Two weeks ago, my fellow Undergraduate Students Association
Council members and I, along with our advisers, entered closed
session for the first time this year.
Two Daily Bruin reporters and all other guests present were
asked to leave, and minutes for the meeting ceased to be taken.
The reasons presented for holding the closed session included
“pending litigation” and “personal
matters.” However, these justifications proved to be far too
broad in nature, and it is debatable whether discussing them openly
would have adversely affected their outcome.
The USAC bylaws allow for very broadly defined issues to merit a
closed session, such as “personal, litigation and investment
matters” and even leaves open the door for “other
matters as deemed appropriate by a majority of those voting in the
affirmative or negative.”
In other words, with a simple majority nearly anything can be
taken behind closed doors and beyond the eyes and ears of the
public and press. It is important to note that the council approved
the closed session by consent and followed all necessary
requirements. What is suspect is the ease with which that process
is executed.
The council often refers to marquee legislation such as the
Brown Act or the Bagley-Keene Act in its proceedings. These acts
hold nearly every government body in the state accountable to the
public and are designed to provide constant transparency and
openness.
Unfortunately, within the University of California, only the UC
Board of Regents is technically bound to these documents. All
bodies under them, including USAC, are exempt. But escaping on a
technicality does not bode well for keeping government discourse
open to the public. Our own bylaws must be amended to address this
concern.
I certainly do not believe any councilmembers acted with the
goal of disenfranchising the public. Environments such as closed
sessions are always enticing in their convenience and the strategic
secrecy that they can provide.
But such restricted access is only acceptable when discussing a
matter in public would adversely change the ability for the council
to produce a positive outcome.
I, along with the rest of the council, must constantly remain
aware of our first and foremost duty ““ to serve all students
in the public eye.
When less than a quarter of students vote in USAC elections,
further limiting access is the last thing the council can afford to
do.
Further, I do not disagree with supporting UCLA’s
membership in the United States Student Association, the issue that
brought about the closed session. It is vital for USAC to remain
invested in this national lobbying organization.
Yet before we can wholeheartedly challenge our state and federal
government for further accountability, we must provide the same
level of accountability ourselves in Kerckhoff Hall.
It seems clear that reform must take place in USAC’s
guiding documents. The restrictions on closed sessions in our own
bylaws are far too weak and allow for nearly any matter to justify
removal of the public and press.
There are several ways in which such a reform could be
accomplished. USAC could place more detailed and stringent
requirements for closed sessions in the bylaws through an
amendment. Alternatively, the council could simply choose to
voluntarily adopt either the Brown Act or the Bagley-Keene Act,
which would bring USAC in line with most other government bodies in
the state, such as city colleges and California State
Universities.
Because our student government makes decisions that will affect
the way students’ money is spent, we should hold ourselves to
as high a level of transparency as any other government body in the
state.
Making such a change is vital to maintaining the trust of our
student body and remaining responsible government
representatives.
This is just one of many changes that need to be made in respect
to USAC’s guiding documents. Both the constitution and the
bylaws contain numerous inconsistencies, misinterpretations and
outdated components, and this incident is just one example.
The council should consider a detailed evaluation of all
problems with these documents and not hesitate to amend them in a
fashion that will allow for a more accountable, fully
representative government.
Gruenberg is the USAC Financial Supports
commissioner.