Minutes of May 3, 1995 ASA Executive Board meeting -------------------------------------------------- Summer Mailing - It seems impractical to send a full page for each group. A half page is more likely although no confirmation has been given by Dean Smith. It was done last year by graphic arts, but other alternatives are being considered. Finance Board proposal - A proposal by Doug Wyatt is appended to the end of this document. Concerns of the GSC are also appended. Cultural Lounges - ASA needs to decide whether to allocate space for cultural lounges separately from standard room requests. Consensus was that ASA would support a cultural lounge provided that it does not come from current ASA space. Walker tour - Several members of the board took a tour of offices in Walker. Several ideas came up to better utilize the space, including providing groups file cabinets and storage areas separate from offices. There was one unallocated room in Walker which ASA may make into a meeting room reserved through CAC. Voice-mail - An idea came up for ASA to buy a computer and a modem and provide a voice mail service for student groups. This would eliminate the current need for some groups to buy a phone line and and a phone when an voice mail account is all that is needed. This would also free up some offices since many groups only really need a phone number and some storage space. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposal by Doug Wyatt for a combined Graduate/Undergraduate funding board: MIT Student Activity Finance Board Constitution Article 1. Name The name of this body shall be the MIT Student Activity Finance Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board"). Article 2. Purpose The Purpose of the Board shall be to evaluate the financial needs of the various student activities at MIT, and distribute the financial resources available to student activities in a manner that is fair and in accordance with the restrictions and recommendations placed on the money available. Article 3. Membership The Board shall be comprised of 18 voting members. They shall be as follows: Chairman (elected from the previous board) Vice-Chairman (elected from the previous board) Secretary (elected from the previous board) Association of Student Activities Treasurer Undergraduate Association Treasurer Graduate Student Council Treasurer (2) Two representatives from the UA (as determined by the UA) (2) Two representatives from the GSC (as determined by the GSC) (4) Undergraduate Members-at-Large (elected by the Undergraduate student body) (4) Graduate Members-at-Large (elected by the Graduate student body) Article 4. Officers Chairman The Chairman shall be the chief officer of the Board. She/He shall preside over all meetings of the Board, except in impeachment hearings for the chairman. The Chairman will be the official spokesperson of the Board and will present the Boards decisions to all appropriate bodies. Vice-Chairman The Vice-Chairman shall preside over all meetings at which the Chairman is not present. The Vice-Chairman shall assist the Chairman in whatever ways the Chairman deems appropriate. The Vice-Chairman shall preside over impeachment hearings of the Chairman. Secretary The Secretary shall be the official record-keeper of the Board. The Secretary shall make and distribute meeting minutes of all Board meetings. The Secretary shall be responsible for communicating with the student body at large. The Secretary shall also assist the Chair in whatever ways the Chair deems appropriate. Article 5. Operating Procedures The Board shall make budget allocations twice a year. In the late spring, the Board will hear requests for funding for the Summer and Fall term. In the late fall, the Board will hear requests for funding for the Independent Activities Period and Spring term. The Board must give adequate notice to all student groups at least three weeks prior to the due date for budget requests. In addition, during the year, the board will hear requests for funding for particular events and groups that were formed during the term. The board must meet at least once per week during the academic year. Meetings shall be called by the Chairman of the Board. Voting on matters, otherwise stated in this document, is done by a simple majority vote of present members. Quorum is defined as at least 10 voting members, 2 of which must be officers of the Board. Article 6. Approval Process For the first two funding periods, the Board's budget must be approved by the ASA Executive Board and the UA and GSC Councils. Specifically, the ASA must approve of the entire allocation, and the UA and GSC must approve of their respective portions. It is understood that gr oups that are primarily undergraduate students will be allocated money from the UA portion of the money and groups that are primarily graduate students will be allocated from the GSC portion of the money. After this trial period, the approval process will be as follows. Once the Board has made its budget decisions, the UA, GSC and ASA have 1 month to veto them. A veto require at least 2 of the three bodies make a 2/3's majority vote to veto the budgets. If a veto succeeds, the vetoing bodies must give sufficient reason and direction to the Board, and the Board had 1 month to submit a modified budget. This process continues until a budget is passed. Article 7. Vacancies In the case of a officer vacancy, the order of succession is Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary. If the position of Secretary is vacant, the board shall hold internal elections for that position. Any of the members may run, but no member may hold more than one seat. Thus, if the UA, GSC or ASA Treasurers run and win office, they must resign from their positions in the UA, GSC or ASA. In the event of any other vacancy, the position must be filled by the respective organization. The position of UA Treasurer, UA representative and Undergraduate Member-at-Large must be filled by the UA. The position of GSC Treasurer, GSC Representative and Graduate Member-at-Large must be filled by the GSC. The ASA Treasurer must be filled by the ASA Executive Board. Article 8. Removal of Members An member of the Board may be removed by a three-quarters vote of the Board. A call for removal may be made at any meeting, but the member in question must be given an opportunity to speak in defense of his or her position. Members who miss more than 2 consecutive meetings, or more than three meetings total in any term, without receiving prior approval from a Board officer, are automatically removed from the Board. Board members who miss an entire budget compilation are automatically removed from the board. An officer who missed more than one consecutive meeting or more than 2 meetings in a term, regardless of the circumstances, is automatically removed from the board. A two-thirds vote of the board is sufficient to prevent such an automatic removal of either a member or an officer. Any member of the ASA General Body may call for the removal of a member of the Board at one of the regularly scheduled ASA General Body meetings. A three-quarters vote of the ASA General Body is required to effect of such a removal. Article 9. Amendments Amendments to this Constitution must be approved by a 2/3's vote of the Board and then a simple majority of the ASA General Body. Such amendments must be presented in writing to the Body at least 2 weeks prior to a meeting where such an amendment will be voted on. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comments by the GSC on Finboard proposal: Article 3 Membership: Comment (1) Do we really need 18 people? Such a large board will make it very difficult to make decisions and almost impossible to obtain a forum on any regular basis. Perhaps a more workable solution might be to have a board of 8 members Chairman Vice-Chairman Secretary ASA Treas. UA Treas. GSC Treas. 1 At-large Rep from undergraduate student body (elected by Undergraduate student body) 1 At-large Rep from Graduate student body (Elected / Appointed by the Graduate student council) Article 5 Operating Procedure: Comment (2) The people should be aware that the current GSC funding board operates on three terms: Spring, Summer and Fall/IAP. This would need to be worked out. Graduate students tend to spend their summers at MIT and hence their organizations are active during the summer. Comment (3) Why does the group have to meet once a week? We think once a month would be more than enough. Given the composition of the board, even the proposed 8 member form above, trying to coordinating timetables would be a major headache. Many of these people are already fully booked doing other things within the ASA, UA, and GSC. Article 6. Approval Process A veto should not require votes from just any two of the three bodies, there needs to be a further restriction on this. We think that the groups providing the money and the ASA should be able the only ones able to veto a decision regarding the allocation of money that comes from them. Thus, i) Only the GSC and ASA should have the power to veto monies allocated from the GSC pool for graduate use. ii) Likewise for undergraduates, for UA and ASA. I think the 1 month time limit is fair (especially if the board meets once a month) Article 8. Removal of Members Comment (4) While we realize the need to get rid of "dead weight" one simply cannot remove certain members. In the proposed composition of the Board above (8 people), this process could be used for the 2 at-large reps. The treasurers of the respective organizations (ASA/UA/GSC) should not be removed from the board unless they are first relieved of their duties as treasurer of the organization. In order to encourage the treasurers to attend, I would suggest allowing the Board to complain the the organization about the lack of responsibilty displayed by that organization's treasurer. Then the organization is responsible for handling the matter. Same thing with voting a member off - the treasurers cannot be voted out of office by anyone except their organization, so they HAVE to be exempt from this. Comment (5) We also don't think any member of the ASA General Body should be able to call for removal of members from the board. By definition, the ASA can not speak for everyone on campus as it must form a single voice from all the groups. Therefore it is highly likely that at least one point of view will have been sacrficied in order to reach concensus. We propose that only a person's constituents should be able to remove him/her from the board. For example, if the Undergraduate student body votes to put someone on the board, then only the Undergraduate student body can vote to have that person removed. Article 9 Amendments Comment (6) The whole purpose of this board is to provide a means of checks and measures on how student funds are allocated. Given that these funds come from other sources, they should have at least some say in the way the board runs. Not total control mind you, as then the board would be useless. Therefore we recommend that changes that affect the composition of the board (structural, not who fills a particular position) and changes that affect the procedures used to determine the funding of graduate groups must be approved by 2/3 of the GSC. Similarly for undergraduate. We must be careful about rendering the ASA, UA, and GSC totally powerless and vesting all of the power in the new Fin Board. These three groups should each perfom a function for their respective constituents. To render the UA and GSC totally powerless, would be a bad thing as it would mean less diversity in the number of voices available to students. The UA and GSC find it hard enough as it is to recruit people to deal with issues that only they can. e.g. housing. Therefore, despite what perceptions people may or may not have about the UA and GSC's performance over past years, we must ensure that they are still relevant and not made obsolete by an all powerful super Fin Board that would effectively run the campus. Comment (7) In light of the comments that were made at the last ASA meeting regarding the disbursment of funds and the GSC's need to keep recognition up by having groups go to the GSC for their funding once allocated, a section about disbursment should also be added. It should explains that the GSC] will still follow its regular disbursment scheme (i.e. reimbursement). Perhaps the section should say that each organization has the power to decide how its funds (allocated by the Board) will be dispersed?