Tensions between college employees and Superintendent Dr. Raj K. Chopra heightened when he banned from campus three high-ranking members of Southwestern College's faculty union along with a Spanish professor, for allegedly inciting a student march on the superintendent's office last week. Chopra issued the order the day before he left on a three-week vacation to India.
Phil Lopez, Andrew Rempt, Janet Mazzarella and Dinorah Guadiana-Costa were placed on administrative leave when Director of Human Resources Jackie Osborn, escorted by an armed campus police officer, hand-delivered a notice of administrative leave to their homes the evening after the march. It said Chopra had withdrawn his consent to allow the four faculty members to remain on campus, pending an investigation. They were told not to use SWC facilities, phones or e-mail.
The letter cited California Penal Code 626.4(a), which states that the superintendent can bar a person from campus if there is "reasonable cause to believe that such person has willfully disrupted the orderly operation of such campus." Lopez said he was told campus police are looking into possible criminal charges for inciting students to move outside the campus designated free speech area, ignoring campus police directives and physically confronting campus police. He was advised by his attorney not to speak about the incident.
Two days after she received the letter Mazzarella was allowed to return to campus. A hearing for the other three is tentatively scheduled for Nov. 1, but the fact that criminal charges are involved may delay it, according to Community College Association staff member Marianne Reynolds. SWC Governing Board President Dr. Jean Roesch said in a statement issued by Chopra's office that the three faculty members restricted from campus would remain on paid administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation.
"Please understand," said Roesch, "that no formal charges or allegations have been made against any college faculty member or employee at this time."
Lopez denied inciting anything and said he and other members of the faculty union had not attended the student rally because they had a regularly-scheduled meeting of the Southwestern College Education Association, the faculty union.
"I had just left the union meeting," said Lopez, "and I saw students marching around the building and I wanted to go check out what was going on."
Acting Superintendent Nicholas Alioto said campus police felt the situation "compromised the safety and security" of other people on campus.
"We sincerely wish that we could provide more detailed facts but we must also protect the privacy rights of the employees in question," said Alioto.
Once the investigation has been closed, SWC administration will make a recommendation to the board, according to Alioto.
The latest skirmish with Chopra started Oct. 22 at an 11 a.m. student rally in the campus free speech area attended by about 300 students. At noon about 50 students marched toward Chopra's office, met by campus police who had barricaded the sidewalk leading to the office. SCEA President Phil Lopez was seen there questioning police about the students' right to walk past their barricade. Several witnesses insisted Lopez did not lead or incite the march, and did nothing inappropriate.
Lopez said the charges were "preposterous" and the episode was an attempt by Chopra to "intimidate and silence" the faculty and its union. Professors have opposed Chopra's decisions to lay off classified employees, cut 40 percent of the colleges classes, intimidate the campus newspaper and pass a new district policy that limits the free speech rights of classified employees. Chopra has also come under fire by faculty for refusing to move crowded governing board meetings to larger venues, refusing to meet with faculty leaders and accepting a $15,000 raise during a financial crisis.
Associated Student Organization Social Vice President Oliver Osuna was at the march and said Lopez did nothing to disrupt campus operations.
"He was questioning why we couldn't walk across," Osuna said. "But he wasn't inciting a riot."
Osuna said the march on the president's office began when a student speaking at the rally suggested moving the rally from the campus's free speech area to the superintendent's office. A number of members of the audience echoed this sentiment, and a group of about 50 moved toward the president's office, Osuna said.
"To say that any staff really took them (to the president's office) would be a flawed statement," said Osuna.
Staff stayed mostly to the side at the police barricade, according to Osuna. He said Lopez was the only professor he saw speaking to the police.
Lopez said it was the district that was disrupting operations, not him.
"It seems to me," Lopez said. "(The district) pretty willfully disrupted the operation of our classes."
Rempt was directed by his attorney not to discuss details surrounding the administrative leave, but said his participation in the student rally was solely to support students.
"Honestly, it's all about the students," said Rempt. "That's the point. I attended a rally because I wanted class cuts restored and I believe in my students and I believe that they have the right to classes at this college."
Rempt, a former SCEA secretary, currently co-chairs the union's Political Action Committee with Mazzarella. The PAC raises money to support the campaigns of governing board members during elections. He said his 130 students had been left in good hands with experienced part-time instructors, but he wished he could be there.
"This is midterm time," he said. "This is make or break time for so many of them and it kills me that I can't be there."
Some of Rempt's students were upset when they learned he was placed on leave and they went to the superintendent's office for answers. They were stopped by the campus police and accused of "misdemeanor unlawful assembly," according to a student. Guadiana-Costa said her students were very upset and some threatened to drop their class.
"My students have been hurt just as much as I have, ironically by the institution that cares and guides their education," she said.
Guadiana-Costa, who is a member of the union, is the coordinator for two campus events, Dia De Los Muertos and the SWC International Film Festival. Both were canceled due to her being put on administrative leave, according to a letter posted to her office door.
"I am very wounded where it hurts the most," she said. "My students, first, and then (the district's) intimidation tactics and lies."
Mazzarella was at least 100 paces away from the police barricade. She said she had been looking for a colleague when she saw the protest, but denied any connection to it. She was put on leave that evening with the others but the district withdrew it and reinstated her two days later. When Mazzarella did not show up to her class on Friday, her students also went to Chopra's office looking for answers. They received none, according to Mazzarella.
The incident has drawn national attention and the scorn of educators across America who have accused Chopra and his aides of violating freedom of speech, abuse of power, misuse of the campus police and compiling a faculty hit list. Many faculty and classified employees have charged Chopra with retaliation and vindictive behavior.
In the wake of the May reorganization, leaders from both unions accused Chopra of retaliating against former Community Outreach Director Nevada Smith, former Arts Program Coordinator Silvia Lugo, and former web technologist Elisandra Singh and laying them off for reasons that were not budget related. Former Director for SWC Outreach Fernando Poveda, who had been laid off in the reorganization, also accused Chopra of retaliation.
When reassigned time was cut for advisors of the newspaper, speech team and art gallery, faculty charged that Professor of Journalism Max Branscomb was punished for unflattering editorials written by his students about Chopra in the Southwestern College Sun newspaper and his refusal to censor student journalists. The Sun is currently being audited, something that has not been done in Branscomb's 14 years as the advisor. Earlier this week a campus police officer asked for copies of photographs taken by Sun photographers to aid in an investigation of students who protested near Chopra's office. Branscomb refused to turn over the photos.
Mazzarella said her case was about retaliation.
"I believe Dr. Chopra is looking for reasons to retaliate against certain faculty members, myself being one of them," she said. "He has a hit list and I'm number one."
Rempt, Mazzarella and Lopez have been vocal faculty leaders critical of various administrative decisions in the last several months. In August, Lopez urged faculty members to walk out during Chopra's opening day speech. Nearly 300 faculty members and employees participated. Lopez and Mazzarella gave speeches in opposition to the recent class cuts.
"Chopra appears to me, at least, to be a person who is really into retribution and revenge," said Lopez.
Lopez said the reasons being given for paid academic leave are flimsy and Chopra is merely searching for reasons to punish the four faculty members.
"One of Chopra's MOs is that he can confuse this issue by including other people," said Lopez. "So it's more difficult to see, clearly, what's going on."
Lopez referenced the spring 2009 reorganization as an example. Three of the five positions included people who had experienced difficulties with Chopra. This may have been Chopra's attempt to hide his true motivation to cut problem faculty members, said Lopez.
An administrative source said Chopra skipped over his titular second-in-command, Dr. Mark Meadows, and gave control of the college to Alioto, a CPA who began work at SWC in August. Meadows said he does not know why Alioto was elected to be interim superintendent.
Administrators and other members of the campus community clearly have different definitions of freedom of speech. Roesch said the school "respects, values, and is committed to lawful free expression." Reynolds called the free speech area on campus a "square of freedom."
SWC Policy 5550 describes the college as a "non-public forum institution," which limits freedom of expression to special "Free Speech" areas. Students must arrange to use the SWC free speech area in advance and there are time constraints. The march on Chopra's office occurred after the one hour allotted for the approved student rally.
"There has to be some control so your classes aren't disrupted, and pathways aren't blocked," said Human Resources Compliance Coordinator Patti Blevin.
Andy MacNeill, acting SCEA president, said a number of national organizations have expressed interest in assisting faculty and students, including the Center of Campus Free Speech and the San Diego chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Inside Higher Education," a national publication ran an article entitled, "Can free speech be furloughed?"
Faculty are showing their own disapproval through fliers. One flier displays the United States as a free speech area with the caveat "not available at SWC."
Chopra and Alioto were unavailable for comment, according to members of there staffs. Meadows declined comments until the investigation is complete. Vice President for Student Services Angelica Suarez could not be reached before deadline.
Be the first to comment on this article!