This week, on A-S-U-C!!!

The agenda packet is up early this week. BILLS!

A Bill in Opposition to the City of Berkeley Social Host Ordinance: Briefly mentioned here and here. I want to give you what's in the packet, though:

WHEREAS, the ASUC represents the voice of students, and;

WHEREAS, friendly amendments to this bill will forthcoming within the next week, then;

BE IT RESOLVED, that the ASUC oppose the City of Berkeley Social Host Ordinance

You know, not to be nitpicky, but I dunno how well "we'll write the bill later" fits with the philosophy of public notice. It's not like this bill will pass before the City Council meeting anyway.

A Bill In Support of the ASUC Judicial Council: David Wasserman wants to allocate $103.88 for two microphones for the Judicial Council to record hearings. My only concern is whether they would actually effectively record what is said by all parties, but otherwise, I hope this passes. Then we can hear the ridiculous arguments brought by Student Action as many times as we like!

A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SENATE IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES: This bill will add a section to the by-laws on Senate Impeachment Procedures, which currently will only include a requirement for a committee to look at them be formed. Presumably, once they come up with their ideas, they'd fill it in.

A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PROMOTING ONLINE ELECTIONS WHILE REDUCING ELECTION EXPENDITURES: This bill seeks to reduce the number of polling stations, and thus reduce cost. Since we now have online voting, this is definitely a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, the bill as written is unconstitutional, since the Constitution requires certain polling locations, and they aren't included in the bill. In particular, it looks like the residence hall locations are being removed.

A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF PRACTICAL ASUC ELECTION DATES: (Daily Cal story) This bill forces the ASUC to schedule the election (i.e. fix the date) by the 10th week of the Fall Semester, and halts all business if they don't. It requires that this be done with the assistance of the Elections Council Chair, so this will indirectly force the Senate to appoint the Elections Council Chair on time, too. (I hope they don't amend this out, because it's probably even more important)

A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF 2007 ASUC ELECTIONS: This bill seeks to schedule the election for April 11-13. This is Wednesday-Friday.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 2/07/2007 09:35:00 PM #
Comments (5)

. . .

Comments:

I <3 the Bill in Opposition to the City of Berkeley Social Host Ordinance. Everyone should go to Tuesday night's City Council Meeting and show them that we won't be responsible for our underage guests not abiding by this country's drinking laws. And thanks for pointing out the unconstitutionality of my bill (SB53). But you forget, I always get my way...

# posted by  Anonymous : 12:32 AM, February 08, 2007

 

C. The Elections Council, or successor agency, shall provide for the placement and operation of polling places at the dining commons, or no more than fifty feet away from the perimeter if a polling place absolutely cannot be installed, of each of the residence hall units owned or managed by the University, including the International House, and excluding, except as provided in the By-Laws, family apartment complexes. These polling places shall be open at a minimum from ten minutes before the opening of the dinner period for each dining facility through thirty minutes after the end of the serving time for the dinner period. Any student may vote at any one of these polling places.

I assume you're referring to this clause. However, one can remove or add other polling locations as you see fit. Prior to the Spring '05 election, for instance, I worked with the ECC to shift around some of the locations, including Haas and VLSB, as a way of saving money.

# posted by  Unknown : 8:27 AM, February 08, 2007

 

Yeah, that part of the bill I like. In fact, I had thought that the whole reason for online elections was to cut costs.

The bill in question removes all the residence hall dining locations, which is why it's unconstitutional. The other three removals are fine.

# posted by  Beetle Aurora Drake : 8:35 AM, February 08, 2007

 

wow it looks like someone took the suggestion about fixing election dates in advance to heart -- i wonder if they are still going to force tabulation before election suits have been completed.

# posted by  Anonymous : 1:20 PM, February 08, 2007

 

I believe that bill has already passed. It was changed to make it less useful, though, because it won't provoke campaign violation suits anymore, so major parties will continue to have de facto immunity. I mention it here.

What don't you like about the rule?

# posted by  Beetle Aurora Drake : 1:27 PM, February 08, 2007

 

Post a Comment