Lynn C. Neault, Assistant Chancellor of Student Services
San Diego Community College District
3375 Camino del Rio South
San Diego, CA 92108-3883
Ms. Neault:
Subject: Student grievances, lack of District response, and saftey and security issues
I attempted to reach you by phone this afternoon, but I was told you were in a meeting. I have been attempting to keep you informed regarding ongoing grievance matters, and have been relying on Jim Smith to advise me further. Today he advised me to send my grievances regarding all Continuing Education employees to President Wilson, and refer to you to determine where any grievance concerning you should be sent. He did not respond to my request to know where to send any grievance against Chancellor Gallego, so I ask for your input on that matter as well. I realize that student grievances, according to Procedure 3100.1, are supposed to relate to Policy 3100 violations.
It has been extremely difficult to concentrate on completing forms and attaching supporting information without more clearly defined guidelines for handling student grievance matters. It was unfortunate that Jim Smith was out of town, and I feel that additional time for filing my grievances is necessary and warranted. In addition, I have been extremely stressed trying to keep up with classes, while additional violations of Policy 3100 are happening at West City Center as recently as yesterday and today.
Ongoing Policy 3100 violations by some of the same employees at West City Center support my contention that grievances filed earlier against them have not been resolved. I have not been able to sleep or eat well, nor focus on my studies with so many simultaneous stresses, frustrations, and hardships occurring. I will nevertheless do my best to complete necessary paperwork as soon as possible even at further detriment to my health and class work. However, I am very much a human being with human tolerances that I must respect — or risk greater difficulties.
Due to decisions by you and Mr. Smith that I believe have deprived me of due process, I have been working more intently on documents related to grievance issues. I spent the entire last few days working on attachments to 3100-1A589's and have been frustrated trying to determine what to do about filing 3100-1B589's; part of this time included documenting a series of new incidents involving violations of Policy 3100 at West City Center. How tragic and troubling it is that these violations are mushrooming faster than they can be properly addressed. I don't believe it will serve the District or Continuing Education to tolerate the mismanagement at West City Center until more dissension erupts.
Today, in addition to Associate Dean Lyon's further acts of intimidation and aggression, Mr. Lyon's intolerable interference in the fulfillment of a simple request for copies (which I offered to pay for) of information posted by site employees on the student bulletin board in Bldg. 1 — left the office manager in tears. Dean St. John is awash not only in his own problems but in additional problems caused by his associate, problems that Dean St. John appears afraid to address fully, as if he is second in command depending on circumstance and Mr. Lyon's mood. Something very fishy is going on with regard to management co-ordination between the two of them that creates a endless nightmare for the best students, faculty, and staff.
The only people that could be happy with current management are those clinging to their paycheck and benefits at all costs — and those lacking clarity or competence — employees that wouldn't be retained under good management. So students are poorly served on many fronts and on many levels by many personnel that survive by virtue of paycheck or fear-based loyalty to the current managers. Everyone else appears unhappy, fearful of retaliation, and frustrated with the lack of equitable District and Continuing Education oversight. So when you asked in our first meeting as to how the District can help me with MY concerns, I believe you failed to consider the wider situation that needs to be addressed so that grievances don't overlap semester to semester and endlessly strain and stress human resources.
I'm reminded of how messengers get shot every time I step on this campus. Mr. Lyon appears to wear the personas of movie and television lawyers, outlaws and thugs more easily than the professionalism his job requires. I refuse to be his victim or scapegoat.
As a safety issue, replacement of site management is preferable to perpetuating a situation where somebody — without the self-restraint that I and others possess — will react to these site managers violently — a horrible but very real possibility with so many livelihoods on the line, and students coming and going with less and less patience and knowledge of due process. Either we can get knowledge of due process into every classroom — or face the increased likelihood of far greater problems and liability. Why is it that I am attempting to get the channels the District has provided TO WORK — with so little success? As you and others may be starting to realize, the District's inaction and misaction — trying to focus blame on me — has been problematic — yet revealing.
I cannot keep up my hope to see best practice when nearly everyone I talk to seems oblivious to it. I am particularly sensitive to deviation from best practice by administrators with special responsibilities to ensure excellent student services, equal access, fair treatment, and well-prepared accommodation.
I would appreciate a THOROUGH response to the issues I've raised in writing, rather than defer such response to another person, time, or place. Please set a better example than the one set by so many other District and Continuing Education employees who I've asked to address my grievances and other site concerns. Put an end to the dismissiveness, neglect, scapegoating and denial that has been the persistent pattern I've witnessed since enrolling at West City Center under the present management.
Sincerely,
Tom Darling
edutrue@mailcity.com
26 February 2000
Dear President Wilson:
Subject: Request for meeting
My student grievances involve a number of employees whose duties range from custodial to managerial. Despite weeks of struggling on my own to understand what is possible in terms of student grievance "relief" to complete Form 3100-1B 589, I find that I am unable to easily do so due to the many overlapping complexities and my limited knowledge of relevant District's policies and practices.
I have many questions that are not answered by Policy 3100 or other policies that I have been able to access. Problems in receiving adequate assistance and information from Ms. Neault, Mr. Smith, and other administrators and counselors present a continuing dilemma. There appears to be no student advocacy presence for assisting me in addressing Policy 3100 issues, particularly those involving behavior of personnel. Unfortunately, the Student Trustee and United Student Council have not proved to be an effective resource or channel for addressing my concerns. Can you suggest someone involved with student advocacy within Continuing Education that can assist me?
I stress that I have made the best start I can manage, including typing up several pages of "relief requested" in draft form, but do not feel these reflect enough policy understanding to submit as attachments to the grievance forms. It would be very discouraging if relief I request is rejected due to policy or other limitations that I am not aware of.
Would you please allow me to meet with you at the Pt. Loma Campus at your convenience to determine what actions can be taken by Continuing Education Administration in responding to student grievance relief requests? If I had suitable transportation I would be happy to meet with you at some other location.
Sincerely,
Tom Darling
edutrue@mailcity.com
Subject: Suppressing communication/Continuing Education's backward "direction"
In your 27 February 2000 e-mail you stated: "I have been directed by the President of Continuing Education to no longer respond to your e-mails." Did President Wilson give you a reason for his action — or did you ask why? Efficient and appropriate use of e-mail needs to be encouraged among all District employees as it is being encouraged for students in Continuing Education and other college classes.
It strikes me as imperious — and backward leaning — to use one's "higher authority" to restrict a Vice-President from using such a commonly accepted tool — a tool that is rapidly growing in acceptance in all professional fields. Right now, President Wilson's interference impedes information flow, and the equitable addressing of student concerns. I believe all publicly funded schools should allow free expression without suffering retaliation for addressing current conditions.
For two years I've raised the issue of the District's inattention to response protocol in particular and inattention to good communication practices in general. Considering the widespread acceptance of e-mail in all fields, it is worrisome to encounter school administrators who fail to recognize the importance of e-mail correspondence in keeping pace with the quickening of electronic communication both locally and around the globe.
Individual students do not have available the assortment of communication options and financial and human resources that Continuing Education administrators do. Fortunately for students, e-mail overcomes the delays, costs, and inherent limitations of other correspondence options. However, it is a regressive, indeed repressive, practice to restrict e-mail use arbitrarily or in retaliation for a student raising of embarrassing issues such as the persistent lack of administrative professionalism and noncompliance with its own policy.
E-mail also offers certain egalitarian advantages by moving communication out of the exclusionary "closed door" back rooms of intimidation and nonaccountability into the "e-light" the District should be more effectively employing and enjoying. When policy is adhered to and mistakes are learned from rather than covered up, critical thinking can be honorably celebrated rather than resentfully avoided. The insecurity of District administrators leads to clumsy moves to keep best practice submerged and unrecognized — even by themselves. To prolong District growing pains due to a chronic vision vacuum on so many levels betrays student trust and further erodes public confidence. Management myopia is no way to manage change.
President Wilson's repressive move to cut off an ongoing e-mail exchange appears to be a variation on the old "shoot the messenger" approach. His taking away an essential communication tool on the administrative end — necessarily affects use on the student end. Thus, the progress possible in resolving student concerns via the most efficient and effective two-way flow of easily verifiable correspondence is circumvented to the detriment of the student. This is another example of how the District pays little heed to the timeliness of administrative response, and unnecessarily and unfairly restricts the means and scope of response to the clear detriment of the student. The timing of such interference by President Wilson indicates a retaliative stifling of information flow that impedes requested clarification of District policy and practice. Furthermore, such interference frustrates the need for quick follow-up when responses are incomplete or unclear, or when responses raise further issues as has so often been the case.
To sum up, I believe President Wilson's interference in allowing the advantages of e-mail to be better utilized between students and management reflects a common lag among school administrators to embrace new technology through their own example and mentoring. It is clear that appropriate and effective use of e-mail allows wider input and sharing of information in a more cost-effective and time-efficient way. Without question, e-mail assists documentation, timely verification and confirmation, and promotes inclusion of others such as those responsible for implementation and oversight.
When the student sector, the least supported and formally represented sector, makes an effort to communicate using tools and skills developed in current school programs, use of such media should not be restricted but rather should be encouraged and guided in useful and innovative ways reflective of the technology itself. There's a heavy negative price to be paid by any District that allows administrators to drag their feet in adapting to new technologies that students are expected to master. Such a contradiction underscores the hypocrisy and shortsightedness of those who manage education programs by in effect saying, "Do as I say, not as I do."
Please respond to me through my P.O. Box 9626, San Diego, CA 92169 — until such time as you are no longer being "e-restricted" by the President. Unfortunately, such routing of correspondence will result in considerable delays.
Sincerely,
Tom Darling
edutrue@mailcity.com
cc: "Maria Nieto Senour"
13 March 2000
President Wilson:
Subject: Resolving problems within SDCCD Continuing Education / West City Center
A higher level of "professionalism" is required in addressing such a broad and longstanding pattern of "unprofessionalism" within Continuing Education. I had hoped that when you moved from Dean of San Diego City College to President of Continuing Education that abuses at West City Center would finally be appropriately addressed. So far under your leadership, I believe further errors in judgment are being made, and none of my documented concerns have been appropriately addressed.
First, please let me remind you that you have not responded to my 26 Feb2000 request for a meeting with you. Secondly, I request an explanation why you would interfere with my obtaining information from Mr. Jim Smith, Vice-President of Instructional Services, via e-mail. Thirdly, I request that interactions with me be conducted more professionally with increased attention given to non-biased documentation that is not only accurate, but more complete, and sufficiently detailed. Please consider the following.
Mr. Martin, in his unexpected 25 Feb 2000 visit to see me during class time, described himself as a "Disciplinary Officer" involved in "fact-finding." After reading his 1 March 2000 letter to me describing that initial visit, I strongly object to any presumption that Mr. Martin is an unbiased "fact finder." To receive such a factually-flawed letter moves me to protest further intrusions by employees such as Mr. martin who are prone to distortion, incompleteness, and inaccuracy. After a similar experience with Mr. Grimes as a "fact-finder" and "Disciplinary Officer" in the spring of 1999, I believe Policy 3100 needs to be amended in an effort to prevent further sloppy handling of student matters, including violation of due process.
If Continuing Education lacks suitable personnel and I am to be repeatedly misjudged and misrepresented, I request the opportunity to tape any further Disciplinary or Grievance Officer meetings or related discussions. I believe taping is warranted so that further problems of this sort can be clearly and efficiently addressed without the denial and evasiveness I've encountered so many times in the past two years.
Continued lack of cooperation and unprofessional conduct among so many administrators suggests a "conspiracy" to deprive me of my rights as a student. I believe West City Center managers and other employees have "colluded," or been issued "gag orders" to block further investigation and disclosure of conditions and treatment of students at the Point Loma campus. Hopefully, your response to these expressed concerns will provide an opportunity for your own leadership and professionalism to shine forth, thereby assuring students and faculty at West City Center that excellence is truly a goal of top managers, and not just an empty pledge.
NO RESPONSE
Tom Darling
edutrue@mailcity.com
cc: SDCCD Board members Mack, Moser, Olson, Schulze, and Senour; Chancellor Augustine P. Gallego; Assistant Chancellor of Student Services, Lynn Neault; Vice-President of Instructional Services, Jim Smith, West City Center Dean, Ortega St. John, Associate Dean Bill Grimes, Associate Dean Fred Martin
NO RESPONSE
Back to Home Page
