Do I need to say more about Proposition 30? It’s the focus of the union until the election. The union is checking in with faculty. It’s leading a “teach the budget” program for faculty to use in their classrooms. It’s organizing students. It’s registering people to vote. And more. Full court press until November 6th. The latest poll (Field Poll, this month) has Prop. 30 barely passing, but with a large undecided vote. There’s a very good chance this will go to the wire. With something this close, little things we all do can matter. I know most faculty are working on this. Thank you all.

Proposition 30 isn’t the only proposition receiving CCFT attention. Proposition 32 (vote no!) is the other. Newspaper editorial boards all over the state are seeing through the smoke and mirrors of this proposition and advising people to vote no. FACCC, the California community college faculty advocate group, would fall under this proposition if it were to pass and would no longer be able to collect dues through payroll deductions. I think this is the third attempt to get a law like this passed.

While CCFT’s current focus is the November election, we’re also looking past the election. Activation of membership is the goal beyond the election. No matter what happens in November, there’s a lot of work to be done, and we need to move forward, together.

Looking beyond the borders of the college, legislators in Sacramento worked until the end of August. One of the last things passed by the legislature was pension reform. This was a promise fulfilled by the governor. Some people decry the erosion of benefits. Others have said something like, “it could have been worse.” The legislation passed had strong support from both political parties. The impact on STRS is minor (in my opinion, and as was said

by another union, the pension reform validates the STRS model because STRS already conforms to much of the reform). From the perspective of the pension promised when I began teaching, it’s a better program now even after this reform. There is a base income limit of $132,000 (adjusted for inflation). Purchasing “air time” is gone. Multiplier year factors are pushed back by two years for new faculty. For example, to get the 2.4% multiplier, new faculty will have to work until 65. When I entered the STRS system, the maximum multiplier was 2.0%. Going to 2.4% was a 20% boost to my retirement. Having the state legislature continue with the larger retirement I see as a gain, not a loss.

The other big news in the state was our accrediting agency, ACCJC, issuing three “show cause” findings for City College of San Francisco, College of the Redwoods, and Cuesta College. When a college is put on “show cause,” it must do two things. First, it must produce a report by October to explain why the college should continue to receive its accreditation. Second, it must generate a plan to shut the school down in the case that the college’s accreditation is pulled. I’ve heard a lot about City College of San Francisco. The Chancellor’s office sent its emergency fiscal team in. That team’s report raises many questions about CCSF’s fiscal management. If Proposition 30 fails and a special San Francisco parcel tax for the college fails, CCSF is in trouble. They have no current plans for dealing with that possibility, and they are not positioned to deal with that eventuality should it occur. However, that doesn’t mean they won’t be able to. It is sobering news for Cabrillo as we put together our accreditation self-study.

Oh, yeah, and our CCFT contract expires at the end of this school year. Something else to work on. Interesting times, indeed.