Jump to content
The calculation of Grant funded programs is deceptive in their 'stand alone' status in the budget. Yes - there are more grants available for professional/technical programs (again they are more costly to run and support as technology has to be constantly updated, partners sought and curriculum rewritten for relevancy) but there is also effort and funding directed towards applying for grants (matching funds by the institution uses facility space, writers are hired, graphic design staff used for packaging, HR and Fiscal Operations staff directed for hiring and tracking responsibilities. As an example funds that are in the instructional side of the budget (facilities, staffing, supplies, curricular design) can be diverted to support non-instructional efforts for the 'greater good.' There is a great deal of 'partiality' in how grants are implemented and the President is in charge.
Dr. VanAusdle' culture will orchestrate and control campus access to the media. Good luck Mr. Diaz on finding anything more to write about. In my 10 years here I have seem only one negative letter to the editor and no articles critical of operations at the community college. And not because there are only 30 some disgruntled faculty. And for those of you long time employees (even those double dipping after being brought back after retirement) the trend has been to hire adjunct (part-time) faculty when fulltime faculty retire so the number of faculty may be high (along with turn over) while the number of faculty able to actually bargain is quite low.
And yes readers could have used some background on who was voting (faculty union?, Department?, tenured faculty?, adjuncts and tenured?) as well as what the Aspen Award was for (not being the best community college in the nation - check the website not the billboards). Readers can expect earnest support for the President in letters to the editor and on this blog by long term past and present employees - mostly from the staff side. I think those faculty quoted in the Diaz article are very brave and, actually, have understated the lack of both budgetary and philosophical support at WWCC for the core Associate of Arts/Science transfer degrees. Students who have either of these degrees, from state community colleges, automatically have their credits accepted by the 4-year public colleges and universities in Washington. There is a lot of pressure put on faculty to pass students so they can get their AA degree in 2 years and, since writing and math skills are also required to succeed with a technical degree, there is particularly pressure placed on arts and science faculty to 'accommodate' those in vocational/technical programs.
WWCC has survived and been program driven by grants - that is the reality in higher education in Washington State where less and less of our tax monies go towards education. And, ironically, those students enrolled in Nursing, wind technology, and other vocational coursework (the most costly to maintain by the institution) are also the most likely to be receiving both financial aid and Student Service assistance (tutoring, counseling, recreation, clubs, work/study) by the institution. It is not the cost of an English or Biology or History or Reading instructors that has skyrocketed.
Dr. VanAusdle is an impressive figure for his ability to sustain the viability of the community college in this corner of the state. I only hope he will retire while his 1980s management style continues to suit the majority of the college's employees.
Using one's status as a 'vet' is about as valid as using one's status as an academic or a Christian or an educator to validate one's access to the truth. My husband is a vet and he does not believe he enlisted in 1967 and put his life on the line in Vietnam because he was protecting those of us in the United States from losing our constitutional rights. He paid attention in High School and knew the conflict was between the north and the south with economics motivating US troop support for the south. I see young people today (my son's age) enlisting because they need the cradle to grave support the military provides. Yes - being killed or badly injured physically and mentally should be a consideration. And those individuals so impacted have all my sympathy. I gratefully support the portion of my taxable income that goes towards their treatment and support of families.
Ms. Semerdjian was writing a column. Rick Eskil accepts guest columnists. A 'guest' is allocated many more words than the 400 word limit given to those writing Letters to the Editor. As a scholar, with relevant credentials, she is well qualified to educate those interested in learning. In the context of being a good citizen in our richly diverse country, she also pointed out the harm in irresponsible use of the First Amendment. Mr. Buchanan seems to have focused on the latter element (and objects) because of comments he made in an earlier Letter to the Editor. Here he opened our eyes to the creeping influence of Muslims/Jihadists in our airline cleaning crews, the local school system and in foreign and domestic policy. The UB does print many Letters to the Editor that are far from factual, literate or logical. That Mr. Buchanan's letter was all those things was not a reason to omit it. However, the UB does need to be cautious about being used as a podium for those who would promote taking action against those we would identify by attire, religion and perceived dislike of Christians.
If the WWPL would rejoin WALNET - the local resource sharing consortia - you would have your choice once again. This is up to the City Council - they were the ones who decide.
I appreciate this fact checking piece posted by the UB. Wish it could have wider coverage in the print edition.
Here they go again. I've read the official complaint and 'supporting' documents.' I'm lost as to the goal of the five who signed the complaint. There is nothing I saw that indicated the RLD had had any secret meetings or took a vote over the phone or even by email regarding annexation plans. The City Council too, may discuss anything controversial before its council meetings and, if deemed prudent , may also chose to avoid certain issues or approaches to those issues entirely. The RLD letter to the City Council spoke of continuing with the strategic plan, in which annexation plans were not included. This strategic plan had been presented in a meeting, open to the public and was accepted by the RLD Board before the letter was sent.
Well written. Still - concern over the building of a new library seems misplaced (really - this is the 'block' to annexation?!)and some of the ongoing $ figures overlook the cost of currently leased space.
The new facility planned by the RLD will consolidate several activities now housed in leased space - administration, processing, technical services. It will also, in part, enlarge on leased space for collections and computers (Plaza Way). This seems a reasonable response to both rural and city residents who have noted the smallness of the Plaza Way library.
A new RLD facility, designed for 21st Century library operations, could be used to also provide processing, network and courier services for the WWPL should it be annexed. This would free up space at WWPL for an enlarged & current item collection, programming and other public service functions the city library staff enjoy (and we enjoy having them available for). And who cares where the offices, network hub and technical services reside.
The RLD's plan for a new facility makes sense to me. Hanging on to 1.3 million and, instead remodelling the WWPL as a library distribution center for the county does not.
Original 'request' by the LUC for removal of RLD Board of Trustees made big headlines and the entire left side column of the front page. Article followup on unfounded 'allegations' is buried on page 5 of section A. Highlighting the LUC's silly allegations made for a lot of unnecessary drama and angst. Not to mention the cost of legal counsel for the County. Guess the truth is judged not as interesting to the UB readership.
The 'proposals' Barbara Clark refers to (see her latest contribution as resident 'Special to the UB' columnist), are a couple of ideas for locking the District into a long-term service contract with the City. These were put together during the Library Working Group sessions but never serously discussed or developed into actual proposals. They were passed out at a City Council meeting. Annexation is also not a consideration as both the city and the District agreed in June to not pursue any consolidation models in the near future.
From her remarks regarding the inefficiency of a District system, the lack of accountability in appointed board members, and the waste inherent in building a new library or remodelling current facilities for county residents who don't read - the District model is not a preference for this City Council member anyway.
Last login: Tuesday, November 4, 2014
2015 Best Of The Best Winners
The latest wine and dine news.
The Valley's people, wine & food.
Find your way around the Valley.
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Union-Bulletin, 112 S. First Ave., Walla Walla, WA 99362/509-525-3300. All rights reserved.