Currently on the table: An ASUC Senate bill suggests ASUC senators and administrators wear nametags around campus and in class — a never-ending “Hello, My Name Is” reminding us that we are indeed in the age of 24/7 accessibility.

Will this bill — authored by Independent Campaign for Common Sense Senator Solomon Nwoche —  create just enough transparency? Or does it cross the line into high-and-mighty name-dropping? Or will it just look completely ridiculous?

In 2000, a group almost as famous as the ASUC had a similar request — suggesting its members’ names be spoken when they were addressed. We thought Destiny’s Child might be the perfect group to describe this ASUC problem:

To the tune of Destiny’s Child’s “Say My Name” (Protip: play the song while reading these lyrics):

Say the name, say the name

No matter who’s around you

They’re the ones you turn to

Transparency’s the aim

Wear the name, wear the name

The nametags on the daily

Some think this bill is crazy

Why the sudden change?

Say the name, say the name

In campus or in classes

Will they look like pompous asses?

Admin could do the same

Know the name, know the name

Don’t know them from elections?

No longer have those questions

These are the goals, they claim

Sep-tem-ber Eighteen

Got brought up, they convened

S B Twenty-One

Done by Senator Solomon

They exchanged their words, some “uh-huhs,” some “OKs”

Will this bill achieve

What they want it to portray

If they took it there

First of all, let us say

Would it make us look

Up to them, the wrong way

They don’t want to seem

Arrogant or too vain

But all these things aside 

Accountability’s still the price of fame…

Image Source: maybeemily under Creative Commons

Contact Leah Hegyi at lhegyi@dailycal.org.

The post Beyonce weighs in on the bill to make ASUC senators wear nametags appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Nathaniel Solley/Staff

The campus Jewish Student Union voted Wednesday to deny membership to J Street U at Berkeley, a Jewish student political advocacy group on campus whose application to join the union also was denied two years ago after the group faced accusations of being anti-Israel.

The bylaws of the Jewish Student Union, an umbrella organization for Jewish student groups on campus, stipulate that a member organization must not host speakers who demonize Israel, said Jewish Student Union President Daphna Torbati.

That requirement was a point of contention surrounding J Street U, which advocates a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Much of the disagreement focused on J Street U’s relationship with Breaking the Silence, an Israeli military veterans’ organization that criticizes Israel’s military operations in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, said Elon Rov, a co-chair of J Street U.

“We are not afraid, as American Jews, to address those (difficult issues),” said Shayna Howitt, J Street U’s national communications co-chair. “We are not afraid … to host people who we might disagree with. We’re not afraid to stand up and question how we can best support Israel, because we’re committed to the safety of Israel.”

Breaking the Silence, however, has garnered serious criticism from other Jewish groups that belong to the Jewish Student Union. Torbati said she was concerned the group unfairly disparages Israeli soldiers.

Jewish Student Union members Avi Hecht and David Eliahu said Jewish students with connections to Israel would be alienated if J Street U were allowed to host Breaking the Silence under the Jewish Student Union umbrella.

“For a lot of members … the (Jewish Student Union is) the only place where they can express their love for Israel because of such an anti-Israel campus climate,” Torbati said. “A lot of people have said that they want the (Jewish Student Union) to stay a place they feel comfortable saying they love Israel.”

Hecht added that Breaking the Silence does not offer a fair picture of Israel’s military operations.

“Regardless of J Street’s intents, the effect of bringing a public event like BTS is detrimental to the image of Israel on our campus,” Eliahu said.

J Street U invited Breaking the Silence to campus in fall 2012, and its founder, Yehuda Shaul, will appear on campus again in November.

J Street U last applied to the Jewish Student Union in November 2011 but was rejected for inviting a co-founder of the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement to campus in spring 2010, among other reasons.

Members of J Street U said they believed their relationship with the Jewish Student Union had improved after working with the campus Jewish community against the ASUC Senate’s contentious divestment bill last spring.

“We did want and expect that the Jewish community was finally going to legitimize our voice,” Rov said. “But we were disappointed.”

J Street U needed eight votes from the union board and its member organizations to be admitted but received only two, with eight votes against it and two abstentions, Torbati said.

Howitt said that J Street U is not anti-Israel but that it is critical of Israel’s policies in the disputed territories.

“The best way to support Israel is not by refusing to talk about the politics that are often uncomfortable and scary — it’s by addressing those politics,” Howitt said.

As of Tuesday afternoon, a petition circulated online by J Street U calling for the Jewish community to be more inclusive had collected 166 signatures, including those of Jewish ASUC Senators Grant Fineman and Liza Raffi, according to Rov.

“We’re not appealing the decision,” Rov said. “We want to prove to the wider Jewish community that the decision does not reflect the vision of Jewish students … We think this decision is inconsistent with what Jewish students actually want.”

Contact Connor Grubaugh at cgrubaugh@dailycal.org

Clarification(s):
A previous version of this article implied that a number of students at last Wednesday’s meeting of the Jewish Student Union walked out in response to J Street U’s failure to secure membership. In fact, the vote on J Street U was the last item on the meeting’s agenda, so students left the room at the meeting’s natural conclusion.

The post Jewish Student Union votes to deny membership to J Street U appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The search committee is made up of 11 student, faculty and staff representatives, including ASUC President DeeJay Pepito, and is chaired by Anne De Luca, associate vice chancellor for admissions and enrollment.

The student forum drew about 20 students who voiced the importance of having a dean of students who is accessible and transparent, according to Austin Pritzkat, Pepito’s chief of staff.

Students said they wanted a dean who would actively participate with students and implement an open-door policy by holding informal meetings with students.

After a November 2011 Occupy Cal protest, Poullard agreed with former UC Berkeley chancellor Robert Birgeneau that students linking arms to prevent police from entering an encampment was not “nonviolent civil disobedience.” In response, students at the meeting expressed concerns that the new dean must understand the rationale behind student protest.

Graduate Assembly President Max Gee, who also sits on the committee, said that he and Pepito will attend all search committee meetings to “make sure the priorities of the undergraduate students are met.”

“The search has just begun, and students will have a voice along every step of the way,” Gee said.

Other search committee members were also present at the student forum. David Robinson, associate campus counsel and a member of the committee, said the feedback about what the students at the forum said they wanted and what was discussed at the committee meetings were very similar.

“The dean of students needs to be someone who has communication skills and an ability to really listen to what the student priorities are,” Robinson said. “The dean needs to engage with students and student leadership as partners.”

According to De Luca, the committee discussed looking for someone who understands the unique dynamics of a public institution like UC Berkeley and who is committed to the type of diversity found in the campus community.

Currently, David Surratt is serving as the interim dean of students and will continue to do so until a replacement is found.

The committee, which has only had one meeting so far on Sept. 25, is in the early stages of finding that replacement. De Luca said there is no deadline and hopes to have finalists on campus to meet with different stakeholder groups by early February.

“Our next step is to review the draft of the position profile, and once it is approved, to begin to advertise the position,” De Luca said. “The committee will then focus on sharing the news of the position and encouraging applications from student affairs professionals nationwide.”

Jane Nho covers student government. Contact her at jnho@dailycal.org.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this article incorrectly identified Anne DeLuca as associate vice chancellor for admissions and enrollment and acting director of undergraduate admissions. In fact, DeLuca is only the associate vice chancellor for admissions and enrollment.

The post UC Berkeley students express hopes for new dean of students appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The offensive quinceanera-themed party thrown by the Delta Chi fraternity on the night of Sept. 21 is a perfect example of this confusion. The party, the impetus of a recently introduced ASUC Senate bill, was defended by Delta Chi’s president, Cody Kermanian, as never beginning with “the intention to marginalize.”

As evidenced by his remarks, Kermanian is sadly missing the point.

It’s reassuring to hear that Kermanian and the fraternity did not intend to alienate or insult Hispanic students on campus, but the problem with the party was not that it was conducted with malicious intent; the trouble is with the careless reappropriation of an important Hispanic cultural ritual for the purposes of throwing a party.

The bill, sponsored by CalSERVE Senator Wendy Pacheco, places the party squarely in the context of other offensive events that have occurred in Greek communities on American college campuses. While Delta Chi’s quinceanera party did not reach the levels of UC San Diego’s infamous Compton Cookout or a gang-themed party at Dartmouth College (where partygoers dressed up like Bloods and Crips), it is symptomatic of a troublesome trend in Greek party culture across the country.

There are productive measures outlined in the bill to address this trend. It calls for “intent versus impact” training, and it also asks Delta Chi to issue a public apology for throwing the party. However, the bill also has its flaws.

The bill rightfully recalls the incident last semester in which the Theta Delta Chi fraternity hung a figure that looked similar to a black male out of its window for Halloween — directly across from the African American theme floor in Unit 1.

However, the bill mentions that in spite of an ASUC bill that required “mandatory racial sensitivity” training after the incident, “there have been no updates on the efforts for mandatory racial sensitivity curriculum.”

In order for the Greek system to adequately implement these protocols, the ASUC needs to actively enforce the reforms they demand the Greek system take on. Otherwise, the changes necessary to effect a culture shift will have no incentive to be taken seriously.

Furthermore, cultural reappropriation and racial insensitivity are not exclusively qualities of the Greek system. Co-op parties and student group events are often guilty of the same kind of ignorance.

But Delta Chi’s failure to consider the consequences of its actions or the reasons behind those consequences reflect an unaware attitude that seems particularly prevalent within the Greek community.

Hopefully, after this instance, the necessary changes will be adopted, and the Greek community made more culturally aware.

The post Intent doesn’t equal impact appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Kore Chan/File

Although a recently introduced ASUC Senate bill that asks senators to wear magnetic nametags is intended to increase ASUC transparency, it has been met with skepticism by senators and students alike.

The bill, SB 21, authored by Independent Campaign for Common Sense Senator Solomon Nwoche, asks senators to wear nametags around campus and in class. It also asks ASUC Student Advocate Timofey Semenov to write a letter encouraging campus administrators to do the same.

“The motive behind my bill is for students to be able to identify their elected officials so they can hold them accountable,” Nwoche said. “Theoretically, students can already search us through a search engine and see who we are anyways. All this nametag does is put this search into a more transparent form.”

Nolan Pack, the ASUC executive vice president, said the ASUC has already taken steps to improve its transparency. He said that the ASUC has made its agendas and meeting schedules more accessible online and that it has also begun webcasting senate meetings.

“I’m a strong proponent of making the ASUC more transparent and more accessible, and I want to make sure we’re using our time and resources to achieve that goal in a substantive way,” Pack said in an email. “As far as SB 21, it remains unclear to me whether or not this bill will promote transparency in a meaningful way.”

Some UC Berkeley undergraduates say they are unsure whether the nametags would be useful within the campus community. UC Berkeley sophomore Elena Behar said most students on campus already know who the ASUC executive officials and senators are through general interactions.

“I’m not sure if people would just want to go up to people and talk to (the ASUC senators and executive officials),” Behar said. “I think relationships (between students and senators) could also be altered, because people could feel that they’re potentially influencing senator decisions.”

Although the bill would not require senators to wear nametags, it would strongly encourage them to do so. Members of the senate, however, said the nametags could create obstacles in their everyday lives.

SQUELCH! Senator Grant Fineman said that although the bill might increase the transparency and visibility of the senate, there are many drawbacks to it.

“It could also come off the wrong way, like we’re being arrogant, like we’re showing our position at all times,” Fineman said.

CalSERVE Senator Caitlin Quinn echoed Fineman’s concerns, saying the nametags would “assert our presence too much.”

“In the classroom, we’re there to learn, just like everyone else,” Quinn said.

SB 21 will be debated Monday at the senate finance committee’s meeting.

The post ASUC Senate to debate bill asking senators to wear nametags appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Graham Haught/Staff

Our campus maintains no shortage of pride in the Free Speech Movement — that period of glorified resistance that paired disgust for the social and political conditions of the time with unbridled optimism that students could be agents of change. At its best, the Free Speech Movement united students who shared strong convictions about the presence of injustice and exposed the hypocrisy and excesses of extant institutions. The unfortunate side of the Free Speech Movement, however, has gone largely unexplored.

More than four decades later, students have achieved few political victories. Higher education remains an easy target for lawmakers looking to slash funding with few political repercussions. In its quest to economize, the state has forced the university to choose among options that thrust the idea of education as a public good into question. Students today have minimal influence in shaping these decisions. The failure of activism to defend the interests of students hints at tacit acceptance of another message that many have taken from the Free Speech Movement: the suggestion that resistance for its own sake is inherently virtuous or productive.

Unfortunately, it is impossible to decouple the vehement daily calls for all flavors of reform on Sproul Plaza from the way students and education leaders are treated in Sacramento when they advocate for issues ranging from increased education funding to Cal Grant reform to added benefits for undocumented students. When student activists and campuswide elected officials adopt wide-ranging positions — often in the form of toothless symbolic resolutions — with little regard for the repercussions of their actions, Sacramento takes note. Berkeley is hardly judged by its Peace Corps volunteers, its alumni who teach for America or its civil servants who represent their nation with distinction in contentious spots around the globe. It is held to the words of its loudest, least accountable voices.

However accepting the echo chamber of Berkeley student politics may be for positions of extreme bravado — a vote of “no confidence” in a leader yet to take office among them — there is a need to consider the effects of such posturing on the treatment of the legislative priorities of students. Lobbying is a zero-sum game. Advocating the funding of student interests means arguing against the use of that money for other worthy causes — recently, health care, primary education and tax breaks have been among them. In that regard, the oft-uncooperative, antagonistic attitude toward the political system that has become a hallmark of activism at Berkeley is unproductive. We inhabit this campus for no more than a few years at once, but our actions maintain a lasting impact on its reputation. Furthermore, they shape the way future student advocates interpret their roles in the university. The Free Speech Movement has shown us this, too.

The most important message is this: Cooperation is not akin to cowardice. As long as the majority of student activists at Berkeley wear the idea of exclusion from the organs of political power as a badge of honor, the interests of students will suffer. The political decisions that have done the most to benefit UC students in the past two years — the DREAM Act, Cal Grant reform and the May 2013 budget revisions — were sculpted in Sacramento, not on Sproul.

Thankfully, some students at UC Berkeley have bucked this trend, working actively with legislators to forge solutions for pressing problems. The California Modernization and Economic Development Act, written by senior Jack Tibbetts, has gained the endorsement of several legislators in Sacramento for its emphasis on supporting education, the environment, and projects at the county level.

Whether or not CMED ultimately passes, it ought to serve as a blueprint for future action. This year, ASUC Senators Emily Truax and Caitlin Quinn, in collaboration with Sally Ching of Cal Lobby Corps, are organizing the first ASUC Senate Lobby Day, which will bring campuswide elected officials to Sacramento to communicate with members of the state Legislature. This is a commendable first step toward forging closer ties between UC Berkeley’s leaders and California’s lawmakers. If it ultimately tempers the traditionally tone-deaf approach toward policymaking that has characterized campus advocacy in the past, it will have done a great service.

Simply put, the decimation of student interests at the state level is unacceptable. A plurality of UC Regents, state senators and state Assembly members are UC, CSU and California Community Colleges alumni. During legislative visits, they regularly reminisce about the thriving public education system of past decades. UC students belong at the negotiating table whenever the state’s education system is at stake. The ASUC Senate could easily fund regular student-led lobbying visits aimed at advancing specific, achievable legislative goals. If our campus does not resist the label of being an institution that thumbs its nose at the prospect of cooperation and dialogue, however, it will be of no use in any case.

Tanay Kothari is a UC Berkeley senior who serves as the UC Student Association’s legislative chair.

The post Finding free speech in the wrong places appeared first on The Daily Californian.

SB 9, co-authored and sponsored by External Affairs Vice President Safeena Mecklai, calls upon the ASUC to express its position on Prop. 13 to the university and elected officials, including Gov. Jerry Brown.

The bill proposes a number of reforms to Prop. 13, including the regular reassessment of nonresidential commercial property, which would lead to at least $6 billion in additional revenue for state funding.

The bill attributes California’s dramatic higher education funding cuts to the state’s “inequitable tax structure.”

Supporters of Prop. 13 reform hope the additional revenue will help reverse a trend of deep cuts to state funding for higher education that have caused UC Berkeley’s tuition to rise from $6,654 in 2007 to $12,834 in 2013. The cuts have made it increasingly difficult for low- and middle-income students to attend college.

Jennie Yoon is the lead student government reporter. Contact her at jyoon@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @jennieyoon_.

The post ASUC Senate unanimously passes bill to support reforming Prop. 13 appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The bill, written and co-sponsored by CalSERVE Senator Caitlin Quinn, opposes the construction of the extension of the current Keystone pipeline that could harm the environment and the economy due to the harmful nature of extracting and refining crude oil from tar sands.

The bill, which passed by an 18-1 margin, instructs ASUC President DeeJay Pepito to write a letter to President Barack Obama formally expressing the ASUC’s position on the Keystone XL pipeline.

The pipeline would be harmful to the “environment, agriculture, native peoples, farmers in the Midwest, the health and safety of Americans, unionized workers, and the American economy,” the bill states.

The bill addresses concerns that pipeline construction will harm the environment without helping economies. It states that the Keystone XL pipeline would create only 35 permanent jobs and that 85 to 90 percent of the temporary jobs created by pipeline construction would not go toward job creation in local communities.

The Amalgamated Transit Union and the Transport Workers Union have also expressed opposition to the construction of the pipeline, according to the bill. The workers’ unions stated that rather than investing in the pipeline, jobs should go toward energy conservation research and public transportation improvement.

Jennie Yoon is the lead student government reporter. Contact her at jyoon@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @jennieyoon_.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the ASUC Senate passed SB 11 unanimously. In fact, the bill passed on a vote of 18-1.

The post ASUC Senate passes bill in opposition to Keystone XL pipeline appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The move comes after a string of failures in the negotiation process between the university and the workers’ labor union, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 3299. The university and union entered negotiations in October. The union’s service workers — which include custodians, food-service workers and gardeners employed by the university — have worked without a contract since February. Having exhausted the option of bargaining, the university is legally allowed to move forward with this plan, according to a UC press release.

Service workers from AFSCME 3299 will now be subject to a two-tiered pension plan. Employees previously contributed 5 percent of their pay toward their pension, but those hired prior to July 1 must now contribute 6.5 percent. Those hired on or after July 1 must give 7 percent. The university will also contribute 12 percent of employee pay to workers’ pensions — an increase of 2 percent.

“Really, we prefer to solve these things at the table with our unions,” said UC spokesperson Shelly Meron. ”(Increasing employee contributions) is something that we have to do to make sure that our pension program is healthy in the long term. We couldn’t just sit by and do nothing. We had to make some changes.”

But AFSCME 3299 President Kathryn Lybarger, who works as a gardener at UC Berkeley, said the university’s offer exacerbates everyday challenges and essentially equates to a pay cut for her and other workers.

“What this imposition does is it cuts at least $50 to $70 from low-wage workers’ paychecks every single month,” Lybarger said. “That equals a tank of gas to get to work, cost of parking at work, putting money away for our kids’ Christmas presents, and it’s the cost of a prescription.”

In July, the university imposed these pension reforms on more than 12,000 patient-care employees, who were also members of AFSCME 3299. Lybarger said the union has asked to meet with incoming UC President Janet Napolitano but did not say whether the union planned to strike.

Paul Roose, a state-appointed mediator brought in during the collective bargaining process, supported the two-tiered pension plan in a report issued in August. He called the bargaining process between the parties “dysfunctional.”

ASUC Senator Briana Mullen said the university’s decision threatens students’ rights to negotiate with the university and said she plans to write an ASUC bill asking the university reconsider its options.

“It’s really atrocious to think that the university can move forward without compromising,” Mullen said. “Students themselves have a stake in this game. They are affected by the way UC is sidestepping organized labor on campus.”

Contact Libby Rainey and Jessie Lau at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post UC to implement final offer on service-worker wages, pension plan appeared first on The Daily Californian.

UC Berkeley Chief Financial Officer Erin Gore is stepping down at the end of the month after four years of helping oversee new campus financial initiatives to aid students.

Gore’s major projects during her time on campus included helping to establish the first comprehensive campuswide budget plan and overseeing the finances of the Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project.

In August, Gore accepted an executive vice president position at Wells Fargo, where she will lead its commercial-banking education and nonprofit team. Although she loved working as the campus’s CFO, Gore said the Wells Fargo offer was one she could not refuse.

“It was the best job in the world, so it’s really hard,” Gore said of the CFO position. “It’s definitely a 24-hour job, and I aspire to have more of a work-life balance.”

When she took over the CFO position in 2009, Gore was surprised to realize she had inherited a budget system that was practically nonexistent, she said. In response, she helped create the first-ever all-funds budget plan in 2012 and 2013 for the campus as part of Operational Excellence. The second budget came out earlier in September.

Gore brought in Cathy Lloyd, the executive director of strategic project management, from Harvard to implement a tool that would help with the school’s budget.

“(The budget) has been fantastic, transformational to Cal,” Lloyd said. “(Gore’s) mission, in her mind, was to have Berkeley be the leader of this revolution that needs to happen in order for higher education to survive financially.”

Gore also was largely responsible for the financial side of the Lower Sproul Redevelopment Project and said that, even though she is leaving, nothing will stop her from being at the reopening.

According to Pamela Brown, executive director of the campus Office of Planning and Analysis, Gore has always been devoted to looking for ways to improve the student experience.

Brown’s favorite story about Gore centers on a time after the implementation of the Middle Class Access Plan, which offers financial aid programs to help middle-class families. Brown recalls Gore leaving the elevator and saying, “Woo-hoo! We changed the world today.”

ASUC President DeeJay Pepito, who worked closely with Gore over the past few years, credits Gore with being one of the primary reasons the ASUC has been successful in many campaign initiatives.

“The next CFO is going to have very big shoes to fill,” Pepito said.

Although she has already accepted the new position, Gore decided to delay leaving to oversee a recent campus financial audit and to ensure continuity.

A search committee has been put together, and she said it was important to her that an undergraduate will be sitting on the committee. In the interim, Delphine Regalia will serve as controller and will report to the vice chancellor of administration and finance, and Laurent Heller will act as interim CFO.

Shannon Carroll covers academics and administration. Contact her at scarroll@dailycal.org.

The post Campus CFO to step down at end of September appeared first on The Daily Californian.