The Associated Students Legislative Council met for this year’s inaugural meeting last night with a lengthy agenda including two action items, ten new bills and three resolutions.
While the new business addressed topics from increased publicity for the student government to a transition in the campus’ e-mail platform, nine of the proposals focused on the restructuring of existing A.S. entities and updates to their respective sections of the organizations’ legal code. As of press time, the council had yet to reach a decision on any of the measures.
During public forum, Director of Visibility and Outreach for the A.S. President Brady Forrest raised concern regarding the appointment process of Committee on Committees officers. According to Forrest, third-year Kelly Gandee — who was considered for disqualification from her position as Rep-at-Large during last year’s Spring elections in connection with allegations that members of her party served alcohol to minors — is set to be appointed a position on the COC.
The representatives were to later discuss a bill revising the selection process and terms of office for COC Chair and Committee Coordinator, specifying that the chairperson will be recommended by the IVP, appointed by the president and approved by a majority vote of the legislated council.
The current lack of transparency in A.S. proceedings makes it difficult for the organization to remain accountable to the student body, Forrest said, and discussion ensued about the lack of record of Gandee’s interview in her bid for the position.
On-Campus Rep Jonathan Abboud said though he could not produce a record, he could attest to the fairness of the process. Additionally, a candidate’s application and past are both private matters, Abboud said.
“I sat on pretty much every single interview, so I can assure you there was no fraud or special nepotism, we interviewed every person,” Abboud said. “We don’t keep minutes from interviews because it’s a safe space and it’s confidential. Also, we are not supposed to take into account somebody’s history. We cannot legally not appoint someone because of their past.”
Among other bills pending discussion were measures to increase the publicity for A.S. and remove the Office of Student Advocate from the Legislative Council office space to avoid the current possibility of the Attorney General taking action within the Judicial Council.
Finally, the council was set to pursue a resolution in support of a Gmail-based e-mail interface to replace the U-Mail system. University administration had previously come to an agreement with the previous IVP Jake Elwood that once campus web system updates have been completed, switching to Gmail will be a priority.
Interesting that they are so adamant about OPP members being properly interviewed in order to leave the position open to “all”, yet the same members of this stance (DP) refuse to put the Queer Commission open positions online saying they already “have people in mind”. Hypocrisy and exclusivity at it’s best.
If you feel this way, I encourage you to speak at public forum. It is your right as a student to tell us (leg council) what you think of us and AS.
Hi, I am the co-chair for Queer Commission and I just wanted to clarify the open positions for Queer Commission. Over the summer one person had to drop their position. We invited people who had run to be in QComm during the Spring and had not yet been accepted, to come to our first meeting if they still held interest in being in the commission. During the first meeting we found out another person was not going to be able to stay in the commission due to time commitments. One position was filled by someone that decided to re-run, the… Read more »
The phrase AS is a place for everyone died a long ass time ago obviously.
I’m not sure why you say that. Feel free to drop by at the main office anytime just to chill, it is in the Multicultural Center. If I’m there I can assure you that I’m down to just talk or listen.
If you’d like to pick up a position, visit coc.as.ucsb.edu. There are dozens upon dozens of chances to get involved.
We actually interviewed 4 people for vice-chair of CoC and the position was advertised through a university announcement, so basically everyone knew about it and only 4 applied. One person declined for a different position, one went abroad, one was given another position, and one was appointed (Kelly). That is about as in depth I can personally be about the process without jeopardizing the confidentiality between myself, the other CoC members, and the people we interviewed. I’m all about being transparent, trust me I post everything I do in AS on facebook, but things like interviews and deliberations are confidential… Read more »