Communications Board allegedly disregards rules
Failure to announce Operations Committee meeting may be
illegal
By John Digrado
Daily Bruin Staff
With only weeks remaining before voting on a controversial
restructuring plan, the Communications Board Operations Committee
met on Tuesday night to discuss some of the fine points of the
proposal.
In the past few months, the restructuring plan, which would
decrease student representatives by two members and increase
outside influence four-fold, has been fraught with controversy.
The Communications Board legislates and enforces all policy
measures that affect the Daily Bruin, the seven newsmagazines, the
Bruin Life yearbook and radio station KLA. The Operations Committee
oversees the day-to-day procedures of Student Media, and plays a
major role in the board’s policy-making procedures.
The prominent issue on the committee’s agenda was the board’s
alleged noncompliance to state open meeting rules, also known as
"sunshine laws."
The law states that meetings addressing issues of civic
importance must be announced publicly – stating agenda, time and
location – no less than 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting
time.
The Communications Board’s failure to announce the Operations
Committee meeting within the time allotted may place the board in
violation of the open meeting laws.
"We are all in agreement that restructuring meetings (regarding
the Communications Board) should have been publicized," said
Student Media Director Arvli Ward. "In the past, we haven’t done
this; we didn’t publicize it, we didn’t tell the public, but we
intend to from now on."
The law also includes meetings of an advisory subcommittee, such
as Operations, where items are discussed that may have effects on
any decisions that the Communications Board may make.
In addition, a meeting must be publicly announced when a quorum,
or two-thirds majority, of board members are present discussing
business regarding the larger body.
Some Operations Committee members were unaware that certain
meetings may have violated the law.
"My understanding according to the law is that subcommittees of
the whole can meet because they don’t constitute a quorum," said
Communications Board Chairwoman Deanna Cherry.
Though a printed agenda for the Tuesday evening meeting was not
publicly released by Student Media until early that afternoon, the
meeting had been verbally scheduled about one week in advance.
Failure to publicly announce the meeting under the law’s
circumstances may constitute a violation, and places the offending
party at risk of a lawsuit from the public.
Cherry expressed further concern that the Communications Board
may have been in violation of the law in the past where a quorum of
Board members were in attendance and business was conducted but the
public may not have been informed.
"The (Communications Board’s) retreat may also constitute a
violation as well," Cherry admitted. "We had a quorum and did
business."
Other Board members expressed uncertainty about the issue,
stating that the committee may actually be in compliance with the
law.
"In application of the (open meetings rules), I wouldn’t be so
quickly convinced if we haven’t been in compliance," said
Administrative Representative Alan Hanson.
With the possible infractions brought to the group’s attention
came a general consensus to adhere to the letter of the law more
carefully in the future.
"If there is a quorum of the whole, we have to be in compliance
with the spirit and the letter of this," Ward said.
Among other issues addressed was the role of the media liaisons
on the Communications Board. Concerns were raised that liaisons
from Student Media sometimes do not offer a general view of the
organizations they represent to the Board.
Originally intended to "get the board members from the round
table and into the offices and newsrooms," some Operations
Committee members feared that the liaison structure may do more
harm than good for the Communications Board, Ward said.
"We need to establish a structure where the media field is
adequately represented on the board," he added. "In its current
structure, it’s not happening."
Some members agreed, raising questions regarding the
effectiveness of intermediaries as opposed to creating a direct
link with Student Media through the actual editors and program
directors.
"If the goal of the liaison is to build a high level of
understanding (about) what’s going on in (Student Media), I don’t
see the liaison model doing that," Hanson said.
Operations Committee members resolved to bring their concerns to
the full board’s attention at the next general meeting, tentatively
scheduled for Jan. 30. The time and location of the meeting have
yet to be announced.Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu