[69] in UA Senate
Re: Meeting this evening - discuss!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Baranay)
Tue Oct 13 16:53:48 2009
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64L.0910131518120.5720@white-meteo.mit.edu>
From: Paul Baranay <pbaranay@MIT.EDU>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:53:21 -0400
To: Catherine A Olsson <catherio@mit.edu>
Cc: Rachel E Meyer <remeyer@mit.edu>, ua-senate@mit.edu
--0016e6d644d0c1ae470475d73dce
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
The Finboard Chair and Vice-Chair just sent me the allocations. They are
located at
41 UAS 1 - Summer Fall 2009 Finboard
Appeals<http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS41/pending/41%20UAS%201%20-%20Summer%20Fall%202009%20Finboard%20Appeals.xls>
Sincerely,
Paul
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Catherine A Olsson <catherio@mit.edu>wrote:
> Unfortuantely, I haven't seen any posted proposal yet.
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Rachel E Meyer wrote:
>
> One thing really quickly... for #4, is there a posted proposal yet? Or
>> even just a total amount being additionally allocated during appeals, or a
>> list a groups receiving money? Something? I don't think Senate needs to go
>> through this very carefully, but individuals should have the opportunity to
>> do so and I think those 2 things (total $ amount and list of groups) are
>> important top-level issues for Senate to know/consider.
>> -Rachel
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Catherine A Olsson wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>> There's a very long meeting coming up this evening, and I haven't seen
>>> any email on the discussion list yet hashing out our opinions on any of
>>> the legislation. This definitely isn't optimal, given how inefficient it
>>> is to try to work out all our opinions in-person at a meeting without
>>> having talked about them at all beforehand, and how easy it is to talk
>>> about things on the mailing list. Personally I don't have anything
>>> particularly controversial to say about this week's agenda, which is why
>>> I haven't spoken up yet, but that is probably no excuse for me to not
>>> have done so.
>>>
>>> With quite a few hours left before the meeting, I'm sure we can have at
>>> least a little productive discussion before then, and make sure the
>>> meeting isn't horrendously long. (also pardon my unprofessional
>>> kibitzing in the parenthetical comments, it's mostly directed at new
>>> senators)
>>>
>>> Here's where I stand on a few important points. Let's discuss!
>>> 1. The UA planning task force report looks great and we should approve
>>> it without much fuss. (go ahead and disagree with me, it's more
>>> efficient to do so here and now than in person!)
>>>
>>> 2. I intend to vote to approve Adam Bockelie as dining chair, SheeShee
>>> Jin as Space Planning chair, and Alexandra Jordan as Sustainability
>>> chair, and don't feel I need more information on them before voting. (if
>>> you want more information, ask someone now!)
>>> 2a. I'd like to know a bit more about Aaron Liu's plans as
>>> Communications Chair. I think communications is one area that the UA
>>> could do *much* better at, and in the question phase of his confirmation
>>> hearing I hope to convey that to the nominee. Can anyone provide
>>> information about Aaron Liu's history in the UA, or his plans as
>>> communication chair?
>>>
>>> 3. To the authors of 41 U.A.S. 1.2, I'd like to see the bill altered to
>>> clarify who MIT's alumni base is a strong asset to - students, the
>>> institute, the UA, etc? I'd also like to see some clarification as to
>>> whether the committee will focus on relationships between individual
>>> students and individual alumni, or students as a whole and alumni, or
>>> something else. In short, I support the bill but think its current
>>> phrasing is unclear.
>>>
>>> 4. I sat on Finboard during the appeals meeting as Senate's
>>> representative, and will glady defend the allocations if people have any
>>> questions.
>>>
>>> 5. The UA operating budget should be approved as it stands. Yes, I am
>>> concerned that we are spending so much money on PLUS and Athletics
>>> Weekend, but think that should be a target for future budgets, not the
>>> current budget. I am glad that there are concrete plans to hand off PLUS
>>> next year, and would like to see this promise held to. Thus I am
>>> considering authoring a bill requiring the management of PLUS to be
>>> handed over by next year as promised - is there support among other
>>> senators?
>>>
>>> 6. The election transparency act is a great bill. I would have written
>>> it myself if it hadn't been done already.
>>>
>>> 7. Suspending the minimum meeting interval is a necessary action for
>>> this meeting, and this bill should be passed with no fuss. Perhaps we
>>> should amend the Senate bylaws to allow for six days, not seven, between
>>> meetings - is there support?
>>>
>>> Also, please look over the minutes if you haven't already to make sure
>>> we can vote on them quickly! We shouldn't need to spend time in meetings
>>> reading over past minutes since they're available beforehand.
>>>
>>> That's all I can think of for now. Here's hoping for only a three-hour
>>> meeting tonight (/wishful thinking)...
>>>
>>> Respectfully,
>>> Catherine Olsson, Random Hall Senator
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
--0016e6d644d0c1ae470475d73dce
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The Finboard Chair and Vice-Chair just sent me the allocations. =A0They are=
located at<div><br></div><div><a href=3D"http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS4=
1/pending/41%20UAS%201%20-%20Summer%20Fall%202009%20Finboard%20Appeals.xls"=
>41 UAS 1 - Summer Fall 2009 Finboard Appeals</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>Sincerely,</div><div>Paul<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_qu=
ote">On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Catherine A Olsson <span dir=3D"ltr">=
<<a href=3D"mailto:catherio@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">catherio@mit.edu<=
/a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Unfortuantely, I haven't seen any posted proposal yet.<div><div></div><=
div><br>
<br>
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Rachel E Meyer wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
One thing really quickly... =A0for #4, is there a posted proposal yet? =A0O=
r even just a total amount being additionally allocated during appeals, or =
a list a groups receiving money? =A0Something? =A0I don't think Senate =
needs to go through this very carefully, but individuals should have the op=
portunity to do so and I think those 2 things (total $ amount and list of g=
roups) are important top-level issues for Senate to know/consider.<br>
-Rachel<br>
<br>
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Catherine A Olsson wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi all,<br>
There's a very long meeting coming up this evening, and I haven't s=
een<br>
any email on the discussion list yet hashing out our opinions on any of<br>
the legislation. This definitely isn't optimal, given how inefficient i=
t<br>
is to try to work out all our opinions in-person at a meeting without<br>
having talked about them at all beforehand, and how easy it is to talk<br>
about things on the mailing list. Personally I don't have anything<br>
particularly controversial to say about this week's agenda, which is wh=
y<br>
I haven't spoken up yet, but that is probably no excuse for me to not<b=
r>
have done so.<br>
<br>
With quite a few hours left before the meeting, I'm sure we can have at=
<br>
least a little productive discussion before then, and make sure the<br>
meeting isn't horrendously long. (also pardon my unprofessional<br>
kibitzing in the parenthetical comments, it's mostly directed at new<br=
>
senators)<br>
<br>
Here's where I stand on a few important points. Let's discuss!<br>
1. The UA planning task force report looks great and we should approve<br>
it without much fuss. (go ahead and disagree with me, it's more<br>
efficient to do so here and now than in person!)<br>
<br>
2. I intend to vote to approve Adam Bockelie as dining chair, SheeShee<br>
Jin as Space Planning chair, and Alexandra Jordan as Sustainability<br>
chair, and don't feel I need more information on them before voting. (i=
f<br>
you want more information, ask someone now!)<br>
2a. I'd like to know a bit more about Aaron Liu's plans as<br>
Communications Chair. I think communications is one area that the UA<br>
could do *much* better at, and in the question phase of his confirmation<br=
>
hearing I hope to convey that to the nominee. Can anyone provide<br>
information about Aaron Liu's history in the UA, or his plans as<br>
communication chair?<br>
<br>
3. To the authors of 41 U.A.S. 1.2, I'd like to see the bill altered to=
<br>
clarify who MIT's alumni base is a strong asset to - students, the<br>
institute, the UA, etc? I'd also like to see some clarification as to<b=
r>
whether the committee will focus on relationships between individual<br>
students and individual alumni, or students as a whole and alumni, or<br>
something else. In short, I support the bill but think its current<br>
phrasing is unclear.<br>
<br>
4. I sat on Finboard during the appeals meeting as Senate's<br>
representative, and will glady defend the allocations if people have any<br=
>
questions.<br>
<br>
5. The UA operating budget should be approved as it stands. Yes, I am<br>
concerned that we are spending so much money on PLUS and Athletics<br>
Weekend, but think that should be a target for future budgets, not the<br>
current budget. I am glad that there are concrete plans to hand off PLUS<br=
>
next year, and would like to see this promise held to. Thus I am<br>
considering authoring a bill requiring the management of PLUS to be<br>
handed over by next year as promised - is there support among other<br>
senators?<br>
<br>
6. The election transparency act is a great bill. I would have written<br>
it myself if it hadn't been done already.<br>
<br>
7. Suspending the minimum meeting interval is a necessary action for<br>
this meeting, and this bill should be passed with no fuss. Perhaps we<br>
should amend the Senate bylaws to allow for six days, not seven, between<br=
>
meetings - is there support?<br>
<br>
Also, please look over the minutes if you haven't already to make sure<=
br>
we can vote on them quickly! We shouldn't need to spend time in meeting=
s<br>
reading over past minutes since they're available beforehand.<br>
<br>
That's all I can think of for now. Here's hoping for only a three-h=
our<br>
meeting tonight (/wishful thinking)...<br>
<br>
Respectfully,<br>
Catherine Olsson, Random Hall Senator<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
</div>
--0016e6d644d0c1ae470475d73dce--
