1. Is there any way I could get a copy of the documents you used at the SGA meetings that showed the changes for the Wyrick Guidelines and the SGA Constitutional changes?

All documents should be available for review on the SGA website at http://sga.missouristate.edu/elections/

2. Why is it important for students to vote on these changes?
As answered by Justin Mellish, Student Body Vice President:

It is important for students to become educated on the changes being proposed and decide whether or not they are changes that should be made; these changes will affect how the Student Government Association functions, which ultimately affects decisions made by the organization. Ultimately, the Student Senate felt that these changes are for the best and will allow SGA to function more effectively and efficiently.

 

Wyrick Guidelines
The Standard and Brett Foster, Chief Wyrick Commissioner

3. I know many of the changes are stylistic, but what are the important changes that students should know about?

There is one amendment that stands out as more substantial than the stylistic changes: The addition of a “preliminary” Wyrick proposal deadline.  This new deadline will be 2-3 weeks before the official deadline that is currently in place (and will remain in place).  The purpose of this new deadline is to get students in touch with the Wyrick Commission before the official deadline, enabling them to work with appropriate administrators as they complete their proposal.  It also serves students by allowing the commission to assess the eligibility of a proposal before the student has invested the time needed to complete an entire Wyrick Proposal.  There is a clause that allows for students who miss the preliminary deadline to still be eligible to submit a proposal by scheduling a meeting with the Wyrick Commissioner.

4. Why did you think these changes, like the addition of the Internet and getting rid of practices that were never followed, were important to make to the guidelines?

These changes served to bring a much-needed update to the Wyrick Guidelines.  By amending the guidelines to include placing Commission meeting times and minutes on the Internet, we are making the commission more transparent to the students.  The guidelines also contained numerous errors, such as references to constitution sections that didn’t exist.  We felt the need to remove section XI (which was never followed) because it is inaccurate to tell students that they will be recognized with a plaque when this is a practice that has never been implemented.  Due to the nature of most Wyrick proposals the placement of recognition plaques is rarely feasible, and that is why we removed the section all together.

5. Will any of these changes significantly affect the student body? How?

As outlined in answer (1), students who are wishing to submit a proposal will be significantly affected by the new deadline, which will enable them to get in contact with appropriate administrators and the Wyrick Commission before completing the official proposal.

 

SGA Constitution
The Standard and Emily Bernet, Speaker Pro Tempore

6. Other than the stylistic changes, what are the major changes that are occurring in the constitution that students should know about?

There are a few major changes that are occurring in the SGA Constitution. The first is that the Senior Class President is being moved to the executive branch exclusively. Next, the Director of Communication was added to the Constitution. There was also a change made to allow for a process to dictate what happens in the instance that the Vice President fails to deliver legislation to the President to be signed. A resignation process was added for members of SGA, and the Good Faith Resolution and Fiscal Responsibility Resolution were added to the Constitution. Other major changes were made to clarify processes that occur within SGA.

7. Why was it decided to change the Senior Class President to one branch, either legislative or executive, instead of keeping that person in both?

The Senior Class President was moved to the executive branch for several reasons. First, the nature of the position is that it is an executive position. Second, since the senior class is given 5 senior class representatives, having the Senior Class President act as a senator meant that the senior class was over-represented. Third, the Senior Class President affects the quorum of Senate but there are no repercussions for missing meetings like there are for other Senators (outside of impeachment by the senior class).  The Internal Affairs Committee and I decided that it was more appropriate to place the Senior Class President in the executive branch and Senate agreed with that decision.

8. Why should the vote be changed from 2/3rds to 3/4ths? Will that change things for Senate or make it harder for resolutions and decisions to pass?

The vote for ratification of the SGA Constitution was changed from 2/3 to ¾. A 2/3 vote is required for ratification to the Constitution as a whole.  A ¾ vote is required for ratification to an amendment to the Constitution. IAC did not see any reason that there should be a different vote for the two very similar processes. This potentially could make changes to the SGA Constitution harder; however, theoretically changes to a governing document should be more difficult.

9. Will any of these changes significantly affect the student body? How?

The changes that are being proposed by Senate to the student body to vote on will not significantly affect the student body. The changes were mostly for internal functioning.

 

 

IAC Constitution Review
The Standard and Emily Bernet, Speaker Pro Tempore

1.  There have been rumors that the student organization constitutions will be looked at with more scrutiny this year. Is that true? Why?

Student organization constitutions are not being looked at with more scrutiny this year as compared to previous years. The difference is that in the spring semester last year SGA adopted a document that provides a list of guidelines that detail what is needed in an organization’s constitution. This document is the Student Organization Development and Assistant Act of 2010 (SODA). This document is helpful because it works not only as a guide for students writing a constitution but as a tool for current members of the Internal Affairs Committee (IAC) to use while they are reviewing constitutions.

2.  If so, is there something specific you are going to review firmer within the student organization constitutions? Why?

N/a.

3.  Why are student organization constitutions reviewed annually?

Student organization constitutions are not reviewed annually. They are reviewed when organizations first write their constitutions and again when they decide to make revisions to their constitutions.

4.  Have there been any new regulations for the student organization’s constitutions this year? If so, what are they?

The new regulations for student organization constitutions are not new this year but were new in April of 2010. The regulations are a part of the Student Organization Development and Assistant Act. A few requirements detailed in SODA include that constitutions state that officers must be Missouri State students, and that there must be processes for impeachment and filling officer vacancies. The document can be found on the SGA website.

5.  How do you or will you help student organizations meet the new guidelines?

IAC helps organizations follow the guidelines by writing comments on their constitutions. Sometimes IAC has general suggestions that would make an organization’s constitution better, and we make sure that they are listed as suggestions, whereas a requirement is stated as a SODA requirement. After we make changes, the constitution is given back to the organization for revision. The Student Government Association is currently creating a constitution generator that will help new student organizations create constitutions that will pass SODA and other constitutional requirements.  This web application will allow members of campus to pick from several pre-filled options and, upon completion, will export a completed constitution to Microsoft Word.

6.  What do new student organizations have the most trouble with when it comes to meeting the standards of having a constitution and bylaws?

The biggest problem that organizations have when writing or revising their constitutions is making sure the enabling clause is correct and word for word as listed in SODA. This clause is placed at the end of every constitution and states how the constitution will be ratified.

Extending Library Hours
The Standard and Kate Shellenberg, Director of Academic Affairs

1. Who will be/is in the library hour’s committee?

The exact members that will serve on the committee are to be determined, but the Academic Affairs committee will have representatives among the members.

2. Will the committee focus solely on searching for the funding needed for extended hours in the library? If so, what will the extended hours be?

Searching for funding will be the main goal of this committee. We have already met with Dean of Library Services, Neosha Mackey, and she is receptive to our proposal. The committee will explore creative solutions as to how best to fund this initiative. As the data collected from students show, 2 am Sunday through Wednesday (or technically Monday through Thursday since it is after the midnight hour) is the desired extension time.

3. Have there been any ideas yet on where to get the funding for extended hours?

No solid ideas have been formed at this time. As ideas are formed, the Academic Affairs Committee will bring those updates to Senate. We do believe that we can significantly cut the proposed expenses down.

4. What costs would the library have for extending their hours?

See attached worksheet* to see what the library has estimated. Notice that these estimates are for keeping ALL areas of the library open throughout the entire week for a year. One objective of this committee will be to determine which areas of the library need to be open and when. From here, we will determine what possible cost cuts could come from there. The custodial cost is a large amount covered in this estimate. That cost is extremely tentative. The custodial staff needs to determine if they will be able to maintain the same level of cleanliness with a reduction in cleaning time. We believe we will be able to maintain the same levels of upkeep with the extension of hours, so hopefully that cost can be eliminated. We are also looking to fund the extension of the computer lab hours through SCUF or a reallocation of current open-access lab services.

5. Will other groups or organizations be involved with finding funding for this project?

To be determined by the committee.

6. How does this best serve Missouri State students? Do you believe there will be a significant improvement for students by extending library hours? Why?

We yielded 973 student responses regarding extending library services. The vast majority indicated a strong preference for extending library hours. We believe this will benefit students for many reasons. While handing out surveys several students mentioned that they leave the library at midnight and move to Cheek Hall to continue studying in the open access lab. We are working to ensure that this service best fits the needs of students.

*a worksheet was provided in the correspondence.

Endowment of Campus Rec Fields
The Standard and Zachary Durhman, Director of Research and Development

1. What all fields will this encompass?

The fields that we are hoping may be endowed are the Recreational Fields by Taco Bell (informally called the Taco Bell fields) and the Recreational Fields behind Glass Hall (informally known as the Glass Fields).

2. Senator Bullock voiced some concern during the meeting that you guys may want to hold off on the resolution until Dunn was closer to finding some endowments. That makes sense. What is the point of rushing the resolution through before more details get ironed out?

I do not feel we are rushing this issue. The aim of this resolution is to put forth a recommendation concerning how that money could be best utilized for the student body. By offering forth this recommendation, it gives Brent Dunn, Vice President for University Advancement, and Cynthia Barnett, Director of Campus Recreation, a chance to see where students think the money could be spent, and it helps to ensure that students have a voice from the beginning. Establishing a general idea of where the money will go could also aid in determining how much money is requested to endow the fields, as well as possibly allowing for those interested in having the field named to have a better idea of where their money will go. This resolution makes the initial strides towards determining where the money will be directed, and it helps ensure that the money will be returned to the students.

3. When do you think is a realistic time for Dunn to obtain endowments (at least by the end of the semester)? Do you know is anyone has expressed any interest in endowing the fields yet?

We cannot predict when an individual or company will agree to establish an endowment. When those details become available we have the option of posing future recommendations.

4. Do you have any idea what type of dollar figures we are talking about for these endowments? What percent of the money would be put away to garner interest, and what percent would go toward annual Campus Rec equipment and facility updates?

This is not determined by us. By outlining our intentions in regards to how that money could be used, we help provide an estimate of the amount that might be sought. The specifics of the percentages of funds allocated to different areas would be determined by the members of the committee that would be formed if the appropriate bodies agree with the resolution. Of course, this committee will consist of students as the resolution states.

5. Who at Campus Rec have you talked to about this? What specifically would the funds go toward? Has MSU really just been under-funding Campus Rec that much, or why the big need for more funds?

Cynthia Barnett has been informed that discussions with Brent Dunn occurred. Where the funds are directed will be determined at a later date when a figure becomes available. We have a few ideas in mind of potential areas that could be improved, but this will ultimately be determined by the committee.

6. Can you explain why exactly this even has to go through SGA? Why can’t this just be between Campus Rec and Dunn?

SGA thought of the concept and then initiated discussions with Brent Dunn. Furthermore, money spent from this project will benefit the student body which is why we are recommending that a committee, with student members serving, be formed to determine where the money can be best used.

7. SGA is the voice of the student body. Why will the student body be receptive to this idea?

The student body will directly benefit from this method of distributing the funding; as such, students will be given a chance to have their voices heard through the members serving on the committee. The committee will ensure that the money is spent in a way such that the student body, through student representatives serving on the committee, will maintain a voice in deciding what improvements should be made.

8. Did anyone ever even consider naming the fields in honor of someone, or was giving them new names always just about the money? The fields will basically get to be named after whoever fits the bill for an endowment, right?

The purpose is to get a source of funds in exchange for the naming rights. Brent Dunn will oversee the endowment process so any criteria used for selecting a person or company will be determined by him.

9. I was wondering if any of the funds from the endowment could possibly go toward funding the new rec center in the future? Why or why not?

It’s not something we’ve considered or discussed, but we are always open to ideas and input.  It would be at the committee’s discretion.