Associated Students of Willamette University
14 February 2013 - 7pm - Montag Den
Senate Agenda
1.0
Call to Order
1.1 Called to order 7:03
2.0 Roll Call
2.1 All here except Hanson, Pate (Proxy), Pitsch
3.0 Approval of the Agenda
3.1 seconded, approved
4.0 Approval of the Minutes
4.1 seconded, approved
5.0 WEB Report
5.1 WEB Committee: Annie- Nathan calculated how much money we spent per
student ($12.00 per person), back tie tomorrow, karaoke night is success. Looking for
volunteers for WEB hiring committee. Interviews are first week of March, need a
representative of ASWU. Senator Balk volunteered.
6.0
Officer Reports
6.1 P Calixtro: Breaking the Bubble: Planning to post a social justice networking
event that would bring together Salem and WU community, possibly part of SSRD.
Diversity climate investigation that we are working with Luis Rosa, invited students to
tell about the idea and how to implement it to survey. Made some pamphlets that are in
ASWU office, will be at forum. Gear is ordered. Met with Pres. Thorsett this week.
6.2 VP Freeman: Working on the budget, going to talk today.
6.3 VP Chand: Tons of constitution meetings, student commencement speaker,
student activities fair, Yoshida and Chand were at Lead Fair today.
6.4 VP Gilbert: Elections coming up, info meetings coming next week, don’t
know if there will be 4 or 3. Packets and building bridges, re-working things, in contact
with JSSL and other connections. Sen. Yoshida helping. Honors and Awards doing good
things. Sen. Underdahl: Did you mention the loss of the building bridges director? Sen.
Gilbert: Matt Bateman will no longer serve.
7.0 New Business
7.1 Club Approval – Headband: Sen. Saul: Headband is looking for approval, COSO
recommends because of previous existence and popularity, leadership is in place and they
work with other groups. Sen Mason: Headband has existed but not been a club for a
while. We have performances planned out already, headband at smith and Acapella
Night. Request for ASWU funding- we would probably not ask for any/much. Moved for
approval, seconded (1 obstaining) approved.
7.2 Club Approval - Electronic Music Collective: Saul-COSO has decided to
recommend them for approval, interested in performing and sharing electronic music.
Adrian is here to talk about it. Adrian: Electronic music has broken into mainstream,
there are lots of students here that love it, we hope to provide forum for people to foster
their love and expand knowledge, as well as a practice for DJs and like to give music out.
We want to hold weekly events in Montag Den where people can practice DJing and
other can come and shake their booty. Sen. Guzman: How much are you asking for, using
ASWU equipment? Adrian: We want turn tables, ASWU sound has an extra one, but if
not, we would ask for one set of club turn tables. We would be asking for funding if we
wanted to hold professional events once/semester or year. Not as expensive as full
concert, just one person. Newcomb: move to approve, seconded, passed.
7.3 Marshall Curry- Relay for Life: ASWU gave start up cost for 2011, and we want to
show where this money is going. First year 1,500, second 2,500, this year we have
already raised 1,700. This year is April 13, we provide cancer victims and families
support. All funds are going towards this larger organizations. We already have 8 teams,
we want 40. Thank you for your continued support.
7.4 Spring Budget Approval- VP Freeman: First I want to apologize to you and the
clubs, the amount I sent out did not include the automatic dispersals that go out every
year. There was a method to this madness, I was including it in my head. When I
separated the 27/18%, it went from total amount and not from fees. When we were going
through the hearing process, I should have made it clear to the board. Rushing through it
didn’t get put together. The pre-Spring allocations were paying for early events we didn’t
cover from start of the semester until now. This funding is for the bulk of spring. This is
coming for the groups who missed the opportunity from first two rounds. There are
groups that I haven’t pulled money from last semester. Before I go into budget any
questions? Basically, we did a lot of big funding this round. The second half of Wula to
$14,050 (big). Sports council got a good amount, it’s not just one club, it’s a combination
of a lot of clubs. They cut away a lot of expenses before coming to board (what they need
to function). We cut some from security fees. We put food precedent in at the start of this
semester, a couple clubs utilized that option. We allowed one exception for math club for
Pi Day. But they had the event in the past and they could attract a lot of people to the
event, so the need was there. The other food precedent 30 was for block-us day
tournament with a lot of different schools to engage in board game. Sen. Underdahl: One
of the impacts is that finance board is going to be denying a lot of clubs because we don’t
have money for it. Freeman: We will have to be strict. We haven’t pulled a lot of funding
that clubs haven’t spent, but if there are a lot of requests this semester we will have to get
stricter with that. It was kind of tough starting out last semester, I didn’t know 27% of
which amount to use, but I am sorry for not showing that. Sen Smyth: With the Bearcat
robotics, what was the reasoning for not giving funding for different parts (frame etc.).
Freeman: We wrote them the option to write to us for full funding. They were uncertain
of the cost, and which parts. We were uncomfortable with the uncertainty, we suggested
to get an invoice and move from there. Smyth: Why did DG get funding for a dance but
Sigma Chi didn’t get it? Sen. Brinster: Wasn’t it because they combined their dance with
a bunch of other things? There were some other things that they weren’t sure if they
wanted to fund. We made a note to give us more detail on that. Freeman: We said we
needed additional info. I have been in contact with their treasurer, he had some new
questions on how to ask the right way. DG’s dance was planning on partnering with
another group. Smyth: I was just wondering if there was something different about the
two. Freeman: Money last year was 2,400, now we are at 5,400. If we stick within this
range, we are fine. Anything over 5,000 goes into endowment, we will be under the limit,
but it’s not different from the past couple years on how it works out towards end of year.
Smyth: Move to approve. Second. Approved.
8.0 Old Business
8.1 Constitutional Review Committee Update: Chand: We will go article by article,
read and talk about it. Preamble. No discussion. Article 1 Section 1/2/3: Underdahl: Did
we make changes and do we change that now? Chand: They did change. Article 2 Section
½. Sen Guzman: If there are only 3 exec members, do they still have to be called by two
members of the executive board? Smyth: If two execs call a meeting, the other has to
show up. Guzman: I feel like it should be “by the ASWU president and another member
of the executive board.” Underdahl: Most meetings are called by pres, that’s their
purpose. If the meeting is called, it should be checked by at least one other voice. Section
3: Sen. Underdahl: edit, the president of Senate should be Vice-President. Section 4:
Underdahl: edit the removal of student services. Section 5: Freeman: It is all accounts,
ASWU and nonASWU, its an advisor not a manager. Underdahl: The finance committee
should not be there, that is in the bi-laws. Freeman: What about the COSO thing. Chand:
That is in the by-laws. Gilbert: Present the budget proposals, like all the time in senate?
Underdahl: It would be the same. Section 6: Freeman: Who is going to manage the
ASWU office budget? Gilbert: and elections? Sen. Smyth: It will make sense later.
Underdahl: (3) I am not sure about the positions in executive board being filled without a
whole student body vote. Sen. Howard: Would you propose having another election?
Sen. Smyth: Like last year, it wouldn’t make sense to have two elections going on at the
same time. You would be electing someone to finish the term and someone else to do
next year. Sen Balk: What if the exec. Board nominated someone and then Senate did the
election. Sen. Saul: I think a full election would be the best option. Underdahl: If an exec
member quits, it wouldn’t have to be a senator to complete it. We could approve
something that if its close to elections we could do something else. Gilbert: I want to
outline about elections. There is a lot of paperwork (sending to WITS at least 2 weeks in
advance). All the lists of people who are voting have to be uploaded, 2 weeks in advance.
That’s when the study abroad election was hard because it wasn’t just me doing that. To
weigh in I think it’s important to have something running elections. Our percentages are
really low except for exec and freshman. If it was an exec elections, people care more.
But we have low numbers for regular elections (10% if that). If you are getting such a
low percentage, you weigh odds what represents the student body more. Sen. Smyth:
Maybe we can use system here to be the interim filling vacancy position until a normal
election approved by student body. Saul: Do we want to talk about that interim period,
put in that 2 weeks. Smyth: We don’t want to put a future exec board in that position.
Saul: I mean when an exec member is leaving during the semester, when they are leaving
how close to elections. P Calixtro: I’m thinking that it makes sense for the VP to become
the P, but think about who the second runner-ups just in case. Sen. Kaiser: It makes sense
to me that this could be in the election bi-laws. Sen. Underdahl: I think that looking at the
runner up could be something that the exec board could do, but I don’t think it should be
in the actual laws itself. I move to move this discussion to the committee- seconded
approved. Section 2. Section 3: Underdahl: Are constitutional procedures ever outlined? I
don’t think bi-laws are constitution. VP Freeman: Can one of you guys on the committee
explain the established removal? Sen. Kaiser: we establish bi-laws by which an exec
would be removed. Freeman: Exec is under supervision of Senate. Kaiser: We make the
laws, that’s what grants us the right. I was confused because whoever is voted into exec,
shouldn’t be under supervision of Senate. Kaiser: Its not that you are under Senates,
you’re under ASWU laws, like President Obama under U.S. law. Sen Smyth: This is
checks and balances, they are held accountable to Senate. Underdahl: This needs to be a
part of the constitutution, like a percentage of Senate that needs to be had to impeach.
Move to committee, seconded, approved. Article 4 Section 1/2/3/4: Sen. Smyth: Can I
add that there is 2/3 majority because half of justices must come in at the end of each
semester so there is rollover. At the end there will be at least two new justices. Sen.
Brinster: Are the justices required to come to meeting. Sen. Kaiser: At least the chief
justice. Sen. Brinster: I think this is good and representative of U.S., but how would this
change senate? Underdahl: right now we do some things that go against constitution, and
we don’t have someone who checks our legislation against ourselves that we are
following the constitution we create. Problems that would exist wouldn’t be from
constitution. Smyth: They wouldn’t interfere, would outline things according to
constitution. Article 5. Sen. Howard: What does ‘be made available to student body
mean?’ Sen. Smyth: We have to make sure students have gotten it (email). Theoretically
the const. shouldn’t be changed, so if someday there is no email it doesn’t have to
change. Underdahl: I guess we should clarify what ‘majority’ of vote means. Article 6.
Freeman: there is a bi-law discussion after this right. Underdahl: basically everything
finance related is in bi-laws so they are accessbile. RECESS Bi-Laws Article 1 Section
½: P Calixtro: The Senate Parliamentarian would be the chief justice. Underdahl: That is
something we should have. Section 3. Approved. Article 2 Section 1: Smyth: Choosing a
senate member should be choosing an ASWU member. Section 2 Smyth: Omit the last
sentence. Section 3 Approved. Section 4: Freeman: 6- The committee should be instead
of Willamette University. Underdahl: ‘and itself and senate.’ Smyth: Does senate approve
the precedence for finance board? No. Section 5 approved. Section 6: Underdahl: number
3 should be copied with appropriate title switched excluding the PO committee. Section
7: already said. Section 8: approved. Article 3: Section 1/2- no later- correction. Sen
Howard: What is the current timeframe for an absence? Chand: 1 week, but nobody does
that, it’s at the discretion of my position. Smyth: We didn’t add this, but we should look
at this. But it is unrealistic to have a proxy two days in advance. Freeman: In the bilaws,
is it possible to add how much execs are getting paid. Smyth: That is in the office budget.
Section 2 approved. Section 3: Sen. Brownlee- for the attendance to committee meetings
it should be a percentage. Smyth: And the chairs aren’t all exec meetings. Article 4/5 not
touched. Sen. Kaiser: Point of inquiry, who wrote the rest of it? Chand: It was previous.
Underdahl: I move instead of reading article 6, Kaiser explains the changes made. Kaiser
explains the changes, Smyth adds about elections board. Howard: If the VP isn’t able to
fill that role, is there stipulation? Article 7: Underdahl: Did you outline who determines
voting for future co-presidents? What section? Smyth: We may have just done it for
collegian. Underdahl: The WEB advisory should be doing decision regarding WEB, this
will be time sensitive, they are currently getting ready for this process. Sen. Parekh: move
to move this discussion to next week. Underdahl: I move to finish current reading
sending the current constitution via email and referring to constitutional review board.
Smyth: I have been making comments on the side, if you finish reading and make some
comments we will look at comments and come back with the edited version next week.
Sen. Yoshida: I will suggest suspend the editing of the building bridges section. Leave a
comment on that. Sen. Leder: I move to end this discussion pending comments until next
const. review meeting, with the condition that we submit corrections by Sunday and
agenda will stay the same for next week. Seconded, approved (abstaining 1).
9.0 For the Good of the Order
9.1 Acapella night
9.2 Sen Harding: marshall wants to consolidate the sustainability groups on
campus. Smyth: Wants to talk to him about this.
10.0 Adjournment
10.1: Leder moves to adjourn, seconded, approved.