By The Signal Editorial Board
Editor’s note: This editorial has been updated to reflect the correct tally of the board’s vote to remove interim President David Andrus from his role, as well as the correct timeline of last year’s board vote ordering a forensic audit.
The dumpster fire still burns at College of the Canyons.
The chaos of the past year was punctuated by the latest in a series of signs of instability and politically charged leadership and management — or mismanagement — when the board of trustees voted last week to oust interim President David Andrus before a permanent replacement has been found for the long-serving chancellor he replaced, Dianne Van Hook, who was discharged by a previous incarnation of the board last summer after more than 36 years at the helm of the Santa Clarita Valley’s community college.
Before Wednesday’s board meeting, the rumors were everywhere. Many of them have already proven true.
The worst-kept secret in COC history was that the COC board, driven by a new three-member majority elected in November, would be removing Andrus from his position. A public outcry ensued from faculty, staff and community members who showed up at the meeting to speak in support of Andrus.
After a lengthy late-night closed session, the board voted 3-1-1 to remove Andrus from his role as interim president, even though the search is still under way for a permanent replacement. The new interim president is Jasmine Ruys, who had been assistant superintendent/vice president of student services
All three trustees elected in November — Fred Arnold, Sharlene Johnson and Darlene Trevino — voted in favor of the termination, Edel Alonso voted against, and Carlos Guerrero abstained.
And, as it was in the case of Van Hook’s dismissal, the exact reasons were not made publicly clear, leaving the rumor mill to continue running on overtime. Since it’s a personnel decision, the board is not obligated to release its reasons.
At the time when the previous board placed Van Hook on administrative leave, leading to her firing, the specific reasons were also not publicly clear, other than speculation about a campus climate survey in which some faculty and staff gave unfavorable ratings of campus leadership.
But the subsequent bread crumb trail that emerged gave some indication of what might have led to it.
The college at the time was embroiled in a controversial decision on whether to build a planned advanced technology center on a piece of land the college owns off Golden Valley Road.
That deal was later described by Andrus as a bad one for the college that would not have met COC’s needs for an ATC and would have cost much more than originally estimated. Ultimately, the college paid $10 million to the developer, Intertex, just to get out of that deal. Now, the college plans to build the ATC on part of the Valencia campus.
In November, at the request of Andrus, the board — prior to the swearing-in of the then-newly elected majority — gave the go-ahead for a forensic audit of COC finances for the preceding 20 years. During that time, it was estimated that, under Van Hook’s watch, as much as $12 million was misused on as many as 700 projects.
Now, the results of that audit — which have not been publicly revealed — are in the hands of the L.A. County District Attorney’s Office for review due to “potential violations of law.”
Many lingering questions about what happened, the finances of COC and the reasons for both firings — Van Hook’s and Andrus’ — still remain unanswered.
We would hope the board has real evidence of malfeasance in its dismissal of Andrus. Anything short of that looks like political retribution from a board that is still very connected to Van Hook. Andrus, who pushed for the audit, angered new board members who were, and remain, close to Van Hook.
Andrus may or may not be the right person to lead COC. That’s not the point. There is a real lack of leadership and stable management at COC, and the issue has been dragging on for at least a year.
Over the years, we have questioned the level of influence that the faculty and staff unions have had on the election of COC board members. We still believe there are times it seems that the faculty and staff unions wield too much power — the employees, after all, are not the college’s only constituents. It serves the entire community.
But, it remains true that campus morale is important, and those two groups are important segments of COC’s constituency.
Hoping for new board members who would steer COC back on course after Van Hook’s messy departure, and act in the best interests of the entire community, we endorsed the new slate of board members who were elected in November. Regrettably, we are now questioning how well those endorsements are aging.
The changing of an interim president for another interim president is a bad look, especially when it appears to have been so sloppily executed.
COC is a great institution that serves our community well. We need it. But we need it to be run correctly without politics and spite and with real sound management, not a clown show. COC is going through some real hardships and will need sound guidance to recover.
COC has had 11 months to find a new president. The board is still looking for one and have hired an executive recruiting firm. The board needs to find someone to lead COC, and it will.
In the meantime, what the board has accomplished is to stoke more rancor in the campus community and perpetuate perceptions that our community college is rudderless.
Allowing Andrus to remain in place until a permanent replacement was found would have saved the college from this embarrassing episode, would have avoided the damage to faculty and staff morale that has ensued, would have avoided potential litigation by Andrus, and would have helped the college preserve its reputation while seeking a new leader and waiting for the other shoe to drop from the DA’s office.
It would have portrayed steady leadership and spared Andrus the embarrassment of having his interim presidency cut short.
Or is that the point?
