University to Pay for ‘No on 54' Expenses

The university will pay back more than $30,000 in student government expenses on a "No on 54" drive in a "one-time exception" to a ban on spending such funds for political campaigns, university officials said yesterday.

The decision followed the release of a university audit yesterday, which found $31,187.32 worth of receipts related to the ASUC and Graduate Assembly campaign since March 20-months earlier than had previously been reported.

"We want to honor our responsibilities to pay back the vendors," said Genaro Padilla, vice chancellor of undergraduate affairs. "We're making this very clear that the student government cannot use university money for offering only one side on a political campaign."

In September, the Graduate Assembly allocated $35,000 for its "No of 54" campaign.

After the expenditure came to public attention through an article published in The Daily Californian, Chancellor Robert Berdahl froze the funds because spending university monies on ballot initiatives violates university policy.

With cries in the ASUC Senate for student officers to resign, Berdahl began a campus audit of the student government.

The audit found that $6,662.70 in funds had been reimbursed since March using mandatory student fees, and 13 other payments totalling more than $20,000 were waiting for final approval.

This oversight stemmed from a "lack of communication" between the ASUC Auxiliary, which oversees the student government's money, and the administration, said Michael Smith, assistant chancellor of legal affairs.

"Given the fact that many of the students may not have been properly informed, the chancellor decided that the best decision was to let the auxiliary cover it," Smith said.

Still, student government leaders said they remain unhappy with the university's decision.

"The rules are still unclear. The university is still unable to admit that they are wrong," said Graduate Assembly President Jessica Quindel.

Quindel maintained that the expenditure was legal, saying that the student government should have autonomy for its spending.

Despite relieving ASUC officials of thousands of dollars of debt to vendors, the university's carefully worded explanation reaffirmed its authority over student government spending.

Indeed, university officials said they will increase oversight of ASUC spending, putting authorization in the hands of Horace Mitchell, vice chancellor of business and administrative services.

And university officials are asking the ASUC and the assembly to bring their rules in line with current

university policy.

But the decision pitted both supporters and opponents of the spending against the university.

ASUC leaders maintained that UC policy does not hold up against a series of court cases which they say argue for student governments' financial autonomy from universities.

Quindel said they will continue the fight and may still sue the university.

"It's no longer about Prop. 54," Quindel said. "It's about students' rights to do political advocacy and free speech."

Others criticized the university's decision for being too lenient.

"It's fairly disturbing," said Greg Broderick, an attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation, a public advocacy group. "We'll definitely take a closer look at this to see if the university is complying with its own policies and California law."

Although Berkeley College Republicans, working with Broderick, had threatened to sue the ASUC, campus administrators believe they are now in the clear.

They said the reimbursement will come from ASUC commercial activities instead of mandatory student fees, the other source of ASUC revenue.

If the expenditures came from mandatory student fees, the university would face the threat of lawsuits. Students could claim free speech violations if they disagreed with how their mandatory fees were spent.

ASUC commercial operations include the ASUC Bookstore and Bear's Lair Pub, which did not turn a profit last year.

In the meantime, university officials hope that revisions to the systemwide language will help clarify policies about student government expenditures.

"I think we have acted in good faith," Padilla said.

Tags: