[1219] in UA Senate
Re: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Betsy Riley)
Mon Mar 28 08:46:12 2011
In-Reply-To: <1301313375.2210.44.camel@Mortimor>
From: Betsy Riley <rileyb@MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 08:45:48 -0400
To: William Steadman <willst@mit.edu>
Cc: Michael P Walsh <mpwalsh@mit.edu>, Allan E Miramonti <allanm@mit.edu>,
"ua-senate@mit.edu" <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--bcaec51b13d1de76c9049f8a5387
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I also agree that having a group discussion/focus group about structural
changes to the UA is a good idea, and I agree with Will that it would be
wise to wait on deciding whether or not to have a committee to work on the
restructuring process. Creating a committee as outlined in 14.1 would
greatly impact the timing of any structural changes, which is a critical
issue that should be examined in greater depth during the group discussion.
Betsy
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 7:56 AM, William Steadman <willst@mit.edu> wrote:
> 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=92m 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
> >
> >
>
>
>
--bcaec51b13d1de76c9049f8a5387
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I also agree that having a group discussion/focus group about structural ch=
anges to the UA is a good idea, and I agree with Will that it would be wise=
to wait on deciding whether or not to have a committee to work on the rest=
ructuring process. Creating a committee as outlined in 14.1 would greatly i=
mpact the timing of any structural changes, which is a critical issue that =
should be examined in greater depth during the group discussion.<div>
<br></div><div>Betsy<div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 28,=
2011 at 7:56 AM, William Steadman <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:=
willst@mit.edu">willst@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex;">
I agree with the idea for discussion on Tuesday.<br>
<br>
There is a key difference between that and the committee.<br>
<br>
A committee has a charge and the purpose of the committee is to execute<br>
that charge.<br>
<br>
The charge of the committee includes "That this Committee submit to<br=
>
Senate by the last meeting of 42 UAS, a set of Constitutional amendments<br=
>
in the spirit of the Coordinated Campus" proposal"<br>
<br>
The informal discussion will discuss all potential constitutional<br>
changes and makes no particular endorsement.<br>
<br>
I think it will be very hasty to at this meeting decide the outline of<br>
constitutional changes without even having the one weeks notice. (42UAS<br>
14.1 and 14.3 make no direct constitutional changes and so could be<br>
pushed through this week to prevent discussion on 42UAS14.2.)<br>
<br>
I recommend that we wait a week until we decide which proposal to<br>
follow. In the meantime, the informal discussion on Tuesday can continue<br=
>
the discussion.<br>
<br>
I also note that 42UAS14.1 as it currently stands has significant flaws.<br=
>
In particular, I believe it is in violation of the UA Constitution<br>
Article IV Section C part 3, which states " The President shall nomina=
te<br>
the chairmen of all ad hoc committees to the Senate, which shall appoint<br=
>
them with a majority vote"<br>
<br>
I pointed this out to the authors and they are addressing it, but I<br>
don't think enough review has been done to pass this within the next 15=
<br>
hours.<br>
<br>
tl;dr I think we should discuss both options at today's meeting, but I<=
br>
don't think we are ready to pass anything.<br>
<br>
Will<br>
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
<br>
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 01:16 -0400, Michael P Walsh wrote:<br>
> A bill is on the agenda to create a Committee to do basically what you=
<br>
> are talking about. =A0I=92m certainly not opposed to both, however I<b=
r>
> believe a committee as outlined in the Bill is necessary to look at<br=
>
> the options on the table. =A0This is not a process to be rushed in one=
<br>
> week. =A0Input from all effected governing bodies is necessary, and th=
is<br>
> Bill will provide a forum to do just that. =A0A revised copy of the Bi=
ll<br>
> should be uploaded to the agenda very soon.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Thanks,<br>
><br>
> Michael Walsh<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> From: <a href=3D"mailto:thebigal1@gmail.com">thebigal1@gmail.com</a> [=
mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:thebigal1@gmail.com">thebigal1@gmail.com</a>] On B=
ehalf Of<br>
> Allan Miramonti<br>
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 12:50 AM<br>
> To: <a href=3D"mailto:ua-senate@mit.edu">ua-senate@mit.edu</a><br>
> Subject: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Good evening,<br>
><br>
> We all should have heard about the structural changes being proposed<b=
r>
> during tomorrow's meeting. =A0The pieces of legislation need to si=
t a<br>
> week before being voted on. =A0Alec and I would very much like for a<b=
r>
> focus group of people to come together and talk about the proposed<br>
> changes. =A0While many discussions have been had about these changes, =
we<br>
> feel strongly that there is real benefit to be had from a group<br>
> discussion.<br>
><br>
> Tuesday evening from 7-8pm there will be an open focus group for<br>
> senators to discuss concerns about restructuring and to whittle down<b=
r>
> the best possible solution to the UA's structural issues. =A0The m=
eeting<br>
> will take place in the UA office and I encourage senators to attend.<b=
r>
> Please be sure to fully read the legislation (especially given that<br=
>
> this is after the senate meeting) and be prepared to discuss concerns<=
br>
> and suggestions.<br>
><br>
> Thank you,<br>
> Allan and Alec<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--bcaec51b13d1de76c9049f8a5387--
