The Judicial Council also announced it will not hold a hearing because of the timing and nature of this case but will instead issue a summary judgment.

“I’m not surprised that the Judicial Council accepted the petition, since they also accepted the original petition filed a couple of weeks ago,” said ASUC Attorney General Hinh Tran. “It’s unfortunate that the council will not allow both sides to vigorously debate, but I respect its decision.”

ASUC President Connor Landgraf is optimistic that the council will uphold his executive order despite the absence of a hearing.

“In the past, it seems like those who have accused me of violating the constitution have been poorly organized during these debates,” Landgraf said. “So it’s not a big deal that the council decided not to hold any hearings.”

Devonte Jackson, campus organizing director for the Office of the External Affairs Vice President, filed the petition against Landgraf on Wednesday, claiming that Landgraf missed a constitutionally mandated deadline for issuing the executive order that placed the referendum on the ballot.

People who have challenged Landgraf’s use of the executive order welcomed the decision.

“I thought that this was the best possible outcome, because I believe the council is interested in questioning the constitutional legitimacy of Landgraf’s executive order,” said Cooperative Movement Senator Jorge Pacheco, who filed a similar petition against Landgraf in the past. “Regardless of who wins the case, I’m happy that the council is respecting and embracing the judicial process.”

The possibility of a settlement remains open if both parties reach an agreement by Tuesday at 5 p.m.

Contact Shirin Ghaffary and Jason Liu at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post Judicial Council accepts petition filed against health and wellness referendum appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The results of the referendum were initially held after ASUC Senators Mihir Deo and Jorge “Cheko” Pacheco filed a petition alleging that ASUC President Connor Landgraf unconstitutionally placed the measure on the ballot.

“Now that the Health and Wellness Referendum has been tabulated, and the results released, I hope the Senators will respect the will of the students of our university, and withdraw their petition to overturn this voter-approved referendum,” said ASUC Attorney General Hinh Tran in an email.

While the results have been released, the Judicial Council will rule on the constitutionality of the referendum at a trial this Thursday.

Deo said he has been considering a variety of options, including the possibility of a settlement. Though the details of a settlement remain unclear, Deo said that ideally, an agreement would include more accommodations for disabled students in the proposed center.

“I’m making sure that no stone is unturned,” he said.

The measure initially sparked controversy after Landgraf issued an executive order to put the measure on the ballot instead of submitting the language to the senate. Landgraf said he employed the executive order because of delays on the part of the UC Office of the President.

If the health and wellness referendum is deemed constitutional, as it currently stands, the measure will finance the construction of the Wellness Center as well as a new Memorial Stadium Fitness Center. It would also eliminate the RecSports membership fee of $10 per semester.

A new fee would begin in fall 2013 at an initial level of $40 per semester and would increase at regular intervals over the next 10 years.

Curan Mehra is the executive news editor. Contact him at cmehra@dailycal.org.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this story indicated that the Judicial Council will consider the constitutionality of the Health and Wellness referendum. In fact, the Judicial Council will consider the constitutionality of the executive order that placed the measure on the ballot.

The post Injunction against Health and Wellness referendum lifted appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Because he tardily submitted bills to the ASUC Senate to put two referendums before student voters, the senate could not consider the measures until after its constitutional deadline to finalize the election ballot. Accordingly, Landgraf issued executive orders over spring break to ensure that students can vote on the Class Pass Referendum, which will extend the student bus pass, and the Fitness and Wellness Referendum, which would levy a fee to provide for the construction of a new “wellness center,” among other things.

Landgraf should have known better. The Class Pass would certainly be on the ballot no matter what because the pass expires this year, so students need to decide whether they will keep it. However, the fitness referendum’s pertinence to this election is a little less clear. Had Landgraf provided the senate with more time to debate the merits of voting on the fee, it may not have made it to the ballot at all. Landgraf should have known roughly when the filing deadline would be and planned accordingly.

ASUC officials should also question whether Landgraf’s orders are legitimate. According to the ASUC Constitution, executive orders can only be issued for actions that are “urgent and necessary to maintain the functioning of the ASUC until the Senate can again meet.”

The Class Pass arguably meets these standards. One could easily construe the language to make the case that the pass’s expiration — set to occur this fall — renders it “urgent and necessary” to keep the ASUC functioning in a certain sense, and the senate technically couldn’t meet to reconsider its ballot placement until next year. But the justification for the fitness fee is not nearly as sound. Landgraf’s missed deadline is unfortunate, but why couldn’t the fee wait until next year? The fitness fee appears to be an inappropriate use of the executive order.

In his order for the fitness fee, Landgraf seems to derive urgency from claims that current campus fitness and wellness facilities are “significantly overcrowded and do not have enough capacity for students.” He also cites student requests for more facilities. Yet these are hardly needed to keep the ASUC functioning, as the constitution requires for executive orders.

Furthermore, raising concerns over Landgraf’s orders inevitably harkens back to similar questions the Judicial Council considered last year, when it overturned then-ASUC president Vishalli Loomba’s executive order invalidating the V.O.I.C.E. initiative — through which students pay $2 per semester to support The Daily Californian. The “functioning of the ASUC” requirement can be interpreted broadly and is somewhat ambiguous, the council wrote, but that “does not serve as a blank cheque for executive authority and jurisdiction.”

Beyond their merits, these orders open the door for even more objectionable actions in the future. An ASUC president should not have unrestricted authority to put any referendum on the ballot. And the Judicial Council should have the opportunity to review Landgraf’s actions and give further clarity to the process of issuing executive orders.

The post Landgraf’s overreach appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The decision comes after the referendums were submitted too late for the ASUC Senate to vote to place them on the ballot by the filing deadline last Tuesday.

“After much thought and deliberation over the last few days, and several very sleepless nights, I’ve decided the best course of action is for me to issue these executive orders to place both referenda on the Spring 2013 ASUC Ballot,” Landgraf said in an email to the ASUC Senate.

Pursuant to the ASUC Constitution, executive orders are intended to direct the “taking of actions which are urgent and necessary to maintain the functioning of the ASUC until the Senate can again meet.”

The Class Pass Referendum would extend the campus’s contract with AC Transit for the next seven years. Students stand to lose unlimited access to AC Transit campus shuttles, including the night safety shuttle, if the measure is not approved.

If passed, the Health and Wellness Referendum would impose a $40 fee on students to finance a Wellness Center as well as the construction of a Memorial Stadium Fitness Center.

Read the full text of the executive orders below.

//

ExecutiveOrder1 (PDF)

ExecutiveOrder1 (Text)

//

ExecutiveOrder2 (PDF)

ExecutiveOrder2 (Text)

Curan Mehra is the executive news editor. Contact him at cmehra@dailycal.org.

Clarification(s):
A previous version of this article may have implied that it was the ASUC Senate’s fault that the Class Pass and the Health and Wellness referendums were not voted in time for the filing deadline. In fact, the referendums were submitted too late for the senate to meet the filing deadline.

The post ASUC President Connor Landgraf issues executive order to place referendums on ballot appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Jeff Capps is the Lead ASUC producer.

The post Video: ASUC Senate vote on President Loomba’s Executive Order on V.O.I.C.E appeared first on The Daily Californian.