In approving the creation of a new student government position Friday, voters handed the incoming Undergraduate Students Association Council a sizable summer project to cut its teeth on.
The Transfer Student Representative Constitutional Amendment earned the support of 74.4 percent of voters, easily surpassing the needed two-thirds vote. The referendum will create a voting position on the council for a transfer representative, whose mission will be to provide a voice for the transfer student population and centralize USAC programming for transfers.
The success of this office is contingent on the council’s early planning and attention to the difficulties that accompany such an unprecedented mandate.
First, the new council must engage transfer students to gather feedback on what services and programming the new office should provide. The council must also discuss the structure, scope and funding of the new office, all information left absent from the text of the referendum that will need to be included in a new set of bylaws.
With so much of the foundation left uncertain, USAC President-elect Devin Murphy would do well to develop a timetable setting clear benchmarks for these discussions and for related appointments, such as the USAC Election Board chair.
After all, internal planning and development will do little if the new council bungles the special election for the position.
Murphy should begin searching for a new Election Board chair early in the summer and appoint the individual well before the beginning of fall quarter, when the official deadline is set. Failure to put in place an Election Board with sufficient time to organize the special election in fall quarter could result in a much-abbreviated term for the new officer, limiting the ability to execute his or her platforms and serve the transfer student community.
It should also be noted that coming off a bitter and even violent election season, conscious efforts must be taken to avoid a similarly contentious race early in the council’s tenure. Voters approved the transfer representative to give a group of their peers better representation on the council, not for slates to have another seat to fight over.
This temptation may be difficult to avoid, especially given the new position’s effect on the council’s vote count. With the addition of another voting member, the council will comprise 14 voting members instead of 13. Having an even number of members throws into question the role of the president, who typically votes only in a tie.
This shift could have dramatic implications for the council’s deliberation on issues such as divestment, a topic likely to return to the council table next year.
The transfer representative position offers an opportunity for councilmembers of both slates to create institutional change with the potential to benefit a sizable segment of the student population. The undergraduate community should hope this mission, and not childish name-calling and barb-throwing, drives the special election and the institutionalization of this position.