Board stays divided on methods of reviewing

By Arj Arjunan
Daily Bruin Contributor

The Associated Students of UCLA Communications Board remained
divided over the issue of an independent management review of
Student Media during its Aug. 7 meeting.

The proposed audit, which could cost Student Media $20,000 if it
chooses to hire a consulting firm, raised concerns over who
controls the operations and management of Student Media.

Supporters of the audit say a review of the department is
necessary, regardless whether the communications board chooses to
contract a consulting firm or seek the services of The Anderson
School at UCLA.

But opponents of the audit argue that the high cost of an
independent management review will siphon resources from an already
limited budget. They maintain that any review of Student Media
should involve student input.

Pam Viele, the administrative representative on the board, said
standards of success for Student Media still need to be set.

“Different members have different views of the
goals,” Viele said. “In my mind, it’s not
clear.”

Viele said the board needs more information about management and
operations issues, adding that she prefers an internal review of
Student Media.

Jim Caufield, a Graduate Students Association representative in
favor of hiring a consulting firm, said the request for a pay raise
by Arvli Ward, the Student Media director, justified a review of
his performance.

He added that the high turnover in the media adviser position
and its current vacancy, in combination with Ward’s request,
warranted a comprehensive review. The next media adviser will be
the fourth in the past five years.

“The board considered that if it were going to look
closely at two management positions, then it might as well look at
them all and figure out what’s really happening in the
department,” Caufield said.

Daily Bruin editor in chief Timothy Kudo said the direction and
responsibility of Student Media should fall on students, adding
that professional consulting firms are designed to assess
corporations operating for profit.

“(Student Media) is not about dollars and cents,”
Kudo said. “It’s about students, and no management
consultant can quantify that.”

Adam Hunt, a fourth-year political science student who serves as
one of four undergraduate board members, supports the audit.

“One of the most responsible things that this board can do
is to complete an audit that will reveal the strengths and
weaknesses of our organization that will benefit all of the
students and other employees not only this year, but in the years
to come,” Hunt said.

The board sent the issue of an independent management review to
the executive committee ““ which consists of one undergraduate
student, one graduate and two non-students ““ for
consideration.

The issue of student control and the proposed audit also arose
when Ward nominated Mike Kline, a critic of the audit who has
served four terms on the board, for one of the four professional
representative positions.

Two mechanisms exist for the nomination of professional
representatives. Both the media director and the operations
committee can propose nominees.

The operations committee, which was selected at the meeting,
consists of six board members and four students involved in various
student publications. Student Media only has voting power through
the operations committee.

Hunt, though not a member of the operations committee, motioned
to table the nomination until the committee could meet and present
its nominations.

Ward defended his right to nominate professional representatives
based on the board’s bylaws and raised the question at the
meeting whether the motion to table his nomination meant a change
to the constitution.

Viele said Hunt’s motion attempted to deprive the media
director of his constitutional right to put forth a nomination.

“(The motion) is completely inconsistent with any of our
practices,” Viele said.

She said any meeting of the operations committee that would
justify the motion needed to be announced before the motion.

She added that historically, the professional representative
positions have been a challenge to fill and that any proposed
nomination required a prompt decision.

Caufield supported Hunt’s motion because he felt Tim
Alger, who strongly supports the proposed audit, also deserved
consideration.

“Everyone on the board supports Mike’s return as a
professional rep,” Caufield said. “The problem was that
Arvli neglected to nominate Tim Alger, another valuable
professional representative who has served two terms on the
board.”

The motion by Hunt failed and the board unanimously elected
Kline as a professional representative.

The board will next meet on Sept. 8 and 9 for a retreat which
will involve further discussions on the audit and consideration of
nominees for the vacant professional representative positions.