ASNAU SENATE MEETING #14
TWENTY-SIXTH SESSION
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Date: January 31, 2014
Date of Senate Meeting: January 30, 2014
Number on council: 12
Number present: 12
Prepared by Amy Edgerton
Senate Chairwoman Shayla Woodhouse called the Senate meeting of the 2013-2014
Associated Students of Northern Arizona University Senate to order at 5:00 P.M. in the
Havasupai Room A & B of the University Union.
Roll Call
The following Senators were not present at the meeting:
- All Present
Approval of Minutes
Motion: Senator Simon move to approve the minutes from last week’s Senate
meeting
Second: Senator Libby
Discussion: None
Vote: Unanimous, last week’s minutes have now been approved.
Call to the Audience
SETE Feedback – Denise, the Assistant to the Provost, was responsible for setting the end of
course evaluations. She has brought some background information for how the trial went
last semester, but would also like feedback from the ASNAU student body representatives.
They created 128,000 surveys; the response rate was 36%. That is considered very high for
first time of an electronic evaluation. She would like to see it must higher and so would the
faculty. The range was from 48% in the College of Engineering and Forestry to 18% in the
College of Education. She will be reaching out to faculty members with large courses, to
figure out what they did to illicit large response. Any time large software is implemented
across a campus this big, last minute decisions must be made. Her strict timeline began in
August of 2013 and she had only last semester to complete and implement the system.
SETE was implemented while being planned, and some of the decisions made on the fly are
impactful for students. One of the not so impactful decisions was that to overlay the NAU
system on the city system, but more important was the decided open and close dates, as
well as how long faculty would see responses. The decision was that after 5 students had
responded, faculty would be able to see the roster of students who had replied. She would
like feedback on these things. Messages about SETE were sent to students because there
are multiple courses that ended at different times, and for this reason there were no
specific close dates. For future reference and with perfecting the system, the company will
create a specific field that will put closing dates in each notice. Every time notices were
sent, there was overall much more response. She would like comments and feedback in
general from the members of ASNAU and the Senate.
Questions: Senator Libby says in the College of Forestry and Engineering, some teachers
will provide extra credit or classroom incentives. She believes this is a good way to increase
response rate, and professors should be encouraged to do this. President Mastrud liked the
multiple emails, she didn’t realize it was 5 total but she appreciated that and felt that
adding due dates would be a good idea. Faculty members should encourage students to
complete these surveys. Senator Gorshe asks specifically what faculty can see once
someone completes a response. Denise replies that faculty can only see students’ names.
Chairwoman Woodhouse asks if faculty can see the specific responses and Denise replies
that this information is anonymous and is only available to faculty and anyone handling
SETE material after the semester has ended. Senator Gorshe asks the purpose of names, she
says that the names allow faculty to see percentages of responses completed, and provide
extra credit if they choose. Senator Lulay feels that this is important, and it works well for
RA’s to see results of their surveys he agrees with professors being able to see the names of
students who have completed these. Chyna thinks that the minimum of what instructors
can see being 5 student responses is unfair for students. She believes this should be
increased to 10 because in her personal experience as a PES instructor, she knows that if
there were only 5 it would be much easier to determine which student negative feedback
could have come from. Denise clarifies that it is the roster opening, and not after semester
information that Chyna is referring to. Chyna suggests that 5 names is easy to narrow down
if negative feedback is received. She also offered extra credit but with a screen shot, so that
she did not even see the names on the roster. Senator Gorshe asks when it is available, and
would like to know if it is still available after the semester is over and grades are due.
Denise says it is definitely after grades are due and at the end of the semester. She believes
the trial was due after Christmas. Senator Gorshe asks if anyone has thought of
implementing a text message system to alert students of SETE. She believes this would be
greatly beneficial, but the primary text system on campus is the emergency system, which
they are discouraged from using for things other than emergencies. Senator Cabral feels
that with the minimum number being 5 for the roster viewing, he offers that some classes
have very little students, and it would be difficult for 10, like Chyna has suggested. He
believes they should use a percentage system to determine the roster. Senator Libby
agrees. Chairwoman Woodhouse liked that the closing date was later and it gave her a
chance to complete SETE effectively, and a lot of her professors encouraged completion and
even offered extra credit. She was concerned that some of the questions were not relevant,
especially the free response portions and she feels that professors may be able to tell via
writing style which student wrote which. Denise says that that is understandable, and for
this reason the free response sections are optional. Her suggestion is if anyone is concerned
they should avoid using the response boxes. She used to be a department chair, and made it
very clear to faculty that if there were any sense of retaliation due to comments in surveys,
there would be serious consequences. She would hope other faculty would do the same.
Unfinished Business
Motion: Senator Libby move to remove Item A: OA: American Indian Science and
Engineering Society, $100 from the table
Second: Senator Startt
Discussion: None
Vote: Unanimous, Item A: OA: American Indian Science and Engineering Society, $100 has
been removed from the table
Motion: Senator Libby move to table Item A: OA: American Indian Science and Engineering
Society, $100 indefinitely
Second: Senator Cabral
Discussion: None
Vote: Unanimous, Item A: OA: American Indian Science and Engineering Society, $100 has
been tabled indefinitely.
Motion: Senator Simon move to remove Item B: Election Code: Article VII, Section 2 from
the table
Second: Senator Cabral
Discussion: None
Vote: Unanimous, Item B: Election Code: Article VII, Section 2 has been removed from the
table
Senator Gorshe submits that in this case, there is nothing written about full endorsement,
and at this time it can be discussed. If discussion happens, Item B can be amended to reflect
changes.
Motion: Senator Cabral move to vote on Item B: Election Code: Article VII, Section 2
Second: Senator Ortega
Discussion: Chairwoman Woodhouse provided the senators with the proposed changes.
Senator Cabral says that they would like to bring up discussion about endorsement in the
ASNAU Senate again. Chairwoman Woodhouse said it was tabled so that everyone could
discuss wording, but she doesn’t feel that the discussion should be exhausted anymore,
since it has been discussed at length since last week and senators have had the opportunity
to discuss over email. She brought up what was written in the Legislative Committee last
year, and notes that the Elections Commission exists to provide balance to ASNAU in these
issues. Everyone should keep in mind the students, and how this section benefits the
organization as a whole. She sees no reason to change it. What is in front of the senators is
what will be voted on tonight, it may be amended as well as any other senate bill. However,
she does not wish to further exhaust the discussion, and would like to avoid a heated
debate on the matter such as the one from last week.
Chairwoman Woodhouse reminds the Senate that in special session, Item A: Election Code:
Articles III, IV, & VIII was voted on. Now, the Senate will vote on Item B, the changes
highlighted in yellow to article VII. Senator Howard begins the discussion by saying that he
feels that endorsement should be brought up during Senate, because email discussion is
not sufficient to discuss this matter. The new portion referring to running mates is basically
the only part pertaining to endorsements. Senator Simon is confused; she wants to know
what is to stop someone who is running for Senate from filling out the paper work, and
then endorsing another candidate without actually running. Chairwoman Woodhouse says
that if the Elections Commission approves the paperwork, the person who completed it is
now an official candidate with his/her name is on the ballot. Senator Howard says that
there is no current amount of running mates specified, so what is to stop a candidate from
having 20 that will serve to endorse them. Senator Ortega doesn’t feel that people will go
and get 200 signatures just to fake being a candidate to be endorsed. Senator Lulay says
that this conversation is null and void and confusing everyone. The discussion should
either convene with the decision of endorsements or no endorsements. Senator Gorshe
points out that the current Election Code says that endorsements and running mates are
not allowed, but this has not been enforced in the past. He feels that it was written for
integrity and neutrality, and it should remain so. Senator Soto clarifies that candidates can
run together as long as they are not currently ASNAU members. Chairwoman Woodhouse
invokes an informal poll to see who currently supports endorsement and who doesn’t.
Senator Libby would like 30 seconds to think, because she is torn. She discusses that
according to the current rules, the entire election last year was wrong. Senator Howard
believes endorsement happens anyway, so it should be opened up and allowed. Senator
Lulay says that Senator Howard is suggesting that it is a bad system, and so it should just be
allowed for that reason. Senator Howard says that this is not what he is saying; he just feels
that it would be more honorable this way. Senator Gorshe says Senator Howard is correct
in that sense, that the Elections Commission has not enforced this in recent past so it has
happened regardless of what is written. 3 members would like to see endorsement. 6
members would not. 3 did not show opinion in the informal poll. President Mastrud would
like to know if, as the senators are suggesting, endorsements are not allowed,
tickets/running mates would not allowed either. This would make how herself,
Woodhouse, and Cooper ran last year not allowed. Chief of Staff Smart asks where it is
currently defined in the Election Code that running mates are not allowed. Senator Cabral
reads the official wording from Article VII pertaining to this topic. Smart says that as soon
as approved by the Elections Commission as a candidate, Senate and Staff are no longer a
part of ASNAU and are made a part of the general student body, so as to make the election
fair. Last year, Smart was not able to endorse anyone as she was not running but Mastrud
could as a candidate and not an active ASNAU member. Senator Cabral says the way this is
defined is questionable and made up on the spot. Smart explains that it wasn’t so easily
made up, it was discussed and decided that candidates are no longer members of ASNAU
once they are approved to run. Senator Libby would like a specific example, but Senator
Simon does not want anyone called out. Senator Cabral gives the example that every
chairperson in a committee should’ve been chosen within the committee, but this hasn’t
been so in the past. Senator Libby doesn’t know how that applies to the current situation,
but Cabral explains that it is just an example of a rule made up on the spot, as he has
mentioned. Senator Libby is not satisfied and would like to know specifically about
elections. President Mastrud gives an example where Chyna and Chief of Staff Smart are
both running, and if she only liked Chyna’s campaign page and not Smart’s, it would be
unfair. Jillian says that this was not made up on the spot, and it is a real scenario. Senator
Gorshe says that specific wording in the Election Code now does not allow running mates
and tickets. Smart says that many senators are planning to run, and would like the Senate
to be careful what the vote is because it is possible that no one will be allowed to be
running mates. She knows they all want to support each other and that it is a lot more
comfortable running with someone. If it is being kept the way it is, then no one can run
together. Chairwoman Woodhouse says the Senate will be voting on what is currently on
the table, or amending the Item to reflect ASNAU member endorsement versus non-ASNAU
member endorsement. Senator Cabral would like to hear from all Senators. Senator Cook is
lost. Senator Libby says that not allowing current members of ASNAU to be running mates
while allowing non-members to gives an unfair advantage. Chairwoman Woodhouse would
like to more clearly define Smart’s idea of candidates no longer being ASNAU members
once approved. Senator Lulay says that ASNAU or not, candidates should run solely by
themselves. Senator Gorshe reminds Senate that this is what is currently written, and
would be the easiest solution. Senator Libby says it is not about what is easy, but what is
fair that should be voted on. Senator Ortega feels like the given definition for running mate
is sufficient and should be added to the Election Code. Being in ASNAU already and running
gives advantage. Oregon points out that the rule that Smart was discussing is already
defined in the beginning of the Election Code, so no one has broken any of these rules by
running together in past years. Senator Cabral does not see anywhere where it says that
being a candidate makes a person no longer an ASNAU official, a person could be both and
it comes down to what hat that person chooses to wear. Smart says that it’s all about how
the Elections Commission reads it. Chyna believes it would benefit everyone so add the
section about running mates, and Senator Simon disagrees. Chyna adds that if not
everyone, at least the majority, and she feels a lot of tension and would like to remind
everyone that we are all a part of this organization. Spencer feels that endorsing and
running mates should be split ideas, because it isn’t fair to the students running who aren’t
in ASNAU to make it one discussion. Senator Howard isn’t running next year, as he is a
senior so he thinks the fairest option would be to not let anyone run with a mate. Jillian
asks if Senator Howard believes that that is what’s best for the student body. Senator
Howard replies that it is fair for everyone that way so he supports it. Senator Gorshe
agrees. Chairwoman Woodhouse asks if the Senate is leaning toward the Election Code
remaining the same and discovers that no, it would have to be amended from it’s current
state. Senator Howard says everyone should run individually, whether in ASNAU or not.
Senator Libby adds that sometimes the fairest things won’t always be the best. She believes
that President Mastrud and VPs Woodhouse and Cooper work well together, and that going
into elections they already knew this and it inspired the decision to be running mates.
Politics in the real world isn’t fair. Senator Howard says that while the current Executive
Board works well together, that won’t always be the same. Senator Simon adds that
someone might choose to run with another person solely because of their influence,
regardless of how well they work with that other candidate. Smart would like the Senate to
remember that however they vote, this also applies to homecoming royalty, and it is fun
and is a tradition to have a running mate in this election regardless of others. Annsley
would like to say that as someone who has run for an executive position, she knows that it
would be stressful and extremely difficult to pursue as a sole candidate. President Mastrud
would like to add that when potential Executive Board members run together, those three
people have the opportunity to discuss campaign ideas, and if elected they already have a
plan and can hit the ground running. Endorsement would also allow for someone outside
ASNAU to run with someone already in, which would give them opportunity to run without
having to fear that they couldn’t do so on their own. Jillian says that NSG freshman
especially would not do well running alone up against everyone else who is experienced,
and a lot of them would like to be involved in the office. Senator Buchta says that since it is
not just affecting ASNAU, it would be more work, and that passing what is given would
essentially keep things the way they have been for the past 6 years. She adds that per
Jillian’s point, she as a member of NSG last year probably would not have run without
Senator Ortega because she would’ve felt intimidated. Senator Howard says that if ASNAU
will allow endorsement, it should be allowed for everyone. Senator Lulay agrees that it
needs to be full endorsement or no endorsement. Senator Cabral goes back to what Senator
Libby said earlier about people running together, and feels that regardless, there will be
teams forming without endorsement. Senator Cabral suggests the following amendment to
more clearly define endorsement regulations in ASNAU:
Section 2.2 Candidates running in ASNAU elections, may not endorse and aid in a campaign
of another candidate(s).
This amendment would include ASNAU and non-ASNAU members. Chairwoman
Woodhouse wonders if how the election code is written would remain the same. Senator
Cabral says yes, besides this amendment to clarify. Spencer says that this is a conflict of
interest because some people want to run in groups and some don’t, and since this has
worked for years she doesn’t understand why it should be changed now. She agrees with
Annsley. Senator Simon says that regardless of who is running, no one will vote to advance
him or herself. The election is and will be based off of the students. Vivian is trying to figure
out if endorsing someone who is also a fellow candidate is the same as running with them,
as running mates. Senator Tillinghast asks if running mates would be allowed without
Senator Cabral’s amendment. Senator Cook wants to understand what is being discussed,
he agreed with Smart on some parts of the discussion but has been trying to follow. As of
right now, he wonders if the general position is that no one can endorse. Chairwoman
Woodhouse again explains that voting will be on what has been handed to the Senators
pertaining to running mates, no amendments have actually been made as of yet. Senator
Lulay gives some basketball analogy and explains that ASNAU with endorsement privilege
would allow the best players to ram the election and remain in office every year, no matter
what campaigning takes place. He lists basketball players I don’t know. It is his second
week, and he has no personal motive, as he cannot be here after this year. He wants
fairness above all. Senator Soto has no personal motive either since she and Senator Lulay
just found out about running, and she feels that if running alone is what this job is about, it
will bring out the best in people. Senator Lulay agrees. Chairwoman Woodhouse feels bad
for me and would like to not continue exhausting the discussion.
Motion: Senator Cabral moves to amend the proposed addition Section 2.2 to read:
Candidates running in ASNAU elections may not endorse and aid in a campaign of another
candidate(s), and add Subsection A to read: The above will not apply to the homecoming
royalty elections. Finally, the proposed addition of Section 2.2 and Article I, Section 24 that
Chairwoman Woodhouse proposed prior to this meeting will be stricken. They are as
follows:
Section 2.2: Candidates may endorse and aid in a campaign of another candidate(s) so long
as they are running mates.
Article I, Section 24: Running Mate: A running mate is a student running together with
another student(s), of which all individuals must be seeking elected positions. Running
mates will not be shown as a joint ticket on the election ballot.
Second: Senator Gorshe
Discussion: Smart says that ASNAU members will still run into an issue running for
homecoming royalty in the event that this passes because of the way it is defined. Senator
Gorshe believes that this would be solved by reference back to Section 2. The addition
Subsection A would pertain only to Section 2.2 specifically.
Vote: 9 in favor, 3 in opposition. Item B: Election Code: Article VII, Section 2 has been
amended.
Discussion: Senator Libby wants to hear from Smart. Smart wants endorsement clearly
defined, because she is still not sure if the amendment means no ASNAU member can like
Facebook pages. She would like to know if members of the Senate have done research on
this matter at NAU’s peer institutions. Senator Simon says yes, they have. Smart explains to
the Senate that with people not running on tickets, will be 26 people running individually
and when there is only one week and so many club meetings this will become extremely
difficult. Senator Libby adds that she knows specifically Gamma Phi would not allow that
many to come and speak to their organization. Smart would like the senators to know that
when voting on this, they need to think about how it will affect other clubs and
organizations on campus. Senator Simon asks if anyone participated in club meetings
during the election, Senator Libby did but not many others. Libby also adds that she saw
Mastrud, Woodhouse and Cooper at almost every meeting she went to in her campaign.
Mastrud explains that they went to at least thirty club meetings while running. Oregon says
that the Senate should propose two amendments, and allow the student body to pick one or
the other. Senator Startt agrees with this. Senator Simon feels that no one will read these,
but Mastrud says that they will work on the wording to ensure that the vote is done right, it
is ASNAU’s job to educate the students on these things. Senator Gorshe says that this
amendment is simply clarifying what is already written. Senator Lulay clarifies that if the
student body votes it down, they are against what is proposed. Senator Libby asks how it
will be explained to efficiently educate the student body. Senator Startt interjects that
ASNAU has just voted with Item A from special session that the student body wouldn’t have
a say in this matter, so once they approve of that change it doesn’t matter. Chairwoman
Woodhouse says that the Senate needs to continue with the current vote as is currently in a
motion. Senator Startt believes that since the student body has no say no matter what, what
Oregon has proposed wouldn’t work. Senator Tillinghast says these things will go out in the
same email, as surveys to the students. Senator Gorshe says that this vote has nothing to do
with the amendment. Senator Startt feels that it will be confusing to the students to do this.
Vote: 9 in favor, 3 in opposition. The amendment has been approved. Chairwoman
Woodhouse states that no other changes to the current Election Code besides those
pertaining to Section 2 about homecoming royalty are made and Item B: Election Code:
Article VII, Section 2 has been approved.
Let it be shown that the wording of the amendment was read back to the Senate after the
vote had taken place.
New Action Business
Motion: Senator Simon move to vote on Item A: Club Recognition: The Premedical Club
Second: Senator Tillinghast
Discussion: Tyler is a biomedical major and asks if he can walk around or if he has to stay at
the podium. Chairwoman Woodhouse says he can walk around if he would like. He begins
by saying that he is aware there is already a medical club on campus called Club Med, and
he loves it and has attended a few meetings. However, he would like something more
dynamic and interactive. He went to ASU last year and attended Alpha Epsilon Delta, a
renowned premed club there. Alpha Epsilon Delta has great activities that are great for
preparing students for medical school, and had over 200 members at ASU. He would like to
have a club with the culture and people to help with the medical school process and
provide an engaging program. Eventually, Alpha Epsilon Delta would get started and would
make NAU more medically renowned by doing so. The current club, Club Med, is very
informative but he is looking for more interaction.
Questions: Senator Gorshe asks if his last day was yesterday, no. He said ‘lab day’ not ‘last
day’ was yesterday. Senator Gorshe congratulates him on this. He would like to know the
distinction between this and Club Med. The Premedical Club will have weekly meetings
instead of monthly, as well as community service opportunities and interactive activities.
Senator Gorshe asks if his leadership of the other club could bring this, but Tyler replies
that he doesn’t want to take away from the other club and change it because it is good for
some types of medical students, but he wants another option for students like him. Senator
Tillinghast asks why he can’t just start Alpha Epsilon Delta. He replies that there needs to
be a medical club on campus for at least a year to establish a chapter here, as well as a few
other requirements. Senator Soto asks when he will graduate. He says two years, because
he is currently a sophomore.
Vote: Unanimous, Item A: Club Recognition: The Premedical Club has been approved
Motion: Senator Cabral move to vote on Item B: IA: Elyssa Hartsock, $130
Second: Senator Soto
Discussion: Elyssa is here with Kappa Kappa Psi, and would like to attend a leadership
event in California. Currently there are five people in her car who will be attending, and the
money received will distribute them to different workshops and allow them to bring back
information to NAU. The cost is $65 per person, and she is asking for $130. Senator Howard
asks why they are not using Kappa Kappa Psi chapter funds for this; she replies that they
will use the chapter money for a larger event later on. Senator Tillinghast asks if she is in a
club, and wonders why she is asking for an individual allocation instead of an
organizational allocation. Senator Gorshe is also curious, and asks her to clarify how many
people are attending, there are five. He asks if the money is to reimburse her personally
and not Kappa Kappa Psi as a club, yes. Senator Simon clarifies that this is why there is an
IA and not an OA. Senator Gorshe asks Hartsock if she would still be attending this if others
in her club were not. Yes, she would.
Vote: Unanimous, Item B: IA: Elyssa Hartsock has been approved
Motion: Senator Gorshe move to vote on Item C: IA: Ashley Richards, $409
Second: Senator Soto
Discussion: Two weeks ago she got the chance to go to a Greek Leadership conference in
Denver, CO. Two other members went with her. There were speakers about leadership in
Greek Life and many other opportunities that she learned a lot from, especially about
building up new organizations. She is a currently a Vice President of Alpha Phi, as well as
other organizations that could benefit from this information she has brought back. Senator
Simon asks if this was PanHellenic, she replies that it is not, it was brought to her from
someone at her church, and not through the organization. Senator Cabral says the IA limit
is $400, and the IA will have to be amended to reflect this limit. Chairwoman Woodhouse
tells Richards that if she needs the extra 9$, a senate bill will be written.
Motion: Senator Gorshe move to amend the Amount Requested on the Individual Allocation
to read $400 instead of $409.
Second: Senator Tillinghast
Discussion: Senate Cabral asks Ashley Richards if she would like a Senate Bill written for
the remaining $9, she says no, she does not need that.
Vote: Unanimous, Item C: IA: Ashley Richards, $409 has been amended.
Vote: Unanimous, Item C: IA: Ashley Richards, $400 has been approved
Motion: Senator Ortega move to vote on Item D: OA: National Society of Minorities in
Hospitality, $500 and Item E: SB 26-44: National Society of Minorities in Hospitality, $3220
Second: Senator Gorshe
Discussion: Shannon is the treasurer and fundraising chair of NSMH. In one month,
members of the club will attend a National Conference in St. Louis Missouri. It is a very
good networking opportunity for hospitality students, and will many attending will obtain
interviews for jobs and internships. There will be workshops for leadership and other skillbuilding activities. The funding will be for airfare, conference fee, and for hotel. Senator
Gorshe asks if the total with the OA and bill is $3720, and wonders why they are not
requesting the full $3500 for the bill. Senator Simon says that Little America sponsored
them $300 already.
Vote: Unanimous, Item D: OA: National Society of Minorities in Hospitality, $500 and Item
E: SB 26-44: National Society of Minorities in Hospitality, $3220 have been approved
Motion: Senator Simon move to vote on Item F: SB 26-45: New Student Government, $2525
Second: Senator Cook
Discussion: Jeremy, Annsley, and Derek are requesting $2525 so that they can take 14 NSG
members and 1 chaperone to the National Collegiate Leadership Conference in Tucson. The
budget is broken down between registration and travel. Each person attending is
contributing $25 and paying for his or her own food. A lot of them will run for ASNAU
positions, and so the conference will be beneficial to this organization as well.
Vote: Unanimous, Item F: SB 26-45: New Student Government, $2525 has been approved
Executive Reports
a. President- Makenzie Mastrud
- President Mastrud thanks Amy for taking detailed minutes at the meeting
tonight. She reports that the State of the Student Address went really well, it was
the first year that the address was completed, and there were a lot of positive
responses although people were confused slightly by the event. Thank you to
Chyna, Jillian, VP Woodhouse, VP Cooper, and Chief of Staff Smart for assistance
with the event. She thanks the entire office as well. The Executive Board has
been advised to slow down adding the new Vice President of Government Affairs
position, and to educate the student body about it more. She will write and
explanation in the student body email, or go to the route of the new executive
team implementing the position next year if the student body votes the position
down. Senator Gorshe explains that since she did not veto by 5:00pm today,
ASNAU is now in a gray area when it comes to timeline for implementing and
explaining the new position. He and Senator Cabral will work on it. She will open
it up to let anyone discuss it with her, and says that she will be in office hours
this week. Monday and Tuesday of next week she is available, but she leaves
Wednesday for ABOR with the directors. Senator Simon asks if the current
Executive Board could lay out the responsibilities for this person, aside from the
formal to adequately prepare them for next year, and specifically, to explain
what will be asked of them. President Mastrud replies that she fully intends to
write out a weekly schedule report and put them in contact with Chelsea Byers,
to help transition this person. She will put as much into transitioning this new
person as she would the new president. Chief of Staff Smart was doodling and
missed Senator Gorshe’s comment, and she would like to know if the new
executive position must go to the student body vote, since it was not vetoed
today. Senator Simon asks about the other office, and Mastrud explains that it
belongs to the University President, and President Haeger would have to give
this space to ASNAU in order for it to be utilized by the new position. ASNAU
would have to find space, salary, and more for the position. For this reason the
process is being slowed down. She also attended Faculty Senate, and contacted
Marketing about selling Kiss My Axe shirts, but discovered that this cannot be
done due to licensing. She also has an updated budget for everyone, and the
administrative assistant line is the only one not up to date. Mastrud is stealing an
idea from the president at ASASU, would like every senator to look into fees that
college they represent pays. It is ASNAU’s job to make sure that students get
what they pay for. She is working with Ice Jacks for their tournament next
month, and determining how to help show them support. Senator Soto has a
meeting with Matt Williams; she is aiming for Tuesday but will attend the
Hockey Club meeting Wednesday night. Finally, may have an open form debate
for Executive candidates in the upcoming elections, she will propose this to the
Elections Commission. If there are errors in the budget, let her know so that she
can work with Ashley and Christine.
b. Vice President of Student Affairs- CJ Cooper
- This week VP Cooper has been working on trying to get Club Headquarters a
temporary location to relocate after Spring break. He emailed TC on Monday but
hasn't heard anything back yet. He is also still waiting to hear more from Rachel
about the Unity Week speaker offer, but he will inform everyone when more
develops. He would like to apologize for his absence at the State of the Student
Address. He has a viral infection of the respiratory system, and is currently
contagious. Hope everyone stays healthy!
c. Vice President of Academic Affairs- Shayla Woodhouse
- Next week, she will be doing one-on-one's next week with all of the Senators.
She began doing one-on-one's earlier this week, but she decided to wait until
next week to do them. Thank you to all of the Senators who participated in the
conference call on Tuesday. Senators, please make sure and check the
notifications folder when you arrive at your office hours. She contacted Nick
Korressel about the recycling changes in the Union. She met with a
representative from the Sustainable Landscape Maintenance Project regarding a
prospective resolution this afternoon. Lastly, she addressed the issue of staff
contributing to Senate discussion. We discussed at the retreat that we would like
to hear from all Senators first, but we need to still value the staff's opinion,
because they have great input to our discussion that we need to respect. Hours
are also due today.
d. Chief of Staff- Sammy Smart
- Chief of Staff Smart reports that they will have a ticket giveaway for the concert
on April 6th, and they are not yet certain whether ASNAU staff/members will
need to attend. She would like everyone to try not to discuss elections in the
office. 76 teams have registered for Relay for Life and she will be drafting an
email for donations. Senator Soto has suggested a coin drop in the office. A
senate bill will need to be created for reimbursement of the chocolate bars, and
advertisements for elections will be out within the week.
Staff Reports
A. Student State Affairs- Ben Silva, Dylan Lefler, Oregon McDiarmid
- ABOR is next week, and if anyone has questions they should be sent to the
directors. There is a signup sheet for tabling which will occur next week, and the
directors are keeping an eye on a few important bills at the moment. Finally,
they have finished Intern applications.
B. Public Relations- Colleen Flynn, Spencer Carlton
- Colleen and Spencer worked on the GO Scholarship advertisements,
advertisements for the ASNAU election packets, the Pledge Tuition water bottle
campaign advertisements, hung posters around campus, and took pictures for
the State of Student Address. If anyone needs anything made, please let them
know.
C. Special Events- Chyna Gade, Jillian Zuniga
- Special Events is very excited for the concert, and will be having some big
advertisements created. Everyone needs to mark his or her calendar for April
10th. Chyna thanks everyone for help with the State of the Student Address. The
February event titled “ASNAU loves our Jacks” will be the 12th and 13th and they
need outside and inside table volunteers. They are currently collaborating and
brainstorming for the March event, an event workshop for NSG, and a
Leadership workshop with Kristine.
D. ITS- Joey Smoll
E. NSG- Annsley Niemann, Derek Lopez, Jeremy Chan
- Philanthropy events- NSG will be tabling next week and writing Valentine’s
Day cards to senior citizens living in the local homes. The social committee is
planning an ice cream social the Wednesday after Valentine’s day, it will be
Valentine’s day themed, so people who didn’t have Valentines know NSG loves
them. The special events committee is planning tie-die shirt-making for this
semester’s Parent Day, and the location is still being decided.
Committee Reports
A. Appropriations: Senator Ortega reports that they worked with the individuals
and clubs the Senate saw today, and in addition, met with the Hexapus man,
Phillip, who brought some examples of 3D printing and gave more information
about his project. She is in contact with him to get documentation from the
Communications department saying they will be displaying it, as well as writing
a bill, so stay tuned.
B. Legislative: Senator Gorshe has no report.
Senator Reports
College of Arts and Letters
a. Thomas Lulay- Made copies and passed in office hours. Emailed clubs
about funding, concert and t-shirts. Currently working on two bills.
b. Scott Tillinghast- Made copies and passed out t-shirts in office hours,
attended legislative committee meeting, will be scheduling Dean
meeting soon.
College of Social and Behavioral Sciences
a. Ernan Cabral- Sent club emails and passed out t-shirts in office hours.
He has met with Pershing Rifles and the Fellowship of Catholic
University Students (FOCUS), and will schedule a meeting with the CCJ
Club next week.
b. Brittany Simon- No report.
College of Health and Human Services
a. Zachary Howard- Still working on a couple bills, hope everyone has a
great super bowl weekend.
b. Nicolas Startt- No report.
College of Education
a. Alyssa Soto- Answered questions and passed out t-shirts in office
hours. In contact with clubs and setting up meetings.
b. Jared Gorshe- No report.
College of Business
a. Ryan Cook- Wrote two senate bills that will be at appropriations on
Monday.
b. Alexandria Buchta- Attended appropriations and office hours, as well
as the University Curriculum Committee, where they discussed
approved of new courses and asked HRM to come back with more
information before the approval of new emphasis courses. Hybrid
courses will now be identified as blended courses with 25% or more
of the material outside of class. Also discussed policies.
College of Forestry, Engineering, and Natural Sciences
a. Nicole Ortega- She worked with NSMH on their senate bill and they
really appreciate the funding, had copier issues in office hours, and
Chyna got her coffee.
b. Savannah Libby- Went to the student safety committee during office
hours, if anyone has any questions let her know.
Advisor Reports (Rick Brandel and Art Farmer)
Rick Brandel— No report.
Art Farmer— No report.
Discussion Items
- None
Announcements
Golden Pine Cone Award: Scott Tillinghast for refilling the water container and for actively
participating in ASNAU.
Important Dates
February 3rd, Begin notifying the Student Body of Elections
March 25th, 7:00-8:30PM Unity Week Presentation @ Prochnow
April 6th, 7:00PM Concert Tickets Available
April 10th, ASNAU ’23 Fee Concert
April 23rd, ASNAU Inaugural Banquet
Adjournment
Motion: Senator move to adjourn the meeting
Second: Senator
Vote: Unanimous, meeting adjourned at 7:03 P.M.