|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Contra Costa Community College District Governing Board has voted not to move forward with considering a censure of Board President Andy Li, deeming the San Ramon representative had not referred to closed-session deliberations in an open meeting, as had been alleged.
The item calling for Li’s censure, which was discussed toward the end of the nearly five-hour board meeting Wednesday, was added to the agenda at the request of Maria Alegria on behalf of LatinX for Inclusion.
Alegria sought to clarify, throughout her discussion on the request, that she and LatinX for Inclusion were not asking for an investigation or additional measures beyond adding the agenda item. Instead, Alegria said, the goal was to rectify what they saw as a problem with Trustee John Márquez’s previous request for Li’s censure not being added to a meeting agenda, at the advice of legal counsel and the chancellor’s office.
“We were simply asking that this item be put on the agenda because it was a request by Trustee Márquez … so we wanted to honor Trustee Márquez’s request that this item be placed on the agenda,” Alegria said. “It’s not my agenda item. It’s an agenda item that LatinX for Inclusion wanted, to support Trustee Márquez.”
The topic of debate was Li’s use of the words “in closed session” during the board’s June 23 public session. Márquez, arguing that this was a violation of the Brown Act, requested that censuring Li be added as an agenda item for the board’s consideration in October.
Alegria’s request on behalf of LatinX for Inclusion echoed Márquez’s request, and added allegations that Li had violated the Brown Act in the board’s May 26 meeting during which Li discussed his justification for voting to censure Márquez for violating the Brown Act with comments about Dio Shipp, the district’s associate vice chancellor human resources, who would be put on paid administrative leave in June.
“I hold myself to the highest ethical standard, and realize that I am a human being and we all make mistakes,” Li said, addressing the matter in his report to the board. “However, in this case I’m clear that I did not divulge any information which was not made public.”
Li went on to recuse himself from the agenda item added at Alegria’s request, with the board’s vice president, Judy Walters, taking the lead of the discussion in his place. Following Alegria’s five-minute discussion on the item, several public comments came in from community members in support of Li.
Susanna Wong Ordway, board president of the San Ramon Valley Unified School District, said that Li had always shown “great integrity and moral principle” in her experiences with him, and argued that the agenda item calling for his censure was “unmerited and frivolous.”
“I believe the area of complaint is really a misinterpretation of Andy’s words,” Ordway said in a written statement. “Though he did say ‘discussed the amount in closed session,’ I believe he was referring to the process of how you work on contracts, and not actually reporting out something from the session.”
Ordway pointed to the college district’s acknowledgement of, and commitment to, the diverse ethnic makeup of the board, students, and surrounding community. She emphasized that one aspect of this means listening to the intent and content behind words, particularly when non-native English speakers such as Li are speaking.
“It’s apparent that we should really take the time to listen to the intent of the comments, not just quickly react to the words,” Ordway said. “Otherwise, miscommunication and misunderstanding occurs and divides rather than unites.”
Kathy Chiverton, executive director of Discovery Counseling Center, emphasized Li’s commitment to the mental health of students in the district, and her work with him as a fellow founding member of the San Ramon Valley Diversity Coalition. She said she was “very much dismayed” to see the agenda item calling for consideration of his censure, in a written comment.
“We need more public servants like Andy,” Shiverton said. “I ask you not to censure him, but commend him for his many contributions to the residents of Contra Costa County.”
San Ramon Vice Mayor Sridhar Verose also expressed dismay at the agenda item and support for Li. In a written statement, Verose also said he was surprised at the $10 million price tag that had initially been floated for marketing services by the board, before they ultimately settled on a rate of just over $2 million for the first year of services in their final contract with Interact.
“I think it is all of your fiduciary responsibility as a public representative to share how you are spending community paychecks, and be transparent about your budget,” Verose wrote.
He added that fiduciary responsibility and transparency would be better uses of the board’s time and energy than considering the censure request.
“I would request that rather than spend the time and energy on censuring President Andy Li, take this opportunity to build your reputation and transparency by sharing more information with the public about this contract’s financial details, and the process and procedure used to select Interact Communications,” Verose wrote
Following public comments, Walters went on to discuss the process that had followed Márquez’s earlier requests for Li’s censure, saying that in a meeting with she and Márquez had with Chancellor Bryan Reece, and the district’s general counsel, in which they reviewed video of the June 23 meeting and a transcript of Li’s comments, it was determined that “no disclosure of confidential information had occurred, and no violation had occurred.”
“Because no violation had occurred, under BP (board policy) 1010, no further action was required,” Walters said. ”
Trustee Rebecca Barrett made a motion that the board not consider censuring Li, if he apologized for his choice of words at the meeting, and that he meet with Walters, in accordance with the board’s policy on the censure process otherwise.
“My motion would be that Judy would meet with Andy to discuss this, unless Andy would just apologize right now for misspeaking,” Barrett said. “We should never use the quote ‘as we discussed in closed session.’ Just blanket, let’s never say that again.”
“If Andy could just say, ‘sorry, shouldn’t have used those words in that sequence…obviously that’s never going to happen again, I’ve learned my lesson,’ … and we can just move on,” Barrett added. “If he doesn’t want to do that, then I would suggest, Judy, that you need to meet with him, and we can come to some type of resolution on this.”
Li said that this proposal struck a nerve with him, having grown up with prevalent censorship in China.
“I think some of you may know what happened in China now,” Li said. “If you say something – some words – you may be in jail, or you may be censured, and police may come for you.”
Li added that his concern was that if he were to commit to never saying certain words in the future, then being on the board would bring back memories of this, if he were to immediately face censure for a wrong choice of words.
“If I apologize here, in the future I say, ‘hey … I met someone in the closed session’, or ‘we had a joke’ – because I mention ‘in closed session’ then I have to be censured again,” Li said. “I don’t think the board should have that precedence.”
Barrett said it could still be argued that, while the consideration of the ultimately renegotiated $10 million contract with Interact was publicly listed on the agenda on June 23, Li had divulged information from a closed session by saying that had discussed the contract during a closed session, which she said the public would not have necessarily known otherwise. She also pointed to her own experiences as board president the previous year, and Li having urged her to make a public apology during her term.
“It is good for unity, it is good for the district, to say ‘I made a simple mistake, I am human’, and we can all move on,” Barrett said. “And it’s a learning experience for us all. All we have to say is ‘as previously discussed.’ We don’t need to flag where we discussed it. It is so minor, but I think as a whole it is important for the district for goodwill and better friendships, for a small apology from you on ‘I shouldn’t have used that phrase, obviously it will never happen again.'”
Li and Barrett ultimately came to terms on Li offering a “small apology for a minor mistake,” with Li adding that he would rather move on than use the district’s time and resources on this matter.
With Li recusing himself, and Márquez abstaining, the governing board voted 3-0 not to move forward with the censure request.
