Controversial PCC Board of Trustees Proposal Restricting Media Access is Tabled, For Now

A complex, bureaucratic bylaw which would markedly restrict media’s access to news and information about Pasadena City College, its administration and operations was tabled during the Board’s Wednesday meeting, but is destined to be-reconsidered in some form.

The proposed bylaw debated this week would have mandated that going forward, Board of Trustees members would only have the right to respond to, or be interviewed by the media about non-controversial issues — and even then, would have to “inform” the Board President about the media contact before replying to it.

Any request for information considered controversial could only be responded to by the Board President — and even then, the Board President would be required to inform the Superintendent-President of any information requested by the media before a response could be provided.

Board President Linda Wah said the proposed bylaw update came as a result of “significant discussion about the behavior of the Board” at a recent retreat, where the Board sought guidance in talking to the press as one voice.

The issue of Board members talking to the press has always been a part of the Board ethics guidelines, but “we needed a bright line,” said Wah, “We needed clearer guidelines.”

Reaction to the proposed bylaw change was swift and strong.

An editorial in the Pasadena Star-News by Larry Wilson prior to Wednesday’s meeting said that the board was considering “muzzling” itself, a charge at least one trustee denied.

Local civil rights attorney Dale Gronemeier wrote, in an open statement to the board Thursday morning, “The proposed action has the odor of unconstitutionality that will engender litigation and the stench of bureaucratic hostility to your acting as the public’s guardian against wrongdoing at a policy level.”

John Orona, editor of the The Courier, PCC’s student newspaper, said the bylaw change would stifle dissent among the trustees and keep opposing viewpoints away from students as well as constituents.

The reference to “controversial” issues in the proposed new bylaw itself brought controversy.

The proposed bylaw stated in part, “Board members should refer all media inquiries, especially those relating to controversial issues, to the Board President or the board vice president, if the board president is unavailable.”

“Whoever is able to determine that something is ‘controversial’, that’s the word they used, that person would then have tremendous power over what people could say, and that’s a key issue,” Orona said.

Board Student Trustee None Garipian, agreed with Orona, saying at the meeting, “How do you define ‘controversial?’ I understand the purpose of the bylaw, but I also understand how this can be a restriction of free speech.”

Pasadena City College’s own student newspaper also bemoaned the current lack of transparency from the college administration, writing in an editorial, “The Courier staff itself has had complaints regarding transparency. Many times, when requesting interviews with administration officials for campus news stories, we’ve been deflected to PCC’s Public Relations Director Alex Boekelheide.

“It’s the antithesis of transparency, and journalism itself, to expect the Courier to only report PR-crafted responses to the student body? the editorial continued.

Area Two Board Trustee James Osterling spoke out against the new bylaw at Thursday’s meeting, saying, “The idea that the Board needs to speak as one board, that struck me as something that stifles differences of opinion, and diversity of opinion is important.”

“The notion that the Board of Trustees needs some kind of permission to speak to their constituency, the voters, the taxpayers, and the community, through the media, is fundamentally flawed,” Osterling continued.

Trustee Berlinda Brown, who was part of the committee that composed the new bylaw said at the meeting Thursday, “The intent of this bylaw is by no means an attempt to muzzle anyone. The purpose was not to deprive anyone from speaking to the media. What we are trying to achieve is one voice.”