Editorial: USAC’s structure sidesteps accountability

Our undergraduate student government leaders constantly demand
accountability of our legislators, administration and student
groups. Yet they don’t hesitate to elevate themselves above
those standards when it becomes convenient.

On July 27, amid conflicting opinions from councilmembers and
administrative representatives, nine members of the Undergraduate
Students Association Council went into closed session for more than
30 minutes.

Violating the council’s own bylaws, no vote was taken on
the decision.

This type of behavior by a governing body would be illegal, had
it occurred nearly anywhere else in the state. City councils,
school boards, the University of California Board of Regents, the
state Legislature ““ all are governed by either the Brown
Act or the Bagley-Keene Act, both of which require meetings of
public officials to be held in public, except under very explicit
circumstances.

Even non-UC students around the state expect accountability from
their student governments. All California State Universities and
community colleges must adhere to these state laws.

The unusual autonomy granted to the UC system in the last 50
years by the Legislature has created a loophole allowing student
governments at UC campuses to play by their own rules.

Sadly, the rules of UCLA’s undergraduate governing council
are vague, allowing student councilmembers to conduct any business
unannounced and in private.

USAC bylaws merely require a simple majority vote for the
council to enter closed session. There are no limitations on what
can be discussed in those sessions, whether the agenda must be
announced beforehand or, most alarmingly, if councilmembers are
allowed to vote in closed session.

The Undergraduate Student Association, which USAC governs,
administrates millions of dollars. Each year, every student hands
$100 to the organization and elects students to manage those
funds.

Administrative Representative Rick Tuttle warned the council
July 27 that it was violating the spirit of state open-meeting laws
on deciding to enter closed session. Tuttle’s point was an
understatement.

USAC’s decision last week and similar decisions in the
past highlight how antithetical its bylaws are in the context of a
democracy.

The introduction of the Bagley-Keene Act says, “The
people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants
the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is
not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed
so that they may retain control over the instruments they have
created.”

USAC immediately must right this most fundamental of wrongs by
amending its weak bylaws to comply voluntarily with the
Bagley-Keene Act.

One of President Allende Palma/Saracho’s four points in
his “concrete plan” publicized during his campaign was
being an advocate for fiscal responsibility at the local, state and
national levels.

He and the rest of the council have the ability to ensure
accountability at the most local of levels. What reason do they
have for ignoring this fundamental right of students?