In 2011, the mean GPA for Haas undergraduates was capped at 3.2 and 3.4 for core classes and electives, respectively, in order to ensure consistent grading across courses. Effective May 3, the caps have been raised to a mean of 3.4 for core classes and 3.6 for electives.

Prior to 2011, professors would often teach the same courses at the same time but have differing grades by section — an example of grading inconsistency the caps aim to resolve, said Haas associate professor Don Moore.

After 2011, many students expressed discontent over the caps, saying they created a more competitive and stressful atmosphere.

“I certainly saw a few of my fellow students suffer along the perception that it was too much work to go from a B to an A,” said Tyler Wishnoff, a Haas senior and Haas Business School Association president.

Strict guidelines led some students to enroll in classes with perceived lenient grading — ones they might not be interested in — with the expectation that they would get better grades, Moore said.

To resolve issues with the 2011 cap levels, faculty looked at historical average grades at Haas and other departments at the university, job prospects for students and grading policies of comparable institutions, Moore said.

“The entire goal was not to adjust average grades but set the average consistent with historical averages,” Moore said.

The amended policy applies to all current undergraduates, including graduating seniors and incoming students, said Richard Kurovsky, executive director of marketing and communications at Haas.

However, some Haas seniors are petitioning for retroactive application of the new grading policy, saying they have been negatively affected by the strict GPA guidelines since 2011. They are asking Haas to either retroactively reweight GPAs, add notations to outline Haas’ grading policies to their transcripts or allow Haas faculty to make exceptions to the cap at their discretion, according to Moore.

Faculty members will discuss retroactive adjustment of grades under some circumstances, but at this time, the schedule for this discussion has not been set, Kurovsky said.

“Retroactive application on all classes sounds great ideally, but pragmatically, this is really hard to implement,” said Shahryar Abbasi, a Haas senior and current ASUC external affairs vice president. “At academic institutions, policies change — it’s not feasible, every time a policy change occurs, to retroactively apply it.”

Contact Christine Tyler at ctyler@dailycal.org.

The post Haas raises undergraduate GPA caps on core, elective classes appeared first on The Daily Californian.

One of the selected plans was submitted by the Berkeley Student District Campaign, a group that aims to give students more representation in city government through the creation of a district with a student supermajority. A student supermajority would increase the likelihood of a UC Berkeley student being elected to Berkeley City Council.

“It’s important to note how historic of a move the council took last night (by) indicating that one of their top proposals is one submitted by students,” said Shahryar Abbasi, ASUC external affairs vice president. “It’s quite a shift in the discourse and the dialogue.”

About 45 UC Berkeley students, including Abbasi, attended the City Council meeting in support of the campaign. While seven different plans were considered at the public hearing Tuesday night, only two did not include a student-majority district.

The only remaining competition to the Berkeley Student District Campaign is the “simplicity” plan, which focuses on straightforward district divisions. The plan’s author, Eric Panzer, openly endorsed the Berkeley Student District Campaign’s plan and said that he hopes his proposal will be considered only as a “worthy alternative.”

The City Council may favor Panzer’s plan due to its clarity, according to ASUC External Affairs Vice President Redistricting Director Noah Efron.

“There are certainly some council members who want clean lines on their map,” Efron said. “The council still has full control.”

Throughout the hearing, multiple City Council members expressed their support for a student-majority district, which has never existed in the city of Berkeley. The only UC Berkeley student to ever hold a seat on the City Council was current State Assemblymember Nancy Skinner, who served from 1984 to 1992.

The plans were made possible by the passage of Measure R last November, which amended the existing city charter to eliminate the 1986 boundary lines and adjusted the district boundaries to reflect the city’s updated population.

According to ASUC External Affairs Vice President-elect Safeena Mecklai, a student district would allow students a say in major city issues like safety, economic development and other issues that impact students and residents equally.
“I think we would benefit from more voices of young people,” said Councilmember Jesse Arreguin last night. “It accomplishes the goal but keeps a lot of major neighborhoods intact.”

The next public hearing, during which the City Council is slated to select a plan, will be on July 2.

Though the meeting will take place during the summer, Mecklai said the campaign plans to build a coalition of students to attend and express their support.

“We certainly took (last night) as a great victory, and it certainly feels more tangible now than it ever has,” Efron said. “(But) until we hear that they have officially adopted it, we won’t be celebrating.”

Contact Claire Chiara at cchiara@dailycal.org.

The post City Council to consider two proposals that include UC Berkeley student district appeared first on The Daily Californian.

At its meeting Tuesday night, City Council voted to extend hours of operation for businesses between Bancroft and Dwight ways to create Berkeley’s first 24-hour commercial zone.

“Students and people — particularly in their 20s or 30s — have schedules that aren’t rigidly 9-to-5, so we thought it’d be something very popular,” said Roland Peterson, executive director of the Telegraph Business Improvement District. “For Telegraph, this makes all the sense in the world.”

Currently, businesses that do not serve alcohol can stay open until midnight Sunday through Thursday and until 2 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays — two hours later than those that do serve alcohol. Businesses that want later hours must apply for an Administrative Use Permit or Use Permit, which is often a lengthy process.

Under the new ordinance, businesses will no longer have to apply for individual permits to extend their closing hours.

Craig Becker, owner of Caffe Mediterraneum, received a permit in June 2011 to stay open for 24 hours. However, since then, the cafe has maintained its regular closing hours at midnight.

“If we had enough traffic, if we were able to build up a nighttime economy, that makes it worthwhile … we might consider extending our hours,” he said. “We hope that in the future, there’ll be more business.”

This idea has long been in the works and has been discussed widely over the last few years. In May 2010, City Council considered extending hours to 3 a.m. until the Telegraph Business Improvement District suggested a “24/7 zone” instead.

“It’ll encourage students to socialize together at different hours of the night and promote safety on Telegraph,” said ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi. “Telegraph needs to be revitalized and provide more options for students.”

However, Berkeley Police Department and the division of code enforcement have expressed concerns that extending hours could lead to “increased negative behavior.”

To address these concerns, the ordinance specifies that businesses that sell alcohol for off-site consumption will have to maintain closing hours at midnight, and many believe the noise level should not be an issue.

“This is new for Berkeley,” said Councilmember Gordon Wozniak. “It’s an experiment.”

Yet the vision for an energetic, late-night environment is just one factor in the city’s efforts to revitalize Telegraph Avenue and boost its economy — one that may take some time to live up to its full potential.

“It may take a few years for it to gain momentum and create a critical mass of businesses that are interested in (staying open 24/7),” said Councilmember Kriss Worthington. “(But) I think it’s worth trying out and seeing if it works.”

Daphne Chen is the lead city government reporter. Contact her at daphnechen@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @dchen_dc.

The post Berkeley city council passes plan allowing Telegraph Avenue to be open 24/7 appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Why would we want such a district to begin with? ASUC Redistricting Director Noah Efron said in an email, “If we have a district whose population is 90 percent student, any council member who has to run in election after election in such a district will be forced to be accountable to student issues.”

At face value, that sounds like something everyone can get on board with. Given the fact that students comprise a large portion of the city’s population, why wouldn’t we want more representation of student issues?

There are some problems to be contended with. Councilmember Laurie Capitelli, who supports the student district, questioned the prominence of student issues. He pointed out to me in an email that, “To some degree (student) issues are not completely known by the Council or the community. There has not been a venue for students to articulate their concerns.”

I don’t want to get into a debate over what is or is not a “student issue” or why the Berkeley community isn’t aware of them. Let’s say we’re able to clearly define them for Capitelli and the council. Even then, would one council member attuned to these issues be enough?

Philippe Marchand, the former assembly affairs vice president of the Graduate Assembly, stated in a comment on a Daily Cal article that “there has been very little discussion on how concentrating students in a single district would affect the overall support for students if none of the other council members have to really care about the student vote.”

There’s a reason that The Three Musketeers are never able to trump The Clique. It’s because there are only three of them. It’s cruel arithmetic at work.

Say an undergrad or grad student runs in the next election cycle and is able to oust Kriss Worthington. Will that solitary figure, working tirelessly to bring student issues to the forefront, be able to enact or solidify change without the support of the others? If he/she’s working alone, that’s a no. Cruel arithmetic.

I asked Efron what he thought about the idea that concentrating the student demographic into a single district could be counterproductive toward the end goal of increasing student representation. Efron said that when the old map was drawn in 1986, students were purposely split up to dilute the student voice. He said, “To suggest that having students in multiple districts means more councilmembers represent them is incorrect … (it) means that it’s not politically important for ANYONE to listen to students.”

Current ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi backs him up, telling me in an email that “having someone on council who walks and talks with students everyday will be far more significant vs. having scattered representation who are not solely focused on our interest.”

Not all students are united on this front. CalSERVE’s EAVP candidate, Spencer Pritchard, said in an email, “Overall … a student district does not tackle the problem of student under-representation in city affairs … The idea of a single student district does not go far enough. We need to be advocating for further representation for all of city government.”

One thing they can agree on is that the council hasn’t done enough for student matters. While all of the council members I interviewed last week expressed their support for students, Efron, Pritchard and Student Action EAVP candidate Safeena Mecklai believe the council hasn’t given student issues their due. “We’ve seen with the current city council that when students are divided, their voices are not heard and councilmembers are not responsive to their needs,” Mecklai said in an email. “One lone councilmember cannot pass something on the council, but it will allow us to raise our voices … That’s a huge step.”

Pause. That was a lot of quotes and perspectives I gave you just now. I’m sure there are many more I’m missing as well. Chew on  ’em, digest ’em and if after all this you’re concerned, show up when the redistricting maps are presented and have your say.

As for my opinion? I think one is a lonely number. I think the math is stacked against us. Then again, I’m not the one who needs to be convinced.

At the end of the day, it comes back to the core nine on the council. Don’t get tired of these rambunctious people — they’ll decide whether we get a student supermajority district or not.

Get loud. ’Cause the ball’s in their court now.

Contact Lynn Yu at lyu@dailycal.org or follow her on Twitter: @lynnqyu.

The post District 7 appeared first on The Daily Californian.

UC Berkeley placed fifth among 100 universities in a worldwide ranking based on reputation. While Berkeley moved down from number four in 2011, it retained its spot among the top five universities that include Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Cambridge and the University of Oxford.

“UC Berkeley has been consistently ranked among the top tier universities nationwide and worldwide and we are proud of that accomplishment,” said campus spokesperson Janet Gilmore in an email. “At a time when funding to public higher education has slipped, it’s an important reminder that the quality of the research conducted here and the education that students gain here remains among the very best in the world.”

According to a Times Higher Education report, the rankings were based on the nominations of around 16,000 peer-reviewed academics around the world who each selected the 15 best institutions in their field of expertise.

UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau said in an analysis of Times Higher Education’s ranking that the campus’s reputation is strengthened by the close relationship between its administration and faculty members.

“There is a strong partnership between the senior administration and the faculty leadership, with outstanding researchers and teachers involving themselves in the governance of the university,” Birgeneau said in an article published along with the rankings. “The academic administrators, from the deans to the provost and chancellor, are all themselves highly accomplished scholars and teachers.”

UC Berkeley also beat Bay Area rival Stanford University, which placed sixth in this year’s rankings.

“We are glad we have had a relationship of friendly competition throughout the years, and I don’t see that changing in the near future,” said Senator Viraj Bindra of the Associated Students of Stanford University.

UC Berkeley has continued to rank high in recent years, consistently maintaining a position in the top five since 2011 despite experiencing state budget cuts and tuition hikes.

“Given what’s happened to tuition and our budget, I think (the ranking) speaks volumes about the leadership (at Berkeley) and how people are able to get through difficult times,” said ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi. “It shows how Berkeley can stay strong.”

Contact Tara Hurley at thurley@dailycal.org.

The post UC Berkeley places fifth in worldwide reputation rankings appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The peak of the event was a noon rally on the steps of the Capitol building in which representatives from the UC, CSU and community college campuses voiced their demands to legislators. Despite the recent passage of Proposition 30, which prevented midyear tuition hikes, speakers voiced concern over long-term tuition increases, decreasing Pell Grants and newly proposed unit caps.

“I’m here today to make sure the state doesn’t decrease funding for public education,” said ASUC Senator and SQUELCH! presidential candidate Jason Bellet.  “Prop. 30 didn’t solve the problem — in many ways, it’s a Band-Aid for a much larger wound.”

Gov. Jerry Brown’s Prop. 30, which passed in November, stopped a $250 million cut to the UC system by imposing taxes on sales and earnings above $250,000. The education funding received from the proposition is set to expire in 2019.

“Even though I’m about to graduate, funding for public education is still going to impact my younger brother and cousin,” said UC Berkeley senior Hannah Benet, a participant in the rally.

An oil-severance tax proposed by state Sen. Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, was hailed by protesters as a possible long-term solution to UC system’s financial woes. The bill, SB 241, would place a 9.9 percent oil-severance tax that would raise nearly $2 billion for public education.

The event drew noticeably fewer participants than it has in previous years. During a similar event last March, thousands of students converged on the state Capitol, and around 100 demonstrators participated in a subsequent occupation of the Capitol building, resulting in 72 arrests.

“Honestly, I thought there were going to be a lot more people,” Benet said. “Most of my friends are very anti-protests — they don’t know much about these issues. The fact of the matter is, there is no other way to do this. You have to participate.”

Benet was one of only a few UC Berkeley students on an ASUC-funded bus taking students from the campus to the Capitol. She cited a lack of outreach and the weakening of student activism on campus as reasons that many students were not as active as she hoped.

“There were less people involved than last year, but more people were engaged with the issues.” said External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi. “Overall, this was a great event. Students were targeting their efforts in constructive conversation with legislators.”

After the rally ended, more than 80 small groups of student leaders met with state legislators in private lobbying sessions. According to Abbasi, delegates from the university were able to speak with legislators including California State Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, who was receptive to Assembly bills increasing Pell Grants as well as establishing more aid for undocumented students.

According to Abbasi and Safeena Mecklai, the ASUC deputy of Vote Coalition, the next step will be to follow up with legislators by rallying students at UC Berkeley to call their representatives.

“It’s unclear how today’s day of action will ultimately impact policy change, but the very fact that they know that we’ll be back on March 4 will keep our legislators accountable to students,” Bellet said.

Shirin Ghaffary is the lead academics and administration reporter. Contact her at sghaffary@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter at @sheesnaps.

The post Student protesters rally for higher education at state Capitol appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Leaders from the University of California Student Association and the UAW Local 2865 — a union representing graduate student instructors — decried plans to raise premiums, claiming such a move could result in lower-quality care for UC students.

Student government presidents from each of the UC campuses are invited to discuss the letter and the future of UC SHIP with Yudof on Monday.

“We wanted to express very, very clearly that raising costs on students is actually not an option,” said ASUC President Connor Landgraf. “We’ll see how it goes.”

Due to financial miscalculations by the accounting firm responsible for setting premiums for the plan, the program has a projected deficit of $57 million, according to a report released by Alliant Insurance Services. To offset this, the UC Office of the President is considering raising student premiums by an average of 25 percent for the 2013-14 plan year, according to Graduate Assembly President Bahar Navab.

“This would be the largest tuition and fee increase at UC of any kind in two years,” wrote UC Student Association President Raquel Morales and UAW 2865 President Erin Conley in their letter to Yudof. “This fee increase would shake our confidence in UC by making us pay even more for executive mismanagement.”

The letter also suggests that raising premiums could lead to a problem of adverse selection.

“When fees are increased, students who are healthy are going to opt out,” said ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi. “When the ones subsidizing the other patients aren’t going to be there anymore, cost will escalate further, and the program will not be able to run itself.”

Signatories of the UAW 2865 petition also called upon UC SHIP to meet all Affordable Care Act standards in 2013, which would remove caps on coverage.

According to the letter, the university should subsidize the costs of outstanding health care cases by dipping into the “$900 million in profits” made by UC medical centers last year.

“Here at UC, we have a large and immensely profitable medical system, but those branches of UC will never be asked to contribute financially to solve this problem,” said Caroline McKusick, head steward of UAW Local 2865.

Contact Virgie Hoban at vhoban@dailycal.org.

The post UC Student Association calls on Yudof to stop UC SHIP premium increases appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Brown’s statements last week that California is finally “in the black” could indicate a change in fiscal health that has eluded the University of California in recent years, but the Legislative Analyst’s Office remains skeptical about Brown’s proposals — among them an expected freeze on tuition hikes and fees for the next four years.

Introduced on Jan. 10, the proposed budget grants both the UC and CSU systems a $125 million funding increase for the 2013-14 year. Both will also receive an additional $125 million from last year’s budget — money they were promised in exchange for not increasing tuition in the 2012-13 academic year. The budget expands funding to California higher education for the first time in recent years.

The office warned against Brown’s plan to maintain tuition hikes and fees at their current rates for the next four years. Maintaining tuition at its current level was a major reason many UC and CSU students advocated for Prop. 30, the November tax initiative that prevented a $250 million midyear budget cut to the UC system. However, a four-year freeze could lead to even steeper increases down the line, according to the report.

“It’s great for students that they are projecting a four-year freeze,” said ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi. “We hope that the revenues for this will materialize, but a two-year freeze is more likely.”

Abbasi said that students and families would be better able to manage tuition increases if they came as minor, planned increases, in comparison to the drastic hikes of recent years.

Within the balanced budget — a feat Brown credits in part to the passage of Prop. 30 — the governor focuses on increasing graduation rates and maintaining the cost of public education. Although in support of Brown’s objectives, the Legislative Analyst’s Office reported concerns that nonspecific allocation of funds could lead to wasted state dollars and unmet goals.

“Though the Governor enumerates several performance expectations for the universities like improving graduation and transfer rates, his plan includes no clear way to hold the segments accountable for meeting these expectations,” the report states.

The report also expressed concern about the budget’s allocation of nearly $200 million in general funds to the community college system.

“Over the past few years, the Legislature has enacted several pieces of legislation specifying a number of priorities it desires to fund once new CCC resources become available,” the report states. “In allowing the CCC system to make its own spending decisions for the proposed base increase, the Legislature would lose assurance that the state’s highest CCC priorities would be addressed.”

Beyond increasing general funding, Brown’s proposed budget calls for various efforts to more efficiently cycle students through the school system and to reduce education costs for both students and the state.

“The goal is to provide our students with a solid and affordable education,” Brown wrote in an address to the California Legislature. “It challenges the leaders of our education system to do better by our students by deploying their teaching resources more effectively.”

These plans include allocating $10 million to the CSU and UC systems, respectively, and $16.9 to community colleges for online education and capping the number of units students can take under state-subsidized tuition — a proposal the report said merits the Legislature’s consideration.

Brown will now have to convince the Legislature that his plans for higher education and the state merit passage. The budget will be finalized in June, and the 2013-14 fiscal year begins July 1.

Contact Libby Rainey at lrainey@dailycal.org.

The post Legislative Analyst’s office skeptical of Brown’s plans for higher education appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The legislation, proposed by Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), would allow local property taxes to pass with a 55 percent voter majority in communities instead of supermajority as currently required.

The proposal comes in the wake of Proposition 30’s passage and newly elected democratic supermajorities in both legislative houses. If approved, the legislation may open the door to even greater changes to Proposition 13 — a landmark piece of legislation that limits property taxes and requires a two-thirds majority to pass local measures in communities and taxes through the legislature.

“I think given the context of everything happening with Prop. 30… changing the way taxes are passed in California through structural changes of Prop 13 is important,” said ASUC External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi.

According to Abbasi, Prop. 13 has been the primary reason for a lack of consistent revenue in the state of California and this has directly affected UC funding.

“Education funding across California has been decimated in recent years, with severe consequences for students and our local schools,” Leno said in a statement. “This change in law would give voters the power to make decisions about public education at the local level.”

Leno’s bill will first be formally discussed in the new year, according to his press secretary Ali Bay.

Implemented in 1978, Prop. 13 has long been a point of contention among Californians for its strict anti-tax constraints. Despite cries for reform, former Berkeley College Republicans President Shawn Lewis said the measure keeps many people in their houses, and most Californians still support the measure.

“Passing Prop. 30 sent a signal that (the legislature) can use students as a bargaining chip,” Lewis said. “That’s kind of what I see happening again.”

As part of their budget campaign, the University of California Student Association took up reforming Prop. 13 due to its effects on public education. But it remains to be seen if Californians are interested in revising the law.

“It feels like we’re not clear right now if the passage of Prop. 30 means that we are in a new era in California in terms of taxes,” said UC Student Regent Jonathan Stein. “Maybe it means that (the state is) open to revising Prop. 13, but maybe it doesn’t.”

Contact Libby Rainey at lrainey@dailycal.org.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that Senator Mark Leno’s proposed legislation would place a proposition on the ballot to amend Proposition 13. In fact, the legislation itself would amend Proposition 13.

The post State senator proposes changes to Proposition 13 appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Overall work of the ASUC Senate: C
This year’s ASUC Senate class has been particularly partisan, much to the detriment of our student body. Senators avidly alienate those with opposing views and demean members of other parties with immature chuckles and unfair labels. Another problem with the senate exists in its lack of critical thinking, as seen in the brevity of meetings and the dearth of constructive dialogue compared to previous senate classes. This year, senate bills are voted on like wildfire, and even though most of the senate’s decisions have been on point, the lack of thoughtful criticism does not do the student body justice. Votes and comments look like attempts at appealing to spectators in the room rather than being geared toward bettering the university. One positive point to note is that the Committee on Constitutional and Procedural Review has actually been the best committee in recent memory under the leadership of Senators Nolan Pack and Jorge Pacheco. Both senators have worked fervently to lead the committee in revamping the bylaws and improving the structure of the ASUC. Overall, the ASUC Senate deserves a not-so-fun C for its work thus far.

Academic Affairs Vice President: A
Academic Affairs Vice President Natalie Gavello has led substantial initiatives that will last beyond her term. The Student Learning Center is now open 24 hours a day, an initiative also worked on by Gavello’s predecessor, Julia Joung. Her office will soon be awarding up to 16 RISE scholarships for students, including those who fall under AB 540 status. Gavello will also be personally leading a DeCal geared at exploring library usage and possible improvements to our facilities. The list goes on and on. Just two years ago, the AAVP office was near obsolete under the helm of Viola Tang, but Gavello has quickly transformed the role into the prominent position it deserves to be. Letter Grade: A.

External Affairs Vice President: B+
As one of the best speakers on campus, External Affairs Vice President Shahryar Abbasi undoubtedly fulfills his role as the external voice of UC Berkeley as aptly as his predecessor, Joey Freeman. With the success of the ASUC Vote Coalition in gathering thousands of voter registration forms and the large support garnered for Proposition 30, Abbasi probably did more for higher education during the current election than all UC Student Association members combined. Education was done right by Abbasi’s work this November, but he does need to pick up the pace post-elections. The presence of his office has waned, and he needs to move beyond post-election euphoria and continue the battle for higher education. Abbasi did neglect significant segments of the campus community when he failed to get input from diverse communities for a contentious UCSA resolution, but it seems that he will act differently in the future. In light of his successes and disappointments, Abbasi deserves a B+.

Executive Vice President: A-
The imminent destruction of Eshleman Hall has plagued Executive Vice President Justin Sayarath with an inhumane workload. “Surge” — the process of moving the ASUC and student groups out of Eshleman and into Hearst Gym — was a logistics nightmare that his predecessor, Chris Alabastro, tranquilized and Sayarath slew. The ASUC Internship program has housed the most interns yet, a feat credited to Sayarath’s office. Sayarath has also been more than fair in leading senate meetings, being blind to party politics as he tries to keep the peace in the hyperpartisan senate chambers. The Senate Leadership Training could have been structured better, but Sayarath has done well in almost every other respect. Sayarath will have to be proud of an A-, a grade still worthy of respect and admiration.

President: A -
Our ASUC president has shown that he possesses exceptional leadership skills, patience during negotiations and skill in his ability to unite students. Landgraf knows when to step up and when to step back, a leadership skill that big personalities like last year’s Vishalli Loomba sometimes forgot. He stepped up during November elections and led the Rock the Vote concert that may have been the best attended showing of student support on our campus this year. Landgraf stepped back by fully supporting the eloquent Abbasi’s participation in the chancellor selection advisory committee, a glamorous task that would usually go to the president. AC Transit has also been visibly influenced by Landgraf’s hand in negotiations, as seen in the survey sent out to students in order to better AC Transit services. His actions should be a bit tougher with administrators, but he will hopefully learn this as his term progresses. No doubt Landgraf deserves a solid A-, and that’s coming from someone who lost to his 80th percentile biceps and charming smile.

Although people may enjoy reading a scathing criticism with F’s handed out like candy, the truth of the matter is that most of this year’s ASUC has exceeded expectations. And, as always, the Student Advocate’s office has been superb under Stacy Suh, so her grade of A+ is a given. At the other end, the senate has a long way to go, but what else do you expect when parties choose to run people who are popular rather than those who are most qualified? Keep on keepin’ on.

Contact Noah Ickowitz at nickowitz@dailycal.org and follow him on Twitter: @noahickowitz.

The post ASUC report card appeared first on The Daily Californian.