CAB situation
July 5, 2004
I’d like to begin by clarifying a few things regarding the CAB situation
that I hope will answer some of your questions.
The SA did not reach inside the CAB organization to fix internal issues.
The elected CAB officers filed a complaint to the SA Supreme Court. Once a
complaint is filed, the SA is obligated to respond. The complaint was based
on the following
1. The current CAB administration was spending money from next years budget
without the consent of the officers that were elected to serve next year and
has refused to show the contracts to the new officers until the plans were
finalized.
2. The current CAB administration revamped the CAB constitution to take away
powers from the executives and rerouted these powers to the staff.
3. The current CAB administration appointed all the staff for next years
administration without the consent of the elected CAB officers. Some of the
current officers (including officers that lost the CAB election) appointed
themselves to serve on next years administration without the consent of the
newly elected officers.
In response, Chief Justice Eric Johnson exercised his right to place an
injunction on CAB that would freeze all activity and dissolve any new
constitution until this issue was resolved or until a hearing was possible.
CAB did not comply by the deadline, so I exercised my authority to suspend
CAB for not complying with the injunction.
Further, the role of Rick Clark and several of his staff people is to advise
SA & CAB. It is not their role to made decisions on either organizations
behalf. Rick and members of UP&A, do not have the authority to veto or
“disallow” the decisions of either organization unless there are university
policies being violated. He has clearly overstepped his boundaries and has
created an atmopshere that is hostile and intimating for both the incoming
CAB executives and the SA.
The incoming CAB officers want what any organization on campus is entitled
to:
a) the ability to select its own staff
b) the ability to do thier own programming
c) have access to resources that will allow them to do the work that the
campus has selected them to do.
Overall, Rick Clark, Lesley Clemens, and Mary Tosch have created an
atmosphere that has literally made it impossible to effectively do the job
that the student body has elected them to do. They have
1. enforced policies that do not exist
2. claimed authority that they do not have
3. made decisions for use of student fees without the consent of the new
officers
4. denied them the right to appoint their own staff
5. Refused to include the new officers on pending contracts that would
effect their term.
The SA owes it to the student body to not allow the UP&A office overtake the
CAB or SA. These are student organizations, financed with student fees, and
the officers were elected by the student body. Rick and his department are
here to advise, not dictate student business. We plan to go the distance to
ensure that student organizations are treated fairly without exception.
For the record, the Supreme Courts decision is still in effect.