Finance Committee Alderson Auditorium, Kansas Union October 17, 2013; 6:00pm

Transcription

1 Finance Committee Alderson Auditorium, Kansas Union October 17, 2013; 6:00pm i. Call to Order ii. Attendance iii. Officer Reports 1. Alek Joyce, Chair 2. Sara Anees, Vice-Chair 3. Jessie Pringle, Secretary 4. Michael Graham, Treasurer i. Absent 5. Drew Harger, Assistant Treasurer 6. Weston Halberstadt, MEF Finance Rep i. Did not meet today. Nothing on the Agenda. 7. Cody Christiansen, Finance Associate Senator i. Friendlied 40 senators on to strong hall resolution, concise debriefing of senate meeting held oct. 9. iv. Consent Agenda 1. BILL : A BILL TO FUND HER CAMPUS KU i. Drew pulls bill to put on top of regular agenda 2. BILL : A BILL TO FUND CLINTON CLOBAL INITIATIVE UNIVERSITY KANSAS 3. BILL : A BILL TO FUND HISTORY GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION i. Drew pulled to put on regular agenda 4. BILL : A BILL TO FUND KU SPORT & EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY STUDENT ORGANIZATION 5. Qi moved to call to question on consent agenda i. Mark P. seconded v. Regular Agenda 1. BILL : A BILL TO FUND HER CAMPUS KU i. Drew moves to postpone to next cycle 2. BILL : A BILL TO FUND HISTORY GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION 3. BILL : A BILL TO FUND SLAVIC GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION i. Group is present to explain the purpose of their event. Not asking for general funding just funding for event

2 ii. Contractual services agreement 1. Given to Tyler 2. Drew has it iii. Mark p. move to call to question 1. Danica seconds 2. Bill passes 4. BILL : A BILL TO FUND THE CLINICAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY PROGRAM GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION (CCPP GSO) i. Group is here to present. Helps troubled children often and this event is a workshop to further their skills in their work. ii. Unknown - Do have contractual services? yes iii. Emma -Where? Dole Center iv. Eric- as undergrad can I participate? Attend workshop and get information on club yes v. Drew: contractual services signed at $300? Indeed signed for $300 vi. Mitch: in compliance with rules and regs with leadership roles not for undergrads? Chair s ruling- requires every level to open to all students. vii. Alek: can undergrad run for leadership position? Have exemption. Appendix G viii. Drew moved to call to question 1. Seconded by Qi 2. Bill passes 5. BILL : A BILL TO FUND ENGINEERS (EWB) i. Group is present. Taking team to Bolivia for assessment trip. Without trip they cannot take normal annual trip. All supplies, mailings and medical kit is for this assessment trip. ii. Drew: talk about specific supplies? Entails hammers, equipment needed for trip. Will finish component of water project. Clipboard, sunscreen, solar showers, ice packs, camping necessities. iii. Sara: how much general allocation did you get last time? None iv. Eric: mailings for what? Mailings are used for funding. Mail to companies to ask for money. Ex. Boeing It is outreach to be more prominent and receive funds. v. Pacey: where are supplies stored? KU vi. Pacey: Specifically? Yeah in engineering building, locked up. vii. Danica: explain no allocation? Bill failed outright viii. Drew: prefer it to say general funding instead of mailings- which would be better for you? We can make it general funding. Flexibility would be appreciated ix. Bill failed outright at Student Rights

3 x. Pacey: Rules say a group must have significant need to receive more funding- can you make it 100$? 112$ is what we used last year from general funding xi. Sara: plan since you didn t get the earlier general funding? Trip to Moor OK -no money was allocated to that trip. We are using that money to pay for due. xii. Neg Speech Pacey 1. One group must have significant reasons 2. Amendment to Line 27 to $100 to be consistent 3. Eric seconded amendment 4. Neg Speech on Amendment Drew/Sara a. Put a lot of thought into what they are asking and that s the reasoning behind the $112. They ve met the standard of proof. Already spent their time and deserve it. b. Alek: any reason why the 12 is needed more? Probably sending out more letters this year and no reason to amend it down c. Eric: what about he rule? It is normally a guideline- they can ask whatever they really want d. Drew moves to call to question a. Mark Seconds b. Amendment fails xiii. Qi moved to call to question on bill 1. Seconded 2. Bill passes 6. BILL : ALTERNATIVE BREAKS i. Postponed to later because group is not present 7. BILL : A BILL TO AMEND SSRR ARTICLE VI, SECTION : SEAB i. SEAB would be better benefited to be led by someone wanting to represent and be in the group. ii. Drew: take affect now? A: Yes iii. Negative from Alek: We want someone who is cognizant of funding on this board. Possibly a vice chair designee. We don t want this to be partisan. I d rather see someone who is cognizant of fees. It should be under the committee s umbrella. Amendment to back out all the changes and add or designee. 1. Drew: Why was SEAB restructured? A: The group wasn t going anywhere with the money, so we wanted someone with a critical financial interest not just an environmental 2. Qi: How much do they distribute and how? A: Not sure how much, but through the center of sustainability. Mark: it is 1$ per semester fee. It has potential to go up. Alek: This should be tied to the legislature, not the executive

4 3. Mitch: Would you be comfortable just having two representatives from Finance as a compromise. Alek: Maybe, with one of those as a chair. 4. Drew: How are many other groups chairs selected. Alek: By president, but I d be in favor of those coming from Finance as well. This one is mainly an allocation board which makes it different and much more like MEF. 5. Drew Negative Speech on amendment: SEAB was structured like this because of their issues. I think that it makes sense for it to be more like the other fee boards. Safety is just like this and it is an appointment. a. Mitch: So you want this for consistency? b. Mark: So this is more like MEF of Safety? Or should we change MEF? Drew: It is more like safety. There is no reason why this would come from Finance, MEF looks more sense. c. Marcus: Do you want to restate everything you ve been saying? Drew: YES!!! d. Mitch: Couldn t anyone come to finance to run this? Drew: Yes, but that s dumb. 6. Sarah Positive on the amendment. Sarah is out of coke so she might not have logic. I don t understand why it s any more fair to have this be appointed by the president then the Committees. Voting is more fair. a. Drew: Which budget is bigger Health or SEAB? Why isn t the chair of student health the vice chair. b. Danica: is it different because health isn t an allocation board? Sarah: yes 7. Qi: I want to amend it to elect someone from the committee to be the chair. a. Drew: How many members is Finance sending? Danica: 2 b. Sarah: Would the designee keep people from outside of Finance. Answer: Yes c. Shelby: Would I say that one of the two will serve as chair? A: Yes d. Mark Negative Speech: We need to do this less on the fly and be more thoughtful. a. Drew: you want us to fail both amendments and then vote on the bill? A: yes, sure. 8. BILL : ALT BREAKS i. Friendly on sponsors. Friendly on wording from therefore to current KU alt breaks be exempted from travel restrictions. To Stay in accordance with other groups. ii. Mark: friendly to have a date of enactment? 1. Maybe iii. Qi: whats the point? We had money cut and this would be a third option

5 iv. Alek- we have funded capital purchases, office purchases in the past- where would this go specifically? Go to gas, toll money, housing, associated with travel. Group is cost-effective v. Neg Speech- Drew/Mitch: can t fund a group that has an application process and a fee. If travel is not vital to group then we can fund other things and this exemption isn t necessary. We don t fund to lower costs/scholarships. Group doesn t benefit campus, but main purpose to benefit they communities they go to. Either we plan to fund them and grant the exemption or we don t and we don t. 1. Cody: how is travel not essential to the group? Not open to all student because you pay and application. Isn t vital because they hold other events on campus. 2. Cody: Model UN, other groups exempted charge fees? No they don t, and they re open to all students. Can go on trips without SS funding. 3. Hannah: how to you compare competitive natures versus Alt Breaks? It has an educational value. Imprudent to compare the two things. How the travel exemption exists for each group. 4. Cody: delineate in R & R that is must be to KU campus? Implied within, unknown specific rule. 5. Positive Speech- Shelby: travel is essential to Alt breaks. We drive to all of them. Weekend break that are free of charge. Other groups also hold events that you claim take away from the travel necessity. a. Weston: where would the money be going to? Be asking money for both types of trips? Defer to group: we can use the money for the weekend breaks if you want us to. b. Mitch: how does Alt breaks differ from other groups we denied? That s the affiliation dues not travel $$ c. Mitch: What makes this group more worthy than EWB? Not more worthy, but we are worthy. That s too subjective to pass/fail it in that mentality. d. Mitch: how is benefit different from theirs? 400 students annually, cross disciplinary e. Kristina: if this exemption passed- would future would we have to pass any bill you sent through? No, you are able to deny us on other grounds f. Alex: other groups with exemption that have free trips? g. QI: why do you suddenly need this supplement? Group is not asking for money, just creating a last resort. The grant was cut from last year and it was the only thing that set off financial need h. Mitch: if you receive money for travel in future will you accept everyone? Logistically coordinators cannot have enough trips and some student financially can t attend

6 i. Qi: what does your budget look like, generally? Participation fee that goes to housing/travel/food. Thin profit margin and that is for emergencies. Policy to keep 5K in account in emergency. 6. Negative Speech- Mark: wants to pass bill but just wants a date of enactment. Travel is very beneficial to students for professional and experiential reasons. Use as opportunity to possibly change the system. a. Drew: friendly legislative cycle to fiscal year b. Alek: if any travel reform were to fail, why should we hold off on funding them until next year? Next year budget is tight and their participation group that could ask for a large amount of money and it is unfair to lift the rule and then not fund them at the amount they request. This would be counterproductive. 7. Negative Break on Date of Enactment Alek Joyce a. If the reforms are made then we should do it now anyways b. Qi: Would they ask for money this year? c. Alek: Yes they would 8. Motion to call the question on the amendment a. Then voting on the amendment they failed it 9. Negtive Speech- Drew: money will off set cost by a little bit, they still have pay 200 for trips. Can t go to specific students which make the funds scholarships. No reason to give exemption if we can t give them money. Previous groups usually go through block funding. a. Qi: credit hours towards breaks? Yes 10. Positive Speech- Shelby/Mark: Free breaks on weekends. Preamble reads to benefits in and outside of classroom. Doing good things to bring back and grow the KU committee. Existence of group is barring them. Seen how stingy group is, we can be responsible with this exemption. 11. Drew: would it go to only weekend breaks? Potentially yes, we want to open the door with this 12. Drew: all groups should be funded just because? Trying to be inclusive. 13. Qi: travel is important and group is great- if we fail this will there be a bill to scratch out all travel restrictions? Possibly. They ll try. 14. Drew: why have we denied BSU from going to conferences? I don t know why, that is an opportunity we are denying them from. Not a logical premise of question. 15. Mitch moved to call to question on the bill a. Seconded b. Delayed until Qi returns

7 c. Division d. Bill passes vi. RETURNING TO SEAB BILL 9. Alek speaking on a second amendment (amendment on an amendment): Current amendment 2 Finance representatives, Vice-Chair (serves or serves as a designee) the bill initially gave it to the student body President. He then says fail the Bill s second amendment. i. Clay: why is it better for a designee to be from Finance rather than the student body president or vice-president? A: Not always the best person for the job (favoritism) ii. Will: why is the Vice-Chair of finance the Chair of SEAB right now? A: Poor SEAB money management skills in the past 10. Drew argument: if the power of who the chair is going to be might as well be open to the entire Finance Committee That way we can choose two instead of one. 11. THE AMENDMENT ON THE AMENDMENT PASSED 12. Amendment Failed 13. Bill passed 14. BILL : A BILL TO AMEND SSRR ARTICLE I, SECTION 1.2 i. Friendly on sponsors ii. Moved to call to question 1. passes 15. BILL : A BILL TO AMEND SSRR APPENDIX N, SECTION 1.6 i. Drew proposes amendment to the bill In the event that a group has received student senate funding via line item for a specific event, project and/or item, and the funding requests meets the eligibility requirements of the MEF, the MEF shall act as a secondary funding source for that request. ii. Negative speech on amendment- Mitch/Kristina iii. Positive Speech Ashlie iv. Negative speech Alek Joyce: this is not too crazy for us to put together v. Positive Speech Drew Harger: funding through line item isn t taxing in any way. Any money that goes out is at our discretion. It s not whining that this is too much for the treasurers to do; it s that it will slip through the cracks 1. Weston: If a group going through line also knew that they wanted to apply for MEF funding, how would that work? 2. Weston: If they went through line item, would they only be eligible for 25% or for half over a thousand?a: They would be eligible for half over a thousand. The difference is where it is coming from.

8 vi. 3. Alek Joyce: given that groups can see how their funding changes over time, would their expenses change between line item and MEF application?a: If a group goes through line item, they should have a good idea of what their costs are going to be. We re funding things where costs are generally concrete. vi. Motion to call to question from Alek Joyce 1. Amendment fails vii. Negative speech on bill Weston Halberstadt, Ashlie Koehn 1. What if we have a special line item session of MEF? 2. Motion to postpone bill to next cycle to allow time to work details 3. Drew Harger Would it be easier to fail this bill now and submit a new piece of legislation later? 4. Mitch would it be repeat legislation if we decide that this is what we want to do? 5. Mitch follow up: will the budget for MEF be decided when line happens? A: You can estimate 6. Positive speech Alek Joyce: pass this and reconsider MEF allocation to line item in the future? a. Alex: could we pass this tonight, and have MEF talk about it? 7. Alex Dang: motion to call to question on bill a. Bill passes Board Reports 1. Weston Halberstadt, MEF 2. Will Admussen, Legal Services for Students 3. Weston Halberstadt and Ashu Agarwal, Student Safety Advisory Board 4. Mark Savoy, Tyler Childress and Sara Anees, Fee Review