University of California, Davis ASUCD Senate Meeting Minutes October 26, 2006 5:30 p.m., Mee Room
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice President Carnes called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m.
II. QUORUM ROLL CALL
Present: Carnes, Savaree-Ruess, Amaha, Deepak, Higgins, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders, Markevich, Dardik, Khan, Rivera, Feldman
Late: Farhad Motomed, Patel, Xie, Lay
Absent: Holloway, Ajlouny, Molnar, Zamora
III. STATUS OF LEGILSATION PREVIOUSLY PASSED
Sanders said all previous legislation has been signed.
IV. INTRODUCTION OF NEW LEGISLATION
SR #4, Authored by Ostrowski, Introduced by Higgins, Referred to EAC and EPPC: An ASUCD Senate Resolution in support of Local Measure K.
SR #5 Authored by Salem, Introduced by Salem, Referred to EAC: An ASUCD Senate Resolution in support of SMUD Annexation and Local Measures H and I.
SB #16 Authored by Harms, Introduced by Rogers, Referred to IAC: An ASUCD Senate Bill to clarify the process for the submission of written unit director reports.
SB #17 Authored by Rosas-Romoero, Introduced by Rosas-Romero, Referred to B&F, EAC, and GASC: An ASUCD Senate Bill to allocate $1600 to the Reaffirming Ethnic Awareness and Community Harmony (R.E.A.C.H) Retreat taking place on January 5th-7th, 2007.
SB #18 Authored by Salem, Introduced by Salem, Referred to AAC and IAC: An ASUCD Senate Bill to introduce an administrative plan for the ASUCD Committee on Science and Engineering.
SB #19, Authored by Molnar, Introduced by Molnar, Referred to IAC: An ASUCD Senate Bill to reorganize the letter order within Chapter 4, Section 404.
V. PUBLIC DISCUSSION
Sanders announced Senators Ajlouny and Zamora will not be here today, they’re dealing with some personal matters. Also Senator Molnar is getting his flu shot, his appointment was at 5:00, hopefully he will be with us shortly and ready to take on the flu season.
Sanders motioned to move into unit director reports; properly seconded without objections.
VI. UNIT DIRECTOR REPORTS
Chris Fricke said I’m the Chief Justice, this is my eleventh and last quarter. Soon you’ll be seeing a constitutional amendment to change the process of appointing the chief justice. Currently the position is a presidential appointment alone and does not even require a senate confirmation: we’ll be proposing a such as that necessary to put people on court.
Fricke continued also I was just made aware that we have three open positions, so posting for those will be up until November 8. A new Chief will be chosen among current justices, and at least three are gunning for the position so I encourage you to pay attention to which justice should take the position of Chief. Come by our meetings to see us in action. In order to give everyone experience, we just voted to give each justice a chance to serve as pro-tempore for a meeting. Besides that, we voted unanimously to accept your petition to remove the word “Student” from “Court” in our judicial code. We’re also reviewing some of the scandal that recently occurred with UC Berkeley.
Sanders said I’m sure you will be informing the pro-tempore of the Senate so he can get the two senators for your interviewing committee.
Fricke said that’s the president’s job, I’m not in charge of that committee. I have to go to class now, but I’ll try to return after.
Higgins said real quick what are you planning to do after you graduate?
Fricke said hopefully go on to law school, but I basically have nine months of limbo during which I don’t know what I’ll do, maybe get a cool internship?
Alex Lee, Refrigerator Services, said everything is good with us: we distributed all of our units just before our customers started school. Now we’re just waiting for repair requests and such. This year we bought one hundred new micro-fridges and forty new mini-fridges so this year over forty-five percent of our customers have brand new refrigerators. Also we’re working on repairing the warehouse and putting our database online so that we might save ourselves paperwork and save the office staff much time.
Sanders motioned to suspend the orders of the day and move into appointments and confirmations; properly seconded without objections.
VII. APPOINTMENTS AND CONFIRMATIONS
Sanders motioned to confirm any members of the Elections Committee; properly seconded without objections.
Kyle Flicke introduced himself: I’m hoping to be publicity coordinator and make sure people know that elections are coming. I want to get info about candidates and about the ASUCD Senate out.
Jonathon Leathers said we’ve interviewed people in the past who weren’t qualified, I think this guy will do a great job.
Sanders said considering there have always been problems with publicity, what’s your new plan for getting elections out there?
Flicke said the reason people don’t vote is a lack of information: we have facebook, myspace, flyers. We can be advertising digitally with my.ucdavis and emails. Elections committee can create its own independent facebook group with event notification. We should get daviswiki involved, and the elections website is up and running (we’re testing it next week with a fake election) so people can know how the process works. Getting information out there is key.
DO CONFIRM, KYLE FLICKE, 10-0-2, ELECTIONS COMMITTEE PUBLICITY COORDINATOR Yes: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Zamora
Sanders motioned to confirm any members or alternates of ECAC.
Motupalli introduced herself as a good surfer and Wildlife and Range Management Major.
Khan said she is one of the most qualified members, with a lot of experience. She just transferred into UCD and is already aware of campus events and politics.
Deepak asked where do you want to take ECAC?
Motupalli said we need a cultural dance off. Second, the budget for all of the commissions needs some work.
DO CONFIRM, PRIYA MOTUPALLI, 10-0-2, ETHNIC AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS COMMISSION Yes: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Zamora
Sanders motioned to resume the orders of the day; properly seconded without objection.
VIII. PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS
Rosas-Romero said R.E.A.C.H Retreat applications are due November 1; please apply.
Amaha said the Clinica Tepati, a student run clinic, is having a benefit party November 3: tickets are $10 presale, $12 at the door. Also there is a Halloween dance in Freeborn Hall and it’s a costume contest.
Ostrowski said the UC Davis Jewish Law Students Association is having an event in King Hall, Monday, October 30 at noon. Also this guy named Alan Vendavis who has been in a lot of wars, involved in Middle East, will be speaking in Young Hall room 195 November 2nd from 2pm to 3pm. Check his facebook event for full information.
Xie said next week is the best week, because it’s pledge week for Calpirg. We need twenty percent of the campus pledged; we usually always have it because great people like you help out.
Deepak said you should all do pledging.
Molnar said I hooked up a session with the chancellor November 22. We need three senators.
Markevich said November 1 is a Beer vs. Wine Debate, featuring Professors Waterhouse and Banforth. The debate is in Wellman 106 November 1 at 7pm. Flyers will be available in the Senate Office tomorrow.
Carnes said Entertainment Council needs volunteers. There are two volunteer meetings coming up. Also if you haven’t heard, there is a fake election starting Wednesday through Friday. We need a thousand people to vote. Please everyone in the room vote at elections.asucd.edu. But also make it clear that this is a fake election, we really don’t want people to mix it up.
IX. APPROVAL OF PAST MEETING’S MINUTES
Sanders said SGAO not given minutes for the past five meetings. So be prepared to approve six weeks worth of minutes at the next meetings. I really don’t know where they are, maybe in cyberspace somewhere?
X. EX-OFICIO REPORTS Markevich, Khan, Feldman, Dardik, Lay, Xie, Rivera, Savaree-Ruess, Holloway, Carnes
XI. SENATE REPORTS Deepak, Salem, Rogers, Molnar, Higgins, Sanders, Rosas-Romero, Amaha, Farhad Motamed, Patel
Media Board: Salem
XII. NEW COURT CASES
Vice President Carnes said that there are none.
XIII. CONSIDERATION OF PAST LEGISLATION
Sanders motioned to consider SB #15.
Author’s Comments Amaha said I had help with this from IAC, and I think this is pretty straight forward.
Commission Reccomendation Rivera (IAC) said I didn’t see any problems; just grammatical changes. Our only objection is that we felt professors might not provide the best books because of price.
Markevich (AAC) said this bill is in line with what the committee was created for, and I believe in Amy’s ability to interact with the staff respectfully and get stuff done.
Questions in Text
Deepak said a new line should be created between line 101 and 102.
Farhad Motamed said “freshman” should be spelled “freshmen” in line 110.
Public Discussion Harney asked under the description of current operations it says “recommend different avenues of legislation.” Is this referring to legislation in the capital, local, what?
Munoz-Lopez said this is our goal whether it is ASUCD, statewide, or national.
Harney said book publishing is not very regulated, I don’t know if that’s something we want to put as a goal to track legislation that will probably not ever exist. I don’t know if that’s really an effective statement of the committee’s mission and it could overlap with Lobby Corp.
Higgins motioned to move into Senate Discussion; properly seconded without objection.
Senate Discussion Vice President Carnes said all coauthors can still speak during Senate Discussion.
Munoz-Lopez said to clarify on the mention of legislation, it’s just in there to keep our doors open. Connecticut has passed a law to keep publishers in line. California could too. To ensure that we don’t step on toes, we put in the interaction chart. We do cooperate with Lobby Corp if something comes up.
Higgins said I think this is straight forward, I hope it succeeds because in the past it’s failed miserably. I hope it works, and makes a difference.
Higgins called SB #15 to question; no second. Motion withdrawn.
Farhad Motamed asked where are you thinking of getting books from for the rental program?
Munoz-Lopez said there has been some research, but the researcher left. We could possibly get grant money or get them donated. There are definitely multiple avenues, and it really seemed doable when he was working on it.
Sanders said I think it’s a good idea; this idea has been around since I became senator. It seems like a lot of research has been done, so let’s take it out for a spin and see what happens. There’s nothing wrong with it, I just want cheaper text books.
Deepak said the second and third rows of the Campus Interaction Chart should be moved to be properly aligned; authors took revision as friendly.
Patel said you might want to try checking out professors for books because sometimes they have hella copies of books. I have some books that were given to me by professors.
Lay said a colon should be inserted after “THIS UNIT” in the Campus Interaction Chart; authors took revision as friendly.
Salem said the second “to” should be removed from line 80; authors took revision as friendly.
Markevich began to propose a revision.
Sanders said remember this is frame for government people, it’s not like a lot of people are reading it. Let’s not tear the bill apart too bad. We don’t absolutely need to show we’re enlightened college students like with some other bills that everyone will be reading.
Markevich said we should still be enlightened college students anyway.
Sanders said I think it reads fine. Called SB #15 to question; properly seconded without objection.
DO PASS, SB #15, 10-0-2 Yes: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Zamora
Sanders motioned to hold a ten minute recess; properly seconded without objection.
Vice President Carnes said I will call the meeting back to order at 6:36 so be on time!
XIV. RECESS
Vice President Carnes called the meeting to order at 6:38pm.
XV. QUORUM ROLL CALL Present: Carnes, Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders, Markevich, Dardik, Khan, Xie, Lay, Rivera, Feldman Absent: Ajlouny, Zamora
XVI. CONSIDERATION OF PAST LEGISLATION
Sanders motioned to consider CA #20; properly seconded without objection.
Author’s Comments
Rivera said like the chief justice said earlier, we’re just trying change how he’s appointed so a majority of senate the senate has to confirm the position.
Questions in Text
Sanders said line 1 should begin with “An ASUCD.”
Carnes asked if “Fall 2006” was a problem.
Salem said no, that’s referring to “if it is passed two weeks before the election.”
Public Discussion
Sanders said this is just food for thought: as far as when it says “constitutional article section 3 subsection 2, maybe we should spell out that part so the voters don’t have to look it up (starts on line 23).
Ostrowski said I would appreciate the president still being involved in this process.
Holloway said when I was on senate I was the person who started the whole process of changing this committee from just president to the committee it is now. The president is still involved, but if you want to go by the intent of the framers of this law, we meant it to be this way and just forgot to address this particular scenario surrounding the chief justice. I personally like this.
Salem asked will the background be included when voters look at this? Should we clean that up somewhat for them? Line 4 should maybe be cleaned up. Take a look at it.
Holloway said I can tell you honestly every time an election comes up my friends call and ask “how do I vote on this?” because they don’t understand what it says. So we should spell it out like Tiny said and clean things up or they will just look at it and see numerals and big words.
Sanders moved to enter Senate Discussion; properly seconded without objections.
Sanders said the president and I both agree. Line 25: enter the text of the subsection (authors took as friendly). I think the amendment is a good idea; the president is still involved but it contributes to open government so all legislative branch can see this. Move to call SB #20 to question.
Patel objects.
Sanders withdrew.
Patel said for line 6: a chief justice could potentially hold office for more than four years.
Holloway asked has the job been taken lightly in past? The tone seems negative maybe, but I don’t know how to change or if it needs changed.
Patel said it sounds fine to me.
Rogers said it still sounds odd to me. My whole thing is that while this may be efficient, if it’s so efficient why are we calling a constitutional amendment? Maybe we should take that part out?
Holloway said maybe we should put something in about wanting a more open government. Maybe authors or someone else has input? I’m sorry…I just had a midterm.
Patel said the first paragraph (BACKGROUND) should read as follows: “Currently, the Chief Justice of the ASUCD Court is appointed by the ASUCD President. The ASUCD Senate should be involved in the appointment process because the position of Chief Justice may last several years” (amendment taken as friendly by authors). Called CA #20 to question; properly seconded without objections.
DO PASS, CA #20, 10-0-2 Yes: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Zamora
XVII. OTHER BUSINESS
Schwab said for the last couple years it has been a tradition for the CoHo to play other units in softball. We want you to come out now, we usually do this in the winter, but we’re willing to wait until spring.
Vice President Carnes said other business is for motions and such, not public discussion
Amaha said I need another senator for the textbook affordability committee. Also I need someone from AAC and EAC to sit on the committee.
XVIII. PUBLIC DISCUSSION
Rogers said my whole deal is that I had a suggestion while Patel was speaking and it went through people and I ended up not being on the speaker’s list. I wish that the speaker’s list be better kept: this isn’t a new thing and I hope it can change.
Sanders said if for some reason the chair or I don’t see it, you can challenge the chair without raising your placard to point out that you should be on the speaker’s list.
Rogers said I still want to be sure that you look over here so that the whole table is kept in mind when checking for people on the speaker’s list.
Lamar Haysteck said I’d like to thank the senators for the resolution to pass Measures H and I. This is about changing the way we provide energy. Fifty percent or more utility payers are renters, and most renters are students. I’m passing out fliers and info. I’ll make sure EAC has copies of the fact sheets. These are put together without bias and are prepared by attorneys in this jurisdiction. This measure will save you money. I’m sure there will be more discussion on this next week.
Molnar asked is it true PG&E gave rebates to residents?
Heystack said yes it’s true; I received one. It seems questionable they gave this during election time. I guess I’ll cash it but I feel the timing is inappropriate. PG&E admits that we’d save money under the public utility paradigm.
Molnar asked if we go SMUD, will there be electricity issues like outages? PG&E suggested that there’s not enough support for Davis to be added to SMUD.
Heysteck said if customers are at stake you would say that (gloom and doom) but other jurisdictions that have gone to SMUD have had fewer outages. It is a not for profit entity, and we elect the board of directors. It’s more reliable and I’ll forward you the statistics with comparison. I’d call what PG&E is saying propaganda. It’s within the Senate’s purview to recommend this. They’re more than capable of handling new customers.
Lay asked is it true that SMUD would have to buy the PG&E systems, and if costs are higher than SMUD thinks will those costs be passed on to the customers?
Heysteck said yes they’ll have to buy the current systems, and the ultimate cost will be determined in a court of law. PG&E says it will cost over $500 million, SMUD estimates $100 million and individual appraisers say $150 million. Customers will pay for the infrastructure, but PG&E still admits it will be cheaper for customers. Keep in mind that twenty nine elected officials in this county who don’t agree on anything, all agree on this one.
Higgins asked why is the electricity provided by SMUD greener?
Heysteck said it’s because they utilize more solar and wind per customer than PG&E. You all can always ask me questions at another time.
Higgins said I don’t mean to totally change the topic, but I’ve been approached to talk about seeing urgent legislation tonight: two urgent resolutions regarding upcoming propositions for the November 7 ballot. I want to say they’d come up urgent because most likely they’ll go to more than one commission otherwise, and based on time it would pass the November 7 ballot and make these worthless. I’d request that we talk about bringing them up urgent and then possibly bring them up because these props will affect us all on campus and in the state. These are props 83 and 85 (83, Jessica’s Law- stricter sex offender prop, 85- parental notification for abortions). If you guys would please bring up discussion on whether or not to bring it up urgent; I believe these have enough merit to at least discuss.
Patel said I spoke to the author and I wouldn’t introduce these because I don’t think we should take a position on these props. They don’t directly affect every student. In the
past as a member of EAC we only took position for things that directly affect us and anyway I don’t think we have enough background information, etc.
Salem said we have large bodies on campus that support both sides. ASUCD makes statements representing the whole campus. I don’t think we should be choosing a side when so much of campus will disagree.
Patel said these bills should not be seen as urgent and I’d vote against them anyway.
Molnar said I don’t think ASUCD should be taking stands on non-local props and I personally don’t want to get into this debate during which we’ll all want to kill everyone else in the room.
Ostrowski said these props do indeed affect students. As far as 83 is concerned, we recently had this problem. For 85 there are freshmen under eighteen who would be affected, and students who are parents. Also these affect the larger Davis area. Last year there were two props that the senate passed resolutions on, why can’t these two even be heard? And they’d have to be heard as urgent because it will take way too much time otherwise.
Amaha said we had a lot of props go to commissions, and these could have at least gone informally in order to give a reason for these to be seen urgent.
Ostrowski said I believe it would be helpful, but if you do it next week it will be so close to election that its affect will be zip. Also if senators are not familiar on these props and other politics, how do you expect students to be familiar? Senators should have opinion on these.
Salem said I see your argument that these affect us, but as ASUCD we cannot take a stance on this (yes or no) because there will be a large majority that feels opposite of the stance we take. This will just create a huge disconnect on campus and I prefer to not do this.
Ostrowski said my philosophy is that each of you represent one twelfth of the student population. The final decision won’t be unanimous, but you’ll all be representing your own part of campus.
Farhad Motamed asked do you have copies of these resolutions so we can all look? And as far as timing is concerned, maybe we’re not completely informed but commissions could have already seen these.
Higgins said if these do come up urgent I’ll go make copies during a short break.
Sanders said let’s kill this resolution thing: let’s not talk about them in public discussion the whole time. If commissions didn’t have time to see these, I’m not enough informed.
Rivera said this isn’t solely a student issue. I don’t think these should be brought up urgent or at all, because it’s not our place to take a position on them.
Rogers said my opinion is same. Also I feel like we’re bypassing the whole system for legislation. If our commissions don’t see these bills and resolutions it’s already taking the voice away from students. If we’re representing students we should let as many students as possible see them. I was asked to introduce them today and I wasn’t even allowed to see a copy.
Harms said to bring this up urgent is completely irresponsible. These props have been around for months and this legislation could have been written weeks ago and gone through the proper channels. You’re bringing these up now so they have to be seen urgent. That’s irresponsible and your fault as an author.
Rogers said if it had gone through the proper channels, commissions would have known, students and the Aggie would have known and we’d have a huge audience today.
Higgins said I’m getting a lot of glares. I told him I’d introduce it; it’s our job if a student comes feeling strongly about something to follow through and bring it to the table. I told Mr. Ostrowski that I didn’t know if it would be brought up but I’d try. We have to respect that he feels strongly and be more than willing to introduce things. I understand the arguments: we shouldn’t take position for entire student body on divided subject. That was an argument a long time ago, if we don’t want to look at these for not segregating the community, we shouldn’t pass resolutions at all. That’s the idea of bringing up two thirds, you might actually have more consensus and representation to pass a resolution for the entire student body.
Holloway said less than a majority of the senate is ready to see these. If you haven’t done enough research, you shouldn’t be seeing these bills tonight.
Higgins said this would bring up and push knowledge onto the students. Even if we failed it, Aggie would talk about it in their issues and it would be a way to mass educate the public. Us talking right now is going to start the education process. It’s sad we’re pushing voter registration and not able to get out to all the props that will be on the ballot.
Sanders said yes, bringing up any item creates discussion. But I’d vote no just because I don’t know enough, and then I may be failing something that I would have supported. I don’t know how people feel on it, and by voting no it says I’m not in favor of the propositions. Even if we abstain and the resolution doesn’t pass, it means we’re against it—and it was just for a lack of information.
Higgins said I’m guessing that if these don’t get brought up, they’ll be brought up next week so people can do their homework.
Deepak said we had a prop debate yesterday and 85 was featured. One of the main focuses is that we have been providing opportunities for students to inform themselves. In all honesty we shouldn’t be taking a position, especially because communities aren’t here to give their input. We should at least bring out groups to hear from them if we were going to see such a thing.
Salem said I want to address the stance concerns. When we see a resolution it’s something that directly affects students. Yes this affects us, but it’s something that affects people both on the yes and the no side. If we have a resolution for a prop like this, it gets iffy. The fact that it’s a state prop makes me think we could be dividing communities.
Patel said the point is that the twelve of us around the table who are voting shouldn’t be voting on this; it’s about whether we should be taking stand and the answer to that question is no.
Deepak said this discussion has become circular and we shouldn’t even approach it further.
Xie said this is not a regular resolution at all. You’re not as anal about resolutions as past senates, but even if we passed this the Aggie usually takes a stance on propositions anyway. I don’t think it will increase voter turnout at all. There are nonpartisan groups already talking about these, and I don’t think it will increase voter turnout at all.
Schwab said I don’t even think it’s about feeling passionate about the issue. I think it seems mean spirited that the author presented both a yes and a no resolution for the propositions.
Kirk Cowgill said I’ve heard a lot of good things, and this is my first time here. I’ve heard a lot of agree and disagree, but I’ve also heard somewhat insulting things toward the author of these resolutions. At least appreciate that the author brought it up; you don’t need to throw out the word “irresponsible.”
Lay said Ostrowski wanted my commission to discuss this, and I agree with discussion. I talked to people who felt against these props in all of these resolutions; I feel uncomfortable taking a stance on any of these issues, and even the issues we’ll be discussing next meeting.
Higgins said I’m just doing this as a representative of the students. I motion to move into any other business.
Sanders objected: I have other public discussion.
Higgins withdrew.
Rosas-Romero said I was asked to introduce the same resolutions, but one was in favor of the props and one was against them and bother were by the same author. It concerned me that the author who wants to take a side made a resolution for both sides. I was going to introduce one and then discovered the same author made an opposing resolution.
Lay said it’s good if we take a stance on things, but sometimes it’s harmful for the democratic process. This could influence vote, and people should be able to vote without us influencing them with our stances.
Ostrowski said as far as the no on 85 goes, I was asked to do it and if it was conflict it was. I was unable to get a Senator to get it in; it wasn’t mean spirited, it was to get discussion open. I want to see resolutions, get an opinion on it. Years before there was a time when ASUCD was very active in voicing its opinion on campaigns etc. and now it’s like the senators don’t even know the basics of these propositions that are affecting their own communities.
Deepak said maybe that was kind of mean. I totally feel we’re very active in the community. We did a prop debate just yesterday, and I believe that it wasn’t anything but it was BOMB. I really think you should reconsider whether you want to introduce the pro and the con to an issue, it seems shady. Anyway let’s move on, if you have something to say then say it.
Vice President Carnes said Christine: I wasn’t trying to skip you, I honestly didn’t see your placard. I’m going to talk to Sanders after the meeting to reform our strategy to make sure we get everyone. I always nod or something so you know I saw you. Hopefully we can get around the table better, and I sincerely apologize and will do my best to make sure nothing like that happens in the future.
Sanders motioned for a five minute break; properly seconded without objections.
Vice President Carnes said be back 7:37.
XIX. RECESS
Vice President Carnes called the meeting back to order at 7:38pm.
XX. QUORUM ROLL CALL Present: Carnes, Amaha, Deepak, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders, Dardik, Khan, Xie, Lay, Rivera, Feldman Absent: Holloway, Savaree-Ruess, Ajlouny, Farhad Motamed, Higgins, Zamora, Markevich
XXI. PUBLIC DISCUSSION
Sanders said I’m going to call the resolutions up, your vote states more than just saying stuff about it. [Read letter announcing withdrawal from LEAD].
Rogers said I’d like to announce that I’m going to go through the process of calling a closed session on the pro-temp. It has nothing to do with the last statement, just duly note it.
Higgins asked can you elaborate on your announcement?
Rogers said I’ll elaborate when the time comes. I feel like if you want to know why I’m doing it you can talk to me about it, and it’ll come up next week. We have a week.
XXII. ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Sanders motioned to consider SR #6 in support of prop 83, calling it up urgent for the good of the student body; Higgins seconded.
Molnar objected: ASUCD shouldn’t take a stand on props like these.
Roll-call vote whether or not to see resolution as urgent:
DO NOT CONSIDER SR#6 URGENT, 0-9-3 No: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Higgins, Zamora
Sanders motioned to see SR #7 as urgent, in support prop 85. Urgent for reasons stated during public discussion; seconded.
Salem objected: roll-call vote please.
DO NOT CONSIDER SR#7 URGENT, 0-9-3 No: Amaha, Deepak, Farhad Motamed, Molnar, Patel, Rogers, Rosas-Romero, Salem, Sanders Abstain: Ajlouny, Higgins, Zamora
Sanders said we need to get interview people, for GASC tomorrow from noon until two. Dwaimy already agreed, we just need one more senator.
Patel said I’ll do it.
Sanders said now for AAC Tuesday, sometime between 3:30 and 7:30.
Amaha said I’m available after 4:30.
Patel said I can be available at 6:00.
Markevich said I’ll give you definite times.
Higgins said please just email us about it.
Higgins said as a bill I wrote a while back, we just got done with the CFC interview…
Vice President Carnes said this is not any other business. Any other business is for legislation, changes to the agenda, etc.
Sanders motioned to re-enter public discussion; properly seconded without objection.
Higgins said coming up is the Theta Zi shoot out, a paintball tournament (with teams of 5). We already have two teams from the fire dept, maybe going to get UCD Fire out. We’re in communication with UCD Police and Davis Police, seem like they’re for it and just need to get people together. It’s a thirty two team tournament and anyone can make a team. It’s all for charity, Theta Zi Habitat for Humanity, two houses are being built in Davis who need more funding so families can be given homes. It’s very cheap to play, thinking like $125 per team, all day of paintball (paint included). All day of paintball with friends, it’s cheap, you’ll be playing against firefighters, police, and other students. I can’t wait to shoot up firefighters and see if the cops waste me. Sign up, get five people, it’s going to be fun and goes for a great cause.
Kevin Powers said as of a couple days ago I am the new ASUCD Events Coordinator. I wanted to tell everyone that I have office hours MWF from 12-2 in the Exec Office. I’m open to ideas for events, I work with the Exec Office but I’m friendly and a good listener.
Patel said in light of the Indian New Year, there will be an Indian Dance Festival tomorrow night in Freeborn at 8:00pm.
Salem motioned to adjourn; properly seconded without objection.
XXIII. ADJOURNMENT
Vice President Carnes adjourned the meeting at 7:49pm.
Submitted by,
Bobby Gray III ASUCD Senate Recorder ’06-‘07
