SENATE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING OSAS CONFERENCE ROOM September 15, 2009 6:00PM CALL TO ORDER Chair Norris called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL: Senate Operations Chair Joe Norris Vice Chair Tyler Sharp Student Senate Parliamentarian Kathy Sexton Senator Luke Fangman Senator Natalie Scott Senator Brandon Abbott Senator William Muir Senator Dee Rodriguez Intern 1 Intern 2
Present x x x x x x x
Excused
Unex.
x
ANNOUNCEMENTS: • There were no announcements. GENERAL BUSINESS: • Chair Norris presented the proposed By-Laws amendments • He opened the floor to questions. o Senator Muir asked if there had been suggested additions. o Speaker Schultz said the primary concern was whether the appeals process violated the Constitution. She said it was determined that the proposed appeals process would not violate the Constitution. o Senator Muir said there is a section in the By-Laws regarding what an appellant is. Article VI potentially poses an interpretative problem with previous judicial problems. It can be improved upon by defining the Elections Commissioner as a review board. Attorney General Tank said it does not violate the By-Laws because of the ability to appeal to a higher judicial authority in this case, the president of the university. He also said it could be argued that the initial appeal in that the Elections Commissioner does not function as a judicial board. Chair Norris said it makes sense to adding a section to the ByLaws noting the Elections Commissioner would be considered a review board.
Senator Muir said for purposes of following Article VI that Chair Norris should do that. Speaker Schultz asked if it could be included in the second subsection of Article I, Section 1. President Henry said he feels the direction the committee is going to make the Elections Commissioner function, as an appeals board is the right one. • He said he thinks some changes are reactive to the past year’s election. • But he feels this change is proactive. • He said he would like to leave it in the confines of student government. Senator Shane asked how the system works now. • Chair Norris explained the process noting that if there’s a violation, the Elections Commissioner will determine if is a major or minor violation and determines consequences. A major violation will go to the Elections Review Committee. If that decision is appealed it will go to the Student Tribunal. • Senator Shane also asked about the Deputy Elections Commissioner. • CCAC Chair White asked about the determination of the violations. o Chair Norris noted that it would stay in the statues as major or minor violations but the Elections Commissioner would make the initial determination. • Senator Muir noted that the Attorney General mainly runs the judicial branch, not as an adjudicator. • Senator Shane asked about the Elections Commissioner replacing the committee. o The committee noted this was the considered change. Chair Norris noted the committee is also trying to streamline the review process and future determinations will be made beyond the 3 ½ days set aside for a review process. Senator Muir noted he did research and looked at the 2002 elections, which were also contentious. • Because of abstentions nobody actually won the election with a majority. • The judicial branch had to order the elections not to occur and then to subsequently write a letter as to what will be counted. • He made the letters available to all individuals at the meeting.
• • •
•
There was discussion about formally making the Elections Commissioner a judicial board under Article VI Section 1 of the K-State SGA By-Laws. This addition would be made at the end of Section 1 A-2 of the K-State SGA By-Laws. • Senator Fangman motioned to pass the By-Laws as amended. It passed 6-0-0. • Senator Muir moved that the Senator Operations Committee be added as authors. The motion passed 6-0-0. • Senator Muir moved the bill be reprinted for the next agenda and including it in the agenda for the next week. Speaker Schultz said she didn’t believe the By-Laws would be passed if the Statues could not also be viewed at the same time. She suggested re-introducing with the changes. o Senator Muir noted that could only be done under suspension of the rules. o President Henry recommended that the Senate Operations Committee provide a document to be dispersed at Thursday’s meeting so the Student Senate could review them. Senator Muir moved the bill be held in committee as amended. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0-0. The committee then reviewed the Statues. o Chair Norris and Speaker Schultz had earlier reviewed them and made changes. Speaker Schultz presented a definition of campaign to be added as Section 106 of Chapter 50. o It would involve persons actively promoting for a candidate as part of a campaign or cause. o Bill Harlan, Chair White and Senator Shane expressed reservations about the definition. She provided an example of the Collegian indirectly benefiting a campaign with something they write. o Bill Harlan said the definition should be more general. o Senator Shane said there should be trust in the campaigns and to try not to hold each member of a candidacy responsible. o Bill Harlan said the loose affiliation has been used to someone’s advantage in the past. He said there should be some framework provided for the judicial body. o Chair Norris explained that this was an attempt at holding members of campaigns accountable. o Senator Shane asked about documenting individuals involved within a campaign. Bill Harlan said that still presents a lack of accountability for certain campaigns. She presented changes to the sections regarding primary and general elections.
• • •
•
•
•
•
•
o She said the changes were made for consistency purposes. o Bill Harlan noted that a primary election must occur regardless of two pairings entering. That change was removed. o In the general election section, she added a purpose. Speaker Schultz questioned whether including the number of student senators should be included in the Statutes. Speaker Schultz presented Section 117 about removing the Deputy Commissioner and Elections Review Committee from the list of entities that could not be candidates for elections. Speaker Schultz presented Section 130 about Primary Election Procedures. o The Elections Commissioner releases the unofficial totals after the completion of tabulation of the votes. Additionally it notes that the results will be made official upon certification by the Elections Commissioner. o The Section notes that there is a 48-hour period to contest unofficial results have been issued. The Elections Commissioner has 72 hours to determine the nature of the contest of the Primary Election. o The committee agreed the sections should be reviewed more thoroughly and changed. o Bill Harlan said the reason for announcing unofficial results is to ensure accurate totals. Speaker Schultz presented Section 133 and the addition of Jardine Apartments as a region similar to the existing Residence Hall region. o The committee tried to refine the definition of Jardine’s boundaries. o An addition will be made regarding following the rules of Jardine’s judicial board. Speaker Schultz presented changes to the Section about mass distribution. o The change included noting a campaign cannot mass distribute campaign materials. o Chair White proposed including Collegian advertisements in the mass distribution section. o Bill Harlan said the only argument that can be made about mass distribution is that it could be connected to leaving a lot of leaf lets in one location. o The advertisement issue will be discussed further. Speaker Schultz presented Section 137 regarding the rotation of candidate’s tables. o The committee and Bill Harlan worked with Speaker Schultz about refining the wording of the section. Speaker Schultz presented Section 138 about posters being tacked to bulletin boards in non-academic campus buildings. o The committee added a section about permitting posters or campaign materials to be tacked on outside bulletin boards such as the ones adjacent to King Hall or Waters Hall. Speaker Schultz presented Section 140 regarding authority to remove. o The proposed section was changed.
•
•
o Senator Muir proposed allowing the section to note a person designated by the Elections Commissioner. The committee decided to review dollar amounts spent on campaigns at a later meeting. o Speaker Schultz encouraged reviewing the rules of other Big 12 schools regarding spending. o Bill Harlan questioned whether separating the expenses of t-shirts should be separated from general expenses. o Speaker Schultz noted that students are not allowed to contribute money to themselves if they are a candidate in addition to a personal donation. Speaker Schultz presented Section 147 eliminating the Elections Review Committee. o Under the section regarding major offenses, the section is changed to read the Elections Commissioner shall conduct a review concerning all major violations defined by the Elections Regulations Code. o Bill Harlan proposed changing wording to note the Elections Commissioner shall conduct an investigation and review of a suspected violation in an earlier subsection of the same Section. As well as determine whether it is a major and minor violation. o Attorney General Tank expressed reservations about including investigation because the review should not include any investigations. o Chair White argued that leeway should be allowed for the Elections Commissioner to investigate. o Attorney General Tank said ownership should fall on the person presenting a complaint. o Bill Harlan said a lack of information might hinder the process. o Chair White argued that there should be room to allow for a non-biased investigation. o Attorney General Tank noted judicial boards are not typically allowed to investigate. o Senator Muir proposed adding a sentence to subsection B allowing the Elections Commissioner may conduct an investigation or call additional witnesses if there is not sufficient evidence presented. o Senator Scott expressed reservations about having a “judge” conducting an investigation. o Parliamentarian Sexton proposed having a Deputy Commissioner to file complaints. o Bill Harlan expressed support for allowing the Elections Commissioner to make complaints because of lack of information for the student body atlarge regarding what violations are. o Chair White also expressed support for the idea of a Deputy Commissioner. o Speaker Schultz and Chair Norris noted that support seemed to be making a Deputy Commissioner function as the Elections Commissioner. o Senator Muir articulated that support was behind an enforcement agent and a complaint agent.
•
• •
•
o Chair White noted that it might be a better accountability measure for smaller campaigns as well that bigger campaigns may not monitor. o Bill Harlan proposed a system where if you went over your expense amounts it would be an automatic violation. Thus eliminating the gray area. o Bill Harlan expressed support for getting rid of trivial rules to reduce the amount of trivial complaints. o Senator Muir said a broader, more transparent process would help get rid of triviality. o The committee discussed nuances of the appeal process and inclusion of different candidates who have appealed. o Senator Muir said if the committee wants to have both sets of candidates included in a review/appeal, it could be done. o Chair White expressed hope that it would alleviate previous problems with differing interpretations. o Bill Harlan noted that differing interpretations are not reviewable. Speaker Schultz presented Section 151 Subsection A-1 and noted that the change would allow disqualification by a major violation by members of a campaign. o In addition, the subsection regarding Elections Review Committee has been changed to Student Tribunal. o The section was changed to emphasize the Elections Commissioner being able to consider the severity of violations and possible mitigating factors. Speaker Schultz presented Section 152 regarding disqualifications. o The sections would be changed from Elections Review Committee to Elections Commissioner. Speaker Schultz presented Section 154. o The Grounds for Appeal section was changed to update from Elections Review Committee to Student Tribunal and Elections Commissioner on an individual basis. o The Grounds for Appeal section was branched off the judicial branch’s Grounds for Appeal to including failure to provide a fundamentally fair process, failure to follow written procedures and rules, lacking substantial evidence to support finding a violation. o Additionally if the Elections Commissioner reached a decision in an unjust manner with existing biases. o Also the sanction is too harsh and The Elections Commissioner denied a candidate his/her constitutional rights, as identified in the SGA Constitution. o Chair White questioned the possibility of accounting for an incorrect interpretation by the Elections Commissioner and whether that would be accounted for under the Elections Commissioner failing to follow written rules and procedures. o Speaker Schultz said it would be based on Tribunal’s decision on whether or not to hear the case. Speaker Schultz presented the removal of the final two sections regarding the appointment time because it will be included in the By-Laws.
• • • •
Chair White expressed that it would be appropriate to include past presidential candidates in the reforming process. Chair Norris reiterated the importance of the time frame and the committee reviewed the time frame of the appeal process. There was a motion made to hold Resolution 09/10/26 in committee. The motion passed 5-0-0. Proofread legislation
LEGISLATION PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE: • Speaker Schultz proposed a Resolution of Appointment concerning one new Arts & Sciences Student Senator. The committee reviewed the legislation and appointment process. It was moved and seconded to recommend favorably the appointment of Randi Black as student senator for the College of Arts & Sciences and for the committee to co-author the Resolution. It was approved by a vote of 60-0. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Senator Scott. Adjourned at 8:33 p.m.