ASUCD INJUSTICE

[aggienaut]

   Yesterday was the quarterly State of the Court address at ASUCD Senate.
   I'm told that while I was reading our verdict from recent case # 23, President Sara Henry was grimacing hatefully. A number of the City Council candidates happened to be at the meeting, including former ASUCD Senator (from 1997), current UCD grad student & Aggie humor columnist Lamar Heystek. He told me that in his seven years of involvement in ASUCD he has never seen a Court that "could write Opinions like that."
   Most disturbing of all though, Heystek informed me that he had filed a case in the fall of 2002, which never went anywhere. Apparently the then Chief Justice (Katarina something) never returned any emails or phone calls... no response from the Court could be gotten at all. This is what I'm talking about when I say that the Court did NOT exist as a functioning entity previous to this. I wonder if his case is still pending.


   Also I just learned from a former Elections Committee member that last election they were considering compelling evidence that if accepted could disqualify the "Student Focus" candidates from the election, & ASUCD Advisor Vicki Swett told them not to accept the evidence because it would "create drama and controversy." This former committee member said they felt that what occured was very wrong but were unable to do anything about it because the hearing was confidential and they were thus forbade from talking to the Aggie or writing a case. Now that they're not on the Elections Committee they'd like to do something about it, but all evidence is still confidential and most witnesses are still on the committee. I am going to investigate legal recourses.


   Real update will come soon.


NOTE TO SELF: check one more time to make sure this is friends only

Comments

[obisan69.livejournal.com]

There was some discussion about the Opinion at the Business and Finance meeting on Tuesday night... they thought the order placed on them was amusing, because they are supposedly only allowed to audit units, and SGAO is not a unit (so there are NO checks on the vileness that is Vicki).

And, based on past election "drama and controversy", if the evidence (no matter how contrived and false) is against the LEAD slate, Vicki doesn't seem to have a problem with that going forward.

B&F

[emosnail.livejournal.com]

Well I'd like them to find WHERE it says they aren't allowed to audit things that are not units, and what specifically makes SGAO not a unit. Vicki has a tendency to tell people what they can and cannot do in utter disregard to actual fact. I DO know that I read somewhere that Vicki is the "unit director" of SGAO.

I looked at the administrative plans the other day and found that there is no Administrative Plan for either SGAO or the Advisor. There is no mention of either in the Constitution, Judicial Codes, or Standing Rules; the Government Codes are the only remaining document I'm not familiar with, I intend to get my hands on a complete copy of the Government Codes forthwith.


Was B&F of the opinion then that they'd accept that SGAO is not a unit and not do anything about it?

This is preposterious, B&F should be able to audit ANY ASUCD budget, be it a unit, commission, the Executive Office, or Vicki's personal (and rather copious) budget. I'm quite confident there is nothing that says they can only audit units except for Vicki herself.

Re: B&F

[obisan69.livejournal.com]

I didn't really probe for more information (as the meeting started before I could), but yes, they just seemed to accept the fact that they couldn't/wouldn't do anything about the situation. It was more the opinion of Victor and Jon Avidor than of the entire commission, but if the Commission Chair and Controller say something is so, I would doubt most commissioners would argue.

Re: B&F

[emosnail.livejournal.com]

Bah.. maybe I'll go to their meeting. I wasn't planning on concerning myself overlymuch about whether or not these court orders were carried out, but its starting to sound like the Association could greatly benefit from a certain amount of enlightenment being shed on B&F.


I was thinking about it in my spare time and again came to the solid conclusion that its ridiculous for B&F to be being told who they can and cannot audit. Its a crucial check/balance on everything.


You know offhand when their meetings are?

Re: B&F

[obisan69.livejournal.com]

Tuesdays at 6:30 in the Fielder room