Sadie Lou

1. Minutes: Approved from last week.
2. Chair’s Report: Thanks for coming to Spencer’s service. Please stay on track today, there is a lot going on.
3. Treasurer’s Report: Last night we funded four different budgets. SLC Lit Review, Swing Dance (Seven Lessons), Environment Speaker, Science is Fun! Club Ice Cream event
4. Roll Call- Madison
5. Committee Reports:
   1. SSSF: Homecoming is a week from Friday. You must attend. Please help out. We need your help. ALL MUST ATTEND. Game and Dance are musts.
   2. General: Brian- long discussion of the role of the sciences in the liberal arts. And then, how to encourage people to take more sciences and also considered the issue of over enrollment in pre-med requirements
   3. Admissions: Went to admissions office and demanded to know when they met. Emily is working with Jennifer about recruitment from high schools
   4. Student Work: heard an alleged violation of academic integrity.
   5. Curriculum: We sat down with director of grad program, first time ever in SLC history. Talked about getting needs met with undergrad classes meeting grad requirements. Finalized the FYS list of teachers for next year. Allowed a change for the curriculum for spring semester, Architecture class will continue as a yearlong instead of semester.
   6. Student Life: discussion on the daily email and other emails. Discussion on how to make the daily email more functional. Approved banner and fundraising requests. Talked about the blood drive- lots of discussion. The committee will continue to discuss before they vote on it. Please come and discuss. 12:15 tomorrow. Go to the library for minutes and other information. (All on reserve. )
   7. Alcohol and Other Drug Task Force: Finalizing the draft.
   8. By-law- will not meet tomorrow
   9. Club liaison:
      1. Kara: SLC Democrats having election night in tent tonight.
      2. Myles: contact club- club hasn’t contacted them back.
      3. Bobby: Porcelain baby has been talking through emails. Needs to find a place to practice. Directed them to college events.
      4. Nina- contacted by someone in Christian union to start another club. There are problems with the club recognition on-line.
      5. Michelle- fill out a paper form
      6. Emily- QVC has a lot of events. Genderfuck and cross-dress cabaret later this month.
      7. Lily: liaison for midnight cabaret. Will be in show because she is the liaison.
      8. Michelle: is anyone having a hard time contacting clubs?
      9. Ava: Wanted to come to see what senate was like. May run for SSSF. !!!
         Club Recognition
6. South East Asian Organization: Charlie- may change name if they come up with something cleverer. Had event last year with Diwali. Great event went well. Had it again this year. Are finding that people are interested in learning about culture of South East Asia. APICAD encompasses such a large portion of the world; there are cultural, culinary and religious differences. This would be a more specific group for those students and for those interested to come to the meetings to be aware of culture. Want to have a Muslim festival. Also want to have a film series. One of them is about partition that happened between India and Pakistan. Events that most people on campus aren’t very aware of. Want everyone else to know about what is happening with specific organization. Hopefully will start meeting in common ground, Meetings are Mondays at 5.
   1. Nina: motions to recognize. No objections. Passes.
7. Gospel Choir: Jack Arsenault. Was started spring 2007 by Christine Spinelli and Sarah Levin. We’ve been meeting every Thursday in Marshall Field. Have had 2-3 concerts per semester. Also just performed for family weekend. Not recognized by music program but they are a club with a director.
   1. Lily: motion to approve. Seconded. No objections. Elizabeth will be the liaison.
      Old Business:
8. By-Law Changes:
   1. This is the text of the proposed changes.
      Notice of Proposed Amendments to Bylaws

In accordance with the bylaws, notice is hereby given that the following bylaw amendments will be considered at the regular membership meeting on November 4, 2008. Sections to be omitted are struck through. Added words or sections are in bold.

Tabled from last week:

Standing Rules, Rule 7: Blogging.

Section 1: Committees Responsible for Blogging

Currently reads: In addition to weekly Senate meeting minutes, any minutes from Standing Committees that Senators sit on shall also be posted on SadieLou.net. All Standing Committees as defined in the Constitutional Bylaws, Title IV, are responsible for posting blog entries. Ad-hoc committees are not required to post blog entries, though they are encouraged.

Proposed amendments: In addition to weekly Senate meeting minutes, any minutes or notes from Standing Committees that Senators sit on shall must also be posted on SadieLou.net within one week of that Committee’s meeting. All Standing Committees as defined in the Constitutional Bylaws, Title IV, are responsible for posting blog entries. Ad-hoc committees are not required to post blog entries, though they are encouraged. One failure to blog after a meeting will be counted as one tardy in the Vice Chair’s attendance records for the Senator who had committed to blog for that meeting.

Rationale: Even if official minutes aren’t taken in a meeting, blogging is a vital way for Senate to keep the community informed of our actions. Creating a system of accountability by equating a failure to blog with a tardy reflects the importance of this process. Much of the feedback from last week’s meeting suggested that including a time limit in this bylaw amendment would be helpful.

Based on last week’s discussion:

Constitutional Bylaws

Title V: Student Activities and Spaces

Article I: Student Groups and Clubs
Section 1: Requirements for Seeking Initial Recognition by the Senate & Section 2: Requirements for Seeking Renewed Recognition by the Senate
Part D (of both Section 1 & 2; wording is identical) : Recognition
Currently reads: The Club Registration Form will be reviewed by the Senate at the meeting in which recognition is being sought. A 2/3 vote is required to officially recognize a Club.
Proposed amendments: The Club Registration Form will be reviewed by the Senate Senate Executive Committee at the meeting in which recognition is being sought. A 2/3 vote consensus vote is required for the Executive Committee to officially recognize a Club. If a consensus is not reached within the Executive Committee, the club recognition will be voted on at the next Senate meeting. A 2/3 vote is required for the Senate to officially recognize a club.

Section 3: Recognition Process
Currently reads: Once a potential student group or club has filled out and turned in their application for recognition, they will be notified of the time that their club will be reviewed at Senate. If they are a returning organization, the preliminary club liaison they were assigned at club chair training may speak on their behalf at the Senate meeting. If they are a new club, at least one member of the club leadership must attend the Senate meeting they are scheduled to appear at. At the Senate meeting, the club officer or the club liaison will present the club’s mission statement and club recognition form to Senate. Senate may ask for clarifications regarding the answers on the form. The club officer or liaison will be available for questions at this time. The status of attendance at a club chair training should be provided. The Senators will then move into a discussion on the organization. Any senator may make a motion to approve the organization, with the exception of any senator who is listed on the club recognition form. The motion requires a 2/3 vote to be recognized. Once the student group or club is approved, the club liaison and back-up liaison will be solidified. If they were assigned preliminary liaisons at Club Chair Training, they will be formally assigned. If no preliminary liaisons have been assigned, then a permanent liaison will be assigned at the meeting. Contact information will be exchanged at this

time. If the club officers were not required to attend the Senate meeting, they must be notified who their club liaison and back-up club liaison are within 48 hours of their approval. The club liaison will be responsible for contacting all club leadership within 48 hours, regardless of whether the club was required to attend Senate or not. If any club is not approved for recognition, the reasons shall be given to them in writing.

Proposed amendments:

Once a potential student group or club has filled out and turned in their application for recognition, they will be notified of the time that their club will be reviewed at Senate in an Executive committee meeting. If they are a returning organization, the preliminary club liaison they were assigned at club chair training may speak on their behalf at the Senate meeting. If they are a new club, at least one member of the club leadership must attend the Senate meeting they are scheduled to appear at. At the Senate Executive committee meeting, the club officer or the club liaison will present the club’s mission statement and club recognition form to Senate will be reviewed by the Executive committee.. Senate may ask for clarifications regarding the answers on the form. The club officer or liaison will be available for questions at this time. The status of attendance at a club chair training should be provided. The Senators Executive committee will then move into a discussion on the organization. Any senator Executive committee member may make a motion to approve the organization, with the exception of any senator who is listed on the club recognition form. The motion requires a 2/3 consensus vote to be recognized. If a consensus vote is not reached, the club recognition will be voted on by the entire Senate at the next scheduled Senate meeting. If they are a new club, at least one member of the club leadership must attend the Senate meeting. At the Senate meeting, the club officer or the club liaison will present the club’s mission statement and club recognition form to Senate. Senate may ask for clarifications regarding the answers on the form. The club officer or liaison will be available for questions at this time. The Senators will then move into a discussion on the organization. Any senator may make a motion to approve the organization, with the exception of any senator who is listed on the club recognition form. A 2/3 vote is required for the Senate to officially recognize a club. Once the student group or club is approved, the club liaison and back-up liaison will be solidified assigned at the next Senate meeting. If they were assigned preliminary liaisons at Club Chair Training, they will be formally assigned. If no preliminary liaisons have been assigned, then a permanent liaison will be assigned at the meeting. Contact information will be exchanged at this time. If the club officers were not required to attend the Senate meeting, they must be notified who their club liaison and back-up club liaison are within 48 hours of their approval. The club liaison will be responsible for contacting all club leadership within 48 hours, regardless of whether the club was required to attend Senate or not. If any club is not approved for recognition, the reasons shall be given to them in writing.

Hypothetical amended bylaw:

Once a potential student group or club has filled out and turned in their application for recognition, they will be notified of the time that their club will be reviewed in an Executive committee meeting. At the Executive committee meeting, the club’s mission statement and club recognition form will be reviewed by the Executive committee. The Executive committee will then move into a discussion on the organization. Any Executive committee member may make a motion to approve the organization. The motion requires a consensus vote to be recognized. If a consensus vote is not reached, the club recognition will be voted on by the entire Senate at the next Senate meeting. If they are a new club, at least one member of the club leadership must attend the Senate meeting. At the Senate meeting, the club officer or the club liaison will present the club’s mission statement and club recognition form to Senate. Senate may ask for clarifications regarding the answers on the form. The club officer or liaison will be available for questions at this time. The Senators will then move into a discussion on the organization. Any senator may make a motion to approve the organization, with the exception of any senator who is listed on the club recognition form. A 2/3 vote is required for the Senate to officially recognize a club. Once the student group or club is approved, the club liaison and back-up liaison will be assigned at the next Senate meeting. If they were assigned preliminary liaisons at Club Chair Training, they will be formally assigned. If no preliminary liaisons have been assigned, then a permanent liaison will be assigned at the meeting. Contact information will be exchanged at this time. If any club is not approved for recognition, the reasons shall be given to them in writing.

The above bylaw change would also affect the standing rule below.

Standing Rules: Rule 10: Club Liaison
Section 3: Assignments
Currently reads: Liaisons will be assigned at the Senate meeting during which the club obtains recognition. If the club is not required to attend a Senate meeting, they shall be notified of their club liaison within 24 hours of their approval. A back-up liaison shall be assigned at the same time in the case that the primary liaison is unavailable for any reason. The Liaison may be preliminarily assigned at Club Chair Training.
Proposed amendments: Liaisons will be assigned at the next Senate meeting during which after the club obtains recognition. If the club is not required to attend a Senate meeting, they shall be notified of their club liaison within 24 hours of their approval. A back-up liaison shall be assigned at the same time in the case that the primary liaison is unavailable for any reason. The Liaison may be preliminarily assigned at Club Chair Training.

1. Kara : the first one we are talking about is the one that was tabled from last week.
   Added a time limit to the bylaw change on blogging.
2. Elizabeth: This is confusing. If in a committee that has minutes then it is hard to know what blogging is or when we are supposed to blog.
3. Eliot: same sentiment as Elizabeth
4. Bobby: continuing with what he said last week, believes there should be a bylaw but doesn’t know about counting it as a tardy.
5. Lindsey: Every senator must blog, then one person on committee is assuming more responsibility than the others—Seems unfair.
6. Aiden: this is a little different. Addressing Elizabeth- This is for minutes that are not publicly posted from faculty dominated committees so that student body can have a better idea of what is going and then, minutes are always up for all of the standing committees. Important, senator who had committed to blog. Schedule for the senators so that one person has A and the other B. So that there is a clear, equal schedule of when people are supposed to blog
7. Madison: Talking about accountability and keeping it equivalent…If we are talking about having it be required, … There should be some repercussion for not blogging.
8. Lily: Agrees it should be a tardy. Because if it is another consequence, What would you propose the other consequence to be?
9. Bobby: Yes, accountability, yes consequence. But there should be a separate category to assess. Physical vs. Internet presence should be considered separately.
10. Nina: Doesn’t have issue with tardy thing because if there is a schedule, then that means that if there are most people then people will only have to blog one or two times a semester. We are all busy but it shouldn’t be that hard to make commitment. Hvaving a different kind of repercussion…
11. Kara: If we made blogging a separate category, would make it very difficult to assess accountability. If bylaw is passed, exec committed to working out a system to help committees figure or who blogs when.
12. Vera: It should not be execs decision how different committees organize self. Easier when it is between the committee. It should be up to every group to organize themselves. Has faith that in committee, people will take care of it. Only responsible for self.
13. Elizabeth: Motions to approve bylaw, after taking an informal poll. No objections
14. Madison: roll call vote. 11YES 4NO 3 Objections
    PASSES.

1. Kara: So the next by-law. On club recognition. Some club chairs feel like the process isn’t something they need to be there for. So the exec would simply decide during their meetings. If consensus, is not meant then they move to senate meeting.
   1. Brian- confused because it says that in proposed amendment they would have to come to senate.
   2. Kara: only if exec can’t meet a consensus.
   3. Brian- too much power to exec. Clubs only have to come once. We would sacrifice our opportunity to ask questions.
   4. Vera: Confused about how liaisons would get assigned. Overly complicated. Good to choose liaisons when they are here.
   5. Jasmine: Likes the system we have because it is just fine. Understands need to save time for club, but Brian is right. If they are putting in time to have club they can give us 15 minutes because then it benefits the school more because then we are more able to spread publicity about the pub.
   6. Michelle: got an email from a club that wanted to start a music club, can’t come to senate because it is during music Tuesdays
   7. Lily: exec meetings are open. So people could come and here club presentations there. If we are supposed to be considered open for school, comfort zone, we don’t want to cause them to miss music Tuesdays. We don’t need to be so worried about club liaisons. Not our role as student senate. Very unfair.
   8. Cat: a lot of what she was going to say has already been said. Maybe we could find a way to supplement our present procedure. Supports the present system.
   9. Bobby: Cat said that whole supplement thing. We should just target that group and give them another time to come. Personal relationships that is important
   10. Elizabeth- what cat said. Another system, switching it.
   11. Lily- what Elizabeth said, if they can’t make it then have exec relay information.
   12. Aiden- ways that present system could be supplemented. Two ways, 1) deal with each club on case-by-case, then simply suspend bylaw and then with that club we could 2) the other would be to come up with a new system within the bylaw to come up with a more concrete way
   13. Jasmine: Is in support. Good idea to have exec take on responsibility when people can’t make it.
   14. Vera: We need to stop talking about. Aiden’s proposal works. But if the alt. is to just suspend bylaw, it should be written down what the alternative situation is.
   15. Brian: should we vote on it?
   16. Michelle: just create own in own motion
2. Kara: anyone can come forward with an amendment to the bylaws. I won’t have time to write another one for next meeting because I’m out of town this weekend. It is helpful to know where everyone stands.
   1. Jasmine- informal polls. Motions to make an addition to the bylaw
   2. Michelle- there must be a written proposal.
   3. Cat: Motions to table. No objections. Jasmine will work on writing an amendment.
3. Reflection: Anti-Oppression Training
   1. Michelle. Heard opinions about negative experiences. Wants to get the whole spectrum. You can repeat what you said last week.
   2. Nina: Something we talked about last week, and this may be fair at least for me, the issue was the anti-oppression facilitator. I was uncomfortable and I was uneasy.
   3. Bobby: Said he initially did not like Yk. But as training progressed, I changed my opinion and it was such a good experience, really meaningful.
   4. Aiden: it we had had more time, feels that it would have been a fuller experience
   5. Hayleigh: I enjoyed the first part and then the second part felt directionless, and she felt lost.
   6. Elizabeth: read the minutes
   7. Brian: I thought it was, she Yk seemed nervous and seemed cold at first. IT was a difficult issue to talk about, so maybe that was why there was a disconnect. Can see why people though it was biased on some ways. Important to recognize that this was not about pointing fingers but this was about the systems that are present in our society.
   8. Vera: Really liked the anti-oppression training. Things that these feelings came up because maybe people weren’t prepared to face the issues. Hard to know if you’ve never done it before. Also not Yk’s responsibility, to make this a safe space. If people felt that they didn’t feel safe, we aren’t children. We didn’t need to be babied. IT is our responsibility to make each other feel comfortable. Being uncomfortable is part of dealing with oppression, being oppressive.
   9. Jay: precisely what she was going to say. Oppression and safe-space don’t go hand in hand. Unfair expectation. Maybe could have been better with preparation. However, don’t get prepared for it in the world. Agrees with Vera. Issues with her were fundamental, ideological. Issue with statement “If you are white, you are racist” not appropriate or constructive. Thus, unnecessarily uncomfortable. Not about creating safeness. The terminology and the way she coached the arguments. No particular impression of personality.
   10. Nina: did people have an adequate amount of time to reflect? We did these exercises and the talked vaguely about senate. Felt as though/ wished she had facilitated more self-inward looking.
   11. Durga: agrees. Reiterating what Aiden said, not much time. Yes the transition was shaky. I think she was trying to make us aware that we are making really important decisions on this campus so we should be constantly aware of our actions. She never wanted us to forget that. We come in with biases/views and we can’t pretend to deny those. At the end of meeting, I wanted to speak up more often and wish I had in training

##Lily: Yk doesn’t go to school; doesn’t have a place in the training. Set up great words and framework for anti-oppression without application. Use examples from her life, the real world to relate concepts to reality.

1. Aiden: I would like to second the sentiment that there was too little application compared to theoretical background.
2. Cat: How was trainer chosen?
3. Michelle: Last year, a group of students came to senate with a list of demands, one of which was that senate undergo anti-oppression training. This year was the first year that we’ve actually had anti-oppression training, and one of the features of the by-laws is that the trainer be from an outside organization. Natalie Gross also supported the use of an outside organization. Over summer, Natalie, Mary, and I interviewed and selected an organization.
4. Eliot- so the students that requested anti-oppression training were not members of the senate.
5. Mary: senate did vote to change bylaws to require anti-oppression training with unanimous approval
6. Vera: the point of this is because we are all senators. This was for us as senators not as people who identify a certain way. She did know about senate and its operation. Our school is about what kind of institution we are and want to be. Part of this was about letting go of individual stuff and what it means to be a senator. Tools and ideology transition was a bit shaky. That kind of language is not unique to yk. All sorts of organizations use this jargon. It is held to be true by many institutions that do this work.
7. Jay: disagrees with a few things that Lily said. Almost more detrimental to receive theory and have discussion on our own. Her role as facilitator requires a thorough explanation. Doesn’t think that her providing example is her role, it is an internal process. About us in this body and processing that situation.
8. Myles: didn’t feel that that the training really spoke to us as senators. Thought it would be more tailored to us as senators. Thought that it was very surface and never got into anything that we could use. Personally, didn’t really see the need to have this four training for the student senate.
9. Lily: so I mean, going on what you said about training and then Vera said about training. Then having anti-oppression training open to the entire school rather than just the senate. Important to see how other people outside of senate feel. Agrees with Jay about her personal experiences wouldn’t best suit the time. Wanted it to be more direct and less vague.
10. Aiden: People have been describing Yk as a facilitator, she is not. She is a trainer.
11. Jay: 1) Didn’t say that her personal experience was not due to the interest of time, completely irrelevant altogether. 2) Disagrees. Thinks that it relating to our jobs as senator. That was the theoretical leap. She situated senate in our culture as whom we are in individuals that are shaped by this society at large. This leap we must make was how those constructs relate to our jobs as senators. Concerning club recognition, when Kara mentioned that there are some clubs we are so enthusiastic about some, theories about different clubs and enthusiasm. The individual that you are and how you bring that into this room. This theory must be applied and is part of internalization process. Not an instantaneous, a process. That was the point of the training, and that was the point. Not saying this to be combative, completely. Sometimes it is difficult to take in everything when you are in this matrix, when you are the oppressor. Perhaps, I am not seeing this in the most complete way. Maybe I feel like I am in one of these groups.
12. Durga: this was really important. Tremendously important. Because the second you don’t think this is important, are when you are not recognizing the power you have as a senator. Thinks we should have another one because this is so incredible important.
13. Bobby: it is important. So important it is a bylaw for many years. For as long as bobby wants to serve as senate. Walked away thinking, deep in thought. Still resonates with him throughout week. There is some part of that training that comes back to him even constantly. Even in this conversation several shades of training have been present. It is important because as we are representatives of the student body. NYT article, Wanted to reference training, how we are perceived outside of this room and elsewhere.
14. Jasmine: reiterate what lily said about doing something like what we did with the whole school would be great. Thinks that we should do this with everyone. So that people will see as senators and as students. We all got different things out of training, views and feeling are their own. Can’t push own opinions on someone else. We are all going through this on our pace. We may feel one way now that may change. Please respect everyone’s opinions.

1. Appeal. 4 to 1 decision on Aiden’s SSSF appointment. Lauren will be coming next week to Senate to present her thoughts. Michelle will email us with her thoughts ahead of time.
2. ON EXEC:
   1. Michelle: brainstorm/function of way exec functions with senate. Also, issue with chain of command. In position when Michelle has opinion, will hand over chair ship to the next on chain of command.
   2. Kara: standing rules on PG 10. For the purpose of having an impartial chair, chair will refrain from opinion, and then vice-chair will remain impartial. Next chain of command→ chair, vice-chair… SEE BYLAWS.
   3. Michelle: keep this in mind during this conversation. Having me chair the committee presents its own problems. Exec will now go through their roles so that everyone has a more clear understandings of the roles.
   4. Hayleigh: Treasurer, in charge of funds that senate allocates. Keeps track of receipts, funds. No vote in SAS because she is the chair. Has a vote in senate. Also helps people how to make budgets. Also sits on SSSF as financial advisor
   5. Maddie: vice-chair, sits on exec and general senate, also sits on SAS. Only has vote in case of tie. Makes it clear what her vote is. Keeps track of administrative things such as liaisons of clubs and tardies.
   6. Michelle, sets agenda. So, club recognition forms, facilitates other items on the agenda. Communicating with other students about their needs. Communicates with administration like Mary and Al. and other people in student affairs. Also being around to answer questions
   7. Kara: supposed to know the bylaws and have a good working knowledge to make sure that the bylaws are followed through the meetings. Went to a professional parliamentarian training. Has a vote in senate
   8. Aiden: chairs SSSF sub committee. Not a voting member, and Hayleigh is the tiebreaker in these situations. Aiden presents budget, up to members to make motions. Talks to administration. Like, Michelle but for SSSF.
   9. Jay: Who has a vote?
      Hayleigh, Kara and Aiden have vote. And Maddie has a vote in case of a tie.
   10. Brian: why is parliamentarian a voting member? Sees it as a facilitating role like Michelle and Maddie’s.
   11. Michelle: This position was created two years ago when Neil (as chair) created exec. The Parliamentarian and Vice-Chair used to just be members of senate that were already senators.
   12. Mary: Chair and Treasurer, were the only ones voted into exec. Three years ago senate felt that exec wasn’t functioning fully until 6-7 weeks into school year. People weren’t able to work together as a group. They wanted people to be able to start in the spring. Decision was made to have them stand-alone. Doesn’t think it was thought t through how parliamentarian has a vote. Yes, it is an important conversation. In the spring, the student body elects all five exec positions. Prior to policy, only the senate elected exec members
   13. Michelle: Brian raising point that there is a position on exec that also has a vote that serves as a facilitator
3. Jay: at anti-oppression training, throwing ideas out. With power, by giving a title. If given title and a vote, it seems that the power or it may seem that the power
   1. Vera: It seems that people are hesitant; exec does a lot more work than senators. Several additional meetings, as a general rule, on exec shouldn’t have a vote. Not problems, just understanding the power dynamic. There is a dynamic that is created specifically in this room. It’s okay that there is a power dynamic.
   2. Michelle: go ahead and say it. Talk about it.
   3. Lindsay: agrees with Vera, there is a power dynamic. So as a new senator, appreciates the facilitation. Thinks we all have a title. Doesn’t think that that should cause a problem.
   4. Lily: agrees with that, power is not necessarily equal with influence. Just because exec has more power in these meetings, Kara as parliamentarian doesn’t mean her vote counts more. Still a vote. Responsibility. Thinks that how those are allocated amongst senators.
   5. Nina: agrees with lily and Lindsay. We all in theory have power. We all have titles. Student life isn’t even on the chain of command. Doesn’t have a problem with parliamentarian having a vote. If parliamentarian was using position to influence or manipulate vote. Understands that chair, should have a vote.
   6. Bobby: not really concerned with the motion that title gives more power to a single vote. Interesting notion that there is a title and vote. Thinks that entirety of exec should be a non-voting body. Not really specific to student body as a whole. Doesn’t think that treasurer or parliamentarian should vote on things they bring to senate.
   7. Brian- thinks that the point that Vera brought up was important— obviously we can’t interrupt. Discourse between exec and senate is lopsided.
   8. Vera: we should end on time. Has to leave.
   9. Jay: -power and influence are intimately related. –Point is not that power is numerical value. –We are not talking about Kara but the role of the parliamentarian in general. – Agrees with bobby, the whole of exec. Entire of exec should not vote because of specialized knowledge.
   10. Myles- agrees with jay and bobby
   11. Durga: example, when discussion and then motion in SAS, parliamentarian corrects discourse and action. Then the tone and influence and example will change.

1. Join under the tent
2. Read minutes,
3. Jay- on Friday, jay is chairing diversity committee. Campus activities on diversity.
4. Monday at 8PM, jasmine and Nina. Faith on campus.
5. Brian- FLUX is releasing zine to go with gender fuck. Deadline for submissions is this Friday. Fucking gender and feminism.
6. Jasmine- tomorrow Peter Young is going to be speaking. SPAAR. Released a bunch of minks from mink farm and was jailed for two years.
7. Madison: blood drive. 12:15-student life.
8. Motion to adjourn

Minutes taken and posted by Elizabeth Esser-Stuart, EESSER [at] GM [dot] SLC [dot] EDU.