Over at the Bay Guardian, G.W. Schulz has a story about another investigation at City College.

The Guardian learned that just days before the November 2005 election, in which City College asked voters for $246.3 million in bond money to continue a series of capital works projects, the office of Vice Chancellor Peter Goldstein received a letter from investigators requesting detailed information about a land transaction that took place in Chinatown earlier that year.

At least three of the school’s elected trustees don’t recall being informed by Chancellor Phil Day about the probe, setting off new concerns after we alerted officials about the letter, which the Guardian obtained. The DA’s Office is also investigating potential laundering of public funds into campaign donations by college officials in connection with that bond campaign.(SFBG 8/8/07)

And that’s not all. There is another ongoing investigation pending at City College. Back in 2005, City College officials allegedly used a $10K lease payment for a campaign for some more bonds.  This is not the way for a community college to be run, or for that matter, any organization to be run.

There seems to be a complete lack of transparency, and much of it for little reason other than they don’t feel the need to bother. City College is rarely covered in the press, and scandals have barely made a ripple in even this overtly political city.  Personally, I don’t want to opine on the long-term viability of Phil Day as Chancellor, that is for the elected trustees.  However, I don’t recall is simply not a good enough answer. There needs to be a frank and open discussion about what is best for San Francisco’s educational needs in general and City College specifically.

And furthermore, beyond transparency, we need a more visible election. I know trustee elections are small potatoes, but we must do more to ensure that they are not ignored. The future of City College is too important to be left to chance.