IAC Meeting February 16, 2010
6:10 PM Garrison
Quorum Roll Call
Meeting called to order at 6:10
Present: Cheema, Chen, Navarro, Hartstein, Ramachandran, Cano, Martin, Salmam
Tardy: Webb
Consideration of Legislation:
Orders of the Day are suspended
Consider ASCUCD Bill 38
Co-Author’s Comments
Chen: This was introduced last year and I think it was Bianci who introduced it and Yani decided to take this up and I recall that most people liked it and there were few objections against it. They just wanted to drop double dipping. Also some text corrections include under appropriations it should say “none,” On line 7 the “f” should not be capitalized. Strike Chapter 6 with a comma.
Gold: The motivation was to protect ASUCD and give it to organizations and make it a much easier passage.
Questions in Text
Hartstein: Line 31 reserves should not be pluralized
Cano: On line 37 votes should be “majority”
Public Discussion
Cano: Can you name an organization that ASUCD has subsidized from more than one ASUCD organization.
Gold: Among others some graduations that received multiple funding from other ASUCD units that brought in more money that was not necessary. Some of the graduations served lots of meat when it received more funds than it needed and it was just a waste of money. The Kroean student union received multiple funding from ECAC and other units.
Cano: As for the ethnic graduations that were vetoes and those vetoes were overridden so I think there will be those who will see waste even without this bylaw.
Ramachandran: On line 1 it should say “providing”
Hartstein: Another example would be Safeboats. One of the large issues is that its referred to IAC and B & F but it affects all other parts of ASUCD not us or B & F it should be seen from the groups who will be directly affected by this. If we passed this it would mean nothing to us but a lot to other ASUCD Commissions and organizations.
Chen: GASC has $3000 they may not be able to give someone $2000 maybe $200. My concern is if they happen to give $300 or $200 but they actually needed more money what if they really needed $1000. Hypothetically, if we removed commissions with senate finance reserves. Club finance council can give $2000 senate reserves can give as much as they want but they would have a limit of $12000. I would like to bring up Hartstein’s concerns about it not going to other commissions that give funding
Gold: This will encourage fiscal responsibility and better planning. It will apply to cfc as well. You will know how much money clubs will need sooner. With the proper planning it will protect commissions from giving out money if they don’t have to. Commissions may not like to admit it but programmatic commissions are biased and will not be able to look at a request for money objectively objectively
Cano: The Queer Leadership Retreat and the money asked were greater than the cost. My concern is pending allocations of funds doesn’t cling on to this clause. It implies that they have already received money. Senate should ask harder question about pending money requests from other ASUCD Commissions or cfc.
Ramachandran: Did you mean commissions would be biased as toward events that are close to them?
Gold: It may be hard to break tradition about giving about money when they see if it looks good. It may be traditional to give money to certain projects and they may not see that they may have to change how they allocate money.
Ramachandran: Clubs going around the commissions will discourage them going to commissions. I don’t think commissions should be included in this bill they will just try to go around and just head strait to cfc or the senate who would be able to give more money.
Gold: I cannot speak for CFC they serve separately from ASUCD. The commissions are good for funding small events. CFC is meant for funding larger events and much grander
Ramachandran: Clubs may not see it that way. They may seem commissions as the first place to go. CFC will have more money and that is where they will go instead of commissions if this were to be passed as is.
Chen: People may not know about this rule. If we pass this I wouldn’t feel comfortable that people would know all about what this bylaw would entail. The may request more from a Commission an may not even know that once they get money that will be the last time they can request money.
Hartstein: If something like this were put in. An outreach thing would be needed. My friend is in a small club. Most clubs are small like a book club. They do not think about going spending over $300. CFC funds events more like spring quarter events. If they go to CFC for a weeklong event could a commission sponsor one of those events?
Gold: That would not be set in stone but I think not.
Hartstein: Having senate stopping a cfc allocation with 2/3 vote does not seem good and I don’t like that at all. We have CFC and commissions to make those decisions not the senate.
Cano: CFC is restricted from helping departments and can only help clubs. Any outside organization would not be allowed to receive money. I like outreach and the senate asking harder questions. I think it is a lack of communication between the cfc and senate that can cause a lot of these problems
Martin: I agree with Hartstein about the 2/3 vote. If you have something that can be overturned with by 2/3 it may lose its effectiveness. I cant think of a position where if you do it correctly.
Hartstein: People will need more money than is given to them if other sources of funding don’t come through or and if they know about cfc and are willing to go then they should
Cheema: Does CFC have a limit?
Gold $2000
Cheema: Senate Reserves?
Hartstein: Senate Reserves would be able to spend as much of their $12000 as they would like at a given time.
Ramachandran: If you are asking for funding are the applications the same. If a group goes to a commission or CFC would they fill out the same applications or the different ones. Also ff someone got $250 from a commission and needed $1000 dollars more then should stop going to Commissions and instead go to CFC.
Chen: It says the restriction can be lifted by a 2/3 majority if the senate wants to spend a majority bill. Next the concerns about the commission is that if you go to GASC this bylaw would prohibit you from going from asking for $50 after asking for $2000 from CFC or Senate Reserves.
Martin: But if that shouldn’t be happening if you really need thousands of dollars worth of money then you should not be asking for more after that.
Chen: If a club doesn’t know what they can get. I do agree on senate being tougher we should put that in the bylaws or some sort of legislation. The concern is that if you get $2000 from cfc you probably don’t need $300. If you need $300 you may need more money in the future and this would stop them from getting more money.
Hartstein: Unexpected cases and other funding not coming can make clubs ask for more money. CFC will look over that application and discuss with a club representative about what they will do with the money. We all know how senate works and we know how senate words. I think the 2/3 thing was up when we look at the bill. Why make a bylaw when a 2/3 vote can override it if that is already the threshold. Commissions have their own applications for funds. I think this ideas was not good then and it doesn’t seem good now. It seems like there are better ways we can do that but this is doesn’t seem like one of them.
Cano: A tougher senate bylaw sounds interesting. Looking at the scenarios there are seven possible scenarios that clubs can go to. Senate then CFC then commissions but I cannot see senate commission then cfc then commissions.. A formal communication between CFC and ASUCD Senate should be done in order to get better connection between them. Commissions can only give $300 and Senate Reserves can become a cash grab in spring.
Gold: The 2/3 problem is a problem and I think that the 2/3 thing as the worst thing. Outreach Assembly should not be allowed in this bill. Outreach will need money because as far as getting money from commissions we just let commissions tell their people that they can only get $300 from them and cannot get any more. Having things that will be written down and will still be here years for years long after we are all gone will have a bigger impact. I have issues with 2/3 Outreach should not be added and commissions can tell
Cano: If you want to integrate Outreach Assembly that would go against the bill in general Outreach is not the same thing
Gold: If you want to make something grow that you feel will be great once it can be independent you have to help it along until it is strong enough to go on its own.
Cano: I think they are doing a fantastic job they do a lot of stuff I think they are pretty well developed
Hartstein: Funneling money to Outreach Assembly would still be up to Yani including a disclaimer would be fine. I see no reason to limit funds. I can see people getting cfc if they go to commissions and vice versa. They will always be able to get Senate Reserves. If they ever go to senate this would be ignored easily as long as they know the right people
Chen: The only way it would require it to be 3/4 or 4/5 or impossible to return it would go into conflict with section 1 which states that the newest bylaw would be done if there is a contradiction. The huge roadblock is the 2/3 vote if you already can have the 2/3 vote regarding commissions and AO commissions will want to give their stamps of approval on something. They will not be happy if they cannot give money to things that they like. There are a lot of commissions and telling all 7 chairs about and keeping up on their contributions that will be hard to do. If we limit it to CFC and Senate that would make it a lot easier in terms of enforcing a rule like this.
Hartstein: I don’t think we should regulate CFC. They are meant to be independent of ASUCD to be more impartial in their decisions.
Martin: It seems like there are a lot of concerns among everyone and I feel like people are agreeing that publicity would be a good thing. Maybe we should throw the bill on the backburner and focus more on the publicity part. Make sure that people know about a rule like this and the amounts they can receive from CFC, Commissions, and Senate
Chen: I agree with Martin, publicity is always good. Unless we find a way around 2/3 we wont have a bill. That is the first priority.
Hartstein: We let people know how much Commission, Senate, and CFC can give to clubs and events
Percoco: I wouldn’t include Outreach because they’re standards are different. I kind of like what this says I know I haven heard much about this yet but I do like what is on this bill.
Commission Discussion
Bill is Tabled.
Other Business
Consider Gold’s Informal Bill
Author’s comments
Gold: I know this is poorly written. I was at many commission meetings where they gave out hundreds of thousands of money. The events made out more many was originally allocated. If an ASUCD group gives many organizations that does not benefit students then that is like giving outside organization money directly. This is modeled after the CFC example. If you are not making a profit they nothing happens. But if a profit is made then the students should have their money back.
Questions in text
Hartstein: Line 1 “senate bill bylaw” should be capitalized, the background should be all caps “oftentimes” is one word, second paragraph should say ASUCD.
Martin: The 2nd paragraph should be lower-cased on the third to last line. “cents” should have an apostrophe.
Cheema: SPAC doesn’t exit anymore its CSI “Center for Student Involvement.”
Martin: 2nd to last line “controller” should be capitalized.
Cano: Line 1 “enact bylaw” should not be there
Hartstein: “Commissions” should be singular. The “association” is capitalized
Salmam: “Commission” should be capitalized.
Cano :603 B already exists this should be titles as some other bylaw sections.
Martin: In the first line “Association” should be capitalized appropriation instead of appropriates.
Hartstein: Controller part should be in section B.
Public Discussion:
Gold: Im sorry guys for all the errors and stuff. On the second paragraph should be changed to outside organization
Chen: This looks interesting can you name anything specific
Gold: ECAC and GASC gave money to organizations that made a profit. CFC gives a lot of seed money that doesn’t mean that all student money should go to all things that make a profit. Lower the amount of money. The cold truth is that it’s the senates’ responsibility to give out money that doesn’t effect students.
Chen: So if a group were given $50 and made a $60 profit they would intend to donate to something not related to UC Davis then they would have to give those original $50 back?
Gold If they got $50 and make a $60 profit. Then they would have to give back 50? You can give money for the event or for the fundraiser
Chen: Playing devil’s advocate here. What if its meant to raise money for the American Cancer Association?
Gold: I don’t want part of my 41 dollars going to the American Cancer Association. I’d rather it be going to getting something for campus or student body.
Ramachandran: On the second paragraph should it be money or moneys? I see your point about senate reserves but as for commissions they are speaking for the students.
Gold: I think it’s a problem that they are not elected and have control over other students’ money.
Ramachandran: I see you point but if they are promoting a club on campus that’s putting on a show to support the American Cancer Association. Its hard to tell the difference between an event and fundraiser
Gold: I’m not sure if I see the difference. Exchanging the sum they are giving it to an outside organization
Ramachandran: I see that but the money is there to be give to organizations. If they give you them money then they don’t have a right to ask for it back
Salmam: Can you clarify the last part?
Gold: I’m referring to the nepotism that occurs in ASUCD. I’m not saying that everyone does it but it does happen. While we are giving money then they should be fine in giving $200 after we gave them $200. This is showing what happened last year with Relay for Life.
Ramachandran: You can have some bad karma for not supporting cancer research.
Hartstein: Strike the last sentence in first paragraph its to polarizing and seems to just stir up anger rather than going after the problem. People think fundraising is hard but there are a bunch of places in Davis that you can do it with. Holding commissions to a higher standard is a bit ridiculous because you can only sensor a senator. What Ramachandran was gong for in event versus fundraiser. The treasuring may be padding the student association
Cano: When I first read this I was worried about this. It sounds like we would make ASUCD a bank and we would be giving out loans. I don’t like inserting things where they don’t belong. I don’t like commissions being under the bill. Senate is not held to that high of a standard.
Martin: If I were in the food club and we want to hold a bake sale and we will give our profits to the American Cancer Society. We don’t have money and we ask for $50 and we make $200 then we give $50 back to ASUCD. I’m not against that but I’m not necessarily for it either.
Gold: It seems feasible that you can get the allocations for the event if IAC funded a bake sale.
Hartstein: Gold comes for raise money for the student organization they we give it to them. If they come back and ask for more money and give a profit
Martin: It’s the ASUCD’s job to ask tough question when someone asks for money when something like this were to come up.
Gold: In response to you question, you bring up legitimate points I will probably look at this bill again and make some changes on it.
Cheema I like the intent of the bill. If they raise a lot of money then they should return some of it back. It also doest talk about Outreach Assembly but this thing doesn’t seem to have any teeth behind it.
Chen: I will bag on this a little further. I don’t think its possible to get this money back. It’s difficult because if someone were to get the money then they can just lie. This would put more responsibilities on people who will have to keep pestering clubs that may just not want to give back the money.