Financial Supports commissioner Rustom Z. Birdie should be removed from office for dishonest conduct

Financial Supports Commissioner Rustom Z. Birdie should be removed from office.

After more than a month of investigation, the undergraduate student government judicial board recommended that the councilmember is guilty of “wrongdoing” for failing to disclose his relationship with startup Web company Jobbook.

In October, Birdie made a deal with the company that would give him 1,000 shares in the company’s stock in exchange for promoting the service to students.

Though he cut ties with the company after a Daily Bruin article brought his conflict of interest to light, Birdie further soiled his reputation by being dishonest in his testimony to the Judicial Board during its investigation and in a series of interviews with The Bruin.

During the investigation, justices found discrepancies between Birdie’s petition to the board and the facts in the case; namely, that Birdie used his office’s resources to promote the site.

And because Birdie did not ask the Judicial Board to give recommendations based on its findings in his petition, none have been provided. However, the results of the case make it clear to this board what needs to be done: Birdie should not be allowed to remain on the council.

Any councilmember who fails to see the necessity of removing Birdie fails to recognize his wrongdoing and the broader implications it has.

The lack of conflict-of-interest regulations in the Undergraduate Students Association Council’s bylaws make a slipup slightly understandable, despite the clear ethical problem of using a public office for personal gain.

But it is obvious from Birdie’s varying accounts about his dealings with Jobbook, and his office’s plan to promote the site, that he wanted to conceal his blunder.

Had Birdie admitted his fault rather than claiming he misspoke or downplaying his involvement in promoting the venture, this would be a different situation. Though he did submit his own case to the Judicial Board for review, and is currently working to help ensure that future councilmembers are informed about the ethical rules he didn’t understand, it does not redeem his dishonesty.

Students in leadership positions should use this case as an example of how not to handle a controversial situation: Dishonesty makes the mistake worse in the end.

Our student government clearly lacks sufficient ethical training about conflicts of interest. The council should prioritize this education; elected officials are not exempt from the standards the rest of the student body is held to. Instead, it is imperative that officials uphold the name of the university both to students and the outside community.

This board urges USAC to consider the impact of allowing Birdie to remain a member. Election season is just weeks away, and tolerance of such blatant disregard for honest and transparent representation further shames the council beyond a single member’s actions.