Berdahl's Gift to ASUC-With a Catch?

On the surface it seemed like a $31,000 gift.

But Chancellor Robert Berdahl's decision last week to pay back $31,000 improperly allocated by the Graduate Assembly for its "No on 54" campaign carried some fine print.

The final lines of the four-paragraph letter handed a top administrator direct authority over student government expenditures.

To many ASUC leaders, these short sentences were a firm rebuke to a student government that has prided itself on independence.

And to many, it was another inch forward in the university's control of the ASUC.

"It is stripping the ASUC of its fiscal authority and that's something we as students can't stand for," said Student Action Senator Suken Vakil.

In retrospect, the decision was not a complete surprise.

Berdahl has forgiven the ASUC's poor financial oversight in the past. Last year, when the Senate found itself $360,000 short in the beginning of the fall, Berdahl reduced the debt and agreed to allow the ASUC to pay off the money interest-free and in yearly installments.

But over the past decade, major incidents of financial mismanagement have led to an erosion of the student government's power, culminating five years ago when the ASUC saw its long-term financial assests ceded to the university with the creation of the ASUC Auxiliary.

Although the letter means greater oversight of the ASUC by a top-ranking administrator, it is unclear how actively that new power will be exercised or how long the arrangement will continue.

One thing is evident: the university has tried to keep the student government fiscally solvent, but stave off the threat of legal backlash.

Either choice led to a sticky legal situation. On one hand, allow the Graduate Assembly to spend the money and risk being sued by conservative foundations (such as the threat from the Berkeley College Republicans).

Or decide that the spending broke state law and face a lawsuit from student government leaders claiming violations of free speech.

In trying to steer its way through the legal minefield, the university allowed the student goverment to spend the money only from commercial funds.

Even if the decision will keep outside lawsuits at bay, it has yet to satisfy student government leaders who believe it is their right to spend money for political purposes.

Already, President Jessica Quindel has called for continued legal action to allow student government to spend ASUC money on political campaigns, which student organizations are currently allowed to do.

"If student groups can use funds for political purposes, what makes the funds that go to student groups any different from the ones that go to student governments?" Quindel said.

Even Student Action senators have said that the senate should take a stance against the university's action.

But university officials see this challenge as part of a longstanding dispute over what type of oversight the university should have.

"Student government is only the student government because the chancellor grants it," said Michael Smith, assistant chancellor for legal affairs.

Tags: