An analysis is provided of the governance system of the California community colleges based on a case study of one example of decision making. First, background information is provided on the history of the California community college system, with particular focus on state and local decision-making processes. The next sections address the question of whether the current state of community colleges governance can better be described as "organized anarchy," which is characterized by ambiguous goals, ambiguous participation, and unclear technology; or as "ultra-stable," which is characterized by clear goals, clear participation, ambiguous outcomes, and clear technology. Next, a description is provided of the decision-making process used by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges to respond to a $30 million defunding. An analysis is then presented of the relative ambiguity of the goals, the level of participation, the ambiguity of the technology, and the clarity of the outcomes reflected in the process and results. While cautioning that the case study only provides a narrow insight into decision making in the system, the concluding section indicates that the process fit the criteria for "ultra stable" better than for "organized anarchy," in that goals were very specific, the Board of Governors as sole participant in the decision-making process clarified participation, and the course classification system and computer models utilized comprised a very specific technology. (AYC)