St. ASUC-Where
While I was out of town for the last two days at the First Annual SQUELCH! Leadership Training Institute, the ASUC Soap Opera has continued.
The Daily Cal has an article on the appeal hearing (sans mentions of necrophilia) that is fairly accurate, although Beetle has some interesting commentary on the piece.
While the Daily Cal did not write an op-ed on the situation this week (the July 3 column was fairly indicative of their opinion), Chris Page of Cal Patriot Blog fame had a Letter to the Editor published. It does a fairly accurate job of providing a timeline of events and also throws a couple of jabs around:
The disqualified Student Action executive candidates have been acting as if they are already in office. In most cases they have been unwilling to work with the non disqualified candidates for their offices. Student Action claims to put “every student” first. Right now they are putting the ambition of four students above all of us.
A decision on the appeal should be published and on CalStuff within the next 5-7 days. The appeal hearing is the last of the remaining administrative remedies for the Student Action Executive Slate, meaning that if the Judicial Council upholds its previous decision, Gabriel v. ASUC et al will probably be re-filed and accepted. If SAES wins its appeal (first pro-SA decision in two months), it certainly appears that this situation may be resolved, as I personally don’t plan on suing the ASUC. I’d like to think that I have more respect for the institution than that.
will this decision on the appeal finally tell us who is actually in office? i’m not asking for you guys not to present your opinions, but i am confused as to what is actually going on in this case amidst all of the opinionated blogging. what with the multiple appeals, E.O’s, and going to superior court, I’m lost…
Comment by confused — July 18, 2006 @ 3:10 pm
I’m still trying to decipher the joke in the title.
Comment by Beetle — July 18, 2006 @ 3:18 pm
Beetle:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/S/htmlS/stelsewhere/stelsewhere.htm
Comment by Ben N. — July 18, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
If SAES wins its appeal (first pro-SA decision in two months), it certainly appears that this situation may be resolved, as I personally don’t plan on suing the ASUC. I’d like to think that I have more respect for the institution than that.
Ben Narodick? NOT sue the ASUC? I’ve been waiting for this day for quite some time. Ben, feel free to get off your high horse at your convenience. Further, I am involved in NO way shape or form in this debaucle, but I think there are several people to whom the ‘high horse’ suggestion might apply. Use your imagination.
Comment by Lauren Tracy Hubbert... SA not-so-anonybot — July 19, 2006 @ 10:52 am
Lauren -
What’s up? How’ve you been? Long time no see.
I think I still owe you a drink - let me know when you come back into town. We’ll go to Triple Rock on my horse.
Comment by Ben N. — July 19, 2006 @ 10:58 am
Also, you imply that I have sued the ASUC in county court at some point. I’m pretty sure that’s not true.
I think you’re referring to this idea within Student Action that all I do is sue people in the Judicial Council. Ignoring the fact that I’ve written more bills for student groups than most of the Student Action senators combined, the fact of the matter is I’ve gone to Judicial Council a remarkably few number of times.
In fact, I have never brought anyone up on campaign by-law charges - never. So, I’m not really sure what you’re trying to get at.
Comment by Ben N. — July 19, 2006 @ 11:11 am
what’s your horse’s name?
Comment by hi — July 19, 2006 @ 1:46 pm
I’m glad you and Lauren are both 21, Ben.
Comment by Anonymity — July 19, 2006 @ 1:54 pm
Is the SAES already making plans as if they were in office?
Any SA insiders know?
Comment by Anonymous — July 19, 2006 @ 4:47 pm
yes they are. foolishly
Comment by SA Insider — July 19, 2006 @ 5:05 pm
In all fairness, I’d guess that we’re all making some sort of plans as to what we’ll do with the offices (i.e. goals, office structure, people that we would consider for key staff positions, etc.) if we were to receive them. That’s not necessarily poor form insofar as a certain degree of preparation is preferable so that one can seemlessly create a functioning office. There’s just a line that one can cross where it becomes arrogance.
Comment by Punch My Ballot — July 19, 2006 @ 5:52 pm
And what’s SAO doing in the meantime? Carrying out its business without any cooperation / help from either side?
Comment by Anonymous — July 19, 2006 @ 7:21 pm
As far as I know SAO’s keeping out of the politics of everything, like what’s really supposed to happen. Though I think Garvin did offer to help mediate the dispute, but that was at least a month ago.
Comment by Josh M. — July 19, 2006 @ 7:32 pm
SAO has always pretty much done it’s thing regardless of what’s goin on elsewhere in the ASUC. I doubt things are any different for them now.
Comment by Ed Martinez — July 19, 2006 @ 9:02 pm
How can SAO keep out of the politics of everything? Don’t they have to start making plans with the other execs? Do they start working with Ben / Igor or the SAES?
Comment by Anonymous — July 20, 2006 @ 5:23 pm
What does the SAO need the other executives for?
Comment by Beetle — July 20, 2006 @ 5:36 pm
I’ve known Ben since freshman year. People who think he’s arrogant are just confused by the fact that he’s extremely level-headed and sane and worked in a senate where those qualities were beyond scarce. Consistently standing up for the most reasonable outcome is not the same as thinking you’re better than everyone else.
Comment by Simon — July 20, 2006 @ 6:20 pm
Beetle - Not a clue. However, I would assume that there’s some level of cooperation between ALL of the executive offices in policy matters.
Side Question - J-Council rejects appeal, SA files suit. The school year begins without anyone in office?
Comment by Anonymous — July 20, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
The SAO tends to function pretty autonomously of the other offices, although it does cooperate with others on an ad hoc basis. Right now, they are likely involved in planning projects that have no bearing on the rest of the ASUC, outlining policy initiatives, but mostly busy staying on top of the caseload with a reduced staff (with last year’s seniors having graduated, on top of normal attrition and many of the caseworkers being out of the area, and obviously before the new caseworkers are hired and trained.)
To the extent any of SAO’s projects for next year require cooperation with any other office, my guess is that they are either on hold, or, more likely, that the Student Advocate has spoken with both sides and will be ready to proceed no matter what. SAO’s projects on which cooperation with other offices is involved tend to be so nonpartisan that it really doesn’t matter who is elected elsewhere.
Comment by Old Fogey — July 21, 2006 @ 1:47 pm