[366] in UA Senate
Re: Agenda for Monday's Meeting
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Stumbaugh)
Mon Dec 7 13:40:41 2009
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 13:40:35 -0500
From: Tim Stumbaugh <ua-vicechair@MIT.EDU>
To: Sammi Wyman <swyman@mit.edu>
CC: Ashley Nash <ashnash@mit.edu>, UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <07179C9A-258F-4653-9334-9759AFC2E2C6@mit.edu>
We thought that VP would chair, VS would vice-chair, but this was just an idea. We plan on talking
about it during the meeting.
On 7 Dec 2009 13.31, Sammi Wyman wrote:
> Does the VP chair the comm? If not, who?
>
>
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 12:08 PM, Tim Stumbaugh wrote:
>
>> And by President, I mean Vice President.
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Tim Stumbaugh wrote:
>>
>>> nomcomm-subcomm is going to recommend that we postpone 6.2
>>> indefinitely (i.e. kill it) because it doesn't really address the
>>> problems that we're having in an appropriate manner.
>>> We are going to recommend that the Nominations Committee be re-tooled
>>> (so to speak) to consist of (at minimum) the UA President,
>>> Vice-Speaker of the Senate, 2 Senators and 2 members of Exec. I will
>>> expand on this more tonight during the meeting, but the basic thought
>>> is that it's very difficult to get people to sit on (let alone chair)
>>> Nomcomm.
>>>
>>> feel free to discuss this
>>>
>>> On Mon, 7 Dec 2009, Ashley Nash wrote:
>>>
>>>> This agenda is really long. It would be awesome if it didn't take this
>>>> long. I think it is fair to say that there are some non-controversial
>>>> things that we can pass quickly, like Fresh Fund allocations, but
>>>> there are
>>>> other items on the agenda that will require more discussion.
>>>> I think people should say what they think about stuff, or at least
>>>> think
>>>> about it before the meeting, so that we can argue, vote and move on,
>>>> not
>>>> argue, argue, argue, move on, and then somehow come back and argue
>>>> more,
>>>> just to postpone or table.
>>>> Also, if you think information is missing, you should ask for it
>>>> before the
>>>> meeting, such that the person who could possibly answer it- has time
>>>> to look
>>>> for the information and have an explanation ready.
>>>> I am going to start with what I think about our agenda items:
>>>> I think 6.1 should pass. Someone showed reservation that not all of the
>>>> principle officers are elected directly by the public, but it would
>>>> make
>>>> even less sense to take out secretary and treasurer because with 6
>>>> officers,
>>>> it requires 4 people agree and if we cut out two people, then only 3
>>>> people
>>>> need to agree. The more people who need to agree to approve someone-
>>>> to an
>>>> extent- the more likely the approved person is suited for the job, the
>>>> harder it is to game the system. Also, the secretary and treasurer
>>>> cannot
>>>> approve someone alone, they need the support of two other officers.
>>>> 6.2 I don't think should be retroactive, unless we have questionable
>>>> students currently serving on institute committees. I don't, on
>>>> principle,
>>>> think that retroactive rules are the way to go, and I also don't
>>>> want to
>>>> suggest that the member is incompetent by subjecting them to
>>>> approval after
>>>> they started. I am also still not clear on what happens if the
>>>> student is
>>>> approached with the committee instead of actively pursuing it.
>>>> I intend to support 7.1. I will vote for the Finboard, but it would
>>>> be nice
>>>> to have some assurance that they have gotten their act together
>>>> since their
>>>> last allocation process: i.e. know which groups are eligible, don't
>>>> lose
>>>> their appeals, and don't forget that they did the first two mistakes.
>>>> 7.2 I think we should support the printer, but I tried reading the
>>>> bill and
>>>> the link was down, so I probably have some questions for Vrajesh.
>>>> 7.3 I vote to approve all reports.
>>>> We already argued over the UA operations budget, and I think we should
>>>> approve it, fast.
>>>> 7.4 Nice ideas and I will vote on it, but I wouldn't hold my breath
>>>> that DSL
>>>> will do anything useful.
>>>> 7.5 link down, more questions for Vrajesh
>>>> I will probably approve of Mary because I don't think chairs should
>>>> need
>>>> senate approval for vice-chairs. I know nothing about her.
>>>> Questions for Vrajesh
>>>> How much does this printer cost?
>>>> What is the UA paying for (I am not asking for line items, just items)?
>>>> When will it happen?
>>>> What does the bill 7.5 encompass?
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> Ashley Nash,
>>>> Senior House Senator
>>>> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Paul Baranay <pbaranay@mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>> Dear Senate,
>>>>> The Finboard allocations document is now available:
>>>>> http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS41/7/finboard
>>>>> Additionally, through my own error, I overlooked a piece of
>>>>> legislation
>>>>> that was sent to me about two weeks ago: "Bill to Extend the Special
>>>>> Projects Committee." This has been added to the agenda as pending
>>>>> legislation: http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS41/7/5/.pdf I
>>>>> apologize for
>>>>> the miscommunication.
>>>>> The agenda has been updated appropriately.
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Paul Baranay <pbaranay@mit.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Senate,
>>>>>> Please find the agenda for Monday's meeting online at:
>>>>>> http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS41/agendas/2009-12-07.pdf
>>>>>> All available legislation has been linked within the agenda. The
>>>>>> text for
>>>>>> 7.3 has not yet been submitted to me. Likewise, as already
>>>>>> mentioned, the
>>>>>> Finboard allocations document will not be available until Sunday
>>>>>> evening,
>>>>>> since Finboard is meeting on Sunday.
>>>>>> This is likely to be a somewhat lengthy meeting, but each piece of
>>>>>> legislation is quite critical. Please consider preparing comments in
>>>>>> advance, as well as sharing any questions or concerns over the
>>>>>> mailing list.
>>>>>> I look forward to an evening of respectful and robust discussion
>>>>>> on Monday
>>>>>> evening.
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> -Tim
>> "There is no ignorance, there is knowledge."
>
--
-Tim
"How can it be you're asking me to feel the things you never show"
