|
October 2000, Volume 11, Issue 2 - Assembly Approves Refiling 50% Lawsuit |
|
|
|
|
By Lantz Simpson At a well-attended Representative Assembly meeting on September 21, the Assembly voted overwhelmingly to approve the refiling of the Faculty Association's lawsuit against the SMC District and the state Chancellor's Office. The lawsuit was filed September 12 after the District rejected the FA's offer to toll (i.e., suspend) the statute of limitations in order to work out a settlement without having to return to court. Faced with the statute of limitations running out, the FA had no choice but to refile the lawsuit in order to protect its rights to pursue enforcement of the 50% law at SMC for the fiscal years 1996-98. The lawsuit was initially filed in November 1998 after the Faculty Association discovered numerous irregularities in the District's 50% law compliance. Despite the fact that no specific procedure exists for an interested party to bring allegations and evidence of non-compliance to the Chancellor, in October 1999 Judge Victoria Chaney ruled that the FA must first exhaust all administrative remedies and directed the FA to take its case to the Chancellor's office. Last December the FA submitted over 600 pages of evidence and arguments for the fiscal years 1996-98 to the Chancellor. On June 20 the Chancellor finally issued a ruling but only for FY 1999! The FA then requested a clarification. On September 8 the Chancellor responded: he again refused to rule on 1996-98, claiming he had no authority to do so. The Chancellor's rulings have, however, in some ways bolstered the FA's case. He did rule that the SMC District was incorrectly reporting reassigned time and interfund transfers for FY 1999. He has further stated that as a matter of law, the ruling regarding reassigned time and interfund transfers applies to all districts and all years. When that ruling is applied to the years 1996-98, SMC is out of 50% law compliance by well over a million dollars for each of those years. Since the Chancellor refuses to enforce compliance, the FA's only legal avenue to pursue compliance for those years is to return to court.
|