Skip to content

Back in the SAC

April 11, 2010

And yes for the second day in a row I am at the SAC for the usual SACGB Sunday meeting.

The hot topic for this meeting was whether or not to change the bylaws to allow SSFC to have oversight on the activities of SACGB, particularly the space allocation process. SSFC Chair Brandon Williams and Vice Chair Michael Romenesko came before SACGB to talk about the proposed changes and field questions and debate from SACGB members.

The changes include having SACGB submit their space allocations to SSFC for approval in order to ensure the allocations are legally completed and there are no questions of viewpoint neutrality. Another change allows for SACGB to have legal council.

Many of the SACGB members balked at the changes, saying SACGB shouldn’t have to answer to SSFC instead of straight to Student Council, since SSFC also has to answer to Student Council.  Williams and Romenesko defended the changes by saying SSFC has extensive training in viewpoint neutrality (making decisions without personal bias but based on whether or not criteria has been met) so it would be an asset to SACGB to have SSFC input and help in the allocation process.

SACGB member Zoe Carpentier said she would like SACGB and SSFC to work cooperatively, but not in an oversight relationship. She added she though SACGB could also go through viewpoint neutrality training–like SSFC members–and be just as capable as SSFC.

Ziebell said this year SACGB and SSFC have had a lot of good communication to help smooth out the allocation process, but she said it might not be the same for other years. Having something in writing could guarantee the partnership will occur in the future.

ASM Vice Chair Tom Templeton said he supports the move to have SSFC check SACGB because of their viewpoint neutrality training and the fact they are also an allocation committee.  He dismissed arguments saying SSFC shouldn’t have more power than SACGB by saying SSFC is actually an entity created by state law–not ASM–so it inherently has more power.

Those opposed to having SSFC oversight did say they wanted written outlines to collaborate with SSFC on a more even keel.

The proposed changes failed by a vote of 5 to 2, with Templeton and SACGB member Martin Uraga the only votes for it.

If committee members want to change existing bylaws, SACGB needs to submit those changes as legislation to Student Council.  SACGB will also have to call an emergency meeting before Tuesday (before Student Council meeting Wednesday) to vote on the changes because of the upcoming elections. (p.s. VOTE THIS WEEK!!!!!!!!!)

And that’s all for now from SACGB.  Laissez le force etre avec vous! (french for “may the force be with you.” no need to say merci; I enjoy teaching that phrase to new people)

Advertisements
No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: