Several students and the University of California Students
Association ““ a system-wide lobbying organization ““
brought a lawsuit against the Schwarzenegger administration
Wednesday, alleging that millions of dollars in mid-year cuts to
the UC were made illegally.
The petition ““ which was brought before the state Supreme
Court ““ seeks to block the implementation of over $148
million in cuts which the governor made in mid-December to various
programs, including the UC.
The lawsuit alleges that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger overstepped
his authority when he bypassed the state Legislature to make the
cuts.
The suit was filed on behalf of UCSA, UCLA second-year political
science and Chicana/o studies student Daniela Conde, one student
from UC Santa Barbara and two students from UC Berkeley. The Equal
Justice Society and Californians for Justice are also petitioners
in the lawsuit.
The mid-year cuts to the UC wiped out funding for the UC labor
research institutes and cut outreach funding to the UC by $33.3
million.
“The reasoning behind (the lawsuit) is pretty simple
““ we want the government and the people of the state to
understand the direct implication of these mid-year budget cuts to
the university and the services they value,” said Matt
Kaczmarek, the chairman of UCSA and internal vice president of the
Undergraduate Students Association Council.
The mid-year cuts also drained general funds that could have
gone toward shoring up the governor’s budget for the
2004-2005 fiscal year”“ a budget that calls for $372 million
in cuts to the UC, Kaczmarek said.
Schwarzenegger’s office referred questions about the
lawsuit to the state’s Department of Finance, which said the
governor’s actions were legal.
“We wouldn’t have taken this action unless we were
sure Schwarzenegger was on solid legal ground in executing his
executive branch powers in the way that he did,” said H.D.
Palmer, deputy director for the Department of Finance.
The Equal Justice Society and Californians for Justice signed on
to the petition mostly because they are worried about the cuts to
outreach and whether they will restrict access to higher education
for minority students, representatives of the two groups said.
The state Supreme Court must now decide whether it will hear the
case or hand it off to a lower court.
The lawsuit’s point of contention lies with two budget
statutes that dictate how and when the governor can repeal the
vehicle license fee, said Nicholas van Aelstyn, a lawyer
representing the petitioners.
The petitioners say the governor violated one statute when he
repealed the vehicle license fee without there being sufficient
funds to make up for the resulting budget gap.
Schwarzenegger repealed the license fee in an executive order
shortly after his inauguration, creating a $4 billion gap in the
state budget ““ a gap Schwarzenegger partially made up through
cuts in state funding.
The petitioners also say the governor did not have the power to
repeal the license fee or designate cuts to the UC without
consulting the state Legislature.
“We believe (Schwarzenegger’s) actions were clearly
in violation of the relevant statutes,” van Aelstyn said.
Kirk Stark, a UCLA law professor who specializes in California
law, said the basis of the lawsuit has merit but budget statutes
are often open to interpretation, which may give the edge to
Schwarzenegger
However, he added that the lawsuit does raise some valid
objections to the monetary shuffle game that is the state budget
process.
“Ultimately, I think this case is significant less for its
legal merit and more for its laudable political objections,”
he said.
“Stranger things have happened in California, so the
Supreme Court could decide it is now the moment to do something
surprising, but I’m a bit skeptical,” he added.