So no microphone for tonight’s council. I don’t know how much of a difference this will make but why not mention it?

First item on the agenda was Public Input. Alumni discussed the importance of the Che Cafe as a student space and its historical significance. They also urged Council to think about the long- term implications of the getting rid of the Che Cafe and how they [council] don’t want to be known as the Council that got rid of the Che Cafe. Alumnus Monty Kroopkin talked about how the Che facility is exempt from the sprinkler requirement according to the UC safety code that discusses fire hazards.

Another alumnus discussed how in the ‘80s, when LGBT rights were not mainstream, the Che Cafe was the only space members of the LGBT community were welcomed to socialize. She also mentioned how the sustainability movement at UCSD, which was also not mainstream, began at the Che Cafe.

A core member of the Che Cafe discussed how the Master Space Agreement requires the University to pay for repairs to the roof. He was followed by Jacqueline Lee, a cross-enrolled student who attended UCSD in 2011, who said the Che teaches students to learn about politics in different ways and has helped students recover from drug and alcohol addictions.

Next, there was a special presentation by Dr. Linda Hill about ending distracted driving. She talked about how using the phone in any way while you’re driving is just bad. At any given time, 660,000 people are using an electronic device while driving. Also, hands-free and handheld talking are equally likely to cause a crash. Hill also talked about different, practical ways to discourage distracted driving and what work is being to done to put effective legislation on the ballot. A.S. Council supporting this type of legislation would carry weight by demonstrating public support. The number of crashes hasn’t decreased significantly even though laws against driving and using handheld devices have been passed.

Following the special presentation were reports from individual council members. VP External Affairs Osorio mentioned that the next UC Students Association Board Meeting will be held at UCLA on Feb. 7 and that divestment will be discussed there. The External Office is unable to give information on tuition because right now it’s just something that Janet and Jerry are figuring out. However, lobbying efforts to stop the hike are continuing.

A.S. Council tabled talks about the changes on who can sit on Council indefinitely. A.S. President Boparai said a compromise was being worked out and that he likes compromises.

Reports from Legislative Committee included amendments to the A.S. Constitution regarding the upcoming elections. After much debate about why these changes are necessary or unnecessary, two potty/cool down breaks, inflating and deflating tensions, candidate filing will begin on Monday of Week 8 and end Thursday of Week 9. Next, there was debate on whether to amend the Constitution to require 150 signatures for ASUCSD candidates and 50 for candidates running to be Campuswide and Academic Senators. The argument was that signatures are a bureaucratic barrier; the counter was that signatures were a good way to validate and legitimize a candidate. This part of the amendment also passed.

There was a motion to move to Unfinished Business and temporarily table the Student Transportation Advisory Committee Charter so community members who only came to speak on behalf of the Che Cafe could speak. The motion failed.

STAC was tabled, after about five minutes, for two weeks to Legislative Committee by a roll call vote of 24–0–1.

Now onto Unfinished Business, the Che Cafe Resolution. AVP Environmental Justice Affairs Sierra Donaldson moved to table the motion for next week so a joint, A.S./GSA committee could be formed. AVP Student Services Mehyar and AVP College Affairs Miller talked about how the motion has been delayed several times already and there were opportunities to work with the GSA in the past. Donaldson reiterated that the A.S. Ad Hoc Committee is moving forward and that the progress shouldn’t be stopped. Mehyar responded by saying that the joint committee would come to the same conclusion as the A.S. Ad Hoc Committee.

Boparai stated that the Che was evicted because it was in violation of the MSA and the University is not renegotiating the lease because of the safety concerns. He doesn’t believe the university should spend the 3.5 million dollars required to repair the Che Cafe because the Che isn’t an issue currently of concern to undergraduates. According to Boparai, it’s time to move forward with the recommendation.

Osorio pointed out that this Council and some of the previous councils don’t identify with this space but that doesn’t make it good or bad. Just because members don’t identify with the Che and just because some members act like it’s a drag (not my words) is not a reason to make a quick decision about this issue. It doesn’t mean that this facility doesn’t mean something to community members, alumni, and will not mean something future to undergraduates. She mentioned that this type of conversation might very well concern other issues that the current Council cares about but future councils may not care about.

UCAB Chair Clair Maniti recommended tabling and composing a joint document because doing so would give weight to the document.

Basically, there was debate on whether or not to table the motion, to join or not join forces with the GSA, whether or not delaying a vote would be productive or counterproductive. The motion was tabled to legislative committee for one week by a roll call vote of 12–11–2.

AVP Travis Miller informed us that he is fostering a well-trained, black lab pup and is looking for a permanent home for him. If anyone reading this column knows of a good home, hit Miller up. I wish I could take him.

There was a moderated caucus where council members asked questions and gave suggestions to Boparai regarding his proposed changes surrounding the transition time of newly elected council members.
After the open forum, meeting adjourned at 11:39 p.m.