Another charge sheet was filed against the V.O.I.C.E. initiative Monday, following an announcement that negotiations are under way to settle current charges against the student fee.
The charges — filed by CalTV co-executive director Myles Moscato — allege similar violations of ASUC and university policies regarding campus-based student fees as those in past charge sheets filed against the V.O.I.C.E. campaign. Moscato also charges the initiative with campaign violations during the ASUC general election.
Moscato filed his claims as an individual. Under ASUC bylaws, ASUC-sponsored student groups cannot campaign for or against election candidates or initiatives.
The initiative asked students to support The Daily Californian through a $2 per semester student fee and was announced to have passed in the ASUC general election on April 24.
A previous charge sheet filed by CalTV Director of Business, Advertising and Marketing Elizabeth Kopaskie on April 8 — which cited a list of campaign violations — was dismissed by the ASUC Judicial Council following the executive order issued by ASUC President Vishalli Loomba that invalidated the initiative. Loomba’s executive order was then overturned by the council.
Moscato said in the new charge sheet that the previous campaign violations went “unpunished.”
After Loomba and ASUC Attorney General Deepti Rajendran filed charges against the initiative on April 25, it was announced Sunday that settlement negotiations with campaign manager for the referendum Lynn Yu had started.
On Wednesday, ASUC Judicial Council chair Erica Furer said that the council had voted to accept the charge sheet filed by Moscato and further information would be released shorty.
Read the full text of the charge sheet below:
Moscato v Yu Charge Sheet (PDF)
Moscato v Yu Charge Sheet (Text)
Chloe Hunt is the lead student government reporter.
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.
I can see how this violates a policy, but why is there such a strong backlash against The Daily Cal? Is it possible that the university doesn’t like that it doesn’t have the ability to censor The Daily Cal, so that’s why such tedious policy is being used to object to it? I really think it’s okay to increase student fees by 2 dollars if the majority of students who voted democratically decided to do so. Opinions?
Haters. Continue to hate.
does anyone watch CalTV?
Yeah, I started watching this semester when it became abundantly apparent that the Daily Cal had absolutely no credibility.
Amen.
No credibility. Certainly not 2 dollars worth.
Dude, you are the one who just admitted to being drunk. You lack credibility.
Yeah, the Daily Cal is such a terrible newspaper… that just won best student newspaper in California: http://www.dailycal.org/2012/04/21/daily-cal-awarded-top-daily-student-newspaper-best-website-in-california/
I’m sure CalTV makes some cute YouTube videos, but when it comes to serious journalism, Daily Cal wins hands down. And, that’s not just my opinion. That’s the opinion of the California College Media Association.
Oh, you won a stupid award?
You must think your blatant regard for journalistic integrity doesn’t matter.
*Disregard.
Whatever, I’m drunk. You still suck
GLORY GLORY MAN UNITED !