Making a bold move for a new council, the undergraduate student
government voted to reinstate two previously-suspended general
representatives to their jobs last week by overruling a Judicial
Board ruling ““ a power that council has rarely ever exercised
in the past.
In a 7-2 vote, the Undergraduate Students Association Council
voted to lift a stay that had been placed on General
Representatives Anneli Villarin and Tommy Tseng, allowing them to
return to their posts after being inactive for over three
weeks.
On June 9, the Judicial Board barred the two representatives
from duty until an investigation into alleged vandalism charges had
been completed by the UC Police Department and the Student Conduct
Committee.
J-board officials believe that it is the responsibility of the
USAC Elections Board to file the appropriate documentation
regarding the investigation, thereby allowing J-board to make a
final decision based on the investigation findings.
But, Roy Samaan, chairman of the elections board, has said he
followed up with the UCPD and the dean of students ““ both of
whom say that insufficient evidence exist to warrant sanctions
““ but does not have the authority to provide the
documentation that J-board required.
The two boards’ opposing views left the issue at a
standstill until council overruled J-board at their June 29
meeting.
“I am extremely happy about the stay being lifted. …
J-board had already exceeded the limitation of their time
limit,” Villarin said, referring to the two-week limit in
which J-board is required to release their official opinion.
Palma/Saracho said he decided to speed up the seemingly stagnant
process because Villarin and Tseng’s inability to function
was hindering council’s ability to work as a collective.
“It wasn’t a quote, unquote SF! person that made the
motion,” Palma/Saracho said, referring to independent
councilmember Jason Gaulton who made the motion and who does not
belong to the Students First! slate. Both Palma/Saracho and the
general representatives belong to the slate. He made the case that
the decision was mostly bi-partisan.
The vote did not come until an hour-long debate had circulated
the table and several voting uncertainties had warranted extended
executive authority.
Council has the authority to overrule J-board decisions with a
three-fourths supermajority vote, according to USAC bylaws. Under
normal circumstances, this supermajority would require nine out of
the 12 voting members to vote in favor of overruling the
J-board.
But President Allende Palma/Saracho made the decision to only
count the councilmembers present at the meeting ““ nine. This
made the supermajority become seven councilmembers.
An initial vote showed a 6-2 vote in favor of the overruling, at
which point Palma/Saracho decided to include himself in the vote
““ a power granted to him through the constitution.
Though the circumstances by which the vote was made seem hasty,
Palma/Saracho said he had consulted with administrative
representatives who informed him that there was precedent for his
decision.
Most councilmembers agree with Palma/Saracho’s decision
and believe it was necessary.
“I just felt that it was appropriate for council to
overturn the decision,” said Gaulton of why he made the
motion. “I am happy to see the table will be complete and we
can do what needs to be done together.”
The two councilmembers who voted against the overruling were
Internal Vice President Darren Chan and Financial Supports
Commissioner Alex Gruenberg.
Chan said he believed council should have waited for J-board to
release their opinion.
“My understanding was that J-board was still in the
process of coming out with their opinion,” Chan said, adding
that by overruling the decision so soon, council may be undermining
the time and effort J-board had committed to the case.
Though council is within its own jurisdiction with the decision
it made, Chan said it was also important to keep in mind that
J-board acts as a check to USAC.
Mark Belgen, the chief justice of J-board, called council
overruling “an abuse of their powers” and pointed out
that without the consent of his board, the two representatives do
not have their names cleared.
Belgen said he is still waiting for E-board to file the
documentation and would have lifted the stay had it been proved
that insufficient evidence existed.
Palma/Saracho said he would still like to see J-board’s
opinion regarding the case and that he does not believe the
decision will hurt the two bodies’ working relationship in
the future.
“I want to let them know that we are here to respect each
other,” Palma/Saracho said.