[1218] in UA Senate
RE: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Steadman)
Mon Mar 28 07:56:12 2011
From: William Steadman <willst@MIT.EDU>
To: Michael P Walsh <mpwalsh@mit.edu>
Cc: Allan E Miramonti <allanm@mit.edu>,
"ua-senate@mit.edu"
<ua-senate@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <54E8CFA35089B141B4BC213D2FDA9031152CBE28FA@EXPO9.exchange.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 07:56:15 -0400
I agree with the idea for discussion on Tuesday.
There is a key difference between that and the committee.
A committee has a charge and the purpose of the committee is to execute
that charge.
The charge of the committee includes "That this Committee submit to
Senate by the last meeting of 42 UAS, a set of Constitutional amendments
in the spirit of the Coordinated Campus" proposal"
The informal discussion will discuss all potential constitutional
changes and makes no particular endorsement.
I think it will be very hasty to at this meeting decide the outline of
constitutional changes without even having the one weeks notice. (42UAS
14.1 and 14.3 make no direct constitutional changes and so could be
pushed through this week to prevent discussion on 42UAS14.2.)
I recommend that we wait a week until we decide which proposal to
follow. In the meantime, the informal discussion on Tuesday can continue
the discussion.
I also note that 42UAS14.1 as it currently stands has significant flaws.
In particular, I believe it is in violation of the UA Constitution
Article IV Section C part 3, which states " The President shall nominate
the chairmen of all ad hoc committees to the Senate, which shall appoint
them with a majority vote"
I pointed this out to the authors and they are addressing it, but I
don't think enough review has been done to pass this within the next 15
hours.
tl;dr I think we should discuss both options at today's meeting, but I
don't think we are ready to pass anything.
Will
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 01:16 -0400, Michael P Walsh wrote:
> A bill is on the agenda to create a Committee to do basically what you
> are talking about. I’m certainly not opposed to both, however I
> believe a committee as outlined in the Bill is necessary to look at
> the options on the table. This is not a process to be rushed in one
> week. Input from all effected governing bodies is necessary, and this
> Bill will provide a forum to do just that. A revised copy of the Bill
> should be uploaded to the agenda very soon.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael Walsh
>
>
>
> From: thebigal1@gmail.com [mailto:thebigal1@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Allan Miramonti
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 12:50 AM
> To: ua-senate@mit.edu
> Subject: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes
>
>
>
>
> Good evening,
>
> We all should have heard about the structural changes being proposed
> during tomorrow's meeting. The pieces of legislation need to sit a
> week before being voted on. Alec and I would very much like for a
> focus group of people to come together and talk about the proposed
> changes. While many discussions have been had about these changes, we
> feel strongly that there is real benefit to be had from a group
> discussion.
>
> Tuesday evening from 7-8pm there will be an open focus group for
> senators to discuss concerns about restructuring and to whittle down
> the best possible solution to the UA's structural issues. The meeting
> will take place in the UA office and I encourage senators to attend.
> Please be sure to fully read the legislation (especially given that
> this is after the senate meeting) and be prepared to discuss concerns
> and suggestions.
>
> Thank you,
> Allan and Alec
>
>
