Constitution and Statutes Agenda
May 20th, 2013
Senate Chambers 6:30 PM
Chair: Kaitlin Ramirez
I.
Call to Order
Call to order at 6:32 pm.
II.
Roll Call
Quorum established with 3 voting members.
III.
Student Remarks
None.
IV.
Approval of Minutes – April 8th, 2013
Senator Anderson: Motion to approve the minutes from April 8th, 2013. Second. No Objections.
Passes.
V.
Approval of Agenda
Senator Anderson: Motion to approve today’s agenda, May 20th, 2013. Second. No Objections.
Passes.
VI.
Guest Speakers
None.
VII.
Remarks of the Chair – sgaspt@unf.edu
Ask we suspend Robert’s Rules for New Business. Attorney General Lehman will help go
through legislation with us. Then make goals for rest of Summer semester and plan for Fall
semester.
Advisor Delaney – reminder, make sure to reinstate Robert’s Rules for voting.
VIII.
Old Business
None.
IX.
New Business
Senator Anderson: Motion to suspend Robert’s Rules. Second. No Objections. Passed. Senator
Ramirez: Ok everyone, how would you like to go through the bills?
Senator Anderson: Let’s go through each one, and vote after each.
Everyone agreed.
a. CR-12S-2565 Constitutional Revisions of 2012
Senator Anderson: I will refer to Attorney General Lehman to give the background on this bill.
Basically this is a mess at the moment. Two bills jammed together. Needs a lot of work. Covers
GPA requirements to friendly revisions. At this point I’ll now hand this over to Attorney General
Lehman.
Attorney General Lehman: Hi guys. Just to give you guys a brief history to understand the
impact of this bill. This CR originally passed in Spring 2012. Vetoed by president after passed
through Senate. Not supposed to be vetoed. But went back to Senate and split into two bills –
CR-12S-2565 and CR-12S-2565A. Recently, Judicial Branch did a Judicial Review and ruled
CR-12S-2565 and CR-12S-2565A are unconstitutional because the president should have never
vetoed the bill. They also ruled this bill should go before students in the Fall General elections.
Needs to go before the students. As in the last Senate meeting, this was called back to your
committee to make some revisions, clean up typos, discrepancies, and contradictions. There are a
lot of friendlies. And it adds in the elections violation process. My recommendation to the
committee is to review the CR. Make a list on the document of things you like from this CR and
maybe things you don’t like. I would probably not make a motion on this and have it die would
be my recommendation. We have another CR coming before you and maybe review, find things
like and don’t like to make one massive CR so not multiple CRs going before the students. Any
questions?
Senator Anderson: Even if we put all of these changes into a single CR. We could still break up
this CR as voting goes?
Attorney General Lehman: You would have to have multiple CRs. That’s something you guys
decide. Take time to really look at the Constitution. This won’t go before the students until the
Fall, scheduled until end of October. No need to rush and really make for Constitution is in
order.
Senator Abreu: You said to let it die. What does that mean?
Attorney General Lehman: In order for it to move in Senate a motion must be made. If no one
makes a motion after 30 seconds or so, then it dies. This is true for all your committees and
Senate. Didn’t get approved or disapproved, just dies. If you’re in a meeting, but don’t want to
approve it don’t make motion. So maybe just make a new bill from this. Particularly, like I said
before this has a lot of friendlies. There are discrepancies for GPS, capitalization and sections are
not correct. Add Elections Violations process. This was added to Constitution and removed to
Title 6.
Senator Anderson: Reminder, underline is to add, strikethrough is removed.
Attorney General Lehman: May see corrections in bill. Looking at it may still be in most up-todate constitution another bill already updated it.
Senator Ramirez: Let’s say you have your Constitution. It says Kaitlin Devi Ramirez. But you
this bill and it says Kaitlin Devi Ramirez. The new bill asking to add my middle name. But
original has my middle name, because something later on made the revision. It’s because this bill
is outdated in certain aspects.
Advisor Delaney: We’ve had 3 CRs since then. This is very old bill which is why difficult from a
year ago. There is different intent. A section on removing college seats, make them all general.
This is what was happening at the time, working on older ideas and we have since moved on
from those ideas. So see what you like from this. Quite possible some of these things have
already been done.
Senator Ramirez: How about we go section by section. We’ll each take a section.
Senator Anderson: Section 3, A&S fees is throughout Constitution but in different forms. Do we
want to make this uniform.
Senator Ramirez: I’ll add this to our list to be tackled.
Senator Anderson: What activities fall in this category? We have budget, student programs. E is
meant to be a catch all. But so is D. How redundant do we find this?
Senator Ramirez: Should we strike.
Attorney General Lehman: If you feel this does not belong this is your jurisdiction. But what if
something comes along and fits may want to keep it. If you are unsure may want to keep it too,
but this is up to your own cognizance. In the future, you realize while going through CR see a
reason to keep it.
Senator Ramriez: Ok so we’ll keep it for now.
Senator Anderson: We have allocation for A$S fee. While we are allocating fund. Are we
allocating or creating and allocating every year?
Advisor Delaney: That’s fine, Title 8 fills in the gaps. E is just a catch-all. The way written now
is absolutely fine.
Senator Garrity reads revision in Article 2.
Senator Ramirez points out what’s already in Constitution.
Attorney General Lehman: Section 2 letter C, referring to the GPA, this bill originally when
separated in to 2. The GPA one did not pass by students. Up to your view if you want to tackle
the GPA again but the students have already voted it down so take that into your consideration.
But it’s in your jurisdiction to keep GPA or tackle it again.
Senator Ramirez: It should be 2.25 for GPA?
Attorney General Lehman: Yes, it should be 2.25 and this bill is asking it to be lowered to 2.00.
Senator Abreu: Question about the school, didn’t they need a good GPA to come to this school?
Senator Ramirez: I think this is if you are in good standing.
Attorney General Lehman: This GPA is to qualify to be in Student Government. This is the
lowest in the state, but we use A&S fees and all students pay the A&S fees despite their GPA. If
we were to increase it may deter people to be part of the membership. And a lower GPA did not
pass the students.
Senator Anderson: I assume we won’t tackle this issue today. But maybe bring up for discussion
later on.
Senator Ramirez: We would like 2.00 to be 2.25.
Senator Anderson reads Section 4.
Senator Ramirez: Do you all think Sec 4 and 5 are repeating each other?
Attorney General Lehman: It does state the Title Names in section B and D. Changing the names
would need to be changed throughout. Just use title number without name so there is not a
problem changing again.
Advisor Delaney: Some background of the Senate President duties in the Constitution. The only
one that needs to be there are what is stipulated by state legislation. Does not have to be in here.
Is listed in statutes in P&Ps.
Senator Ramirez: How do you all feel about revisiting this issue in the future?
Senator Anderson: Listing the Senate President and Senate President Pro-Tempore next to the
President and Judicial and having them in the Constitution makes them more concrete.
Senator Abreu: Another Section lists Pro-Tempore duties. Can we move it to Section 5?
Senator Ramirez: We could combine the three sections. Or just move one.
Senator Abreu: Let’s keep them separate but just put that one part where it talks more about the
Pro-Tempore’s duties.
Senator Anderson: Section 3, 4 and 5, lets create a consistent listing for each office.
Attorney General Lehman: In Article 3. Chief Justice does not have their section. But is
mentioned.
Senator Ramirez: Ok we’ll come back to this so we can finish getting through the bill.
Attorney General Lehman: I would recommend we don’t nitpick through the sections and just
make a list of what you do and don’t like because the Constitution doesn’t look the same. So
what we might be talking about is already changed.
Senator Ramirez: I agree.
Senator Anderson: make broad strokes.
Advisor Delaney: I agree good job.
Senator Ramirez: Thoughts on apportionment?
Attorney General Lehman: Section 4 lists out elected offices. I recommend we keep it to enforce.
Deleting to delete makes gaps in the Constitution. Right now, other section reads election open
for qualified student. I can see why they deleted to begin with but we don’t have to.
Advisor Delaney: Where are we?
Attorney General Lehman: Section 4 where it says apportionment under legislative under Article
2 where they got rid of all the apportionment. Want to know whether or not to undelete.
Advisor Delaney: This section is still in Constitution. This was either shifted or moved. Unless
you want to change roster system I say we keep it.
Attorney General Lehman: Listed under elections title. Covers seats and which type they are. I
don’t think you can go wrong with either decision.
Senator Anderson: That’s what I wanted to make sure that if this is removed, it is somewhere
else solidly.
Advisor Delaney: Sometimes redundancy can be a good thing.
Senator Ramirez: Bad tactic on my part in having us go section by section. We’ll go by as Paige
said, broad strokes. So if we can all go to Section 8, now 10, executive approval and veto. Are
we all there? Looks like e is cleaning up the language. Do we all agree with wording? Yes, ok.
Moving on to Article 3 the executive.
Senator Abreu: Where are breakdowns for positions like Ryan’s.
Attorney General Lehman: The ones that are listed are ones that do no change year after year.
These are the ones that need to be there every year. Positions like Ryan’s change depending on
the President. President has the power in statutes to create positions. Just positions that you need
every year are hear like Treasurer.
Senator Ramirez: The section that is stricken regarding the Treasurer is an outdated method.
Advisor Delaney: Move under duties and powers of Treasurer on another page.
Senator Anderson; Section 7 A, under his duties says President must appoint him.
Attorney General Lehman: This whole section is no longer. Revised from newer CRs.
Senator Anderson: Where does it say this position is created? Anything under President requiring
their appointment?
Advisor Delaney: It’s right above this section. Remember this is the bones you don’t want too
much details.
Attorney General Lehman: Nothing saying they must appoint within a month. So if you want to
add that in President’s duties, it’s up to you guys.
Senator Anderson: That was just my question if it was in there at all.
Attorney General Lehman: Core are Attorney General, Treasurer, and Student Advocate.
Advisor Delaney: However, the only one required by state statute is the Treasurer. The reason is
that we haven’t had a Student Advocate for example. We’ve had a commissioner general instead
of an Attorney General. Still up to discussion.
Attorney General Lehman: This is listed in the Attorney General position must be appointed in a
month. Article 3 Section 4. Is under president’s duties.
Senator Ramirez: To wrap up discussion, keep where is or move to Treasurer.
Senator Anderson: Keep where it is with President. – Everyone agreed.
Senator Ramirez: Paige, Section C, B is not there is in this bill.
Attorney General Lehman: Can add info about assistant directors. If you do, Title 11 would be
out of compliance because Title 9 902.1. No one should hold two positions in branches at the
same time. I believe for history reasons, the reason this is changed, how it worked before. Exec,
then cabinet, then exec agencies. Then a president at the time wanted the cabinet and exec
agencies in the executive branch.
Sen Anderson: Since appointed by President. There have been appointments so they fall under
President. They do function an extension of the President. We should make it congruent so they
tie back to what President wants with his administration.
Attorney General Lehman: They changed the makeup in this one sentence but not elsewhere.
Sen Ramirez: Then let’s look at this in the future. Next is Section 5 additional duties of the
President. The first stricken line is outdated, correct Paige?
Attorney General Lehman: It’s not outdated; no other CR has changed this. Currently in
Constitution, this is outdated.
Sen Anderson: While duties lie to President. It’s their duty to delegate if they wish.
Advisory Delaney: We don’t need to recreate this bill. We should just review and see what need
to stay and go. Want very little change.
Sen Anderson: The reason why I bring this up, if this is something that needs to be put in
Constitution to be open enough for Presidents down the road. Give an overarching bullet. Does
this mean shrinking sections.
Advisor Delaney: Looking at something so outdated. No reference on how this looks now.
Attorney General Lehman: Everything in here is in actual Constitution.
Sen Ramirez: We will come back to this later. Adding duties to Attorney General not in
Constitution.
Attorney General Lehman: Section C is listed verbatim in Title 3 Chapter 305.2 A. If you felt
this is something concrete, add to constitution but it’s in Statutes.
Sen Ramirez: We’ll come back to that then. Next is appointment of Justices.
Attorney General Lehman: In statutes it’s max of 2 years. If kept, as long as qualified and change
statutes or vice versa.
Sen Ramirez: Elections for graduate process. As Paige said this is already in Statutes.
Attorney General Lehman: In Title 5 and 6. Take out of Constitution all together. It’s a new
process tested first time this past year. If move entire process then violations cannot be heard.
During Elections cannot be changed because is in Constitution. In Statues, then can change far
quicker. 5 years down the road people felt this was concrete then maybe move into Constitution.
Sen Ramirez: Moving on let’s look at definition of elections. We’ll look at definition of Special
Elections later on. Let’s look at seat break down
AG Lehman gives a brief history on graduate seat.
Advisor Delaney: Currently, this section that is being cited is incorrect. 4 needs to be changed to
6.
Sen Anderson: Do we need to decide on this?
AG Lehman: There is another CR coming regarding graduate seats.
Sen Abreu: For consistency throughout, can we revisit candidacy later. Yes and added to list to
revisit.
AG Lehman: Section 7, A, B, and C. CR came later and removed C. Just A and B left. Does not
have installation of President.
Sen Anderson: We need to address that.
Sen Ramirez: Is it in Title 6?
AG Lehman: Outlined in Title 6.
Sen Ramirez: Look into adding into Constitution.
Advisor Delaney: Doesn’t have to go into Constitution as long as we have it.
Sen Anderson states problem in Enforcement code and added to list of things to address in the
future.
b. SB-13S-2686 Title X Revisions
Sen Anderson: Motion to reinstate Robert’s Rules. Seconded. No Objections. Passed.
Sen Ramirez: Do I hear a motion for CR-12S-2565 Constitutional Revisions of 2012? None.
Dies.
Sen Anderson: Motion to suspend Robert’s Rules to go over SB-13S-2686 Title X Revision.
Seconded. No Objections. Passed.
Sen Anderson explains the bill. Addressing the Code of Ethics and renaming it to Standard of
ethics.
AG Lehman gives background on the bill. Passed the last committee meeting April 1st, doesn’t
have enacting clause. Missing the 4th whereas. Recalled back to Senate.
Sen Ramirez shares information on Code of Ethics at other Student Governments in the state and
gives suggestions on how to refine our Code of Ethics.
AG Lehman points out Enforcements is its own title, title 7. Don’t want to do something
different in Code of Ethics.
Sen Anderson: We can arrange to what we make this want we want to be. My recommendation is
to table until next committee and we can all be on the same change with everything we like and
don’t like.
Sen Anderson: Motion to reinstate Robert’s Rules. Seconded. No Objections. Passed.
Sen Anderson: Motion to table SB-13S-2686 Title X Revisions until next committee meeting.
Seconded. No Objections. Passed.
X.
Announcements
Thank you everyone for bearing with me for my first CSC meeting. The next scheduled Senate
Meeting will be June 3rd, 2013 at 6:30 pm. If you want to meet with me, my office hours are 2-4
every Monday and Wednesday.
XI.
Final Roll Call
Quorum reestablished with 3 voting members.
XII.
Adjournment at 7:53 pm.