[1220] in UA Senate
RE: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael P Walsh)
Mon Mar 28 09:58:22 2011
From: Michael P Walsh <mpwalsh@MIT.EDU>
To: Betsy Riley <rileyb@mit.edu>, William F Steadman <willst@mit.edu>
CC: Allan E Miramonti <allanm@mit.edu>,
"ua-senate@mit.edu"
<ua-senate@mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:54:32 -0400
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimeg7729NxUJfHnWVOzXso87Z1Bh+3p0nnF9AhH@mail.gmail.com>
I completely agree that this focus group is a great idea. However I also b=
elieve having the committee created tonight is necessary. Input from these=
other governments should be highly valued in this decision process, and th=
at is not conditioned on how long we wait. Vrajesh has made this seem like=
a pretty urgent task, so I see no point in waiting to assemble this group =
to discuss the changes.
I understand that people want to see this quickly, but we should not let a =
rushed reform alter our judgment. This is a very big change in the constit=
ution, and deserves as much time as necessary to make sure everyone will be=
happy and well represented.
Michael
________________________________________
From: Betsy Riley [rileyb@MIT.EDU]
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 7:45 AM
To: William F Steadman
Cc: Michael P Walsh; Allan E Miramonti; ua-senate@mit.edu
Subject: Re: Focus discussion on proposed structural changes
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.
Betsy
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 7:56 AM, William Steadman <willst@mit.edu<mailto:wi=
llst@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> [mailto:thebigal1@g=
mail.com<mailto:thebigal1@gmail.com>] On Behalf Of
> Allan Miramonti
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 12:50 AM
> To: ua-senate@mit.edu<mailto: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
>
>
