And the Muzzle Goes to . . . .

The Administration of Southwestern College!

That's right folks, Dr. Chopra & Co. are again making headlines with their receipt of a not-so-coveted 2010 Jefferson Muzzle. The award was granted by the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, in part "for promulgating and enforcing a policy limiting even peaceful and non-disruptive protests to a designated 'free speech' patio."

One of ten winners, the SWC Admin has the distinction of being the only community college thus recognized. Way to go, guys!

A sampling of coverage:

Greg Lukianoff for the Huffington Post: Muzzle Tov, Southwestern College and Your "Free Speech Patio"!

William Creeley for FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education): Southwestern College Receives Jefferson "Muzzle" Award for Egregious Censorship

Dissent the Blog: Southwestern College administrative rat bastards get major "muzzle" prize

CBS News: Free Speech Group Gives "Muzzle" Awards

The story has also appeared in USA Today, Fox News, and countless other news outlets, both mainstream and specialized. (Try a Google search of "muzzle award" "Southwestern College" and you'll get over 5,000 results.)

Trouble at Southwestern College

Local artist Katherine Sweetman, in conjunction with Media Arts Center San Diego, has produced a short video, Trouble at Southwestern College.

Highlighting the role of electronic news sharing, the video documents the issues leading up to the Oct. 22 student rally and the ensuing suspension of four instructors.

Please share!

Press Updates from the Best Source

If you've been missing our blog updates, do not despair because the award-winning Southwestern College Sun is on the job!

The latest issue (just out today) provides updates on recent concerns:

Speaking Up: coverage of the suspensions and aftermath

Governing Board Members Face Recall (need we say more?)

Filner, ACLU, FIRE Join to Blast College's Restraint of Free Speech

Computer Glitches Drop Thousands of SWC Students (a follow-up to our previous blog post. It should be noted here that VP of Student Affairs Angelica Suarez has not made good on the promise quoted from her email below. Students who were dropped in error are not being reinstated. Instead, they've been told there's nothing to be done.)

Sun Editorial: Board Needs to End Chopra Era, Begin to Repair Damage

For more on what's happening on campus, including more budget and program cuts, visit the Sun at http://www.southwesterncollegesun.com/

Thank you, Sun reporters, for continuing to provide outstanding coverage!

Fiction 101: Report by District Investigator Released

In a report laced with speculation, exaggeration, and downright misrepresentation,
Nancy Solomon, a Los Angeles lawyer hired by the district, presents as fact what campus police and a couple college employees "believed," "thought," and "felt."

The redacted (names removed) report includes police testimony describing "around one hundred" people "surging" at and "shoving" officers outside the 100 building.

Of course, those of us who were there that day know that nothing of the sort occurred.

Here's your angry mob of a hundred:


Here's your surging crowd:



No yelling, no shoving, no riot.

If you were there on Oct. 22, please attend the next Governing Board meeting and give your version of events. The November meeting will be Wednesday, Nov. 18, and begins at 7:00 p.m., but come early and fill out a yellow speaker card. The meeting is currently scheduled to be held in Room 214, seating capacity 85, so bring a warm jacket too.

And remember the Free Speech Rally tomorrow at 11:00 am (no yellow cards required)!

ACLU Letter to Chopra

In an extensively documented letter to SWC President Raj Chopra, David Blair-Loy, legal director for the San Diego/Imperial County chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, outlines how the college's actions and policies violate the First Amendment, California Education Code, and the California Constitution.

These are the primary points of the letter:

1. California law does not allow the college to declare most of the
campus off-limits to free speech.

2. California law does not authorize a prior restraint on college student
speech.

3. The First Amendment narrowly circumscribes the college’s right to
require an advance permit for speech or assembly.

a. The policy may not delegate excessive discretion and must
contain a mandatory deadline for issuing a permit.

b. A permit requirement for small groups is an invalid prior
restraint.

c. Any permit requirement must contain an exception for
spontaneous expression.

4. The college unconstitutionally restricts protected speech.

For the full details, citations, and references to case law, please see the full letter.

And remember the free speech rally coming up this Friday the 13th! (see previous post)

It's NOT Over: The Latest on the Suspended Profs Case

As happy as we are to see the return to campus of Dinorah Guadiana-Costa, Philip Lopez, and Andrew Rempt, Save Our Southwestern College is appalled by the latest turn of events: formal letters of reprimand for all three.

Signed by Acting Superintendent/President Nicholas Alioto, the letters will be placed in each instructor's official personnel file.

Pending legal advice, the content of those letters cannot be released, but they are largely based on the results of an "independent investigation" conducted by a contracted lawyer (paid for by the district) who claims to have consulted many "witnesses." The witnesses are not identified; however, given the investigator's conclusions, we can be fairly certain that people within feet of what happened were not consulted. Individuals who were there have repeatedly stated that they witnessed no incitement to riot, no disregard of police orders, and no physical confrontation.

Given this most recent development, we must ask: who is pressuring these "witnesses" to give false testimony?

In addition, because the investigator's work has concluded, there should be a public report. The suspended instructors have requested it repeatedly to no avail, but rumor has it that the college is willing to produce it for (at least some) members of the media.

Finally, it remains unclear whether the instructors were permitted to return because the withdrawal-of-consent expired (per California Penal Code Section 626.4, "In no case shall consent be withdrawn for longer than 14 days from the date upon which consent was initially withdrawn") or because the "independent investigation" ended. The two appear to have occurred simultaneously.

Suspended Instructors Return, and Faculty, Staff, and Students Rally

Raising signs, waving U.S. flags, and chanting, "Cut Chopra, Not Classes," members of the college community took to . . . the sidewalk today
(not the street--it's illegal; not even the dust of campus property--it's illegal) as passing motorists showed their support with honked horns and thumbs up.






Attending the rally were three of the suspended faculty:


Janet Mazzarella (on the right), former SCEA (faculty union) president, who was suspended Thursday night but allowed to return to work on Monday.


Philip Lopez (center), current president of SCEA, who returned just today


and Andrew Rempt, also returning today.

Dinorah Guadiana-Costa, also suspended, was happily in class at the time of the rally but still there in spirit.

Please see our student paper, the Southwestern College Sun for in-depth coverage on the suspensions, the events leading up to them, and details on current campus climate.

And BIG thanks to both FIRE and the Huffington Post for the coverage and support! We are battling in our little corner, often wondering if any of it makes a difference. You have shown that it does.

Here are a few more photos:

As Rally Nears, Channel 10 Covers Suspensions, and a VP Waffles

Reminder: Please attend the rally tomorrow, Nov. 5, 11:30 a.m.

We will meet at the area popularly called "the corner lot" on the edge of campus at Otay Lakes Road and H Street. All are welcome!

Meanwhile, Channel 10 visited campus today and aired the following story this evening: Criminal Charges Possible for Professors' Role in Protest

Interestingly, in the video, VP of Student Affairs, Angelica Suarez, claims that "At this time charges have not been filed with the district attorney's office."

First, we already know that the case has been referred to the DA. Second, the only entity that can "file charges" is the DA's office itself.

Is this yet another example of SWC admins waffling on words?

Rally to Protest Suspensions, Class Cuts this Thursday!

Southwestern College's faculty union (SCEA) has organized a rally for this Thursday, Nov. 5.

When: 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.

Where: Corner of Otay Lakes Road and H Street.

Who: Faculty, staff, students, and community members. All are welcome!


Important note for employees and students of SWC: Come to the rally during a break. Do not miss class or cancel appointments to attend.

FIREd Up: The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Talks Chop

Earlier today, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) issued a letter to Raj K. Chopra, President/Superintendent of SWC, regarding the suspension of four instructors.

According to its mission statement, FIRE exists "to defend and sustain individual rights at America's colleges and universities." This is no flaky fringe group: the staff, Board of Directors, and Board of Advisors represent some of the most influential names in law, legal scholarship, and civil rights studies.

After an independent investigation, FIRE states that it

is deeply concerned about Southwestern College's (SWC's) violations of the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly of its faculty and students. SWC has unconstitutionally suspended three professors who did nothing more than join a group of students who peacefully protested SWC decisions and requested an audience with you. FIRE is also concerned about reports that the campus police have been used to intimidate faculty members and students and that students are being declared guilty of offenses for exercising their constitutional rights at SWC. Finally, FIRE has determined that SWC maintains and enforces an unconstitutional "free speech zone" policy restricting freedom of expression. SWC's policies and actions have chilled and restricted freedom of expression, making a mockery of students' and faculty members' constitutional guarantees of free speech and free association—rights that SWC, as a public institution, is bound by the First Amendment to protect.

The letter goes on to detail each of the above charges and concludes with the following statement:

Please spare SWC the embarrassment of fighting against the Bill of Rights—a statement of both law and principle by which the university is legally and morally bound. FIRE hopes to resolve this matter amicably and swiftly, but we are committed to using all of our resources to restoring justice at SWC.

The letter is lengthy, but if you are interested in an informed legal perspective on recent events, then please read it in its entirety. We also have a pdf version of the original letter.

And for other recent press updates, please see The Writer's Washroom, which continues to do an excellent job compiling recent coverage.

We Want Answers NOW!

The SWC administration is playing its cards very close to the chest, but here's what we currently know regarding the suspended teachers:

The college has referred the case to the San Diego County District Attorney. An online case search suggests that a case number has not yet been assigned, so we have no further information.

Yesterday, the college issued the following memo:

We would like to provide you with a brief update. The district had scheduled hearings at the request of three individuals currently on paid administrative leave to consider ending withdrawal of consent to be on campus. Those individuals have withdrawn their request for hearings. Therefore, the hearings have been cancelled. The Human Resources Department is diligently moving to conclude the investigation on this matter in the hopes that it can be resolved and that the three individuals may be returned to campus this week.

We are unable to answer any questions with regard to this matter at this time.

The memo indicates it is from the office of SWC Community and Media Relations, but gives no further indication of who "we" are. It does not mention the referral to the DA and that the referral is why the hearing request was withdrawn. It does not explain why an investigation is still continuing, nor does it explain why HR only "hopes" the individuals can return to work this week when the withdrawal-of-consent issued under California Penal Code Section 626.4 expires on Thursday anyway.

So we want answers.

We want to know who referred the case to the DA. If it's Chopra, ostensibly on vacation, why hasn't he come forward to speak to these concerns? Who is responsible for this latest action?

We want to know the basis for referring the case. Is the district recommending criminal charges? On what grounds? And what are the charges?

We want to know what HR is still investigating. One witness after another has come forward and stated that there was no incitement, no disregard of police officers or physical confrontation. Why isn't HR listening?

We want to know why the college is wasting valuable resources pursuing what increasingly appears to be a vanity case catering to Chopra's ego.

We want to know why the Governing Board hasn't called a special meeting to address these questions.

We want to know when the community is going to hold Chopra, the Governing Board, and other college "leadership" accountable for their actions.

"When Is a Suspension not a Suspension?"

Inside Higher Ed weighs in on this question:

Officials at Southwestern College, a community college outside San Diego, moved Friday to explain why three faculty members have been barred from teaching or stepping foot on the campus for more than a week, but the answers aren't quelling faculty anger.

Good overview of the issue so far, with updated info. And the article cites Save Our Southwestern College too!

The Mysterious Case of the Disappearing Comments and Letters

Oddly, online comments on yesterday's San Diego Union Tribune editorial, "Community colleges in a vise," seem to have disappeared. (The editorial itself is intact.) Also missing are two letters to the editor in support of the suspended professors.

Possibly, the online UT is undergoing some formatting changes, and the missing items are the result of a technical glitch. Not to worry. We were able to recover the items, and in the interests of helping out the UT, we present them here.

First, the letters:

San Diego Union-Tribune 31 October 2009: E3 cached at http://bit.ly/49DOR2

Southwestern protest and faculty suspensions

The suspension of instructor Andrew Rempt and three other Southwestern College instructors on the same day they took part in a protest at Southwestern College over plans to cut course selections for the spring semester is unconstitutional because they were exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and assembly.

For the school to suspend them immediately after that protest smacks of a local college government ruled not by democratic principles but rather a pure dictatorship. A contradictory statement released by the college states: “The college respects, values and is committed to freedom of expression.”

What freedom of expression is the college talking about in this case? I guess it's the a 7.9 percent pay raise — expression of gratitude — that the governing board gave President Raj Chopra.

ROGELIO QUESADA
San Diego


Regarding the four faculty members suspended after a protest rally at Southwestern College:

It is surprising to note that today's colleges limit free speech to a “free speech area” of the campus. If we had done that in the '60s, we'd still be in Vietnam. Picture a map of the United States. That's your free speech area.

THOMAS COSTA
San Diego

Here are the comments on the UT editorial:

"Community colleges in a vise" comments, San Diego Union-Tribune 31 Oct. 2009 cached at http://bit.ly/WIo5x

capitlaist_menace 1 day ago:

Does the UT not support free speech? Why does only Chopra's distorted view appear in your product of free speech? The SWC administration is asserting that on the SWC campus there is only a 300 square foot area where free speech is allowed and that outside that area anyone who does not lick the boots of the administration will be censured and placed under criminal investigation. What would Gandhi say? What would Jessie Jackson say?


ReadBooks 1 day ago:

Allow me to answer the one question regarding the number of students that can be served by existing transferable courses that Professor Andrew MacNeill, on the spot, could not. Last weekend, when the Spring 2010 schedule was made available, I went online and counted the number of sections available at SWC for transfer to a college in the CSU system. For simplicity of argument, I will use one class as an example.

I examined the course requirement for Oral Communication. No student can graduate from a CSU without completing and passing an Oral Communication course (one that includes formal training in public speaking). In Spring 2010, Southwestern College is only offering 34 class sections that meet this requirement (COMM 103 with 24 sections, COMM 104 with 3 sections, and COMM 174 with 7 sections).

Each of these classes serve 30 students (having more is not practical as students must give at least 3 speeches each which, time-wise, takes up to at least 8 weeks of a semester). 34 classes can serve 1020 students.

There are 22,000 students enrolled at SWC. According to a statement made by Angelica Suarez, Vice President for Student Affairs, 80% of SWC's students plan to transfer to a university. While I do not have the numbers on how many want to transfer specifically to a CSU, my guess is that at least half of that 80% (most likely more) plan to transfer to a CSU.

So, for argument's sake, let's say we have 6000 (and I believe this number is generously low) who need an Oral Communication class. This semester SWC can serve 1020 of them. When Fall 2010 rolls around, there will be 4980 students who still need the course.

Match them with the thousands of new students who will enter SWC in Fall 2010, and their problem is compounded. Not only are they competing for 1020 slots against the people 4980 left over from Spring 2010, but the new folks for Fall 2010 will be added to the equation. Let's say SWC has 4000 new students enter the college in Fall 2010 who plan to transfer to a CSU, there will be 8,980 students competing for only 1020 slots.

For comparison, I looked up what other community colleges in the area were offering in Spring 2010 to satisfy the Oral Communication requirement for transfer a CSU. When I checked, only Grossmont/Cuyamaca and Palomar had their offerings available.
Grosmont/Cuyamaca offers 57 class sections.
Palomar offers 47 sections.

How bad is the situation regarding cuts to CSU transferable courses at SWC? You might want to do the calculations. Add the problem of getting the Oral Communication course needed for transfer to these additional mandatory transfer courses:
Math - a total of 32 course sections are available at SWC.
English 115 - a total for 46 course sections available are available at SWC.
Critical Thinking (COMM 160, English 116, and Phil 103) - a total of 31 course sections available at SWC.

I hope Dr. Chopra can reinstate the 50 class sections mentioned above that SWC students desperately need to the Spring 2010 schedule. In my opinion, transferable courses have been cut back way too far. If my calculations above are correct, right now, students only have about a 1 in 9 chance of even getting into transferable courses they need. Does this also translate to only having only a 1 in 9 chance of transferring to a CSU?


areyououtraged 1 day ago:

Check out Southwestern College's "transparency." All instructors' names have been deleted from the spring schedule: http://www.swccd.edu/ClassSchedule2/


ayayay 1 day ago:

Trick or treat! This is a Halloween prank, right? The UT trying to bump its circulation by being like The Onion, or more accurately The National Enquirer?

Your editorial board really needs to do its homework and stop taking everything Chopra says at face value. The guy is a carpetbagger who goes from district to district, padding his salary and leaving disaster in his wake.

Get some facts: No one is talking about "draining the reserves." The reserves far exceed state recommendations, and it's a travesty to cut classes while so much money sits in the bank. Faculty already volunteered to take a pay cut, but Chop said no. Obviously, doing otherwise could have put some pressure on him to give up his recent $15,000 raise.

I'm also not sure why you would expect a chair to know anything about the capacity in a completely different department, but I can tell you this: You guys just flunked English 116, Composition and Critical Thinking.

For real info, go to http://saveourswc.blogspot.com.


Concerned_Father 23 hours ago:

Wow this editor is obviously a good friend of Raj! This is one of the articles that I was talking about in my last post, No Name for the author! Are we to believe that this is really the view of the UT? I would hope not! This is one of the worst articles that I have ever read in regards to balance! I have been reading as much as I can about Raj & his "friends in high places" and I feel that this editor is one of them! Look around you Mister or Ms Editor, do you see anyone else supporting this Idiot of a president? The answer is NO for a good reason, he stinks! Better regroup with your people and get the facts straight! Try talking with Maureen Magee, she seems to present Raj in a much more balanced light than you do "Buddy"! Get some Balance and "report the facts", not a drummed up view of how Raj would like the "smarter than you think Public" to believe this direct assault on our Kids and adult Students is the best course of action. From what I understand the Administration is not losing any positions, on the contrary, Raj is hiring former employees of the UT. Maybe you'll be one of them soon!

People, Please Speak Up about this highly slanted article! Wow I can't believe they printed it!!! Amazing what "Someone" without the fortitude to put their name on it can get into the public view!


Concerned_Father 23 hours ago:

If this unbalanced reporting continues, I am canceling my subscription to your paper! Where is Maureen Magee?


notsonormalmom 22 hours ago:

This editorial is a joke. Whoever wrote this is obviously not doing his/her research. Also, he/she is not paying attention to all of the other news outlets shouting the truth.

I wish I had more to say about how pathetic this piece is, but I'm just speechless.

There They Go Again

Once again, the editorial board of the San Diego Union-Tribune has chosen to disregard facts in order to praise their pal Chopra ("Community colleges in a vise"), but the community is answering back.

Several comments on the story attempt to set the record straight, and Phil Lopez, one of the suspended teachers, writes the following:

Your editorial “Community colleges in a vise” omits some very important facts about Southwestern College.

First, no one is proposing that we “drain college reserves” to provide classes for students. At the most recent Governing Board meeting, the public was informed that saving 429 class sections would cost anywhere from $1.3 to $1.7 million. Our current unrestricted reserves are about $11.5 million.

The State Chancellor’s Office recommends a “prudent minimum reserve” of 5%. Reserves at Southwestern College are 11.6%. Simple arithmetic reveals that this is more than twice what is recommended.

Next, your editorial states that faculty could “volunteer to take a pay cut” to help balance the budget. In 2003, faculty voted to do exactly that. However, we were inspired by the leadership of then-President Norma Hernandez who, in another bad budget year, served as Superintendent/President while receiving a Vice President’s pay.

In contrast, our current President, Raj Chopra, got an 8% pay raise last year. No one else on campus received a raise, and, in a bad budget year, we weren’t looking for one. Chopra also gets a $20,000/year housing allowance. His total compensation--salary, housing allowance, car allowance, discretionary expense account, health benefits, and retirement—totals $250,000/year.

Finally, last Spring, the Governing Board filled two vacant administrative positions. If you look at the school website, you will find that the District plans to hire four more new administrators this semester.

While it is certainly true that community colleges are “in a vise,” it is not only “militants” who are suggesting that cuts should begin from the top down, that sacrifices should be shared, or that students—the very heart of our institution—should be the last to be cut.

Philip Lopez
President
Southwestern College Education Association

For more details on SCEA's position on the budget and how classes and jobs could be preserved, see our earlier post A Plan to Save $2 Million.

Here's Some Press!

La Prensa San Diego says, "Southwestern College community wants answers!"

Previously firmly in Raj K. Chopra's court and supportive of both him and the Governing Board, La Prensa has taken a second look in the wake of recent events. In this editorial, La Prensa sums up current community opinion:

"For those at the college who have been outspoken opponents of the Superintendent, this only confirms their charges that Dr. Chopra's management style is autocratic. For those who have supported Dr. Chopra, this situation has put them into a very uncomfortable position. For those who have taken a wait and see attitude toward this administration, they have seen enough and are no longer in support of the management style of Dr. Chopra. And this has cast a dark shadow over the school board."

Read the entire article at La Prensa San Diego: Southwestern College community wants answers!

SWC Faculty and Staff Respond to Alioto's "Update"

Responses to Acting Superintendent/President Alioto (original message linked below)

---

RE: Call for an explanation
From: Mark Van Stone
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 8:57 PM
To: Nicholas Alioto
Cc: All Staff; picknickaguilar@cox.net; Jorge Dominguez; Jean Roesch; Yolanda Salcido; Terri Valladolid

Dear Vice President Alioto, et al.,

You claim that "No disciplinary action has been taken."

Sure looks "disciplinary" to the rest of us.

Your hair-splitting pettifogging spin on this series of events is spitting into the wind. Nobody is convinced that you did this for the protection of anyone, except yourselves. And for you administrators to hide behind the fine SWC police department, who were surely just following your orders, is sheer cowardice.

Why not admit you haven't a case and immediately reinstate the "not-suspended-just-prohibited-from-doing-their-job" professors? And then open some REAL action towards solving our problems together?

By the way, are you paying for the substitute instructors and the lawyers in this situation out of the Reserve fund, or are you just going to cut more classes to pay for this divisive waste of resources?

Just trying to help,
Mark Van Stone

---

RE: Update from Acting S/P Alioto
From: Larry Lambert
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:46 PM
To: Nicholas Alioto
Cc: All Staff

Tom Holst is a very brave classified professional because he took the time and opportunities to weigh in on these important issues in spite of the vulnerability classified professionals have at this time. I am supporting his effort and adding my voice to his. I sincerely believe that if most Classified Professionals were not so burdened with the culture of fear, retaliation and intimidation that engulfs this college they would be overwhelmingly supportive of our faculty brethren more openly.

The latest rounds of tactics are unforgivable and should be challenged at every step. Trying to make us believe the semantic phlegm that an administrative leave, paid or otherwise, is not punishment is like telling us that it is not dark at night, we're just out of light. We are simply not that stupid and it is consummately insulting that anyone thinks we will actually believe that.

These retaliations by the district only serve to galvanize all of the employees of this college towards one common foe, and now we have four symbols of that unity and solidarity.

The time has come to sit down and speak openly and without hidden agendas. We continue to slip down the dark side of the moon with less and less hope of finding the light if egos and megalomaniacal control issues do not take a back seat long enough to find common ground. At some point we will have a watershed moment and realize that the paralyzing fear we currently feel about losing our career at SWC comes in second place to standing up and openly supporting what is right an honorable. Then we will all stand up and make all our voices heard. When that happens the Governing Board will pay attention, there will not be any other choice.

Regards,

Larry B. Lambert
Online Instructional Support Specialist

---

RE: Update from Acting S/P Alioto
From: Eliana Santana
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 10:54 AM
To: Nicholas Alioto
Cc: All Staff

Mr. Alioto,

I'd be interested in seeing the evidence you have collected that these three faculty members were engaged in a violent act with the police. Where is the evidence? Besides, if they were involved in violence with the police, there would be an arrest and charges filed. Where are the charges and where is the police report?

The community would like transparency in this matter.

Eliana Santana-Williamson, Ed.D
Professor of ESL and ESL Coordinator at San Ysidro

----

RE: Update from Acting S/P Alioto
From: Tom Holst
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:05 AM
To: Nicholas Alioto
Cc: All Staff


To all who would give a hoot, I took my lunch break and went down in my CSEA t-shirt to show support for our students. I arrived as the last speakers finished. There were a couple of students who urged the group to "take it to the streets." I followed the procession down to the 100 area where they were redirected around the 100 building where the procession stopped at the breezeway between 102 and 100 building. The police blocked all breezeways. At the 102 breezeway I watched the group question the police as to why they could not enter area. The Sergeant and 1 other cop explained they could not allow disruption of campus business. I saw absolutely no angry confrontation in any shape or form. A couple of male students were a bit loud but the crowd quickly lost interest and dispersed. A petition was passed around for a minute or two. I went back to work. I was within 10 feet of the whole thing. This whole thing is just ridiculous. My belated break is over now. Back to work. PS: I support what is good and right for SWC based on truth, honesty and facts. Tom

---

Re: Update from Acting S/P Alioto
From: Dan Moody
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 10:39 AM
To: Nicholas Alioto
Cc: All Staff

Dear Mr. Alioto,

Congratulations on your promotion to acting Superintendent-President.

I was interested to read your statement that the College Police are saying that this situation "compromised the safety" of others, and very surprised that these three teachers are being accused of "physical confrontation with police officers." As someone who knows these three teachers as I do, I find this allegation absolutely impossible to believe.

--Dan Moody

---

Alioto's original message.

We will post more responses from SWC faculty and staff as permission is received.

Revelations and Equivocations

Revelations

At today's faculty union (SCEA) meeting, it was revealed that in addition to questioning faculty, the administration has been calling in not only students who attended the 22 October rally but those who spoke at the earlier 14 October Governing Board Meeting.

Unlike faculty, students are not protected by a union or other organized group. One faculty member suggested that affected students contact the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF)

At the same time, the teacher suspensions are drawing the interest of several groups. CCA (the Community College Association) is already involved. CCA is the higher education affiliate of the California Teacher's Association (CTA). Nationally, CCA is affiliated with the National Education Association (NEA), the largest public employee association in the country. Both CTA and NEA are also taking an interest in the case.

In addition, the local chapters of the ACLU and NAACP have expressed a desire to assist in the case, as have organizations like FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) and the Center for Campus Free Speech.

Equivocations

At 5:02 p.m. Acting Superintendent/President Nicholas Alioto (currently in charge with Chopra on vacation) issued a statement addressed to the "College Community." In the statement, Alioto claims that "no faculty have been suspended, as that is a disciplinary action. No disciplinary action has been taken."

This claim will no doubt come as a surprise to the faculty who have been left in limbo while indefinitely barred from campus and unable to teach their classes. It will probably also come as a surprise to everyone in the "College Community" who recognizes the administration's actions as an attempt to intimidate and to silence dissent.

Alioto's statement also cites "three areas" of "concern":

"a) Incitement of students to move outside the free speech area and to violate College policies"
"b) Disregard for warnings and directives of police officers"
"c) Physical confrontation with police officers"

For anyone who was present, these accusations are laughable. For those affected, they surely constitute "disciplinary action."

And More Press

From the Writer's Washroom:

• Southwestern College's Suspended Professors Receive Media and Press Attention (And It's Positive!)

From Student Activism:

• New Details on the Suspension of Four CA Profs for Campus Budget Protest
• "Lawful Free Expression" at Southwestern College
• Power 101 (or "Raj Chopra Plays Checkers")

More Press

From Inside Higher Ed:
Confessions of a Community College Dean: Power 101

From the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE):
Community College in California Suspends Four Professors Without Explanation Following Peaceful Protest

From the Center for Campus Free Speech:
Suspended for Walking Across Campus?

Supensions in the News

Here is a partial listing of the news outlets, blogs, and other sources that have picked up the story:

• Channel 10 News: College Instructor Place on Leave: "This Is Union Busting" (includes video of Phil Lopez interview)
  
  
• Inside Higher Ed: Can Free Speech Be Furloughed? and More Anger After College Statement on Suspension of 4 Profs
  
  
• The Chronicle of Higher Education: Professors Suspended After a Protest May also Face Criminal Charges
  
  
• Dissent the Blog: Curious Suspensions
  
  
• The Writer's Washroom: Southwestern College Students Protest Class Cuts (And What the Administration Did Afterward)
  
  
• KPBS: Four Southwestern College Professors Suspended
  
  
• San Diego Union-Tribune: 4 Faculty at College Suspended After Rally

Numerous other sites, like The Center for Campus Free Speech and Student Activism, are also reposting articles and getting the word out.