City College of San Francisco's Accreditation is in Jeopardy Solely Due to the Board of Trustees
By Jill Yee
Contrary to CCSF's Trustee Alan Wong's commentary, published on the RichmondSunsetNews.com website on May 17, CCSF is far from "stable." His failure to reveal CCSF was denied full accreditation by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), is troubling and misleading. In fact, his actions as president of the Board have served to further destabilize CCSF.
In January 2024, ACCJC, sent a warning letter to CCSF, declining to renew its accreditation, specifically sanctioning the CCSF's Board, for 1) neglecting the long-term fiscal health of the college, 2) interfering with the chancellor's authority, and 3) failing to follow its own policies and bylaws. CCSF's failure to receive full accreditation rests solely on the Board. Shame on them.
Concern for the Board's neglect of the long-term health of the college stems from the fact that in 2018, the California Community Colleges instituted a new Student-Centered Funding Formula (SCFF) to replace funding primarily based on enrollment numbers. SCFF incentivizes community colleges to focus on student success and equity-degree and certificate completions, transfers to four-year colleges and socio-economic demographics. To allow colleges to adjust to the potential impact of SCFF and declining enrollment, funding continued to be based on 2017-18 enrollment. As a result, CCSF has received funding for approximately 53,000 students, even though enrollment is currently at 23,600. SCFF is expected to be implemented in 2026-27 when funding will be based on actual enrollment. The Board failed to provide ACCJC a three- to five-year budget plan reflecting the impact of declining enrollment and SCFF, relying only on the strategy of increasing enrollment. To date, the Board has no coherent plan to address ACCJC's sanctions.
CCSF was placed on enhanced fiscal monitoring since 2019. David Martin was appointed chancellor in August 2021. Because of his financial acumen and strong leadership, he balanced the 2022-23 budget and the college received a clean audit. This was achieved after making the tough, but necessary decisions, to reduce salaries and layoff faculty. Under Chancellor Martin's leadership, CCSF was finally getting back on track.
Wong takes credit for the balanced budget, yet he opposed the chancellor's fiscal decisions at every turn. In the face of what he described as "hemorrhaging enrollment," he was the only Board member to vote against the layoff of faculty, capitulating to AFT 2121's threat to oppose the re-election of any Board member who voted for the layoffs.
In 2022, in retaliation for the layoffs, AFT 2121, the union representative for faculty, backed Anita Martinez, Susan Soloman and Vick Chung to run against the Board incumbents. The AFT candidates were elected and together with Alan Wong, formed the new Board majority, who are beholden to AFT 2121, whose only agenda is to rehire laid-off faculty and keep faculty employed, making CCSF basically an employment agency.
Despite ACCJC's warnings, balancing the budget, the end of enhanced fiscal monitoring, the Board majority has acted to undo the chancellor's fiscally responsible decisions and undermine his authority. In 2023, the Board supported rehiring laid-off faculty, restoring salary cuts, granting raises and increasing classes, without considering its long-term fiscal impact.
In January 2024, at a secret late-night meeting, Wong, Martinez, Soloman and Chung voted to fire Chancellor Martin. It's worth noting, Chancellor Martin has broad support from faculty, administrators, classified staff, and department chairs and the SF community. The four majority Board members and AFT 2121 orchestrated his removal, a retreat from the progress achieved. Martin's contract ends in June and the Board has yet to announce an interim replacement, which will mean more instability for the college.
It's an exaggeration for Wong to declare "hemorrhaging student enrollment has finally been staunched." From 2018 to 2022, enrollment declined by 12,000 students. (Over the past decade, enrollment has declined 60%). Wong touts the additional 1,000 students enrolled in 2022-23. This is hardly a trend and in no way offsets the previous decades of enrollment decline.
Trustees Wong, Martinez, Solomon and Chung have put the college on the path to insolvency. Their only strategy is to magically increase enrollment, confident they will find tens of thousands of students who have never heard of CCSF. Mass advertising has been underway for years, tuition is free, yet enrollment continued to decline. Faculty and the Board accuse the Administration of "shrinking the college," but the reality is students are shrinking the college. Denial and magical thinking are the only Board response to the fiscal downward spiral.
AFT 2121 and the majority Board members believe, if you build it, they will come. Add more classes and more students will enroll. Been there, done that. Enrollment didn't grow, but the deficit and low enrolled classes did. Nationwide, community college enrollment is declining. It's even more challenging for SF, because of the high cost of living, unaffordable housing, immigration on the decline, and the majority of SF residents have college degrees.
While CCSF was still under enhanced fiscal monitoring, deficit spending, declining enrollment, the college received $20 million per year from a parcel tax which doesn't expire until 2032, $15 million per year for Free City College, an $845 million bond measure was approved in 2020, and approximately $92 million per year from the state. Remember, since 2018, CCSF has received state funding for 53,000 students when it only had 20,000+ enrolled. For the past five years, CCSF has received funding for some 30,000 students who don't exist. Yet, the Board still has been unable to live within its means.
In 2022, AFT 2121 felt CCSF was deserving of more tax dollars and put Prop. O on the ballot, for another parcel tax that could bring an additional $37 million/year to the college. SF voters wisely rejected Prop. O, tired of CCSF's years of fiscal mismanagement and squandering tax dollars. The perpetual bailouts CCSF receives has only enabled it to live beyond its means, confident taxpayers will always come to the rescue.
AFT 2121 is now making the outrageous claim CCSF is hiding millions of dollars, sitting on a surplus, to demand adding more classes to justify rehiring laid off faculty, while conveniently ignoring low-enrolled classes. Tax payers really need to look closely at the fact that CCSF uses public funds to allow classes with fewer than 10 students to continue. The AFT 2121 contract allows the college to cancel classes with less than 20 students. In all my years at the college, this has never been enforced.
It's now projected that CCSF will not be able to meet its payroll by fall 2025. Salaries constitute 90% of the college expenditures. Yet, Wong and the Board have no concrete plan other than to magically increase enrollment to address the fiscal disaster that is eminent. Exactly where in SF are 30,000+ students hiding? In what world is it acceptable to increase expenditures and add more classes when faced with less demand? Only at CCSF.
Jill Yee is a resident of the Richmond District and a former dean, department chair and tenured faculty at CCSF. She was also a candidate for the CCSF Board of Trustees in 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment