Washington v. Drummond
Plaintiffs and appellants Rudolph Washington, Shirley Edwards, Essie French-Preston, Robert Butler, Stanley Camilla Viltz and Leroy Porter appeal, following an order of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained demurrers without leave to amend filed by defendants and respondents Chancellor Marshall Drummond, Arthur Tyler, Ulis Williams, and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Appellants challenged the constitutionality of and actions taken pursuant to Education Code section 71093, which was an urgency measure designed to stabilize the Compton Community College District. The trial court ruled that section 71093 does not violate the California Constitution, as it neither creates a new office nor changes the duties of any existing office. (Cal. Const., art. IV, 8, subd. (d).)
Court affirm. Section 71093 does not run afoul of the Constitutions urgency measure restrictions. Rather, it applies existing statutory provisions which permit the appointment of a special trustee to manage a community college district failing to achieve fiscal stability.
Comments on Washington v. Drummond