NR GLOBAL NEWS
3 campaigners, 1 Vision for College! College Trustee Hopefuls Share Views
Candidate Forum Overview
The focus was on key issues affecting the colleges. 3 campaigners, 1 Vision for College!
Meet the Candidates
Three candidates are vying for the Area 4 seat, which covers Moorpark and Simi Valley. Incumbent Bernardo Perez seeks his fifth term. He has served on the board for 14 years. Each candidate presented their visions for the community colleges.
David Maron from the League moderated the event. Candidates provided opening and closing statements. They also responded to audience questions.
Candidate Forum Overview
Incumbent Bernardo Perez
Bernardo Perez is a long-time resident of Moorpark. He has experience as a city council member and former mayor. Currently, he chairs the community college board. He also serves on a statewide board for community colleges. Additionally, he is involved in local organizations such as the Workforce Investment Board.
Perez highlighted significant achievements of Moorpark College. The college is also a finalist for the 2025 Aspen Prize for community college excellence. He pointed out district programs like free tuition and zero-cost textbooks. The dual enrollment program for high school students was also emphasized. Moreover, new four-year bachelor’s degrees are now offered at all three colleges.
Despite these successes, Perez acknowledged challenges. He cited financial pressures due to a potential state deficit. He stressed the need to meet student needs during tough times.
Challenger Joe Piechowski
Joe Piechowski is a Simi Valley resident. He co-founded a sports blog at UCLA. He has also been the chair of Simi Valley’s Neighborhood Council 4.
Piechowski entered the race in opposition to an $820 million bond proposal. This proposal was nearly placed on the November ballot. He criticized the incumbent’s support for the bond.
He praised the dual enrollment program. Piechowski believes it is one of the district’s most valuable initiatives. He pledged to expand this program.
Campus Demonstrations
Piechowski addressed the issue of campus demonstrations. However, he voiced concern over demonstrations that escalate into chaos. He referenced recent protests at UCLA and other campuses.
Ruth Luevanos
Ruth Luevanos also participated in the forum. She shared her own insights on the pressing issues. Luevanos emphasized the importance of fostering a safe and inclusive environment on campuses. She advocated for mental health services for students. Additionally, she highlighted the need for improved resources for marginalized communities.
Luevanos believes that education should be accessible to all. She aims to support initiatives that enhance student experiences. This includes expanding scholarship opportunities and mentoring programs.
Audience Engagement
The forum allowed for direct audience engagement. Attendees posed questions to the candidates. This interactive format helped clarify their positions.
Key topics included fiscal responsibility and campus safety. The audience showed interest in how each candidate plans to handle budgetary constraints. Many attendees expressed concerns over rising tuition costs. The candidates’ responses aimed to reassure voters about their commitment to affordability.
This interactive component allowed attendees to voice their concerns and queries directly to the candidates, fostering a dynamic dialogue. Such engagement not only enhances the transparency of the electoral process but also empowers community members by giving them a platform to influence decisions that affect their local colleges.
The forum encouraged active participation from the audience, which included students, parents, educators, and concerned residents. Each candidate fielded questions that ranged from fiscal responsibility and enrollment strategies to campus safety and mental health resources. This diverse array of topics reflected the community’s varied interests and priorities, highlighting the multifaceted challenges facing local educational institutions.
One notable aspect of the audience engagement was the candid nature of the questions posed. Attendees sought specific answers rather than vague promises, pushing candidates to articulate their plans clearly. This level of scrutiny provided valuable insights into each candidate’s vision and preparedness for the role. For instance, when questions arose about rising tuition costs and financial aid, candidates were compelled to share their strategies for maintaining affordability while ensuring quality education.
Furthermore, the forum’s format facilitated a more personal connection between candidates and voters. By addressing community members directly, candidates could demonstrate their understanding of local issues and their commitment to addressing them. This interaction not only builds trust but also fosters a sense of accountability.
In conclusion, audience engagement during the candidates’ forum was a crucial element that enriched the electoral process. It provided a meaningful opportunity for constituents to engage with the hopefuls, ensuring that their voices were heard and considered in shaping the future of the Ventura County Community College District.
Conclusion
The forum highlighted diverse perspectives on the future of the Ventura County Community College District. Candidates emphasized their commitment to student success. They also addressed challenges facing the district. The discussions provided valuable insights for voters in Area 4.
As the election approaches, the community will weigh the candidates’ visions. Each hopeful aims to earn the trust of the voters. With important issues at stake, the outcome of this election will significantly impact local education.
