety and security assessment passed five-zero on the board. The urgency was clear from the board.
Two months passed, and the superintendent stalled and delayed the signing of the contract of the assessment firm. She further delayed the contract and gutted the scope of the assessment thus obstructing a full independent evaluation. She now prescribed that the investigators only talk to two people on campus; the VP of Finance and the HR Director. All other communication was prohibited.
Five months passed until the two investigators of the assessment firm informed the board president of all the delays, stalls and gutting of the contract. The Superintendent was unresponsive. The board president met with the superintendent to ask about the status of the contract and she claimed ignorance. She did not know about the status. When asked further for a status update, a week later, she indicated that the contract “wasn’t ready”. Six months later, after the original contract scope had changed and the delayed continued, the contracted investigators communicated to the board president that the delays had now limited the scope and time frame. Where the original scope was for twelve months now they have only six months to do a year’s amount of work, if the contract ever gets signed.
On or about June 10th 2019, The board president received an amended contract to forward to the superintendent since she was unresponsive. The board president met with the superintendent to discuss the status of the contract and modification requested by the firm given that six months had passed and still no contract had been signed. In discussion, the superintendent agreed that a years’ worth of work must now be done in six months warranted a modification. The conversation about the importance of safety and security was mutually agreed and that the assessment was needed. The Superintendent informed the board president that the modification will be placed on the consent agenda by her recommendation. However, the story of the safety and security assessment was told differently by the superintendent at a board meeting.
The bottom line is this, Rio Hondo College students and employees deserve to study and work in a safe environment. After the gun incident and other reoccurring circumstances like stalking, now is the time to conduct an independent safety and security assessment so that we can identify our weak points and strengths to begin to address them. Why should we wait till a serious safety crisis arises? The stall and delay were a tactic to prevent any scrutiny of the gun incident. The delay was successful. The assessment will not be conducted while the sitting president is in office. However, the assessment must continue without delay or obstruction. Our students and employees deserve to be safe.
The superintendent was reluctant against any safety assessment where the gun incident might be investigated. The gun carrying dean claimed that the superintendent allowed him to carry the gun on campus without notifying the board of trustees. The superintendent made herself clear to the board president that she was adamantly against any inquiry related to the gun incident and that she would strike out any focus from the scope of services. However, the board directed the superintendent to allow the assessment firm to do a full comprehensive review of safety and security at Rio Hondo College without any interference. In private, however, the superintendent demanded that the safety and security assessment occur only after she leaves which was counter to the board’s wishes and directive. The safety and security assessment passed five-zero on the board. The urgency was clear from the board.
Two months passed, and the superintendent stalled and delayed the signing of the contract of the assessment firm. She further delayed the contract and gutted the scope of the assessment thus obstructing a full independent evaluation. She now prescribed that the investigators only talk to two people on campus; the VP of Finance and the HR Director. All other communication was prohibited.
Five months passed until the two investigators of the assessment firm informed the board president of all the delays, stalls and gutting of the contract. The Superintendent was unresponsive. The board president met with the superintendent to ask about the status of the contract and she claimed ignorance. She did not know about the status. When asked further for a status update, a week later, she indicated that the contract “wasn’t ready”. Six months later, after the original contract scope had changed and the delayed continued, the contracted investigators communicated to the board president that the delays had now limited the scope and time frame. Where the original scope was for twelve months now they have only six months to do a year’s amount of work, if the contract ever gets signed.
On or about June 10th 2019, The board president received an amended contract to forward to the superintendent since she was unresponsive. The board president met with the superintendent to discuss the status of the contract and modification requested by the firm given that six months had passed and still no contract had been signed. In discussion, the superintendent agreed that a years’ worth of work must now be done in six months warranted a modification. The conversation about the importance of safety and security was mutually agreed and that the assessment was needed. The Superintendent informed the board president that the modification will be placed on the consent agenda by her recommendation. However, the story of the safety and security assessment was told differently by the superintendent at a board meeting.
The bottom line is this, Rio Hondo College students and employees deserve to study and work in a safe environment. After the gun incident and other reoccurring circumstances like stalking, now is the time to conduct an independent safety and security assessment so that we can identify our weak points and strengths to begin to address them. Why should we wait till a serious safety crisis arises? The stall and delay were a tactic to prevent any scrutiny of the gun incident. The delay was successful. The assessment will not be conducted while the sitting president is in office. However, the assessment must continue without delay or obstruction. Our students and employees deserve to be safe.
Sunday, April 21, 2019
A History of Holding Up Shared Governance at Rio
April 2019: Recently. "What do you know about Shared Governance?", she asked. Well...as a paralegal student [1990's] at Rio I did a semester long independent studies course on AB 1725 reviewing the legislation, committee reports, California's Code of Rules & Regulations, Rio's policy and that of other colleges.. As a student trustee, I participated in the College's review of the shared governance policy leading to the inclusion of students. Soon after, I organized two state-wide student conference on Shared Governance. That's what I know and I've forgotten nothing.
(Campaign material from Rio student leadership days. Ran for Policy Director for the California Student Association of Community Colleges. I won.)
Wednesday, April 10, 2019
Rio Hondo College: A Past Practice Doesn't Make it A Good Practice
"That's they way we have done it" is a typical statement used to justify not following a written rule, procedure or policy.
Recently, on Friday, March 8, 2019 I sat on the Special Awards Committee, BP 1500 that states that "by March 1, a committee composed of the Superintendent/President of the college, the president of the Board of Trustees, the president of the Academic Senate, and the president of the Associated Students" will meet to recommend a Fellow of the College.
Two issues arose quickly; 1) the committee is meeting beyond the March 1 deadline and 2) where is staff(csea)? Staff are excluded on the committee by policy. I could not turn the other cheek and ignore the two serious issues for expediency. Rio Hondo College is government, a branch of the State of California and designed to be locally governed to represent local communities. This is a serious responsibility which the people and communities we represent demand transparency and accountability. How could I look the other way and say "well..that's the way we've done it for years". Responsible government requires us to follow our own rules and policy.
Board Policy 1500 has existed since 1977 and renewed in 2014.
So, in discussing it with the committee we had two choices: 1) not have a Fellow this year or 2) changed the date for the committee and add staff to committee. We choose number two. We agreed at making two small amendments that are temporary so we can consider the fellow yet understanding that this policy needs a comprehensive review after graduation. We made our amendments and "referred" (or committed) our amendments to the Planning and Fiscal Council for "review". Under Robert's Rules of Order the process to refer or commit gives you two choices: 1) refer without any specific direction leaving it open or 2) refer with the question (amendments) put forward for review. Choice number two is specific directions to the referred committee (PFC). The direction is that the Special Awards Committee proposes to make a temporary and small amendment to allow it to recommend a fellow to the board by changing its meeting deadline prescribed by BP 1500 and add staff to committee.
The policy overall is inconsistent and not cohesive. A summary of issues with the policy includes:
1) the Special Awards Committee for the Fellow's deadline is too restrictive.
2) Staff (csea) are excluded from the Special Awards Committee for the Fellow in gross violation of shared governance.
3) The nomination form for Fellow and Distinguish Service is not compliant with the policy and misleading.
4) Distinguished Service Award does not state that the Awards Committee, whom recommends the Fellow, also recommends the Distinguished Service Award but it does in practice. No committee exist for this award.
5) There is no deadline for Distinguished Service Award and can be awarded anytime.
6) Policy states that the Distinguished Service Award recipient must be "member of the Rio Hondo Community College District" which is a resident requirement but rarely has this been followed.
7) We do not have a staff (CSEA) award bestowed by the District. As it exist in policy, the "Classified Employee Award" is a state award that staff recommends a nominee and the Board endorses.
8) The deadline is the state deadline which all the above must occur by March 10. No nominee has been forwarded.
9) The Distinguish Faculty Award does have a nomination deadline of "third Friday in February".
10) The "Selection Process" for the Faculty award contains two sub-committees: 1) Academic Senate and 2) Superintendent/President of the college, the president of the Board of Trustees, the president of the Academic Senate, and the president of the Associated Students to "affirm" the first committees choice. This year (2019), the first committee has forwarded a nominee to the board, however, skipped the second sub committee. Policy not followed.
My intent, is to hold Rio Hondo accountable to its established policies. We need to follow policy or change it. The idea that "that's the way we do it here" contrary to policy is unacceptable. Yes, people say that questioning how we've done things, out of policy compliance, creates a "toxic environment". What I've learned and observed is that the stalwarts of bad practices react toxic stating the the questions are toxic. What is right?
Recently, on Friday, March 8, 2019 I sat on the Special Awards Committee, BP 1500 that states that "by March 1, a committee composed of the Superintendent/President of the college, the president of the Board of Trustees, the president of the Academic Senate, and the president of the Associated Students" will meet to recommend a Fellow of the College.
Two issues arose quickly; 1) the committee is meeting beyond the March 1 deadline and 2) where is staff(csea)? Staff are excluded on the committee by policy. I could not turn the other cheek and ignore the two serious issues for expediency. Rio Hondo College is government, a branch of the State of California and designed to be locally governed to represent local communities. This is a serious responsibility which the people and communities we represent demand transparency and accountability. How could I look the other way and say "well..that's the way we've done it for years". Responsible government requires us to follow our own rules and policy.
Board Policy 1500 has existed since 1977 and renewed in 2014.
So, in discussing it with the committee we had two choices: 1) not have a Fellow this year or 2) changed the date for the committee and add staff to committee. We choose number two. We agreed at making two small amendments that are temporary so we can consider the fellow yet understanding that this policy needs a comprehensive review after graduation. We made our amendments and "referred" (or committed) our amendments to the Planning and Fiscal Council for "review". Under Robert's Rules of Order the process to refer or commit gives you two choices: 1) refer without any specific direction leaving it open or 2) refer with the question (amendments) put forward for review. Choice number two is specific directions to the referred committee (PFC). The direction is that the Special Awards Committee proposes to make a temporary and small amendment to allow it to recommend a fellow to the board by changing its meeting deadline prescribed by BP 1500 and add staff to committee.
The policy overall is inconsistent and not cohesive. A summary of issues with the policy includes:
1) the Special Awards Committee for the Fellow's deadline is too restrictive.
2) Staff (csea) are excluded from the Special Awards Committee for the Fellow in gross violation of shared governance.
3) The nomination form for Fellow and Distinguish Service is not compliant with the policy and misleading.
4) Distinguished Service Award does not state that the Awards Committee, whom recommends the Fellow, also recommends the Distinguished Service Award but it does in practice. No committee exist for this award.
5) There is no deadline for Distinguished Service Award and can be awarded anytime.
6) Policy states that the Distinguished Service Award recipient must be "member of the Rio Hondo Community College District" which is a resident requirement but rarely has this been followed.
7) We do not have a staff (CSEA) award bestowed by the District. As it exist in policy, the "Classified Employee Award" is a state award that staff recommends a nominee and the Board endorses.
8) The deadline is the state deadline which all the above must occur by March 10. No nominee has been forwarded.
9) The Distinguish Faculty Award does have a nomination deadline of "third Friday in February".
10) The "Selection Process" for the Faculty award contains two sub-committees: 1) Academic Senate and 2) Superintendent/President of the college, the president of the Board of Trustees, the president of the Academic Senate, and the president of the Associated Students to "affirm" the first committees choice. This year (2019), the first committee has forwarded a nominee to the board, however, skipped the second sub committee. Policy not followed.
My intent, is to hold Rio Hondo accountable to its established policies. We need to follow policy or change it. The idea that "that's the way we do it here" contrary to policy is unacceptable. Yes, people say that questioning how we've done things, out of policy compliance, creates a "toxic environment". What I've learned and observed is that the stalwarts of bad practices react toxic stating the the questions are toxic. What is right?
Saturday, June 2, 2018
Whittier Police Department Explorer: Dream Destroyed
Like most kids, I always wanted to be a cop. I had all the action figures from the SWAT TV program and the SWAT van. Fast forward to my teen years.
My karate sensei Jim Richardson, founder of the Tai Crane Karate Studio-Whittier, inspired me to join the Explorer program but that came with a warning. He said that "not all cops are like the officers you have encountered". Be ready to face some challenges, he said.
Jim taught a great deal of law enforcement personnel and studying side by side with officers and later teaching them was further inspiring. A great deal of my karate class mates (officers) would say "you should join the explorer program, you have what it takes to be a good cop". So, at the age of sixteen and after earning my black belt at fifteen I signed up for the Whittier Police Department Explorer Program. I was so proud of myself and also very nervous.
Years before that, my experience was that being a "Mexican" automatically made me a target by Whittier PD (WPD). Walking home from karate six nights a week almost always included an encounter with WPD slow rolling next to me with search lights on me asking me what I'm doing. I didn't always take offense since i was just walking home from teaching karate. On occasion they would pull me over hold me at gun point while an officer went through my pockets and backpack with my karate gi. They would even say, "we know you sell drugs, where are the drugs?"
Growing up in a home with domestic violence where my mother was beaten we
called WPD regularly. Most often they were annoyed by the call and often told us they were tired of coming. WPD were not our friends nor protectors. All the while, I had great law enforcement officers as role models.
After graduation from the Sheriffs Explorer's Academy as a WPD Explorer i started my department assignment. I was very excited, proud. My family didn't know what to think of my endeavor. They were not supportive but I've done things on my own anyways and always encouraged myself.
Wow, did i look sharp in that dark navy blue uniform. No picture exist. There were no cell phone cameras back then and pictures required resources I didn't have. Lining up for roll call with my chest out, thumbs along my sides and looking stone face forward. "Mendez?" here sir!
"Wipe that smile off your face! The sergeant said. Oh, shit what did i do wrong, i asked myself. "Why are you smiling, Mendez!" I'm happy sir, happy to be here, i said. "You are not allowed to be happy here. You are not allowed to smile!" said the sergeant. OK, note taken. Damn was that hard. I would have to go to the bathroom to smile because I was so happy. Next time, i was caught smiling again and the wrath came from most police officers. "Who do you think you are!? Stupid me I answered. I'm Gary Mendez. "I don't give a shit who you are, your one degree from being behind those bars, Mendez!" My explorer colleagues joined in when we were alone. "If you wanna be a cop, you better knock that smile shit off, Mendez", they said. I thought about that for days. I asked myself constantly, why am I a happy person? The response was always the same, I smile because I feel good about myself, who I am and who I'm becoming. Do I need to change who I am?
Then came other issues that made me very uncomfortable. There was always talk about "wetbacks, ese's, N-word, and beaners". On a memorable occasion, three officers were hanging around talking about keeping the "beaners" and "N-word" from coming over the bridge on Whittier blvd from Pico Rivera. "We got to keep them out". Was I the beaner? I've been called a beaner and wetback in Whittier and not long ago. The one and only Latino officer in that group would smile and laugh and look at me. He later told me aside, "go along to get along if you wanna be a cop". There was constant hate spewing from these people. They hated every ethnic minority and expressed it.
I just could not change who I am and fill myself with hate. I refuse, I told myself.
After less than a month, I never went back. I never wanted to be like them.
I never told anyone. I was too ashamed. No one ever asked, anyway.
Dream destroyed.
p.s. I joined civil rights groups soon after: The American GI Forum, LULAC, MAPA and Amnesty International.
https://youtu.be/2RJEZCGSZqE
My karate sensei Jim Richardson, founder of the Tai Crane Karate Studio-Whittier, inspired me to join the Explorer program but that came with a warning. He said that "not all cops are like the officers you have encountered". Be ready to face some challenges, he said.
Jim taught a great deal of law enforcement personnel and studying side by side with officers and later teaching them was further inspiring. A great deal of my karate class mates (officers) would say "you should join the explorer program, you have what it takes to be a good cop". So, at the age of sixteen and after earning my black belt at fifteen I signed up for the Whittier Police Department Explorer Program. I was so proud of myself and also very nervous.
Years before that, my experience was that being a "Mexican" automatically made me a target by Whittier PD (WPD). Walking home from karate six nights a week almost always included an encounter with WPD slow rolling next to me with search lights on me asking me what I'm doing. I didn't always take offense since i was just walking home from teaching karate. On occasion they would pull me over hold me at gun point while an officer went through my pockets and backpack with my karate gi. They would even say, "we know you sell drugs, where are the drugs?"
Growing up in a home with domestic violence where my mother was beaten we
called WPD regularly. Most often they were annoyed by the call and often told us they were tired of coming. WPD were not our friends nor protectors. All the while, I had great law enforcement officers as role models.
After graduation from the Sheriffs Explorer's Academy as a WPD Explorer i started my department assignment. I was very excited, proud. My family didn't know what to think of my endeavor. They were not supportive but I've done things on my own anyways and always encouraged myself.
Wow, did i look sharp in that dark navy blue uniform. No picture exist. There were no cell phone cameras back then and pictures required resources I didn't have. Lining up for roll call with my chest out, thumbs along my sides and looking stone face forward. "Mendez?" here sir!
"Wipe that smile off your face! The sergeant said. Oh, shit what did i do wrong, i asked myself. "Why are you smiling, Mendez!" I'm happy sir, happy to be here, i said. "You are not allowed to be happy here. You are not allowed to smile!" said the sergeant. OK, note taken. Damn was that hard. I would have to go to the bathroom to smile because I was so happy. Next time, i was caught smiling again and the wrath came from most police officers. "Who do you think you are!? Stupid me I answered. I'm Gary Mendez. "I don't give a shit who you are, your one degree from being behind those bars, Mendez!" My explorer colleagues joined in when we were alone. "If you wanna be a cop, you better knock that smile shit off, Mendez", they said. I thought about that for days. I asked myself constantly, why am I a happy person? The response was always the same, I smile because I feel good about myself, who I am and who I'm becoming. Do I need to change who I am?
Then came other issues that made me very uncomfortable. There was always talk about "wetbacks, ese's, N-word, and beaners". On a memorable occasion, three officers were hanging around talking about keeping the "beaners" and "N-word" from coming over the bridge on Whittier blvd from Pico Rivera. "We got to keep them out". Was I the beaner? I've been called a beaner and wetback in Whittier and not long ago. The one and only Latino officer in that group would smile and laugh and look at me. He later told me aside, "go along to get along if you wanna be a cop". There was constant hate spewing from these people. They hated every ethnic minority and expressed it.
I just could not change who I am and fill myself with hate. I refuse, I told myself.
After less than a month, I never went back. I never wanted to be like them.
I never told anyone. I was too ashamed. No one ever asked, anyway.
Dream destroyed.
p.s. I joined civil rights groups soon after: The American GI Forum, LULAC, MAPA and Amnesty International.
https://youtu.be/2RJEZCGSZqE
Wednesday, March 7, 2018
Sacrafice for Rio Hondo College: the Truth about Rose Marie Joyce, and Her Forced Retirement.
It’s Time the Truth Be Told about Rose Marie Joyce, former superintendent of Rio Hondo College and her Forced Retirement.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct
03/07/18 Gary Mendez
Starting from the beginning, when first elected as president of the board of trustees we were searching for a superintendent/president of Rio Hondo College. We narrowed it down to a finalist, Rose Marie Joyce from Gavilan College in the central valley. I was part of the team that visited Gavilan College to interview board members, staff, faculty, administrators and select community members.
The interviews were 50/50 in favor and anti-Joyce. Joyce explained it before we arrived that some board members made ethnic slurs to her and she considered them ant-Latino. The people who liked her basically said the same thing which was primarily focused on her relationships with Latino groups in the community. However, some board members and staff made bold warnings about her financial management of the district including over spending and exuberant use of lawyers.
I believed Joyce that several board members treated her badly though I never confirmed it. One board member showed me an article in the local paper where Joyce accused a board member of calling her a “wet back. The paper basically took the board members side. I dismissed it. We hired Joyce.
Fast forward four years later. All the warnings the people of Gavilan College started to rear their ugly heads at Rio Hondo College. We experienced a serious drop in enrollment costing us millions of dollars. Our legal bills skyrocketed from $50,000-$100,000 a year to 1.5 million. We lost a jewel of a federal program, the Small Business Development Center of the Small Business Administration to poor oversight and we were placed on warning from the U.S. Department of Education and on the verge of losing our federal financial aid status due to the same lack of oversight and reporting. Morale on campus was at its lowest in years.
Despite the negative environment Joyce’s evaluations from the Board, staff, faculty, students and administrators was a high and on the average 4.5 of a 5 rating consistently for the four years. I thought it unusual because when you talk to people who had to work with her it wasn’t good.
Four years later, I was elected again as president of the board and just before the superintendents’ evaluation. As president of the board it was my responsibility, in practice, to bring up the evaluation with the board. The process changed a bit since the last time I broached a superintendent’s evaluation.
For the four years of Joyce’s tenure one board member volunteered every year to facilitate the superintendent evaluation. I didn’t think much of it. Who wanted the work? We were convinced every year that the lawyer board member of the board should be given the task. He just about insisted.
I went to staff to get some information about the process. What I learned was shocking. The key staff member who administered the process was under direct supervision by superintendent on a daily basis.
When I approached the staff member, in a friendly manner she explained to me that the lawyer board member helps organize the evaluation. When I asked about the campus community evaluation by key leaders she leaned in and told me how the process really works. Thinking I was like minded she begin to tell me that she sent out evaluations to staff, faculty, student and administrators with the last paragraph on the first page of the evaluation was changed around to know who it came from. “We know who turned in each evaluation”, she said. What happens if people are negative, I asked. She said, “We changed the results to keep bad people from skewing the results”. Holly Toledo! Did she just tell me they fix the evaluation? Yes!
I stayed cool and played along to not show my alarm. The next day I called a trusted friend in our state community college association. He advised me that the evaluation process needs to be taken out of the hands of the superintendents secretary and the one board member. It should be done as quietly and unsuspecting as possible. We found an independent consultant who performed superintendent’s evaluations and was a former superintendent.
I managed to get three votes to hire the independent consultant to perform the evaluation thereby taking the process away from the one board member and the superintendent’s secretary and the superintendent herself. The reaction from the one board member and his other ally was visceral.
The superintendent knew something was afoot and it wasn't good for her. However, the process was now in the hands of our independent consultant. Besides the board approving the evaluation instrument and its questions, all evaluations were sent directly to each board member, staff, faculty, student and administrators with a pre addressed stamped envelope to the consultant’s office.
No more fixed evaluations. The lawyer board member was furious.
After all the evaluations were turned in the consultant calculated the scores and added the comments uncensored. I was then sent the first copy via email. Wow. The superintendent’s evaluation scores from staff, faculty, students and administrators on the average went from 4.5 previous years to 2.1. The comments were scathing, blunt, critical and damning. The comments said she was a frequent bully, especially to staff. Her management of administrators was atrocious. It was all bad.
The board evaluation wasn’t any better. The scores went from a 4.5 to a 2.5 and would have been lower if it wasn’t for 5 rating across the board by two board members.
Now it was time to advise the board and post an agenda with the superintendent’s evaluation as a subject in closed session.
I made no mention of the corrupt evaluation practices of the past as to not start a different fight.
The evaluation was handed out in closed session and every board member had time to read and absorb the results. The air was thick of tension. Well, I said, these scores are the lowest in years and lowest of any superintendent of my tenure. We went around and everyone commented. There was only one direction that we all agreed, non renewal of the superintendents’ contract. We did discuss termination if she became an issue. There wasn’t any argument. We all agreed.
We brought in the superintendent and handed her a copy of her evaluation by the board and the staff, faculty, students and administrators. She had a stone cold face almost as though she knew what the results contained and what it meant for her contract. I calmly, diplomatically, and compassionately informed her that the board has agreed that we will not be granting her renewal of her contract.
She sat there stone cold with no reply and turned to her allies on the board and they looked away from her gaze. She had several months on her contract and we asked if she would help us prepare for the colleges search. She made a long pause and said “of course”. The manner was as though she might have the last laugh.
I called boards members at her previous college, Gavilan, because I now believe what they warned us about. I called the board member she accused of calling her racist names. He told me the whole story which became apparent and familiar. He then gave me the phone number of another board member who turned out to be a sitting Superior court judge. He told me all her tricks and deceit tactics. His advice was to minimize the damage on the college although I might sustain the brunt of her lies and damage. But the damage had already begun. Who would believe me? So, i moved forward.
Her response to what just happed was soon to come.
Two days later, Joyce called me to ask me to meet with her in her office. I said sure, thinking nothing of it. She asked me to sit down and she began screaming calling me a scumbag who had no business on a community college board. I was shocked. She continued with insults and I sat and listened. At this point it occurred to me that this person is very angry and vindictive. I need to leave, now!
She screamed to “get the hell out of her office”. I got up and walked away from more of her insults. In a deep voice she said "you don't have the votes to get rid of me". I held three fingers up. Three votes i thought. So, the next day i get a call from another board member telling me the president is accusing me of calling her a b#*ch. The board members who fixed the previous evaluation process were now on the attack.
However, the die had been cast on her fate, she had to leave. With the accusation made against me, she bargained her exit from Rio Hondo College. The two board members secured a third board as a result of the accusation.
The lawyer board member began the process of censure to punish me in public. [it’s now a practice he commits from time to time on the boards he sits on].
I sat at the censure meeting hearing the allegations from the one board member and his newly acquired lawyer friend who was now our lawyer for the district.
I took the lashings. She had to leave. She could no longer destroy our college, I thought. I've taken many physical and mental beatings. This won’t kill me. It will hurt but I did what was right and God knows my heart.
She was now able to negotiate her departure and was now allowed to retire.
This is the short of the big longer story. I will continue to offer this testimony under the penalty of perjury and with a lie detector anytime.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct
03/07/18 Gary Mendez
Starting from the beginning, when first elected as president of the board of trustees we were searching for a superintendent/president of Rio Hondo College. We narrowed it down to a finalist, Rose Marie Joyce from Gavilan College in the central valley. I was part of the team that visited Gavilan College to interview board members, staff, faculty, administrators and select community members.
The interviews were 50/50 in favor and anti-Joyce. Joyce explained it before we arrived that some board members made ethnic slurs to her and she considered them ant-Latino. The people who liked her basically said the same thing which was primarily focused on her relationships with Latino groups in the community. However, some board members and staff made bold warnings about her financial management of the district including over spending and exuberant use of lawyers.
I believed Joyce that several board members treated her badly though I never confirmed it. One board member showed me an article in the local paper where Joyce accused a board member of calling her a “wet back. The paper basically took the board members side. I dismissed it. We hired Joyce.
Fast forward four years later. All the warnings the people of Gavilan College started to rear their ugly heads at Rio Hondo College. We experienced a serious drop in enrollment costing us millions of dollars. Our legal bills skyrocketed from $50,000-$100,000 a year to 1.5 million. We lost a jewel of a federal program, the Small Business Development Center of the Small Business Administration to poor oversight and we were placed on warning from the U.S. Department of Education and on the verge of losing our federal financial aid status due to the same lack of oversight and reporting. Morale on campus was at its lowest in years.
Despite the negative environment Joyce’s evaluations from the Board, staff, faculty, students and administrators was a high and on the average 4.5 of a 5 rating consistently for the four years. I thought it unusual because when you talk to people who had to work with her it wasn’t good.
Four years later, I was elected again as president of the board and just before the superintendents’ evaluation. As president of the board it was my responsibility, in practice, to bring up the evaluation with the board. The process changed a bit since the last time I broached a superintendent’s evaluation.
For the four years of Joyce’s tenure one board member volunteered every year to facilitate the superintendent evaluation. I didn’t think much of it. Who wanted the work? We were convinced every year that the lawyer board member of the board should be given the task. He just about insisted.
I went to staff to get some information about the process. What I learned was shocking. The key staff member who administered the process was under direct supervision by superintendent on a daily basis.
When I approached the staff member, in a friendly manner she explained to me that the lawyer board member helps organize the evaluation. When I asked about the campus community evaluation by key leaders she leaned in and told me how the process really works. Thinking I was like minded she begin to tell me that she sent out evaluations to staff, faculty, student and administrators with the last paragraph on the first page of the evaluation was changed around to know who it came from. “We know who turned in each evaluation”, she said. What happens if people are negative, I asked. She said, “We changed the results to keep bad people from skewing the results”. Holly Toledo! Did she just tell me they fix the evaluation? Yes!
I stayed cool and played along to not show my alarm. The next day I called a trusted friend in our state community college association. He advised me that the evaluation process needs to be taken out of the hands of the superintendents secretary and the one board member. It should be done as quietly and unsuspecting as possible. We found an independent consultant who performed superintendent’s evaluations and was a former superintendent.
I managed to get three votes to hire the independent consultant to perform the evaluation thereby taking the process away from the one board member and the superintendent’s secretary and the superintendent herself. The reaction from the one board member and his other ally was visceral.
The superintendent knew something was afoot and it wasn't good for her. However, the process was now in the hands of our independent consultant. Besides the board approving the evaluation instrument and its questions, all evaluations were sent directly to each board member, staff, faculty, student and administrators with a pre addressed stamped envelope to the consultant’s office.
No more fixed evaluations. The lawyer board member was furious.
After all the evaluations were turned in the consultant calculated the scores and added the comments uncensored. I was then sent the first copy via email. Wow. The superintendent’s evaluation scores from staff, faculty, students and administrators on the average went from 4.5 previous years to 2.1. The comments were scathing, blunt, critical and damning. The comments said she was a frequent bully, especially to staff. Her management of administrators was atrocious. It was all bad.
The board evaluation wasn’t any better. The scores went from a 4.5 to a 2.5 and would have been lower if it wasn’t for 5 rating across the board by two board members.
Now it was time to advise the board and post an agenda with the superintendent’s evaluation as a subject in closed session.
I made no mention of the corrupt evaluation practices of the past as to not start a different fight.
The evaluation was handed out in closed session and every board member had time to read and absorb the results. The air was thick of tension. Well, I said, these scores are the lowest in years and lowest of any superintendent of my tenure. We went around and everyone commented. There was only one direction that we all agreed, non renewal of the superintendents’ contract. We did discuss termination if she became an issue. There wasn’t any argument. We all agreed.
We brought in the superintendent and handed her a copy of her evaluation by the board and the staff, faculty, students and administrators. She had a stone cold face almost as though she knew what the results contained and what it meant for her contract. I calmly, diplomatically, and compassionately informed her that the board has agreed that we will not be granting her renewal of her contract.
She sat there stone cold with no reply and turned to her allies on the board and they looked away from her gaze. She had several months on her contract and we asked if she would help us prepare for the colleges search. She made a long pause and said “of course”. The manner was as though she might have the last laugh.
I called boards members at her previous college, Gavilan, because I now believe what they warned us about. I called the board member she accused of calling her racist names. He told me the whole story which became apparent and familiar. He then gave me the phone number of another board member who turned out to be a sitting Superior court judge. He told me all her tricks and deceit tactics. His advice was to minimize the damage on the college although I might sustain the brunt of her lies and damage. But the damage had already begun. Who would believe me? So, i moved forward.
Her response to what just happed was soon to come.
Two days later, Joyce called me to ask me to meet with her in her office. I said sure, thinking nothing of it. She asked me to sit down and she began screaming calling me a scumbag who had no business on a community college board. I was shocked. She continued with insults and I sat and listened. At this point it occurred to me that this person is very angry and vindictive. I need to leave, now!
She screamed to “get the hell out of her office”. I got up and walked away from more of her insults. In a deep voice she said "you don't have the votes to get rid of me". I held three fingers up. Three votes i thought. So, the next day i get a call from another board member telling me the president is accusing me of calling her a b#*ch. The board members who fixed the previous evaluation process were now on the attack.
However, the die had been cast on her fate, she had to leave. With the accusation made against me, she bargained her exit from Rio Hondo College. The two board members secured a third board as a result of the accusation.
The lawyer board member began the process of censure to punish me in public. [it’s now a practice he commits from time to time on the boards he sits on].
I sat at the censure meeting hearing the allegations from the one board member and his newly acquired lawyer friend who was now our lawyer for the district.
I took the lashings. She had to leave. She could no longer destroy our college, I thought. I've taken many physical and mental beatings. This won’t kill me. It will hurt but I did what was right and God knows my heart.
She was now able to negotiate her departure and was now allowed to retire.
This is the short of the big longer story. I will continue to offer this testimony under the penalty of perjury and with a lie detector anytime.
Monday, April 10, 2017
Genealogy Gold: Discovery of death certificate of Great Great Grandfather Dolores "Doroteo" Valdepena
Genealogy Gold: Discovery of death certificate of Great Great Grandfather Dolores "Doroteo" Valdepena Mártir de Cananea La Huelga de 1906- Martyr of the Cananea strike of 1906.
Great Great Grand father was shot off his horse and the first casualty of the strike that was the precursor of the Mexican Revolution.
Death record:
In Cananea, Sonora, Mexico there is a monument with the names of 11 martyrs killed in the strike.
It fills me with pride that my Great Great Grandfather Dolores "Doroteo" Valdepena was a Martyr of working people and Mexico!
Photos: 1)top-David Alfaro Siqueiros' "First Mexican Strike" mural. Grandfather is man being held in middle: first man killed. 2) death cert, and 3) Dolores on horse far right.
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
Former Rio Hondo student, Board of Trustee member forms task force to steer re-development of America’s largest landfill
October 31, 2015
“At the workshops held by the county about the master-plan for the new regional park they discussed who their partners and their neighbors were, and how the park would affect them. They talked about Rose Hills and the Hacienda Heights community, but they left out Rio Hondo College,” said Mendez.
When Mendez identified himself to planners at the meeting and declared that Rio Hondo College should be considered a significant partner, he was told they acknowledge Rio Hondo College a “good” partner. Rose Hills and Hacienda Heights were being addressed because they had requests and concerns that they had voiced about the development. Rio Hondo College wasn’t being discussed because they weren’t a squeaky wheel.
“I knew we had to hurry, this needs to happen quick,” recalled Mendez. “Rio Hondo College needs to organize, put our thoughts together and communicate a demonstrated vision of how we would like this partnership between the landfill, the Regional Park, and Rio Hondo College to be.”
Mendez quickly generated a 9-point agenda of concerns and ideas regarding cross developmental opportunities for the Regional Park and Rio Hondo College. He then lobbied for a meeting with the county. The county agreed to a meeting, but only gave Mendez a three day notice.
“They told me Oct. 12 that we needed to get the facilities prepared to host them. I went Tuesday and Wednesday to every club I could and gave a speech at each one to try and get students to that meeting. I was recruiting right up until the meeting itself. If I saw three students standing together, I was approaching them,” said Mendez.
Mendez’ grass roots approach paid off. Mendez says there were about 20 students and five each from faculty, staff, and administration. The meeting, which took place in a room at the lower level of the Rio Hondo College Learning Resource Center, had a total attendance of around 40 people, a great many of them arriving with Mendez’ proposals sheet in hand.
The nine points on Mendez’ proposal are:
1. SEA Extension: Rio Hondo SEA (Significant Ecological Area). Link/connect/expand wildlife corridor. Close the gap between the Chino Hills Wild Life corridor and Rio Hondo’s SEA. It would be desirable to Create/designate an official extension of the wild life corridor which would allow animals to travel safely.
2. New Community Courses Opportunity: Rio Hondo Community courses (credit and noncredit). Rio Hondo may provide community courses like health, fitness and environmental courses. Health and fitness courses like walking, hiking and tai chi Environmental courses may be considered like bird watching, flora and fauna, and other courses.
3. Enhance Current Courses: Rio Hondo Environmental Studies. Enhance current program to include new regional park’s gardens, fauna, and trees. Link Rio’s SEA with Regional Park trails to increase educational opportunities for Rio Hondo College students and members of the public.
Physical Education Courses: Walking, hiking, running, yoga in the park, Tai Chi in the park.
4. Link Park trails and walkways to Rio Hondo College: Provide access to Regional Park from Rio Hondo College. Link/create hiking/walking trails.
5. Observatory Access for community courses: Rio Hondo and the Regional Park may create a partnership to provide community access and educational programs related to the observatory. Rio Hondo’s Observatory classes may be offered on a regular basis to the public and educational groups like K-12. Create a small amphitheater for classes with parking.
6. Improve Schabarum Trailhead and Parking: Schabarum Sky trail and trail head improvement. The trail heads current condition warrants improvement and should serve as a hiking/horse access trail to the Regional Park in connection with the Rio Plaza.
7. Rio Plaza Transit Center as an Access Point: Rio Plaza- regional public transportation center may serve as an additional gateway to the Regional Park. As a regional transportation center, Rio Plaza may serve as a regional means to access the park.
9. Rio Hondo Conference Center: Mini Conference Center at very top of West side plateau hill with a near 360 degree view that would be ideal for a conference center to host P.O.S.T Executive programs, Fire programs, and other college related events. Rio Hondo may use this as a laboratory for its new “Hospitality program” transferable to the Cal Poly Pomona program. Rio Hondo may profit from such a venture and add a steady stream of income from a mini conference center.
Mendez’ proposals and concerns regarding the Regional Park are created to benefit RHC and its students, as are all of his projects as a Trustee. Two previous projects Mendez spearheaded are Go Rio, which provides free public transportation to full-time RHC students, and Rio Plaza, which is an intermodal regional public transportation center slated to begin construction in 2016. Both projects are aimed at making RHC more accessible and have their roots in Mendez’ own experience getting to and from RHC during his student years.
“I rode the bus, bicycled, walked to school, and bummed a ride when I could,” said Mendez. “”I did everything but ride a horse. I had to walk the hill almost every day. Look at these calves, I can barely pull my jeans up over them. These are Rio Hondo calves.”
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Marin Door to Door Shuttle
Marin Door to Door is a Bad service. I made reservations from SFO to Marin two weeks in advance and they said my reservarion didnt exist. I showed them two emails. The reservation center was just as unhelpful till I emailed her back the email they sent me. Driver: Man driving was very intolerant of minorities. He only helped two white ladies and didnt help the hispanic lady with a child. Gave me the cold shoulder. This service should pay more attention to who they hire. I'm going to Uber for now on.
Wednesday, May 20, 2015
Rio Hondo College unveils Veterans Memorial
Board member Gary Mendez, center, talks with veterans Jess Hernandez, Jr., left, and Raymond Luna, right, of Baldwin Park as Rio Hondo College unveils its Veterans Memorial on campus in Whittier on Wednesday May 20, 2015. (Photo by Keith Durflinger/Whittier Daily News)
By Mike Sprague, Whittier Daily News
POSTED: 05/20/15, 5:28 PM PDT | UPDATED: 1 WEEK, 3 DAYS AGO # COMMENTS
NORTH WHITTIER >> Rio Hondo College’s long-awaited Veterans Memorial was unveiled Wednesday before about 150 people, including those who have served and community members who support them.
The idea for the memorial dates back to 2004 when trustee Gary Mendez first suggested it. But nothing came to fruition until 2013, when members of the Rio Hondo Veterans Club came to the Board of Trustees to raise the issue again.
“I’ve waited 10 years and written my speech for 10 years,” said Mendez. “That’s how long it takes. This memorial will serve as a reminder that we should ask ourselves, Are we doing our best to serve veterans at Rio Hondo College?”
The memorial, which sits in the college’s mid-quad area, is an 8-foot-by-3-foot concrete monument topped with a brass plaque and bearing discs for each of the five branches of the U.S. military. Adjacent to the monument are a bench and U.S., California and Rio Hondo College flags.
“I see the memorial and its flags as a place where students can reflect on their past and their future,” said Robert Diaz, president of the Veterans Club, which donated the bench,
Diaz, who became the club’s president in 2012, said he went to a board meeting after discovering there was no readily apparent American flag in the newly redone courtyard. “As I surveyed our beautiful new quad, there was no sign of our nation’s most honored symbol,” he said.
After a search, he found one hidden in an area that was no longer a focal point. “I decided to examine the opportunity of moving the flag,” Diaz said.
Before long, he received a call from Mendez, who suggested not only moving the flagpole but establishing a place to honor veterans. Two years and $100,000 later, a fitting memorial is a reality, with a monument constructed by Quatro Design Group of Los Angeles.
Dominic Lopez of Montebello, a member of the Navy and a student at Rio Hondo, was impressed. “It’s very inspiring,” he said. “It’s very touching.”
Michael Felix, commander for Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 10218 in El Monte, saw the memorial as a good idea. “We think this is really appropriate that (veterans) are starting to get recognized at institutions of higher education,” he said.
“Rio Hondo is really showing respect to all veterans. We know there are a lot of veterans going to school here.”
Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans founder Jose Ramos of Whittier likes having a memorial close to home.
“One of the proudest things is that it’s great to have it here in our backyard,” Ramos said. “It’s not in West Los Angeles or Santa Monica — it’s right here.”
The school also issued a commemmorative coin to celebrate the monument’s completion. Designed by Ygnacio “Nash” Flores, dean of public safety and interim dean of business, and Don Mason, an associate dean, the coin features the college logo and dedication date on one side and an inscription of the memorial site and the three flagpoles on the other.
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Mendez Spearheads Rio Hondo Intermodal Transit Center & Park
Yes, from the creator of "GoRio" bus program comes "Rio Plaza" an Intermodal Transit Center and Park that encourages and provides services for bus, bike, walking and rideshare for students, staff, faculty and members of the public to get to and from Rio Hondo College.
Rio Plaza is the larger part of the vision that Trustee Mendez has for providing and encouraging alternative modes of transportation to Rio that reduces traffic congestion, demand for on-campus parking, carbon emissions, and encourages a healthy lifestyle.
Rio Hondo College's student newspaper "El Paisano" covered the first story on this public benefit project.
The article in full:
Trustee Mendez spearheads campus Intermodal Transportation Center
Caroline Carroll, Staff Writer
March 23, 2015
Filed under News
Board of Trustees Member Gary Mendez presented the Rio Hondo Intermodal Transportation Center and Park at the Feb. 10 ICC meeting.
Trustee Mendez introduced the concept of the Intermodal Transportation Center as a welcome center, describing it as “the transition from the public to the college; this multi-use facility would serve as a hub for alternative modes of transportation including bus, bicycle, walking pedestrians and rideshare.”
Student Javier Cano who attended the ICC meeting said, “The Rio Hondo College Intermodal Transportation Center is a great idea, it would make our school look more welcoming and it would be safer for students to get up the hill”.
Trustee Mendez often rides the bus to campus meetings and is concerned with the traffic congestion that is caused when bus drivers unload students on Workman Mill Road.
Trustee Mendez is not the only member of the Board of Trustees concerned with student’s safety. Student Trustee “JJ” Magallón supports this project for many reasons,
“The welcome center would be the new face of the college; it will feature an information center. Those with any questions about the school could get an answer without having to go up the hill. I liked that the sidewalks are going to wrap around the campus, and would link all around the college so students would not have to walk on the streets anymore. The bike paths were also a good idea, it would promote students to ride their bicycles to campus rather than drive their cars and they would feel good knowing their bike was secure.”
The new bus cut-in lanes would allow bus drivers to pull aside to pick up and drop off pedestrians without jeopardizing the safety of other traffic. The bike cut-in lanes would also make it ADA compliant.
Currently the bottom of the hill may seem unwelcoming and is susceptible to severe traffic jams. The new bus stop would feature new applications with GPS for live location of busses. Another goal is to increase the visibility of the busses from all bus stops.
One of the upgrades would be a Bicycle hub. Rio Hondo College would be linked to the Whittier Green trails. Designated bike paths from Beverly, South El Monte, Pico Rivera, City of Industry/Hacienda Heights, and the San Gabriel River Bike paths will connect to the campus.
The total estimated cost for this construction project is $3.5 Million. However, Chairman of the Board Supervisor, Fourth District Don Knabe generously donated $1.5 Million for sidewalks along Workman Mill Road.
The welcome center would offer a serene, resting area, a new information center, equipped with restrooms, retail venues and a hydration station all powered by self-sustaining energy.
The plans include a new shuttle drop-off and visitor parking, the idea being for students to transition from their transportation to the campus in an easy, stress-free manner.
The anticipated date of completion for this project is Fall 2016. The project is still in its planning phases, the blue prints need to be approved through the Division of the State Architect and usually take 4-6 months.
- See more at: http://elpaisanoonline.com/news/2015/03/23/trustee-mendez-spearheads-campus-intermodal-transportation-center/#.dpufhttp://elpaisanoonline.com/news/2015/03/23/trustee-mendez-spearheads-campus-intermodal-transportation-center/
Monday, February 16, 2015
Rio Hondo's Acceditation Reaffirmed
In letter addressed to Rio Hondo College on February 6, 2015, Dr. Barbara Beno informs us that our accredition has been reaffirmed with a required follow-up report and visit.
This is a wonderful action for Rio Hondo College. The actually accreditation visit by the commission was very pleasant and cordial. All of Rio Hondo's constituent groups really pulled together in one of the most positive team spirited efforts ever. Faculty, staff, students, administration and the board worked tirelessly to prepare a near flawless report and visit by the visitation committee.
What does this mean? Rio Hondo's overall programs and services to the community was given an approved endorsement by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Juinior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
This is a wonderful action for Rio Hondo College. The actually accreditation visit by the commission was very pleasant and cordial. All of Rio Hondo's constituent groups really pulled together in one of the most positive team spirited efforts ever. Faculty, staff, students, administration and the board worked tirelessly to prepare a near flawless report and visit by the visitation committee.
What does this mean? Rio Hondo's overall programs and services to the community was given an approved endorsement by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Juinior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
Go Rio!!
Monday, January 19, 2015
AGIF Founder Dr. Hector P. Garcia in his Knickers
It’s been over 25 years since I last saw Dr. Hector Garcia in person and its time I told the story.
If you don’t know, Dr. Hector P. Garcia was a Mexican-American physician, surgeon, World War II veteran, civil rights advocate, and founder of the American G.I. Forum.
Well it was in the late eighties, I was a leader in the AGIF National Youth, and the conference was held in Omaha, Nebraska. Our Founder, Dr. Garcia, was (is) revered by all in the Forum including its youth organization. We knew the story of the founder and the effort and sacrifice he made for the civil rights of Latino veterans and people. Whenever we got a chance to meet him it was meeting a living Hero and legend.
So, at the conference us youngsters swiped some brew and organized a little party of invited guest that included some youth leaders (16-18 years old), the state pageants queens and other sorts. These little get togethers were common place where we would play poker, drinking games and other things. Rarely did they ever get out of control since we were upstanding young leaders but we had fun too.
So, as the party assembled in my room our assigned doorman let people in and turned away the younger kids. The brew was put in the bath tub with loads of ice and was filled to the rim. As usual, I was bad at poker and lost most of my clothes but my underwear. I wasn’t the only one though. It was also typical that the pageant queens were just as bad at poker. The party was great with good jokes, laughs, and raging hormones.
At about 2:00 am, we got a call from an uninvited youth that told on us security was on its way up. The panic ensued. Clothes went back on and people began running out of the room. I begged my close compadres to stay behind to help me ditch the remaining beer (at least 3 cases). In my underwear, I gathered the beer with two friends began dumping the beer down the trash chute in the hallway. Soon than later I was alone in the task. We'll, since there was no one to hold the door I was locked out of the room without my key.
I stood aloneiIn my underwear in the hallway and dread began to set. There was no house phone on the floor. Ugg! Pacing and in a little panic I began figuring out my options. I could go down to the lobby in my skivvies and ask for a key? Nope. Maybe I could knock on one of my neighbor’s door and ask them to call the front desk for me? Embarrassing, but what if it turns out to be a nasty person?
As I stood there considering my options, I could hear a faint TV news program on down the hall. Hmm?
I walked down the hall past the elevators four to five doors down. The TV news program was coming from a room with the door cracked open by that latch used to make ice runs that I didn’t think of doing earlier. This could be my break!
I knocked lightly on the door and I braced myself for the worse. In my mind I was through stories to tell explaining my situation. Should I be honest and confess to the party or just give a simple lockout story?
The door opened. My jaw dropped to the ground and my heart stopped. I froze. It was our Founder Dr. Hector P. Garcia with his Freedom medal and Forum cap on wearing a white muscle shirt, stripped boxer shorts, and black sock suspenders held up by his then white calves. "Get in here Mendez!", said the Founder. Oh shit, I thought. Of all people.
I began quickly to confess and apologize for the party and for any disturbance. I'm really sorry Founder. He looked at me and said that he was disappointed. My head and eyes fell looking at the rooms dark stripped short shag carpet. He continued, “You had a party and didn’t invite me, he said. I looked up to his wise cracking smile and I smiled too. “You had some alcohol and our queens there too, ha?” Yes, founder. I did. “It's great to be young Mendez, enjoy it while you can”, he said.
We sat in our underwear talking. I mostly listened. Eventually, he called the front desk and someone brought me a new key. No questions asked.
“Get some sleep Mendez; we have a long day tomorrow.” Yes Founder, good night.
Walking back I wondered, how did he know my name? How could he possibly know who I was? I was both perplexed and relieved that the Founder pulled me out of that mess.
I will always remember that night and the image of the Founder answering the door in his stripped boxer shorts, muscle shirt, sock suspenders wearing his Medal of Freedom and American GI Forum cap.
"Education is our freedom, and freedom is everybody’s business." - Dr Hector P. Garcia
link: History of the American GI Forum
Thank you Jerry Jaramillo (RIP) and Ruben Treviso for mentoring and guiding me all these years!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)