ASUCI Senate Minutes
Tuesday, March 07, 2017

 ASUCI Senate Minutes

Tuesday, March 7th, 2017

 

  • Called to Order by Natoolo at 5:11
  • Attendance
    • Senator Pourmand arrives late at 5:15. Senator Noureldine arrives late at 5:21. Senator Orozco arrives late at 5:26. Senator Aldoghmi arrives late at 5:41.
  • Approval of Minutes
    • Motion: Lim/ Second: Jacoby
  • Approval of Agenda
    • Motion: Abdelrahman / Second: Lim
    • Abdelrahman retracts his motion.
    • Mousa: Motion to table R52-50 until the meeting of Tuesday, March 14th.
    • Abdelrahman: Motion to approve the agenda/ Second: Zheng
  • Public Comment
  • Executive Officer Reports
    • Student Services VP: Soulstice was last week. Great show. Had a great time. Thanks for those that came out. Lots of great work went in to it. We had roughly 2,500 in attendance.
    • External VP: I will stop bugging you to go to slc. Thanks for all those coming. We have notified out delegates and almost everyone is confirmed. 44 to DC and 44 to Sacramento to lobby our legislators. We have the USSA VP here today. Some of our community leaders went to our lunch ‘meet n greet.’ We had a UCSA board meeting this past weekend. We had a fee waiver they were considering, following the discussion, the fee waiver failed. We will not be given a fee waiver. We can talk about it in a later discussion I bring back up.
  • Special Committee Reports
  • Old Business
    • 5A: R52-49: Formation of Disability Special Committee

§  Lu: Motion to bring R52-49 to the floor/ Second: Lim

§  Chair passed to Chirigotis

§  Legislation read by Natoolo

§  Abuzeid: Motion to bring R52-49 into discussion/ Second: Chavez

§  Natoolo: Need to make changes. Remove Elsie and add Abdelrahman. We have been working on starting this committee for a long time. If anyone else wants to join it will be a blessing to have you all on board. Especially with the new referendum.

§  Yakub: When will the committee meet?

§  Natoolo: We will have to set up some time, you see on the agenda where we have it. So we will set something up and as team we will set it up.

§  Abuzeid: If this passes, what is the next step?

§  Natoolo: To meet with the director of the Disability Services Center. It will be more powerful with more people.

§  Pourmand: What are things mentioned by the Disability Services Center that they would like us to do?

§  Natoolo: For finals, the number of students that need support increases and they need to rent rooms now and it costs 1,000 dollars out of their limited fund. Another issue is the 20 year old trailer. Not a lot of privacy for students. A better building and place for students with disability needs to have more privacy. Now that we have the referendum coming along and the building coming a long it won’t be a problem. We need to have the goal of moving the referendum along. Those are the major issues.

§  Abuzeid: How do we keep track of the accomplishments?

§  Natoolo: It will be part of the agenda. Same process as posted resolutions. First is to meet with the director and the students.

§  Orozco: Usually you are in the same committee for the whole year. We only changed because we had so many new senators coming in.

§  Orozco: Next quarter, the new senators voted in will start next fall.

§  Abuzeid: Motion to move R52-49 to rules/ Second: Mousa / vote passes over 2/3rd.

    • Office of Academic Affairs Budget Report

§  Budget report by someone from AA office on behalf of Tianna.

§  List of VP expenses from fall to winter quarter. This was made week 5 so there may be some additional charges that are missing that occurred after the presentation.

§  Academic Senate budget: 200. It has all been spent for booking for an event of spring quarter week 3.

§  Anteater mentorship program: 2,000 dollars left about. Budget 3,000. Most was spent during recruitment in the fall.

§  Visions leadership: Usually don’t use a lot of budget until after Winter quarter and during spring quarter, 1,000 budget, 974 still left.

§  Academic engagement: budget: 2,300;1864 left.

§  Speakers and debate: budget: 25,000, about 5,000 left. Costs to bring famous people that students want to see. We can take care of this by applying grants and stuff.

§  Advocacy: Budget 800, 800 left. We haven’t spent yet because we will be buying scantrons to give out 2 times next quarter. We will also implement a GRE class.  

  • New Business
    • R52-53: Student Resource Service Initiative

§  Lu: Motion to bring R52-53 to the floor/ Second: Lim

§  Legislation read by Chirigotis

§  Hernandez: Move into discussion of R52-53 for 15 minutes/ Second: Yakub

§  Presentation by Chirigotis

§  ASUCI fee is where the majority of the funds come from/ 18 dollars per quarter. Second source is ASUCI funding requests which are very minimal.

§  Rundown of all other UC student services fees, UCSB: 172, UCLA 72… UCI is last with 18 per quarter.

§  Speakers are very expensive. Discussions of having Bill Nye and others, but they are just too expensive.

§  Chanes: EVP previously was not a member of UCSA. For about 1 year and a half we pulled out back in 2014. That money was pulled out and shared with other offices. Last year we rejoined and we had a fee waiver and had to make cuts to ASUCI. This year, we knew we would have to start paying about 33,000 and find it in a budget that had previously been cut before. When we rejoined UCSA, we had to cut everything to secure the 33,000 we needed. It affected so many students we could take to conferences and workshops.

§  Chirigotis: Other offices were cut. Office of the President, Internal VP. SPFB needed stricter guidelines. Cannot give everyone that needs and wants funding. Student Services VP cut. We had to increase tickets for shocktoberfest by 7 dollars. We are still having issues because production costs are getting bigger and bigger.

§  Members of ASUCI are severely under paid. I assume everyone is working more than the designated hours per week. Probably not getting compensated for all the work we do. We have had to make this cut back to accommodate for this budget.

§  A five dollar increase per year per fee for the next 6 years. Would got toward events and campaigns designed for voter registration or conferences.

§  Lim: Reason for 6 year 5 dollar increase?

§  Chirigotis: Based off last year’s campaign. The fee is the same and additionally we thought that too large of an increase would put a lot of financial responsibility on the next senate team. But 5 should be okay. We had ballot language change; the language is a lot more particular on what ASUCI does. Last year we had 54% vote yes. However we needed 60%.

§  Yakub: reason for 20% instead of 25% quorum?

§  Chanes: This has already been done. Maybe a lot of us wouldn’t want this. But this is what happened last year. I do want to emphasize, I don’t think our biggest problem is quorum, it’s on education about the election. It got to the point here, people were voting so people will stop bothering them. The 20 % may be so we can have people make more educated votes instead o struggling to just get people to vote.

§  Chrigotis; Again it is the new constitution. We can’t change it before the end of the quarter.

§  This money can potentially go toward expansion of what we have been doing. For freshman students to provide more on campus opportunities for those that live on campus, cross cultural communities, funding, advocacy, Greek communities, dance communities, professional and academic orgs.

§  Abuzeid: Motion to extend time by five minutes/ Second: Jacoby

§  Overall UCI community benefits. Making UCI a first choice community. Any questions, Taylor (EVP) and I can answer. Thank you for your time.

§  Yakub: Two questions. One related to first line of initiative, I first thought it meant 5 dollars per student per quarter. Confusing.

§  Chirigotis: Office of President has to review it. UCOP has to change it. I agree it is a little confusing.

§  Chanes: The reason it is 5 per student per quarter. If you were just saying it was a 5 per student, they might think it would just be added to the whole year. That was a hard line. We thought last years was also confusing. Idk if you have any suggestions.

§  Chritigoits; We try to make it clear as possible, but it needs to be very specific. We need to make it transparent. If they are approved to run a campaign we would try to have them really know before reading how they are going to vote.

§  Abuzeid: Motion to extend  time by 2 minutes/ Second: Lim

§  Abuzeid: At the end, I believe it is very clear. I believe that when someone reads the ballot at the beginning, I think the breakdown is written very well.

§  Lu: I know there is suggestions on how these funds should be allocated? Is there an advisory on how it should happen?

§  Chanes: You all are the advisory board.

§  Orozco: Move to commit R52-53 to rules committee/ Second: Jacoby/ passes over 2/3rd

 

    • R52-54:ASUCI Endorsement of Student  Resource and Service Initiative

§  Lim: Motion to bring R52-54 to the floor / Second: Hernandez

§  Legislation read by Chanes

§  Orozco: Move to bring to discussion for 15 minutes/ Second: Jacoby

§  Abuzeid: May we see the ballot for a second?

§  Lu: Were there any types of collaboration to inform the voters on the referendums?

§  Chanes: That would be really awesome. That may be something for the elections commission. A non-partisan voters guide maybe.

§  Noureldine: Motion to commit to rules/ Second: Abuzeid. Passes with over 2/3rds

§   

    • R52-55: ASUCI Funding for the Student Resource and Services Initiative

§  Lim: Motion to bring to floor/ Second: Abdelrahman

§  Legislation read by Chanes

§  Trinh: Motion to bring to discussion for 10 minutes/ Second: Zheng

§  Orozco: This is a resolution, but it involves money. So would it be committed to finance or to rules.

§   Orozco: Motion to amend R52-55 to be changed to B52-07/ Second: Abuzeid

§  Orozco: Move to commit B52-07 to finance committee/ Second: Hernandez/ passes over 2/3rds vote.

§  Yakub: Motion to suspend by-laws to move discussion  of VP USSA for 15 minutes to 6E

§  Yakub: Motion to retract the motion/ Second: Pourmand

    • R52-56: Measure U Newspaper Fund

§  Hernandez: Motion to bring to the floor for 10 minutes/ Second: Lim

§  Legislation read by Erikat.

§  Xiao: Motion to bring to discussion for 10 minutes/ Second: Jacoby

§  New U Reps: We want to talk on behalf of the New U and what we do on the campus and why we want this referendum. We are the oldest and most consistent publication found on the campus. We currently have a circulation of about 5,000 papers per week. We reach a majority of students and staff each Tuesday. We cover things that students can’t get from any other publication. Senate meetings. Regents meetings. Things that are relevant specifically to UCI students. All of our reporters are UCI students who know it a lot better than any other reporter. We are often the first on the scene and are the closets to students who this affects. We often have more objective reporting than outside sources. I would like to add that the New U is completely independent we are not funded through anything but ads; not ASUCI or the school. We can avoid conflict of interest with admin and student government. New u is important for journalism students by providing marketable skills that you may not get through classes. Is open to all majors and to everyone who wants to write. In addition we help student’s work on their writing. To the campuses image it has a benefit, no other publications report tour degree. We adhere to a number of ethics. We get cited by LA Times people. I want to explain a little about why were are asking for this referendum. For the past decade due to down fall of print media, unlike most newspapers we don’t have students pay; it’s entirely free. We are not funded through outside sources. We want to extend our previous referendum of 99 cents. We would lose staff and be unable to fund essential tools we need for reporting. As well as online presence. Ways we have already cutback, is to cut our print edition from about 60 to 40 pages we cut color pages, print distributions is a 3rd of what it used to be. We only have 3 students delivering. We cut stipends by half. The news room has no functional cameras, voice equipment etc, so all of our reporters have to check out from Ayala or to use their own. We have to rely on our own editors to make our online presence revamped. We’ve had to cut editors from 3 of our most important sections. Our editors are the only people that consistently write every week. One comment we get is why the New U doesn’t cover all events. It’s because we only have 2 people running the whole show we’ve cut everything we can. We wouldn’t ask for this referendum if we weren’t in dire need of it. We want to improve our newsroom instead of operate in survival mode. We want to reach everything that UCI students want to read about and we want to expand our web presence. Eventually when the referendum is over we would want the bit to be online only. At this point we can’t. If you have any questions we can answer.

§  Bender: Motion to bring into discussion for 10 minutes/ Second: Jacoby