Editorial: Appointment of USAC officer’s replacement lacked transparency

Barely a week has passed since Omar Arce, the then-Undergraduate Students Association Council Community Service commissioner, was arrested in connection with a series of alleged sexual batteries against another student.

The campus learned of the arrest on April 2. Six days later, on Tuesday, the council appointed the assistant commissioner, Alex Lee, as Arce’s replacement.

At no time prior to Lee’s appointment did USAC President John Joanino or any other member of council announce that Arce had been removed, resigned or become ineligible to serve as commissioner, leading to a bizarre situation, at least in appearance, where there were two commissioners in the same office.

Nobody knew what to expect on Tuesday, whether the council would take action to remove Arce, who might replace him and what USAC procedures applied to filling a vacant council seat.

Only after Lee was appointed did the Daily Bruin learn that Arce had been ruled ineligible to hold office, and at no point was it publicly announced during the meeting. Further, the council itself was only notified of Arce’s ineligibility on Tuesday. The bylaws state that a position becomes vacant only five days after such notification, a provision the council ignored.

The council added Lee’s appointment as Community Service commissioner to its agenda at the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting, catching all observers, including this board, by surprise.

Toward the end of Tuesday’s meeting, the council entered an executive session to discuss personnel matters, meaning everybody other than the councilmembers were compelled to leave the room. Following the closed session, Joanino announced that no action had been taken, and he moved to nominate Lee. The council immediately proceeded to appoint Lee unanimously.

During Lee’s nomination and subsequent appointment in open session, no questions or discussion took place.

The council failed to completely fulfill its constitution’s requirement for “open interviews,” and gave students no indication that Arce’s status on the council had changed prior to the meeting.

While the council technically conducted a public interview by opening the floor for councilmember questions at Tuesday’s meeting, the fact that students were not notified beforehand that such an interview would take place means the appointment was constitutionally questionable at best.

Lee, who previously served as assistant Community Service commissioner, would seem to be the right person for the job. But by failing to hold a fully transparent and public discussion about the appointment, the council deprived both its constituents and its new colleague an open presentation of his qualifications and plans for the last stretch of the year.

It appears that Joanino, who nominated Lee, tripped over a familiar mistake. Just as he did when he conducted multiple straw polls at a controversial divestment vote in February, by leading the push for Lee’s appointment, he again neglected to turn to USAC’s bylaws as a guide for procedure at the council table.

It may seem odd to harp on a point of procedure given the extraordinary circumstances, but it isn’t. The constitution and bylaws exist to guide the council through tense and emotional moments such as these.

Accountability and transparency, the two necessary conditions for good government, become more important than ever during times of strain and change.

USAC demonstrated neither on Tuesday, when it needed most to show its constituents that the organization’s legitimacy can outlast the travails of one member.