• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

Josh Lawson speaks to the J-Board about USAC’s new accountability guidelines.

An effort made by some members of the Undergraduate Students Association Council to increase the accountability of its appointees hit a brick wall recently, as it was ruled unconstitutional by the council’s judicial board.

After a two-and-a-half-hour hearing, USAC’s Judicial Board found that new accountability guidelines made by council were in violation of USAC bylaws.

The case was filed by USAC General Representative Josh Lawson in mid-September, two weeks after council had approved the guidelines.

Co-written by council’s three executive officers, the guidelines were intended simply to make presidential appointees more accountable, said President Anica McKesey.

Among other things, the guidelines called for each presidential appointee to attend two council meetings each quarter and make an informal presentation to council about their respective committees each year.

The guidelines outline additional responsibilities for appointees of three committees: the Associated Students of UCLA Communications Board, the ASUCLA Board of Directors and the Student Fee Advisory Committee.

The significance of the three committees should make appointees to these committees even more accountable, many councilmembers believe.

But Lawson said the guidelines were flawed on many levels.

Lawson called the guidelines an “affront” to those committee members who were assigned prior to the guidelines being created.

“The students had no warning about these new requirements when they signed up. It’s like a professor giving an exam on materials never assigned,” Lawson said in a press release.

Lawson’s second concern was that members of the Communications Board would be subject to further scrutiny by council. The board oversees Student Media and all of its publications, including the Daily Bruin.

If appointees of this board were subject to close review, they may also be influenced by the politics on council, Lawson said.

Beyond his initial concerns, Lawson said he also discovered that the guidelines were in violation of the bylaws.

According to the bylaws, committee members already have several stated responsibilities.

“We do have a need for accountability, but if we would enforce the current guidelines, we would accomplish everything we want to accomplish,” Lawson said.

But McKesey said more accountability is needed for some of these appointees who are receiving “fat stipends” and do not seem to be fulfilling their responsibilities.

Council can overturn a J-Board decision with a two-thirds vote.

The only other option for enforcing the additional guidelines would be to amend the USAC bylaws.

A proposal to change council bylaws may be looked into and brought to council in the future, but definitely not anytime soon, McKesey said.