reclaimucsd

Posts Tagged ‘ASUCSD’

Disorientation Day 2012

In Disorientation 2012 on October 1, 2012 at 4:35 pm

At long last, the event you’ve been waiting for all summer is here!

If you are a student organization and would like to send this image out to your organization’s email list-servs, please feel free! It’s also not too late to table. If you are interested, send an email to Disorientation2012@gmail.com ASAP.

We’ll be keeping the Facebook event (located here: https://www.facebook.com/events/179110952225539/) up-to-date with all workshop times, so click attending and invite your friends!

Hope to see you there! And stay tuned with this blog, as we’ll be using it to send out Disorientation Communiqué’s throughout the quarter.

CLICS Poll

In Reclaim CLICS on March 6, 2012 at 6:30 am

In the spring of 2011, the closure of four libraries was announced, despite mandatory fees having increased 32% the previous year. Additionally, plans to renovate CLICS have been made by an advisory committee with members of ASUCSD as student representatives. As part of the goal of promoting transparency, shared-governance and democratization please respond to the following poll questions:

[The first question was first heavily edited by AS, then mistakenly left off the special elections ballot.]

SJP at UCSD Denounces ASUCSD

In Uncategorized on March 5, 2012 at 9:00 am

SJP at UCSD Denounces ASUCSD Failure to Uphold Principles of Community and Corporate Responsibility for Palestinian Human Rights

9:05pm 2 March 2012
Students for Justice in Palestine, UC San Diego

Associated Students at UCSD failed the “Resolution in Support of UC San Diego Corporate Accountability through Divestment from Corporations Profiting from Violent Conflict” in a 13-20-0. The decision came after over seven hours of public input and deliberation.

The SJP community and its allies were repeatedly demonized by members of the public as well as university staff and faculty. UCSD students were publicly singled out, followed, and harassed outside the AS chambers. In addition, senators who were seen as sympathetic to SJP’s dedication to corporate responsibility and human rights were sent threats and verbally harassed throughout the night. SJP questions the dedication of administration to Principles of Community as no authority present made moves to protect the student body from such intimidation.

Such open hostility is not new for those who advocate for human rights and corporate responsibility on campus. Earlier this quarter, SJP members were harassed at their event by university staff, fliers for the organization have continually been defaced, and students are continually harassed during Muslim Student Association’s Justice in Palestine week. Despite this, students have still presented issues such as divestment, and will continue to do so.

Furthermore, It has come to the attention of SJP at UCSD that the office of the president at AS sent emails advocating for the rejection of the divestment bill. President Alyssa Wing also attempted to contact outside organizations and individuals to submit open letters aimed to frame divestment as divisive. SJP at UCSD condemns her abuse of executive power as a violation of the Principles of Community. Additionally, the rhetoric she employed in accusing students of playing a “game” is deeply offensive. SJP questions whether advocating for the corporate responsibility and the humanity of Palestinians are what the office of the president believes to be a “game.”

SJP at UCSD encourages students to contact AS president Alyssa Wing at aspresident@ucsd.edu or 858.534.4452 to express distaste with the tactics of her office and the decision reached by Associated Students at UC San Diego regarding divestment.

Students for Justice in Palestine is a diverse group of students, faculty, staff, and community members centered at the University of California, San Diego and organized in accordance with democratic principles to promote justice, human rights, and the right of self-determination for the Palestinian people.

Election Grievance: Details of Alleged Violation

In D1 Referendum 2012 on March 3, 2012 at 3:08 pm

Former AS president, UCSD alumnus Utsav Gupta sent out an email to many students containing demonstrably false and misleading information, urging students to vote yes on the DI referendum.

In the email he claims that those on financial aid will not be harmed by this referendum because of its 29% allocation to increase aid funds. This is misleading, since some financial aid comes in the form of loans which must be repaid, and in that case will hurt those on financial aid. He claims that our US News ranking will be improved by a DI program. This is false, since US News does not consider sports in its ranking, and only through increased alumni support (not sports) would our ranking improve. He claims that UCSD is the only DII UC. This is misleading since it implies that all other UCs are DI, when in fact UCSC is DIII and UC Merced is not currently in an NCAA division. He claims that this referendum is a step towards a football team. This is misleading because he does not note the fact that the Feasibility study concluded football was not feasible at UCSD and would entail an additional $33 million to support.

Given 1) the immense influence that this act could have on the election, 2) its egregious impropriety considering its inaccuracy and possibly improper access to a UCSD-wide listserv, 3) previous allegations of serious conspiracy and foul play, given 4) that AS has no authority over Mr. Gupta since he is neither part of an official campaign nor a student, 5) that Mr. Gupta is an employee of UCSD as an Alumni Outreach Officer and that other UCSD employee’s have had their personal opinions on private networks censored in an effort to maintain neutrality, and 6) that requesting an apology or fine will not undo the impact this misinformation may have on the election results:

I ask the AS Elections Committee, Advocate General, and/or Judicial Board to recognize these as exceptional and extenuating circumstances regarding the two-day deadline for considering this grievance.

If these entities are unable to establish exceptional and extenuating circumstances, and are thereby unable to consider this grievance, I ask that these entities, and AS Council to do the following immediately: 1) publicly denounce this email as an egregiously improper effort by a UCSD employee to influence a student election, 2) publicly endorse, promote, and provide access to at polling stations the letter writing campaign I have initiated concerning this email 3) seriously consider the potential for this email to undermine the possibility of this election remaining neutral, fair, and valid.

[This grievance was covered by the UCSD Guardian on March 5th, 2012. Between February 27 and March 9 UCSD undergraduates will vote on a referendum that will raise the Athletics student fee 134%, to a total of $854 per year, in order to fund a move to D1 in the event that UCSD receives a bid from a D1 conference.]

Don’t forget to vote!

Letter writing campaign: Thank Former AS President for Trying to Influence Our Election

In D1 Referendum 2012 on February 29, 2012 at 11:06 pm

Former AS President and UCSD alumnus Utsav Gupta has sent out a mass email to a UCSD-wide listserv from his personal email address[1]. While the illegitimacy of this act is unclear, it is offensively unscrupulous for anyone to use such a strong tool to try to influence a vote on undergraduate student-fees after graduating.

Gupta would really appreciate it if you checked your ucsd.edu email and responded to him with something like the following courteous message:

Dear Utsav Gupta,

Thank you for trying to influence my vote for a referendum whose outcome poses no risk to you, but will cost students an additional $495 a year. It is heartening to know that alumni support a sports team in thought. I would prefer it if they supported sports financially, rather than making struggling undergraduates pay for alumni’s sense of legacy, but I understand how times are hard.

Thanks again.

Signed,

[your name]

PS: Why don’t you do your job by sending a mass email to the 150 alumni the UC pays you to ask for money, and ask them to support DI instead? [2]

He deserves the flood of community support.

Between February 27 and March 9 UCSD undergraduates will vote on a referendum that will raise the Athletics student fee 134%, to a total of $854 per year, in order to fund a move to D1 in the event that UCSD receives a bid from a D1 conference.

Don’t forget to vote!

____________________________________________

[1] http://reclaimucsd.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/guptas-letter.png

Screen cap for the wary:

[2] http://www.linkedin.com/in/utsavgupta

Open Letter to AVP Athletic Relations

In D1 Referendum 2012 on February 28, 2012 at 5:47 pm

[This letter was sent to Aurora Lopez, AVP Athletic Relations, on February 26th. It is intended to address the entire athletic community.]

Dear Aurora,

I am personally writing to you about March 1st because I have been quite vocal against the DI referendum, and because I am sure that the athletics community feels that March 1st is not for them. I entreat you to support March 1st by encouraging athletes to attend, by forwarding this email to your athletics contacts, and by attending yourself.

I want to emphasize to you, and to the athletic community in general, that March 1st is a day for education first and foremost, and that there are problems with our public education system which directly affect athletes. The loss of state funding has seriously harmed athletics programs at UCSB, UCI, UCR and UCD to name just a few. Increased system-wide mandatory fees harm athletes just as they harm other students, if not more because athletes already have such full schedules.

Unfortunately, for many students the fight is against any increase in fees for which they perceive no benefit. Many of the organizers for March 1st fall within that group, and so the issues of state-wide fees (which affect us all) and campus fees (like DI) have been run together. The reaction against the DI referendum is a product of the current atmosphere of fee escalation. If the regents and UCOP were not facing the possibility of raising fees by 16% annually, the D1 referendum would be far less contentious than it has proven to be.

I believe our athletes deserve to advance to DI. We are the largest school in DII and we already have three sports in DI. That being said, all students have been made to suffer through cut backs, and fee increases, not just athletes. We all deserve a better, more affordable education, and while we will have different priorities I believe we can all agree there are problems within our system which are unacceptable to everyone.

Athletics are an important part of a college experience, and neither I, nor anyone I have spoken to, is against DI in and of itself. It is part of the tragedy of our system that many students feel they cannot support program improvements they would otherwise love to have.

Please show your solidarity.

Sincerely,

Kevin Quirolo

Statement at ASUCSD Public Input Session 2/22/12

In Privatization on February 22, 2012 at 11:26 pm

I come tonight to express my deep disappointment with ASUCSD.

On Wednesday, February 8th, a Resolution to support March 1st and the Call to Action from the Public Education Coalition was passed by this governing body.

The language in this resolution is quite explicit in its declaration for AS to fully and actively support this call to action.

There have been lots of discussions lately about why AS as a body needs to maintain its neutrality on the position of Division 1 Athletics, while still encouraging students to vote; however, individual members are well within their rights to express personal opinions and stances on this issue.

The way I see it, this resolution supporting March 1st binds AS as a body to actively support and educate the student body and the University Administration about March 1st and help garner support for it.

When I went to UC Riverside for the Regents meeting on January 19th, ASUCR was out there in the streets with us the whole time. They were passing out buttons and shirts that said “AS – Taking A Stand 2012.” They led chants and they were there when the cops showed up. They were exhibiting true leadership throughout the day.

Then I came back to UCSD, and what did I see? I saw student government bringing an election to students that will potentially have them raising fees on themselves in one vote; and including a survey question that hides proposed budget numbers from the greater student population and, in my opinion, delegitimizes students’ efforts to reclaim our university from the poisonous effects of fee hikes and privatization.

That’s not what I want to see from my student government. I want to see students dedicated to the issues that are hitting them the hardest. I want to see this body dedicated to issues that are greater than profit margins and resumé padding. Read the rest of this entry »

D-1 Pro Statement (Annotated)

In D1 Referendum 2012 on February 15, 2012 at 9:39 pm

[The official publication of this statement is available here]

The Division I and Student Scholarships Referendum does more than just move our athletic community and our student life to the next level. The Division I and Student Scholarships Referendum will raise nearly $8,000,000 per year in scholarships, $3,000,000 of which will go to student grants and aid, not just to athletes.

[If AS wanted to increase scholarships they would not have tagged $14 million dollars of D-I to it. The goodness of D-I is ambiguous and complicated so pairing it with something ‘inherently good,’ like scholarships, improves its chances of passing. While financial aid will be adjusted for the fee increase, much of financial aid is loans which must be paid back. Debt on graduation has increased 20% since 2000, this will not help. [1]]

This Referendum WILL:
+ Increase UCSD’s exposure and visibility.

  • We will play against, and have rivalries with, schools that are more familiar and similar to us Instead of playing against “The Academy of Art,” we’ll be playing against schools like UC Irvine, UC Santa Barbara, UC Riverside, and UC Davis.

[Since the 2008 financial and economic crises UC Irvine has cut five sports entirely, UC Davis has cut four sports entirely, UC Riverside has cut athletic spending by 8.4%, and UC Santa Barbara has cut its sports as well.[2]

Athletics at other schools have not been spared from the general cut in support that has resulted from poor state governance, and system-wide mismanagement. Why would we more than double our support for sports when all divisions and departments of our school have had to cut back?] Read the rest of this entry »

AS Resolution Endorsing March 1st

In Privatization on February 15, 2012 at 11:40 am

[This resolution was passed by AS on Wednesday February 8th]

Resolution to Endorse the March 1, 2012 Day of Action

WHEREAS, The California Master Plan for Higher Education called for a
tuition free University [1]; and

WHEREAS, Tuition has been consistently increased since the creation of
the California Master Plan, with a 68% jump between 2007 and 2011
alone [2]; and

WHEREAS, students now contribute more into the UC than does the state
of California [3]; and

WHEREAS, the University of California, San Diego, has been greatly
impacted by tuition hikes; and

WHEREAS, CLICS Library, the IRPS Library, and the Medical Center
Library in Hillcrest, have all been shut down due to budget cuts; and

WHEREAS, since 2009, UCSD has reduced its workforce by over 5.5% [4]; and

WHEREAS, current workers have had pay and benefits significantly
reduced [5]; and

Read the rest of this entry »

CLICS Clarifications to Guardian

In Privatization, Reclaim CLICS on February 15, 2012 at 1:01 am

[This letter was published by the UCSD Guardian available here: http://www.ucsdguardian.org/opinion/item/25318-editorials-should-support-student-orgs]

Dear Editors,

Our primary goal is to defend public education by engaging and empowering students. We are not the out-of-touch idealists featured in your article and editorial on January 26th.

The renovation of CLICS was not announced in response to the reclamation last quarter. It was announced in an A.S. Council press release on September 30th, 2011. Last year A.S. killed an $8 student fee to save CLICS, but now it wants to pass a $165 fee for D-1 sports.

Although students have taken responsibility for running CLICS, we have not set its hours, we did not know or plan for it to be open, and University Centers closes the building every night. The administration did not “invite student input” about re-opening CLICS. They re-opened CLICS without communication or negotiation, and only afterwards did they email students.

For a student-run news paper, your editorial board is surprisingly cynical about student-run organizations. The $370,000 you said it would take to run old CLICS is irrelevant to whether students can run a 100 seat study space in the new ‘Galbraith Hall’ (named for Chancellor John S. Galbraith and his lifelong commitment to libraries which have lost 16% of their budget at UCSD).  Running CLICS costs $450,000 annually, but renovation will cost $6,700,000, enough to run CLICS almost fifteen years. Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 197 other followers