City College of San Francisco special trustee Bob Agrella is charged with helping the campus keep its accreditation. Credit: Kathryn Baron, EdSource Today.

City College of San Francisco special trustee Bob Agrella is working to help the campus keep its accreditation. Credit: Kathryn Baron, EdSource Today

Bob Agrella, the special trustee entrusted with saving City College of San Francisco, wants to make one thing clear: City College is fully accredited and open for business, and his intention is to keep it that way.

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges announced early this month that it would revoke City College’s accreditation in July 2014 unless the school meets all the required standards. After a year on “show cause,” the most severe sanction, the commission found that City College “had fully addressed just two of the 14 recommendations for change,” and remained out of compliance in key areas of governance, leadership and evaluating the quality of courses.

Days later, the California Community Colleges Board of Governors approved an emergency resolution stripping all authority from the college’s elected Board of Trustees and handing it to Agrella. The decision elevated Agrella from special trustee with veto power over the local board to special trustee with all the legal rights, authority and decision-making power of the board.

“I couldn’t think of a more prepared person than Bob Agrella for that trustee position,” said Tom Henry, who holds the special trustee spot at Compton Community College, which lost its accreditation in August 2005. (See sidebar)

Not everyone feels that way. Student and faculty groups criticized Agrella’s appointment, arguing that he couldn’t save the college in his first year as special trustee and should not be given another year with broader powers.

They’re also critical of his salary; Agrella will earn $22,000 a month under his one-year contract, according to the statewide chancellor’s office. For someone who will be running a college with about 80,000 students, the state controller’s office shows his salary is on par with other community college presidents.

Critics have also directed plenty of anger at the accrediting commission, accusing it of a conflict of interest, playing politics and overstepping its authority. It’s an understandable response, said Henry, who suggested that Agrella read a dissertation comparing the volatile emotions on a campus in danger of closing to the five stages of grief outlined by psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.

Although he’s not at City College, Henry said from what he’s been reading, people on campus are stuck in the early stages of denial and anger. “That’s problematic. They have to get through those stages and they have to get through them in a hurry or they won’t recover.”

City College of San Francisco is using radio, video and print ads to send the message that school is open. Source: CCSF

City College of San Francisco is using radio, video and print ads to send the message that school is open. Source: CCSF

City College has until July 31 to file a formal request asking the commission to review its decision, and Agrella said it plans to make that deadline. The college will also file an appeal with the commission, and has launched an advertising campaign to let the community know that classes are open for enrollment for the fall semester.

Agrella, 69, began his career as a high school teacher before moving into community colleges. Since the early 1970s, he’s been founding dean of several campuses in Arizona, provost of Pima Community College District in Tucson, president of Cabrillo College in Santa Cruz County, and, until retiring – or so he thought – in 2011, he was president of Santa Rosa Junior College for more than two decades.

EdSource sat down with Agrella at City College’s Ocean campus to talk about his new powers, challenges and game plan. Despite a schedule that would test many younger people, Agrella appeared relaxed, unruffled, unwrinkled and in control.

Read on for excerpts or click here for a full transcript of the interview.

EdSource: What is the mood on campus right now?

Bob Agrella: It’s hard to tell you precisely what the mood on campus is right now because it is summer and there are a lot of people not around, but I would say that the mood, in general, for those folks that I’ve been visiting with the last several weeks, is somber. I think people are taking this entire accreditation business very, very seriously. … They’re concerned, obviously, about what’s going to happen to the institution, and I think all of that is probably to be expected.

EdSource: What has been the most difficult decision you’ve had to make since you became the trustee extraordinaire? And what were the immediate changes, going from the trustee who could veto to the trustee who is the board?

Bob Agrella: I think the trustee who could veto worked much more behind the scenes, tried not to get either the Board of Trustees or myself in a public, embarrassing position of trying to overturn a decision of the board. So it was much more behind-the-scenes, less operational than what it is now. Assuming the board’s duties and responsibilities, I think, takes on a much bigger role, obviously, in the institution. The ability to, and the responsibility of making decisions is much greater than what it was then, and I’m just much more active now in the actual operations of the institution than I was previously.

EdSource: What is the most difficult decision that you had to make or will have to make?

Bob Agrella: I anticipate some difficult decisions, coming forward, and those difficult decisions will, of course, be in the areas that were identified by the commission, where the institution fell short of meeting the standards or the sub-standards. And those decisions will involve some finance issues.

While I think we’ve developed a good plan, looking forward and stabilizing the institution from a financial perspective, to carry that through is going to require continued sacrifice on a lot of people’s part, and I think those decisions are going to be difficult. And I might say that one of the things that is compounding our problems right now is the loss of enrollment.

We’re down in enrollment. As you know, California community colleges are enrollment-driven institutions. You’re paid on enrollment. And so, as you lose enrollment, your financial base begins to go down, and that’s the situation we’re in right now. We’ve made considerable savings this past year. We have a budget this year that I think will sustain us, but we can’t continue on this slide in enrollment that we are.

EdSource: When you were talking about some of the difficult decisions, though, there has been talk about closing some of the campuses, the centers. Is that a strong possibility?

Bob Agrella: That’s a possibility, because we’re looking at every aspect of the institution, so at this point in time I’ve not ruled anything out. I want to, however, make sure that the decisions we make are made on good information. We don’t have all the information that we need to make some of these decisions, and that’s part of the task ahead, to get the best information possible in order to make the best decisions possible.

EdSource: How is the search for a permanent chancellor going?

Bob Agrella: The search is actually going quite well. I received information this morning from the search firm that they sent out another email blast to a little over 300 potential candidates across the country. They’ve reported to me that they’ve had some good contact with some potential candidates already. We’re early in the process, but I think it’s going about as well as it possibly could go – maybe even better than I had even hoped for.

EdSource: What are the skills, strengths and traits that you need, that you have, to bring to this challenge?

Bob Agrella: A sense of humor, number one! It’s important. I think you need to try and maintain some stability and have a sense of humor. But once you get beyond that, the serious side of it, I think, is that you have to have some experience in running institutions. You have to have experience in observing a well-run institution and what it takes to make a well-run institution.

Personal strengths, I think you have to not be afraid to talk to people. Not be afraid to let people know where you’re coming from. Be honest with them. Not everyone wants honesty. But over the long haul, I’ve found in my career that people appreciate an honest “yes” or an honest “no,” rather than a “maybe” or never getting back to them.

I think you have to develop a pretty thick hide, understanding that you’re going to get a lot of criticism if you do things one way or the other. It’s very, very difficult in a college setting to please everyone.

EdSource: When I spoke to (Compton Community College special trustee) Tom Henry … one thing he said is he would urge you to get past the anger as soon as possible.

Bob Agrella: … What we have to try to do is not let those angry folks dictate the agenda of this institution. And the agenda of this institution right now, and for the foreseeable future, is to meet those accreditation standards, to get busy, continue to work on our action plans that we’re developing in our “show cause” report, and do the best possible job we can so that we can show progress.

We’ve made considerable progress since last July 1. It’s just that we didn’t make sufficient progress. The way the commission looks at your progress is pretty simple. You either meet the standard or you don’t. It’s not one of those things where you’re 50 percent there, or 60 percent there. And also, when you institute a new planning process, or program-review process like we instituted in the institution, before you can actually say you meet that standard – it’s actually a sub-standard – you must have gone through one complete cycle. We will not have gone through one complete cycle on some of these activities until October, November, December and January, and so forth. So we’ve got our job cut out for us.

EdSource: …The college (didn’t) get into this situation overnight, and it can’t get out of it overnight … (Does) the accreditation process account for the fact that it could take a long time to turn a school around after it’s been so entrenched in bad governance and financing?

Bob Agrella: I think the accreditation process takes that into account. You know, their extension to June 30, 2014, was actually a very good step. They could have said, “You’re done right now.” They could have said it after a semester. They didn’t. They gave us the absolute maximum amount that they could get at this point in time. Our job is to try and show the absolute best amount of progress in meeting those standards that we can. …

I do know that no accrediting body wants to remove the accreditation of an institution. I really believe that. Their job is to see that the institutions meet those standards, not take accreditation. And they will do everything in their power to try and help us do that, I believe. They are bound by some federal guidelines, obviously, but I think if we show significant progress while we go through that appeals process, I think we’ll be OK.


Filed under: California Colleges, Community Colleges, Featured, Q&A, Reporting & Analysis · Tags: , , , , ,

Comment Policy

EdSource encourages a robust debate on education issues and welcomes comments from our readers. The level of thoughtfulness of our community of readers is rare among online news sites. To preserve a civil dialogue, writers should avoid personal, gratuitous attacks and invective. Comments should be relevant to the subject of the article responded to. EdSource retains the right not to publish inappropriate and non-germaine comments.


EdSource encourages commenters to use their real names. Commenters who do decide to use a pseudonym should use it consistently.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

  1. CarolineSF says:

    An important update on this story —

    CCSF’s value to Bay Area outlined in report
    San Francisco Chronicle 9/19/13
    By Nanette Asimov

    It’s a no-brainer that losing City College of San Francisco would cripple thousands of students who depend on its classes for a leg up into the workforce and higher education while hurting dozens of Bay Area industries that rely on its trained graduates to fight fires, nurse patients, serve up gourmet food and much more.

    But now there’s proof.

    As City College advances toward the deadline next summer when its accreditation is to be yanked and its state funding eliminated, San Francisco’s budget and legislative analyst is offering the first quantitative look at the impact that closure would have on the city, students, college employees and local industry.

    Although it’s unlikely that the information will change the college’s fate as it struggles to remain accredited, the report’s message showed in stark figures what its many devotees have been saying for more than a year: The college is a vital part of the Bay Area economy that would leave the region in far worse shape if it vanished.

    http://www.sfgate.com/education/article/CCSF-s-value-to-Bay-Area-outlined-in-report-4825750.php#src=fb

  2. Magpie says:

    I agree with the concepts of best practices and peer review, but I think that the commission should also be bound to follow best practices and be subject to some kind of review, instead of acting as a law unto itself. Some of the charges in the “Third party comment and complaint” are very serious and the evidence provided in that document is compelling. Corruption, cronyism, favoritism, anti-faculty bias, nepotism, conflict of interest, are some of the main charges. Yet ACCJC is in charge of investigating itself! Which results in another dismissive and shallow response basically claiming that all of the charges are false but without providing any specific documentation to refute the very specific and detailed charges. (the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges has links to all these documents at http://www.faccc.org/ccsf_news.asp)

    Many wonder if the actions against CCSF aren’t in fact punitive in reaction to this complaint, and also for the fact that CCSF faculty, staff, students, and trustees have argued vociferously and publicly over aspects of their college’s governance, budgeting, and planning. ACCJC seems more concerned that colleges “keep a lid on it” regarding these kinds of disagreements. There may even be some grounds for a claim that their actions have a chilling effect on free speech.

  3. navigio says:

    I think its important to realize that the five stages of grief were a description of the observation of people’s reaction to a terminal disease. If there is any analogy, its not that there is something ‘productive’ to come out of moving more quickly from one of the stages to another. :-(

    I also dont think those stages apply too well to this situation, especially not for students. I think in the public sector, the primary response to such problems is prolonged anger. In a sense, denial exists as part of the daily routine, and bargaining is useless for someone without power. Depression and acceptance depend on the extent to which one is willing to live with the tradeoffs (which always exist), and/or whether one decides to forgo the institution altogether. This applies not just to this situation, but any dealings with public school entities.

    I actually think it would be useful to come up with a ‘stages of grief’ scenario for community and parent reaction to the failings of public institutions, especially schools (I dont necessarily mean academically only, btw). I have been watching this in my community for a while now and the variations in responses by people are staggering. Ironically, the existence of many (if not all) of our charter schools is a direct response to perceived district failings (again, not only academically).

  4. Thomas Henry says:

    This sincere response by a CCSF student is a great example of the grief construct referenced in Kathryn Baron’s article regarding the status of City College of San Francisco (CCSF). The student’s response is understandable and we all need to communicate clearly and accurately to our students the positive steps of recovery. Timely and accurate information regarding the ACCJC process is also essential.

    The ACCJC process of accreditation is at the core, “peer review” of “best practices”. In terms of accountability and quality improvement, it is difficulty to argue against that approach. The majority of institutions in the nation and state embrace this approach and methodology. As such, they remain accredited and vibrant. If CCSF focuses on the importance of “peer review” and “best practices”, the steps toward a sustained quality institution will be achieved.

    This student took the time to read the article and respond, which means a student that is engaged and positively interested. I would encourage the student to trust Special Trustee Agrella and help support his recovery effort. If one researches Special Trustee Agrella’s educational background, you will find a very sincere leader with a proven track record of success. CCSF is very fortunate to have his leadership at this time.

    I would encourage the student leadership at CCSF to rally around Trustee Agrella and to know that all institutions benefit with “continued quality improvement.”

  5. CCSF student says:

    I hope Mr Agrella is sincere, and if so, I wish him the best, but the evidence so far isn’t very reassuring.

    How does one satisfy the standards of an agency which capriciously and unaccountably changes those standards and the associated metrics? How does one satisfy contradictory standards (e.g. cut your expenses, but simultaneously hire more administrators)? How can the ACCJC in good conscience punish students (most of whom are lower income) for the supposed sins of faculty and administrators of a cherished public institution? The Pentagon pays $10,000 for toilet seats; why isn’t anyone clamoring to shut it down?

    If the ACCJC held itself up to the arbitrary, shifting, and ill-defined standards it imposes on California’s community colleges, it would be shuttered.