The way students are appointed to undergraduate student government leadership positions has received criticism, prompting some councilmembers to pursue avenues to reform the process.
Some former undergraduate student government leaders have cited issues of transparency and slate politics in the appointments process this year, along with councilmember apathy in researching candidates they approve for appointments.
After a new Undergraduate Students Association Council is elected, members are tasked with filling more than 80 appointed positions. The USAC president must fill about 70 positions, and the external vice president and Academic Affairs commissioner must also fill positions.
Some appointments receive stipends of hundreds of dollars from student fees, while others receive no pay. High-profile appointments include the undergraduate representatives on the Associated Students UCLA Board of Directors, who receive free tuition, and representatives to the University of California Student Association Board of Directors, along with the Election Board chair, who runs the spring USAC elections.
In an effort to solve appointment issues and smooth out the process, Devin Murphy, the newly elected USAC president, said he plans to create a director of appointments within his office.
This new position within the Office of the President will deal with all aspects of the appointments process and centralize the process next year, Murphy said.
Murphy added that this is a response to the controversy surrounding the appointments process for this year’s council, including concerns about transparency and accountability.
Avi Oved, the outgoing internal vice president, said he thinks slate politics play too large of a role in the appointments process, which often leads to the appointment of individuals who have affiliations with certain slates and may not be the most qualified candidates.
Slates, or groups of students who combine resources and run candidates together, function like political parties in USAC.
Oved, a member of the Bruins United slate, said that being a member of a different slate than outgoing USAC President John Joanino caused some friction between him and Joanino this year.
“The slate difference really tested the checks and balances of the appointments process,” Oved said.
After students submit applications for appointed positions, the officer responsible for the appointment refers a candidate to the Appointments Review Committee, which is chaired by the USAC internal vice president and consists of at least three councilmembers selected by the president.
The committee then interviews the candidate and, if approved by a majority vote, sends the candidate to council for final questioning and approval.
This year, many appointments were unanimously approved by the council after very little discussion and questioning.
Maryssa Hall, former USAC External Vice President and a member of the Appointments Review Committee, said inefficiencies with the way the committee was run often plagued the appointment approval process.
Difficulty scheduling meetings and a lack of timeliness in recommendations were some of the main problems with the leadership of the committee this year, Hall said. She added that she thought the appointments review process brought out slate differences and led to objections by certain members of the committee based on slate affiliations.
But Joanino said the main purpose of the Appointments Review Committee is to provide a check on officer appointments and limit slate bias in the appointments process.
“Politics can obviously play into the process for the bigger and stipended positions, but that’s why we have multiple layers and checks on power within the appointments process,” Joanino said.
Oved said he thinks the process could be more transparent by allowing councilmembers to see the applications and resumes of all applicants for a position, instead of only being able to consider the president’s recommendations.
Joanino said the appointments process was one of his biggest challenges as USAC president, and he met with and interviewed each applicant for each appointed position.
“I think I did a good job increasing transparency by doing group interviews with all applicants for a position before I recommended anyone to the (Appointments Review Committee),” Joanino said.
Murphy said he does not think it’s necessary for council to see all applications for a position because it would create an inefficient process of reviewing many applicants who did not receive a recommendation.
“Students elected me to select these candidates, and I would hope council has enough faith in me to make these decisions,” Murphy said.
The new director of appointments position will be tasked with keeping the almost 70 presidentially appointed positions accountable to their jobs, and will also serve to improve communication between appointees and councilmembers, Murphy said.
He added that the director will solicit regular memos and presentations at USAC meetings from presidential appointees and ensure they are keeping up with their required weekly office hours.
Outgoing Academic Affairs Commissioner Darren Ramalho said he would like to see more students apply for appointed positions within USAC.
“I think we can always do more outreach to get a bigger number of qualified applicants,” Ramalho said.