The harmful rhetoric and procedural missteps at the undergraduate student government’s discussion of a divestment resolution last quarter illustrated a deep division among communities on campus.
In turn, that division was represented on the council, where a straw poll revealed adherence to a strict party line, with members from the Bruins United slate voting against and members of the LET’S ACT! slate voting for the resolution.
But the measures taken to solve those problems were ironically marked by the same rift so apparent in the large crowd of public commenters that night.
Following the meeting, Undergraduate Students Association Council President John Joanino created a task force to address the procedural issues that arose at the divestment meeting.
The body was made up of Joanino, External Vice President Maryssa Hall and Cultural Affairs Commissioner Jessica Trumble, all three of whom are a part of the LET’S ACT! slate and spoke out in favor of the controversial use of a secret ballot during the divestment meeting.
That these three members of council were the only voices of representation in the debriefing committee is inherently problematic and showcases a lack of initiative by this council to involve dissenting voices in its projects and decisions.
Political affiliations have incapacitated USAC from addressing the procedural issues that caused so many problems at the divestment hearing, and until councilmembers are willing to collaborate, those problems will be impossible to effectively address.
It should be noted that while Joanino made the committee open to every councilmember, only Hall and Trumble were ultimately able to coordinate their schedules to meet over spring break, although general representatives Sam Haws and Sunny Singh as well as Student Wellness Commissioner Savannah Badalich also initially expressed interest.
The loudest dissenting voices regarding decisions like the secret ballot at the divestment meeting were missing from that committee. Ideally the committee would have been made up of an equal number of members from the two opposing slates and opposing viewpoints regarding the way that the meeting was run.
The makeup of the committee is just one instance of the issues with members of different slates refusing to cooperate with one another. At council meetings throughout the year, the tension between certain members of USAC could not have been more apparent. Slate politics have stalled projects and initiatives throughout the year, such as the quarterly budget reports set up through the Internal Vice President’s office.
Internal Vice President Avi Oved recently wrote a letter to the editor to the Daily Bruin about the difficulty he’s had in completing the project with so much opposition from External Vice President Maryssa Hall, who has delayed meetings and openly criticized the report when it came out. While the frustration at the delay is founded, his letter felt accusatory and frankly unnecessary.
The debriefing committee’s main suggestion was the creation of a non-voting USAC officer to provide procedural insight on tricky issues that arise at council. While this suggestion is sensible enough, it ultimately misses the point. Adding a new position to council isn’t going to do much to solve the breakdown in communication among councilmembers who refuse to cooperate with one another.
With the potential for a four-slate council next year, it’s crucial for next year’s officers to take the cue from this year’s problems and commit themselves to collaboration even with those members they don’t agree with.