Full ASUC Election results 2005-2006 

From election.asuc.org:

Download Tommaso Sciortino's ASUC Tabulation application and the raw voting data here. This is the offiical program that is used by the Elections Council to tabulate results, and was designed by Sciortino for the 2003 election. Instructions on how to use this application will be posted soon, as will a list of special drops in the senate tabulation, so you can host your own accurate election at home!

Senate Composition:
Student Action: 8
Squelch: 1
Independents: 3

Manuel Buenrostro (SA) - 2810
Justine Lazaro (CalSERVE) - 1899
Rebecca C. Brown (Squelch) - 904
Ronald Cruz (DAAP) - 433
Zach Liberman (Independent) - 226
Alfred Twu (Independent) - 154

Executive Vice-President:
Anil Daryani (SA) - 2403
Camille Pannu (CalSERVE) - 2215
Ben Narodick (Squelch) - 785
Billy Wang (Independent) - 753

External Affairs Vice-President:
Sharon Han (SA) - 2615
Linda Salinas (CalSERVE) - 2159
Mark Thomas (Squelch) - 508
Alejandra Cruz (DAAP) - 423
Jordan Mikes (Independent) - 222

Academic Affairs Vice- President:
Jason Dixson (SA) - 2634
Brandon Smith (CalSERVE) - 2088
Andy Ratto (Squelch) - 507
Josie Hyman (DAAP) - 372
Matt Werner (Independent) - 283

Student Advocate:
Vikram Aiyer (Independent) - 1704
Yvette Felarca (DAAP) - 1355
Mitch Rodricks (Squelch) - 781
Nare Avagyan (Independent) - 343
Mahin Ibrahim (Independent) - 204
Kiren Rizvi (Independent) - 141

Oren Gabriel (SA) - 330
Ki-Hong Lee (SA) - 330
Igor Tregub (APPLE-Engineering) - 330
Edward Lam (UNITE-Greek) - 330
Josie Alvarez (CalSERVE) - 330
David Kim (Independent) - 330
Chris Abad (APPLE-Engineering) - 330
Vishal K Gupta (SA) - 311
Yvette Felarca (DAAP) - 311
Ahmad Huzair (CalSERVE) - 301
Ben Narodick (Squelch!) - 294
Ernie Macias (SA) - 287
Anthony Lin (CalSERVE) - 287
Max Besbris (CalSERVE) - 270
Sapna Mehta (CalSERVE) - 269
Ashley Thomas (CalSERVE) - 259
Lisa Putkey (SA) - 246
Billy Wang (Independent) - 233
Rita Encarnacion (CalSERVE) - 230
Jesse Yang (Independent) - 218

Next in line:
Melissa Jones (Berkeley College Republicans)
Matt Jones (APPLE-Engineering)
Jamie Hiraishi (SA)


ASFCME Strike 2005 

Following up our last post, here are some pictures of the strike outside of campus at around 5 PM.

Both Mayor Tom Bates and chancellor Robert Birgeneau, who are both at odds over development and tax issues (see this Calstuff post), showed their support of the union. I managed to get video (MPEG, 1.22 Mbs) of Bates speaking to the protestors.

Bates at the Protest

I also interviewed Kandy Piper, a service worker at Albany Village. Here's her account (WMV, 256kbs) of what happened early today.

Finally, here are more pictures.


Crusade for Equal Rights for Same-Sex Couples is On!
For background of what I'm talking about, see this post, that explains all the details. We've come up with a gameplan of what needs to be accomplished, and Stage 1 involves passing the bill here at Berkeley and building the website. Passing the bill should be easy (here at Berkeley, everyone loves the gay), but building the website is something I could use some help with.

If anyone with any html skills can assist me with this, please let me know (calratto@berkeley.edu). We are planning on having a rather simple website with a left sidebar that lists the various sections (bill text, schools, contact, help FAQ...) and then the main section that would be almost entirely text. Basically, as easy and simple a website as would be possible to explain to people what we are trying to accomplish. Then, as this campaign picked up steam we could work on revising it into something more substantial. Thank you to everyone who has already suggested ways they can help out, I will be contacting you all soon.

ASUC Bill In Support Of Equal Rights for Same-Sex Couples
[If you want to comment on this, please do so at the original post on CalStuff, found here.]

Authored by Andrew David Ratto and David Israel Wasserman
Sponsored by Senator B. Narodick

WHEREAS, Article XI, Section 1 of the ASUC Constitution embodies the Association’s commitment to “equal protection of the laws.” and

WHEREAS, college students have been at the forefront of previous struggles for equality, freedom and social justice, such as the Free Speech Movement, the Civil Rights Movement, and the Anti-Apartheid Movement; and

WHEREAS, there are at least 1,049 federal right granted to those who enter in a government-sanctioned marriage, and countless other rights from states that are denied to couples in same-sex relationships; and

WHEREAS, a California court recently ruled that denying equal marriage rights to same-sex domestic partners is a violation of the equal protection clause of the state Constitution; and

WHEREAS, public opinion is slowly moving toward wider acceptance of equal rights for same sex couples; and

WHEREAS, in an attempt to slow down this social progress, activists opposed to this change are attempting to pass state and federal constitutional amendments banning recognition of same-sex marriage or civil unions; and

WHEREAS, now is a crucial time to act in order to help remedy the social injustice that is plaguing our society; and

WHEREAS, college students have an opportunity to raise their voices and help draw attention to this issue and help create change

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Associated Students of the University of California supports equal rights for same-sex couples; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the ASUC Senate instruct the EAVP’s office to draft a letter voicing the concerns of the ASUC regarding this matter, to be included with this bill, and sent to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, State Senator Don Perata, State Assemblywoman Loni Hancock, U.S. Representative Barbara Lee, U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein and U.S. President George W. Bush; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Office of the President shall draft an op-ed column to be sent to the Daily Californian voicing the concerns of the ASUC about the injustices recognized in this bill and the importance for college students to stand up and attempt to make a difference.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the ASUC shall join with other schools as part of “Colleges Supporting Equal Marriage Rights” (CSEMR) and ask that we be included on the school list at www.csemr.org as a college that supports equal rights for same sex couples


Nathan Royer speaks on the Bears-United Situation 

Attorney General Nathan Royer left a long comment, sharing his letters to both the people affected by the Bears-United Decision and to the ASUC (see this Calstuff post).
To all the people affected by the Bears-United situation,

I just want to take the time to speak from the heart and get some things off my chest...

First of all, I want to say that I offer my sympathies to all the BU candidates who are suffering because of the irresponsibility of a few. I know you have put a lot of time and effort into your campaigns, and I wish things had not turned out this way.

Please understand that neither the elections council nor myself have any agenda against the Bears-United party or any other party. Obviously I have been accused of being partisan because of this situation. If you only knew me, to say that I am beholden to ANYONE'S wishes is completely contrary to the person I am. I take tremendous pride in being able to say that I am not anyone's boy-never have been, never will be. I was overjoyed when the Senate first placed their confidence in my impartiality by appointing me, and since that day, I have done nothing but try to live up to their expectations.

Since this whole thing started, I have been told I am partisan because of things like me having more Student Action Facebook friends than CalSERVE friends. First of all, this is hardly research/evidence befitting Cal students. There are dozens of reasons why I may have more Facebook friends from one party than another. I have Manny Buenrostro, who I have spoken to maybe 4 times, as a Facebook friend, while I don't have listed Brent Kastenbaum, one of the Senators I respect the most. I encourage all of you to use the reasoning capabilities that got you into this school before making or believing claims like this. Secondly, had I been particular to Student Action, I never would have prosecuted Rocky Gade or any of the other things they haven't liked. My apologies for going off on the Facebook example, but it illustrates the way things can become irrational in stressful situations.

I will give you my only (and it should be the only one needed) explanation for my position on this situation, and my position on ASUC matters in general as they relate to me. I am truly sorry if you feel that I am in any way partisan, but please realize that I am a person who lives by principles. In the Constitutional description of the role of Attorney General, it says I am to uphold the Constitution and By-Laws of the ASUC. I have structured my efforts all year around fulfilling that duty to the best of my abilities. Please don't misconstrue this to mean I am a legalistic hardass by any means. I realize that sometimes people deserve forgiveness and an extra chance, but when extra chances have been given, and opportunity has been extended equally to all involved, and yet there is still no compliance, I must do what I feel is right by sticking to the rules and guidelines established by the student body.

All right, so far I have been spilling the softer side of me that is hurt and sympathetic about this situation-now for the other side. Since I do live by principles, I want to make it clear that I will not be intimidated by threats and accusations. You are my friend, my colleague, possibly even my authority, but I am not afraid of you. I will not be intimidated by accusations that I have sex with underage girls. I will not be swayed by threats of press releases to national media. I am not intimidated by threats that my entire past will be exposed on TV. I am not worried about my name being trashed in lecture halls. I do not fear lawyers, congressmen, or your connections.

Finally, the outcome of this situation is really going to be determined by the legislative and executive bodies. And guess what? Because this is not a personal or political vendetta, whatever the outcome, I will be okay with it. I am not going to be angry at BU leaders, I will not ignore them when I see them on campus, and they are welcome at my parties. I realize many are going to take this letter as me being self-righteous and trying to portray myself as better than others, but that is not the case. I just want to say what I feel.

Best regards to all of you,
Nathan Royer

Dear ASUC Officials,

I know you are probably sick of hearing about this, but it is a conviction of mine that grows stronger every day. I want to give some further reasoning as to why the Elections Council took the position it did regarding Bears-United. I am most definitely trying to persuade you that we had NO CHOICE; all I ask is that you give due, careful consideration to what I say.

Think for a moment about the various consequences of what some Senators have said we should have done: allowed a little extra grace and accepted the forms 15 minutes late. The resulting fiasco would have been just as bad as the current situation, and here's why.

The By-Laws set the point of no return so that we can accomplish another By-Law mandated duty: arranging the ballot AT the candidates meeting. It says specifically that the ballot must be arranged at that meeting. Period. We could not have waited another 15 minutes for a form we weren't even sure was coming. We could not have waited until the next day. Don't you understand that? Student Action, can you honestly say you would not have sued us if we had?? I know somebody would have.

We began arranging the ballot at the point of no return, and were well into the process by the time BU returned their forms. What did you want us to do, start over?? Be reasonable. CalSERVE, can you honestly say you would have given up Justine's #1 spot and negated everyone else's fairly obtained positions on the ballot? Can you honestly say you would not have sued if we had started over? I know somebody would have.

The point is: what did you want us to do, break this By-Law or that By-Law, and be subjected to another lawsuit? For all the talk I hear about students rights, I have heard surprisingly little about the rights of the 100+ other candidates in the race. Whether you choose to believe it or not, the fact is SOMEONE ELSE would have suffered if we had done things differently. I hate that any group has to suffer, but if one has to, I think it should be the one who actually did the deed.

Again, please just consider these thoughts. Thanks for reading another long letter...my apologies.

Nathan Royer

2005 ASUC Election Ballot in Full 

Thanks to this post from the Cal Patriot Blog. They also have a copy as a word document.

You'll notice that all the former Bears-United Candidates are now running as independents, as a result of the party not turning in the proper forms early enough (see this Calstuff Post)


20.JUSTINE LAZARO - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
21.Zach "Morris" Liberman - Independent
22.Rebecca "Slander and Libel" Brown - SQUELCH!
24.RONALD CRUZ - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
25.ALFRED TWU - Independent

Executive VP
26.ANIL DARYANI (ASUC Senator) - Student Action/UNITE-Greek/APPLE- Engineering
27.BILLY "TWO-TERM SENATOR" WANG (ASUC Senator) - Independent
28.Ben "4SIGHT NOT 4SKIN" Narodick - SQUELCH!
29.CAMILLE PANNU - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)

External VP
30.LINDA SALINAS - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
31.SHARON HAN - Student Action/UNITE-Greek/APPLE-Engineering
32.Mark "90s TEEN POP IDOL" Thomas - SQUELCH!
33.JORDAN S. MIKES - Independent
34.ALEJANDRA "Ali" CRUZ - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)

Academic Affairs VP
35.BRANDON "B Safe" SMITH - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
36.JOSIE HYMAN - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
39.JASON DIXSON (ASUC Senator) - Student Action/UNITE-Greek/APPLE- Engineering

Student Advocate
40.Mahin Ibrahim
42.YVETTE FELARCA (ASUC Senator) - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
43.Vikrum Aiyer - Independent
45.Nare Avagyan - Independent

51.Drew DeHaven Hall - Independent
52.Aaron "The Shit Shoveler" Diek - Independent
53.Amy Morrison - Independent
54.Ed "Represent Co-Ops" Martinez - Independent
55.Tom Shook - Independent
56.Geoff Danker - Independent
57.Chris "Topher" Warren - Independent
58.Tom Geddes - Independent
59.MIKE XING - Independent
60.Tina Garcia - Independent
61.Amanda Cook - Independent
62.Sara Tarano - Independent
64.Sima Namiri-Kalatari - Independent
65.NARE AVAGYAN - Independent
66.ALFRED TWU - Independent
67.David Kim - Independent
68.BILLY "TWO TERM SENATOR" WANG (Incumbent) - Independent
69.Jennifer "Clean up the Senate" McClean - Independent
70.Tyler Humphrey - Independent
71.JESSE YANG - Independent
72.Richard Noroski - Independent
74.RAMA TAVVA - Independent
75.Michael "Grad Student Issues" Ferguson - Independent
76.Uriridiakoghene "Ulili-UNO" Onovakpuri - Independent

77. suken "VOTE STUDENT ACTION" vakil - Affirmative Action for HOT BABES and GOOD GRADES

78. ARSALAN SALAMAT - Student Action
79. EMILIE "Leads the Way" SALEH - Student Action
80. ERNIE MACIAS - Student Action
81. JAIME HIRAISHI - Student Action
82. JOY "Bring mo’ Joy to Cal" MOH - Student Action
83. KI-HONG "KING KONG" LEE - Student Action
84. LISA PUTKEY - Student Action

85. NEVIN "CAL MAN" TREHAN - Student Action
86. NIMA "NEMO" RAHIMI - Student Action
87. OREN "O.G." GABRIEL - Student Action
88. SEAN PHILIP McBRIDE - Student Action
89. VISHAL K GUPTA - Student Action

90. SAPNA MEHTA - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
91. SANK "Green Party" SRIDARAN - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
92. ALBERTO "BETO" GONZALEZ - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
93. JOSIE ALVAREZ - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
94. Anthony "Transfer/APA" Lin - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
95. VAUGHN VILLAVERDE - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
96. RITA ENCARNACION - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
97. TAYLOR "Women's Party" ALLBRIGHT - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
98. LIZ HALL - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
99. JUSTINE "for President" LAZARO - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
100. CAMILLE PANNU - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
101. BRANDON "Vote for Ashley" SMITH - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
102. LINDA SALINAS - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
103. DENA TAKRURI (Incumbent) - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
104. NATASHA DANDAVATI - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
105. AHMAD HUZAIR - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
106. CHITHALINA "Service Party" KHANCHALERN - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
107. JACKIE "Jo" KELIIAA - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
108. MAX "Labor Party" BESBRIS - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)
109. ASHLEY K. THOMAS - CalSERVE (Cal Students for Equal Rights & a Valid Education)


114. Ben "4SIGHT NOT 4SKIN" Narodick - SQUELCH!
116. Perry "I LOST A BET" Fetterman - SQUELCH!
117. Alisa "TOTAL DOUCHE" West - SQUELCH!
118. Simon "12in JEW NOSE" Ganz - SQUELCH!
119. Morgan "BARELY LEGAL" Wadsworth - SQUELCH!
120. Rebecca "Slander and Libel" Brown - SQUELCH!
121. Mark "90s TEEN POP IDOL" Thomas - SQUELCH!
122. Ethan "FOUR MORE YEARS!" Weiner - SQUELCH!
123. Christine "Vote STUDENT ACTION" Lee - SQUELCH!
124. Colin "I FUCKED YOUR MOM" Elzie - SQUELCH!
127. Tahl "realFREAKYnaughty" Stein - SQUELCH!

130. SHALINI BHASKER - APPLE-Engineering
131. IGOR "Get Jiggy With It" TREGUB - APPLE-Engineering
132. CHRIS ABAD - APPLE-Engineering
133. MATT JONES - APPLE-Engineering

134. Melissa Jones - Berkeley College Republicans

135. YVETTE FELARCA (Incumbent) - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
136. RONALD CRUZ - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
137. ALEJANDRA "Ali" CRUZ - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
138. YVE LARIS COHEN - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
139. KWAME AGYEPONG - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
140. MICHELLE RESTREPO- Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
141. PAOLA NICTE CUBIAS - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
142. YENI GARCIA-AGUILAR - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
143. JOSIE HYMAN - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
144. MARTHA EDITH HERNANDEZ - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
145. VANESSA RANCANO - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
146. NIMISHA D. BHAKTA - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
147. DANIEL PHILIP DWORKIN - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)
148. ALEX BRATKIEVICH - Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP)


Pictures from the CUE Protest 

There was a rally in front of the International House today, at around 12 PM, put on by the Coalition of University Employees (CUE) supporting the clerical staff as they bargained with the administration inside. The main issue was pay raises for the staff who wished to gain 5% wage increases the first year, 7% the next, and 9% the last year. Currently, the University offers no such scale for pay increases. The bargaining began on Wednesday (11/17) and ended tonight at 5 PM. Many of the workers were there rallying, picketing across the street corner of Pidemont and Bancroft (which caused some minor traffic problems), blowing bubbles, and handing out fortune cookies with messages for their cause (mine's said "Your family will expand with new brothers & sisters-when you join the union). Two people were also dressed up in costumes: one a Mr. Peanut, symbolizing what the Unviersity pays it's workers, and another a Greedy Pig.

Cross posted on Calstuff.


Text of E-mail Regarding Class Action Lawsuit Over Student Fees
[Below is the text from the law firm representing the grad students who are currently seeking to hald the fee increase by the University. To return to the post on CalStuff about this lawsuit, click here. To return to the front page of CalStuff, click here.]

Reply-To: Class Action Claims Administrator
Case No. CGC-03-422747
Individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons,




1. Current and former University of California ("UC") students who enrolled in a UC professional degree program prior to December 16, 2002, and whose professional degree fees were raised after that date.

2. Students who attended any UC school on a semester system during the Spring 2003 semester, whose fees for that semester increased after they had already enrolled in classes and received bills for the semester.

3. Students who attended the Summer 2003 session at UC Berkeley or UCLA, whose fees for that summer session increased after they had already enrolled and received bills for the session.

This notice may affect your legal rights.

Please read it carefully.

Students filed this lawsuit against the Regents of the University of California challenging certain tuition increases. The students who filed the lawsuit, and the students whom they seek to represent, are the "plaintiff class" or the "plaintiffs." The purpose of this notice is to advise you that you have been identified as a possible class member and to advise you of the potential effect this case will have on your rights.


The lawsuit challenges three different fee increases: (1) the plaintiffs allege that the University promised all professional school students who first enrolled in their programs prior to December 16, 2002, that it would not increase the amount of the professional degree fee for the entire time of their enrollment, and that UC breached that contract when it increased their professional degree fees in the Spring of 2003 and for the 2003-04 and 2004-05 school years; (2) the plaintiffs allege that UC breached contracts it made about the price required for the Spring 2003 semester when it increased fees after students had already signed up for classes and received a bill for the semester; (3) the plaintiffs allege that UC breached contracts it made about the price required for the Summer 2003 session at UC Berkeley and UCLA when it increased fees after students had already signed up for classes and received a bill for the session.

The University denies that it entered into enforceable contracts with the students not to increase the professional degree fees or fees for the Spring 2003 semester and Summer 2003 session and asserts that all UC students were cautioned that all fees were subject to change without notice.

The Court has not yet determined whether the plaintiffs' or the University's contentions are correct. On October 1, 2004, the Court held a hearing on potentially dispositive motions. If the Court's ruling on those or subsequent motions does not resolve the case, the trial is scheduled to begin on May 2, 2005.


The Court has approved the parties' stipulation that this lawsuit may be maintained not only by the representative plaintiffs, but also on behalf of three subclasses: (1) the Professional Student Subclass consists of all UC students subject to the Fee for Selected Professional School Students who first enrolled in their respective professional degree programs prior to December 16, 2002, and whose Fee for Selected Professional Degree School Students was raised on or after that date; (2) the Spring 2003 Student Subclass consists of any and all students at UC Berkeley (all schools) or any UC school of law or medicine who were billed, assessed, or charged fees for the Spring 2003 semester prior to receiving individualized notice that the Educational and/or Professional Degree Fees would be increased for that semester and whose Educational and/or Professional Degree Fees were increased subsequent to that bill, assessment, or charge; and (3) the Summer 2003 Student Subclass consists of any and all students at UC Berkeley or UCLA who were billed, assessed, or charged fees for the Summer 2003 session prior to receiving individualized notice that the per-unit and/or per-student fees would be increased for that session and whose per-unit and/or per-student fees were increased subsequent to that bill, assessment, or charge.

Counsel for the class are Jonathan Weissglass and Danielle Leonard, Altshuler, Berzon, Nussbaum, Rubin & Demain, 177 Post Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94108 and Andrew D. Freeman and Deborah T. Eisenberg, Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP, 120 E. Baltimore Street, Suite 1700, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, info@browngold.com.


The plaintiffs seek to recover refunds of the fee increases they were required to pay. If the Court rules that the University breached its contracts, the plaintiffs will seek recoveries that will vary depending on each student's status and school. Estimated recoveries include $135 per student for those whose educational fees were increased for Spring semester 2003; $160 per undergraduate and $182 per graduate student at UC Berkeley and $18 per unit at UCLA for those whose fees were increased for Summer 2003 sessions after they had enrolled and were billed or charged; and, for professional degree students, additional amounts ranging from $150 to $400 for Spring 2003 and from $1,125 to $3,473 for 2003-04 and 2004-05. Plaintiffs will also seek interest on these amounts. Any such amounts will be reduced by any offsetting increases in financial aid grants that the students received to cover such fee increases.


If you fall within the definition of any of the above three subclasses, you will automatically become a class member in this lawsuit. If you wish to be a member of the student class in this case, you do not need to do anything further at this time, and you should NOT file an exclusion request. As a class member:

You will be represented by the named class representatives and the attorneys representing the class. You will not be charged for this representation. If the plaintiffs win, plaintiffs' counsel will ask the Court that they be compensated based on a reasonable percentage of the total benefits to the class. However, you may enter an appearance through your own attorney by mailing a Notice of Appearance to the Clerk of the Court, San Francisco Superior Court, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA, 94102. You may also may move the Court for permission to appear as named class co-representative.

You will receive notice of any ruling affecting your membership in the class and notice of any proposed settlement or dismissal of class claims or any judgment rendered.

You will be bound by any judgment or other final disposition of the class lawsuit, whether that disposition is favorable or not.

You will participate, upon meeting any prerequisites set by the Court, in a distribution of any refunds or monetary damages recovered in the litigation.

You should retain all records and documents pertaining to the subject matter of this case, including all billing statements.

You will be deemed, as discussed below, to have consented to the University's disclosing certain personally identifiable information about you from University records to counsel for the class so they may represent you and determine the amount of any refund or monetary recovery to which you may be entitled.


If you want to be excluded from the class, you must send a written notice of your intent to exclude yourself from the class, with the information requested below, by mail postmarked no later than December 15, 2004, to: Class Action Administrator, P.O. Box 1740, Faribault, MN 55021-1740.

Please include your full name, your social security number, your current mailing address, phone number, e-mail address, and a statement that you wish to be excluded from the Kashmiri v. Regents fee lawsuit. The choice to exclude yourself from the class has certain consequences, and you may wish to consult an attorney regarding this choice. If you elect to be excluded: (1) you will not be bound by any judgment in the case and will retain any claims you may have against the Regents, subject to applicable statutes of limitations, and (2) you will not share in any monetary or other recovery that might be paid to students if the class representatives are successful in trial or from any settlement.


Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 ("FERPA") and UC policy, you have the right to maintain the privacy of certain educational records maintained by UC about you, and to prevent disclosure of certain information without your consent. If you remain a class member, you will be consenting to UC's disclosure of information about you to class counsel so they can adequately represent you in this case and determine any monetary recovery to which you may be entitled. Such information may include, for example, the dates on which you enrolled or registered for certain semesters or sessions, the dates on which you were billed, assessed or charged fees for those semesters or sessions, the dates on which you paid certain fees, the amounts of such payments, and the amounts of any grants and other financial aid you received that may have covered the fee increases.

Counsel for the class will use such information solely for purposes of representing you in this case, and your status as a class member will not be deemed a consent for the University to release this information to anyone else. Unless you send a request to be excluded, this information will be provided to class counsel, even if you have previously exercised by written or electronic notice to UC your right to refuse to permit the UC to disclose certain categories of personally identifiable information designated by the campus as directory information, and will not rescind your refusal for that purpose. If you do not wish UC to disclose this information to counsel for the class, you must send a request for exclusion from the case, as discussed above.


If you any questions concerning the matters in this notice, or if you have corrections or changes to your name or address (so future notices about this case will reach you), please contact plaintiffs' counsel at info@browngold.com or the addresses above. DO NOT CALL OR WRITE THE COURT.

The pleadings and all other records of this litigation may be examined and copied any time during the regular office hours in the office of the Clerk of the Court at the address above.

October 25, 2004 Judge James L. Warren

California Superior Court

San Francisco County


Apparent Gang Graffiti Photos Below, CalStuff Extended on Hiatus
Below are the photos of the vandalism that was discovered on the trees outside of Pi Kappa Phi on Channing and Prospect. If this is the top post on CalStuff Extended, then there hasn't been any other content lengthy enough to need housing here at CalStuff Extended. I would encourage you to check out our main site CalStuff, which is constantly being updated. Any additional posts on Calstuff Extended will be noted on CalStuff.

Thanks for stopping by.

This is a wider picture, which shows the trees and telephone pole from their non-vandalized side, and where they are in relation to Pi Kappa Phi (which can be seen in the background). Posted by Hello

Same tree as below, but from a different angle. Posted by Hello

This photo and the one above it both show the same tree from different angles. The graffiti is harder to see on this tree, although anyone with experience might still be able to figure out what it represents. Posted by Hello

This tree also contains some graffiti. Posted by Hello

For those who have some knowledge of gang graffiti, here is an additional photo of a vandalized telephone pole located outside of Pi Kappa Phi.
 Posted by Hello


Michelle Malkin Photos Below, CalStuff Extended on Hiatus
Below this post is the statement from the groups that took part in the Michelle Malkin protest and photos from that event. If this is the top post on CalStuff Extended, then there hasn't been any other content lengthy enough to need housing here at CalStuff Extended. I would encourage you to check out our main site CalStuff, which is constantly being updated. Any additional posts on Calstuff Extended will be noted on CalStuff.
Thanks for stopping by.


Letter by Protest Organizations on Malkin

After the protest, a number of student leaders representing the groups that were present met with Sid Patel to sign off on a letter describing their position. The Daily Cal ran an edited version of this letter, and left off the group names that supported the statement. Below is the text of the letter and the campus groups which were signatories:

The united protest on Wednesday, September 8, gave students whose voices are seldom heard an opportunity to speak out against the bigotry of Michelle Malkin.

Malkin currently enjoys unopposed airtime as acommentator for Fox News with her unscholarly works and shortsighted views often left unquestioned. She is a syndicated columnist and has had two books published. She has an enormous amount of free speech- the ability to have her ideas heard on a wide scale.

On the other hand, the thousands of Arabs, Muslims, and South Asians who have been harrassed, detained and deported have had no free speech - they have been silenced by the racist policies of the War on Terror, and their protests and ideas have not been broadcast. What about their speech, their ability to speak out and spread their ideas? Malkin advocates a further silencing of their voices. That's why we protested her- to defend and speak out for the freedoms of communities under attack.

The solidarity of students from a myriad of ethnic backgrounds at the protest resurrected our voices which have been anything but free since the advent ofthe PATRIOT Act and its curtailing of basic civil liberties.

For the Berkeley College Republicans to bring this type of figure, who openly defends the internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII, disrespects all those who suffered during internment, which itself was condemned by the US Government. The racist ideologies of Malkin come at a time of immense backlash against Arab, Muslim, Sikhs, and South Asian Americans. We are threatened and appalled that the issue of internment reappears favorably during a dramatic rise of xenophobia in this country.

In addition, the argument that racial profiling might be a worth while inconvenience has been thoroughly discredited. Experiences, over and over, have shown that racial profiling is ineffective - when used by the police to find criminals, when used by the US government against the Japanese, and even in the case of terrorism. The Oklahoma City bombing was perpetrated by white men - the profile doesn't holdup. Let's not repeat a historical error by using a method which is both racist and ineffective.

The current US administration has consistently incorporated racism and fear in defense of the invasion of Iraq and the so-called "war on terror." Malkin embodies the dangerous narrow-mindedness that threatens our communities.

Internment and racial profiling should never be tolerated under any circumstances; we will always stand united against racism and those who actively promote it.

Pilipino American Alliance, Core Officers 2004-2005
Committee 4 Pilipino Studies
Asian Pacific Islander Sisterhood Alliance
Arab Student Union
Students for Justice in Palestine
Sikh Student Association
Berkeley Stop the War Coalition
International Socialist Organization

Some supporters of Malkin chose to bring signs of their own recognizing her right to speak. Posted by Hello

A protester has a sign reading "This Brave College Republican is too busy 'defending' Michelle Malkin to fight in IRAQ." which he held above the head of members of BCR. Posted by Hello

Sid Patel, the organizer behind the letter signed off on by the campus organizations that took part in the protest can be seen here during one of the chants. Posted by Hello

Two protesters can be seen here taunting one of the members of BCR> Posted by Hello

There was at least one police officer guarding the entrance to 145 Dwinelle during the entire speech. Posted by Hello

This unidentified girl was leading one of the chants during the protest. Posted by Hello

A large crowd or protesters can be see here chanting slogans denouncing racism, with BCR members visible in the back of the photo (you can tell them by their yellow ribbons) and a police officer by the door. Posted by Hello

Bruce, the lone counter-protester that I saw showed up with his Bush Cheney shirt to argue with the protesters. Posted by Hello

Members of BCR stood outside of 145 Dwinelle during the speech, and here two members of the group can be seen standing in front of the protesters. They had very little interaction with the protesters, and for the most part refused to engage them in any dialogue. Posted by Hello

There was a large number of professional reporters at the event, and I saw news vans parked outside on Bancroft and spoke to a KRON 4 reporter who was there. Posted by Hello

Amaury Gallais got on a table and used a bullhorn to ask the protesters to leave. They shouted him down, and refused to leave. Posted by Hello

The protesters first grouped up right inside of the doors to Dwinelle before moving further inside until they were right outside the doors to 145 Dwinelle.  Posted by Hello

Protesters can be seen packing the hallway in Dwinelle between 145 and 155. The Asian American students in the far left of the picture (behind the tables and wearing the yellow shirts) are members of AAA, which was meeting in 155 Dwinelle during Malkin's speech. Posted by Hello

Dean Kenney was inside for much of the speech, as well as outside in the hallway of Dwinelle later in the night for part of the protest. Posted by Hello

I counted between 10-12 Police Officers at the event, including the woman in the light blue shirt who had that camera running during the entire protest. This is an extremely wise move in my mind, as it will aid the police in pursuing any charges against a suspect as well as defending against accusations of abuse if there is a video record of what appeared. Posted by Hello

Right at 7:00 the protesters outside lined up with the Asian groups on the right, and the socialists on the left to chant slogans together. Posted by Hello