Senate debates search committee appointment

Dean search awaits senate appointments

Student senators bickered with one another at their weekly meeting on Sunday despite having passed a proposal to increase unity within their group .

Sunday night's agenda included a proposal for Senate mobilization, more discussion concerning the dean of student life and services search committee and charter issues.

Plenary session moved quickly, with little opposition to a proposal for Senate mobilization. Authors senator junior Sarah Fineberg and senator junior Sam Taylor created the proposal to amend the bylaws so that Senate will be able to focus on one specific issue every few weeks. "Senate as a group has no direction," said Taylor.

Fineberg showed that "Get Out the Vote," a formal effort to get students to vote, unified Senate and made them visible to the student body. The hope is that Senate will continue to work closely together as well as become more visible around campus. All advisory councils are required to ask for assistance from Senate at least once a year, and senators are encouraged to ask for assistance for their individual projects.

The first project Senate will tackle with the new addition to the bylaws will be research of what students want in the new dean of student life and services. It will be an effort to inform the students and faculty on the search committee of the needs and desires of the campus. Taylor said, "We want to be able to give the [search committee] something about pertinent issues."

Senate pieced together their selection board, the group that will choose the students who sit on the dean of student life and services search committee. Members of the board were chosen just after plenary session in a meeting closed to all persons interested in being on the search committee. The selection board will consist of five senators: sophomore Amy Pandjiris, senior Adrianna Lopez-Young, junior BJ Renteria, junior Sam Taylor and first-year Liane Lau.

Even though they proposed to encourage unity, senators found themselves at each other's throats when discussing the issue of the dean search committee. The debate came from concerns that interviewees for the search committee could cause a biased election for members of the selection board. Senator first-year Chris Anton made his application for the search committee public during the discussion.

"I can't bring up any issues if I'm excluded, even if they are important," said Anton, expressing his concern that members of the selection board would not be a diverse group.

"We are going to have to sacrifice representation to prove legitimacy," said senator junior Aaron Slodounik in response. "I don't think that this is about morals; this is about being accountable to the student body," he said in reply to Anton. Anton had made a statement declaring his participation an issue of consciousness.

Fineburg summed up Senate's feelings. "I think we could not possibly take this issue too seriously," she said. The conclusion of the debate was the election of the selection board in a meeting closed to interviewees for the search committee.

Several other proposals were taken into consideration during plenary session. The affirmation of proposal process, advisory council requirement, biography proposal and interview committee proposal were all passed.

Some senators were unhappy with what seemed a redundant affirmation of general procedure. "I feel like we are writing things for the sake of writing things," said Anton. Slodounik reiterated his point that general procedure needs to go down into the bylaws in order to maintain them in years to come. Referring to his advisory council requirements, which requires formal status reports by Susanna Henighan on the councils from each senator, Slodounik stressed the need for more checks and balances within the senate.

Charters were another issue about which senate failed to reach a resolution. Senate was posed with seven charters for new student organizations. All seven charters were tabled when Senate decided that they would have to evaluate their charter approval process. The Student Finance Committee (SFC) had raised a concern of overlapping purposes of new organizations and funding.

New organizations have to pass through the Student Union, Senate, Student Life Committee and a General Faculty meeting in order to be chartered. Before the chartering process is complete, SFC can allot certain moneys to a new organization. Its precedent has been to give money to most organizations according to a budget review. SFC informally suggested that Senate look more carefully at each group asking for a charter. The hope would be to cut down on overlapping groups, thus allowing SFC to concentrate funding rather than spreading it around thinly.

Senators remained wary of denying any charter. "We can't say if an organization can exist or not," said Pandjiris.

"Senate doesn't know what the hell is going on," said Taylor, agreeing that Senate needs to reevaluate its role in the chartering process. No conclusion was reached, though, and the process tabled so that Senate could discuss the issue outside of plenary session. The issue will be on the agenda this Sunday.