Role of ASUCLA changes over time

Tuesday, May 5, 1998

Role of ASUCLA changes over time

ASUCLA: State of financial crisis added to loss of
independence

By Michael Weiner

Daily Bruin Staff

ASUCLA has maintained the same basic purpose from its inception
in 1919 until the early 1990s – to serve UCLA’s students. But,
according to many of the association’s current board members,
ASUCLA’s focus has changed in the wake of its recent financial
crisis.

"In the current situation, we don’t give back to students as
much as we should," said undergraduate representative Lung-Chi
Lee.

To many ASUCLA insiders, the financial crisis appears to have
turned an organization for and by students into an organization
concerned mainly with fiscal matters controlled by a professional
management staff.

Where did this "students’ association" come from? How has it
evolved? And why did it become more of a business than an endeavor
with the primary purpose of serving students?

The roots of the association date back to 1882 when a student
organization was created at the Vermont Normal School Teacher’s
College in what was then downtown Los Angeles. When the California
Legislature changed the school to the University of California,
Southern Branch in 1919, a small group of students formed
ASUCLA.

When the university moved to Westwood in 1929, Kerckhoff Hall –
the original student union building – was one of the first
buildings constructed. Kerckhoff has been operated completely by
ASUCLA since its dedication on Jan. 20, 1931.

During the 1930s, ASUCLA experienced severe financial problems
because of the Great Depression and declining football ticket
sales, which ASUCLA used to handle. William C. Ackerman, general
manager of the association, asked the UC Regents for a loan. In
1933, the regents agreed to lend ASUCLA $50,000 if a structure was
established to supervise the finances of the association. This
structure became the Board of Control, later renamed the Board of
Directors.

In addition, students voted to assess a student union fee on
themselves in order to ensure the long term financial health of the
organization. In 1960, the university took control of athletics and
parking, which ASUCLA had run until that point.

Until the early 1970s, ASUCLA was completely independent from
the university. In 1972, the regents passed a resolution stating
that ASUCLA and the other students’ associations throughout the UC
system were official entities of the university.

An important time in the association’s history came in June 1974
when ASUCLA and the University of California signed the "Statement
of Understanding of ASUCLA Relationships with the University of
California."

"Although the association is subject to all applicable regents
and university policies, it is understood that the Associated
Students UCLA has maximum feasible operating and decision making
freedom" the statement asserted.

According to Don Findley, then the association’s executive
director, the Statement of Understanding weakened ASUCLA’s
independence.

"You could no longer say that the Associated Students was
strictly autonomous," Findley said. "But it still had great
independence."

The association experienced great financial success during the
1980s. But because of financial mismanagement by then-executive
director Jason Reed, ASUCLA entered a state of financial emergency
in the mid-1990s. Reed was fired by the Board of Directors and a
professional turnaround firm, headed by Charles Mack became the
interim executive director. Mack’s main objective was to bring
ASUCLA back to financial stability.

"It was clear that the businesses were suffering from lack of
attention and focus," Mack said. "The clear goal of mine was to
focus on the businesses."

In June 1996, in exchange for borrowing $20 million from the
university, ASUCLA entered into an "Advance Agreement" with the
UCLA administration. ASUCLA was forced to commit to certain
financial standards by preparing a five-year forecast every year
when it prepares its budget.

Then-Chancellor Charles Young also required that student
government presidents no longer be allowed to serve on the Board of
Directors. If ASUCLA failed to meet any of these criteria, the
chancellor had the right to appoint more administrative
representatives onto the board, thereby eliminating the student
majority that had steered ASUCLA since the 1930s. This has never
been done.

Since the financial crisis began, student board members have
witnessed many of their powers being shifted to ASUCLA’s
professional management. The board used to set food prices through
a food service committee and had influence over student store
prices and inventory through a student store committee.

"The board could exert a lot of influence over what brands to
carry in the store, whether burritos should be 98 cents or 99
cents," said graduate representative Tim Beasley, who has served on
the board since 1994. The board decided to give this responsibility
to management as part of the restructuring during the Mack era.

Beasley sees an advantage to the board having less power in that
the members do not have the burden of responsibility if problems
arise.

"Management can’t blame us for anything that goes wrong, and we
can’t make anything go wrong," he said. "(But) when we see things
we don’t like, we’re less able to do anything about it," he
said.

In a very controversial decision in March 1997, ASUCLA increased
the student union fee from $7.50 per year to $51 per year in order
to help bring the association back to financial stability.

Beasley said that there was a lot of opposition to the fee
increase, but that the official board view was that students needed
to contribute to an organization that provides services to
them.

Beasley added that the Mack era hurt the association in its
dealings with students.

"It’s a students’ organization," Beasley said. "We will serve
students first and if we end up losing money then so be it. Chaz
Mack came along and said we have to concentrate on business. We’re
not nearly as student focused as we were when Jason Reed was
here."

Graduate representative Jim Friedman concurred.

"The association’s focus has changed," Friedman said. "Because
of this (financial) crisis, it has to be focused squarely on
financial viability.’

Current Executive Director Patricia Eastman said that she
suspects that ASUCLA has always been interested in financial
stability and that its focus has not changed very much.

"I don’t think that the philosophy now is radically different
from the philosophy at the time the association was founded,"
Eastman said. "It’s always been a business that’s about serving
students."

But Friedman said that the board’s biggest goal should now be
"to ensure that the organization returns to an organization that is
dedicated to maintaining the quality of life on campus." Board
members want ASUCLA to put more money into the student interaction
fund, which provides money for programming, provide a better book
buy-back program, and provide more meeting space.

"We need to go back to doing those things that make us valuable
to students and staff," he said.

Photos courtesy of University Archives