USF Sarasota-Manatee Student Government Association Legislative ...
USF Sarasota-Manatee Student Government Association Legislative Branch 03/4/16
Senators in Attendance: Alicia Whitworth, Sean Barber, Marina Rambo, Darrel Xayarath, Ricardo Centeno, Kate Quiros, Andre Obradovich Student Services Members in Attendance: Guest(s): Jonilda Bahja, Danielle McGinley, Sydney Whitlock, Jeanie Ziven Call to Order: Barry Callahan calls the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Amendments to the Meeting Agenda: o Alicia moves to add SB [P] 41-015 and SB [S] 41-016 and SB [A] 41-042 Sean Seconds The motion passes and the agenda is amended to reflect the new additions o Andre moves to approve the agenda as amended. Amendments to the Meeting Minutes: o Alicia moves to approve the minutes for February 19th 2016 o Sean seconds o The motion passes and the minutes for February 19th 2016 have been approved Senate President Updates: o A wing Renovations o “We actually went through the formal vote inside of the meeting for the A-wing renovations, so everything in that committee has been approved. The next step for us, is to make a formal document authorizing the expenditure of 1.5 million dollars out of our reserves and 500 thousand dollars out of CITF funding. Alex made a student government resolution that was presented at the Jusenex earlier this week. Everyone has signed it as far as I am concern, and hopefully we can move forward with the plans ASAP.” o Elections o “We got an amazing turnout for the elections; we received over 200 votes for the general election with is a significant improvement over the 80 votes we received two years ago. This really shows that we are getting students involved and that we are really representing the student body.” Jusenex o o “We discussed several things at the Jusenex yesterday, One being salaries; we had an open discussion about whether the amount that we budget for our salaries are appropriate. There were a lot of mixed opinions on that. Nothing really got solidified in that meeting, we just decided that we needed to gather more evidence on how many hours senators are clocking and whether or not the students would be comfortable with amount of spending we use on salaries. So I proposed to Alicia that during our next food for thought that we show students our budget and see what they think. If they are not comfortable with our budget then we should react to it accordingly. Other than that, not much else was discussed.” o Budget Committee o “Budget Committee has already starting meeting and I’ll save some of their updates for later on in the meeting.” o CAB ROP
o
The CAB ROP has recently been updated to reflect a stricter ROP, which I think that is fantastic.
Old Business: New Business: o Judicial Confirmation o “Today will we be interviewing Sydney Whitlock for Associate Justice” o Barry asks Sydney to leave the room o Barry does a full reading of the interview questions 1. What is you strategy to remain impartial in dealing with people you know? 2. How would you go about resolving conflict without escalating the situation? 3. Have you ever been in a situation when you had to deal with dissatisfied people, and what did you do to pacify the situation and what was the outcome? 4. Why do you think the Judicial Branch is the best fit for you within Student Government? 5. Why are you interested in being considered for a position within the Judicial Branch, and how will the experience benefit you if you are selected? (What do you hope to get out of this experience?) 6. If there was a trial in which the removal of a Student Government member would be the best course of action not only for SG, but for the entire student body as a whole, would you vote for removal of said member if there was sufficient evidence to do so? o Andre moves to approve the questions Sean seconds The motion passes and the questions have been approved o Barry invites Sydney back into the room o Interview Sydney Whitlock 1. What is you strategy to remain impartial in dealing with people you know? In dealing with people I know, if I were elected, I would look at the situation objectively. I would take myself out of the situation, out of bias. And I would try to look at the conflict from all points of view in order to come up with a compromise that benefits everyone. 2. How would you go about resolving conflict without escalating the situation? When dealing with conflict without escalating the situation, I like to remain calm and make sure everyone involved is calm, in order to keep emotions out of the problem because when emotions get involved that is when problems get messy. And I feel that people need to think logically when dealing with conflict.
3. Have you ever been in a situation when you had to deal with dissatisfied people, and what did you do to pacify the situation and what was the outcome? In high school, I was an office secretary at my high school, and often I had to deal with parents who were very angry when it came to their students because they are very protective of their students. It was my job to deal with them and to make sure they were calm and that they understood the situation in depth because sometimes they were left in the dark. That’s probably why they were angry and it was my job to make sure they knew the situation clearly and were calm.
4. Why do you think the Judicial Branch is the best fit for you within Student Government? Well I just love our judicial system in America. I love following Supreme Court cases; I’m very fascinated by it. I love rules and orders and I feel that the judicial branch plays a large part of rules and orders on this campus. 5. Why are you interested in being considered for a position within the Judicial Branch, and how will the experience benefit you if you are selected? (What do you hope to get out of this experience?) I would just love to be a part of student government anyway I can. I would love to be a part of direst decision making anyway that I could be, because I love this school and I love everyone involved, I love the student and I would love to make a difference. 6. If there was a trial in which the removal of a Student Government member would be the best course of action not only for SG, but for the entire student body as a whole, would you vote for removal of said member if there was sufficient evidence to do so? Insufficient evidence? If there was insufficient evidence, I would like to see more evidence. I would like for the member in question to have a fair trial with the jury of their peers. And if we were to come up unanimously that the member should be removed then I would have to agree. o Following up questions None o Barry asks Sydney to step outside during the discussion process o Ricardo motions for Roll call vote on Sydney Whitlock for associate justice. Andre seconds The motion passes and we shall have a roll call vote o ROLE CALL VOTE Ricardo –aye Darrel –aye Marina –aye Andre –aye Sean –aye Alicia –aye Kate –aye The vote is unanimous and Sydney Whitlock is confirmed as the new Associate Justice. SB [R] 41-016 Pool table Restoration )reconsideration o Barry states, “I put this on the agenda because Christine brought it to my attention that if we were to pass this bill and then we would have to level the pool table twice due to the A wing renovations. The breakdown should be in a PDF separate from here. Inside the breakdown for this, there is a 25 dollar fine for releveling the pool table. So Christine brought it to my attention that if we do it now, and level the table, then we would have to do it after the A wing renovations take place. So I was hoping for a motion for reconsideration so we can delay this till the next fiscal year. I thought maybe we could do the payment request after the A wing renovations take place but unfortunately when the renovations are done, it will be a new fiscal year. So I feel that we should incorporate a line item for the pool table in our next year’s budget. I know the executive board have plans to move out the table we have in their currently and put the air hockey table there in the meantime. So do we have any questions? o Questions Andre asks, “So we would basically be postponing this from happening?”
o
o
Barry replies, “Basically it would take off this bill, and hopefully, once we go through the budgeting process, make a line item for it. Of course when we go through the final approval of the budget, you all will be here so I thought this would be an easy fix for the time being. Sean asks, “ If that’s the case why can’t we just be the initial $345 to upholster it now and then save the releveling for when it gets moved?” Barry replies, “We can totally do that, but because the way the bill was passed, we’re still going to need a reconsideration and then draft a new bill anyways.” Marina asks, “Do we know how much it will cost for them to come back out and releveling the table? Because right now in this bulk, in the whole transaction, it only costs $25 for releveling. If it only cost $25 dollars next time, then it kinda seems like a moot point. But if it’s going to have a $60 dollar trip fee plus $25 then I can understand waiting. Barry replies, “I cannot answer that right now.” Marina moves for open discussion Andre seconds The motion passes and discussion is now open Marina states, “When this bill first came through, I asked some of the same questions Christine is asking. I was wondering why we were doing this before the A wing Renovations. But looking at the cost, the main cost that we are debating being $25; if it really doesn’t cost significantly more for them to come back and have them relevel it again then I don’t see why we would have to go through the issue of storing it and using the hockey table, which is less popular than the pool table. Sean states, “When I had contacted the company who does the refurbishment they told me that releveling the table was a flat fee, that wasn’t in conjunction with reupholstering the table. o Marina asks, “Do they have a trip fee?” Sean states, “I don’t believe so, no.” Marina states, “So that’s something we should really find out, because if there’s no fee then I don’t see why we can’t have them come back out again to relevel the table.” Alicia states, “I agree with Marina, if it’s only $25 dollars then why wait” Ricardo states, “The only thing I can say on this, is that I’m ok with passing this as long as going forward, all this will happen soon. I just don’t want to see this process get delayed any further. Darrel states, “So has there been a lot of complaints about the pool table?” o Barry replies, “Most people just expect pool tables to be leveled. o Darrel states, “I just think this will all be easier if we just wait till the renovations. Marina states, “I felt the exact same way when this bill first passed through but at the same time, if the main cost we are concerned with is with releveling the table a second time, then why we should restrict students from utilizing it now.” Sean states, “If you look at the table now, people have stuck papers under the table leg to try to balance it. The pool table is pretty much the most popular thing in the game room next to Super Smash Bros. Even right now, students are still using the broken pool cues just because of how desperate they are to play it.
o
o
Darrel states, “If we were to do this, then I would suggest to create new policing guidelines to ensure no more damage can happen to the table. Sean states, “I’m currently working out a new checkout system for the pool cues and pool balls. Darrel states, “The main issue is that people feel that they are no consequences to their actions.” Ricardo states, “I feel that I’m ready to vote on this bill and if we have any ideas for making regulations on the pool table, we can save that for open forum. Marina states, “I would actually like to table the bill, until we know the exact cost for them coming out a second time to releveling the table.” o Alicia moves to table the bill Marina seconds All in favor- Darrel, Kate All oppose – Ricardo, Andre, Sean All abstain The motion passes and the bill has been tabled. SB [A] 41-041 HFTP leadership conference o Alicia takes the floor Hi everyone, I am the club liaison for HFTP and I have the club president here. They would like to go to a conference, it is May 21st to the 25th. It is the national restaurant conference and the purpose is for where they can see new technology in the new trends in the business. It would be a total of $6513 and that comes out $814 per person. That cost does not include an advisor because the organization us paying for their advisor to go. They are going for 4 nights They are taking 3 boys and 5 girls o Questions Marina asks, “The hotel for 3 days and 4 nights seems a little expensive but I don’t see where the nightly prices are listed. Alicia states, “It’s on the screen shot, its $185 a night.” Marina asks, “Is it the conference hotel?” o Alicia replies, “It is but the prices can go up to $300 a night so it’s one of the lower ones.” o Marina asks, “So the conference is happening at that hotel?” Jonilda replies, “No it is no, the event is actually held at a different location.” Ricardo asks, “How many conferences have you guys gone to this year?” Jonilda replies, “We have gone to one conference.” o Andre moves to approve SB [A] 41-041 Darrel seconds Motion passes and SB [A] 41-041 has been approved SB [P] 41-015 Electronic Attendance o Alicia takes the floor “Basically the purpose is, well, let me read the purpose” “Members attending the meeting via technology should not be counted as absent.” (skype, speaker phone) “I thought this was a good decision, because if you skype in then you’re still here and still participating.” o Questions Marina asks, “Do we have any type of guidelines that outline how often
o
someone can attend meetings remotely? You might want to add something like that. Alicia states, “No I have not put anything in place. Kate moves for open discussion Kate states, “I just wanted to answer your question from my own perspective, I don’t think that there should be any regulation on how often we can skype into meetings because we already have so many other restrictions in regards to emailing. I consider someone skyping in as present so I don’t see why we should put a limitation on that anyways. Marina states, “My concern is that have been people who have taken advantage on various loopholes and things like that, and on the topic that a senator can attend via remote services, there are plenty of times I just come to campus for these meetings. I feel that it can be taken advantaged off. Kate states, “I disagree, I would still consider people skyping in as present but I would still encourage senators to still make meetings. Ricardo states, “I’m seeing both sides of this right now, I think what Marina is trying to say is that we want to avoid another Bryce scenario where someone was taken advantage of loopholes in ROP. I would like to make an amendment where everyone can agree on, so that we can make this compromise. Rachel states, “Why don’t we just make an amendment stating that it’s at the discretion on the Chair of the meeting and it must be done one day in advance? Alicia states, “I know we have had issues in the past, but let me put it this way; What if we have a senator that has a job in Tampa, and we can find a way where they can attend our meetings despite their scheduling conflict. They are being active and I don’t think we should penalize them for trying to be proactive to their scheduling conflict. Marina states, “I just want to say that we are asked about our schedule in the beginning of every semester to set a time where we can all meet in person. As for a 24 hour notice, sometimes my son is sick in the morning of the meeting and I don’t have the luxury of letting everyone know 24 hours ahead of time. I feel that we should put some regulation like senators can attend up to 30% of total meetings electronically. Kate states, “I don’t think that we should put anymore limitations on the bill because the reality is that we schedule these meetings around each other and if someone has a scheduling conflict then we change it again. This is also not another Bryce-esk issue, this issue is in regards to someone who has an opportunity to attend the meeting unconventionally, not just to not attend at all. Ricardo states, “I just don’t want someone to be able to blow off every meeting in person and to take advantage of the legislation. Personally I enjoy senators taking the time to come to campus and being here physically. My opinion aside, why don’t we just make an amendment that the decision will be at the Discretion of the chair of the meeting. So if there is conflict, then grivenceous can be filed and we can let the Judicial Ethics Committee take care of it. Alicia states, “I can understand that it can be abused, but I feel like that we should deal with those problems when the issues present themselves. Marina, “I think its human nature for people to take advantage of Loop holes, so I feel that it’s inevitable for someone to abuse it. So I propose that unless approved by the chair, a senator cannot attend more than 33% of total senate meetings electronically. I think putting rules in place saves drama later. Kate states, “I don’t see the issue with someone attending remotely all the
o
time. Personally I feel that there are still fulfilling their responsibility as a senator, just as if they were here in person. Marina states, “I feel that there is a lot of things that are missed when someone is not present physically in meetings. There would be a loss of communication initially and I feel that people would be missing out on everything that is happening in the room. Kate states, “Then I would argue that people who listen to our voice recordings of these meetings are also losing the meaning of these meetings. That is just my counterpoint to that, because the way we should conduct ourselves should be verbally since we are required to take minutes. Marina states, “The people who are listening to it afterwards aren’t the ones making the decisions.” Kate states, “That is true.” Darrel states, “If it isn’t broke don’t fix it, I think the bill is fine the way it is.” Ricardo states, “I don’t think it’s that complicated to make an amendment. I feel that it’s already been stated and I don’t see where this can go wrong with adding an amendment to the bill. I propose the amendment states, “Senators can attend up to 33% of total meetings and anything meetings further must be decided at the discretion of the chair.” Andre states, “I’m all for the amendment.” Alicia states, “I’m in favor for setting the mark at 33%, but I feel that anything pass that should be decided by simple super majority vote. o Ricardo moves to amend the bill to reflect, “A senator may attend up to 33% of total senate meetings via electronic attendance and anything meetings going forward must be voted on by simple majority vote.” Marina seconds All in favor –Andre, Darrel, Sean, Alicia All opposed- Kate All abstain The motion passes and the bill has been amended as stated. o Andre moves to approve SB [P] 41-015 as amended Alicia seconds All in favor- Ricardo, Marina, Darrel, Sean All oppose- Kate All Abstain The motion passes and SB [P] 41-015 has been approved as amended. SB [S] 41-016 Sweep exemptions o Alicia takes the floor Last year we had added a clause stating that after the fiscal year we would sweep 75% of the budget left over to senate appropriations for the next year and 25% would go into the Reserves. With the new A wing Renovations on the Horizon, we are using over half of our total reserves which is 1.5 million dollars. This bill is to remove that clause so now everything can be swept into reserves so we can start to build them up once again for future projects. o Questions Kate asks, “My question is why you decided to take out both subsections under title 8 when we can just readjust the total percentage of how much is swept back into senate appropriations?” Alicia states, “I thought that those both sections were added to together. Marina asks, “It says that the 75% of the remaining budget can be swept into senate appropriations if requested, then can’t we just not request it.” Alicia states, “Yes that is true”
Marina states, “Then doesn’t that mean we just should not request it?” Alicia replies, “Truthfully we can just remove the sub section 804.2 instead of both sections. Marina states, “Well can we just revise the section to state a new percentage can be swept back in upon request by student government?” Alicia states, “The first section states we can request but the second section states that it will happen regardless.” Marina, “So can we revise that section to reflect that it can be requested and be based on a new percentage.” Alicia states, “I feel that is a great idea, but I would like to further discussed in the amendment committee rather than discuss this on the floor.” o Alicia moves to send Chapter 804 to the amendments committee Marina seconds The motion passes and the chapter has been sent to committee o SB [A] 41-042 Planners for Week of Welcome o Barry takes the floor. I was approached by Kim Mones and they noticed that we have a surplus of planners in the office and to prevent that for the next year they would like to hand out planners during orientations that would take place during the summer and early fall. But to do that they need to money to make the purchase now because they would not be able to do it that early next fiscal year. They would like $2400 to be transferred in the planners line item o Sean moves to approve SB [A] 41-042 Kate seconds The motion passes and SB [A] 41-042 has been approved Open forum o Ricardo moves for a reconsideration for sending Chapter 804 to amendments o Ricardo states that the chapter can be addressed better in Appropriations and can be done a lot faster in that committee rather than amendments. o Andre seconds o The motion passes and it has been reconsidered o Ricardo moves to send Chapter 804 to the appropriations committee o Andre seconds o The motion passes and the bill has been sent to committee. o Kate states she has some thoughts on the way meetings are conducted o Kate states that we shouldn’t have to be recognized to make a motion according to Roberts’s rules. o Barry states that according to Roberts Rules everyone has to be recognized to make a motion or anything for that matter. o Kate states that we shouldn’t do it either way, she feels that it would make meetings go smoother. Ricardo states that he is not opposed and he doesn’t think it wouldn’t hurt the flow of meetings if we didn’t have to be recognized. o Barry states the purpose is to control the order of the flow of the meetings. o Barry also states everything is up for the chair to be decided on how the meetings are conducted. o The senators feel that they would like to have a test run where they don’t have to be recognized during the meeting next week. Barry holds a vote on the matter Next week they will have a test run
Ricardo brings up setting up guidelines for policing the pool table. o Kate suggest that we just run under the same guidelines for the checkout program where students will be held responsible if it is damaged under their name. o Announcements/Upcoming Events: o
o
o
o
o
Executive Board Updates (Sean) Geborah is almost finished with the book of bull Michelle has expressed that the bill system still needs more work. Kathy is working of the new design for the tervis tumblers They are working on extending hours for the campus on most nights. Someone stole the condom bowls in men room on the 2nd floor They are creating an Ad hoc committee for deciding the new gym equipment post renovations They want to create a voting registration day on this campus and they are trying to work with local politicians They are working on new t shirts for the entirety of student government April 8th CAB are conducting their Club Carnival Judicial Board: (Danielle) Parking appeals We have been revising titles to reflect the current changes to the ERC We are working on the electronic parking passes CAB updates No CAB updates
Andre moves to adjourn the meeting o Sean seconds o The motion passes
Meeting Adjourned: Meeting adjourned at 3:19 P.M.
Senators in Attendance: Alicia Whitworth, Sean Barber, Marina Rambo, Darrel Xayarath, Ricardo Centeno, Kate Quiros, Andre Obradovich Student Services Members in Attendance: Guest(s): Jonilda Bahja, Danielle McGinley, Sydney Whitlock, Jeanie Ziven Call to Order: Barry Callahan calls the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Amendments to the Meeting Agenda: o Alicia moves to add SB [P] 41-015 and SB [S] 41-016 and SB [A] 41-042 Sean Seconds The motion passes and the agenda is amended to reflect the new additions o Andre moves to approve the agenda as amended. Amendments to the Meeting Minutes: o Alicia moves to approve the minutes for February 19th 2016 o Sean seconds o The motion passes and the minutes for February 19th 2016 have been approved Senate President Updates: o A wing Renovations o “We actually went through the formal vote inside of the meeting for the A-wing renovations, so everything in that committee has been approved. The next step for us, is to make a formal document authorizing the expenditure of 1.5 million dollars out of our reserves and 500 thousand dollars out of CITF funding. Alex made a student government resolution that was presented at the Jusenex earlier this week. Everyone has signed it as far as I am concern, and hopefully we can move forward with the plans ASAP.” o Elections o “We got an amazing turnout for the elections; we received over 200 votes for the general election with is a significant improvement over the 80 votes we received two years ago. This really shows that we are getting students involved and that we are really representing the student body.” Jusenex o o “We discussed several things at the Jusenex yesterday, One being salaries; we had an open discussion about whether the amount that we budget for our salaries are appropriate. There were a lot of mixed opinions on that. Nothing really got solidified in that meeting, we just decided that we needed to gather more evidence on how many hours senators are clocking and whether or not the students would be comfortable with amount of spending we use on salaries. So I proposed to Alicia that during our next food for thought that we show students our budget and see what they think. If they are not comfortable with our budget then we should react to it accordingly. Other than that, not much else was discussed.” o Budget Committee o “Budget Committee has already starting meeting and I’ll save some of their updates for later on in the meeting.” o CAB ROP
o
The CAB ROP has recently been updated to reflect a stricter ROP, which I think that is fantastic.
Old Business: New Business: o Judicial Confirmation o “Today will we be interviewing Sydney Whitlock for Associate Justice” o Barry asks Sydney to leave the room o Barry does a full reading of the interview questions 1. What is you strategy to remain impartial in dealing with people you know? 2. How would you go about resolving conflict without escalating the situation? 3. Have you ever been in a situation when you had to deal with dissatisfied people, and what did you do to pacify the situation and what was the outcome? 4. Why do you think the Judicial Branch is the best fit for you within Student Government? 5. Why are you interested in being considered for a position within the Judicial Branch, and how will the experience benefit you if you are selected? (What do you hope to get out of this experience?) 6. If there was a trial in which the removal of a Student Government member would be the best course of action not only for SG, but for the entire student body as a whole, would you vote for removal of said member if there was sufficient evidence to do so? o Andre moves to approve the questions Sean seconds The motion passes and the questions have been approved o Barry invites Sydney back into the room o Interview Sydney Whitlock 1. What is you strategy to remain impartial in dealing with people you know? In dealing with people I know, if I were elected, I would look at the situation objectively. I would take myself out of the situation, out of bias. And I would try to look at the conflict from all points of view in order to come up with a compromise that benefits everyone. 2. How would you go about resolving conflict without escalating the situation? When dealing with conflict without escalating the situation, I like to remain calm and make sure everyone involved is calm, in order to keep emotions out of the problem because when emotions get involved that is when problems get messy. And I feel that people need to think logically when dealing with conflict.
3. Have you ever been in a situation when you had to deal with dissatisfied people, and what did you do to pacify the situation and what was the outcome? In high school, I was an office secretary at my high school, and often I had to deal with parents who were very angry when it came to their students because they are very protective of their students. It was my job to deal with them and to make sure they were calm and that they understood the situation in depth because sometimes they were left in the dark. That’s probably why they were angry and it was my job to make sure they knew the situation clearly and were calm.
4. Why do you think the Judicial Branch is the best fit for you within Student Government? Well I just love our judicial system in America. I love following Supreme Court cases; I’m very fascinated by it. I love rules and orders and I feel that the judicial branch plays a large part of rules and orders on this campus. 5. Why are you interested in being considered for a position within the Judicial Branch, and how will the experience benefit you if you are selected? (What do you hope to get out of this experience?) I would just love to be a part of student government anyway I can. I would love to be a part of direst decision making anyway that I could be, because I love this school and I love everyone involved, I love the student and I would love to make a difference. 6. If there was a trial in which the removal of a Student Government member would be the best course of action not only for SG, but for the entire student body as a whole, would you vote for removal of said member if there was sufficient evidence to do so? Insufficient evidence? If there was insufficient evidence, I would like to see more evidence. I would like for the member in question to have a fair trial with the jury of their peers. And if we were to come up unanimously that the member should be removed then I would have to agree. o Following up questions None o Barry asks Sydney to step outside during the discussion process o Ricardo motions for Roll call vote on Sydney Whitlock for associate justice. Andre seconds The motion passes and we shall have a roll call vote o ROLE CALL VOTE Ricardo –aye Darrel –aye Marina –aye Andre –aye Sean –aye Alicia –aye Kate –aye The vote is unanimous and Sydney Whitlock is confirmed as the new Associate Justice. SB [R] 41-016 Pool table Restoration )reconsideration o Barry states, “I put this on the agenda because Christine brought it to my attention that if we were to pass this bill and then we would have to level the pool table twice due to the A wing renovations. The breakdown should be in a PDF separate from here. Inside the breakdown for this, there is a 25 dollar fine for releveling the pool table. So Christine brought it to my attention that if we do it now, and level the table, then we would have to do it after the A wing renovations take place. So I was hoping for a motion for reconsideration so we can delay this till the next fiscal year. I thought maybe we could do the payment request after the A wing renovations take place but unfortunately when the renovations are done, it will be a new fiscal year. So I feel that we should incorporate a line item for the pool table in our next year’s budget. I know the executive board have plans to move out the table we have in their currently and put the air hockey table there in the meantime. So do we have any questions? o Questions Andre asks, “So we would basically be postponing this from happening?”
o
o
Barry replies, “Basically it would take off this bill, and hopefully, once we go through the budgeting process, make a line item for it. Of course when we go through the final approval of the budget, you all will be here so I thought this would be an easy fix for the time being. Sean asks, “ If that’s the case why can’t we just be the initial $345 to upholster it now and then save the releveling for when it gets moved?” Barry replies, “We can totally do that, but because the way the bill was passed, we’re still going to need a reconsideration and then draft a new bill anyways.” Marina asks, “Do we know how much it will cost for them to come back out and releveling the table? Because right now in this bulk, in the whole transaction, it only costs $25 for releveling. If it only cost $25 dollars next time, then it kinda seems like a moot point. But if it’s going to have a $60 dollar trip fee plus $25 then I can understand waiting. Barry replies, “I cannot answer that right now.” Marina moves for open discussion Andre seconds The motion passes and discussion is now open Marina states, “When this bill first came through, I asked some of the same questions Christine is asking. I was wondering why we were doing this before the A wing Renovations. But looking at the cost, the main cost that we are debating being $25; if it really doesn’t cost significantly more for them to come back and have them relevel it again then I don’t see why we would have to go through the issue of storing it and using the hockey table, which is less popular than the pool table. Sean states, “When I had contacted the company who does the refurbishment they told me that releveling the table was a flat fee, that wasn’t in conjunction with reupholstering the table. o Marina asks, “Do they have a trip fee?” Sean states, “I don’t believe so, no.” Marina states, “So that’s something we should really find out, because if there’s no fee then I don’t see why we can’t have them come back out again to relevel the table.” Alicia states, “I agree with Marina, if it’s only $25 dollars then why wait” Ricardo states, “The only thing I can say on this, is that I’m ok with passing this as long as going forward, all this will happen soon. I just don’t want to see this process get delayed any further. Darrel states, “So has there been a lot of complaints about the pool table?” o Barry replies, “Most people just expect pool tables to be leveled. o Darrel states, “I just think this will all be easier if we just wait till the renovations. Marina states, “I felt the exact same way when this bill first passed through but at the same time, if the main cost we are concerned with is with releveling the table a second time, then why we should restrict students from utilizing it now.” Sean states, “If you look at the table now, people have stuck papers under the table leg to try to balance it. The pool table is pretty much the most popular thing in the game room next to Super Smash Bros. Even right now, students are still using the broken pool cues just because of how desperate they are to play it.
o
o
Darrel states, “If we were to do this, then I would suggest to create new policing guidelines to ensure no more damage can happen to the table. Sean states, “I’m currently working out a new checkout system for the pool cues and pool balls. Darrel states, “The main issue is that people feel that they are no consequences to their actions.” Ricardo states, “I feel that I’m ready to vote on this bill and if we have any ideas for making regulations on the pool table, we can save that for open forum. Marina states, “I would actually like to table the bill, until we know the exact cost for them coming out a second time to releveling the table.” o Alicia moves to table the bill Marina seconds All in favor- Darrel, Kate All oppose – Ricardo, Andre, Sean All abstain The motion passes and the bill has been tabled. SB [A] 41-041 HFTP leadership conference o Alicia takes the floor Hi everyone, I am the club liaison for HFTP and I have the club president here. They would like to go to a conference, it is May 21st to the 25th. It is the national restaurant conference and the purpose is for where they can see new technology in the new trends in the business. It would be a total of $6513 and that comes out $814 per person. That cost does not include an advisor because the organization us paying for their advisor to go. They are going for 4 nights They are taking 3 boys and 5 girls o Questions Marina asks, “The hotel for 3 days and 4 nights seems a little expensive but I don’t see where the nightly prices are listed. Alicia states, “It’s on the screen shot, its $185 a night.” Marina asks, “Is it the conference hotel?” o Alicia replies, “It is but the prices can go up to $300 a night so it’s one of the lower ones.” o Marina asks, “So the conference is happening at that hotel?” Jonilda replies, “No it is no, the event is actually held at a different location.” Ricardo asks, “How many conferences have you guys gone to this year?” Jonilda replies, “We have gone to one conference.” o Andre moves to approve SB [A] 41-041 Darrel seconds Motion passes and SB [A] 41-041 has been approved SB [P] 41-015 Electronic Attendance o Alicia takes the floor “Basically the purpose is, well, let me read the purpose” “Members attending the meeting via technology should not be counted as absent.” (skype, speaker phone) “I thought this was a good decision, because if you skype in then you’re still here and still participating.” o Questions Marina asks, “Do we have any type of guidelines that outline how often
o
someone can attend meetings remotely? You might want to add something like that. Alicia states, “No I have not put anything in place. Kate moves for open discussion Kate states, “I just wanted to answer your question from my own perspective, I don’t think that there should be any regulation on how often we can skype into meetings because we already have so many other restrictions in regards to emailing. I consider someone skyping in as present so I don’t see why we should put a limitation on that anyways. Marina states, “My concern is that have been people who have taken advantage on various loopholes and things like that, and on the topic that a senator can attend via remote services, there are plenty of times I just come to campus for these meetings. I feel that it can be taken advantaged off. Kate states, “I disagree, I would still consider people skyping in as present but I would still encourage senators to still make meetings. Ricardo states, “I’m seeing both sides of this right now, I think what Marina is trying to say is that we want to avoid another Bryce scenario where someone was taken advantage of loopholes in ROP. I would like to make an amendment where everyone can agree on, so that we can make this compromise. Rachel states, “Why don’t we just make an amendment stating that it’s at the discretion on the Chair of the meeting and it must be done one day in advance? Alicia states, “I know we have had issues in the past, but let me put it this way; What if we have a senator that has a job in Tampa, and we can find a way where they can attend our meetings despite their scheduling conflict. They are being active and I don’t think we should penalize them for trying to be proactive to their scheduling conflict. Marina states, “I just want to say that we are asked about our schedule in the beginning of every semester to set a time where we can all meet in person. As for a 24 hour notice, sometimes my son is sick in the morning of the meeting and I don’t have the luxury of letting everyone know 24 hours ahead of time. I feel that we should put some regulation like senators can attend up to 30% of total meetings electronically. Kate states, “I don’t think that we should put anymore limitations on the bill because the reality is that we schedule these meetings around each other and if someone has a scheduling conflict then we change it again. This is also not another Bryce-esk issue, this issue is in regards to someone who has an opportunity to attend the meeting unconventionally, not just to not attend at all. Ricardo states, “I just don’t want someone to be able to blow off every meeting in person and to take advantage of the legislation. Personally I enjoy senators taking the time to come to campus and being here physically. My opinion aside, why don’t we just make an amendment that the decision will be at the Discretion of the chair of the meeting. So if there is conflict, then grivenceous can be filed and we can let the Judicial Ethics Committee take care of it. Alicia states, “I can understand that it can be abused, but I feel like that we should deal with those problems when the issues present themselves. Marina, “I think its human nature for people to take advantage of Loop holes, so I feel that it’s inevitable for someone to abuse it. So I propose that unless approved by the chair, a senator cannot attend more than 33% of total senate meetings electronically. I think putting rules in place saves drama later. Kate states, “I don’t see the issue with someone attending remotely all the
o
time. Personally I feel that there are still fulfilling their responsibility as a senator, just as if they were here in person. Marina states, “I feel that there is a lot of things that are missed when someone is not present physically in meetings. There would be a loss of communication initially and I feel that people would be missing out on everything that is happening in the room. Kate states, “Then I would argue that people who listen to our voice recordings of these meetings are also losing the meaning of these meetings. That is just my counterpoint to that, because the way we should conduct ourselves should be verbally since we are required to take minutes. Marina states, “The people who are listening to it afterwards aren’t the ones making the decisions.” Kate states, “That is true.” Darrel states, “If it isn’t broke don’t fix it, I think the bill is fine the way it is.” Ricardo states, “I don’t think it’s that complicated to make an amendment. I feel that it’s already been stated and I don’t see where this can go wrong with adding an amendment to the bill. I propose the amendment states, “Senators can attend up to 33% of total meetings and anything meetings further must be decided at the discretion of the chair.” Andre states, “I’m all for the amendment.” Alicia states, “I’m in favor for setting the mark at 33%, but I feel that anything pass that should be decided by simple super majority vote. o Ricardo moves to amend the bill to reflect, “A senator may attend up to 33% of total senate meetings via electronic attendance and anything meetings going forward must be voted on by simple majority vote.” Marina seconds All in favor –Andre, Darrel, Sean, Alicia All opposed- Kate All abstain The motion passes and the bill has been amended as stated. o Andre moves to approve SB [P] 41-015 as amended Alicia seconds All in favor- Ricardo, Marina, Darrel, Sean All oppose- Kate All Abstain The motion passes and SB [P] 41-015 has been approved as amended. SB [S] 41-016 Sweep exemptions o Alicia takes the floor Last year we had added a clause stating that after the fiscal year we would sweep 75% of the budget left over to senate appropriations for the next year and 25% would go into the Reserves. With the new A wing Renovations on the Horizon, we are using over half of our total reserves which is 1.5 million dollars. This bill is to remove that clause so now everything can be swept into reserves so we can start to build them up once again for future projects. o Questions Kate asks, “My question is why you decided to take out both subsections under title 8 when we can just readjust the total percentage of how much is swept back into senate appropriations?” Alicia states, “I thought that those both sections were added to together. Marina asks, “It says that the 75% of the remaining budget can be swept into senate appropriations if requested, then can’t we just not request it.” Alicia states, “Yes that is true”
Marina states, “Then doesn’t that mean we just should not request it?” Alicia replies, “Truthfully we can just remove the sub section 804.2 instead of both sections. Marina states, “Well can we just revise the section to state a new percentage can be swept back in upon request by student government?” Alicia states, “The first section states we can request but the second section states that it will happen regardless.” Marina, “So can we revise that section to reflect that it can be requested and be based on a new percentage.” Alicia states, “I feel that is a great idea, but I would like to further discussed in the amendment committee rather than discuss this on the floor.” o Alicia moves to send Chapter 804 to the amendments committee Marina seconds The motion passes and the chapter has been sent to committee o SB [A] 41-042 Planners for Week of Welcome o Barry takes the floor. I was approached by Kim Mones and they noticed that we have a surplus of planners in the office and to prevent that for the next year they would like to hand out planners during orientations that would take place during the summer and early fall. But to do that they need to money to make the purchase now because they would not be able to do it that early next fiscal year. They would like $2400 to be transferred in the planners line item o Sean moves to approve SB [A] 41-042 Kate seconds The motion passes and SB [A] 41-042 has been approved Open forum o Ricardo moves for a reconsideration for sending Chapter 804 to amendments o Ricardo states that the chapter can be addressed better in Appropriations and can be done a lot faster in that committee rather than amendments. o Andre seconds o The motion passes and it has been reconsidered o Ricardo moves to send Chapter 804 to the appropriations committee o Andre seconds o The motion passes and the bill has been sent to committee. o Kate states she has some thoughts on the way meetings are conducted o Kate states that we shouldn’t have to be recognized to make a motion according to Roberts’s rules. o Barry states that according to Roberts Rules everyone has to be recognized to make a motion or anything for that matter. o Kate states that we shouldn’t do it either way, she feels that it would make meetings go smoother. Ricardo states that he is not opposed and he doesn’t think it wouldn’t hurt the flow of meetings if we didn’t have to be recognized. o Barry states the purpose is to control the order of the flow of the meetings. o Barry also states everything is up for the chair to be decided on how the meetings are conducted. o The senators feel that they would like to have a test run where they don’t have to be recognized during the meeting next week. Barry holds a vote on the matter Next week they will have a test run
Ricardo brings up setting up guidelines for policing the pool table. o Kate suggest that we just run under the same guidelines for the checkout program where students will be held responsible if it is damaged under their name. o Announcements/Upcoming Events: o
o
o
o
o
Executive Board Updates (Sean) Geborah is almost finished with the book of bull Michelle has expressed that the bill system still needs more work. Kathy is working of the new design for the tervis tumblers They are working on extending hours for the campus on most nights. Someone stole the condom bowls in men room on the 2nd floor They are creating an Ad hoc committee for deciding the new gym equipment post renovations They want to create a voting registration day on this campus and they are trying to work with local politicians They are working on new t shirts for the entirety of student government April 8th CAB are conducting their Club Carnival Judicial Board: (Danielle) Parking appeals We have been revising titles to reflect the current changes to the ERC We are working on the electronic parking passes CAB updates No CAB updates
Andre moves to adjourn the meeting o Sean seconds o The motion passes
Meeting Adjourned: Meeting adjourned at 3:19 P.M.
