Editor’s note: The following two letters from Alex D’Aurora question Rudy Soto’s office remodel reported on by the Vanguard last week [“Rudy Soto’s first move? An $8,000 office remodel,” July 3]. On June 15, Soto requested and received $10,000 in SFC reserve funds for student government: $5,600 for staff salaries and $4,400 to revamp his office. Soto used close to $1,600 for staff salaries and about $8,300 to revamp the ASPSU office. Tonantzin Oceguera, director of Student Activities and Leadership Programs, has told the Vanguard on multiple occasions that she interprets the constitution to say that student groups may use SFC funds for any purpose as long as they are used in line with the “intended purpose of the organization.”
Misuse of SFC funds
You people need to wake up! My boy Jesse brought you the scoop of the year but your editor-in-chief doesn’t get it… check out Tonantzin Oceguera’s statements in the last article. Then go to Article V point 10 of the SFC rules and regulations and 1.1 of the Constitution under the SFC headline. Then get a legal opinion.
I talked to Rudy personally about this and he admitted it was a question of policy vs. practice… meaning “we fucked up.” You people need to go look this up, print my letter from yesterday. This is the story of the decade. This is SALP telling student groups it is OK to break the rules. Rudy’s new office is illegal! So is the massive overspending of the Morse administration. I know I am rude, but I need you people to try to figure out just how big this is and go ask the right questions!
Misuse of funds, part II
While I agree that the ASPSU office needed cleaning, the Student Fee Committee Rules and Guidelines clearly state that all funds are to be used “for the established purpose” in Article V point 10. The funds that Rudy spent on a new office were designated to pay overages from Courtney Morse’s administration. I believe a violation of the Student Fee Commitee rules has occurred. Tonantzin Oceguera should be aware of this. Perhaps she is too busy spending the $14,000 raise she received from last year’s Student Fee Committee, which Rudy Soto voted in favor of. Considering all the problems with last year’s committee, a raise of over $1,000 a month seems excessive. Regardless, important questions have been left unanswered: After the office upgrade, how are the debts of the Morse administration to be paid? Also, have, in fact, rule violations occurred?
Alex D’Aurora
Re: [“Rudy Soto’s first move? An $8,000 office remodel,” July 3]
Are you kidding me? As a former member of ASPSU, I find we are heading down the road as an even bigger joke after spending $8,000 on a “new image.” How about we put that $8,000 towards a desperate re-model of our classrooms and buildings?
Anonymous
$8,000 is a lot of money to improve your image. Image is not everything… we want to see results, especially those that you promised in your platforms!
Anonymous
Re: [“Smoking ban snuffs out choice,” July 3]
I’ve been going to school in Washington for three years, and I felt the same way you do when Washington passed its smoking ban last winter. My feelings haven’t changed… entirely. It is not only infringement on the businesses’ rights to decide what sort of legal activity is allowed in their establishments; it is also a right pain to have to gather up all of one’s belongings and suck down a drink, just to go stand outside (15′ from the door… which puts you in the street or in front of another door) for a smoke.
All that aside, it is nice to not be choking on other people’s smoke while out at the pub. Seems to me that Oregon–which tends to have things down better than Washington–could figure out some sort of compromise that allowed bar owners to exercise their rights to determine what is acceptable on their property.
Anonymous