|
news
Court
rules 'No Beach'
By Kandace Hsu
On-line Forty-Niner
Cal State Long
Beach student Scott Strichart was refunded the money he paid
toward the Beach Pride fund after the Associated Students
Judiciary ruled in his favor.
The total amount Strichart will be paid is $48, said Rosa
Hernandez, Associated Students Incorporated treasurer. The
check was to be cut Monday, but Hernandez had to wait for
A.S.I Executive Director Richard Haller to give her the amount
and final go ahead. Haller is still working on finding Strichart's
whereabouts. Hernandez is not sure if Strichart is still a
student here.
The Beach Pride Referendum was voted on and passed by CSULB
students during the spring 2000 elections to increase student
fees by $21.
Strichart demanded his money be refunded based on the
fact that the A.S.I. did not post its intentions prior to
the senate resolution that determined the referendums that
appeared on the ballot. This violated the posting rules of
California law.
"The Court ruled that the Referendum was the fruit of
a poisonous tree," said Presiding Justice Edward Ober.
"And the Senate was in violation of the posting rules."
The Beach Pride Referendum was created to improve athletic
programs and facilities at CSULB. According to A.S.I. President
Wayne Stickney-Smith, the fund money from Beach Pride goes
toward programs such as student-athlete scholarships, the
NCAA Division I Athletic Team Operation Budget and the Beach
Pride Center located on the first floor of the University
Student Union.
The Athletic Team Operation Budget includes money needed for
things such as athletic team travel expense, uniforms, and
workout equipment. It also provides sufficient funding for
the cheer team, the dance team and the band.
The referendum also doubled the club sports budget from $64,000
to $120,000 and increased the intramural sports budget to
$10,000, Stickney-Smith said.
About $200,000 has gone toward improving athletic facilities
and about $15,000 has gone to student organizations if they
choose to use the athletic facilities for organizational events
such as basketball or flag football games.
According to the Judiciary Decision documents, the Court ruled
in favor of Strichart on the grounds that "the Senate's
actions were questionable 'ram-rod tactics' and a clear violation
of California law."
The initial court ruling in 2000 stated that the Senate was
to reimburse Strichart, but the Senate never paid Strichart.
According to case documents, "the Senate withheld its
compliance with the Court's order and sought a clarification
from the Court that the judgement may be paid from Beach Pride
Referendum funds."
The Senate did not pay Strichart because they were unsure
of whether the money would come out of the Beach Pride fund
or the A.S.I. fund.
Other factors that contributed to the payment being delayed
included questions about whether or not the Senate had control
over Beach Pride Referendum funds and whether the court had
stated a time frame to which Strichart was to be paid.
Former A.S.I. Vice President Sheryl Mauricio claimed that
the court had not given her a time frame to pay Strichart
when, in fact, court documents showed that former Chief Justice
Terrence A. Pickens did send Mauricio a time frame that the
payment was to be made.
The delay of the fund reimbursement led to a declaratory judgment
to clarify the previous case. On April 17, a writ of mandamus,
or final notice, was sent to A.S.I. ordering them to pay Strichart
by May 6.
The writ of mandamus stated that Strichart be paid "$21
for each academic year he attended CSULB after April 2000"
and "interest on those amounts calculated at 10% per
annum compounded monthly up through month when the check is
to be delivered to him, pursuant to California Code of Civil
Procedure §685.010. et seq."
|
|
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Search our site
DEPARTMENT
OF
JOURNALISM
ONLINE 49ER
DEPARTMENTS
ADVERTISING
ADMINISTRATION
DAILY
49ER ALUMNI
SUBSCRIPTION
SERVICE
GIVE
FEEDBACK
|
