Faculty and community members express frustrations over unfilled board vacancy.
The Jan. 8 Lane Community College Board of Education meeting drew criticism, with faculty and community members raising concerns about transparency and adherence to procedural norms. The frustration stemmed from December sessions that failed to fill the ongoing vacancy for Position 7.
Among the public comments, Matt Keating, a former LCC board member and now Eugene City Council member, shared his thoughts in a letter to the board: “I am deeply proud of my service at Lane and pleased that some semblance of our transparent appointment process that we helped shape remains in place today,” Keating wrote.
He criticized the delay in filling the vacancy and urged swift action. “It is imperative this board operate as a complete unit with full representation of all zones and two at-large members as enumerated on all forward-facing college documents.”
During the meeting, an LCC math faculty member, Sarah Ericson read a statement on behalf of an anonymous colleague who expressed fear of retaliation. The anonymous faculty member voiced disappointment over the board’s indefinite postponement of the appointment. “As a longtime LCC faculty and community member, I was taken aback by the board’s inability or possibly unwillingness to follow their own agreed-upon ranking of interim board member applicants,” the statement read.
The statement also alleged that the board’s inaction violated Board Policy 2110, which mandates the timely filing of vacancies. “To those who refused to rank all four applicants or participate in the ranking process, I implore you to reconsider, fulfill your civic duty, and do right by this community,” It concluded by highlighting that several board members did not rank the applicants in the ranked-choice process, despite having agreed on this method as the selection process during the Dec. 16 meeting.
Adrienne Mitchell, president of the LCCEA, and Wendy Simmons, vice president-at-large, called on the board to take action after encouraging community members to attend this meeting. “We speak as faculty members, union leaders, voters, and constituents of Lane County,” Mitchell stated. “We urge you to fulfill your civic duty to the people of Lane County and proceed with the appointment process to select a seventh member for our Board of Education.”
Board member Austin Fölnagy proposed rescinding the decision to indefinitely postpone the appointment process, highlighting the importance of fair representation. “By taking no action, we are removing a third of the representation that every member of this taxing district deserves,” Fölnagy said, pointing out potential accreditation risks tied to leaving the seat vacant.
Board member Kevin Alltucker defended his decision not to rank additional candidates beyond his first choice during the December meeting. “None of the other candidates have the same qualifications as Bob Brew,” Alltucker said. Brew is a former deputy director of the State of Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission and served as a budget officer for the city of Springfield.
Alltucker also referenced a letter addressed to the board from Kevin Cronin, an LCC alum accusing him of bias. “One of the letter writers called me a racist, which I didn’t appreciate, and so for me, that kind of negates the credibility of that letter writer,” Alltucker said.
Cronin’s letter had argued that other candidates had comparable qualifications and described claims of their unfitness as “unfounded and, frankly, a little bit racist.” Board member Steve Mital echoed support for Brew, describing him as “the most qualified candidate by a significant margin.”
Mital expressed doubt about the sincerity of some board members, saying, “The fact that he has been ranked last twice in a row makes me question the motivations of some board members.”
Denise Diamond pushed back, saying, “A difference of opinion on rankings does not indicate inconsistent motives or a lack of understanding of qualifications. Following the agreed-upon ranking policy ensures fairness and transparency for the community.”
Board member Julie Weismann upheld her decision not to support rescinding the postponement, emphasizing her belief in leaving the decision to voters in the upcoming election. “I haven’t heard anything compelling enough to change my principled view,” Weismann said. “I am sticking with my principles and values by trying to remove politics from this decision and putting it into the hands of the voters.”
Board Chair Zachary Mulholland explained his opposition to reconsidering the postponement, citing concerns about potential deadlock. “I worry that we would be spinning our wheels and wasting time,” Mulholland said.
Student Government Association President and student representative to the board Sophie Gibson expressed disappointment over the unresolved vacancy, urging the board to prioritize the community. “No matter what happens, whether there is a three-and-three split on the board or a new board member is selected, each of us in this room represents the students, faculty and staff of this college,” Gibson said. “It is our duty to put ourselves and politics aside so we can engage with one another and make decisions that serve everyone—students, employees, and board members alike.”
After contentious debate and a lack of support, Fölnagy withdrew his motion, leaving Position 7 unfilled.
