THE JUNGLE
AZTECS FOR AFRICA
PSYCH WARD FUN
The SDSU football team has named its student section “The Jungle.” page 2
Find out how students support African plight.
‘Funny Story’ isn’t great, but one actor shines.
dailyaztec the
Thursday, October 14, 2010
w w w. T h e D a i l y A z t e c . c o m
Vol. 96, Issue 28
San Diego State University’s Independent Student Newspaper since 1913
INDEX:
sports ... 2
features ... 5
page 5
Tw i t t e r : T h e D a i l y A z t e c
entertainment ... 6
classifieds ... 11
page 9
TODAY @ STATE Speed Coaching 11:45 a.m. to 2 p.m. Casa Real Graduate and Professional School Fair 10 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Career Services
backpage ... 12
Associated Students executive pay does not depend on hours worked SARAH GRIECO MANAGING EDITOR
&
ANTHONY BRONSON S TA F F W R I T E R
Last year’s Associated Students executives earned $26,166 per person regardless of how many hours they worked. Former executives Tyler Boden, Natalie Colli, Ignacio Prado, Alyssa Bruni and Jeremy Katz each clocked a different hour total, yet made the same wage for their employment. Dan Cornthwaite, an A.S. adviser, said the reason all the executives are paid an equal amount is because it is specifically indicated in the organization’s bylaws. “That’s been the policy in A.S. council for at least 30 years or more,” Cornthwaite said. Last year’s A.S. executives were essentially compensated a total of $26,166; however, California labor laws do not allow part-time student workers to be salaried, so they were allotted an hourly wage of $10.53 per hour. The predetermined annual wage also serves as a limitation, which means last year’s A.S. executives could not earn more than $26,166. For the 2009 / 2010 academic year, A.S. executives solely earned their hourly wages until their last paychecks. The final check included both the remaining amount of their budgeted earnings, and also retroactively remunerated them for the 2009 summer’s
cost of living. The summer subsidy of $4,371 was formerly nonexistent, as A.S. voted to include that particular funding last May. When Prado, former vice president of finance, received his final paycheck it contained more than $7,500 that included his summer cost of living, along with an additional amount remaining from his guaranteed compensation. Prado worked less than 1,300 hours, which, based on his hourly wages alone, would not equal enough for him to receive the full compensation permitted to him by A.S. But because the organization contains the bylaw stating each executive must receive the same wage, he was compensated $7,500 based on the fact he performed his outlined duties. “Ignacio was particularly bright and capable,” Cornthwaite said. “With people like that ... it’s entirely possible that they can get the job done in less time.” Boden, however, worked more than 1,700 hours, yet received an identical wage to Prado. Boden’s final paycheck included nearly $1,500 worth of remaining money from his fixed annual wage. To fully compensate them for their yearly earnings, all of last year’s A.S. executives incurred more than $28,000 in their final paychecks combined. Cornthwaite said the tasks all A.S. executives complete are worth the predetermined amount, which varies year to year based on
David J. Olender / Photo Editor
Tyler Boden, Ignacio Prado and Natalie Colli each earned $26,166, but worked different hour totals.
the cost of attendance determined by the SDSU Office of Financial Aid. The system is set up in such a way that A.S. executives are compensated for the cost of attendance for the academic year and three months worth of summer expenses.
“(Executives) are not paid on the basis of the hours they work,” Cornthwaite said. “What we’re compensating them is for the worth of the job they’ve been elected to perform ... they do a job that is worth what has been determined by A.S. Council.”
Protesters fume about Proposition 23
Jeff Lewis / Staff Photographer
Students from all around San Diego met Sunday to protest Proposition 23 at the Adams Avenue Valero.
YANULA RAMIREZ S TA F F W R I T E R
Twenty-three days before the November 2 general election, students from all around San Diego banned together to protest Proposition 23. Supporters of the measure refer to it as the California Jobs Initiative while its opposition calls it the Dirty Energy Prop.
Approximately 60 students chanted outside North Park’s Valero gas station, “Get off our soil! We don’t want your dirty oil!” alongside a chorus of passing cars answering to signs that read, “Honk for green jobs.” If passed, Proposition 23 suspends plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions approved in California’s Assembly Bill 32. Demonstrations organized by California Public Interest Research Group and Environment California were held all around the state in 20 different Valero gas stations. Texas-based oil companies Valero Energy along with Tesoro Corporation
have together donated more than $5.5 million to fund the proposition. Actions against Proposition 23 continue to grow at San Diego State with more than 5,700 students who pledged to vote “no” on it. Supporters of Proposition 23 claim the measure would ease the state’s unemployment by saving around 1.1 million jobs that would have been destroyed with the implementation of clean energy standards outlined in AB 32. Communications Director of Proposition 23, Anita Mangels, said the AB 32 is often perceived as only targeting big energy and oil companies. But, according to the California’s Air Resources Board, both San Diego State and UCSD are listed as major greenhouse gas emitters. “SDSU is looking at $30 million in gas emissions fees that would probably be passed down to students, or other budget cuts would have to be made to compensate,” Mangels said. According to Bureau of Labor statistics, as of January of this year, California’s unemployment rate increased more than 12 percent, which means more than 2.25 million Californians remained unemployed. The national average figure is 9.6 percent, which is less than California’s. Arguments submitted to the secretary of state in favor of Proposition 23 affirm the measure would only suspend the implementation of the clean energy law until the unem-
ployment level in California decreases to less than 5.5 percent for four consecutive quarters, for a total of one year. UCSD student and Calpirg chapter chair Aaron Speer argued that the cap of 5.5 percent for unemployment can be misleading to voters, because according to the Stop the Dirty Energy Propositions website, the unemployment level in California has reached 5.5 percent only three times in the past 40 years. Instead of helping the economy, Holly Hellerstedt, with Power Vote at SDSU, argued it would only damage it. “Over 500,000 jobs are in danger and those are the ones that are already here right now,” Hellerstedt said. “Since 2005, the green energy sector has grown 10 times faster than any other sector in California’s economy.” SDSU student Audrey Richardson, with Environment California agreed, as she added that green jobs are “the only bright shining star in our otherwise faltering economy.” Mangels disagreed with assumptions that green jobs are in danger with the passing of the proposition. A c c o rd i n g to R i c h a rd s o n , s t u d e n t involvement is key when it comes to the November elections. “Students are the most environmentally aware, the most concerned with clean job creation and the most open-minded in terms of renewable energy,” Richardson said. “So they are the most likely to side with environmental issues.”