|
Richard J. Cowsill, a former Valley College student body president who claimed he received unearned credits for eight classes, legally can – and will – address today’s meeting of the Los Angeles Community College District Board of Trustees
The board had banned Cowsill from speaking at its meetings for six months claiming he violated the sate Brown Act’s privacy clause on personnel matters by publicly naming teachers who gave him the phony grades.
However, Cowsill, with the help of American Civil Liberties Union attorney Rees Lloyd, challenged the gag order in court here Tuesday and won – at least temporarily.
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Thomas T. Johnson issued a temporary restraining order, permitting Cowsill to address today’s bimonthly trustees’ meeting and scheduled a further hearing on the civil suit for June 30.
However, Johnson specifically banned Cowsill from mentioning any faculty members’ names in his remarks to the trustees.
Cowsill, 31, a Vietnam veteran and current college dropout who hopes to return to school and become a lawyer, said he will concentrate on criticizing the now public abbreviated report of the trustees’ investigation of the phony grade issue. He said he had not planned to name faculty names today.
Cowsill ran afoul of the trustees’ interpretation of the Brown Act and its enforcing rule at earlier board meetings when he demanded release of the full investigation report. He said Tuesday he still believes the complete report would prove he got five A’s (one for a yoga class was later rescinded) and three C’s for work never done, and that he received favored treatment because he personally obtained student funds for two college departments.
Each time the board refused to release the report at earlier meetings, Cowsill started naming the eight accused faculty members in the public session.
The edited report, issued at a June 3 meeting where Cowsill was banned from speaking revealed that two teachers received reprimands because of the fraudulent grading. However, it concluded that student body financial expenditures were handled with a normal system of checks and balances, negating claims that Cowsill single-handedly controlled the funds.
Cowsill’s suit challenges the constitutionality of the controversial board rule that permits banning speech and attendance at board meeting for up to six months by anybody who criticizes college employees in public session. Lloyd argued that the rule is overboard, acts as a prior restraint on the rights of expression and to petition the government for redress, and denies due process of law.
Robert Henry, district general counsel, said the rule , merely enforces the Brown Act, which permits a challenged employee to choose whether to have a grievance heard behind closed doors or in public.
|
