The college is violating the California Public Records Act by refusing to share the accreditation commission evaluation of the Board of Trustees, according to a top media law attorney.

“They haven’t demonstrated that the public interest is in them keeping it (confidential),” said Jim Ewert, general counsel of legislative and legal services for the California Newspaper Publishers Association. “(It) clearly outweighs the public interest in finding out what it have to say. Therefore they have to provide it immediately.”

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges sent the college a summary of its findings, based on an investigative team’s evaluation of the Board of Trustees in November 2011.

The letter was received by the college on Monday, Feb. 6. The Channels has asked repeatedly and unsuccessfully this week to see the letter so it can publicize its contents. Editor in Chief Morgan Cullen said  The Channels next step will be to file a formal request under the California Public Records Act

The commission investigated the board after receiving a complaint in Summer 2011. The complaint, filed be several faculty members,  aaccused the board of not following accreditation standards. The complaints cited several instances, including the board’s handling of the dismissal of former president-superintendent Andreea Serban.

According to an email from Sue Ehrlich, vice president of human resources and legal affairs,  “consistent with Commission policy on interim communications that precede any decision-making, the draft is confidential.”

Ewert, who advises hundreds of professional and student journalists on public access law, disagreed..

“A preliminary draft, under the Public Records Act, is allowed to be withheld by an agency when it is something that they would not keep in an ordinary course of business,” Ewert said.

“They are not going to go back and re-do it. Therefore, it is not a preliminary draft by definition,” Ewert said. “Moreover, the school intends to keep this in its possession … meaning that they are going to retain it.

“In order to qualify for this exemption, it has to be a document they would not otherwise keep.”

The Board of Trustees, according to its agenda, is set to review the matter at a special study session this afternoon. Because no supporting attachments were included in the agenda, however, it was not clear before the meeting whether the board would discuss process or content.