IAC 2/7/11
Meeting called to order at 5:10pm
NAVARRO -- Motion to see Senate Bill #38
**Author’s comments** MARTIN -- Author’s amendment to cut co-author section, there is no co-author.
**Questions in Text**
HSU -- Should there be a section 902 (E)?
MARTIN -- Yes, should be section 902, with subsection E.
** Move into public discussion**
NAVARRO -- Are there digital minutes for Senate meetings?? - We might there eventually
FREEMAN -- Digital recordings approved once they are posted? and then reposted?
MARTIN -- Yes, minutes sent to SGAO after they are taken and they are posted. The following week when minutes are approved, changes are sent to SGAO and then reposted with those changes.
FREEMAN -- Change so there is no reposting? Just change before it is posted.
HSU -- Line 13, capitalize Commission
LEE -- No way to get digital recordings of every commission, because they’re meetings overlaps. Best to follow normal procedures and have minutes taken by elected recorder. Might be better to amend to remove digital recordings
MARTIN -- Author’s amendment to line 12, strike “and all digital recordings”, line 13 strike “digital recordings”, line 15, 17, and 7 strike “and digital recordings”. Line 1, capitalize Commission, line 6 capitalize Commission (twice).
HSU -- Line 5, insert comma after “however”.
**Move to Commission Discussion**
HSU -- Line 7 needs to be fixed. Strike “also” and add “as well” at end of line 8.
FREEMAN -- Are we expecting this to be followed? Anyway to follow up?
MARTIN -- SGAO has been informed of bylaws they were not following. Can take this up with the VP to make sure this is followed through
LEE -- Would like IAC to be the “bylaw police”. Trying to get a new Webmaster.
**Motion to call bill to question**
**Senate Bill #38 passed 9-0-0**
NAVARRO -- motion to see Senate Bill #39.
** Author’s comments ** MARTIN -- Chair of GASC was interested in removing all binary gender references in bill revisions that Segio made last quarter. GASC saw this last Tuesday and it passed 8-0-1 (one abstained vote for absence). Line 51 should say “That individual’s” instead of “that person’s”. Line 86 should also say “that individual’s”.
**Questions in Text**
LOVELACE -- Line 156-168, removing subject makes sentence all clear. Save this for public discussion
MOHAMMED-ZAKIR -- Line 3, “make” or “makes”?
**Public discussion**
LEE -- Bothers me, because it is silly. His/her should be meant to include everyone. Feel revisions are roundabout. Original versions are not offensive, or not meant to be offensive. Pronouns are used in an inclusive manner. Would this remove all gender terms from the bylaws?
MARTIN -- Yes.
NAVARRO -- Agree with Andre. Line 199 should be “the president’s designee” (end of sentence) . Line 249 capitalize the “a” in Author’s designee.
HSU -- Line 74 also needs more capitalizations.
HSU -- Concur with Senator Lee. Main problem is that it increases the wordiness and ambiguity of the bylaws. Line 74, subject is unclear. Line 103 continues to show the ambiguity. There are a lot of places that need to be fixed.
LOVELACE -- Inclined to agree that IAC should make bylaws clear. However, the purpose of this bill is good. With rise of gender fluidity and other genders, it doesn’t make sense to use his/her labels. Should be an effort to recognize all sexualities and genders, especially in legislation. Better ways to do this, but we shouldn’t throw it out.
MARTIN -- I understand that IAC isn’t here to promote change, but it isn’t authored by IAC. I disagree that line 130 area is incorrect. I can try to fix any type of ambiguity. Line 75 include “or that chairperson’s designee” and line 76 “or the president’s designee”. Also line 77 “that chairperson’s designee”. This was a hot topic at the Senate meeting where it came up. But I believe there was only one dissenting vote.
LEE -- Amendment made was grammatically incorrect and that is why I disagreed. Compromise was “the individual” and removed my objection after it got fixed.
NAVARRO -- Why is it sometimes “the” and sometimes “that”? Line 288 should say “or the chairperson’s designee”. These changes are a step up from his/her, I would support this.
MARTIN -- The “that” refers to the most immediately referenced person when there are two or more people.
LEE -- Disagree with Kevin. Most legislation uses his/her pronoun distinction. Bill is proposing to remove all pronouns that we can use from the bylaws. We can make this grammatically correct, but this isn’t what you find in other national examples of the English language. Would rather just use “her” because it is more natural in English. “Her” is an inclusive pronoun in the English language. The bylaws, as they stand, don’t exclude anyone. Making changes is outside of the norm and does make bylaws more wordy. Urge commissioners to vote independently of what others think or the majority opinion is.
NAVARRO -- Best thing is to stay away from his/her. That is what we’re trying to do.
MOHAMMED-ZAKIR -- I don’t think this flows. I don’t want to make it harder for other people reading these bylaws. Line 254 and 255, does that refer to one senator or multiple?
FREEMAN -- Point made that the current bylaws are not offensive is a personal belief. Idea that his/her is all encompassing is also a personal belief and should not be applied to student body documents. It seems wordy because we are reading it all at once. Line 97 should say “that position” instead of “student services...”. Line 157 should say “the candidacy” and line 222 should say “an employee in that position”, instead of “in the job”.
HSU -- Line 4 move period to before quotations marks. Line 5 delete word “would”. Line 221 replace “a person” with “the individual”. I understand motivation of this bill. Language can be not inclusive even if we change to include no pronouns, “the individual” can also be exclusive. We shouldn’t remove a good portion of the English language from English bylaws. It is a good intention, but we should ensure this bill doesn’t create more messy debates in Senate.
MARTIN -- I will need to leave, and Melissa will be taking over my position. There was an interest last year for gender neutral pronouns but no one knows these terms. Amendment to line 8 to include parenthesis around the letters, “(A)” and can be done throughout. Not friendly to any reference back to his/her. Open to making it less ambiguous.
LOVELACE -- Options for pronouns that are gender neutral. Z thing is more radical, used as not representative.
SALMAN -- I don’t think this has to be passed today. If we spend more time going through all the changes.
LEE -- Think we can make amendments to avoid pronouns. Aside from ambiguities, I think we can call it to vote today. The language is already inclusive. Hard to remove gender and I don’t think we have to remove gender to be inoffensive, just change the meaning of what the terms are.
NAVARRO -- Gender neutral pronouns are confusing. Student government isn’t here to reinvent the English language. I think we should vote on this today.
**Motion to move to Commission discussion**
HSU -- Pronoun “han” is interesting, but it would be misunderstood in the public. These ideas have a way to go in English language. A lot of things aren’t problematic, but a lot are.
FREEMAN -- Would love for everyone to find sections that are grammatically incorrect and fix them. Don’t feel that we are rewriting the English language, because it is grammatically correct. Understand that Davis is a progressive campus and nothing wrong with making a gender-neutral bylaw. Still support this bill.
LOVELACE -- True that English language changes by its usage. As problems come up, legislation is always behind it and its hard to make legislation all inclusive.
HALLARE -- Line 284 should be to “or the chairperson’s designee”. Line 255 is very ambiguous, suggestion to change to “that legislation”.
LEE -- His/her is meant to create fluidity in the English language. If we use “her” it would be inclusive throughout the bylaws. I think we are a progressive association, but we write legislation formally. Urge commission to author bylaw to make all future legislation consistent with this language.
SALMAN/FREEMAN -- Would not be all inclusive at all. Do not agree to just using “his” or “her”.
HSU -- Line 249 modify to “the Author or Author’s designee may withdraw the Author’s legislation”. Line 157 change to “before the current candidacy is announced...”. Line 103 need to be fixed. Line 134 also needs to be fixed. Line 266 change “a” to “the president’s”.
**Motion to call this bill to question**
**Bill passed 7-0-2**
**Motion to pass minutes from 1/10 and 1/29**
**Minutes passed**
**Motion to adjourn. Meeting 6:32pm**