Chancellor asked for input on allocations

By Scott B. Wong
Daily Bruin Staff Chancellor Albert Carnesale has been asked to
choose sides in a bitterly contested debate between members of the
Undergraduate Students Association Council over the issue of
student group funding. But university officials said it’s unlikely
the chancellor will intervene. Members of USAC sent two letters to
Carnesale Thursday – one urging him to uphold and another to
abolish a Feb. 27 administrative deadline for finalizing new
funding allocation criteria. USAC President Elizabeth Houston’s
letter requested Carnesale uphold the deadline which would
effectively freeze all accounts of student advocacy groups if
council fails to produce a funding process that ensures the
criteria is not content-driven. But in a last-ditch effort, eight
council members sent a second letter to the chancellor Thursday
afternoon, urging him to abolish the fast-approaching deadline so
council could have more time to review and change the constitution
without negatively affecting student groups. Houston stated in the
letter that USAC bylaws are currently contradictory to the 1997
University of California policy that maintains content-neutrality
in allocation processes. "I strongly advocate that the deadline for
the revisions of the USA bylaws … be firmly upheld by the
administration," Houston wrote. "We would ask the administration to
demand that Council act in the best interest of all students by
establishing bylaws which are non-discriminatory, content-neutral,
and, in all ways required, compliant with the University and campus
policies and regulations," Houston added. Although Houston enlisted
the support of the other 12 council members, only one – Facilities
Commissioner Steve Davey – signed her letter. That was because
others on council were drafting their own letter. Led by Internal
and External Vice Presidents Elias Enciso and Evan Okamura, other
council members stated in their letter that an estimated $326,000
in base budgets for student advocacy groups and related program
funding, like community service and contingency funds, are
vulnerable to the administrative freeze. "The given time frame does
not allow for us to adequately complete this review and make
changes to the constitution," the letter stated. "It does not make
sense to force thousands of students and hundreds of programs to
come to a standstill while the USAC works on these guidelines." Bob
Naples, assistant vice chancellor of student and campus life, said
during Friday’s Associated Students of UCLA board meeting he thinks
the chancellor won’t respond to either request. "I sense that he
would view the requests as independent groups of students making a
request of him," said Naples, who is also dean of students. "It
would not preempt him to get involved." Naples said he met with
student leaders who are displeased about the possible freeze.
"There has been some discussion that students would take legal
action against the university if they thought it was withholding
their funds," he said to the board. The administrative deadline
comes on the same afternoon Carnesale will meet with students to
address issues of concern during an open town hall meeting in
Ackerman Union. The issue of content-neutrality arose last summer
when USAC Administrative Representative Lyle Timmerman challenged
the council’s current funding allocation process. He alleged it was
in direct violation with recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, like
University of Wisconsin v. Southworth and University of California
policy, which states that mandatory student fees shall be legal
only if the money is distributed without regard to content or
viewpoint. Timmerman, who said he would freeze all student advocacy
group accounts if council fails to comply with these decisions by
Feb. 27, is holding firm to his promise. "You’ve got seven days,"
Timmerman warned council at last week’s meeting. "That deadline has
not moved." But some council members contend UCLA is the only UC
campus engaged in such discussion around the Southworth case,
despite the fact that the case was reopened and remains unresolved.
"We seek coherent guidance and direction in making necessary
constitutional amendments, and do not wish to overstep our bounds
relative to the rest of the UC," stated the letter of the council
majority. Enciso said he’s adamantly opposed to the freeze. "If the
chancellor does that, then there’s going to be a mess on this
campus," he said. "Freezing finances of student organizations is
not the way in which disagreements ought to be settled." Student
advocacy groups are upset they will suffer by the hand of the
administration due to council’s inability to negotiate a course of
action. Muslim Student Association President Ghaith Mahmood said
freezing an account is an extreme tactic. "It’s done more as an
intimidation factor and a show of strength," he said. "I’d like to
think SAGs have the ability to work with council, to show them
these tactics are not acceptable." Mahmood said he is troubled the
USAC president would rather push for a freeze than have the
deadline extended. "It’s very disturbing that someone who
supposedly represents our campus would deny us access and the
ability to provide basic programs, like student outreach and
student retention," Mahmood said. "It’s a narrow vision on behalf
of Elizabeth." Administrators are not looking forward to imposing
the freeze on student advocacy groups’ accounts and said it will
have negative effects on student and campus life. "If we get to a
freeze, it will disrupt our operations," said Jerry Mann, director
of student union. "It’s the last thing in the world I want." "We
won’t do this with a glad heart," he continued.

LETTERS TO THE CHANCELLOR

USAC members sent two separate letters to Chancellor Albert
Carnesale on Thursday, stating their views on the administration’s
Feb.27 deadline for council to revise its bylaws regarding student
group sponsorship.

SOURCE: University of California Office of the President

Original by VICTOR CHEN Web Adaptation by NAM NGUYEN