While it appeared last week that the work of the Governance Commission was drawing to a close, it now seems its work of examining changes to the Union Constitution will continue. With the deadline for constitutional changes to be voted on during GM Week now having passed, it is clear that no amendments will be put up for a vote by the student body next month.
Leading up to last Friday’s Student Senate meeting, a flurry of e-mails were exchanged between several student government members concerning the constitutional changes worked on by the Governance Commission. In one of these, President of the Union Peter Baldwin stated, “the E-Board has voted unanimously to reject the idea of sending the proposed Union Constitution, as drafted by the Governance Commission, to the student senate and possibly to a student referendum.”
One of Baldwin’s stated reasons for this was an idea that these changes were being rushed through the system. This sentiment was also echoed in other e-mails leading up to the meeting, but not all agreed that changes were being rushed through.
The final vote of the Governance Commission on the new unified document saw two nay votes, which basically meant that the commission did not feel the document should be recommended to the Senate in its current form.
At the Senate meeting, Grand Marshal Mike Dillon, who also chairs the Governance Commission, began a presentation of the proposed changes and then ended abruptly saying that he did not feel it was worth finishing the creation of the presentation because, “I knew the results; I knew the outcome.”
Accusations were made during the meeting that certain individuals were participating in “backdoor politicking.” These accusations were denied and some cited that the problems came down to miscommunication. Some senators said they weren’t comfortable making any final decisions without having an entire presentation on the changes.
One motion considered would have thanked the commission for its work and encouraged later work on the current draft. When it was on the floor, Hansel Baez, the E-Board representative to the Governance Commission said that although he appreciated the Senate’s “political BS,” he did not appreciate having put in a year’s worth of work to have not gotten any feedback. He told the Senate that at this point, “We really need feedback.”
The motion was withdrawn and after a lengthy discussion of how to proceed, the Senate discussed a few of the proposed changes. The Senate, through straw polls and motions, responded positively to changes in the way the Undergraduate Council president was selected and a change that would require all class senators be directly elected; it struck down the idea of having a Policies of the Union article—at least in its then proposed form, that would have established an official set of policies and dictate rules to modify them.
In a subsequent interview, Dillon said, “I’m glad that the process is going to continue, but I’m disappointed that there was so much backdoor politicking of uninformed people trying to destroy it.” He said he was particularly upset by the fact that people criticized the presentation before he had yet to create it.
Dillon said that the work of the Governance Commission will continue and that he will give a full presentation to the Senate of all of the proposed changes in coming weeks. He stated that the Commission would probably have a meeting after spring break.
