ASUCI officials announced that an incorrect quorum calculation, which was publicly displayed on the elections website for the duration of the voting period, had falsely represented that this year’s student fee referendums met the required 20% undergraduate quorum during the 2026 Election results ceremony on April 29. The actual final undergraduate quorum was 18.1%, resulting in a failure to pass all four referendums on the ballot.
The four measures on this year’s ballot were the Undergraduate Basic Needs student fee referendum, Support Student-Run Newspaper student fee referendum, UCI DREAM Center student fee referendum and Safeguarding our Cultural and Identity Centers student fee Referendum. All four received more yes votes than no votes, meaning that each had a high enough approval vote to pass if the quorum was met; however, the true quorum was below the required threshold.
Of the undergraduate students who voted on the Basic Needs referendum, 86.22% voted yes, while The New University referendum received 61.8% yes votes. Among the joint undergraduate and graduate population, UCI DREAM Center received 77.78% yes votes and the Cultural and Identity Center referendum received 70.57% yes votes.
The 2026-27 ASUCI elections voting period was open from April 13 to April 17, and results were announced during a ceremony at the Student Center Terrace on April 29. After candidate results were presented, President of the Associated Graduate Students (AGS), Amelia Frazee took over to announce the referendum results and explain the situation regarding the public quorum mistake.
According to the explanation shared during the ceremony and later posted on the elections website, the initial live quorum percentage shown on the elections website had been calculated using all ballots opened, including those that were never submitted, rather than only completed ballots. As a result, the public quorum percentage shown online at the end of voting overstated total undergraduate turnout.
A statement on the election website states that the number of completed ballots was correctly reflected, but the display on the homepage was based on more data than it should have been. A screenshot of the website before the correction was made displays an undergraduate percentage of 21.55%.
Andrea Mora, director of the Basic Needs Center, said the revised outcome was especially painful given how much labor student leaders had invested into campaigning. Mora said the disappointment was heightened by the fact that organizers had spent roughly two weeks believing the quorum had already been met.
“I am heartbroken for the student leaders who spent so much time and so much effort advocating for this space … they put their studies to the side, they gave it all they had.” Mora told New University.
For the Basic Needs Center specifically, Mora mentioned that the failed referendum could have immediate material consequences. She added that the center would continue fundraising and grant-writing in order to keep supporting students.
“The end of the current undergraduate fee referendum does mean a loss of $250,000 for the center’s budget, which will in turn mean reduction of services,” Mora said.
Academic Advocacy Representative in Academic Affairs and chair of the Student Fee Advisory Committee Harshvardhan Rathore, called the outcome saddening, especially for the Basic Needs Center. He also noted that all four campaigns had received strong support from voters, pointing to the final vote percentages as evidence that many students wanted the measures to pass.
Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Life & Leadership and Dean of Students Rameen Talesh said students should continue expressing their concerns through ASUCI and AGS leadership while officials review what happened.
“We need to be accountable and to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” Talesh told New University.
He added that the administration would try to understand how the error occurred, whether there is a precedent for a similar situation on other campuses and what mechanisms could be put in place for future elections. Talesh said the mistake could affect confidence and the student elections process if it is not addressed seriously. He also said he hoped the incident would not discourage future participation in student government and referendum campaigns.
“A lot of people were hurt and disappointed, so we want people to believe in the system,” Talesh told New University.
In an email to New University, Systems Administrator of the Office of Information Technology, Aaron Grant Echols, who manages the elections website, said in an email to New University that the issue was not a question of integrity regarding the ballots, but only a display error on the elections homepage.
Executive Director and Associate Dean of Students, Stephanie Noel Van Ginkel declined to comment and referred New University to the public notice posted on the elections website.
Correct referendum results are now posted on the ASUCI elections website.
Brinda Popli is a News Intern for the spring 2026 quarter. She can be reached at bpopli@uci.edu.
