Agenda
S.E.S.S. Special General Meeting
February 27th , 2015
Contents
1.
Call to Order ......................................................................................................................................... 2
i.
Welcome to Council ............................................................................................................................. 2
2. Nomination of General Meetings Officials ............................................................................................... 2
3.
Adoption of the Agenda ........................................................................................................................ 3
3.
Approval of Minutes [Last Council Meeting Minutes]......................................................................... 3
5.
Old Business ..................................................................................................................................... 4
6.
New Business ........................................................................................................................................ 4
i.
Debate on Proposal 03: ......................................................................................................................... 5
7. Discussion ................................................................................................................................................. 8
8. Adjournment ............................................................................................................................................. 8
1.
Call to Order
The chair calls the meeting to order at 6:16 p.m.
Student groups present: AeroDesign, Sask Invent, USST, Spectrum, ¼ Scale, Huskie
Motorsports, EWB, USIET, CIM
Discipline societies present: Ag Bio, Chemical, Civil, Geo, IEEE (Elec/Comp), Mechanical,
Physics
i.
Welcome to Council
Acting Chair Ben Fahlman, Acting Secretary Avery Cornelius
44 Voting Members, Dr. Sean Maw (Huff Chair) present
2. Nomination of General Meetings Officials
For Chair: Ellen McLaughlin
Motioned by Conor Kerslake, Seconded by James Vossen
Accept Nomination – Used to be secretary, has chaired a lot of meetings before
For 42
Against 0
Abstain 2
For Chair: Ryan Chester
Motioned by James Vossen, Seconded by Skylar Allardyce
Accepted Nomination – Great leader, ignore petty comments and keeps meeting on track.
For 0
Against 0
Abstain 2
For Secretary: Avery Cornelius
Motioned by Conor Kerslake, Seconded by Alex Heimlick
Accept
For 42
Against 2
Abstain 0
3.
Adoption of the Agenda
Call for amendments
Conor Kerslake (SESS President): Instead of having a motion to take the student levy proposal document
to the University, we would like to motion to hold a referendum first (see Proposal 4). Conor would also
like to withdraw proposal 3 and invite Dr. Sean Maw to speak first on the agenda.
Proposal 01
Title:
Agenda
Mover:
Conor Kerslake, seconded by Emma Greendale
Goal:
To establish the order of proceedings for the Council Meeting.
BIRT:
The Agenda be adopted as displayed on screen.
Result:
Passed/Failed
For:
44
Against:
0
Abstain:
0
3.
Approval of Minutes [Last Council Meeting Minutes]
Proposal 02
Title:
Previous Minutes
Mover:
Conor Kerslake, Tim Hlady
Goal:
To officially approve minutes from the previous Council meeting.
BIRT:
The members acknowledge that the minutes are correct as circulated
through email and can be officially adopted.
Result:
Passed
For:
44
Against:
0
Abstain:
0
5.
Old Business

6.
None
New Business
Proposal 03
Title:
Motion to Present the SESS Student Levy Proposal to the University of
Saskatchewan
Mover:
Conor Kerslake, on behalf of the SESS Executive
Goal:
To adopt the SESS Student Levy Proposal document and present it to the
University of Saskatchewan for consideration.
Whereas:
Student Groups in the College of Engineering are underfunded, and the SESS
Executive has drafted a solution to the issue.
BIRT:
The SESS Student Levy Proposal document be adopted as circulated, and be
presented to the University of Saskatchewan for consideration.
Result:
Passed/Failed MOTION WITHDRAWN
For:
Against:
Abstain:
i.
Debate on Proposal 03: Proposal Withdrawn
Proposal 04
Title:
Student Levy Proposal
Mover:
Conor Kerslake, on behalf of the SESS Executive, Seconded by Ben Fahlman
Goal:
To approve the SESS Student Levy Proposal document with amendments and to call a
referendum on March 20-23 regarding the Student Levy Proposal.
Whereas:
Student Groups in the College of Engineering are underfunded, and the SESS
Executive has drafted a solution to the issue.
BIRT:
The SESS Student Levy Proposal document be adopted in its present form, and the
referendum be called for March 20-23.
Result:
Passed
For:
38
Against:
1
Abstain:
0
i.



Debate on Proposal 04:
Ben Fahlman (SESS VP External) and Conor Kerslake (SESS President) will speak on behalf of
the motion. (Discussion of Student Levy Proposal Document)
Met with USSU this week – are tentatively in support but would like to hear support from
students themselves (was sick and could not attend SGM)
These fees would not be applied to next year’s tuition, this motion will be bringing the student
levy proposal to the committee in charge of discussing student levies. This provides a year for the
SESS executive in correspondence with Council, the Board of Directors and Students, to work
out the distribution of the funds.















If the endowment fund was set up with the University of Saskatchewan, it may be able to have
charitable status and donators to the fund would be able to receive a charitable receipt. Professor
Sean Maw – Be careful as this puts restrictions on distribution.
Ryan Chester (USST) - $2.50 to split between discipline societies and $2.50 for student societies
but $20 per term to SESS. How does this seem fair? – A lot of the SESS’ funds they receive are
going directly back into the student groups. They are not allowed to apply for endowment
funding. When student groups and discipline societies are applying for up to 50% of their budget
– How is that realistic?
How much are fees going up for? $55 per term. $30 to endowment fund, $20 to SESS
membership fee, $2.50 each for discipline society fee and affiliated group fee.
How would it be shown – Similar to USSU fees in tuition
If this motion is passed now, will the fees be set? – No, we will be holding a referendum to
discuss what students feel about this. If the referendum passes it will be sent onto the student levy
committee. If it fails, reasons for why it failed will be discussed.
Is it tax deductible? – If it is under student fees and tuition, yes.
Why is the SESS membership opt-out when the others are not? – That is the only fee that a
specific group is gaining money directly (not applied for.) The endowment fund and student
levies would be the most sustainable for student group funding in the future.
Currently membership is opt-in and $20 per year. When most people will probably be too lazy to
opt-out, why are you doubling fees when non members already benefit from member services? –
Throughout the year the SESS has been looking to increase member value; this means increasing
the services that are not provided to students through other sources (tutorials are not put on by
every society).
The endowment fund does not mention supporting new buildings? – This document is not the
policy that is being put in place. Future meetings
Currently when you buy a membership, you get yearbooks, agendas, and mugs. Will this
continue? – Conor’s idea was to still provide the problem paper, redbook and yearbook and
supply the mug to only first years. – People like the mugs
How will students be made aware of their ability to opt-out? – Would be equivalent to opt-out of
Health and Dental for the USSU.
Are you looking in the future to making it mandatory?
Slade Mckee (UofS Aerodesign) and Devin Bradburn (SaskInvent) would like to note their
support for the student levies as presented.
Will all the new money coming in, would it be possible to have more tutorials throughout the year
instead of just one before midterms?
Looking at current membership income and proposed income. Do not see the value in increasing
the fee and by making it opt-out instead of opt in. – The reason for $20 a term was chosen was
because the membership fee has not changed as far back as records exist. Comparably to
universities across Canada, the average undergraduate society fee is $21.56 per term. By
increasing this membership, we would be able to provide the services that the college needs. The
levy at this value will allow for that. Examples – UBC pays $100 for conferences instead of
$300+








Of the 43 member schools in the CFES, 3 are opt in (including the U of S, the other two schools
are less than 10 years old) while the other 40 are opt-out or mandatory.
When we compare ourselves to other universities, we are not happy with paying more to the
university. – Lowest fees are $10.50 a year and highest are $250 a term. The difference between
this fund and tuition increases is that the increase in tuition has not seen any benefits (new lab
equipment that is available or buildings).The SESS is not wanting to compete with student groups
and discipline societies for sponsorship.
As a discipline society (Civil), we found issues at first with the increase in budget and fees;
however, the end result benefits the discipline societies and student groups to benefit more in the
end. Civil’s opinion was to have the SESS levy as $15 a term instead of $20.
An issue with increase in tuition fees was that no benefits were seen. –We would like to see
where the proposed funds will go to (see the budget).
James Vossen (UofS Aerodesign) is in support of the levies but suggests that the budget needs to
be reviewed before more suggestions to change are thrown out. In favor of this going forward as
this is a sustainable resource for future students.
Sean Sebry (USIET) supports the idea but feels not everything is worked out. Would like to have
further discussion.
Ryan Chester (USSU) is against the idea.
Once we make membership opt-in. Where is the accountability and drive to make the
membership beneficial to have? When budgets are proposed and ideas put forward, the board of
directors has the final vote on any changes. The SESS executive does not have the say to
completely revamp how funds are distribution. The Board of Directors is made up of the
presidents of the discipline societies, a minority of SESS executive and the first year director.
Sakeena Akhtar would like to make a motion to reduce the SESS membership fee from $20 to $10;
seconded by Jamie Labrecque.
- The extra $20 the SESS would be receiving is going directly back to student services. – A lot of
people would probably opt out of the $40 membership compared to the $20 membership. Opt-out
would be per term (not finalized). - The health and dental by USSU is opted out of in the first
month of school and is for the whole year. - The current increase affects things that are not
currently provided to students. – If we were to leave the membership fee to $20 per year, how
easy is it to increase it in the future. Another referendum is needed. – It is frustrating to not have
money to use currently, this change now will benefit greatly in the future.
- Note: A referendum is a yes/no motion.
- Wouldn’t more discussion with all students be more beneficial
- How many people need to vote in the referendum? – 10% of the college needs to vote and either
50% + 1 or 2/3s need to be in favour.
- The first thing cut from the SESS budget when sponsorship
- Would rather see the SESS levy as $10 per term and then $35 per term for the endowment.
- Is it possible to put in a referendum that in 10 years you would increase the budget? – Probably
not, will check into it.
- Could we add to policy that the fees be reviewed every X years?
For: 10
Abstain: 2
Against: 27
Floor open to student interest groups/ discipline societies that are for or against?
¼ Scale is for the proposed levies as presented. If it doesn’t pass at referendum, it can be looked at again.
Ag Bio is for the proposed levies.
Spectrum is for the proposed levies are presented.
SAE Aero is in favor of the student levies
Emma Greendale (Civil, Spectrum) motions to reduce the SESS levy fee from $20 per term to $15 per
term; Seconded by Sakeena Akhtar
- The whole process has already taken a year to discuss fees; the reworking of fees will not get any
easier.
- Note: A referendum does not provide information about where the money goes. If a referendum
fails, it reflects negatively to go back and have a second referendum.
- Lucas Baldo (Mechanical) strongly supports the endowment fund but feels that too high of
membership fees will not have the support of the students.
- There will be three weeks of campaigning to raise awareness for the proposals.
For: 34
Abstain: 1
Against: 4
7. Discussion
Dr. Sean Maw (Huff Chair) – Is in favour of endowment fund proposal. Waterloo endowment fund
started by a friend of Professor Maw is now worth 12 million dollars currently, with $60,000 available for
distribution every year. This endowment fund contributed 4 million dollars to a new engineering building
in Waterloo. Other schools such as Manitoba also have endowment funds in place and the implementation
of the endowment fund is a very important procedure. U of C has very recently started an Endowment
Fund, McMaster started in ’97 and distributed 60k per year. MIT has a 12 billion dollar endowment fund
and receive 1 billion every year.
At $60/student per year for 1600 students the endowment fund will provide $5000 by next year if
implemented. Endowment funds are also open to alumni donations.
Websites for other engineering student societies’ endowment funds are below:
Weef.waterloo.ca
Endowment.eng.umanitoba.ca
8. Adjournment
At this time, the chair will entertain a motion to adjourn the Council Meeting.
Motioned by Conor Kerslake
Seconded by Everyone
Meeting Adjourned at 7:48