There is no shortage of candidates for four seats on the Los Angeles Community College District's board of trustees, but the most qualified are missing, a consequence of an undemocratic system that elects candidates by majority vote and does not allow for runoffs, so a candidate can win without a majority vote.
Despite the frustrating nature of LACCD elections, it’s important for voters to pay attention. The board oversees California’s largest community college district. Voters, who can cast ballots in all four races, should elect the four incumbents. They haven’t done a perfect job, but they are aware of the issues and speak intelligently about where the board has been successful and what it still needs to do, including changing the way its elections are run. Many of their opponents have never seen a board meeting.
The Los Angeles Community College District, with about 200,000 students, has made some important strides in recent years, but it has been a disappointment in key areas. It has long struggled to help incoming students planning to transfer to four-year schools. The transfer rate has increased by several percentage points, but it remains below 15%, which is simply unacceptable.
The nine colleges within the district have added 900 more full-time, tenure-track faculty over the past few years and have diversified their workforce.. More than half of the students are low-income, and the district has established programs to provide homeless students with food, clothing, medical care and other support. Community colleges offer a wide range of courses, from short-term vocational certificates to nursing degrees, to students from diverse backgrounds who have very different educational goals.
At the same time, not all is well at the district's top levels. In a surprise move, its rector for the past decade, Francisco Rodriguez, resigned in early August. Meanwhile, the vice-rector's post had been vacant for a year and two other high-level district posts were vacant.
A well-run district should not face a leadership gap like this.
The district has also been under scrutiny for how it handles harassment complaints after a jury awarded $10 million to a teacher who accused a senior administrator of sexual misconduct.
In other words, there is plenty of room for improvement. Unfortunately, voters will not find that improvement in the challengers, so they should re-elect the current candidates:
Seat 1: Andra Hoffman. As director of career services and job placement at Glendale Community College, Hoffman helps students transfer to four-year schools and find careers in their chosen field. She also teaches as an adjunct professor of political science at the college. She is a past chair of the San Fernando Valley National Women's Political Caucus and is a mentor to girls and young women.
Seat 3: David Vela. Vela worked as a senior adviser to the state Employment Development Department, as a legislative assistant to former Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, and as a top aide to the late Gloria Molina when she was a Los Angeles County supervisor. He runs his own consulting firm.
Seat 5: Nichelle Henderson. As a faculty advisor and clinical field supervisor for Cal State's TEACH teacher preparation program, Henderson instructs and mentors pre-service teachers. She is also active in the California Teachers Association, where she serves as chapter vice president and chair of the political action committee.
Seat 7: Kelsey Iino. Iino has worked as a community college counselor for over 15 years. She currently works with students involved in the fields of health science, athletics, creative arts, and MANA (an Asian American Pacific Islander scholarship program) at El Camino College in Torrance. She serves as the president of the El Camino College Federation of Teachers-AFT1388.
The other candidates failed to impress. Most admitted they had not watched board meetings, which can be viewed online. This is the minimum a candidate should do to learn about the job. Opponents often could not explain what a trustee's role entailed, and sometimes could not explain why they were running for the board or challenging a particular incumbent.
Voters should note that they are casting ballots for four open seats; elections are not held by district as they are for the Los Angeles City Council or the Los Angeles Unified School District board.
And that’s one of two possible reasons voters don’t see more viable challengers. Unlike most public bodies that cover an area and population as large as the Los Angeles district, these elections are held at-large. This means that students and residents from different parts of the district don’t have a single trustee to turn to who represents their interests and concerns. It also means that running for one of these seats is an expensive proposition because it requires reaching out to voters across a wide area. Without an interest group backing challengers, they face an uphill climb to unseat incumbents.
There is no primary election for the board of trustees, as there is for council, school board and virtually every other election. There is only a general election, in which multiple candidates can compete for the same seat, making it possible for a candidate to win a seat with less than a majority of the vote.
The LACCD is the only community college district in California that has the legislative authority to skip primaries. Combined with general elections, this is a system that favors incumbents. In a sea of unknown candidates, voters are more likely to opt for those with a better-known name and the best-sounding title after their names. That usually means the person already in office, and that discourages other qualified candidates from running.
This time, the incumbents are indeed the most qualified, but they might not be if the board of directors…
Changing policies to create fairer elections should be a priority for trustees over the next year. Some incumbents said it would be too costly to hold primaries. True democracy is more important than money and more important than retaining an elected seat.
