New College Independent Alumni/ae Association

The alumni discussion list recently witnessed an 
important lesson in social conflict — basic 101 
activism and social change stuff.

Frustrated in holding the trustees accountable, some 
alumni were easy prey for mobilizing resentment. 
Feeling powerless to take action against the trustees, 
that resentment was redirected internally by an agent
provocateur.

Whether Toni Riss was a witting agent or unwitting pawn 

of the trustee mouthpiece Kathy Voutyras, the discord 

sown was the same. Recognizing this vulnerability to our 

unity in holding the culprits who destroyed our school 

and the credibility of our degrees accountable, is a 

lesson we can and should learn.

In this March 5 article in the Bohemian, New College trustee Jane Swan faults the school’s rapid growth for the financial disaster—indicating that if the trustees had a few more years to build an endowment, things might be peachy. What Swan neglects to mention, however, is that the neglect to build an endowment in the past, combined with ill-thought-out real estate investments and whimsically-added programs that hemorrhaged funds, were all decisions made by the trustees themselves. How a professional adviser to the wealthy like Northern Trust VP Jane Swan could fail to understand basic economics is beyond me.

Now that New College is closed and bandits are busy looting the remains, the 

Peter Gabel coterie is probably getting nervous about having to return 

ill-gotten gains. Should a class-action lawsuit materialize against them, 

that is a real possibility.

So what better way to derail the alumni than to drive a wedge between the 

alumni leadership? After all, the tactic of divide and conquer was standard 

operating procedure for the Gabel gang in preventing democratization of the 

school for three decades. They’ve honed the technique of infiltrating, 

rumor-mongering, and back-stabbing to an art. (There is now evidence pointing 

to a recent undercover operation by a true-believer of the Gabel cult to cozy 

up to some of the alumni leadership in order to undermine the most vocal of 

Gabel’s critics.)

In social conflict, there are always those who intentionally sow discord as 

part of psychological warfare. There are also those who unintentionally create 

disharmony due to their ignorance or argumentative nature. 

In order to prevail against enemies of social justice, both intentional and 

unintentional subversion of authentic activism must be dealt with. Whether 

those who disrupt productive organizing do so as a result of being misguided 

or malevolent will determine the manner in which they are dealt with, but due 

to the limited energy available for these distractions, needlessly indulging 

them is strategically unwise.

People get emotional under stress, and even civil discussions can get heated. 

But better that discussions take place than not. Otherwise, no learning. I 

could avoid criticism by flattering the ignorant or cajoling the delinquent, 

but that requires sacrificing the goals we’ve set. 

Over the years I’ve discovered that teaching and mentoring means that students 

and proteges sometimes turn on the messenger. It’s unfortunate, but it happens. 

But with agents of discord, I find it’s best to point out their game straight 

off before they can do much damage. A good policy is that everyone’s welcome who 

participates in good faith. Those who don’t can suffer the consequences.

On a related topic, we can also file complaints with the California Attorney 

General regarding New College’s charitable trust status:
http://ag.ca.gov/charities/forms/charitable/ct9.pdf
 
Now they have lost accreditation and federal funding and thus no longer meet 

public benefit criteria under which they incorporated, my feeling is that they 

should have their charitable status terminated. They certainly shouldn’t be 

able to continue soliciting tax-deductible donations to pocket for further 

nefarious purposes.

As the lights go down at 777 Valencia, we wish to take a moment to honor the employees who served there with dignity, some of them up to the very end. For various reasons, they will be honored anonymously by acclimation. Still, the faculty, advisors, and other employees who put the students first, often at personal sacrifice, deserve recognition. For these noble friends and colleagues, we are eternally grateful. You know who you are.

I’ve now read Peter Gabel’s pleading to WASC, and frankly, he’s become such a predictable bore, I can’t recommend wasting the time suffering any more of his nonsense. I’ve dealt with deluded trust-funders before, and were it not for their inclination to muck up other people’s lives with their fantasies, I wouldn’t give these delinquents the time of day. But since these prima donnas almost always insist on throwing their tantrums in public, I mostly have no choice but to ridicule them in this arena.

Gabel’s latest adolescent whining, typically undeserving of response by mature adults, nevertheless warrants further mockery. The title of his juvenile argument, Truth and Reconciliation, says it all; Gabel doesn’t know the meaning of the phrase. He hasn’t told the truth in ages, perhaps ever. He and his minions have done nothing but lie for the last thirty years–and they’re still at it.

So while all the injured parties from Gabel’s games now have to make the best of the misfortune he has brought on everyone, poor little Peter has chosen to throw himself on the floor kicking and screaming about conspiracies against him and his brave new world. Pathetic.

But even worse than his childish effrontery, Gabel’s assertion that his criminal enterprise must not be terminated, because they ostensibly served underprivileged populations, turns accountability on its head. In fact, it is precisely because the school once had an infrastructure that could do public good, that the malfeasance of Gabel and the other trustees is so reprehensible.

In maritime disasters, boards of inquiry are convened to determine whether any act of misconduct, inattention to duty, negligence or willful violation of the law contributed to the casualty, so that appropriate proceedings against such persons may be recommended and taken. In academic disasters like New College, accrediting commissions investigate similar responsibilities and take measures to prevent public harm. Given all the evidence against Gabel et al, they should be thankful that they aren’t facing criminal charges or personal liability for destroying the institution they were responsible for. That may still happen.

As I write this post, the buffoons self-identified as the ‘Council of Elders’, ‘Thinkers for the Whole’, aka ‘Historical Leadership’ of New College, are preparing a letter to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges pleading their case for leniency in moral terms. We kid you not.

While attempting to get away with fraud and gross incompetence due to their assumed piety is nothing new for charlatans like Peter Gabel (the leader of this imagined ’spiritual community’), it’s still galling, after all the lives he’s ruined, to hear him claiming a right to the high ground.

One really has to read Nina Siegal’s profile of Gabel to comprehend the extent of his delusions. At some level of consciousness, he probably knows he’s a fraud, but that is likely more than he can psychologically handle. Especially now that his playhouse has been taken away.

Since November, professors at New College law school have been working without 

paychecks, but with the promise of pay. Now that the school has lost its 

accreditation, these professors have been asked to sign a document saying they 

will work for free but reserve rights against the school. According to our 

source, the faculty members pushing this falsely claim that this is what WASC 

wants for the teach-out of existing law students.  

While New College now threatens to replace anyone that will not sign this form, 

they have apparently not checked with outside counsel as to how the form will 

impact a creditor position in a bankruptcy, nor have they checked on how this 

would affect the faculty filing for unemployment benefits. They just say they 

have plenty of friends in the wings to teach if they will not sign.

What is funny is, the two faculty insisting on this signing of forms have 

alleged job guarantees from JFK law school in consideration for delivering 

the majority of New College students to JFK to open a possible 2nd law school 

in Berkeley which they claim all along is what they have had plans to do. So 

in reward for hanging in there with their distraught students since the 

financial scandal hit New College last July, the law school professors are now 

having to choose between their students and their right to get paid.  

To state the obvious, these guys need a lawyer.

Institutional integrity involves a lot more than financial solvency. In fact, without integrity,
solvency cannot obtain.

The New College board of trustees included some rich people, several lawyers and 

accountants, but also included politically-connected people, as well as people with technical 

and organizational expertise in managing private and public corporations. One was even 

State Chair of the Association of Community College Trustees. Explain that.

Judging by their almost total neglect of their duties over two decades, I think it is fair to say the
trustees of New College viewed this as just another item on their resumes that required no 

responsibility. The problem with that view, other than it ran the school on the rocks, is that it is 

also contrary to state and federal laws, and for good reason. 

I mean, if the alumni cannot place their trust in the trustees of an institution of higher learning to
prevent complete collapse and public disgrace, what’s the point of having trustees? Maybe 

Rodel Rodis can answer that for us.

Matthew Wilkes, Peter Gabel’s co-conspirator in conning WASC, as well as fellow 

board member for New College’s landlord, the Arlene Francis Foundation, might 

not be personally wealthy, but he could conceivably be compelled to testify 

against Gabel in a court of law. If anyone knows about Gabel’s liability in all 

this, it is Wilkes. The only way to test the depths of his loyalty to Gabel is 

to force him to face charges of perjury for not coming clean. It’s amazing the 

treachery that unfolds when everybody tries to save their own hide.

The San Francisco Chronicle has the story of the closing of New College. Although fair enough that the institution and trustees who ran it be chastised, it remains for another day to correct the erroneous assumptions about Prior Learning programs and other matters. For now, getting everyone resettled as best as possible is the priority; celebrating those who survived and went on to contribute to society in special ways will come later.

New College lost its accreditation yesterday. In the notice, WASC admitted the situation has gone on for thirty years, and that despite the failure to meet standards of higher ed throughout that time frame, they issued accreditation that falsely assured the public and students that their degrees would be worthy of credit. Now WASC is telling us that our degrees are worthless [links to WASC letter terminating accreditation, with reasons for termination--Admin.].

Reports from students who attended the Alice in Wonderland get together with the three remaining trustees Ted Corman, Philip Knowlton, and Jane Swan today, attest to the ethereal ambience created by the trustees’ inability to come to grips with the reality of loss of accreditation and access to federal funding. Allegedly, the accrediting agency WASC informed the trustees this morning that they have ten days to formulate a plan to deal with student, alumni, and employee issues under school closure. But instead of being forthright with those in attendance this afternoon about what will happen as the school disassembles, the trustees dithered in their delusions about what programs they might keep as profitable ventures in their looking glass world, as though the disaster of the last nine months never happened.

To say we find it odd that this remnant board that fails to make records available and likely doesn’t even constitute a legal quorum under federal law, is yet able to prolong the misery of everyone involved simply because they haven’t been hauled before a judge, is an understatement. The fact they haven’t been sued personally for the harms they’ve caused as trustees puzzles us no end.

A class-action lawsuit by New College alumni against Peter Gabel, et al would undoubtedly be a real circus. But should the alumni determine that it might be worth the effort and expense to sue the trustees for damages, there are some tangible remedies to consider. One of those — based on alumni input — would be the establishment of a community service center that would provide guest instructors, motivational speakers, and mentors from the alumni association as a resource to other schools and colleges. In this way, alumni could receive stipends or fees and simultaneously support ongoing community service consistent with the stated mission of their alma mater. My recommendation would be to use a court settlement to establish this facility in the Mission District of San Francisco. My suggestion for a name is the Ani Mander Service Center.

As the many comments on the February 13 San Francisco Chronicle article about New College’s collapse observe, the story is mostly one of malign neglect of faculty and alumni by a group of self-selected trustees who found a common interest in self-promotion. Part of that self-promotion included marketing degrees in such areas as activism and social change, rather than using more traditional connotations like political science. The coursework and emphasis of study could be the same, but the deliberate naming of programs in recent years to either reflect the ideology of trustees or to support the intentional marketing of a defiant image only contributed to the marginalization of the school.

Were the trustees truly devoted to nurturing agents of social change, they would have offered such academic freedom within recognized fields that would have enabled graduates to pursue these interests unhampered by social conventions. Other state and private universities in the Bay Area do this, and their alumni are able to enter academia and other realms seamlessly while achieving noble goals. For some reason, New College trustees thought they had to present an eccentric image to succeed. They were obviously wrong.

The school’s failure to provide academic conferences, a thesis catalogue, mentoring, and other alumni services, shows that the trustees sole interest was in milking students for federal funds and then abandoning them. This unconscionable malfeasance deserves redress.

With a decision on accreditation due any day, the New College trustees have sent a “new” eleventh hour plan to the accrediting agency–the dog ate our homework, so please give us more time. We kid you not.

Of course the whining includes lots of smoke blowing about what the trustees might do if given another chance, but as usual there is no explanation of why they neglected to do anything they promised eight months ago, or five years ago, or twelve years ago. Also in line with their long tradition of not accepting personal responsibility for the mess they’ve created, the trustees blamed the Department of Education in their latest list of excuses. Anything to avoid accountability.

The sooner this nonsense ends the better.

Some alumni/ae have expressed embarrassment at being duped by the school’s marketing, and regrets that they chose to attend there. Personally, I experience neither, though I admit to resentment that the return on my investment in studying there hasn’t been more fruitful.

It’s easy in hindsight to be critical of one’s choices, but the decision to enroll in a school that was apparently more nurturing is nothing to apologize for. The fact this image was fraudulent is grounds for seeking restitution, not for self-criticism.

Both alumni and faculty who were deceived by the false marketing are aggrieved parties. Given neither group received what was promised, perhaps they can walk the path to restitution together.