Quick Biography

• I was born in Winfield in 1972, and grew up in Villa Park.
• I graduated from Willowbrook High School in 1990. I graduated from Boston University in 1994 with a B.A. in (a) chemistry with a biology minor, and (b) political science. I was able to complete my double major in 4 years because I was able to take transferrable coursework at the College of DuPage. I received my J.D., with honors, from the George Washington University law school in 1997.
• Since receiving my law degree, I have worked for three law firms; since 2004, I have founded and worked for my own law firm, Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP. My work biography is here. To summarize, I specialize in pharmaceutical patent litigation. My skill set, which includes investigating large companies; digging out the facts; cross-examining expert witnesses; and applying complex areas of law to those facts, will help the Board of Trustees engage in real oversight over COD’s activities. I have further founded several other companies; I also have served on various boards in the private sector. My success as an attorney can be shown by the fact that my clients trust me to handle their disputes involving products valued in the hundreds of millions, and sometimes billions of dollars; and that my legal practice grew from 3 to over 70 employees in the last 10 years.

What do you want students to know about you?

My mother, sister, family members, friends have all attended COD; COD is an essential asset to our community that needs to be protected both now and for future generations of students. That requires quality faculty and classes and facilities tailored to provide the classwork students need at low cost. I believe the board should be run with the utmost openness, transparency, honesty, and respect for the institution, students, faculty, and community as a whole. It is unfortunate that the actions of a certain few in the administration, combined with a lack of real oversight by the board, has compelled the conclusion that all but one of the trustees should resign and led to state legislators believing COD’s behavior at this level been so contrary to good governance practices that state intervention (either as audits or new legislation) is needed.

Why are you seeking office?

The Board of Trustees primarily is responsible for deciding four things: the tax levy; tuition; contracts; and policies and procedures that govern the college administration as a whole. I have never before run for political office. I initially decided to run for this particular position because I believe people in Illinois are fed up with governing bodies not doing the job they were elected to do. My skill set is uniquely suited to resolving the particular problems addressing COD.

For example, I want to see an end to the allegations that there is a group of insiders taking student and taxpayer dollars intended for education and either wasting them or enriching themselves at the expense of the students and community at large. This requires transparently investigating the allegations; discerning the real facts on the ground; and resolving the allegations, not ignoring them. The students, faculty and public have a right to know whether there are individuals within the college that are spending their money unwisely or unlawfully to have those individuals held accountable. As another example, over the last several years the trend was to increase the tax levy and tuition (the recent tax freeze and $4/credit hour reduction being the rare exception), even though the funds extracted were not necessary (given that COD is sitting on a cash surplus of around $180 million). Likewise, the Waterleaf restaurant has continued to lose approximately $500,000 per year—equivalent to the full-time tuition payments of 100 students. The board needs to reprioritize spending on items that will benefit the students’ learning experiences.

What factors determine whether or not tuition should be increased?

Tuition should not be increased; if anything, the Board of Trustees should be focusing on ways to decrease it. One of the most attractive things about community colleges generally is low cost; that is true for COD in the various student surveys released, and according to the many people I have met as part of this campaign. Personally, when I was deciding where I could go to school, cost was the primary driver of that decision, because my parents lacked the means to pay for any state or private school at full cost, and what amounts I had saved from part-time jobs during high school would not even come close to paying that dollar amount either. Today, students’ cost-concerns have become even more paramount. When I took classes at COD, the cost was roughly $200/class. That amount has increased substantially. Likewise, the student loan default rate has crept up as tuition has increased. That is simply unacceptable. In my opinion, tuition increases should be the last, not first, resort when considering financing.

In regards to President Barack Obama’s proposal for free community college, what do you believe the threshold should be for a free education at COD?

First, community college obviously isn’t free; someone has to pay for the buildings, faculty, administration, etc. (Much as we may have beloved and devoted faculty at COD, we could never maintain the quality we have via unpaid volunteer faculty). Second, President Obama’s community college proposal has been modified, and now seems to be off the radar screen. It is doubtful that any new legislation will emerge from Washington in the near future.

Nevertheless, this question remains: how do we balance the competing interests of the community, administration and faculty with the students’ desire to perform college coursework at low cost? My preference would be to have the lowest cost we can for everyone in the community. That said, there are existing scholarship opportunities; there are existing federal and state programs; and eligibility can be based on need, family income, excellence in past education performance, etc. We have existing dual-credit programs that allow students to earn credits while in high school. Every student is an individual, and will have individualized experiences that dictate whether and to what extent they need assistance to further their education, and those must be taken into account.

To the extent there are specific areas where it would be beneficial to attract or assist certain kinds of students to COD, I think the Board of Trustees should be open to considering any possibilities in designing such programs.

What would your top three priorities be if elected?

Because of the length of the term, there may be several issues that need to become priorities that are not even yet known. However, at the outset, the new board will have several key issues to address near-term, which includes: (1) the selection of the next college President; (2) the tax levy and tuition; and (3) resolving the many allegations that have arisen ranging from the fraud indictment to Dr. Breuder’s “buyout” to conflicts of interest creating questionable contracts. We need to restore the trust between the board and the students, faculty, and community as a whole.

What is your opinion on the possible addition of a new Teaching and Learning Center?

The current COD website states that the current “Teaching and Learning Center” is an “on-campus resource that provides training, workshops and classes to College of DuPage employees.” The concept of a “Teaching and Learning Center” was also at the center of the controversial $20 million grant proposal involving Dr. Breuder. This is an issue where the Board should carefully consider whether it will be the highest and best use of existing dollars, including after hearing public input from all stakeholders (including students, faculty, and COD employees) and discerning whether the training/workshops/classes must be held (a) in a separate center, versus utilizing existing building resources; and (b) on-campus, or whether there are more efficient venues for performing any necessary training, workshops and classes.

In your opinion, does the college need more parking? How would you go about creating more parking if you do believe it is an issue?

Yes! This was a problem when I was a student at COD, and it is disheartening that despite the millions of dollars spent, students still have problems finding parking to actually get to class on time. (And designating premium parking spots/charging $75 for parking passes does not really address the fundamental problem). For parking, there inevitably are three options (alone or in combination) when you need more spaces beyond existing single-level surface parking: incorporate it within a building; build more spaces underground; or build more spaces above ground. Any independent parking garage building should be sited to take the pressure off high density traffic times; and should be designed with the interests of being sensitive to the neighborhood in which the College sits; and address issues relating to, e.g., storm water management, particularly if going below-ground. If the peak parking is extremely variable throughout the campus, such that no site in particular would alleviate traffic/parking overflows, then a garage combined with shuttle services to target the peak location areas may also be an option that requires consideration. Again, this requires meaningful data on parking patterns and student needs/requirements, along with cost analyses, to make an appropriate decision.

A recent satisfaction survey said students are unhappy with the current counseling options on campus. How would you improve it?

The survey stated that students feel that “Academic Advisors are not knowledgeable about their program requirements”; “are not knowledgeable about the transfer requirements of other schools”; and “COD does not do everything it could to help students reach their educational goals.”

It is interesting to note that some of these issues are tied to two new challenges stated to be identified from the 2014 survey. (See Survey results, p. 4, referencing Questions 25 (“My academic advisor is concerned about my success as an individual”) and 48 (“Counseling staff care about students as individuals”); compare with, e.g., Questions 32, 40, 52, 72). It is also noteworthy that the questions that were present year to year had fairly stable ranges out of the scaled reported range of 0-6. (See id. p. 7, question 32 range of 4.71-4.91, with 4.89 in 2014; question 52 range of 4.86-4.95, with 4.92 in 2014). The survey identifies things as strengths if they were roughly above 5.25 on the scale. (Compare p. 8 survey results).

It is further interesting to note that areas that were not identified as challenges on the scale, such as question 13, “Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful with college planning,” despite having had a similar satisfaction score range on the survey (4.24- 4.77 range, 4.77 in 2014) as areas identified as challenges. Likewise, issues relating to child care and veterans’ affairs (questions 10, 17) scored comparatively lower on the scale, yet were not identified as challenges either. (Survey p. 11). Consequently, I would want more information on this issue to understand the selection process for sorting an issue as a “challenge” versus neutral vs. “strength” of COD.

Further, before suggesting improvements, it is worth reviewing the raw data, and engaging in more follow-up analysis.

For example, consider one of the challenges the survey identified, and potential reasons why the Academic Advisors may lack knowledge about the transfer requirements of other schools. Has anyone asked the Academic Advisors why this perception may exist? What specifically did students have problems with? Are the issues the result of, e.g.,:

• the changing requirements of other schools?
• a lack of centralized information on those schools to access?
• the breadth of majors and transfer colleges at issue, such that every answer must be individually researched and tailored to a particular student?
• changing federal/state/accrediting board standards?
• Other issues?

This is important information to know, because when setting policy, the first and fourth items may not be in COD’s direct power to address, and would require further follow-up as to what resources COD could put in place to be more proactive. The second may simply require a better database that is updated in real time for the students and advisors alike to access. The third may require more institutional manpower.

Ultimately, the improvement to put in place must address the root cause of the problem. The current survey results do not contain adequate information on that score, though they do suggest areas for further research and follow up.

The full-time faculty has voted to express no confidence in President Robert Breuder. Breuder has also been granted a severance package. Do you support this decision? Why or why not?

I am on record, including at the January 2015 special Board meeting to discuss the fourth addendum, as stating that in my opinion, given the public record, when Dr. Breuder gave unconditional notice of his intent to retire in March 2016 in his January 20, 2015 letter, the Board erred in enacting the fourth addendum to what has been represented to be Dr. Breuder’s contract documents, because subparagraph (G)(1)(b) of the contract expressly stated that the contract independently terminated on such retirement date in March 2016. Thus, there was nothing to “buy out” if the board was willing to have him serve through his retirement date, because the contract is then done. The payout is a clear waste of money that could have been used to help over 150 students attend COD tuition-free instead. When elected I look forward to reviewing in considerable detail all of the non-public discussions and documents surrounding Dr. Breuder’s fourth addendum. If it was legally improper, and/or the board misinformed of its legal rights and obligations, the payout should be clawed back.

What qualities do you seek in a new president when President Breuder’s term is up?

Given much of the present controversy involving Dr. Breuder, the next COD President should be selected after giving due consideration to all of the relevant stakeholders, including students, alumni, faculty, and members of the community at large. Criteria I personally want to see considered, in no particular order, include:

• Respected academic credentials;
• Qualities and a history that demonstrate the ability to re-build the relationship with the college Faculty, and respect them as professionals.
• The ability to understand that the role is one of public servant, not a public master, and who will support the desire to keep taxes and tuition low and under control.
• No hostility to FOIA, transparency or real oversight by the board.
• A vision of ways to innovate, whether with technology, school partnerships, compensation structures, or other ways to make education within the community more accessible and affordable.

I’m sure that the above list will grow as the Board receives further input from the COD community as a whole.