ASUC President Vishalli Loomba issued an executive order early Wednesday morning invalidating an initiative on the 2012 ASUC general election ballot that asks students to support The Daily Californian.
Loomba’s order comes just as the second of three voting days for the election begins. In the order, she cites a UC policy which states that the student referendum process shall not be used to establish a new fee for the purpose of supporting a non-university organization.
This policy applies to the Daily Cal, Loomba said in the order, because it is an independent organization that does not receive funding from the university. Rather, the Daily Cal pays rent for its office space in Eshleman Hall and has an agreement to distribute its papers on campus.
The V.O.I.C.E. Initiative will remain on the ballot but will be voided, according to the order.
The initiative asks students if they will pay $2 per semester to help sustain the Daily Cal and allow it to continue enhancing its online presence. Daily Cal student leaders estimate that the initiative would generate about $93,800 annually and that without the funds, the newspaper could very likely lose additional days of print publication, among other cuts.
According to Daily Cal Editor in Chief and President Tomer Ovadia, the UC Office of the President brought up the policy to which Loomba referred when the office approved the petition language that the Daily Cal circulated to get the initiative on the ballot. But Ovadia said he thought the Daily Cal’s status as a registered student group or the drafting of a memorandum of understanding would take care of the matter.
UC Berkeley senior Andy Nevis, who opposes the V.O.I.C.E. Initiative, said that Loomba’s executive order was appropriate and that it should have been issued earlier. He said the university’s policy is “fairly clear.”
“I think that she is in solid footing in terms of implementing an executive order,” he said, adding that the order would at least “let the student body know that this is an issue.”
Loomba also said in her order that a memorandum of understanding would have to be drafted between the Daily Cal and the campus in order for the Daily Cal to receive funding through a campus fee referendum. She said that both campus officials and officials from the UC president’s office have said that such a memorandum could impact the Daily Cal’s independence and financial oversight.
Concerns about independence stemming from a memorandum of understanding were not raised in any prior discussions with campus and university officials, according to Ovadia.
The order also states that the campus whistleblower program received letters saying that due to the Daily Cal’s status as an independent organization, the newspaper cannot receive mandatory student fees if students do not have oversight over its operations.
“It is the role of the ASUC student leadership to ensure that students are able to vote in a transparent and fair election and are ensured full and accurate information in order to make informed decisions,” Loomba’s order states.
The ASUC Constitution gives the president power to issue through an executive order “the taking of actions which are urgent and necessary to maintain the functioning” of the ASUC until the ASUC Senate can meet again. While Loomba’s word is likely to be final, the senate could vote to overturn her executive order, according to the ASUC Constitution. The senate’s next meeting is Wednesday night.
This is Loomba’s fourth executive order since becoming ASUC president. Her last order was issued in August and granted ASUC sponsorship to a student group.
An executive order has not been used to void a ballot initiative in at least the last three years. ASUC Attorney General Deepti Rajendran said there appears to be no precedent in recent memory for Loomba’s actions.
“This is kind of a confusing situation,” Rajendran said. “It hasn’t been done recently.”
In an email addressed to the senate regarding this executive order, Loomba said she hopes that “further action on this matter” will be discussed by the senate at its meeting Wednesday and by the ASUC Judicial Council.
“I feel strongly that as the elected representatives of the student body, we must do our due diligence to ensure that students have every opportunity to get clear and 100% transparent information when making choices regarding student fees and referenda,” Loomba said in the email. “It is unfortunate that we are in this situation, but it is of utmost importance that we promote an informed student vote.”
SQUELCH! senator and presidential candidate Noah Ickowitz said the senate will need to look into the situation.
“The senate needs to closely examine whether or not an executive order was appropriate,” Ickowitz said. “I think a lot of issues that need to be taken into account are the timing and the content of the executive order and whether or not it is constitutional.”
Read Loomba’s executive order below.
Staff writer Chloe Hunt contributed to this report.
J.D. Morris is the university news editor.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
how the hell do you take this action after the voting has started, before polling closes?
ASUC, gross incompetence, per usual.
In this time of dire need , we need only one man to step up and run for ASUC president…
VOTE ANTHONY MENDOZA for president !
Students are in the midst of voting on the VOICE initiative. Students should be allowed to vote and have their votes counted. To claim to void it, while the vote is ongoing, is very questionable. To issue an order on a day when there is a Senate meeting is disrespectful to the entire Senate. Whatever your opinion on the fee, this attempt to void is undemocratic, unprofessional, unfair and unreasonable. The order purports to seek to “ensure that students are able to vote in a transparent and fair election”. But the issuance of an order while a vote is occuring seems to mostly have the opposite effect of confusion and discouraging students from voting. The validity of the VOICE initiative can be decided after a democratic discussion and diligent legal research. This dictatorial attempt to void VOICE should be replaced with an intelligent democratic decision by all 20 Senators.
Nice try, but the senate already validated it, so your point is moot.
The ASUC, Vishalli Loomba, and The Daily Cal are all jokes.
But Loomba made a good decision this time.
good decision imo
Is it just a coincidence that she decided this only AFTER seeing the paper didn’t endorse members of her party for office? Smells stinky to me …
this was probably getting sorted out over the past couple of days now. While I agree that it should’ve happened earlier, I doubt the exact timing had anything to do with DC endorsements. I doubt student action even cares haha
lol, if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you
I am curious as to why ASUC President didn’t bring these concerns up earlier. There had been a lot of talk about the initiative for months, and it seems so untimely that the initiative be invalidated during the election when there’s a chance that her executive order can be overturned.
People will be confused by the vote being invalidated and still on the ballot. There’s no way we can have a fair vote now.
The only conclusion is that the ASUC President is trying to torpedo the Daily Cal.
“The only conclusion is that the ASUC President is trying to torpedo the Daily Cal.”
Of course not. Having a mandatory fee for an organization over which the students have no control is like forcing students to pay a fee for some other independent organization. For example, imagination if students were forced to pay a $2 fee every semester to support the Red Cross or something else that is completely independent of the ASUC. It wouldn’t be right. And it only makes sense that there should be control by students over the organization or at the very least some type of memo of understanding between the students and whatever organization is receiving mandatory fees.
”I am curious as to why ASUC President didn’t bring these concerns up earlier.”
You think it’s a surprise that she issued the executive order right after the endorsements?
If the Daily Cal had endorsed SA, the referendum would still be on the ballot.
I agree that the timing has been poor, but your assertion is too conspiratorial for my taste. What’s your basis for that? Plus Shahryar got endorsed for EAVP instead of Sydney.
connor, anthony, and natalie didnt.
justin*
This seems super last minute…
I agree that Daily Cal would do better to stay independent, but they’re sort of out of options.
The timing of this stinks. Right after they publicly announce their endorsements of which only one is a Student Action candidate, our Student Action president attacks their initiative. Why weren’t these issues before? How come it was allowed on the ballot on the first place?
Looks an awful lot like political corruption and payback for not endorsing candidates from her ticket.
why the hell is a supposed news organization endorsing candidates anyways? aren’t they supposed to be an objective entity?
while i agree the VOICE initiative would inapproriaately benefit a non-university org,
Loomba and the rest of the ASUC should have figured this out a long time ago.
There was no need for it to even get on the ballot. It just looks sloppy.
No, it *is* sloppy.
In a democracy, things should never go so far as to have a single person making a decision.
And don’t cite the US or any other faux-democracy as precedent.
The Daily Cal isn’t a University organization? Weird.
well, it’s not funded by the asuc or the university. but that’s so that the daily cal doesn’t have to abide by any rules and restrictions that the asuc or university would impose upon it due to that funding. so really it’s essential that the daily cal remain a non-university organization so that it can have more say on how it is run.
If it’s not a part of the university, then how can they force every student to pay for it? That really doesn’t make sense to me. This should have been handled before.
Because it is a non-university group almost entirely made up of and run by university students.
The Daily Cal hires non-university-affiliated people for paying jobs. Most university students who work are paid nothing.
I wasn’t aware AC Transit was a university organization….
key words “new fee” ac transit is shifting funds from elsewhere, like the rsf discount
AC transit is a public entity; same as the university. The DC is an independent business.
Student Action does not believe in democracy.
Vishalli is acting like a tinpot dictator. Like Chavez or Hitler if you will.
Excellent trolling, good sir.
I am disappointed, because I was looking for this vote to act as a solid way to show the Daily Cal that students are unhappy with the paper.
the item is still on the ballot, make it icing on the cake
But where else will we go for disgustingly inappropriate sex columns that advocate date rape?
Funny that the people that are criticizing and laughing at the paper’s struggles are learning and reading about the news on the Daily Californian’s website.
and that’s where it will remain, on the internet
Maybe so, but that doesn’t invalidate my point that most people are learning about this ruling from DC publications, underlining its importance.
Of course DC would be reporting on this – it’s of extreme relevance to them. While I also think Daily Cal should have a significant presence on campus, I don’t think the fact that they reported on an initiative that funds their own paper is really proof of their importance. Not to mention, DC needs a lot of work. They are constantly publishing stories without second fact-checking or addressing both sides of the issue; they’ve been prone to practice “gotcha journalism” without investigating deep enough into the issue – case in point, administrator emails about Dumpster Muffin, the famous protester. Not to mention, the paper is stylistically horrid.
I don’t think it is funny. You point out how the Daily Cal can be an important resource, but I see how that good will is constantly offset by the paper’s articles and opinions which alienate it from much of the student population.
A good and valid point. But the main question that I think everyone has their own opinions on is: will an online only DC or an online presence with fewer print editions fill the demand for news on UCB and the Berkeley community?
Despite the paper’s quality, it still serves this function. Where will the people turn to get their news about this great university?
Side note: I didn’t go to school here nor am I particularly invested in whether or not this initiative passes.
Every student would be able to get the online version from most of the buildings on university property because of the wifi access provided. I might appreciate the paper more if they cut costs from printing and used the savings to update the online paper during the day for more current news.
How about Berkeley Political Review, CalTV, or any of the other 41 student-run publications on campus?
It would be interesting to see the type of audience these 41 publications have compared to the Daily Californian. I don’t know for certain but I would guess that the majority of these other 41 student-ran publications are niche publications as well and (in my opinion) don’t fulfill this role quite like a general college newspaper would.
If I’m not mistaken, CalTV was the first to break the news of this executive order.
I h8 — your constant commenting shows that disagreeing with Cal students only makes those students more interested in reading and commenting on Cal articles. It doesn’t alienate them at all.
With a university of around 30K students, having under 100 comments on an article does not indicate that the Daily Cal is popular.
First learned about this on facebook. I’m sure that’s where most people and the Daily Cal get a majority of their “news” too.
“News” being in quotes because I feel like putting it in quotes.
PLUS, we’re reading and commenting on this story ONLINE.
yes, but only to be collectively amused by all of the comments that the student body is posting about how uninspired, self-important and isolated the daily cal – staff and newspaper – is from the rest of campus. the best part is that the daily cal is completely in denial about it and thinks that they somehow “represent” us.
the really bad writing is what keeps us away the rest of the time (note the visible lack of comments on other articles, unless you count laudatory comments by fellow staff).the best reporting i’ve seen by the daily cal in recent years? their twitter feed.
Maybe a true independent voice in student journalism will arise from the ashes of the Daily Cal… one not beholden to the interests of far-left activists and other mindless rabble-rousers.
whhhhat? the DC is hardly far-left and in fact devotes lots of its time to the most boring rabble rousers of this school: sports.
funny that this comes out after the dc endorses the squelch, huh?
President Loomba is on top of her stuff to have figured this out and put the order forward!
Fuck yes!
LOL! Oh Daily Cal.. :)